USA 1943/1942-S Cent Verified! Now certifiable by PCGS.
CaptHenway
Posts: 31,564 ✭✭✭✭✭
Press release. For general release.
5-24-2022
1943/1942-S Lincoln Cent Discovered
Previously Known 1943-S Doubled Die Obverse Cent
Discovered to Actually Be a 1943/1942-S Overdate
By Tom DeLorey
ANA LM-1696
About 45 years ago, collector Del Romines came into my office at Coin World’s Collectors Clearinghouse with two well-worn 1943-P nickels that he thought were 1943/2-P overdates. I thought that he might be right, so I took pictures of his coins, published them in Coin World, and asked if anybody had a higher grade specimen that could verify the overdate. One week later a member of my local coin club, Bern Nagengast, cherrypicked a sharp BU specimen at a coin show, and the 1943/42-P Jefferson nickel was confirmed. At the time people were amazed that it had taken almost 35 years for the overdate to be noticed.
About a month ago longtime collector James Elliott contacted me via the Internet and said that another collector in the die variety collecting field, Pete Apple, had recommended that he contact me about a 1943-S cent that he had with a known Doubled Die Obverse that he thought was also a 1943/2-S overdate. As with Del Romines and his 1943/42-P nickels, I think he is right, and my fellow die variety specialists Bill Fivaz, John Wexler and James Wiles agree with me, as does noted Lincoln cent specialist and author David Lange. In our unanimous opinion, the 1943/1942-S cent is a true overdate!
Though it is a known die variety, and has been for many years, it has only ever been recognized for its die doubling. It is currently listed as such in the “Cherrypickers’ Guide” by Bill Fivaz and the late J.T. Stanton as variety FS-101 (019.5) among the 1943-S cents. [The (019.5) number is an obsolete reference number from the earlier editions of the CPG, which is noted because it might be found on older TPG slabs.]
The misalignment of the designs between the 1942-dated hub and the 1943-dated hub pivots around a spot on the left obverse rim. Because of this swing the coin shows only trivial doubling on the word LIBERTY close to the pivot point, but some fairly strong doubling almost due North and South at the base of the 1. There is similar doubling under the top curve of the 9 and along the right side the leg of the 9. There is extra metal below the sharp left angle of the 4 that corresponds in scale to the doubling on the 1 and the 9. Fairly rare early die state coins will also show similar doubling on the base of the 4, but this feature apparently was either worn off or polished off of the die early in its die life.
Elliott gets the credit for first suggesting that the doubled die was actually an overdated die, ever since he asked the question back in July of 2020 in a private online forum, “Lincoln Cent Errors and Varieties Only,” on Facebook. As he pointed out, “the extra metal to the upper right side of the 3 matches a 2.” He provided an overlay to show how an underlying 2 could account for that extra metal. As my colleagues and I have confirmed, this extra metal does not line up with any part of the 3 if the entire 1943 date is doubled in a North-South direction, the same way that the 1 and the 9 and the 4 are doubled.
As seen in the attached overlay of a 1943 date and a 1942 date created by die variety specialist Dr. James Wiles, owner of the Variety Vista website, the high arched curve of the upper right part of a 2 falls into the field to the right of the top of the 3. Study the pictures of the overdate, and see that the blob of raised metal to the right of the top of the 3 cannot align with any part of a 3 that is doubled only North and South.
There is extra metal inside the top of the 3 that corresponds with the upper left curve of the 2, though its similarity to the upper left curve of the 3 must be acknowledged. However, it does seem to match the angle of the upper left curve of the 2 more than that of the 3. There is extra metal below the center “tine” of the 3 that corresponds with the lower left curve of the 2, above the base of the 2 (which is not present).
If you are wondering why there is nothing else inside the bottom of the 3, look at the images of normal 1942 and 1943 dates and see that the 2 is rather short, the same height as the 4, while the 3 is much taller, the same height as the 9. Only a 3 could be down there if the 3 were doubled, and there is nothing.
Why is the base of the 2 missing and the upper right curve of the 2 weak? This is a function of the hubbing process. Back then blank dies were polished down to a very shallow cone on the end to help the positive steel hub transform the negative steel die more effectively. As the hub came into contact with the die blank the center of the design would form first, and then spread outwards as the hub sank deeper and deeper into the die.
Eventually the die became work hardened from all this pressure, and so the hub stopped entering the conical die blank before the design impression had reached out all the way to the rim of the die. The die now needed to be annealed, or heated in an oven to a certain temperature and allowed to cool slowly overnight. This softened the die steel. On the next working day it was put back under a design hub for another impression. Sometimes this process had to be repeated more than once, depending upon the diameter and relief of the design, the skill of the annealer, the skill of the hubber, etc., etc.
