bobh Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 In the auction ddescription, this coin is listed as "Brekke 7A" and unlisted in Bitkin. I have the original Brekke book from 1977 and both the 1987 supplement pamphlet published by the RNS as well as the 1997 supplement in book form. Yet I was not able to find any reference to "Brekke 7A". Here is the auction link: http://sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&sid=171&lot=7452 Now compare it with this coin in the upcoming WAG auction which is apparently of the same type as above: http://sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&sid=173&lot=3749 There, the description lists it as "Bitkin 100" which cannot be right since the mintmark is totally different in size and placement. At first, looking at the WAG coin, I thought it might be Bitkin 98 (variety E:M:), but it is probably the same type as Mr. Bakken's coin. Where is "Brekke 7A" listed? Has there been yet another supplement published in the previous 12 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 To my eye, they are both of the same type. The WAG coin is particularly nice, with all 3 dates clear as day. btw, compliments on a well put together article on the gold 15 rubles in the new RNS Jounal, Bob! In fact, an excellent all around issue, my compliments to all the contributors and the editor. Good reading! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Never knew there were 1791 EM 5 kopek overstruck on 1796 10 kopek. Thanks for showing! Also, what's that odd "6" or 9 in lot 3749 where the "17" is supposed to be at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 Also, what's that odd "6" or 9 in lot 3749 where the "17" is supposed to be at? This coin started life as a 1796 5 Kopek. The "old" 96 is where the 17 should be, (rotated 180 degrees). It was overstruck in 1796 to a "cipher" 10 Kopek. That date is visible at the top of the eagle side. The coin was then re-overstruck by Paul I, in 1797, using an old date, 1791, to avoid blame for the sloppy look of the coin. In general, All of this was done to re-value the coinage for economic reasons, but was a failured project. It makes for some nice collectilbe variants and combinations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted September 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 To my eye, they are both of the same type. The WAG coin is particularly nice, with all 3 dates clear as day. btw, compliments on a well put together article on the gold 15 rubles in the new RNS Jounal, Bob! In fact, an excellent all around issue, my compliments to all the contributors and the editor. Good reading! Thanks, Josh! I agree that the two coins illustrated are of the same type. My "real" question is, where can I read about Brekke 7A when none of the supplements (nor the original Brekke book) mentions it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RW Julian Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 In the auction ddescription, this coin is listed as "Brekke 7A" and unlisted in Bitkin. I have the original Brekke book from 1977 and both the 1987 supplement pamphlet published by the RNS as well as the 1997 supplement in book form. Yet I was not able to find any reference to "Brekke 7A". Here is the auction link:http://sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&sid=171&lot=7452 Now compare it with this coin in the upcoming WAG auction which is apparently of the same type as above: http://sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&sid=173&lot=3749 There, the description lists it as "Bitkin 100" which cannot be right since the mintmark is totally different in size and placement. At first, looking at the WAG coin, I thought it might be Bitkin 98 (variety E:M:), but it is probably the same type as Mr. Bakken's coin. Where is "Brekke 7A" listed? Has there been yet another supplement published in the previous 12 years? I suspect, but cannot be certain, that this new number refers to an unpublished manuscript by Tom Bakken. It is his collection and perhaps he catalogued the material (i.e. the references) for the auction house. RWJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted September 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 btw, compliments on a well put together article on the gold 15 rubles in the new RNS Jounal, Bob! As a matter of fact, this story began right here on this forum: http://www.coinpeople.com/index.php?showtopic=18611&hl= The discussion took place a long time ago, and I had completely forgotten about it in the meantime. But as you can see, it was CP member "maya" who first spotted the fact that there was a difference between the Adam's apple / no Adam's apple varieties, although I eventually coined the name for it. Unfortunately, the article went to press before I was able to give her credit ... however, there should be something appearing in the next newsletter thanking her for her eagle eyes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted September 1, 2009 Report Share Posted September 1, 2009 I suspect, but cannot be certain, that this new number refers to an unpublished manuscriptby Tom Bakken. It is his collection and perhaps he catalogued the material (i.e. the references) for the auction house. RWJ That must be the answer! btw, Tom Bakken was planning to attend to the Munich auction of his coins. Anyone going there? Maybe I will if time allows. Sigi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 In the auction ddescription, this coin is listed as "Brekke 7A" and unlisted in Bitkin. I have the original Brekke book from 1977 and both the 1987 supplement pamphlet published by the RNS as well as the 1997 supplement in book form. Yet I was not able to find any reference to "Brekke 7A". Here is the auction link:http://sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&sid=171&lot=7452 Now compare it with this coin in the upcoming WAG auction which is apparently of the same type as above: http://sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&sid=173&lot=3749 There, the description lists it as "Bitkin 100" which cannot be right since the mintmark is totally different in size and placement. At first, looking at the WAG coin, I thought it might be Bitkin 98 (variety E:M:), but it is probably the same type as Mr. Bakken's coin. Where is "Brekke 7A" listed? Has there been yet another supplement published in the previous 12 years? just to let you know that there is another variation of 1791 5 kopeks with no mintmark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altyn Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 btw, compliments on a well put together article on the gold 15 rubles in the new RNS Jounal, Bob! In fact, an excellent all around issue, my compliments to all the contributors and the editor. Good reading! Bob, would you happen to have a pdf reprint? I'd appreciate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted September 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 Bob, would you happen to have a pdf reprint? I'd appreciate it. Since the RNS sells the back issues of all the journals, I don't think they would appreciate it if I did this. And what if 100 other people wanted the same? (Well, I guess I can dream... ) You can order back issues here: http://www.russiannumismaticsociety.org/Available.