Do these coins look authentic?

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by iameatingjam, Aug 5, 2021.

  1. iameatingjam

    iameatingjam Well-Known Member

    Something looks off with this hadrian denarius to me, it just seems different than all my other denarii. Which kind of makes me suspicious of all the coins that came from this auction house...( not ready to call anyone out.. but they're on biddr)

    What do you guys think? I've never returned anything to a legit auction house before, I imagine I need more than a suspicion?

    218957844_427359231846209_1436771581395151520_n.jpg
    224185027_267335385202521_3990766363577835708_n.jpg
    216825196_1287731908296753_3929669985245302291_n.jpg
    220383762_343936947412696_385211544666992086_n.jpg
    226355941_547305893053073_7980465003632367333_n.jpg
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Herodotus

    Herodotus Well-Known Member

    Nothing immediately screams "fake" to me from the photos.

    What seems different about it? Its fabric? How it feels in hand?

    I've never bid on a Tauler&Fau auction, so I can't speak from personal experience in dealing with them.
     
    iameatingjam likes this.
  4. mrweaseluv

    mrweaseluv Supporter! Supporter

    I'm not one to make many calls on ancients.. but I will say I really like that bottom left coin with the snakes.. Neat piece :D
     
    iameatingjam likes this.
  5. hotwheelsearl

    hotwheelsearl Well-Known Member

    Something about the surfaces screams suspect to me.

    The cistophoros and the tetradrachm look fake. The first coin, the Hadrian, looks either fake or highly polished.

    How much did you pay for them? Price is often the first indicator of authenticity.
     
    Etcherman and iameatingjam like this.
  6. DonnaML

    DonnaML Supporter! Supporter

    The Hadrian and the Augustus (a very common type) look pretty typical to me. But I've been wrong before, in both directions!
     
    iameatingjam likes this.
  7. RichardT

    RichardT Well-Known Member

    I was telling myself I'll take a break from such threads. But just in case the OP is really thinking about returning the denarius (I assume you're only asking about the denarius, as the thread title indicates).

    The style of the Hadrian denarius looks completely fine. Compare this other example:

    https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=7883526

    Since the style is correct, if it's a fake it has to be a cast or a transfer die fake.

    Transfer die fakes for such a common coin will be quite unlikely.

    A cast fake is possible. I say "possible" because, to me, the image resolution is simply too poor to tell. I can't see the fields clearly for example. However the edge does look ok.

    Weight and diameter of the Hadrian denarius would be helpful.
     
    iameatingjam likes this.
  8. iameatingjam

    iameatingjam Well-Known Member

    Ah yes of course! I should have included that, my apologies. I am suspect of them all actually, just the hadrian the most. And augustus the least. But I don't really know, I'm a noob. But heres some more data.


    2014603_1624369257.jpg cistside.jpg
    Mysia. Pergamon. Cistophorus. 166-160 BC. (Sng von Aulock-7462). Anv.: Serpent emerging from cista mystica; all within ivy wreath. Rev.: Bow in bowcase decorated with aphlaston, flanked by two serpents; ΠΕΡΓ civic monogram to left, horizontal caduceus right to right. Ag. 12,64 g. Almost VF. ~27mm

    2014788_1624369401.jpg

    Augustus. Denarius. 7-6 BC. Lugdunum. (Ffc-22). (Ric-207). (Cal-852). Anv.: (CAESAR AVGVSTVS D)IVI. F. PATER. PATRIE, his laureate head right. Rev.: C.L. CAESARES AVGVSTI. F. COS. DESIG. P(RINC. IVVENT), Caius and Lucius Caesars standing facing, shields and spears between them; above, between the spears, simpulum and lituus turned inwards. Ag. 3,89 g. Minor nick on reverse. Almost VF. ~18mm

    2014813_1624369420.jpg


    Hadrian. Denarius. 121 AD. Rome. (Spink-3516). (Ric-67). (Seaby-1073). Rev.: PM TR P COS III. Mars advancing to right with spear and trophy. Ag. 3,06 g. VF. Est...80,00. ~18mm

    2014830_1624369433.jpg tetside.jpg

    Caracalla. Tetradrachm. 215-217 AD. Phoenicia. (Prieur-1551). Anv.: ΑΥΤ ΚΑΙ ΑΝTѠNINOC CЄ, laureate, draped and cuirassed bust to right. Rev.: •ΔHMAPX• ЄΞ• YΠATOC TO• Δ•, eagle standing facing on club, head to left and wings spread, holding wreath in beak; murex shell between legs . Ag. 10,72 g. Attractive. Choice VF. Est... ~26mm

    Thanks for the responses!
     
