a bit in doubt

[okidoki]

The 2e coin is a forgery according Beast coins, my coin appears to my eyes legit, but have same obverse die

details of my coin

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-126853

details fake report
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/displayimage.php?pos=-19821

same reverse
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/displayimage.php?pos=-19822

[Molinari]

Do we know if the obverse die exists for unquestionably authentic specimens?

[okidoki]

Do we know if the obverse die exists for unquestionably authentic specimens?

thank you a good question, will be hard to find because eastern mint are scares and the legend even more not even known to Strack.
i'll keep looking

[Din X]

I am almost certainly that your coin and the Eastern one are authentic, I can not see anything wrong with them.
There is even the circular line on obverse  to determine the position where they will put the letters on obverse, you can see such lines on authentic coins too such fine details make it even more convincing although forgers could do the same but I do not think that most do even know about it.
The fabric looks struck the style looks ok the wear looks ok absolutely everything looks ok.
If  the coins picture 1+2  would be fake, then they aould be the best I have seen in my whole life.
The coin with Roman mint oberse , looks a little bit odd but could be well authetnic, too.

We do not know based on what arguments this coins have been condemned and if this arguments are actually correct and we can not verify them so. If you rely blind on others you can be lost very often.
"The blind leading the blind"

If they would be fakes from modern hand cutted dies all die linked coins must be fakes too.
You can look for fun for dies links to your coin and the Eastern coin  in mueum collections and literature and in auction archieves (acsearch and cng etc) .

We already have 2 obverse and 2 reverse dies and I guess that there will be more die linked dies around.
And the more die links the higher the change that there will be a die link to a proven authentic example and so that we can prove at least some possibly all of them as authetnic.

what really speaks against authenticity except this die link and is this die link really impossible and the one with Roman mint obverse is Roman based on style ?

The one with Roman mint obverse looks a little bit odd so I do not know maybe authetnic and just looking odd or transfer die fake (possibly recutted obverse) and or they mixed with not fitting transfer die as they often do.


Again why are they fake?
And hwo do we konow that they are really fake if we do not know why they have been condemned.
Even the condemnation of some IBSCC fakes had to be withdrawn in the past, no one ist perfect.

[okidoki]

Dear Din X,

Thank you very much for taking the time and effort here.

My coin is also eastern, i mailed it to the BM and had no comment or any hesitations on my coin being not authentic, they know the 2e coin and have it marked as possible modern

however seeing it now in the reports after 3 years made me post it here

as you state the fine line/circle is which is very hard to copy made me also a bit in doubt but then others have more experience.

http://www.beastcoins.com/RomanImperial/II/Hadrian/Hadrian.htm

[Molinari]

Here is Beasley’s write up:

[curtislclay]

Reproductions struck from dies derived from authentic coins can be very deceptive, because of course their style is correct and they are struck not cast.

However, the evidence presented so far does not convince me that these three Hadrian denarii are false.

I agree with Din X that Okidoki's coin and Zach Beasley's first coin look very authentic. Therefore Zach's second coin, being struck from the same rev. die as Okidoki's, is probably authentic too.

The one actual argument that Zach presents for condemning these coins is that the same rev. die cannot have been used both at the Eastern mint and at Rome. But I don't think that the obv. die of his second coin is in Rome-mint style, as he asserts. I think it is in Eastern style, though of course it would be nice if one could point to another, obviously Eastern denarius struck from that same obv. die.

Another point in favor of the authenticity of Zach's two coins is their source: the coins sold by Gantcho Zagorski were generally of high quality and authentic, to judge from their pictures on Yahoo and eBay and the many coins I bought from him for my own collection. Those who accused Zagorski of frequently selling tooled or false coins were wrong in my opinion, as I stated at the time and still believe today.

[okidoki]

Dear coin friends (cf)

Thank you on your comments i am happy my coin cleared and i hope Zach his coin has not been thrown away

[okidoki]

I think i have found the obverse die link, in the Strack eastern mints Strack * 74

i hope this picture is good enough
Best
Eric

[curtislclay]

I agree, that FORTVNA AVG denarius in Strack is from the same obv. die as yours and Zach's with rev. AEGVPTOS.

However, it still remains to find an obv. die link for the AEGVPTOS coin that Zach shows from Zagorski in 2009, ascribing it to the mint of Rome though I think it is Eastern.

[Din X]

To find an oberse die match to the oberse which is supposed to be Roman mint would be of course good to disprove their main argument against authenticity.
I think curtis is right that both obverse dies are Eartern it only has to be proven.

