| Contenuto dell'articolo |
- From rogermoore435@yahoo.com Sat Sep 13 06:43:38 2008
Return-Path: <rogermoore435@yahoo.com>
X-Sender: rogermoore435@yahoo.com
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
X-Received: (qmail 18056 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2008 13:43:34 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (66.218.67.95)
by m50.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Sep 2008 13:43:34 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (HELO web58005.mail.re3.yahoo.com) (68.142.236.113)
by mta16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2008 13:43:34 -0000
X-Received: (qmail 18064 invoked by uid 60001); 13 Sep 2008 13:43:33 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: 4o12yCQVM1lz0Rfp3N7wY1R6tw8NC4H0A7F0e_beccYR1BysACbYqBLoJf4qRLqo3njNqsGErcAY9t.ktbP4EY6sIipaXR2KLuBgnIGu7KgkFbNLrZYmjehxG4t0pFSofwzWb5B.qgT2OBMQ5mDxyT4-
X-Received: from [64.12.116.13] by web58005.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:43:33 PDT
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.218.2
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
In-Reply-To: <d4b.3af15a40.35fc0573@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1863577403-1221313413=:17920"
Message-ID: <941595.17920.qm@web58005.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
X-Originating-IP: 68.142.236.113
X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0:0
From: Roger Moore <rogermoore435@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: rogermoore435@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] NJ Contemporary Counterfeits Census; was 23-R
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=65078925; y=dB-_-yoIPZ7rHdV2NVApDP2XCOszMFCKcb2Ou2Rg7nJYcQi5B9zVgw
X-Yahoo-Profile: rogermoore435
--0-1863577403-1221313413=:17920
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
85-nn is believed to be a low grade 56-n that has been messed with.=A0 Roge=
r
--- On Fri, 9/12/08, Rosaamltd@aol.com <Rosaamltd@aol.com> wrote:
From: Rosaamltd@aol.com <Rosaamltd@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] NJ Contemporary Counterfeits Census; wa=
s 23-R
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, September 12, 2008, 1:48 PM
John, just FYI -- I believe that most experts have delisted the "85-nn" tho=
ugh I suspect Roger or Jack could be more specific about that.=A0 The "Brok=
en A Punch" theory has also been fairly discredited -- if the matrix itself=
had the defect, then EVERY punch made from it would show the similar defec=
t, unless hand-altered in the punch itself...
=A0
=A0
In a message dated 9/12/2008 9:27:03 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jlupia2@ya=
hoo. com writes:
A few scattered thoughts.
We know from the consensus so far that three CC 23-R's exist. Two are known=
for 81-ll; About three for the 83-ii; two for the 84-kk; only one for the =
85-nn.=20
The 56-n Camel is believed by some, like Phil Mossman, coined by Matthias O=
gden, while other attribute it to be a MM. Albion Cox is thought by some to=
have been involved in MM's.The question rises is there a connection betwee=
n the Elizabethtown Mint and MM's? If so what was it? Did they help one ano=
ther, share puncheons and dies? =A0 If the Camel Head is actually MM's then=
why not 37 Goiter; or the 54-k Serpent Head? Maybe these feature defects i=
n the die engravings are the hallmarks of the engraver, and if the Camel He=
ad is MM's then these others might be as well. These could be the result of=
a collaboration between Elizabethtown and MM's. I would not rule out cast =
copies being used not for the copy but the cast die to be used as a model o=
r guide for the engraver. So, don't misunderstand when I suppose casts were=
made by MM's that this was the opted for method of counterfeiting. My view=
is that it might have been a method a die engraver could have used
as a tool to help him engrave accurately a device for which he had no die =
model except the coins themselves. Seeing them [the coins] reversed and sun=
ken might have been a tough mental acrobatic feat so a visual model or guid=
e in the form of a cast die makes sense. Of course, this would be true of a=
ny counterfeitor not exclusively MM's. If there was a way to tell the age o=
f the casts counterfeits with a relative degree of certainty it would contr=
ibute to our knowledge.
