1857 Russia 20K proof

[Hussulo]

Hi guys,

 

I've seen this coin being sold as a 1857 Russia 20K proof is it a proof? and if so what would be its current market value?

 

[grivna1726]

I've seen this coin being sold as a 1857 Russia 20K proof is it a proof?

 

It doesn't look like a proof to me. In my opinion, it looks more like a dipped-out business strike.

[Hussulo]

It doesn't look like a proof to me. In my opinion, it looks more like a dipped-out business strike.

 

Thanks Grivna thats what I thought too when I came across it being described as a proof (not that i know much about Russian coins).

[mummytrol]

Dear friend! Do you think they could do proof coins 150 years ago?????? It is a big BS!!!!! Thank you. Mummytol.

[grivna1726]

Dear friend! Do you think they could do proof coins 150 years ago?????? It is a big BS!!!!! Thank you. Mummytol.

 

Yes, they could make proof coins 150 years ago. For example, proof roubles from the 1850s are known to exist and the binational Russo-Polish 1½ roubles/10 zlotys (and smaller denominations) are also known to exist in proof, dating from the 1830s.

 

Here are some examples:

 

Link #1

and

Link #2

[mummytrol]

Yes, they could make proof coins 150 years ago. For example, proof roubles from the 1850s are known to exist and the binational Russo-Polish 1½ roubles/10 zlotys (and smaller denominations) are also known to exist in proof, dating from the 1830s.

Dear Grivna! I think there were proof coins produced much more later than 1830S. Because of the technology. Thank you. Mummytrol. P.S. Maybe 20Th century.

[gxseries]

Disagree, the first proof coins were struck in the UK, probably even a lot earlier than what most people think - perhaps around or even before the industrial era. I believe St. Petersburg imported most of the British technology at the end of the Pavel I era (1801) which created standardized sized coins. I wouldn't be too suprised if there were proof coins by then.

[grivna1726]

Dear Grivna! I think there were proof coins produced much more later than 1830S. Because of the technology. Thank you. Mummytrol. P.S. Maybe 20Th century.

 

Hello MummyTroll,

 

Of course proofs were created in the 20th century. No-one suggested that there weren't.

 

What was in dispute was whether or not there were any proofs made as far back as 150 years ago. You stated that there were not ("Do you think they could do proof coins 150 years ago?????? It is a big BS!!!!!") and I disputed your contention by providing evidence to show that there were.

 

That is the matter which is under discussion, not whether 20th century proofs were made.

[mummytrol]

Hello MummyTroll,

 

Of course proofs were created in the 20th century. No-one suggested that there weren't.

 

What was in dispute was whether or not there were any proofs made as far back as 150 years ago. You stated that there were not ("Do you think they could do proof coins 150 years ago?????? It is a big BS!!!!!") and I disputed your contention by providing evidence to show that there were.

 

That is the matter which is under discussion, not whether 20th century proofs were made.

It is just an opinion of a grading company and sellers wish to sell the coin for as highest pric e as they can. Check latest graded coins on e-bay. it is a shame. Just a way to make money, nothing to do with history.

[Art]

Pretty soon off this goes to debates.

[Hussulo]

Dear friend! Do you think they could do proof coins 150 years ago?????? It is a big BS!!!!! Thank you. Mummytol.

 

???? I KNOW for a fact proofs were minted more than 150 years ago.

 

Link to 1831 British sovereign:

Coinarchives

 

Link to a lot of Russian proofs:

Coinarchives

 

I'm not sure about Russian proofs but by definition a proof is regarded as being a coin especially struck for presentation purposes. By this definition, the 'Fine Work' of James 1st 1701 coinage or Thomas Simon's 'Petition' Crown 1663 would count as 'Proofs' although clearly these do not have the mirrored surfaces we now recognise.

 

I think the first actual listing of a proof in Spink's Coins of England in my copy is the 1664 Crown (S3355).

[RW Julian]

Dear Grivna! I think there were proof coins produced much more later than 1830S. Because of the technology. Thank you. Mummytrol. P.S. Maybe 20Th century.

No. The collection of Herman Blank, sold at St. Petersburg in 1908, shows that proofs

were coined in Russia in the early 19th century. Blank was an exceptional collector

for his time in that he sought out both proof and uncirculated specimens of each date,

as well as collecting by Giel-Ilyin numbers.

 

Proof coins were first struck at the Philadelphia Mint about 1817 and most European

countries struck proofs during the 19th century.

 

RWJ

[Hussulo]

(1801) which created standardized sized coins. I wouldn't be too suprised if there were proof coins by then.

 

Indeed depending on your definition of proof you can go way back.

If you are talking about proof coins with frosted or mirrored surfaces pre 1801 then George III proof coins come to mind.

Link 1

 

Link 2

[grivna1726]

Indeed depending on your definition of proof you can go way back.

