more FAKES

[Coppers]

Is this a new type of 1763 Fake Shilling

Ebay 1716 7515 9718 Stunning UNC been in his collection 35 years

and only ever handled with gloves

link

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/171675159718?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_from%3DR40%257CR40%26_sacat%3D0%26_nkw%3D171675159718%26_rdc%3D1

[Coinery]

I bet if we could look at the edge, particularly at 3 and 8 o'clock on the reverse, we'd see some giveaway issues?

It doesn't have a milled look about it somehow?

Anyone know how many dies might have been made for this issue?

[Rob]

It has been cleaned at some point irrespective of whether it is genuine or not. Jewellers' rouge in the reverse legend. That might suggest a genuine coin, as modern copies are unlikely to need cleaning.

[jelida]

Note the strange double nose and formation of the lettering "E" falling apart etc

Interestingly both of these features also appear to be present on the one coinageofengland are selling on Ebay at the moment 171675159718

Jerry

[TomGoodheart]

Back again... 251840834396

[Coinery]

Note the strange double nose and formation of the lettering "E" falling apart etc

Interestingly both of these features also appear to be present on the one coinageofengland are selling on Ebay at the moment 171675159718

Jerry

Same coin isn't it?

[numismatist]

Interesting that " jelida " saw that. I think same dies but not the same coin.

Ive been watching these since I got caught with one, and looked at many

dozens of photos, and never seen these dies, so very very strange and it

will be interesting if more show up !

Heres a Genuine nice one...note the lettering and especially the

drapery under the Kings chin

Edited February 15, 2015 by numismatist

[Coinery]

I can't find the coinageofengland coin anymore, the item numbers above all direct to koscoins now???

[jelida]

Here it is. I seem to have posted the wrong number, as you point out. I am not really up to speed with this ipad.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1763-SHILLING-GEORGE-III-NORTHUMBERLAND-ISSUE-VERY-RARE-IN-THIS-GRADE-/221681026769?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item339d3806d1

Jerry

[jelida]

Interesting that " jelida " saw that. I think same dies but not the same coin.

Heres a Genuine nice one...note the lettering and especially the

drapery under the Kings chin

The folds of the drapery are quite different, they flow smoothly unlike the 'clipped sine wave' effect on the questionable coins. But can we be confident that these coins are forgeries? It seems to me suggestive that this might be the case.

Jerry

[Peter]

I have bought from this seller and believe him to be an honest dealer.

He doesn't do fairs but does a good deal.

[TomGoodheart]

I have bought from this seller and believe him to be an honest dealer.

He doesn't do fairs but does a good deal.

I've bought from Guy (coinageofengland) His coins are genuine afaik.

.

[jelida]

I have bought from this seller and believe him to be an honest dealer.

He doesn't do fairs but does a good deal.

I've bought from Guy (coinageofengland) His coins are genuine afaik.

.

Which rather brings us back to the coin numismatist first posted. The two coins are clearly from the same dies, but could they both then be genuine despite the marked difference in style and execution of the drapery and lettering from the known genuine one numismatist shows us? How many dies were used in producing this rare coin? I dont know the answer, this is not my field but I would like to be able to recognise a forgery should this coin ever come my way. I hope for Guys sake it is genuine, as it would be an expensive coin to have been caught out on.

Jerry

[numismatist]

I think the answer will come if more from this strange die work turn up ,

they certainly look very doubtful to me and if they are wrong, its quite

certain more will show up. Some say the 1763 fakes are casts , which

I very much doubt as the Chinese are doing lots of Die struck fakes

and thinking if a coin is Die struck its okay and genuine is a very

dangerous path to tread, as its caught out many in the past . Things

are getting serious in the fake market and my feelings are the BNTA

are side stepping the issues by keeping it secret . It doesnt matter how

ethical and respectable a dealer is, they can get caught out just like

Baldwins and DNW were with the first 1763 Shillings that hit the market.

Edited February 17, 2015 by numismatist

[Coinery]

There's no doubt an indepth, and ongoing, die-study is required here! It would most definitely need to begin with a calculation of original dies, and then good access to an historical archive of images.

Also, it would be interesting to know the date we were first plagued with this particular fake, and/or when they first became good enough to require an indepth die study?

