Proof Finnish Imperial Coins

[Oldman]

Hello!

 

Can not find any reliable info on Proof silver coinage of Finland under Russia (XIX-XX centuries).

Any links or ideas? I have read a lot but w/o any specifics.

Thanks a lot !

[Sir Sisu]

Hello!

 

Can not find any reliable info on Proof silver coinage of Finland under Russia (XIX-XX centuries).

Any links or ideas? I have read a lot but w/o any specifics.

Thanks a lot !

 

 

Hello and welcome! Sorry that I have not been able to respond sooner.

 

As far as I know and from the literature and auction catalogues that I have, silver proof coins from the Grand Duchy era are very rare. In fact, they normally are not classified as officially Proof, but as MS with a descriptor like "mirror-like finish" or something similar. These are more likely to be proof-like as a result of an early strike rather than an intentional attempt with a seperate special die. (If you can read Finn than see item #373 for an example of this type of description. The image is no longer available unfortunately.) Consequently there are no numbers available and no price catalogues have proof grades listed for this era. The highest grade given is Mint State (implying full luster and no toning). Trial strikes exist for some coins, but these are extremely uncommon. Coins of this era, with few exceptions, were struck in Finland at the Mint facilities in Helsinki. (The first Proof issues ever officially issued by the Mint of Finland were a small number (700 pcs) of the Åland 100 markkaa commemoratives in 1991.) And as I mentioned above, as far as I know no proper proof silver coins exist.

 

If you have an example or have have come across literature that states otherwise I would be more than happy to hear/see anything that you might have. I could then inquire to more knowledgable fellow members of the Finnish Numismatic Society for further details and clarification.

 

And again welcome to Coinpeople! Hopefully this helps.

[Oldman]

Hello and welcome! Sorry that I have not been able to respond sooner.

 

As far as I know and from the literature and auction catalogues that I have, silver proof coins from the Grand Duchy era are very rare. In fact, they normally are not classified as officially Proof, but as MS with a descriptor like "mirror-like finish" or something similar. These are more likely to be proof-like as a result of an early strike rather than an intentional attempt with a seperate special die. (If you can read Finn than see item #373 for an example of this type of description. The image is no longer available unfortunately.) Consequently there are no numbers available and no price catalogues have proof grades listed for this era. The highest grade given is Mint State (implying full luster and no toning). Trial strikes exist for some coins, but these are extremely uncommon. Coins of this era, with few exceptions, were struck in Finland at the Mint facilities in Helsinki. (The first Proof issues ever officially issued by the Mint of Finland were a small number (700 pcs) of the Åland 100 markkaa commemoratives in 1991.) And as I mentioned above, as far as I know no proper proof silver coins exist.

 

If you have an example or have have come across literature that states otherwise I would be more than happy to hear/see anything that you might have. I could then inquire to more knowledgable fellow members of the Finnish Numismatic Society for further details and clarification.

 

And again welcome to Coinpeople! Hopefully this helps.

 

Dear Sir Sisu,

thank you very much for your very detailed message. I've come across (in my old coin album) 25 pennia in clear proof. I can not make a photo as I sent it to a grading company to see what they think about it. I'm very well aware of the lack of decent information on this topic but will post the results.

Thanks a lot,

[Sir Sisu]

Dear Sir Sisu,

thank you very much for your very detailed message. I've come across (in my old coin album) 25 pennia in clear proof. I can not make a photo as I sent it to a grading company to see what they think about it. I'm very well aware of the lack of decent information on this topic but will post the results.

Thanks a lot,

 

 

I look forward to it!

[WCO]

Hello!

 

Can not find any reliable info on Proof silver coinage of Finland under Russia (XIX-XX centuries).

Any links or ideas? I have read a lot but w/o any specifics.

Thanks a lot !

 

Oldman,

 

I can not offer you "reliable" info about the issue (as a book or online source), just my own thoughts and how I see it. If you want any of it I would be more than glad to discuss the issue. If you just looking for a list of books and sources I can not help. However, I can offer one opinion/explanation that was received via e-mail from Finland some time ago, to be exact from The National Museum of Finland, department of coins and medals.

