Tooled Coins in German Auction

[Jim_Clayton]

In a coming major German auction, there are a series of problematic coins. There are obviously tooled and/or smoothed bronzes (which are not noted as such), but more worryingly there are also a number of silver denarii which exhibit the characteristics of some supposedly laser-tooled coins that did the rounds in 2010-2011.

What do people think? In my opinion they have all been tampered with to the point that I'd no longer consider them 'kosher'.

[Jim_Clayton]

More... The sharp eyed among us may find additional coins worthy of scrutiny.

[Andrew McCabe]

I agree all look tooled including the silver. I'd already noted the top two silver coins as tooled when I looked at  the catalogue but this sure looks like a systematic problem.

[Galaxy]

At least the surfaces are a bit of a giveaway. They look WAY too smooth. No ancient coin has field surfaces that look like perfectly still water, as these ones do.

[okidoki]

interesting topic,

how can yoou see tooled on silver sharp lines on noose?

best regards,

eric

[carthago]

In a coming major German auction, there are a series of problematic coins. There are obviously tooled and/or smoothed bronzes (which are not noted as such), but more worryingly there are also a number of silver denarii which exhibit the characteristics of some supposedly laser-tooled coins that did the rounds in 2010-2011.

What do people think? In my opinion they have all been tampered with to the point that I'd no longer consider them 'kosher'.

Speaking to just the silver, they do have a very odd look to them.  They have a lot of definition, yet look smooth.  I don't like the look of them, but it could also be the photography.

With regards to the laser tooling, I had a coin that I think might have been subjected to that.  Upper left was my coin which had been tooled, bottom was the original before tooling, upper right is what I think is a unmolested die match to show where the artistic license was taken during tooling.

[carthago]

BTW, I've got an email out to this auction house about a fairly rare and higher profile Roman Republican coin that I believe is fake.  I have yet to hear anything.  It's been 2 days...

I don't want to post anything here yet in the event I'm wrong.  I'm pretty darn sure I'm right though.  Another transfer fake.

[vitellio]

Hi Carthago,

It seems to me that in your M. Antonius denarius it was "only" added metal ( cold sintering ?) on hairs, ear an eye and forehead. These areas should be a little bit more porous or grainy, with a slightly different colour...
It is a method used for denarii of this epoch, especially Caesar's.

regards,
Enrico

[okidoki]

with this coin they write "Felder etwas geglättet" that is Fields somewhat Smoothed.

[Andrew McCabe]

Speaking to just the silver, they do have a very odd look to them.  They have a lot of definition, yet look smooth.  I don't like the look of them, but it could also be the photography.

I don't think it's the photography. There's something wrong with many coins.

BTW, I've got an email out to this auction house about a fairly rare and higher profile Roman Republican coin that I believe is fake.  I have yet to hear anything.  It's been 2 days...

I don't want to post anything here yet in the event I'm wrong.  I'm pretty darn sure I'm right though.  Another transfer fake.

The auction house hasn't been named here (and shouldn't be, in line with Forum rules), so I see no issue with you giving us a show and tell of why you think a coin might be fake. This'll enable you to get more support for your views.

[Jim_Clayton]

These coins, to my eyes, are also very suspicious...

[carthago]

These coins, to my eyes, are also very suspicious...

That Buca Caesar is very suspect to me too and that was actually the first coin in the whole catalogue that didn't sit right with my eyes.  I looked through CoinArchives last night for a die match and couldn't find one. I don't have access to my library right now, but I bet that die doesn't exist and it's either a modified transfer like we've seen so much or a complete recreation.  I intend to review the die studies later and I'll report back if I find what's going on with it.

The auction house hasn't been named here (and shouldn't be, in line with Forum rules), so I see no issue with you giving us a show and tell of why you think a coin might be fake. This'll enable you to get more support for your views.

I didn't want to queer the coin in the event I'm not right, though I'm disappointed I haven't even received at least a courtesy response my email earlier this week.  Their authentication experts are probably too busy burning the midnight oil trying to sort out these suspect coins. 

I don't have access to my library at the moment, but I'll see if I can put it together from memory and the wonders of the internet.  I'll post it separately in authentications once I have my case built.  In keeping with my latest speciality it seems, it's a modified transfer fake IMO.

[carthago]

Hi Carthago,

It seems to me that in your M. Antonius denarius it was "only" added metal ( cold sintering ?) on hairs, ear an eye and forehead. These areas should be a little bit more porous or grainy, with a slightly different colour...
It is a method used for denarii of this epoch, especially Caesar's.

regards,
Enrico

We probably have too many discussions going on, but can you please explain this further, Encrico?   I no longer have the coin but I could see some porosity in the detail of the hair under strong magnification.  That is what always made me wonder because it didn't have scrapes or areas that looked like metal had been moved and I assumed that porosity was due to the high heat of the laser.  I'd like to learn more about metal being added. 

