What is Your “Best Made” Coin?

[Curtisimo]

By this I don’t mean your most artistic, your highest grade, your most interesting or your favorite. I mean, which of your coins was made with the highest quality control in terms of its fabric and manufacture. For me this breaks down in to the following criteria;

• A well made flan free of excessive edge cracking that is of an appropriate shape and size to fully fit the coin design.
• Proper weight
• Perfect centering
• Good strike
• Fresh dies

In my own collection I don’t have any that fully meet all of the criteria. I think the closest I have is this Antoninianus of Diocletian. The strike is good, the dies look pretty fresh and the centering is almost perfect. A portion of the beading on the bottom right of the obverse is ever so slightly off flan. The flan is large enough for the design but it is somewhat irregularly shaped and there is a flan crack on the bottom edge.

Remember that circulation wear is not a factor for determining “best made” so even your low grade example may qualify as perfectly manufactured. So what do you think? Did I miss any criteria?

Let’s all pile on with our “best made” coins!

[CassiusMarcus]

Great ant of Diocletian there @Curtisimo ! He was a big fan of cabbages, did you know 🤣


I think that my Tiberius drachm would fit these criteria decently well! 

Although its a bit worn on some areas, i think its fairly fresh.. got some good centering and strike power

Let me know what you think

[Bonshaw]

I've posted this one in another context, but I think it a marvel of near technical perfection, especially since it was struck in the 4th century BC, near modern-day Kerch, Crimea, Ukraine - near the edge of the Hellenic world.

Near perfect centering, a marvelous strike, artistic and fresh dies, a perfectly shaped flan, everything lines up about as well as I can imagine. 

Cimmerian Bosporos. Pantikapaion circa 325-310 BC.
Æ 21 mm, 7.69g
Bearded head of satyr right / Π - Α - Ν, forepart of griffin left; below, sturgeon left.

 

Edited September 6 by Bonshaw

[CPK]

1 hour ago, CassiusMarcus said:

Great ant of Diocletian there @Curtisimo ! He was a big fan of cabbages, did you know 🤣


I think that my Tiberius drachm would fit these criteria decently well! 

Although its a bit worn on some areas, i think its fairly fresh.. got some good centering and strike power

Let me know what you think

Gorgeous example!! 

[CPK]

My "best made" coin is very similar to yours @Curtisimo! Save for a slight flat spot on Jupiter's head, it's as close to FDC as any coin I own:

DIOCLETIAN, AD 284-305
BI Antoninianus (23.53mm, 4.15g, 6h)
Struck AD 285. Ticinum mint
Obverse: IMP C C VAL DIOCLETIANVS P F AVG, radiate and cuirassed bust of Diocletian right
Reverse: IOVI CONSERVAT, Jupiter standing left holding thunderbolt and scepter; P XXI T in exergue
References: RIC V 222, RCV 12660
Darkly toned silvering. A superb specimen, virtually as struck and well-centered on a large flan.

[Orange Julius]

A hard question to answer but since I like coins from one of the periods with the worst quality coins…. Here’s a really nicely made coin from the reign of Gallienus. Nice heavy round-ish flan, full beaded boarder on both sides, nice strike both sides, legends well spaced and done, nice eastern style typical of the period… the only quality point that is a negative is the small flat area on the reverse figure around the waist where more metal flowed into the obverse bust and not enough metal was left to fill the lowest points of the figure in the reverse die. Anyway, a fun coin from a period not known for quality.

[Ryro]

Fun idea, Curtis!

There's a lot to choose from. But here's an oldy that really shines in hand:

Helena, Augusta,

324-328/30. Follis (Bronze, 19.5 mm, 3.37 g 6), Treveri, 327-328. FL HELENA AVGVSTA Diademed and draped bust of Helena to right. Rev. SECVRITAS REI PVBLICE / STRE Securitas standing left, holding branch in her right hand. LRBC 41. RIC 508. Nicely patinated. Extremely fine.

[CPK]

13 minutes ago, Ryro said:

Fun idea, Curtis!

There's a lot to choose from. But here's an oldy that really shines in hand:

Helena, Augusta,

324-328/30. Follis (Bronze, 19.5 mm, 3.37 g 6), Treveri, 327-328. FL HELENA AVGVSTA Diademed and draped bust of Helena to right. Rev. SECVRITAS REI PVBLICE / STRE Securitas standing left, holding branch in her right hand. LRBC 41. RIC 508. Nicely patinated. Extremely fine.

That's one of the nicest Helena portraits I've seen yet.

