I was watching an episode of America’s Lost Vikings for some reason, possibly because my IQ dropped so much from even the briefest exposure to the show while flipping by that I lost the ability to operate the remote. Whatever the reason, the cast was endeavoring to determine if a Viking coin allegedly found in Maine was indeed ancient. The technique they used was based on the thickness of the patina. Fake coins, they argued, would have a patina of even thickness. Coins that had been in ground a while and patinated naturally would have a patina of uneven thickness. They used some type of poorly described laser technique to determine patina thickness across a transect of the coin. Neat. Never heard of that method, but the logic seems sound. I don’t want give away the surprise results from the show [SPOILER ALERT], but suffice it to say the coin exhibited an uneven patina thickness, was adjudged to have been in the ground for a while, which could only mean the “finder” — who wouldn’t you know just so happened to have been a coin collector himself — must have found the coin in Maine, therefore proving Vikings in America. Ugh. Anyway, has anyone heard of this technique? I’d be interested in learning more about it.
I don't think it would be too difficult to add an artificial patina unevenly. I've never heard of this technique and I'm skeptical.
Very lucky that a coin collector found the proof of Vikings in America by finding a coin. Very lucky indeed. My thoughts are... If they were able to get all the way across the galaxy, Aliens would have the technology create an uneven patina too.
I call BS. This coin has very even patina, but it is fake. This coin has very uneven patina, but it is genuine:
I'd think it even easier to apply patina evenly throughout, and then wear it thinner in some places . . .
I completely misread that. Oops. Anyhoo, here is a (likely) fake with uneven patina And a genuine coin with even patina:
