En esta entrada analizaremos tres últimas piezas de busto de Carlos III acuñadas en Sevilla, dos de ellas (FIGURAS 126.1 y 126.2) en 1778 y la otra en 1788 (FIGURAS 126.3), así como dos piezas de Carlos IV de Madrid, acuñadas en los años intermedios de su reinado en 1798 y 1802. En la misma forma que el estudio de monedas de un tipo uniforme, como las producidas en el Ingenio segoviano, pero emitidas por diferentes monarcas: Felipe II, Felipe III,, Felipe IV y Carlos II, nos plateaba el problema de fijar una determinada proporción entre rareza y precio, entre las correspondientes a un rey u otro, con objeto de proporcionar una primera orientación al coleccionista, antes de indicar cuál es la rareza relativa de una fecha u otra, entre las piezas de un mismo rey, aquí nos encontramos ante una cuestión parecida.
Las monedas de busto peninsulares de: Carlos III, Carlos IV y gran parte de las de Fernando VII, tienen un diseño semejante: busto del monarca en el anverso y escudo de Castilla y León en el reverso, pero es evidente que la rareza de las fechas comunes de uno u otro monarca no son las mismas, así como tampoco es la misma, en nuestra opinión, la incidencia que tiene en el precio de estas monedas, la variación del grado de conservación.
En el párrafo anterior ya han quedado mencionadas las tres variables que determinan substancialmente los precios de estas monedas: a nombre de qué rey están emitidas, cuál es la escala aplicable al incremento de precios según conservaciones para las monedas de ese rey y cuál es finalmente, su grado de conservación. Aparentemente, estas variables son las mismas que hemos venido considerando para determinar el valor de los grandes bronces romanos en el Volumen I de esta otra: El Valor de los Sestercios, en el que proporcionábamos una estimación de los precios de los Sestercios comunes de cada emperador o persona relevante de su familia, en una conservación determinada (Good, G en este caso) en función de su rareza relativa con respecto a una pieza tomada como patrón; en este caso, el precio en G del Sestercio mas común de Trajano que estimábamos en 55€. En cuanto a los incrementos de precio, con el aumento de grado, después de analizar cientos de datos procedentes de listas de adjudicación en subastas para los Sestercios de cada emperador en diferentes estados de conservación y tratar de detectar qué tipo de curva (tratando de que ésta fuera lo mas simple posible dentro de las que acojaran unos coeficientes de correlación aceptable) nos permitía relacionar precio con conservación para cada emperador, hemos llegado a la conclusión de que una curva parabólica del tipo: P(N) = P*2**C (el precio en un determinado grado es igual al precio en un grado inicial (Good en nuestro caso) multiplicado por 2 elevado a la potencia representada por el número en que ese determinado grado excede al número que representa al grado inicial. Es decir que se asignamos los números: 1, 2, 3, etc… a los grados G, VG, F, etc… y el precio de un Sestercio en G común de Trajano es 55€, el precio de ese mismo tipo de Sestercio en F sería: 55*2**(3-1) = 55*4 = 220€.
Ésto es lo que en lenguaje mas llano venimos expresando diciendo que en este caso el precio de una moneda de este tipo, se duplica con cada aumento de grado. Ahora bien, en principio, que esta duplicación se lleve a cabo para las monedas de un determinado emperador, no quiere decir que éste se verifique para cualquiera de ellos. El análisis de regresión de los datos comentados, nos acredita que los coeficientes de correlación de una curva de crecimiento exponencial, del tipo de la que hemos comentado, correlaciona aceptablemente, no solo para los Sestercios de un determinado emperador, sino también para los de la mayoría de los demás emperadores.
Cabe preguntarnos a qué puede deberse ésto, ya que en principio parecería lógico que los precios de las monedas de los emperadores mas antiguos crecieran con la conservación mas deprisa que los de los mas modernos, al haber estado circulando durante mas tiempo. Ello no es así por dos razones fundamentales.
Por una parte, muchas de las monedas de emperadores anteriores (y sobre todo las mas gastadas) fueron fundidas para disponer de metal suficiente para nuevas acuñaciones, especialmente en los casos en los que el cambio de emperador o de dinastía, se realizaba por procedimientos violentos, por lo que políticamente era conveniente eliminar en lo posible las monedas con la efigie del emperador o emperadores anteriores. Y por otra parte, las monedas supervivientes, sabemos por referencias de los historiadores coetáneos, no desaparecieron bruscamente de la circulación al dejar de emitirse los Sestercios a mitad del siglo III D.C., sino que siguieron siendo empleados como medio de pago para pequeñas compras hasta los tiempos medievales, por lo en relación con el tiempo total que cada tipo de Sestercio estuvo circulando (que puede ser de varios siglos) la diferencia entre los años transcurridos entre uno u otro reinado no es demasiado significativa.
Ello significa que en principio, podemos con una aproximación suficiente, el tener en mente la misma regla de incremento de precio para los Sestercios de la generalidad de los emperadores. Es evidente que esta regla no es en absoluto, de aplicación para los Antoninianos o para los Denarios, pero sí para los Sestercios. En otro lugar comentamos que teníamos que partir para determinación de estos criterios, siempre a partir de los datos proporcionados por la adjudicación de las piezas, en un número suficiente de subastas (precio de adjudicación, no precio de salida que pueden o no ser cubiertos). Este mismo tipo de incremento de precio con la conservación, hemos indicado en las entradas iniciales del Volumen II de la serie El Valor de las Macuquinas, que era, en general, aplicable a las monedas macuquinas que habían sido emitidas a nombre de los Reyes Católicos o de los diferentes monarcas de las Casas de Austria y de Borbón.
