A qustion about hammered coins.

[Hussulo]

To start with I will just mention that I don't know much about hammered, but I was just wondering?

If you have a nice example of a hammered coin say EF and there was a planchet flaw (small split) on the coin in the middle and this was caused while being struck. Would it affect the price much?

[TomGoodheart]

Ooh goodness. Where to start?.... Well, it's going to depend on the type of coin, rarity etc. It's also going to depend on whether the flaw goes through the coin (ie if it possibly weakens it) or it's a 'crease' in the metal. The extent of the split (ie the proportion of the coin it covers) is also a factor.

Some coins are more prone to such things and so collectors will perhaps be more likely to tolerate them.

But ultimately I'd guess that, like me, most collectors will look for a decent strike, an even design (ie are the letters and bust equally clear), a central strike and a nice, round flan. The more of these I can get the more likely I'd overlook a small split. It is, as you say, one of the unfortunate but naturally occuring problems of such coins.

Will it affect the value - probably yes it will. But the degree to which it does will depend on the above and the grade. After all, true EF hammered coins are not that easy to find!

If you can post a pic that may help!

[Hussulo]

Ooh goodness. Where to start?.... Well, it's going to depend on the type of coin, rarity etc. It's also going to depend on whether the flaw goes through the coin (ie if it possibly weakens it) or it's a 'crease' in the metal. The extent of the split (ie the proportion of the coin it covers) is also a factor.

Some coins are more prone to such things and so collectors will perhaps be more likely to tolerate them.

But ultimately I'd guess that, like me, most collectors will look for a decent strike, an even design (ie are the letters and bust equally clear), a central strike and a nice, round flan. The more of these I can get the more likely I'd overlook a small split. It is, as you say, one of the unfortunate but naturally occuring problems of such coins.

Will it affect the value - probably yes it will. But the degree to which it does will depend on the above and the grade. After all, true EF hammered coins are not that easy to find!

If you can post a pic that may help!

Thanks Tom. I can't seem to get my head round hammered coin grading. So how can you determine an Ef grade? If the bust really clear and the all the lettering isn't clear would that knock it down to a vf? Have you got any pictures of Vf or Ef hammered coins for comparison?

[Geordie582]

Along with splits, especially in 'light' coinage, there is the usual "test cut" where a small portion of the coin is removed to prove that it is silver (gold) all the way through. There were lots of contemporary forgeries made. Perversely, some of the forgeries are rarer than the coin they copy! So the test cut works for both varieties.

Complex isn't the word for it!

[Sylvester]

Thanks Tom. I can't seem to get my head round hammered coin grading. So how can you determine an Ef grade? If the bust really clear and the all the lettering isn't clear would that knock it down to a vf? Have you got any pictures of Vf or Ef hammered coins for comparison?

Well that depends yet again on the type of hammered coin you're dealing with. On some serieses the legends are notoriously bad, on others they are good.

In my experience it's very seldom (bearing in mind other types i'm not familiar with may differ from this), but i've often found it to be the case that if the legend is good then the portrait is below average. If the portrait is a stunner then the legend is crap!

To see both being good is somewhat uncommon. Certainly for things in say Queen Mary's reign, and Elizabeth I's reign it generally holds true. The Stuarts may vary somewhat.

Grading is very difficult, it often depends on strike to some degree, weakly struck coins with only light wear can look pretty circulated whilst exceptional strike coins with more moderate wear can still pull off a high VF.

There is no general rule, it really does depend upon the coin and the 'normal' wear features of that series.

I'm sure Tom would agree that grading a coin of William the Conqueror would be a whole different kettle of fish than say a coin of Henry I or Charles I.

Hammered is all about knowing the series. Grading Stuart coins is VASTLY different to grading Norman coins.

Actually whilst we're on about grading and legends this reminds me of something that annoys the hell out of me. I once saw the most beautifully struck Queen Mary groat for sale, sharp legends, crisp sharp portrait (exceptionally uncommon!), the catch? Mary being unpopular as she was the coin had been defaced by having lines (deep lines) scratched through the portrait!