[azda]

We had this same discussion on Here around 18 months ago, luckily i kept the Pics of a couple

Edited February 17, 2015 by azda

[azda]

Another

[Coinery]

Maybe we should make this our first 'proper' investigation into a fake series!

I feel very uneasy with the statement 'send it to CGS for authentication'! It sends out a very bad message about how we view ourselves as serious collectors! I'd sooner clear it up once and for all on our own terms!

It's not rocket science!

[Paulus]

I have posted this before, but for convenience here is the story of this moody Northumberland once again.

This was my first consignment to CGS. Bought from a dealer who won it at a Downies auction in Melbourne. I took it to them when I happened to be in Melbourne 3 years ago, after some members on here expressed doubts about it (thanks Rob, Dave, et al) - they were frighteningly ignorant and naive about it, saying 'it was probably okay as most fakes are higher grade'.

So I sent it to CGS, who confirmed it as a fake, and eventually got my money back due to it being rejected (via Downies, even though I didn't buy it from them). I asked CGS what gave this one away, and they said a significant factor was the shape/formation of the 6 in the date - the angle of the intersection of the loop at the bottom of the 6 should form a 'rounder '0'.

[Rob]

The most glaring problem is that they look cast even before you get into discussing the minutiae of the fine detail.

[DaveG38]

I think the answer will come if more from this strange die work turn up ,

they certainly look very doubtful to me and if they are wrong, its quite

certain more will show up. Some say the 1763 fakes are casts , which

I very much doubt as the Chinese are doing lots of Die struck fakes

and thinking if a coin is Die struck its okay and genuine is a very

dangerous path to tread, as its caught out many in the past . Things

are getting serious in the fake market and my feelings are the BNTA

are side stepping the issues by keeping it secret . It doesnt matter how

ethical and respectable a dealer is, they can get caught out just like

Baldwins and DNW were with the first 1763 Shillings that hit the market.

The perceived wisdom is that just about £150 worth of shillings were struck by the Duke of Northumberland, meaning there were only ever 3000 of these coins in existence. How many dies would be needed to strike this number - I'd say just the one, unless something went catastrophically wrong with the first die and a second die had to be cut. I'd have thought somebody would have found this in any records if it had happeend, so I'm of the view that anything unusual that deviates from the 'normal' is likely to be a fake. But, I stand to be corrected.

Edited February 17, 2015 by DaveG38

[Paulus]

Yes, just 3000 supposedly, so similar-ish to the number of circulation wreath Crowns minted for each year (I know they all vary, with 1934 being <1000) ... which unsurprisingly are also swimming with fakes.

For reference this is a high grade CGS authenticated example:

I was relatively new to serious collecting 3 years ago, and would like to think I would be much more wise and careful now ... I have steered clear of them ever since, but I would like a choice one for my collection one day, where the authenticity and provenance was beyond doubt!

But as my fake example illustrates, a coin bought at auction does not necessarily guarantee its authenticity, and since this example I have had to return coins bought at auction that were passed as genuine but had very obvious signs, such as an incorrect die axis (GIII half crown forgeries often exhibit this) - and this is of course something you cannot check from the pics!

Edited February 17, 2015 by Paulus

[Coinery]

I wonder if the loop of the 6 was a red herring from CGS?

Interesting to see the open topped G of Georgivs. I remember that being a point of interest in the past!

[Paulus]

I wonder if the loop of the 6 was a red herring from CGS?

Interesting to see the open topped G of Georgivs. I remember that being a point of interest in the past!

Yes, I'm not convinced that that is a reliable indicator ... I remember some fakes having a 'line' from the King's mouth to the edge, a pretty sure fire indicator.

With the BNTA not sharing the information we need, we really should be able to put something together on here. Problem coins appear to include:

• 1905 HC
• Wreath crowns
• Northumberland shillings
• GIII HC
• Gothic Crowns
• Gothic Florins

there are many others, but shall we begin with those, and document the known fakes from our membership?

[Rob]

Unfortunately I only have two hands which makes keeping the book open a bit problematic, but this image from Greuber shows the BM's coin in 1899, so the most obvious feature is the die filled R at 9 o'clock. As we can safely assume that this predated the modern copies, it suggests that a blocked R is the first thing to appear (and one would assume stayed for the duration)