Happy holidays to all ! High 50's today,three feet of snow almost gone in 12 hours. Decided to give my new christmas boots a going over. Hunted a spot in my favourite park that just to popular in the warm months. Alot of the space was ankle deep in water. Got a nail file, junk ring, chinese coin and 72cents in clad. Had a wonderful time. Off to track down this coin. Cheers!
Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
Chinese coin
- Thread starter tsn
- Start date
nwdetectorist
Active member
Try out the following websites for some identification of your find.
http://www.sportstune.com/chinese/coins/idpage.html
http://coins.calkinsc.com/old_site/doc/chinesecash.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_w%C3%A9n
http://www.@#$%&.com/wongtk_3/
http://www.joelscoins.com/china.htm
Of course there are probably other websites that might help you with an ID, these should work well for you.
I found several of the Chinese cash coins searching inner city Portland, Oregon metro area parking strips and sidewalk repairs.
This is when I found the first site on the list.
Also, you can find World Coin reference books at major city central library reference desks to help out too.
Thanks,
Doyle
http://www.sportstune.com/chinese/coins/idpage.html
http://coins.calkinsc.com/old_site/doc/chinesecash.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_w%C3%A9n
http://www.@#$%&.com/wongtk_3/
http://www.joelscoins.com/china.htm
Of course there are probably other websites that might help you with an ID, these should work well for you.
I found several of the Chinese cash coins searching inner city Portland, Oregon metro area parking strips and sidewalk repairs.
This is when I found the first site on the list.
Also, you can find World Coin reference books at major city central library reference desks to help out too.
Thanks,
Doyle
Great finds!
It appears you have found a Liao Dynasty to Ching Dynasty 1644.Looks similar to the one i found.I have had a hard time identifying mine.The symbols on the obverse are supposed to be rare.Is the coin well worn.I was told that mine was probably a token or a fake. Looking at yours they look a lot alike.If you don't mind me asking ,where abouts did you find it.
It appears you have found a Liao Dynasty to Ching Dynasty 1644.Looks similar to the one i found.I have had a hard time identifying mine.The symbols on the obverse are supposed to be rare.Is the coin well worn.I was told that mine was probably a token or a fake. Looking at yours they look a lot alike.If you don't mind me asking ,where abouts did you find it.
Those are common out west, whenever hunting sites where 1800s targets are to be found. The Chinese coolies came over during the gold rush, and then another wave during the RR building boom, and then more Chinese immigration up till the turn of the century (before discriminatory laws slowed down/stopped the in-flow). Those guys must've brought hundreds of those coins EACH with them. In our small city's "Chinatown district", they tore down some buildings years ago, and these were the predominant coin finds (along with opium bottles 
)
I've read that they go in age by emporer's reigns or something. So each coin type can span 70 years or whatever. Their date range ended shortly after the 1900. Some of the are incredibly old, and you have to ask yourself "sheesk how long did they circulate in China before even being brought here?"
None of them have any value, but they're a fun indicator of the age era you're in (that barbers or seateds "could be next"), and a fun indicator of an era of history.
)I've read that they go in age by emporer's reigns or something. So each coin type can span 70 years or whatever. Their date range ended shortly after the 1900. Some of the are incredibly old, and you have to ask yourself "sheesk how long did they circulate in China before even being brought here?"
None of them have any value, but they're a fun indicator of the age era you're in (that barbers or seateds "could be next"), and a fun indicator of an era of history.Thankyou for the links Doyle. Coin was found about 5 miles from downtown Detroit. Sure glad I am not a chinese coin collector, makes your eyes sore looking through all the symbols.
Wow Jog! (It appears you have found a Liao Dynasty to Ching Dynasty 1644) thanks for the heads up, I believe you are right. I looked at so many last night they all started to look the same. Was holding it upside down the whole time no wonder I couldn't find it. Probably a good luck token as it is in very good shape and only the inside black is well worn. Thanks to all for the help!!
