Options
1909-S/S $10 Indian. Unlisted?
Insider2
Posts: 14,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
Breen#7108 lists a 1909-S/S $10 Indian. The first "S" was punched to the right of the strong mint mark. There is one imaged in an ANACS slab on the ToughCoins web site.
A friend sent me an image of a different 1909-S/S $10 Indian. Anyone have another? The coin is polished. 
0
Comments
Looks like a hit to me.
BHNC #203
Thanks Frank! Did you enter my new contest ?
The top coin isn't an RPM imo.
Thanks. Both images are the same coin. I see notching at the base and outline on the curve. There is even a hint of the outer curve from different punch (triple punch?). I have found that when a date has one RPM, there is often another. I think it is an RPM.
Nevertheless, two No votes so far and IMO YOUR opinion counts for 10 NO votes!
Didn't realize that -
It looks like it's an RPM, west of the right
curve of the S. It's strange that the top
photo doesn't show that. A very small thin line
does show in the top photo, but that's why
I thought it was a diff. coin.
It could also be metal flow - as shown in the
surrounding areas, but I'd go with RPM.
The outer curve 'line' could be damage,
like the bottom of the serif.
I did!
BHNC #203
Here are two of the three repunched mintmark 1909-S varieties identified so far. I do not yet have a good photo of the 3rd RPM. (This is part of research for a forthcoming book on the Saint-Gaudens Eagles 1907-1933.)
RPM variety 1 (multiple die states); most commonly seen RPM for 1909-S. This might actually be triple punched since the curve and right, and serif at left cannot have come from the same S punch:
RPM variety 2:
There are also three distinctly different S punches.
Thanks, Roger...knowledge is power! I just told him to send it off for a generic S/S attribution until the RPM get's assigned a # in print.
This is the basic S mintmark style and position of 1909:
Also known in a slightly lower location in relation to the arrow head. (The curve to lower right appears to be superficial damage and not part of another S.)
Not to be fussy but I see what looks like the crescent of another "S" punch coming from the right of the lower loop!
I added the "superficial damage" to my post and it probably crossed paths with insider2's comment. However, it raises a good point and highlights why research takes time to do, and that varieties must be verified on multiple examples. On this photo, the coin will get additional scrutiny along with others having the same MM style. We need at least 2 specimens with identical features. Maybe it IS a RPM, and I was wrong about the damage -- that's OK if we catch this stuff early. [The project has been in the works for 2+ years so far.]
Very interesting. So I guess only the minor coinage got the mintmark with the flaw in the upper curve?
Pete
NOT True. If I remember the $5 & $20 have the usual "1909-S" punch with notch at top.
I'm a little busy but I'll check.
That's what I thought, Insider...........no need to rush.
Pete
Answered my own question.....
Pete
1909-S Double Eagle with repunched mintmark. The letter form is similar to that on the Eagle.
One would have thought that sinking a mint mark into a die for gold coinage would have entailed a little bit more "care".
Pete
deleted .... wrong series
I could easily imagine the aggravation of the die-sinker, while muttering "Again? Effin' again again!!!
" contributing somewhat to a lack of diligence 
Dies were "dies" and people were "people." Mistakes were inevitable.
...and beer and pizza Friday's are not a new "perk." Perhaps beer and sausage back then?
Mint marks sure seem to get a lot of 'repunch' action.... and not a lot of diligence when it came to 'cleaning up' the surface. Cheers, RickO
By the time of Saint-Gaudens eagles, punching a mintmark was almost the only manual part of die making. They had little alignment jigs, but a guy with the punch and a 2-1/2 lb hammer working on a small die.
I wonder how many dies were ruined?
I'll bet not many because some misplaced mint marks and RPM are way off.