FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board

Resources => Fake Coins and Notorious Fake Sellers => Topic started by: Ed D on June 08, 2011, 05:09:37 am

Title: Carinus Aureus
Post by: Ed D on June 08, 2011, 05:09:37 am
Now for sale on ebay, your opinium please.


 
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: benito on June 08, 2011, 05:43:14 am
Good,IMO
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: Potator II on June 08, 2011, 07:14:41 am
Of course one has to start somewhere, but seller has 0 transaction, and all bids are private. No need to even see the bad picture to get alarmed

Red flag + rings bells : CAUTION
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: *Alex on June 08, 2011, 08:41:53 am
All you are seeing is a picture of a coin. There is no guarantee that, even if the coin was genuine, the seller actually has the actual coin to sell. A picture does not prove ownership.
To be clear, anyone owning a genuine coin like this would  normally sell it through a reputable auction house or consign it to a dealer for sale.
I completely agree with Potator II, I am being deafened by the warning bells on this one.

Regards,

Alex.

Good,IMO

Then why don't you go for it?  :tongue:  ::)  ;D
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: Pekka K on June 08, 2011, 08:52:27 am

One more bell:

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/displayimage.php?pos=-6034

Pekka K
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: Mark Z on June 08, 2011, 09:28:28 am
Not to pile on, but it's also a 1-day auction.

Tread with caution!

mz
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: Hydatius on June 08, 2011, 09:41:33 am
One more bell:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/displayimage.php?pos=-6034

Not just any bell: a funeral bell. It's 100% fake.

Richard
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: benito on June 08, 2011, 11:27:34 am
What about this one
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: bpmurphy on June 08, 2011, 11:56:17 am
Not sure how the one coin got in the Fake report as a Slavey as it's clearly not a Slavey. Not really close to Slavey style.

These dies have been known for a long time so clearly aren't new Bulgarian dies. In fact there is an example in Mazzini from the same obverse die and a different reverse die.

That being said I'm, not convinced the coin that started this thread is authentic. The luster doesn't look right and the fields of the coin look unusually flat. I'd like to see a better photo that is properly lit and larger. So it could be a cast but it's not made from modern dies and not a Slavey forgery.

Barry Murphy
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: benito on June 08, 2011, 12:22:30 pm
The " slavey" and the eBay coin together.
The V in Carinvs looks quite different.
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: Rich Beale on June 08, 2011, 01:31:29 pm
That is probably due to the lighting. They look like a match to me.
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: Mark Z on June 08, 2011, 04:57:08 pm
Here's something interesting:

Another one (found on acsearch.info) sold in 2005 for $8704.

mz

EDIT: Same one as benito posted. mz

The eBay coin sold for US $1,375.99
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: commodus on June 08, 2011, 05:27:06 pm
Here's something interesting:

Another one (found on acsearch.info) sold in 2005 for $8704.

mz

EDIT: Same one as benito posted. mz

The eBay coin sold for US $1,375.99


The host, perhaps? Or a (genuine) die match to the host?
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: benito on June 08, 2011, 05:32:23 pm
The obverse is not the same IMO.
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: byzcoll on June 08, 2011, 06:33:57 pm
Hi,

another specimen with the same obverse was sold in 2008 and is to be found on acsearch. This coin is the Mazzini plate coin which bpmurphy is referring to. It has a provenance dating back to 1958.

The ebay coin does not look cast on the pictures. Given the flatness and the appearance also noted by bpmurphy I think that it has been struck from transfer dies. It just has this type of dullness and brightness at the same time I have seen on dangerous fakes of byzantine solidi struck from dies.

byzcoll
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: SRukke on June 08, 2011, 09:22:48 pm
But it must be real, it has a lifetime guarantee in the listing.
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: Ed D on June 09, 2011, 02:54:58 am
A similar aureus, perhaps it maybe the host, was sold by NAC AG, auction 54 on march 24 2010.
Calicó 4351 (this obverse die). The winning bid was  45717 USD.

Ex Rollin & Feuardent, 25 April1887, Vicomte Ponton d’Amécourt 589; Sotheby’s 10 November 1972, Metropolitan part I, 208 and NAC 21, 2001, 549 sales.


Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: benito on June 09, 2011, 03:43:35 am
A similar aureus, perhaps it maybe the host, was sold by NAC AG, auction 54 on march 24 2010.
Calicó 4351 (this obverse die). The winning bid was  45717 USD.

Ex Rollin & Feuardent, 25 April1887, Vicomte Ponton d’Amécourt 589; Sotheby’s 10 November 1972, Metropolitan part I, 208 and NAC 21, 2001, 549 sales.

The eBay coin (if fake) has two hosts. One for the obverse and one for the reverse.
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: marrk on June 09, 2011, 05:21:53 am
some time ago. held in my hand. Karin authentic. shows signs of turning. like this picture, I see the same traces
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: commodus on June 09, 2011, 01:07:18 pm
The coin in the fake reports is not a Slavey, that we can say for certain. Can we say for certain that it is fake? On what basis was that report made? I'm not altogether persuaded that all these coins are exact die matches (both sides), let alone fakes.
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: maridvnvm on June 09, 2011, 01:15:41 pm
The fake report was submitted by Dr. Prokopov so we would have to ask him.
Regards,
Martin
Title: Re: Carinus Aureus
Post by: commodus on June 09, 2011, 03:55:13 pm
I should have checked first to see who submitted the report. If Dr. Prokopov says it is fake he'd have a valid reason and would know what he's talking about; so I think here's no doubt that at least that one is fake, then. I'm curious to know more about it, though, and the reasons for the Slavey attribution.