FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board
-
I need help....have this for quite some time, is it fake or real? Was it a coin jewerly?
Written front:
AVRELIVS CAE SAR AVG PII
back: COS II
17mm x 18 mm
thanks!
-
I don't see anything wrong. Striking marks - the radiating lines near the edge - are a good sign. The ring has obviously been soldered on, so I imagine the coin was used as jewellery at some point.
-
I don't see anything wrong. Striking marks - the radiating lines near the edge - are a good sign. The ring has obviously been soldered on, so I imagine the coin was used as jewellery at some point.
Robert, for my own learning I was wondering about the hair. At first glance it looked odd, very undetailed but not in a worn sort of way. Is this normal? I included another MA for comparison.
-
I'm no expert on this period, but seriously, I can't see anything wrong. You get a wide range of variation with many of these coins; each die was cut by hand, and no two are ever identical. If others thought the coin was fake, they'd have said so by now!
-
The coin looks fine. Style is right, nice flow lines, no evidence of casting. I see nothing unusual in the portrait or the hair, except perhaps some indication of weakening dies.
There's that nasty little modern loop, or what's left of it, soldered onto it, but that is easily removed by a good jeweler. Some damage from it may show, but that's better than how it looks now. Obviously someone wore it as a pendant once and had that thing put on. Probably threw the coin aside after the loop broke. Pity they didn't put it in a bezel instead, but the damage may have been done a long time ago.
-
It looks very suspicious to me and I don't think it is genuine. Colour, surfaces etc. look wrong and I am quite sure I have seen similar copies in the past.
Lars
-
The general style and fabric of the coin looks fine to me except for one thing that gives me serious concern - there appear to be patches of exposed copper/bronze on some of the high spots, most noticeably on the emperor's neck - and also on the pendant loop. This suggests to me that the coin might be a silver-plated base metal cast (made in one piece complete with loop), moulded from a genuine ancient denarius. It could be a plated ancient forgery (fouree), but these usually have much thicker silvering which tends to chip/flake away rather than wearing in this manner.
Is there any sign of a seam along the edge of the coin? I think I can see a seam inside the remains of the loop.
-
There wouldn't be flow lines on a plated fourée, so we can discount that possibility right away.
It is either a cast produced from a genuine coin or it is a genuine coin.
Except in hand the possibility it is a cast cannot be entirely discounted, of course. I find no die matches in the fake reports or other fakes databases, which isn't proof positive, of course, but dismisses the possibility that it is a common fake, at any rate.
From the photos provided I see nothing that overtly indicates anything other than worn dies and a a damaged coin, however.
-
Probably genuine.
-
hello everyone ,
I know i dont have many posts here and many of you will not take me seriously.
I`m collecting ancient coins for more then 5 years , and i think i have a good reputation on an Romanian forum ( http://forum.transylvanian-numismatics.com/ )
About the coin in discussion i`m 100% sure that i saw ( today ) an similar one at an antiques fair in Bucharest.
It was a bracelet with 9 so-called "denars" and one of them was the same coin from here.
It is made from copper or copper alloy and silver plated . My opinion is that the loop was not welded to the coins , but the coins were made with the loop.
The weight seemed less than the authentic dinars.
I will attach some similar ones sold as replicas on an actions website from Romania.
(i`m sorry if they are already in the Fake coins gallery , i did not have time to check)
Regards,
Mihai
-
Could well be. Or not.
A photo of a match to that coin would be more useful than photos of entirely different and unrelated ones, none of which match in surface appearance, fabric, or style, let alone type!
If the M. Aurelius denarius is fake -- and it may or may not be -- we can't make a determination of it based on these.
-
i`m sorry but i dont have a picture with the coin similar to the one from here , i saw this post few moments ago and i remember that bracelet .
About the pictures that i attach i can delete them if they are not helpful.
Regards
-
No need to delete them. Others may see something there I don't. I'm only saying a picture of a match would be more pertinent.
-
I'm also more inclined to say its real. :-\
-
I would say that coin doesn't look good...
-
There are two things about this coin that don't look right to me:
- what appears to be exposed copper/bronze under the silver - the most noticeable locations are the emperor's neck, the lower left edge of the obverse, and the loop on the obverse - also that this is the same colour on the loop as on the coin (suggesting they're the same casting)
- what looks to be a very noticeable seam/mould misalignment on the top edge of the reverse.
There wouldn't be flow lines on a plated fourée, so we can discount that possibility right away.
I don't want to take this thread off-topic, but surely it would be possible for a fourée to have (apparent) flow lines if they were present on the host coin used to make its dies? (though I would agree with you that this coin is either a modern fake or a genuine, non-fourée ancient)
-
I don't have a lot experience yet, but I'm rather sure this is a fake. People already pointed out the brown colour, it's also a bit visible on the obverse letters. And the seam looks really wrong on a lot of places. And I can't say what's wrong with the style from the reverse, but it looks borderline fake to me, it just doesn't feel right (although it's close to the normal style).
Edit: I looked at it again, and it looks like the obverse is cast using a real coin. The reverse looks like it was carved on a flat surface (that may explain the strange style). You can see a depression around the letters and the figure. The surface looks really flat and the seem doesn't look like one from a struck coin (reverse flan looks almost completely round, with the obverse flan sticking out from beneath). But it's just a theory off course. :)
-
I posted earlier in this thread but didn't really express my opinion. I did post another MA side by side to compare the details. But all along I thought it looked very fake. The cracks look to be one sided and fake, the curls of the hair have no detail in the depths even though the coin doesn't have that much wear, the ear the same thing. The copper color, the odd looking part at the top of the reverse. The odd looking fabric which could be the lighting but I think it has too much going against it.
Plus I notice the new Forum Member that posted it hasn't chimed in at all during this discussion. I would like to see some more pics, the edge the fabric etc.
-
You can see a depression around the letters .........
Nothing unusual with that.
-
You can see a depression around the letters .........
Nothing unusual with that.
I didn't know that, so thx for the info. ;D Do you think I'm right about the strange style of the figure? I just want to be sure about what I say, so I don't have any wrong idea's as a beginner.
-
I don't think the reverse figure raises any suspicions. I'd like to see it in hand of course, but I lean genuine on this coin. Can we get an edge photo?
Fake Coins and Notorious Fake Sellers => Topic started by: Ana I on August 15, 2011, 05:40:19 pm