Is the Gelos coin in any catalog? I'm still looking for references

You do not need to reveal your private source or picture, if you say it is just like the Gelos coin that is enough.

As far as minor and fantasy Novodels, many serious collectors both now and in the past don't (and did not) regard them as worthy of notice. Just read want the Grand Duke had to say about them! Researchers don't care for them either, that is why there is no good reference as far as I know.

I think I will politely disagree with this. The modern references named essentially use the
Grand Duke as amplified by Giel-Ilyin and Ilyin-Tolstoy. In each case the modern author
has made a good effort to add pieces to his lists but there are still many discoveries waiting
to be found.

A reasonable example of this is the 1786 gold two roubles. It was originally published in the
late 1830s by Chaudoir but then denounced by Schubert in the 1850s and again by the Grand
Duke in the corpus volume for Catherine II. Giel, Ilyin, and Tolstoy unanimously condemned
the Chaudoir listing, saying in essence that it was a die fault, not a 6 in the date. We now know
a great deal more about dies and hubs than was known before 1917 and the 1786 two roubles
is genuine beyond any doubt; it is, however, not listed in any of the references given above.

It is not necessary to find archival documents or provenance to a major collection to show that
a coin is genuine. I will agree with And986, however, that such proof is welcome at any time.

RWJ

Here is a (previously posted) example of the 1786 2 roubles:

"It is not necessary to find archival documents or provenance to a major collection to show that
a coin is genuine."

RWJ, what is necessary than? In your example you referred yourself to the old documents! You even refer to the year the first related document was published for the 2 rouble example. Almost 200 years ago... How is your own example relevant to the above statement? This coin has such a rich history behind...

You say "still many discoveries waiting to be found." - and I wonder how? By declaration? Please explain! No documents, no archives, no collections. The coin just appear out of nowhere...

My point was simple. Discoveries WILL BE MADE. The documents can be found, archives will be researched, old collections with the traceble purchase history will surface...

Who or what curcumstances give someone the right to declare the coin real? Again, IF there is NO documentation, NO archives or museum records, the similar dies are NOT present in prestigious collections.... What should that be? A miracle? Without reference to "archival documents or provenance to a major collection" Would you answer please?

Alexbq2, the Gelos coin was in old the auction catalog (similar one, same dies). The dies are traceable back to 1930-th. Good enough for me. But again, for me only! Other people may think differently. If I find it - I'll scan it for you. As I said before I do have a picture of the real coin for the comparison. So i would gladly buy Gelos coin if I would be living in Russia.

It's just a coincidence that I have the picture of the coin made with the same dies. If I wouldn't have the picture I would say that I'm not sure about that coin ether.

I would like to thank everyone for their input!

In addition to RW Julians mention of the Grand Duke, I would like to point out that not only is his corpus the foundation and much more of Russian Numismatic studies, but also his views are still very much with us. And he is the man who stopped with his petition the entire practice of Novodels, so I am not surprised that I can't find any popular reference on the subject. For the same reason lots of Novodels would me missing from the more significant collections of the period, since the collectors did not regard them as legitimate coinage.

But moving away from the academic to more practical. I took the WAG coin with the large flan. Resized it rotated it slightly made it opaque (thank you Paint.net) and layered it on top of the Gelos coin (which we know is genuine). The result is a perfect match! This is it:



Here is the smaller WAG coin:

Thank you, I would appreciate if you could post the image(s) you have.

Also, do not forget that a new coin can be found in a coin hoard. In wires they are making a lot of new discoveries all the time! This of course is not likely to apply to Novodels.

The WAG coin is good too than... Thank you for the work you did, Alexbq2! Makes me confident am not mistaken...

Right. Archeological findings of course. When the time incapsulation is without doubht.

So, who here thinks I have way too much time on my hands?

Here's some more CSI

Looking at the flip side of the Gelos coin, I was able to match it to another WAG coin. Here:

Now Gelos:

And now both:

Now the Rider on the WAG coin:

Now how about this guy? Does he look familiar?