If the second (or third) hub impression happened to be from a different hub with a different date, the result should be an overdate “IF” the earlier date was sufficiently formed during the previous impression(s). Dual date hubbing could have happened near the end of any calendar year when the Engraving Department was still producing dies for current usage from the current year’s hub while simultaneously producing dies from the next year’s hub in order to have some ready to be used on January 2nd.
The same thing happened with the 1909/8 gold double eagle, the 1918/7-D nickel, the 1918/7-S quarter, the 1942/41-P&D dimes, and the 1943/42-P nickel. It has been speculated that it is no coincidence that six of the seven modern hubbed overdates occurred during wartime, when the Mint would be less inclined to scrap out a blundered but perfectly usable die. It is also possible that one or more of the skilled hubbers was off serving his country in the military.
On this particular die the outer parts of the design, such as IN GOD WE TRUST, were not formed by the first impression, and so they could not be doubled by the second impression of the hub. Over in the word LIBERTY, the BERTY shows some very trivial die doubling (being close to the pivot point), while the LI show no doubling at all because they did not exist before the second hubbing. The upper right curve of the 2 was incompletely formed by the first hubbing, while the flat base of the 2 was not formed because it lies closer to the rim.
Something similar can be seen on the 1943/42-P nickel, on which the top of the date is closest to the rim. It shows a strong base of the 2 from the original hubbing, but not the center or top of the 2. The result was a 3 over a partial 2. By contrast, if only the bases of LIBERTY and IN GOD WE TRUST were formed by the 1942 hub impression, the letters were simply finished normally by the subsequent 1943 impression.
Several specimens of the 1943/1942-S cent have been examined. Only the earliest die states show doubling at the bottom of the upright of the 4. Middle to later die states show some strong vertical die polish lines, as might have been caused by the use of an emery stick to clean the die, in the field above the date.
The die variety will continue to be listed in the “Cherrypickers Guide” as FS-101, though a new description of it will be forthcoming. The description in the Numismatic Guaranty Company’s Variety Plus archives will also be amended.
I would like to thank James Elliott for having the wisdom to look at “what everybody knows is so” and asking questions. I would also like to thank Bill Fivaz, David Lange, John Wexler and Dr. James Wiles for their invaluable contributions in adding yet another overdate to the canon of American die varieties. To those of you who were amazed when I published the 1943/42-P nickel some 35 years after it was first struck, all I can say 79 years after the 1943/1942-S was first struck is: “KEEP LOOKING!!!”
Pictures to follow
Comments
Wow!
Can’t wait to see the pictures.
Wayne
Kennedys are my quest...
(Pic. 1) The 1943/1942-S Lincoln cent, FS-101, in an early die state with doubling under the bottom of the upright of the 4. Photo courtesy Numismatic Guaranty Company’s Variety Plus archive. Used with permission.
(Pic. 2) The 1943/1942-S Lincoln cent, FS-101.Since all four digits were rehubbed we are using the entire 1942 as the underdate. Photo courtesy Numismatic Guaranty Company and David Lange. Used with permission.
(Pic. 3) The 1943/1942-S Lincoln cent, FS-101, with arrows highlighting the remains of the 2. Photo courtesy Dr. James Wiles. Used with permission.
(Pic. 4) Full obverse of the 1943/42-S cent. Photo courtesy Numismatic Guaranty Company and David Lange. Used with permission.
(Pic. 5) Photographic overlay a normal 1943 date positioned a bit north of a normal 1942 date, created by Dr. James Wiles. Used with permission.
(Pic. 6&7) Closeups of the dates on normal 1942 and 1943 cents. Photos courtesy Numismatic Guaranty Company and David Lange. Used with permission.
(Pic. 8&9) Full obverses of normal 1942 and 1943 cents. Photos courtesy Numismatic Guaranty Company and David Lange. Used with permission.
(Pic. 10) Closeup of LIBERTY on the 1943/1942-S Lincoln cent, showing very minimal die doubling on the BERTY because this area was so close to the pivot point. Photo courtesy Numismatic Guaranty Company’s Variety Plus archive. Used with permission.
An early die state would be extremely helpful. 😒
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
@CaptHenway, I have only the upmost respect for this work. It is truly fantastic, and and exemplary description and effort. I unfortunately have none of the years of knowledge and respect that you have gained with your decades of experience.
With that being said, I would like to respectfully disagree. As much as I would love to agree, I'm afraid the coins show something different. Take anything I say with a grain of salt, as I have nowhere near the knowledge you have.
Anyways, here's why I disagree. The hub appears to have been slightly adjusted south and slightly west when the first impression occurred, before the final and last hubbing was completed. Some die states in CoinFacts show low elements of that initial 3, though is is well blended in to the final impression.
As you said, this could not be true if a 2 was impressed first, and I must agree with that statement. However, as the images show, the impression does continue below, leading to my opinion against a 42/43.
