Volledige afbeeldingen bekijken — gratis registratie
Doorgaan met Google — het is gratis of registreer met e-mail

Waarom registreren? Alleen om bots buiten ons catalogus te houden. Uw e-mail blijft privé — we delen het nooit en sturen u niets zonder uw toestemming. Dat garanderen wij u!

Kopeck - Peter I

Uitgever Russian Empire
Jaar 1702
Type Standard circulation coin
Waarde Log in om details te zien
Valuta Log in om details te zien
Samenstelling Log in om details te zien
Gewicht Log in om details te zien
Diameter Log in om details te zien
Dikte Log in om details te zien
Vorm Log in om details te zien
Techniek Log in om details te zien
Oriëntatie Log in om details te zien
Graveur(s) Log in om details te zien
In omloop tot Log in om details te zien
Referentie(s) Log in om details te zien
Beschrijving voorzijde Log in om details te zien
Schrift voorzijde Log in om details te zien
Opschrift voorzijde Log in om details te zien
Beschrijving keerzijde The reverse bears a Cyrillic inscription arranged in two lines across the irregular flan, reading the royal title and name of the issuing sovereign. A titlo abbreviation mark appears above the abbreviated text, as was conventional in Old Church Slavonic scribal practice. The relief is bold and the lettering characteristic of the hand-cut wire money dies of the early Petrine period. The flan edges are ragged and uneven, consistent with the manufacture of chekanka coinage struck from drawn wire blanks.
Schrift keerzijde Cyrillic
Opschrift keerzijde Log in om details te zien
Rand Log in om details te zien
Muntplaats Log in om details te zien
Oplage Log in om details te zien
Aanvullende informatie

Peter I's wire kopecks — hand-struck on irregularly shaped silver flans — were a medieval holdover he actively despised. The 1702 issue falls in the middle of his currency reform push: by 1704 he had introduced the round, machine-struck kopeck and effectively killed off the wire coinage entirely. These pieces circulated alongside the new issues only briefly before being recalled and reminted.

The GKH reference split between editions reflects ongoing scholarly disagreement about die attribution for this type.

MISSCHIEN OOK INTERESSANT