1764 5 copper kopek used to strike SEE WHAT

[WCO]

Timofey and BKB, thank you for the replies.

 

Timofey:

So you confirm that the article is a general article about how counterfeiters make fake coins over genuine pieces. But you included 1848 coins in your list, and they are not fakes. You also combined it with Thaler made over 5 Kopecks. Let me clarify my position.

 

- I think that most likely Thaler made over 5 Kopecks is a fake.

- I am sure that French patterns are genuine.

- I am sure that two different technologies made Thaler over 5 Kopecks and French patterns, but do not want to engage into lengthy and boring discussion about it.

 

So please do not combine authentic coins and fakes into a mix of fakes, about which you used to read that article in Russian Antiques magazine. That article has nothing to do with 1848 French patterns whatsoever. You call French patterns as "so-called French pattern". However, you should use plural form you were shown many such coins different kinds of French patterns, so we are discussing a group of coins here, not just a single coin. For me it looks very unlikely that counterfeiters make many different dies to make a group of coins. Too much work.

 

----

 

BKB, you said the following: "No one in a right mind will mint a series of patterns on Russian or any other coins".

 

I showed group of pattern coins minted for Paraguay answering this statement of yours, and before that answering similar statement. Those Paraguay patterns were made over other South American coins (Just the same as French patterns were made over some European coins). This proves my point that such coins (struck over other world coins) known to be minted in 19-th century. If you think that "No one in a right mind..." would do such a thing, well then think again. But may be you do not believe those Paraguay patterns are authentic and NGC certified another group of fakes?

 

No I do not have other explanation for making such coins other than "no planchets were available", but it was confirmed on French forums that this is true and many 1848 French patterns were in fact struck over older French and some world coins (according to you those who did it are not "in a right mind"). Same information is on HKMAL's blog, there are no reasons not to trust information that comes from several independent places.

 

I also want to point that no matter what is the undercoin. Russian, Greek, Danish or others. French Patterns made over Russian coins have NO PREMIUM vs coins struck over Greek, Danish or any other coins and they have NO PREMIUM over similar coins where no undercoin is visible at all, so speculation that those coins were made for Russian collectors because Russian coins cost more is just a speculation, nothing more. It has no legs to stand on from the beginning.

 

As of now I do not have any new information on the issue so I will kindly withdraw from this thread.

 

Have a good day.

 

WCO

[IgorS]

I really do not care about 1848 French patterns, but I wanted to post the following:

Here is an image of a very rare pattern gold coin struck over another coin. Why was not a blank planchet used to create it? Was not this pattern important enough? After all, how hard is it to create a little gold blank? It seems to me that Mints work in mysterious ways and we can mostly speculate on this subject. So these French patterns struck over other coins have the right to exist. On the other hand they could be fake, because there is market for this kind of stuff. (See my first sentence for my position on this matter).

 

 

P.S. If anyone wants to doubt the pictured coin - it is from The Russian State Historical Museum (GIM).

[grivna1726]

P.S. If anyone wants to doubt the pictured coin - it is from The Russian State Historical Museum (GIM).

Yes, but is it in a slab?

[BKB]

I really do not care about 1848 French patterns, but I wanted to post the following:

Here is an image of a very rare pattern gold coin struck over another coin. Why was not a blank planchet used to create it? Was not this pattern important enough? After all, how hard is it to create a little gold blank? It seems to me that Mints work in mysterious ways and we can mostly speculate on this subject. So these French patterns struck over other coins have the right to exist. On the other hand they could be fake, because there is market for this kind of stuff. (See my first sentence for my position on this matter).

 

 

P.S. If anyone wants to doubt the pictured coin - it is from The Russian State Historical Museum (GIM).

 

"Long time no see" the topic of this wonderful pattern. Again, imho, these overstruck patterns, just like 180. rouble patterns minted on coins of Anna etc, I believe to be novodels, just like the novodel rouble of Peter III struck on Catherine, Anna, etc. Luckily, with Peter III we have the design differences.

With these gold patterns, the edge may provide the ansfer at times... But, at least we have historical records of existence of these struck upon other coins + we have material for die comparison. Russia was historically very poor when it came to gold and silver. Until the time of the Catherine II, mining of russian gold and silver was very limited and most of the precious metals used in coin production was purchased abroad in the form of coin etc. This was true throughout the reign of Peter, Catherine I, Peter II, Anna, and I am sure, continued well into the Elisabeth reign. Thus, there may be a very good explanation why a foreign or domestic gold coin was used to strike a pattern (although, it is very unlikely which makes me believe it to be a novodel) But there is no plausible explanation of minting a copper pattern in 19th century france upon a russian copper coin, where one would know that the metal qualities would not allow the design of the undercoin to be completely erased at this thickness of the final product.

