Romanov Tercentenary Rouble 1913

[bobh]

My Severin silver book arrived in great condition on Friday!

In the listing for the 1913 tercenenary rouble on page 246, however, Severin seems to have gotten something backwards:

 

"For this event 50,000 specimens in high obv. relief were originally to be run off but die breakdown caused a stoppage as flans showed but slight relief on effigies."

 

This much would appear to be correct; however, he continues:

 

"Fresh dies continued turnout in flat aspect for a total issue of 1,500,000 pieces. Comparison on both types of this 'prophetic' Ruble is difficult."

 

Also, the single illustration of the Romanov rouble in the plates section is obviously the high relief variety which he attributes to the flat strike. This mis-attribution is also reflected in the appendix of his book where he quotes some mint reports; also, the mintage numbers appear to be rounded off if we take Kazakov's numbers at face value. (Kazakov published approximately the same mintage figures but with the correct attribution: 50,000 flat relief and 1,422,019 high relief ... I wonder where he gets such exact numbers, though?)

 

Can anyone shed some light on this issue? Did Severin get this information from the Grand Duke's compendium? Where does Kazakov get his exact numbers?

 

Here are my two Tercentenary roubles for comparison:

High and Low relief 1913 tercentenary roubles

[RW Julian]

My Severin silver book arrived in great condition on Friday!

In the listing for the 1913 tercenenary rouble on page 246, however, Severin seems to have gotten something backwards:

"For this event 50,000 specimens in high obv. relief were originally to be run off but die breakdown caused a stoppage as flans showed but slight relief on effigies."

This much would appear to be correct; however, he continues:

"Fresh dies continued turnout in flat aspect for a total issue of 1,500,000 pieces. Comparison on both types of this 'prophetic' Ruble is difficult."

Also, the single illustration of the Romanov rouble in the plates section is obviously the high relief variety which he attributes to the flat strike. This mis-attribution is also reflected in the appendix of his book where he quotes some mint reports; also, the mintage numbers appear to be rounded off if we take Kazakov's numbers at face value. (Kazakov published approximately the same mintage figures but with the correct attribution: 50,000 flat relief and 1,422,019 high relief ... I wonder where he gets such exact numbers, though?)

Can anyone shed some light on this issue? Did Severin get this information from the Grand Duke's compendium? Where does Kazakov get his exact numbers?

Here are my two Tercentenary roubles for comparison:

High and Low relief 1913 tercentenary roubles

The overall figure of 1,472,019 for the 1913 Tercentenary Rouble was published in the U.S. Mint Report for 1915 (page 160), as furnished by the St. Petersburg Mint Director. The Imperial decree authorizing this coinage was dated February 15, 1913.

 

In the Numismatic Sbornik III (Moscow, 1915) S.I. Chizhov published an article on the commemorative roubles of 1912 and 1913. I do not have direct access to this work but presumably this article is the source of the comments by Kazakov and Severin on the number of high and low relief pieces. Chizhov was apparently unaware of the exact number struck.

 

RWJ

[WCO]

My Severin silver book arrived in great condition on Friday!

In the listing for the 1913 tercenenary rouble on page 246, however, Severin seems to have gotten something backwards:

 

"For this event 50,000 specimens in high obv. relief were originally to be run off but die breakdown caused a stoppage as flans showed but slight relief on effigies."

 

This much would appear to be correct; however, he continues:

 

"Fresh dies continued turnout in flat aspect for a total issue of 1,500,000 pieces. Comparison on both types of this 'prophetic' Ruble is difficult."

 

Also, the single illustration of the Romanov rouble in the plates section is obviously the high relief variety which he attributes to the flat strike. This mis-attribution is also reflected in the appendix of his book where he quotes some mint reports; also, the mintage numbers appear to be rounded off if we take Kazakov's numbers at face value. (Kazakov published approximately the same mintage figures but with the correct attribution: 50,000 flat relief and 1,422,019 high relief ... I wonder where he gets such exact numbers, though?)

 

Can anyone shed some light on this issue? Did Severin get this information from the Grand Duke's compendium? Where does Kazakov get his exact numbers?

 

Here are my two Tercentenary roubles for comparison:

High and Low relief 1913 tercentenary roubles

 

Looks as low relief coins are somewhat scarcer than high relief. Uzdenikov catalogue info (edition of 1992, page 490, #198, Russian text only) is that first variant of coins is in low relief. So therefore high relief was prepared and struck later on when it was obvious that coins in low relief are not that pleasant.

 

-------------

Цитата по книге: Уздеников 1992, Монеты России, стр. 490

 

"198: Известны две разновидности этого Рубля: с низким рельефом изображения на аверсе (первоначальный вариант) и с более высоким рельефом".

-------------

 

WCO

[bobh]

Looks as low relief coins are somewhat scarcer than high relief. Uzdenikov catalogue info (edition of 1992, page 490, #198, Russian text only) is that first variant of coins is in low relief. So therefore high relief was prepared and struck later on when it was obvious that coins in low relief are not that pleasant.

 

-------------

Цитата по книге: Уздеников 1992, Монеты России, стр. 490

 

"198: Известны две разновидности этого Рубля: с низким рельефом изображения на аверсе (первоначальный вариант) и с более высоким рельефом".

-------------

 

WCO

Большое спасибо Вам за объяснение, WCO!

 

Indeed, the flat relief variety is scarcer than high relief -- this also corresponds with what I have been seeing the last two or three years on eBay and in other auctions.

 

If we compare the relatively low mintage figures of 50,000 for the flat relief rouble to other coins of comparable circulation -- for example, 1909 poltina (approx. 50,000 minted) -- I sometimes wonder why I see so many of both rouble varieties offered in auctions, yet there is no significant premium for these flat relief roubles? In comparison, the 1909 poltina seems to be much scarcer than the mintage numbers would suggest...perhaps because it is more easily recognized as scarce and therefore more often hoarded? I saw one offered on eBay (condition XF) in July from a Canadian seller, but I didn't win it ... final bid was more than $300!

[gxseries]

Bobh, if you are extremely desperate, Basok has a fingerprinted version for sale