If you are talking about proof coins with frosted or mirrored surfaces pre 1801 then George III proof coins come to mind.

Link 1

 

Link 2

 

 

Those are wonderful coins.

[WCO]

No. The collection of Herman Blank, sold at St. Petersburg in 1908, shows that proofs

were coined in Russia in the early 19th century. Blank was an exceptional collector

for his time in that he sought out both proof and uncirculated specimens of each date,

as well as collecting by Giel-Ilyin numbers.

 

Proof coins were first struck at the Philadelphia Mint about 1817 and most European

countries struck proofs during the 19th century.

 

RWJ

 

 

I am wondering how from collection of Herman Blank may be concluded "that proofs were coined in Russia in the early 19th century"?

 

First Proofs definetely came from Great Britain from the middle of 17-th Century with portrait of Cromwell. First Proof coins that may have anything to do with Russia that I can think of were jettons of Matthew Boulton with portrait of Alexander I, struck in 1804 for testing purposes. However, Russian mint in St. Petersburg installed new equipment somewhere around 1845.

 

WCO

[RW Julian]

I am wondering how from collection of Herman Blank may be concluded "that proofs were coined in Russia in the early 19th century"?

 

First Proofs definetely came from Great Britain from the middle of 17-th Century with portrait of Cromwell. First Proof coins that may have anything to do with Russia that I can think of were jettons of Matthew Boulton with portrait of Alexander I, struck in 1804 for testing purposes. However, Russian mint in St. Petersburg installed new equipment somewhere around 1845.

 

WCO

Blank was clearly a discerning collector and the fact that he sought coins

in both uncirculated and proof is indicative of what what going on at the St.

Petersburg Mint. Judging from the Blank auction catalogue, proofs were

first struck at St. Petersburg not long before 1820.

 

The fact that new equipment was installed in 1844 and 1845 has nothing to

do with whether proofs were struck. At the Philadelphia Mint proofs were struck

as early as 1817 on the large screw press and there is little doubt that proof

coins were struck in Russia on a screw press, not the new Boulton machinery

which began to be used in 1807.

 

RWJ

[mummytrol]

I am wondering how from collection of Herman Blank may be concluded "that proofs were coined in Russia in the early 19th century"?

 

First Proofs definetely came from Great Britain from the middle of 17-th Century with portrait of Cromwell. First Proof coins that may have anything to do with Russia that I can think of were jettons of Matthew Boulton with portrait of Alexander I, struck in 1804 for testing purposes. However, Russian mint in St. Petersburg installed new equipment somewhere around 1845.

 

WCO

Dear friends! All of your examples are specially altered coins. Nothing to do with a regular strucks with proof technology.Thank you.Mummytrol.

[WCO]

Blank was clearly a discerning collector and the fact that he sought coins

in both uncirculated and proof is indicative of what what going on at the St.

Petersburg Mint. Judging from the Blank auction catalogue, proofs were

first struck at St. Petersburg not long before 1820.

 

The fact that new equipment was installed in 1844 and 1845 has nothing to

do with whether proofs were struck. At the Philadelphia Mint proofs were struck

as early as 1817 on the large screw press and there is little doubt that proof

coins were struck in Russia on a screw press, not the new Boulton machinery

which began to be used in 1807.

 

RWJ

 

RWJ, thanks for the reply.

 

As far as I understand, due to the fact that Proofs dated before 1840's were found in Blank collection someone came to conclusion that they (Proofs) therefore must be struck at the date that is shown on a Proof coin. At list it is not always true, Russian Proofs could be struck at later time and therefore are just Novodels. Some people believe that even the famous Russian 1839 Proof-set that came from Blank collection (sold by firm of Kopylov in St. Petersburg and most likely this same set later was acquired by Richard Margolis and in 1960's sold to Irving Goodman) actually was made (struck) several years later after 1839. I also heard opinion from some quite knowledgeable sources that all 1819 Poltinas in Proof and similar early dated coins are entirely Novodels. I never saw any information about what coin may be called "the first Proof coin struck in Russia" and when it actually happened, would be very glad to learn anything regarding this matter.

 

WCO

[Hussulo]

Dear friends! All of your examples are specially altered coins. Nothing to do with a regular strucks with proof technology.Thank you.Mummytrol.

 

So what your saying is we and all the major auction houses which sold the coins as well as all the people who have wrote books about them are wrong BUT you are right?

 

Come on now friend can't you just admit defeat and say you didn't know or that YOU were wrong?

 

I don't mind helping people out and backing up my claim with facts and information but when that someone still says I am wrong without any proof, then that I do find it funny.

[WCO]

Dear friends! All of your examples are specially altered coins. Nothing to do with a regular strucks with proof technology.Thank you.Mummytrol.