From a different WAG coin:

But this last guy has this flip side:

And this is from the eBay coin shown earlier (not mine):

So now out of a single documented coin we have 4 identifiable dies!!!

To Be Continued...

The saga continues!!! Plot thickens!!! When will this all end?!

Well last lettered side can be matched to 2 almost identical WAG coins. The size of the flan is different but the design on both sides is the same. So the lettered side, WAG calls it reverse, but I would think that it is obverse, is the same as the last one. But the rider is once again different:

This happens to be the same rider as on one of the eBay coins (once again not mine):

In case the reader is not convinced one more superposition:

What's interesting is that eBay coin is has a new reverse die. This time Fedor Alekseevich!

As you can guess this reverse (lettering) die matches something on WAG.

This time it is a much smaller coin - Fedor's Denga:

Luckily, this last coin (I hope no one will disagree), is identical to one of the coins that I bought:

They are very different in my opinion. Different dies. Only Gelos and WAG coins seems to be similar

The eBay Fedor die also matches another WAG kopeek, with a different rider - so a new coin die!

This is the superimposition:

Here is that coin:

the question is, who did make them and how many months ago?

Here is the WAG denga rider on top of my coin. The WAG's crown I think is damaged, but the shape of the rider, and details such as the horse's leg being detached from the horse are the same. Here is the superimposition:

If you were following I have traced the dies back to the Gelos coin, which you say has documented history. This means that all these coins were made at about the same time. So when was the Gelos coin made?

Gelos coin made probably as I think no later than 1930-th. WAG coin is very similar. The other ones AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED were made yesterday, if you wish. The other coins are different in my opinion. DIFFERENT!

eBay coin is a fake. We are going in circles in here. I think this issue is over for ME for now. I'll ask for the permission to post the coin from the collection.

alexbq2,

Your coin looks OK to me. Just wire Novodels are not a popular kind.

Regards,
WCO

I'm sorry you feel that way.

My goal was not to convince anyone specifically, but to empirically analyze the dies from the images that I have collected over the last few days. As I promised in the earlier post, I will make any relevant findings public. Since a coin can not be half fake and half genuine, I have done my best to match the dies to the coin that you say has history. There is one more coin with some history, provided by forum member Thee_Imortal_One. That coin came from Alex Basok, probably with some traceable history. I forgot to save it's images earlier, but you can find them on this forum. It matches one of the WAG coins in the die chain that I identified, so I could also start with that one.

I will continue my analysis later, I think it could be useful to somebody someday. It takes time to go through images and compare them attentively. I can sort of see similarities that may allow me to add a few more WAG coins to this chain and maybe one more of silver eBay coins. I can definitely link one of the eBay coppers to one of the WAG coppers, but I see no link (at the moment) between Petr/Fedor Alekseevich novodels and Aleksey Michailovich Novodels. So unless, I will find an Aleksey Michailovich coin with some history, I do not think I could demonstrate their authenticity.

If anyone sees a mismatch between the die images I provided, please point out the details that do not correspond.

I think And986 raised a good point. I have not found any reference on these, yet.

I certainly understand why there isn't much information, as you say "wire Novodels are not a popular kind". I have heard (read) some respectable researchers state that they simply don't care for any Novodels, or at least the once that were not struck with original dies. Wires (real once), are still not very popular among the collectors. Although, in the last couple of months the interest seemed to have picked up a bit - at least on eBay. If interest in Russian coins keeps increasing, we will certainly see more information published on all subjects. But for now, I'll keep digging on my own.

Thank you for your patience, Alexbq2. Usually it's not a good idea to judge the pictures... There is a combination of factors why my posts are not so friendly. Nothing personal.

I have nothing in my library on wire novodels.

I assumed that the coins were probably fake, now I am far less sure.

Your die linkage study is interesting and is causing me to reconsider my view on the matter of authenticity.

I know of no other such information being published in the West, but maybe there is something in Russia.

