Worn Coin, or worn die?

Worn Coin, or worn die?

How do you tell the difference between a coin with normal wear, and a coin that was struck with worn dies? This question was answered on the Moneta coin discussion list by Robert Kokotailo, of Calgery Coin, a collector and dealer with years of experience. Robert was kind enough to allow me to reprint his answer here, and also use his images.

Robert has a large variety of wonderful coins on his site. Please visit him at:

Calgary Coin, and let him know that you appreciate his work.

Question: Is it possible to distinguish between a coin that itself is worn,and a coin that was strucked with worn dies?Or even more dificult:a worn coin strucked with worn dies? I am especially talking about the image itself,as a worn coin normally will be worn all over. Could somebody give a link to pictures?

Robert's answer: I am only going to deal with the concept of how to tell a coin struck from a worn die, vs a coin that is actually worn, and only with respect to a relatively high grade coin. There is little point talking about how coins struck from worn dies would look after they were well worn in circulation because most of the very fine features one needs to see would have been worn away.

The coin I will be discussing can be seen at :

Note how the obverse appears to be a full grade higher than the reverse. In normal circulation a coin wears evenly on both sides, so this un-even wear is the first clue the more worn appearing side was probably struck from a worn die (it is actually rare to see a coin struck with worn dies on both sides).

To understand how to tell a worn die, it is first important to understand the signs of wear on an fresher die, and I will first discuss the obverse which can be seen enlarged at :

The die was not absolutely fresh as it has a very minor die crack which resulted in the raised line extending from the hair on the forehead towards the edge, but overall the die was still in pretty good shape.

Note how beard on the cheek is gone on the high point but there is a gradual re-appearance of the beard lower down. This could be due either to weak strike or circulation wear, but that area clearly has a different (smoother) texture than the rest of the coin, and thus it is safe to assume this is a point of actual wear. Also, note how crisp and sharp the hair is at the top of the head, where it is lower on the coin and thus somewhat protected. That very crisp areas tells us that the die was very sharp and thus not worn.

What is important to remember is that in normal circulation wear first affects only the highest points on a coin and progresses to lower points as the amount of wear increases. Only after considerable wear does it begin to affect the more protected areas (even a coin worn to fine will have areas of non-worn metal in the most protected areas).

Now turn your attention to the reverse at :

Notice how it at first appears to have fairly heavy wear over the entire design. In normal circulation, it would be all but impossibly to have this much wear on the reverse, yet only minor wear to the highest points on the obverse. We can safely assume this appearance of worn die results from a worn die.

Look very carefully at the lettering on the right side of the reverse for which I have provided this enlargement :

Note the one or two very course raised lines that come off each letter and run towards the rim of the coin. Also note the many very fine lines that radiate from each letter towards the rim. Those are areas where, due to extreme die wear, very fine groves developed in the die and caused fine raised lines on the coin. That is clear and very direct evidence of a deteriorated die.

Look at the head of Virtus on the reverse:

There appears to be heavy wear evenly over the entire area, but there is no sharper details on the lower points. As discussed above, coins do not wear this way in normal circulation. At the same time we see more of the radiating very fine lines to the left of the figure, extending from the body, through the arm, and out towards the edges. On a well worn coins these lines would be worn away, so their presence tells us the coin is not actually worn.

Since the coin has features that prove it is not well worn, yet it has the appearance of being well worn, we know the appearance has to be caused by having been struck from a worn die.

Theoretically a weak strike might make it look like this, but weak strike would affect both sides relativly evenly, so that can also be eliminated as the cause.

Something that is important to keep in mind is that with respect to price, it really does not matter if a coin is worn appearing due to actual wear, or worn appearing due to having been struck form a worn die. A coin struck from worn dies that looks like a fine is not worth any more than a coin that looks like a fine because it is worn to a fine.

HOME