Jump to content
CoinPeople.com

Ian

Members
  • Posts

    2,402
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ian

  1. The `WRL' on it is a clear indication that it is a replica.
  2. I guess beauty is in the eyes of the beholder . To me it looks like someone has dragged it through a hedge....more than once! Still, it is authentic and a collectable example of a scarcer type coin.
  3. My latest acquisition related to this theme. Not many examples of this jeton to be found these days other than those that have been made into a fob or pendant..... or otherwise vandalised. This one is in pretty good shape, dark toned and otherwise problem free....except for the star countermark in the exergue. i have no clue as to the significance of the mark.
  4. Here's a (hopefully genuine ) rouble from the period of Peter III. Not exactly in the best of conditions....it appears to have been holed (and plugged) and scrubbed to death at some stage. Dated 1762, Moscow mint (MMD below bust) when Daniel Mochalkin was mint master.
  5. Thanks again Sigi. I'll take a look at your website and the one above at some point tomorrow. Shut eye time here too:)
  6. OK. There is no `sadness' on my part in relation to the coins in question. it would be absolutely brilliant if they were genuine, but no significant financial loss if they are not. I've knowingly paid more for counterfeits than i did for these. The 10 kopecs cost the most though. The seller is a coin dealer in Portugal and they were selling it as a `novodel'. That most certainly it isn't, but I had thought it may very well be a normal circulation strike. It has remarkable similarity to coins authenticated and certified by PCGS that I have seen.....but then again memory is a very fickle thing at my age :) As I do not intend enlarging upon my Russian coin collection any time soon, especially given that I would be unable to assess coins `in the flesh', I have to be proportionate with my studies in relation to my collecting intentions. I will indeed have a look at the sites mentioned but suspect (unless I spend some numerous hours looking) I will be little the wiser at the end of it. There are probably as many (if not more) different dies used in striking these large lumps of copper as there were for copper coinage in my part of the world during that era, and as such I would still be left relatively ignorant as to whether small differences were due to die variety or other. What is your opinion of the 1778 5 kopecs and the 1770 10 kopecs by the way?
  7. I'm entirely unsure as to the authenticity of any of these `siberian' coins. i had thought one of the 5 kopecs and both 10 kopecs were possibly genuine but so far all the `pronouncements' are that they are `fakes'. They may very well be fakes....but where's the data to form any conclusion (?) I'll try to get the edges scanned. Good idea! Thanks
  8. Hey guys (in general on this thread......I don't want to come across as being ungrateful but i do feel the need to give some feedback as to what i've got from this so far. Hopefully i won't offend in the process as that is not my intent. FEEDBACK: Firstly, many thanks for the welcome. it is appreciated, and on a positive note I have been provided with reference sites for Russian coins and one for `copies' for which i am truly very grateful. I will be making use of them, even though my knowledge of Russian stems from one year of study some 50 years ago. Basically I would only just manage to order a cup of tea , coffee, or a bowl of borsch from a menu written in Russian. On the downside however.....its all very well being told that some thing is not authentic but being told that without being given ANY data as to the `why' a conclusion has been reached.......Being frank that's as useful to me as a one legged man in an arse kicking competition! So far no-one has given me even the slightest grain of insight as to how they have concluded why any of these items are not authentic. I don't honestly need any of these items to be anything other than what they are (whether fake or real). However what I do need to know is how to tell the difference. ........Can any of you guys actually help me with that? Bear in mind that if you give a man a fish then you only feed him for a day. However, TEACH a man to fish and you feed him for life! Come on now folks...if the knowledge is there then how about sharing it with me....please?
  9. Hi Sigi, here's a scan of the 91/0. The remnant of the 0 is still evident.
