coin forgeries and replicas 2007 / ilya prokopov

Coin collections and coin hoards from Bulgaria

Volume VI of the Coin Forgery Series

COIN FORGERIES AND REPLICAS2007

Ilya Prokopov

Sofia 2007

4

Copyright © 2007 by Provias Ltd., SofiaAuthor © 2007 Ilya Prokopov Photographs and layout © 2007 Simeon Prokopov

Publisher: Provias Ltd.Tel.+359 886 743243www.sp-p.netE-mail: [email protected]

All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or trans-mitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including pho-tocopying, recording or any other information storage and retrieval system,without prior permission in writing from the publishers.

Copies of this and other titles can be purchased directly from the publishersat http://sp-p.net

5

FOREWORD

With every passing day it becomes more and more difficult totrack the flow of counterfeit ancient and medieval coins that appearon the market. However, it is even harder to precisely document thesefakes. The dishonest producers and dealers already noted the dangerfor themselves caused by the activities of internet forums, antiforgerygroups and publications on this theme. The feeling of impunity wasgradually substituted by higher caution. For example, for me it isalready hard to see fakes offered on the local market. Frauds haverealized the new situation and now they do not offer coins in thecountry they were produced, but directly export them to the endclients in Western Europe and North Amerika.

Besides, the quantity and range of coins made is growing con-stantly and greatly troubles the processes of detecting and forewarn-ing. It is now not in the potential of separate scholars without a seri-ous coordination to cope with this matter. It is not necessary to repeatmy words about the quality of the forgeries.

There is a specific tendency observed. There are two clearly dis-tinguished flows of fakes. The first are almost impossible to detectand they easily infiltrate into the market. The rest are comparativelyeasier to detect not only by specialists, but also by collectors withsome experience. The reason is that it is very attractive to earn easymoney with few efforts and many people with low morality and smallabilities moved to this business of counterfeiting. Their production isa result of bad preparation and obvious lack of talent. However, onthe other hand, the talented ones belonging to the first group receive

an even better opportunity to market their forgeries. Authenticators,meeting every day low quality production, instinctively lose some oftheir sense and surrounded by lots of bad fakes they could easilymake a mistake.

I have no idea how the different forums or committees intend tohandle the growing danger caused by this coin forgery wave, but forme - I chose the way of monitoring and periodic publications regard-ing fakes for the general public. Everything that I find and that is notpublished will be included in my next books. From now on I willavoid the catalogue description of coins which I now consider asunnecessary, except the cases when it is essential to clear any ques-tions raised about a specific coin.

Sofia, December 2007 Ilya Prokopov

6

NBThis book is number 6 of the coin forgery series

and the first one distributed in a digital form only.This sign means that the image is quality

enough to zoom over 400% in your Adobe Readerprogram. The rest of the photos were made underurgent conditions which have resulted in their lowerquality. As a whole, we have tried to present the bestpossible images.

7

CATALOGUE

GREEK COINSAEGINA1. AR Stater, 10,591 gThe metal is crumbly and porous. Its color is more grey than the puresilver used in the original staters of this town. The incuse square hereis divided into 6 even zones, and in the originals of the same type theyare 5 uneven zones. Sea or land tortoise is situated in a hollow whichhas ideal proportions and angle. Made by modern machines.

Studio Unknown

8

PAMPHYLIA, ASPENDOS

Coins 2-4 are precise copies of 3 different silver staters. They aremade very realistic and could mislead even experienced numisma-tists. In all specimens, however, there is a difference in the color tonesand density. The obverses were patinated simultaneously and have thesame tones and density. When the artificial patina has dried, the forg-er has turned all coins to apply the patina on the reverse. Then he didnot guess the he should leave one for sample. He has worked usinghis memory and the effect is a lighter and much thinner patina. If onlyone of the coins is observed, this could be hard to notice. Fortunately,I could see them together and was able to orientate. On all of themthere are traces of plasticine and plaster which makes me think thatthey were also used for taking prints and probably there are more for-geries with these pairs of coin dies. Studio: unknown

2. AR Stater

3. AR Stater

4. AR Stater

9

ILLYRIA, DYRRHACHION5. AR Drachm, 2,283 gThe coin is a comparatively good cast. The print is taken from a gen-uine coin. A remaining part of the found metal that is not well clearedcan be noticed. Probably forgers have decided to leave it unfinished.In this state it is a good examination specimen for beginners. "South West -2" Studio.

