Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Expert Authentication - Accurate Descriptions - Reasonable Prices - Coins From Under $10 To Museum Quality Rarities Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Support Our Efforts To Serve The Classical Numismatics Community - Shop At Forum Ancient Coins

New & Reduced


Author Topic: Suspicious Maximus siliqua  (Read 2082 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Din X

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #25 on: June 18, 2022, 11:36:15 am »
More ex Demetrius7107

Offline Din X

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #26 on: June 18, 2022, 11:55:50 am »
in ebay archiv you can find many more Bulgarian fakes sold by him Demetrius7107 and some authentic coins.
To lazy to post all here, who is interested can have a look.

https://www.coryssa.org/index.php/coins/all/search_seller/on/keywords/Demetrius7107/search2/yes/date_to/2022-06-18/use_checkboxes/0

Some are terrible like this one , have seen this fake offerd by other fake sellers before

https://www.coryssa.org/2084204/subcategory_id/5006/page/0/search_seller/on/keywords/Demetrius7107/search2/yes/date_to/2022-06-18/use_checkboxes/0/period/all/period/all/

Offline Din X

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #27 on: June 18, 2022, 12:01:41 pm »
I posted this fake sold by Demetrius7107 already in this thread.

This Caears Elephants were struck from really many many different dies, how likely is it that anyone can have two from the same dies and he has sometimes of rare coins 2 from the same dies and from same die state, that these dies are so far unpublished is clear and that his fakes share the same style although they are from different emperors has been mentioned before, too

https://www.coryssa.org/2277547/subcategory_id/5006/page/0/search_seller/on/keywords/Demetrius7107/search2/yes/date_to/2022-06-18/use_checkboxes/0/period/all/period/all/

Offline Joe Sermarini

  • Owner, President
  • FORVM STAFF
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12103
  • All Coins Guaranteed for Eternity.
    • FORVM ANCIENT COINS
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2022, 01:41:35 am »
Posting all those photos in a single thread with no explanation is worthless. Some of them appear to be cast. If these are photos of fakes, then they should be added to the fake coin reports with descriptions that allow them to be found with a search. In this thread, they are not very useful.
Joseph Sermarini
Owner, President
FORVM ANCIENT COINS

Offline Din X

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2022, 03:00:38 am »
I already explained, why they are fake, because they share all the same style and fabric but they are from different emperors and times and he even made some Roman and Greek fakes and not any proven authentic coin is know from any of these dies or die links to authentic coins.
And he has of rare coins some times 2 or 3 but from the same dies and from same die state which is pretty much impossible.
Not any of these is cast, that would mean that there would be a mother and casting twins this is not the case, you will not be able to find.
Not sure why some look so soapy, what I can tell is there is a Bulgarian workshop who is only making modern hand cut die fakes and they are all that soapy, but I know them mainly from fakes of Greek coins but it is actually possible and likely that this is this workshop with the soapy fakes from modern hand cut dies. What is possible is that they cut in hard silicon details and make dies with electroplating like Lipanoff.

To show many fakes from same artist and workshop actually makes much sense to see stylistic peculiarities of the artist, then you can look similarities in fabric and  how most are identically altered with artificial wear and black toning and for their very uniform planchets etc.
So sometimes it can be helpful to see many coins from the same artist together, to see what they have in common.
The problem is that some look a little bit more convincing than others and to condemn the more convincing ones we need to see them togehter with the more obvious fakes, to see that they share same style and problems and must be fakes too.

If we speak about style, it is possible to recognize the style of different artists very reliable meaning recognizing all or almost all artworks of one artist.
False positive results are extremely rare if you are good and if the sytle of the artist is well recognizable.
I asked Slavey to make me all replicas that I am missing from him and I have sent him picture of the replicas I already had from him.
So he made me the ones he thought I do not have, but it seems like he did not check carefully.
I later dared to ask, if two medaillons and aurei, which were so far not attributed to him but that have very similar style and fabric are possibly from him, he was surprised that I did not have them and offered me to make them for me, too.


It is important to recognize the style of this artist and the characteristics the fakes have in common, to detect even unpublished fakes of him.
The most important thing is to recognize fakes, fake databases can be then used for confirmation, fake databases can never be complete and there will be always most of the fakes missing in the databases.

