An interesting discussion of a slabbed fake of a Caligula drachm

STLNATS

This analysis appeared on the Forum Ancient Coin board over the past couple of days. Just reinforces that caveat emptor is still operative whether the coin is in plastic or not and it's still important to know your dealer or the coin (or better yet know both).

forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=111723.0

CIVITAS

The thread either requires a login or has been pulled.

But yes, to further reinforce your point, your authenticity guarantee for ancient coins in NGC slabs comes from your dealer, NOT from NGC. That being said, having Barry Murphy and David Vagi lay eyes upon any given coin should eliminate all but the most deceptive forgeries.

bronzemat

@CIVITAS said:
The thread either requires a login or has been pulled.

But yes, to further reinforce your point, your authenticity guarantee for ancient coins in NGC slabs comes from your dealer, NOT from NGC. That being said, having Barry Murphy and David Vagi lay eyes upon any given coin should eliminate all but the most deceptive forgeries.

You have to be logged in to view it. It's still there

STLNATS

@CIVITAS said:

That being said, having Barry Murphy and David Vagi lay eyes upon any given coin should eliminate all but the most deceptive forgeries.

I'm sure that's generally true. However, it's worth logging in to see the thread since this appears to be a fairly valuable coin and one would think would it have received extra scrutiny. It doesn't appear that it took the OPer a lot of effort to not only link the slabbed coin to other identified fakes but even to id some die "enhancements" that the forgers made along the way. The FAC forum participants have some folks with an incredible knowledge base in many arcane areas and I thought this was an interesting analysis worth sharing as well as a cautionary tale...

CIVITAS

Hmm, I don't even know if I have a login there. I will take a look because I am curious.

CIVITAS

I created a login to view. Overall good detective work done by the OP. However, the "L" coin and "NGC" coin are the same coin. Differences in lighting angle and exposure make it look slightly different, but if you look at the overall toning pattern on each, it's exactly the same. The only difference is the toning spots on the neck, which could easily be added (deliberately or accidentally) in the 10 years between it's first appearance and second appearance. The weight anomaly is just a typo on either NGC's or the cataloger's part. It doesn't change the authenticity though, as it is still obviously somehow derived from the "S" specimen and is certainly a cast of some kind.