    NOS likes this.
  9. iameatingjam

    iameatingjam Well-Known Member

    A lot... after dealer fee and shipping and import taxes and everything it was like $1000 CAD for these. And there was one other lower value coin.
     
  10. Herodotus

    Herodotus Well-Known Member

    Seriously,

    I don't see anything here that screams: "obvious fakes". If any are, they are extremely well done.

    You didn't answer my question pertaining to: How does the denarius "seem different" than your other coins?
     
  11. iameatingjam

    iameatingjam Well-Known Member

    I wish I knew how to put it in words better, but I have a couple dozen denarius now and this one is just a bit too shiny.. or something. maybe its just polished and im paranoid. but then the caracalla also seems different than my other tets too, like the surface, 'fabric' might be it. idk.
     
  12. iameatingjam

    iameatingjam Well-Known Member

    Thanks, you're probably right. I tried my best to answer your question up there ^
     
  13. RichardT

    RichardT Well-Known Member

    The Hadrian denarius, Augustus denarius and the cistophorus all look fine in terms of style and wear. Weight for all three are within expectations too.

    Fields of the Hadrian denarius look ok to me. It may seem overly shiny or even blast white due to overcleaning. The coin will retone over time.

    Cistophorus has (inexpert) cleaning scratches. Normally not something a collector would look for, but in this context, the scratches further suggest it's authentic. It is still a handsome coin.

    I do not know enough about the Caracalla billon tetradrachm to tell.
     
    ultprice, iameatingjam and DonnaML like this.
  14. Herodotus

    Herodotus Well-Known Member

    If I were to be slightly suspicious of any of them, the Caracalla's surface appearance does look a little soapy. It's really hard to tell from a picture alone, w/out the coin in hand. It also appears to be a little on the light side for weight.

    Additionally, the edge seems a little less chunky than other Eastern Roman Tets that I've personally handled.

    I am not qualified enough to state one way or another if all (or any) are absolutely genuine with certainty based on pictures alone. So, my apologies in not being able to alleviate any concerns that you may have. Perhaps others with more experience may also contribute to the thread. I'm curious to read more opinions.

    That all stated, I will repeat that nothing about them screams "absolutely fake" to me.

    Here is a similar Caracalla that I recently sold:
    (15)Caracalla.jpg
    PHOENICIA, Tyre. Caracalla. (AD 198-217). AR Tetradrachm. (23mm, 13.64g).
    Struck (AD 213-215).
    Obverse: ΑΥΤ ΚΑΙ ΑΝΤWΝΙΝΟC CЄ; Laureate, draped, and cuirassed bust right.
    Reverse: ΔΗΜΑΡX ΕΞ ΥΠΑΤΟC ΤΟ Δ; Eagle standing facing on club right, head and tail left, with wings spread, holding wreath in beak; murex shell between legs.
     
    iameatingjam likes this.
  15. Mat

    Mat Ancient Coincoholic

    The Caracalla Tet is fine.

    The Hadrian gives me pause but could be the pic.
     
    ultprice likes this.
  16. Agricantus

    Agricantus Allium aflatunense

    I would send all of them to NGC for their economy service. If all are ok, the price will be decent even after you add the $150 for NGC. I am not familiar at all with the tet and cista. From reading the webs, I can say I do not like the Caracalla at all. The Hadrian may have been cleaned harshly, I do not see flow lines.
     
  17. Victor_Clark

    Victor_Clark standing on the shoulders of giants Dealer

    What I think when I see these threads :D


    5i9px6.jpg
     
    Ryro, red_spork and Orfew like this.
  18. hotwheelsearl

    hotwheelsearl Well-Known Member

    Pretty much. I have no idea what I'm talking about, but that hadrian does look rather polished.
     
  19. gsimonel

    gsimonel Supporter! Supporter

    If you look at the letters of the obverse inscription, you'll see that the spaces between them are pretty dark. The entire coin was that dark at one time. Someone, probably fairly recently, cleaned the fields and the high points to remove this dark patina. They may have used something as crude as a pencil eraser. (Look at the space between the R and the trophy on the reverse.) This is why the appearance looks a bit "off." Not to worry, though. The coin will darken in time.

    I can't say for sure from the photo, but it looks like your Augustus coin might be crystalized. Please handle this coin very carefully just in case.
     
    iameatingjam likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page