Sin embargo, cuando en este Volumen III de la serie, El Valor de los Dólares (en el que analizamos también los 8 Reales o Pesos) hemos abordado el análisis de las piezas acuñadas a rodillo en el Ingenio de Segovia, en sus primeras entradas ya hemos visto que el criterio anterior no es aplicable para este tipo de monedas, ya que el crecimiento de precio con la conservación, obviamente ya no se derivaba de multiplicarlo por 2 por cada incremento de grado, lo que resulta lógico teniendo en cuenta que lo llamativo del diseño de estas piezas y su bella factura determinaba que se fundieran relativamente poco y que alcanzaran escasa circulación, por lo que el incremento de precio con la conservación, necesariamente tenía que ser mas atenuado, por lo que el análisis de regresión de los datos de adjudicaciones en subasta de estas piezas en distintas conservaciones (dato que siempre se ha obtenido sobre piezas, para las que su fotografía nos permitía hacer personalmente una asignación homogénea de su grado de conservación) nos ha permitido constatar que en este caso el coeficiente a aplicar al precio en el cambio de grado es 1,5.
En el caso de las monedas peninsulares de 8 Reales de busto de los Borbones, la primera cuestión que hemos estudiado, es la proporción relativa de los precios de las piezas comunes de cada rey, en función de los de las de los otros monarcas para un grado concreto de conservación para el que hemos tomado el de Fine (F). Ciertamente, el grado medio (average grade) en el que se encuentran las piezas de los tres reyes: Carlos III, Carlos IV y Fernando VIII no es el mismo. De acuerdo con nuestras estadísticas, para el primero, este grado medio es F-, para el segundo es F+ y para el tercero, es VF. No obstante, si tomamos todas las piezas adjudicadas como un conjunto, con independencia de a nombre de cuál de los tres reyes fueron emitidas, su grado medio es, aproximadamente F.
Es por ello que hemos elegido ese grado para indicar que en él, en nuestra opinión, el valor de las piezas comunes de este tipo de Carlos III es de unas tres veces el de las de Fernando VIII y el de las de Carlos IV de una y media veces las de Fernando VII y la mitad del de las de Carlos III. Es decir que estimamos que en grado F, la rareza y por tanto los precios de estas monedas se encuentran en una proporción de: 3, 1,5 y 1, respecto a las de Carlos III (3), Carlos IV (1,5) y Fernando VII (1).
Una vez fijada y verificada, en base a los datos a los que hemos tenido acceso, la hipótesis de en qué relación se encuentran los precios de las piezas de este tipo de los tres monarcas, en grado F; de cara a poder determinar cuáles son los criterios del aumento del precio con los grados de conservación, hemos vuelto a repetir el análisis de regresión para detectar cual es el tipo de curva que nos muestra un mayor coeficiente de correlación con los datos de grado y precio de las piezas mas comunes de cada uno de estos reyes. En base a éste, hemos deducido que los coeficientes que nos dan una mayor correlación son: 2 para las piezas de Carlos III, 1,5 para las de Carlos IV y 1,25 para las de Fernando VIII de 8 Reales de Madrid y Sevilla.
Esto quiere decir que para estimar los precios de una pieza de Carlos III a partir del precio en F, multiplicaríamos por 2, en el caso de Carlos IV, por 1,5, y en el Fernando VII por 1,25. Los resultados del análisis concuerdan evidentemente con la opinión que tienen todos los numismáticos, expresada en unos términos mas llanos: Las monedas de 8 Reales peninsulares de Carlos III están generalmente mucho mas gastadas que las de Fernando VII, y las de Carlos IV se encuentran en un punto intermedio.
No obstante, cuando pretendemos orientar al coleccionista con tablas de precios por conservaciones, como las que figuran las tablas incluidas al final de estos Volúmenes, es muy conveniente ser mas explícitos, facilitando precios para cada tercio de grado de F- a AU+, ya que al tratarse de monedas de valor elevado, la diferencia de dinero a desembolsar para un ejemplar u otro, una pequeña diferencia en conservación puede llegar a ser muy significativa. Pensemos, por ejemplo, que si bien para Fernando VII la diferencia de precio para una pieza en estos dos grados (F- y AU+) puede ser poco importante: de 120€ (F-) a 350€ (AU+), sin embargo para Carlos II puede ser muy importante: de 375€ en F- a 4.800€ en AU+.
Vemos por tanto que así como la diferencia de precios entre las piezas de cada rey no son muy altas en F (de 3 a 1), sin embargo en AU ya las diferencias son de 12 a 1, divergiendo de la opinión común de que la conservación es mas importante que la rareza. Esto es efectivamente cierto respecto a las fechas mas o menos difíciles, pero no lo es en modo alguno, respecto a las piezas de tipos distintos, en este caso las de cada rey. Ahí se evidencia que los precios verdaderamente altos, son los de aquellas piezas en alta conservación, pero que al mismo tiempo correspondan a tipos de gran rareza (en este caso en concreto, a las de Carlos III). En cuanto a las diferencias de precios por razón de la rareza de una pieza u otra, en función del año de acuñación o sus ensayadores cuando existen ensayadores diferentes dentro del mismo año, hemos seguido un criterio similar al empleado con los Sestercios y las Macuquinas, con tres categorías de piezas: las Raras, con un precio doble que el de las fechas comunes, las Muy Raras, con un valor cuádruple, y las Rarísimas, con un valor de 8 veces el de las mas comunes. Por tanto vemos que estas categorías las establecemos en función de la rareza relativa de unos años u otros, dentro del mismo tipo, y no, para diferenciar la escasez relativa de unos tipos respecto a otros.
