Hi

Here is a coin from my collection. Would someone please take a look at it and let me know if it is authentic?

it is 100% authentic!

Authentic. 1814 is the most common date for this mint/series. Little point in faking one.

Steve

Thanks! Russian coins are not my area, but I do sometimes take a risk and pick up coins I don't know about, provided they are VERY cheap. BTW, can someone please recommend a good beginner's book on Russian coinage?

Well, there is no single book which covers everything. Most references which cover coins issued during the imperial era (1700-1917) do not cover the wire kopeks, etc. which are older.

If you don't need prices/grades, I would start with V. V. Uzdenikov's "Monety Rossii - Russian Coins". He covers every period beginning with approx. 1700 and ending with 1917. There are indications of rarity for every entry. Although he does not by far cover all varieties, most of the more important ones are listed there. There is also very valuable information WRT coin weights, alloy standards, mintage numbers, edge varieties, etc. It is a standard reference which is used by most auction houses, and almost everyone has it, so it is a common point of reference.

For more in-depth coverage of varieties, Bitkin is a valuable asset to have. For Russian silver coinage, there is RW Julian's book "Russian Coinage 1796-1917" -- as the date indicates, if you want to collect anything earlier, and are particularly interested in silver, you should try to pick up a copy of the older book by Severin. It is somewhat hard to find, though, and will probably cost between $50 - $100. Brekke is best for copper, and there is a nice reprint of the Severin book on gold and platinum coinage published by Durst. Brekke also has price lists, and there have been updated supplements published in 1987 and 1997.

For Soviet issues, Rylov/Sobolin is very good, as is the more recent reference by Adrianov. Both of these also cover the imperial era and provide some breakdown of prices by grade. Also, mintage numbers given by Rylov/Sobolin seem to be very accurate, whereas Krause often isn't. I hardly ever refer to Krause these days any more for Russian coins, although I use it a lot for other world coins.

No problem with authenticity as others have already noted. However there
is an interesting feature about this coin in that the letter Pi (=P) of the mintmaster
initials (at the sides of the eagle’s tail) is upside down. Has this error been
published?

RWJ

Good catch, RWJ!
I looked in Brekke, Bitkin and Adrianov ... couldn't find any mention of it. I would have looked in the GDM corpus (published on CD by Alexander Basok), but it still takes me much too long to find anything in there.

I haven't seen one, though the 1814 Pi's often look like two punched I's with no connector added at all. RWJ...were the Pi's still composite by this date or had they moved on to a single letter punch?

As far as I know, until 1844–45 all lettering on coin dies was done with with partial
punches, so the letter P (= Pi) would have been made up of |, |, and _. The engraver
in this case put the symbol “_” at the bottom rather than at the top as should have
been done.

RWJ

Adrianov hasn't seen this before. Said he wouldn't mind paying about 30 bucks for it!

Thanks a lot for the info, bobh.

What can I say about the error coin........beginner's luck?

Perhaps the die sinker was trying to be efficient, and only used the I punch twice, and just touched the top serifs together to make the P as his normal method. He missed on this one and touched the bottoms together....

Here's a 2 kop from the same mint 1811. I did not get this one but it looks interesting. Looks like there is a double line above mint marks.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=140210077661

Nice example.
I think there probably should be a double line. I examined 38 of these coins. The double line is there either completely or partially on the better condition ones. With any wear on the coin the lines quickly merge into the single thick bar normally seen.

I also see the die deterioration below the 2 on one other example.
Interestingly, this also shows a well defined double bar above the mint even in the presence of wear.
Your example
Click to view attachment
Conros 171, Lot 348
Click to view attachment

Steve