So I guess the toolers and smoothers have won?

Its the retoning that really gives it away. The reverse has deposits sat on the surface of the coin which are a different colour to the surface. The obverse has deposits still sat on the coin (see the area below the hairline above the eyebrow), but they are the same colour as the surface!! The whole obverse was retoned to hide the tooling done around the hair which would have looked coppery. busted!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The thing is with that Hadrian is that in the auction link he gives the previous auction listing, Roma E-Sale 1 Lot 465. The coin has changed drastically since it was listed there.

If anyone has the paid version of acsearch they can compare the prices.

 

I dont know what you want to call it, smoothed or tooled, but this coin has certainly had 'work done' as a plastic surgeon might say. By that I mean a scalpel or dremel has been used to scrape away hard surface deposits on a coin whose surface itself is clearly unstable (signs of pitting). Notice from the image I have attached, the yellow areas where deposits have clearly been scraped away from the coin to reveal detail. The red area is where scalpel marks can still be seen because the restorer did not scrape down to the surface but instead left marks in one direction in the deposits, making them far more obvious. The deposits may have protected the coins surface once, but now exposed, i would keep an eye out for powdery green deposits in the pitting (I am not going to say the dreaded words). So if we are to clean coins do it properly or not at all imo.

 

(You didn't attach anything)

 

IMO, tooling and smoothing are the exact same type of surface alteration. I have never heard the word "smoothing" used with ancients before (I have not been involved with them in anything other than a cursory manner since 1987). So I'm going to guess it is something only a few decades old. Perhaps some "modern" authority used the words to describe the degree of alteration. Otherwise, it was cooked up by an auction company just as "cabinet friction" came into use for US issues.

I do not wish to come across as a know-it-all because I still cannot tell one emperor from another without Seaby or Sayles. However, the only way I examine an ancient coin after an initial look is with florescent light and a stereo-zoom microscope set at around 8X.

IMO, every advanced ancient collector posting here must know that most ancient copper has been altered in some way to make it more attractive. It was acceptable in the past before any of us were born. Modern chemistry and methods of "tooling/smoothing" have made it harder to detect for the uninformed less experienced collector/dealer as new hoards/finds hit the market.

Honest people should describe a coin they are selling fully. If they don't, either out of greed or ignorance (there are plenty of US dealers who would not be around if the "crutch" of slabbing was not invented) it is up to the collector to learn for themselves. IMO, it is much easier to detect surface alterations on ancients than to identify them or authenticate them! As long as a collector knows what he is buying - described or not, what does it really matter.
Acceptability is up to the buyer.

For example: The coin in post forty is another obviously HEAVILY ALTERED coin. Unfortunately, some "ham-fisted" moron got a hold of it. In the right hands, it can be made much more attractive.

 

Wait...which one is post forty?

 

Smoothing is an alteration of the patina on selected areas of the surface of the coin. Most commonly this is done to fields but not touching letters perhaps for fear of cleaning them off. Tooling goes below the patina layer into the metal itself selectively lowering fields to raise the details like letters as well as to deepen worn off lines like hair detail. Tooling can be used to replace missing detail or change completely what was or was not there. Tooling usually will require application of an artificial patina or, at least, toning to darken the exposed metal.

Below is my favorite tooled coin. The entire legend and portrait were reworked into a Zenobia starting, I suspect, with a Flavian as.

 

My mistake. Professional authenticators teach that any type of "smoothing/removing patina/original surface" is a type of alteration to a coin's surface that is called "tooling." Perhaps the ancient dealers/collectors use the definition you have provided rather than the one I have suggested for coins in general.

While engraving the design details on a coin is universally called tooling, the act of smoothing a coin's surface to remove corrosion must not be for some collectors anymore as it is a matter of degree.

Rather than split hairs, while you have explained your usage very plainly; I'll stick with mine. Thanks

 

I disagree with this definition. In fact, I believe Insider's opinion that tooling and smoothing are the same is absolutely accurate. Smoothing is nothing more than a euphemism for tooling; ie., manipulating the actual metal of the coin to improve it's appearance. If you're removing patina and don't actually move metal, that is cleaning IMO. Once you get to metal, you're playing a different game.

Smoothing is used to move metal on the coin to cover up pits, corrosion, scratches or other damage. It's done on silver and gold as well, which do not have patina.

