Copper 5kop1758-- (Sestroretsk mint)

[alexbq2]

A very good post! I think even I have finally got a clue about the 5 kopecks.

 

Sigi, congrats on the CM upgrade. A rarer variant, and your Dassier looks plugged. Now just need to find an EM "Dassier" type, as Eugene suggested.

[extant4cell]

Just to share an interesting find. Here is the coin:

 

 

The shape similar to this one doesn't appear until 1760. Look at the right wing bottom part. It usually, if not always, looks like a wave, not just curved like this one. I think it's interesting... Copy with an extreme variation.

[extant4cell]

Here is another interesting coins:

 

 

It is somewhat similar to the coin above. Atypical shape of the right wing for 1758. Most of them follow the Dassier suite...

 

By the way, I never gave it a thought as to why they decided that this particular observe with eagle was CM (talking about the one with cross further away from banner). Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it is just some simple narrowing down from following years where we know what mint it was. Like these ones, from the wonderful Sigi's collection:

 

 

 

 

The only coins with a banner that pushes eagle (and cross) further up a bit is the one used in СПМ and CM later on. One can theorize that CM and СПМ collection of tools and dies were interchangeable somewhat. This shorten banner was not used in Ekaterinburg, so the only mint with no mint letters in 1758 and following years, that was using it, was the one connected to СПМ mint... That seams logical enough. They numbering tools were also somewhat similar to MMs and differ from EMs...

 

It is also safe to assume that they had both shortened banner and a wider one, as in post #25, as they surely had them later as well:

 

 

 

(high resolution images borrowed from Sigi's collection: http://www.sigistenz.com/ )

[sigistenz]

Hi Eugene, thank you very much - I do not want to hurt you , you are very nice. But I think this eagle business is worth at least one separate thread. Let's start it separately.

 

My point was the 1758(EM) versus 1758(CM) - how to tell the mint. We have the 2 different globecross/scroll configurations indicating either (EM) or (CM). There are the eagles. It also has been stated that (CM) can be recognized by its typical "5" of 1758. And that I think is not correct. See below four (CM) "5"s.

 

The 1st one is mine which I presented above.

The 2nd one is the Kaostram/Andrey piece at the beginning of this thread (with the white circles).

The 3rd and 4th ones are from the Russian forum (your link).

 

The "5"s are not alike.

My conclusion for my personal use: It is the globecross/scroll configuration that indicates reliably the anonymous mint (EM) or (CM).

Sigi

.

[alexbq2]

Sigi look at the pictures of EM coins that GSE shared (and Eugene and I both copied), all the EM 5s are slanted, almost like cursive. I think that is a good tell for the EM vs CM. Your coins have more upright 5s, and being in a very good shape they seem to lack the ruffled feathers of the EM eagles.

[extant4cell]

Hi Sigi! Healthy arguments are the best way to find the truth. The active doubt is the strive for quality.

 

I collected the examples of different "5" shapes. I think the picture talks for itself. It is the general shape style of the number "5", not an exact shape, as they had numerous "5" tools, but style was always similar, I believe.

 

Top examples are from 1758 coins that are assumed as "EM" by Evdakimov.

Middle - from 1758 assumed "CM" coins, taken only from coins with cross further away from the banner.

Bottom - taken from silver 1757 roubles and gold 10 roubles with sister-mint for CM - SPB with SPB marks on them.

 

 

 

The "5" general shape style for assumed CM and for confirmed SPB - the end of the open circle ends inside the circle.

The "5" general shape style for assumed EM - the top "tail" is pointing up, and the end of the open circle ends outside.

 

The "5" in question is from your coin, that I believe belongs to "CM" in shape style...

Please examine / compare them for yourself, and see what do you think.

 

Eugene (with friendship and love)

[sigistenz]

Hi Eugene, thank you for the patience with me. As you know I do not understand much Russian, so I cannot suck much honey out of the Russian forum. If I understand correctly, the typical 5 would be sufficient to tell a coin (CM), regardless of the orbcross/scroll thing?

That "5" along with a Dassier eagle would also indicate (CM)? If so, the coin from the Brekke Collection, recently auctioned by World Wide Coins of Calif. (Elmen) is also (CM)?

Sigi

-

 

[alexbq2]

A very CM looking coin.