FIGURA 126.1
La pieza de la FIGURA 126.1 es un 8 Reales de Carlos III acuñado en Sevilla en 1778 con los Ensayadores Carlos Jimenez (C) y Francisco López (F). La rareza de esta pieza es algo mas alta que la de las anteriores de la Ceca de Sevilla. Así YRIARTE la evalúa en 160$ y Calicó que la considera muy rara (rr), en 275$. CAYÓN y CALICÓ siguen una pauta para la valoración de esta pieza similar a la del resto de las de Sevilla. Así CAYÓN las valora en 25.000P, en 1976, 130.000P en 1980 y 1998, en F, mientras que CALICÓ lo hace en 65.000P en 1981, bajando a 55.000P en 1994 y 500€n en 2008, prácticamente el mismo precio en VF, que casi 30 años antes, lo que explicita claramente la estabilización de su precio. Por su parte, VICENTI la valora en 20.000P en 1968 y 60.000P en 1978. PEIRO 2007 la asigna un valor de 350€ en F (MBC) y 600€ en VF+ (EBC). KRAUSE 2002 aumenta para esta pieza, mas rápidamente su precio con la conservación, que en el caso de otras piezas de Sevilla, llegando hasta 1.300$ en XF, partiendo de 225$ en VG.
Nuevamente nos da idea la supervaloración de estas piezas en los 70, el que la moneda de esta fecha de la colección CALBETÓ en VF saliera con un precio de 3.000FS en la subasta organizada en Ginebra en el 4 de diciembre de 1974 organizada por Calicó, Spink y Galerie de Monnais. Esta pieza se encuentra en grado F por presentar un desgaste generalizado en toda ella, especialmente en las cabezas de los leones y las bases de los castillos en el reverso, y en la parte delantera de la peluda del Rey y su coleta, en el anverso. En estas condiciones de acuerdo con los criterios que hemos expuesto, su valor y precio de mercado es de 450€.
FIGURA 126.2
La moneda mostrada en la FIGURA 126.2 es exactamente de mismo tipo y fecha que la anterior, por lo que no es preciso que comentamos mas que sus características especificas. En este caso su grado es F- ya que el relieve en las partes sensibles que hemos indicado, es menor que el de la pieza de la FIGURA anterior, además de presentar igual que ella, desgaste generalizado. En este caso, su precio en F- sería de 275€, pero como presenta pátina, a diferencia de la anterior que ha sido limpiada, podemos elevar su precio de mercado en un 20% llegando hasta los 450€.
Figura 126.3
La pieza mostrada en la FIGURA 126.3 es un 8 Reales de Carlos III acuñado en Sevilla en 1788 con el Ensayador Carlos Jiménez (C). Esta fecha figura en algunos catálogos con una valoración mas alta que el de las piezas comunes de Sevilla de Carlos III. No obstante, nosotros pensamos que la rareza no solamente no es mas alta sino que, hoy en día, es inferior. Por tanto, no creemos justificada la valoración de CAYÓN 1998 que fija para esta pieza un precio de 150.000P en F, mientras que en 1976 y 1980 solamente la evaluaba en 30.000P y 100.000P respectivamente. En cambio la valoración de CALICÓ en 1981 y 1994 es algo inferior a la de las otras piezas de Sevilla, aunque en 2008 la asigna un precio de 500€, el de las mas comunes de esta Ceca. VICENTI y PEIRO evalúan esta moneda igual que las otras fechas comunes de Sevilla, mientras que KRAUSE en conservación baja (VG) la valora mas alto y en conservaciones altas (XF) mas bajo.
Esta pieza es la última de las acuñadas por Carlos III. En esta misma fecha, su sucesor Carlos IV también acuñó monedas de este tipo con su busto, que son mas raras que las de su antecesor de esta misma fecha. La conservación de esta pieza es claramente mejor que la de las dos anteriores, como suele ser normal en las monedas de esta fecha. El gastaje, en este caso, solo afecta a las partes mas altas del diseño, aunque al ser suficientemente extenso en las partes comentadas, solamente podemos llegar a asignar una conservación VF-, por lo que llegamos a un valor de 750$. Por lo que se refiere a su precio de mercado no encontramos razón para modificarlo porque aunque la pieza no presenta pátina, tampoco conserva brillo original, ni está limpiada.
Figura 126.4
La moneda mostrada en la FIGURA 126.4 es un 8 Reales de Carlos IV acuñado en Madrid en 1798 con los Ensayadores Manuel de Lamas (M) y Francisco Herrera (F). Esta fecha es tradicionalmente considerada como bastante mas difícil que las piezas comunes de Madrid de la primera década del siglo XIX. Así YRIARTE 1965 la valora en 100$, CALICÓ 1970 la considera rara (r) y la asigna un precio de 225$. También CAYÓN y CALICÓ la valoran aproximadamente con un precio doble que el de las monedas anteriormente citadas de Madrid. Así CAYÓN 1976 la asigna 42.000P, CAYÓN 1980 y 1998, 1000.000P. Y CALICÓ 1981, 67.000P, CALICÓ 1994, 75.000P, bajando en 2008 hasta su precio en 1981, 500€. Como vemos, según estos autores su precio es prácticamente equivalente al de las piezas comunes de Carlos III, opinión en el que también abunda KRAUSE 2000 que la valora en 425$ en F.
La pieza se encuentra en grado F como consecuencia del fuerte gastaje que presenta en el centro de su anverso, posiblemente por su forma ligeramente cóncava. En estas condiciones su valor en F sería el doble que el de las piezas comunes de Carlos IV de Madrid e es de 175 en F, tendríamos por tanto un valor de 350€ en F que elevaríamos hasta un precio de mercado de 420€, por la buena pátina que presenta la pieza.
FIGURA126..5
La pieza de la FIGURA 126.5 es un 8 Reales de Carlos IV acuñado en Madrid en 1802 con los ensayadores Francisco Herrera (F) y Antonio Goicoechea (A). Esta pieza es una de las mas comunes de la Ceca de Madrid, juntamente con la de 1805, especialmente con los Ensayadores FA, siendo algo mas escasa la variante con los Ensayadores MF. Su valoración es la mínima por parte de todos los autores con un precio de 40.000P en CAYÓN 1998 y de 300€ en CALICÓ 2008. Para KRAUSE es también la pieza de este tipo en la que su precio se eleva mas despacio, con relación a su conservación; desde 100$ en VF hasta solamente 400 en XF.
