Resources > Fake Coins and Notorious Fake Sellers

Constans Fel Temp galley Rome

(1/3) > >>

The top coin in this picture is from the FORVM fake gallery, having been identified as a fake by Warren Esty on the CFDL based on style. The coin below it is a presumably genuine one of the same type (image copied from Dirty Old Coins).

I have to say that the top coin looks genuine to me - in fact I remember it being for sale, and think I may have bid on it!

If the coin is fake, then not only IMO is the style very close, but it's a masterful work, and the flan itself looks convincingly ancient, even down to what appears to be a removed jewelery mounting (I have a coin with an almost precisely similar sign of a  previous mounting/clasp).

I'm curious what anyone else thinks? Curtis - do you have a strong opinion on this one?

It would fool me as well.  I think its genuine..and very nice for that matter.


If the only evidence presented to condemn this coin as a fake is style, then I disagree with it.  Style alone should very rarely be used to condemn a coin, in my opinion.  It should take a combination of factors unless the problem is something really obvious like metal used, weight, etc.

      I am not a student or collector of late Roman coins so do not have a strong opinion regarding the authenticity of this one.
      However my uninformed opinion is that I see nothing wrong with the coin.  
      I believe Warren E. said there are some erroneous details which betray the fraud, but he wouldn't reveal them publicly lest he educate the forger.  
      I think some had to do with the depiction of the emperor's drapery and shoulderflaps in the obv. portrait, which however look correct to me.  
      The long, curving tail of the phoenix on rev. is extraordinary and I would want to find parallels for it on unquestionable originals.  But looking again, I think the apparent tail below the emperor's hand is actually just a clumsy rendering of his fingers!
       I would have thought the edge fault is just a flan defect, not damage from a removed mount?

I can't see anything obviosuly wrong about these either.   I would much prefer to base my judgement on how they look in hand rather than style alone.   Patina, fabric, engraving method are equally important and can't be inspected in a photo.  

If it is of any help, here are the two Rome FEL TEMPs we have in the catalog.  Any Rome FEL TEMP image might help a bit to solve at least the style issues. (as a side note, its fantastic how crude these are compared to the eastern variants. Antioch are finest)


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version