Diadumenian denarius Opinions?

Thank you for your help and interest. They are die scratches (I called them tool marks, I guess die scratches would be more appropriate).I thought the weight was low as well.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thank you for your response. This purchase was based on everything else in the collection purchased over a decade ago, so I have no hard feelings over the rest that may or may not be genuine. I now am just trying to save money on grading fees and rejects by putting feelers out. My other problem is I can only do a little at a time, they are very time consuming I will put up a few more next week. Please check them out

 

Yes, this one did give me some skepticism. This coin seems light weight, and the die scratches on the reverse gave me concern. There is some die deterioration on the letters which makes them look almost doubled in some areas. There are a lot of fakes out there, and if most collector's feel it if fake, I am not going to send it to ngc. (too expensive)

 

In this last post, you mention NGC. I would suggest that you are wasting your money and our time if you are going to second guess the most reliable (perhaps only worthwhile) TPG for ancients. When they say it is fake, it is. In the case of the Diadumenian the style and fabric strike me as off. How did you determine the 95% silver figure? Does it not bother you that 95% is about double the appropriate silver purity for a Severan era denarius? Several people above have taken you to task for buying things about which you have insufficient knowledge but I'm as bothered by paying for an opinion and not accepting it as if the provider was not expert enough to trust when they report against your wishes. If I were to be offered an old collection of coins including this coin, I would figure the value of the item as if it were fake because my level of expertise is not high enough to accept the coin which strikes me as more Bulgarian than Roman and possibly intentionally defaced to make it look believable. When the half that came back rejected were returned, was there no hint of why? I'm thinking 'Modern Fake', 'Bulgarian', 'Lippanoff' or something more definite than 'Unable to Determine Authenticity'.

Old collections often are made up of a mix of two kinds of coins: (1) genuine coins of no interest and (2) coins of great interest that are not genuine. I will be interested in seeing the Pertinax, Didius, Pescennius etc from this collection if they are included. We never know if grandpa knew he was buying fakes or if he was victim of a fake-seller from a previous generation. When you buy apples by the barrel, it is best to assume there will be some worms in the bottom.

 

Thank you for your post. I certainly agree that NGC’s evaluation on the other coins is accurate. I have not sent this coin, and I am only posting coins that have yet to be sent in. I certainly do not want to waste anyone’s time. As a matter of fact if someone, such as yourself, tells me they are mostly confident that it is a forgery, I will not send it in, save $40, and put it in my fake collection. Of course NGC did not give an opinion on why the coin is not genuine for the ones that were rejected. I did reject some of the coins that were way off base, or had numbers stamped in them. I am only putting up the coins that are deceiving. I will be posting more coins next week, but I want to do my research before putting them up. I am amateur with ancients, but am learning more all the time. Unfortunately, it is time consuming.