grivna1726 Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 You are saying it right, BKB. I wish I could have all varieties of this coin and indeed known that authentic, and preferably 10 pieces for each variety or better a 100. Then I could sit and compare. But unfortunately, only a few museums can do such a thing and even they (like Hermitage or Russian State Historical museum) have some varieties missing even in their collections. I don't know if the coin is real or not. If it is a fake, then it is a dangerous fake. I certainly wouldn't have suspected it was bad if it were offered to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 You are saying it right, BKB. I wish I could have all varieties of this coin and indeed known that authentic, and preferably 10 pieces for each variety or better a 100. Then I could sit and compare. But unfortunately, only a few museums can do such a thing and even they (like Hermitage or Russian State Historical museum) have some varieties missing even in their collections. When I mentioned Commemorative coins, I did so on purpose. I have a friend with a very large and old collection. All coins have auction records going back decades. With commemoratives, he has, or until recently had, at least 3 specimens of each coin (Except Gangut and Family rouble). For some, like a Marriage rouble, he has 7-8 different die variations. Thus, I guess I am lucky to be able to compare the Commemoratives as if I was working in a museum. To determine whether the coin is real, you do not necessarily need to compare it to an identical variation. The process of making dies allowed only minor variations since 1840's in Russia. As to NGC and other grading companies -- I really have no idea what they base their decision on. The weight, the diameter, the thickness and quality of dies. Some experts specialize on the edge. One thing is certain -- die comparison is the best way, and these grading companies do not have the resources for a proper comparison. When they are puzzled, they send the coin to an outside "expert" who is supposed to be independent. However, as far as I know, most of these experts are dealers. And a dealer has incentive to pronounce an original coin a fake if it did not come from his stock. One of my coins was so pronounced a fake one year ago by such "independent" examiner. The coin is undeniably original. Dealers at NY show were laughing at the NGC envelope stating that the coin is fake. I received a couple of offers to purchase it. On the other hand, I know of a number of fakes graded as real by NGC not so long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted September 16, 2006 Report Share Posted September 16, 2006 BKB, would you by any chance know where I can get those excellent high quality counterfeit coins at a cheap price? Yes, it may sound mad but I personally would like to expose to the world of the high quality counterfeits of these coins. I personally have the 1839 Borodin and 1914 Gangut ruble and would like to expose the world of the existance of such high quality counterfeits. The problem is, that they are sold as originals. Thus, it is hard to find them cheap. Even if you buy it at an auction and later find out that it is a fake, you will still be hesitant to sell it for much less than you paid for it. Some, like Borodino, were discovered quickly. Others, like Gangut, are badly made. However, there are some that are sold evn today at auctions as originals. Some are even graded by NGC and other grading services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCO Posted September 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 After some more inspection I found some dots or "something" on the coin. The first bigger dot is above letter "O" in word "POVEL." on the monument side and the other smaller one above and between letters "K" and "O" in word "NIKOLAI" on portrait side. Are these natural and if they are what may be explanation of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCO Posted September 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 After some more inspection I found some dots or "something" on the coin. The first bigger dot is above letter "O" in word "POVEL." on the monument side and the other smaller one above and between letters "K" and "O" in word "NIKOLAI" on portrait side. Are these natural and if they are what may be explanation of this? Is it possible these are because of rusty dies or what may be other cause they found on the coin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted September 17, 2006 Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 I did better picture of these two "dots", here is the link. Is it possible these are because of rusty dies or what may be other cause they found on the coin?http://i01.expertcollector.com/uploads/0003001054_1.jpg I seriously doubt that rusty dies could be used to strike a commemorative coin. These were struck with greater care and control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCO Posted September 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 I seriously doubt that rusty dies could be used to strike a commemorative coin. These were struck with greater care and control. Thank you, BKB. But are these 1859 Rubles struck during a single year or for several years? Also, what is the most likely explanation of these dots. I thought that dies become somewhat rusty, but were thoroughly cleaned and just a few very small caverns left that resulted in this kind of dots? Does my theory sound reasonable or there may be some other explanation to this (like for example: dots were intentionally left on the die by engraver, or some technology issues during die preparation, on planshet or during striking, or something other)? WCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted September 17, 2006 Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 Any such coin struck after 1859 would be a novodel. No record of such novodels exists. Also, if the dies we so rusty and then polished -- you would not have such high relief -- the coin would be softer. Now, why would the engraver leave something like that on purpose? An explanation comes to mind -- to recognize his own work. Why -- also explainable, but it would be rather hasty and unsupported by other evidence. So, let us hope that it was not left there on purpose. :-) However, I remember reading an article about 1722 2 rouble coin. This coin only listed as novodel. But, there is a speciment in Russia that is believed to be struck with untempered dies. It also has dots used by engraver to mark the hubs. Realy, you should find another high relief specimen and compare haircuts. That will answer the most important question -- fake or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted September 17, 2006 Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 I don't collect these (yet), but there were three 1859 commemorative roubles sold in the last UBS auction in Switzerland, this lot and the next two: UBS auction All three are Bitkin 566 (embossed striking), and all three have the dot after the obverse legend. I