10

LETE6. Stater,around 7 gA bungled execution with an impossible concave square. The metalhas been recently cast and is not patinated. In the silver alloy used forthe cast there is probably a small percentage of gold. Studio: unknown

THASOS7.AR Stater, 5,709 gObv. Naked ithyphallic satyr, carrying inhis arms a struggling nymph on r.Rev. Rough quadripartite incuse square.The coin is an accurate copy made by aprint of an original coin. The metal ismore greyish than usual. On the surfacethere are knots and caverns as a result ofthe casting that can be seen with a nakedeye. The coin is aged and covered withartificial patina. Cast."Pernik Studio"

11

8. AR Stater, 9,029 g Galvanoplastic copy.Like the previous coin this one is also a precise copy made by a printof a genuine coin. However, this specimen is not cast, but pressedwith a thick galvanoplastic (electrogalvanic) cover applied on it. Inthe production process there have appeared some slight deformationson the nymph's nose and lips, and the Silen eye is blurred. The imagecontours are also blurred and the transition to the low relief is unnat-urally smooth. On the reverse around the concave square there aretraces of galvanoplastics - the metal is very light and clearly differsfrom the rest of the surface. Studio Unknown

12

9. AR Tetradrahm, 15,050 gCast. The coin is a cast of a genuine Thasos tetradrachm. It has all signs,typical for the previous number 7. "Pernik"Studio

DAMASTION10. AR Drachm, 14/16 mm; 2,221 gNaive, amateur work. A very bad cast, easy to detect.

13

PSEUDO HOARD (16 coins)HISTIAIA

Coins from no.11 to 26 are a fragment of one much bigger pseudohoard of silver tetrobols. The coins shown here are casts from genuinecoins. I have already written about this very popular forgery type intwo of the previous books 1. These 16 coins shown below are addi-tionally processed. They are covered with a not very well made arti-ficial dark patina. It is necessary to compare the coin dies with thealready published forgeries to avoid any possible mistakes.

11. AR Tetrobol

Similar12. AR TetrobolCast.

1. Prokopov, I., R. Manov. Forgery studios and their coins. Sofia 2005, nos. 104-108;Prokopov, I. Coin forgeries and replicas 2006. Sofia 2007, p. 51-73.

http://sp-p.net/forg5.htm


14

Similar13. AR Tetrobol





15






16





17

APOLLONIA PONTIKAThe 5 coins shown below are a part of the inexhaustible "Black SeaHoard". They are silver struck by the classical technology. It is nec-essary to observe the coin dies and whenever needed to comparethem.

27. AR Drachm, 12/13 mm; 3,328 g"Varna-1 Studio"



18



32. AR Drachm, 12/12 mm; 3,279 gThis is a low quality fake, cast of metal that is used in the dental lab-oratories. On the edge there are big knots. The metal color is grayishand the artificial patina cannot conceal it. The print is taken from acoin forgery struck by Varna-1 Studio.

19

PANTIKAPAION33. EL StaterEveryone who has ever held a real electron stater of Cyzicus in hishands will immediately feel the difference in the metal nuances, aswell as the unusual roughness of the surface. Besides, there are clearsigns that the coin was struck on a hydraulic or mechanic press. Theeasiest way to note this is when observing the high points of theincused square. There is an odd structure of the wall as it can be seenon the detail. This is the effect of the gradual and slower pressing ofthe steel die on the cold coin core. The metal is furrowed in horizon-tal levels. This does not happen with the original coins when the coreis well heated and the coin is struck only with a single hard hammerhit. Then the side wall of the concave square is smooth and has nomarks from matrix skidding. Otherwise, this electron stater is a goodone and could mislead somebody."Dimitrovgrad" Studio?

ISTROS, THRACE34.AR Stater, 5,568 g This is a copy cast from a metal used in the dental laboratories. Onthe edge there are obvious knots. On the reverse, at the inscription thesurface height is uneven and the letters base level remains low. Thiseffect appears when the print is not made well. The metal color isgreyish and the artificial patina cannot hide it. The print is taken from

a struck fake coinstruck by Varna-1Studio.

20

BYZANTION35. AR Tetradrahm, 33/32 mm; 16,365 gThis is a not very high quality cast, an exact copy of a genuineByzantion tetradrachm of Lysimachos type. To hide knots, pearls andother defects on the surface, a very thick artificial patina is plasteredby the producer. I have seen several identical fakes of this die combi-nation processed in the same way. "South West -2" Studio.

21

FIRST MACEDONIAN REGION36. AR Tetradrachm, 31/31 mm; 15,397 gA cast from a genuine First Macedonian region tetradrachm. The coinis not processed additionally and all defects are clearly seen.However, I have seen another specimen with dense patina that lookedmuch more realistic. "South West -2" Studio.

22

MACEDONIAN KINGS

PHILIP II 37. AV 1/4 Stater, 11/11 mm; 2,154 g; 6hThe coin is cast and is produced from gold that does not correspondto the original. Probably it is a coin used in the 19th c. with a higherCu content. Spots of green patina that have come up on the face sur-face can be easily seen. Lots of small pearls can be seen - traces of thecast. There are also marks of a rather flimsy dark brown patina. Onthe reverse the matrix is displaced and as a result the border dots areerased. Trident"Sofia GP Studio"

38. AV 1/2 Stater, 4,350 gThis coin is a relatively good cast. To conceal the knots and metalremains, the edge is well hammered and as a result a sharp edge hasappeared. Still, one can see traces of knots. On the reverse, the edgeof the lion's protome is also hammered additionally. "Sofia GP Studio"

23

39. AR Tetradrachm, 13,298; 11h Silver alloy cast made by a print of a genuine coin. At the time whenthe the print was made and during the casting process the sharpnessand the normal relief of the border dost have been lost. Besides, onthe obverse there are several large spills of metal (Note: not concavelike a knot, but the opposite-bulged.). Similar ones, though smaller,can be seen on the reverse, but besides this, there are knots as well. "Pernik" Studio.

