Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 1946378, member: 19463&quot;]While I agree that the coin is fake, I base it mostly on just having a feeling when I see it rather than having extensive experience with the type.&nbsp; I do this a lot and probably pass up some real coins just because of a feeling that I am not able to support fully.&nbsp; This coin brings up a situation that bothers me on many coins including too many offered by dealers who know more than I do.</p><p><br /></p><p>The reverse of the coin is an incuse punch.&nbsp; When a square punch is hammered into a flan resting on an obverse die, the metal should (usually does) wrap up around the punch a little or a lot.&nbsp; This might not happen if the punch was hit weakly.&nbsp; A weak strike by a smaller than the obverse punch should give some weakness to the transfer of the obverse.&nbsp; This would not be the case if the reverse punch was a full size disk with a raised lump of metal in the middle.&nbsp; This might be the situation if a coin is formed by a modern machine simulating a punch but actually having a flat die surface that presses the metal into the obverse along with the punch.&nbsp;&nbsp; There are a few coins that show this flat reverse field but have a little curve to the obverse that make me wonder which side was up when struck.&nbsp; The coins that bother me, like the OP fake, have flat fields on both sides.</p><p><br /></p><p>The problem to me is that there are too many coins that I fail to see distortion of the flan caused by the small punch.&nbsp; Perhaps these were struck, reverse down, on an anvil with raised lumps that held the metal in place but this stikes me as far fetched.&nbsp; I am missing some point.&nbsp; Ardatirion, or anyone,&nbsp; can you explain how it happens that a reverse field around an incuse square ends up looking like it was flattened in the striking process?&nbsp; Was the coin struck once with a flat faced hammer and once with the incuse?</p><p><br /></p><p>Below I show two similar coins of Eion.&nbsp; The first shows the reverse metal raised around the edge of the punch while the second does not dispite the punch being half the size of the obverse design.&nbsp; I believe both are genuine.&nbsp; What difference in the striking process produced this difference?</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]338928[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]338929[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in