[Croatian Coin Collector]

Kushan Gold Dinar of Kanishka the Great:

 

 

[Al Kowsky]

[AncientCoinnoisseur]

I think none of my coins meet all your criteria, but the closest ones for me are these, for different reasons:

1) This Macedon First Meris Tetradrachm has the whole shield and the whole reverse perfectly centered and everything fits well in the flan, especially the reverse, with the thunderbolt and the leaves. Speaking of leaves, these are probably amongst the best I have ever seen, they are usually either worn down or really badly made:

The colored version probably makes you appreciate the details more (I should just correct the obverse, since I thought those were flowers, and it turns out they are stars, so I should color them all yellow I guess):

 

2) This Septimius Severus Denarius has very fresh dies, with crisp details everywhere, although the flan is quite cracked and it is not perfectly centered, so it doesn’t exactly meet your criteria:

 

3) This Philip I Antoninianus is very well centered in a nice flan, although I feel this does not meet your criteria either:

So no ‘Best made coin’ among mine, but some close ones 🙂 

[shanxi]

• no edge cracking ✔️
• Proper weight ✔️
• Perfect centering ✔️
• Good strike ✔️
• Fresh dies ✔️

Staufen im Breisgau
AR Brakteat
year: ca. 1300
Obv.: Elephant walking to left
Rev. Incuse of obverse
AR, 19 mm, 0.39g
Ref.: Untermann / Bechtold: Die Stadtwüstung Münster im Breisgau „Archäologische und historische Untersuchungen 1995-97. Ein Vorbericht“
From the collection of Dr. Max Blaschegg
Ex. Westfälische Auktionsgesellschaft in May 1995.

[rasiel]

An interesting thread, thanks Curtissimo! Using your key

• A well made flan free of excessive edge cracking that is of an appropriate shape and size to fully fit the coin design.
• Proper weight
• Perfect centering
• Good strike
• Fresh dies

I'm glad that you left out wear and corrosion or other problems that took place after the coin left the mint as that, obviously, can't be faulted on the QA team! Still, I think that (reflexively) collectors will just tend to gravitate towards their sharpest coins. When looking at my own coins I'm tempted too to post a few of the best preserved rather than focus on what you intended but it's still difficult to see past circulation/burial damage to appreciate an initially high-grade sample. 

So, if you don't mind me rephrasing what you meant, I think that it can be distilled to: imagine the (emperor, king, etc.) asks the chief engraver to send a sample of the newest series. What coin in your collection would he had approved for this purpose?

After spending a good long while looking over my Roman money I have to admit none really hit the mark. The chief engraver would be sweatin' bullets if all he had handy were specimens in my possession.

In any case, of all these, I feel this rather ordinary Tacitus probably comes closest. It's nothing special to you or me but it ticks off most of the checkboxes. It's not a great photo but with a little imagination it's not hard to "see" it as it would have been when literally hot off the press. It gets a ding for the clogged die on the reverse letter T - damnit!

 

Now this is a bit of a cheat because I no longer own this coin but if we can look past that then this Aelius would have been a good candidate as an honest-to-goodness mint showcase back in the day. Not sure if Aelius would have forgiven the small die crack at six o' clock though.

This Valentinian II is as close to "mint state" as I can possibly imagine but that reverse die is a tad past its prime I think, tsk tsk.

I can find no fault with this Pupienus.... if we're willing to overlook the slightly soft strike on the reverse, that is.

Lastly, this argenteus of Constantius I is a true masterpiece of late Roman engraving art. With perfect centering and a healthy silver planchet it'd be a shoe in if it wasn't for that little blotch below the right barbeque grill. Always gotta be something lol!!

Rasiel

 

 

Edited September 6 by rasiel

[traveler]

My vote will be for the unusual incuse coinage of southern Italy. Specifically those struck by the Greek colonies. You can read more here: https://www.ngccoin.com/news/article/8345/Ancient-Greek-coins-Italy/

Metapontium AR stater. 7.96g. 25mm. 510-470 BCE.

Reasons:

Mirrored dies for obverse and reverse, but with subtly different designs

Perfectly aligned obverse and reverse dies: always 12h.

Broad flans

[Ursus]

Interesting question, Curtis! Here are some of my coin – some rarer, some abundantly common – that I would consider to be exceptionally well-made:

 

[Bonshaw]

6 hours ago, traveler said:

 

@traveler, this is a fantastic example of a truly unique coin. Thanks for sharing.

 

[robinjojo]

Metal quality is another factor, I think.  While debasement directly impacts this factor, still some debased coins seem to be less granular than others which seems to me to relate to somewhat higher levels of silver versus copper.

The Alexandrian tetradrachms are well known for significant debasement over the years of minting, but every now and then an exceptional coin surfaces, such as this one of Gallienus :

Roman Egypt, Gallienus, tetradrachm, 253-268 AD, Alexandria, RY 14( 266/7 AD).

