Why make counterfeits?

[Md. Shariful Islam]

I think old forgery which was in circulation .

You may find much more information regarding reverse as :

Though a different question but what is the economic benefit of making a forged coin in equal quantity of silver as the genuine one and risking life?

[Figleaf]

Though a different question but what is the economic benefit of making a forged coin in equal quantity of silver as the genuine one and risking life?

After 1816, British silver coins were token coins. That means that the silver in the coins was worth less than the nominal value of the coin. A forgery with the correct amount of silver would therefore be profitable in terms of value added.

The machines to make such forgeries would cost a lot of money, so poor people could not make forgeries. It is likely that there were three criminal layers. One would be a rich man, who would invest money in crime. He would try to create a situation where his risk was minimal by making the investment seem to be in an innocent enterprise, e.g. a small knives or cutlery factory. The middle layer would be an educated man running the machine. His risk was to be discovered with the machine. He would run a network of poor people who would buy the rupees at a discount and run the biggest risk: getting caught spending or changing the counterfeit coins. As the poor people would depend on the fake maker for their income, they would also act as informers and as protection from the police.

The poor would run the most risk. The educated man would have a good chance of escaping if things went wrong, the rich man would run the least risk but would make it all possible.

Peter

[andyg]

Though a different question but what is the economic benefit of making a forged coin in equal quantity of silver as the genuine one and risking life?

British sovereigns were forged in the Lebanon in the 1940's and 50's, usually to very similar standards as the original coins - not to deceive - but because there was a shortage of sovereigns (they were no longer being produced)

http://www.goldsovereigns.co.uk/sovereignfakesin20thcentury.html

this page is also interesting to study,
http://www.goldsovereigns.co.uk/fakes.html

[Md. Shariful Islam]

OK. Got it. But what method(s) of minting fakes were used by the fakers? Is the method similer to the official mints? How to trace a fake?

Islam

[FosseWay]

The most likely area to tell good fakes apart will be in the workmanship of the design, and especially in any naturalistic, non-geometric and non-stylised elements of the design. For British-influenced coinage, that generally means the monarch's portrait. So look at Victoria rather than the semi-stylised wreath of vegetation on the reverse. Lettering can also be a giveaway, as can the quality and spacing of the edge milling.

Even today, many of the better UK £1 fakes in circulation give themselves away on the Queen's portrait, which is often significantly less well-defined than other parts of the design, even the coat of arms/heraldic beast/flower/bridge that's on the other side. For some reason, reproducing naturalistic portraits is more difficult than other designs, and it shows in the end product.

Also, check that the coin 'exists'. If there's no record of it having been officially struck in the year or at the mint that your coin purports to represent, then it's probably a fake. Again, even the best UK £1 fakes sometimes include impossible combinations of date, edge inscription and reverse design, and I have UK and Irish halfpennies from the late 18th century whose workmanship is no worse than that of the real thing, and which are made of the same metal, but are dated with years like 1777 and 1783, when no official coins were minted.

[Md. Shariful Islam]

Thanks to WoC. I got important resources and background infomation from this site to complete this paper. Discussions on forgery, methods and causes, by experts helped a lot. BTW, sharing the link in this thread because, I hope it may be useful for the readers.
Sincerely

[Figleaf]

Good stuff, MSI. Bravo! Maybe two additional remarks. First, on the shroff marks on forgeries. These may have been applied by the forgers to increase confidence in their product. If you find remnants of silver within the hole, that is the likely case. Second, on the non-silvered piece. Many such pieces exist for British coins. The reason is that under contemporary legislation, it was legal to make them. Refer to my earlier post above. The rich man and the educated man would produce a legal product. The poor man would buy the core and the silver separately. By silvering the coin, the poor man would turn a legal product into an illegal product. Therefore, 100% of the risk would be for the poor man.

Peter

[Md. Shariful Islam]

Good stuff, MSI. Bravo! Maybe two additional remarks. First, on the shroff marks on forgeries. These may have been applied by the forgers to increase confidence in their product. If you find remnants of silver within the hole...
Peter

On the semi-machined one I don't find trace of silver remnant. There are at least two drills on it. Second milled coin does not show me any shroff marks. BTW, thanks sir for your encouraging words!

[Md. Shariful Islam]

Second, on the non-silvered piece. Many such pieces exist for British coins. The reason is that under contemporary legislation, it was legal to make them. Refer to my earlier post above. The rich man and the educated man would produce a legal product. The poor man would buy the core and the silver separately. By silvering the coin, the poor man would turn a legal product into an illegal product. Therefore, 100% of the risk would be for the poor man.

Peter

This is really a nice observaton that may lead to further research on these pieces.