Using your images, I can also see a downward die line (very faint) that does not match the shape of a 2, while also going against the flow of the die wear. Here they are:
Once again, exemplary work. I, however, still see the evidence of a 43/43. Thanks for sharing!
Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.
Kudos to the research, but I’m not sold on it being a ‘43/42. The base of the 2 would have to be much lower. I see a 43/43 also. Sort of looks like the ‘63/3-D.
Yup. I'm try hard to see it as an overdate but it's just not there.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Interesting. Why would they rehub the entire date?
Because each hub had a complete date, and two different hubs were used.
Ah.....
Are there other examples of this? I really can't think of any though varieties are not a primary interest of mine.
The 1960 Large over Small Date and Small over Large Date cents.
Pic 1 is an early die state.
This die never did have a full underdate, like the 1942/41-P dime. It had a partially hubbed underdate, like the 1943/42-P nickel.
Look at a picture of a 1916/1916 nickel. The first hub impression did not form a full date. The last hub impression did. The 2 on this die was incomplete.
What's the over/under in days until album makers add a hole for it and everybody (well, almost everybody) freaks out because their Lincoln set isn't complete anymore?
1916 DDO nickel. Full date over partially-hubbed date.
http://varietyvista.com/03 Buffalo Nickels/DDO 1916.htm
Fantastic find!! I need to check my inventory of better grade 43-S cents.
Thanks for the details Tom. Congratulations!
Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )
Ah, yes... thanks for reminding me.
My first comment was using my phone for viewing. Viewing the images at home, with a larger screen, make quite a bit of difference!
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
@CaptHenway... Thank you for the detailed explanation and those excellent pictures. Very impressive detective work. I probably do not have one, though I have a lot of '43 cents that I will look through - hopefully this week. Cheers, RickO
The mark on the far right curve of the bottom half of the 3 on your image appears to be a small contact mark. There is nothing there on my three closeups of the overdated die, or the four BU's I have sitting on my desk. I really must return them now.
The vague hint of a horizontal line leading right from the extra metal below the center tine of the 3 on my Pic. 1 appears to line up with the top of the base of the 2 on the overlay. However, it is so vague I did not think I should mention it.
I hope that this publicity turns up an even earlier die state than my Pic. 1. Happy hunting!
TD
Who is in charge of die varieties at our gracious hosts?
From what I understand, the PCGS variety folks refer to a published listing of varieties; CPG, Redbook, etc. and other specific specialists listed at;
https://www.pcgs.com/varietyfaq
I did not see a specialist for Lincoln Cents though.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
This post stopped me right in my tracks! I usually peruse the posts daily, and when this one showed up, it immediately got my full attention.
The premise that overdated dies were missed during manufacture and production used to be my belief. I, however, now am of the opinion that because of the war and the extreme need for minor coins, the dies were purposefully allowed to escape the inspectors scrutiny and let through.
Great presentation, Tom. An equally great effort to bring this new overdate to the light of day.
Pete
do you know if much study was done for 1942 (pds) (edited from 1942-s) cent diagnostics that may have survived the process the dies went through?
obviously tons of research/work was done here and the in wwi/wwii era, it is no far stretch rehub/overdates exist that we are unaware of and may/will be uncovered.
also, did i miss something about why the mm appears to be unaffected? the odds of the mm lining up is pretty slim.
great presentation!
@LanceNewmanOCC
Mint marks were added to the dies independent of the hubbing process, which is why one of the identifiers of MD is a doubled mint mark. Essentially, after the die was made they took a punch and added it.
Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.
Mint marks were not added to the hubs until the 1990's.
the 1943/2 nickel, 1942/1 dime, 1909/8 Double eagle, 1918/7 nickel and quarter
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
.
edited my comment to accommodate all mints since we don't know where which die went after hubbing.
Sure we do. Since all dies were hubbed and prepared for shipment at the Philadelphia Mint, the ones destined for the Branch Mints got their dies after the appropriate mintmark was hammered in.
That's the way it was done in 1943.
..............at least I think that's what you mean.
Pete
I did study normal 1942 and 1943 cents looking for any hub difference that might have survived the dual hubbing, but I could not find anything.
As others have already pointed out, the mint marks were not on the hubs. If you look at the 1969-S DDO cenbt, for example, the date is doubled but the mint mark is not.
Wow congrats on the great find and an amazing discovery for the numismatic community!
Young Numismatist/collector
75 Positive BST transactions buying and selling with 45 members and counting!
instagram.com/klnumismatics
Interesting situation because the variety is already published, but only as a Doubled Die. It may be some time before we see a printed volume with a new description.
NGC's Variety Plus writeup has been changed to acknowledge it as an overdate, so I assume that they will be putting the overdate on the labels. I just thought that our hosts should be made aware of the situation so that they could consider doing likewise.
TD
Thank you, but James Elliott made the discovery. I merely helped him prove it and publish it.