It breaks the heart. Good contemporary damage = good history and context for sure, but not on a museum quality specimen!

[TomGoodheart]

And here we have exactly why it's likely to be so difficult to 'certify' grades for hammered coins!!

As Sylvester says, you need to compare coins with similar in the series. A great Ed II penny is going to be different from a great Chas shilling. Just to show you, and as you asked (!), here are a couple of examples. The first two are early coins showing the ruff collar popular in the first 'Blackadder'! The coin on the left is as close to EF as you will ever see, the other near VF.

The second pair show two coins that are as close possible to how they were when they were first struck (ignore the toning for now). Neither shows any wear at all so, in theory, would be EF. Despite this they only really grade VF because of weaknesses in the striking plus the fact that the first is from knackered dies, the other from poor artistry (what Spink call 'coarse'!).

[TomGoodheart]

If you want a fairly good guide, Lloyd Bennett is one of the dealers that does state grades on his listings. As you'll see if you browse, you can get some pretty nice Cnut pennies but Ed VI shillings not so good. Charles shillings are only really good when made using specially prepared flans - so called 'fine work' issues. In other words, the 'norm' for different types or ages of coins can differ significantly. Just ask Sylvester how many well centred Stephen pennies he's seen with both good legends and bust!

That's because there is possible variation at every stage of production! The flan (planchet) is hand produced. They were cut from rods or plate and roughly rounded. They were then stacked together like a pile of pancakes and the edges bashed until the whole stack was more or less circular. This means that often the centre of the coin is thinner than the edge, therefore the legend often strikes up better than the bust. The coin just needs to be dropped into the pile (the lower of the two dies, bearing the bust imprint) without care or the trussle (the upper die) held at a slight angle and the coin will be off-centre or struck more strongly on one side than the other. If the hammer blow or the coiner's grip is weak, if the hammer bounces.....

For Charles I by the time Chas had left London, while coins was still produced with the royal portrait, quality control had gone out the window. This means that coins that would for Elizabeth or James only rate as good fine or nVF may be as good as you will ever see outside a museum.

That's why grading hammered coins requires you to know so much more about the particular coin you are looking at than the later milled series. Yes it's a challenge but for me (and I suspect Sylvester!) it's one of the things that make collecting such coins so interesting.

Edited October 4, 2006 by TomGoodheart

[Sylvester]

Just ask Sylvester how many well centred Stephen pennies he's seen with both good legends and bust!

One, at Manchester Museum.

That's why grading hammered coins requires you to know so much more about the particular coin you are looking at than the later milled series. Yes it's a challenge but for me (and I suspect Sylvester!) it's one of the things that make collecting such coins so interesting.

Exactly why i like hammered!

[scottishmoney]

One aspect of hammered coins to be considered, is that there is no one coin that is like another, they are all unique because of the manner of which they were struck.

Probably one of my favourite hammered coins from Medieval Scotland, this is one of the first Groats struck in Scotland during the 1350's. From the reign of David II(1329-1371), this coin may have been used to pay ransom to Edward III after David II was released from a long captivity in England in 1356.

[Sylvester]

Probably one of my favourite hammered coins from Medieval Scotland, this is one of the first Groats struck in Scotland during the 1350's. From the reign of David II(1329-1371), this coin may have been used to pay ransom to Edward III after David II was released from a long captivity in England in 1356.

Noyce!

[Geordie582]

Let me drop a pebble in the pond! When grading hammered, as has been said, a lot depends on the series you're discussing. Take the Henry II 'Tealby' series. flans so thin that this is a frequent result! Try grading that. Now that's a split!

Edited October 5, 2006 by Geordie582

[scottishmoney]

And my split on striking example, a half merk or 6/8 from the reign of James VI of Scotland. This piece is dated 1572 and is my largest Scottish coin.

[Hussulo]

Thanks for your replys everyone. I can now begin to appreciate how hard it is to grade hammered coins, but it won't stop me buying some more.