40. AR TetradrachmA silver alloy cast with poor production quality. The surface was notprocessed in order to imitate aging and artificial patina was notapplied. Be aware for the coin dies because, with a thick patina, thisone can cause problems.

24

41. AR Tetradrachm2

This is an already published coin, but the image then was not clearenough.

42. AR TetradrachmA well produced silver coin - a copy of a gen-uine tetradrachm. At close examination thepearls of the cast could be seen - for example,on the Zeus beard. At some places there aredeformations - Zeus eyes and lips. The materi-al has not filled completely the horse head onthe reverse. Studio Unknown.

2. Prokopov, I., K. Kissyov, E. Paunov. Modern Counterfeits of Ancient Greek and RomanCoins from Bulgaria, Sofia 2003, p. 41, no. 96

http://sp-p.net/first.htm

25

43. AR Tetradrachm,A well made silver coin - a copy of a genuine tetradrachm, East celticimitation. The surface is very well processed after the casting. It iscovered with thick, but not dark patina which hides the minimaldefects. It could mislead a beginner so it is a good idea to compare thecoin dies. "Sofia OA Studio"

44. AR Tetradrachm,Similar as no. 43"Sofia OA Studio"

45. AR Tetradrachm,Similar as no. 43"Sofia OA Studio"

26

46. AR Tetradrachm, 12,897 gA low quality silver alloy cast. In spite of the attempt for applyingpatina - the defects are easily noticed. "Pernik" Studio

27

The group of the coins from no.47 to no.56 are silver cast with oneobverse and two reverse dies. This is an amateur attempt to imitate anentire coin finding. They were produced in the 80ies of 20 c. in Sofiain order to be replaced for genuine coins from different collections.They all are from "Sofia ZP" Studio (author’s term).

47. AR TetradrachmCast.


49. AR Tetradrachm Cast.


28







29

ALEXANDER III

57. AR Tetradrachm, 16,190 g; 5hA low quality cast of a silvery-grey alloy. In spite of the attempt foraging by rubbing it with a metal brush, the defects like knots andpearls are clearly seen. "Pernik" Studio

58. AR TetradrachmA well made silver coin - copy of a genuine tetradrachm. The surfaceis processed very well after casting. It is covered with thick, but notdark patina which hides some minimal defects. It could misleadbeginner numismatists so it is necessary to compare the coin dies. "Sofia OA Studio"

30

59. AR Drachm,Made of 2 halfs that have been cast separately and then additionallyglued together. When carefully examined the defects can be seen aswell as the spot on the edge where the two parts are joined.

60. AR Drachm,This is an ineffective attempt to cast a drachm with a print taken froma genuine coin. Usually, counterfeiters destroy such specimens toavoid suspicions. The coin is confiscated together with some otherhigher quality specimens and was granted to a museum. They all area product of the quoted studio. "Sofia ZP Studio"

31

61. AR Drachm,The coin has the same origin. Here the counterfeiters haven't succeed-ed to cut the surplus metal remains and to erase their traces on theedge."Sofia ZP Studio"

PSEUDO HOARD (8 COINS)

PHILIP II - CELTIC IMITATION AR Tetradrachms. All coins from no.62 to no.69 are cast from prints of genuine coins ofan authentic coin hoard and do not differ at all, except the metalwhich is greyer and softer then silver. Another hint for recognizingthem gives us the sound they produce when dropped, which is dulland without jingle. "Novi Pazar" Studio

62. AR Tetradrachm, 25/23 mm; 13,726 g"Novi Pazar" Studio

32

63. AR Tetradrachm, 25,5/24,5 mm; 12,537 g "Novi Pazar" Studio

64. AR Tetradrachm, 25/24,5 mm; 12,851 g "Novi Pazar" Studio

65. AR Tetradrachm, 25,5/24,5 mm; 12,851 g"Novi Pazar" Studio

33

ALEXANDER III

Obv. Head of Heracles with lion's skin r.Rev. Zeus enthroned l.



68. AR Tetradrachm, 26/26 mm; 17,126 g "Novi Pazar" Studio

34

69. AR Tetradrachm, 24,5 /24,5 mm; 17,126 g "Novi Pazar" Studio

THRACIAN KINGS

LYZIMACHOS70. AR Tetradrachm, 13,839Cast. A low quality coin. It was cast with silver as the print comes froma genuine coin. There are lots of knots and it is easy to be recognized."Pernik" Studio

35

71. AR TetradrachmThe notes for the previous no.70 are valid fot this one as well. Herethe quality is better and a careful observation is needed to avoid mis-takes. "Pernik" Studio

SADALAS72. AEMade of brass alloy, not bronze. Cut with steel matrixes. It is addi-tionally aged and partially covered with artificial patina and grayish-white silicate particles.Studio Unknown

36

ROMAN REPUBLIC

PSEUDO HOARD OF ROMAN REPUBLIC DENARIIAll coins (no.73 to no.80) are casts taken from genuine coins of a realhoard. The casts are of the "pressed" type, with small knots. Afterpressing they are put into an electrolyte bath and are silver-plated butnot entirely. Under magnification one can see the porous mass of abase metal, which is not well covered. Thousands of coins of this typewere produced. They can be easily recognized as they are made of asofter material which is also easier to melt. They can be even treatedwith a pocket lighter if possible.

