Jump to content

Examples of fake coins of the Roman Empire.


Filat

Recommended Posts

Diva Faustina Senior
 

в синих кругах мы видим  крупные каверны (объединение мелких пузырьков воздуха, которые лопнули в процессе литья данного изделия) → in blue circles we see large cavities (a combination of small air bubbles that burst during the casting of this product);


в желтых кругах мы видим множество мелких пузырьков  воздуха, которые не лопнули, в процессе литья данного изделия → in the yellow circles we see a lot of small air bubbles that did not burst during the casting process of this product. 
 

Примеры подделок  монет Римской Империи..jpg

Edited by Filat
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm having a hard time seeing any burst bubbles in most of those blue circles. The majority of them look like shadows or deposits to me, inconclusive at best. The photo quality from the original listing doesn't seem to be quite good enough to say much more IMO.

Is there any other evidence that this is a fake, such as a die match to a known fake example? I'm not too familiar with aureii so can't say much about the surface bumps, could it perhaps be die rust?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Filat said:

см. дополнительную картинку ниже (see additional picture below):
 

Примеры подделок  монет Римской Империи. 2.jpg

Sorry I'm not convinced. What you've circled could be anything, there's not nearly enough detail to conclusively say whether what you have circled are actually bubbles or just shadows, deposits, scrapes, specular highlights etc.

I'm open to other evidence if you have it but the blue circles, for me, don't point to anything conclusive. The yellow circles may just be highlighting die rust or similar features from the die like flow lines. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think - this is my opinion - an accusation that a coin is a forgery is sometimes a harsh accusation. Especially when the accusation is made against a seller.

So I think it's important that when you call a coin a fake, you have to be able to justify it professionally.

To say or write - here these are bubbles, here this is a notch, this is wrong - it is not enough to show the disturbing elements (in this case the bubbles) - you also have to be able to explain what you see (here the bubbles) and why (technically) these bubbles are irrefutable proof of a forgery. From my point of view, you can't just say, here's a bubble, so it's a fake, you should write, here's a bubble, it's a fake, because bubbles occur because etc. etc.

An accusation of a fake is quickly written and should also be proven with background and expertise. 

I have often read the accusation "this is a fake!" in forums - and in the end it turned out not to be a fake after all. But the written word, the allegation, remains on the internet - and the internet does not forget.

Of course, I don't mean to attack anyone.

My 2 cents.

 

 

Long story short - I still don't know exactly why it should be a fake.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Filat said:

I have the same question (i have the same question).
 

Examples of fake coins of the Roman Empire.  4.jpg

Many of the aureii in that auction have similar surfaces to this coin, are all of them fake as well? I'm just trying to understand how what you have circled is different to die rust and markings from worn dies (for the non-burst bubbles) or how you can conclusively say the "burst bubbles" aren't just deposits, shadows, dust, or similar when the pictures are so pixelated at that level of zoom.

For example:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/roman-imperial/ancient-coins/ancients-hadrian-ad-117-138-av-aureus-20mm-700-gm-6h-ngc-au-5-5-5-5-fine-style/a/3056-30013.s

https://coins.ha.com/itm/roman-imperial/ancient-coins/ancients-antoninus-pius-ad-138-161-av-aureus-19mm-707-gm-6h-ngc-choice-au-5-5-4-5/a/3056-30028.s

https://coins.ha.com/itm/roman-imperial/ancient-coins/ancients-lucius-verus-ad-161-169-av-aureus-19mm-727-gm-6h-ngc-gem-ms-5-5-5-5/a/3056-30118.s

Edited by Kaleun96
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Ricardo123 said:

And what about flow lines on coin ? Never see this on cast !

Respectfully, well-made modern casts reproduce fine detail from the host almost perfectly, including flow lines. Microscopic flow lines of the sort that produce luster on mint state coins are another story but they are often difficult to discern even under magnification. Those who think they are authenticating ancient coins by the presence of flow lines visible to the naked eye should think again. Caveat emptor.

  • Like 6
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Faustina Junior

в желтых кругах мы видим множество мелких пузырьков  воздуха, которые не лопнули, в процессе литья данного изделия → in the yellow circles we see a lot of small air bubbles that did not burst during the casting process of this product. 
 

Примеры подделок  монет Римской Империи. 5.jpg

Edited by Filat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see anything wrong with either of the two coins. Both look perfectly fine and authentic. @Filatwhat you are circling in blue are mostly shadows and in yellow some minor bumps and metal irregularities, which actually speak for the coins' authenticity and not against it.

Edited by SimonW
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Filat said:

несерьезно (not serious).

Listen Mr filat, you circle about 100 « proofs » of forgery in the first picture of aureus. Do you really think NGC miss that with the coin in their hand ??? You better than experts who work with thousands of coins ??? Be serious yourself. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...