James Falconer Atlee's purported broken A is found on the 68-w. Lorenzo's t=
heory about the broken A die puncheon from a nick or hole or crack=A0 is un=
tested and could prove it either way. I am inclined to think that a broken =
A die cannot produce an unbroken one in the minting process.
John N. Lupia III
New Jersey, USA; Beirut, Lebanon=20
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Roman- Catholic- News/
God Bless Everyone
--- On Sun, 9/7/08, John Lupia <jlupia2@yahoo. com> wrote:
From: John Lupia <jlupia2@yahoo. com>
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R
To: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Sunday, September 7, 2008, 11:25 PM
Well, BB, I think you have settled this matter very nicely. Your drawing at=
tention to the trial transcripts was right on target and the sort of thing =
I was thinking as I have intended on checking Old Bailey and other sources =
I have at my disposal. Thanks for pointing out that example of London trial=
courts that settles the issue about deceptive treatment processes that wer=
e employed confirming their practice. Excellent work. Kudos to you.
John
John N. Lupia III
New Jersey, USA; Beirut, Lebanon=20
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Roman- Catholic- News/
God Bless Everyone
--- On Sun, 9/7/08, B B <rlbcomuser@yahoo. com> wrote:
From: B B <rlbcomuser@yahoo. com>
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R
To: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Sunday, September 7, 2008, 9:00 PM
All;
=A0
I'm feeling in an agreable mood tonight, so I'll say this, Im' in agreement=
with Byron....... .I think he'll regret his chiming in on this thread.
=A0
That being said, the origional question about darkening coinage for passing=
into circulation should not be addressed by brainstorming about Machins Mi=
lls processes and activities.=A0=A0 The prevailing techniques for coining w=
ere pretty much , during the 1780's to 1790-91 when MM was in operation, ca=
me from the coiners in the British Isles.=A0=A0 They, as evidenced in the t=
rial testimony from the London criminal courts, were using ashes and oil an=
d sawdust as well as other froms of sulfur and oil to color the brightness =
and coat the halfpence.=A0=A0 We know the operations were supplied with die=
s and equipmenbt from the Vermont Mint operations and one Connecticuit Mint=
site, with all that tooling and stajmping experience casting coins would b=
e an unlikely and combersome effort, in my opinion.
=A0
Some other coloring and cooking processesd were utilized by those who were =
clipping silver and gold issues and making debased castings but those darke=
ning or plating operations were different than for coppers.=A0=A0 These are=
well documented in the Trial transcripts as well.=A0=A0 Some of these skil=
ls may have also have been imported into the colonies, but mor likely they =
would have=A0appeared in Australia or Canada, me thinks.
=A0
Just my opinion..... .
=A0
BB
=A0
=A0=A0=A0
--- On Sun, 9/7/08, Byron Weston <bkw11@psu.edu> wrote:
From: Byron Weston <bkw11@psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R
To: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Sunday, September 7, 2008, 5:05 PM
I'm probably going to regret adding my two cents to this discussion=20
but...the only cast counterfeits with any plausible possibility of an=20
American provenance would be halfpence and farthings dated 1749, and=20
even that cannot be proven as fact, all others would be pure=20
speculation. Group lots that I've gotten from Britain in the past=20
have regularly contained some casts of every sort, from Charles II to=20
George III, and beyond. I think there was some casting going on in=20
the Colonies, but that most casts and the vast majority of struck=20
counterfeit halfepnce were and still are obviously being imported.
Machin's Mills would have no reason to cast counterfeits when there=20
stuck counterfeits operation apparently was working rather well. They=20
struck only one Geo. II variety, and all others were Geo. III, and=20
there aren't that many Geo. III cast counterfeit halfpence - and no=20
doubt the majority of those were imports as well.
