Counterfeit coin

On Jun 10, 8:40 pm, (Paul Ciszek) wrote:

"Plated" in what sense? Not electroplating, obviously, but bonding
silver leaf onto a copper coin sounds like a lot of work. Or was it
more like our modern "sandwich" coins, with the edge somehow concealed?

And the winner is: Door Number Two. Your second answer is the correct
one, closest to it. Yep, this no doubt took a lot of work. But labor
in ancient times was extremely cheap. Coins were minted by slaves,
same as with was much else time-intensive manual labor. Counterfeits
were likely made by slaves too, or by desperate poor people, given
that punishment was typically death.

Greek-era silver-plated counterfeits were made, for the most part,
with silver foil (thicker than leaf) hammered onto a heated copper
planchet. Sometimes you see not two layers but three, with the third
layer being the intermediary layer separating the silver and copper,
which is widely referred to in the literature as the "eutectic" layer
(you'd have to have read the literature to know this, but not knowing
never stopped anybody online from making definitive pronouncements
about this or anything else!).

It's unclear though whether the eutectic layer was a copper-silver
solder applied to help bond the silver plating to the copper core or
was formed when the silver-plated planchet was heated, partially
melting and interdiffusing the silver and copper. It's likely, in my
view, that both methods were used at different places and times.

Yet another method thought to have been used was dipping a base-metal
planchet in a silver solution, leading to a thinner coating of silver.

Gold-plated fakes also exist, typically gold foil or multiple layers
of gold leaf over a silver planchet.

In Roman times, official "silvered" coins -- mostly bronze with a very
thin layer of silver that wore away quickly through circulation or
corrosion -- were produced using still another method. These "surface
enriched" coins were made through creating a planchet of bronze/copper
alloyed with a small amount of silver, then pickling it with an acid
before striking, with the acid leaching copper from the surface and
leaving a thin layer of nearly pure silvering. These coins, however,
aren't considered fourrees though they're related to them.

I have a site about fourrees he

http://rg.ancients.info/fourees

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On Jun 10, 3:40 pm, Anka wrote:

Vertigris? Is that the alternative spelling of verdigris?

~Anka

You didn't respond to my suggestion that you share what you know about
verdigris, though I can't say I'm very surprised. There's actually a
lot of interesting substance regarding this, but I suppose you'd need
to be interested in substance. A lot of people confuse verdigris
(harmless) with bronze disease (harmful). The Owl fourree I pointed to
may in fact have bronze disease, though to me from the pic anyway it
looks more like verdigris. We'll see when it arrives. If you're not
interested in verdigris, how about sharing your experiences with or
knowledge about bronze disease? You collect ancients, so you must have
some insights. Something, anything? Or just point out more typose if
you like. Just left one there to make it easier for you. g

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
Greek-era silver-plated counterfeits were made, for the most part,
with silver foil (thicker than leaf) hammered onto a heated copper
planchet. Sometimes you see not two layers but three, with the third
layer being the intermediary layer separating the silver and copper,
which is widely referred to in the literature as the "eutectic" layer

OK OK.
Stop now.

That is just nonsense.

The word "eutectic" has a very specific and precise meaning. You are either
misquoting accurate sources, or accurately quoting ignorant sources. You're
not relying on your "expert" friends ar PCGS again, are you?

Lead/tin solder has a eutectic composition.
Silver/copper alloys also have a eutectic composition.
So does iron/carbon (my personal favourite).

However - "eutectic" doesn *not* mean: "that layer of alloy between the two
metals".

(you'd have to have read the literature to know this, but not knowing
never stopped anybody online from making definitive pronouncements
about this or anything else!).

Definitive pronouncements are appropriate when they a
(1) correct, and
(2) used to counter ignorant usage.


If you are referring to an alloy of 28.1% / 71.9% Cu/Ag then fine. Go
ahead and use the term correctly.
If not, then kindly use the term "alloy".

I know *you* don't care about precision in language (or metallurgy) but some
of us object to your journalistic dumbing-down tendencies.

And yes - it *does* matter.

--
Jeff R.

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Jun 10, 3:40 pm, Anka wrote:

Vertigris? Is that the alternative spelling of verdigris?

~Anka

You didn't respond to my suggestion that you share what you know about
verdigris, though I can't say I'm very surprised. There's actually a
lot of interesting substance regarding this, but I suppose you'd need
to be interested in substance. A lot of people confuse verdigris
(harmless) with bronze disease (harmful).

No doubt any reaction which produces HCl ( "bronze disease") is harmful, but
is verdigris actually harmless?

You'd agree, surely, that verdigris is one (or more) of a number of copper
compounds, yes?

Where do you think the copper comes from?
The atmosphere?

--
Jeff R.

On Jun 14, 12:14�am, "Jeff R." wrote:
"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message

...

On Jun 10, 3:40 pm, Anka wrote:

Vertigris? �Is that the alternative spelling of verdigris?

~Anka

You didn't respond to my suggestion that you share what you know about
verdigris, though I can't say I'm very surprised. There's actually a
lot of interesting substance regarding this, but I suppose you'd need
to be interested in substance. A lot of people confuse verdigris
(harmless) with bronze disease (harmful).