 

I am also interested in your vision of this issue. Do you think that Finnish Proofs exist (in copper, silver and gold) and any explanation you can offer to support your statement would be appreciated.

 

Thank you in advance,

 

WCO

[Timofei]

I did not see this thread untill somebody mentioned it in Russian forum. I personally saw finnish copper and silver coins. Modern catalogs (like Kazakov) list these. Coppers and silver proofs have frosty devices, polished field (polished die and undercoin), double strike, polished edge on 2 marks. Whether it is PP or proof in the modern meaning - maybe difference there is too small.

 

As far as Finnish gold proof - there are 2 coins graded as PF by NGC. Both are bogus novodel pieces if not fakes. Here is a picture of one of them. This die was apparently polished (probably AFTER use as business strike, and probably after 1917) - the most striking argument is mirror-like area inside central shield (where lines should be) plus very thin feathers (results of polishing off the die).

 

....

[Oldman]

I am also interested in your vision of this issue. Do you think that Finnish Proofs exist (in copper, silver and gold) and any explanation you can offer to support your statement would be appreciated.

 

Thank you in advance,

 

WCO

 

WCO,

I'm familiar with the Finnish Mint's opinion. If I am not mistaken, they still believe that there were no proofs (at least oficially) minted.

And I would agree with them on this and want to add that all proofs are "restrikes" or "novodels". I've seen many copper proofs and at least a couple of silvers, however, in perfect condition , with no doubts made using original dies.

 

The bottom line here is (in my opinion): Originally , there were no proofs planned for mintage. However, with growing interest in that area of numismatics and to FILL the gap, PP coins were minted using original dies.

Again, I may be wrong here as I still try to find the reason ??

BTW, I'm still waiting for NGC on my silver piece !

[Oldman]

As far as Finnish gold proof - there are 2 coins graded as PF by NGC. Both are bogus novodel pieces if not fakes. Here is a picture of one of them. This die was apparently polished (probably AFTER use as business strike, and probably after 1917) - the most striking argument is mirror-like area inside central shield (where lines should be) plus very thin feathers (results of polishing off the die).

I tend to agree with this (please read my message above) with some exceptions

 

Take care,

[WCO]

WCO,

I'm familiar with the Finnish Mint's opinion. If I am not mistaken, they still believe that there were no proofs (at least oficially) minted.

And I would agree with them on this and want to add that all proofs are "restrikes" or "novodels". I've seen many copper proofs and at least a couple of silvers, however, in perfect condition , with no doubts made using original dies.

 

The bottom line here is (in my opinion): Originally , there were no proofs planned for mintage. However, with growing interest in that area of numismatics and to FILL the gap, PP coins were minted using original dies.

Again, I may be wrong here as I still try to find the reason ??

BTW, I'm still waiting for NGC on my silver piece !

 

 

Oldman,

 

Thank you for your answers. I'll try to be as short as possible. I hope you can read Russian and here is part of a Russian official document (Issued by Central Bank of Russia), that states that "Proofs" are minted only modern days, in other words there were no Proofs in Russian Empire (Finland included) since as they state this technology is modern.

 

-------------------

Приложение 2 к Инструкции Банка России N 33

"О порядке выпуска в обращение в Российской Федерации памятных монет" от 27 декабря 1995 г.

КЛАССИФИКАТОР КАЧЕСТВА МОНЕТ

 

..... "Пруф" и улучшенное качество чеканки - это специальные категории новейшей технологии монетного производства последних десятилетий, используемые для выпуска, главным образом, коллекционных монет".

.....

------------------

 

The same is opinion not only mint in Helsinki but also biggest Museums in Russia expressed the same opinion, I heard this opinion years ago and many times over. I am sure that in your collection there are some Proofs not only from Finland, but from Russia as well, so tell me, do you believe that Finnish and Russian sources are right and grading services marking any Russian or Finnish coin minted before 1917 as Proof are wrong? And how you can explain this huge difference in opinions?

 

A few months ago one known to me person wrote to the museum in Helsinki asking their opinion. Here are e-mails they exchanged (I removed only contact info and the rest is unedited).

