CFDL:

Following up on Warren's post about Jbcollectables99 and I am now positive that
some of Jbcollectables99's fakes are The New Bulgarian Flu - Type III - big flat
flan.  So we have cast fakes with an enlarged flan which makes them different
from the previous cast fake crappies.

This cast fake Trajan denarius was the key because you can clearly see the
legends were cut by the end of the host flan but the new flan extends beyond the
limits of the host
The New Bulgarian Flu - Type III cast fake Trajan denarius
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270508291021
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=bF~x~UtUqOfOU=
The original Bulgarian Flu - Type I cast fake Trajan denarius
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=93jPFmE2aDI=
The Bulgarian Flu - Type II multi-color cast fake Trajan denarius
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=FRf7klkI/E4=

The original Bulgarian Flu type I cast fake Antoninus Pius Imperator Victory
denarius
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=4mDEjmc0mn8=
The doctored Bulgarian Flu Type III enlarged flan cast fake Antoninus Pius
Imperator Victory denarius
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170426024716
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=Kh8iYApq9K0=

The original Bulgarian Flu type I cast fake Republican Norbianus denarius
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=IHnOACt3Xao=
The doctored Bulgarian Flu Type III enlarged flan cast fake Republican Norbianus
denarius
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170419299896
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=8GF2THr0jls=

Here again is the Bulgarian Flu Type III enlarged flan cast fake Hadrian
Alexandria denarius
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270502996485
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=aSdUEHH7Ff4=
The Bulgarian Flu type II multi color cast fake Hadrian Alexandria denarius
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=k/LuvcrJ3LA=
The original Bulgarian Flu type I cast fake Hadrian Alexandria denarius
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=tbe0B5Osj3E=
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=E9aaLioLbFU=

So now my friends, beware of the cast fake crappie with the enlarged flan.

Sincerely yours,
Cliff

Chris/CFDL:

Yes,I sometimes warn "winning" bidders of fakes that they won fakes.  Ebay puts
me on "double secret probation" after I warn too many and stops me from
contacting other ebayers unless I have a current transaction with them.  I have
gone on and off "double secret probation" maybe a dozen times.  A few weeks ago
I was on amybe I am off it now.

Sincerely yours,
Cliff

--- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, christopher.brierley@...
wrote:
>
> Hi Cliff,sellers f/bk is from selling items for $0.06 !!! Will be interesting
to see f/bk from any fake coins,do CFDL members ever try to contact the buyers
via their ID given in their F/BK to warn them they have a fake,cheers chris
>
> --- On Sat, 2/1/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
> Subject: [CFDL] Alikoki66
> To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, 2 January, 2010, 20:09
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> CFDL:
>
> Here is a new fakeseller, Alikoki66, only two cast fake Alexander III tet so
far.
> <http://cgi6. ebay.com/ ws/eBayISAPI. dll?ViewListedIt ems&userid= alikoki66&
sort=10&page= 1&rows=200& since=31& rdir=0>
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Cliff
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Chris/CFDL:

To "Hose" is an IMPOLITE American idiom, taking its meaning from the male member
that looks like a hose.

http://onlineslangdictionary.com/definition+of/hose

Sincerely yours,
Cliff


--- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, christopher.brierley@...
wrote:
>
> Hi Cliff et al,have just looked at sellers f/bk and found what i wrote,also
saw this comment"BEWARE THE BULGARIAN HOSE JOB !" any idea what it means.chris
>
> --- On Sat, 2/1/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
> Subject: [CFDL] Re: jbcollectables99 - BLACKLISTED
> To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, 2 January, 2010, 20:07
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> Warren/CFDL:
>
> I have completed my preliminary study of this bum and he is an interesting
fake seller.
>
> His denarii are derived form known cast fake but with a larger flan. The cast
fake Hadrian Alexanderia denarius is one exampe.
> http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& item=27050299648 5
> now compare the DIES to these cast fake crappies
> http://www.forgeryn etwork.com/ asset.aspx? id=tbe0B5Osj3E=
> http://www.forgeryn etwork.com/ asset.aspx? id=E9aaLioLbFU=
>
> This cast fake Trajan denarius was the key because I have a copy ofthe cast
fake and the LEGENDS cut by the end of the flan are missing from the
Jbcollectables99 cast fake, with extended flan
> http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& item=27050829102 1
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Cliff
>
>
> --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com, Warren Esty <wwesty@>
wrote:
> >
> > The relatively new English seller
> > jbcollectables99
> >
> > has this fake Julian II/bull and a fake Caracalla, Hadrian and
> > "PERFECT Diocletian"
> >
> > http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& item=27050582936 6
> >
> > I think he deserves blacklisting.
> > -- Warren
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Chris/CFDL:

This is a well worn Sabina denarius which is difficult to authenticate.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=180449743078

I do not see obvious signs of casting/fakery.

Sincerely yours,
Cliff



--- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, "christopher.brierley@..."
<christopher.brierley@...> wrote:
>
> Hello anyone to help me please.Does this coin look genuine,thnx chris
>

Hello anyone to help me please.Does this coin look genuine,thnx chris

Ah I replied too quickly :)
Actually this coin isn't 'as found', the first proof being the shiny area on
rev., which may be the result of a partial cleaning. But this shiny area is also
the proof that no darkener has been applied (why darken only a part of the coin
only). The line in front of the neck seems to correspond to a thick oxides
patch. The ribbons can be less visible due to strike and especially circulation;
I've seen that already.

T.S.

--- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, Llu�s Mendieta <lmendi@...>
wrote:
>
> Good afternoon, The Stalker
>
> Thanks for input!
>
> For patina, I suppose that is a question of perception. I have cleaned coins
that ended appearing this way. Just brushes, ammonia and Deller's darkener.
Kushan ones. Prone to BD attacks.
> And I consider them repatinated....
>
> What disturbes me is disjoining in ribbon, the line under neck (if a die
break, only in middle, why?.....), cracks that does not go throuugh all the
flan, metal excess, wear that I do not understand, reverse circle that seems odd
to my eyes, ....
>
> Maybe I am too suspicious.
>
> With best wishes
>
> Llu�s
>
> P.D.: And even that, I got my share of confirmed fakes....   :-(
>
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: С�,алке�?
>   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 9:43 PM
>   Subject: [CFDL] Re: A sestertius
>
>
>
>   Lluis: absolutely no problem with this Sestertius, the patina is even
ancient, probably 'as found'.
>
>   T.S.
>
>   --- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, Llu�s Mendieta <lmendi@>
wrote:
>   >
>   > Dear list
>   >
>   > Maybe you remember sestertius eBay item 350279962388
>   >
>   > A friend was kind enough to send me better images of the coin. You could
find it in
>   >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CoinForgeryDiscussionList/photos/album/1815122821/\
pic/list
>   > I still think that it is a fake, although in the small pictures seen in
eBay, was said it is legit.
>   > And, of course, I see patina as modern.
>   >
>   > May wiser members be so kind to tell his opinion?
>   >
>   > With best wishes
>   >
>   > Llu�s
>   >
>   >
>   > P.D.: not as interesting as the Commodus medaillon, but just interesting.
>   >
>   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>   >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi, Christopher/List

I still think I see cast bubbles.
But yes, I agree that black seems copper sulphide. If copper oxide, in the
cleaned spots I would expect to see some red points due to cuprous oxide under
cupric oxide. So, I would say copper sulphide as my better guess.

With best wishes

Llu�s
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: christopher.brierley@...
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 10:14 PM
   Subject: [CFDL] 160390192302 caligula



   Hello anyone,any comments please on this coin,its not a particularly good
one,these seem to make too much,it looks genuine to me but with a lot of
unpleasant black patina,probably copper sulphide although Lluis in particular
may correct me.Any idea on value in this condition,cheers chris





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Good afternoon, The Stalker

Thanks for input!

For patina, I suppose that is a question of perception. I have cleaned coins
that ended appearing this way. Just brushes, ammonia and Deller's darkener.
Kushan ones. Prone to BD attacks.
And I consider them repatinated....

What disturbes me is disjoining in ribbon, the line under neck (if a die break,
only in middle, why?.....), cracks that does not go throuugh all the flan, metal
excess, wear that I do not understand, reverse circle that seems odd to my eyes,
....

Maybe I am too suspicious.

With best wishes

Llu�s

P.D.: And even that, I got my share of confirmed fakes....   :-(



   ----- Original Message -----
   From: С�,алке�?
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 9:43 PM
   Subject: [CFDL] Re: A sestertius



   Lluis: absolutely no problem with this Sestertius, the patina is even ancient,
probably 'as found'.

   T.S.

   --- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, Llu�s Mendieta <lmendi@...>
wrote:
   >
   > Dear list
   >
   > Maybe you remember sestertius eBay item 350279962388
   >
   > A friend was kind enough to send me better images of the coin. You could
find it in
   >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CoinForgeryDiscussionList/photos/album/1815122821/\
pic/list
   > I still think that it is a fake, although in the small pictures seen in
eBay, was said it is legit.
   > And, of course, I see patina as modern.
   >
   > May wiser members be so kind to tell his opinion?
   >
   > With best wishes
   >
   > Llu�s
   >
   >
   > P.D.: not as interesting as the Commodus medaillon, but just interesting.
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello anyone,any comments please on this coin,its not a particularly good
one,these seem to make too much,it looks genuine to me but with a lot of
unpleasant black patina,probably copper sulphide although Lluis in particular
may correct me.Any idea on value in this condition,cheers chris

Lluis: absolutely no problem with this Sestertius, the patina is even ancient,
probably 'as found'.

T.S.

--- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, Llu�s Mendieta <lmendi@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear list
>
> Maybe you remember sestertius eBay item 350279962388
>
> A friend was kind enough to send me better images of the coin. You could find
it in
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CoinForgeryDiscussionList/photos/album/1815122821/\
pic/list
> I still think that it is a fake, although in the small pictures seen in eBay,
was said it is legit.
> And, of course, I see patina as modern.
>
> May wiser members be so kind to tell his opinion?
>
> With best wishes
>
> Llu�s
>
>
> P.D.: not as interesting as the Commodus medaillon, but just interesting.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi Cliff,sellers f/bk is from selling items for $0.06 !!! Will be interesting to
see f/bk from any fake coins,do CFDL members ever try to contact the buyers via
their ID given in their F/BK to warn them they have a fake,cheers chris

--- On Sat, 2/1/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:


From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
Subject: [CFDL] Alikoki66
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, 2 January, 2010, 20:09


 



CFDL:

Here is a new fakeseller, Alikoki66, only two cast fake Alexander III tet so
far.
<http://cgi6. ebay.com/ ws/eBayISAPI. dll?ViewListedIt ems&userid= alikoki66&
sort=10&page= 1&rows=200& since=31& rdir=0>

Sincerely yours,
Cliff








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Cliff et al,have just looked at sellers f/bk and found what i wrote,also saw
this comment"BEWARE THE BULGARIAN HOSE JOB !" any idea what it means.chris

--- On Sat, 2/1/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:


From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
Subject: [CFDL] Re: jbcollectables99 - BLACKLISTED
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, 2 January, 2010, 20:07


 



Warren/CFDL:

I have completed my preliminary study of this bum and he is an interesting fake
seller.

His denarii are derived form known cast fake but with a larger flan. The cast
fake Hadrian Alexanderia denarius is one exampe.
http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& item=27050299648 5
now compare the DIES to these cast fake crappies
http://www.forgeryn etwork.com/ asset.aspx? id=tbe0B5Osj3E=
http://www.forgeryn etwork.com/ asset.aspx? id=E9aaLioLbFU=

This cast fake Trajan denarius was the key because I have a copy ofthe cast fake
and the LEGENDS cut by the end of the flan are missing from the Jbcollectables99
cast fake, with extended flan
http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& item=27050829102 1

Sincerely yours,
Cliff


--- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com, Warren Esty <wwesty@...>
wrote:
>
> The relatively new English seller
> jbcollectables99
>
> has this fake Julian II/bull and a fake Caracalla, Hadrian and
> "PERFECT Diocletian"
>
> http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& item=27050582936 6
>
> I think he deserves blacklisting.
> -- Warren
>








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Bob/CFDL:

AVOID AUCTION WITH POOR IMAGES.  This auction has poor photos.  Also the toning
looks fake.  However, I didn't find a die match with the common Galba fake
denarii.

Sincerely yours,
Cliff


--- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Wearn" <bob@...> wrote:
>
> Any opinions on this coin?  250555986226
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

CFDL:

Here is a new fakeseller, Alikoki66, only two cast fake Alexander III tet so
far.
<http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewListedItems&userid=alikoki66&sort=10&\
page=1&rows=200&since=31&rdir=0>

Sincerely yours,
Cliff

Warren/CFDL:

I have completed my preliminary study of this bum and he is an interesting fake
seller.

His denarii are derived form known cast fake but with a larger flan.  The cast
fake Hadrian Alexanderia denarius is one exampe.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270502996485
now compare the DIES to these cast fake crappies
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=tbe0B5Osj3E=
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=E9aaLioLbFU=

This cast fake Trajan denarius was the key because I have a copy ofthe cast fake
and the LEGENDS cut by the end of the flan are missing from the Jbcollectables99
cast fake, with extended flan
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270508291021

Sincerely yours,
Cliff


--- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, Warren Esty <wwesty@...>
wrote:
>
> The relatively new English seller
> jbcollectables99
>
> has this fake Julian II/bull and a fake Caracalla, Hadrian and
> "PERFECT Diocletian"
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270505829366
>
> I think he deserves blacklisting.
>  -- Warren
>

Frank - thanks for confirming my views.  Always good to bounce the
occasional one off an expert!



From: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
frank.reinhardt@...
Sent: 02 January 2010 6:54 PM
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [CFDL] Galba





probably ok, but with these amateur-fotos hard to say.
anyway, for 200 pounds a galba in F condition? I wouldn't buy it. :)
regards
frank
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Wearn
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:CoinForgeryDiscussionList%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 6:32 PM
Subject: [CFDL] Galba

Any opinions on this coin? 250555986226

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Warren/CFDL:

Great Catch!!!!  I am starting to investigate this blacklist candidate and I
found these two eastern european cast fake Istros staters

Jbcollectables99 Cast fake Istros stater @$41 with 3 hours to go
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270506695623
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=zV7ajK1FKHQ=
compare to
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=VBFUeyntafk=
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=YLV9DCYwhjs=
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=iry5ut0P9jE=

Jbcollectables99 Cast fake Istros stater sold for $83
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270499027866
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=HioZcta8C2U=
compare to
http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=mOl7QrG6B4M=

Sincerely yours,
Cliff




--- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, Warren Esty <wwesty@...>
wrote:
>
> The relatively new English seller
> jbcollectables99
>
> has this fake Julian II/bull and a fake Caracalla, Hadrian and
> "PERFECT Diocletian"
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270505829366
>
> I think he deserves blacklisting.
>  -- Warren
>

Dear List

As a listizen reminded me, is hobo Nickel, not hobbo.....   :-(

With best wishes

Llu�s

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear list

Maybe you remember sestertius eBay item 350279962388

A friend was kind enough to send me better images of the coin. You could find it
in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CoinForgeryDiscussionList/photos/album/1815122821/\
pic/list
I still think that it is a fake, although in the small pictures seen in eBay,
was said it is legit.
And, of course, I see patina as modern.

May wiser members be so kind to tell his opinion?

With best wishes

Llu�s


P.D.: not as interesting as the Commodus medaillon, but just interesting.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

probably ok, but with these amateur-fotos hard to say.
anyway, for 200 pounds a galba in F condition? I wouldn't  buy it. :)
regards
frank
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Bob Wearn
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 6:32 PM
   Subject: [CFDL] Galba



   Any opinions on this coin? 250555986226

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Any opinions on this coin?  250555986226



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi, Cliff

Thanks for sharing!
We should always remember that a COA stays that "is my opinion..."
That opinion is as good as people believe is good.

I remember an advertisement from an Spanish stamp auction: "Edifil number so (an
Isabel II classical stamp), with certificate of Mr. So ( a known certifier,
formerly of very good reputation, buy needs are needs....  :-() as original,
with original gum and mint. Stamp is used and cleaned, and regummed"

At the end, we all are humans

With best wishes

Llu�s

P.D.: I would prefer in Europe to have a Calic� certificate, for my easy of
mind....



   ----- Original Message -----
   From: gibfrog
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Friday, January 01, 2010 8:42 PM
   Subject: [CFDL] $1,000 Sear Certified Fake Lipanoff Matidia Denar from
Ancient_treasures?



   CFDL:

   Here is a published fake Lipanoff matidia denarius, See Contemporary Coin
Engravers and Coin Masters from Bulgaria, "Lipanoff Studio", Prokopov, page 35,
plate 47 Van Arsdale "Roman Coin Forgery" images #317, #318, #319. That
Ancient_treasures is sellng for $1,000
   http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200421880534
   http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=lIkUuXjMagE=
   compare to
   http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=PxjVh0pnjuU=
   http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=ibyk3nivdJk=
   http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=6rhy1PWhgt8=

   Let us not forget this cast fake Philip II stater, being sold by
Ancient_treasures for $3,250 and also Sear Certified as Authentic
   http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120510697402
   http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=HzfrZ7A750I=
   compare to
   http://www.forgerynetwork.com/asset.aspx?id=Gr2ZCpS3rHQ=
   On the Serdiko cas fake, the host edge is visible form about 2:00-8:00. On the
Ancient_treasures cast fake, the host edge is visible from 4:30-5:30.

   Also, I have not forgotton all the modern cast fake denarii that
Ancient_Treasures is selling as "ancient forgeries" with a Sear Certificate of
authenticity.

   Sincerely yours,
   Cliff





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi, Frank.

Thanks for link.
Downloaded and inspected.

Yes, Commodus did medaillons galore, but the one we are talking about, is in BM
described as bimetallic (number 14, page 24)
So, I still maintain what I said.
I did not dispute the other types, I have no opinion. But the one  brought by
Mr. Tkalec to our attention is number 14 in BM, as far as I understand, and it
is bimetallic. So, lines should be there, in my humble opinion.
If not, well, not me who would buy that.

With best wishes

Lluís

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: frank.reinhardt@...
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 6:02 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions



   hi lluis
   make a download of this:
  
http://www.archive.org/download/romanmedallionsi00brituoft/romanmedallionsi00bri\
tuoft.pdf
   there you will find all the medaillons the BM has.
   with descriptions and on the last pages with fotos.
   there are all kind of medaillons in all metals, and as commodus made quite a
lot of them, you will see many bi-metallic and also uniform.
   as these medaillons where gifts to higher persons (and not coins), maybe the
bi-metallic would be given to the even higher in rank. :)
   regards
   frank
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Lluís Mendieta
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 4:32 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Hi, Frank

   Thanks for point. Touché :-)

   But if medaillons exist in bimetallic and in uni-alloy, any explanation for
such duplication?
   Any bimetallic has a lot more of work to do.....Makes not too much sense in my
mind....
   And, any monometallic medaillon like the one we are talking about? Old and
recorded, I mean, like the one brought by Numizmo?
   Just curious.

   And as I said, *Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a
thermodinamic impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)*, so all I
posted I think that still applies......Yes, for bimetallic only.
   But personally I would be still more comfortable with Tkalec medaillon. My
taste.

