alexbq2 Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 Please take a look at this coin - Denga 1712 (Samoderjetz). Is it Bitkin 2833? Many Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 Please take a look at this coin - Denga 1712 (Samoderjetz). Is it Bitkin 2833? Many Thanks! I'm a bit out of my depth when it comes to Peter I copper varieties, but it looks like 2833 to me based on a comparison of the obverse pictures. I'm less certain about the reverse die. According to Bitkin, #2833 should have a rosette (at 12 o'clock?), but I don't see one there on your coin (maybe it is off the planchet?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted April 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 I'm a bit out of my depth when it comes to Peter I copper varieties, but it looks like 2833 to me based on a comparison of the obverse pictures. I'm less certain about the reverse die. According to Bitkin, #2833 should have a rosette (at 12 o'clock?), but I don't see one there on your coin (maybe it is off the planchet?). Thanks for the reply Grivna. I’m also confused by the multitudes of Peter I varieties. Isn’t Obverse the side with the eagle on it? Well, on that side you can see a big dot surrounded by little dots (it is partially of the planchet) The other side, presumably the Reverse, has a big dot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 Isn’t Obverse the side with the eagle on it? Well, I might be mistaken, but I usually consider the side with the eagle as the reverse, on the basis that if the eagle on an 18th century portrait rouble is considered the reverse, then the same should hold for the copper coins as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 ...you can see a big dot surrounded by little dots (it is partially of the planchet) That sounds like a rosette to me. I can't really see it in your photo, which is rather dark (even with the brightness boosted to maximum on my monitor). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 That sounds like a rosette to me. I can't really see it in your photo, which is rather dark (even with the brightness boosted to maximum on my monitor). Here's a manipulated version of your picture to try to bring out the details. I think I see a crown between the eagle's heads with a convex arc consisting of 4 dots above the crown. I don't think that's a rosette (based on what I can see). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted April 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 Great photo editing! So right at the edge above the crown and a little left of the middle crown point I see a big dot. Right above the left crown point I see a little dot. And I think I see 2 or 3 more little dots, around the big dot. Of course I could be imagining this. It happens:) As to the obverse/reverse. IMHO you are absolutely correct about the roubles. But as I understand, it is an issue of precedence. If a coin has a portrait on 1 side – that side is always the Obverse. If there is no portrait, the side that carries the more important heraldic imagery is the obverse. On this coin – the eagle. What happens if there are 2 portraits – 1 on each side of the coin? Or as on Elisabeth and Catherine II coppers, what’s more important – the eagle or the monogram? I’m confused, but I decided to consider the side that has the denomination to be the Reverse. Not sure that I’m right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Great photo editing! Thank you, but all I did was play with the brightness and the contrast and then save the result as a new picture. I'm sure someone skilled in the use of such graphics programs could do much better. So right at the edge above the crown and a little left of the middle crown point I see a big dot. Right above the left crown point I see a little dot. And I think I see 2 or 3 more little dots, around the big dot. Of course I could be imagining this. It happens:) I don't see this, but do not have the advantage of seeing the coin in hand, so I could easily be wrong. As to the obverse/reverse. IMHO you are absolutely correct about the roubles. But as I understand, it is an issue of precedence. If a coin has a portrait on 1 side – that side is always the Obverse. If there is no portrait, the side that carries the more important heraldic imagery is the obverse. On this coin – the eagle. I don't know how this works and your interpretation might well be correct. What happens if there are 2 portraits – 1 on each side of the coin? Or as on Elisabeth and Catherine II coppers, what’s more important – the eagle or the monogram? I’m confused, but I decided to consider the side that has the denomination to be the Reverse. Not sure that I’m right. On Elisabeth and Catherine II coppers, I do have an opinion. I see the monogram as the representation of the sovereign, just as a portrait would be. Therefore, the monogram is the obverse. I am curious to see what the copper specialists will have to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Shaver Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Have been collecting 18 th century copper for a while and always considered the eagle to be the reverse. Baroque kopeks are the exception. If you can think of more .. I love to be further educated. mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Baroque kopeks are the exception. On Baroque kopeks, one cartouche has the denomination, the other one has the monogram. The side with the monogram is the one I consider the obverse, for the reason given previously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted April 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I agree with the analysis of the baroque kopeek and the monogrammed coppers. However, the Konros catalog, the MIM online catalog, and Uzdenikov (at least early editions) all classify the monogram side as the Reverse, the eagle or St. George as the Obverse. But I don't understand the reasoning behind such classification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.