 

I understand that in Mummytroll's kingdom all early Proofs are "specially altered coins". Made from Mint State coins by altering them.

 

But interestingly enough what is saying Mummitrol is exactly as if it is from instruction of Central Bank of Russia. It is stated there that "...Proof is a modern technology...".

 

Regards,

WCO

[RW Julian]

RWJ, thanks for the reply.

 

As far as I understand, due to the fact that Proofs dated before 1840's were found in Blank collection someone came to conclusion that they (Proofs) therefore must be struck at the date that is shown on a Proof coin. At list it is not always true, Russian Proofs could be struck at later time and therefore are just Novodels. Some people believe that even the famous Russian 1839 Proof-set that came from Blank collection (sold by firm of Kopylov in St. Petersburg and most likely this same set later was acquired by Richard Margolis and in 1960's sold to Irving Goodman) actually was made (struck) several years later after 1839. I also heard opinion from some quite knowledgeable sources that all 1819 Poltinas in Proof and similar early dated coins are entirely Novodels. I never saw any information about what coin may be called "the first Proof coin struck in Russia" and when it actually happened, would be very glad to learn anything regarding this matter.

 

WCO

 

The technology for striking proofs in Russia existed as early as 1701 when the first

screw presses were used. Why proofs were not struck until after 1800 I will leave for

others to determine.

 

The Constantine rouble of 1825 is indicative of special proof strikings. In 1994, by permission

of Mr. Kalinin, I examined the Constantine rouble in the Hermitage collection against

photographs furnished by Q. David Bowers for a specimen that Bowers & Merena sold

at auction that year. I paid special attention to the edge lettering, which matched perfectly on both

specimens. However, the edge lettering was not the same as on the regular rouble coinage

of 1825-1826, indicating clearly that the Constantine pieces had been struck elsewhere in

the Mint, almost certainly in the medal department which used screw presses. My opinion is

that the Constantine rouble patterns used rouble planchets on hand, in the medal department,

that had been prepared for regular proof roubles.

 

I know of no reason why proof coinage could not have begun before 1820. I also think that the

1839 proof set was struck in 1839 or, at worst, the following year.

 

RWJ

[WCO]

The technology for striking proofs in Russia existed as early as 1701 when the first

screw presses were used. Why proofs were not struck until after 1800 I will leave for

others to determine.

 

The Constantine rouble of 1825 is indicative of special proof strikings. In 1994, by permission

of Mr. Kalinin, I examined the Constantine rouble in the Hermitage collection against

photographs furnished by Q. David Bowers for a specimen that Bowers & Merena sold

at auction that year. I paid special attention to the edge lettering, which matched perfectly on both

specimens. However, the edge lettering was not the same as on the regular rouble coinage

of 1825-1826, indicating clearly that the Constantine pieces had been struck elsewhere in

the Mint, almost certainly in the medal department which used screw presses. My opinion is

that the Constantine rouble patterns used rouble planchets on hand, in the medal department,

that had been prepared for regular proof roubles.

 

I know of no reason why proof coinage could not have begun before 1820. I also think that the

1839 proof set was struck in 1839 or, at worst, the following year.

 

RWJ

 

 

Talking of Konstantine Rubles (I held for several minutes only one from Dm. Markov holdings several years ago in NY) who actually knows when they were struck? There are LITTLE DOCUMENTS and too many fairy tales and legends about those coins. Here is a link to Russian web-site that tells about Konstantine Ruble: http://www.vd.net.ua/journals/articles-1008 Those who can read Russian will read that first Konstantine Ruble (plain edge) was described by General Feodor Shubert in 1857. By the time information about those coins become public (in 1870's) everyone who could shed a light on this was already dead. Alexander II personally given instructions about Konstantine Rubles issue, who knows what it was? It may very well be that such Rubles all together were struck also at later time than 1825. It is just a matter of believes or disbelieves, no historical documents are known so it looks that there is not enough evidence that Konstantine Rubles may serve as "indicative of special proof strikings".

 

Here: http://unicum-coins.narod.ru/1998/st05b.html is text on Russian: Несмотря на очень небольшой объем чеканки, известно до трех разновидностей узлов орла, использованных в это время. Использование такого количества лицевых штемпелей для такого небольшого объема чеканки может указать на некоторый объем повторной чеканки в 40-х годах ХIХ века, но это всего лишь (по крайней мере в настоящее время) предположение.

 

Theory is that since the mintage figures of 1839 Rubles were very small but up to 3 varieties of the 1839 Rubles are known, some coins were struck at later time in 1840-s. There is no evidence to prove or decline this theory. However, at least possibility that 1839 set was struck in the mid 1840's should not be removed from consideration. It seems likely that MS pieces were struck in 1839 and become part of official mint records. Proofs were struck later on from newly made dies when it was already known how rare 1839 Ruble really is.

