bobh Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 L I N K The date looks a little strange (especially the shape of the "8") ... what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 This is what I have for a 10 kopek: Don't see something unusual here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RW Julian Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 L I N K The date looks a little strange (especially the shape of the "8") ... what do you think? Here is another 1837 EM FX 10 kopecks: http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/8100/1837emfxne9.jpg RWJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCO Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 L I N K The date looks a little strange (especially the shape of the "8") ... what do you think? Just corroded piece with "doctoring" (dissolved by chemicals and therefore porous and unattractive surfaces). Looks unnatural therefore but is authentic. WCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RW Julian Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 This is what I have for a 10 kopek: Don't see something unusual here. There is an interesting variety of the 1834 EM 10 kopecks, as follows (note the claws on the right): RWJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted January 8, 2007 Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 These two pictures are from my 10 1834 10 kopeks (these are getting unusually difficult to find?) : Definately doesn't look like the unusual variety there. Thanks for the picture Julian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.