La presente pieza se encuentra en VF ya que tiene desgaste solamente en las partes mas altas de su superficie abarcando la parte de la peluca del Rey sobre la oreja, en el anverso, y las cabezas de los leones y las bases de los castillos, en el reverso. Por ello, su valor en VF sería el de las piezas mas comunes de Carlos IV: 350€. Su precio de mercado lo elevaríamos en un 20% con relación a este valor, como consecuencia de la bella pátina que exhibe la pieza, llegando a 420€.
THE CORRELATION BETWEEN CONSERVATION AND PRICE OF THE COINS OF 8 REAL OF MADRID AND SEVILLA OF THE MONARCHS OF THE HOUSE OF BOURBON
In this post we will analyse three latest bust coins of Charles III minted in Seville, two of them (figures 126.1 and 126.2) in 1778 and the other in 1788 (figure 126.3), as well as two coins of Charles IV in Madrid, minted in the middle years of his reign in 1798 and 1802. In the same way as the study of coins of an uniform type, as those produced in the Ingenio of Segovia, but issued by different monarchs: Philip II, Philip III, Philip IV and Charles II, set out us the problem of fixing a certain proportion between price and rarity, among the corresponding to a king or another, in order to provide a first orientation to the collector, prior indicating the relative rarity of a date or another, between the coins of a same king, here we are faced with a similar question.
The peninsular bust coins of: Charles III, Charles IV and much of Ferdinand VII, have a similar design: the bust of the king on the front and shield of Castile and León on the back, but it is clear that the rarity of the common dates of one or another monarch are not the same, as well as it is not the same, in our opinion, the impact that have on the price of these coins, the variation in the grade of conservation.
In the previous paragraph, the three variables that determine substantially the price of these coins have already been mentioned: in the name of which king they are issued, what the applicable scale to the increase in prices according to conservations for the coins of this king and finally, what is its grade of conservation. Apparently, these variables are the same that we have been considering to determine the value of the large Roman bronzes in the volume I of this work: The Value of the Sesterces, in which we proportionate an estimation of the prices of the common Sesterces of each emperor or important person of his family, in particular conservation (Good, G in this case) in relation of their relative rarity of a coin taken as a pattern; in this case, the price in G the most common Sesterce of Trajan which we estimate to €55. Regarding to the increases of price, with the increase of the grade after analysing hundreds of data from lists of sale in auctions for the Sesterces of each Emperor in different states of conservation and try to detect what kind of curve (dealing with the fact that it was the simplest thing possible within the one that accept some acceptable correlation coefficients) allowed us to make a relation between the price with conservation for each emperor, we have come to the conclusion that a parabolic curve of the type: P(N) = P*2**C (the price in a certain grade is equal to the price to an initial grade (Good in our case) multiplied by 2 making higher the power represented by the number in which this grade exceeds the number that represents the initial grade. That is to say that we attach the numbers: 1, 2, 3, etc... to the grades G, VG, F, etc... and the price of a Sesterce in common G of Trajan is €55, the price of that same kind of Sesterce in F would be: 55*2**(3-1)=55*4=€220.
This is what in a language most flat we have been expressing in saying that in this case the price of a coin of this type, doubles with each increase of grade. Now well, in principle, this doubling is carried out for coins of a particular emperor, it does not mean that this is checked to any of them. The commented data regression analysis makes us believe that the coefficients of correlation of a curve of exponential growth of the type of the one that we have discussed, acceptably correlates, not only for the Sesterces a particular emperor, but also for those of the majority of other emperors.
We should ask ourselves what is due to that, since in principle it would seem logical that the prices of the currencies of the most ancient emperors would grow with the more rapidly conservation than the one of the more modern, to have been circulating during more time. This is not the case for two fundamental reasons.
On the one hand, many of the coins of previous emperors (and especially the more spent) were melted to dispose of sufficient metal for new coinages, especially in the cases where the change of emperor or dynasty, was carried out by violent procedures, so it was politically convenient to eliminate as far as possible the coins with the effigy of the emperor or the previous emperors. And on the other hand, the surviving coins, we know from contemporary historians references, did not abruptly disappear from circulation by ceasing to be coined the Sesterces in the middle of the 3rd century D.C., but continued to be used as means of payment for small purchases until the medieval times, by it in relation to the total time that each type of Sesterce was circulating (that it may be from several centuries) the difference between the years between one or other reign is not too significant.
This means that in principle, we can with one sufficient approximation, keep in mind the same rule of price increasing for the Sesterces from the generality of the emperors. It is obvious that this rule is not at all, in application for the Antoninianus or to the Denarius, but it does for the Sesterces. Then, we commented that we had to leave for determination of these criteria, always from the provided data for the sale of the coins, in a sufficient number in auctions (price for the sale, it is not the price of output which may or not be covered). This same type of increase in price with the conservation, we have indicated in initial posts of the Volume II of the series The value the Cob Currency, that was, in generally, applicable for the cob coins which had been issued in the name of the Catholic monarchs or of the different monarchs from the Houses of Habsburg and Bourbon.
However, when in this Volume III of the series, The Value of the Dollars (in which we also analyze the 8 real or peso), we have dealt with the analysis of the coins roller minted in the Ingenio of Segovia, in its first posts, since we have seen that the previous criterion is not applicable for this type of coins, since the growth of price with the conservation obviously already not derived to be multiplied by 2 for each increase of grade, what makes sense taking into account that what is striking the most in the design of these coins and their beautiful coinage determined that they were melt relatively little and they achieve few circulation, so the increase in price with the conservation, necessarily had to be more toned down, which is why the regression analysis of the data of sales in auction of these coins in various conservations (information that have always been obtained about the coins, for the one that the photography allowed us to make personally an homogeneous allocation of its grade of conservation) this has enabled us to see that in this case the coefficient to be applied to the price in a change of degree is 1,5.
