I received this coin (pictured below -- taken with my phone but I can make better pictures if needed) from my family after a great aunt passed away. I understand it to be Greek, but I don't know anything else about it. My research has lead me to believe it may be from the Greek colony of Akragas on the island of Sicily, circa 500 B.C. The crab seems to be consistent with other coins from that colony, as does the inscription on the obverse. However, the bird on the back does not appear to be as "sharp" or "detailed" as some of the examples I've seen online. Anybody have any thoughts, or estimation of what its value is? Thanks!
Do you have any photos of the edge? I am not an expert on these, but the porosity of the coin, along with the unusual incuse on the obverse troubles me at first glance. Normally that obverse is a simply punch on the flan, it is not incuse.
Also size and weight are needed for ID. The type was issued in several sizes and the concern regarding the incuse would be more serious with some.
Doug and Medoraman: I'm sorry for not responding sooner. I'm in court a lot (my work consumes most of my time) and I had forgotten to reply. This week I was in Chicago for a work and I took the coin to the Harlan J. Berk research department, which is just a block from the Cook County Circuit Court. They confirmed that the coin is a fake. I told them about this thread and the researcher who looked at the coin confirmed that the "giveaways" were the porosity and the obverse. Good eye!
Eh, we get lucky sometimes. Well, I get lucky, Doug's is based upon his vast skill. I am glad you had someone check it out in hand. Please, anyone, do not accept an opinion from a photo as the only opinion possible. You ca post a photo, but its always best to double check with a real expert in person just to be sure. Photos can only tell so much, and I have seen too many good coins condemned as fakes, and vice versa, just from photos. Chris
I only partially agree. Some fakes can be identified with 100% certainty from a photo. These are coins known to be made by modern fakers whose die work is well known and documented online. There is zero chance that they are even the original from which casts were made since the original was just as fake as the copies. I do agree that good coins have been falsely condemned and bad coins have been missed based on tricky photos but it is going too far to say that no coin can be written off with certainty using a photo.
Alright, alright, but its an exception, right? I simply prefer to say a coin should be examined in hand to be sure. More concise.
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/fake.html On my page or 'exceptions' above, only the Albinus is not 100% identifiable as fake from the photo. It fooled me in hand long ago but I was really stupid then. A good percentage of posts asking us to 'rule' on a coin can be handled from photos simply because non-collectors and new collectors seem to run across certain fakes more often than others and we can always handle the old favorites like the Gela tetradrachm, Constantine/prutah and all those Slaveis without additional input.
