Ancient Greek & Roman Coins

Grading and Describing Ancient Coins

Conditions of Manufacture

Ancient coins were struck with varying degrees of excellence. Some mints exercised excellent quality control so nearly every coin was perfect when it left the mint. Others worked in such a haphazard manner that a well struck, well centered specimen is a great rarity. Flan preparation, alloy mixing, die condition and pure luck all conspired to make each coin an individual effort. The following table addresses conditions that have existed on the coin since the moment of striking. These factors do not change as result of the passage of time but some of their signs can wear away. In low grade coins it is hard to tell the fullness of the strike. Many coins will require separate grading and description for each side.

Conditions of Manufacture
	F Well Centered Titus sestertius	Ancient coins are most frequently slightly off center. It is worthy of note when, by accident, a coin is struck centered on a perfectly round flan. These are common in some issues and very rare (worth a premium) in others.
	VF Off Center Alexander the Great barbaric mint tetradrachm	Small degrees of poor centering are not usually noted. However this should be described when important design or legends are lost.
	VF Crowded on small flan Septimius Severus Emesa mint denarius	This coin is slightly off center on a small flan cutting into some legends but the design is otherwise complete.
	VF Bold Septimius Severus Emesa mint denarius	Coins boldly struck on large flans show (very nearly) a full border of dots and every letter is sharp.
	aVF Wide flan with weak centers Gordian III antoninianus	Many coins on wide flans will be softly struck in the centers (here the ear) due to the excessively thin flan. There simply was not enough metal to fill the dies.
	aVF Flat spot opposite head Numerian antoninianus	The portrait head was usually the most deeply cut part of the design. When the flan was thin and hammer force insufficient there could be a void in the reverse design where the metal went into the obverse. This coin shows the void on the legs of the figure.
	VF Soft Vabalathus Antioch mint antoninianus	This coin shows little wear but has mushy details from a soft strike or a worn die.
	F Ragged flan Antoninus Pius denarius	Some flans were not very round and smooth. Some collectors discriminate against these coins. Care should be taken to distinguish this from a chipped flan.
	F Squared flan Marcus Aurelius sestertius	Some flans seem to have been cut from larger pieces and have squared shape. It is hard to strike a round coin on a square flan! Much legend is lost on such coins.
	aEF Normal strike Septimius Severus Fortuna rx. Laodicea mint (early style) denarius	This coin is reasonably well struck on full, normal flan. Design, other than the border, is complete if not well centered.
	F Some legend weakness Allectus antoninianus	There is an area of striking weakness but not to a bothersome degree. Frequently this will show only in a few letters of the legend. Few dealers will bother to mention this condition.
	VF Filled die Septimius Severus denarius	Foreign material in the die could erase some letters and leave others bold.
	aVF Severe striking crack Gordian III sestertius	The severe flan crack does not involve important details. Most coins have minor edge splits; this example is reduced in value due to the extreme nature of the flan crack.
	VF Die Crack Alexander the Great Arados mint fourree tetradrachm	The fine line running across the middle of this coin (light line under Zeus' arm) is the result of a crack in the die.
	VG Die cud Aegina stater	More extreme die damage with a piece missing produces lumps on the coin. To the left of the turtle is a die cud, not a part of the design.
	F Uneven strike with flat areas Constantius II Spearing rx. Constantinople mint centenionalis	This example is unevenly struck to a distracting degree with loss of significant details at the top the Roman soldier's body.
	F Uneven flat strike Domitian Barbaric mint dupondius	This coin is poorly struck to an extreme. It is half flat but earns points by having the better half (head of Athena) present and losing the feet.
	F+ Even flat strike Hadrian sestertius	Most flat strikes show uneveness as on the above two coins. If, however, the strike is perfectly even but just not hard enough to transfer all detail we see the high points (here around ear) completely lacking in detail with good detail on the nearby areas (here hair and beard). A worn coin would have lost detail more evenly across the field. This class of coin is hard to grade fairly. It looks better than a worn Fine but still lacks the detail needed to grade higher. This example has elements of EF but still can not be called anything above Fine.
	VF Casting voids Septimius Severus Eagle/Wall rx. Amasia, Pontus AE 32	Flan flaws (of manufacture!) detract greatly from the appearance of the coin. The example shows small flan casting voids severe enough they were not erased by striking. Some coins are much worse than this!
	VF Flan Flaws Postumus double sestertius	A combinination of a casting void and raised ridge from foreign matter inclusions in the alloy ruins this portrait.
	VF Casting sprue Istros cast bronze	A few ancients were cast rather than struck from dies and often show remnants of the sprue where metal entered the die. These can also appear on struck coins made on cast blanks.
	VG Double Struck Constantius II Antioch mint? centenionalis	Many ancient coins were struck by more than one blow of the hammer. When the flan shifted between blows the result was a coin with doubling of part of the design. In this example the portrait looks like a pair of jugate bust twins. Minor degrees of doubling cause loss of detail and are undesirable. Extreme examples reenter the realm of collectability as mint errors.
	VG Mint error Claudius II Pax rx. antoninianus	Even normal ancient coins show variety that would be considered errors on modern coins but sometimes this can be of an extreme nature. This is a flip over double strike and is simply ungradable by any system. To be considered an error, an ancient coin must be severely different.
	F Centration Dimple Gordian III Nicopolis ad Istrum AE28	This is NOT a fault. Some Greek and Greek Imperial mints smoothed flan surfaces on a machine that left a shallow hole in the center of the flan. These vary in size and depth but must be present on these issues. Foolish collectors have filled the pits to correct a 'fault'. These dimples are not always centered or in the same place on each side of the coin. Some students (incorrectly, in my opinion) attribute these marks to tongs or believe the intent was to round the edges.

These are by no means all of the factors to consider when grading ancient coins. Please let me know what conditions I should add to this list. It is hoped that these examples will make you think about what makes a coin appealing, attractive or desirable and cause you to lighten up a bit when criticising dealers who have to grade using the woefully inadequate current system.

Back to Grading Menu Page
Back to Standard Grading Page
Go to Conditions of Preservation Page
Back to Main Page