   With best wishes

   Lluís

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: frank.reinhardt@...
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 5:14 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   hi lluis,
   just to remind you that most medaillons existed as bi-metallic and as normal
issues! so please don't jump to conclusions just by seeing pieces without the
concentric line.:)
   regards
   frank
   p.s. i think the stalker's fantastic job explained sufficiently what was
done,and was not, to the different discussed pieces.
   and of course we all agree that tooling should ALWAYS be mentioned by every
dealer or auction-house.
   than it's everyone's personal choice to accept or not such
alteration.(personally I think tooling is a crime!)
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Lluís Mendieta
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:09 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Hi, Yuriy

   I think same as you.
   But as a friend said me, a coin is legit or not in each and one viewer that
sees it.
   So, not game. Just opinions and educated guesses.

   Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a thermodinamic
impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)
   With best wishes

   Lluís
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Giouri Giouri
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:54 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Gentlemen,
   here on CFDL now started very strange game.
   NAC example is not more genuine than Lanz one. Sure...

   --- On Sat, 1/2/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:

   From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
   Subject: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Date: Saturday, January 2, 2010, 5:50 AM

   CFDL:

   THANK YOU THE STALKER!! What an amazing piece of work. Also thank you for the
time it took.

   CFDL's - The animated gif's are better viewed if you download them and then
use an image viewer, like Windows Picture & Fax Viewer, to zoom the image and to
place a mouse pointer (for a steady point of reference) on interesting areas of
the animated gif.
   ============ ========= ====

   Stalker, does it really matter if the $60,000 NAC medallion was struck in
ancient times because even you admit that prior to modern tooling, it (or its
host) was more worn than the $8,750 Goldberg example so there was over $51,250
of fraud or 85%+ of the $60,000 was due to modern fraud. Are we just splitting
hairs arguing over the remaining <15% of value? If the NAC medallionis ancient,
does this absolve NAC of committing a major fraud? Of course not and even you
posted " And Mr NAC, you didn't do your job, even if the kind of customers for
dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt too much." Besides if 85%+ of a
ancient medlaaion's value is due to modern fakery, to me, it is a modern fake.
   ============ ========= =====

   The same arguement may be made for the Lanz fake. but it is even more fake
than the NAC fake, due to the cartoonish reverse. In my opinion, it is possible
that the Lanz fake could be an original well worn/corroded bimetalic medallion
that was restruck with modern dies and them "tooled to splendor". Would you
consider it an authentic ancient medallion in this case? Where does one draw the
line? The cartoonish Lanz Hercules is not OK, while the tooled Tkalec Hercules
is OK because it does not depart too much from the original? (The Tkalec
Hercules tooling included the abdominal muscles, the full face instead of 3/4
face, the shoulders, the right foot, the lionskin, the trees/many branches, the
alter, the flames, etc)
   ============ ========= ========= =

   My point is that at a certain level of modern alterations/ tooling, an ancient
coin/medallion becomes a modern fake. Of course, you are welcome to call such
coins/medallions altered/tooled authentic ancients.
   ============ ========= ========= =====

   We all agree that it is FRAUD not to disclose such tooling and that is good
enough for me..

   Sincerely yours,
   Cliff

   --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ ...> wrote:
   >
   > Yes, I do believe so. I base my opinion on the perfect match of the devices
SHAPES with the original known dies (so, not a modern engraving), and the
sharpness of many details (like the letters of the obv. legend). Now, the
strange style of this medallion is due to the badly recut details on the top
surfaces (hair, beard, drapery on obv., draperies and legend on rev.); so yes,
the style is not totally ancient and at first glance, this can be misleading and
one can consider the piece as a fake.
   > Furthermore, the Lanz med. obv. doesn't match exactly the NAC's, it can be
clearly seen that there is a recut work on the Lanz.
   >
   > Last, Mr Tkalec firmly said it is ancient (whether he saw it himself, or he
has other sources of information) ; his opinions should always be considered
very seriously!
   >
   > T.S.
   >
   > PS. Frank: if know what you are searching for, the comparison between 2
pictures is always very useful, even the coins haven't been lighted the same
way. It is very important to 'learn' to see through a picture.
   >
   >
   > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com, "ellinorosos"
<ellinorosos_ 33@> wrote:
   > >
   > > Sorry, are you really beleive what this item http://www.acsearch
.info/ext_ image.html? id=39106 is genuine?
   > >
   > > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ > wrote:
   > > >
   > > > A good time for discussing these medallions, which were traditionally
offered as gifts for the New Year!
   > > >
   > > > The Lanz and the NAC medallion show strange similarities on their
obverses between them only; see animated Gif of the Lanz & NAC:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1831006867/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > while showing a perfect similarity about some other features, especially
the legends; see animated Gif of the Lanz & Italian museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/46096296/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > So the die is the same for all, with alterations on the Lanz and NAC ex.
The process is actually quite simple to understand, based on the Goldberg med.
This one shows some circulation, which has blurred some details, especially on
the drapery of the bust; see animated Gif of the Goldberg & museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1798316494/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Now, it is clear, seen the shape of the drapery on NAC and the curls of
the hair, that the NAC med. was actually in a lower condition of circulation,
probably in inferior grade than the Goldberg, and was ‘improved’ by
tooling, to restore some lost details: drapery, shoulder pteryges (but alas for
the tooler, none on the original die), hair, beard. The rev. underwent the same
treatment, where the original style for the scene with Jupiter, clearly visible
on the Goldberg untouched ancient med.; notably the recreated draperies from the
top surfaces of the flan, and reconstructed letters from the legend. But the
tooler made an improper work and couldn’t find the original ancient
style.
   > > > See animated Gif of the NAC & Goldberg med. for comparison:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/7860001/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Yes, Mr Tkalec was right of course, the NAC med. is authentic even if
extensively tooled. Goldberg med. was sold for $8,750 while NAC med sold for
$60,000. Nice profit, Mr Tooly, eh? And Mr NAC, you didn’t do your job,
even if the kind of customers for dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt
too much.
   > > >
   > > > Now back to the Lanz med. While the style of NAC med. is globally
ancient, this is not the case with the Lanz med., especially on the rev. How to
explain such a discrepancy between a 'stylish' obv. (despite the modern bust
drapery) and such a poor rev.? Simply by the cast of the NAC med., then reworked
(look at the difference on the waves of the drapery), and an engraving job on
rev. Remember, the Roman medallions were special gifts and the issues were much
smaller than coins. There is only one rev. die for this type. Now compare the
Lanz & It. museum med. for comparison:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1102498905/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > It appears that a lot of devices don’t match at all the ancient
die, and it would be impossible to reconstruct them from tooling, even if the
rev. was completely encrusted by oxides, basic material for possible
reconstruction. The details could have been created by using the metal itself,
diminishing the thickness of the flan. But this isn’t compatible with the
very well-conserved obv.; even if corroded, the rev. would be well-enough
preserved to undergo a tooling job respecting the original design.
   > > > So the Lanz med. is a modern fake using a mould from NAC med. obv., and
an entirely new design (by a bad worker) on the rev.
   > > > Do these medallions originate from the same ring of fraudsters? Anyway,
nice job of patination, patina looks like a cleaned ancient one.
   > > >
   > > > A last point on the Tkalec med: the rev. has been lightly tooled, as
some details don’t match the original die (so well preserved on the It.
museum med.) and for which the differences between the pictures cannot explain,
as can be see on this animated Gif of the Tkalec & It. museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/730808882/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Notably, muscles on the chest and face of Hercules, altar garland, some
branches of the tree.
   > > >
   > > > Happy New Year 2010!
   > > >
   > > > The Сталкер
   > > >
   > >
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi, Cliff

Well, just in presence of water and any electrolyte the corrossion would start.
If patinated, even if artificially, corrossion would be bigger in interface. So,
in my understanding, corrossion should always enhance the inner circle.
Frank said that the Commodus is in bimetallic and in monoalloy (in all types, I
suppose). So, if monometallic, no circle. And no objection (just the one as to
find any old and recorded example, I mean. Cautious one had learned to be)
Still, I think that is hard to cover the inner circle (I am cleaning coins by
hobby, for friends, and beleive me that is not that easy to hide that (well,
doing hard tricks, like resins and so, yes. But not with normal things)

And also again, a semiuniform patina could form. But if it is thick enough to
hide the circle, then many details would be also hidden. If cleaned, I do not
know any way to avoid increasing the circle (more soft, so, you will always
scratch more). Not a flat surface, that using a leveler you could make a flat
surface.

Say that anyone cleans the medaillon to bare metal. Then fill the gap and then
return to repatinate.
My objections

-First is that the Museum example is cleaned to bare metal; so, why care to
repatinate? One reason could be to hide tooling. Other, I do not know.....

-Second, if filled the gap, then master tooler should be a genius making
distressed all the inner circle. Could be done in one spot, making it bigger
(hiding a hole with a bigger one), but not in my opinion in a long line. More,
tricks of light, mainly difference of shades/colours under different illuminants
would make that very hard to achieve

I still think that if no circle, no bimetallic.
Maybe a stubborn mule, but I work in textiles. Metameries (those changes in
colours under different illuminants) are a nightmare. And I do not know any way
to avoid that.
At least, any repatinated and filled tooled example should show traces under
inversion of colours tool.

With best wishes

Llu�s

P.D.: a very interesting debate, indeed!



   ----- Original Message -----
   From: gibfrog
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 4:55 PM
   Subject: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions



   Yuriy:

   You misunderstood my post. I personally believe that both the NAC & Lanz
medallions are complete modern forgeries, derived from a tooled host. I just
tried to express in my previous post, that even if one believes in the
authenticity of the NAC core, it is still a modern fabrication due to the extent
of the tooling.
   ------------------------------------------

   Lluis:

   Please look at the Cohen images, the circle or metal interface is not always
evident. Also the BM medal does not show the circle. Yes, in the presence of
humidity and salt, an electrochemical reaction will occur along this circle due
to the different electropotential of the two alloys/metals. However, a
semi-uniform patina may form over both metals due to the copper in both. The
circular depression could be smoothed away. Also the medallion may be cleaned,
depressions filled and then repatinated. All the modern examples of these
medallions were altered/tooled. Not all the toolers realized the importance of
this circle at the bimetallic interface.