With the peninsular coins of the bust of the Bourbons of 8 real, the first issue we have studied is the relative proportion of the prices of the common coins of each King, on the basis of the ones of the other monarchs for a particular grade of conservation for which we have taken the Fine (F). Certainly, the medium grade (average grade) in which are the coins of the three kings: Charles III, Charles IV and Ferdinand VIII is not the same. According with our statistics, for the first, this medium grade is F-, for the second is F+ and for the third, VF. However, if we take all the coins awarded as a whole, regardless the name of which of the three kings they were issued, their average level is approximately F.
This is why we have chosen this grade to indicate that in it, in our opinion, the value of the common coins of this type of Charles III is about three times those of Ferdinand VIII and the one of Charles IV is about half time those of Ferdinand VII and half of the ones of Charles III. That is to say that we consider that in F grade, the rarity and therefore the prices of these coins are in a proportion of: 3, 1,5 and 1, as for the ones of the Charles III (3), Charles IV (1,5) and Ferdinand VII (1).
Once fixed and verified, based on the data that we have had access, the hypothesis of in which relationship are the prices of the coins of this type of three monarchs, in F grade; looking to determine what are the criteria of the increase in the price with the grades of conservation, we have repeated again the regression analysis to detect the type of curve that shows a greater correlation coefficient with the data of the grade and the price of the most common coins for each of these kings. Based on these, we have deducted that the coefficients that give us a greater correlation are: 2 for the coins of Charles III, 1,5 for Charles IV and 1,25 for Ferdinand VIII of 8 real of Madrid and Seville.
This means that to estimate the prices of a coin of Charles III from the price in F, we multiply by 2, in the case of Charles IV, by 1,5, and Ferdinand VII by 1,25. The results of the analysis clearly match the opinion that has all numismatists, expressed in more flat terms: the peninsular 8 real coins of Charles III are generally much more spent than the ones of Ferdinand VII, and these of Charles IV are in a middle point.
However, when we try to orient the collector with tables of prices by conservations, such as those contained in the tables included at the end of these Volumes, it is very convenient to be more explicit, by providing price for each third of grade from F- to AU+, as it is dealing with high value coins, the difference of money to pay for a copy or another, a small difference in conservation can be very significant. We consider, for example, that if for Ferdinand VII the difference in price for a coin with these two grades (F- and AU+) cannot be so important: from €120 (F-) to €350 (AU+), for Charles II however it can be very important: €375 in F- to €4,800 in AU+.
Therefore we see that as well as the price difference between the coins of each King are not very high in F (from 3 to 1), however in AU the differences already are from 12 to 1, diverting from the common opinion that conservation is more important than the rarity. This is indeed true regarding the more or less difficult dates, but it is not in any way, regarding with the coins of different types, in this case those of each king. There is evidence that the very high prices are those of the coins in high conservation, but which at the same time correspond to types of great rarity (in this case in particular, those of Charles III). About the differences of prices because of the rarity of a coin or another, depending on the year of minting or their assayers when there are different assayers within the same year, we have followed a similar approach to the one employed with the sesterces and the cob coins, with three categories of coins: the rare, with a double price than the common dates ; the very rare, with a quadruple value ; and the extremely rare, with a value of 8 times the one of the more common. Therefore we see that these categories we establish them depending on the relative rarity of a few years or other, within the same type and not, to differentiate the relative shortage of one types respecting to others.
The coin of the figure 126.1 is an 8 real of Charles III coined in Seville in 1778 with the assayers Carlos Jimenez (C) and Francisco López (F). The rarity of this coin is something higher than the one of the previous ones of the Mint of Seville. Thus Yriarte evaluates it for $160 and Calicó which considers it very rare (rr), for $275. Cayón and Calicó follow a pattern for the valuation of this similar coin to the rest of those of Seville. Thus Cayón valued them for 25,000 pesetas, in 1976, 130,000 pesetas in 1980 and 1998, in F, while Calico does for 65,000 pesetas in 1981, going down to 55,000 pesetas in 1994 and €500 n in 2008, almost the same price in VF, which almost thirty years earlier, what clearly explicit price stabilization. For its part, Vicenti values it for 20,000 pesetas in 1968 and 60,000 pesetas in 1978. Peiro 2007 assigns it a value of €350 in F (MBC) and €600 in VF+ (EBC). Krause 2002 increases for this coin, but its price with the conservation, as in the case of other coins of Seville, quickly reaches $1,300 in XF, starting from $225 in VG.
Once again it gives us idea the overvaluation of these coins in the 1970s, the currency of this date from the Calbetó collection in VF came out with a price of 3,000FS in the auction organized in Geneva on December the 4th, 1974 in organized by Calicó, Spink and Galerie de Monnais. This coin is in F grade presenting a generalized wear in all of it, especially in the heads of lions and the bases of the castles on the back and in the front hairy part of the king and his ponytail, on the front. In these conditions according to the criteria we have set out, its value and market price is €450.
The currency displayed in the figure 126.2 is exactly the same type and date than the previous one, so it is not necessary to comment more than its specific features. In this case its grade is F- since the relief in the sensitive parts that we have mentioned, it is less than the coin of the previous figure, as well as presenting like it, a widespread wear. In this case, its price in F- would be €275, but as it presents patina, unlike the previous one which has been cleaned, we can raise its market price of 20% price reaching €450.
