Help with Identification

I agree. Like I said, I wanted to keep the coin regardless of it's authenticity. If it had been genuine, I would have been ecstatic. But since it is not, I can learn from it. And now that I have the original price plus postage refunded, the money I spent on David Sear's opinion is "almost" worth it in the long run.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

wish I'd said that

 

Oh, I thought he had given you a note or something. I must have misread you. Personally I would have been very curious in regards to what David Sear would have had to say.

I would be skeptical too.

 

Speaking of annoyances, don't you hate it when you've put 47 items in your vcoins cart, and they clear the cart!

I was going to buy some of those and now I forgot what I was going to buy.

 

I paid $40 for each hour of college lecture, this was University of Michigan in the late 90s. I also calculated (a bean counter that I am) my friend paid close to $65 per hour at Columbia. Keep in mind professors had to spend time outside of lectures with their students.
That really isn't the point though.
A lot of us have access to these "high tech" equipments. Maybe not bausch and lomb, but a digital microscope isn't all that unaffordable.
Equipments do no good if one didn't know how to use them, or what to look for, and Bing's case was probably as good as it gets for an opportunity to learn something useful. If "19th century" and "cast fake" were all Bing had gotten, then David Sear either didn't want to give out his trade secrets, or was unwilling to spend 5 more minutes writing down what he saw.

Most doctors don't just tell you whether you were sick, they also tell you why and how to avoid getting sick.

 

He didn't have much to say, but then again my doctor only tells me whats wrong and writes a prescription. Here is a scan of the report:


And since it's too small to read, the salient points read as such:

"This is a modern (probably 19th century) cast forgery of a brass sestertius of Nero (AD 54-68) issued at Lugdunum c.AD 65. It displays all the usual charastics of a cast, such as pitted surfaces, edge smoothing, and very poor definition of the types and legends......"

 

Actually, I think Sear did a fine job of succinctly conveying his reasons for the determination.

 

Actually he did describe his reasoning, just not pointing out exactly where.
Since he had already photographed the coins, circles and arrows would had been nice, but that's too much to ask I guess.

This is what I don't understand.
He was already communicating via email, what more good does a piece of printed paper do? Why even bother sending that piece of paper and why not just emailing his verdict. That with some enlarged jpeg where he pointing out these "usual characteristics" would had been better wouldn't it?

I'm sure some people would really like that piece of paper as a proof of authorized verdict, but think about it, which is easier to forge. Color print, or encrypted email?

 

I thought the same about communicating via email, but that is how he does his business. I have another certificate from him dated 1971. But of course, back then, the internet was very young and not available to the general public.

 

I know it's already been said but 19th century fake seems cool in its own right, especially after the refund. When I was a kid I'd go nuts over anything that was both coin and 19th century.. something about that 100-year mark was magic.

 

First off, welcome. And your comments are welcome as well.

You know, you are absolutely correct. Heck I remember looking for that 1909 svdb penny which would have been only 50 years old when I was 10. I only collect Ancients now, but being over a 100 years old is kinda ancient. Kinda like me and Doug. I still like the coin and it is still sitting in the middle of my desk.

 

This is my second welcome from you! Both have been appreciated.. the first was in the thread I posted asking about the authenticity of a running boar hemiobol. Maybe I should get an avatar or something..

I'm about to hit 35 and that vdb had me running through change too. Ancients kind of spoil all the other coins for you. I just went to the coin show in Santa Clara and table after table of nearly-identical Morgan dollars sure made American coins seem pedestrian.

 

I felt the same way at World's Fair of Money last summer. Table after table after table of Morgan dollars, which I don't find attractive in the first place.

 

Hey, I'm getting old and memory ain't what it once was. So, welcome for the third time.

 

morgans are highend, grownup stuff. Kids collected mercury dimes. Much like the difference between you guys that have dekas and people like me that go after drachms

 

I still like Mercury Dimes.

 

Baltimore had over a thousand tables. Maybe 10 were dealers in ancients. That's ok though. More for me.

 

I hope you're being tongue-in-cheek.

 

=> dude, why don't you put them in your "wish-list" rather than your cart?

Hi