1857 Russia 20K proof

[RW Julian]

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Russian Proof coin was minted (or released by mint) I would be more than glad to learn the info, do you know any historical documents to support your statement that "proofs were first struck at St. Petersburg not long before 1820"?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

The statement that proof coins were struck before 1820 is based on the Blank collection.

 

The difference in edging for the Constantine rouble is in itself definitive that special blanks

were used, apart from the regular coinage. They were almost certainly struck in the medal

department, which was the source of proofs in world mints of this era.

 

The 1834 coins were almost certainly still on hand at the Mint in 1839 for distribution to

collectors and it is very unlikely that they were restruck for this purpose.

 

I am well aware that novodels were made but unless documentation exists to the contrary,

then we can assume that the Blank collection is a good indication of what was struck for

collectors on a yearly basis. It is very difficult to believe that advanced Russian collectors

of the 1820s and 1830s would not have been interested in the current coinage. Collectors

in other European countries certainly were so inclined.

 

One can speculate endlessly about Russian proof coinage but the best indication of what was

made is the record of the Blank collection. It was an extraordinary assemblage which probably

could not be duplicated today by a private person at any cost.

 

There is of course little doubt that some of the proof coinage dating from the 19th century may well

be restrikes but it will not be until the relevant Mint documents are publilshed that we will know

precise details. If we were to go by mint reports, for example, it would be easy to say that no

proofs were coined in Imperial Russia; the St. Petersburg Mint never reported the proof coins sold to

collectors.

 

Perhaps WCO has documentation on the issuing of proofs in the 19th century? If not, then we have

only the auction records for reference. Endless speculation proves nothing, especially when it does

not take into account known world mint procedures of the 19th century.

 

RWJ

[WCO]

The statement that proof coins were struck before 1820 is based on the Blank collection.

 

RWJ,

 

Do you know years of life of G.G. Blank? Also how do you think what was the main source of coins in the Blank collection, mint or other sources not related to the mint?

 

Thank you.

WCO

[RW Julian]

RWJ,

 

Do you know years of life of G.G. Blank? Also how do you think what was the main source of coins in the Blank collection, mint or other sources not related to the mint?

 

Thank you.

WCO

No, but the sale has some odd features. For the silver and copper the proof sets have a

final date of 1906. The uncirculated silver goes only to 1904 while uncirculated copper

goes through 1905. The sale was held by B.F. Kopylov in 1908 and was comprised of

2,550 lots.

 

The source of the collection is not known to me but perhaps much of it was obtained by

buying entire collections, such as was done by the Grand Duke. Blank was clearly

wealthy and may have had agents in various parts of the country buying coins for him.

I doubt that the St. Petersburg Mint was a major source for coins, except for those dated

after about 1885; Blank had only a single 1871 SPB copper coin, the half kopeck, for

example.

 

RWJ

[WCO]

No, but the sale has some odd features. For the silver and copper the proof sets have a

final date of 1906. The uncirculated silver goes only to 1904 while uncirculated copper

goes through 1905. The sale was held by B.F. Kopylov in 1908 and was comprised of

2,550 lots.

 

The source of the collection is not known to me but perhaps much of it was obtained by

buying entire collections, such as was done by the Grand Duke. Blank was clearly

wealthy and may have had agents in various parts of the country buying coins for him.

I doubt that the St. Petersburg Mint was a major source for coins, except for those dated

after about 1885; Blank had only a single 1871 SPB copper coin, the half kopeck, for

example.

 

RWJ

 

 

I do not know the exact years of life of G.G. Blank but since he was still alive somewhere in 1906 plus or minus (two of his books were published in 1902 and 1904, many coins run up to 1906) I assume that he (with very high degree of accuracy) did not collect coins neither in 1820's nor in 1830's, and very likely he WAS NOT EVEN BORN at that time. Most likely he started collecting somewhere in 1870's or 1880's, less likely in 1860's and very unlikely in 1850's. So there is NO WAY any early dated Proof coin came into his collection out of mint. And if some early dated Proofs came to his collection out of mint this proves absolutely contrary to your statement. They all had to be Novodels then, mint could not keep originals for sale for DECADES in their inventory. In any case "the statement that proof coins were struck before 1820 is based on the Blank collection" lucks elementary logic. His collection can prove anything only if he lived and actively collected coins at the time of their mintage. Collection of Blank can not be any evidence in dating of actual years of mintage of early Russian Proofs, the same as any modern collection that have early dated Russian Proofs in it. He collected decades later.

