Help with Identification

I feel it is more likely genuine but I'd still return it because you will always have trouble accepting it fully and selling it to someone with a clear conscience.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I want it to be genuine but have doubts. Like chrsmat and ancientnut, to me the junction of the devices and fields look soft on the obverse. The reverse's remaining features look soft as well. Plus, rather than the appearance being from a weak strike + wear/corrosion, the reverse looks weakly and unevenly impressed, as if there was a problem when the casting mold was made.

While it will be impossible to definitely determine from pictures alone, I'm leaning towards cast fake. This may be one that requires microscopic exam for definitive diagnosis. Are there any ancient coin specialists in your ares who might take a look with a high powered microscope?

It is an interesting coin and interesting question. If you didn't pay much for it, I'd keep it regardless of the dubious authenticity. Take it to a coin show, get expert in-hand opinions. Even if proven to be modern, it may be worth keeping as a study coin.

 

You mentioned trying to post better photos. Perhaps you might do this and then elicit some second opinions. There are many knowledgeable people on this forum, but the only way to definitively ascertain authenticity would be NGC or another certification authority. Since I assume you paid very little for the coin, this probably isn't practical!

 

Correct. However, I will attempt some additional images today once the household chores are done. I don't have the best of cameras, but usually I can take fair photos, dependent upon lighting of course.

 

Chores still need to be done, but I took some pics outside in the sunlight. I'm not sure they will sway anyone one way or the other, but here they are:

 

I had assumed in the original pictures that the softness may have been due to photography, but the details still look soft in the new pictures. Also, are those some small raised bumps that I see on the obverse? One about three-quarter way down the inner tie behind his head, and another at about four o' clock in front of his neck.

 

Not raised bumps; just where the color is different. I must point out too that the color of this coin is a nice bronze/brown, not the grey in the last images.

 

There appear to be small holes (bubbles created during the casting process), especially on the obverse; a larger one in the R of GER.

 

What if this coin had been very harshly cleaned at different stages, in addition to its bad condition and appeared corrosion. It could still be genuine.

 

The attribution of RIC Nero 143 appears to be correct, at least in my copy of RIC.

I do not believe that this is a fake. (1) The wear, especially on the obverse legend, appears to be genuine. (2) The apparent pitting could easily be due to the cleaning process. (3) The reverse also appears to be normal (but high) wear. (4) If I were going to fake this coin, I would probably make the condition somewhat better than this one.

Finally, you should note that there is a HUGE condition difference between this coin and the $11,000 one whose link is posted above. Especially in 12 Caesars coins, a difference of one grade of condition (e.g, EF vs. VF) can make a 10X or more difference in price.

 

Hey, Big-bro ... sadly, I have my doubts (my go-to-dude gave it the ol' probable thumbs-down)

He thinks it's most likely an "older" cast fake ...

=> "Whenever there is any doubt, there is no doubt"

... oh, but for what it's worth => I certainly would have fallen for it!!

I hope that the rest of your Saturday goes a bit smoother than this morning's thread

Cheers

 

Well, it appears to be 50/50 on it's authenticity. I think I might just send this one off to David Sear. I think it's worth the cost to find out for sure. Like Doug said, I will always have the nagging feeling that it might not be genuine. Best to know. The saga continues.

 

I stand by my earlier opinion that the coin is genuine. None of us here is an expert on fakes, but Doug has been collecting ancients longer than most of us have been alive and my personal focus over the past few years has been 12 Caesars bronzes, so between the two of us we've seen a lot of coins.

Compare this recent sale (Ponterio & Associates Jan. 2013 New York):



The pitting and surface look somewhat similar and would make me think your coin is genuine.

But I agree 100% that you should engage an expert (David Sear) to validate it. It's worth the cost.

 

I respect your opinion as I do others on this forum. Because I respect many who have expressed differing opinions I will send this one off to David Sear. I appreciate everyone's honest opinions regarding this coin.

 

I agree that's a good site

 

I will be interested in hearing the Sear result. I did not say the coin is fake. I said:

I also stand by that. Certainly having a Sear certificate would make the coin better but I have trouble spending nearly as much on the certificate (and postage) as I would pay for the coin. I suppose this reverse would sell for a few hundred even in this shape so it may be the best answer.

Seeing the Ponterio coin, my first thought is that it would be a great subject for tooling/smoothing. Without touching a single letter or portrait part but just smoothing out the fields and repatinating would produce a coin that would do well in certain auctions. I hope it belongs to someone who won't and I really hope they don't decide to recut the missing laurel wreath details (which would give the coin away) but this looks like a candidate for evil.

 

Just to bring this thread back to the forefront, the coin was returned by David Sear in yesterday's mail with a note on the packaging "Documentation under separate cover". I anxiously awaited the mail delivery today, but alas, no documentation. Maybe tomorrow. Like I told someone else, I feel like Ralphie waiting for the delivery of his Little Orphan Annie decoder ring.

 

Wouldn't it be funny if David sent you a note telling you not to forget to drink your Ovaltine?

 

Sometimes you can be a funny guy JA. This is one of them times. Even my wife had to laugh. And, to answer your question, yes, it would be funny.

 

=> my fingers are crossed (obviously, we all hope that it passes muster)