sigistenz Posted May 3, 2014 Report Share Posted May 3, 2014 The 5kop1758 were minted w/o mintmark in Ekaterinburg (mainly) and in Sestroretsk (a small part). For a long time it could not be said whether a 1758 copper piatak originated from (EM) or (CM) mint. About 1/2 year ago our friend Eugene "extant4cel" posted the newly found solution of the problem as below (probably from a Russian forum):- Note that the horizontal bar of the orb's cross points into the scroll (EM) or slightly above (CM) and the more symmetrical eagle wings at (CM). (CM) is much more difficult to find. Proudly bragging my new find below Sigi - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted May 3, 2014 Report Share Posted May 3, 2014 Is this only for 1758, or the later years as well? Nice find, Sigi! Im off to check my shoebox for a '58 and have a look! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted May 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 Is this only for 1758, or the later years as well? Nice find, Sigi! Im off to check my shoebox for a '58 and have a look! This mini-variant appears only with 1758 date (and the Sestroretsk mint contributed only to that date). Did you find any in that shoebox? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 This mini-variant appears only with 1758 date (and the Sestrorezk mint contributed only to that date). Did you find any in that shoebox? No '58s at all... But this gives me something to chase, now, doesnt it! FWIW I do have 59MM, 60MM, 61, 62. Also missing the elusive 61MM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 A very good looking coin! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted May 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Thank you - these early 5kop. are often poorly struck. I am happy with this one AND that it is the scarcer Sestroretsk variety. Sigi - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 15, 2014 Report Share Posted May 15, 2014 Congratulations Sigi! It is a really nice looking coin! If you search long enough you will find what you are after, I guess. Your perseverance proves that to me. The info was provided to me by Andrey (kaostram) especially for Sigi. I only translated. Here is the extract: The difference is in orb as most easily identifiable difference that helps to determine the mint in 5-kopecks 1758, but not exclusively in orb. 5-s in the year differ as well, also Yekaterinburg mint 5 kopecks are often with over-date 58 from 57. The information comes from Evdokimov's research, that is not published yet. The discussion took place on CFN. It's in Russian, but you may scan through it if interested: http://coins.su/foru...howtopic=101759 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 15, 2014 Report Share Posted May 15, 2014 I think the eagle's crown is a little shorter on CM (on these two examples anyhow)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted May 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2014 Thank you, Eugene for enlightening me about the difference between (EM) and (CM). I also appreciate the link to the Russian forum. Though not understanding all of it I see that the great majority of the 1758 pictures show (EM) coins. (CM) seems to be pretty scarce. For me the most striking difference is the eagle's right wing. Plus the cross on the orb compared to the scroll. Please transmit my hello to Andrey/Kaostram . Sigi . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 17, 2014 Report Share Posted May 17, 2014 The wings are a little different, the location of the cross compare to the edge of the scroll, and cross itself, one is more vertical, the other horizontal. The longer you look at them, the more you see the difference. I will pass your hello to Andrey! Thank you for showing this nice example. May I ask where you found it? I understand there are no more left there, but love to hear the story... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted May 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 Here are the two together for better comparison I found the Sestroretsk coin at MA-shops at EURO 110 - would have paid more. Sigi . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 18, 2014 Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 It is a very nice looking coin! I would pay a lot more for it as well! Well spotted! Once again, congratulations!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 By the way, Sigi, there are some very interesting errors on 5 kopecks that you may want to look out for: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 By the way, your EM 5 k 1758 eagle, looks similar to Dasye Eagle: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 It does. And that's why I'm puzzled by why this coin is attributed to Ekaterinburg. I will admit that I have not yet read the coins.su topic on the 5 kopeks. Perhaps it is explained there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 I think it is a little different from usual eagles of Ekaterenburg, as I've noticed. Correctly or not, I am not sure, as I only touched different aspects of the subject of 5 kopecks,,have never studied it in full. But this coins puzzled me. If it is Dasye's eagly, what mint does it make it (SPB?)? In that case, Sigi may still need to find a nice example of EM Another quest! