extant4cell Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Do you have any good examples of 1788 2k on cruciform 5k? I understand this a reasonably rare overstrike that skipped 1k 1755, 2k 1757, 4k 1762 and back to 2k 1763-4-ect... till 1788. The condition of this coin is not great and it's hard to be 100% sure that his is 5k to 2k 1788 overstrike, without other types, but it looks that way nonetheless... What do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Mostly, these overstrikes known on SPM coins. I didn't find any on MM: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 It's interesting to see how some of the older coins survived for a period of time and finally met its fate to be overstruck. Here's another example that missed a few overstrike events, this being a rather scarce 1796 4 kopek. http://www.m-dv.ru/monety-rossii-1700-1917/prohod,38635/coins,3387/type,5978/auction,24/date,2010-01-28/lot,1196/images-prohod.html I have a 1793 2k EM overstruck over 1796 4 kopek and I was researching about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 They are more common around 1763, etc... the further into the century we go the less common they become. There are even some 1793 Paul's recoining of 2 kopecks that used 1762 Peter III for a base, you may see some on MD site if look through the the sales. The coolest Paul recoining of 2 kopecks would be on 5 kopecks or on 1 kopeck... if one would ever be found... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 There's definitely some interesting history behind them. Such overstrikes are definitely somewhat underrated in my opinion. The way I see it is that the banks must have accumulated unusable coinage and sent them to be the mints to be destroyed. This did not happen and the mints just overstruck them. Out of all major overstruck event, I reckon 1795 MM series is the toughest, excluding all other offside / one off overstrikes, 1795 MM 5 kopek being the toughest as Moscow Mint mostly overstruck over 1762 10 kopek. More than a decade ago, I remember there was an overstruck coin over a pattern. Can't quite remember what it is now but I'm certain the underlying host was a 1724 kopek with the word kopek in a square pattern instead of the rectangular pattern. Another one is a 1730 denga which showed a rather clear feature of the 1724 kopek. There's a couple more hypothetical overstruck coins in my opinion that could have happened but yet to be proven - 1) Overstruck 5 kopek over counterfeit 5 kopek. I cannot see why this couldn't have happened. 2) Overstruck 5 kopek over the illusive 1757 5 kopek, which is supposedly missing commemorative coin from Sestroretsk mint. Problem is no one really knows what they even look like for starters! I suspect the discovery could be made any time in the near future. Afterall, I did suspect a while back that Sestroretsk mint was known to overstrike 1 ore coins into 1 kopek and there was no reason why 2 ore coins couldn't have been used to overstrike to 2 kopek coins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 There's a couple more hypothetical overstruck coins in my opinion that could have happened but yet to be proven - 1) Overstruck 5 kopek over counterfeit 5 kopek. I cannot see why this couldn't have happened. 2) Overstruck 5 kopek over the illusive 1757 5 kopek, which is supposedly missing commemorative coin from Sestroretsk mint. Problem is no one really knows what they even look like for starters! I suspect the discovery could be made any time in the near future. Afterall, I did suspect a while back that Sestroretsk mint was known to overstrike 1 ore coins into 1 kopek and there was no reason why 2 ore coins couldn't have been used to overstrike to 2 kopek coins. 1) did you mean 2k on counterfeit 5k of 1723 type? I wouldn't expect many counterfeit 5 kopeck 1758 type, since "what's the point?" 2) sometimes one may run into a coin that has mysterious "left-over" images, but as to 1757 sestroretsk coin... I appreciated your sarcasm ( http://www.coinpeople.com/index.php/topic/35918-aint-she-sweeet-5kop1757/ ) This one is not on a 5 копеек 1757 from сестрорецк , but it shows an interesting undercoin image... Can you guess what coin is it from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Part of the cypher from the 5 kopecks coin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Which part? No fit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Bottom part of the 'E'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Too long and curvature of a "E" cipher doesn't fit, if that's what you ment. I tried to overlay different images on top of this left-over image, nothing I knew did fit... I had this picture for a few month now, and I only yesterday, when I had another look at it, and figured it out. The problem was that I was fixated on that line image, too similar to the cipher lines. There are some other leftover images there that will help you. Also, have a look through the cipher, it kind of continues toward "1" in a date, so it's not part of cipher for sure. One crazy idea was, that it possibly was an an outskirt of the die, but that die would be 2-3 times larger than the dies for 5 kopecks, plus the curvature isn't constant it changes, so it's not part of a full circle, it must be a part of an image, but the idea wasn't that far off. Another idea was that may be a medal was involved here? But no, it's so much simpler! A very unlikely left-over image from the same coin... If you didn't figured that out yet, you will in a second... Here is the coin in full beauty: just note the reverse E and an eagle's hand over 88... