I can see that. The Purist Collectors tend to be that way...lol Seems like a great bunch of guys. I even remember Doug from another forum...can't figure out which one, ancient coins I'm sure of that.
Seriously, folks, when you are looking for some bit of information, you never know which of the several lists might turn up what you need so it helps to keep an eye on more than one. CT is stronger on some points than others but there are other lists that fill the gaps. Some lists have more 'personalities' while some take themselves a bit (too?) seriously. My first was Numism-L which folded years ago. Some lists use software I like a lot better than others but we usually have to put up with that because the real deciding factor is who hangs out where. I'd love for there to be just one perfect place to access online brilliance but that has not yet happened.
I don't think any of us should be surprised that we have the technology to make a modern coin look ancient. After all, we can safely land spacecraft on distant planets. Distressing a bit of bronze to make it look old should be child's play. I have a couple of book ends, busts of Aristotle, that are artificially-toned brass and have obviously been through some sort of tumbler. They look perfectly ancient until you turn them over and read the sticker that says "Made in China."
LOL....very true John!!! In this case I practiced toning/patinas for many years and have had great success. I've managed a range of artificial colors, this example is incredible and the flan edges have all the right feature to fool many a collector. Had it not been for my search for this example of Hadrian coins, I would have believed it genuine. Thank goodness for data bases & coin groups and their collectors.
This "coin" baffles me because I can't understand the motivation behind it. I can understand the motivation behind distressing it to look ancient: that's clearly an effort to deceive someone into thinking it's authentic. But if you had the tools and skill to make such a fantasy piece, why even bother? Why bother creating something that never existed and stamping it as a copy? It's not a copy of anything! Why not take your tools and skill, and create some original medals??
Thats a great question John....why create a coin which can and has been Debunked. Its non existence in recorded history makes absolutely no sense at all. Fool some one with a coin that can be attributed??? as being a fake.......a waste of energy,skill & time.
There were two completely different people at work here. The original marked copy was never made to deceive anyone. I do not recognize this one but I'd place it alongside the WRL and Antquanova replicas which have bad enough style that they should not fool anyone and are issued in mint state. The criminality here came when someone decided to convert the replica into a pseudo-antique by removing the copy stamp and adding 1900 years of instant wear and tear. I don't have the heart to make jewelry out of real coins but see nothing wrong with a pair of Antiquanova EID MAR cufflinks (if only their obverse were done better). These could be used as stage props or space fillers for those of us who realize that we will not ever be buying the real ones. Companies that sell replicas openly as replicas can be allowed to exist in my world view but when someone decides to take that step into deceit is where we have the problem. Perhaps the maker of this coin realized that his work might tempt the criminal element and that he could improve the situation by mismatching the reverse type. All through this thread we have all agreed that the coin was wrong just because of that mismatch. The only thing I might prefer would be a one sided replica with the reverse taken by an ID and maker's mark but no design. These, like the old BM electrotypes, could be glued to a board and hung on a wall.
Nice => Hey, if they ever end-up inventing that Coin-Nirvana, can somebody please score me a gate-pass?!! (ummm, and sneak me through the side-door?) :high5: