A fake of a Gela tetradrachm, Jenkins 485?

[Marek W]

Dear Sirs,

I just investigated the object supposed to be a Gela
very rare tetradrachm, Jenkins 485. In my humble opinion
it may be a cast fake similar to one already reported
in here by mihali84:

https://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/displayimage.php?pid=9524

The suspicious coin was not offered for selling or exchange.
It is since about 16 years property of my friend.
As he says, he obtained the coin as a gift from
one of his neighbours in Bielefeld, Germany...

Anyway I have practically no knowledge about
ancient coins so I hereby kindly request you for your opinion 🙂

One unusual thing more: according to words
of this friend of mine he discovered very small
letters near to the edge of the obverse - hardly
visible (only in specific lighting). They are actually
marked on one of the pics. I really don't know
what I should say to that. Has anyone seen
something like this before? The letters are really
visible on one of the pics.

So I would be very grateful for any kind of
comments. Maybe if it's fake it would be
noticed by more that the one case reported
by mihali84? Maybe the source of it is known?

Thank you very much in advance for your attention 🙂

Best regards!

Marek

[Steve Moulding]

At least the weight looks good and the obverse right side lettering is normal. Anybody see anything suspicious?

Steve

[Molinari]

Looks to be a match to the fake you linked it to, and the surfaces are indeed problematic.

[Kevin D]

Both obverse and reverse are a 'die' match to the known fake (linked by the OP in this thread). A mark to the left side of the letter gamma on the reverse has been duplicated on both examples.

[Steve Moulding]

Hi all, I agree the surfaces do look problematic.  Kevin...which mark do you mean? There is a mark left of gamma on this (presumably genuine) example from an Ars Classica sale in 1924.

Steve

[Marek W]

In fact on the example from Heritage auction 2011 there is such a mark as well.. If the "slash" line was meaned 😀

[Kevin D]

Steve,
All of these examples are from the same obverse and reverse 'dies'. The Heritage images just posted by Marek W seem to show that the "slash" mark to the left of the letter gamma purports to be a mark on the coin, not in the die. The die wear seen on the obverse exergue line is in the same state on all the examples.

[Steve Moulding]

Another example, for comparison. Jenkins 485.18, Santamaria (1961), lot 50

Steve

edit: sorry...let me see if I can get a larger version, this is quite small.

[Steve Moulding]

A little larger

[Steve Moulding]

Hi Kevin, you may well be right but to my untrained eye it seems that the die defects (slash, exergue wear, vertical deterioration behind the forelegs) look to be consistent across all these examples?

Steve

[Marek W]

Otherwise there is also another mark on the
left side of the gamma letter. A fragment of
its vertical line seems to be doubled.
You may not recognise this on my previous
pics as I unfortunately had to reduce their size.
The pic from the mihali84's report is also not
of a resolution enough to see this detail.

Let you watch it here:

[Kevin D]

What I thought was a mark on the coin might in fact be in the die. Below is the HA auction listing text for the coin image posted earlier in this thread. Since this reverse is known from only a single die, checking the images in the references cited will probably show that the mark is in fact in the die. I am not at home at this time, but will look later.

HA 3012  Lot 24389

Gela. Ca. 415-405 BC. AR tetradrachm (17.22 gm). Quadriga racing left in three-quarter view, third horse with head turned back, eagle flying left above, grain ear left in exergue / ΓEΛAΣ, man-faced bull standing left, two barley plants before him, barley grain in exergue. Jenkins 485 (O97/R194). Rizzo pl. xix, 4 (same dies). Gulbenkian 202 (same dies). Antikenmuseum Basel 291 (same dies). SNG ANS 101-102 (same dies). SNG Lloyd 988 (same dies). Among the finest known examples of this unique reverse type, represented by only a single die. Beautifully toned. Good very fine.

Ex Gemini V (6 January 2009, lot 331). Ex American Numismatic Society collection (inv. #1997.9.5). From the estate of John D. Leggett, Jr.

[Steve Moulding]

That's good information! Thank you, Kevin

[Kevin D]

Hi Kevin, you may well be right but to my untrained eye it seems that the die defects (slash, exergue wear, vertical deterioration behind the forelegs) look to be consistent across all these examples?

Steve

Steve, Yes, there are many 'marks' common to all the coins, as would be expected since this reverse is known only from a single die (according to HA in 2011). So, anything in the die could be expected to show up on all coins from that die (more or less). I thought the mark to the left of the letter gamma was on the coin, but it might be in the die. It's either in the die, or most of these examples would become suspect, as they all couldn't have the same 'coin contact mark' unless duplication (forgery) had occurred.

[Din X]

The fake in fake reports is not a cast fake it is a transfer die fake.
And the coin on frist post is a transfer die fake struck with same transfer dies.
And the mother was an authentic coin struck from worn dies with many die flaws.
The mentioned wear and die flaws were already in the ancient dies and can so be found on authentic specimens from this dies with, that were struck with this or a later die state.
I have an Silver imprint of these transfer dies in my collection.

[Marek W]

  And everything clear 😀 Thank you very much for your help.
Should I report the discovery of a new item of this kind? Maybe a remark to the existing report will be good enough...

Best regards 😀

Marek

[Kevin D]

Thanks Din X for dialing this in for us.

The shallow 'mark' on the coin to the left of the letter gamma was from the die (as Steve showed yesterday). Below is the image of Jenkins 485,5