Some reflections on ancient coin acquisition and fakes

From my short experience in this hobby and based on the evidence I have encountered so far, I have come to the following conclusions and reflections. I thought that it would be useful to start this discussion to see the general consensus on CoinTalk, especially given this recent thread (http://www.cointalk.com/threads/vespasian-dream-coin.340287/).

1. The assumption "established/respected auction house = coin authenticity guaranty" should be dismissed. Maybe it was the case before, but not nowadays.

Many auction houses have moved towards the business model of high coin turnover with just basic authenticity checks or, often, with no hands-on checks (some consigned coins). I am sure the coins they realize for 10k+ price would pass through a more detailed investigation, to minimize their own risks, however, the coins accessible to common collectors, pass the same amount of checks that any capable forger would do as a "quality control" of his/her own work.

The auction houses are there for a profit, and everything is evolving around that. If detailed checks for each and every coin they move would drain more money from them (i.e. payments to different professionals covering specialized coinage and periods) than the occasionally found fakes being returned to them, then such vigorous checks will not be done (I wonder which part of "occasionally found fakes" comes from "occasional researching", rather than the fakes being rare).

Some airlines sell more tickets than there are places on an airplane, since the occasional need to compensate the passengers that have to be left out (in case everyone shows up at boarding) drains less money from the company than the profit gained by not loosing a single seat when some people do not show up. Many big shops do not hire security, because their annual salary would be higher than the cost of products stolen from unguarded shops in a year. The analogies are everywhere. Auction houses are doing business and any other assumption is a wishful thinking.

With the advent of auction houses that have large quantities of coins in their monthly turnover, even the older and more "trusted" ones have to switch to the above business model to survive the competition.

I have had a few concerns with a few accessible coins (not talking more frequent dynasty, mint city, period misattributions) that I did not bid on, but while contacting the respective houses (to make up my mind), none of them said anything remotely close to "we stand by our coins, those all passed our checks and we guarantee those to be authentic". The replies were mostly variations around "those coins are consigned, not actually ours", "we have not seen those coins in hand", "mistakes always happen and are expected, you can always return if unhappy", "we do some general checks, but if you find something, you are always welcome to let us know".

Of course, buying from an auction house or an established dealer is still better as it would allow you to return the coin if proven to be a fake, but one should still do his/her homework as the only party interested in digging up the origin of the coin, and as the only party that can actually spend weeks on researching a single coin.

2. The assumption "good provenance = coin authenticity guaranty" should be dismissed.

All the coins were either recently found/cleaned, or passed through multiple hands. The fact that some of those passing were recorded for some coins, is not a guarantee of authenticity. The fact that some of the owners were rich and famous, does not add to the authenticity. Even the fact that some of the owners were renowned numismats, does not shield us from a fact that you may hold a coin from their black cabinet, or a coin that their numismat owners did not manage to research.

This, of course, does not mean that a good provenance would not be a pleasant addition to the coin as a nice extra spice on it. However, it is just an extra information that is great to have, maintain, add and pass on, rather than something authenticating or making the necessity to research the coin any less relevant. We all collect prevalently because of the epoch and people who held the coin at its origin (thanks to @Bing, I have a Syracuse coin contemporary to freakin' Archimedes), not because of the people that held it while the coin traveled to us (unless someone more exciting than a Roman villager, a druid or an ancient soldier touched it).

3. Most of us collect coins as a hobby that co-exists with our family, profession, and other hobbies. I may spend weeks researching a coin from a few of my favorites, but the rest of the coins would not get more than a few days each, certainly not enough for a guaranteed authentication, die link research etc. To this end, if I post a coin, I also appreciate that the "Hive Mind" of CoinTalk will have far superior capabilities and valuable members, who may have spent more time researching the specific types I post about. To this end, if any of the members have concerns or evidence even at a fraction of what @Lolli brought in the recent post, please post those concerns and scream about it as loudly as possible. Any other attitude is what creates the opportunities for fakes to infiltrate, then gather "good provenance" by staying for a while with us. By all means post praises about the coins too. The subject area is too broad for any of us to cover all, and we were lucky in that particular case a person appeared who knew it better for that coin type. As in science "No evidence will ever finally prove a hypothesis/model, but one good evidence is enough to destroy it". I would not like people on CoinTalk to feel restricted to bring up their good evidences.

