What is the technical meaning of "uniface"?

I've found several definitions of “uniface”. Two examples:

• coinsblog.ws: A coin or medal struck on one side intentially or otherwise. The other side is blank.
• americanmint.com: A coin with a design on only one side. And “design” is defined: The design is the particular image or motif displayed on the coin, such as a person’s face, a Lady Liberty, or a landmark.

Other definitions I found were somewhere in between those two.

1. Both of the definitions would call N#214611 uniface.
2. I think both definitions would intend to call N#294546 uniface, but there is a design on the reverse (visible from the strike through).
3. For many Chinese cast coins like N#211805 the mold covers both sides. The reverse has an explicit outer and inner ring. But no technical “design” (from the americanmint.com definition above) on the reverse.
4. Some exonumia like N#284924 have struck symbols on the reverse but are called uniface. This fails the first definition, but meets the second as there is no “particular image or motif” on the reverse.

I would call 1 and 2 uniface, but say that 3 and 4 have intentional designs on the reverse and therefore aren't uniface.

How do you define “uniface”?

If you have a formal numismatic dictionary could  you post relevant definitions?

I have assumed it meant a coin that is struck between two dies, one of which is blank (flat … completely featureless).

But I never went looking for a definition. (Shame on me)

Bracteates differ in having been produced with a single die, and I would not call them uniface since neither side is flat and/or lacking a design.

What they have in common is that there is only one die with a design, but the effect of the manufacturing proess is different in the case of a bracteate.

In an attempt to get more discussion I made change requests to remove “uniface” from my examples 3 and 4 – the referees agreed and approved.

I'm not yet convinced bracteates shouldn't be called uniface so I didn't change that entry. (Not that previous usage is always correct, but of the 1265 coins with technique Bracteate there are 908 coins with “uniface” in the description.)

(I also discovered that a search for Bracteate finds more coins than a search for coins for Technique Bracteate. For example, Stargard has a currency of Brakteat with four coins, two of which aren't brakteats.)

Hm, interesting and probably not that easy to define.

A brakteat simply means a thin coin (you can only use one die and on soft ground, otherwise you would rip it apart), there are also half brakteats that were made with two dies (wiki in german).

Personally I would call any object made with a single die uniface, a negative face would still be the first face for me.

So all thin and thick coins with one positive design, as well as hollow or dome shaped coins.

For the cash type coins I always put blank if only the raised borders around the hole and rim are present. They are cast so technically no die is involved (or a conundrum; a single coin/die is used for both sides 🙃).

Also brakteat isn't a currency and probably should be changed on the example you've listed.

I wish you a nice collector's day, colleagues,

   Although I personally suffer - after winning the auction 3 weeks ago, I can't get the seller to send it, he has the money right from the second day after the auction.

To the point,,definition-Uniface,,

Our "Encyclopedia of Numismatics and Nathophilia":

-He doesn't know the definition for coins

-it only deals with banknotes

translation:  a banknote with only one side, which is most often referred to as an obverse (also unilateral notes)

+ an example is the mentioned banknote

In my opinion, it was not solved in the past, and the view of the label is defined together, and the one-sided coin Mr. Google will immediately show in all its beauty.

Ahoj Ivan

Maybe we are mixing “uni-die” (manufacturing technique) and “uni-face” (the appearance of the resulting coin).  ANd maybe it doesn't matter.

Bracteate applied to coins is a “uni-die” technique that gives an object with a design on both sides, one side having the incuse and mirror-image design of the other side (or something like this).  

Uniface is a process of some sort (I assume it could involve the use of two dies, one of which is not engraved) that gives an object with a design on only one side.   

We also do this with klippe and scyphate.

In my opinion klippe is only a manufacturing technique, not a shape (the shape is usually square irregular, rectangular irregular, octagonal etc, all of which we have as options).

Likewise, for me, scyphate is primarily a 3-dimentional shape (if we have it as a technique, then we are differentiating curved dies from flat dies… but I think bracteates also use curved dies 😵‍💫).

For another thread …

A brakteat for me is a hammered uniface coin with on its reverse the incuse image of the obverse.

I had a revelation about uniface unrelated to the precise definition: An item can be uniface, but uniface isn't a good description of the reverse of an item. To say “the reverse is uniface” means the reverse is printed/engraved/struck on one side, which means the reverse has content and so the item isn't uniface.

The reverse for a uniface item is blank (or “not printed” or “has no design” or “the incuse image of the obverse”).

bjherbison

I had a revelation about uniface unrelated to the precise definition: An item can be uniface, but uniface isn't a good description of the reverse of an item. To say “the reverse is uniface” means the reverse is printed/engraved/struck on one side, which means the reverse has content and so the item isn't uniface.

 

The reverse for a uniface item is blank (or “not printed” or “has no design” or “the incuse image of the obverse”).

I agree (mostly).

Yes, a uniface item could have “blank,” “not printed” or “no design" for the reverse description, but should not have “uniface” as the reverse description.  Uniface is only appropriate as a coin/banknote overall descriptor.

However, for coins, an incuse image of the obverse is still a design, and is not blank (which is why I do not consider bracteates as uniface, even if nobody else agrees with this viewpoint).

tdziemia

 

However, for coins, an incuse image of the obverse is still a design, and is not blank (which is why I do not consider bracteates as uniface, even if nobody else agrees with this viewpoint).

I totally agree!

In french reverse description of Bracteate I always write “Représentation incuse de l'avers”.

I think we could have a nice feature deactivating the reverse fields when “bracteate” is selected as technique, and replacing by the same descriptions everywhere