Fake Trajan...what Are The Signs?

I thought about suggesting such a thread with comparisons of real and fake coins but then I thought maybe it is a bad ssuggestion to educate the fruadsters how to do a better job.

I believe a casting ring maybe what they call the line caused where the rubbers where cut apart to make the wax models from which they cast. The simplest way to describle that is a line exists where two halfs of a mould fit together.

It looks like a sprue would have been attached at the 9 o'clock on the coin you show (there is a mark at 11 too so not 100%)

Casting bubbles appear as porosity, the roughness of this coin is not that; just they didn't buff the fields of the coin dead flat maybe because the details are in their way. (Obviously a minted coin doesn't need to be cleaned up in the same way a casting does)

Also it is impossible to cast metal to below certain thicknesses and that means crisp edges and fine details can't be created by a casting to the same standard as a strike.

I am no expert on fake coins and wear and bad quality can be confused, I guess there is no substitute for handling and dealing with the real thing and the fake and building experience... there is no substitute for experience.

The other images are REALLY relevant here as they illustrate the edge with a blatant casting seam including filing on the edge.

Martin

I agree with Doug, this coin is a bit worse for wear and it's appearance can be due to that. I can not dismisses it as a fake without having it on hand to examine.

Yes. This thread was a set up and I bit. The photos of the obverse and reverse were presented but why were we not shown the edge photos that make it 100% obvious that the coin is a cast fake? Could the coin be an ancient fake? Possibly, but the edge seam all around the coin with file marks where the sprue was removed shows that it was not an official, struck coin. However, any signs of it being ancient have been removed by harsh cleaning so there is no reason to believe the coin is anything other than a modern copy.

I should have gone to see the Forvm post before making the first comment but I will repeat that I can not accept this question as having been asked in good faith when it was decided to shown the photos shown and hide the fact that there were edge shots and that those edge shots were what was discussed condemning the coin.

On my page on fakes:
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/do...th/fake.html
I show a cast fake of a denarius of Septimius Severus including an sdge view that is no where near as good as the one on this Trajan. My page dates back to when I was trying to make my pages faster loading for people with dial up modems. I really need to redo that page instead of wasting my time here!

Doug Smith - Is there a good write-up on what constitues a silver foil coin fake or what process was used to make silver foil ancient fakes?

John Lorenzo
United States

Ummmm, ok. I think you're being a tad hasty in casting me (no pun intended) in this rather negative light. I apologise for overlooking the other pictures, but that's all it was- a simple error. And easily explained too. I didn't realise that one had to be logged in to see images in the Forum discussion boards. As I wasn't logged in, I saw nothing to indicate that there were other, more incriminating pictures. When I popped back into this thread just now, I immdiately retrieved my password from Forum (having forgotten it), logged in, and saw the other pictures. That's it. There was no attempt to pull the wool over anyone's eyes, or pull a stroke. I'm newat collecting ancients, and I value the opinions of others here, especially yourself, so the last thing I would wish to do is annoy people by acting the dick.

Apologies for the omission, but hand on heart it wasn't intentional.

On the plus side though, I know now what a casting rim looks like, and I also know that one needs to be logged into Forum to see their pictures!! Not bad for a cock-up of a thread!!