C.PVLCHER73. AR Denarius"Novi Pazar" Studio

37

L.TITVRI L.F SABINVS74. AR Denarius"Novi Pazar" Studio

38

L.PROCILI F76. AR Denarius"Novi Pazar" Studio

39

L.IVLI BVRSIO75. AR Denarius"Novi Pazar" Studio

40

C.POSTVMI T.77. AR Denarius"Novi Pazar" Studio

41

L.FVRI CN F BROCCHI78. AR Denarius"Novi Pazar" Studio

42

T.CARISIVS IIIVIR79. AR Denarius"Novi Pazar" Studio

43

MN.ACILIVS IIIVIR (B. Acilia)80. AR DenariusA new coin by "Lipanoff" Studio

CAESAR81. AR DenariusCast of a base metal, made from a print of a genuine coin that has beenin circulation for a long period and marked on the obverse. The cast issilver plated by the means of galvanoplasty. The metal texture is sim-ilar everywhere - at the low and the high relief. The small pearls androughnesses, even at the bottom of the control marks, result of the cast,can be seen. The relief is low and blurred, details are lost. The contourline of Aenes and Anchises figures is unnatural because in the processof making the print there was some skidding and excessive materialwas taken from the plasticine or silicone."Novi Pazar" Studio

44

BRUTUS82. AR DenariusCast, "pressed" type with small knots. It is covered with artificialblack patinaglued to thecoin. "Novi Pazar"Studio

MARK ANTONY83. AR Denariusius, 21/20 mm; 3,537 g; 11hObv. ANTONI AVGVR COS DES ITER ET TERT. Bust of Antony r.Rev. IMP TERTIO III VIR R P C. Armenian tiara, bow and arrow insaltire in background.Cast, "pressed" type made from a print of a genuine coin that has beenin circulation for a long period and besides it has been burnt. Smallpearls around Anthony's nose can be seen. The relief is low and blurred,details are lost, especially the letters of the inscription. The metal isgreyer than silver and is very crumbly. There are large cracks reachingthe core center - something unusual for the coins of that epoche, pro-duced of silver with high purity. Studio Unknown

45

ROMAN EMPIRE

TIBERIUS84. AR DenariusA primitive work. Without additional masking it is very easy to rec-ognize. There are knots and cast defects. A piece of metal is takenfrom the edge. "South West 2" Studio

85. AR DenariusA base metal cast made by a print of a genuine coin. The cast is coat-ed with silver by galvanoplasty. The metal texture is similar every-where - both low and high relief. There are knots, small pearls androughness as a result of the casting and on the obverse image there isa big defect - lowering of part of the surface at the upper lip and nos-tril. There is an attempt for making an artificial patina. "Pernik" Studio

46

86. AR DenariusA base metal cast made by a print of a genuine coin. The cast is coveredwith silver by galvanoplastic method. The metal texture is similar in bothlow and high relief and wear marks are lost. There are knots, small pearlsand roughness as a result of the cast. The obverse image has several defects- a big knot at the mouth and the whole zone at the bust base has a bad sil-ver coating. The padding for the galvanoplasty is low quality. "Pernik" Studio

87. AR DenariusA comparatively good pressing. The matrix is taken from a genuine coinof Tiberius. The metal is greyer than normal. There are some knots, therelief is not high enough, and there are also core cracks that are not typi-cal for the originals. The area around the mouth, nose and eyes is not wellfilled with metal and the surface there is unnatural. The ear is deformedbecause of the overdone pressing of the obverse matrix. "Novi Pazar"Studio

47

AGRIPPINA SENIOR88. AE SestertiusWhen looking at the coin from its edge, it is like a lens. This is a resultof the production method. When struck, only one side of the coin canbe bulged, but the other one must be slightly concave. The surface isrough, with lots of knots and pearls, partially hidden under an artifi-cial patina. A very weak point on this coin, helping us to detect it asa fake, are the inscriptions on the obverse. They are uneven andblurred, and the highest part is not thick enough or the opposite - thematerial is more than necessary. This can be seen when one comparesthe inscription beginning with the letters just over Agripina head. Theedge is also unnatural for a sestertius. This is a cast coin. Print takenfrom a genuine one, but probably because of the poor quality it wasnot processed further. "Sofia MB" Studio

48

CALIGULA (WITH AGRIPPINA)89. AR DenariusSilver struck coin. It has all signs of the style and work of the "StudioLipanoff" masters.

