This will be a little
bit confusing and complicated because very much information + pictures.
I will try to explain why they can not be made from the transfer dies in Dr. Ilya
Prokopov´s book.
I have to mention what Odysseus and Dr. Ilya
Prokopov wrote about this dies for better understanding.
Odysseus:
"I just realized all these samples of gold solidus of Constantine I are forgeries, struck by modern dies."https://numismaticfakes.wordpress.com/2016/05/18/oh-my-they-are-all-forgeries/The Odysseus, the author of
https://numismaticfakes.wordpress.com is refering to:
Dr. Ilya
Prokopov on “
COUNTERFEITS OF
ROMAN AND
BYZANTINE GOLD COINS – Revealing the secret of how they are made.” (
Sofia, 2015), p.32, No.3.
FIRST dies are not modern! (An specimen in
ANS is from same dies dating back to (Fundstelle:
Beaurains ("Arras"),
France, 1922)/Bequest of E.T.
Newell Another example from same dies is dating back to 1935 Hess sale.
Picture see in my next post
http://numismatics.org/collection/1944.100.6007http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.6.tri.815Dr. Ilya
Prokopov is
writing in
his book about this die:
See picture 1+2
"3.
CONSTANTINE I Couple of
nickel dies for AV
Solidus,
Trier,
struck 310-313 AD.
Obv. CONSTANTINVS
P F AVG, laureate
head right.
Rev. p q r optimo principi' target='_blank'>S
P Q R OPTIMO PRINCIPI,
legionary eagle between two stan
-
dards, one surmounted by a hand, the other by a
wreath.
In ex. PTR.
RIC VI, p. 222, No 815.
Cohen 556; Alföldi 507;
Depeyrot 17/9;
Sear 15715.
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/constantine/_trier_RIC_VI_815.
jpg
Specific features:
Obverse - smudged letters on 9h (PF);
Reverse - short
positive line between the letter P and
border of dots on 2,5h. See No.11."
NOW it is my turn!
The "positive line between the letter P and
border of dots on 2,5h" is on both authentic specimens, too. (
ANS + Adolph Hess sale, May 22, 1935, 3947)
That means that this line was in the authentic dies (die break or die flaw) and it is pretty normal that authentic coins made with this dies have this line (die break or die flaw).
That such a die break or flaw develops (it becomes stronger and larger) with the time of usage should be clear.
So there must be authentic coins without without die break or flaw, they were minted from fresher dies before this (die break or flaw) appeared in the dies.
There must be examples with a weak die flaw or break when it started to develop and examples with much stronger die flaw or break at a late die state after much more usage.
ANS ans Hirsch seem to be from an earlier die state that the other examples.
I think it is a flow line and flow lines grow with usage.
About flow lines from bpmurphy
"Flow lines develop in the die, not the
flan. When a coin is struck the
flan expands from the center towards the edges. Flow lines appear in spots where the devices meet the fields or anywhere where there is a change in depth of the die. As a
flan is struck and the metal expands, there is friction and a change of speed in the flow of the metal wherever there is a change in the depth of the die. The most abrupt change occurs where the devices meet the fields, but there are other places such as around the ears and eyes. This friction is what causes the flow line to appear in the die. At first they are microscopic, but with successive strike they grow. There is much less friction across the fields so you are much less likely to get flow lines in the fields, although, as a die is used more and more, the flow lines extending from the devices can extend across the fields. The most likely places for flow lines to develop are around the
bust and at the tops of the letters, extending toward the rims, as you go from device to
field.
"Where and when flow lines develop are a function of several factors. 1) The depth of the engraving. 2) How close the engraving is to the edge of the die. 3) The hardness of the die and the eveness of that hardess across the die's surface. 4) Whether the
flan is struck hot or cold 5) How hard the dies are routinely struck. All these factors effect the speed the metal flows and in which directions it flows the fastest. The flow lines will develop quickest and deepest where the metal flows the fastest and where the dies are the softest.
"Even today, modern dies develop flow lines. It is these microscopic lines in the die that give a coin cartwheel luster. Modern dies though are repolished occasionally so the flow lines tend to be erased repeatedly. Ancient dies were not polished as frequently, if at all with most dies, and the flow lines would continue to grow as the die was used. Two coins struck from the same dies in relative proximity to each other should exhibit the same flow lines."
The coin in Dr. Ilya
Prokopov´s book is not from this transfer dies, a condemnation due to the line on the P is not plausible, he should have made a die study by comparing it to authentic examples to see what was in the authentic dies and what not.
Another methodic thing, if you determine the position it would be
good if both picture are mirrored or both are not mirrored (picture 2).
No.12 is not mirrored and position
red cycle is 9 o clock.
No.13 is mirrored and so the correct position not mirrored would be 10 o clock and not 2,5 o clock
That is confusing.
On the
obverse the P at 9 o clock is actually damaged in the transfer dies and this defect should be visible on the
fakes made with it.
(P can look a little
bit different an
fakes made with this transfer dies due to differences from striking/minting (metal flow, soft or strong strike, slippage etc.).)
A coin with a PERFECT UNDAMAGED P at 9 o clock can not be made with this dies. (picture 4, I think that the P is better on all other examples).
Striking/minting can and will not repair a damaged P!
It is pretty easy to tell if a coin can not be a transfer die fake, you have to look for details, which are sharper/better as in the transfer dies, things that were off center on the mother and so missing in the transfer die if not recutted (parts of letters or dotted
border etc.) ......
You can look for things that are/were always from the beginning in the transfer dies and missing on the coins, too. (For example rised lines "tooling marks")
There will be always a transfer loss in the transfer dies, softer details and some very small details will be lost.
This transfer loss can be seen generally
very good at the very
very fine flow lines (small die breaks in the original dies often connecting the letters with the dotted
border), which will not be completely or not captured in the impression or gettting lost while making the dies from the impression with casting or electroplating.
Transfer die
fakes and
cast fakes do generally have problems when it
comes to capture the
very fine letter details and
very fine flow lines perfecty.
Some transfer dies will show rised lines which where not in the mother and will be either the result from tooling the impression or a problem while the transfer die is produced with electroplating.
If you look carefully you will see that the condemned coins have flow lines (flow lines are small die breaks) which are not in the transfer die!
If a coin has flow lines you can be sure that these flow lines are in the dies, too.
This means that they can not be made with this transfer die , because the transfer die do not have the flow lines that are on the coins.
What is this green cycle picture 4?
If it is a
nick or scratch and not something that is/was in the original authentic dies, it would be a problem and mean that some of them are fake .
The pictures in my next post are for detail comparison for the points mentioned above.
Fake Coins and Notorious Fake Sellers