I have bought two Istros coins from reliable sources, so what did I do check acseach and museum collections and fake databases.
For the Drachm, in museum collections were 2 die linked ones as authentic and on acseach many die linked ones sold as authentic, and in fake reports and that was supposed to be a cast fake and so not important (because mine is not cast).
I never really felt comfortable with this coin but hoped for authentic. coryssa.org was down at this time.
After many month, I got another Istros Drachm with the same sytle from same artist which was clearly fake in a fake lot.
coryssa.org was then working again and I checked what Istros coins where sold at ebay and by whom.
And I have found out that so many of these Drachms were sold by fake sellers and that they must be fakes.
And the other coin was hemidrachm, that was not in any fake database.
The hemidrachm has the same style and fabric and is fake and some but not many were sold by fake sellers at ebay or were offered with fakes.

What do we learn?

Fake databases are often incomplete, mine is much much superior to fake reports, but my database is missing so many fakes too, fake databases can never be complete.
If you can find a match in fake databases it can be a confirmation that a coin is fake.
But if you do not find a match in fake databases, it does not mean that the coin must be authentic, it only means that in such cases fake databases will not help and other reseach must be done to verify authenticity.
To rely on acseach and coins sold by reputable auction houses is not really good too becasue it is if it comes to some coin emissions acseach is sometimes contaminated with fakes, too.
And relying on dealers is the same, no one is perfect and no one can be familiar with all coin emissions.
And yes even museum collections are not fake free, some fakes will come there through purcases or donations or maybe even through confiscations in some countries.











Offline Joe Sermarini

  • Owner, President
  • FORVM STAFF
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12103
  • All Coins Guaranteed for Eternity.
    • FORVM ANCIENT COINS
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #30 on: June 19, 2022, 04:28:17 am »
I cannot see any clear relationship between this stream of photos and the original coin. I do not see the same style and fabric. I get that you see it, but I have spent a bit of time studying fakes, and I still cannot see it. I think few will.

In one week, nobody will look at this thread again. It would be far more helpful to have photos of fake coins added to the fake coin reports that will be seen over and over, hopefully for decades. Of course no database is complete, they can be grouped as study images by style and fabric or by maker for education, not just matching.

I believe some of the coins are cast. They are not just soapy, but also have pearls and bubble pits, and the style is much better than I expect from a modern die engraver. 

It is not unusual for a hoard to include multiples of the same type in the same die state. It may be suspicious, but not enough to condemn.
Joseph Sermarini
Owner, President
FORVM ANCIENT COINS

Offline Din X

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #31 on: June 19, 2022, 06:22:05 am »
They are so many different coins offered by him, so we must expect to find die matches ro die links to authentic coins but they do not seem to exist.
But die matches were sold by fake sellers and one was withdrawn at auction as fake.
It should be possible to find more if someone would be willing to spend time for research.

Forgers generally only make 1 die pair and rarely 2 die pairs for the same emission, so we must expect that these fakes will be all struck or pressed form the same dies at same die state.
That in some really rare cases in hoards can be of course coins from the same dies and sometimes from same die state, is true I know that.
But we have to see here what is more likely, that a seller has many really rare expensive coins from unpublished dies and sometimes many from same dies and same die state that they are from a hoard and authentic even if die matches of some were sold by fake sellers or withdrawn from auction?

I do not see pearls or anything that would incicate that they are cast except the soapy surface.
Cast means that there would be a mother and casting twins, I would like to see them, I did not find any!
And maybe you remember the very soapy legionary denarii from Marc Anthony, which we discussed here because Lanz was selling many of them, the ones from same dies had different centering and a little bit different strike and planchet and no casting twins were know.
I am not sure what you think you are seeing but you imply that I am to stupid to recognize cast fakes, thank you for insulting me.
BTW, I have one of these the legionary denarius I posted the Leg VI in hand no cast, picture can be found here. But of course you can think what you want.

As written there exist such struck or pressed soapy coins from modern dies, I have picture of many and many in my collection, many and possibly all seem to be from same workshop/artist.
Non of them is cast, but you can again try to imply I am incompetent and to stupid to recognize them as cast and I will be wondering how I can recognize even on pictures cast fakes reliable for sale at aucitons or dealers offerings (proven fakes, with mother or cast twins) and why I am then getting fooled then so often on pictures and in hand by supposed cast fakes.