 

-----------------

Dear Dr. Tuukka Talvio,

 

I'm sorry to bother you again. This is my last question to you about Finnish coins. I know that you are very busy, but your opinion, as the only one qualified expert in Finnish coins, is very important to me. According to Finnish mint records, gold coins 10 and 20 MARKKAA were never minted in PROOF state. Meanwhile, NGC (NUMISMATIC GUARANTEE CORPORATION of AMERICA) graded at least 2 gold coins from Finland as PROOF. I'm a little confused. Can you explain this contradiction? Is this because of not good qualification of graders here in US, or Proof gold coins were, indeed, minted?

 

Thanks a lot for your help

 

Sincerely yours,

Dr.....

 

--------------------------------------

 

Dear Dr.........,

 

The mint of Finland has issued proof coins 'officially' only since the 1990s. However, already in the late 19th century special strikings were produced for collectors with fresh dies. At that time persons like the Grand Duke Georgii Mikhailovich and I. I. Tolstoi ordered sets of coins from the mint, and when Tolstoi's coins were sold by A. Hess in 1913, many of the Finnish pieces were described as 'polierte Platte' which is usually translated as 'proof'. So you can say that proof coins were indeed minted in Finland but only for special purposes, and with a technique that was less developed than today.

 

Best wishes,

Tuukka Talvio

 

Keeper of Coins and Medals, PhD

The National Museum of Finland

P.O. Box 913, FIN-00101 Helsinki

 

----------------------------

 

Oldman, after reading this particular letter what can you tell? Is Mr. Talvio confirming existence of such coins, denies it or unsure? What meaning you can extract from his answers? Also, is Mr. Talvio saying that such coins are Novodels or on the contrary they are originals (minted for Grand Duke and I.I. Tolstoi, sold at Hess in 1913, i.e. well before 1917)? I am interested in your opinion.

 

Thank you.

 

WCO

[Oldman]

Oldman,

 

1. The same is opinion not only mint in Helsinki but also biggest Museums in Russia expressed the same opinion, I heard this opinion years ago and many times over. I am sure that in your collection there are some Proofs not only from Finland, but from Russia as well, so tell me, do you believe that Finnish and Russian sources are right and grading services marking any Russian or Finnish coin minted before 1917 as Proof are wrong? And how you can explain this huge difference in opinions?

 

2. Oldman, after reading this particular letter what can you tell? Is Mr. Talvio confirming existence of such coins, denies it or unsure? What meaning you can extract from his answers? Also, is Mr. Talvio saying that such coins are Novodels or on the contrary they are originals (minted for Grand Duke and I.I. Tolstoi, sold at Hess in 1913, i.e. well before 1917)? I am interested in your opinion.

 

Thank you.

 

WCO

 

WCO,

I broke your response into two major parts above.

 

1. I do not think that NGC/PCGS/etc. making mistakes grading coin as Proof - they are pretty knowledgable in this area and I believe , over years, they have learned a big deal of the 3 major "proof-detection" characteristics that I do not want to repeat here. So, in my opinion Finnish Proofs do exist ! However, [now read below]

2. ... as I stated in my previous posting, those Proofs are indeed novodels (Am I smart or what ? ) This letter from Finland , that you kindly provided, just proves my point (actually, Scandinavian coinage has been my area of inrerest for 40 years or so). Thus, there were no ORIGINAL proof coins minted for/by Finland under Russian rule. Those minted for His Majesty Grand Duke and Duke Tostoi were indeed minted before October 1917, however, for PREVIOUS years. As an example, known in existence proof 25 pennia 1875S was most likely minted in 1903-1904 for Duke Tolstoi collection using original dies. It does not lower its price or uniqueness , however, we're not discussing numbers here , we are trying to do some scientific research.

 

 

As to the Russian proofs I do believe they existed well before XX century. However, I have some concerns in this area looking through recent auction catalogs - you know what I mean

Sorry , if my message was too lengthy.

Have a good one,

[WCO]

WCO,

I broke your response into two major parts above.