CLAUDIUS90. AR DenariusThe coin surface is uneven, with small pearls and knots. Occasionalythe metal has not filled the matrix well. This can be observed at theobverse inscription and at the emperor's lower lip. Also there arepearls and unevenness at the emperor's cheek-bone and neck. On thereverse some of the border dots are not fully filled with metal and alsothere is a deformation of Victory's bust. Studio Unknown

49

91. AR Denarius, 3,076 gSilver cast. Poor work. The defects are again knots and pearls,unskillfully hidden with mechanic hits and scratches. Yet, larger knotscan be seen clearly. Easy to detect. Studio Unknown.

92. AR Denarius, 3,650 gSilver struck coin. It has all signs of the "Studio Lipanoff" style.

50

NERO93. AR DenariusGrey metal cast. Afterwards it has been additionally silver plated. Partof this silver coating has fallen. Some rough areas and knots are eas-ily visible. Studio Unknown

GALBA94. AV Aureus, 7,2 g Typical forgery made with the technology "cast pressing". There aremany marks of additional processings of the matrix. There are somemarks from tools. This can be observed on the emperor's neck andhead on the obverse, as well as at the high areas of most letters. To acertain extent the artificial patina resembles the original, but still it isobvious that it is concentrated at thicker spots which are contrast attheir otlines and do not gradate like the original. The print is takenfrom Slavey aureus.Studio Unknown

51

VITELLIUS95. AR DenariusThis coin has all typical signs of a coin struck by "Lipanoff" Studio3,however here the coin was produced by taking a print from a genuineone, then cast and finally a galvanic covering was made. On theobverse at the emperor's eyebrow there is a big defect - two caverns.The letters are badly printed in general.

VESPASIAN96. AR Denarius, 3,255 gCast, "pressed" type. The print is taken from a genuine coin. At somespots the matrix is not well filled, there are signs of "missed" materi-al - at the emperor's lips, under his ear, as well as at some letters. "Novi Pazar" Studio

3. Prokopov, I. Contemporary Coin Engravers and Coin Masters from Bulgaria, "Lipanoff"Studio. Sofia 2004, no. 30

http://sp-p.net/last.htm

52

97. AR DenariusA base metal cast. It is silver coated by the galvanoplastic method.There is a specific uneven surface, a result of the casting and the gal-vanoplastic covering. On the obverse there is glued artificial patina. "Novi Pazar" Studio

98. AR DenariusA base metal cast silver coated by the same method of galvanoplasty.Again, uneven surface - result of the casting and galvanoplastic cov-ering. There is a defect on the obverse caused by a bad padding andanother one - on the right side of the bust base caused by the bad gal-vanoplasty. As a whole, the obverse is concave because of the harderpressure when making the print. This resulted into a higher rim thatdisplaced the border of dots. Studio Unknown

53

99. AR DenariusA base metal cast, silver coated by the galvanoplastic method. Roughsurface as above. On both sides there are small pearls and knots. Onthe obverse there is a defect in the emperor's eye. Letters of theinscription have all signs of a badly taken print. Studio Unknown

100. AR DenariusA base metal cast, silver coated by the galvanoplastic method. Again,the surface is specifically uneven. On the obverse, behind emperor'shead and at his chin there are large defects because of the poorlymade print. Studio Unknown

54

101. AR Denarius, 3,308 gA cast of a metal alloy that is greyer than silver. The print is takenfrom a genuine coin. Some matrix displacement can be noticed, aswell as incomplete relief filling. On the reverse periphery there aresome caverns, as a result of the insufficient material. Studio Unknown

DOMITIAN102. AR Denarius 4

Silver cast. The print is taken from a "Lipanoff" Studio coin. There isa big defect on the obverse.Studio Unknown

4. Alan Van Arsdale. Roman Coin Forgery. 2005, Pl. 130, no. 266; Prokopov, I.Contemporary Coin Engravers and Coin Masters from Bulgaria. "Lipanoff" Studio, no. 37.


55

NERVA103. AR Denarius, negativeThis coin half allows us to see one of the technologies used for mak-ing a fake coin of 2 separate cast parts. They are glued and the edgeis processed in such a way that the seam cannot be noticed. Studio Unknown

104. AR DenariusCast, "pressed" type coin. The print is taken from a genuine coin. Theimage relief is not filled quite well and this can be seen on the highpoints - the emperor's face. There are small knots on the surface. "Novi Pazar" Studio

56

105. AR Denarius, 3,083 gCast, "pressed" type coin. Made from a genuine coin print. The qual-ity of work is poor, there are lots of defects - knots, caverns (in thefield), some empty spaces (missing metal in the letters), deformationsand cracks (on Nerva's face). Obviously the metal has started to coolwhich resulted in some big rifts on the reverse. Studio Unknown

106. AE AsBronze alloy cast. The print is taken from a genuine coin. The surfaceis covered with an artificial green patina under which some pearls andknots, results of the casting, can be seen.Studio Unknown

57

TRAJAN107. AR DenariusCast coin, cold pressing type with additional silver coating by the gal-vanoplastic method. The print has shifted and this resulted in obviousdefects. Studio Unknown

