The ‘Facing Eagle’ variety of Mexican Republic ½ reales was produced from 1825 thru 1869, and was a replacement for the ‘Hookneck Eagle’ variety which had only been produced in 1824. The challenge of collecting ‘Facing Eagle’ ½ reales is undeniable, as there are a large number of hidden rarities and even more grade rarities. Those collectors who focus their attention on the series for a good number of years will ultimately be rewarded with a collection that is worthy of deep admiration.
‘Facing Eagle’ half reales were struck at 11 mints (12 if you count Alamos). Each mint struck half reales for a different subset of dates during this period. Republic ½ reales were made of .903 fine silver, and were supposed to weigh 1.69 grams. Mexican mints at this time were run for a profit, and production of half reales was an unprofitable (but mandated) denomination to produce. Due to this, quality control in the production of half reales was substandard, and as a result the weight of uncirculated half reales tended to vary slightly from coin to coin. It should be noted that the silver content and weight for Iturbide, ‘Hookneck’, and ‘Facing Eagle’ Republic ½ reales were all the same as was the case for earlier portrait Spanish Colonial ½ reales.
New collectors of ½ reales are at a tremendous disadvantage because unlike experienced collectors, they rely heavily on the misleading information in current price guides. It is very difficult for new collectors to have courage to effectively compete with advanced collectors for choice ½ reales. Scarce and rare coins are often unrecognized by new collectors. When alerted to a coin‘s true rarity by the seller, most new collectors lack the confidence to pay a fair price because it may be many times what the price guide lists for it.
Advanced collectors of the series have a great advantage over new collectors because in many instances they possess detailed notes from years of observation. When questions arise, the advanced collectors have a good network of fellow collectors whose knowledge can be tapped.
Rarity is not currently well recognized. Most collectors assume that coins from certain mints are rarer than others, thus deserving of a higher price. Given the same rarity, a Date/Assayer/Mint (DAM) from Guadalupe y Calvo will sell for more than a DAM from Zacatecas. Variable prices based on rarity are reasonable, but only if data on relative mint rarity is accurate.
There are many varieties, especially in the early DAMs. Some varieties may be rare, even though the normal DAM is common. For the sake of simplicity, the DAM supplement does not address rarity of varieties.
Where possible, I reveal the following information about the coins produced by each mint:
1) Number of DAMs produced, and the regularity of production
2) Number of common DAMs for the mint
3) Rarity estimation for the mint‘s coins
4) Strike quality by date range
5) Engraving quality
6) Available varieties
7) Availability of high-grade coins
8) Number of assayers.
Knowing relative rarity and various quirks from mint to mint will allow new collectors to more accurately determine which coins to buy, and which may be worth paying a premium for. They will be better armed to compete with other collectors for good pieces that may seem overpriced, but in reality are not.
The only date for this mint is 1862. All examples from this date are supposedly contemporary counterfeits, which does not matter much because they are Extremely Rare (XR). I have never seen one, but would still love one in my collection.
Two DAMs were produced at this mint (1844 and 1845), and both are rare. Prices are far higher than the rarity alone would justify because of demand from mint type collectors (Prices are always higher for coins from mints that produced for very few years).
A type collector looking for a high-grade example from this mint would have to settle for an 1844 in XF. Be prepared to pay $3,000 or more for such an example. In 2007 a few high-grade examples, previously unknown, appeared on the market. It may be another decade before they reappear for sale.
No varieties were produced for either of these two dates. The dies appear to have come from the Guanajuato mint as all have Soho design features. Coincidentally, by 1844 Guanajuato was well on its way to phasing out use of the Soho dies. (Soho dies refer to the design produced in England in 1835 for the Guanajuato mint. In addition to producing the design, it is also widely believed that at the time Guanajuato illegally smuggled hundreds of English made Soho dies into Mexico. )
Great strikes and high quality engraving make high-grade examples beautiful to look at. The trouble is most collectors will never see one available for sale from this mint.
There was intermittent production of ½ reales in Culiacán. Between 1846 and 1869 there were only 15 DAMs produced. Intermittent production is usually an indicator of scarcity among its products, and such is the case here. Four of these dates are common, and coins from this mint can generally be considered Scarce.
It would be easy for a type collector to obtain an example of a Culiacán ½ real in high grade, but most dates are rarely if ever seen in high grade. Chances are good that if you have any Culiacán ½ reales they are dated 1860 or 1861.
Very few of the BU examples are spectacular looking, having subdued luster, and weak strikes. Strike quality is usually low to moderate, caused by weak striking pressure and rust damaged dies. Engraving quality of the dies and punches was generally very good.