This is an interesting question. I have identified a variety that is, in my opinion, way more obvious. I have also had unanimous support in the identification of my discovery. I have been told that until it shows up in a major book (like the Cherrypickers' Guide or specialty book on a series) then it is not really going to get attention at PCGS. The most recent significant exception that I know of is the 1919 DDO Merc. Granted, you have the advantage of having 512 experts that seem to agree, so that's good. And it is also published in Coin World. But, we all know that not all varieties that make it into books get added to the PCGS variety registry sets. You can provide all the evidence you want but if it seems too minor or not obvious enough to the general peanut gallery, it won't make it in. Based on this thread, I would lean towards it not making it in...but of course I am a Coin Politics Outsider and my opinions count for nothing.
Playing the roll of devil's advocate, I know if I would have posted a thread like this, it would have received two or three replies and they would have gone something like this... Too minor, not what you say it is, looks like a couple of die chips, now that you have blown it up to the size of a couple of dinner plates, blow it up ten times larger...blah blah blah....and the thread would fall off to page 17 in 24 hours.
Going back to the Cherrypickers' Guide, I have a feeling a new edition will never be released and someone needs to buy them out and take it over for there to be anything that happens. The Sixth Edition Volume II has been worked on since about 2015 or so and just doesn't seem to be happening.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
Here's another example. Photo courtesy of collector John Smith.
This is a great discovery, and a great post about it. I wish I still had the one I cherrypicked and sold.
I am wondering how our host would label this.
Wayne
Kennedys are my quest...
I would hate to have to cross mine over over to NGC if PCGS doesn't change their designation on the label and soon. I have one raw xf and one 66. This is the type of attention it needs to get the bids up to at least close to the guide price.
http://www.silverstocker.com
Anyone can PM me Any Time about Any thing.
Who is in charge of varieties here?
.
don't know if you made any headway yet but i do recall a thread(s) about the former (head?) attributer Mike Farone, i think, and the gentleman that came after and him. i gotta believe considering the people you consult with from year to year, you'd have your answer pretty quickly.
it probably won't turn up anything but did you also look at the off-metals? 43-bronze, as you noted about not finding any matching similarities, mainly because the rehubbing would have wiped any of them out but after seeing what i've seen (and the immense amount of material you've seen), ya never know (sometimes lightning strikes) and while you all probably did nail this one and it is a 43/42 and not a 43/43 (the former wouldn't make much sense) and also not a ddo
is there really any difference between rehubbing and ddo/ddr etc? granted, overdates do change this up a bit and happen significantly less often. why don't we see more doubled dates on ddo/tdo etc or am i just not paying enough attention? pivot points perhaps?
either way, no need to respond unless you want, just throwing some things out there that may or may not help.
i do love after all the time the usa has been doing its own coinage, even in 2021/2022 we all are STILL uncovering/updating neat finds like this. who knows what is to come!
Has anyone done an overlay yet with the 2s? To these eyes it looks like a simple DDO shifted south
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
The fifth picture at the start of the thread is an overlay.
Edited to add: If you move one 3 up or down relative to the other 3, it never, ever shows that bulge to the right of the top of the 3. That is where the back of the 2 sticks out on the overlay.
Thanks
Ok I kind of see it, not a slam dunk though.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
well, just for participation, study and posterity, after doing some overlays, i couldn't get the 3 to line up properly over the other 3. depsite how much taller the 3 is than the 2, the top bar of the 3 and the middle are not far enough apart to account for something to be sticking out of the top outer curve of the 3 AND below the middle bar, yet the 2 when overlaid, matches these distances spot-on. i wasn't in 100% agreement and i do like the idea of peer-reviews so the main reason for posting is just because i thought there was a chance it wasn't an over-date but now it seems obvious. the beauty is because of the shapes/dimensions/font or whatever you call it, the 3 and the 2 simply cover different spaces at key points here.
enjoy.
i wasn't going to post the overlay but since i had the images in paint.net, the mock-up was pretty quick and easy and could be much better but it seems pretty obvious after doing the overlays.
Are we suggesting that all 43-S DDO's are overdates rather than doubled dies?
.
just this one, far as i know.
http://varietyvista.com/01a LC Doubled Dies Vol 1/1943SDDO001.htm
https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1943-s-1c-ddo-fs-101-019-5/37822
So all 43-s fs-101 would actually be an over date rather than a doubled die. Interesting re-establishment of an existing variety.
Great Stuff! Good on you!!
WS
for anyone wondering about the discoverer, Capt mentioned it in the OP - Pete Apple. CORRECTED as the discoverer is James Elliott. ty Capt.
No, the discoverer was James Elliott. He looked at one of the DDO coins and figured out that the extra metal to the right of the top of the 3 could not be from another 3. He then set out to prove it. Pete Apple referred him to me.
TD