   Sincerely yours,
   Cliff

   PS. Yuriy & I believe Numizmo, brought up the problem of the Tkalec/NAC die
matched Hercules reverse, which is different form the 15th Century Italian
Museum example. Is this from identical tooling or die transfer forgery.

   --- In CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com, Giouri Giouri
<ellinorosos_33@...> wrote:
   >
   > Dear Llluis,
   > you agree what internal circles on these two examples:
   > � http://www.acsearch.info/ext_image.html?id=62777
   > http://www.acsearch.info/ext_image.html?id=145268
   > is part of die's engraving, so these are NOT bimetallic ?
   > Regards
   > Yuriy.
   >
   > --- On Sat, 1/2/10, Lluís Mendieta <lmendi@...> wrote:
   >
   >
   > From: Lluís Mendieta <lmendi@...>
   > Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions
   > To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   > Date: Saturday, January 2, 2010, 6:55 AM
   >
   >
   > �
   >
   >
   >
   > Dear all
   >
   > I think that chemistry could explain many things.
   >
   > From the list of medaillons, only the ones that have clearly the line
(Tkalec and the old one provided by Numizmo) could be bimetalic.
   > The old one provided by Numizmo is certainly bimetallic. One could see the
brass and bronze, so no doubt.
   >
   > Please, take a look at the line between two alloys in the ancient one: the
line is *corroded*, as it should be because the two alloys have two different
reduction potentials, are stressed, and then, form a cell, a nice way to have
corrossion.
   >
   > If no line is seen, those medaillons are two possibilities
   > -moderns
   > -monometallics (well, monoalloy)
   >
   > In two cases I am afraid that we are talking about fakes. Tooled, not
tooled, more likely ancient ones, and all we would like to talk about, but just
thermodinamic impossibilites, and then fakes.
   >
   > The Goldberg one is for me more amazing.
   > It has no line (as shown by Tkalec piece, that I think is the only genuine,
along with the old one), and furthermore, it has some blue patches in my screen.
   >
   > Blue in copper alloys could be azurite or some arsenates (if wished, I could
place names, but just interesting for mineral lovers as I, I fear :-( ).
   >
   > Then, analyze two possibilities.
   >
   > -Blue is arseniate: then is used arsenical copper in side of bronze. Well,
could be. It was used in very old times before bronze was known. I doubt any
arsenical copper has survised till the time of Commodus; so if blue is
arseniate, I fear that someone used an old "bronze", but too old. In my opinion
a fake for inconsistency with metal used in that era.
   >
   > -Azurite: unstable hydroxy copper carbonate, that evolves to malachite,
green, in presence of water (not high humidity, just the humidity that you could
get in Mediterranean basin). The evolution is *irreversible* .
   > It could be done if patina is done in presence of high pressure of carbon
dioxide. Then modern devices used to patinate.
   > And with idea to deceive. So, not a definite proof, but taking in account
absence of inner circle and modern patina, I fear that it is a fake. Modern,
because cilynders of CO2 are not that old.
   >
   > Then, I fear that we are seeing a flood of fakes.
   >
   > Thanks to Mr. Tkalec to draw our attention to them
   >
   > By the way, old style could be perfectly mimicked with a good artisan and
microfusion. Anthony told us how latex moulds could be adjusted to have a size
that is bigger enough to have casts at same size as original...
   > My grandgrandfather was metallurgic. He did some casts, hand finished, that
are certainly sharp....
   > I see the external signs. They do not agree with what chemistry says, then,
I think in human intervention.
   >
   > With best wishes
   >
   > Lluís
   > ----- Original Message -----
   > From: gibfrog
   > To: CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com
   > Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 2:50 PM
   > Subject: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions
   >
   > CFDL:
   >
   > THANK YOU THE STALKER!! What an amazing piece of work. Also thank you for
the time it took.
   >
   > CFDL's - The animated gif's are better viewed if you download them and then
use an image viewer, like Windows Picture & Fax Viewer, to zoom the image and to
place a mouse pointer (for a steady point of reference) on interesting areas of
the animated gif.
   > ============ ========= ====
   >
   > Stalker, does it really matter if the $60,000 NAC medallion was struck in
ancient times because even you admit that prior to modern tooling, it (or its
host) was more worn than the $8,750 Goldberg example so there was over $51,250
of fraud or 85%+ of the $60,000 was due to modern fraud. Are we just splitting
hairs arguing over the remaining <15% of value? If the NAC medallionis ancient,
does this absolve NAC of committing a major fraud? Of course not and even you
posted " And Mr NAC, you didn't do your job, even if the kind of customers for
dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt too much." Besides if 85%+ of a
ancient medlaaion's value is due to modern fakery, to me, it is a modern fake.
   > ============ ========= =====
   >
   > The same arguement may be made for the Lanz fake. but it is even more fake
than the NAC fake, due to the cartoonish reverse. In my opinion, it is possible
that the Lanz fake could be an original well worn/corroded bimetalic medallion
that was restruck with modern dies and them "tooled to splendor". Would you
consider it an authentic ancient medallion in this case? Where does one draw the
line? The cartoonish Lanz Hercules is not OK, while the tooled Tkalec Hercules
is OK because it does not depart too much from the original? (The Tkalec
Hercules tooling included the abdominal muscles, the full face instead of 3/4
face, the shoulders, the right foot, the lionskin, the trees/many branches, the
alter, the flames, etc)
   > ============ ========= ========= =
   >
   > My point is that at a certain level of modern alterations/ tooling, an
ancient coin/medallion becomes a modern fake. Of course, you are welcome to call
such coins/medallions altered/tooled authentic ancients.
   > ============ ========= ========= =====
   >
   > We all agree that it is FRAUD not to disclose such tooling and that is good
enough for me..
   >
   > Sincerely yours,
   > Cliff
   >
   > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
С�`,алке�`? <stalker042004@ ...> wrote:
   > >
   > > Yes, I do believe so. I base my opinion on the perfect match of the
devices SHAPES with the original known dies (so, not a modern engraving), and
the sharpness of many details (like the letters of the obv. legend). Now, the
strange style of this medallion is due to the badly recut details on the top
surfaces (hair, beard, drapery on obv., draperies and legend on rev.); so yes,
the style is not totally ancient and at first glance, this can be misleading and
one can consider the piece as a fake.
   > > Furthermore, the Lanz med. obv. doesn't match exactly the NAC's, it can be
clearly seen that there is a recut work on the Lanz.
   > >
   > > Last, Mr Tkalec firmly said it is ancient (whether he saw it himself, or
he has other sources of information) ; his opinions should always be considered
very seriously!
   > >
   > > T.S.
   > >
   > > PS. Frank: if know what you are searching for, the comparison between 2
pictures is always very useful, even the coins haven't been lighted the same
way. It is very important to 'learn' to see through a picture.
   > >
   > >
   > > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com, "ellinorosos"
<ellinorosos_ 33@> wrote:
   > > >
   > > > Sorry, are you really beleive what this item http://www.acsearch
.info/ext_ image.html? id=39106 is genuine?
   > > >
   > > > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
С�`,алке�`? <stalker042004@ > wrote:
   > > > >
   > > > > A good time for discussing these medallions, which were traditionally
offered as gifts for the New Year!
   > > > >
   > > > > The Lanz and the NAC medallion show strange similarities on their
obverses between them only; see animated Gif of the Lanz & NAC:
   > > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1831006867/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > > >
   > > > > while showing a perfect similarity about some other features,
especially the legends; see animated Gif of the Lanz & Italian museum med.:
   > > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/46096296/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > > >
   > > > > So the die is the same for all, with alterations on the Lanz and NAC
ex. The process is actually quite simple to understand, based on the Goldberg
med. This one shows some circulation, which has blurred some details, especially
on the drapery of the bust; see animated Gif of the Goldberg & museum med.:
   > > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1798316494/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > > >
   > > > > Now, it is clear, seen the shape of the drapery on NAC and the curls
of the hair, that the NAC med. was actually in a lower condition of circulation,
probably in inferior grade than the Goldberg, and was â?~improvedâ?T by
tooling, to restore some lost details: drapery, shoulder pteryges (but alas for
the tooler, none on the original die), hair, beard. The rev. underwent the same
treatment, where the original style for the scene with Jupiter, clearly visible
on the Goldberg untouched ancient med.; notably the recreated draperies from the
top surfaces of the flan, and reconstructed letters from the legend. But the
tooler made an improper work and couldnâ?Tt find the original ancient style.
   > > > > See animated Gif of the NAC & Goldberg med. for comparison:
   > > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/7860001/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > > >
   > > > > Yes, Mr Tkalec was right of course, the NAC med. is authentic even if
extensively tooled. Goldberg med. was sold for $8,750 while NAC med sold for
$60,000. Nice profit, Mr Tooly, eh? And Mr NAC, you didnâ?Tt do your job, even
if the kind of customers for dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt too
much.
   > > > >
   > > > > Now back to the Lanz med. While the style of NAC med. is globally
ancient, this is not the case with the Lanz med., especially on the rev. How to
explain such a discrepancy between a 'stylish' obv. (despite the modern bust
drapery) and such a poor rev.? Simply by the cast of the NAC med., then reworked
(look at the difference on the waves of the drapery), and an engraving job on
rev. Remember, the Roman medallions were special gifts and the issues were much
smaller than coins. There is only one rev. die for this type. Now compare the
Lanz & It. museum med. for comparison:
   > > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1102498905/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > > >
   > > > > It appears that a lot of devices donâ?Tt match at all the ancient
die, and it would be impossible to reconstruct them from tooling, even if the
rev. was completely encrusted by oxides, basic material for possible
reconstruction. The details could have been created by using the metal itself,
diminishing the thickness of the flan. But this isnâ?Tt compatible with the
very well-conserved obv.; even if corroded, the rev. would be well-enough
preserved to undergo a tooling job respecting the original design.
   > > > > So the Lanz med. is a modern fake using a mould from NAC med. obv.,
and an entirely new design (by a bad worker) on the rev.
   > > > > Do these medallions originate from the same ring of fraudsters?
Anyway, nice job of patination, patina looks like a cleaned ancient one.
   > > > >
   > > > > A last point on the Tkalec med: the rev. has been lightly tooled, as
some details donâ?Tt match the original die (so well preserved on the It.
museum med.) and for which the differences between the pictures cannot explain,
as can be see on this animated Gif of the Tkalec & It. museum med.:
   > > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/730808882/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > > >
   > > > > Notably, muscles on the chest and face of Hercules, altar garland,
some branches of the tree.
   > > > >
   > > > > Happy New Year 2010!
   > > > >
   > > > > The С�`,алке�`?
   > > > >
   > > >
   > >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi, Anthony

