BKB Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Could not fit all pictures in one post :-) Last but not the least: 1796 overstrike with a mixed edge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Could not fit all pictures in one post :-) Last but not the least: 1796 overstrike with a mixed edge. Wonderful coin! I think this is Bitkin 110 (R3). What appears to be a mixed edge is the result of re-edging edge 5 (XXXXXXXXXXX) into edge 6 (\\\\\\\\\\\\\\). Congrats! Sigi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted August 7, 2008 Report Share Posted August 7, 2008 Very attractive coin. The condition is outstanding, having been overstruck at least twice, even more so! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted August 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 2 sigi: No, it is not Bit. 110. I think It is 109. The mixed edge is the result of \\\\\\ re-edged into XXXXXX. They just missed a spot, I guess. Thank you for your kind words. Still missing Bit. 110, though. Anyone has a duplicate? :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 Well done! Congrats! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennysky Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 Persistence as a virtue! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 Nice coins! Not to start a new thread, I have this coin that puzzles me. It is a 1795 AM 5 kopeks. The edge is re-edged ( I do not have a picture handy), but I do not see any signs of cypher 10 kopeks. I know that some coins were "re-overstruck" without being new cypher type (just happened to mix into the bag). I hope this is the case with this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 Nice coins! Not to start a new thread, I have this coin that puzzles me. It is a 1795 AM 5 kopeks. The edge is re-edged ( I do not have a picture handy), but I do not see any signs of cypher 10 kopeks. I know that some coins were "re-overstruck" without being new cypher type (just happened to mix into the bag). I hope this is the case with this one. Igor, I'm pretty sure that this is an overstrike over 10kop1796!!! Look at the "7" in the date and its area. I think gxseries would have his word to say. Higher rez pictures would however be necessary, of the edge as well. I am very interested in this. Maybe you could start a new topic with this? I'd then show my pictures of a similar coin. Thank you in advance, Sigi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 2 sigi: No, it is not Bit. 110. I think It is 109. The mixed edge is the result of \\\\\\ re-edged into XXXXXX. They just missed a spot, I guess. Thank you for your kind words. Still missing Bit. 110, though. Anyone has a duplicate? :-) But BKB - there had not been an earlier edge 6 (\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\) before on this size of coin. Edge 6 is seen only on 1767 Siberian 5 and 10 kop. Those would not correspond in size to your coin. As there had not been an edge 6 on this size of coin before 1796, your coin can only be what is meant by Bit 110 (R3) Don't you agree? Sigi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted August 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 But BKB - there had not been an earlier edge 6 (\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\) before on this size of coin. Edge 6 is seen only on 1767 Siberian 5 and 10 kop. Those would not correspond in size to your coin. As there had not been an edge 6 on this size of coin before 1796, your coin can only be what is meant by Bit 110 (R3) Don't you agree? Sigi I wish you were right, but -- nah, first was XXXXX, then re-edged as \\\\\\\\\ when overstruck into 1796 10 kop, then back to XXXXXX, but missed a spot. The idea was to make them look again like the ordinary coins of Catherine II. I think that Bit. 110 is a mint error where a coin simply escaped the mint by accident without being re-edged. Just like most if not all "great rarities" with "rare" edge (long list). . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BKB Posted August 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 Nice coins! Not to start a new thread, I have this coin that puzzles me. It is a 1795 AM 5 kopeks. The edge is re-edged ( I do not have a picture handy), but I do not see any signs of cypher 10 kopeks. I know that some coins were "re-overstruck" without being new cypher type (just happened to mix into the bag). I hope this is the case with this one. Are there any known differences between the dies of Catherine and those used by Paul for overstriking? That would help... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 Igor, I'm pretty sure that this is an overstrike over 10kop1796!!! Look at the "7" in the date and its area. I think gxseries would have his word to say. Higher rez pictures would however be necessary, of the edge as well. I am very interested in this. Maybe you could start a new topic with this? I'd then show my pictures of a similar coin. Thank you in advance, Sigi Sigi, I will start a new thread in two weeks with better pictures. At the same time I will make better pictures of other coins I promissed to a few members. Are there any known differences between the dies of Catherine and those used by Paul for overstriking? That would help... BKB, the original dies were used. But maybe someone here knows something about it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted August 9, 2008 Report Share Posted August 9, 2008 Not to start a new thread, I have this coin that puzzles me. It is a 1795 AM 5 kopeks. The edge is re-edged ( I do not have a picture handy), but I do not see any signs of cypher 10 kopeks. I know that some coins were "re-overstruck" without being new cypher type (just happened to mix into the bag). I hope this is the case with this one IMHO this looks like a double strike. I guess we'll see more with better images - especially of the edge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted August 9, 2008 Report Share Posted August 9, 2008 But BKB - there had not been an earlier edge 6 (\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\) before on this size of coin. Edge 6 is seen only on 1767 Siberian 5 and 10 kop. Those would not correspond in size to your coin. As there had not been an edge 6 on this size of coin before 1796, your coin can only be what is meant by Bit 110 (R3) Don't you agree? Sigi What about the edge on the KM mint pyataks, wasn't it also \\\\\\\\\\\? And the size would work out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted August 9, 2008 Report Share Posted August 9, 2008 What about the edge on the KM mint pyataks, wasn't it also \\\\\\\\\\\? And the size would work out. No, Alex, the KM piataks 1781-1796 all had edge 1 (////////////////). As said, before 1796 edge 6 (\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\) had only been seen on a small portion of both the Siberian 10kop1767KM (too large and too heavy for the reoverstrike) and Siberian 5kop1767KM (too small and too lightweight). Sigi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted August 9, 2008 Report Share Posted August 9, 2008 In my opinion, BKB's 5 kopek edge was originally a (\\\\\\\\\\\\) which was then reedged to (XXXXXXXXXXXXXX) If you look carefully at the second last slash before it is joined with the XXXX, you can see that there is a pitting at the bottom. Quite bizarre and I like it! Igors' 5 kopek is quite bizarre - I can't quite comment on it yet unless a new higher resolution picture is uploaded. For now, my opinion is that it is struck twice. The curve figure under the 1"7"95 is probably just a monogram of Elizabeth II but this is just my guess at the moment. Igors - you NEED to upload your awesome coin pictures and kill us all with them I'm still waiting for your picture of 1795 MM kopek overstruck over para coin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted August 9, 2008 Report Share Posted August 9, 2008 Speaking of which, I do have a massive 76.4g 5 kopek, which is clearly heavier than an average Siberian 10 kopek. Most of the edge is fine except for a part. I should take a photo of it when I get the time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted August 9, 2008 Report Share Posted August 9, 2008 No, Alex, the KM piataks 1781-1796 all had edge 1 (////////////////). As said, before 1796 edge 6 (\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\) had only been seen on a small portion of both the Siberian 10kop1767KM (too large and too heavy for the reoverstrike) and Siberian 5kop1767KM (too small and too lightweight). Sigi Sorry, I got confused as to which coin is being discussed The badly edged Paul's overstrike should have edge 1. As dumb as it sounds, is BKB holding the coin the right way with respect to the under coin on the edge shot? The coin's obverse is the undercoin's reverse in this case. No disrespect, just want to be sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.