 

1. I do not think that NGC/PCGS/etc. making mistakes grading coin as Proof - they are pretty knowledgable in this area and I believe , over years, they have learned a big deal of the 3 major "proof-detection" characteristics that I do not want to repeat here. So, in my opinion Finnish Proofs do exist ! However, [now read below]

2. ... as I stated in my previous posting, those Proofs are indeed novodels (Am I smart or what ? ) This letter from Finland , that you kindly provided, just proves my point (actually, Scandinavian coinage has been my area of inrerest for 40 years or so). Thus, there were no ORIGINAL proof coins minted for/by Finland under Russian rule. Those minted for His Majesty Grand Duke and Duke Tostoi were indeed minted before October 1917, however, for PREVIOUS years. As an example, known in existence proof 25 pennia 1875S was most likely minted in 1903-1904 for Duke Tolstoi collection using original dies. It does not lower its price or uniqueness , however, we're not discussing numbers here , we are trying to do some scientific research.

As to the Russian proofs I do believe they existed well before XX century. However, I have some concerns in this area looking through recent auction catalogs - you know what I mean

Sorry , if my message was too lengthy.

Have a good one,

 

 

Dear Oldman,

 

Thank you for your time and answers.

 

1. I am not sure that I understand how reading the letter you came to conclusion that ALL Finnish Proofs are Novodels?

 

2. Reading this letter do you believe that Mr. Talvio answered that there are authentic Finnish Proof gold coins in existance? Authentic pieces struck at the mint? Is it stated in this letter or there is some other meaning which does not allow to clearly say "that proof coins were indeed minted in Finland but only for special purposes, and with a technique that was less developed than today"?

 

3. While you satate that in 1903-1904 were struck 1875S 25 Pennia coins you completely dismiss possibility that mint could also strike 1903-1904 coins at that same time? What info makes you to dismiss such a possibility?

 

4. Also interesting to find out your opinion on why Russian-Finnish sources (mints, museums) deny even existence of such coins?

 

Sincerely,

 

WCO

[Oldman]

Dear Oldman,

 

Thank you for your time and answers.

 

1. I am not sure that I understand how reading the letter you came to conclusion that ALL Finnish Proofs are Novodels?

 

2. Reading this letter do you believe that Mr. Talvio answered that there are authentic Finnish Proof gold coins in existance? Authentic pieces struck at the mint? Is it stated in this letter or there is some other meaning which does not allow to clearly say "that proof coins were indeed minted in Finland but only for special purposes, and with a technique that was less developed than today"?

 

3. While you satate that in 1903-1904 were struck 1875S 25 Pennia coins you completely dismiss possibility that mint could also strike 1903-1904 coins at that same time? What info makes you to dismiss such a possibility?

 

4. Also interesting to find out your opinion on why Russian-Finnish sources (mints, museums) deny even existence of such coins?

 

Sincerely,

 

WCO

 

WCO,

here is what you quoted in your original letter from Mr Talvio:

"Dear Dr.........,

 

The mint of Finland has issued proof coins 'officially' only since the 1990s. However, already in the late 19th century special strikings were produced for collectors with fresh dies. At that time persons like the Grand Duke Georgii Mikhailovich and I. I. Tolstoi ordered sets of coins from the mint, and when Tolstoi's coins were sold by A. Hess in 1913, many of the Finnish pieces were described as 'polierte Platte' which is usually translated as 'proof'. So you can say that proof coins were indeed minted in Finland but only for special purposes, and with a technique that was less developed than today. "

 

Now let me answer your questions above to my best knowledge:

 

1. Isn't it what Mr Talvio writes ??! Please re-read his letter above... This has been known for many years by the way.

2. Finnish gold proofs exist...now ! But they have not existed 100 years ago or so ! Again, they were minted by the Mint for Grand Duke and Duke Tolstoi specifically and later than the date on the coins show.

3. As far as I know , there were no silver proofs minted in 1903-1904 FOR 1903-1904, only for previous years. Please do not get me wrong - THESE COINS ARE VERY RARE (if true proofs and authentic) even as restrikes or novodels, much rarer than Russian proofs of Nicholas II.