Many DAMS have varieties, but few of them command a high premium. Some of the overdates from this mint are among the most obvious overdates possible, with no attempt to hide the old date. This mint never had a major style change. If it were not for the scarcity of coins from Culiacán and the audacious overdates, there are mints that are more fun to collect.
There were two assay initials used during this time by Culiacán (CE and PV), but no dates have more than one assayer.
There was intermittent production of ½ reales in Durango. Between 1832 and 1869 there were only 28 DAMs produced. None of the Durango ½ reales are common, and coins from this mint can generally be considered Very Scarce.
The strike quality is low in the 1830s and most of the 1840s. The main problems are twofold:
1) the low relief of the Paris dies,
2) low striking pressure.
I suspect that they had acquired dies directly from Paris in 1832, and were never resupplied with more. Running the presses at low pressure was their attempt to preserve the dies. The low strike pressure is probably responsible for the unusually high proportion of low-grade coins from this mint, as their ½ reales wore out prematurely. Engraving quality of the dies and punches was generally very good.
It would be very challenging for a type collector to obtain an example of a Durango ½ real in BU, as only a handful or so BU examples exist. Most dates are rarely seen even in XF. Later date BU examples can have spectacular appearances. I have an 1864 in MS64 that is stunning to look at, but the cost was several thousand dollars.
Most DAMS have numerous varieties. There are so many varieties that few of them command a high premium. Overdating was so common in the 1840s that for some of the dates it is difficult to identify them without pictures of other coins of the same date.
There were five assay initials used in the production of ½ reales by Durango (RL, RM, JMR, CP, and LT). Coins with the RL assay initials were probably struck in Paris, and sent to Mexico as sales samples. Coins with the JMR assay initials sell at a substantial premium. Coins using two different sets of assay initials were struck in only two years.
KM-370.4 Estado de México ½ Real, 1829-EoMo LF (Stack’s Bowers auction, 13 February 2019, lot 71390)
This mint produced coins for three years, but ½ reales were only produced in 1829. Due to demand from type collectors, and the coin‘s rarity, ½ reales from Estado de México are extremely expensive. This mint was owned by the state of Mexico, and was mere miles away from the Federal mint in Mexico City. The mint was closed prematurely by the state because it was losing money.
The strike quality is high, but for most people that does not matter because they are generally only available in Good or Very Good condition. AU grade examples exist, but are Very Rare and very highly sought after.
The single DAM has no varieties that I have ever seen.
Guadalajara was a consistent producer of ½ reales, missing production in only 1827, 1833 and 1836. Between 1825 and 1862 there were 39 DAMs produced. Only four of the Guadalajara DAMs are common, and coins from this mint can generally be considered Scarce to Very Scarce.
The strike quality for Guadalajara is great during the 1820s, 1830s and the first half of the 1840s. Starting in 1848 thru 1862 there were problems with rusty dies. High-grade examples from this period do not have cap or eagle breast details, only raised dots from rust pits.
KM 370.5 ½ real Guadalajara 1825 GaFS (Stack’s Bowers Baltimore auction. April 2011. lot 8133)
1825 GaFS is one of the few early dates from this mint that can be found in high grade
It is easy for a type collector to obtain an example of a Guadalajara ½ real in BU, but the date will most likely be 1860 or 1861. The only high-grade DAM possible to get in the 1820s would be 1825. BU examples from the 1820s and 1830s exist, but I have never been offered one for sale. Even XF or AU coins from this period are Rare to Very Rare. It is not until the 1840s where BU examples can be found by the dedicated collector with average connections in the Mexican collecting community. My sincere advice to people wanting to pursue ½ reales collecting is to never pass up purchasing ANY high-grade Guadalajara example unless it is an 1860 or 1861.
Guadalajara varieties are numerous, mostly consisting of overdates and mid-year cap design changes. Unusually, some of the varieties that command the greatest premium are a few of the DAMs that do not have an overdate that year.
There were four assay initials used in the production of ½ reales by Guadalajara (FS, LP, JG and MC). Coins with the LP assay initials were only struck in 1831, and are VERY VERY RARE. Anyone trying to collect one coin from each assayer would probably NEVER get an LP example. Coins were struck four years using two different assay initials.
Guadalupe y Calvo was a consistent producer of ½ reales during its short run from 1844 thru 1851. The collector community is confused about rarity from this mint, thinking that all dates are equally scarce. Despite this, the more available dates from this mint sell at a significant premium from what their actual availability would justify. My experience would lead me to believe that the 1845 and 1847 are the most available. Several of the other dates are far more difficult to acquire than are commonly thought. Coins from this mint can generally be considered Very Scarce. As with most of the other mints, ½ reales do not exist in as great a number as do 1 reales.