A quick search of the latest CNG auctions on their website gives 2 perfect examples to illustrate my point.

http://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=309550

http://www.cngcoins.com/Bid.aspx?ITEM_ID=311738

 

Somebody pleeeease tell me if I am wrong, but isn't there 20 posts to a 'page' so that the 40th 'post', (including the "O.P."), would be the last one on Page 2?
(Or does this 'rule of thumb' not always apply?)

 

There's a number at the bottom of every post.

 

Oooops. Well there you go. I have never seen that! (New glasses required.)
Thank-you, Carthago.
So simple.

 

Gosh! But that doesn't look anything like a Zenobia, and I've been looking at coins of hers for ages (I've only seen one in an auction in the last two years). An as size and weight is too big - a forger would be more convincing if they tooled a debased bronze Salonina ant.

When somebody is specialised enough to be in the market for a Zenobia, they would surely know what a coin of hers looks like? Did the example you posted sell for a big price?

 

It took me almost a month here to learn that so you are way ahead of me.

 

Having read all of the members' opinions presented here, for my part, and my purposes, I am prepared to say that "Smoothing" and "Tooling" are different by nature, even though they achieve a similar 'goal'. To the 'lay-person' (which I believe most of us are), either (generic) term may be used to describe a recently (post Industrial Revolution) alteration to the 'found' coin to 'improve' on the chemical, mineral, or manufactured state.
Regarding the terminology, well, it is a bit like a 'car' and a 'truck'. They are both mechanical conveyances used to move an object(s) from one place to another, but each is intrinsically different to the other.
To sum up. Yes, they are different, and yes they may be viewed in the same light.
(P.S. For my part, I HATE them both.)

 

Well, well...Looks like the auction companies were the original culprits who "coined" the word "smoothed." And I'll bet this happened long before CNG was around although I believe Victor England (I think I read he was an owner - if not I'm mistaken) was dealing ancients in the 1970's when I first met him.

 

Thanks for the input everyone, we really appreciate it! Thanks especially to Doug for the links and Yoc for taking time to point out issues with the coin.

My brother is really happy with it. He's had it for about a year now.

Yes, Steve, it was great to free Nero from his cage.

It's awesome that you're all willing to share your knowledge and help people like my brother and I who are still noobs at collecting ancients.

Keep up the great work!

Erin

 

I find it hard to believe that you are bothered by the size of the coin and not by the Greek legend. I assume the intent was to create an Alexandrian bronze with reverse date LE fashioned from the SC. I have no idea when this item was made and who it was intended to fool. Researching what a coin should look like was a lot harder before the Internet and much harder before photos were a part of catalog. I really wold like to believe that the thing was made in 1600 to fool a stupid aristocrat but that is less likely than it was made in 2000 by someone with too much time on his hands. It's cost was doubled by adding postage (domestic). There existed in the late 1960's a very similar looking as of Pescennius Niger of which a photo was shown to me by someone who knew it was impossible. I'd love to have it and would pay big money (maybe $20?) which is more than something like that was worth. Over the years I misplaced the reverse photo. Such things are part of the history of the hobby. They are not to be taken seriously but the thought of some 17th century peer paying a piece of gold for something like this has some appeal.

 

Yep, and then there are SUVs... and some people refer to their SUVs as "trucks," while, IIRC, in the state I grew up in, my parents' Tahoe was classified as a 'station wagon' when they went to register it.

Regarding the ethics of tooling, I obviously don't believe one should alter a coin, but if selling a coin that is already tooled, it should be clearly disclosed. That "P. Niger" @dougsmit just posted would be a great conversation piece, and I'd gladly buy it for that reason alone.

 

As a relative newcomer to ancients I had no real point of reference or example of tooling and smoothing although I had heard about it. One of my first bronze purchases was this Domitian AS with an exceptionally attractive price. It wasn't until a few months later when I was looking at it in thew sunlight did I notice smoothing to the left of the obverse portrait right behind the neck all the way out to the legend as well as above and below the letter S on the obverse (my cellphone pic's don't show the traces of back and forth smoothing very well, but it's there). I am also unsure about the portrait, which may be over cleaned

I was torn because I like this coin but was angry that the online seller did not mention "enhancements" in their description. I've decide to keep the coin as a reminder to be more careful in the future. As for that dealer, I have not done business with them again.