 

If someone could find a French pattern in a french museum, and then compare the dies to the dies used to strike these overstruck patterns, it would be a good start.

[Loyal Citizen]

... Russia was historically very poor when it came to gold and silver. ...Thus, there may be a very good explanation why a foreign or domestic gold coin was used to strike a pattern (although, it is very unlikely which makes me believe it to be a novodel)

 

 

Is that it? You can do better than that Presentation piece was struck on a used planchet because there was no blank one available ? Well, not very convincing. At the time of Elizabeth Petrovna, Russia started minting large gold 5 and 10 rouble coins in large quantities and they could easily find gold for this presentation pattern at the mint.

 

...But there is no plausible explanation of minting a copper pattern in 19th century france upon a russian copper coin, where one would know that the metal qualities would not allow the design of the undercoin to be completely erased at this thickness of the final product...

Obviously, that was not the purpose! The purpose was to select the best designs for future massive production. It did not really matter what was used for trial verions. That's why we see (1) various designes exist (2) different minting styles used.

 

One point I'd like to make: If you focus on the fact that some RUSSIAN coins were used as hosts you will fail to accept. However, if you focus on the fact that ANY AVAILABLE coin was used as the host you will be able to accept. This fact is not creating new chapter in Russian numismatics, it is just showing the mint production process in details.

[one-kuna]

gold coin control & check point is uncomparable to copper at any mints - this is for novodel gold ruble reply;

 

the "coin" showed up as a 1848 french essai struck on a copper russian planchet IS NOT PARIS MINT production and

it is a modern artifact made by copied dies, therefore a fake;

 

this subject is completely lost in world history, including russian numismatics; those links and references provided earleir are not credible even close to be considered; for example, one of the link providing the info on striking french essai is under my investigation, but it can be said as of now, that a person who provides the info is not specialized in it

[BKB]

Is that it? You can do better than that Presentation piece was struck on a used planchet because there was no blank one available ? Well, not very convincing. At the time of Elizabeth Petrovna, Russia started minting large gold 5 and 10 rouble coins in large quantities and they could easily find gold for this presentation pattern at the mint.

 

 

Obviously, that was not the purpose! The purpose was to select the best designs for future massive production. It did not really matter what was used for trial verions. That's why we see (1) various designes exist (2) different minting styles used.

 

One point I'd like to make: If you focus on the fact that some RUSSIAN coins were used as hosts you will fail to accept. However, if you focus on the fact that ANY AVAILABLE coin was used as the host you will be able to accept. This fact is not creating new chapter in Russian numismatics, it is just showing the mint production process in details.

 

I did not make the argument you attribute to me. I was pretty clear on stating that I think this is a novodel. But, it would be easier to accept that a gold coin (soft metal) was used to strike a pattern in 18th century Russia. Not a very plausible story, as you point out., and I have to agree. That is precisely why I think these are novodels. If not for the long record of appearance of these coins, I would think they are fake. Better safe than sorry.

 

I am not sure what you are getting at with 5 and 10 rouble coins of Elizabeth with the "massive" production of 2 to 24 thousand pieces. You would have a better argument with a 2 rouble coin. That, you think proves that Russia at that time had an abundance of gold which was freely available to mint workers on a whim? Ok, whatever...

 

Alex, I know it is your coin and you defend it as hard as I would defend any of my coins. I do not want to change your opinion, and you will not change mine by making statements like that. Not that you should care what my opinion is. Design for future production is a very nice theory. However, why not just submit a drawing? That is how it was done in Russia. I am not to savvy on the French mint design approval procedure, but everyone keeps on bringing Russian examples, so I fall back to what I know. And what I know, is that normally a drawing was approved prior to any minting, at least that is what I read.

 

And yes, it would be easier to accept if the coin was struck on a French coin.

[alexbq2]

I think there is some confusion here. Essai in French literally means trial. Trial and Presentation pieces are not one and the same. Why would anyone expect perfection from strikes that were intended to try out dies under development?

 

In the Staraya Moneta thread WCO presented links to coins struck on Greek and was it Dutch? coins. Also they are struck with a completely different design:

http://www.cgb.fr/monnaies/vso/v14/images/...html?depart=618

http://www.cgb.fr/monnaies/vso/v14/images/...html?depart=619

 

So is this another copied die? What does it make it now? 3 different copied sets of dies?

And what about Compagnie Générale de Bourse? Are they also knowingly selling fakes? Or are they just incompetent when it comes to French coins?

 

Of course being French and all, they do not understand the 19th century practices of the Russain mints, and as such cannot understand that the French mint had no right to function differently.

[BKB]

Of course being French and all, they do not understand the 19th century practices of the Russain mints, and as such cannot understand that the French mint had no right to function differently.

 

After this statement without a smiley face, I choose to retire from this thread. I do not know who knows what. I will stick to what I know. You guys stick to what you know. Enjoy our overstruck patterns or presentation pieces, or whatever.

