Hi Ken W2,
I think that the answer that you are really after is more subtle
still.
Ignoring
fakes for a second.
In some series, where the volume of production is relatively low and the number of dies having been made is quite low, die matches within that series, whether single or double die matches occur quite frequently but the coins themselves might be quite
scarce. In the examples I shared in the post directly above the six coins that share an
obverse die match are all quite
scarce. It just happens that that
obverse die is from a small sub-series that contains a series of
legend errors on the
obverse that are often unique to a single die. I have gathered those 6 examples over a 20+ year time period and am aware of a couple of more dies in other
collections that would extend the number of
reverse dies even further. In a larger series, where the number of dies made is much larger then die matches do occur but are less common. In some collecting areas (e.g. some
roman provincial collecting series) it is unusual not to encounter die matches as sufficient study has been published that the majority of dies are known.
Now to consider the subject of
fakes.
These can be considered in at least two categories either modern dies or ancient dies. By this we mean that the actual dies used to make the
fake are made in modern times.
Let us take the following as an example. These dies were made by a
Bulgarian engraver "
Lipanoff" and several examples created.
We have images of the dies themselves:-
Here is a freshly struck example made with these dies:-
Here is an example that is a
cast of a
fake coin created from the dies above. This example can be identified as a
cast due to the softness of detail but also the casting seam evident on the coin.
Any examples that can be matched back to these dies can be deemed to be a
fake. Knowledge of the dies is thus key in identifying these
fakes.
It should be noted that once these dies exist and casts of these exist id does lead to the use of these dies to create impossible combinations. The following is an example of this. A whole series of modern dies were created and then used in a mix-and match fashion to create several impossible variations. I create a montage of the die linkages I found within this group which can be seen here:-
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/displayimage.php?pid=18629Again, it is the knowledge that the dies used are
fakes that allows us to conclude that the coin is a
fake.
Now you get to
cast fakes. Knowing how a
cast fake is made is useful here. A host coin is taken and is used to create two halves of a mold, which can then be filled with metal to create a copy of the original item. This could be a
fake coin but could also be a real coin. There are tell-tales that you can learn about identifying casts in hand but here I am not going to delve into that but will say that if we have two coins, from the same dies, with the same
flan shape and identical wear pattern then at least one of those is a
cast fake. There is a possibility that one of them is the host but in all likelihood they are both
cast fakes.
I will illustrate this with a
denarius of
Julia Domna that I bought.
I didn't know this was a
cast fake when I bought it. I knew that it was a
cast fake when I
had it in hand and
had examined the coin in detail. It is probably created from a real host coin.
Several more matching examples have appeared on the market since.
Here, the die match alone is not sufficient to indicate that it is a
fake. It is the die match combined with the other factors. Finding a double die match but with a different
flan shape, strike, wear pattern etc. might well be a real coin.
Has this been helpful?
Regards,
Martin