Carthago

[areich]

These coins, to my eyes, are also very suspicious...

That Buca Caesar is very suspect to me too and that was actually the first coin in the whole catalogue that didn't sit right with my eyes.  I looked through CoinArchives last night for a die match and couldn't find one. I don't have access to my library right now, but I bet that die doesn't exist and it's either a modified transfer like we've seen so much or a complete recreation.  I intend to review the die studies later and I'll report back if I find what's going on with it.

The auction house hasn't been named here (and shouldn't be, in line with Forum rules), so I see no issue with you giving us a show and tell of why you think a coin might be fake. This'll enable you to get more support for your views.

I didn't want to queer the coin in the event I'm not right, though I'm disappointed I haven't even received at least a courtesy response my email earlier this week.  Their authentication experts are probably too busy burning the midnight oil trying to sort out these suspect coins. 

I don't have access to my library at the moment, but I'll see if I can put it together from memory and the wonders of the internet.  I'll post it separately in authentications once I have my case built.  In keeping with my latest speciality it seems, it's a modified transfer fake IMO.

They know and they don't care. They might not be able to tell if a particular coin is fake but they know they're selling boatloads of fakes/manipulated coins.

[carthago]

This coin is also in the auction we're discussing and I think it is fake. The explanation of why is in this separate post:

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=100688.0

[glebe]

The problem here is that buyers are dealing with unprovenanced coins from anonymous sellers.
Don't buy coins like these without (at the minimum) a confirmable reference to a previous sale.

Ross G.

[okidoki]

The problem here is that buyers are offered unprovenanced coins from anonymous sellers.
Don't buy coins like these without (at the minimum) a confirmable reference to a previous sale.

Ross G.

it is on a auction from well known auctioneer, not some body on ebay.

eric

[glebe]

The problem here is that buyers are offered unprovenanced coins from anonymous sellers.
Don't buy coins like these without (at the minimum) a confirmable reference to a previous sale.

Ross G.

it is on a auction from well known auctioneer, not some body on ebay.

eric

I'm not quite sure what your point is here, but auction houses generally sell on consignment - we don't know who the actual sellers are.

Ross G.

[okidoki]

ok but one should trust the seller, not selling fakes or tooled without telling.

same with going too a bank one expects to get real money.

 

[areich]

Trusting most German auction houses is foolish though.

[okidoki]

Trusting most German auction houses is foolish though.

haha maybe, spanish or usa better?


i work allot in Germany, trusty people 

[carthago]

Here's one in the auction that has that same look as the other silver coins above along with an earlier sale.  Unless this is all lighting and photography, something was done to the coin.  It looks like it's been polished or something.  It's got that same melted look as the others, especially the reverse. 

[glebe]

The last coin has simply been cleaned and buffed.
I suspect that's true of most of the (silver) coins here - just shows that well preserved coins can scrub up quite nicely.

Ross G.

[Jim_Clayton]

Hi Carthago,

Thanks for posting those two - I had looked at them and thought them also a bit 'off', but didn't feel quite as sure as I did with the others.

The problem here is that buyers are dealing with unprovenanced coins from anonymous sellers.
Don't buy coins like these without (at the minimum) a confirmable reference to a previous sale.

Ross G.

Sorry Ross, but that's just about the dumbest thing I've heard all week.. and it had some stiff competition to beat. The problem is not that they are unprovenanced coins. Virtually every coin was unprovenanced at some point, but by virtue of being sold publicly by auction houses they acquire a provenance. You can still have a fake that has passed through one or more auctions, especially if those auction houses were either not knowledgeable or unscrupulous. One prominent German house (not the one that these coins are being auctioned by) and one prominent Italian house spring immediately to mind.

No - the problem is that the cataloguer has clearly been deceived by a forger / manipulator of coins. Yes, it is bad that this auction house could be deceived. However, @Areich: that is not reason enough to start making accusations of that sort. The auction house has let themselves down in a big way here. They should have spotted these as looking suspect, but I firmly believe that as the date of the auction approaches and other dealers view the coins they will be sufficiently informed about the problem, and I am sure they will act.  

Going back to Ross' comment: if you buy from an established company with a good reputation and a sound returns policy you have nothing to fear from buying at auction. You can further protect yourself by buying from (and with the assistance of) trusted and erudite professionals. Personally, I believe the three most trust-worth companies conduct their auctions in New York, London, and Zurich respectively. Make of that what you will - if and when I buy from those houses I know that for my buyer's fees I am getting their expertise and professionalism, and my own peace of mind.

[Jim_Clayton]

The last coin has simply been cleaned and buffed.
I suspect that's true of most of the (silver) coins here - just shows that well preserved coins can scrub up quite nicely.

Ross G.

Details and surfaces have clearly been altered - this is not just a case of buffing. My god man, just look at that Augustus!