108. AR DenariusA common material cast from a genuine coin. Silver coated by thegalvanoplastic method. Because of the poor print quality the lowrelief is not dense. Behind the emperor's back the field is uneven, inthe first part of the inscription there are damaged letters. There isblurring and missing border dots. On the reverse there are also smallpearls and uneven surface on the silver coating. "Novi Pazar" Studio

58

109. AR DenariusA base metal cast, silver coated by the galvanoplastic method. There issome blurring and missing border of dots. On the surface there are smallpearls and uneven surface on the silver coating. On the obverse at thebust down right there is a serious defect - bad silver coating because ofthe low quality galvanopolasty padding. A similar, but smaller defectcan be seen on the reverse in the core centre next to the figure. Studio Unknown

110. AR DenariusA base metal cast made from a genuine coin print. The original one hasbeen in circulation for a long period. The print quality is quite low andimages have lost many details. The cast is silver coated by means of gal-vanoplasty. The metal texture is similar at both low and high points, with-out any traces of wearing. The pearls and uneven surface caused by thecasting process can be seen. The relief is low and blurred, details are lost. Studio Unknown

59

111. AR DenariusA base metal cast made from a print of a genuine coin that has been in cir-culation for a long period. The print quality is quite low and images havelost many details. The cast is silver coated by means of galvanoplasty. Thesmall pearls and uneven surface caused by the casting process are visible.There are several apparent defects around the emperor's mouth. Studio Unknown

112. AR DenariusA base metal cast made from a genuine coin print. The print quality is quitelow and images have lost many details. The cast is silver coated by meansof galvanoplasty. Again, small pearls and uneven surface caused by the cast-ing process can be seen. There is an obvious defect on the emperor's chin -a print skidding as well as low quality galvanic coating at the neck. On bothsides an artificial patina is glued to the surface.Studio Unknown

60

113. AR Denarius, 3,361 gA pressed coin. The print is made from a genuine coin, but there is adeformation (for ex. on emperor's face - eyebrows, nose and mouth)and uneven density. The metal structure is grey and fragile. There hasbeen a thin silver coating but it has started to fall and the grey surfacehas shown. Studio Unknown

HADRIAN114. AR DenariusThe coin has all signs of a cast, "pressed" type. The print is takenfrom a genuine coin. On the paraffin positive there are some tracesfrom tools. The metal alloy has a grey color. Well preserved silvercoating. "Novi Pazar" Studio

61

115. AR DenariusThis coin has all typical signs of a coin struck by Studio"Lipanoff"5,however it was actually made from a print of the coin in question,then cast and galvanoplastically covered. The coating itself is verybadly produced, the surface is uneven with superfluous metal accu-mulation which forms pearls and zones with a porous structure. Studio Unknown

ANTONINUS PIUS116. AV Aureus (Foure)The coin is pressed and then coated in electrolyte bath with a thickgold layer. The pressing itself is a foure type. A plastic and soft fill-ing is coated in foil and this is how the pressing is done. It is also pos-sible that it has been made being cold, without extreme core heating.This can be seen under the gold coating. In the field, especially on thereverse, there are bumps and the images have smooth contours, with-out the typical contrast. The print is most probably taken from a sil-ver denarii. Studio Unknown

5. Prokopov, I. Contemporary Coin Engravers and Coin Masters from Bulgaria, "Lipanoff"Studio. Sofia 2004, no. 49. The obverse is published, but in combination with another reverse.


62

117. AR Denarius, 3,017 gThe coin has all signs typical for a cast, "pressed" type. The print istaken from a genuine coin. The metal alloy has a grey color, the sil-ver coating is well preserved. "Novi Pazar" Studio

118. AR DenariusSimilar to the previous but the quality is much lower. This is definite-ly an unsuccessful attempt. The print is taken from a genuine coin. The metal alloy has a greycolor. Lots of defects can be noticed easily, as well as an unskillfulattempt to additionally finish the paraffin positive. This coin is easyto be detected but it is advisable to pay attention for other more suc-cessful examples of the same coin die. "Novi Pazar" Studio

63

119. AR DenariusAll remarks about the previous coin are also valid for this one."Novi Pazar" Studio

FAUSTINA SENIOR120. AR DenariusSimilar. Again, all remarks about no.118 are valid here as well. "Novi Pazar" Studio

121. AR DenariusA base metal cast made from a print of a genuine coin. The cast is sil-ver coated by means of galvanoplasty. The big cuts that the originalcoin has had, have been copied on this one and were covered withnew silver, which is obvious. Because of a badly taken print there isa bulge in the low points of the reverse. This is why letters remainedin small concaves. On the reverse a part of the image is lost - theupper part of the scepter and the hand holding it. Studio Unknown

64

122. AE SestertiusAt a first glance, a pleasant coin. Implies the association of a souvenir. The metal is brass, not bronze. The relief is low and very unusual fora Roman sestertius. If observed carefully, many defects will be seen.The artificial patina is too constant and has a strange color. Studio Unknown