Byron
--- In colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com, John Lupia <jlupia2@... > wrote:
>
> Give it some more thought. Think about it, mull over it. Is it=20
possible the farthest thing from my mind was trying to figure out how=20
MM darken cast counterfeits. Let's try to give ideas a chance.=20
Actually the farthest thing from my mind was that MM set up a full-
blown casting operation. I thought if they did cast it was on a small=20
scale, not for counterfeit production of cast coins, but to make cast=20
dies as models for their own die-sinking. But, Craig looked at it=20
from another angle and saw that my time constraints were easily=20
gotten by. I think he is right that there is no solid grounds to=20
restrict when the few casts we have were made 1789-1810. MM could=20
have done this 1789-1790. But, then again, it could have been anyone=20
at anytime just before the few known specimens were purchased.
>=20
> John
>=20
> John N. Lupia III
> New Jersey, USA; Beirut, Lebanon=20
> http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Roman- Catholic- News/
> God Bless Everyone
>=20
>=20
> --- On Sat, 9/6/08, palmers4@... <palmers4@.. .> wrote:
>=20
> > From: palmers4@... <palmers4@.. .>
> > Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R
> > To: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com
> > Date: Saturday, September 6, 2008, 10:52 PM
>=20
>=20
> > Marc, the question is apparently, What did the Machin's
> > Mills coiners use
> > to darken THEIR cast coinage? Yeah, right.<S> David=20
>=20
>=20
> >=20
> > Original Message:
> > ------------ -----
> > From: marc marcm@...
> > Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 20:43:54 -0600
> > To: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com
> > Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R
> >=20
> >=20
> > John,
> > British counterfeiters used brimstone (sulfur)to darken
> > their coins.
> > ----- Original Message -----=20
> > From: John Lupia=20
> > To: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com=20
> > Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2008 19:53
> > Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R
> >=20
> >=20
> > Craig
> >=20
> > Interesting suggestion. But I have a few questions,
> > in your
> > generosity, you might be able to answer for me to bring me
> > up to speed on
> > this. Are there any known examples of this sort that might
> > support such a
> > view? What sort of mechanism would someone have available
> > to age coins with
> > dirt in a solution or by some other method? Was this sort
> > of deception in
> > counterfeiting an 18th, 19th, or 20th century concept? What
> > evidence do we
> > have to support this view? I do recall a counterfeiter
> > mentioned in the
> > American Journal of Numismatics, published in one of the
> > early issues. The
> > guy buried them only to dig them up pretending to have
> > discovered them. But
> > they were silver NE coins. He did this with malice to
> > deceive eager buyers
> > among the collecting community. It is possible that thiese
> > cast NJ coppers
> > were from some later period and made to look circulated in
> > order to defraud
> > collectors. On the other hand, if they were earlier, say
> > between 1789-1810,
> > theyy could have come from Machins Mills, active at this
> > time.
> >=20
> > John
> >=20
> > John N. Lupia III
> > New Jersey, USA; Beirut, Lebanon=20
> > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Roman- Catholic- News/
> > God Bless Everyone
> >=20
> > --- On Sat, 9/6/08, CMcdon0923@. ..
> > <CMcdon0923@ ...> wrote:
> >=20
> > From: CMcdon0923@. ..
> > <CMcdon0923@ ...>
> > Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R
> > To: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com
> > Date: Saturday, September 6, 2008, 9:22 PM
> >=20
> >=20
> > It would have been very simple to darken it to
> > make it look like
> > it had been in circulation for 50 years.
> >=20
> >=20
> > Craig
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > In a message dated 9/6/2008 5:57:03 P.M. Central
> > Daylight Time,
> > jlupia2@... writes:
> > I seriously doubt anyone in 1839 would attempt
> > to pass off into
> > circulation a fifty year old coin in shiny new red
> > condition.=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
----
> > Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a
> > new fashion blog,
> > plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at
> > StyleList.com.=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
--
> > mail2web.com =E2=A4" What can On Demand Business Solutions do
> > for you?