The coin shown in the figure 126.3 is an 8 real of Charles III coined in Seville in 1788 with the assayer Carlos Jiménez (C). This date is contained in some catalogues with a higher valuation than the common coins of Seville of Charles III. However, we think that the rarity is not only higher, nowadays, is lower. Therefore, we do not believe justified the assessment of Cayón 1998 setting for this coin a price of 150,000 pesetas in F, while in 1976 and 1980 it was only evaluated for 30,000 pesetas and 100,000 pesetas respectively. Instead the valuation of Calicó in 1981 and 1994 is something less than the one of the other coins of Seville, although in 2008 it assigns a price of €500, the one of the most common of this mint. Vicenti and Peiro assessed this currency as well as other common dates in Seville, while Krause in low conservation (VG) values it higher and in high conservations (XF) lower.
This coin is the last of the minted ones by Charles III. On this same date, his successor Charles IV also minted coins of this type with his bust, which are rarer than his predecessor of the same date. The preservation of this coin is clearly better than in the previous two, as it tends to be normal with the coins of this date. The wear, in this case, only affects the higher parts of the design, while it is sufficiently extensive in commented parties, we can only reach to assign a VF-conservation, by which we reached a value of $750. By it refers to its market price we did not found any reason to modify it because although the coin does not have patina, nor retains original brightness, nor is cleaned.
The currency shown in the figure 126.4 is an 8 real of Charles IV coined in Madrid in 1798 with the assayers Manuel Lamas (M) and Francisco Herrera (F). This date is traditionally considered as rather more difficult than the common coins of Madrid of the first decade of the 19th century. Thus Yriarte 1965 valued if for $100, Calicó 1970 considered it as rare (r) and assigns it a price of $225. Also Cayón and Calicó value it approximately with a double price as the above coins of Madrid. Thus Cayón 1976 assigns it 42,000 pesetas, Cayón 1980 and 1998, 1,000,000 pesetas. And Calicó 1981, 67,000 pesetas, Calicó 1994, 75,000 pesetas, in 2008 falling its price to the one of 1981, €500. As we see, as for these authors, its price is practically equivalent to the common coins of Charles III, opinion of which also abounds Krause 2000 that values it for $425 in F.
The coin is in F grade as a result of the strong wear that presents in the center of the front, possibly because of its slightly concave shape. In these conditions its value in F would be the double of the common coins of Charles IV of Madrid and is 175 in F, we would therefore have a value of €350 in F that we would go up to a market price of €420, for the good patina showing in the coin.
The coin of the figure 126.5 is an 8 real of Charles IV coined in Madrid in 1802 with the assayers Francisco Herrera (F) and Antonio Goicoechea (A). This coin is one of the more common of the Mint of Madrid, together with the one of 1805, especially with the Assayers FA, still a variant somewhat more limited with the Assayers MF. Its valuation is the minimum by all the authors with a price of 40,000 pesetas in Cayón 1998 and €300 in Calicó 2008. For Krause it is also the coin of this type in which its price rises more slowly, regarding with its conservation; from $100 in VF to only 400 in XF.
This coin is in VF that has wear only in the higher parts over its surface covering the part of the wig of the king on the ear, on the front, and the heads of lions and the bases of the castles on the back. Its value in VF would therefore be the one of the more common coins of Charles IV: €350. Its market price we would raise it in a 20% in relation to this value, as a result of the beautiful patina that exhibits the coin, reaching €420.
THE CORRELATION BETWEEN CONSERVATION AND PRICE OF THE COINS OF 8 REAL OF MADRID AND SEVILLA OF THE MONARCHS OF THE HOUSE OF BOURBON
In this post we will analyse three latest bust coins of Charles III minted in Seville, two of them (figures 126.1 and 126.2) in 1778 and the other in 1788 (figure 126.3), as well as two coins of Charles IV in Madrid, minted in the middle years of his reign in 1798 and 1802. In the same way as the study of coins of an uniform type, as those produced in the Ingenio of Segovia, but issued by different monarchs: Philip II, Philip III, Philip IV and Charles II, set out us the problem of fixing a certain proportion between price and rarity, among the corresponding to a king or another, in order to provide a first orientation to the collector, prior indicating the relative rarity of a date or another, between the coins of a same king, here we are faced with a similar question.
The peninsular bust coins of: Charles III, Charles IV and much of Ferdinand VII, have a similar design: the bust of the king on the front and shield of Castile and León on the back, but it is clear that the rarity of the common dates of one or another monarch are not the same, as well as it is not the same, in our opinion, the impact that have on the price of these coins, the variation in the grade of conservation.
In the previous paragraph, the three variables that determine substantially the price of these coins have already been mentioned: in the name of which king they are issued, what the applicable scale to the increase in prices according to conservations for the coins of this king and finally, what is its grade of conservation. Apparently, these variables are the same that we have been considering to determine the value of the large Roman bronzes in the volume I of this work: The Value of the Sesterces, in which we proportionate an estimation of the prices of the common Sesterces of each emperor or important person of his family, in particular conservation (Good, G in this case) in relation of their relative rarity of a coin taken as a pattern; in this case, the price in G the most common Sesterce of Trajan which we estimate to €55. Regarding to the increases of price, with the increase of the grade after analysing hundreds of data from lists of sale in auctions for the Sesterces of each Emperor in different states of conservation and try to detect what kind of curve (dealing with the fact that it was the simplest thing possible within the one that accept some acceptable correlation coefficients) allowed us to make a relation between the price with conservation for each emperor, we have come to the conclusion that a parabolic curve of the type: P(N) = P*2**C (the price in a certain grade is equal to the price to an initial grade (Good in our case) multiplied by 2 making higher the power represented by the number in which this grade exceeds the number that represents the initial grade. That is to say that we attach the numbers: 1, 2, 3, etc... to the grades G, VG, F, etc... and the price of a Sesterce in common G of Trajan is €55, the price of that same kind of Sesterce in F would be: 55*2**(3-1)=55*4=€220.
