Jump to content
CoinPeople.com

1802 10 ruble


gxseries
 Share

Recommended Posts

I reckon this is from the same seller that is selling "air" coins and this is one of them

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=200263664633

 

Rather than discussing whether he's a scammer or not - we'll leave that one side, this seems to be an interesting coin from the image alone.

 

Does anyone happen to see some text around the rim of the coin in particular near the date 1802? Not too sure what it's supposed to be but it doesn't seem it's part of the original design and possibly overstruck. Just can't figure out what it is at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reckon this is from the same seller that is selling "air" coins and this is one of them

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=200263664633

 

Rather than discussing whether he's a scammer or not - we'll leave that one side, this seems to be an interesting coin from the image alone.

 

Does anyone happen to see some text around the rim of the coin in particular near the date 1802? Not too sure what it's supposed to be but it doesn't seem it's part of the original design and possibly overstruck. Just can't figure out what it is at the moment.

After my original posting on this seller (and the source of some of his photos) I have found

a source for this coin. It was in Ekaterina 46 (13 October 2007). The Ekaterina website,

however, has for some time put lettering across the bottom of photographs so it is likely

that the eBay seller got the illustration out of the published catalogue or from another source.

 

The caption in the auction catalogue says that it was struck over a 1781 10 rouble coin and

that the piece is an original pattern. It brought 4 million roubles at auction, more than 5 times

the present "sale" on eBay.

 

RWJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The caption in the auction catalogue says that it was struck over a 1781 10 rouble coin and

that the piece is an original pattern. It brought 4 million roubles at auction, more than 5 times

the present "sale" on eBay.

 

RWJ

 

Why would a pattern be struck on some old coin and not on a new planchette? Only if the intent was to overstrike the 10 ruble coins into these 10 ruble coins (and what would be the purpose of that?). Never read of any such proposed overstrike program...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would a pattern be struck on some old coin and not on a new planchette? Only if the intent was to overstrike the 10 ruble coins into these 10 ruble coins (and what would be the purpose of that?). Never read of any such proposed overstrike program...

The 10 rouble pieces had not been struck for some years (as of 1802) and perhaps it

was simply easier to use an older coin before going to the trouble of making new planchets.

It was an occasional practice in world mints to use older coins to test new dies; these older

coins would normally have been defective in some way and not fit for circulation.

 

The fact that an old coin was used to test the dies does not imply a program of overstriking.

 

RWJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 10 rouble pieces had not been struck for some years (as of 1802) and perhaps it

was simply easier to use an older coin before going to the trouble of making new planchets.

It was an occasional practice in world mints to use older coins to test new dies; these older

coins would normally have been defective in some way and not fit for circulation.

 

The fact that an old coin was used to test the dies does not imply a program of overstriking.

 

RWJ

 

Well, I always thought that true patterns in russia were normally struck to be presented to the "highest" authority and the party promoting the new coin design was interested in that the coin is of the best possible eye appeal. Overstriking does not help it. We are not talking about the die testing -- this is a new coin design (i think). I personally never believed in russian patterns (coins for presentation for approval of new design) struck on anything but a new planchette, except for overstriking programs. (IMXO)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your research, Julian. I knew I saw it somewhere but couldn't just remember where. Your database is awesome.

 

BKB, I believe a few coins were made for the mint internal purposes. For example there is a set of "pattern" gold coins struck in Paraguay: http://www.byersnc.com/paraguayoverstrikes.html Isn't it similar for the 1796 Albertus ruble coin overstruck on some Dutch coins? :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your research, Julian. I knew I saw it somewhere but couldn't just remember where. Your database is awesome.

 

BKB, I believe a few coins were made for the mint internal purposes. For example there is a set of "pattern" gold coins struck in Paraguay: http://www.byersnc.com/paraguayoverstrikes.html Isn't it similar for the 1796 Albertus ruble coin overstruck on some Dutch coins?

Your second point is correct. Old coins or defective planchets were sometimes used to test the dies

but these pieces were not the ones shown to the Emperor and other high-ranking officials.

 

For example, when a new pair of dies was put into a coining press it was necessary to adjust (or

fine-tune) the spacing between the dies. Disposable planchets or old coins were used for this

purpose. Occasionally these test strikes were accidentally released to circulation but it was normal

practice to melt them. Why the 1802 gold test piece was retained is anybody’s guess.

 

RWJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your second point is correct. Old coins or defective planchets were sometimes used to test the dies

but these pieces were not the ones shown to the Emperor and other high-ranking officials.

 

For example, when a new pair of dies was put into a coining press it was necessary to adjust (or

fine-tune) the spacing between the dies. Disposable planchets or old coins were used for this

purpose. Occasionally these test strikes were accidentally released to circulation but it was normal

practice to melt them. Why the 1802 gold test piece was retained is anybody’s guess.

 

RWJ

 

a novodel perhaps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...