Is there any way to identify clipped coins?

I’ve seen NGC mark some coins as “clipped” and I’m wondering what signs or methods they use to identify a clipped coin?

I feel like this Hadrian denarius might have been clipped even though NGC didn’t identify it as such.



The reason for that is because the lettering is almost right on the very edge and I remember reading somewhere that when coins were clipped they usually clipped very close to the letters and made sure not to clip off part of the Emperor’s portrait.

Not only that but even accounting for margin of error 2.89 grams seems way too light for a coin that isn’t missing something. It should have been 3.4 grams and in AU condition it’s unlikely that half a gram of silver was worn away from wear and tear. It also seems unlikely for it to be simply from margin of error when minting.

I can totally imagine someone shaving 0.5 grams off every denarius they came across before spending it. They’d basically be able to profit 1 denarius from every 7 they clipped (0.5g x 7 = 3.5g) and considering 1 denarius was about a day’s wages back then it seems likely that many people would’ve been motivated to do so even with the harsh penalties (death) for doing so.

If anyone can help me figure this out or give me some way to help determine whether a coin is clipped or not I would appreciate it greatly.

Thanks!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Could be a Misaligned strike. It wasn't centered properly?

Or a planchet/flan that wasn't perfectly round when created.

 

But usually with misaligned strikes the portrait may be off center but then there is extra metal extending outside the normal area right?

Like in this extreme example much of the portrait is missing but the entire coin is still the right size there is just a bunch of blank space.

 

Comparing issues between Ancient Coins and Modern Day coins is like Apples and Oranges.
Two different ways of making coins.

BTW.. That Cent is an Off-Center strike not a Misaligned Strike.

 

I would agree with weight. PM coins usually they were pretty good with tolerances. Unless visibly porous, (it lost weight in the ground due to leeching), the weight should be close. If its not, I assume clipping. Problem with looking at the edge is it was done a long time ago, and there was no collar so I find most clipped coins difficult to now see the evidence of clipping versus normal flan preparation for ancients. Maybe medieval had different flan prep techniques making it more visible.

 

Coins made 2000 years ago were made differently than they are today. A clipped coin is an incomplete planchet. Several types exist, curved, straight and ragged. In Roman times this didn’t happen as coins were not made by machines. Each coin was made by hand. Sometimes, most times, the design did not fit onto the intended piece of metal. Look at the number of ancient coins that have splits in the planchet.

 

Clipped coins for modern coins is different from clipped coins for ancient coins. Planchets weren't made the same way. Another name for ancient clipped coins would be "shaved" coins where the diameter was reduced by shaving it to get the PM it was made from.

 

That's TPG's for you!

 

Dang imagine how long it would take to make coins if you’re limiting to making one at a time

 

Well darn that’s kind of a bummer to buy a clipped coin without knowing it’s clipped until afterwards.

However since NGC marked it as problem free (and Heritage Auctions) if I ever re-sell it I’m definitely not going to even mention that it might be clipped.

 

I kind of doubt if this denarius has been clipped.

If you are really interested in this general topic (ancient Roman denarii production, purity etc), I would strongly recommend reading this book:

The Metallurgy of Roman Silver Coinage: From the Reform of Nero to the Reform of Trajan

It answers many of the questions raised in this thread. Like how denarii were prepared and struck, discussed in Part I, 6 - Metallography and the production of denarius blanks (pp 130-147).

The ancients also commonly struck debased silver coins which look like pure silver to the eye. The book explains the process by which the ancients did that (via the deliberate creation of a silver enriched surface). This while the core of the coin has lower silver purity. You can see from the attached table that by the time of Trajan the silver purity was about 80%. Hadrian succeeded Trajan, so the purity should be close. Certainly not higher, at least.

Also, the book also has a section explaining that such debased silver coins that look seemingly fine on the surface can actually have had their non-silver content leached out. The weight of such coins will be much lower than expected, and the weight will vary greatly even between two coins of the same issue. But this doesn't mean the coins were clipped. It's simply that the copper or other base metals are gone while the silver remains.

Your coin IS light for the issue. I suspect it's because:

1. The coin's had it's copper or base metals leached out, or
2. The coin was originally struck at such a low weight, or
3. The coin is clipped.

I doubt if the coin was clipped though, because Hadrian's denarii were not pure silver to begin with. If you were clipping coins, I would think you would want pure silver. Would you want to clip metal which you had to refine again yourself?

 

Well I mean I don’t think any Emperor issued denarii that were pure (or 99%) silver right?

If I recall correctly even when the denarius was at it’s heaviest & most pure under Julius Caesar they were still “only” 95-98% pure and would need further refining to get pure silver.

I think you’re right maybe it’s just the base metals leeching out.

 

Your question about whether any emperor issued pure silver is, to reiterate, answered by The Metallurgy of Roman Silver Coinage: From the Reform of Nero to the Reform of Trajan.

Roman Republican issues (in general), along with the issues of Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero before his coinage reform are all considered to be pure silver by ancient standards.

Not by our modern standards of course, but by ancient standards, the silver will have been refined to the limits of their technology. The ancients intended and perceived it to be 100% pure.

Domitian also issued 100% pure silver (again by ancient standards) for a short period. Please look at the table again.

 

I did indeed look at your table.

My comment was in response to the table you posted.

 

...and imagine how many millions there are even then

 

Well I mean it’s known as a historical fact that Caligula spent 1 Billion sesterces in the first year of his reign alone. O_O

That’s 250 million denarii coins.

It’s not like they had electronic banking back then so everything he spent would have had to be in cold hard cash.

I can totally imagine him giving a merchant a handful of gold aureii coins for several amphorae of Falernian wine. The very best wine in Rome. Apparently a single sextarius (~0.5 liters) cost 2 denarii and a single cup cost 4 ases.

As part of the ruins of ancient Pompeii, a price list on the wall of a bar establishment notes

For one "as" you can drink wine
For two you can drink the best
For four you can drink Falernian.


It may not sound like much but it was 2 days wages for the average Roman for a single sextarius of wine. But an Emperor would’ve bought it in large quantities of course.

 

Oh yeah don’t forget Julius Caesar!

His denarii are the only ones I’ve ever seen that weigh up to 4 grams and over.

 

There does tend to be a bit of extra goober on the side of an extreme off center coin, but lots of Romans were simply not well struck.

Extreme off center:


Nice flan, poor centering.