The strike quality for Guadalupe y Calvo is less than good. High-grade examples that I have seen exhibit weak cap and eagle breast details, indicating the use of lower pressure on the presses. In 1849 there appeared to be a small problem with rusty dies, but I do not see that in later years. Engraving and sinking of the number and letter punches seems to be a bit cruder than for the main mints.
It would be almost impossible for a type collector to obtain an example of a Guadalupe y Calvo ½ real in BU, but a small number of the dates are available in XF or possibly AU. A few BU examples do exist, appearing at auction every five to ten years.
As far as I know, there are only two varieties (both overdates) from this mint. These are generally worth buying if you ever see one, but at present do not command a premium.
There was only one assay initial used in the production of ½ reales by Guadalupe y Calvo (MP).
There was uninterrupted production of ½ reales in Guanajuato. The only break in production was during the years of Maximilian‘s reign, when the country produced decimal coinage. Between 1826 and 1868 there were 44 DAMs produced. As a rule of thumb, mints that have uninterrupted production of a series will usually produce coins in vast quantities. Of the Guanajuato ½ reales, 29 DAMs are common. Despite the number of common DAMs, ½ reales are probably only half as numerous as the 1 reales or 2 reales from Guanajuato for the same dates. Coins from this mint can generally be considered Uncommon.
The strike quality from 1826 thru 1843 was good. A surprising number of higher-grade example coins, even though in only XF condition, still have full details on the caps and eagle‘s breast. This is mostly lost on today‘s collectors because very few coins higher than XF still exist, except for just a few dates. Starting in 1844 and 1845 there were problems of low strike pressure and rusty dies. The Guanajuato eagle struck from 1844 to 1853 is especially beautiful if you can ever find an example fully struck. Such examples should command a significant premium, but today do not. Starting again in 1850 thru 1858 strike quality vastly deteriorated due to rusty and eroded dies. BU coins from this period are relatively available, but really well struck coins are scarce. Examples from 1859 thru 1868 are usually well struck.
Engraving quality from 1826 thru 1836 was poor. Once they started using the Soho dies in mid 1835 thru 1844, engraving quality was excellent but that is because most of the dies were made in England. Engraving quality after 1844 was far better than in the early years of the mint. In the last decade of production engraving was on par with Mexico City.
It is pretty easy for a type collector to obtain an example of a Guanajuato ½ real in BU, mainly because of the availability of the 1838, and the later 1850s and 1860s. Many BU coins from 1838 are stunning in appearance if they have not been cleaned, but those from the 1850s and 1860s often do not have an exceptional appearance. There are FAR FEWER BU examples from Guanajuato than there are from Mexico City.
Guanajuato is by far the most exciting of the mints to collect by DAM and variety!!! The number of years with multiple assayers, midyear design changes, and numerous varieties are unmatched in the series. Many of the varieties sell for large or small premiums, but most of the overdates do not. The thrill of the hunt for Guanajuato varieties cannot be overstated!
This is one of the most interesting and rare varieties of the series. Note the reversed ‘N’ in ‘MEXICANA’
The five DAMS that have engraving errors all sell for a very high premium.
1829 reversed ‘N‘ in ‘MEXICANA‘
1831 ‘II‘ in ‘REPUBIICA‘
1832 ‘II‘ in ‘REPUBIICA‘
1834 ‘10Ds 0Gs‘
1839 ‘REPUBLIGA‘
There were an amazing eight assay initial combinations used in the production of ½ reales by Guanajuato (MJ, JG, MR, PJ, PM, PF, YE and YF). Coins were struck in three years using two different assay initial combinations, and in 1828 three different assayer combinations were used.
There was very sporadic production of ½ reales in Hermosillo, caused by its late authorization to mint silver and the break in production during the years of Maximilian‘s reign, when the country produced decimal coinage. Between 1839 and 1867 there were only three DAMs produced. 1839 is generally considered to be a contemporary counterfeit, but due to its rarity it does not matter much to collectors. If I were offered the coin I would buy it. Half reales from Hermosillo can generally be considered rare. Far more 1 reales from this mint were produced than ½ reales.
The strike quality was good, but does not matter much since only low-grade coins can usually be found. A type collector would stand virtually NO CHANCE of ever acquiring a high-grade example from Hermosillo. Even many of the lowgrade examples are pierced or damaged. If you could ever locate an example in VF, buy it without hesitation. My highest-grade example is in VF, but it has a hole at the top.
Engraving quality of the letter and number punches was very crude. These resulted in several varieties in 1867. Dies with the central design must have come from Culiacán because these features are well engraved.
There were three assay initial combinations used in the production of ½ reales by Hermosillo (PP, FM and PR).
There was nearly uninterrupted production of ½ reales in Mexico City. The only break in production was 1837. Between 1825 and 1863 there were 42 DAMs produced. Of the Mexico City ½ reales, 35 DAMs are common. Overall, coins from this mint can generally be considered Common.