But to look for die links or matches for the new reverse die and the other here mentioned dies would make sense too. The more die links and matches the higher the chance that the coins are authentic especially if die matches or links to proven authentic because from excavation or from proven very old collection (in museum or private hands) and accepted as authentic by experts of type.

We already have 2 obverse and 3 reverse dies and there could be more. (I think that this new reverse die exists with most likely another obverse die and this new obverse die will be possibly die linked to another reverse die and sooner or later on of these will be die linked to a proven authentic coin.)
And Erics reverse die could exist with another obverse die too which could be die linked to another reverse die etc.

Is it really plausible that some really talented artist and numismatist with knowledge of this types is investing really much time to study this types for deceptive fakes and then investing much time for cutting new dies by hand or to gather impressions of authentic coins and then to recut this impressions and then making several Plausible die combinations but not striking more than 2 coins in most cases only 1 coin for 1 die combination.
And this coins are not really expensive at all maybe 500-1000 Euro.

Doesn t make sense he could have forged with his skills more expensive coins easily so why investing so much effort for so little money?

[Molinari]

Clarifying question:  Do you all suspect that this one might also be authentic?

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/displayimage.php?pos=-19822

This one certainly looks fake to me, specifically because of the flatness of the fields, as if it were machine pressed and not struck.

[okidoki]

for me Zach his and my eastern minted are authentic, the Rome minted i am so not sure hard to tell from picture, metal looks off

[Din X]

May I ask a stupid question, does it really make sense that a forger would make several dies for one emission and then striking all combinations with a hammer except one which is supposed to be Roman mint and only this coins is supposed to be pressed?

Why pressing one coin with hydraulic press and striking all others strange?

Why would a forger do this?

For the other die linked coins the style fits, coins with similar style Eastern mint exist, possibly same artist and die cutters made in their life generally many dies so this is really good, number of die links and small number of coins and low value 500-1000 Euro speaks for authenticity, forgers would generally make less dies and producing many fakes with them or more expensive coins, the metal looks good, they look struck wear is plausible etc...

I guess the picture of the "Roman"  one are missleading and coin looks different in hand.

The Roman coin is supposed to be Roman only due to style, I have seen coins with similar style Eastern and Roman mint so this is not really a good argument!  Are there die links to proven Roman mint coins?  No?  So how do they know that it must be Roman mint

[Molinari]

I don't have an answer to your question but I still don't like the coin.  The metal and fields do not look right to me. Maybe the two eastern coins are authentic and a die was created from one of the reverses and combined with a Roman style obverse?

[Beast]

Hello folks! Sorry for not responding earlier. Been very busy with helping my roommate move from Florida to Dallas. Anyway - I sold most of my collection years ago through VAuctions, so I don't believe I have any of the Eastern mint pieces any more, but I'll check when I have some time. I do remember talking about the pieces in question with Barry Murphy years ago so I will have to look through to see if I have anything new to add that isn't on my website. I don't recall what I did with the coins after Barry and I concluded they weren't good - I might have returned them to Gantcho for a refund. He was good about that sort of thing since I did buy quite a lot from him back then.

I would really love to get back into Eastern Mint Hadrian denarii and now that I am the ancients guy at Heritage Auctions I see a ton of material, so I keep my eye out for them. We happen to have in a large consignment of Eastern cistophori right now that I've been selling through our weekly internet auctions and some of the pieces are not in RIC, so they will help expand the knowledge and dies of these fascinating eastern mint products.

[Din X]

I do not understand why they are fake, they do all look ok to me.

Edit: I do think the one which is suspected by some to be pressed is struck and the pictures are misleading.
The camera angle and position can imho make coins look more flat and different than they actually are.
It seems like the picture was made a little bit from the side so the coin looks soooo flat and I can not see the for pressed fakes typical edge cracks .


And that the style must be Roman is stupid nonsense!!!!

SHOW ME A DIE LINK TO ANY PROVEN ROMAN MINT COIN !!!!!

There are another coins which are almost certaily from the same artist.

Look for the face of Egyptos and Fortuna (nose long throat etc.) on reverse and on obverse for the the individual style of Hadrian´s eye.

Every artist has his own individual and distinctive style and THEY WANT TO BE DIFFERENT FROM OTHERS, so you can easily recognize who made an artwork.

All this coins seem to be from same artist, btw the style of artists can develop and change and they can try new thigs out and  their taste and so style can change with time...