I do not know any personally, but in Andalusia, Spain, there are by sure
authentic genious.
And if you make any easy short search for "hobbo nickels" in eBay, you could be
scared of the quantity of artists (true artists, because they do not want to
mimic nothing) that are around. (thanks to Warren for such typ!)
No need of yellow pages, I am afraid

And if that work means that price is increased in 40000$, well, no all souls
resist such temptations....

With best wishes

Lluís
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Theholmess@...
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 6:01 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions




   I just cannot imagine anyone handing a genuine $50,000 medallion over to a guy
with a chisel !! Where do you get the tooler guys from - the Yellow Pages ? And
as they are all so rubbish how do they get the chance to practice their 'art'
when everything they touch gets so devalued ?

   -----Original Message-----
   From: Lluís Mendieta <lmendi@...>
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:32
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Hi, Frank

   Thanks for point. Touché :-)

   But if medaillons exist in bimetallic and in uni-alloy, any explanation for
such duplication?
   Any bimetallic has a lot more of work to do.....Makes not too much sense in my
mind....
   And, any monometallic medaillon like the one we are talking about? Old and
recorded, I mean, like the one brought by Numizmo?
   Just curious.

   And as I said, *Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a
thermodinamic impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)*, so all I
posted I think that still applies......Yes, for bimetallic only.
   But personally I would be still more comfortable with Tkalec medaillon. My
taste.

   With best wishes

   Lluís

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: frank.reinhardt@...
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 5:14 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   hi lluis,
   just to remind you that most medaillons existed as bi-metallic and as normal
issues! so please don't jump to conclusions just by seeing pieces without the
concentric line.:)
   regards
   frank
   p.s. i think the stalker's fantastic job explained sufficiently what was
done,and was not, to the different discussed pieces.
   and of course we all agree that tooling should ALWAYS be mentioned by every
dealer or auction-house.
   than it's everyone's personal choice to accept or not such
alteration.(personally I think tooling is a crime!)
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Lluís Mendieta
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:09 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Hi, Yuriy

   I think same as you.
   But as a friend said me, a coin is legit or not in each and one viewer that
sees it.
   So, not game. Just opinions and educated guesses.

   Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a thermodinamic
impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)
   With best wishes

   Lluís
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Giouri Giouri
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:54 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Gentlemen,
   here on CFDL now started very strange game.
   NAC example is not more genuine than Lanz one. Sure...

   --- On Sat, 1/2/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:

   From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
   Subject: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Date: Saturday, January 2, 2010, 5:50 AM

   CFDL:

   THANK YOU THE STALKER!! What an amazing piece of work. Also thank you for the
time it took.

   CFDL's - The animated gif's are better viewed if you download them and then
use an image viewer, like Windows Picture & Fax Viewer, to zoom the image and to
place a mouse pointer (for a steady point of reference) on interesting areas of
the animated gif.
   ============ ========= ====

   Stalker, does it really matter if the $60,000 NAC medallion was struck in
ancient times because even you admit that prior to modern tooling, it (or its
host) was more worn than the $8,750 Goldberg example so there was over $51,250
of fraud or 85%+ of the $60,000 was due to modern fraud. Are we just splitting
hairs arguing over the remaining <15% of value? If the NAC medallionis ancient,
does this absolve NAC of committing a major fraud? Of course not and even you
posted " And Mr NAC, you didn't do your job, even if the kind of customers for
dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt too much." Besides if 85%+ of a
ancient medlaaion's value is due to modern fakery, to me, it is a modern fake.
   ============ ========= =====

   The same arguement may be made for the Lanz fake. but it is even more fake
than the NAC fake, due to the cartoonish reverse. In my opinion, it is possible
that the Lanz fake could be an original well worn/corroded bimetalic medallion
that was restruck with modern dies and them "tooled to splendor". Would you
consider it an authentic ancient medallion in this case? Where does one draw the
line? The cartoonish Lanz Hercules is not OK, while the tooled Tkalec Hercules
is OK because it does not depart too much from the original? (The Tkalec
Hercules tooling included the abdominal muscles, the full face instead of 3/4
face, the shoulders, the right foot, the lionskin, the trees/many branches, the
alter, the flames, etc)
   ============ ========= ========= =

   My point is that at a certain level of modern alterations/ tooling, an ancient
coin/medallion becomes a modern fake. Of course, you are welcome to call such
coins/medallions altered/tooled authentic ancients.
   ============ ========= ========= =====

   We all agree that it is FRAUD not to disclose such tooling and that is good
enough for me..

   Sincerely yours,
   Cliff

   --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ ...> wrote:
   >
   > Yes, I do believe so. I base my opinion on the perfect match of the devices
SHAPES with the original known dies (so, not a modern engraving), and the
sharpness of many details (like the letters of the obv. legend). Now, the
strange style of this medallion is due to the badly recut details on the top
surfaces (hair, beard, drapery on obv., draperies and legend on rev.); so yes,
the style is not totally ancient and at first glance, this can be misleading and
one can consider the piece as a fake.
   > Furthermore, the Lanz med. obv. doesn't match exactly the NAC's, it can be
clearly seen that there is a recut work on the Lanz.
   >
   > Last, Mr Tkalec firmly said it is ancient (whether he saw it himself, or he
has other sources of information) ; his opinions should always be considered
very seriously!
   >
   > T.S.
   >
   > PS. Frank: if know what you are searching for, the comparison between 2
pictures is always very useful, even the coins haven't been lighted the same
way. It is very important to 'learn' to see through a picture.
   >
   >
   > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com, "ellinorosos"
<ellinorosos_ 33@> wrote:
   > >
   > > Sorry, are you really beleive what this item http://www.acsearch
.info/ext_ image.html? id=39106 is genuine?
   > >
   > > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ > wrote:
   > > >
   > > > A good time for discussing these medallions, which were traditionally
offered as gifts for the New Year!
   > > >
   > > > The Lanz and the NAC medallion show strange similarities on their
obverses between them only; see animated Gif of the Lanz & NAC:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1831006867/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > while showing a perfect similarity about some other features, especially
the legends; see animated Gif of the Lanz & Italian museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/46096296/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > So the die is the same for all, with alterations on the Lanz and NAC ex.
The process is actually quite simple to understand, based on the Goldberg med.
This one shows some circulation, which has blurred some details, especially on
the drapery of the bust; see animated Gif of the Goldberg & museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1798316494/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Now, it is clear, seen the shape of the drapery on NAC and the curls of
the hair, that the NAC med. was actually in a lower condition of circulation,
probably in inferior grade than the Goldberg, and was ‘improved’ by
tooling, to restore some lost details: drapery, shoulder pteryges (but alas for
the tooler, none on the original die), hair, beard. The rev. underwent the same
treatment, where the original style for the scene with Jupiter, clearly visible
on the Goldberg untouched ancient med.; notably the recreated draperies from the
top surfaces of the flan, and reconstructed letters from the legend. But the
tooler made an improper work and couldn’t find the original ancient
style.
   > > > See animated Gif of the NAC & Goldberg med. for comparison:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/7860001/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Yes, Mr Tkalec was right of course, the NAC med. is authentic even if
extensively tooled. Goldberg med. was sold for $8,750 while NAC med sold for
$60,000. Nice profit, Mr Tooly, eh? And Mr NAC, you didn’t do your job,
even if the kind of customers for dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt
too much.
   > > >
   > > > Now back to the Lanz med. While the style of NAC med. is globally
ancient, this is not the case with the Lanz med., especially on the rev. How to
explain such a discrepancy between a 'stylish' obv. (despite the modern bust
drapery) and such a poor rev.? Simply by the cast of the NAC med., then reworked
(look at the difference on the waves of the drapery), and an engraving job on
rev. Remember, the Roman medallions were special gifts and the issues were much
smaller than coins. There is only one rev. die for this type. Now compare the
Lanz & It. museum med. for comparison:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1102498905/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > It appears that a lot of devices don’t match at all the ancient
die, and it would be impossible to reconstruct them from tooling, even if the
rev. was completely encrusted by oxides, basic material for possible
reconstruction. The details could have been created by using the metal itself,
diminishing the thickness of the flan. But this isn’t compatible with the
very well-conserved obv.; even if corroded, the rev. would be well-enough
preserved to undergo a tooling job respecting the original design.
   > > > So the Lanz med. is a modern fake using a mould from NAC med. obv., and
an entirely new design (by a bad worker) on the rev.
   > > > Do these medallions originate from the same ring of fraudsters? Anyway,
nice job of patination, patina looks like a cleaned ancient one.
   > > >
   > > > A last point on the Tkalec med: the rev. has been lightly tooled, as
some details don’t match the original die (so well preserved on the It.
museum med.) and for which the differences between the pictures cannot explain,
as can be see on this animated Gif of the Tkalec & It. museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/730808882/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Notably, muscles on the chest and face of Hercules, altar garland, some
branches of the tree.
   > > >
   > > > Happy New Year 2010!
   > > >
   > > > The Сталкер
   > > >
   > >
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I just cannot imagine anyone handing a genuine $50,000 medallion over to a guy
with a chisel !! Where do you get the tooler guys from - the Yellow Pages ? And
as they are all so rubbish how do they get the chance to practice their 'art'
when everything they touch gets so devalued ?


