Unfortunately in this series, as in others, there are modern fakes.

In the world of numismatics, there are generally two types of counterfeits: those that produce one or a few coins of great rarity and very high value, and those that produce a high number of coins of low market value.

In this case of the DiviSeries we find the second option, as they are not excessively rare coins that have a limited market value.

Until now, numerous forgeries of three very specific types have been detected: one for Augustus with a pyre revers, one for Hadrian with revers eagle and another for Alexander with a pyre revers.

I am not going to go into details on the topic of falsification techniques as this is not the purpose of my work. I recommend the excellent work of Carlos Traver Fábrega (1), available in print and online.

In the first case (DIVO AUGUSTO) we find copies made from dies obtained from an authentic original coin, this means that we have coins with blanks with different shapes and cracks. We can see this falsification reported on the specialized website https://www.forgerynetwork.com/ where this case, of the falsification of DIVO AUGUSTO, has its own chapter.

The second case (DIVO HADRIANO) was reported on ForumAncientCoins. I attach the photographs and comments provided courtesy of Din X:

Why are they transfer die fakes?

1. There is a ghost line on the obverse which is 100% representing the flan shape and flan end of the authentic mother

2. The edge cracks on the reverse have been copied, they are an individual characteristic from striking of the mother and should not be found identical on another coin

3. There is an encrustration on the I of DIVO on the mother this encrustration, which is an individual characteristic of the mother from environment and it has been copied

4. These fakes only have details from the original dies which can already be found on the authentic mother!
No new details, from the original dies which are missing on the mother.

5. Detail loss and soapyness

Comparison of details that are transmitted from the authentic mother coin to the other two coins considered counterfeits.

Another coin considered fake, with various details of the coinage and the ghost line in the upper left quadrant, originating from the mother coin.

In the third case (DIVO ALEXANDRO) we see that they are replicas of the same original coin tooled to make identification difficult.

It is interesting to observe the edge of the coin with its cracks, unrepeatable facts at the time of production that demonstrate the copy nature of the coin.

Surely the authentic original coin must have been auctioned or sold and it will be difficult to differentiate it from fakes through photos that appear on the web.

Likewise, the dies that show the counterfeit coins are real, original dies that were used to strike authentic coins with the same obverse and reverse combination, or other combinations. Therefore, we can find coins that, showing the same dies on the obverse and reverse as the fake ones, are authentic.

We see several authentic coins that share one of their dies with the fake coins, I mark them with the arrow:

The database states in the "Reference" section of the coin that there are counterfeits with this pairing of obverse and reverse dies. This does not imply that we are certain that the coin is fake, since it cannot be ruled out that among the photos of the coins with those dies the original authentic coin or an authentic twin coin appears. Therefore, it is necessary to understand this information only as an indication of suspicion of forgery.

(1) Traver Fábrega, Carlos. È FALSO IL MIO DENARIO? Guida all'autentificazione delle monete d'argento dell'antichità. Ed. Diana 2013.