Briac

i want to inform you about a seller on ebay who can cheat any of us who show a little over-enthusiasm (it was my situation last year) this guy does sell perfect copies of genuine roman coins which where sold in auction houses between 2016 and 2020 I sure they are fakes because I'm or I know the owners of the genuines his ebay shop is https://www.befr.ebay.be/str/getod4?_trksid=p2047675.m3561.l2563 picture 1 IMP CAE (Sic !) M ANT GORDIANVS AVG only specimen known top fake from this dealer (mine) bottom genuine from solidus numismatik auktion 9 lot 476 (hungarian collection) picture 2 IMP CAES M ANT GORIANVS (Sic !) AVG (4 specimens known) top fake from this dealer (hungarian collection) bottom genuine from Tauler y fau Subasta 61 lot 1340 picture 3 IMP CAES M ANT GORDIANVS AVG/ P M TR P II COS P P Jupiter seated holding thunderbolt (9 specimens known) top genuine from solidus numismatik auktion 9 lot 474 (french collection) bottom fake actually for sale

Comment of the ANS to the Sponsianus coinshttps://numismatics.org/pocketchange/sponsian/?fbclid=IwAR2PuaWuUvZ5ml7T_UhzVLPwEtbmOicS1ClckdZB3BwhuSA6vtNKDHx0HDs

I am opposed to this publication because the conclusions are ideological but are described as scientific by the author in the mainstream press. the title "Gold coin proves 'fake' Roman emperor was real" is just a lie... with the same results I give the title "gold tokens prove that austrian minister was an idiot" I am opposed to this publication because Sponsianus was never an emperor, at best we would be dealing with a local usurper but that too is uncertain, I would even say improbable. I'm opposed to this publication because there is no rigurous, objective, and fact-based datas for the conclusions, so the conclusion is not a scientifical conclusion

please don't change my words, yes in the future we will have more knowledge and yes in the future it will probably be possible to determine the age of a coin based on an incrustations. Yes it is interesting to raise the fact that these fields of research are to be developed but no, the results are not proof and to date it is not possible to determine the age of these tokens and therefore to determine that these tokens are ancient on the basis of the results obtained is a matter of ideology

Science can tell if there is glue, but it can't tell how long it takes to get those encrustations. here we raise the limits of science because there is no comparative data Assuming that these encrustations take 3 months to form, what would be the value of your evidence? By the way, if authors had found it, this talk does not exist...

there is no evidences only interpretations made because of an ideology. Science don't tell when the coins have been buried, science don't tell how long they spent in the ground, science don't tell when the gold was melted, to be exact, science don't give any informations about genuiness, science only say it's compatible with genuiness but it's also compatible with modern forgeries and authors choosed genuine

You forgot 2 points... 1) the wear is compatible with circulation but Becker perfectly imitated this wear on his production, so this is in no way a proof. (even more because authors tells it themselves) 2) the authors say that they do not know the time necessary for such concretions to form, it may be compatible with a currency that has spent centuries underground but may also be with coins that have spent a few weeks or months there. .. we do not know how to determine the burial time

the Paris specimen was stolen in 1831 with a lot of gold coins and was melted down, when they were arrested, the burglars confessed to having melted down the gold coins and hid the ingots in the Seine where they were found. For the sepcimens in Vienna you can find them in the google drive I gave

I give you here the analysis of Nick Vaneerdewegh (Senior Numismatist near Leu)

That's great, could you send me more details about this find? it's funny to see Gordians appear near the house (I'm living near Charleroi)

before talking about age of the coins, you should read this publication of 1923 about those coins https://drive.google.com/file/d/19_4hf9NVFLWkUGzLucDsapktTHzGM1Nd/view

if you can find that data again, it would be realy helpfull for this analysis. are you speaking of violity auctions? but thes "sponsianus" coins are not from the "aurum barbarorum" serie, the weight are too heavy and more than anything els, aurum barbarorum coins ares not poor cast..

I don't think so because to fill the head, the strike needs a minimum of force (the head is still at least 3mm thick) so to leave bubbles, you would need huge bubbles.

If you want it, may your wishes be granted. here is the only one I took since I was at the Bibliothèque Nationale for the Gordian's coinage, it was my 1st visit in the museum for my book axe 0-6 28.40mm axe 3-9 27.31mm weight 13.73g picture took in oct. 2010 with hundreds of other coins of Gordian I, Gordian II, Balbinus, Pupienus, Gordian III and Tranquillina Happy?

Hi guys, if you are on facebook there is a great analysis made by Nick Vaneerdewegh (senior numismatis near Leu) on the group "Ancient & medieval coins" I also asked some questions to the author on "cointalk" because I found problems in his publication and I'm waiting his answer Since i got some of the so called Sponsianus coins in hand a few years ago I can tell you to my eyes those are modern forgeries

Hi guys, no doubts to me, it's Gordian, you can read ΓΟ around 12O'clock on obverse

unfortunately the book is out of print and the author of the photos of the coins in my own collection has made a complaint to the publishing house, which has decided to no longer publish the book. I was thinking to do a second edition (corrected and completed) in english but I don't have time to do it actually

Hello everyone, I received a mail this morning to inform me about this antoninianus and so I came to see it. For first I have to thank you for the comment about my book I really appreciate to see it. About this coin, I know 2 other specimens of this type (see picture 1) both from same dies and I didn't list them in my book because of an old talk with Thibaut Marchal who prove that those where ancien imitation By the way, in the Georges His collection was another coin from same obverse die (see picture 2) To my eyes, the style of obverse die is quite strange. Georges His and Triton V cataloguer did missattributed the PAX AVGVSTI to Antioch, R. Bland didn't add this coin in his theses but add a lot of other coins from the G. His's collection. Gemini auction did attribute the Pax to Roman mule I don't believe in an official obverse die for this coin even more because the probability of finding 2 official hybrids of the same obverse die but different reverse is close to 0 best regards