Tooled hairstyle.

horrible...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Another egregious example of a tooled coin that nonetheless sold for a very high price is this Titus Colosseum sestertius, sold three years ago for $90,000 (not including buyer's fees) by Heritage:



I viewed this coin in person at Heritage's office in L.A., prior to the auction, and the Heritage representative said the coin was "untouched" despite the obvious level of tooling on the reverse. So I have very little respect for Heritage's evaluation of the condition of any of their auction coins.

Of course, a non-tooled example of this coin in similar condition would fetch at least 2X - 3X the amount for which this coin hammered.

 

Sorry you feel that way; often the truth is so hurtful that it is unaccepted.

IdesOfMarch01, posted:"When I first started collecting bronzes about six years, my dealer who has 30+ years experience in ancients (Greek and Roman) told me that silver and gold was never tooled. That was true when he told me, but is clearly no longer true."

I probably would recognize his name BUT I stand by my statement 100%! Your dealer "expert" may be very accomplished in many things but he is sorely mistaken about tooling and has given you as a new collector of ancients a pack of misinformation. As you get some experience, you'll learn to listen to all you hear and test its veracity for yourself.

Let's examine what you wrote that he said: ..."silver and gold was never tooled. That was true when he told me [six years ago], but is clearly no longer true." So, silver and gold was never tooled until six years ago? As I wrote, that's both.

 

And of course, as usual, you cannot prove fact one about your assertion.

You don't know my dealer, you don't know his knowledge, you don't know his reputation, you don't me, you don't know my level of knowledge, you don't know my experience..

But you do know you're always right, and how to insult people you've never met.

You don't happen to work in the White House, do you?

 

Sounds like a troll was involved in this thread but now ignored by the mods.

 

It is important for us as collectors to not accept tooled coins or we are creating a market that will attract more and more toolers.

 

IdesOfMarch01, posted: "And of course, as usual, you cannot prove fact one about your assertion."

I thought the fact that virtually ALL compositions of ancients were "improved" was common knowledge - even forty years ago. Guess that makes me the ignorant one!

The fact that in the distant past, gold coins were less "worked" than silver and copper was commonly "improved" does not change anything I posted.

"You don't know my dealer, you don't know his knowledge, you don't know his reputation, you don't me, you don't know my level of knowledge, you don't know my experience."

While this may be true, it has absolutely nothing to do with anything! You were misinformed about altered coins by that ancient coin "expert."

"But you do know you're always right (how you came up with this is ...well? Nevermind ) and how to insult people you've never met." I don't appreciate misinformation in my chosen field of numismatics. When I am responsible for it, I hope to heck I am corrected. That's what's important to me. I'm a big boy and don't care how it's done as long as it is just words.

"You don't happen to work in the White House, do you?" This appears to be a "reportable" borderline political crack from a ...
SELF EDIT ...but it sure felt good to write what I removed.

 

Guys, I have a piece of advice to both. IOM, the rules say that one can express 'disrespect' of a coin and to some aspects dealer organizations, grading houses, tv sales, etc. Insider, you approach teaching in the most backward way I have seen, In the case of any altered coins, either this one or the dime, you express glee in presenting them forward and then pointing out the situations they did not notice but of course , you did, in multicolor and repetitive emojis == Instead of presenting the coin WITH your observations out front and then defend your reasons. Teaching by demonstration and expression of observations. If I presented in a chemistry class the students with 2 bottles, with harmless substance labels , and told them to mix them and drink it, and then after their throats were burned, called them ignorant for not confirming the contents, I would be kicked out and in the legal system. You say you are a teacher ~~~ then act like one, not a show off. Using an emoji or color for emphasis once is OK, multiple times is pushing it into someone's face. Both of you are very skilled, the forum would like to keep both in participation, but not like this.
Think about it. Jim

 

I think one dimension of the conflict here is the problematic term "never." Certainly in conversation we may employ a bit of hyperbole to make a point. Maybe the dealer's point was that it is exceedingly uncommon to see tooled ancient gold and silver coins. I suspect that was the original point, rather than an absolute statement that in the long 2500-year history of literally millions of Roman coins, one will never find a tooled silver or gold coin.

