Was I duped with this Novodel?

[joel]

Hi,

 

here is a coin I bought off ebay. (ok... please stop laughing and get back on your chair).

What are your views on this coin: trash or treasure??

 

It was claimed to be a Novodel made in 1900-1915 of pure gold, of a 1727 two Rouble.

It definitely is not gold, you can see from the colour that it is more like copper.

It 'could' be rose gold, but the metal doesn't seem heavy enough in my hand to be gold.

Weight is 3g. Thickness 0.9mm, Diameter 21.7mm

 

Copper novodels are not necessarily 'bad', hence the posting.

 

Pictures attached:

Coin next to gold on white paper - for colour comparison

Both sides of coin

 

 

 

[bobh]

here is a coin I bought off ebay. (ok... please stop laughing and get back on your chair).

There is nothing laughable about buying or selling coins on eBay. However, for coins like this one, I would be extremely cautious!

 

What are your views on this coin: trash or treasure??

Since the portrait is supposed to be Peter II, and this one looks more like Peter I (edit: actually, it IS Peter I) I'd say it isn't genuine. But I am no expert in this series. You can compare it to the images in Uzdenikov (on p. 48, 2nd edition of his reference). Don't look at all the same, do they?

 

It was claimed to be a Novodel made in 1900-1915 of pure gold, of a 1727 two Rouble.

It definitely is not gold, you can see from the colour that it is more like copper.

It 'could' be rose gold, but the metal doesn't seem heavy enough in my hand to be gold.

Weight is 3g. Thickness 0.9mm, Diameter 21.7mm

Judging from these pictures, I would say it is probably gold plated, not very thickly either. However, you'd have to do a specific gravity test to be sure. At any rate, gold used for coins in the late 19th and early 20th century has 0.900 fineness. The other metals in the alloy (usually copper) can change color with age. Also, as you implied, there are different shades of gold metal (yellow, white, red...)

 

Copper novodels are not necessarily 'bad', hence the posting.

If there were no copper novodels produced by the Russian mint for this series, then they are not novodels, but simple fakes.

[joel]

There is nothing laughable about buying or selling coins on eBay. However, for coins like this one, I would be extremely cautious!

Since the portrait is supposed to be Peter II, and this one looks more like Peter I, I'd say it isn't genuine. But I am no expert in this series. You can compare it to the images in Uzdenikov (on p. 48, 2nd edition of his reference). Don't look at all the same, do they?

Judging from these pictures, I would say it is probably gold plated, not very thickly either. However, you'd have to do a specific gravity test to be sure. At any rate, gold used for coins in the late 19th and early 20th century has 0.900 fineness. The other metals in the alloy (usually copper) can change color with age. Also, as you implied, there are different shades of gold metal (yellow, white, red...)

If there were no copper novodels produced by the Russian mint for this series, then they are not novodels, but simple fakes.

 

Hi,

 

just did my own specific gravity test from the dimensions of the coin. Not gold - more like copper.

 

Joel

[bobh]

Hi,

I should have said Peter I - not Peter II.

Also, just did my own specific gravity test from the dimensions of the coin. Not gold - more like copper.

 

Joel

Strange ... I didn't think you said either Peter I or Peter II? Doesn't matter ... but since Peter II was Tsar in 1727, it would be very strange to have his (pre-)predecessor on the obverse.

[joel]

Hi,

 

I see what you mean, the Portrait looks a bit like Peter I in 1721.

Link of an original: http://www.coinarchives.com/w/lotviewer.ph...291&Lot=314

 

However, the picture of St.Andrew carrying the cross is clearly dated 1727.

I'm guessing that's bad?

 

Maybe its a 'rare forgery' ? lol

 

Joel

[grivna1726]

Hi,

 

I see what you mean, the Portrait looks a bit like Peter I in 1721.

Link of an original: http://www.coinarchives.com/w/lotviewer.ph...291&Lot=314

 

However, the picture of St.Andrew carrying the cross is clearly dated 1727.

I'm guessing that's bad?

 

Maybe its a 'rare forgery' ? lol

 

Joel

Hello Joel,

 

Sorry to say, but your coin is almost certainly false.

 

The portrait is that of Peter I, who died in 1725. It is also of a type which was discontinued in 1723 in favor of the "seaman" style portrait used 1723-1725. You can see an example of the seaman type HERE.

 

The 2 roubles of Peter II was struck in 1727 & 1728 only. My current icon is a genuine 1727 2 roubles of Peter II. Notice the difference in the portraits. Gold used in the 1718-1728 2 roubles coinage does have a reddish hue (.750 fine, if memory is correct) but is easily distinguished from copper.