To style, to recognize style, you can look how the faces, eyes, noses and lips are cut and on reverse for the deities.
To style critic this is part of art, to tell from whom an artwork is.
From which artist is it?
Is it a copy, an old copy, maybe it can be even possibe to recognize the forger?
If authentic, was it made by the master himself or only from his workshop or was a part of it made by the master and the not important parts by his pupils from his workshop.
Every artist has his own style and peculiarities and if you know then you can recognize his artworks.
I am not sure if this is really practised by numismatics.

For me they are clearly from the same artist (not sure about one Elepant Denarius, sold by him), but everyone can have his own opinion.

Joe : "I cannot see any clear relationship between this stream of photos and the original coin. I do not see the same style and fabric. I get that you see it, but I have spent a bit of time studying fakes, and I still cannot see it. I think few will."


But if you do not see what I see does it really mean that I must be wrong becasue you overrlue me. You speak for others "I think few will", which is problematic because you can not know what others see but you must be convinced of your opinion if you say most will think the same and implying that I am wrong.

Other question is any fake which I see but which you do not see authentic becasue you can not see it and you seem to imply that you are better than me?

I have spend some time to post them here to warn others and help to recognize these fakes but everyone can of course think and decide form him- or herself if he/she really is following my arguments or not.

In your post you implied 2 times that you are better than me and doubted my competence, so it seems like I am not needed here anymore.

bye


Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #32 on: June 19, 2022, 07:32:00 am »
so it seems like I am not needed here anymore.

Oh, Din, don't be so touchy. You are absolutely needed here. At least I need your knowledge.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Joe Sermarini

  • Owner, President
  • FORVM STAFF
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12103
  • All Coins Guaranteed for Eternity.
    • FORVM ANCIENT COINS
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #33 on: June 19, 2022, 09:12:58 am »
Although I cannot see the similar style and fabric, I believe that is my weakness, not your failure. I believe you have a better eye for that than me or anyone else here. That I cannot see it does not mean I don't believe it exists. You misread my intent. Although you can see it, I don't think we can benefit from that without you providing more descriptive detail, because we (I assume I am not alone) cannot.  If I disagree with you, that does not mean I doubt your competence. I am not insulted that we disagree. I don't think you should be. I accept that I am probably wrong. I actually do believe you are much better than I am at spotting fakes and I greatly appreciate your participation here. 
Joseph Sermarini
Owner, President
FORVM ANCIENT COINS

Offline Din X

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #34 on: June 19, 2022, 11:42:18 am »
The problem is that it is not always that easy to prove coins from modern hand cut dies to be actually fakes.
The main aspect is fakes are different from authentic coins.
Generally they have more than one problem.
And at the end we can collect arguments for and against authenticity and see which side has more arguments and better agruments and then choose this side.
Sometimes it is not so easy to find words for what is wrong or sometimes we do not even know exactly what is wrong with a coin we only know that it is fake becasue it reminds us on fakes and seems to look different than authentic coins.
But if we lay such a fake next to an authentic coin from this emission we see that it must be wrong.

I suspect the metal to be modern, I doubt that they melted ancient coins for them, so this can not be verified.

Interesting would be for example die axis of these fakes.
Many forgers use die axis 12 or 6 o´clock or some do not use a specific die axis.
So it would be interesting to compare, the die axis with the die axis needed for authentic coins form this emissions.
Sadly it is not so easy and sometimes impossible to correct determine die axis of coins from pictures alone:(
If you have something to orientate it can work like a huge edge crack going through rim and visible on both sides, 1 or 2 casting sprues (they are normal for some Greek emissions), or a very specific flan shape.
 
It seems like the coins from Roman Republic (Rome mint), did not have any specivic die axis but they started to to become fixed dies at the end of the republic (die axis 6 or 10 o´clock).
And Roman coins from the later Roman Empire "Imperial" coins from Rome mint generally seem to have a die axis 6 or 12 o´clock.
And it seems like even if there where lose dies in Roman Republic, coins from the same dies still had very often same die axis.
But at Roman Republic coins from other mints could have fixed dies at 6 or 12 o´clock.
See at the end of my post the 2 articles I am referring to and the quotes form them.

It seems like some coins of Julius Caesar, of which he has some fakes too, were not struck at a specific die axis.
Then it would be a problem and condemning if his fakes of these coins are all struck with a die axis 6 or 12 o´clock and if lose dies it would be a problem if coins from the same dies would have different die axis.

