Wings down 1833 overstruck on 1830

[RW Julian]

Here are the pictures of the last digit on 1833 5 kopeck novodel, taken with 30x and 15x magnification. I think that only '0' could leave such a mark. Any ideas?

 

This photograph is much better than the first one and it now does appear that it is 1833/0. The only explanation I can think of at present is that regular coinage was planned in 1830 for this design but was aborted for unknown reasons, the dies later being redated for use.

 

It is perhaps worth noting that poltinas of 1832 and 1833 are known as overdates (1832/1 and 1833/1) but there is no known poltina of 1831 with this reverse.

 

RWJ

[BKB]

The most interesting question, to me that is, is which dies were overdated --the original dies or novodel dies? The more likely response is the Novodel dies. If that is correct, then there is a way to distinguish the Novodels of 1830 em-fx from the originals. I do not believe that any catalog lists the distinguishing features.

[Timofei]

This photograph is much better than the first one and it now does appear that it is 1833/0. The only explanation I can think of at present is that regular coinage was planned in 1830 for this design but was aborted for unknown reasons, the dies later being redated for use.

 

It is perhaps worth noting that poltinas of 1832 and 1833 are known as overdates (1832/1 and 1833/1) but there is no known poltina of 1831 with this reverse.

 

RWJ

 

 

I forgot to mention the important point about 5 kop 1833\0 (it is difficult to photograph): the field\surface of the coin disk is not exactly flat like in regular business-strike coins and it is proof-like. The surface shows very very slight waves which may confirm that rusty dies, prepared in 1830 could be polished\refurbished at a later date (1833). The strike is in collar.

[Timofei]

The most interesting question, to me that is, is which dies were overdated --the original dies or novodel dies? The more likely response is the Novodel dies. If that is correct, then there is a way to distinguish the Novodels of 1830 em-fx from the originals. I do not believe that any catalog lists the distinguishing features.

 

You are right, no catalog lists the differences. A picture of 1830 EM novodel would be a great help in this matter - we could compare 2 novodel dies - 1830 and 1833 - and the original coins. Unfortunately I do not have in my collection 1830 EM (neither novodel nor original).

[BKB]

You are right, no catalog lists the differences. A picture of 1830 EM novodel would be a great help in this matter - we could compare 2 novodel dies - 1830 and 1833 - and the original coins. Unfortunately I do not have in my collection 1830 EM (neither novodel nor original).

 

I have an original 1830 em fx (I think it is an original due to its condition). The condition, for which I apologize, will not allow for detailed comparison. The date has not been tampered with, which wasverified under x80 magnification:

 

 

[Timofei]

I have an original 1830 em fx (I think it is an original due to its condition). The condition, for which I apologize, will not allow for detailed comparison. The date has not been tampered with, which wasverified under x80 magnification:

 

The coin on your picture shows no differences. In general I found that on many coins even of the same mint and date there are 3 major items: form of precious stones on the main crown, size of Ф and Х, and (funny!) the type of the ground under St.George.

[BKB]

I believe that there are at least 3 differences. The most major one is "X" in FX.

[BKB]

I believe that there are at least 3 differences. The most major one is "X" in FX.

 

This is the completion of my thought from yestarday:

 

The most obvious differences are:

 

1. "X" in FX which looks more like a deformed "K"

 

2. shape and position of numerals "8" and "3" in the date

 

3. Feathers of left wing

 

Now, I do not believe that there could be more than 1 original die. The total mintage was very low. There were a number of instances, however, when the Novodels were produced on Yekaterinburg Mint. There were at least 2 or 3 instances when EM prepared a complete date set of all of its coinage production. (I do not remember the source of this information -- it was an article about Novovdels) Most dies had to be newly made and then destroyed. These instances were orders that were not related to Trade fair of 1870. I am not completely certain that 1830 EM-FX Novodels were produced in 1870 at all. The existence of 1830 EM actually produced for 1870 Fair negates the idea that 1830 em-fx were also produced.

 

Notwithstanding the above, it is likely that there is a number of different novodels of this series. All those instances took place much later than 1830. It would not be very probable for the novodel to circulate so much. It appears that there is a possibility that we can tell at least one of the novodels from original now.

[Timofei]

Now, I do not believe that there could be more than 1 original die. The total mintage was very low. There were a number of instances, however, when the Novodels were produced on Yekaterinburg Mint. There were at least 2 or 3 instances when EM prepared a complete date set of all of its coinage production. (I do not remember the source of this information -- it was an article about Novovdels) Most dies had to be newly made and then destroyed. These instances were orders that were not related to Trade fair of 1870. I am not completely certain that 1830 EM-FX Novodels were produced in 1870 at all. The existence of 1830 EM actually produced for 1870 Fair negates the idea that 1830 em-fx were also produced.

 

Notwithstanding the above, it is likely that there is a number of different novodels of this series. All those instances took place much later than 1830. It would not be very probable for the novodel to circulate so much. It appears that there is a possibility that we can tell at least one of the novodels from original now.

 

The source of info you mentioned is Spassky. Exactly this article on novodels says that:

- 1840 official Ministry order to Ekaterinburg for reproduction of complete yearly sets from 1757 to 1840 on new dies. In particular, each year must have incuded all types (even if certain types were not coined at all within a particular year). All dies were supposed to be freshly made for each nominal and for each year. The dies were destroyed afterwards

- 1856 official Ministry order to Ekaterinburg for reproduction of complete yearly sets from 1726 to 1856. In particular, each year must have incuded all types (even if certain types were not coined at all within a particular year). All dies were supposed to be freshly made and be kept afterwards. 1 collection of 1740 coins was made.

- 1870 order for exhibition. The set of 1856 dies was used. It was 4 collections actually and Spassky said that these exact 1856 dies were used for private orders.

 

When I compared 1833\0 novodel, 1831 original coin, 1833 original coin and your picture I took measurements of ФХ letters (I do not know what is the practical use of that, not a big waste of time though ) so here is a table. Finally I do not really know for certain, but under microscope the shape (not position) of 183X and letters ФХ could be also explained by wear, circulation damage, production defects and not by the engraver's exact design. I do not know how to consider the shape of X, the letter is so tiny so it could just be anything.

[BKB]

As I said in the beginning -- the condition of my coin will not allow for a detailed comparison. It would be nice to get a Proof original with certification by Shiryakov. Then it would be very easy. But, such easy way is not always available in numismatics when you want to compare dies (outside of a museum) of coins of which under 20 peices are known to exist.

 

Interesting:

 

Novodel striking at Ekaterinburg Mint:

 

1) 1840 -- Novodel date set from 1757 through 1840. ( all dies destroyed thereafter)

 

2) 1856 -- Novodel date set from 1726 -- 1856 ( dies were not destroyed thereafter)

 

3) 1870 (I stand corrected) -- 4 Date sets (not clear what dates)

 

Thus, we have at least 2 different novodel dies for 1830 as well as 1831. Now, this information makes this 1830 Novodel striking way more rare than the original at 6 total specimens. However, I wonder if there is any information about private orders. That could change the picture...

 

All in all, an interesting coin to have. I wonder what it brings.