 

So what you have is a copy with the wrong portrait/date combination and in the wrong metal. Therefore it is not real. I suppose there is a slim chance that it might be a novodel purposely struck as a fantasy in order to make it more "interesting", but I cannot recall ever hearing of such a novodel. Note that I do not have access to my references at the moment, so I am speaking from memory only. It is possible, but extremely unlikely, that this might be a previously unknown novodel. I think it is far more likely to be a fake.

[gxseries]

I'm going to ask further Joel - where exactly did you get the coin and I really hope that you have some kind of refund policy. Original gold coins from this era are in terms of TENS of thousands of dollars - they aren't cheap these days. Getting a genuine one for a steal is almost as good as trying to win a lottery.

[grivna1726]

Gold used in the 1718-1728 2 roubles coinage does have a reddish hue (.750 fine, if memory is correct) but is easily distinguished from copper.

Correction to the above. The gold is not 75% but 75 parts out of 96, which yields a fineness of 0.781, not 0.750 as I incorrectly stated above. This difference has no significant effect on the color of this type, but is mentioned in the interest of providing correct information.

 

So far, a quick check of my references has not found any such novodel as yours listed. I therefore think that can be safely described as a fake.

 

I hope you didn't pay much for it and that you will be able to get your money back.

 

Please, if you are able to do so, provide a link to the ebay auction where you purchased this piece. Thank you.

 

BTW, welcome to coinpeople.

[joel]

Correction to the above. The gold is not 75% but 75 parts out of 96, which yields a fineness of 0.781, not 0.750 as I incorrectly stated above. This difference has no significant effect on the color of this type, but is mentioned in the interest of providing correct information.

 

So far, a quick check of my references has not found any such novodel as yours listed. I therefore think that can be safely described as a fake.

 

I hope you didn't pay much for it and that you will be able to get your money back.

 

Please, if you are able to do so, provide a link to the ebay auction where you purchased this piece. Thank you.

 

BTW, welcome to coinpeople.

 

 

Hi guys,

 

thanks for the help. Not big bucks involved. The coin was claimed to be a 'novodel' rather than an 'original'. I realise an original coin would be worth a huge amount. I will be pursuing the seller through eBay and Paypal. I have a good mind to report directly to Australian Federal Police (the seller and I are both in Australia).

 

eBay item link is: http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi...em=300214515172

 

In a follow up email questioning the colour of the item I asked the seller, if the coin was genuine gold, and they replied:

"Hi Yes, it made from solid gold,but because I SOLD IT WELL BELOW MY ESTIMATION PRICE I ALWAYS HAPPY TAKE IT BACK.Regards,bruno-oscar"

 

Sometimes cameras can have trouble reproducing colours properly, so I gave the seller the benefit of the doubt.

As a gold piece weighing 3 grams (1/10th oz), it means I 'would' have been buying it at bullion price with zero value attached to the coin.

 

Anyone who has handled gold before would know from the colour and the weight that it was likely to be copper.

 

With this in mind, either the seller was misleading me, or had never seen real gold before. I find the latter difficult to believe.

 

==============

None of this will stop me from buying coins in the future. Your knowledge and love of the topic is fantastic.

 

Thanks

 

Joel

[bobh]

Correction to the above. The gold is not 75% but 75 parts out of 96, which yields a fineness of 0.781, not 0.750 as I incorrectly stated above.

This would apply to an original gold coin. However, if this piece WERE a genuine novodel minted around 1900, as the original message states, wouldn't the gold have been 0.900 fine?

[STEVE MOULDING]

This would apply to an original gold coin. However, if this piece WERE a genuine novodel minted around 1900, as the original message states, wouldn't the gold have been 0.900 fine?

 

Hi Joel. Duped if you were told it was gold...probably. Duped on any other basis...I don't think you have much of a case. The definition of novodel (a non-english term to begin with) is so broad and fuzzy that even experts disagree as to what it means. Also just try to prove it wasn't made 1900-1915.

 

If it's not gold, and your specific gravity test seems to indicate that (color alone can't be used...gold comes in all kinds of colors as you and others have noted), then you have a point and can call the Australian police, interpol, or whoever (you could even try ebay ).

 

Anyway for just 99 AUD what did you honestly expect? You've already got some entertainment value from this.

 

My 2c

[grivna1726]

This would apply to an original gold coin. However, if this piece WERE a genuine novodel minted around 1900, as the original message states, wouldn't the gold have been 0.900 fine?

 

Correct. That (75/96) is the standard for an original strike. I have no idea if that was the standard used to strike novodels.

 

BTW, unless my memory is playing tricks on me again, didn't novodel production stop during the reign of Tsars Alexander II or Alexander III following a request by the Grand Duke?