4. That should be paramount to not simply keep the sure fake coins in a "black cabinet". Mark them in some permanent way, or better, destroy them after documenting them. You never know what will happen a few hundred years downstream, and where that coin will end up sold as an authentic one. Unless there is a harsh clearance process for the fakes, those will just keep accumulating for millennia, and gain lives of their own. This is one of the few hobbies where "time is in the equation", and we need to think for millennia.

5. With the ever increasing ease of creating convincing fakes that will confuse most collectors, we all need to be alert in this hobby and help each other to identify and reject the fakes. The techniques are ever improving. The improved knowledge of collectors forces the forgers to evolve. There is no reason why a-few-millennia-old techniques cannot be perfectly reproduced now. All the chemical tools are there too for accelerated aging and patina formation. With the influx of more collectors and increasing demand for ancient coins, expect increased influx of struck fakes with ever convincing toning and patination.

6. In any authentication attempt (i.e. attempts to properly recognize ancient coins - desirable true positives, TP), there can be false positives (FP, coins assumed to be authentic, but fakes in reality) and false negatives (FN, coins assumed to be fakes, but authentic in reality). We shall all aim to identify FPs as precisely as possible, even if that would mean to use harsher criteria which may also cause some FNs to suffer. At present, most of us have "the coin is authentic until proven otherwise" attitude. Unfortunately, it will soon be reasonable to switch to "the coin is fake until proven otherwise", as techniques improve and the identified fakes stay in some sort of cabinets.

Happy collecting!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It seems to me that many of the recent postings here relating to authenticity, fakery, provenance, relations with some (Added via Edit - actually only a few) dealers & auction houses (Added via Edit - but maybe mostly e-bay?) ………… are reflections of those that I encounter (or have encountered) on the discussion Forums and Message Boards relating to two of my other pursuits/hobbies: collecting and researching Antique Arms and Accoutrements (particularly flintlock and percussion firearms) & Japanese Samurai swords (Nihonto). Some of the postings on those venues are almost echoes of those posted here reflecting the apprehensions, uncertainty and concerns of (especially) newcomer collectors and enthusiasts.

It has reached the point where I have stopped adding Nihonto items to my collection entirely for that is a very expensive hobby to pursue and authenticity pitfalls are many. Similarly, It is very difficult to find truly authentic antique flintlock firearms with original patina (“un-messed with”) these days (and like here, frequently very hard to determine) - I think there is much fakery or “doctoring” - and those bearing guarantees of authenticity/originality are becoming very expensive.

I hope I have not overstated my case, but those are my personal observations.

Little consolation, I know, but we are not alone here.

BTW, very good post Alex22.

 

This is an interesting thesis on which to start a thread, but I'm wondering if you have conducted sufficient research or have sufficient empirical data on which to make this generalization/assertion, other than "...contacting the respective houses (to make up my mind),..." From a purely mathematical standpoint, your statement doesn't resemble a statistically significant, unbiased subsample of the auction houses selling ancient coins. As anecdotal data, it points to your assertions but doesn't prove them.

Note that I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your points [Edit: In fact, I generally agree with most of them], but you're stating them as if they're proven facts, which most assuredly they're not. Further, if I were a conscientious, established auction house that provides a guarantee of authenticity for my coins, I'd be a little irked at being implicitly accused by such generalizations, even more so without having had a chance to respond to such generalizations. There are many auction houses that seem to fit your observations, but certainly not all of them, and maybe not even a majority of them.

I do agree that this forum, when posts about authenticity are objective, civil, and diplomatically made, is a great place to uncover forgeries and discuss specific coins whose features are suspect. We should all strive to provide our substantiated opinions courteously and devoid of snarky or insulting innuendo, and conversely, we should welcome such comments about our own coins. We all learn and improve in this way.

 

Thanks @IdesOfMarch01 for the comment. I agree on the limited sampling, and the lack of specific details which I don't want to bring up as it would not help my point, but as a newbie encountering such responses from a few auction houses not too unknown, I think it would be safer to generalize the "not a guaranty" part of my statements. I don't say that the auction houses don't care whether they sell authentic coins or fakes, but they would tend to relax their assessment depth in order to save time and money on research (hence to have more competitive prices), while also easing the support conditions for taking back the coin and generously refunding if such cases arise. The latter does not lower their reputation, as many major auction houses have coins returned, or taken out from forthcoming auctions because the collectors pointing out something, and they do their business just fine. I more refer to the fact that we cannot outsource the need to research our coins to the auction houses, by unconditionally trusting their judgement.

