Questionable authenticity on sovereigns

[thanasis]

Hello forum!

Today I would like to share some photos from 2 auction lots I found some time ago. The lots consist only of sovereigns, and in my opinion the vast majority of them (if not all!) are counterfeit. Since most members here on the forum collect/stack them, I would like to add some more pictures on the "fake sovereign" database, so that people may get more information of what's out there.

Enjoy the photos!

[Petra]

8 minutes ago, thanasis said:

Hello forum!

Today I would like to share some photos from 2 auction lots I found some time ago. The lots consist only of sovereigns, and in my opinion the vast majority of them (if not all!) are counterfeit. Since most members here on the forum collect/stack them, I would like to add some more pictures on the "fake sovereign" database, so that people may get more information of what's out there.

Enjoy the photos!

Can you give some pointers as to why they are fake please?

[Zhorro]

7 minutes ago, Petra said:

Can you give some pointers as to why they are fake please?

I think given the pictures, it is difficult to be precise about why they are fakes.  But often it is an initial gut feeling after seeing quite a few sovereigns - but that may not be of much help to you!

The lack of definition on some of them may be a warning sign, in particular on some the lack of differentiation between the body of St George and the mane of his horse.  Also the colour of the coin may be a warning sign.  Some look to have had their gold coating worn off, revealing the black base metal underneath.  Some of the dates look as if they may be too large.

If in doubt, give them a miss.

[thanasis]

@Petra Sure!

1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.

2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.

3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".

4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:

     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.

     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.

     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".

     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.

     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.

     Cheers!

 

 

[Petra]

46 minutes ago, thanasis said:

@Petra Sure!

1) First of all, the dates 1916 (London mint - no mint mark) and 1911-C are quite scarce, so when you see them come up you should be wary and examine if they are fake. Of course it could be a batch of hoarded sovereigns which are genuine, although there is a very low possibility of that happening.

2) You can notice that some of them have a date of 1919 with no mint mark, therefore London mint. That can't be correct, since London sovereigns weren't minted that year.

3) On some of the coins there seems to be an "B.B.P." instead of "B.P.".

4) Details on the coins. Some examples are:

     a) 1st photo, 1st row, 1st coin from the left: The sword and leg of St. George lack detail and seems to be "integrated" into the body of the horse. There should have been clear lines and details on both the aforementioned parts.

     b) 1st photo, 2nd row, 2nd coin from the right: Details are all wrong, although I would say that the leg and hair streamer of St. George seem to stand out.

     c) 1st photo, 2nd row, 3rd coin from the right: Details are absent and also the date "1916" looks like it was vertically "squeezed".

     d) 1st photo, 3rd row, 3rd coin from the right: Again the details are all wrong, of which the belly of St. George and also the details on the dragon stand out. Plus, under the dragon there is a "canyon", which shouldn't be there.

     These are some of the many wrong things that I can tell you on the spot. Using a photo of an original sovereign will help you greatly in comparing and identifying the wrong thing you see.

     Cheers!

 

 

Cheers

[ArgentSmith]

Out of interest, where were they being auctioned? @thanasis

[GoldDiggerDave]

Thanks @thanasis for posting this 👍 Some closer pictures 

F1 is just weak and the dragons head is all wrong

F2 is the BBP you mentioned

F3 all wrong soft mushy strike and the numerals in the date a wrong

@thanasis  Could you show a spread of genuine sovereigns and put and put a few of these in the photos to see if we can pick them out, would be good to see if theres any noticeable colour difference as some fakes stand out as the colour is well off. 

[sovereignsteve]

Shocking to have so many fakes in such a big batch at auction

I've never seen a BBP before😁

[Petra]

As a newcomer to all this, can anyone recommend the best book for advice on sovereigns and half sovereigns?

[GoldDiggerDave]

47 minutes ago, sovereignsteve said:

Shocking to have so many fakes in such a big batch at auction

I've never seen a BBP before😁

Special edition Bullion By Post.......LOL

[LawrenceChard]

22 hours ago, thanasis said:

Hello forum!

Today I would like to share some photos from 2 auction lots I found some time ago. The lots consist only of sovereigns, and in my opinion the vast majority of them (if not all!) are counterfeit. Since most members here on the forum collect/stack them, I would like to add some more pictures on the "fake sovereign" database, so that people may get more information of what's out there.

Enjoy the photos!

Although I get to see quite a few fake sovereigns, I have never before seen what look like 45 fakes in just two photos, and from one auction or other source.

Were these photos from the auction catalogue?

I agree they do all look like fakes.

Bigger, better, hi-res photos would help, as some of the dates or mintmark areas are not clear.

1916-M is a scarce date / mintmark combination, so it would be surprising to see so many in one batch, although by coincidence, last Friday I tested one incoming fake sovereign, which was also a 1916-M.

If one is actually a 1919-L, then that is definitely a fake, as otherwise it is a non-existent date / mintmark combination.

As @ArgentSmith asked "where were they being auctioned?". Do you have a name, lot numbers, links?

