Woe unto me! A tooled sestertius!

[robinjojo]

I must say that I am by no means an expert in detecting skillful, or even marginally skillful tooling.  I would like to think that I have some experience in this area, but unless a coin comes with a bright flashing sign "Tooling! Beware!" it would very likely slip by.

Here is the thread that I created on CT for this coin, an interesting sestertius of Trajan Decius from the current Harlan Berk buy/bid sale.  Boy did this one blow up in my face!

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-possibly-unpublished-sestertius-of-trajan-decius.407308/

I am making arrangements to return the coin to HJB.

[John Conduitt]

16 minutes ago, robinjojo said:

I must say that I am by no means an expert in detecting skillful, or even marginally skillful tooling.  I would like to think that I have some experience in this area, but unless a coin comes with a bright flashing sign "Tooling! Beware!" it would very likely slip by.

Here is the thread that I created on CT for this coin, an interesting sestertius of Trajan Decius from the current Harlan Berk buy/bid sale.  Boy did this one blow up in my face!

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-possibly-unpublished-sestertius-of-trajan-decius.407308/

I am making arrangements to return the coin to HJB.

You have the excuse that HJB didn't notice. (Although they also don't notice 'Replica' written on their coins). And to be fair, it's not cartoonish. Easy to miss when you're not looking for it. A nice example for us non-experts to compare.

Edited August 31, 2023 by John Conduitt

[robinjojo]

I can see some tooling on the reverse figures.  It looks as if lines to the gowns were added.  As for the right figure's head facing left, that is more ambiguous.  For that, I think, engraving must have been done after the removal of the head facing right.  I'm not sure how that was done without adding metal.  I suppose the field could have been lowered with additional tooling, but that would create a definite depression around the head.  

Barry Murphy is so adamant about the tooling that the credibility of the coin's integrity is thrown into doubt.  David Vagi apparently agrees with him, including some pretty strong language! 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2023 by robinjojo

[LONGINUS]

Great post. It’s still an amazing coin!

[ambr0zie]

I must say that if I see no signs of tooling. And this bothers me a lot since, if Barry Murphy AND David Vagi agreed the coin was HEAVILY tooled, they can't be wrong. 

This is the part where my skills are extremely weak - detecting tooling and detecting forgeries. And this is not good at all. 

[kirispupis]

I own only one sestertius, so I know nearly nothing about them, but it's certainly my impression based on recent discussions that a large number of the sestertii in EF condition are tooled. I certainly would have been fooled by this one.

I guess the lesson is to compare any target sestertius with other copies, especially those in worse condition, to judge whether the coin's condition has been altered.

Luckily, even if I do increase my setertii collection, my budget wouldn't allow me to purchase a coin like this anyways... 🙂

[Al Kowsky]

 

[robinjojo]

I guess the problem with this coin, as is often the case with ancient bronzes, is that the surface can become quite altered through burial.  Add to the mix dies that were often crudely engraved, and welcome to the Twilight Zone.   

I am not thoroughly convinced.  On the CT thread a second coin is posted by Barry that is, he says, a die match with mine, with the exception of the orientation of the right figure's head, presumably altered through tooling to face left.  Being a neophyte in the realm of tooling, I'm not sure how this was accomplished at such a fine level of detail.

However, doubts and even aspersions have been case, by authoritative individuals, so the legitimacy of this example is definitely in question.     

[LONGINUS]

Thanks again for this post, @robinjojo! — I was about to embark on a sestertius acquisition quest!

[robinjojo]

1 minute ago, LONGINUS said:

Thanks again for this post, @robinjojo! — I was about to embark on a sestertius acquisition quest!

You're very welcome.

This very much an education for me, having collected primarily silver coinage over the years.  

I have emailed Aaron Berk about this time.  His initial reaction to the thread is that he does not necessarily agree with Barry's assessment, so the discussion will continue.

I do now think that there might have been some work done on the gown lines, but it is difficult to say, for me, definitively. 

 

[robinjojo]

More comments by Barry, for those interested...

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-possibly-unpublished-sestertius-of-trajan-decius.407308/

 

[John Conduitt]

8 minutes ago, robinjojo said:

I guess the problem with this coin, as is often the case with ancient bronzes, is that the surface can become quite altered through burial.  Add to the mix dies that were often crudely engraved, and welcome to the Twilight Zone.   

I am not thoroughly convinced.  On the CT thread a second coin is posted by Barry that is, he says, a die match with mine, with the exception of the orientation of the right figure's head, presumably altered through tooling to face left.  Being a neophyte in the realm of tooling, I'm not sure how this was accomplished at such a fine level of detail.

However, doubts and even aspersions have been case, by authoritative individuals, so the legitimacy of this example is definitely in question.     

I don't know if they had to recreate the figures quite so comprehensively.

On the reverse, it's easy to imagine all the lines on the clothing have been added as some are quite crude. It's not much of a stretch to think the faces have been added too, especially as they forgot to face the two figures in different directions. If you look at expat's example, you have worn figures that still give you a good amount of metal to work with.

On the obverse, there's the classic tooling of the hair and wreath, so that nothing appears to be worn, unlike the other example Barry posted.

[robinjojo]

I agree, particularly with the face of the right figure.  I think the left figure's face is okay, but now that I look at the right figure's face, it seems somewhat makeshift.

[AETHER]

A sneak peek at next podcast content perhaps? 😉

[Heliodromus]

Looking at examples of the type (across all denominations) on acsearch, it seems that in cases where the Pannoniae are facing the in same direction one might (should?) expect a similar depiction of the veil on both, but if they are facing in opposite directions then the back of the veil may be depicted differently.

