BKB Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 I know that it is ugly. But this is the only one I was lucky to get. Evidently, unlike what T.W. Bakken says in the Supplement, there are other coins besides GM specimen. P.S. If anyone has it in better condition, I am very interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 Wow suprisingly enough, I just received a similar coin but obviously in much worse grade and it's just the normal variety. BKB if I am not mistaken and not seeing things, is that coin overstruck on a Pavel I kopek? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 Maybe Brekke was right all along, "-" Uzdenikov does not mention the large date, which is odd. (2nd edition) ? Conros price is 200 for VF, (vs 7 for small date), so pretty scarce in their opinion, but not unique. how many grams is this coin? is it under weight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted April 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 Maybe Brekke was right all along, "-" Uzdenikov does not mention the large date, which is odd. (2nd edition) ? Conros price is 200 for VF, (vs 7 for small date), so pretty scarce in their opinion, but not unique. how many grams is this coin? is it under weight? The coin's weights 14.16 g. So, it is slightly overweight even in its worn condition. Was even heavier originally. As to its rarity -- I specifically collect 1810 -- 1812 coppers. It took me years to find this variation and when I did, it was purely by accident. Brekke "-" rarity sign is assigned to coins that are merely scarce, like 5 kop TM of 1787 or 1788. Now, those I can get at any time. I think that the real story is between "-." and ":-". And, it is probably closer to ":-" Conros may, of course, have different information. However, I do not remember them ever listing one of these. It also never appeared at any big "copper" auctions. Although, with the advances in metal detecting, we may see an influx of coins previously regarded as great rarities. For instance, you can now buy a Sievsk's chekh and pay something like $300 to $2,000 depending on condition. While, in 1890's Zubov offered to pay 100 rubles for one of those, while, most collector never saw one in their lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 Congrats on finally finding that! Perhaps it will be published in the next supplement So its weight is too heavy to be overstruck on a Paul 1 kopeck? (10g) Does this complete your 1810-1812 collection? Thanks for showing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 The coin's weights 14.16 g. So, it is slightly overweight even in its worn condition. Was even heavier originally. It does look like an overstrike, but I doubt it is one of Paul. There were no copper overstrikings for either revaluation or for political reasons under Alexander I (of which I am aware). That line above the eagle's head looks like it could be part of a Cyrillic "P", but both the location and the weight seems to make that unlikely. So a foreign coin seems a more likely candidate as the undertype. Maybe a Persian copper of some type? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted April 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 It does look like an overstrike, but I doubt it is one of Paul. There were no copper overstrikings for either revaluation or for political reasons under Alexander I (of which I am aware). That line above the eagle's head looks like it could be part of a Cyrillic "P", but both the location and the weight seems to make that unlikely. So a foreign coin seems a more likely candidate as the undertype. Maybe a Persian copper of some type? I do not think that it is an overstrike. Simply a die break. That metal flaw above the eagle's head is as high as the relief of the coin. If it had been an overstrike, the relief of the coin would be a bit higher than the remnants of the undercoin. (IMXO) Although, I would love for it to be an overstrike :-) However, even this die break possibly sheds light on the rarity of this die-variation. It is possible that the die rapidly deteriorated due to some flaw or error, and new dies were made with a small year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted April 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 Congrats on finally finding that! Perhaps it will be published in the next supplement So its weight is too heavy to be overstruck on a Paul 1 kopeck? (10g) Does this complete your 1810-1812 collection? Thanks for showing! Sadly, it does not. That series is impossible to complete in a lifetime, unless you own an oil field. It contains 6 em-if patterns of 1811. (I only have one of them) It also contains 2 kop piece struck with a portrait rouble die, which I will never be able to afford. There are 1 kop spb pieces that are impossible to find outside of a museum. There are 1 kop and 1/2 kop em/nm of 1810 that are unobtainable (i missed my chance with 1/2 kop last year). There is also 1811 km 1 kop that is unique. All in all, I have my work cut out for me. Even novodels of those coins are impossible. :-). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 Very interesting really BKB.What bothers me is how someone tried to remove traces of the the underlying feature by harshly scratching it off. Will it be possible to upload a larger file? I would love to manipulate it and try to see what I can come up with Nevertheless, still a very nice coin to have regardless of the condition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 I do not think that it is an overstrike. Simply a die break. That metal flaw above the eagle's head is as high as the relief of the coin. If it had been an overstrike, the relief of the coin would be a bit higher than the remnants of the undercoin. (IMXO) Although, I would love for it to be an overstrike :-) However, even this die break possibly sheds light on the rarity of this die-variation. It is possible that the die rapidly deteriorated due to some flaw or error, and new dies were made with a small year. You are probably correct because you have the actual coin in hand to study and I have only the scan posted here. However, if it is a die crack, it is surprisingly smooth in its shape and it appears to end in the field of the coin rather than at one of the devices, which seems rather odd to me. Are you SURE that it isn't an overstrike? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted April 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 You are probably correct because you have the actual coin in hand to study and I have only the scan posted here. However, if it is a die crack, it is surprisingly smooth in its shape and it appears to end in the field of the coin rather than at one of the devices, which seems rather odd to me. Are you SURE that it isn't an overstrike? Is it possible that this is an overstrike? -- yes. It is just I do not see any traces of it. The metal flaw does look smooth, but that could be due to many factors. Indeed, It does end in the field, but it does not have to be a result of a die crack that originates at the very edge of the coin. EM was a mint that lagged far behind in their equipment. It is possible that the quality of steel was lower and dies did not crack, but rather crumbled. In summary, if this coin were offered to me as an overstrike, someone would have to do a good job in trying to convince me. 2 gx: I will try to send you a larger file today if you give me your email address. What is your email capacity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.