 

Regards,

WCO

[mummytrol]

The statement that proof coins were struck before 1820 is based on the Blank collection.

 

The difference in edging for the Constantine rouble is in itself definitive that special blanks

were used, apart from the regular coinage. They were almost certainly struck in the medal

department, which was the source of proofs in world mints of this era.

 

The 1834 coins were almost certainly still on hand at the Mint in 1839 for distribution to

collectors and it is very unlikely that they were restruck for this purpose.

 

I am well aware that novodels were made but unless documentation exists to the contrary,

then we can assume that the Blank collection is a good indication of what was struck for

collectors on a yearly basis. It is very difficult to believe that advanced Russian collectors

of the 1820s and 1830s would not have been interested in the current coinage. Collectors

in other European countries certainly were so inclined.

 

One can speculate endlessly about Russian proof coinage but the best indication of what was

made is the record of the Blank collection. It was an extraordinary assemblage which probably

could not be duplicated today by a private person at any cost.

 

There is of course little doubt that some of the proof coinage dating from the 19th century may well

be restrikes but it will not be until the relevant Mint documents are publilshed that we will know

precise details. If we were to go by mint reports, for example, it would be easy to say that no

proofs were coined in Imperial Russia; the St. Petersburg Mint never reported the proof coins sold to

collectors.

 

Perhaps WCO has documentation on the issuing of proofs in the 19th century? If not, then we have

only the auction records for reference. Endless speculation proves nothing, especially when it does

not take into account known world mint procedures of the 19th century.

 

RWJ

Thank you , RW! Mummytrol.

[RW Julian]

I do not know the exact years of life of G.G. Blank but since he was still alive somewhere in 1906 plus or minus (two of his books were published in 1902 and 1904, many coins run up to 1906) I assume that he (with very high degree of accuracy) did not collect coins neither in 1820's nor in 1830's, and very likely he WAS NOT EVEN BORN at that time. Most likely he started collecting somewhere in 1870's or 1880's, less likely in 1860's and very unlikely in 1850's. So there is NO WAY any early dated Proof coin came into his collection out of mint. And if some early dated Proofs came to his collection out of mint this proves absolutely contrary to your statement. They all had to be Novodels then, mint could not keep originals for sale for DECADES in their inventory. In any case "the statement that proof coins were struck before 1820 is based on the Blank collection" lucks elementary logic. His collection can prove anything only if he lived and actively collected coins at the time of their mintage. Collection of Blank can not be any evidence in dating of actual years of mintage of early Russian Proofs, the same as any modern collection that have early dated Russian Proofs in it. He collected decades later.

Regards,

WCO

As WCO continues to present speculation as fact there is no point in continuing this

discussion. I did not, for example, indicate that Blank was collecting in the 1820s. All

we have at present are the auction catalogues. I suggest that WCO do his own

research in the archives and then report back to us.

 

I will, however, add one point. The Tolstoy and Klingert collections were also considered

in my views of the early proof coinage.

 

RWJ

[WCO]

As WCO continues to present speculation as fact ...

 

RWJ,

 

I do not provide any speculations as facts. On the contrary, it is you who presented statement:

 

Judging from the Blank auction catalogue, proofs were

first struck at St. Petersburg not long before 1820.

 

Some people who read this may actually decide that somehow from research of auction catalogue of Blank collection printed around 1907 or 1908 you somehow figured out when some of the coins were actually struck (i.e. if they are Novodels, restrikes made at later time or Originals minted during the year they bear) and therefore were able to approximately provide dating on mintage of first Russian Proofs.

 

You failed to provide any reasonable explanation how from reading the Blank auction catalogue you came to conclusion that early Russian Proofs were minted somewhere before 1820's? The fact that early dated Russian Proofs found in the Blank collection does not provide any logical explanation to your statement. Blank acquired his coins decades after 1820's. I also have/had early dated Proofs in my possession, but how can anyone based on my holdings tell when coins were actually struck? Since you did not care to explain how you came to conclusion, I assume that you have no explanation and your statement is just a speculation that have no real base under it. Further discussion is completely pointless therefore.

 

Best regards,

WCO

 

P.S. Catalogs printed in late 1820's or early 1830's may only serve as trusted source of information to prove existence of Proof coins "not long before 1820" if such coins are listed in those catalogs. Of course mint records or other trusted sources of information (archives). And all the rest is just a speculation. Catalogue of Blank collection printed in 1907 is no better than any other catalogue printed in 2007 with many early dated Russian Proofs in it.