  10. I am no `expert' on fakes either, but I really have studied them for years. it's just that I've never really studied Russian ones before now. Have had a look at this site and there's a wealth of info there to look at. As an aside....the edge of my 2 kopeks looks identical to the first example listed (edge numbered 4). Sadly, that one is about fine (grade) so it is difficult to differentiate from the picture any similarities /differences. Weighs in totally correct though. Will check out both of my 5 and 10 kopec coins here when the opportunity allows. Once again, many thanks for this...it's a new adventure for me and a welcome distraction from things `covid'. Hope you are keeping yourself safe and well
  11. That is a very useful site. Many thanks for this. There is a copy 2 kopec 1764 available from them that looks remarkably similar to the one I have...on sale for 89 roubles . There are no 5 or 10 kopeks listed. However, even the copy on sale would require significant / radical surgery to get it to look like the one I have. Although an `as struck' copy, it appears to lack a lot of the definition evident on my one. For example...look at the defined feet (toes) on my one then compare... also at the left of the ribbon tying the wreath together there is a berry on my one....not so on the copy. Not saying that my one is `genuine' just that it isn't one of those particular copies.
  12. Hi. I'm not exactly sure what they are to be honest, hence my posting here. I have no reference manual or bona fide samples of Russian `Novodels' to compare them against, unlike the many other coins in my collection. I have however made a point of studying counterfeits / copies over the past 45 years....everything from ancients through to modern. In doing so i have saved a fortune...and amassed a fair collection of fakes /counterfeits / replica's / souvenirs /copies (call them what you will) When buying items outside of my normal area of expertise i expect to (sometimes) `pay' for my ignorance. i make the occsaional `mistake'. I do however try to keep such incidences to a minimum by using my reference materials....and learning from said `mistakes' You say these items are Chinese in origin. However, I am not so sure. The chinese fakes i've come upon are good (and getting better) but these don't seem to me to be from China. I would be happy to be educated if you could be so kind as provide me with some insight as to what has made you reach your conclusion?
  13. Here's my other (rather worn) 10 Kopeks
  14. Hi Sigi, Not overly hung up on the semantics involved in that we both mean the same thing ....that being one digit of the date on the host coin has been overstruck using a different digit (normally a higher digit). As an aside, the best example I have in my collection of an overstruck date is a fairly high grade Transylvanian thaler dated 1593/2. I'd post it here but it would be `off topic', this forum being for Russian coins.
  15. Thanks for making me look closer! it is indeed a 1791/0 overstrike! I'll try experimenting with my scanner to see if i can capture it close up. in the meantime I have to say that the 1793/2 of yours is a real thing of beauty. The overstrike is very clear and prominent.
  16. OK, my latest (and last) addition to my Siberian copper puppies!...for now at least. This one is a beautiful large slug of copper in the shape of a 10 kopeks coin dated 1768 with the KM mint mark. It weighs in at 62 grams and has a close oblique reeded edge.
  17. this last one is dated 1795 and weighs in at 47.7 grams.
  18. next is dated 1792 and weighs in at 52 grams
  19. this one is dated 1791 and weighs 50.5 grams
  20. The next is dated 1790 and weighs 49.9 grams
  21. Here's five different dated copper 5 kopek pieces from Anninsk mint The first is dated 1789 and weighs 48.9 grams.
  22. They do look odd in comparison to normal circulation strikes. Fortunatley, they didn't cost me that much in the first place (probably cost more to send them back) so worth the `punt' .....they will do until something `real' comes along . However, it's not often that you find die cracks on modern replica's though. The 2 kopeks has prominent examples on both obv and rev. Never seen this on large copper items before now
  23. Here's a silver jeton dated 1689 which was minted for Chartres. Not the best of grades but still very collectable, and the first one i've actually seen for over 10 years. The jeton was also struck in copper...both the silver and copper pieces are rarely seen on the market.
  24. Here's an ordinary 5 Kopeks dated 1778 (reeded edge) which weighs in at 26 grams
  25. ...and here's a 5 kopek `novodel' (weighs in ar 21.6 grams). Plain edge
×
×
  • Create New...