The strike quality from 1826 thru 1838 was excellent. All higher-grade examples exhibit full details on the caps and eagle‘s breast. This is surprising given that the design in this period had a pretty high relief, which points to high striking pressure. Starting in 1839 thru 1844 there were sporadic problems of minor rust on the dies, but the strike pressure continued to be pretty good. Starting in 1845 there was a slight design change where the eagle and cap had a lower relief. From 1845 onward, it is relatively more uncommon to see full details on the cap and eagle. In the future fully struck BU examples from 1845 thru 1863 may command a slight premium. Starting again from 1854 thru 1860 there were sporadic problems with minor rust on the dies.
Engraving quality from Mexico City was Good to Excellent. The only imperfections I have seen are periodic repunched numbers or letters, and punching the letters and numbers in a nonperfect arch.
BU examples of Mexico City ½ reales are more widely available for most DAMs than is the case for coins from any mint for any of the 1, 2, or 4 reales. It is very easy for a type collector to obtain an example of a Mexico City ½ real in BU. There must have been numerous small hoards of ½ reales surfacing over the decades for so many dates to be still available in high grade.
I would highly recommend trying to assemble a collection of each of the Mexico City DAM in high grade (XF to BU). This is the only mint and the only denomination in all of the Republic era where such a collection would be possible for dedicated collectors. Granted that some of the dates are not available in BU, but you could still choose a well struck XF or AU. It took me over ten years to acquire every DAM in high grade from Mexico City in my collection I do not believe it would be significantly more difficult today since many inexperienced collectors try to buy only the highest MS grades possible, rather than having an eye for condition rarities below MS60.
Mexico City has a moderate number of varieties, mainly due to short die life in the 1820s and early 1830s, and periodic mid-year style changes. If you want a challenge, try collecting 1825 and 1826 Mo half reales by die variety. It would be inexpensive and very enjoyable. I tried this and found close to 30 different dies from each date. Since many current collectors consider this a boring mint, most varieties currently sell for little to no premium.
Mexico City takes the record for the mint with the greatest number of different assay initial combinations used in the production of ½ reales. There were 11 different combinations used (JM, MJ, ML, MM, MF, RC, GC, GF, FH, TH and CH). Coins were struck in four years using two different assay initial combinations. In years where multiple assayers produced coins, there is a higher probability that one or more of them will be uncommon to rare.
San Luis Potosí was a consistent producer of ½ reales, after its ten-year halt in production from 1832 thru 1840. From 1831 thru 1863 there were 29 DAMs produced. The number of DAMs from this mint was high mainly because of the number of years with more than one assayer combination. Only two of the San Luis Potosí DAMs are common. Coins from this mint can generally be considered Rare, mainly due to the large number of great rarities from this mint, and the small number of common and uncommon DAMs.
The strike quality for San Luis Potosí coins is very high during the entire production run. If you ever get a BU example from this mint, it will be beautiful with frosty cap and eagle on most examples.
It is possible for a type collector to obtain an example of a San Luis Potosí ½ real in BU mainly because of a hoard of BU coins from the early and mid-1850s that is now widely disbursed among collectors. The only high-grade DAMs possible to get in this series are from this period. BU examples from 1831 exist, but none have ever been offered to me. BU examples from the 1840s may exist, but I have never been offered one for sale. Even XF or AU coins from this period are Rare to Very Rare. It is possible to get high-grade examples from the 1860s but at a much higher price.
There are a moderate number of San Luis Potosí varieties, mostly consisting of overdates, over-assayers, and mint superscripts. Owing to the rarity of the average DAM, varieties usually do not command much of a premium.
There were five assay initial combinations used in the production of ½ reales by San Luis Potosí (JS, PS, AM, MC and RO). In 1842, 1843, 1857, 1858 and 1862 there were two combinations of assayer initials used.
There was uninterrupted production of ½ reales in Zacatecas. The only break in production was during the years of Maximilian‘s reign, when the country produced decimal coinage. Between 1826 and 1869 there were 43 DAMs produced.
As a rule of thumb, mints that have uninterrupted production of a series will usually produce coins in vast quantities, but here is an anomaly. Half reales from Zacatecas are almost unobtainable compared to its other minor denominations. A possible reason for this scarcity was proposed to me in a conversation with Dave Busse about ten years ago. He said many of the Zacatecas ½ reales were slightly overweight by his measurements, and he accounted for their scarcity due to melting at the time by people who wanted to make a bit of money.
Only five of the Zacatecas ½ reales are common. Overall, coins from this mint can generally be considered Scarce to Very Scarce. At the current time very few people are aware of this and the prices do not adequately reflect their scarcity.