Here is a pic of the real thing, borrowed from one of doyles links.(sportstune.com)
This coin was cast in the year of the Emperor's reign (1644). It was issued from the mint attached to the Board of Revenue at Peking, and bears on the reverse the inscription in Manchu letters Boo Ciowan, being the transcript of the two Chinese characters Pao Ch'uan, 'the Fountain Head of the Currency." The money from this mint served as a model for the provincial coinages
Wow Jog! (It appears you have found a Liao Dynasty to Ching Dynasty 1644) thanks for the heads up, I believe you are right. I looked at so many last night they all started to look the same. Was holding it upside down the whole time no wonder I couldn't find it. Probably a good luck token as it is in very good shape and only the inside black is well worn. Thanks to all for the help!!
Here is a pic of the real thing, borrowed from one of doyles links.(sportstune.com)
This coin was cast in the year of the Emperor's reign (1644). It was issued from the mint attached to the Board of Revenue at Peking, and bears on the reverse the inscription in Manchu letters Boo Ciowan, being the transcript of the two Chinese characters Pao Ch'uan, 'the Fountain Head of the Currency." The money from this mint served as a model for the provincial coinages
From what I have understood they coins were worthless when a new Emperor took over and new ones were made, so there is so many of them over the years many were made into jewelry. I have seen several bracelets made out of these and had someone tell me he seen a jacket with these all over them and one said they seen a lamp shade made out of these coins too.
We seem to find a few each year up here in ND from churches, schools, parks and some private yard we get permission to detect with most these site date from the 1930-1940 with some older and some even into the 50s. I feel what we find up here are from some of the bracelets and just souvenirs.
We seem to find a few each year up here in ND from churches, schools, parks and some private yard we get permission to detect with most these site date from the 1930-1940 with some older and some even into the 50s. I feel what we find up here are from some of the bracelets and just souvenirs.
If you read Lost Mines and Treasures of the pacific northwest by Ruby El Hult,under The Many Mysteries at Neahkahnie there are stories of the Clatsop Indians possessing Chinese coins dating back to the 1600s.(that's before the white man ever set foot on those shores).I do agree that US coins are worth more in money value,but some of these coins date back 200 years prior to the US 1800 coins.Personally i would rather have the older coin worth less money.The jacket that Rick(ND) is referring to was a Armor vest of caribou skin covered with Chinese coins that was i believe made by the Clatsop Indians(not sure).
Supposed to have been a Chinese junk or a Spanish galleon ship washed ashore on the beach near an Indian village.It's called the clatsop wreck.These coins were traded up and down the coast and up the Columbia river by the Indians.Should get the book by Ruby El Hult very good book.
Jog & Dahut: I believe this idea that indians had these Chinese coins "even before the white man came" is incorrect. It's merely an assertion, just because the coins were found (archaeologically for instance) in indian village sites. It simply doesn't follow logically that since 1) the coin dates to the 1600s, and 2) it was found in an indian village site, that 3) therefore the Chinese must've been here before any European got here!
Here's why the logic doesn't work that way, in a way that only an md'r would understand: For starters, Chinese coins of this period are found, as is pointed out by others on this thread, even in simple western era sites (that would've had Chinese immigrants in the 1800s for fishing, gold rush, RR building, or whatever), right? I mean, for example: I've found those Chinese coins by the dozens. And yes, some of them date to the 1600s I suppose. And they were found in places where we'd be finding seateds or other such mid 1800s sites. They were simply a coin that was lost even as late as the mid to late 1800s, and yes, even though they can date to the 1600s.
Having hunted a lot of contact period indian sites (which were both pre-historic and contact period), it is not unusual to find whatever you might expect to find in any other site of the time-period. Although an archie may be digging a pre-contact site, there's nothing to have stopped something to be lost there during the contact times. Villages continued to exist often time, both before, and during the contact period, unless conclusively known otherwise, strata-wise, or whatever. Who's to say the coin wasn't lost there after European contact? So it would not be unusual to find a chinese coin (or reale, or early seated, or whatever) in these sites. But the minute you get some zealous newbie archie to happen to find a 1600's chinese coin there, having not been exposed to the proliferation of, yes even wickedly old ones circulating for insanely long times, they muse "gee, I guess the Chinese were here way long ago!"
