unusual 1727 5 kop.

[oregoncoin]

Hello,

 

I'm puzzled by this 1727 5 kopek. It's much smaller than a normal coin of the same date (see pics), and it has an unusual edge style. Is this a Swedish counterfeit? A contemporary counterfeit? It looks old, so I don't think it's a modern fake, but does anyone think it is? Opinions would be much appreciated. Thanks!

 

here's the coin in question

 

side-by-side with a regular size 1727 5k (I wonder about the "regular" coin, too - is it overstruck?)

 

here's the edge, and comparisons with the regular coin - see how much bigger the strange coin is? strange webbed edge pattern, too - is that found on any other coins of the era?

 

here's pics of the regular coin - what's up with that bar in the reverse field at 3-4:00?

[grivna1726]

Hello,

 

I'm puzzled by this 1727 5 kopek. It's much smaller than a normal coin of the same date (see pics), and it has an unusual edge style. Is this a Swedish counterfeit? A contemporary counterfeit? It looks old, so I don't think it's a modern fake, but does anyone think it is? Opinions would be much appreciated. Thanks!

 

[images snipped]

I think it might be a contemporary counterfeit.

 

Probably the most important reason for the overstriking and revaluation of the copper coins in the 1730s and 1750s was the flooding of the country with false copper coins caused by the difference between the face value of the coins and the value of the copper contained in them. The difference was profitable for the government, but also profitable for counterfeiters, who could manufacture coins at or near the specified metal content but still make big profits.

 

Many of the krestovik pyataks such as your coin were later overstruck in the 1750s as Baroque kopecks, an 80% reduction in face value.

[oregoncoin]

Probably the most important reason for the overstriking and revaluation of the copper coins in the 1730s and 1750s was the flooding of the country with false copper coins caused by the difference between the face value of the coins and the value of the copper contained in them. The difference was profitable for the government, but also profitable for counterfeiters, who could manufacture coins at or near the specified metal content but still make big profits.

 

What do you think about the much smaller size, then? Why not make a counterfeit the right size?

 

Thanks for the useful information!

[grivna1726]

What do you think about the much smaller size, then? Why not make a counterfeit the right size?

What is the "right" size? These were struck without a collar, so thickness and diameters could probably vary to some extent.

 

If it was easy to pass the fake coins, maybe that was not a major concern. If you get a $100 dollar bill in payment, you might check it carefully for signs of being counterfeit. But if you get a $1 bill, would you give it the same close scrutiny?