Early dates from Zacatecas in high grade are a rare find. Note the full detail on cap and eagle despite only being in XF condition
The strike quality from Zacatecas was good. There does not seem to be a problem with striking pressure on the vast majority of high-grade examples I have seen. I see no evidence of rusty dies except in 1869. It is likely the case that after 1863, with a five-year period without use, they let the half real dies deteriorate.
Engraving quality was always average or less, especially in the early years thru 1836 when the punches were sometimes pretty crude. There is an interesting feature with the production from 1860 thru 1863, when the assayer was ‘VL’. In every instance that I have seen the ‘V’ is always an upside down ‘A’, showing a reluctance to invest in punches when needed.
It is possible for a type collector to obtain an example of a Zacatecas ½ real in BU, mainly because of the availability of 1860 ZsVL and 1869 ZsYH examples. BU examples of other dates are very difficult to find. You would have to build a lot of relationships among fellow collectors and dealers to stand any chance of obtaining a few examples. There are FAR FEWER BU examples from Zacatecas than there are from any of the other major mints.
Zacatecas produced fewer varieties than many other mints did. Most are overdates, and a few punch varieties. Due to the scarcity of coins from Zacatecas its varieties do not command premiums.
There were seven different assay initial combinations used in the production of ½ reales by Zacatecas (AZ, AO, OV, OM, MO, VL and YH). Coins were struck in four years using two different assay initial combinations.
The first coins of the Mexican Republic were the attractive “hookneck”, or profile eagle coins, struck by the mints at Mexico City (Mo), Durango (Do) and Guanajuato (Go). They were somewhat inconsistently issued from 1823 to 1825 (i.e., whereas the Go mint was striking the hookneck in 1825, the Mo mint had switched to the facing eagle in 1824{footnote}T.V. Buttrey and Clyde Hubbard, A Guide Book of Mexican Coins, 1822 to Date, sixth edition, Krause Publications, Iola, WI, 1992{/footnote}: poor internal communication within the new republic is the probable reason). The ½ real (Mo), 1 real (Do, rare), 2 real (Do, Mo) and 8 real (Do, Go, Mo) were struck in silver, and the 8 escudo (Mo) was struck in gold. In general, the coins from the Mo mint are the more available of the series.
In my (probably ultimately futile and certainly slow moving) attempt to assemble a República type set, I acquired an 1824 Mo hookneck ½ real at a local coin show that put the ug in ugly. It is so ugly I have not even typed it in the excellent reference book Hookneck{footnote}Clyde Hubbard and David O’Harrow, Hookneck, privately published, 1997:/footnote}. I figured something better would come along, and sure enough, a nice looking VF appeared on eBay, and I obtained it without too much struggle or grief.
When the piece arrived, I happily plunged into Hookneck to type it. However, the longer I looked at it, the more I felt it wasn’t described in either Hookneck or the Supplement to Hookneck{footnote}Clyde Hubbard and David O’Harrow, A Supplement to Hookneck, privately published, 2001{/footnote}Hubbard and O’Harrow, 2001).
The Liberty cap die is a Type 4 (p.58/59 in Hookneck). All the die markers are there, including the small tool mark to the right of the 1 in 1/2. This side is slightly double struck in the 10 Ds 20 Gs area and along the bottom rim, perhaps explaining why LIBERTAD is so weak on an otherwise nice VF coin.
The Eagle side, though, is obviously not a Type 4. It is closest to, but different from, the Type 2 die. This makes me think it was produced toward the middle or end of the die production, and is a sibling to the Type 2 die, cut when the engravers at the mint were used to making the die and had achieved some amount of similarity between the dies.
The differences with Type 2 are:
• P of REPUBLICA set higher than the E or B and slightly rotated clockwise relative to Type 2
• If you connect the tops of P and B in REPUBLICA, the U is lower than Type 2
• L of REPUBLICA is also slightly rotated clockwise relative to Type 2
• M of MEXICANA is set even with the E, not higher as in Type 2 (as far as I can tell from the plate in the book)
• The eagle left wing tip is more centered under the I of MEXICANA
• The first A in MEXICANA is set more even with the C and N, not raised like the Type 2
• The final A in MEXICANA might be repunched, or there are tool marks under the A. There also appears to be a tool mark to the left of the N in MEXICANA
• There are fewer water lines under the cactus than the Type 2
• The left center cactus pad has short spines, not the long spines on Type 2
• On the right cactus pad, the upper spines point to the right, not the left as on the Type 2
• The snake head terminates under the center of the letter E upright, unlike the Type 2 that terminates on the left side of the letter E upright in REPUBLICA
Finally, probably the biggest difference is that there is a die break through the B in REPUBLICA, from the rim through the B to the eagle wing, and along the top of the right wing to the left wing. It looks like it originated along the upright of the B, hence to the rim, and subsequently to the eagle wing.
