real shekel or not

I am not very savy about shekels of Tyre, but this one interests me. Any comments about its being fake or not?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Looks fake, what is the weight and the size ?

From my black cabinet , looks better but still a fake:

 

Have you looked in Forum's fakes database and in Forgery Network? Where is the coin for sale-- through a reputable and knowledgeable seller or on eBay? What's the weight of the coin? This type is widely faked. Knowing who is selling it may tell us a lot, as well as the weight.

I don't know the type well enough to have an opinion although I don't see any overt signs of casting. Well-made casts don't have many signs though, and there are of course other ways to make forgeries.

 

Doesn't look right to me either. Mainly cause of the edges.

 

Your Coin: PHOENICIA, Tyre. 126/5 BC-AD 65/6. AR Shekel. Dated year 29 (98/7 BC). Laureate bust of Melkart right, [lion skin around neck] / Eagle standing left on prow; palm frond in background; to left, ΘK (date) above club; monogram to right; Phoenician A between legs. DCA-Tyre 73; Rouvier 2011; HGC 10, 357; DCA 919.

Below is your coin side by side with CNG's example that was auctioned in 2017 (Sold for $1770 w/ buyer's premium)

Yours is a reverse die match with CNG's example.
- Note the faint horizontal line that runs to the left and just at head level with the eagle. This is a good sign and shows that both of your coins shared the same die scratch/imperfection.
-Note at the tip of the bottom 2 tail feathers how the metal is pushed up to the edge of the flan. Another good sign showing the metal naturally flowing to the point of least resistance when being struck. The CNG example was struck when the die was younger; ergo, yours was later.


The obverses are not die matches; which is probably the best sign. It would be very uncommon for forgers to mix and match dies; though it has occurred before.
- Note that the flans are of different shapes and struck differently. A good sign.
- The CNG example weighs 14.40 grams. I would recommend weighing yours to look for a little disparity between the 2.


CNG Shekel, E-Auction 394, Lot 297
14.4 grams

Source: https://cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=332361

Prognosis: I lean, heavily, toward genuine.
Nice coin. I don't have one yet. The Alpha/Lambda over a tipped epsilon seems to be a rarer monogram than the traditionally oriented monogram, more commonly found on year 29 shekels. (Yours and the CNG example are the only examples I could find with the vertically oriented monogram.)

- Michael

 

Michael, Nice work ! I did lighten-up the tartanhill reverse for easier comparison & it sure looks like the CNG example.

 

do scratch test. if its a silver/0.01 impure compound, its best to grade. Also weigh it. You could also visit your local dealer for he/she's opinion. nice coin though.

 

I don’t exactly know what Colby is suggesting but any idea with the word “scratch” in it is a very bad idea indeed. I have handled and owned many of these shekels. The style is correct but I wouldn’t buy it from these pictures unless I knew that the seller was a trusted expert.

 

I do not like both.
There is a rised line left on reverse (see arrow).

Is it normal that the details are soooo supersoft although there is no die wear visibe to explain it ?

Why are there circular holes in the letters and hair (CNG) ??????

What is the explanation for this holes ? ^^

http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=/Wan2ZhDeWg=

 

Comparing all 3 Shekels, top example from the Forgery Network, middle example is from the CNG E-Auction 394, and the bottom example is tartanhill's example, all 3 examples have the identical reverse at different stages of die ware. Could one of these coins be the "mother" coin that made the other two with different obverse dies ?

 

There are die matching examples in "Dated Shekels of Tyre"!
In first and second edition of this book the author uses different examples of this emission, so two different obverse dies with same reverse die.
I do not like the example from first edition, does anyone know why they have changed the shown specimen?

No. 105 ) Shekel, Year 29, ΘΚ, letter Alef between legs, 14.49 g

Book second edition is available for free

https://www.coinsweekly.com/en/News...plement-available-as-free-download/4?&id=5515

in first edition there is another example from same dies but there number 73

name of frist edition :

Cohen_DCA_Supplement_2014 Shekel.pdf

I do not know where to find first edition in interent but i guess it is still available for free somewhere.

 

Wright is 14.21 grams and diameter is 28 mm. Thanks much to all who replied.

 

So I'm totally confused. My initial impression is that the obverse looked a bit "off." (I'm by no means an expert, so I didn't say anything.) Then iamtiberius convinced me that it was legit. Then lolli pointed out an example on the forgery network.

Have there ever been coins mistakenly posted on the forgery network, or is that pretty much the last word?

 

Everyone who is registred can post on forgerynetwork like everyone can post fakes to fake coin reports.
The problem is that it is often not written why the coin was condemned to be fake.

They seem to be transfer die fakes if actually fake.
If no one has an explanation for the holes (I have seen such holes and defects etc often on high relief points (hair or letters) on transfer die fakes (they must be transfer errors in the transfer dies) but never ever on an authentic coin.

Filled dies with dirt is no explanation, filled dies do look different.

There is currently another coin with such circular holes in hair and with too soapy details which can not be explained with die wear for sale from SMYRNA

https://www.numisbids.com/n.php?p=lot&sid=3021&lot=332

http://forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=1R3lJAgbrCI=

It is published in Bulletin on Counterfeits BOCS Vol 14 No.1 1989 Page 25 Fig 6b

 

All of these, including the CNG coin, are forgeries. I’ve seen about 20 of these year 29 fake shekels. There are a few more on
CoinArchives.

Barry Murphy.

 

Agreed. That's dangerous and bad advice to be giving out. That's near as bad as the "Give it a test cut advice".
I'm no pro, but that coin may be real (I'm leaning toward unlikely myself) and there are much better ways to tell if it's fugazi other than damaging it or posting it on a hobbyist forum.
Send it to David Sear if you really think it is on the level.

 

There you have it

 

This entire thread has been a revelation & great learning expierence! Coins like these "Betrayal Shekels" are an open invitation to very skilled forgers because of their popularity & high market value. If they can fool the experts they can fool us too .

 

These are actually not that deceptive in hand. The first time I saw one it was clearly a forgery. A little digging turned up more to confirm my initial suspicions.

Unfortunately, there are a bunch of these around. Different years with this same obverse die, and different obverses with the same
reverse dies. This was evidently a large run of forgeries with about 6 obverses and reverses that we’re mixed and matched randomly.

Here is a fake year 28 from the same obverse die.



Barry Murphy

 

I just checked my old emails. I had notified CNG about their coin the day of the sale. It was too late to pull as the sale had already started to close, but Victor sent me an email saying they were not going to sell it. They bought it in themselves.

Here is the email correspondence I had with Victor that day.

Barry