65

MARCUS AURELIUS123. AR DenariusSilver cast, additionally intensively processed with acid to concealthe casting traces. The surface has a granular structure, a typical resultof acid processing. The artificial patina mixed with silicate materialsis glued on top. "Novi Pazar" Studio

124. AR DenariusA base metal cast, silver coated by means of galvanoplasty. Bothsides are concave because of the stronger than required pressing whenthe print was made. This resulted in a higher rim that displaced orblurred the border dots. There is an additional correction applied onthe eye and the mustache. The eye pupil is split. There are knots anduneven surface. Studio Unknown

66

125. AR DenariusA base metal cast, silver coated by means of galvanoplasty. Again,there are knots and bumps on the surface. Some letters and parts ofthe images on the reverse are not well filled with metal and look flatand unreal. The coin is covered with rough artificial dark patina thatwas glued on it. Studio Unknown

126. AE Pautalia, ThraceA cast coin. The prototype was copied from a genuine coin, but theimage has had a bad relief and the paraffin positive was additionallyprocessed by an amateur. The result was a low quality and schema-tized image. To mask the coin, it was treated with acids and otheraggressive agents at high temperature. Then, an artificial patina wasproduced and applied on several layers. Studio Unknown

67

LUCILLA127. AV Aureus, 7.28 gCast, "pressed type" coin. Its matrix however was not well prepared.There are obvious traces of pearls and uneven surface in the lowrelief. There are also many defects as the most obvious are at Lucilla'seye, nose and eyebrows. Studio Unknown

68

CLODIUS ALBINUS128. AR DenariusCast, "pressed" type made of a metal alloy with greyish color. Theedge has very sharp unusual sides. There is no additional silver coat-ing. Looks like Lipanoff style.

SEPTIMIUS SEVERUS129. AV Avreus, 19/18 mm; 6,822 gGold minted. We have seen similar pair of coin dies but struck fromsilver. Published 6. "Lipanoff" Studio



69

130. AR Denarius, 1,840Cast, "pressed type". The matrix pressure on the soft material hasbeen too strong and it resulted in high edge, especially on the reverse. "Novi Pazar" Studio

IULIA DOMNA131. AR DenariusThis one has all signs of a coin struck by "Lipanoff" Studio7, but it isa copy made by a print from the Lipanoff coin, then cast and coatedwith galvanic covering. The surface is uneven and covered withpearls, at some areas it even changes to porous structure. Lipanoffhave made an error when engraving the reverse inscription. Instead ofVENVS it is written VEMVS.

7. Prokopov, I. Contemporary Coin Engravers and Coin Masters from Bulgaria, "Lipanoff"Studio. Sofia 2004, but in other coin dies combination. The obverse was published underno.no. 72,76, and the reverse - no. 64.


70

132. AR DenariusCast, "pressed" type made of a metal alloy with greyish color. Thewhole surface is dotted with small pearls and knots. 8

133. AE SestertiusA new "Lipanoff" Studio coin. Struck from a brass alloy. There are notraces from any attempts to be additionally processed for aging or forapplying an artificial patina.

PLAUTILLA134. AR DenariusA silver coin struck by a steel matrix. Everything in its style distin-guishes it from the original coin. For example, the Plautilla portrait,the hairstyling, theinscription, they allbespeak of an unsuc-cessful engraver'sattempt. Studio Unknown

8. The coin was detected as a forgery also by Paul-Francis Jacquier. A similar specimen ispublished: Prokopov, I. K. Kissyov, E. Paunov. Modern Counterfeits of Ancient Greek andRoman Coins from Bulgaria, Sofia 2003, p. 58, no. 143.


71

PESCENNIUS NIGER135. AR DenariusThe coin is a "cold pressed" type, additionally, but not fully, coatedwith silver. The caverns under the silver can be clearly seen. The printwas taken from a genuine worn coin. There is a rough artificial pati-na over the silver coating, mixed with silicate materials. Obviously itwas glued. "Novi Pazar" Studio

72

DIDIUS JULIANUS136. AR Denarius, 3,649 gThe coin is struck by steel matrixes. It has all signs of "Lipanoff"Studio. There are no attempts for aging.

SEVERUS ALEXANDER137. AR Denarius, 3,339 gStruck by steel matrixes. A new variant of "Lipanoff" Studio. Theobverse is already known but here it is in combination with anotherreverse.9 No attempts for aging.



MAXIMINUS "THRAX"138. AV Avreus, 19/18 mm; 6,712 gStruck by steel matrixes. A new variant of "Lipanoff" Studio. Thesame coin, struck from silver though, has been already published.10

139. AR Denarius, 3,226 gStruck by steel matrixes. A new variant of "Lipanoff" Studio. Theobverse and reverse are already published but in combinations withother coin dies.11 No attempts for aging have been made.

73

10. Prokopov, I. Contemporary Coin Engravers and Coin Masters from Bulgaria, "Lipanoff"Studio. Sofia 2004, no. 10611. Ibid. Obv. no. 107, rev. no.106.