4. They base their conclusion on available sources, trust me they have ALL possible sources available. Why would we want to question that ? Existence of a couple of proofs does not prove their EXISTENCE !!! Some of them very well may be modern strikes !

 

I hope I've addressed your concerns. Best wishes,

[dk_spb]

Sorry for my bad english.

 

I discussed finnish proofs with Mr Tuukka Talvio few months ago.

 

1) There are well known finnish proof like 25p 1872 and 1898. It was an experiment on finnish mint after 1917. These coins have non-standard obverse (obverse type 1913-1917 on 1872).

 

2) I think that new dies was polished on Helsinki mint since end of XIX cent. There are many coins with mirror surface from this period. Usually it is a small silver coins (silver is softer than copper; don't need big strength for small coins). There are many proof-like (with mirror surface) 25p 1913-1917. But these coins is only first strike with fresh dies. It was minted on standard equipment with only one strike (usually need few strikes for proof).

There was not so many VIP collectors. It is regular coins.

Many years these coins was graded as MS but few years ago something was changed (not in coins ) and these coins grading as PF now.

You can check lot 1974-1976 Sale 36 at goldbergcoins.com for copper coins

 

3) There are few proof coins like gold coins from post above (which sold by WCO). I think that born history of this coins like as 75p 1863. Old used dies was polished and used for strike this coins after WWII.

I think it was not possible that defect coin was provided to VIP collector before 1917. You can check: http://www.mkjassociates.com/cgi-bin/ilgvu...=36&lot=863

state of arm was broken by polish

 

 

With best regards,

Denis

[gxseries]

Very interesting. Thanks for the discussion.

 

I am curious - where the Finland got it's minting technology from? From Russia or elsewhere?

[Oldman]

Sorry for my bad english.

 

I discussed finnish proofs with Mr Tuukka Talvio few months ago.

 

1) There are well known finnish proof like 25p 1872 and 1898. It was an experiment on finnish mint after 1917. These coins have non-standard obverse (obverse type 1913-1917 on 1872).

 

2) I think that new dies was polished on Helsinki mint since end of XIX cent. There are many coins with mirror surface from this period. Usually it is a small silver coins (silver is softer than copper; don't need big strength for small coins). There are many proof-like (with mirror surface) 25p 1913-1917. But these coins is only first strike with fresh dies. It was minted on standard equipment with only one strike (usually need few strikes for proof).

There was not so many VIP collectors. It is regular coins.

Many years these coins was graded as MS but few years ago something was changed (not in coins ) and these coins grading as PF now.

You can check lot 1974-1976 Sale 36 at goldbergcoins.com for copper coins

 

3) There are few proof coins like gold coins from post above (which sold by WCO). I think that born history of this coins like as 75p 1863. Old used dies was polished and used for strike this coins after WWII.

I think it was not possible that defect coin was provided to VIP collector before 1917. You can check: http://www.mkjassociates.com/cgi-bin/ilgvu...=36&lot=863

state of arm was broken by polish

With best regards,

Denis

 

Thanks! Indeed interesting.

Actually, this new information proves the point: there were NO ORIGINAL Finnish proof coins minted. All of

then either re-strikes or "novodels".

 

You have mentioned 1872 and 1898 25p proofs. They are known to exist (I am still sure they both were restruck in 1903-1904 .... see my postings above) but how about 1875 25p ? Do you have any information on those, or other dates ?

 

Thanks a lot,

[dk_spb]

You have mentioned 1872 and 1898 25p proofs. They are known to exist (I am still sure they both were restruck in 1903-1904 .... see my postings above) but how about 1875 25p ? Do you have any information on those, or other dates ?

 

"I am still sure they both were restruck in 1903-1904"

It is incorrect because obverse die for 1872 was type of 1913-1917 and for 1898 was type of 1906-1910 (type 1906-1917 but different mintmark).

In 1903-04 there was not these obverse dies. Both proofs 1872 and 1898 was minted not early 1906.

You can check picture of lot 373 from second post in this thread.

 

I have not any info about other years or denomination (like 25p 1875).