could not find the small dots referred to in WCO's last post in any of these, however. I looked at these coins myself when I went there beforehand to see the other coins I was interested in. The first lot, the best of all, is actually proof-like -- something one would never realize from looking at these dark catalogue images. Here is the link to the prices realized: UBS auction -- prices realized (PDF file) I thought that the estimates for the Nicholas II gold coins, except for the 37-1/2 rouble and 25 rouble rarities, were all too high. Sure enough, most of them didn't sell. Almost all of the older coins sold for 2 to 3 times the estimate, sometimes double the estimate, except for a Catherine II rouble 1763-SPB (Bitkin 183), lot #3910 which also had a much too high estimate for its grade (F/VF, planchet flaw). The nice Paul I rouble of 1798 that I almost bid on (lot #3934) went for CHF 2000, or 4 times the estimate. The one coin I did bid on -- an 1852-PA prooflike rouble (advertised as proof) -- went for CHF 900, or 4-1/2 times the estimate. But after looking at it myself, I cannot say that it was actually a proof. And if it were a proof, the estimate of CHF 200 was ridiculous. I think they should get someone else to grade and estimate the coins for their next auction. Whoever put in the estimates for lots 3969-3971 must not know much about these coins at all, IMHO, or else were just plain greedy. Serves them right for not selling them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted September 17, 2006 Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 Another difference between the medallic and the coin obverse which I noticed looking in Bitkin is the nose. In the medallic obverse, it looks like a boxer's nose, whereas in both the embossed and lower-relief coin obverse, the nose is much more Roman-looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCO Posted September 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 Any such coin struck after 1859 would be a novodel. No record of such novodels exists. Also, if the dies we so rusty and then polished -- you would not have such high relief -- the coin would be softer. Now, why would the engraver leave something like that on purpose? An explanation comes to mind -- to recognize his own work. Why -- also explainable, but it would be rather hasty and unsupported by other evidence. So, let us hope that it was not left there on purpose. :-) However, I remember reading an article about 1722 2 rouble coin. This coin only listed as novodel. But, there is a speciment in Russia that is believed to be struck with untempered dies. It also has dots used by engraver to mark the hubs. Realy, you should find another high relief specimen and compare haircuts. That will answer the most important question -- fake or not. Dear BKB, those were just my theories that I can not support. I saw sometimes this kind of "dots" on some coins in different places on each particular coin. Does not look as if they were intentionally left by engraver. I have no idea how to explain them and just gave the first explanation I could think of. May be someone else with deeper knowledge in technology (then my own) can answer about how these "dots" are "made"? Not necessarily on this particular coin in discussion, but in general. About Novodels or not. This issue is quite complicated, even though some Russian coins were made for more than a year and even more coins were struck well after the end of calendar year (while mintage figures counted for financial year) no one is saying that it is a novodel just because a coin bearing year 1859 was struck in January of 1860. WCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted September 17, 2006 Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 Dear WCO, I understand that those are theories. They are sound theories, at that. If you meant that the coin was struck until the end of the fiscal year, you are right -- it is not a novodel even if struck in 1860. But, in order for dies to rust to an extent where there are caverns which cannot be polished out, -- they have to be dormant for a longer period of time than a couple of months. It is tempered steel after all. That is why I do not think that rusty dies theory is an explanation. (IMXO) By the way, dies sometimes crack in a funny way -- coverns could also theoretically be created. But such dot can only exist if: the coin is a cast copy, or if the die has a hole in it. Now, I assume that you have checked that the coin is not a cast copy. Then it leaves only one option -- holes in the die. As to who made those holes in the reverse die or why those holes were made (if intentionally) -- only the engraver can tell. And I hope that the engraver of this coin is long dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted September 24, 2006 Report Share Posted September 24, 2006 Hi everyone! I truly hope the scans of these three coins will help. The 1st two are for an NGC MS-63 The 2nd two are for an NGC MS61PL The 3rd two are for an NGC PF62 Look pretty similar to me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted September 24, 2006 Report Share Posted September 24, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted September 24, 2006 Report Share Posted September 24, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted September 24, 2006 Report Share Posted September 24, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted September 24, 2006 Report Share Posted September 24, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted September 24, 2006 Report Share Posted September 24, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted September 24, 2006 Report Share Posted September 24, 2006 Holy! Three 1859 rubles! Welcome to coinpeople btw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Citizen Posted September 24, 2006 Report Share Posted September 24, 2006 Holy! Three 1859 rubles! Welcome to coinpeople btw! Thanks a lot. I hope these pictures will help. Sorry for poor quality though..just can not handle slabbed coins with my digital camera :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHV Posted October 30, 2006 Report Share Posted October 30, 2006 Dear BKB, those were just my theories that I can not support. I saw sometimes this kind of "dots" on some coins in different places on each particular coin. Does not look as if they were intentionally left by engraver. I have no idea how to explain them and just gave the first explanation I could think of. May be someone else with deeper knowledge in technology (then my own) can answer about how these "dots" are "made"? Not necessarily on this particular coin in discussion, but in general. About Novodels or not. This issue is quite complicated, even though some Russian coins were made for more than a year and even more coins were struck well after the end of calendar year (while mintage figures counted for financial year) no one is saying that it is a novodel just because a coin bearing year 1859 was struck in January of 1860. WCO Please check ms63 example, it can help. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.