[extant4cell]

I believe that coin from the Elmen's auction is also the CM coin, as it has their typical CM "5". I know, it's shocking! I looked through the last 3 catalogs on Friday, and I noticed this for this coin too!

 

They don't exactly say that on Russian forum openly, in terms of pointing it out that "5" is the clue (knowledge is buying power for them, so they don't scream about it), but they hinted and pushed me into this direction, and it seams that way...

 

Interestedly enough, I also seam not being able to find any coins with Dassier eagle from EM mint apart from the ones that were shown by G.S.E., and they supposedly a more common variant! That's a bit strange... If you find any good quality pictures, can you please share with me? Also, Sigi, is it OK to use some of your coins' images (with reference to your site) for a small article I started working on about Dassier eagles?

[extant4cell]

My friend bought this one recently (cross away) that has somewhat week strike. I love how you can see Dassier's wing pattern on this coin's eagle's right wing! This is not very common. http://molotok.ru/5-kopeek-1758-g-2-i4247648464.html

[sigistenz]

Sigi look at the pictures of EM coins that GSE shared (and Eugene and I both copied), all the EM 5s are slanted, almost like cursive. I think that is a good tell for the EM vs CM. Your coins have more upright 5s, and being in a very good shape they seem to lack the ruffled feathers of the EM eagles.

Thank you Alex, I did not realize at first, understanding only by and by. I will have to look for a true (EM) but good grades are hard to find (outside Russia). They were often crudely struck and the earliest date circulated the longest time.

Today I got word that I was lucky at Elmen's latest auction (I don't have the coin yet, will show off as usual) .

Best, Sigi

-

[sigistenz]

I believe that coin from the Elmen's auction is also the CM coin, as it has their typical CM "5". I know, it's shocking! I looked through the last 3 catalogs on Friday, and I noticed this for this coin too!

 

They don't exactly say that on Russian forum openly, in terms of pointing it out that "5" is the clue (knowledge is buying power for them, so they don't scream about it), but they hinted and pushed me into this direction, and it seams that way...

 

Interestedly enough, I also seam not being able to find any coins with Dassier eagle from EM mint apart from the ones that were shown by G.S.E., and they supposedly a more common variant! That's a bit strange... If you find any good quality pictures, can you please share with me? Also, Sigi, is it OK to use some of your coins' images (with reference to your site) for a small article I started working on about Dassier eagles?

 

Thank you for the list of "5"s of (EM) and (CM). I understand fast but it takes time...

I will look for pictures and share what I find.

Of couse you may use any or all of my own pictures. Know what? (but promise to keep the secret!):-

I like to show off my coins.

Best, Sigi

 

-

[extant4cell]

Thank you for that! I'll do the same. You are a good friend! And congratulations on another beautiful coin!

[extant4cell]

 

 

By the way, it is a different variant of the one you already have, by the look of it, I'd love to see the colour picture.

 

This is still raw and but here are similarities (connected) and none-similarities (solo circles) as I can see them:

 

 

[sigistenz]

Here is another pair (EM) and (CM), it appeared in some Russian auction about 4-5 years ago, I do not recall where.

Sigi

 

 

.

 

[extant4cell]

Thank you Sigi, I 100% agree! Nice examples, but I prefer your pictures!!! On your pictures coins look alive, on this ones - like zombies that came back from their graves... They probably do that to hide the deadly spots...

[extant4cell]

Sigi, this article Portrait of Elizabeth, Eagles Designed by Dassier and Hedlinger: http://www.coinpeople.com/index.php/topic/35854-portrait-of-elizabeth-and-eagles-designed-by-dassier-and-hedlinger/ was inspired by this topic and by some other topics around 1758 5-kopecks, and also by my experience examining your wonderful collection and probing into your inquiring mind in our previous conversations. This is not an attempt into writing a scientific work, this is a fun article on the subject full of assumptions and speculations. Just as I like it... My thanks to you for inspiring me, to my son Alex, who very patiently put up with me and listened to my speculations on this subject, and to other people who helped in one way or another, including my family and my wife for their patience with me spending too much time on a lap-top. I hope you will enjoy reading it... Cheers!

[sigistenz]

Hello Eugene, thank you very much for honoring me. I will have to read your article once or twice more to fully understand it. Great job! Many of us are just collectors but you have got the inquiring mind of a true numismatist!