Other details on the Eagle die seem fresh (the detail is not mushy, there are no clash marks or die chips, and there are no apparent flow lines or ridges, the appearance of which would indicate a worn die). This suggests to me the Eagle die cracked and failed relatively early in the striking, and they subsequently pulled it off and replaced it with the Type 4 Eagle die.
After email exchanges of descriptions and photographs with David O’Harrow, he agrees this is a new, previously unreported Eagle die. Due to the apparent early die failure, this also appears to be a rare variety, being the first time it has come to his attention in the 14 years since Hookneck was published. Continuing the numbering in the Supplement to Hookneck, this would be Eagle die Type 6 (new) matched with Cap die Type 4, making the sixth variety of the 1824 Mo hookneck ½ real reported.
The One Real series is quite popular among collectors and it features one of the classic and most sought after rarities in all of República Mexicana, the 1824 Durango 1R Hookneck (Profile Eagle) Style.
KM 371.1 1R Durango 1824 DoRL (Stack’s Bowers auction, 25 February 2021, lot 74101)
The Hookneck eagle. This early specimen features retrograde superscript Ss and is very difficult to encounter.
The standard size 1R has a diameter of 20mm and a weight of 3.384 grams with a silver fineness of 0.9027. The basic design and legends are similar to those of the ½R with the exception of the denomination, which is usually 1R. After the Hookneck came numerous issues of the Facing Eagle Style struck at eleven different mints between 1825 and 1869. At this time, there are no known 1R from Alamos, Catorce or Oaxaca, nor have I found any record of those mints striking them. These are usually elusive in higher grades (EF or better). As with other minors, there are a few hoard and/or common dates.
The coin, valued at 12½¢ in the US, and often referred to as a bit, circulated widely and heavily because of its constant use in day-to-day commerce. Specifications of diameter (20mm), weight (3.384g) and fineness (90.27% silver, 9.73% copper) were the same in both the Hookneck and the Facing Eagle Styles. Most are quite elusive in uncirculated condition. Moreover, many higher-grade examples, VF, EF, AU and even some UNC often show evidence of having been cleaned. If you are attending a coin show, it is worth checking dealers who do not specialize in Mexican coins as they may use a catalog as a price guide and you could pick up a bargain. Also, be aware that some 1R were often struck without a collar and one frequently finds over-diameter pieces (sometimes referred to as having a “Broad Flan.”). In fact, I happen to have one Zacatecas piece (a 1R ZS 1833 O. M). that is 22.7mm in diameter with a weight of 4.520 grams even though it is probably no better than VF!
The following mints produced 1R in the listed years:
| Mint | Years Struck |
| Chihuahua | 1834, 1844-45, 1855 |
| Culiacán | 1846, 1848, 1850-54, 1856-58, 1860-61, 1869 |
| Durango | 1824 (Hookneck), 1832, 1834, 1836-37, 1841-62, 1864 |
| Estado de México (Tlalpan) | 1829 |
| Guadalajara | 1825-26, 1828-32, 1834-35, 1837-62 |
| Guadalupe y Calvo | 1844-51 |
| Guanajuato | 1826-62, 1867-68 (some sources show a RNC 1869 & 1870) |
| Hermosillo | 1839, 1862, 1867 |
| Mexico City | 1824-36, 1838-63 |
| San Luis Potosí | 1831, 1841-63 |
| Zacatecas | 1825-63, 1869 |
Currently, I have no evidence to indicate that Alamos, Catorce, or Oaxaca struck the 1R.
The various mints produced the 2R every year (except for 1866 and 1871) from 1824 through 1872. The standard Republic 2R is 27mm in diameter and has the same silver fineness (90.27% silver and 9.73% copper) as the 8R and the other silver minors. The standard 2R weighs 6.768 grams. Usually the edge design is referred to as ornamental, but there is one exception, an Alamos with a reeded edge. Again, the design is the same as the other Cap & Rays issues except for the denomination. Uncirculated examples range from relatively easy to very difficult to all but nonexistent. One of the reasons for the scarcity of High Grade pieces is that the Republic mints were primarily concerned with producing the 8R. Usually the minor denominations were not a priority, and at times, the mints ignored them entirely. Evidence of that is the fact that none of the mints produced a 2R (or any other minor denomination) in every year from 1824 through 1872. Secondly, the 2R, 1R, ½R silver issues, the 1/16R, ⅛R (copper) and ¼R (silver and copper) issues were what the average citizen used to purchase daily necessities. Few were set aside for any reason, let alone posterity. As a result, most 2R circulated extensively.