[RARENUM]

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

Dear Mummytrol,I believe it is just your opinion or you don’t like technology of 19th century. I did home work for 10 min. and have fond: 1. Blank collection I have found silver proof from 1801 and up and copper proof from 1810 and up in 2. Dublekats of Hermitage from 1818 and up gold in Proof.3. Tolstoy from 1809 und up...

[IgorS]

RWJ,

 

I do not provide any speculations as facts. On the contrary, it is you who presented statement:

Some people who read this may actually decide that somehow from research of auction catalogue of Blank collection printed around 1907 or 1908 you somehow figured out when some of the coins were actually struck (i.e. if they are Novodels, restrikes made at later time or Originals minted during the year they bear) and therefore were able to approximately provide dating on mintage of first Russian Proofs.

 

You failed to provide any reasonable explanation how from reading the Blank auction catalogue you came to conclusion that early Russian Proofs were minted somewhere before 1820's? The fact that early dated Russian Proofs found in the Blank collection does not provide any logical explanation to your statement. Blank acquired his coins decades after 1820's. I also have/had early dated Proofs in my possession, but how can anyone based on my holdings tell when coins were actually struck? Since you did not care to explain how you came to conclusion, I assume that you have no explanation and your statement is just a speculation that have no real base under it. Further discussion is completely pointless therefore.

 

Best regards,

WCO

 

P.S. Catalogs printed in late 1820's or early 1830's may only serve as trusted source of information to prove existence of Proof coins "not long before 1820" if such coins are listed in those catalogs. Of course mint records or other trusted sources of information (archives). And all the rest is just a speculation. Catalogue of Blank collection printed in 1907 is no better than any other catalogue printed in 2007 with many early dated Russian Proofs in it.

 

WCO,

 

In your posts and discussions the main phrase always is "it is not me..., it is you...". I wonder if anyone ever read your long posts from the beginning to the end. I certainly did not, since I do not expect to find any answers there. Please re-read your posts before posting them and shorten them to the max. Sorry for not so nice comment, but let's call it constructive critisism.

On the other hand, I always enjoy RWJ's (who is a gentlemen and a scholar) comments.

[WCO]

WCO,

 

In your posts and discussions the main phrase always is "it is not me..., it is you...". I wonder if anyone ever read your long posts from the beginning to the end. I certainly did not, since I do not expect to find any answers there. Please re-read your posts before posting them and shorten them to the max. Sorry for not so nice comment, but let's call it constructive critisism.

On the other hand, I always enjoy RWJ's (who is a gentlemen and a scholar) comments.

 

 

Igor,

 

Since you understood RWJ better than me, then please explain how from 1907 Catalogue follows conclusion that "...proofs were first struck at St. Petersburg not long before 1820". And please be short in your explanations the same as you want it from me.

 

WCO

[mummytrol]

Dear Mummytrol,

I believe it is just your opinion or you don’t like technology of 19th century.

I did home work for 10 min. and have fond:

1. Blank collection I have found silver proof from 1801 and up and copper proof from 1810 and up in

2. Dublekats of Hermitage from 1818 and up gold in Proof.

3. Tolstoy from 1809 und up...

I think all of them just NOVODELS, made by the orders of very famous ane rich collectors of the pa

st. As you know russian mint did it maybe for 50 years until Great Duke asked emperor to stop it. Thank you. Mummytol.

[RARENUM]

I think all of them just NOVODELS, made by the orders of very famous ane rich collectors of the pa

st. As you know russian mint did it maybe for 50 years until Great Duke asked emperor to stop it. Thank you. Mummytol.

I'm sorry for late answer.

1. Not only famous and rich have order Novodels,

2. Yes, the mint stop struck Novodels (and continues with Gangut).

3. I just not agree with your opinion:

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

You should bring more details...

4.Of course Machinery on the mint was change couple times on the beginning of 19th century, but then they start use Proof technology for coins or medals? I believe No documents exist on the mint about start striking coins in Proof before 1830’s, but it doesn’t mean the coins in Proof was not struck “150 years ago”.

Best Regards,Rarenum.

[banivechi]

I know nothing about early proofs, but in this thread I can learn alot about! RWJ, it's a real pleasure to read your posts!

[grivna1726]

I know nothing about early proofs, but in this thread I can learn alot about! RWJ, it's a real pleasure to read your posts!

 

 

Indeed.