u/xqw63

I recently shared an article about a 1797 British George III "Emergency Issue" countermark (S-3765A) that sparked a healthy debate. A fellow senior collector raised a valid concern: If the official countermarking occurred in 1797, how can the host coin be dated 1802?

As a researcher, I prefer evidence over blind faith—even when a coin is slabbed by PCGS. After digging through the archives and numismatic literature, here is the breakdown of why these "anachronistic" coins exist and why they are recognized as genuine.

1. The PCGS Verdict

The coin in question is housed in a PCGS holder labeled "PCGS Genuine / Chop Mark-VG Detail". The label specifically identifies it as S-3765A KM-634 C/M on Mex 8R.

• S-3765A: The Spink catalog designation for the George III Emergency Dollar.
• C/M on Mex 8R: Confirms the countermark was applied to a Mexican 8 Reales host.

By slabing this coin with these specific attributions, PCGS is explicitly certifying that the George III oval countermark is genuine, despite the host coin date.

2. Why the Dates Don't "Add Up"

While the official Bank of England authorization for these emergency issues was in 1797, my research into the history of the steel dies revealed some surprising facts:

• Longevity of the Dies: The oval punches used for these coins were not destroyed in 1797. They remained available for many years.
• Widespread Use: These punches were used across various assay offices for gold and silver taxation, not just the Tower Mint.
• The "Collectors' Market" Theory: According to Numista, these dies were likely used for years afterward to countermark foreign coins—other than Spanish 8 Reales—specifically to satisfy the demands of collectors.
• Documented Survival: In the Birmingham Mint, these specific punches were used as late as 1830.

3. Historical Evidence of "Late" Stamping

In Harrington Emerson Manville’s Bank of England Countermarked Dollars (2001), he documents several instances of genuine oval countermarks appearing on coins dated after the official 1797-1799 period:

1. 1798 8 Reales: Stamped a year after the official Mint issues.
2. 1803 8 Reales: Stamped six years late (formerly in the A.J. Byrne collection).
3. 1806 8 Reales: Stamped nine years late (formerly in the R. Gladdle collection).

He also notes that these genuine marks appear on copper coins and smaller silver denominations (half-reales) that were never part of the official Bank of England silver bags.

Summary & Takeaways

1. The countermark is real, but it isn't a "circulating" 1797 emergency issue. It was likely applied later using the original official steel dies.
2. Expertise matters. PCGS experts are aware of these variations and the history of the punches.
3. Market Value. These "variants" that defy traditional logic (stamped on non-Spanish or later-dated coins) are often rarer and can command higher prices among specialists.
4. Protect yourself. Due to the high premiums on George III countermarks, I strongly recommend only purchasing coins authenticated by reputable TPGs (Third-Party Graders).

I recently participated in the auction of the world-renowned chopmarked coin collector, Edgar Murphy, hosted by Stack’s & Bowers. As a chopmark enthusiast, I was eager to secure a "centerpiece" for my future collection. The bidding was intense, with collectors from around the globe fighting over items until the early hours of the morning. Eventually, I managed to snag this unique piece at a price I could afford.

The Coin at First Glance

This is an 8 Reales silver coin originally minted in 1802 at the Mexico City Mint, then a Spanish colony. It carries two distinct marks of its history:

Chinese Chopmarks: Evidence that the coin circulated in China.

The King's Portrait: A small, clear countermark of King George III of Great Britain.

Historical Background: The Emergency Issue

In 1796, Britain was embroiled in the Anglo-Spanish War. To ease financial strain, the British captured Spanish merchant ships laden with silver dollars.

On March 3, 1797, the Treasury issued a warrant to the Tower Mint:

"These are to authorize and direct you to prepare the necessary means of Stamping the Mark of the King's Head... on such Silver Spanish Dollars as shall be sent to your office from the Bank of England.".

Between 1797 and 1799, these coins were stamped with an oval portrait of George III to make them legal tender in Britain. In 1804, a second batch was issued with an octagonal stamp.

The Mystery: An "Impossible" Date?

When I first received the coin, I didn't think it was a "unique" piece. However, after world-famous chopmarked coin expert Taylor Leverage compared it to another coin on Reddit, a British countermark enthusiast raised a red flag.

The contradiction: The oval countermark was officially used between 1797–1799, but my coin was minted in 1802. The enthusiast claimed the mark must be a later forgery. This raised a huge question: How did PCGS—a top-tier grading service—authenticate a coin with such a glaring date discrepancy?.

The Investigation

I searched for answers and found that my coin isn't the only "anomaly."

Numista Records: Professional sources state that the oval dies remained available for many years after the official issue, and were used to stamp various foreign coins specifically for collectors.

Auction Evidence: I found an 1807 coin with the "1797-1799" oval stamp , as well as 1805/1807 coins with the 1804 octagonal stamp. See pictures.

《The Bank of England Countermarked Dollars, 1797-1804 》https://www.britnumsoc.org/publications/Digital%20BNJ/pdfs/2000_BNJ_70_11.pdf, in page 17, there is a picture of two samples.

Why This Coin is a "Rare Treasure"

While other "late" countermarked coins exist, mine is uniquely significant:

1, It proves the continued use of the George III oval die on later-dated host coins.

2, Crucially, it is the only known "late" George III countermarked coin that also bears Chinese chopmarks..

It represents a global journey: minted in Mexico (1802), stamped in England (post-1802), and eventually circulating through the trade routes of China.

What do you guys think? Have you ever seen a "late" official stamp on a host coin that shouldn't exist?