74

140. AR Denarius, 3,391 gStruck by steel matrixes. A new variant of "Lipanoff" Studio. Theobverse is already known but here it is combined with anotherreverse.12 There have been some attempts to age the coin and cover itwith artificial patina.

141. AR DenariusThe coin has all typical signs of a coin struck by "Lipanoff" Studio13,but it is a copy made by a print from the Lipanoff coin, then cast andcoated with galvanic cover. The surface is uneven and covered withpearls. Studio Unknown.

12. Prokopov, I. Contemporary Coin Engravers and Coin Masters from Bulgaria, "Lipanoff"Studio. Sofia 2004, no. 10513. Ibid., no. 105.


75

GORDIAN III, HADRIANOPOLIS142. AE Provintial coin, 25/25 mm, 10,456 gCast coin, many knots and caverns, especially on the coin edge. Theprint was taken from a genuine coin. "Novi Pazar" Studio

76

FLORIAN143. AE Medallion, 35/35 mm; 26,696 g; 12hA coin of the MONETA AVG type, rough cast. The matrix was man-ually finished. The portrait reproduction is quite crude and haschanged Florian's face. Besides, the inscriptions are rough and do notcorrespond to the original. Studio Unknown

77

DIOCLETIAN144. AV Aureus, 5,290 g; 6hThe coin was struck by the classical method - from gold with steelmatrixes. The core was preliminarily cast and shaped. The engraverhas tried to follow the original matrix, but did not manage very well.Stylistically this coin differs too much from the original and is easilyrecognized as a fake. Photos taken under artificial and natural light.Studio Haskovo?

78

CONSTANTINE145. AV MedallionStruck by a hydraulic press with steel matrixes. The engraver hastried to follow the original matrix, but did not manage very well.Stylistically this could be clearly seen on both sides of the coin.Because the metal core was pressed when it wasalready cold, there are clear marks on the sur-face-the specific furrows on the low relief. Studio Unknown

146. AV Solidus, 4,261 gA brass alloy cast, additionally gold plated. The print was taken froma genuine solidus of Arcadius. The fake is easy to detect. Studio Unknown

79

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Bernardi, G. Dangerous Counterfeits of Roman Aurei: In Bulletin on Counterfeits Vol.2, No.4, December 1977 published by International Bureau for the Suppression of Counterfeit Coins (IBSCC of the IAPN)

2. Bernardi, G. Dangerous Counterfeits of Roman Aurei, II: In Bulletin on Counterfeits Vol.3, No. 4, Winter 1978 published by International Bureau for the Suppression of Counterfeit Coins (IBSCC of the IAPN)

3. Coin Forgery Discussion List (CFDL) archives, a yahoo internet egroup, diverse authors

4. Demettiradi, B.C., "Slavey: the truth behind the legend", The Celator 13, Jan. 1999, no.1,20-25.

5. Dimitrov, D., I.Prokopov, B. Kolev, Modern Forgeries of Greek and Roman Coins. Sofia, K&K Publishers 1997, 72 pp. illus.

6. Forum Ancient Coins - Fakes Report page7. Goldsborough, Reid. Alexander the Great Ancient and Modern Fakes8. Goldsborough, Reid. New York Hoard Counterfeits of Apollonia Pontika Drachms9. Goldsborough, Reid. Parion Hemidrachms, Imitations, and Forgeries10. Larson, Charles M. Numismatic Forgery 200411. Marinescu, C. A., "Modern Imitations of Ancient Coins from Bulgaria", Minerva 9,

no. 5 (Sept.-Oct.), London 1998, 46-48.12. Prokopov, I. K. Kissyov, E. Paunov. Modern Counterfeits of Ancient Greek and

Roman Coins from Bulgaria, Sofia 2003.13. Prokopov, I. Contemporary Coin Engravers and Coin Masters from Bulgaria,

"Lipanoff" Studio. Sofia 200414. Prokopov, I. E. Paunov. Cast Forgeries of Classical Coins from Bulgaria, Sofia

200415. Prokopov, I. R. Manov, Forgery studios and their coins. Sofia 2005.16. Prokopov, I. Coin Forgeries and Replicas 2006. Sofia 2007.17. Puetz, B. "The Slavey Interview" (2 parts), The Celator 14, April 2000, no.4, 18-24;

May, 31-33.18. Sayles, W.G. Classical Deception. Counterfeits, Forgeries and Reproductions of

Ancient coins. Iola, WI, Krause Publications: 2001 (esp.61-65, 87-89).19. Van Arsdale, A. Roman Coin Forgery. 2005

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CoinForgeryDiscussionList/messages

http://www.celator.com/

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/fakes/index.php

http://rg.ancients.info/alexander/copies.html

http://rg.ancients.info/bulgarian_school/

http://rg.ancients.info/parion

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?param=B1173p00.jpg&vpar=910&zpg=6467

http://www.minervamagazine.com/





http://www.sp-p.net/forg6.htm

http://www.celator.com/

http://ansmagazine.com/winter03/deception.html

http://ansmagazine.com/winter03/deception.html

coin forgeries and replicas 2007 / ilya prokopov

Documents