No doubt any reaction which produces HCl ( "bronze disease") is harmful, but
is verdigris actually harmless?

You'd agree, surely, that verdigris is one (or more) of a number of copper
compounds, yes?

Where do you think the copper comes from?
The atmosphere?

--
Jeff R.

Hee-hee.

I knew you'd be responding to "eutectic", so I figured I'd let you
have this one as well.

Watch him wiggle. ;-)

"Phil DeMayo" wrote in message
...

Hee-hee.

I knew you'd be responding to "eutectic", so I figured I'd let you
have this one as well.

Watch him wiggle. ;-)

Hi Phil.
Pretty sad, id'n'it? ..that I am *that* predictable.

He won't wiggle. He'll just accuse me of being a pedantic Thistlebottom and
then cite half a dozen experienced coin dealers who have been using that
word that way for umpteen years and therefore they must be right and I am
wrong.

Y'know - I don't mind religious proselytizers; I can ignore Chinese scammers
and porn-site promoters... (etc.) I just am irritated beyond reason by his
own particular brand of pseudo-intellectualism.

He makes us *real* intellectuals look bad.

--
Jeff R.
(he won't get *that*, either)

On Jun 13, 6:41�pm, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
On Jun 10, 3:40 pm, Anka wrote:

Vertigris? �Is that the alternative spelling of verdigris?

~Anka

You didn't respond to my suggestion that you share what you know about
verdigris, though I can't say I'm very surprised. There's actually a
lot of interesting substance regarding this, but I suppose you'd need
to be interested in substance. A lot of people confuse verdigris
(harmless) with bronze disease (harmful). The Owl fourree I pointed to
may in fact have bronze disease, though to me from the pic anyway it
looks more like verdigris. We'll see when it arrives. If you're not
interested in verdigris, how about sharing your experiences with or
knowledge about bronze disease? You collect ancients, so you must have
some insights. Something, anything? Or just point out more typose if
you like. Just left one there to make it easier for you. g

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer:http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur:http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit:http://rg.ancients.info/bogos



All I know about verdigris is what I see and read in garden catalogs
and city tour books, so I know just enough *not* to spout off about
its connection to numismatics. I'll just sit back and let the RCC
experts do that. Besides, I was never good in chemistry.

That being said... Typose? Is that a kind of sugar?


Anka ------- reaching for her Renaissance Wax

On Jun 14, 7:40 am, Anka wrote:

All I know about verdigris is what I see and read in garden catalogs
and city tour books, so I know just enough *not* to spout off about
its connection to numismatics. I'll just sit back and let the RCC
experts do that. Besides, I was never good in chemistry.

RCC experts. LOL. Like the two who did in fact respond to my post
about verdigris/bronze disease. Yep, experts! You sure are good at
picking them out, the experts. LOL. Sorry, being redundant here. Maybe
you should team up with one of them and do another article, you know,
to topple the established wisdom. LOL. There I go again. But I'd
advise not doing the same as you did before, boldly pronouncing that
you spent a year doing research but conveniently ignoring the research
that refutes your "new paradigm," and consequently being refuted in
turn by everybody in ancient numismatics. LOL. Ouch, I have to stop
this. My sides are starting to hurt. I didn't mean everyone, of
course, just David Sear, Wayne Sayles, David Vagi, T.V. Buttrey,
Oliver Hoover ... and others. True experts. Your "experts" are better
ignored. Time is too valuable. My time. Then again, you like calling
people on their typos here, so spend your time as you see fit. Free
world. Well, not all of it.

Anyway, since no one knowledgeable seems interested in talking
seriously about this, there's no point really in sharing the print
references I have here or talking in detail about the information in
them. But there is some pretty good information on the Web about this,
though as usual you have to be careful because there's misinformation
out there too, from a quick Google search primarily from those who as
I said before are confusing verdigris and bronze disease. Maybe your
"experts" can comment on what's on the Web, pointing to links and
offering their expert views. LOL. Sorry. This would be valuable, or at
least interesting, but they of course have no interest in the
substance of this, just in making their idiot denunciations. Sorry, I
meant expert denunciations. LOL. OK then.

Well, can't wait for this Owl fourree to arrive. Fun stuff.
Interesting too how this thread has played out, isn't it, with you
responding first with your sage comments. I think this is the first
time a thread here has played itself out this way. I'd throw in
another LOL but I'm played out too. Bye, for now.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

On Jun 14, 1:53�pm, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:

snip

Maybe your "experts" can comment on what's on the Web, pointing to
links and offering their expert views. LOL. Sorry. This would be
valuable, or at least interesting, but they of course have no
interest in the substance of this, just in making their idiot
denunciations. Sorry, I meant expert denunciations.

So I guess you're sticking with your idiotic statement that verdigris
is harmless.

"Phil DeMayo" wrote in message
...
On Jun 14, 1:53�pm, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:

snip

Maybe your "experts" can comment on what's on the Web, pointing to
links and offering their expert views. LOL. Sorry. This would be
valuable, or at least interesting, but they of course have no
interest in the substance of this, just in making their idiot
denunciations. Sorry, I meant expert denunciations.

So I guess you're sticking with your idiotic statement that verdigris
is harmless.

Looks like it, doesn't it.

--
Jeff R.