[Oldman]

"I am still sure they both were restruck in 1903-1904"

It is incorrect because obverse die for 1872 was type of 1913-1917 and for 1898 was type of 1906-1910 (type 1906-1917 but different mintmark).

In 1903-04 there was not these obverse dies. Both proofs 1872 and 1898 was minted not early 1906.

You can check picture of lot 373 from second post in this thread.

 

I have not any info about other years or denomination (like 25p 1875).

Dear dk_spb,

 

Thanks. Most likely you're right and I have just forgotten the dates. It could very well be 1913-1914 and not 1903-1904 (it's been awhile since I researched the topic).

Great !

 

Thanks a lot,

[dk_spb]

I am curious - where the Finland got it's minting technology from? From Russia or elsewhere?

 

"In May 1861 Soldan (first mint director) travelled to Sweden, Denmark and Germany. The Stockholm mint he considered too big to serve as a model for Finland, but the mint of Hannover .... seemed to fit the role. The drawing and the cost estimate ... were prepared in Berlin" (from book by T.Talvio)

First dies for finnish coins (before 1872) was made by Lea Ahlborn (Stockholm).

In 1866 there are project (not realized) for 2p and 20p coins as in France.

 

Is it answer for your question ?

[WCO]

Thanks! Indeed interesting.

Actually, this new information proves the point: there were NO ORIGINAL Finnish proof coins minted. All of

then either re-strikes or "novodels".

 

You have mentioned 1872 and 1898 25p proofs. They are known to exist (I am still sure they both were restruck in 1903-1904 .... see my postings above) but how about 1875 25p ? Do you have any information on those, or other dates ?

 

Thanks a lot,

 

 

Some observations.

 

1. Some Novodels may be distinguished from original coins if they are Class II, i.e. have different details from original coins. Proof 25 Pennia 1872 and 1898 as dk_spb said have obverse of later type (1913-1917), and may be therefore distinguished as Novodels made at later time.

 

How about Novodels of Class I. They have all details and everything the same as on originals, were struck with original dies just at later time. Since it is not possible to distinguish Novodel or not, no one actually cares, and no one calls "Novodel" such a coin.

 

So calling ANY coin a Novodel makes sence ONLY if there is something that allows to distinguish between the two coins, orifinal strike and Novodel.

 

 

2. After very brief research I found references on the following Finnish Copper and Silver coins that were listed as Proofs (in addition to two 25 Pennia coins already mentioned):

 

Copper

 

1 Pennia 1916

 

5 Pennia 1873

5 Pennia 1892

5 Pennia 1896

5 Pennia 1913

 

10 Pennia 1865

10 Pennia 1866

10 Pennia 1867

10 Pennia 1891

10 Pennia 1896

10 Pennia 1899

10 Pennia 1915

 

Silver

 

25 Pennia 1891

 

50 Pennia 1869

50 Pennia 1872

50 Pennia 1874

50 Pennia 1889

50 Pennia 1892

 

1 Markka 1872

1 Markka 1874

1 Markka 1892

 

I am pretty sure that this list is not complete and references may be found on most other dates in Proof, I recall to see 25 Pennia 1908, several dates of 1 Pennia, etc. but can't be sure or do not have reference or do not have time to look more into the catalogues or other sources. So we are not talking about just 2 or 3 coins, we are talking about almost date run of Finnish series in Proof. While I agree that earlier dates may be Novodels struck by the mint at later time I do not see any proof to the statement that ALL dates and denominations of Finnish Proof coins are Novodels.

 

If there will be any explanation, documents or references provided to prove or reject this theory I would be more than glad to hear what it is.

 

As additional (but weak) evidence to reject this theory is Hess auction of 1913. The coins there were listed as PP (Proof) and it is definite that at least MANY Finnish Proofs were struck BEFORE 1917 and obviously NOT LATER THAN 1913. I would be pleased if someone can list here ALL Finnish PP coins sold at Hess auction in 1913.

 

3. Do we all agree that Finnish coins exist as Proofs (Novodels or not) or dk_spb has different opinion on this matter?

 

WCO

[Oldman]

Some observations.