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 What kills me, I still don't understand how in the world that "line" image manage to survive the field strike from the the dies?!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 There are strangely misaligned traces of a die clash right above the line. The line seems to follow the banner, is it the empty space between the bottom of the banner and the edge of the die? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 That's it. But how nit it looks?!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 As we started on strange and unusual overstrikes / corrective strikes. Here is a little bit on 1802 2 kopecks: This is a corrective "mini" overstrike of an early 1802 EM production, that was not in line with the full instructions. Nothing too unusual, but still exciting overstrike. Next one, due to the quality of photo, is hard to figure out, but I think I know where your mind will take you... Who knows? Experements were done in the early days, and not all of them recorded... Any one dares to share your wildest ideas? Apart from being a possible interesting "overstrike", it also has a very interesting reverse die with dots sitting too high up. Very rare too! Interesting to know if you'd know of any auction-sales of coins with this reverse die. There is one description of it in Kazbek Temeryaev's catalog on 1802 kopecks, but no price tags attached... And in fact it's the same coin... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 I like the one that shows the undercoin with EM on the sides of the eagle's tail. I do not think an overstrike like that is easily obtainable. Does Kazbek's book mention it? What rarity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Yes, it does, but not as a type. Depending on the left-over image and on the new coin's attributes anywhere from R1 to R5. This is not exactly a type of a coin (he describes types), as a God's given chance of getting good under-image with EM showing... There are lot's more of them that show different degree of under-coin. As always, the more the merrier, and the better image the rarer the coin. The one like here is pretty dam rare... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 There are some other very rare variants. I only know one coin, so far, with dots on top of the nominal (not under, as on other coin), and the one with 6 rings on the nominal side (not the usual 5), the other rare one is with nominal missing, only the year and EM present. These are the most unusual reverse sides of that coin. To see, why the 2 dots over the nominal so unusual for this coin, you can watch a little video that compares the usual central location (under nominal) with a higher up (over): https://youtu.be/wA-rGzAJ9o4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 I have this one - with dot after the date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 Very small picture. Has it got left-over EM markings under the eagle? I have one too, thanks to Alex prompting me towards the auction sale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 Yes, it does have leftover EM markings under the eagle. The scan was taken 15 years ago. One day I will make a better picture. Show us yours in the meantime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted May 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2015 Here is the one I have: It's like the one from Willy Bakken's collection: but mine has a dot after the year, like on the very first original coins that later were overstruck with new, standard design coins. I expect there were no ghostly mintmarks on any of the 5 kopecks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted May 31, 2015 Report Share Posted May 31, 2015 The one with a dot after the date is much harder to find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Sorry, missed reading the conversation earlier. I had to look at the 1788 5 kopek carefully and the line really doesn't make much sense. At first, I thought it was an off center 1757-1762 5 kopek with Elizabeth I monogram. The die clash with the letter E (above the number 8) makes it a lot more confusing. What I am more troubled is that if this is indeed an overstrike, there should be more details of the underlayer on the reverse from my experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted June 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 I know... it is very confusing. But there is no die clash here, there is an incurs. A previous strike's coin got in a way and was pressed itor this on. The reverse "E" and the line, all part of one after image from that incident. The line was pressed by the empty space of a lower part or the legend thing and the edge of the die, Go figure... how it survived the corrective strike!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Why do you think that this is brockage and not a die clash? 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.