> > http://link. mail2web. com/Business/ SharePoint
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > ------------ --------- --------- ------
> >=20
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >=20
> >=20
> >
>
=A0
Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the late=
st fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.=20
--0-1863577403-1221313413=:17920
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<table cellspacing=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" border=3D"0" ><tr><td valign=3D"=
top" style=3D"font: inherit;">85-nn is believed to be a low grade 56-n that=
has been messed with. Roger<BR><BR>--- On <B>Fri, 9/12/08, Rosaamltd=
@aol.com <I><Rosaamltd@aol.com></I></B> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(=
16,16,255) 2px solid">From: Rosaamltd@aol.com <Rosaamltd@aol.com><BR>=
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] NJ Contemporary Counterfeits Census; wa=
s 23-R<BR>To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com<BR>Date: Friday, September 12,=
2008, 1:48 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=3Dyiv302788970>
<DIV id=3Dygrp-text>
<DIV><FONT id=3Drole_document face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2>
<DIV>
<DIV>John, just FYI -- I believe that most experts have delisted the "85-nn=
" though I suspect Roger or Jack could be more specific about that. T=
he "Broken A Punch" theory has also been fairly discredited -- if the matri=
x itself had the defect, then EVERY punch made from it would show the simil=
ar defect, unless hand-altered in the punch itself...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 9/12/2008 9:27:03 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jlupi=
a2@yahoo. com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT style=3D"BACKGROUND=
-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2>
<DIV id=3Dygrp-mlmsg>
<DIV id=3Dygrp-msg>
<DIV id=3Dygrp-text>
<DIV>
<TABLE cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=3Dtop>A few scattered thoughts.<BR><BR>We know from the consensu=
s so far that three CC 23-R's exist. Two are known for 81-ll; About three f=
or the 83-ii; two for the 84-kk; only one for the 85-nn. <BR><BR>The 56-n C=
amel is believed by some, like Phil Mossman, coined by Matthias Ogden, whil=
e other attribute it to be a MM. Albion Cox is thought by some to have been=
involved in MM's.The question rises is there a connection between the Eliz=
abethtown Mint and MM's? If so what was it? Did they help one another, shar=
e puncheons and dies? If the Camel Head is actually MM's then why no=
t 37 Goiter; or the 54-k Serpent Head? Maybe these feature defects in the d=
ie engravings are the hallmarks of the engraver, and if the Camel Head is M=
M's then these others might be as well. These could be the result of a coll=
aboration between Elizabethtown and MM's. I would not rule out cast copies =
being used not for the copy but the cast die to be used as a model or
guide for the engraver. So, don't misunderstand when I suppose casts were =
made by MM's that this was the opted for method of counterfeiting. My view =
is that it might have been a method a die engraver could have used as a too=
l to help him engrave accurately a device for which he had no die model exc=
ept the coins themselves. Seeing them [the coins] reversed and sunken might=
have been a tough mental acrobatic feat so a visual model or guide in the =
form of a cast die makes sense. Of course, this would be true of any counte=
rfeitor not exclusively MM's. If there was a way to tell the age of the cas=
ts counterfeits with a relative degree of certainty it would contribute to =
our knowledge.<BR><BR>James Falconer Atlee's purported broken A is found on=
the 68-w. Lorenzo's theory about the broken A die puncheon from a nick or =
hole or crack is untested and could prove it either way. I am incline=
d to think that a broken A die cannot produce an unbroken one in the
minting process.<BR><BR>John N. Lupia III<BR>New Jersey, USA; Beirut, Leba=
non <BR>http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Roman- Catholic- News/<BR>God Bless=
Everyone<BR><BR>--- On <B>Sun, 9/7/08, John Lupia <I><jlupia2@yahoo. co=
m></I></B> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid">From: John Lupi=