Now even with such hyperbole acknowledged, perhaps Insider would wish to disagree even with this scaled-back assertion. But certainly such disagreement can be articulated without making sweeping generalizations about the character or knowledge of someone who holds a different position.

No one is a snowflake on this list, and I personally enjoy and learn from seeing members share opposing views on this board. However, one of the things that makes this ancients forum a little different from so many other boards is that most participants post in a uncommon but welcome mixture of expertise, collegiality, and even humility. I know I would take Insider's perspective more seriously if it were articulated in such a spirit. Expertise and civility are not mutually exclusive impulses.

 

Feel free to actually prove this "fact" with real pictures of ancient silver and gold coin examples from 30 - 40 years ago that clearly show the tooling vs. an untooled example. I haven't seen any of these myself in any of the available online research sites, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. If you have the ability to do this, then I'll have learned from actual verifiable data. In this post-fact (similar to "post apocalyptic") era, I've learned never to accept assertions as fact from any individual whose expertise I can't verify.

You're correct -- it's quite likely my dealer didn't use the word "never" and I'm misquoting from memory.

 

Smoothing unfortunately is a part of the scene especially if one is trying to collect ancient base metal coinages such as Sestertii. It can be really difficult to determine the extent of the issue.The problem with tooling is that the individual doing the tooling can and usually does make a mistake and thus ruins the coin. I saw one sestertius where the re-engraving of a togate figure made him look like he was wearing striped prison garb. Often the most egregious problem is the re-engraving of the hair. I have seen so many coins where the re-engraved hair is not in the style contemporary to when the coin was struck. A botched tooling can absolutely destroy any value the coin originally had.

 

I would be satisfied with that. But it would be helpful, then, to reference a specific book--perhaps even a chapter or page number--that demonstrates that tooling ancient Roman gold and silver coinage was not an uncommon practice. "Trust me, I know what I'm talking about" is much less convincing to me than a photograph or a textual reference, particularly when the matter is contested.

 

If there are books that illustrate tooling, it would be helpful to know what those books are.

The advantage of illustrating tooled coins on this site (there are three examples here so far) is that everyone can see the tooling for themselves. Referencing a book that may be difficult or impossible to obtain currently, or for which there aren't any online illustrations, doesn't really further anyone's understanding of what tooling looks like.

The best illustration so far in this thread has been the comparison between the OP tooled Vespasian denarius, where the hair is tooled, and a similar untooled denarius that clearly illustrates Vespasian's forehead is bald and never had hair:



In fact, even after the second coin was posted, PMONNEY still asked specifically where the tooled area was:

I certainly agree with Gavin's sentiment ""Trust me, I know what I'm talking about" is much less convincing to me than a photograph or a textual reference..." and that's pretty much the value of this site in helping others: illustrate, don't just assert.

Personally, I'd love to see 30+ year old examples of aurei and denarii that were tooled back then since I haven't run across any, either in the printed catalogs I possess nor in auctions posted online. Pictures of tooled bronzes are plentiful; pictures of tooled aurei and denarii, not so plentiful.

 

Thanks

 

@desertgem Thanks for the gentle reminder. I like the example of the poison bottle trick in the chem class!

I believe this is a very informative thread in spite of my colorful posts...BTW, I was calling the dealer out for giving one of our members (who has probably learned more about ancients in six months of collecting than I ever will) false information - not the member.

It is very sad to me that the younger generation has gone "soft." When I was learning about coins in seminars, the best teachers I had were constantly hurling "curved-balls" and "fast-balls" at us. Think about it. Just about every dealer in the coin business has the ability to try to put one over. If we let our guard down...This applies to the TPGS's too. Inattention and naked-eye grading are two reasons "state-of-the-art" counterfeits and repaired coins get slabbed as genuine. That is often pointed out in this forum.

I enjoy a challenge; however, as I wrote on another thread, if I post any more coins in the future, I'll take your suggestion along with the wishes of the majority and play it straight , dry, no fun , and no challenge.

This is exactly what all collectors should be like. SHOW ME OR FORGET ABOUT IT! That is the way I am too. As for providing an example for you...I lose. There is no way to tell that an alteration was made forty years ago without access to old auction catalogs, records from 1970's era certification services that authenticated these coins (INSAB or ANACS), and lots of research. Furthermore, I no longer have access to ancient coins on a daily basis as I did working for two ancient coin dealers decades ago. However, I will guarantee I can walk the floor of any Ancient Coin Section at a major show and scoop up dozens of physically-altered silver or gold ancients that are being sold as original! Since we don't know when they first got on the market (1940's to present day) you can forget about that statement also as I cannot prove it in person.

