| Author |
Message |
 StevenExpert Member
Posts: 1298
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Location: S/E Missouri
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 7:09 pm |
 |
|
Patterns in the dirt or old glue on fell off. What do ya think? I don't believe the positioning or the style is right for an S MM of a 1909????
Steven
|
|
|
|
|
 |
GabeSenior Member
Posts: 691
Joined: 11 Jul 2003
Location: Gainesville, FL
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:03 pm |
|
|
Very interesting. It looks to me like a mint mark that fell off.
_________________
-Gabe
|
|
|
|
|
|
 eagamesExpert Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:13 pm |
|
|
Steven,
I think you got it right that it's a glue mark.
An old time dealer told me that years ago somebody sold copper trees with S mintmarks to be broken off and glued on like they sell detail parts for models. He said that many collectors filled holes with them to complete their sets. Those coins are still out there to bug us.
_________________
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
 RobertSenior Member
Posts: 896
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Location: Oklahoma
|
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:18 pm |
|
|
Based on the shape of the "S" mintmarks on the 1909S/S page (http://www.coppercoins.com/lincoln/dietype.php?date=1909&die_mint=s&die_type=mm&page=0), I think the "S" on your coin is not of the correct type. That is, I think it was an added mintmark of some kind that fell off.
The "real" mintmark seems to be bulbous and thick at the bottom curve and the bottom serif itself is "blocky". The top half and bottom half of the mintmark are about equal in size. It's "symmetrical" about a horizontal axis.
The shadow of a mintmark on your coin seems to me to be larger on the bottom than on the top. The bottom serif isn't nearly as "blocky" as on the real mintmark and the bottom curve is much "thinner".
The top serif on your coin even seems to be thinner and "pointier" than the real one.
My two cents. I could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 DickExpert Member
Posts: 5780
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Location: Rialto, CA.
|
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:54 am |
|
|
I'm with you Robert. The style of the "glue-on", is not rhe same style on the '09-S. I checked the site, and the one used , and "placed" in the mint is heavier than the skinny one that has left a faint impression. I think the genuine "S" is the same as one of the three used on the '46-S cents.
Dick
_________________
" Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard this bull before".
|
|
|
|
|
|
eagamesExpert Member
Posts: 3013
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
|
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 10:08 am |
|
|
46-S uses 3 different styles, 4 if you count the upside down ones 
I read someplace that 09-S and 10-S are the same.
_________________
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
|
wavysteps2003Expert Member
Posts: 1344
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
|
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:56 pm |
|
|
Ed - you had it right the first time about the 1946-S Lincoln cent having three different mint marks. The inverted mint mark is actually a ball serif or trumpet tail mint mark, the least common of the three used for that year, that was turned upside down.
As for the mint mark used on the 1909, it does not seem familar to any of the Lincoln cent S mint marks used.
WAVYSTEPS2003 aka BJ Neff
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
