Just another sandy Claudius II

There must have been a hoard of this period recently. I've been seeing Gallienus and Claudius a lot. This Juno has the optional peacock and letter B in exergue neither of which keep RIC from calling it #212 page 229. It is a moderately nice coin and the first sand patina I have shot with my revised set up. It looks like the coin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My 212 is a left facing head rather than the draped and cuirassed bust right.
I have come to mistrust sandy patina after the patina fell off a few such coins that I bought and a bit of investigation proved it to have been glued on with a water based glue. Ho hum.

 

Doug,
Are you aware of the more up to date reference for your coin? This is maintained by Dr. S. Estiot and J. Mairat. This will form the basis for a new RIC covering this period.

http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/coin/1020

and for mine

http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/coin/1048

Regards,
Martin

 

nice patina Doug.

 

Here's mine, bought some time last year, sans sand.



And thanks for the link, Martin!

 

Very nice coin of a very good Emperor!
All coins shown so far have put my measly little Antoninianus of his to shame

 

Is there a way to tell a fake sand patina without ruining one that is genuine?

While I am aware of the French site, I will believe it leads to a new RIC V when I see it. I even have a coin there. I'm collection privee.
http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/coin/1739?...e=&Reference=&page=1&mod=result&from=advanced

 

I wonder too. Afraid of taking my nail to it and scraping.

 

Doug,
I am not aware of any easy method of telling genuine from false without risking a genuine coin. I know that I was burned with a few a couple of years ago from a dealer who used to apply this to virtually all his lower end bronze and to "enhance" surfaces of other coins. I accidentally got one of them wet and the sand parted company with the coin. I then saw some of the before and after pictures of some of his repatinated coin and discovered that all the bronzes I had bought from him were similarly treated. It has left a sour taste and a general mistrust of desert patina ever since.
Martin

 

Nice find Doug.

 

My similar experience turned me off of vCoins rather than the patinas. They had and still have a few dealers 'soft' on repatination. I do not pay extra for sandy but certainly must have a few bad ones.

 

Interesting and will make me look twice before I buy any sand patina coins.

 

The practice can be difficult to spot and is quite well executed. It came to light after some people spotted coins being sold by a major dealer and then appearing shortly afterwards for sale with a desert patina that hides much of the surface issues of the original coin. The new seller didn't make any mention of the repatination.

Here is an example of the before and after.


Martin

 

Thanks for posting the example.

 

I have a coin which arrived recently and is clearly covered in fake dirt. It scratches off easily with a fingernail. I payed a pittance for it, so no matter, but I am going to soak and clean it, to see what's underneath - whether the "sand" is covering up some tooling. Why anyone would go to such trouble over such a common coin is beyond me. Perhaps practicing for something more valuable?

 

Did you smell it? (Let's not forget Tif's experience with makeup a few months ago...)

 

Well, since you asked, I had to go smell it. My wife gave me a very strange look. But I didn't smell anything at all...

 

Phew => luckily it wasn't one of those goat-fed coins that Doug sometimes talks about!!

 

Lol!

 

One thing I look for (right or wrong) is demonstrated by the Alexander or Carthage Martin showed. I ask myself what the coin would look like if the sand were gone but no damage was done to the metal in removing it. The Alexander is obviously a rough coin pitted before the sand was applied. Adding the sand filled in general rough surfaces and a few larger pits like the one near the bottom of the reverse figure. Adding the smoother sand made the coin look better and increased its eye appeal several hundred dollars worth. My OP coin did not benefit from what I can see but that does not make me in any way certain that the sand is original. I suspect that clean it would look a lot like zumbly's coin. Some will prefer my coin because they like sand but others would just as well have a smooth, brown surface. The cash difference would be minimal unless the sand were hiding a fake making it look 'old'. I believe all the coins on this page are real so it is just the dirt we are discussing.

John's coin is more of a mystery but it does have some roughness so probably looks better now than it will when cleaned. Losing the dirt in the face pits might even make it look better. I see no way that tooling would change the value of the coin since it is not just a letter away from anything more or less valuable than what we see. I suspect we fail to appreciate how it benefits anyone to turn a $4 coin into a $5 coin but a dollar is a lot of money for a little dirt so a thousand such coins would make a good paycheck for someone.

I yield to vlaha and steve as more expert in the odors of makeup and goats. I have minimal experience with goats and none with makeup.