On your coin one sign that something is amiss is that at the supposed back of the head of the right Pannonia we don't see the veil hanging down to the shoulder line as on the left one, but instead see the jawline of the head as originally engraved facing right.

Maybe this is a case where one's better off buying an NGC Ancients slabbed specimen with Barry & David's blessing!

[robinjojo]

5 minutes ago, AETHER said:

A sneak peek at next podcast content perhaps? 😉

Well, if that happens, I hope to remain anonymous.  I hate publicity.

[robinjojo]

4 minutes ago, Heliodromus said:

Looking at examples of the type (across all denominations) on acsearch, it seems that in cases where the Pannoniae are facing the in same direction one might (should?) expect a similar depiction of the veil on both, but if they are facing in opposite directions then the back of the veil may be depicted differently.

On your coin one sign that something is amiss is that at the supposed back of the head of the right Pannonia we don't see the veil hanging down to the shoulder line as on the left one, but instead see the jawline of the head as originally engraved facing right.

Maybe this is a case where one's better off buying an NGC Ancients slabbed specimen with Barry & David's blessing!

Perhaps.  I think for more common sestertii, buying from a reputable dealer should be safe enough, provided there is a return guarantee.  In the case of this coin, because of its "exotic" nature, the possibility of manipulation increases significantly, a potential mine field, really.

Here's Barry's assessment from CT:

"On the Pannonia, the [right] head has been completely tooled. The veil and the face are complete fabrications. On both figures, the drapery has been completely tooled from neck to ankles. On the obverse, the hairline on the forehead and temple has been strengthened, the eye tooled, the shoulder tooled, a beard has been added with irregular dashes that don't make sense, the mouth is tooled and the nose profile has been reshaped.  Barry"

[Heliodromus]

3 minutes ago, robinjojo said:

Perhaps.  I think for more common sestertii, buying from a reputable dealer should be safe enough, provided there is a return guarantee.  In the case of this coin, because of its "exotic" nature, the possibility of manipulation increases significantly, a potential mine field, really.

Yes, as an anti-slabber I was mostly being facetious. although it'd certainly give some peace of mind.

Rather you than me having to navigate the minefield!

 

[CPK]

Well that must be disappointing! Even if you successfully return it - and I have no doubt HJB will handle the matter professionally - it's a shame it turned out to be tooled like that. I have to say, the portrait looks pretty good to my eyes, and if I hadn't been aware of it the reverse probably wouldn't have tripped any alarms either. Especially coming from such an experienced and reputable dealer.

[Roman Collector]

5 hours ago, ambr0zie said:

I must say that if I see no signs of tooling. And this bothers me a lot since, if Barry Murphy AND David Vagi agreed the coin was HEAVILY tooled, they can't be wrong. 

This is the part where my skills are extremely weak - detecting tooling and detecting forgeries. And this is not good at all. 

Barry posted a die match to compare it to and the tooling is more noticeable when you compare the two coins. 

[sand]

I've occasionally wondered, if some of my bronze coins are tooled. I'm certainly not an expert at detecting tooling. Here's a copy of the untooled example which Barry Murphy posted in the Coin Talk thread, followed by @robinjojo's example.

Of course, it's easy for me to pick on the coin, now that Barry Murphy and David Vagi have given their expert, professional opinions that the coin is tooled. My opinion of the coin is prejudiced by knowing that Barry and David have identified it as tooled. Here's my "Monday morning quarterback" opinion of the coin. 1st, the obverse legend is suspicious, because the obverse legend is not circular at all. The obverse legend is very lopsided. The right side of the obverse legend suspiciously follows along the edge of the coin, as if the right side of the legend were tooled along the edge of the coin. In contrast, the obverse legend on the untooled coin, looks relatively circular, which seems like the way it should be. 2nd, at 4 o'clock on the obverse, there is a suspicious line on the inside of the legend, where it seems like coin material may have been removed, in order to carve out the legend. 3rd, on the reverse, on the left figure, the robe below the belt, has suspicious looking crude lines, which look like they may have been carved into the coin.

Edited September 1, 2023 by sand

[Kaleun96]

14 hours ago, robinjojo said:

I have emailed Aaron Berk about this time.  His initial reaction to the thread is that he does not necessarily agree with Barry's assessment, so the discussion will continue.

If Berk can't see the tooling, then I'd have serious doubts about ever buying a bronze from him again. The best case scenario is that these are "cleaning scratches" but given their placement, that's a very generous interpretation and also doesn't excuse Berk for not mentioning them at all in the first place.

The obverse has less noticeable marks but when I first saw it, my eyes were drawn to the hairline and chin. The area around the chin and face is usually a good place to spot tooling when there's also smoothing because they smooth down the fields and then try to demarcate the face's outline and end up creating a hard stop between the fields and face where they've perhaps gone too deep and created a small impression. If the face's original outline is not easily discernable, they tend end up inadvertently changing the outline of the face, which seems to have been the case for the nose in particular.

Pic of rev to highlight just some of the marks that look like tooling to me, there's even more than this though.

Edited September 1, 2023 by Kaleun96

[ominus1]

...it was purdy well done...if not for minor items, (and of course now our opinions are influenced by this  information :P)..its hard to tell...i thought of the whiskers on the jaw being very visible while the medal underneath has corroded..

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

Certainly I am no expert at tooling but this one gave me the impression that something was wrong with the reverse immediately. The right Pannonia looks ghoulish and the head is unnaturally bent to the left. Coupled with problems with the hairline of Decius it's pretty obvious. I would hope he gives a quick and speedy refund rather than getting into a debate. Good luck with the resolution.

[robinjojo]

Thanks. 

There won't be any problems getting a refund.  I've been a customer of HJB going back to the 1980s.