Latvia (KM#1-3). About the mistake that catalogs and grading companies make every year.

MedveD

In this article I want to speak about three Latvian coins and it's so-called "varieties": "with..." and "without..."
2 santimi 1922
5 santimi 1922
1 santims 1928

First of all, we need to check a few "Standard Catalog of World Coins" (Krause Publications) to find out the differences between editions in coins’ description. There will be a lot of similar information, but we have to do this to see how the information has changed.
1) Standard catalog of World Coins 1972 edition (1972)
No varieties

2) Standard catalog of 20th Century World Coins 1st edition (1981)
1 santims – Varieties exist.
2 santimi – Varieties exist.
5 santimi – No varieties

3) 21st edition (The full correct name of this catalog and year of issue - unknown, only this fragment left on my web site and number of edition)
1 santims – Designers name below ribbon & w/o designers name below ribbon
2 santimi – Designers name on rev. & w/o designers name
5 santimi – Designers name on reverse & w/o designers name

4) 2001 Standard catalog of World Coins 28th edition (2000)
1 santims – Designer’s name below ribbon & w/o designer’s name below ribbon
2 santimi – Designer’s name below ribbon & w/o designer’s name
5 santimi – Designer’s name below ribbon & w/o designer’s name

5) 2004 Standard catalog of World Coins 1901 – present 31st edition (2003)
1 santims – Mint name below ribbon & without designer’s name below ribbon
2 santimi – Mint name below ribbon & without mint name
5 santimi – Mint name below ribbon & without mint name

6) 2007 Standard catalog of World Coins 1901 – present 34th edition (2006)
1 santims – Mint name below ribbon & without designer’s name below ribbon
2 santimi – Mint name below ribbon & without mint name below ribbon
5 santimi – Mint name below ribbon & without name below ribbon

7) 2008 Standard catalog of World Coins 1901 – present 35th edition (2007) (And all next editions)
1 santims – Mint name below ribbon & without mint name below ribbon
2 santimi – Mint name below ribbon & without mint name below ribbon
5 santimi – Mint name below ribbon & without name below ribbon

Now you can see how varieties have appeared in 35 years and the name of the designer has smoothly turned into the name of the mint. Let's figure out what is the “name of the designer” and the “name of the mint”, where is the location of the “names” and the ribbon.
We have a good quality image of pattern 5 santimi 1923 from Heritage auctions with all elements that we need. Let's check the image.

So we can see only one ribbon on this coin - it is on the obverse under the coat of arms with "LATVIJA" (Latvia) inscription inside. Below the ribbon we can see the "HUGUENIN" inscription - this is a Swiss mint name. The full name of the mint is "Huguenin Fréres & Co" (Le Locle, Switzerland). On the reverse we can see "R ZARRIŅŠ" inscription - Rihards Zariņš was the designer of some Latvian coins. You can find information about him on Wikipedia. And this is it, no other marks, names, etc exists on regular Latvian coins 1922 – 1939.

Next our step will be mints for Latvian coins 1922-1939 (This is another mistake of Krause Publications and unfortunately not the last, but now we will speak only about “with” & “without” varieties).
1922 – 1924 coins was minted in Switzerland
1924 – 1935 coins was minted in United Kingdom
1937 – 1939 coins was minted in Latvia
The information about mints easy to get from Bank of Latvia web site, but I have also information from Latvian archives, from Royal Mint Museum and from other official sources. There is the list:
1 santims 1922 - Huguenin Fréres & Co (Le Locle, Switzerland)
1 santims 1924 - Huguenin Fréres & Co (Le Locle, Switzerland)
1 santims 1926 - King’s Norton Metal Company (Birmingham, UK)
1 santims 1928 - King’s Norton Metal Company (Birmingham, UK)
1 santims 1932 - Royal Mint (London, UK) in our days located in Llantrisant, Wales
1 santims 1935 - The Mint Birmingham Limited (Birmingham, UK) (one half of the mintage) and ICI (Metals) Ltd, formerly King’s Norton Metal Company (another half of the mintage)
1 santims 1937 - Valsts papīru spiestuve un naudas kaltuve (Riga, Latvia)
1 santims 1938 - Valsts papīru spiestuve un naudas kaltuve (Riga, Latvia)
1 santims 1939 - Valsts papīru spiestuve un naudas kaltuve (Riga, Latvia)
2 santimi 1922 - Huguenin Fréres & Co (Le Locle, Switzerland)
2 santimi 1926 - The Mint Birmingham Limited (Birmingham, UK)
2 santimi 1928 - The Mint Birmingham Limited (Birmingham, UK)
2 santimi 1932 - Royal Mint (London, UK)
2 santimi 1937 - Valsts papīru spiestuve un naudas kaltuve (Riga, Latvia)
2 santimi 1939 - Valsts papīru spiestuve un naudas kaltuve (Riga, Latvia)
5 santimi 1922 - Huguenin Fréres & Co (Le Locle, Switzerland)
10 santimu 1922 - Huguenin Fréres & Co (Le Locle, Switzerland)
20 santimu 1922 - Huguenin Fréres & Co (Le Locle, Switzerland)
50 santimu 1922 - Huguenin Fréres & Co (Le Locle, Switzerland)
1 lats 1924 - Royal Mint (London, UK)
2 lati 1925 - Royal Mint (London, UK)
2 lati 1926 - Royal Mint (London, UK)
5 lati 1929 - Royal Mint (London, UK)
5 lati 1931 - Royal Mint (London, UK)
5 lati 1932 - Royal Mint (London, UK)

If you don’t want to waste your time to find this information in official source, just compare the information in Krause catalogs fragments and this PCGS slab (This is a coin from my collection) and you will see catalog information – was minted in Switzerland, but PCGS slab said – Kings Norton, which located in UK.

Now we will return to the 1 santims 1928. We can see it was minted in UK (King’s Norton Metal Company). Now we can switch on our logic and think a little bit. World Coins Catalog from 35th edition till now tell to us - 1 santims 1928 variety mint name below ribbon. But how it's possible if only mark of Swiss mint exists on Latvian coins, but this coin was minted in Birmingham and UK mints never marked Latvian coins with their names? The answer is simple - it is impossible. But NGC, for example still somehow finds the Swiss mint name below ribbon on the coins minted in UK. Please take a look on another coin from my collection. The NGC slab, photos of obverse and reverse. Try to find mint name there.

You can say to me: OK, description of the 1 santims 1928 is wrong, but we still have 2 and 5 santimi 1922, these coins were minted in Switzerland and they have mint name below the ribbon.

To get the answer we need to go to the past. The Book of Aleksandrs Platbarzdis “Latvijas Nauda” (Latvian Money) 1971. Author was famous numismatist, he wrote numismatics books and articles also about history of Latvian coinage. Platbarzdis was born in 1899 and died in 1975.
In his book we can find the same coins, but if we will compare with World Coins catalog - description will be quite different. Please see some fragments from his book in Latvian language. So I will translate description.

2 santimi 1922 – Two variants: with designer’s name and without the designer’s name. About coin without designer’s name it is written next: “In the auction catalog "Abner Kreisberg" (USA) November 29, 1965, under the number 1652 was presented as "Very Rare" one copy without the name "R. ZARRIŅŠ". Since such variant didn’t discover by collectors till this time and, in addition, the presented specimen was "Extremely Fine", the suspicion arose that the coin was created for the purpose of making a profit.”

5 santimi 1922 - Two variants: with designer’s name and without the designer’s name. About coin without designer’s name it is written next: “Partially or completely without the signature "R. ZARRIŅŠ". Apparently struck with a stamp in which the engraved name was filled with metal dust.”

1 santims 1928 – Same like 5 santims with designer’s name and without the designer’s name.

Now we see that most likely in the catalogs these "varieties" appeared because of this book, and then for some unknown reason changed. I think that the authors of the catalogs simply confused the name of the mint and the name of the designer. We also see "Partially or completely" and "metal dust" in the description, and this already looks like not a variety, but a striking error (filled die).

But this is not the finish of this article yet! Let’s go deeper to the past. In the Latvian archives I found interesting documents about these inscriptions (mint name and designer's name). Again in Latvian language, so I will translate.

First document:
“At the direction of "HUGUENIN" we ask you to give a final decision that on the one side of the coins will be designer's name, and on the other side - mint name, executed in the same small and almost invisible letters, as on the Romania coins, patterns of which at your disposal. This small print can be used as an identification mark against possible forgeries, because such small letters can be produced only with special equipment.” I found few images of Romanian coins, please see below.

Second document:
“We would like to inform you that there are no objections to the Huguenin's request for the mint name. The name of the mint must be struck on the side of the coin where the coat of arms is. The mint name should be written in very small letters.”

As we can see, these small details were negotiated even before the minting of coins (the date is visible on the documents - October 1922, the contract with the Huguenin was concluded on October 5, 1922 after a competition for the minting of coins for Latvia).
The name of the designer was originally on the sketches of the coins, but Huguenin suggested adding the name of the mint, and after the consent of the customer, the company began production of stamps, and then coins. Therefore, all coins made in Switzerland have both inscriptions. There were no stamps without such inscriptions, and, accordingly, such coins’ varieties as "without an inscription" do not exist. There are only mint errors, we will talk about this below. In addition, all plaster model of Latvian coins which located in the Neuchâtel museum in Switzerland has both inscriptions.

