Edge/Rim issues on Ancients

It can be disappointing when you find a coin with a portrait style you like, but the coin's surface or edges appear to have issues. Many times I am willing to overlook minor rim & edge issues if the rest of the coin is appealing.

At what point is a coins rim/edge issues considered detrimental to the coin's appeal & deserves a call out?

Below is an example of what I'd consider enough "damage" to be worth noting and making a coin unattractive given the metal deterioration/flan chipping



While a coin that looked like this wouldn't bother me much at all, edge cut or not:


Post your thoughts on rim & edge damage in Ancients

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't find the coin in the image to be more or less attractive because of the edge. The portrait looks well defined and detailed. It's the devices that make or break a coin for me. Besides, the image you show is greatly magnified showing I believe the edge issues which may not be as prominent to the naked eye. I also prefer full legends so if the edge issues affect the legend it can be a problem for me (but not a game changer). BTW, show the entire coin. I'm interested in seeing the issue as a whole.

 

That's the way it left the mint. The flans were cast en chapelet, that is, using open or closed molds in which a number of mold hollows were connected by channels. This resulted in a "runner" or sprue between the cast flans, which would be removed before striking. Sometimes, the process of breaking off the sprue removed a chunk from the flan's edge, leaving what is known as a "flan chip." That's what happened here. It's just a byproduct of the manufacturing process and it makes the coin interesting.

 

It makes it look more interesting - like comparing the edges of an ancient parchment to a piece of A4 photocopier paper.

 

This is very interesting thanks for explaining this. At what point would you consider it to be a flan issue vs a biproduct of the minting process itself?

 

Ancients since they were struck by hand started out as disks that were super heated and then struck by a hammer on a die. This process often led to the metal spreading out and not appearing as a "circle" as you would find with a milled coin. Part of the charm of these coins to me.

 

This has probably the worst edges I own, but it's kinda endearing.


When the edge has actual damage, that's a major issue:

 

Case in point, this example of Gallienus, who is known for sometimes ragged flans.

 

Thanks for your opinion. I try to balance the fullness of the legends with the portrait when deciding if a coin is attractive. I'm willing to overlook offcentering to a degree if the portrait style is really nice.

 

I think it's a matter of personal taste how gnarly an edge you can tolerate. A certain amount of edge character can add to a coin and certainly help to verify it's authenticity.

I am a lot less worried about edge issues that were created by the mint when the coin was made than about chips that happened later in the coin's life. Chips that remove part of the design are especially unappealing.

 

..i myself am leary of perfect edges on ancients....

 

This flan chip is a tad overboard:

 

..well, idk if that chips 'from the factory'.......if thats what ya mean...

 

Nailed it (from my manufacturing experience.)

 

Agreed.

 

For me, it becomes unattractive if majorly affecting main devices or puts the integrity of the coin in doubt. Examples would missing a major device or if a large flan crack can break the coin in two if you look at it wrong. Short of that, its part of the coins history, along with the die used and wear incurred.

 

I'm usually not too worried about edge issues, a lot of times they add character in my opinion.

Roman Empire
Constantius Gallus | 352-353 CE
AE Follis | 3.51 grams
Heraclea Mint
Obv: DN FL CL CONSTANTIVS NOB CAES, Δ behind bust
Rev: FEL TEMP REPARATIO, fallen horseman, S above and left, SMHΔ below
Ref: RIC VIII Heraclea 89​

 

I really like odd shaped flans and personally feel it gives the coin some character.
Here's a couple of my favourites...
Plautilla RIC#369

Gadhaiya paisa 1 Drachm

 

I actually prefer mine with edge/rim issues. Gives the coin special character.

Gallienus
BI Antoninianus

267 - 268 A.D., Rome Mint, null Officina
3.25g, 21.0mm, 6H

Obverse: GALLIENVS AVG,
Head of Gallienus, radiate, right

Reverse: NEPTVNO CONS AVG,
Hippocamp or capricorn, right

Exergue: II

Provenance: Ex. CNG Electronic Auction 436, Lot 688, Ex. William Whetstone Collection

Reference: RIC V Gallienus 245


Julian II the Apostate
AE Maiorina

361 - 363 A.D., Antioch Mint, 1st Officina
8.46g, 30.0mm, 6H

Obverse: D N FL CL IVLI-ANVS P F AVG,
Bust of Julian, pearl-diademed, draped, cuirassed, right

Reverse: SECVRITAS REI PVB,
Bull, standing right, head front; above, two stars

Exergue: -/-//(palm branch left)ANTA(palm branch right)

Provenance: Ex. CNG Auction 406 Lot 797

Reference: RIC VIII Antioch 216

 

The top coin looks good to me. It looks like all of the edge issues are in part of the coin that has no features. If the rest of the coin looks as good as the top of the head, I'd give the coin a thumbs up.
I run across edge issues on cast coins a lot. My first choice is to but round coins, but sometimes I buy less than round pieces.

Some are less round than others.