a <jlupia2@yahoo. com><BR>Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R<BR=
>To: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com<BR>Date: Sunday, September 7, 2008, 1=
1:25 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=3Dyiv69921523>
<TABLE cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: inherit; font-size-adjust: inherit" vAlign=3Dtop>=
Well, BB, I think you have settled this matter very nicely. Your drawing at=
tention to the trial transcripts was right on target and the sort of thing =
I was thinking as I have intended on checking Old Bailey and other sources =
I have at my disposal. Thanks for pointing out that example of London trial=
courts that settles the issue about deceptive treatment processes that wer=
e employed confirming their practice. Excellent work. Kudos to you.<BR><BR>=
John<BR><BR>John N. Lupia III<BR>New Jersey, USA; Beirut, Lebanon <BR>http:=
//groups. yahoo.com/ group/Roman- Catholic- News/<BR>God Bless Everyone<BR>=
<BR>--- On <B>Sun, 9/7/08, B B <I><rlbcomuser@yahoo. com></I></B> wro=
te:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid">From: B B <r=
lbcomuser@yahoo. com><BR>Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R<BR>To:=
colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com<BR>Date: Sunday, September 7, 2008, 9:00 =
PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=3Dyiv2084131776>
<TABLE cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: inherit; font-size-adjust: inherit" vAlign=3Dtop>
<DIV>All;</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm feeling in an agreable mood tonight, so I'll say this, Im' in agre=
ement with Byron....... .I think he'll regret his chiming in on this thread=
.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>That being said, the origional question about darkening coinage for pa=
ssing into circulation should not be addressed by brainstorming about Machi=
ns Mills processes and activities. The prevailing techniques fo=
r coining were pretty much , during the 1780's to 1790-91 when MM was in op=
eration, came from the coiners in the British Isles. They, as e=
videnced in the trial testimony from the London criminal courts, were using=
ashes and oil and sawdust as well as other froms of sulfur and oil to colo=
r the brightness and coat the halfpence. We know the operations=
were supplied with dies and equipmenbt from the Vermont Mint operations an=
d one Connecticuit Mint site, with all that tooling and stajmping experienc=
e casting coins would be an unlikely and combersome effort, in my opinion.<=
/DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Some other coloring and cooking processesd were utilized by those who =
were clipping silver and gold issues and making debased castings but those =
darkening or plating operations were different than for coppers. =
; These are well documented in the Trial transcripts as well. S=
ome of these skills may have also have been imported into the colonies, but=
mor likely they would have appeared in Australia or Canada, me thinks=
.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Just my opinion..... .</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>BB</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> <BR><BR>--- On <B>Sun, 9/7/08, Byron Weston <I><b=
kw11@psu.edu></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid">From: Byron Wes=
ton <bkw11@psu.edu><BR>Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R<BR>To=
: colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com<BR>Date: Sunday, September 7, 2008, 5:05=
PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=3Dyiv200658554>
<DIV id=3Dygrp-text>
<DIV>I'm probably going to regret adding my two cents to this discussion <B=
R>but...the only cast counterfeits with any plausible possibility of an <BR=
>American provenance would be halfpence and farthings dated 1749, and <BR>e=
ven that cannot be proven as fact, all others would be pure <BR>speculation=
. Group lots that I've gotten from Britain in the past <BR>have regularly c=
ontained some casts of every sort, from Charles II to <BR>George III, and b=
eyond. I think there was some casting going on in <BR>the Colonies, but tha=
t most casts and the vast majority of struck <BR>counterfeit halfepnce were=
and still are obviously being imported.<BR>Machin's Mills would have no re=
