Authentic or Fake?

I am terrible at picking out copies or replicas of coins, particularly ancients, however I just saw this on e-bay and just wanted to get opinions:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yes looks very modren too me, soapy lettering and edge.
Best
Eric

 

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=5794

Check mine

 

Fake to me too.

 

The dealer on e-bay is offering it in 6 and 9 g versions.

 

Look at the overall mushiness of the design. If a coin was worn, there should be loss of high point details, but there isn't. Its just overall soft, most likely from a cheap cast. Next look at the bottom edges. If this were correct, shouldn't you see some dots where the flan cut it off? Its just a clean cutoff of dots or no dots. Also the edge looks very sharp, not common on ancients and surely not common on an ancient that is supposed to be worn. Without even knowing the type that is how I view it.

Sometimes a lightly corroded piece will look like this, but there are other things to look for on those. Until you can tell the difference stay away from both.

 

Actually no thought of buying it, just saw it and it looked so fake, I thought I would post it. There has been some discussion of how to spot a fake in a generic sense, and I thought this was a good example. If I were deemed wrong, I wanted to know.

 

One long-standing and often still reliable method used to detect fakes is by the condition of their surface. In this case, I am not only speaking about the granularity. When you see a coin with the details of a circulated coin yet its surface is "original, as made" - no actual friction wear, it is just one more indication that the coin may not be genuine.

EDIT: Looks like this was already said.

 

For all the reasons already stated, I'm totally in agreement.

 

Thank you for posting this. Very interesting comments!

 

Cast copy?

 

My gut said fake.

 

Nero from Heritage just came today. Real or fake? It's description was: SYRIA. Antioch. Nero (AD 54-68). AR tetradrachm (14.32 gm). Dated RY 10 and Year 112 of the Caesarean Era (AD 63/4). Laureate head of Nero right, aegis around neck / Eagle standing right on thunderbolt; palm frond to right; BIP and I (dates) to upper left. McAlee 265b. Prieur 89. RPC I 4189

 

Why is it you have doubts on the coin? Your photos make it look a bit overcleaned but not modern.

 

It's fine....

 

I would say real, but by the 1st century AD these Tetradrachms were being debased to 3 Denari or less. This may be why you are questioning the way it looks? It will have a fair amount of base metal in it, though not as bad as issues from Roman Egypt.

 

It's my first and just hard for me to believe such a coin is possible for under $200 or even $1000 for that matter. I'm a US slab guy and since you guys say this is real sure opens up a whole new world for me. Handling it just wonderful. When I heard you guys break them out of slabs I though that was just crazy but now I fully understand.
Sorry about my photo's my lens is for capturing 8mm film and has no depth of field. Yes I can't wait to start my collection. Anybody want to buy some US slabs? lol

 

Thank you, but no thank you
Welcome to the world of ancients

Q

 

Start shopping for an Alexander The Great Tetradrachm or an Athenian Owl... those are a TRIP to handle.