Interestingly two different mints, Durango and Mexico City produced the Hookneck 2R, but only in the year 1824.
KM-373.4 2r Mexico City 1824 JM (Stack’s Bowers Baltimore auction, November 2014, lot 628)
KM-373.3 2r Durango 1824 D RL (Stack’s Bowers auction, 22 October 2020, lot 72175)
The design was the Hookneck or Profile Eagle on the obverse and the Cap & Rays on the reverse though the style was different at the two mints. The design was similar to the Facing Eagle except on the Cap the word LIBERTAD had cursive rather than block lettering, and was across the peak of the Cap rather than the base. On the obverse, the Eagle was profile; the viewer seeing the eagle’s left side, with a curved neck thus, Hookneck. The Hookneck Eagle 2R are not particularly rare. However, they are tough in true VF – most circulated heavily due to daily commerce – and are extremely difficult to acquire in grades of EF or better. There are very few known Uncirculated specimens from either mint and one should be aware that nearly all known examples of the Mexico City 2R have softly struck centers. Many collectors, Type, Date, First Year of Issue, and Style; have “hole fillers” for these 2R not because they are rare but because high-grade specimens are. The author has seen mint state examples of both the Mexico City and the Durango Hookneck. They are in private collections. The Facing Eagle Style was minted from 1825 until 1872. The thirteen issuing mints produced the same basic Cap & Ray design (there are some stylistic variations for the Cap & Rays and the legend, but it is not necessary to go into detail about them at this time) on the reverse, and featured the Facing Eagle obverse. The diameter, weight and fineness remained the same.
Mints issuing the Facing Eagle 2R:
| Mint | Year(s) Struck |
| Alamos | 1872 (15,417 minted, struck with a reeded edge) |
| Catorce | 1863 |
| Chihuahua | 1832-36, 1844-45, 1855 |
| Culiacán | 1846-48, 1850-54, 1856-57, 1860-61, 1869 |
| Durango | 1824 (Hookneck), 1826, 1832, 1834-35, 1841-46, 1448-49, 1851-1852, 1854-56, 1858-59, 1861 |
| Estado de México (Tlalpan) | 1828 (4,922 struck) |
| Guadalajara | 1825-26, 1828-29, 1832-35, 1837-37, 1840-57, 1859, 1862 |
| Guadalupe y Calvo | 1844-51 |
| Guanajuato | 1825-29, 1831-63, 1867-68 |
| Hermosillo | 1861-62, 1867 |
| Mexico City | 1824 (Hookneck), Facing Eagle 1825-34, 1836-37, 1840-42, 1847-63, 1867-68 |
| San Luis Potosí | 1829-30, 1841-46, 1849-50, 1856-59, 1861-63, 1868-69 |
| Zacatecas | 1825-65, 1867-70 |
At this time, as far as we know Oaxaca was the only mint that did not strike a 2R.
The Facing Eagle design has three one-year-type issues. It is possible that a high-grade piece or two from any or all of those three mints is out there somewhere. I have not seen any of those issues in Uncirculated condition though I am told by those whom I consider to be reliable sources that at there is at least one Uncirculated example from each of those mints – Alamos (with a full strike no less), Catorce, and Estado de Mexico.
KM-374.9 2r Hermosillo 1867/1 Ho PR/FM (Stack’s Bowers auction, 13 February 2019, lot 71276)
KM-375.6. 4r Mexico City 1863/2 Mo CH (Stack’s Bowers ANA auction, 16 August 2019, lot 21346)
If you have chosen to collect the Republic Cuatro Reales (4R), I simultaneously offer admiration for your fortitude while extending sincere sympathy as the 4R series is one of the most rewarding, but it is more than difficult to assemble. It is especially challenging if you are attempting to complete the series by Date (any grade) or Mint/Type/Style in high-grade (EF or better). It is a series requiring some discretionary funds and an even greater amount of time in order to attain anything other than the most modest of goals. The disappointments are frequent and vexing but the rewards are more than satisfying. The standard Republic 4R is 32mm in diameter and of the same silver fineness (90.27% silver and 9.73% copper) as the 8R and the other silver minors (diameters can vary from year to year and mint to mint. This is especially noticeable in San Luis Potosí and Zacatecas. Research has convinced me those variances were probably because the mints frequently struck the coins without a collar. Personally, I try to measure 4R by both the horizontal and vertical axis. Very few – particularly those minted prior to 1860 – have the same horizontal and vertical diameters). The 4R’s standard weight is 13.536 grams. Usually the edge design is referred to as ornamental, but there are two exceptions, with the Oaxaca mint. The 4R has the same basic design as the 8R and the other Cap and Rays Minors. The Eagle side feature the ancient Aztec symbol of victory – an eagle grasping a water snake in its beak and its right claw while using the other leg to stand on a cactus that is rising out of Lake Texcoco. Below and to the right are laurel branches, leaves and berries, to the left are oak