filolif

4 hours ago, sand said:

I'm not saying that Mr. Beale is innocent. I just don't like the idea of "plea guilty" or "plea not guilty" or "plea bargaining".

If every case went to a jury trial, the system would slow to a halt and everyone would have to spend months as jury members every year. Hence why plea bargaining is necessary.

They're talking about same dies, not same coin. I don't think its confusing. If it was the same coin they would say "this coin". That is usually how I see it phrased.

It's possible they also mean same type but it's definitely same type or same dies (usually same dies). Whether or not they are actually the same dies, I'll leave it up to others to determine.

This appears to be Roma filling out an auction with its own retail inventory stock to make it appear they are still a worthwhile place for high quality coin consignments. I think it has yet to be determined if they can keep this up long term. A lot of the offerings in this auction have incredibly steep starting prices, sometimes well over the hammers in auctions from just late last year.

7 hours ago, Pellinore said:

Very interesting case. I’m curious about the firm’s answer. It could be the game of one consignor with a mind to gamble, an able tooler and money to spend. 
Curious also that these are all the same type. Did they fetch high prices at Leu’s, and is it possible to find out the buyer’s paddle number? Then you know where to find more tooled coins.

Hammers were around $1000 at Leu if I recall. I have a feeling they may not make their money back on these coins and that will be a lesson in itself. Ridiculous starting prices (probably requested by the consigner). 

This is the fourth coin (seemingly from the same consigner):

I assume it has also been manipulated but I'm not sure how as I can't find the before photo. Perhaps on the obverse by the neck?

Here is Rauch’s response:

“thank you for the information. We noticed that there has been „something“ done on the reverse, hence the description „Bearbeitungsspuren im Rv“, which means tooling on reverse. A filled test cut is a good explanation for this, but we could not tell for sure, therefore the describtion of tooling. The same case are the three following lots from the same consignor.“

I’d much prefer they explicitly state what has happened to the coin and not just abstractly mention ‘traces of tooling’. Buyer beware I guess. Also shame on that consigner for ruining 4 nice coins. 

I ran out of acsearch image credits before I could confirm, but it seems that there are more coins with repaired test cuts that Rauch is selling.
Rauch 116 Lot 47:

Leu Web Auction 24 Lot 1019 (March 2022):

Rauch 116 Lot 49 (this one is really ugly and obvious):



Leu Web Auction 24 Lot 1021 (March 2022):

There may be others. I'll keep looking. Whoever is "repairing" these coins really is misguided.

11 minutes ago, septim said:

Lection learned by me: never use any irony again (I meant: I totally disagree that it is incredible workmanship, so it seems (!) like we might not look at the same coin). just say, what you mean ... 

No to the public: Of course it is the same coin. Leu: 14,36 g; Rauch: 14,42 g - The weights make sense

 

I'm getting the sense that English may not be your first language, hence the confusion. Needless to say, if you meant to tell a joke, it did not come through.

But yes, this is clearly the same coin. The only circumstance in which it would not be the same coin is if they were both very highly executed fakes... which seems more unlikely than the repaired test cut theory.

11 minutes ago, septim said:

I am really not sure we are looking at the same coin here. Upon a close look, it is really hard to oversee that something on the reverse is not right. And I am pretty sure in hand it will even be more obvious. Incredible workmanship is something else. 
But this is of course only my opinion ...

Why do you think it’s not the same coin?

1 hour ago, zadie said:

Thank you so much for sharing. Would love to see more of this on the forum. You should really let them know though, regardless if they're responsive or not depending on how they act afterwards will better inform all of us as to what standing Rauch should have in the community.

🙏 Happy to share. I have just sent an email to HD Rauch as well and will post a follow-up in this thread should I receive any response.

1 hour ago, jfp7375 said:

Wow, insane catch on your part. Did you just remember the Leu auction, or did you come across it on acsearch looking for price comps and recognize the coin?

Honestly makes you wonder, as the repair is impressive and I would never have noticed without the "before" photo. Definitely a shame 

I'd like to claim I have that good a memory (and for some coins I do) but this was something I noticed while using acsearch to look for past sale history. Comparing the two coins now, it's relatively easy to see the manipulation of that area but I'm not sure it would have been as clear to me without a before photo to reference. This is all made especially hard when you can't look at a coin in hand either. 

In the course of researching some coins, I noticed this coin in the upcoming HD Rauch auction sold last year at Leu but has since had it's test cut repaired.

HD Rauch Photo:

Leu Web Auction 24 Lot 1020 (March 2022) Photo:

Link to the lot in HD Rauch sale: http://auctions.live-bidder.com/clients/rauch/en/sale/showLot/1411/50

The description only mentions (via Google translate) "Traces of processing in Rv." Seems a bit concerning to me but maybe they don't know. I have not emailed them about it as I'm not sure how responsive they'd be.

A real shame as the coin in its original state was quite pleasing.

27 minutes ago, Deinomenid said:

@filolif so what's the answer?

I saw you posting something about Barry Murphy and  this same  coin on another thread.

Sounds like we all think it looks ok - what's the tell that it might not  be?