With a little fleshing out, I think this might make a worthwhile contribution to JRNS as original research on a poorly understood aspect of Russian numismatics.

It's not only wire kopeks that is severely understudied. Let's go back to the original topic - overstruck coins too are not well studied either such as the late years of Elizabeth I 1 kopek coin overstruck over Swedish 1 ore.

Good point, gx. I have never seen such a coin in real life, only pictures in books and on the net.

As long as we are back on the original subject ...
Are there any known fakes of Paul's overstruck coins such as the one in the link of the first message of this thread?

Awhile back on eBay I bought one (1793/96) ... it was advertised as such, and luckily the price didn't go too high. I think I paid about $100 for it; it is in much better shape than the one in the eBay auction and is free of green crud. I would show it to you, but at the moment I am having some unpleasant issues with my webspace provider. Anyway, everything about it appears genuine, except that there is a little line along the edge. This could have been due to a planchet flaw, since it only extends about 1/4 way around the coin. Also, the line appears to be incuse rather than raised. I really can't imagine why anyone would want to make a cast copy of this -- the undercoin's design is plainly visible, but not so that it jumps out at you.

Glad to be back on track. Don't know how your thread got hijacked and turned into a massive argument on Novodels.

Regarding fakes...absolutely they exist. I have a fake 1793 overstrike 5K. The edge has been smoothed away. A collector in Italy contacted me recently and showed the exact same coin down to every last die defect also with a smoothed edge. He'd picked up in a local flea market for a few bucks.

There are also well done fakes that show an EM on the under-cipher coin. An extremely rare thing.

Steve

Thanks, Steve.

I remember reading about the fake 1793/96-EM in one of the more recent JRNS. Could you possibly post obv/rev images of the fake (the one without "EM" on the undercoin, that is), please? That way I could compare them to my own coin.

Thanks!

Obverse
Click to view attachment

Reverse
Click to view attachment

Thank you VERY MUCH for these images, Steve!

In the meantime, I was intermittently able to upload new images again to my coin gallery. Here is the coin I have:
http://hairgrove-goldberg.com/Gallery/russ...l-restrike-1793

It looks like they were struck from different dies. There are rotated images with highlighting of the undercoin elements I could see which I placed below the top row of pictures. There is a picture of part of the edge as well, and the faint line I mentioned can also be seen. Not sure what to make of it...it doesn't go all the way around the edge, and it doesn't look like it has been smoothed because it is actually incuse.

Anyone?

Click to view attachment

Well, here is my example.

Original cipher is rotated right about 15 degrees.

Click to view attachment

This is the reverse.

Bare traces of Curvy 'E' visible.

Hey! Guess what? Another P without the cross-bar. RWJ...what do you think? Very interesting to see this in the re-overstrike coins.

I remember having this dicsussion with RWJ. If memory serves me right, RWJ's opinion was that P without the cross bar are die maker/engraver signature/special mark. I've seen it in much earlier roubles of Catherine II.

Very interesting! We've seen it recently in an 1814 IM 2 Kopeck discussed here. And then there's RWJ's C2 5K that has an E without lower bar (so it looks like an F). I didn't know you also saw this in Roubles. Thanks Igor!

I am pretty sure RWJ have evidence to prove that "... P without the cross bar are die maker/engraver signature/special mark". I think many collectors would like to hear such an outstanding story.

How about worker at mint punched two I's instead of P (possible for several reasons, like P punch was broken or worker was too lasy or did not see much difference, etc.) or other reasons (like filled die), why these were dismissed?

WCO

WCO, your list of possibilities all seem reasonable , though the special mark theory is also interesting. It's still amazing to me that they built letters in pieces and didn't (for example) have a P punch. How hard could it have been to make a set of single letter punches? Is there a technical reason why they did this? Was a single letter too fragile (P cross bar kept breaking, for example). We sure wouldn't be having these discussions otherwise.

Steve

Heres mine. Very distinct II in "FIVE" but clearly a cross bar in "KOPbEKb"

the flip side......