 

Yes, I know that the Soviet government made novodels of some Nicholas II coins, but I have grave doubt that usable dies from the 1720s would still have been hanging around the mint in Soviet times. So how could this have been OFFICIALLY struck 1900-1915 as stated?

 

BTW, the link supplied by Joel does not work for me "This Page Is No Longer Available". However I did find it on ebay.com LINK.

 

Joel, you might want to save that page before it disappears completely.

[grivna1726]

BTW, the link supplied by Joel does not work for me "This Page Is No Longer Available". However I did find it on ebay.com LINK.

BTW, I wondered why no-one here had commented on this listing while it was still active.

 

The seller listed it under "Coins > Australian > Coins, Decimal > Gold, Platinum" even though aware that the "coin" is of a Russian type, which seems like a rather strange thing to do. However, doing so would mean that a collector with knowledge of the series would probably not see it, since such a person would probably not go looking for Russian coins in the Australian listings.

[RW Julian]

More than likely a modern forger got his dies mixed up.

 

RWJ

[grivna1726]

More than likely a modern forger got his dies mixed up.

 

RWJ

That seems like the most reasonable explanation.

[alexbq2]

BTW, unless my memory is playing tricks on me again, didn't novodel production stop during the reign of Tsars Alexander II or Alexander III following a request by the Grand Duke?

 

Yes, I know that the Soviet government made novodels of some Nicholas II coins, but I have grave doubt that usable dies from the 1720s would still have been hanging around the mint in Soviet times. So how could this have been OFFICIALLY struck 1900-1915 as stated?

 

That’s correct the official novodel production was stopped in 1890s (as I recall), but most statements from most sellers regarding their merchandise on eBay can and should be ignored.

 

My suggestion is - if the coin is made of gold keep it even if it is a fake. Gold prices are going up. You can probably take it to a jeweler if you are not fully convinced that it is not gold. Also, if you think it is a somewhat interesting coin, keep it, you did not pay that much for it – a good conversation piece.

 

PS: I think I have heard of some gold plated novodels of gold coins, and in late 1700’s and early 1800s they would mix and match whatever they wanted to make fantasy coins. But given the amount and quality of modern forgeries odds are somewhat against this being a genuine novodel. Even if it is, how can one prove it?

[bobh]

But given the amount and quality of modern forgeries odds are somewhat against this being a genuine novodel. Even if it is, how can one prove it?

According to Brekke, there are four classes of novodel: Class 1 novodels were made from both original obverse and reverse dies and often cannot be easily distinguished from the originals. Class 2 novodels were struck from new dies of somewhat different design than the original; Classes 3 and 4 are mules of original and new dies. I would think that if the design on a coin is not already documented somewhere, it should be obvious that it is not a genuine novodel. Also, pairing the wrong ruler with the date, e.g. 1727 here, is an error that no one at the mint could have made.

[RARENUM]

I would use terms -New made for 2 roubles, instead "Novodel" I'm buying original novodels because it is very interesting area for me and I agree call Novodel if coins was struck on Official mint including mule coins(pairing the wrong ruler with the date )

[alexbq2]

This seems a bit reminiscent of the coin you got:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=280217118764

[RW Julian]

This seems a bit reminiscent of the coin you got:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=280217118764

It is the same reverse die. Both pieces are therefore modern forgeries.

 

RWJ

[Cheburgen]

<Sorry to say, but your coin is almost certainly false.

 

Almost certainly? Почти?

[grivna1726]

<Sorry to say, but your coin is almost certainly false.

 

Almost certainly? Почти?

There are occasionally novodels struck in the wrong metal or with muled obverses and reverses of different rulers.

 

While I had no doubt that the coin is not an original, I left open the possibility of a novodel because I was reluctant to make any absolute statement on a coin which I had not seen in hand and without benefit of consulting my references. That becomes fairly obvious if you continue reading further in the thread.

 

In fact, I can find no listing of such a novodel. Previously unknown novodels do surface occasionally, but it is a very uncommon event. I do not think this is such a novodel. It is just a fake.

[grivna1726]

It is the same reverse die. Both pieces are therefore modern forgeries.

 

RWJ

The first one came from a seller in Australia. This one is from a seller in Israel.

 

That suggests that these are already fairly widespread, so more will likely appear in the near future.

[Cheburgen]

It is just a fake.

 

Bingo.

 

Sincerely,

[alexbq2]

The first one came from a seller in Australia. This one is from a seller in Israel.

 

That suggests that these are already fairly widespread, so more will likely appear in the near future.

 

I am familiar with the seller from Israel. I bought a few wires from him over the last couple of years. There is actually 2 brothers (I think), they have different eBay IDs but sell similar items. I have no complaints about either. I have seen them sell copies of gold wires and court coins. They always indicate that it is a gold copy. The guy in Australia could have easily bought his from them.