 

Thanks @jamesicus for sharing your experience. Awareness of the problem reduces its significance/influence, and I am sure you will be a far better expert in the items of your collection focus than any general specialist assessing a few hundreds to thousands of diverse items for a given auction house in a constrained time, for money.

 

There's been many reasons why I've mostly stayed away from auctions. I would say a lot of my purchases these days comes from a few select dealers.

Starting with the 20% fees, outrageous shipping costs, and now the added risk of a few bad apples selling questionable coins, I guess it's easy to see why 95% of my business over the last year and a half has gone to Marc Breitsprecher, FORVM, Civitas Gallery, London Ancient Coins, and 1 or 2 other dealers, and only about 5% has gone to auctions (mostly common cheap coins from Agora Auctions).

 

I would agree with Alex 22 in his conclusion that no system is fool proof. However by dealing with knowledgeable dealers who specialize in ancient coins does dramatically increase the odds of getting a genuine coin, than say trying your luck with Ebay. Further with most reputable dealers getting your money back should they have inadvertently sold you a forgery is not as big of a problem (Though it is still annoying). Having good provenance can also increase the odds as well.
However, it can be very difficult to determine if a coin is a fake simply from a photo. Some months ago we had an issue with what was likely a "troll" who seemed to be targeting some of the members on the site. Unless one has some form of compelling evidence one should be very careful in denouncing someones coins.

 

I think that whether you're buying from an auction house or from a retail shop, all dealers are human and can make mistakes. It may be an overgeneralisation to say auction house=bad and retail=good. I think it's far more important to consider the reputation of the firm. Which can change over time.

As for condemnation of coins: it's hard to be tell from online images, but if sound arguments and compelling evidence is presented, I'd urge people to consider it with an open mind. No one likes to have a fake in their collection. But I think it's better to know, than not to know.

 

I agree with almost nothing in this post. There's occasional points I recognise but going through item by item, it's almost a complete list of "don't agree on this" items. I think it's far to pessimistic and doesn't remotely reflect how much better matters are today than a century ago. There's two key changes that have improved life immensely for collectors. The widespread sharing of information and photos on the internet means we are amazingly better informed and protected. And there's a far more widespread network of assurances nowadays from the VCoins and IAPN codes of conduct to authentication options via slabbing or other means. Sure fakes slip through as they always have. However aside from occasional bad fakes its true that older catalogues do tend to illustrate genuine coins that precede the modern invention of pressed fakes, laser tooling etc. So provenance has real value. I could go line by line through this post, but my general message is be optimistic. Things are far better and easier today for collectors.

Collectors however have a responsibility to protect themselves. If one buys an apparent high value rarity cheaply off eBay it will be invariable fake. Instead patronise the major dealers and auctioneers. Consider slabbed coins if you are really unsure (after some experience though you'll realise slabbing evidently genuine coins costs money, adds no value and separates you from your coins). Handle lots of coins. Look at lots of photos. Read widely. You have much more tools available today, to guide your collecting, than 50 or 100 years ago. Make use of them.

 

I wasn't going to wade into this thread because it is too negative for my tastes, but I agree with everything you wrote and the above statement is spot on. Felix Reusing did not have access to all the databases and references that I have. That's likely his excuse for picking up a fake from a reputable dealer a century ago. I purchased that same fake from another reputable dealer and I have no excuses other than laziness. If I had even bothered to look at Forvm's Fake Gallery I would have seen several examples of that cast. If I had bothered to examine the piece in hand more critically instead of trusting an old provenance, even without the fake matches, I would've seen the piece for what it is. I learned a valuable lesson.

This is a hobby that you have to work at. The tools are available. Again, make use of them

 

Thanks @RichardT, however, I am not generalising into auction house=bad and retail=good. I am just saying that auction house or provenance is not a guaranty of the authenticity, i.e. one should not get the coin and refrain from any further exploration on the basis of a full trust of its source. Threads popping up here on CoinTalk once in a while are a good testament that the mistakes always happen.

I think the confusion here is between the varying perception of the probability vs. "guaranteed to be authentic". The latter one, for me, is binary. It is either authentic or not, so we cannot say that the auction houses and good provenance are a guaranty of authenticity. Those may indeed increase the odds of authenticity while taking in consideration with other factors, but we should refrain from an over-reliance on the source alone.