This is what in a language most flat we have been expressing in saying that in this case the price of a coin of this type, doubles with each increase of grade. Now well, in principle, this doubling is carried out for coins of a particular emperor, it does not mean that this is checked to any of them. The commented data regression analysis makes us believe that the coefficients of correlation of a curve of exponential growth of the type of the one that we have discussed, acceptably correlates, not only for the Sesterces a particular emperor, but also for those of the majority of other emperors.
We should ask ourselves what is due to that, since in principle it would seem logical that the prices of the currencies of the most ancient emperors would grow with the more rapidly conservation than the one of the more modern, to have been circulating during more time. This is not the case for two fundamental reasons.
On the one hand, many of the coins of previous emperors (and especially the more spent) were melted to dispose of sufficient metal for new coinages, especially in the cases where the change of emperor or dynasty, was carried out by violent procedures, so it was politically convenient to eliminate as far as possible the coins with the effigy of the emperor or the previous emperors. And on the other hand, the surviving coins, we know from contemporary historians references, did not abruptly disappear from circulation by ceasing to be coined the Sesterces in the middle of the 3rd century D.C., but continued to be used as means of payment for small purchases until the medieval times, by it in relation to the total time that each type of Sesterce was circulating (that it may be from several centuries) the difference between the years between one or other reign is not too significant.
This means that in principle, we can with one sufficient approximation, keep in mind the same rule of price increasing for the Sesterces from the generality of the emperors. It is obvious that this rule is not at all, in application for the Antoninianus or to the Denarius, but it does for the Sesterces. Then, we commented that we had to leave for determination of these criteria, always from the provided data for the sale of the coins, in a sufficient number in auctions (price for the sale, it is not the price of output which may or not be covered). This same type of increase in price with the conservation, we have indicated in initial posts of the Volume II of the series The value the Cob Currency, that was, in generally, applicable for the cob coins which had been issued in the name of the Catholic monarchs or of the different monarchs from the Houses of Habsburg and Bourbon.
However, when in this Volume III of the series, The Value of the Dollars (in which we also analyze the 8 real or peso), we have dealt with the analysis of the coins roller minted in the Ingenio of Segovia, in its first posts, since we have seen that the previous criterion is not applicable for this type of coins, since the growth of price with the conservation obviously already not derived to be multiplied by 2 for each increase of grade, what makes sense taking into account that what is striking the most in the design of these coins and their beautiful coinage determined that they were melt relatively little and they achieve few circulation, so the increase in price with the conservation, necessarily had to be more toned down, which is why the regression analysis of the data of sales in auction of these coins in various conservations (information that have always been obtained about the coins, for the one that the photography allowed us to make personally an homogeneous allocation of its grade of conservation) this has enabled us to see that in this case the coefficient to be applied to the price in a change of degree is 1,5.
With the peninsular coins of the bust of the Bourbons of 8 real, the first issue we have studied is the relative proportion of the prices of the common coins of each King, on the basis of the ones of the other monarchs for a particular grade of conservation for which we have taken the Fine (F). Certainly, the medium grade (average grade) in which are the coins of the three kings: Charles III, Charles IV and Ferdinand VIII is not the same. According with our statistics, for the first, this medium grade is F-, for the second is F+ and for the third, VF. However, if we take all the coins awarded as a whole, regardless the name of which of the three kings they were issued, their average level is approximately F.
This is why we have chosen this grade to indicate that in it, in our opinion, the value of the common coins of this type of Charles III is about three times those of Ferdinand VIII and the one of Charles IV is about half time those of Ferdinand VII and half of the ones of Charles III. That is to say that we consider that in F grade, the rarity and therefore the prices of these coins are in a proportion of: 3, 1,5 and 1, as for the ones of the Charles III (3), Charles IV (1,5) and Ferdinand VII (1).
Once fixed and verified, based on the data that we have had access, the hypothesis of in which relationship are the prices of the coins of this type of three monarchs, in F grade; looking to determine what are the criteria of the increase in the price with the grades of conservation, we have repeated again the regression analysis to detect the type of curve that shows a greater correlation coefficient with the data of the grade and the price of the most common coins for each of these kings. Based on these, we have deducted that the coefficients that give us a greater correlation are: 2 for the coins of Charles III, 1,5 for Charles IV and 1,25 for Ferdinand VIII of 8 real of Madrid and Seville.
This means that to estimate the prices of a coin of Charles III from the price in F, we multiply by 2, in the case of Charles IV, by 1,5, and Ferdinand VII by 1,25. The results of the analysis clearly match the opinion that has all numismatists, expressed in more flat terms: the peninsular 8 real coins of Charles III are generally much more spent than the ones of Ferdinand VII, and these of Charles IV are in a middle point.
However, when we try to orient the collector with tables of prices by conservations, such as those contained in the tables included at the end of these Volumes, it is very convenient to be more explicit, by providing price for each third of grade from F- to AU+, as it is dealing with high value coins, the difference of money to pay for a copy or another, a small difference in conservation can be very significant. We consider, for example, that if for Ferdinand VII the difference in price for a coin with these two grades (F- and AU+) cannot be so important: from €120 (F-) to €350 (AU+), for Charles II however it can be very important: €375 in F- to €4,800 in AU+.
Therefore we see that as well as the price difference between the coins of each King are not very high in F (from 3 to 1), however in AU the differences already are from 12 to 1, diverting from the common opinion that conservation is more important than the rarity. This is indeed true regarding the more or less difficult dates, but it is not in any way, regarding with the coins of different types, in this case those of each king. There is evidence that the very high prices are those of the coins in high conservation, but which at the same time correspond to types of great rarity (in this case in particular, those of Charles III). About the differences of prices because of the rarity of a coin or another, depending on the year of minting or their assayers when there are different assayers within the same year, we have followed a similar approach to the one employed with the sesterces and the cob coins, with three categories of coins: the rare, with a double price than the common dates ; the very rare, with a quadruple value ; and the extremely rare, with a value of 8 times the one of the more common. Therefore we see that these categories we establish them depending on the relative rarity of a few years or other, within the same type and not, to differentiate the relative shortage of one types respecting to others.