-----Original Message-----
From: Lluís Mendieta <lmendi@...>
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 16:32
Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions




Hi, Frank

Thanks for point. Touché :-)

But if medaillons exist in bimetallic and in uni-alloy, any explanation for such
duplication?
Any bimetallic has a lot more of work to do.....Makes not too much sense in my
mind....
And, any monometallic medaillon like the one we are talking about? Old and
recorded, I mean, like the one brought by Numizmo?
Just curious.

And as I said, *Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a
thermodinamic impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)*, so all I
posted I think that still applies......Yes, for bimetallic only.
But personally I would be still more comfortable with Tkalec medaillon. My
taste.

With best wishes

Lluís

----- Original Message -----
From: frank.reinhardt@...
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

hi lluis,
just to remind you that most medaillons existed as bi-metallic and as normal
issues! so please don't jump to conclusions just by seeing pieces without the
concentric line.:)
regards
frank
p.s. i think the stalker's fantastic job explained sufficiently what was
done,and was not, to the different discussed pieces.
and of course we all agree that tooling should ALWAYS be mentioned by every
dealer or auction-house.
than it's everyone's personal choice to accept or not such
alteration.(personally I think tooling is a crime!)
----- Original Message -----
From: Lluís Mendieta
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

Hi, Yuriy

I think same as you.
But as a friend said me, a coin is legit or not in each and one viewer that sees
it.
So, not game. Just opinions and educated guesses.

Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a thermodinamic
impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)
With best wishes

Lluís
----- Original Message -----
From: Giouri Giouri
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

Gentlemen,
here on CFDL now started very strange game.
NAC example is not more genuine than Lanz one. Sure...

--- On Sat, 1/2/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:

From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
Subject: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, January 2, 2010, 5:50 AM

CFDL:

THANK YOU THE STALKER!! What an amazing piece of work. Also thank you for the
time it took.

CFDL's - The animated gif's are better viewed if you download them and then use
an image viewer, like Windows Picture & Fax Viewer, to zoom the image and to
place a mouse pointer (for a steady point of reference) on interesting areas of
the animated gif.
============ ========= ====

Stalker, does it really matter if the $60,000 NAC medallion was struck in
ancient times because even you admit that prior to modern tooling, it (or its
host) was more worn than the $8,750 Goldberg example so there was over $51,250
of fraud or 85%+ of the $60,000 was due to modern fraud. Are we just splitting
hairs arguing over the remaining <15% of value? If the NAC medallionis ancient,
does this absolve NAC of committing a major fraud? Of course not and even you
posted " And Mr NAC, you didn't do your job, even if the kind of customers for
dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt too much." Besides if 85%+ of a
ancient medlaaion's value is due to modern fakery, to me, it is a modern fake.
============ ========= =====

The same arguement may be made for the Lanz fake. but it is even more fake than
the NAC fake, due to the cartoonish reverse. In my opinion, it is possible that
the Lanz fake could be an original well worn/corroded bimetalic medallion that
was restruck with modern dies and them "tooled to splendor". Would you consider
it an authentic ancient medallion in this case? Where does one draw the line?
The cartoonish Lanz Hercules is not OK, while the tooled Tkalec Hercules is OK
because it does not depart too much from the original? (The Tkalec Hercules
tooling included the abdominal muscles, the full face instead of 3/4 face, the
shoulders, the right foot, the lionskin, the trees/many branches, the alter, the
flames, etc)
============ ========= ========= =

My point is that at a certain level of modern alterations/ tooling, an ancient
coin/medallion becomes a modern fake. Of course, you are welcome to call such
coins/medallions altered/tooled authentic ancients.
============ ========= ========= =====

We all agree that it is FRAUD not to disclose such tooling and that is good
enough for me..

Sincerely yours,
Cliff

--- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ ...> wrote:
>
> Yes, I do believe so. I base my opinion on the perfect match of the devices
SHAPES with the original known dies (so, not a modern engraving), and the
sharpness of many details (like the letters of the obv. legend). Now, the
strange style of this medallion is due to the badly recut details on the top
surfaces (hair, beard, drapery on obv., draperies and legend on rev.); so yes,
the style is not totally ancient and at first glance, this can be misleading and
one can consider the piece as a fake.
> Furthermore, the Lanz med. obv. doesn't match exactly the NAC's, it can be
clearly seen that there is a recut work on the Lanz.
>
> Last, Mr Tkalec firmly said it is ancient (whether he saw it himself, or he
has other sources of information) ; his opinions should always be considered
very seriously!
>
> T.S.
>
> PS. Frank: if know what you are searching for, the comparison between 2
pictures is always very useful, even the coins haven't been lighted the same
way. It is very important to 'learn' to see through a picture.
>
>
> --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com, "ellinorosos"
<ellinorosos_ 33@> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, are you really beleive what this item http://www.acsearch .info/ext_
image.html? id=39106 is genuine?
> >
> > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ > wrote:
> > >
> > > A good time for discussing these medallions, which were traditionally
offered as gifts for the New Year!
> > >
> > > The Lanz and the NAC medallion show strange similarities on their obverses
between them only; see animated Gif of the Lanz & NAC:
> > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/ photos/album/
1023545932/ pic/1831006867/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
> > >
> > > while showing a perfect similarity about some other features, especially
the legends; see animated Gif of the Lanz & Italian museum med.:
> > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/ photos/album/
1023545932/ pic/46096296/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order= ordinal&start=
1&dir=asc
> > >
> > > So the die is the same for all, with alterations on the Lanz and NAC ex.
The process is actually quite simple to understand, based on the Goldberg med.
This one shows some circulation, which has blurred some details, especially on
the drapery of the bust; see animated Gif of the Goldberg & museum med.:
> > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/ photos/album/
1023545932/ pic/1798316494/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
> > >
> > > Now, it is clear, seen the shape of the drapery on NAC and the curls of
the hair, that the NAC med. was actually in a lower condition of circulation,
probably in inferior grade than the Goldberg, and was ‘improved’ by
tooling, to restore some lost details: drapery, shoulder pteryges (but alas for
the tooler, none on the original die), hair, beard. The rev. underwent the same
treatment, where the original style for the scene with Jupiter, clearly visible
on the Goldberg untouched ancient med.; notably the recreated draperies from the
top surfaces of the flan, and reconstructed letters from the legend. But the
tooler made an improper work and couldn’t find the original ancient
style.
> > > See animated Gif of the NAC & Goldberg med. for comparison:
> > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/ photos/album/
1023545932/ pic/7860001/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order= ordinal&start=
1&dir=asc
> > >
> > > Yes, Mr Tkalec was right of course, the NAC med. is authentic even if
extensively tooled. Goldberg med. was sold for $8,750 while NAC med sold for
$60,000. Nice profit, Mr Tooly, eh? And Mr NAC, you didn’t do your job,
even if the kind of customers for dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt
too much.
> > >
> > > Now back to the Lanz med. While the style of NAC med. is globally ancient,
this is not the case with the Lanz med., especially on the rev. How to explain
such a discrepancy between a 'stylish' obv. (despite the modern bust drapery)
and such a poor rev.? Simply by the cast of the NAC med., then reworked (look at
the difference on the waves of the drapery), and an engraving job on rev.
Remember, the Roman medallions were special gifts and the issues were much
smaller than coins. There is only one rev. die for this type. Now compare the
Lanz & It. museum med. for comparison:
> > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/ photos/album/
1023545932/ pic/1102498905/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
> > >
> > > It appears that a lot of devices don’t match at all the ancient
die, and it would be impossible to reconstruct them from tooling, even if the
rev. was completely encrusted by oxides, basic material for possible
reconstruction. The details could have been created by using the metal itself,
diminishing the thickness of the flan. But this isn’t compatible with the
very well-conserved obv.; even if corroded, the rev. would be well-enough
preserved to undergo a tooling job respecting the original design.
> > > So the Lanz med. is a modern fake using a mould from NAC med. obv., and an
entirely new design (by a bad worker) on the rev.
> > > Do these medallions originate from the same ring of fraudsters? Anyway,
nice job of patination, patina looks like a cleaned ancient one.
> > >
> > > A last point on the Tkalec med: the rev. has been lightly tooled, as some
details don’t match the original die (so well preserved on the It. museum
med.) and for which the differences between the pictures cannot explain, as can
be see on this animated Gif of the Tkalec & It. museum med.:
> > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/ photos/album/
1023545932/ pic/730808882/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order= ordinal&start=
1&dir=asc
> > >
> > > Notably, muscles on the chest and face of Hercules, altar garland, some
branches of the tree.
> > >
> > > Happy New Year 2010!
> > >
> > > The Сталкер
> > >
> >
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

hi lluis
make a download of this:
http://www.archive.org/download/romanmedallionsi00brituoft/romanmedallionsi00bri\
tuoft.pdf
there you will find all the medaillons the BM has.
with descriptions and on the last pages with fotos.
there are all kind of medaillons in all metals, and as commodus made quite a lot
of them, you will see many bi-metallic and also uniform.
as these medaillons where gifts to higher persons (and not coins), maybe the
bi-metallic would be given to the even higher in rank. :)
regards
frank
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Lluís Mendieta
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 4:32 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions



   Hi, Frank

   Thanks for point. Touché :-)

   But if medaillons exist in bimetallic and in uni-alloy, any explanation for
such duplication?
   Any bimetallic has a lot more of work to do.....Makes not too much sense in my
mind....
   And, any monometallic medaillon like the one we are talking about? Old and
recorded, I mean, like the one brought by Numizmo?
   Just curious.