ason to cast counterfeits when there <BR>stuck counterfeits operation appar=
ently was working rather well. They <BR>struck only one Geo. II variety, an=
d all others were Geo. III, and <BR>there aren't that many Geo. III cast co=
unterfeit halfpence - and no <BR>doubt the majority of those were
imports as well.<BR>Byron<BR><BR>--- In <A title=3Dmailto:colonial-coins@y=
ahoogroups.com href=3D"mailto:colonial-coins%40yahoogroups.com" target=3D_b=
lank rel=3Dnofollow>colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com</A>, John Lupia <jl=
upia2@... > wrote:<BR>><BR>> Give it some more thought. Think abou=
t it, mull over it. Is it <BR>possible the farthest thing from my mind was =
trying to figure out how <BR>MM darken cast counterfeits. Let's try to give=
ideas a chance. <BR>Actually the farthest thing from my mind was that MM s=
et up a full-<BR>blown casting operation. I thought if they did cast it was=
on a small <BR>scale, not for counterfeit production of cast coins, but to=
make cast <BR>dies as models for their own die-sinking. But, Craig looked =
at it <BR>from another angle and saw that my time constraints were easily <=
BR>gotten by. I think he is right that there is no solid grounds to <BR>res=
trict when the few casts we have were made 1789-1810. MM could <BR>have don=
e
this 1789-1790. But, then again, it could have been anyone <BR>at anytime =
just before the few known specimens were purchased.<BR>> <BR>> John<B=
R>> <BR>> John N. Lupia III<BR>> New Jersey, USA; Beirut, Lebanon =
<BR>> <A title=3Dhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/Roman-Catholic-News/ href=
=3D"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Roman-Catholic-News/" target=3D_blank rel=
=3Dnofollow>http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Roman- Catholic- News/</A><BR>&=
gt; God Bless Everyone<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> --- On Sat, 9/6/08, palmer=
s4@... <palmers4@.. .> wrote:<BR>> <BR>> > From: palmers4@..=
. <palmers4@.. .><BR>> > Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23=
-R<BR>> > To: <A title=3Dmailto:colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com href=
=3D"mailto:colonial-coins%40yahoogroups.com" target=3D_blank rel=3Dnofollow=
>colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com</A><BR>> > Date: Saturday, Septembe=
r 6, 2008, 10:52 PM<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> > Marc, the question is ap=
parently,
What did the Machin's<BR>> > Mills coiners use<BR>> > to darke=
n THEIR cast coinage? Yeah, right.<S> David <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>=
; > <BR>> > Original Message:<BR>> > ------------ -----<BR>&=
gt; > From: marc marcm@...<BR>> > Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 20:43:54 -=
0600<BR>> > To: <A title=3Dmailto:colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com href=
=3D"mailto:colonial-coins%40yahoogroups.com" target=3D_blank rel=3Dnofollow=
>colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com</A><BR>> > Subject: Re: [Colonial N=
umismatics] 23-R<BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > John,<BR>> >=
; British counterfeiters used brimstone (sulfur)to darken<BR>> > thei=
r coins.<BR>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> > From: John=
Lupia <BR>> > To: <A title=3Dmailto:colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com h=
ref=3D"mailto:colonial-coins%40yahoogroups.com" target=3D_blank rel=3Dnofol=
low>colonial-coins@ yahoogroups. com</A> <BR>> > Sent: Saturday, Sept=
ember 06,
2008 19:53<BR>> > Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] 23-R<BR>> &=
gt; <BR>> > <BR>> > Craig<BR>> > <BR>> > Interestin=
g suggestion. But I have a few questions,<BR>> > in your<BR>> >=
generosity, you might be able to answer for me to bring me<BR>> > up=
to speed on<BR>> > this. Are there any known examples of this sort t=
hat might<BR>> > support such a<BR>> > view? What sort of mecha=
nism would someone have available<BR>> > to age coins with<BR>> &g=
t; dirt in a solution or by some other method? Was this sort<BR>> > o=
f deception in<BR>> > counterfeiting an 18th, 19th, or 20th century c=
oncept? What<BR>> > evidence do we<BR>> > have to support this =
view? I do recall a counterfeiter<BR>> > mentioned in the<BR>> >=
; American Journal of Numismatics, published in one of the<BR>>
|
|---|