I only have a legionar fake from him with die axis 6 o´clock and ordered a Julius Caesar Denar for 400 Euro, which should be struck at lose dies but I just ordered so I do not have it now and do not know die axis.
And even if the die axis would be 6 or 12 o´clock it would not be representative becasue we do not know of the others but it would be a bad sign, if someone can determine the die axis from his pictures of Julius Caesar coins it would be great and more representative.

I looked for fun at my fake Roman and Greek from modern hand cut dies about 1500 and as we could and would expect most have die axis 6 or 12 o´clock = 180 or 360 degrees.
Almost all Roman Republic fakes I own have a die axis 6 or 12 o´clock = 180-360 degrees although authentic coins were not struck at any specific die axis.
There are some exceptions authentic Brutus denarii and aurei were not struck at Rome mint and only with die axis 12 o´clock = 360 degrees.
And so some Brutus fakes in my collection have correct die axis 12 o´clock = 360 degrees and some wrong die axis 6 o´clock = 180 degrees.
One Brutus Eid Mar fake in my collection has die axis 190 degrees it an old fake of a silver denar which is a die match to the old fake Eid Mar aureus in BM, I assume, the die axis of the fake BM Brutus aureus is wrong, too, die axis must be 360 degrees!
Most authentic Greek coins were struck with lose dies without any specific die axis.
But really many Greek fakes are struck at die axis 6 or 12 o´clock = 180 or 360 degrees.

For die axis Greek coins see "François de Callataÿ, Les monnaies grecques et l'orientation "


Page 487+488

The most precise account of that subject has long been Hill´s statement that at Rome irregular prevails during Replublic except towards the end when there is a tendency to regularize, and under the Empire the dies were fixed wither (arrow up) or (arrow down)"

W. HOLLSTEIN, Die Stempelstellung - ein ungenutztes interpretationskriterium für die Münzen der Römischen Republik

https://www.skd.museum/fileadmin/userfiles/Forschung/Dokumente/Dokumente_Forschungskanal/XII.Int.Kongress_Berlin_2000_Beitrag_WH.pdf


Page 91+92 "the view that Crawford expressed, and which remains widely accepted, was that Roman denarii were produced carelessly and in hast".

Page 91  "and it was mainly to highlight, that coins from the same pair of dies often have the same die axis"

Patterns in Die Axes on Roman Republican Silver Coinage by CHARLES PARISOT-SILLON, ARNAUD SUSPÈNE and GUILLAUME SARAH

https://www.jstor.org/stable/44710185

There are so many fakes I even stopped to download pictures of all of them a long times ago, I only download pictures form imho interesting ones and later get in trouble if fakes will appear at auctions, of which I did not save picture because they were not interesting enough. To add fakes can be very time consuming (and it does not seem to be really that appreciated and honorated).
Of course a fake databe can be very helpful (if quality and quantitiy is good).
But to understand how to detect fakes can be even more important.

The fakes I got fooled recently have identical or similar problems as these fakes.
The fakes Chersonesos, Istros and even some of these Apollonia Pontica Drachms looked convincing at first sight and my main problem was that I underestimated forgers.
As excuse for Apollonia Drachms, I already had 2 fakes from New York Hoard and they were pressed (thickness of planchet is everywhere the same), they had artificial toning (or paint) and strange planchets.
Then I got another one which had been withdrawn as fake but looked convincing in hand, struck, planchet had different thickness at ends, the edge and planchet looks fine and much superior than the 2 fake I already has that I could not believe that they can be from same workshop. And I bought another one from a reputable dealer, struck and convincing edge and planchet but not as convincing like the one I had already and later I saw that this dealer has listed another one which was very obvious fake and which I bought too.
So I have know 5 Apollonia Drachms, all fake and die linked to each other, some more obvious fake than others, from fresh dies and if from same dies from same die state.
And 3 Istros fakes from one artist, 2 bought as authentic 1 as fakes, if you see them together and the die links, it is clear that they are fake.
Chersonesos 5 fakes from one artist, die linked, from fresh dies and if from same dies from same die state.

But if you do not look at one coin alone but on the whole die linked dies, then it becomes more obvious that they must be fake.