I do agree with @Terence Cheesman and others on buying from a trusted source dramatically increases the odds of having a genuine coin, and ends in no loss when fakes are identified, because of the possibility of returning and a full refund, which is what I mentioned in the original post too.

@Andrew McCabe, we indeed live at an age when information is more accessible, for those who are willing to contribute sufficient time and efforts to study it, or funds to have others doing it for you. This age also opens opportunities to store the full extent of individual "investigations" and justified conclusions for each coin, for the curious souls and next owners to find those if searching for it later. There is however no guarantee that decades downstream, the stored information here and in the fake reports of FAC will not disappear because the hosting service payments cease.

 

Thanks @David Atherton. The above line you brought is exactly my point of the original post, which is more of a pragmatic one (at least that was my intention) than a negative. For the newbies like me, I would just add

... and don't rely that the respected dealers would have used them before selling the coin to you. However, do purchase from respected dealers and firms, as you can then return the coin if necessary.

 

Yes, the resources available to us are wonderful but we still need to apply common sense in their use. For example:
https://www.acsearch.info/search.ht...s=1&thesaurus=1&order=1&currency=usd&company=
The first coin in the above link is a fake.
https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5650131
The coin was withdrawn after it was reported to the seller but somehow it still is listed on acsearch. If you look for it on the seller's site, you will not find it but once listed such evidence of being good is out there forever. I have mixed feelings about reporting it to acsearch and other for profit listings who are charging people for listing fakes. Is this the only one of the coins in that first link that are fakes? I do not pretend to be expert enough to say one way or another but there are others I do not like and would not buy even if told by my betters that the coins are OK.

The only protection here is to patronize ONLY the most knowledgeable and honest sellers and to work on educating yourself as well as possible. There is no 100% certain protection. If you choose to walk in the woods, use insect repellent, proper clothing and do a tick check when you return. With all these precautions you need to expect an occasional bite.

edit: Look familiar?
https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2733653

 

You are my role model in terms of how one should think about ancient coins. Thanks a lot @dougsmit for your posts and valuable advice along the learning curve.

 

One of the considerations of ancient coin collecting is the level of uncertainty you’re willing to accept.


Leaving aside those who are malicious, the greater the number of experienced people who consider a coin, the more likely you’ll get accurate information. But even professional certifiers offer only opinions on authenticity, scholars endlessly debate dating, mints can travel, provenance can be doubtful and metal content changes over time.


Our hobby has many charms; certainty is not one of them.

 

I have been collecting ancient coins since 1972 and have owned at one time or another something like 3800 coins. Most have come reputable dealers with perhaps 100-200 coming from EBay and perhaps 20-30 from dealers who did not specialize in ancients. Less than 10 from these two sources would be classified as being expensive (over $200). Out of the rest I have been hit with 4 fakes. One from a V Coins dealer, the second from an auction house the other two at a coin dealer. In all three cases my money was returned promptly, and in one case ,the auction house, they contacted me about the problem.
I began my collection dealing with reputable people and when I would get the coin, I would study it carefully looking for features that would tell me that this coin was genuine. Over the years i have figured out a number of "tells" that would help me identify perhaps the easiest fake to spot a cast copy.
When EBay came on line and the problems with forgeries began to surface, I developed a strategy to protect myself from fakes. When ever I saw a coin that i liked from a dealer that i never had dealt with before I studied the rest of his coins as well as the material he had sold in his feedback section. If I saw anything I did not like eg. an obvious fake or tooled coin or that his feed backs consisted of mostly cheap novels, I did not buy the coin and looked elsewhere.
Currently if I am buying a very expensive coin (above $2000) I tend not to purchase such a coin unless I can study it "in the flesh" or have somebody whom I trust look at it for me. This policy helps protect me from forgeries as well as other unwelcome problems.
A little bit of due diligence can do a lot to protect you from problem coins. Despite all the modern advances the best defense is the good old MK 1 eyeball and a good lens

 

This is an interesting discussion...rather out of my bottom-feeding low-budget league, but still instructive - thank you all.

I looked at this acsearch link Doug provided and was flummoxed. Virtually everything there looks "too good to be true" to me - not just the first one. I don't like any of them (the denarii, I mean)!

Rare guys like P. Niger with nice centering, nice strike, same "look" over and over and over again. The "differences" can be ascribed to diddling with the flan, edges, toning, tweaking the mold, etc. The third one down just looks modern to me.

Admittedly, I know nothing about this sort of material, so I am just shooting from the hip here - but is anybody else suspicious?