Posted 01/03/2016 07:05 am
I am very disinclined to outright call a coin to be a fake from pictures only, unless it is very obvious.
Unfortunately as far as 'provenance' is concerned, I have found that rarely has it been proved beyond the allegation stage. That does not mean a subject coin is a fake, but it does mean that testing and further inquiry may be indicated in the absence of 'provenance', and an opinion from an ancients specialist professional may be required.
Mind you, there is a very good body of experience right here in the CCF, to help in the inquiry of fake coins. Education is one of the base reasons why the CCF exists.
You really need to see the coin 'in hand' to better form an opinion, and even then, I admit that I can be fooled.
Nevertheless, I will express my suspicions or not, if the question about 'fake' has been asked by the O.P.
Unfortunately as far as 'provenance' is concerned, I have found that rarely has it been proved beyond the allegation stage. That does not mean a subject coin is a fake, but it does mean that testing and further inquiry may be indicated in the absence of 'provenance', and an opinion from an ancients specialist professional may be required.
Mind you, there is a very good body of experience right here in the CCF, to help in the inquiry of fake coins. Education is one of the base reasons why the CCF exists.
You really need to see the coin 'in hand' to better form an opinion, and even then, I admit that I can be fooled.
Nevertheless, I will express my suspicions or not, if the question about 'fake' has been asked by the O.P.