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted September 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 just to let you know that there is another variation of 1791 5 kopeks with no mintmark Well, yes -- Bitkin 96 or Brekke 8 (also listed as 291A under Catherine II). Also for sale in the Bakken collection auction. But I don't see the connection to the present discussion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 In the auction ddescription, this coin is listed as "Brekke 7A" and unlisted in Bitkin. I have the original Brekke book from 1977 and both the 1987 supplement pamphlet published by the RNS as well as the 1997 supplement in book form. Yet I was not able to find any reference to "Brekke 7A". Here is the auction link:http://sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&sid=171&lot=7452 Now compare it with this coin in the upcoming WAG auction which is apparently of the same type as above: http://sixbid.com/nav.php?p=viewlot&sid=173&lot=3749 There, the description lists it as "Bitkin 100" which cannot be right since the mintmark is totally different in size and placement. At first, looking at the WAG coin, I thought it might be Bitkin 98 (variety E:M:), but it is probably the same type as Mr. Bakken's coin. Where is "Brekke 7A" listed? Has there been yet another supplement published in the previous 12 years? *lot 7452 - can you see two dots after M - it is Brekke 6 - which pictured to his book from GM *there is no 7A in all books *1791 with no mint mark was mentioned as an addtion to answer your question that literature not really availbale on this subject so far but some pieces of info little by little can be found on russain forums where it is written in russian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted September 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 *lot 7452 - can you see two dots after M - it is Brekke 6 - which pictured to his book from GM That was also my first thought. However, there are no dots after the E and the M, therefore it is not Brekke 6. Look at the coin in the WAG auction -- also no dots. I wonder what the relative scarcity of this variety is? The E:M: variety, of course, is very rare. *there is no 7A in all books Yes. However, Tom Willy Bakken, who worked closely with Brekke on the supplements, has designated it thus. I'm fairly sure there will soon be a further supplement written by him (is Mr. Brekke still alive?) and there we will see 7A listed. *1791 with no mint mark was mentioned as an addtion to answer your question that literature not really availbale on this subject so far but some pieces of info little by little can be found on russain forums where it is written in russian Can you post some links, please? I'm sure others would like to see them, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 I am guessing 7A has a different edge than 7. If Sigi (or anyone else) makes it to the auction, it would be nice to verify that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted September 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 I am guessing 7A has a different edge than 7. If Sigi (or anyone else) makes it to the auction, it would be nice to verify that. From what I can see of the edge (just barely) on the two coins above, they both look like edge #5 (net) to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigistenz Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 I am guessing 7A has a different edge than 7. If Sigi (or anyone else) makes it to the auction, it would be nice to verify that. Will do Sigi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEVE MOULDING Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 Instead of all the idle speculation about 7A, why not just ask Tom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 Instead of all the idle speculation about 7A, why not just ask Tom? since I am in touch with him as many others, e-mail sent out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 That was also my first thought. However, there are no dots after the E, therefore it is not Brekke 6. *I wouldn't rush to say that there is no dots after E looking at its picture only *from another point is that if there are dots after E - so it is Brekke 6 *if there is no dots after E but clearly to me after M - new variant? and so on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 is Mr. Brekke still alive? Dam, we just missed his birthday, September 1 !!!! He is 95 !!! I can e-mail to Mr. Bakken to send our congratulations to Mr. Brekke !!! He can call him !!! Does someone want to join me to express some specials wishes write me in PM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 Dam, we just missed his birthday, September 1 !!!!He is 95 !!! I can e-mail to Mr. Bakken to send our congratulations to Mr. Brekke !!! He can call him !!! Does someone want to join me to express some specials wishes write me in PM. e-mail sent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted September 2, 2009 Report Share Posted September 2, 2009 Can you post some links, please? I'm sure others would like to see them, too. read PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altyn Posted September 3, 2009 Report Share Posted September 3, 2009 Since the RNS sells the back issues of all the journals, I don't think they would appreciate it if I did this. And what if 100 other people wanted the same? (Well, I guess I can dream... ) You can order back issues here: http://www.russiannumismaticsociety.org/Available.htm Ok, never mind. I naively thought this information is in public domain now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEVE MOULDING Posted September 4, 2009 Report Share Posted September 4, 2009 Instead of all the idle speculation about 7A, why not just ask Tom? Tom tells me that 7A is a new listing (large Mint Mark) from a new edition in progress. The 7A wasn't meant to be used in the sale. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.