I guess this was a Greek auction?

The big variation in colour should alert anyone.

They all / mainly have a weakly struck appearance.

Some have what look like mould "flash lines" on them.

Thanks for posting these photos, it should be a good educational resource.

🙂

[Petra]

Can someone say where these are for sale? You can re-word to ‘possible’ fake so auction house can’t complain? If sold as a batch like some were on line last week that is not a problem for me as that is out of my price reach, however, if they get away with this they could be slipping individual ones in?

[Zhorro]

2 hours ago, Petra said:

As a newcomer to all this, can anyone recommend the best book for advice on sovereigns and half sovereigns?

The best book is The Gold Sovereign Series  by M.A. Marsh (revised by Steve Hill) 2021:

https://www.tokenpublishing.com/shop/product/8058

At £39.95 it is excellent value - this is about 10% of one sovereign!

[thanasis]

@ArgentSmith It was an auction from Europe, I think France, although I didn't keep a record of it. 😞

@LawrenceChard Yes, I noticed these mould "flash lines", too, but I thought that maybe it was caused by the photo angle. Any idea what causes them?

@Petra As @Zhorro said, the book by Mr. Marsh is an excellent addition to the library of any gold sovereign enthusiast. I would also like to add another source that has helped me immensely and gave me a more in-depth knowledge concerning sovereigns:

Look for "The Bentley Collection of British Milled Sovereigns" catalogs (Part 1 ,2 & 3), which can be found on the Baldwin's website for free. 😉

You will get lost in the variety that the sovereign has to offer...😮

@Petra Now, you can thank me for all the info, by providing more photos of the doggo...☺️

Edited February 21, 2022 by thanasis

[Petra]

4 minutes ago, thanasis said:

@ArgentSmith It was an auction from Europe, I think France, although I didn't keep a record of it. 😞

@LawrenceChard Yes, I noticed these mould "flash lines", too, but I thought that maybe it was caused by the photo angle. Any idea what causes them?

@Petra As @Zhorro said, the book by Mr. Marsh is an excellent addition to the library of any gold sovereign enthusiast. I would also like to add another source that has helped me immensely and gave me a more in-depth knowledge concerning sovereigns:

Look for "The Bentley Collection of British Milled Sovereigns" catalogs (Part 1 ,2 & 3), which can be found on the Baldwin's website for free. 😉

You will get lost in the variety that the sovereign has to offer...😮

@Petra Now, you can thank me for all the info, by providing more photos of the doggo...☺️

?

[LawrenceChard]

13 minutes ago, thanasis said:

@LawrenceChard Yes, I noticed these mould "flash lines", too, but I thought that maybe it was caused by the photo angle. Any idea what causes them?

Flash, also known as flashing, is excess material attached to a molded, forged, or cast product, which must usually be removed. This is typically caused by leakage of the material between the two surfaces of a mold (sic) (beginning along the parting line) or between the base material and the mold in the case of overmolding (sic).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_(manufacturing)

 

 

[Smiler999]

3 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

Flash, also known as flashing, is excess material attached to a molded, forged, or cast product, which must usually be removed. This is typically caused by leakage of the material between the two surfaces of a mold (sic) (beginning along the parting line) or between the base material and the mold in the case of overmolding (sic).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_(manufacturing)

 

 

Not to hijack another thread, but do you/your company actually test each sovereign that comes in the door and if so how? I'm just curious as I'd imagine you have a lot of coins coming in and out of the shop everyday?

Thanks

[papi1980]

That was pretty astonishing to see so many fake sovereigns…I presume they have the right metal content (probably even higher gold share), so not a metal forgery, but a numismatic one..? 
I’m pretty novice in this but some look definitely ‘hazy’, ‘smooth-lined’

Do you think these could be the work of the  Middle Eastern forger? 

 

[GoldDiggerDave]

5 minutes ago, papi1980 said:

That was pretty astonishing to see so many fake sovereigns…I presume they have the right metal content (probably even higher gold share), so not a metal forgery, but a numismatic one..? 
I’m pretty novice in this but some look definitely ‘hazy’, ‘smooth-lined’

Do you think these could be the work of the  Middle Eastern forger? 

 

Just have a look around some pawn brokers, there are more fakes around than you might think.  

[LawrenceChard]

10 hours ago, Smiler999 said:

Not to hijack another thread, but do you/your company actually test each sovereign that comes in the door and if so how? I'm just curious as I'd imagine you have a lot of coins coming in and out of the shop everyday?

Thanks

We don't test most of the brand new mint sealed ones, but we do "random" checks on one or two coins. We do weigh all the incoming new monster boxes and tubes, to ensure weights, and quantities are correct.

With secondary market coins, every incoming coin gets a visual check, which usually only needs to be brief. Older coins (pre-QE2) usually get double checked. More "interesting" coins get XRF tested, and sometimes photographed. Most get double checked by a numismatist before being allocated to stock, before we sell them.

An XRF test can detect incorrect metal content, but correct metal content does not guarantee a coin is genuine.