 

Sorry for not updating. I had posted the photo/video of the coin elsewhere and had several people weigh in. Barry Murphy (NGC certification guy for those who don't know) had this to say about it:

Quote

There are fakes of this issue that are cast and are not very deceptive. The one on Forgery Network is authentic in my opinion. These come from a fairly large hoard of these that came out in the late 90’s. The one on Forgery network was uploaded by Cliff Laubstein who really didn’t know a lot about forgeries. He was active on CFDL but had very little experience in ancients. He’s been awol now for about 15 years. He saw lots of these showing up in auctions and assumed they must be fake. I’ve handled probably 300 of these and I have no reason to doubt them. The one that started this thread looks fine to me.

So, that more or less clears it up to me. Others had questioned it's legitimacy because of the postings on forgerynetwork and the the fact that it was listed in Prokopov 'Coin Forgeries & Replicas 2006'.

To be clear, if this is a fake coin or part of a fake hoard, then there are probably a couple hundred other coins that would also be questionable. It's not a cast. So if we accept it as struck, then it's part of the legit 1990's hoard and NGC would likely slab it as authentic should it be sent in for certification.

Hope that explains. I appreciate everyone who weighed in. It was quite an adventure with all the extensive analysis done by many people on facebook, discord and here as well.

1 hour ago, El Cazador said:

I thought Barry said that looked ok, why are you returning it?

I posted that before he commented I think. Going to keep it now. Barry knows his stuff.

20 minutes ago, DimitriosL said:

What makes you suspicious about this one?

I was suspicious based on some forgery reports but it seems they were applying to casts of this coin. This coin definitely does not seem like a cast so I think it's legit.

Posting this one now before I return it.

It may be real, it may not be! If it is fake, it's an extremely high quality one. Sad to let it go but I would always have doubts.

I purchased this Philip II tetradrachm from a reputable dealer a few days ago but I have had a few people questioning it's authenticity. I don't want to prejudice any responses by mentioning their reasons. Does anyone here have any reasoning for or against it being fake? I'd be very curious to know your thoughts.

Dealer tag states the following:

Quote

Philip II 359-336 BC Pela 325-315 BC Tetradrachm, 14.26 g, 6h, 24mm, Bearded head of Zeus with Laurel wreath I within beaded border/ youth riding horse r. with shield and snake below, legend above and r. Le Rider 531b CNG websale 7/2001

Thank you to anyone who takes a look!

6 hours ago, David Atherton said:

I'm amazed(Ancient) at the gaslighting certain folks are doing to justify criminal behaviour.

And kudos to Donna, you're a beacon of rationality in a very polarised topic!

Anything to not trust the big bad government. Speaks to how broken many Americans brains are and the state of our politics/society at the moment. 
 

Thanks to @DonnaML for steadfastly defending what should be common sense in this thread. 

Gela Tetradrachm
 

Next: Seleucid 

1 hour ago, Barnaba6 said:

However, let us not forget that the criminal case is not against the Roma Numismatics company but against Mr. Beale personally. As of now, there are no worrying signs pertaining to Roma Numismatics itself.

"Just because they are accused of one kind of crime doesn't mean they are guilty of another kind of crime."

Well, obviously. 

I understand the impulse to try to exonerate Roma as an auction house (especially in your position as a current consigner), but Roma and Mr. Beale are very intertwined in a way that makes them different from other businesses where wrongdoing is alleged. 

This information was posted elsewhere and I believe it to be public. This is the factual basis for the charges per the New York Criminal Court. I am in no way speculating about the guilt or innocence of the people in question based off of this information.

Here's a gif I made comparing my Siculo-Punic Tetradrachm to photos from a couple auction catalogs where it was featured.

1929: Rodolfo Ratto (Lugano), Auction 18, 24, lot 544
1931: Glendining & Co. Ltd. - B. A. Seaby Ltd., Auction III, lot 1183
2023: Roma E-Sale 105, lot 38

I find it really interesting that casts were used for the photos which accounts for the slight variation in appearance. Does anyone have more information on this? Why they did it? Where these casts ended up? Anyone have one?

One more 🦀from my collection. One of the finest coins I own. An Akragas Tetradrachm:

I, too, have many crabs. 🦀🦀🦀

Here is a didrachm from Akragas.

33 minutes ago, savitale said:

I only have one Greek coin, and this is it. Thanks for offering a game I can play.

 

 

You're welcome. And what a Greek coin to have! Phenomenal owl!

Those New Style's look great! Here's one of mine:

Attica, Athens, silver tetradrachm, (167-166 B.C. or 135-134 B.C. revised date), (16.51 g), obv. head of Athena Parthenos to right, wearing triple crested Athenian helmet, ornamented with Pegasos, dotted border, rev. owl standing right, head facing on prostrate amphora, to left a standing Asklepios with staff and snake, A QE across, on left side across ME, to right side across in five rows NED/EPI/GENO/NIKOG/SOFA on the amphora letter E, below amphora DI, all within olive wreath, (cf.S.2555, Thompson 351a [example in London Pl.35, from the same obverse die], HGC 4, 1602). Nearly extremely fine and very rare. Thompson reports 101 known tetradrachms featuring Asklepios, from 9 obverse and 63 reverse dies and only one example from this obverse die. There is a difference of 32 year less between Thompson and the suggested revised chronology. This would make this issue 135-4 B.C.  Asklepios (Asclepius) was the god of medicine in ancient Greek religion and mythology. He was also the patron god, and reputed ancestor, of the Asklepiades (Asclepiades), the ancient guild of doctors. Asklepios was the son of Apollo and the Trikkaian (Triccaean) princess Koronis (Coronis).