As for books...There are none that I have seen and counterfeit and altered coins are a passion of mine. "Classical Deception" by Sayles is the only one that comes to mind and that deals with counterfeits. I recollect that only one page is devoted specifically to alterations (I'm too lazy to get up and check on this). There are lots of bibliographies/references in that book that may contain some specific information on tooled gold and silver ancients.

I think the reason no one has written a book about tooled gold and silver is because much of it has gone undetected for many years except for "smoothing" There is another thing to consider. IMHO, only a few engravers of today have the skill of their 18th and 19th century counterparts or the famous forgers of ancient coins. Additionally, why tool a genuine gold or silver ancient when a very deceptive copy can be produced (tool the transfer die) that will fool just about everyone for awhile - even in Europe.

 

No one "needs" to post anything at all, but typically, illustrations are considered indispensable tools in the world of ancient numismatics. On what basis do you dispute that? But OK, let's stipulate for the nonce that you're right, that reading "more" books will suffice to demonstrate the long-standing pervasiveness of tooling of precious metal ancient coins. Any books in particular you care to recommend to make the point? Or is the content irrelevant, and the sheer quantity of books consumed--on any subject, of any quality--all that matters in the end?

Never is doubtless too strong a word, but the fact is that until fairly recently genuinely deceptive tooling of gold and silver ancient coins, doctoring that might fool a reasonably experienced collector, dealer or academic, was very seldom encountered. Leafing through the a Naville or Cahn catalogue from the 1920s or 30s, it's simple enough to point out sestertii that quite obviously have been "improved." Where are the equally obvious denarii or aurei?

Phil Davis

 

I spent a long time examining that sestertius in 2007. I couldn't believe it wasn't being pulled from the sale. I didn't think it was borderline at all. As you note, a lot of other dealers also had no doubt that the coin had been "improved." In the end, it brought imo a lot less than an unquestionably unaltered would have, but sadly, it did sell.

 

Volodya asks:"Where are the equally obvious denarii or aurei?"

I can answer this very easily:

1. Up until more modern times (Possibly beginning in the 1970's as that is when I first started examining ancient coins with a Nikon SMZ-2 stereo microscope with a range of 4X to 80X using different accessories and we (me and the other mice) were detecting alterations to genuine gold and silver ancients.) I'll bet the majority of these alterations to gold and silver coins went undetected. Ancient dealers rarely used magnification. They didn't need it to detect carved up, pitted, and smoothed-out copper because it's a naked eye thing!

2. Gold is unaffected by the elements. It is not found corroded so only the design details would be altered by tooling. I have seen scratches removed from the fields of aurei and Byzantine solidi decades ago. Also rim and edge repairs from removal from jewelry.

Silver does corrode so more of these coins were tooled than gold. All I said about repairs and tooling to gold apply to silver ancients as well. Again, all seen decades ago and still seen today.

We all know what happens to alloys of copper. These coins have been improved, tooled, repaired, reengraved, and er "smoothed" for centuries. Everyone knows that and everyone is looking for it on these coins. It's as common as they are! That's why someone in the business may be of the opinion that gold and silver ancients are never or at least rarely altered! That is not true. But I don't have photos so...fogetabouit.

PS, As I posted months ago, the newcomers to this hobby and even long time professional dealers and auction houses adopted the word "smoothed" to make the method of altering a coin's surface by tooling (using a tool to change the coin's surface or design) more acceptable. It's the same thing as TPGS's calling buffed or polished coins "cleaned." The "suckers" who buy the coins swallowed it. I cannot think of a less offensive/abrasive way to pass my opinion on.

 

I wonder if this coin wasn't at least a reverse die match to the coin you're discussing before tooling. It's always hard to say with a heavily worked coin but it is the closest I was able to find and while it isn't always possible to say for sure with tooled coins it can give you an idea of just how "improved" they are and in this case the letter spacing between the examples is remarkably close even though the letters have obviously had some considerable work on the NAC example.