[alexbq2]

Didn't realize the smileys were that popular. Here you go -

[IgorS]

I did not make the argument you attribute to me. I was pretty clear on stating that I think this is a novodel. ...

 

Nope, not a novodel. Reeded edge and all. But we all have the right to our thinking (as long as it has something to float on). I am at work now, but I do not recall known novodels for 2 roubles of this type (which this is), only 1 rouble.

In any case, I did not mean to reignite the discussion, just wanted to create a reasonable doubt

[one-kuna]

In any case, I did not mean to reignite the discussion, just wanted to create a reasonable doubt

I really do not care about 1848 French patterns...

...they could be fake, because there is market for this kind of stuff...

that's OK nothing wrong against above

[IgorS]

that's OK nothing wrong against above

How about this comment of mine?:

 

"...So these French patterns struck over other coins have the right to exist..."

[Loyal Citizen]

...I am not sure what you are getting at with 5 and 10 rouble coins of Elizabeth with the "massive" production of 2 to 24 thousand pieces. You would have a better argument with a 2 rouble coin. That, you think proves that Russia at that time had an abundance of gold which was freely available to mint workers on a whim?

....

 

Mentioning 5 and 10 roubles, I tried to point out that Russia finally had enough gold to strike large coins in "large"(not "massive" ) quantities at that time. Before Elizabeth we could only find ducats, 2 roubles,etc., I guess. Following Peter The Great "The Mining Privilegeî" act issued in 1719, series of discoveries followed in 1737-1748, giving Russia enough gold to start the monetary program.

 

Anyway, thanks for your opinion and good luck next month !

[WCO]

More of French Patterns:

Ponterio Auction 152 lot 7678

FRANCE. 10 Centimes Essai in Copper, 1848. Maz-1334. NGC MS-63 BN

 

http://www.coinarchives.com/20fab2335c977b.../image07678.jpg

 

It is not difficult to recognize overstruck coin (mostly visible on reverse). Coin sold for $175 plus 15%.

Another link for this coin: http://www.ponterio.com/auctions/AuctionLe...gacyLotID=42642

[one-kuna]

guys please, this thread is dedicated & related to russian coinage..

"french patterns" can be discussed in a top left corner where a link of world coins is located..

how simple it is..

thank you all..

[grivna1726]

After this statement without a smiley face, I choose to retire from this thread. I do not know who knows what. I will stick to what I know. You guys stick to what you know. Enjoy our overstruck patterns or presentation pieces, or whatever.

BKB, I think you have done an admirable job in arguing your position, but the available evidence seems not to support you.

 

I, like you, was initially mistrustful of these French pieces. I did not think it logical to create patterns as overstrikes because it would not be esthetically pleasing and a mint-made pattern would normally be produced to show the proposed design to its best advantage.

 

But the explanation of a public competition (or whatever word would best describe the process) by designers outside the mint making trial strikes on whatever coins of the right size which might happen to be handy sounds plausible to me.

 

I note that the coin originally shown was overstruck on a Russian copper, but those posted today clearly were not.

 

If one accepts the belief that these coins are merely fakes, then one must then accept that CGB (and NGC) are complicit in perpetrating a fraud. Of course, it is not completely impossible that this could be the case, but I do think that a fair and reasonable person might have great difficulty accepting such an idea, particularly when no evidence is offered to support the existence of such a conspiracy (an allegation which I note you did not make).

 

Or, if not malicious, then it could only be an astounding level of numismatic incompetence. On the balance of probabilities, I think the French pieces shown are likely genuine and I think that most reasonable and disinterested observers would probably agree.

[WCO]

... an astounding level of numismatic incompetence.

...

 

I could not say better than this!

 

WCO

 

P.S. To opinions of Compagnie Générale de Bourse and NGC may be added opinions of PCGS, Heritage, Maison-Palombo, Stacks, Ponterio and many others who sold or authenticated or otherwise dealt with such an overstruck 1848 French essai coins.

[WCO]

...

If someone could find a French pattern in a french museum, and then compare the dies to the dies used to strike these overstruck patterns, it would be a good start.

 

That is very difficult to do, but I should mention that one guy on Russian forum (resides in Paris) reported a long ago that searching for 1848 overstruck essai coins he went to the National Library of France in Paris (Bibliothèque nationale de Franc) where is department of numismatics. He found just a few 1848 essai coins there and one among them was overstruck over another coin. He said: "On pattern 10 Centimes of another design in the Library there are remnants of overstrike, one can read inverted "10", and the piece made in different metal, not red but greenish copper".

 

Original Russian text:

"... на 10 сантимах другого рисунка пробнике в Библиотеке есть следы перечекана - читается перевёрнутая 10, и они другого металла, -не красная, а зеленоватая медь".

 

 

WCO