 

So calling ANY coin a Novodel makes sence ONLY if there is something that allows to distinguish between the two coins, orifinal strike and Novodel.

 

I can not agree with this statement. NOVODELS may or may not have features different from original coins. However, they all are minted later and not for circulation with ,normally, higher quality.

 

3. Do we all agree that Finnish coins exist as Proofs (Novodels or not) or dk_spb has different opinion on this matter?

 

 

 

WCO

 

Absolutely, 100% ! But they were minted not on original dates (in my mind).

[dk_spb]

After very brief research I found references on the following Finnish Copper and Silver coins that were listed as Proofs (in addition to two 25 Pennia coins already mentioned):

....

 

I am pretty sure that this list is not complete and references may be found on most other dates in Proof, I recall to see 25 Pennia 1908, several dates of 1 Pennia, etc. but can't be sure or do not have reference or do not have time to look more into the catalogues or other sources. So we are not talking about just 2 or 3 coins, we are talking about almost date run of Finnish series in Proof. While I agree that earlier dates may be Novodels struck by the mint at later time I do not see any proof to the statement that ALL dates and denominations of Finnish Proof coins are Novodels.

1) If all of these coins are really proof - I think that all of these coins can not be novodel

2) If there are so many proof coins - must be many document or references about producing proof coins before 1917

3) Why all of proof coins graded as proof in last few years? There not any references about proof coins before 2000.

 

As additional (but weak) evidence to reject this theory is Hess auction of 1913. The coins there were listed as PP (Proof) and it is definite that at least MANY Finnish Proofs were struck BEFORE 1917 and obviously NOT LATER THAN 1913. I would be pleased if someone can list here ALL Finnish PP coins sold at Hess auction in 1913.

I think it is mean that coins has mirror surface. Not Proof.

We discussed this on russian numismatic forum. PP in 1913 was not proof.

[WCO]

I can not agree with this statement. NOVODELS may or may not have features different from original coins. However, they all are minted later and not for circulation with ,normally, higher quality.

...

 

Dear Oldman,

 

What I was saying is quite DIFFERENT from what you are saying.

 

You were stating that "NOVODELS may or may not have features different from original coins". I agree

 

You were also stating that "... they all are minted later and not for circulation with ,normally, higher quality". I agree with you too.

 

But this all is not related to my statement. I said, that "calling ANY coin a Novodel makes sence ONLY if there is something that allows to distinguish between the two coins, original strike and Novodel".

 

And it means the following. Let's say you have two coins in your hands that both were minted as Proofs. You also know that this was done twice, first this coin was minted as original during that year which it bears, second time it was minted several years (or decades) later as Novodel. You also know that Novodel was struck with original dies (Class I Novodel) and there is nothing on both coins (they are looking as twins) that will allow you distinguish where is Novodel and where is Original strike. Would you call BOTH Novodels, BOTH originals or how?

 

You got what I was trying to say, I hope.

 

 

... Absolutely, 100% ! But they were minted not on original dates (in my mind).

 

Agreed 100% too, there is no doubt for me that many Finnish coins in all metals copper, silver and gold exist as Proofs and they are authentic, genuine coins and may be stars in any advanced collection. However, I asked dk_spb since I saw on other forums he expressed other opinion.

 

Dating of time when Novodels were struck 1903-1904 or 1913-1914 is VERY important, since it allows to think somehow what dates are Novodels and if they are ALL Novodels.

 

As so far you did not provide ANY evidence to support your statement that Finnish proofs are ALL Novodels.

 

best regards,

WCO

[WCO]

1) If all of these coins are really proof - I think that all of these coins can not be novodel

2) If there are so many proof coins - must be many document or references about producing proof coins before 1917

3) Why all of proof coins graded as proof in last few years? There not any references about proof coins before 2000.

I think it is mean that coins has mirror surface. Not Proof.

We discussed this on russian numismatic forum. PP in 1913 was not proof.

 

Somehow I missed this post, it appeared when I was typing my answer I guess.

 

dk_spb, welcome to Coinpeople! I hope we can discass issues here in a friendly atmosfere.

