grivna1726 Posted March 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2009 Does the identification of the underlying Taler indicated that the Mourning Ruble in question is authentic, or that the forger, was clever enough to strike the fake onto an original Taler. Correct silver content, size, and weight as a starting point. This is my question, given the fake Dassier Ruble also sold by this gentleman. I don't know. Maybe it is real (or maybe it isn't). I mistrust the source and there are aspects of the apparent overstriking which bother me, but nothing which I consider conclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Interesting. The 1630 coin you show looks like it might be an overstrike itself. Note particularly the field and legend areas at 5 & 6 o'clock on the reverse (arms) side. another interesting moment could be that what happen with the image or remnants of Sigizmund portrait from the other side, or that was another bad night at the mint and they forgot to fix/clean one side, or forgers thought that some castle detalis could be enought to fool collectors... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted March 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 another interesting moment could be that what happen with the image or remnants of Sigizmund portrait from the other side When I said "there are aspects of the apparent overstriking which bother me, but nothing which I consider conclusive", that was one of the things that I had in mind. However, I don't know what method was used to try to obliterate the undertype, so it is possible that there is a unknown explanation for something that seems so odd. Some overstrikes (e.g. Peter I roubles over foreign thalers) appear (at least, to me) to have had details somehow removed before being being fed into the press and overstruck with Peter's dies. Other overstrikes (e.g. Elizabeth over Ioann III roubles) mostly appear to have been overstruck without such preparation (possibly due to a greater sense of urgency). Catherine II over Peter III appear to have been overstruck in this way, except possibly under higher pressure so that less of the undertype remains. In the case of the mourning rouble, I am suspicious of its authenticity, but I am not certain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 When I said "there are aspects of the apparent overstriking which bother me, but nothing which I consider conclusive", that was one of the things that I had in mind. However, I don't know what method was used to try to obliterate the undertype, so it is possible that there is a unknown explanation for something that seems so odd. Some overstrikes (e.g. Peter I roubles over foreign thalers) appear (at least, to me) to have had details somehow removed before being being fed into the press and overstruck with Peter's dies. Other overstrikes (e.g. Elizabeth over Ioann III roubles) mostly appear to have been overstruck without such preparation (possibly due to a greater sense of urgency). Catherine II over Peter III appear to have been overstruck in this way, except possibly under higher pressure so that less of the undertype remains. In the case of the mourning rouble, I am suspicious of its authenticity, but I am not certain. i did not find a place in any reference books so far where it says in details how was the process done (obliterate the undertype) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.