So colleagues, the conclusions are as follows:
1) First and foremost. This is a mint error, but not the varieties!
2) It is necessary to stop publishing these "varieties" in catalogs and on the slabs of the grading companies. Because this is the same like: "two varieties: without a die crack and with die crack" or "two varieties: without edge strike and with edge strike", etc. As you can see this is ridiculous. So this must be stopped!
3) To recognize mint error need to use coins only in good condition. Because coins of 1922 has not very high relief (that's why patterns dated 1923 exists, because Latvia wanted to order new coins with higher relief) and while in circulation these inscriptions may disappear. Even on the coins with higher relief dated after 1922 very hard to see this inscription (check photo of 1 santims 1928 - it is MS65, but anyway designer's name looks not very clear.

And finally a few word about statistics. For years me and my colleagues try to find these errors. We found only 5 santims error, my colleague has this coin without designer’s name in MS63RB (please see photos). I also have, but condition is worse than my colleague’s coin. Neither I nor my colleagues have ever found or seen such errors on 1 santims 1928 or 2 santimi 1922. Also, we do not know anyone who has ever seen such mint errors.

Thank you for your attention!

tcollects

you belong here with us

TwoKopeiki

Awesome post. Learned something today about a series I knew nothing about.

MedveD

@TwoKopeiki Thank you and sorry for my English

MedveD

@tcollects Thank you

TwoKopeiki

@MedveD said:
@TwoKopeiki Thank you and sorry for my English

Твой Английский намного лучше чем мой Латышский

MedveD

@TwoKopeiki said:

@MedveD said:
@TwoKopeiki Thank you and sorry for my English

Твой Английский намного лучше чем мой Латышский

Это потому, что я неплохо обращаюсь с переводчиком, а латышский у меня хуже, чем английский 🙂

SaorAlba

Очень интересно, мне нравятся латвийские монеты той эпохи

MedveD

@SaorAlba said:
Очень интересно, мне нравятся латвийские монеты той эпохи

Тогда возможно Вам понравятся другие мои статьи на русском и несколько видеороликов:
https://world-coins.weebly.com/articles-about-coins.html

pruebas

Sorry to disturb the Russian love-fest....

This is interesting, but hardly surprising.

You have to remember that the Krause catalog is not a scholarly publication, and certainly not exhaustive. It covers a huge area (the entirety of world coins) with limited staff (and in the end, a staff of one) and was basically a “cash cow” for Krause. As long as it sold, there was really no incentive for other than incremental improvement from year to year.

Specialist books, as long as they don’t just copy Krause, are always going to be better, since they have independent research.

Your new work in this area will help advance numismatics.

MedveD

@pruebas
The problem is that most people turn to Krause, as this catalog, with a lot of errors, is universal and in English. In addition, many catalogs copy it. It is easily traced by errors. Grading companies also print numbers from Krause on their slabs, along with errors.

pruebas

@MedveD said:
@pruebas
The problem is that most people turn to Krause, as this catalog, with a lot of errors, is universal and in English. In addition, many catalogs copy it. It is easily traced by errors. Grading companies also print numbers from Krause on their slabs, along with errors.

Well, yes, agreed. But neither you, I, nor anyone else can control that. If someone copies another's work, the onus is on them and we have no say.

And now, with the ownership of the Krause catalogs in other hands, and further investment in the catalogs uncertain, things may never change. I highly doubt there will ever be a research team invested in keeping the catalogs as current as they were under Chet Krause (such as it was even then).

So, how do we move forward? This pertains to all countries too, not just Latvia about which you are discussing. I don't think anyone knows yet. Do we go back to specialty references for each country? That would be a nightmare.
For example, how would I order your reference book on Latvia in the US? Not to mention the cost.

With every closed door, a new one opens.

MedveD

@pruebas
Therefore, I want to make a catalog online in Russian and English, with varieties. People will be able to use it for free, report new varieties or mistakes. Then after some time, will be possible to release a book with details, documents, etc.
I started doing this precisely because of a mistake in Krause. I was holding a coin in my hands and what I saw did not agree with what was written. It became interesting to me, I began my research: went to libraries, then to the archives, I have correspondence with the museum of the Royal Mint and the Swiss Archives of Huguenin. There is also enough information collected from colleagues, discovered something by myself. But now I have a problem with the site, so everything has stopped for now.
Reason:
"Weebly also applies censorship to its availability with a wide selection of geoblocked countries where Weebly is unavailable to internet users. Site owners are unable to login from these geoblocked locations to administer the site just as internet users cannot reach the site. According to Weebly official support forum, the exact list of blocked countries is secret, but the employees confirmed blocking of Côte d'Ivoire, Iran, Russia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Ukraine, as well as much of the Middle East, West and Central Africa."

I tried to find an analogue of Weebly to build the new site, but because of different reasons - unsuccessful

MedveD

The first move is done! Numista removed those "varieties" from their catalogs! Thanks to my colleague Arno from the Netherlands!
1 santims: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2397.html
2 santimi: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces4919.html
5 santimi: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces4481.html