sigistenz

As the 1791 E:M: (Paul's re-overstrike) is a pretty rare coin,  I wouldn't have expected that it is still subdivided by different pairs of dies. The above 2 pieces differ on both sides:

On the cipher side the cipher's E lies over the I  or under it, the second 1  of 1791 is either upright or slanting, etc.

The eagle's tails are different (longer or shorter), the E: is in line with the upper two tail feathers or with the 2nd and  3rd tail feathers, etc.

Sigi

.

The last digit of the coin above, the 5kop1781СПМ, is manipulated, I have held this coin in hand and under the microscope. I think it was discussed in this forum a while ago. I do not remember any novodel as an overstrike.  As to the purchase of my coin - the seller is obviously not a coin man. This was the only coin among his other stuff. I doubt that he knows about real coins, copies or fakes. As there are only copies of the 10kop1796 on eBay,  he must have made his price according to theirs.

Seeing it on eBay at £48 "buy it now" I rubbed my eyes in disbelief,  then hurried to buy it before anyone else. It looked like the real thing. Even in hand color and surface look old and trustworthy. But Eugene convinced me - it is an imitation to say the least. I feel ashamed that even after my 56 years of coin collecting experience I was fooled. Now that I have it I'll tolerate it as a filler. It looks old and attractive, other than the normal copies and I do not expect to ever get the real coin.

Sigi

I watched the Russian forum's reaction, the replies are enigmatic to me, nothing concrete to bring the matter forward. Anyway,  the coin serves at least as a filler, I am happy to have found it at a give away price. Should I see another one, I'll post it.

Sigi

Thank you, especially for solving my little problem with authority.  At first glance I took it for the real thing but you opened my eyes.  

Sigi

About 2 weeks ago.

Hi Eugene,  thank you for your research and comments. Today I checked my coin against all the m-dv picures, originals and novodely.  As you said the only match is with Künker's auction of Dec.3, 2015,  then this same coin appeared again 1/2 year later at Aleksandr on May 27,  2016. I saw mine cheap at an eBay Britain "buy it now" offer. I think I was very lucky to see it instantly after insertion and reacted right away. The seller was reluctant revealing it's provenance, upon my 2nd inquiry he answered laconically, "I had some family who spend time in Russia working".

I had never seriously considered the type because out of reach. Now I am very happy with it,  as the link between Ekaterina's 5-kopek and Paul's reoverstrikes. It is old and looks close enough to the original. Of course I'll be on the lookout now for upcoming matches. Happy hunting 😳

Sigi

Eugene, that looks pretty convincing 😕.  As the coin is real old I had not thought of a copy.  It is very smooth, not cast but overstruck.  This nearly perfect overstrike must have required a very powerful press, the kind used in the mint.  Tomorrow I'll take the coin out of the bank to compare it with the m-dv pictures.  Thank you for your great research job - again improving my knowledge of the matter.

Sigi

This coin is definitely old, it weighs 48,25 grams. The pictures of business strikes and old novodels do not differ much.

As the foot of the 7 is hook shaped, I think it is rather an old novodel. What do you think?

Thank you, Sigi

Thank you for the demonstration and explanation of the screw press,  there is always something new (or long forgotten, coming back to mind).

It is indeed quite likely that the 3 differently placed  die impressions on the cipher side are due to a loosening and slipping upper die.  Before the operator  realized    and could switch off power the press struck a second and a third time. The 3 strikes  flattened and widened the coin to an enormous diameter of 51mm (instead of the normal 45).  See the compression on both rims of the edge.

Sigi

Something went wrong but I cannot imagine how this happened . The two jaws of the screw press holding a die each should meet centered. Thus the 3 strikes

should show similarly on both sides - or was the screw press falling apart? Can anybody explain why the nominal side does not show likewise 3 impressions?

Thank you for your consideration and reflections,  Sigi

Your patience and perseverance was finally awarded - congratulations to your find  All the features are clearly showing.

As I am focusing on the copper 5 and 10 kopeks only, I cannot comment much to this coin. What does it make so particular? Our friend  Eugene is on vacation now. I am sure that he will have his word to say about it.

Happy hunting, Sigi

On 7/21/2018 at 10:23 AM, extant4cell said:

That's right. You have a late variant of MM 1758 pyatak there. Where mint masters already had an opportunity to use their "shaving" tools, fixing the sides of the scroll a little and the top of the left wing on the eagle, making it straight. Here is an example of the early MM type, that partly survived to 1759:

 

The 1758 MM is a difficult date and even more so in acceptable shape. Thank you for showing this type of wing.

DAJ, my collection can still be viewed at www.sigistenz.com

I do not know if the link will work from this post.

Sigi

Belatedly I now inserted the 1758 MM which I had overlooked. It is a representative of type I same as Ekaterinburg.  I appreciate your research

Sigi

On 7/16/2018 at 6:01 PM, extant4cell said:

HI Eugene, congratulations for finding an outstanding coin again and thank you for another important contribution to numismatics. You widened my horizon once again. As to now I did not care much about the scrolls but there are indeed distinct variants and you categorize them as to provenience and abundance.  I got the 1758 scrolls type I (Ekaterinburg and Moscow), type II, and type IV, see them in that order below. Sigi

Thank you all. And happy hunting 

Sigi

I could not resist to doctor the dull looking coin a bit, stripped it of some sort of old wax and most of the verdigris. In hand I like it better than before.

Sigi

.

Thank you Eugene and Igor. A 5kop1793 no mintmark was listed in the DUBLETTEN sale, unpictured (Adolph Hess, Frankfurt Germany 1932 -  Dubletten Russischer Museen).  As the Michailovich coin was in the Novgorod Museum it might well have been the one in the Dubletten sale. I'll try to inquire at Künker's. 

Sigi

There was a 5kop1793 Paul's reoverstrike in the latest KÜNKER sale. At first glance it looked like just another Paulian 1793EM. Only when comparing my own 1793EMs  with the picture it struck me that the KÜNKER coin lacked the "EM" mintmark. WOW. Looking the coin up in my catalogs was worth an even bigger WOW - the KÜNKER coin is the MICHAILOVICH specimen!!!,  the same picture later borrowed by Brekke, Bitkin, Yusupov, Diakov etc.  The identical MICHAILOVICH picture everywhere. In the Corpus it says, that  the coin was in the Novgorod museum - the Grand Duke did not even own it himself!! WOW.  I had the very very faint hope that the coin might pass under the radar of most people - and  Bingo!  I won it at EURO1600 / $1980. Awful heap of money for me (don't tell my wife) but I never had dreamed of a coin with this pedigree.  It is safe to assume that there is no shaved off "EM" and that the anonymous coin was struck at the Novgorod auxiliary mint. See the Michailovich coin above and the Künker coin below.

Sigi

Hi, we missed you. Welcome back!

Sigi

Thank you Eugene,  but I do not understand completely.  To my knowledge there was no coal mined in the Petersburg region, what kind or measure of a box, why the odd 3/4? Does anyone know ?

Sigi 

That is a real nice one. What do the abbreviations say?

Sigi

.

Wonderful - thank you for sharing!

Sigi

Isn't it 1811 date?

.

Hi, your coin is in average condition and it is pretty common. It would not reach $10.

Sigi

.

Hi Eugene, that looks very interesting, indeed. Would you communicate the link of the thread in the Russian forum?

Thank you, Sigi

.