gxseries Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 I obviously have forgotten about this coin and it wasn't until someone who emailed me today that this is a sad counterfeit coin. Obviously, had I checked my catalogue book properly for the varieties, I wouldn't have fallen for it, but strangely enough, it had passed the weight test if I remember right. I don't have the particular coin with me at the moment. This is a quote from ahlbeback left for me in omnicoin (thanks in advance) (grivna, is that not you in Omnicoin? ) Comment: This coin is not genuine. Notice that the central point of the shield extends up to the crown. This is wrong for the long ribbon variety. See any of the standard references. Also the date lettering is Date: 15-Mar-2006 Nevertheless, it was just a painful 20USD that was bought before the mad Russian market hit in 2003. I don't think I have to worry getting both varities as I got partially both varities in one coin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 No, not me, although I agree that it is not real. Why not add it to the fakes section on http://kopek.ws ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 No, not me, although I agree that it is not real. Why not add it to the fakes section on http://kopek.ws ? I went to that website and found a Russian-language coin forum here: L I N K Also, while browsing the kopek.ws site, I found this coin in the fakes section:Nicholas II, commem. Rouble 1912, "Glorious year" The link offered by qwerty leads to the Russian coin forum. About half-way down the page, I found a link to a larger picture of the coin (I'm actually not sure if these are of the same coin):Larger Picture of coin What are your opinions on this? Is it really a fake, and why? I compared pictures of two of these coins, one a proof and the other not, which were auctioned this last January by Dmitri Markov. The auction catalog can be DL'd from his website here. There are subtle differences in reverse design which I could see, noticeably the height of the digits in "1912" at the bottom as well as the length and distance of the line above it to the date. The coin in the links above seems to be not a proof coin, but has the reverse design of the proof in the New York Sale auction. What do you think? (I had a hard time following the Russian jabber in the forums, BTW ... if any of you speak Russian, what do they mean by "натюрлих"? Do they mean "genuine"? That word means "natural" in German ("natürlich"), but has a different meaning, i.e. same as in English. "натюрлих" is not in my dictionary. Thanks for looking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted March 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2006 I am quite perplexed over why that is called fake. Perhaps if there is a high resolution picture, I might be able to tell but right now, I am awfully confused. Note that there was actually a prototype medal using the reverse die (the text side) Perhaps that die was used in the production of rubles, which is not unheard of. Maybe I SHOULD pay attention to what I am buying Actually, I should kick myself as I saw the same ruble in XF, totally toned in black for only 200USD around two years ago. Of course, I blew too much money on getting hold of the 1834 proof Alexsanderine Column ruble. Now I kinda regret about that P.S. I think "натюрлих" might mean natural. It seems that english words are "translated" into English via phonetics, so that's why you might not be able to find it in your dictionary. Edit: Forgot to add, all Imperial Russian commemorative coins have been under the scrunity of being counterfeited, including the ever common 1913 Romanov ruble. So far, most of the 1912 War ruble that I have seen are counterfeited in IRON, which is pretty silly, and so far I have not heard of one counterfeited in silver yet. Most of them seemed to be coming from Belarus and Latvia. It could be possible that counterfeit is a high quality counterfeited silver made ages ago. But hey, I have a counterfeit Gangut ruble that passes all the mass, diameter and thickness test The only thing that failed right away was the color, and some edging issue, if not, it would have fooled most of the eBay buyers and send it to a high few hundred dollars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grivna1726 Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 I went to that website and found a Russian-language coin forum here: L I N K Also, while browsing the kopek.ws site, I found this coin in the fakes section:Nicholas II, commem. Rouble 1912, "Glorious year" The link offered by qwerty leads to the Russian coin forum. About half-way down the page, I found a link to a larger picture of the coin (I'm actually not sure if these are of the same coin):Larger Picture of coin What are your opinions on this? Is it really a fake, and why? I don't think the kopek.ws and www.coins.su pictures are of the same coin. For one thing, they have rim dings in different locations. The kopek.ws coin which is listed as a fake looks cast to me. The details are mushy and the fields appear grainy to me. I remember seeing a dangerous fake of this coin published some years ago, but can't find it in my library nor can I recall the diagnostics for it. I just remember that it was one of the more skillfully made counterfeits I have seen published. Perhaps it might be helpful to compare those images with a known genuine example sold by the Goldbergs in 2005. Notice the sharpness of the lettering and devices of the Goldberg coin and the evenness of the fields compared to the grainy-looking coin shown in the kopek.ws fakes section. I don't see anything about the www.coins.su example that seems really wrong, but maybe I'm missing something. To me, it looks the way these are often found, cleaned with light wear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 Perhaps it might be helpful to compare those images with a known genuine example sold by the Goldbergs in 2005. If you click the "Next Lot" button in the Goldberg site, it brings you to a 1913 Romanov rouble which is described as "high relief". I have been trying to learn how to tell these two apart -- difficult with just a two-dimensional picture. But I think this one might actually be the rarer low relief variety. I have found what looks to me like a minor difference in the decorative ring around the obverse: with high relief, the lower right end of the ring as it meets the coat of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich has a longer segment after the dot. With low relief, the last segment is so short that the dot before it actually looks larger (or maybe it is larger). Can anyone confirm this or does anyone know of additional diagnostics which are immediately visible in a photo? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 ... Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich ... Oops, should be Tsar Mikhail, the original patriarch of the Romanovs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Yes, VERY easily. I made a booklet on Imperial Russian commemorative coins and I think I covered that quite well. I don't have the jpg in this computer right now, but the keypoint is the cross on the top of Tsar Mikhail and at the right side, in between Tsar Mikhail and the rim - the line with dots. With the low relief version, the cross is touching the inner ring, the cross more "slanted", whereas the higher relief doesn't and clearly shows a higher detail of the cross. The short line which touchs the Tsar Mikhail should almost be a lot shorter compared to the version of the higher relief. I believe Basok has two excellent pics of both of them for sale. Alternatively, I'll be evil and borrow Tane's pics. Thanks again Tane. Lower Relief version: Higher Relief version: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Thanks -- Do you agree that the coin in the Goldberg auction is of the flat relief variety? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 I believe Basok has two excellent pics of both of them for sale. Alternatively, I'll be evil and borrow Tane's pics. Thanks again Tane. I found the pictures over at the rustypennies site -- but I prefer Tane's (without the fingerprint ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 That I believe is indeed a high relief. Don't forget that the lower relief is a lot harder to get hold of, because mintage is just 50,000 out of nearly 15 million pieces. Speaking of which, I should pay attention and get one before prices skyrocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 ... high relief ...But look at the end of the ring. If this is a high relief, then there must have been obverse dies with the same ring characteristics as the low relief variety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Good point - I noticed it too and wondered about it. Hm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.