Sigi

.

[extant4cell]

Thank you Sigi. You and Alex, helped me to focus on this topic. Hopefully I am not too overconfident with my assumptions there... In any case, it was enjoyable to learn what I have, and to work on that article. The main points in it (apart from historical accounts) are:

 

(Less disputable) Concerning the portrait:

 

Elizabeth stopped the production of coins displaying her “incomplete” bust. It was stopped as quickly as it began. Monarch’s beauty concept takes priority over the artistic finesse and grace of portraits on coins. Elizabeth gives a persuasive suggestion to make portraits based on a portrait made by B. Scott.

 

It was Timothy Ivanov who had a hand in making portraits, matching size and bust of Elizabeth of Scott’s portrait (that was based on portrait sketch made by Hedlinger), with the portrait face designed by Dassier. Ivanov, as a disciple of both masters: Scott and Dassier, managed to combine seemingly incompatible. Having made his portrait in the style and technique of two teachers, he reduced the face of the Dassier’s portrait of Elizabeth, while increased the bust, borrowed from the portrait by Scott, thus bringing the portrait to perfection (as much as his talent permitted).

 

 

 

Image 3: Four portraits of Elizabeth by Hedlinger, Scott, Ivanov and Dassier.

 

The image-3 clearly displays that Scott dressed Empress in style of apparel as sketched on a portrait by Hedlinger, which was made using a drawing Elizabeth sent to him. In his turn Ivanov took this style from Scott. It also shows that the face of Elizabeth made by Ivanov performed in the style of a face from portrait made by Dassier, but with a shortened neck. Of course, the size of coins on image-3 was changed to provide clarity in comparing design and style of appropriate parts. All roubles are approximately the same size, and the medal was conceived by Hedlinger to be 1.5 - 2 times larger.

 

I must say that Ivanov was a diligent and worthy disciple, who lived up to the expectations of SPB mint. Actually, this was his work as a portraitist (medallist) and as a skilful engraver-copier, who combined both style of portraits into one. The portrait has his initials «IT». There is also a medal "To Victor over Prussia” dated 1759, which has exactly the same portrait that bears the signature of the medallist "TIMOFEI.I.F.", indicating authorship. This portrait’s grace and beauty merged in unison and enjoys approval. Portrait of Ivanov goes into mass-production, appearing on coins from SPB between 1757 and 1761. Thus, the fate has arranged an interesting meeting to Dassier’s and Scott’s portraits, assigned by their student and the vagaries of fate.

 

(Disputable) Concerning the two types of original Dassier eagles on 5 kopecks:

 

Finding the copper coins with Dassier eagle (as on the last coin in the image-2) in a more or less good condition and with visible signs of "patterned" feather in wing design is difficult, but possible. These "patterned" feathers, perhaps, can be considered one of the characteristic features of Dassier’s eagle, except for basic shapes, and other elements. But interestingly enough, on the 5 kopecks coins of Sestroretsk Mint in 1758 (where Dassier’s eagle is found more often), there are two main variations (see. Picture-5), coins with the eagle of the second variation can be found occasionally in virtually untouched condition, untouched by repairs.

 

The first variation matches Dassier’s eagle as it is seeing on silver coins, apart from some repair nuances on worn out dies. Let's conditionally call this eagle on copper coins - "silver". This is an eagle with a characteristic "bite out" of feathers on the right wing, so it seems that the right wing bents a little in motion. The second variation, except the form of the right wing, has exactly the same form, and in addition, it looks as if the eagle came out from under a fresher dies on which many elements were not subjected to repairs. Let’s conditionally call this eagle - "copper".

 

 

 

Image 5: Comparing two versions of Dassier’s eagles («silver" and "copper") on copper 5 kopecks coins, the wings of which clearly display Dassier’s "patterned" feathers, against Dassier’s eagle taken from a silver rouble (coins from private collections)

 

The only repair-free eagle on copper coins is a "copper" Dassier’s eagle, I think, that can be found exclusively among the coins of Sestroretsk mint production. We can assume that it was the very first version that Dassier made for the silver rouble. However, as far as we know, it never landed on silver coins. It seems that it was sent for approbation as a first version, that for whatever reason was rejected. It was then reworked to a version of "silver" eagle with characteristic shape of the right wing, which was approved, whereas a more symmetrical "copper" eagle was put away. Not in vain, the “copper” eagle tools found their use in 5 kopecks production, and didn’t go to waste completely. One can almost argue that both eagle originate from the same master-hub. After not accepting the "copper" version of the eagle, the master-hub was trimmed and transformed into a "silver" eagle. In any case, "copper" eagle can rightfully be called a Dassier’s eagle and most likely – the first version.

 

 

 

Image 6: One of the best images of "copper" Dassier’s eagle (from Auction House "Alexander" archive)

 

We can assume that tools for making 5 kopecks dies were made in St. Petersburg and passed to Moscow and Ekaterinburg mints, including master-punches of "silver" eagle, as part of preparation for production of copper 5 kopecks in 1758. In part, this must be true for Sestroretsk as well. It seems to me however, that Sestroretsk mint did not receive master-punches for "silver" eagle (used in rouble production). Instead, they received tools only for "copper" eagle – that was not approved for rouble production. The "copper" eagle was the one applied to dies produced at the Sestroretsk mint. Dies with "silver" eagle were most likely made at the St. Petersburg mint and passed to Sestroretsk as the need for additional dies was becoming apparent and additional dies required. For instance, coins made with the Sestroretsk dies (that used "copper” eagle) have cross of the orb higher up and it dows not touch the denomination inscription. If the same masters used both eagles in the same composition (at the same mint) they would hardly change the composition, i.e. Eagles form would be both interchangeable and there would be no need in changing the placement of the main components relative to each other. In addition, we see two different sets of tools, "Eagle / banner for an inscription," and similar (St. Petersburg) set of letters of the inscription. The assumption that the masters of different mints, with different tools, made dies for Sestroretsk, as a theory, may explain why we often come across the coins from Sestroretsk mint displaying original Dassier eagles, as well as the existence of two versions of eagles on coins of that mint, moreover, it explains why there it a difference in eagle (orb cross) placement relative to the inscription "five kopecks."

[sigistenz]

Again, I am very impressed about your job - thank you, Eugene, for the English version for people like me, not understanding much Russian.

As to the 1758 copper 5 Kopeks (EM) and (CM) I have this question left:-

Andrey (kaostram) explained the difference as the orb/scroll relation (cited at the beginning of this thread). There is also the eagle's right wing and the introverted "5" of 1758.

One of my 1759 coins also shows an introverted "5" and as far as we know there were no (CM) in 1759.

My concern is: What makes you believe that my 5 kopeks 1758 with the "bit out" wing is also (CM) mint? Is it the "5" alone?

Thank you again, Sigi

 

[extant4cell]

Hi Sigi,

For me, the shape of "5" was enough of a proof, but from what I know, some went into analyzing the scroll letters as well, as additional proof. CM used lettering and numbering tools from SPM( in 1758, in later years the tools may have been repaired and changed their shape a little, but not drastically. MM and EM had enough manpower to make and use their own lettering and numbering tools.

The assumption that I am making in the article is that the CM dies with "silver" eagle (same as on roubles) were made for CM at SPB mint, using their numbering and lettering tools that almost identical to CM tools that they supplied to CM in the first place. The CM made dies used "copper" eagle (without bit-out wing, and strongly visible patterns on wings), but the scrolls they used on SPB and CM were different, and CM used unorthodox positioning for the eagle on their dies, placing it slightly higher.

The "5" on the 1759 coin you showed is a typical EM number. What you see as inverted end, is the die crack.



The rest of it's shape is typical for EM.

 

The other thing, for this type of eagle (orb/cross touching scroll) all CMs in 1958 have eagle with "bit-out" right wing, as an additional hint towards them being made at SPB, instead of being repaired to the extend of EM eagles, as shown on the 1759 coin (use of triple-ended feathers).

[alexbq2]

I looked at the portraits of Elizabeth that I have, and found this one by Waechter:

 

 

[IgorS]

The ones by Waechter are much more scarce than those by Ivanov. I am still to find one in copper.

[sigistenz]

Thank you Eugene for the convincing answer.

Sigi

 

.

[gxseries]

I'm sure I did mention this a while ago but Sestroretsk "mint" has a homepage

 

http://www.toolfactory.ru/en/

 

Curious to know if anyone has been up there to see if there's anything interesting.