 

WCO

[mummytrol]

I understand that in Mummytroll's kingdom all early Proofs are "specially altered coins". Made from Mint State coins by altering them.

 

But interestingly enough what is saying Mummitrol is exactly as if it is from instruction of Central Bank of Russia. It is stated there that "...Proof is a modern technology...".

 

Regards,

WCO

I think that statement was from professionals. Thank you. Mummytrol. P.S. I mean people who work at the mints.

[RW Julian]

Talking of Konstantine Rubles (I held for several minutes only one from Dm. Markov holdings several years ago in NY) who actually knows when they were struck? There are LITTLE DOCUMENTS and too many fairy tales and legends about those coins. Here is a link to Russian web-site that tells about Konstantine Ruble: http://www.vd.net.ua/journals/articles-1008 Those who can read Russian will read that first Konstantine Ruble (plain edge) was described by General Feodor Shubert in 1857. By the time information about those coins become public (in 1870's) everyone who could shed a light on this was already dead. Alexander II personally given instructions about Konstantine Rubles issue, who knows what it was? It may very well be that such Rubles all together were struck also at later time than 1825. It is just a matter of believes or disbelieves, no historical documents are known so it looks that there is not enough evidence that Konstantine Rubles may serve as "indicative of special proof strikings".

 

Here: http://unicum-coins.narod.ru/1998/st05b.html is text on Russian: ???????? ?? ????? ????????? ????? ???????, ???????? ?? ???? ?????????????? ????? ????, ?????????????? ? ??? ?????. ????????????? ?????? ?????????? ??????? ????????? ??? ?????? ?????????? ?????? ??????? ????? ??????? ?? ????????? ????? ????????? ??????? ? 40-? ????? ?I? ????, ?? ??? ????? ???? (?? ??????? ???? ? ????????? ?????) ?????????????.

 

Theory is that since the mintage figures of 1839 Rubles were very small but up to 3 varieties of the 1839 Rubles are known, some coins were struck at later time in 1840-s. There is no evidence to prove or decline this theory. However, at least possibility that 1839 set was struck in the mid 1840's should not be removed from consideration. It seems likely that MS pieces were struck in 1839 and become part of official mint records. Proofs were struck later on from newly made dies when it was already known how rare 1839 Ruble really is.

 

WCO

The historical documentation for the Constantine rouble is reasonably complete. Anyone

can engage in speculation but proving such assertions is something else again. The fact that

the Constantine rouble was not published until 1857 is interesting but proves nothing. The

1786 two roubles gold was first published in 1837 but no one seriously contends that they

were first struck in 1836, for example.

 

It is also clear that most persons enganging in such speculation about the coinage of 1839,

for example, do not understand Mint procedures of the 19th century. It was general practice

at world mints to keep a selection of coins from recent years on hand for sale to collectors at

face value. These stocks of coins would have included proofs.

 

RWJ

[WCO]

The historical documentation for the Constantine rouble is reasonably complete. Anyone

can engage in speculation but proving such assertions is something else again. The fact that

the Constantine rouble was not published until 1857 is interesting but proves nothing. The

1786 two roubles gold was first published in 1837 but no one seriously contends that they

were first struck in 1836, for example.

 

It is also clear that most persons enganging in such speculation about the coinage of 1839,

for example, do not understand Mint procedures of the 19th century. It was general practice

at world mints to keep a selection of coins from recent years on hand for sale to collectors at

face value. These stocks of coins would have included proofs.

 

RWJ

 

About Constantine Ruble we only know what Russian secret department of that time (1870's) wanted to know the public (personal order of Alexander II). And nothing else. No need to speculate both ways, assuming that all the info about the Ruble is true is the same kind of speculation. I would remove Constantine Ruble from discussion of Proof coins since it's a complicated story by itself.

 

Yes, it "was general practice at world mints to keep a selection of coins from recent years on hand for sale to collectors at face value". But it was general practice at Russian mints to strike collector's coins for years and make Novodels using old (existing) and newly made dies. We all know coins that were released for circulation (MS coins) and Novodels for collectors (museums, exhibitions) were made as Proofs at later time (sometimes decades later). So that theory (you call it speculation) does not look that bad. Especially when consider other coins included into 1839 set. For example, there is 1834 Ruble, and info that dies of 1834 Ruble were most likely still in use in 1839 (5 years later). And who knows for how many years after that. Also Polish coinage. No one can be sure that it was struck in Warsaw and then brought to St. Petersburg to make the set. May be it was struck in St. Petersburg, we don't know. We also do not know when 1839 set was actually made.

 

RWJ, if there are documents about when earliest Russian Proof coin was minted (or released by mint) I would be more than glad to learn the info, do you know any historical documents to support your statement that "proofs were first struck at St. Petersburg not long before 1820"?

 

Best regards,

WCO