Offline Virgil H

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1404
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #35 on: June 19, 2022, 01:02:30 pm »
For what it is worth, I found this discussion interesting and informative. For someone like me with very little experience and ability to identify any but the most obvious fakes, this kind of discussion is very educational. I would consider it worthy of being a sticky with a more descriptive Title or turned into a Wiki article.

Virgil

Offline Meepzorp

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 5128
    • Meepzorp's Ancient Coins
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #36 on: June 19, 2022, 05:07:15 pm »
Hi folks,

I certainly appreciate Din X's knowledge. I am in awe of him. I rarely or never post in his topics because he simply blows me away with his knowledge, and I have nothing to add.

However, Joe does have a valid point when he states that (a) all of those coins should be in the Fake Reports, and (b) that in 2-3 weeks, people will have forgotten this topic. And Din X's knowledge and expertise will have basically been "lost in the shuffle". Why not post them both here and there? That way, we have the best of both worlds.

Meepzorp

Offline glebe

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1338
    • Glebe Coins
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #37 on: June 19, 2022, 06:39:51 pm »
Before the recent update of the Forum site large images were automatically reduced to a viewable size on the screen, but this no longer occurs.
This means that these days many of the images are so large that I can only see a small part of them unless I save them off and work on them individually with a screen editor.
Which I usually can't be bothered doing, and so I normally miss any point Din X (or anyone else) is making.
Or is there some trick I am missing?

Ross G.

Offline glebe

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1338
    • Glebe Coins
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #38 on: June 19, 2022, 06:58:09 pm »
And more specifically I find it hard to believe in this supposed Bulgarian master forger who seems to have produced enough fakes to fill a museum.

Ross G..

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #39 on: June 19, 2022, 07:26:47 pm »
This means that these days many of the images are so large that I can only see a small part of them unless I save them off and work on them individually with a screen editor.

Ctrl+- should work.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline glebe

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1338
    • Glebe Coins
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #40 on: June 19, 2022, 08:16:41 pm »
This means that these days many of the images are so large that I can only see a small part of them unless I save them off and work on them individually with a screen editor.

Ctrl+- should work.

Cumbersome, and now the text is unreadable with the larger images.

Ross G.

Offline Joe Sermarini

  • Owner, President
  • FORVM STAFF
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12103
  • All Coins Guaranteed for Eternity.
    • FORVM ANCIENT COINS
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #41 on: June 19, 2022, 10:13:21 pm »
It all displays fine on my screen but there probably is a setting for maximum or default image display size.  I will have to check on that.  What size pix width display are you using?
Joseph Sermarini
Owner, President
FORVM ANCIENT COINS

Offline glebe

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1338
    • Glebe Coins
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #42 on: June 19, 2022, 10:47:23 pm »
It all displays fine on my screen but there probably is a setting for maximum or default image display size.  I will have to check on that.  What size pix width display are you using?

I have no idea - I can't recall ever having set a maximum picture width.

All I know is that larger images (greater than c.800 pix wide I think) used to display in full no matter what their actual size, i.e, they were automatically reduced to displayable size, and now they aren't.

Ross G.

Offline Lech Stępniewski

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2900
    • NOT IN RIC
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #43 on: June 20, 2022, 05:33:56 am »
All I know

Note that your problem is not reported by others so maybe it is something in options/preferences on your side which is not compatible with updated FORVM.
Lech Stępniewski
NOT IN RIC
Poland

Offline Joe Sermarini

  • Owner, President
  • FORVM STAFF
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12103
  • All Coins Guaranteed for Eternity.
    • FORVM ANCIENT COINS
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #44 on: June 20, 2022, 03:40:50 pm »
I split off the most recent posts into new threads. This thread is supposed to be about a Suspicious Maximus siliqua. If you discuss a new topics, please start a new thread. Thanks.
Joseph Sermarini
Owner, President
FORVM ANCIENT COINS

Offline glebe

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 1338
    • Glebe Coins
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #45 on: June 20, 2022, 06:32:28 pm »
All I know

Note that your problem is not reported by others so maybe it is something in options/preferences on your side which is not compatible with updated FORVM.

Well I can't find any setting option for the image size other than the general zoom size (which I set at 125% for Forum).

Same with both Chrome and Edge.

Ross G.

Offline Din X

  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
Re: Suspicious Maximus siliqua
« Reply #46 on: July 01, 2022, 02:33:04 pm »
I have now two in hand, and they are clearly struck and not cast.
Die axis on both 180 degrees.

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity