1796-EM pyatak

[bobh]

What are the odds that this one is Paul's overstriking?

 

1796-EM 5 kopeek

 

Look at the slanted line on the obverse running from 5-9 o'clock ... then look at the field left of the eagle's head. There seem to be remnants of a different crown at the place one would expect if the slanted line on the other side were indeed the dividing line above the date on the cipher undercoin.

 

And if the seller told you that it was 44mm wide? (probably measured not at the widest place)...

[gxseries]

My instincts say that it's overstruck but I can't quite tell from the details. Normally you can't be wrong if the fields that are supposed to be clear aren't which can only be explained by either poor planchet or overstruck.

[STEVE MOULDING]

My instincts say that it's overstruck but I can't quite tell from the details. Normally you can't be wrong if the fields that are supposed to be clear aren't which can only be explained by either poor planchet or overstruck.

 

My instincts say it isn't. It really doesn't feel like an overstrike, and I think that line (which I don't see extending more than half way) may actually be a deep scratch/gouge. I could be wrong. Just an initial opinion after a first look and some photoshop adjustments of brightness/contrast.

 

Steve

[gxseries]

Steve, I'm pretty sure I can be terribly wrong as well. What's more important is to have the coin in hand and then carefully examine it. Bob, did you win that coin? If so, please kindly entertain us with some high quality photos of yours If it's not an overstrike, please feel free to sell it to me so that I can learn from my mistakes and not make such nonsense claims next time.

 

That reminded me - I remembered getting a 1793 5 kopek which showed almost no traces of the overstrike. After carefully looking at it for a few minutes, I noticed it was an overstrike as well. Got to photograph this coin this weekend.

[STEVE MOULDING]

Steve, I'm pretty sure I can be terribly wrong as well. What's more important is to have the coin in hand and then carefully examine it. Bob, did you win that coin? If so, please kindly entertain us with some high quality photos of yours If it's not an overstrike, please feel free to sell it to me so that I can learn from my mistakes and not make such nonsense claims next time.

 

That reminded me - I remembered getting a 1793 5 kopek which showed almost no traces of the overstrike. After carefully looking at it for a few minutes, I noticed it was an overstrike as well. Got to photograph this coin this weekend.

Like I said just a first impression. The line *does* look like it would be in about the right place which is encouraging, but again some other clues would help.

[bobh]

Steve, I'm pretty sure I can be terribly wrong as well. What's more important is to have the coin in hand and then carefully examine it. Bob, did you win that coin? If so, please kindly entertain us with some high quality photos of yours If it's not an overstrike, please feel free to sell it to me so that I can learn from my mistakes and not make such nonsense claims next time.

 

That reminded me - I remembered getting a 1793 5 kopek which showed almost no traces of the overstrike. After carefully looking at it for a few minutes, I noticed it was an overstrike as well. Got to photograph this coin this weekend.

I did win it, and will post photos if it turns out to be what I think it is.

 

As to 1793 overstrikes, these were made with different dies than the regular 1793-EM strikes. The eagle is different, and also most noticeably the digit "3" in the date has a different shape.

[bobh]

My instincts say it isn't. It really doesn't feel like an overstrike, and I think that line (which I don't see extending more than half way) may actually be a deep scratch/gouge. I could be wrong. Just an initial opinion after a first look and some photoshop adjustments of brightness/contrast.

 

Steve

That's what I thought, too, but there are some other indications such as the remnants of what might be the old crown next to the eagle head on the left. It is also in the correct place!

 

And the other 1796 overstruck coin we discussed at length (which I also won on eBay, and you helped to find some of the letters of the undercoin ) had a diameter of 45mm but at the narrowest place was only 44mm. It was also somewhat underweight. Unfortunately, the seller didn't say what the weight of the coin is.

[STEVE MOULDING]

Ok! Well, good luck Bob! Look forward to finding out more.

 

Best,

 

Steve

[sigistenz]

Ok! Well, good luck Bob! Look forward to finding out more.

 

Best,

 

Steve

Hi Bob, all has been said. I wish you luck, too.

Sigi

[alexbq2]

Funny I saw this coin on eBay and was wandering the same thing:)

 

I couldn't really tell because of the texture of the coin. I don't know if this is rust or dirt.

 

I can see signs of a die clash. There is an imprint of the wreath and the crown. But beyond that I can't tell. I decided not to bid since odds are against it, and I already have a heap of EM coins that I bought because I thought I saw something lurking in there.

 

But good luck to you and I hope I will see cleaner pictures of this coin!

[nicholasz219]

Apparently half of the forum was watching this coin on ebay. I had placed this on my watch list because even though the condition was pretty rough, the seller started it at 99 cents and it languished there for a long time. I really couldn't tell what the story was because the photos are not the best and the coin is apparently very dark to begin with. I planned on bidding if the price stayed low enough that I could get it at a bargain and inspecting it further.

 

Thank you, Bob, for dashing those plans on the rocks.

 

Actually there were three pyatak's that this seller had listed and they all got bid up pretty quickly. I missed all three.

 

I really couldn't make out what was going on with this coin so I let it be. I hope that it turns out to be an overstrike for you Bob! Please post clearer pictures when you have the chance!

[sigistenz]

Apparently half of the forum was watching this coin on ebay. I had placed this on my watch list because even though the condition was pretty rough, the seller started it at 99 cents and it languished there for a long time. I really couldn't tell what the story was because the photos are not the best and the coin is apparently very dark to begin with. I planned on bidding if the price stayed low enough that I could get it at a bargain and inspecting it further.

 

Thank you, Bob, for dashing those plans on the rocks.

 

Actually there were three pyatak's that this seller had listed and they all got bid up pretty quickly. I missed all three.

 

I really couldn't make out what was going on with this coin so I let it be. I hope that it turns out to be an overstrike for you Bob! Please post clearer pictures when you have the chance!

Finland was part of the Russian Empire. So were what today are the Baltic countries, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia. As most collectors tend to collect their home country, old Russian coins make part of that and are commonly collected there. Russia with its layer of rich collectors is bordering. So each "suspect" coin will have been checked many times before appearing on ebay. That is to say that chances are very dim to obtain an overlooked rarity from Finland or the Baltic countries.

But one never knows.... I'm crossing fingers for Bob.

Sigi

[gxseries]

Kinda disagree there Sigi. Sometimes it's a combination of everything of how events fold - for instance, a collector suddenly passed away and his / her children having no idea of their parents' collection just sell them at whatever price they can get. That may include some rarities. I've won a couple of rarer Russian coins from a Russian living in the US and both of us knew they were rare, just bad timing when the global financial crisis hit hard. Of course, there can be a possibility of people not looking at an auction such as the tympf which happened quite recently.

 

That said, I'm still hunting down the coin that I was talking about...

[alexbq2]

Kinda disagree there Sigi. Sometimes it's a combination of everything of how events fold - for instance, a collector suddenly passed away and his / her children having no idea of their parents' collection just sell them at whatever price they can get. That may include some rarities. I've won a couple of rarer Russian coins from a Russian living in the US and both of us knew they were rare, just bad timing when the global financial crisis hit hard. Of course, there can be a possibility of people not looking at an auction such as the tympf which happened quite recently.

 

That said, I'm still hunting down the coin that I was talking about...

 

That Tympf did not sell cheap! It may still have been a bargain considering the rarity, but it was not cheap. Also, I think that if the seller did not set off many caution flags he could have walked away with more money.

 

But it has become difficult to snatch up bargains. Too many people are watching. Can still get an ugly rare coin once in a while, just because it's ugly and does not stand out as rare. Here's my example:

[nicholasz219]

Yes, it is harder to locate coins that are on the rarer and better condition side. I think it has to do with a much more active collector base and ease of transaction between buyers and sellers globally in addition to removal of scarcer material nearly as soon as it is brought to market because of the vast number of websites from individual dealers to auction houses to auction websites like Ebay. That being said, it is hard to determine the nature of the person selling until you have experience with that seller. Some sellers find that the 99 cent starting price attracts a lot of bidders and helps them maximize exposure and prices realized. Other sellers may just be a bit naive as to the value of their coins and price their lots accordingly. I prefer the latter category.

 

I occasionally still pick up the bargain but I spend a lot of time searching and a lot of time not buying the sheer number of lots as I did five to seven years ago. I would hope for Bob that he finds a little rarity or surprise in his piece. I still am curious to see better quality pictures...

[nicholasz219]

That Tympf did not sell cheap! It may still have been a bargain considering the rarity, but it was not cheap. Also, I think that if the seller did not set off many caution flags he could have walked away with more money.

 

But it has become difficult to snatch up bargains. Too many people are watching. Can still get an ugly rare coin once in a while, just because it's ugly and does not stand out as rare. Here's my example:

 

 

Alex-

 

I meant to include in my last post how much I like that Peter 5K piece you have in your post. I happen to think that is a fairly nice example of that series. I do not have an example of that series yet and am actively looking. This is a good example of something I spend a lot of time searching for on Ebay. I see many examples for sale, but I also find either their condition or price unattractive. So I put more work into finding the right piece and hope to find a coin that I think is attractive along with their seller's asking price.

[alexbq2]

Alex-

 

I meant to include in my last post how much I like that Peter 5K piece you have in your post. I happen to think that is a fairly nice example of that series. I do not have an example of that series yet and am actively looking. This is a good example of something I spend a lot of time searching for on Ebay. I see many examples for sale, but I also find either their condition or price unattractive. So I put more work into finding the right piece and hope to find a coin that I think is attractive along with their seller's asking price.

 

Thank you Nick! Though I'm not sure that you quite caught my meaning with that 1723. Check your Uzdenikov #2438.

[nicholasz219]

I see! A rarer type!

[gxseries]

This is the 1793 EM 5k that I have been talking about:

 

 

Here are bigger photos:

 

http://www.gxseries.com/dump/IMGP0022.JPG

http://www.gxseries.com/dump/IMGP0023.JPG

[STEVE MOULDING]

gx...I know of no 1793EM Paul overstrikes with this reverse; they're all supposed to have the new eagle. Can you point out why you think this is an overstrike? It's not impossible, but I'd say quite unlikely.

 

Best,

 

Steve

[gxseries]

Steve, I dismissed this coin as an overstrike when I first saw the picture. I didn't think much of it either when I saw it in hand but only after handling it the second time, I found it as odd as I can't explain an element that is around the letter "1". I strongly believe it's the letter "D" and the letter "E" is next to it. The rest of the design is pretty much destroyed.

 

After messing around with photoshop for a while, I'm pretty sure the underlying coin should be in +20 degrees clockwise. This one is a lot more difficult to show in photoshop and the only other point that I can refer is the reverse, where the tounge of the right side of the double head is pointing towards to his feather. It's one of the 10 points that surrounds the emblem.

 

I guess it's an interesting challenge to keep me occupied.

[bobh]

Steve, I dismissed this coin as an overstrike when I first saw the picture. I didn't think much of it either when I saw it in hand but only after handling it the second time, I found it as odd as I can't explain an element that is around the letter "1". I strongly believe it's the letter "D" and the letter "E" is next to it. The rest of the design is pretty much destroyed.

 

After messing around with photoshop for a while, I'm pretty sure the underlying coin should be in +20 degrees clockwise. This one is a lot more difficult to show in photoshop and the only other point that I can refer is the reverse, where the tounge of the right side of the double head is pointing towards to his feather. It's one of the 10 points that surrounds the emblem.

 

I guess it's an interesting challenge to keep me occupied.

These are great photos!

 

We know that many of the coins overstruck by Paul were overstruck with original dies, although 1793-EM (Paul's overstrike) is almost always found with the new, different dies. It is the only year and MM which used new dies, AFAICT. But it is not inconceivable (to me, at least) that they tried striking a few of these at first with the dies they already had, and only later (for whatever reason) decided to make the new dies. According to Brekke, the 1793-EM dies were all worn out by the time Paul got around to doing the restriking, so they decided right away that they needed new ones. But maybe they found a couple of dies which were still serviceable? (Or at least they thought so...)

 

However, if it were an overstruck cipher coin, wouldn't the "ДЕ" in "ДЕСЯТЬ" be located farther up north on the coin? And I really don't see any other evidence of a cipher undercoin. To me, the strokes of "ДЕ" look too thin ... more like scratches (and in the same direction as most of the other scratches on this side).

 

Now if you could find a few dots, or curls of the "E", or more letters (they would have to be in the right place), that would be a different story!

 

(The 1791-AM coin which I bought recently on eBay, thinking it might be overstruck, is soaking in olive oil right now. But it probably isn't overstruck after all... )

[one-kuna]

to find such coin is very little possibility and up to now it is unknown to collectors over here and overseas

[gxseries]

Bob, these are awful photos that I took within 30 seconds! I just received a 10MP as a present and all I had was a torchlight as a source light and that was pretty much it. No camera stand or proper lighting or such. As I just moved, all my usual goods are packed away so this was taken with bare minimum - shows that you can take reasonable photos with little equipment.

 

As much as I want to retake photos of it, it is 2 hours away from me and it will be next week that I can get another shot at it. For now I have these photos to work with. Next time I'll take photos with a loupe or some kind of magnifying glass.

 

Bob, do you mind sharing photos of the 1791AM as well as the seller's photos? If it's too big, you can always send it to my email address.

 

[STEVE MOULDING]

 

We know that many of the coins overstruck by Paul were overstruck with original dies, although 1793-EM (Paul's overstrike) is almost always found with the new, different dies. It is the only year and MM which used new dies, AFAICT. But it is not inconceivable (to me, at least) that they tried striking a few of these at first with the dies they already had, and only later (for whatever reason) decided to make the new dies. According to Brekke, the 1793-EM dies were all worn out by the time Paul got around to doing the restriking, so they decided right away that they needed new ones. But maybe they found a couple of dies which were still serviceable? (Or at least they thought so...)

 

Well...I think the story is more like this:

 

Ekaterinburg used existing original dies on hand. With a relatively small amount of ciphers to overstrike they used only the 1796 die. So...only 1796EM overstrikes from Ekaterinburg.

 

Anninsk also used dies on hand, had more to do, had a better supply of older dies, and so overstruck ciphers to 1794AM, 1795AM, & 1796AM.

 

The new dies were made at St. Petersburg for use at St. Petersburg, Moscow, and Nizhny Novgorod, where by far the majority of Ciphers were sitting. Dates used on the new dies were 1791 (rare), 1793(common), and 1794 (very rare). All new dies carried the EM mintmark despite not being produced at Ekaterinburg at all (a very rare few carried no mintmark).

 

The hypothesis that Ekaterinburg tested original dies before switching to new ones cannot be....they never saw the new dies. The only way we'd see a 1793EM original die is if Ekaterinburg decided to use one and there was really no good reason they should....the 1796 dies were recent and more than sufficient for the task. Why go back and fish out an older die?

 

Again it's not impossible, but with this coin we're up against (1) The re-overstriking program history...no 1793EM overstrikes with original dies are expected (2) A puzzling lack of clear undercoin which is clearly present in the majority of 1796EM original-die overstrikes (3) No 1793EM overstrikes with original dies are known.

 

It would be very interesting to see convincing evidence otherwise, and it's fun to look, but I really think it's unlikely.