10.22 grams

Edited September 6 by robinjojo

[Coinmaster]

This one score some points!

 

[Al Kowsky]

6 minutes ago, robinjojo said:

Metal quality is another factor, I think.  While debasement directly impacts this factor, still some debased coins seem to be less granular than others which seems to me to relate to somewhat higher levels of silver versus copper.

The Alexandrian tetradrachms are well known for significant debasement over centuries of minting, but every now and then an exceptional coin surfaces, such as this one of Gallienus :

Roman Egypt, Gallienus, tetradrachm, 253-268 AD, Alexandria, RY 14( 266/7 AD),

10.22 grams

robinjojo, This coin appears to be made of especially good metal for the period 🤨. I wonder if this was intentional to give the god Helios (the sun god) more brightness than regular issues 🤔. For comparison see this near mint state tet of Philip II, that appears to be only bronze.

Philip II, AD 247-249. 

[robinjojo]

8 minutes ago, Al Kowsky said:

robinjojo, This coin appears to be made of especially good metal for the period 🤨. I wonder if this was intentional to give the god Helios (the sun god) more brightness than regular issues 🤔. For comparison see this near mint state tet of Philip II, that appears to be only bronze.

Philip II, AD 247-249. 

Nice coin!  Yes, it seems to be mostly bronze, but a tad silvery based on the photo.

Perhaps that true for Helios.  I think the coin is still debased, perhaps .750 fine?  The weight is typical for the period, and there might be some silver wash - it's hard to say.

Edited September 6 by robinjojo

[Curtisimo]

Really fantastic coins everyone!

Below are a few more of mine that I considered as possibly my “best made” but then decided against.

Well struck and beautifully centered but the flan cracks and edge defects weigh against it.

This one is a really nicely made coin but it is slightly off center.

The quality control of all the First Meris tetradrachms is fantastic. I suspect the need to center the sheild design encouraged a level of care in the manufacture. This one loses marks for having an area of weak strike.

[Qcumbor]

Thanks Curtis for bringing this up and have members posting their best examples. Some gorgeous ones so far !

 

• A well made flan free of excessive edge cracking that is of an appropriate shape and size to fully fit the coin design.
• Proper weight
• Perfect centering
• Good strike
• Fresh dies

 

Some of mine come to mind :

 

Q

[Curtisimo]

17 hours ago, CPK said:

That's one of the nicest Helena portraits I've seen yet.

That’s only because you’ve never seen my Helena…

… jk. He is right. That is a beautiful Helena, @Ryroand very well made as well.

12 hours ago, rasiel said:

So, if you don't mind me rephrasing what you meant, I think that it can be distilled to: imagine the (emperor, king, etc.) asks the chief engraver to send a sample of the newest series. What coin in your collection would he had approved for this purpose?

That is a good way to think about it. Though instead of the Chief Engraver it might be better to imagine the Chief… Manufacturer?… the Mint Overseer? Essentially the person who could say to the emperor “this is the best coin possible using the designs/dies I was given.”

12 hours ago, rasiel said:

Now this is a bit of a cheat because I no longer own this coin but if we can look past that then this Aelius would have been a good candidate as an honest-to-goodness mint showcase back in the day. Not sure if Aelius would have forgiven the small die crack at six o' clock though.

Beautiful Aelius example! The coins of the second century seem to be pretty well made from a fabric standpoint. Artistic too really.

4 hours ago, robinjojo said:

Metal quality is another factor, I think.

Good point and yes! Metal quality could make up a big component. Some of the silvered coins of the 3rd century are somewhat hard to judge in the regard. The silvering may have been well don’t but just didn’t survive as well for reasons out of the minters control.

34 minutes ago, Qcumbor said:

Some of mine come to mind :

Wow! That SA denarius really ticks all the boxes! Beautiful coins all though.

[expat]

The two coins I think of when viewing my example are these Tacitus and Constantine I. They tick most and very nearly all of your criteria. I often wonder how they would have looked fresh from striking.

TACITUS Antoninianus. Ticinum mint.
Obverse: IMP C M CL TACITVS AVG. Radiate, draped, and cuirassed bust right.
Reverse: PAX AVGVSTI. Pax standing left, holding olive branch and transverse sceptre; P in exergue.
 
RIC 150, Cohen 72.  Ticinum mint, early-June 276.  3,5 g - 22,5 mm

Edited September 6 by expat

[Sulla80]

Scrolling through my photos : centering on the flan is one of the first elements I am willing to overlook - this Antiochus VI is an extreme example:

Here are a few that are better made examples - in the RR denarii it is easy to see "quality control" went up and down from moneyer to moneyer with some issues particularly high quality and other particularly sloppy.

RR strikes seem to be more than average in the off-center, off-flan, and edge cracks