Not saying Chinese or any other people groups didn't get here earlier than Columbus or whatever, just saying the random find of a 1600s chinese coin doesn't prove anything. Also be aware that although the west coast didn't get the first permanent habitation till 1769 (San Diego), there had been a few centuries of occasional ships stopping to take on water, explore, map, etc... And they did trade with the indians. For example, there is an indian midden site by Santa Barbara, near the Channel Islands, where coins that way predated the Santa Barbara mission have been found (coins and buttons back to the 1500s I believe). This was because ships stopped to trade or take on water whilst coming back from the Manilla trade. So metal items did get into the trading system. And think of it, they weren't necessarily *only* Spanish coins. Who's to say they didn't have other coins of other ports (including Chinese) they'd stopped at?
If a coin found somewhere is proof that those people groups were here at that time, the I guess the Romans beat them all, 'cuz a friend of mine found a first-century Roman coin in a demolition site in Monterey, CA
Now how do you explain that?? haha Obviously someone brought it back as a souvineer and lost it here, right? So old coins can enter the oddest sites.
Here's why the logic doesn't work that way, in a way that only an md'r would understand: For starters, Chinese coins of this period are found, as is pointed out by others on this thread, even in simple western era sites (that would've had Chinese immigrants in the 1800s for fishing, gold rush, RR building, or whatever), right? I mean, for example: I've found those Chinese coins by the dozens. And yes, some of them date to the 1600s I suppose. And they were found in places where we'd be finding seateds or other such mid 1800s sites. They were simply a coin that was lost even as late as the mid to late 1800s, and yes, even though they can date to the 1600s.
Having hunted a lot of contact period indian sites (which were both pre-historic and contact period), it is not unusual to find whatever you might expect to find in any other site of the time-period. Although an archie may be digging a pre-contact site, there's nothing to have stopped something to be lost there during the contact times. Villages continued to exist often time, both before, and during the contact period, unless conclusively known otherwise, strata-wise, or whatever. Who's to say the coin wasn't lost there after European contact? So it would not be unusual to find a chinese coin (or reale, or early seated, or whatever) in these sites. But the minute you get some zealous newbie archie to happen to find a 1600's chinese coin there, having not been exposed to the proliferation of, yes even wickedly old ones circulating for insanely long times, they muse "gee, I guess the Chinese were here way long ago!"
Not saying Chinese or any other people groups didn't get here earlier than Columbus or whatever, just saying the random find of a 1600s chinese coin doesn't prove anything. Also be aware that although the west coast didn't get the first permanent habitation till 1769 (San Diego), there had been a few centuries of occasional ships stopping to take on water, explore, map, etc... And they did trade with the indians. For example, there is an indian midden site by Santa Barbara, near the Channel Islands, where coins that way predated the Santa Barbara mission have been found (coins and buttons back to the 1500s I believe). This was because ships stopped to trade or take on water whilst coming back from the Manilla trade. So metal items did get into the trading system. And think of it, they weren't necessarily *only* Spanish coins. Who's to say they didn't have other coins of other ports (including Chinese) they'd stopped at?
If a coin found somewhere is proof that those people groups were here at that time, the I guess the Romans beat them all, 'cuz a friend of mine found a first-century Roman coin in a demolition site in Monterey, CA
Now how do you explain that?? haha Obviously someone brought it back as a souvineer and lost it here, right? So old coins can enter the oddest sites.But I like the shipwreck idea best. Yours makes my head hurt. 
Just kidding. We do have to be careful about making assumptions, just becasue something or someplace is "old."
I can see 1600 vintage coins coming over with Chinese workers, 200 years after they were minted. They likey meant something to them, that we cannot fathom.
Just kidding. We do have to be careful about making assumptions, just becasue something or someplace is "old."
I can see 1600 vintage coins coming over with Chinese workers, 200 years after they were minted. They likey meant something to them, that we cannot fathom.
Back in the 1980's or early 90's someone wrote to one of the treasure mags, asked about the old Chinese coins and several reason were given as to why so many were found. The reason given was that they were so plentiful they were worthless and were used for other purposes, including being used as decorations on baskets sold in rural areas in the late 1800's and early 1900's. That may not be true, but it would explain why I and the guys I hunt with have found so many, some of which date to the 1700's, around homesites here in northeast MS that only date to the early 1900's.
