| Conteúdo do artigo |
- From johnmenc@optonline.net Sat Apr 06 05:03:43 2013
Return-Path: <johnmenc@optonline.net>
X-Sender: johnmenc@optonline.net
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
X-Received: (qmail 87869 invoked by uid 102); 6 Apr 2013 12:03:41 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (HELO mta1.grp.bf1.yahoo.com) (10.193.84.135)
by m10.grp.bf1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Apr 2013 12:03:41 -0000
X-Received: (qmail 11736 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2013 12:03:41 -0000
X-Received: from unknown (HELO ng14-ip2.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com) (98.139.165.118)
by mta1.grp.bf1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Apr 2013 12:03:41 -0000
X-Received: from [98.139.164.125] by ng14.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Apr 2013 12:03:41 -0000
X-Received: from [10.193.94.44] by tg6.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Apr 2013 12:03:41 -0000
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2013 12:03:41 -0000
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <kjp2ut+71ud@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC7kd3T5JD3=HdUVCQ8dSYOw4rhGv=p-=y6oBy-weYwTDneAaQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose
X-Originating-IP: 69.123.181.16
X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0:0
X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 69.123.181.16
From: "colonialjohn" <johnmenc@optonline.net>
Subject: Kleeberg KNOCKOUT Compeititor
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=111282553; y=LN_tXo1NdW1VfkcpJX8ussv-H0j71_0TehHzPu5vnoUShdvl1G8VqwUcqw
X-Yahoo-Profile: colonial_john_c4
Good point ... I guess you do not own any 1817 1/2R Texas Jolas found in th=
e river bed <BG> ... here is a piece that recently competes with your Kleeb=
erg KNOCKOUT find:
VERY KOOL ... with Bob Gurney telling me he is going to $550 ... he lost an=
d was the underbidder ... 4***1 ... who are you?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1823-8-Real-KM-Cant-find-Mexican-coin-26-9-grams-Me=
xico-coin-/261192936012#ht_82wt_946
Still very curious on the composition of the top layer and if not done to p=
ass as a counterfeit of a higher metal alloy denomination ... then why crea=
te it? To be continued ...
JPL
--- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Rock <rosaamltd@...> wrote:
>
> John, when you talk about probability I am with you -- but I think you ha=
ve
> the actual probabilities reversed here! IF this was something that Wood
> did as an experimental piece it would probably be in choice condition --
> like most of his other pattern, proofs, off-metals and the like! If he
> went to the time and expense of doing something "special" I doubt he woul=
d
> put it into circulation at face value -- and risk confusing the public if
> he did! Yes, there were collectors at the time who paid premiums for
> special pieces for their cabinets -- but, again, if they did pay a premiu=
m
> they would hardly put the piece into circulation. It seems that the cas=
e
> here is more probable that someone did what Will suggested -- and we have
> NUMEROUS gilt and silvered counterfeit British and Irish halfpence (some
> perhaps used more for jewelry purposes than trying to fool the gullible
> public) that must have been done AFTER they were struck, not before.
>=20
> I think you're going down the same road that you did with the Hibernia "h=
ub
> trial" that wasn't -- you WANT it to be something, so you start off with
> the position that it IS what you want, then you selectively look at the
> facts that might, just might, support that. And you tend to ignore the
> facts that argue much stronger against your position. If you can't prove
> WHEN the plating was done, then what's to stop anyone from plucking a wor=
n
> Rosa or Hibernia off e-bay, mixing up whatever mixture you say this is,
> plating a coin and wearing it down a bit so that another "Wood Experiment=
al
> Coin" could be offered on the market.
>=20
> Jeff
>=20
>=20
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 2:59 PM, colonialjohn <johnmenc@...> wrote:
>=20
> > **
> >
> >
> > To answer Jeff questions if not a CC then the proability it may have co=
me
> > from W. Wood is HIGHER. Which is why I mentioned it. Will - exactly - I
> > have not seen a darkish brass bilayer coin like this before - applying
> > brass or a brass like substance (if brass) over a copper core has no
> > monetary benefit as a CC. Let's not foget Lot #58 -sure I strongly
> > suggested its PROBABLY a silver mercuric amalgam and not Ag plated or a=
Ag
> > foil type end product like the 1723 Proof Hibernias ... but again ... W=
ood
> > may have been experimenting ... its all about probability Jeff ... Lot =
#59
> > is more probable from Wood's hand ... as lot #58 pieces are offered wee=
kly
> > on E-Bay as Ag/Hg amalgam CCs ... but then again ... this Ag/Hg? (lot #=
58)
> > would pass as what? ... with these features? A British Crown ... that i=
s
> > very illiterate ... but possible. Just saying ... you may have me on on=
e
> > point ... Jeff ... can't see how I can prove the time period of this
> > coating on Lot #59 ... again its about proability that someone else did=
it
> > ... the W. Wood Experimental Piece will always have this symbol after i=
t
> > ... (?). Well ... at least in our lifetimes.
> >
> > JPL
> >
> > --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "dadpleasesendmoney" <books@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Could you explain why it couldn't be the case that someone applied a
> > gold-colored coating (even brass would have been bright for a while) to=
a
> > Rosa and said, "Hey, have you seen the new Guineas that the mint is tur=
ning
> > out?" (no pun intended), in a way analagous to the "racketeer" nickels?=
Will
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Rock <rosaamltd@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > John, you first need to prove that it was done BEFORE striking, not
> > > > something that was applied afterwards. If you don't figure out how =
to
> > do
> > > > that, then your analysis will be meaningless since anyone can plate
> > > > anything with a metal of any type at any point after the piece was
> > struck.
> > > > And I don't think anyone has suggested that this piece is a
> > counterfeit, so
> > > > not sure why you are bringing that into the equation...
> > > >
> > > > Jeff
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:24 AM, colonialjohn <johnmenc@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > **
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > http://stacksbowers.com/auctions/AuctionLot.aspx?LotID=3D452113
> > > > >
> > > > > Anton bought it. Syd - lets see what XRF Microanalysis has to say
> > about
> > > > > this unique? bi-layer piece. Will report results to you via the C=
4
> > > > > Newsletter. If my theory is right why would Wood apply a gold
> > mercuric
> > > > > amalgam paste over a bath metal piece other than for experimental
> > purposes?
> > > > > He may be the first person to see the effects of metal fusion in =
the
> > other
> > > > > case of silver and high zinc with his foil pieces prior to Sheffi=
eld
> > > > > process a century later ... I believe this piece was another
> > experimental
> > > > > piece ... as no counterfieter would make such a piece ... whether=
a
> > brass
> > > > > type amalgam or a Au type amalgams ... amalgams normally contain =
Ag
> > or Au
> > > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > JPL
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >=20=20
> >
>
|
|---|
| URL da fonte |
|
|---|
| Data de publicação |
|
|---|
| Volume |
|
|---|
