Note the metal "curl" around the edge, where it meets the obverse and reverse surfaces. Does this mean the coin was overstruck, or struck in a collar, perhaps?

I was thinking of spooned, i.e. someone hammered the edges latter although I can't see the edge at the moment. Speaking of all the overstrikes that I have, the only coin that I have that seems to be overstruck with a collar is this one



Seems unreal as usually after double overstrike, the planchet would become thinner but this one isn't.

Looks like kids was playing in "pogera".I was playing then I was kid and exchange better coin for my "collection".

I remember hearing once that Russian kids used to use these heavy 5K's in some kind of back-yard game
Can you give us more details? (though I'm not sure I want to know )

Steve

Can you post a photo of the edge in that area? And a photo of the ridge shot with the coin on an angle so the interior curve is facing the lens?

I tend to agree w/ post-mint damage. But, if the planchet flows over the edge of the die, it can form an ridge. Those are typically smoother though.

Coins are slid / thrown against a wall. The one remaining next to the wall wins them all. I remember having played that as a school boy in Germany with 10-pfennig-pieces (roughly the size and value of a nickel). Of course that ruins coins, large and heavy ones in particular. Sigi

GX,

I don't think they were struck in a collar before the Boulton press. Looks like quite a bit of undertype there so I wouldn't expect much reduction. Also could be it was just a thick planchet to start with.

Visible CM overstrikes are not encountered very often. The coin (and picture) shown is not my own. Sigi

By sigistenz

The specimen illustrated by Sigistenz appeared in two different Russian auctions, the last time by Gelos in
May 2006. I have checked my database and this is the only auctioned overstrike from the CM mint that I
could find. This is in addition to the one in my own collection, mentioned in another posting.

I find that I have illustrations of 93 CM piataks, with only 2 (including the one in my set) showing signs of an
overstrike. This would seem to reinforce the belief (as noted by Rittenhouse in another posting) that the CM
planchets were overwhelmingly new. I have not read the original documents published by the Grand Duke
but it is my understanding that they indicate overstrikes only.

RWJ

I have checked my database and find nothing quite like this piece for a CM piatak. In
the past I have seen occasional EM pieces, however, with edges like this which had been
damaged after striking.

A few pieces in the database have slight rims along the edge and this probably resulted when
the die did not quite reach the edge of the coin.

These coins were struck in a screw press but I think that the collars used in these presses
would have been of the kind that merely centered the planchet. (In other words, the coin did not
expand to meet the collar.)

Rittenhouse may wish to comment on this further.

RWJ

It's very interesting from the picture from what Sigi has posted. Although that might be relatively obvious, I'm pretty suprised how the reverse side has almost all of the underlying image totally destoryed as it was double struck and I don't see any evidence of the 10 stars yet.

squirrel can you actually email me a higher resolution photos of them if it's not a bother? I'm somewhat suspecting an unusual region which might be a point of interest.

Also rittenhouse, that coin I have shown has puzzled me as it's too circular from the rest of the overstrikes that I have and seen. Usually after two overstrikes, it's pretty much an "oval" shape. By the way, would you happen to know any books that has written on the topics of overstrikes? I find it pretty them pretty bizarre - the more you see, the more variations can one find even under the same overstriking process. For example, Sigi's example is a good one.

I have images of 155 CM 5K's (though I expect a lot of overlap with RWJ's set).
I also have 10 CM's of my own which I can inspect more closely, though I don't recall ever seeing any evidence of overstriking. Sigi's image is a spectacularly nice example.

RWJ...is your example also 1763? If so, I wonder if there were, at first, a few recorded overstrikes that year. Perhaps many others in 1763 and all later CM's (1764-1767) were on new planchets.

Steve

Yes, 1763. Your suggestion may well be correct as the only two seen are both dated 1763.
There are no doubt more out there, however; I will be interested to learn if you find any in
your database, which has at least 60 more CM pieces than mine.

RWJ

Forgot to add in last post that my specimen is illustrated in RNS Newsletter 10.

RWJ

Here is another example of a 1763 CM 5 kopeks sold on EM

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=190166477730

Hard to tell if it was overstruck or not.

For some reason the CM 5 kopek coins look to be more heavily struck? They kind of reminded me of the TM 5 kopeks struck in 1787-8. Basok's site proved to be a useful site even though if it's a sell site.

Also, wasn't the Sestroretsk mint in some way more advanced than the other mints at that time? I mean in 1771, they were the only mint that dared to experiment with the kilo ruble. I'm sure they experiemented with some unusual technology that wasn't done in other mints other than in EM back in 1725 with it's square plates.

Just out of curiosity, how far away is Sestroretsk from St. Petersburg?

To me, it looks like a double strike (as described by the seller) rather than an overstrike.

I'm probably in over my head here, not having studied the particular characteristics of CM issues, but this coin causes me to wonder if CM did not use especially powerful presses, but simply struck the coins more than once using normal pressure. That might explain why the Peter III 10k undertype on the 1763-CM piatak shown by Sigi shows so little evidence of the stars (as gx has pointed out earlier) even though it is obviously an overstrike.

I am doubtful that the coin shown by gx was overstruck in a collar. Certainly the silver coins of this era were not struck in a collar (nor was the gold) and it seems unlikely that a more advanced technology would be used for copper coins. The blanks were edged first in a Castaing or similar machine, then struck without a collar. It is easy to understand why the nearly perfect roundness (unusual for an overstrike, as gx has pointed out) of gx's coin might lead one to think that a collar might have been used, but that seems improbable, in my opinion.

Another example of a 1763CM overstrike out of a Russian auction.

Click to view attachment

Note the star on the undercoin just left of the crown.

Steve

(it is a CM, but there's not much of interest on the reverse)

You're right, typically overstrikes (and oftern double strike) are thinned and more ovate than normal strike. However, sometimes they aren't. Back in the 80's and early 90's before everyone looked at everything with a loop, I found a few double-struck US large cents in coin lots at estate auctions. No one looked close 'cause the coins were low grade and not obvious. But once you looked carefully and esp. with a loop there was the second strike.

I don't know of any books or comprehensive articles on double and overstruck in any series. That's probably a good thing 'cause gives coin geeks like us an edge.

I don't want to be ignorant but I am kind've new to this but what is an overstrike? I know what a double strike is I think it is when the die hits twice when its not supposed to. Don't laugh if I'm wrong.

Hello Doug.

The quick answer is that an overstrike is when a new design is struck over an older one. This avoided the time and/or expense of having to melt down existing coins and produce new planchets. It was fairly common in 18thC Russia, especially in copper coins. It usually, but not always, happened when the copper standard changed or when there was a new Tsar/Tsarina.

Overstriking is actually quite a broad topic in Russian numismatics and I would recommend any further general discussion to go into a new thread.
You can also see earlier discussions and examples by searching previous posts.


Steve

Thanks a lot Steve that answerd what I needed to know you done good in explaining it

Thanks again Doug