Sorry to those of you who think I am paranoid about fakes ( ... well, maybe I am a little bit ... ). But please look at this 1790-EM pyatak on eBay. Look very closely at the feathers on the left side of the eagle as well as the shape of the digits in the date.

Now compare that with this one: My 1790-EM pyatak

Brekke lists only one variety for this date and MM. I didn't look in Bitkin yet, but there are differences -- what do you think? I am assuming that both coins are genuine, because it doesn't make sense to fake something this common.

Thanks for your opinions!

Actually, it looks like this is the eagle of 1789-EM in the eBay auction. The first two digits of the date are also more similar to the 1789 coin. Is this variety documented somewhere??

Ask for the edge photo. It may disclose "many" interesting things

The Oldman

There were almost 40 million 5 Kopecks struck with this date/mint. Definetely to make the quantity, many dies were used. They can have sometimes distinguishable difference, but not sufficient enough (from historical point of view) to list them as "varieties".

WCO

Not only not sufficient but impossible, imho. A die for such big coin would make 10000 coins at most, 40mln makes 4000 die variation for each side, now calculate possible pairings

Thanks for the replies, folks!

Nevertheless, I still think this shows that there was a subtle change in design of the eagle feathers which probably took place in or around 1790. I certainly don't have enough material at my disposal (coins or photographs) to come to a definite conclusion. But I have 1788-EM and 1789-EM, and there is this eBay auction. All have the same irregular outline at the tips of the feathers on the left side. My 1790-EM and all later-date EM coins which I have show the feather tips to be much more evenly aligned. It looks as if they decided to "clean up" the feathers a bit without making major changes to the design. If this was a deliberate change, as I suspect it is, then we would indeed have two distinct eagle designs, each of which was in use for a period of a few years.

Steve Moulding: If you are reading this, it would be great to hear your take on this matter. Unfortunately, I do not have the article you wrote for the "Journal of the RNS" since I signed up only recently, and that number is out of print (still???)

come on Bob, that's a really nothing to worry about. This is a decent genuine coin. I can bet 100:1 that this coin is ok, imho, there are no doubts. There are so many varieties for high mintage numbers that it is not possible to account for all of them.

Hi, I also think that the eBay coin is OK. See here the eagle sides of my own two 5kop1790EM. The left wings are not 100% alike, either.
http://www.sigistenz.com/bilder/5kop1790EMn2x.jpg
Best wishes for 2007 to everyone - and happy hunting! Sigi

Thanks, Sigi ... very nice coins you have there! And they illustrate very well what I am trying to say.

In the meantime, I hope that others who want to contribute to this subject will read the entire message which I wrote initially as well as the second message, and realize that I have stopped talking about fakes a long time ago in this thread. I did say that I believe "both coins are genuine" ... it was just my first "knee-jerk" reaction upon discovering these differences to think that there might be something wrong with one of them.

As to relative scarcity, I am sure there is absolutely no difference; but there was obviously a slightly different design used for the eagle after 1790. If you compare your later-date EM coins with the one on the right in your picture, I think you will find that all have the same smooth outline on the wing, whereas 1789 and 1788 look like the other one (Brekke lists a scarcer 1788 with the earlier type eagle, but the later type is this one -- Brekke No. 270. Unfortunately, he shows no illustrations for EM coins after 1788).

Also, the mintmark appears to be slightly larger in the picture on the right -- especially the "M" which is tall and narrow. The right-hand picture as a whole is also slightly larger scale than the left-hand picture, but comparing the "E" with the "T" in "PJATb", the "E" is larger relative to the "T".

Auch Dir alles Gute im neuen Jahr!

Bobh, it's your turn to make a new catalogue!

That would be the job of my dreams! However, it requires a lot of things that I will not ever be able to achieve considering that I have limited access to a lot of coins (i.e., I must buy almost every coin that I can examine as opposed to someone like Brekke who was able to amass a large collection on his own), and I don't have the time to examine every variety, even if I had access to them, because I do have to earn a living doing work which has nothing to do with coins.

Besides, I don't have the numismatic experience necessary for such an undertaking. (This may even be obvious to most people judging from some of the responses to my previous messages here. )

Bob, my 2 coins were placed on the scanner together, one of them being slightly larger. The GrandDuke Michailovitch depicts one coin each per year, Diakov copied them. In both catalogs you can see one coin per date - but sometimes (if not often) there are one or several minivariants per year, unlisted. In a few days I will submit a scan with all my thirteen 5kop1788EM to 1796EM together side by side for comparison. Take care, Sigi

Bob, here are my 15 coins with the 1788EM type eagle. Hit the link, click then on the picture to enlarge. Please let me know about your findings. Thank you, Sigi
http://www.sigistenz.com/bilder/5kop1788EM...p1796EMnx15.jpg

Sigi, all of your 5 kopeks are very nice. I never bothered to collect them in such high grade because of the costs.

Just one thing: taking a look at the 1794 5 kopeks - isn't that 5 kopek struck on a brokeage? Seems like so.

Thank you, Sigi ... these are beautiful coins! Now I need a little time to examine them carefully.

There is something going on with your 1794 pjatak ... possibly a double strike or even overstruck?? For the overdates, it would be nice to see the other side if you have time.

Funny thing ... the first time I saw one of these, I thought to myself: "Such ugly coins, and so large and unwieldy ... why would anyone want to collect them?" Now I think they are some of the most fascinating coins I have ever seen.

gxseries, thank you for the praise! I have been collecting these actively for more than 30 years, always replacing with better grades. I am still not satisfied - never will be, I'm affraid. As to the 5kop1794EM brockage - the coin shows traces of the negative impression of the other side, this is pretty common with Russian copper of that period. Regards, Sigi

These are really wonderful coins, almost any one of which would make a great type coin. To have such quality in a date run is a remarkable achievement!

Do you collect copper coins only, or do you collect those struck in silver/gold/platinum as well?

grivna1726, thank you! 12 years ago I sold my collection with silver, gold and my only platinum coin in order to buy a house. Most of the big coppers, however, could survive. Many more big coppers have joined meanwhile. I think I am addicted to them. Sigi

That's a nice collection of coppers.

And that is an understatement.