   And as I said, *Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a
thermodinamic impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)*, so all I
posted I think that still applies......Yes, for bimetallic only.
   But personally I would be still more comfortable with Tkalec medaillon. My
taste.

   With best wishes

   Lluís

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: frank.reinhardt@...
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 5:14 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   hi lluis,
   just to remind you that most medaillons existed as bi-metallic and as normal
issues! so please don't jump to conclusions just by seeing pieces without the
concentric line.:)
   regards
   frank
   p.s. i think the stalker's fantastic job explained sufficiently what was
done,and was not, to the different discussed pieces.
   and of course we all agree that tooling should ALWAYS be mentioned by every
dealer or auction-house.
   than it's everyone's personal choice to accept or not such
alteration.(personally I think tooling is a crime!)
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Lluís Mendieta
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:09 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Hi, Yuriy

   I think same as you.
   But as a friend said me, a coin is legit or not in each and one viewer that
sees it.
   So, not game. Just opinions and educated guesses.

   Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a thermodinamic
impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)
   With best wishes

   Lluís
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Giouri Giouri
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:54 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Gentlemen,
   here on CFDL now started very strange game.
   NAC example is not more genuine than Lanz one. Sure...

   --- On Sat, 1/2/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:

   From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
   Subject: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Date: Saturday, January 2, 2010, 5:50 AM

   CFDL:

   THANK YOU THE STALKER!! What an amazing piece of work. Also thank you for the
time it took.

   CFDL's - The animated gif's are better viewed if you download them and then
use an image viewer, like Windows Picture & Fax Viewer, to zoom the image and to
place a mouse pointer (for a steady point of reference) on interesting areas of
the animated gif.
   ============ ========= ====

   Stalker, does it really matter if the $60,000 NAC medallion was struck in
ancient times because even you admit that prior to modern tooling, it (or its
host) was more worn than the $8,750 Goldberg example so there was over $51,250
of fraud or 85%+ of the $60,000 was due to modern fraud. Are we just splitting
hairs arguing over the remaining <15% of value? If the NAC medallionis ancient,
does this absolve NAC of committing a major fraud? Of course not and even you
posted " And Mr NAC, you didn't do your job, even if the kind of customers for
dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt too much." Besides if 85%+ of a
ancient medlaaion's value is due to modern fakery, to me, it is a modern fake.
   ============ ========= =====

   The same arguement may be made for the Lanz fake. but it is even more fake
than the NAC fake, due to the cartoonish reverse. In my opinion, it is possible
that the Lanz fake could be an original well worn/corroded bimetalic medallion
that was restruck with modern dies and them "tooled to splendor". Would you
consider it an authentic ancient medallion in this case? Where does one draw the
line? The cartoonish Lanz Hercules is not OK, while the tooled Tkalec Hercules
is OK because it does not depart too much from the original? (The Tkalec
Hercules tooling included the abdominal muscles, the full face instead of 3/4
face, the shoulders, the right foot, the lionskin, the trees/many branches, the
alter, the flames, etc)
   ============ ========= ========= =

   My point is that at a certain level of modern alterations/ tooling, an ancient
coin/medallion becomes a modern fake. Of course, you are welcome to call such
coins/medallions altered/tooled authentic ancients.
   ============ ========= ========= =====

   We all agree that it is FRAUD not to disclose such tooling and that is good
enough for me..

   Sincerely yours,
   Cliff

   --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ ...> wrote:
   >
   > Yes, I do believe so. I base my opinion on the perfect match of the devices
SHAPES with the original known dies (so, not a modern engraving), and the
sharpness of many details (like the letters of the obv. legend). Now, the
strange style of this medallion is due to the badly recut details on the top
surfaces (hair, beard, drapery on obv., draperies and legend on rev.); so yes,
the style is not totally ancient and at first glance, this can be misleading and
one can consider the piece as a fake.
   > Furthermore, the Lanz med. obv. doesn't match exactly the NAC's, it can be
clearly seen that there is a recut work on the Lanz.
   >
   > Last, Mr Tkalec firmly said it is ancient (whether he saw it himself, or he
has other sources of information) ; his opinions should always be considered
very seriously!
   >
   > T.S.
   >
   > PS. Frank: if know what you are searching for, the comparison between 2
pictures is always very useful, even the coins haven't been lighted the same
way. It is very important to 'learn' to see through a picture.
   >
   >
   > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com, "ellinorosos"
<ellinorosos_ 33@> wrote:
   > >
   > > Sorry, are you really beleive what this item http://www.acsearch
.info/ext_ image.html? id=39106 is genuine?
   > >
   > > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ > wrote:
   > > >
   > > > A good time for discussing these medallions, which were traditionally
offered as gifts for the New Year!
   > > >
   > > > The Lanz and the NAC medallion show strange similarities on their
obverses between them only; see animated Gif of the Lanz & NAC:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1831006867/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > while showing a perfect similarity about some other features, especially
the legends; see animated Gif of the Lanz & Italian museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/46096296/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > So the die is the same for all, with alterations on the Lanz and NAC ex.
The process is actually quite simple to understand, based on the Goldberg med.
This one shows some circulation, which has blurred some details, especially on
the drapery of the bust; see animated Gif of the Goldberg & museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1798316494/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Now, it is clear, seen the shape of the drapery on NAC and the curls of
the hair, that the NAC med. was actually in a lower condition of circulation,
probably in inferior grade than the Goldberg, and was ‘improved’ by
tooling, to restore some lost details: drapery, shoulder pteryges (but alas for
the tooler, none on the original die), hair, beard. The rev. underwent the same
treatment, where the original style for the scene with Jupiter, clearly visible
on the Goldberg untouched ancient med.; notably the recreated draperies from the
top surfaces of the flan, and reconstructed letters from the legend. But the
tooler made an improper work and couldn’t find the original ancient
style.
   > > > See animated Gif of the NAC & Goldberg med. for comparison:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/7860001/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Yes, Mr Tkalec was right of course, the NAC med. is authentic even if
extensively tooled. Goldberg med. was sold for $8,750 while NAC med sold for
$60,000. Nice profit, Mr Tooly, eh? And Mr NAC, you didn’t do your job,
even if the kind of customers for dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt
too much.
   > > >
   > > > Now back to the Lanz med. While the style of NAC med. is globally
ancient, this is not the case with the Lanz med., especially on the rev. How to
explain such a discrepancy between a 'stylish' obv. (despite the modern bust
drapery) and such a poor rev.? Simply by the cast of the NAC med., then reworked
(look at the difference on the waves of the drapery), and an engraving job on
rev. Remember, the Roman medallions were special gifts and the issues were much
smaller than coins. There is only one rev. die for this type. Now compare the
Lanz & It. museum med. for comparison:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1102498905/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > It appears that a lot of devices don’t match at all the ancient
die, and it would be impossible to reconstruct them from tooling, even if the
rev. was completely encrusted by oxides, basic material for possible
reconstruction. The details could have been created by using the metal itself,
diminishing the thickness of the flan. But this isn’t compatible with the
very well-conserved obv.; even if corroded, the rev. would be well-enough
preserved to undergo a tooling job respecting the original design.
   > > > So the Lanz med. is a modern fake using a mould from NAC med. obv., and
an entirely new design (by a bad worker) on the rev.
   > > > Do these medallions originate from the same ring of fraudsters? Anyway,
nice job of patination, patina looks like a cleaned ancient one.
   > > >
   > > > A last point on the Tkalec med: the rev. has been lightly tooled, as
some details don’t match the original die (so well preserved on the It.
museum med.) and for which the differences between the pictures cannot explain,
as can be see on this animated Gif of the Tkalec & It. museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/730808882/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Notably, muscles on the chest and face of Hercules, altar garland, some
branches of the tree.
   > > >
   > > > Happy New Year 2010!
   > > >
   > > > The Сталкер
   > > >
   > >
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello John Jenson,his return policy is "-If you are not satisfied with your
purchase for any reason, just notify us within 10 days  and we will provide
refund of your money!!! "and in my case was told to keep the coin,chris

--- On Fri, 1/1/10, jbjcoins@... <jbjcoins@...> wrote:


From: jbjcoins@... <jbjcoins@...>
Subject: SV: [CFDL] jbcollectables99
To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, 1 January, 2010, 17:24


 



Hi Group

This sellers return policy; NO RETURNS ACCEPTED

Yours
John Jensen
Denmark

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-- ---
Fra: CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com
[mailto:CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com]På vegne af Lluís Mendieta
Sendt: 1. januar 2010 18:04
Til: CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com
Emne: Re: [CFDL] jbcollectables99

Good afternoon, Warren/List

Thanks for sharing!

Indeed he deserves the blacklist, i my opiion.
Is nice to see that he has a fibula with intact clapper....Taking in
account that, as Alan said many time ago, that those would be as rare as
hen's teeth.... :-)

With my best wishes for a nice, prosperous and happy new year 2010 to all
listizens

Lluís
----- Original Message -----
From: Warren Esty
To: CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com
Sent: Friday, January 01, 2010 5:08 PM
Subject: [CFDL] jbcollectables99

The relatively new English seller
jbcollectables99

has this fake Julian II/bull and a fake Caracalla, Hadrian and
"PERFECT Diocletian"

http://cgi.ebay. com/ws/eBayISAPI .dll?ViewItem& item=27050582936 6

I think he deserves blacklisting.
-- Warren

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date: 15-05-09
06:16

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi, Frank

Thanks for point. Touché :-)

But if medaillons exist in bimetallic and in uni-alloy, any explanation for such
duplication?
Any bimetallic has a lot more of work to do.....Makes not too much sense in my
mind....
And, any monometallic medaillon like the one we are talking about? Old and
recorded, I mean, like the one brought by Numizmo?
Just curious.

