Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;robinjojo, post: 8290682, member: 110226&quot;]Here&#039;s another well known fake that has been around for many years as noted in earlier posts.&nbsp; It came to me as part of a group lot of Byzantine bronzes.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1465439[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>This is a follis, Justinian I, Constantinople, year 12, officina epsilon.&nbsp; To a new collector this coin could slip by as genuine.</p><p><br /></p><p>While at first glance the style of this coin is pleasant in its own way, but it is way off, when compared to a genuine contemporary follis, which is below, a year 13 follis of Antioch.&nbsp; Comparing the two coins reveals the crude nature of the fake, with its thick letters and rendering of the portrait.&nbsp; Further, the flan of the fake is narrow and significantly underweight, at 15.2 grams, compared to 22.7 grams for the Antioch follis.&nbsp; Because of the narrower flan, the die completely fills it.&nbsp; The Antioch and other early large flan folles of Justinian I have dies that are narrower than the flan, producing in most cases a nearly complete impression of the die, provided that the striking is well centered.&nbsp; Finally, the edge of the fake is oddly rounded, much more so than the edge of the Antioch follis, which is more angular.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1465442[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>So, if you encounter the fake Justinian I follis, year 12, Constantinople, don&#039;t consider buying it, unless you want to add a well documented fake to your Byzantine collection, which could be useful, if the price is right.[/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