Jump to content
CoinPeople.com

RW Julian

Members
  • Content Count

    990
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RW Julian

  1. The Carson City Mint did not open until January 1870. These dollars with the wrong mintmark/date combinations are mostly made in China.
  2. I have been tied up on other matters for a few days (including a trip to the Central States show in Chicago) and not able to respond. My maternal grandfather was Charles E. Girard (1864-1945), the source for the name. One must eventually sell off a collection and I began to do so several years ago but used the Girard name as I was still editor of the Russian Journal. It had originally been intended to use the Girard name for this sale but I decided to use my own for this and the coming November sale. The November sale will basically be the type coins as well as a fair number of th
  3. I was unaware of the 1806 AT listing until you mentioned it on this forum. The R4 listing by Bitkin is a guess on his part; he also lists novodels (per Uzdenikov) for the Georgian series but I doubt that any exist. He says, for example, that the 1807 AT double abazi is a novodel but it is not; it is definitely a fake.
  4. It is likely a counterfeit, though above average. There is an 1807 AT Two Abazi that is false but was accepted as genuine by Giel-Ilyin in their 1904 reference; it is illustrated in the RNS Journal summer 2008, page 67.
  5. And here is another one who doesnt read a members post fully before he comments. The original post was not well stated. Until it was clarified, I took it the same way as BobH.
  6. My printed catalogue arrived in the mail today.
  7. I was in semi-regular contact with Tom until about 18 months ago. He was then working on an update to the copper book but it is now clear that his illness prevented the completion. It is a loss to all collectors that this planned work was not finished.
  8. B. F. Brekke standing outside his home on the island of Fyn (Denmark), June 26, 1971. I had the pleasure of visiting him for a few days and took this photograph before leaving. ..................
  9. It is correct that the zolotnik pieces were the method by which the silver in gold deposits was returned to the depositors. However, it would not have been the same silver as the Mint would have kept a stock of such pieces on hand. There is no doubt that the medal department records, if they still exist, would report the number of such pieces made.
  10. The general rule in such matters was for the home mint to send complete hubs for the dies and edging devices. These hubs were then used to create working dies. The silver was normally purchased from local suppliers and the home government reimbursed the foreign mint for the labor costs and the metal. So far as I know, the star on the edge of the 37.5 rouble pieces being the same as Paris was merely a coincidence.
  11. Some comments on this seller: 1) The 1745 rouble he has for sale at $990 is a well-known Chinese fake. 2) He does not accept returns 3) He does not accept questions about his offerings 4) Despite repeated complaints eBay has refused to do anything about the Chinese fake Enough said.
  12. This is an interesting piece. The Chinese counterfeiters have been making, for several years, a series of Moscow roubles for 1742–1755. In this case, however, they changed the mintmark to that of St. Petersburg. This is easily detected because the dies are identical except for the mintmark and date.
  13. This seller, shifaragallery, is in Estonia but obtained a Chinese fake to sell. His starting price is $990, about $989 more than it is worth. There is no return for this item and the seller has even blocked questions. In my opinion a seller to avoid. http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5574633083&toolid=10001&campid=5335826004&customid=&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg&icep_item=290537119765 These fakes are easy to spot because the Chinese counterfeiters were too lazy to make any changes
  14. The whole matter of proofs is an interesting one. It is quite possible for uncirculated pieces to exist in what is supposed to be a proof-only issue. When proofs are struck the rule is that only the best pieces go to collectors (or the Emperor &&), leaving the less well-struck pieces to be destroyed at year’s end or released to circulation. It is also quite possible for such pieces, rather than being melted, to leave the Mint via some high-ranking official or even the Grand Duke, who might well have picked up these remainders at his pleasure, for distribution to friends. Th
  15. My opinion is that this is a coincidence. An odd one to be sure, but a coincidence. The defects, although in the same location, are not identical. I looked at my database of 10 kopeck pieces and found several with planchet defects, though not in this exact spot.
  16. Uneven toning and a weak obverse strike. Perhaps it was stored around paper containing sulfur or some other chemical.
  17. Actually the material will go to the printer Tuesday or Wednesday and be mailed about 10 to 12 days after that. The article by Steve is outstanding and a must for anyone interested in the copper coinage of Nicholas I. RWJ
  18. Actually there is more to this. He tried to sell the same piece in October but with a much better photograph and it is definitely a fake, not probably. (I had forgotten about the earlier posting to this forum.) This is definitely a Chinese-made counterfeit and I told the seller this in October. The person who sent the fake to ICG was presumably banking on the grading service not spotting it as a fake. There was another case this past week. A seller had a fake listed on eBay and I notified him of the fact. He asked for proof (a reasonable response), I furnished it, and the piec
  19. The following ICG slabbed 1751 Moscow rouble is on eBay at the present time: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280621464969 Yesterday I sent an e-mail to the seller, indicating that the piece was almost certainly a Chinese counterfeit but, as the photos are not the best, I asked for a better illustration of the obverse to be certain. He replied as follows: HI, If You like this coin, you can buy, and do investigation. Thanks. $899 for a likely counterfeit seems about $900 too high. The seller says to “bid with confidence.” His answer to me says otherwise
  20. The Imperial Mint used only copper, not bronze, but color is easily affected by how it has been stored over the years.
  21. Not sure when the Nordic hoard was actually released. The general belief at the time, however, was that these 5 rouble pieces were coming from Swiss banks. I saw very large piles of them (hundreds of pieces in some cases) at major coin shows.
  22. In 1955 I paid $4.25 for a 5 rouble piece of 1902 in BU. I could have easily purchased a thousand pieces from this source as they were plentiful in those days.
  23. It took me several years to find the 1902 one kopeck. The 20 million mintage figure is misleading as this is a fiscal-year number, not calendar year. The 1902 20 kopecks is not, to my knowledge, a rare coin. There were no coins of this denomination struck during the fiscal-year 1902, leading to a mistaken belief of rarity. There were 10 million pieces coined in the fiscal-year 1903, however, which would have included the 1902 coinage in the last months of 1902. RWJ
  24. It is possible that the rollers (which flattened the ingots) were of poor quality and, as a result, the planchets themselves were of equally poor quality and pitted. It is not likely that the planchets were cast, but this is possible. RWJ
×
×
  • Create New...