The coin of the figure 126.1 is an 8 real of Charles III coined in Seville in 1778 with the assayers Carlos Jimenez (C) and Francisco López (F). The rarity of this coin is something higher than the one of the previous ones of the Mint of Seville. Thus Yriarte evaluates it for $160 and Calicó which considers it very rare (rr), for $275. Cayón and Calicó follow a pattern for the valuation of this similar coin to the rest of those of Seville. Thus Cayón valued them for 25,000 pesetas, in 1976, 130,000 pesetas in 1980 and 1998, in F, while Calico does for 65,000 pesetas in 1981, going down to 55,000 pesetas in 1994 and €500 n in 2008, almost the same price in VF, which almost thirty years earlier, what clearly explicit price stabilization. For its part, Vicenti values it for 20,000 pesetas in 1968 and 60,000 pesetas in 1978. Peiro 2007 assigns it a value of €350 in F (MBC) and €600 in VF+ (EBC). Krause 2002 increases for this coin, but its price with the conservation, as in the case of other coins of Seville, quickly reaches $1,300 in XF, starting from $225 in VG.
Once again it gives us idea the overvaluation of these coins in the 1970s, the currency of this date from the Calbetó collection in VF came out with a price of 3,000FS in the auction organized in Geneva on December the 4th, 1974 in organized by Calicó, Spink and Galerie de Monnais. This coin is in F grade presenting a generalized wear in all of it, especially in the heads of lions and the bases of the castles on the back and in the front hairy part of the king and his ponytail, on the front. In these conditions according to the criteria we have set out, its value and market price is €450.
The currency displayed in the figure 126.2 is exactly the same type and date than the previous one, so it is not necessary to comment more than its specific features. In this case its grade is F- since the relief in the sensitive parts that we have mentioned, it is less than the coin of the previous figure, as well as presenting like it, a widespread wear. In this case, its price in F- would be €275, but as it presents patina, unlike the previous one which has been cleaned, we can raise its market price of 20% price reaching €450.
The coin shown in the figure 126.3 is an 8 real of Charles III coined in Seville in 1788 with the assayer Carlos Jiménez (C). This date is contained in some catalogues with a higher valuation than the common coins of Seville of Charles III. However, we think that the rarity is not only higher, nowadays, is lower. Therefore, we do not believe justified the assessment of Cayón 1998 setting for this coin a price of 150,000 pesetas in F, while in 1976 and 1980 it was only evaluated for 30,000 pesetas and 100,000 pesetas respectively. Instead the valuation of Calicó in 1981 and 1994 is something less than the one of the other coins of Seville, although in 2008 it assigns a price of €500, the one of the most common of this mint. Vicenti and Peiro assessed this currency as well as other common dates in Seville, while Krause in low conservation (VG) values it higher and in high conservations (XF) lower.
This coin is the last of the minted ones by Charles III. On this same date, his successor Charles IV also minted coins of this type with his bust, which are rarer than his predecessor of the same date. The preservation of this coin is clearly better than in the previous two, as it tends to be normal with the coins of this date. The wear, in this case, only affects the higher parts of the design, while it is sufficiently extensive in commented parties, we can only reach to assign a VF-conservation, by which we reached a value of $750. By it refers to its market price we did not found any reason to modify it because although the coin does not have patina, nor retains original brightness, nor is cleaned.
The currency shown in the figure 126.4 is an 8 real of Charles IV coined in Madrid in 1798 with the assayers Manuel Lamas (M) and Francisco Herrera (F). This date is traditionally considered as rather more difficult than the common coins of Madrid of the first decade of the 19th century. Thus Yriarte 1965 valued if for $100, Calicó 1970 considered it as rare (r) and assigns it a price of $225. Also Cayón and Calicó value it approximately with a double price as the above coins of Madrid. Thus Cayón 1976 assigns it 42,000 pesetas, Cayón 1980 and 1998, 1,000,000 pesetas. And Calicó 1981, 67,000 pesetas, Calicó 1994, 75,000 pesetas, in 2008 falling its price to the one of 1981, €500. As we see, as for these authors, its price is practically equivalent to the common coins of Charles III, opinion of which also abounds Krause 2000 that values it for $425 in F.
The coin is in F grade as a result of the strong wear that presents in the center of the front, possibly because of its slightly concave shape. In these conditions its value in F would be the double of the common coins of Charles IV of Madrid and is 175 in F, we would therefore have a value of €350 in F that we would go up to a market price of €420, for the good patina showing in the coin.
The coin of the figure 126.5 is an 8 real of Charles IV coined in Madrid in 1802 with the assayers Francisco Herrera (F) and Antonio Goicoechea (A). This coin is one of the more common of the Mint of Madrid, together with the one of 1805, especially with the Assayers FA, still a variant somewhat more limited with the Assayers MF. Its valuation is the minimum by all the authors with a price of 40,000 pesetas in Cayón 1998 and €300 in Calicó 2008. For Krause it is also the coin of this type in which its price rises more slowly, regarding with its conservation; from $100 in VF to only 400 in XF.
This coin is in VF that has wear only in the higher parts over its surface covering the part of the wig of the king on the ear, on the front, and the heads of lions and the bases of the castles on the back. Its value in VF would therefore be the one of the more common coins of Charles IV: €350. Its market price we would raise it in a 20% in relation to this value, as a result of the beautiful patina that exhibits the coin, reaching €420.
