Clash Marks as an Educational Tool

[TomB]

Quite often, especially on early Federal coinage, we read about coins with odd striking characteristics.

 

The term "weakly struck" is commonly used to describe early half dollars, particularly the Capped Bust half series. A "poorly aligned collar" can be seen on many mid-18th century proof pieces. Coins struck from "abraded dies" are a phenomenon that plagues early Buffalo nickels and Lincoln cents. Perhaps most ubiquitous are the use of the terms "struck through" and "clash marks".

 

Clash marks, I believe they were called "suction marks" a century ago, occur when a die pair come together to strike a planchet while there is no planchet in place. The resulting steel-on-steel impact will leave residual design elements from one die of the pair onto the other. Thereafter, if the die is not reworked, shattered or worn out, each coin struck using that die will show a ghost image of the other die, either in part or in whole.

 

The coin illustrated here is an 1805 Draped Bust quarter that has severe clash marks on the reverse. The obverse is lightly marked, but the reverse retains nearly the entire outline of Ms Liberty clearly visible in-hand.

If one views the obverse first, one thing that is immediately noticed is the almost complete absence of an E in LIBERTY. The knee-jerk reaction would be to call this a strike through error. However, if one overlays the obverse and reverse images it is clear that one of the high points of the reverse, the eagle's tail, directly juxtaposes the missing letter. In this case, we can tell that a strike through is not the cause, but that an incomplete or weak strike may be the culprit. I would cut this particular coin some slack and state that the early Mint did not have the technology to adequately strike most of their designs, hence the rapid design modifications within series, and that it was the norm rather than the exception to have an incomplete or weak strike.

The reverse of this coin is very interesting as the coin in-hand retains the entire outline of Ms Liberty. The images may not portray the dramatic effect this has, but I will describe some of the lines that are apparent. The pair of lines coming out of the middle cloud and going through OF are the bottom drapery bust lines from the obverse. Ms Liberty's nose, eye ball and top of her forehead are visible as a tracing between the olive branch, lower quarter of the wing and the shield. The back of her head is clearly seen between the arrows and the shield while her intricate bow, where we get the term "fillet head" for this series, is seen below the E PLURIBUS. Lastly, her myriad curls can be seen interwoven in the stars of the reverse field.

 

This coin is incredibly cool and we can learn from it. By being able to see the negative image of the obverse portrayed upon the reverse it is apparent where the high points for each die in a pair are placed. This allows one to distinguish wear from a weak strike; to tease apart a strike through from an incomplete strike; and to understand why certain elements do not show up well when other parts of the coin, even if they are very close in space, show up beautifully.

 

Enjoy!

[stman]

Very interesting and informative post Tom. It's hard for me to see all the clashing,

but when I have a bit more time I'll save the images and look with interest.

 

I did indeed learn something here. And thanks for taking the time to do this!

[cpm9ball]

Tom, I'm a little confused. Are you saying that the absence of the "E" is the result of a die clash or that it is an example of a weak or incomplete strike?

 

Since the eagle's tail is "raised" on the coin, it would be "recessed" on the die. How could a die clash result in the missing "E"?

 

If it were the result of a weak or incomplete strike, how could the adjacent letters, "B" & "R", be relatively bold?

 

Could it not be the result of the "E" on the die filled with compacted debris?

 

Please bear with me, I'm trying to learn.

 

Chris

[airplanenut]

Here's one of my newest pieces... it's got a little bit of clashing

 

 

[TomB]

The near absence of the E is not from a clashed die. In the original post I wrote, regarding the near missing letter-

that an incomplete or weak strike may be the culprit

When a coin is struck there is a tremendous amount of pressure and of heat generated that act upon the metal. This forces the metal into the recessed areas of the die. In this case, relatively deeply recessed areas for the eagle's tail feathers and the E of LIBERTY directly face one another, on opposite sides of the planchet. The striking process forces metal into these recessed areas, however, there was either insufficient strike pressure or not enough metal to fully raise the recessed areas of each die. Quite often in our early Federal coinage our designs were too intricate, and less well spatially prepared, to allow sufficient metal to fill out each detail.

 

The reason for B and R to be bold is because there is relatively little on the reverse design that directly faces them, please see the clash mark overlay that I provided, and so the metal is free to flow in one direction and to provide a fully formed letter. I highly doubt that the E was filled with any debris as this is a common feature on these coins and the tail feathers are one of the high points of the reverse design.

 

I hope I was clear this time.

[michael]

[Hoot]

however, there was either insufficient strike pressure or not enough metal to fully raise the recessed areas of each die.

 

Isn't it also possible that a clash could have made the incuse portion of the die where the E was a bit more volumous? That would make the trouble of metal flow in that area even more difficult than usual. Just a thought.

 

Nice post, Tom.

 

Hoot

[cpm9ball]

The near absence of the E is not from a clashed die. In the original post I wrote, regarding the near missing letter-

that an incomplete or weak strike may be the culprit

When a coin is struck there is a tremendous amount of pressure and of heat generated that act upon the metal. This forces the metal into the recessed areas of the die. In this case, relatively deeply recessed areas for the eagle's tail feathers and the E of LIBERTY directly face one another, on opposite sides of the planchet. The striking process forces metal into these recessed areas, however, there was either insufficient strike pressure or not enough metal to fully raise the recessed areas of each die. Quite often in our early Federal coinage our designs were too intricate, and less well spatially prepared, to allow sufficient metal to fill out each detail.

 

The reason for B and R to be bold is because there is relatively little on the reverse design that directly faces them, please see the clash mark overlay that I provided, and so the metal is free to flow in one direction and to provide a fully formed letter. I highly doubt that the E was filled with any debris as this is a common feature on these coins and the tail feathers are one of the high points of the reverse design.

 

I hope I was clear this time.

 

Thanks, Tom! Now I understand. Great thread.

 

Chris

[Calypso]

Wonderful Tom, great imagery!

[ClassicsRule-migration]

Neat post. While I find clash marks interesting at a certain level, like if you are into die varieties and so forth, I really do not like them on my own coins - I prefer coins from "perfect" dies.

[Mozin]

TomB,

 

Great stuff!