Human eyes, combined with experience, still beat machines, for speed and accuracy.

😎

Just found this YouTube video I was looking for:

 

We may have a better one somewhere.

Edited February 22, 2022 by LawrenceChard

[LawrenceChard]

2 hours ago, papi1980 said:

That was pretty astonishing to see so many fake sovereigns…I presume they have the right metal content (probably even higher gold share), so not a metal forgery, but a numismatic one..? 
I’m pretty novice in this but some look definitely ‘hazy’, ‘smooth-lined’

Do you think these could be the work of the  Middle Eastern forger? 

 

It is more likely that none of them had the correct gold content, than all of them having the correct gold content.

These were not numismatic forgeries, they could have been "circulation" forgeries, or more likely "bullion" forgeries, to sell to tourists, investors, or for jewellery. 

Even from the mediocre photos, every coin looks fake or suspect.

"the  Middle Eastern forger?" - there must have been / still are thousands of them.

 

[LawrenceChard]

On 20/02/2022 at 12:12, thanasis said:

Hello forum!

Today I would like to share some photos from 2 auction lots I found some time ago. The lots consist only of sovereigns, and in my opinion the vast majority of them (if not all!) are counterfeit. Since most members here on the forum collect/stack them, I would like to add some more pictures on the "fake sovereign" database, so that people may get more information of what's out there.

Enjoy the photos!

 

 

On 20/02/2022 at 12:21, Petra said:

Can you give some pointers as to why they are fake please?

 

On 20/02/2022 at 12:51, Zhorro said:

I think given the pictures, it is difficult to be precise about why they are fakes.  But often it is an initial gut feeling after seeing quite a few sovereigns - but that may not be of much help to you!

The lack of definition on some of them may be a warning sign, in particular on some the lack of differentiation between the body of St George and the mane of his horse.  Also the colour of the coin may be a warning sign.  Some look to have had their gold coating worn off, revealing the black base metal underneath.  Some of the dates look as if they may be too large.

If in doubt, give them a miss.

 

On 21/02/2022 at 10:31, LawrenceChard said:

Although I get to see quite a few fake sovereigns, I have never before seen what look like 45 fakes in just two photos, and from one auction or other source.

Were these photos from the auction catalogue?

I agree they do all look like fakes.

Bigger, better, hi-res photos would help, as some of the dates or mintmark areas are not clear.

1916-M is a scarce date / mintmark combination, so it would be surprising to see so many in one batch, although by coincidence, last Friday I tested one incoming fake sovereign, which was also a 1916-M.

If one is actually a 1919-L, then that is definitely a fake, as otherwise it is a non-existent date / mintmark combination.

As @ArgentSmith asked "where were they being auctioned?". Do you have a name, lot numbers, links?

I guess this was a Greek auction?

The big variation in colour should alert anyone.

They all / mainly have a weakly struck appearance.

Some have what look like mould "flash lines" on them.

Thanks for posting these photos, it should be a good educational resource.

🙂

Here are the photos of the 1916-M fake sovereign I mentioned:

Awful reverse!

The obverse is just as bad:

And for anyone who thinks a Niton or other XRF machine can tell genuine from fake:

The gold content is within normal range, but the silver content is a big clue.

This is an excellent example of human eyes, brains, and experience being better than dumb reliance on technology.

😎

[MonkeysUncle]

This sort of thing is precisely why I only buy gold from respectable dealers. I may pay more for the privilege, but I can be pretty damn sure that a man/ lady far better at spotting dodgy coins than I has done their job. The dealers profit margin is a small price to pay in my books.

[LawrenceChard]

1 minute ago, MonkeysUncle said:

This sort of thing is precisely why I only buy gold from respectable dealers. I may pay more for the privilege, but I can be pretty damn sure that a man/ lady far better at spotting dodgy coins than I has done their job. The dealers profit margin is a small price to pay in my books.

I think if you bought from most private individuals on TSF, you should be OK.

I try to ensure that @ChardsCoinandBullionDealer are competitive on bullion sovereigns, even when compared with smaller dealers who don't know or care about fakes or substandard coins. Most of their customers are unaware until they come to sell.

In fact, I forgot to mention, we bought the coin above in a lot of 42 coins. The seller told us he had bought them all from a well-known bullion dealer, and mentioned their name to us. As I didn't have the opportunity of speaking to the seller, and double-checking with him, I will not name his supplier. I do encourage our staff to get original receipts, or copies of them, if possible. I will ask our "teller" if she can contact the seller to let him know one of his coins was a fake, mainly for his own information. Obviously, the deal we did with him still stands, as we take responsibility for our purchase from him. The slight loss we take on scrapping the coin is possibly outweighed by the educational value all round.

😎

[papi1980]

All appreciate the insights, especially Lawrence. I just realise who little I know about sovereigns and fakes…

Forgiven me for the stupid question(or if that has been discussed before), but it seems most fakes are George and the dragon. Have anyone seen a fake (metallic or numismatic) of a shield sovereign

my presumption is that it is much harder to cast?