The coins that the Clatsop Indians had were more than likely not from a Chinese junk but from a Spanish galleon.Quote from Judge James Wickersham.( A Spanish galleon trading in Manila with it's large Chinese colony could easily have carried such Chinese money.Chinese Junks operate near protecting shores and islands,where favorable winds push them to safety.)The clatsop Indians had a lot of these coins.They dated back to 1614-1796.GOTTA READ THE BOOK!I I'm not saying that all Chinese coins came from here.
When you're talking about the Spanish Manilla Galleons, you're talking about shipping that ended in the late 1700s, or very early 1800s at the latest. When they came back across the Pacific on the currents, they reached N. America @ the mid CA area, then headed south to Mexico.
I still maintain that Chinese coins didn't necessarily come from this period, or any other such early contacts. They simply could've gotten here the same way the get into any place they exist (and area all similarly aged): From later Chinese immigration in the mid 1800s. Those coins got into all sorts of places, including indian village sites, as often-times those sites continued to have communities ... until eventually assimilated or abandoned into this period. The error continues to be, that since the coins are "1614 to 1796" that researchers grasp at straws to try to develope theories of how they could've come over in those years. It continues to forget that these cache coins from those earlier years came over with Chinese from much later immigration periods, as they apparently circulated for these long periods.
If you pressed clatsop indian village researcher people, I bet they'd concede that indian habitation there was not strictly prehistoric. Ie.: that indians lived there till into the 1800s or whatever, well after white man got there. But they get boogered down in the notion that since there is prehistoric history there, and since they found this "1614 coin", that therefore some bizzare early contact was going on.
I still maintain that Chinese coins didn't necessarily come from this period, or any other such early contacts. They simply could've gotten here the same way the get into any place they exist (and area all similarly aged): From later Chinese immigration in the mid 1800s. Those coins got into all sorts of places, including indian village sites, as often-times those sites continued to have communities ... until eventually assimilated or abandoned into this period. The error continues to be, that since the coins are "1614 to 1796" that researchers grasp at straws to try to develope theories of how they could've come over in those years. It continues to forget that these cache coins from those earlier years came over with Chinese from much later immigration periods, as they apparently circulated for these long periods.
If you pressed clatsop indian village researcher people, I bet they'd concede that indian habitation there was not strictly prehistoric. Ie.: that indians lived there till into the 1800s or whatever, well after white man got there. But they get boogered down in the notion that since there is prehistoric history there, and since they found this "1614 coin", that therefore some bizzare early contact was going on.
Explain that to the Indians Who had these coins passed down through generations, and to the Indian lady Cheesht,from the clatsop Indians who is near 80 years old.And to her great great grandmother who Had been given Chinese coins from a survivor from a shipwreck who she ended up marrying.(some bizarre early contact)
Yeah yeah I read those accounts. It's entirely possible that "explorer era" shipwrecks (or simply sailors who got off to have a look around, take on water/supplies, etc..) could've introduced metal items too. And yes, that "era" started the minute Spain started coming up north from Mexico, even as early as the 1500s (Cabrillo etc...) & 1600s (Vizcaino etc...). By the time of the Manilla trade route shipping (which skirted the west coast before heading south) of the late 1500s to 1817, the coast had been mapped out, stopped at at various locations and various times.
So yes, although the first perported permanent land-hold (someone actually getting off the ship and STAYING here) wasn't till 1769, there's nothing to have stopped items from entering land sites earlier than that, in the explorer period, or whatever you want to call it. But I will say this: The Oregon/Washington area is pretty far north, as far as this older era goes. Yes some ships did go further north than CA to look around, and yes the Russians did start coming down from Alaska in *perhaps* the late 1600s (more likely not till the 1700s).
So yes, although the first perported permanent land-hold (someone actually getting off the ship and STAYING here) wasn't till 1769, there's nothing to have stopped items from entering land sites earlier than that, in the explorer period, or whatever you want to call it. But I will say this: The Oregon/Washington area is pretty far north, as far as this older era goes. Yes some ships did go further north than CA to look around, and yes the Russians did start coming down from Alaska in *perhaps* the late 1600s (more likely not till the 1700s).