 

Yes, over the years I myself used to see with my own eyes may be two dozen of DIFFERENT dates and denominations of Finnish proofs. Some of them (few) I had in my posession and others I just inspected that were on major auctions here and there. I know collection that contains several pieces as such right now. These are scarce or even rare coins but not something that no one ever heard of.

 

And as you see, nice Oldman with his 50 years in coins business also have no doubt about existance of Proofs.

 

1) If all of these coins are really proof - I think that all of these coins can not be novodel...

 

They are real Proofs and I agree to you THEY ALL CAN NOT BE NOVODELS. So Oldman'd theory does not look right for me, especially without any evidence presented.

 

2) If there are so many proof coins - must be many document or references about producing proof coins before 1917

 

I do not know any official Finnish (or Russian) documents or other research references, may be you know, then please present it here. But luck of references can be easily explained. Any such a reference will question official Helsinki mint opinion (Russian official opinion and statements of Russian Museums and even Central Bank of Russia official documents) about existence of Proofs at that time. Remember, they state that this is MODERN TECHNOLOGY.

 

So if you or someone else will be able to explain WHY they state that, you will move far in understanding everything about early Finnish (and by the way Russian too) coins in Proof. I asked this question on Russian forum, but it was left without answers by you and the rest of opponents.

 

...

3) Why all of proof coins graded as proof in last few years? There not any references about proof coins before 2000.

 

What is the earlier reference you can find on Finnish Proofs? Is Hess catalogue 1913 a sufficient reference for you that lists PP coins. They are called Proofs for many decades, not just several last years.

 

Grading system is not something frozen, it is still in its development process. As soon as new knowledge becomes available and accepted by numismatic public it becomes part of a very straight and quite easy to understand system. The grading services are young itself, so everything they graded is graded within the last few years. But Proof coins are old.

 

...

... it is mean that coins has mirror surface. Not Proof.

We discussed this on russian numismatic forum. PP in 1913 was not proof.

 

That was what you were stating, you did not want to listen to anything else.

 

-----

 

I apologize if there is too much "water" here and my messages are too long.

 

Sincerely,

WCO

[dk_spb]

And as you see, nice Oldman with his 50 years in coins business also have no doubt about existance of Proofs.

I never said that there are not finnish proof.

But there are only Novodel ("experiment" coins): 25p 1872 and 1898.

 

They are real Proofs and I agree to you THEY ALL CAN NOT BE NOVODELS. So Oldman'd theory does not look right for me, especially without any evidence presented.

I do not know any official Finnish (or Russian) documents or other research references, may be you know, then please present it here. But luck of references can be easily explained. Any such a reference will question official Helsinki mint opinion (Russian official opinion and statements of Russian Museums and even Central Bank of Russia official documents) about existence of Proofs at that time. Remember, they state that this is MODERN TECHNOLOGY.

I need ask you about correct discussion.

We (both you and I) clear understand all about info from modern official documents from Central Bank of Russia.

You know opinion by Tuukka Talvio: He practically said that there are not proof coins before 1917.

 

What is the earlier reference you can find on Finnish Proofs? Is Hess catalogue 1913 a sufficient reference for you that lists PP coins. They are called Proofs for many decades, not just several last years.

PP is a polier platte = mirror surface.

Not proof. And "many decades" this coins was graded as MS or "mirror surface" not proof.

 

Grading system is not something frozen, it is still in its development process.

Ok. But I am sure that is very bad for grading system if MS coins will be PF after "development process".

Could you provide me any reference (auction catalog, grading records or other) about finnish proof (not only mirror surface) before 2000 (before "development process")?

[dk_spb]

Any can check this genuine "proof" coin.

http://www.northeastcoin.com/popupcontaine...=/inventory.jsp

This is lot 1976 from sale 36 from goldbergcoin.

If this coin was minted as high quality coin WHY it was minted by broken dies????

Both "1" has broken right down "leg".

Can mint director provide this broken coin for VIP collectors?

 

I think that this is a regular coin.

 

Questions to WCO: Are you think that proof coins was minted as regular coins in Helsinki mint ? Or this is not regular coin?