branches with leaves and acorns. The legend around the top half of the outer perimeter of the coin reads REPUBLICA MEXICANA. Sometimes there is a dot after MEXICANA and sometimes there is not. The reverse features a Phrygian Cap with the word LIBERTAD (Liberty) in block letters across its base. Extending out from behind the Cap are Rays. Thus, the design signifies the dawning of liberty (freedom from Spanish rule) in Mexico. The reverse legend reads “★ 4R • MM • date • assayer initials • fineness • ” for example a Zacatecas 4R minted in 1831 would read: ★ 4R • ZS • 1831 • O • M • 10 DS • 20 GS • . Note that there were several variances from mint to mint and even year to year within an individual mint such as a six, seven or even eight pointed star instead of the normal five pointed one, irregular spacing in the legends, missing or improperly placed dots, missing superscript “S” and reversed superscript “S“. In addition, there were over-dates, over-assayers, and re-punched stars, dots, mintmarks, dates, assayer initials, fineness numbers and letters that many collectors of the series find fascinating. Depending on how much detail one chooses to include in one’s collecting criteria, varieties can be almost endless as nearly every set of dies was at least slightly different from those preceding and following. An interesting one is the number of berries and acorns in the wreath below the Eagle. I have seen as many as six and as few as two. Some collectors use the term “Incomplete Wreath” to describe such a variety. Note that the Facing Eagle 2R, 1R and ½R had the same basic design except for the appropriate denomination and the fact each smaller denomination had half the silver of the previous.
Like the 50¢ in both Mexico and its northern neighbor the 4R was not that popular with the mints as evidenced by the relatively few that were actually struck. However, most of the 4R did circulate heavily (It is possible that the miners were paid with 4R). It seems that none of the ten mints that produced 4R ever struck a large number of them in any single year. Even the Mexico City mint was not exempt. It struck the first 4R – by any mint – in 1827, but did not produce another until 1850. In fact, Mexico City only issued the 4R in twelve of the forty-two years (1824-1868, leaving out 1864-66 because of the Maximilian episode) it produced minor Real coinage. As one might expect, aside from a few “common” Date/Assayer/Mintmark examples from Guanajuato and Zacatecas, finding a true Uncirculated 4R is a difficult endeavor. Another problem the collector faces is that this issue often comes with softly struck centers even in the better condition coins so grading them properly can be difficult. Being eternally optimistic, one continues to hope that there are some high-grade examples out there just waiting to be discovered, perhaps a hoard of 4R! I know one serious collector who acquires only BU 4R. It is doubtful that collector will ever have a large number of these coins and even less likely that the collection will contain a mint state example from each of the mints that struck the 4R. Another collector friend once told me that he believed any collection containing ten mint state Republic 4R is a World Class Collection. I agree with him completely. For an excellent picture of an exceptional Mexico City 4R, refer to Hubbard-Buttrey 6, page 76. In my view, they do not come any better.
There is no record of a Hookneck Eagle 4R being struck at any mint. In fact, no mint struck any 4R until 1827 when Mexico City issued the first of the series. Interestingly all known 1827 4R are the over-date – 1827, 7/6 – therefore it is just possible that there is an 1826 out there. However, a more likely explanation is that the dies were prepared in 1826 but for reasons unknown to us production did not start until 1827, thus the last digit was over-punched. Another interesting fact about the ’27 4R is that it comes with both medal and coin orientations. The next 4R issue came three years later from Zacatecas, which was the only mint to strike 4R from 1830 through 1834. Starting in 1835 at least two mints, and in some years up to six, struck the 4R. There was a two-year hiatus in 1865 and 1866 because of the Maximilian episode. Production of the 4R restarted in 1867 but halted permanently sometime during 1870. The following mints produced the Facing Eagle 4R:
| Mint | Year(s) Issued |
| Catorce | 1863 |
| Culiacán | 1846, 1850, 1852, 1857, 1858, 1860 |
| Guadalupe y Calvo | 1844-47, 1849-50 |
| Guadalajara | 1843-50, 1852, 1854-60, 1863 |
| Guanajuato | 1835-63, 1867-69, 1870 |
| Hermosillo | 1861-62 & 1867 |
| Mexico City | 1827, 1850, 1852, 1854-56, 1859, 1861-63, 1867-68 |
| Oaxaca | 1861 |
| San Luis Potosí | 1837-38, 1842-64, 1868-69 |
| Zacatecas | 1830-64, 1868-70 |
At this time, as far as we know, Alamos, Chihuahua, Durango and Estado de Mexico did not strike the 4R.