Ancient real or fake?

I would love to buy a coin of Alexander the great, but this one just doesn't "smell" right to me. Opinions

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=251000453135

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Doesnt look right to me either.

 

The coin in the image appears genuine, but heavily crystallized and porous.

 

A quick glance at the sellers feedback shows he has been buying ancient replicas.

 

I hate to do it, but I disagree with Ardatirion. Look at their appears to be three layers to the edge, (the outside dots of the design, then the flan, then another layer) . The third one clearly looks like casting remnants, that the coin was cast larger than the original, to me. I have never seen an authentic ancient look like that, but have seen loads of fakes look identical to this coin.

Chris

 

I asked the seller if it was cast and how he knew it was "authentic". He replied that it was not cast but the appearance was from "being in the dirt". He said he bought it from a power seller. When I look at this coin and then at others that are worn, I notice that any writing on this coin seems to be smooshed out and not clear at all even for the degree of wear.

 

The only thing I do not see doubt on regarding this coin is whether I want it. No, thanks. The seller says it is not cleaned so we can only assume he is a horrible photographer.

 

Kentucky, in my 15 years of collecting Alexander the Great coins, (he's my main collecting interest), I have never seen a coin like this, anywhere. And that ridge that medoraman pointed out looks like a casting seem. It's possible it's an unusually struck, corroded in the ground, authentic coin. But I wouldn't want it. Even if this isn't a fake there are plenty of much more attractive, and less suspicious coins, than this one available. Take your time. You will find a better one.

EDIT: Looking at it again, the obverse looks like a very early lifetime Macedonian style, and the reverse looks like a posthumous Asian style. It doesn't add up.

 

Just out of curiousity, I am wondering how Ardatirion and Doug explains the "lip" on the lower obverse and reverse? Do flans come that way? Like I said, I have never seen an ancient that looked like this and the extra "lip" of metal was not a coin cast too large for the impression cast into it. If you have another example that looks like this but is authentic I would love to see it.

Not disagreeing per se, but would like to learn.

Chris

 

I agree with Davey. He has very little numismatic reputation on E-bay, but he does buy replicas. What does that say?

Why roll the dice here?

guy

 

You guys are awesome!

 

What appears to be an extra line on the edge struck me as something that could be caused by shining too much light on that edge when photographing. I have added suspicious looking artifacts to the edges of photos before (accidentally) and would hold open the possibility that some of the oddity here could be the photo. The criticism that can not be explained away is tenacious' observation that the two sides do not match up in terms of style. I suppose that could point to an ancient hybrid counterfeit of some factor that a non-specialist collector like me is not prepared to address. Someone who owns Price could research the coin to be sure that this is correct but that takes us back to the fact that the coin is not in a condition that would make me want it enough to do the work and run the risk of it being good by any definition of the word.
Is this coin an example of what you mean by 'extra lip'? I see it as possible when striking deep dies on a flan a bit wider than what fits and a line is made by the die edge. Such a line does not scream 'cast' to me.


Below is an example of a thick and shiny coin with too much light directed on the bottom edge making a dark shadow looking like a recess that is not on the coin. It is a poor photo but the coin is not cast. I am no Alexander expert so my statement was that it is not a coin I would want to bet on. I hate to condemn good coins which suffered bad things (cleaning or photography) and am not 100% sure this is modern but what I see would cause me to pass on it for my collection whether due to its appearance or its questionability.

 

If in doubt kentucky pass on it. $40 is enough to get a better example of this coin. Here is my coin of the same subject and mint -

 

It looks to me like a common issue of the Miletos mint.

 

Interesting post Doug. I had not considered light shadows from the photograph. I just have experience with many cast ancients, and I would say about half of them have a line like the OP coin appears to have regardless of thickness. It appears when they copy a coin, but then when making the cast they make slightly too large a flan, so this extra "lip" is formed, basically a second field level where the cast flan had no original to copy. It is just an earmark or a poor cast copy, along with line around the edges that could or could not be filed off.

If there are other reasons that lip could be formed it is news to me. Maybe I simply have been around too many poor fakes.

 

Outstandingly good and informative responses to this. I am not an ancient collector (that is, I do not collect ancient coins as a practice, not that I don't have a few years on me ), but I do have a desire for a couple of coins. One with Hercules in the Lion Skin which I identify with Alexander the Great, although I know in the back of my head that these were made for a "few" years after he died, and the other with the head of Athena on the obverse and the Owl on the reverse. I wanted to get a coin for a bargan price, fully realizing that many bargans are not really that. I saw this coin and started to jump on it, then looked at it critically and realized it was not what I wanted. Ripley's coin shows much better detail with equal wear and is a nicer coin. I don't want to pay a cheap price and end up with something I regret buying. I think I will pass on this one and look for a specimen that I will be happy with.

 

Good idea sir. My rule of thumb, (obtained after years of unfortunate purchases), is that if I do not love a coin the moment I see it, I do not buy no matter how cheap. Money comes and goes, everything goes up, but you always love quality.

The only time I break my rule is group lots. As long as I love one coin in the group I am fine buying the others along with it I may not really care for. Its an intersting way to acquire tons of coins, I tell you.

 

Yes, the reverse does. It appears it even has the Miletus mintmark. "posthumous Asian style" There is something about the Herakles style that just reminded me of some late Philip II and some very early Alexander Macedonian Herakles styles. But I admit that could be nothing and something I'm just reading into it.

But ultimately I've never seen that much blank flan beyond the engraved devices. Usually on drachms the Herakles just fits.

Look how thick the flan appears. With that much flan beyond the Herakles I wouldn't expect it to also appear so thick. If the Herakles is the usual size as on other drachms, the amount of metal looks like it would be more than a drachm. But the thick appearance could just be from the photo. Unfortunately a weight is not listed.

Maybe the engraver just happened to make an unusually small Herakles that day. Because the reverse fits the flan.

As I said it's possible this is just an unusual coin. It could happen. Although the ridge still bothers me. My apologies to the seller if the coin is authentic. But I tend not to buy coins that may possibly be authentic. I would want to be sure on my own or buy from a seller who has a known good reputation.

 

#1
The seller of this "ancient coin" has purchased nothing but copies & replicas in his last half dozen coin purchases. This seller is never going to be on my trusted seller list. Always check a seller's feedback & read about what he is actually buying & selling.

#2
The guys at CT have posted some GREAT opinions about the coin in question. I learned several tidbits by reading this thread. Thanks to all.

 

the coin is a replica, it looks nothing like the original as there are rim problems which mat account for it being cast.........