| Author |
 Replies: 26 / Views: 3,099 |
|
New Member
United States
8 Posts |
Hi everyone, I am new to this site, but am interested in starting to collect Roman coins. I received these two as gifts before I could vet them. I am VERY skeptical of the one bronze Constantinvs one on the right. As of now, I only know that one was purchased off ebay from Saxby's Coins which I already see doesn't have the best reputation. Any help or advice you can offer would be fantastic. Thanks!   |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
 to the community I enhanced your images a bit some that we can see more detail. The first coin is real. The second one is a bit questionable, the patina looks a bit odd. Lets see what the others have to say about it.   |
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
From the pictures (which are unfortunately quite small), I can't see anything wrong with these coins. Postscript: Even with the enlargement 'echizento' did, can't make a good assessment - have seen cleaned coins which looked that way, please make a better/closer picture. Edited by Medieval
12/26/2014 8:22 pm
|
|
New Member
 United States
8 Posts |
Thank you for the warm welcome and quick replies!
I have a scanner I will get out, and will get nice crisp photos in a few hours with a higher level of detail.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
270 Posts |
Hey there! By in no means am I a professional but I thought id lend an opinion
.. personally, I think the one on the left is authentic based on the wear. When fakes are produced, of course they are made to look aged, but they would not want to make the coin appear so aged/worn that it would barley be ledgible, and/or have too low of a conditon grade to be able to make anything off of the produced fake...
As for the second coin, I would have to agree that it looks very questionable. I say this because it appears as tho the highest points have less wear than the lowest points, and also the lettering is done so cleanly but the overall shape of the coin is quite crude. Also the obverse's lettering looks much more clean that the reverse..my final thoughts is one on left is genuine, one on right reproduction.
As I said tho, not a professional and just lending my opinion. Dont go throwing it out based on my reply! Haha...besides, many people hang reproduction picasso or van gogh paintings just because they also look amazing just as the original, they just dont carry the same value...keep that mind.. So the absolute worst case is you now own a beautiful looking coin...real or not.
Edited by UncleLuc
12/26/2014 8:40 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
8 Posts |
Thanks again guys. Here are 4 scans I just made.   |
|
New Member
United States
8 Posts |
The other coin   |
|
Valued Member
United States
356 Posts |
If the second coin is from Saxby, and was expensive I would be very very nervous. He tends to fake the higher end coins and let the low end ones go legit and cheap. It builds credibility. So, as always check the weight, look at it in comparison to other similar coins using databases, then finally look on the fake match up sites. In the words of Cicero, Cui Bono! In this case I mean, who benefits from selling a fake, is it in need of being faked? High value? However, Saxby is a notorious site and it is not libel to say he has sold fakes, the evidence is there.
|
|
New Member
United States
8 Posts |
Thank you Caesar77. I have been searching the web for the better part of the day looking for comparisons. I found many sites claiming to be databases, but really just end up being dealer sites.
In regards to the one from Saxby, it was about $50 (32 GBP).
Do you have any recommendations for good database sites and good fake comparison sites?
Also, the weight is:
Top one (grey): 2.00g
Bottom one (bronze): 3.85g
Edited by Fender1967
12/26/2014 9:57 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3772 Posts |
The greyish one looks genuine, you can see quite some corrosion on edges.
Now with the better pictures I have to agree with 'echizento' on the other one. Rather than a natural patina it looks like having been 'painted' with the 'paint' having been rubbed off on the high points.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5155 Posts |
I am nearly 100% sure number 2 is a fake of the worst kind. A fake of a lower cost common coin.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23731 Posts |
Thanks for posting better pictures. I'm convinced the second coin is fake. Hope you can return it.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
270 Posts |
Wear on second coin definatley looks fabricated.. If naturaly worn in that fashion, the hair right next to the headband, inner ear and top lip should have absolutley no wear, because the high points are intact, this would not allow lower points to become worn from abraision. Every single high-point is lighter than the rest, which leads me to believe a chemical was used, than purposely worn off in choice places. Also the planchet of the coin should be more deteriorated if from that era.
Uncle Luc the New-mismatic.
|
|
New Member
United States
8 Posts |
Thank you very much for the input guys!! Glad the first one is real! I should be okay to get my money back on the other. It was purchased through ebay and paypal. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1045 Posts |
I respectfully disagree that the second coin is fake. It looks like a genuine ancient coin exhibiting all of the characteristics of a struck coin. The style is perfect and the wear pattern is completely normal.
The painted on patina does make it look a bit odd but isn't a reason to condemn this coin.
Edited by Biancasdad
12/27/2014 03:35 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
4208 Posts |
Nothing about No.2 strikes me as fake. The style is impeccable, it is clearly struck and not cast and I could not find a matcho n the fakes database (and there is a fake BEATA / PTR / Eagle tipped scepter, and its not this one). The way it has been cleaned is a difficult method that is generally frowned upon, but has been executed well.
However, that Saxby is a bit of a weasel, I wouldnt put selling fakes of this quality past him.
|
| |
Replies: 26 / Views: 3,099 |
Posted 12/26/2014 8:18 pm