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 How very lucky for you Sigi!?! I just got confermation ( #178 ) that the eagle on your coin (in the middle) is in fact SPM by Dasye! My congratulations! It's time to look for another EM now! Wohooo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 How very lucky for you Sigi!?! I just got confermation ( #178 ) that the eagle on your coin (in the middle) is in fact SPM by Dasye! My congratulations! It's time to look for another EM now! Wohooo! That makes sense. Well done! Does put the orb/banner theory to question though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 Not sure how to tell the CM from EM, as it appears that there were Dassier looking eagles earlier on at EM. There was a hint at that thread that the digits of the year might be the tell. As I understand, all of these are EM coins: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 Sestroretsk mint is identified by this theory pretty well. Differentiate between others may be a bit more difficult - have to compare the eagles. But I can not say I am a specialist in that, I've read the topic touching it only lightly, looking for things that interested me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 EM eagles are very feathery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 I am a bit confused now, as I found at the start of the topic one example of Dasey's eagle on 1758 and they mentioned it as Ekaterinburg mint. I think I may be running ahead of the train, and need to read the topic and summurise it for myself. Once I am done, I may question people why one Dasey's eagle is considered EM and this one SPM, but I'll read it first, as the answer may lay somewhere in this topic waiting for my discovery. Excitining! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 Sigi I do apologize that we kind of took over your topic, but this may be interesting and it feels the right place to discuss this at the moment. I will still concentrate mainly on 1758 year though. On the 3rd page these examples are given. From what I understand G.S.E. didn't state there that these coins are from EM. He is focusing on eagle types for the no-mint letters coins, without sorting them out at this stage into the mint groups. So, it's probably mixture of SPM and EM. If I remember correctly, and I may as well be wrong, as I rely on my not so good memory here, I read sometime ago in passing (5 k have never been in my focus), but original dies matrices were made in one mint (SPM?) and passed around for copying (to CM and EM), probably including special types as Dosyes. That's why they are all so similar to start with (in early 1758) and are difficult to distinguish. I think, Alex, you are right, that for these coins the only way to determine is to look closely at the lettering and number shapes, as they should differ from mint to mint. I may be wrong, so please correct me. On these pictures Evdokimov (G.S.E.) believes that the first and the second columns - the Dasye's eagles. the third row - borderline eagles with Dasye, similar but not quite Dasye's, the fourth - eagles with two rows of feathers (fluffy), and the fifth - triple-ended-shape feathers used in wings. Shape of the tails also taken into consideration, but not clearly described. The reverse they discriminate only by the number of triple-endед-leaves in the crowns (3 or 5, typically). Could that somehow relate to mints as well as lettering and number tools? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted May 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 The tousled eagle (as on the Dassier rubles) appeared already on a part of Scott's 1757 rubles (the small head on 1754-1757 СПМ). I don't know by heart if that tousled eagle must be attributed to Scott's last year or to Dassier. The Dassier portrait appeared only on a few 1757 rubles, whereas that eagle survived to 1760 rubles. So the tousled eagle was maybe not a job of Dassier's ??? But that does not concern the (EM) - (CM) problem. I'll have to try to go thru the lenghthy Russian thread Eugene provided above. Hopefully there can be found something about the (EM) versus (CM) features. Sigi . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 OK, I think the day spent well for me... Sigi, I discussed this on Russian forum. This is the idea, as I understand it now. Information in that thread on 1758 EM/CM coins is sketchy, so I had to ask a straight question after reading it and as it seams not many people had the answer... In any case here it is: The cross/orb location (higher, as you explained) is a sure sign that the coin belongs to CM mint, but not the only one. Once you identified the CM coin, you have a sample of their tools for lettering and numbering and their banners, pretty much as Alex hinted above. The most striking difference for the CM mint is the shape of number "5" in the year. It is just as characteristic as number "3" in Paul's recoining. It becomes a sure sign that coins is or isn't CM. Both of your coins have this strikingly different "5"! None of the coins in post "23" have it, even the "Dassier type" are all EM, as all of them there. It looks like you already have had Sestroretsk 5 kopecks, and now you have two! One with "normal" cross/orb location (and I am told it is a more rare one) and one with "characteristic" cross/orb location (your new coin)! Congratulations, it's a nice pair to have, and both in one of the best condition I've seen around! Scott's and Dassier's eagles is a fascinating subject. I've read on it a while ago. From what I remember, their had Dassier's eagle matrices and copied from them (some of the eagles). So, you are probably right by saying that this eagle is not of his making, but it's of his design, hence called eagles of Dassier's type. They vary, as copy will never be as perfect as the original and now we have many variants... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.