And as I said, *Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a
thermodinamic impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)*, so all I
posted I think that still applies......Yes, for bimetallic only.
But personally I would be still more comfortable with Tkalec medaillon. My
taste.


With best wishes

Lluís


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: frank.reinhardt@...
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 5:14 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions



   hi lluis,
   just to remind you that most medaillons existed as bi-metallic and as normal
issues! so please don't jump to conclusions just by seeing pieces without the
concentric line.:)
   regards
   frank
   p.s. i think the stalker's fantastic job explained sufficiently what was
done,and was not, to the different discussed pieces.
   and of course we all agree that tooling should ALWAYS be mentioned by every
dealer or auction-house.
   than it's everyone's personal choice to accept or not such
alteration.(personally I think tooling is a crime!)
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Lluís Mendieta
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:09 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Hi, Yuriy

   I think same as you.
   But as a friend said me, a coin is legit or not in each and one viewer that
sees it.
   So, not game. Just opinions and educated guesses.

   Only that absence of line in such bimetallic medallion is a thermodinamic
impossibility.... A thing that is hard to forget :-)
   With best wishes

   Lluís
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Giouri Giouri
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2010 3:54 PM
   Subject: Re: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions

   Gentlemen,
   here on CFDL now started very strange game.
   NAC example is not more genuine than Lanz one. Sure...

   --- On Sat, 1/2/10, gibfrog <laubstein@...> wrote:

   From: gibfrog <laubstein@...>
   Subject: [CFDL] Re: Study on the discussed Commodus medallions
   To: CoinForgeryDiscussionList@yahoogroups.com
   Date: Saturday, January 2, 2010, 5:50 AM

   CFDL:

   THANK YOU THE STALKER!! What an amazing piece of work. Also thank you for the
time it took.

   CFDL's - The animated gif's are better viewed if you download them and then
use an image viewer, like Windows Picture & Fax Viewer, to zoom the image and to
place a mouse pointer (for a steady point of reference) on interesting areas of
the animated gif.
   ============ ========= ====

   Stalker, does it really matter if the $60,000 NAC medallion was struck in
ancient times because even you admit that prior to modern tooling, it (or its
host) was more worn than the $8,750 Goldberg example so there was over $51,250
of fraud or 85%+ of the $60,000 was due to modern fraud. Are we just splitting
hairs arguing over the remaining <15% of value? If the NAC medallionis ancient,
does this absolve NAC of committing a major fraud? Of course not and even you
posted " And Mr NAC, you didn't do your job, even if the kind of customers for
dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt too much." Besides if 85%+ of a
ancient medlaaion's value is due to modern fakery, to me, it is a modern fake.
   ============ ========= =====

   The same arguement may be made for the Lanz fake. but it is even more fake
than the NAC fake, due to the cartoonish reverse. In my opinion, it is possible
that the Lanz fake could be an original well worn/corroded bimetalic medallion
that was restruck with modern dies and them "tooled to splendor". Would you
consider it an authentic ancient medallion in this case? Where does one draw the
line? The cartoonish Lanz Hercules is not OK, while the tooled Tkalec Hercules
is OK because it does not depart too much from the original? (The Tkalec
Hercules tooling included the abdominal muscles, the full face instead of 3/4
face, the shoulders, the right foot, the lionskin, the trees/many branches, the
alter, the flames, etc)
   ============ ========= ========= =

   My point is that at a certain level of modern alterations/ tooling, an ancient
coin/medallion becomes a modern fake. Of course, you are welcome to call such
coins/medallions altered/tooled authentic ancients.
   ============ ========= ========= =====

   We all agree that it is FRAUD not to disclose such tooling and that is good
enough for me..

   Sincerely yours,
   Cliff

   --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ ...> wrote:
   >
   > Yes, I do believe so. I base my opinion on the perfect match of the devices
SHAPES with the original known dies (so, not a modern engraving), and the
sharpness of many details (like the letters of the obv. legend). Now, the
strange style of this medallion is due to the badly recut details on the top
surfaces (hair, beard, drapery on obv., draperies and legend on rev.); so yes,
the style is not totally ancient and at first glance, this can be misleading and
one can consider the piece as a fake.
   > Furthermore, the Lanz med. obv. doesn't match exactly the NAC's, it can be
clearly seen that there is a recut work on the Lanz.
   >
   > Last, Mr Tkalec firmly said it is ancient (whether he saw it himself, or he
has other sources of information) ; his opinions should always be considered
very seriously!
   >
   > T.S.
   >
   > PS. Frank: if know what you are searching for, the comparison between 2
pictures is always very useful, even the coins haven't been lighted the same
way. It is very important to 'learn' to see through a picture.
   >
   >
   > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com, "ellinorosos"
<ellinorosos_ 33@> wrote:
   > >
   > > Sorry, are you really beleive what this item http://www.acsearch
.info/ext_ image.html? id=39106 is genuine?
   > >
   > > --- In CoinForgeryDiscussi onList@yahoogrou ps.com,
Сталкер <stalker042004@ > wrote:
   > > >
   > > > A good time for discussing these medallions, which were traditionally
offered as gifts for the New Year!
   > > >
   > > > The Lanz and the NAC medallion show strange similarities on their
obverses between them only; see animated Gif of the Lanz & NAC:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1831006867/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > while showing a perfect similarity about some other features, especially
the legends; see animated Gif of the Lanz & Italian museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/46096296/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > So the die is the same for all, with alterations on the Lanz and NAC ex.
The process is actually quite simple to understand, based on the Goldberg med.
This one shows some circulation, which has blurred some details, especially on
the drapery of the bust; see animated Gif of the Goldberg & museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1798316494/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Now, it is clear, seen the shape of the drapery on NAC and the curls of
the hair, that the NAC med. was actually in a lower condition of circulation,
probably in inferior grade than the Goldberg, and was ‘improved’ by
tooling, to restore some lost details: drapery, shoulder pteryges (but alas for
the tooler, none on the original die), hair, beard. The rev. underwent the same
treatment, where the original style for the scene with Jupiter, clearly visible
on the Goldberg untouched ancient med.; notably the recreated draperies from the
top surfaces of the flan, and reconstructed letters from the legend. But the
tooler made an improper work and couldn’t find the original ancient
style.
   > > > See animated Gif of the NAC & Goldberg med. for comparison:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/7860001/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Yes, Mr Tkalec was right of course, the NAC med. is authentic even if
extensively tooled. Goldberg med. was sold for $8,750 while NAC med sold for
$60,000. Nice profit, Mr Tooly, eh? And Mr NAC, you didn’t do your job,
even if the kind of customers for dozens of thousands $ coins wouldn't be hurt
too much.
   > > >
   > > > Now back to the Lanz med. While the style of NAC med. is globally
ancient, this is not the case with the Lanz med., especially on the rev. How to
explain such a discrepancy between a 'stylish' obv. (despite the modern bust
drapery) and such a poor rev.? Simply by the cast of the NAC med., then reworked
(look at the difference on the waves of the drapery), and an engraving job on
rev. Remember, the Roman medallions were special gifts and the issues were much
smaller than coins. There is only one rev. die for this type. Now compare the
Lanz & It. museum med. for comparison:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/1102498905/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > It appears that a lot of devices don’t match at all the ancient
die, and it would be impossible to reconstruct them from tooling, even if the
rev. was completely encrusted by oxides, basic material for possible
reconstruction. The details could have been created by using the metal itself,
diminishing the thickness of the flan. But this isn’t compatible with the
very well-conserved obv.; even if corroded, the rev. would be well-enough
preserved to undergo a tooling job respecting the original design.
   > > > So the Lanz med. is a modern fake using a mould from NAC med. obv., and
an entirely new design (by a bad worker) on the rev.
   > > > Do these medallions originate from the same ring of fraudsters? Anyway,
nice job of patination, patina looks like a cleaned ancient one.
   > > >
   > > > A last point on the Tkalec med: the rev. has been lightly tooled, as
some details don’t match the original die (so well preserved on the It.
museum med.) and for which the differences between the pictures cannot explain,
as can be see on this animated Gif of the Tkalec & It. museum med.:
   > > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/CoinForger yDiscussionList/
photos/album/ 1023545932/ pic/730808882/ view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order=
ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc
   > > >
   > > > Notably, muscles on the chest and face of Hercules, altar garland, some
branches of the tree.
   > > >
   > > > Happy New Year 2010!
   > > >
   > > > The Сталкер
   > > >
   > >
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

When we discuss a seller with so many items deserving our attention, it would be
good to discuss any of his offerings that are probably OK.  My first thought
would be to avoid the Istros just because it is hanging around in bad company
and has a less than fully familiar (to me) style.  Is it good?  That leaves the
beat up 'Caracalla' (actually a cousin of his but that is not a blacklistable
offense) which falls in the category of not nice enough to want for the price
anyway.  The lighting on the photo makes the obverse look concave and reverse
convex which makes me favor condemning it again for bad company as much as my
certainty.

There are two kinds of fake sellers.  This one claims to be selling items from
his personal collection.  If so, he formed that collection by buying coins from
inappropriate sellers and I feel bad blacklisting him like a common criminal. 
On the other hand, we need to protect the next generation of buyers who might be
fooled by these coins and try to sell them to our grandchildren.  I hope his
"personal collection" doesn't include anything I want because it seems a fair
assumption that everything he offers has a problem but I might not be sharp
enough to spot each and every one offered individually.

Doug Smith
dougsmit@...
Photo Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/dougsmit
Ancient Coin website:
http://dougsmith.ancients.info/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]