@seanq said:
So which of these is RPM#1 and which is RPM#2? I assume from your post above that the RPMs are dies 3 and 6, as they are the only ones not used with the VDB reverse.
Sean Reynolds
Go ahead and post images of the RPM's here and let's take a look at 'em.
I'm glad I did make the request to have those posted here. Got me to thinkin'. Usually, that's a good thing. I'm not so sure that one of the RPMs is really an 's' over a horizontal 's' though.
Have seen many pieces from that die under a microscope, some of them high grade from an early die state. It is UNQUESTIONABLY an S over a horizontal S.
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Author "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," due out late 2025.
I would be very interested in seeing the pictures of a known counterfeit, especially one good enough to get slabbed.
#38363500 purchased March 2020. Old school counterfeit. Was made from a genuine 1909-S cent with obverse ⑥ having a "new" or "style of 1910" reverse. The V.D.B was etched on using concentrated nitric acid. #38363500 has been removed from PCGS' verification database. ALWAYS buy PCGS certified, especially for expensive key date coins and get their forever "money back" guarantee of authenticity.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
That 20 obverse dies used figure includes the two Indian Head obverses. Also we don't know how many of the 1909-S obverses used to make 1909-SVDB coins were also used to make 1909-S Lincolns.
Somebody could have fun shooting hundreds of 1909-SVDB and 1909-S Lincolns in the exact same enlargement and then overlapping them using the date as the common denominator just to see how many position there really are.
Thanks for correcting me on this detail, Captain. Eighteen obverse dies used then for 1909-S Lincoln cents. It must be true then that the two 1909-S LC RPMs are included in the 18 number?
Here's a close-up picture of date and 's' mintmark that purports to be of the four known 1909-S V.D.B. obverses. I found this picture several years ago and decided to save it. The image in the upper left corner troubles me. The 's' is showing in an even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP. Would like to hear your thoughts about the image in the upper left corner.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
@mr1931S said:
If I get just one request here for it, I will publish the images of my counterfeit 1909-S V.D.B. with comments, my comments, on what to look for so that no one here paying attention will end up with a similarly made counterfeit S V.D.B. in their collection. I actually wish I still had the counterfeit piece in my collection but I had to turn it in to get an authentic replacement (pictured here, #44090046) for it.
I would be very interested in seeing the pictures of a known counterfeit, especially one good enough to get slabbed.
For those of you who wonder about where I got the idea to refer to my unbeknownst-to-me-at-the-time counterfeit 1909-S V.D.B. as having a "whispering V.D.B" I refer you all to Harsche 5th edition, page 13 where Mr. Harsche discusses "faint V.D.B." pieces:
"...It is well known that some 1909-S V.D.B. pieces exist with faint V.D.B. initials (faintest at the bottom of the letters)..."
To learn more, and there is more, a lot more, you all are going to have to purchase your own personal copy of Harsche 5th (or 6th) edition and read for yourself. Anyway, I decided to swap out Harsche's word "faint" with my word, "whispering", to describe the V.D.B. on my piece, a V.D.B. which, indeed, was very faint.
The piece, made from a genuine 1909-S cent, would not have been immersed in C.P. nitric acid for very long to make the V.D.B. since too long an immersion of the entire coin in concentrated acid would have resulted in an overall unnaturally grainy appearance creating unwanted suspicion about authenticity to a coin buyer. That said, I consider that the counterfeiter definitely knew what he was doing with regard to making a fake V.D.B. on my piece.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
@mr1931S said: That 20 obverse dies used figure includes the two Indian Head obverses. Also we don't know how many of the 1909-S obverses used to make 1909-SVDB coins were also used to make 1909-S Lincolns.
Somebody could have fun shooting hundreds of 1909-SVDB and 1909-S Lincolns in the exact same enlargement and then overlapping them using the date as the common denominator just to see how many position there really are.
Thanks for correcting me on this detail, Captain. Eighteen obverse dies used then for 1909-S Lincoln cents. It must be true then that the two 1909-S LC RPMs are included in the 18 number?
Here's a close-up picture of date and 's' mintmark that purports to be of the four known 1909-S V.D.B. obverses. I found this picture several years ago and decided to save it. The image in the upper left corner troubles me. The 's' is showing in an even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP. Would like to hear your thoughts about the image in the upper left corner.
I would be very interested in seeing the pictures of a known counterfeit, especially one good enough to get slabbed
#38363500 purchased March 2020. Old school counterfeit. Was made from a genuine 1909-S cent with obverse ⑥ having a "new" or "style of 1910" reverse. The V.D.B was etched on using concentrated nitric acid. #38363500 has been removed from PCGS' verification database. ALWAYS buy PCGS certified, especially for expensive key date coins and get their forever "money back" guarantee of authenticity.
The six dies used for 1909-S Lincoln Cent are characterized by the position and tilt of the 's', relative to the date:
Die 1- high left, 's' tilts right a great deal.
Die 2- high right.
Die 3-high right, farther right than 2.
Die 4-medium high right, 's' tilts right.
Die 5-low, far right.
Die 6-far low, far right.
@mr1931S said:
None of us was in San Francisco or Philadelphia in 1909 to see exactly what was going on with the making of the then new Lincoln pennies of 1909. Any number of topics, not just numismatics, has it's share of information out there that is inaccurate. I acknowledge that I could be mistaken, have some wrong ideas or misimpressions about how things go down at the mints. Coin collecting is just a hobby. Nobody is going to die if a bit of misinformation finds its way into the hobby we all love. Tactfully done correction is a lost art, at least around here, it seems.
I started this thread mainly to share some of the findings of numismatic pioneer Mr. Bert Harsche not to get into a pissing match about RPMs. Want to discuss RPMs? Do it in another thread. Don't like what I write don't read it. My advice is to stay out of threads like this and avoid commenting if all you have to offer is showing the world how clever you think you are.
@mr1931S said: All of this is nonsense. There are no RPMs known on the 1909-S VDB. Maybe some or all of the four obverses known for the issue were reused later and paired with the non-VDB reverse, but the two obverse dies with an RPM are not among them. Those dies came from Philadelphia with the mintmarks already punched, they were not used and reworked / repunched after striking coins.
Are you reading-with-understanding challenged? Show me where I said there are RPM's for the 1909-S V.D.B. That's right, I never said there are RPMs for 1909-S V.D.B. Since you seem to know a lot about the RPMs for 1909-S without V.D.B. why not start a thread about them instead of trying to hijack this one?
Mod, why is disruption like we are seeing here allowed to occur? Please advise.
Mr. Bert Harsche, numismatic pioneer, produced the earliest work, far as I know, on identifying obverse die varieties for 1909-S Lincoln cents. His work has stood the test of time. I challenge anyone reading this thread to show earlier (before 1973) findings about the various obverse die varieties of 1909-S cents with or without V.D.B. Harsche identified three of the four known obverse dies used to make 1909-S V.D.B. cents. He never did see an example of what we now know to be the 4th one by the time his 5th edition or 6th, and last, edition of Detecting Altered Coins was published. Three of the four obverses used for 1909-S V.D.B. are relatively common and one, the one Harsche never saw, is very scarce, some would say "rare."
A few months, I attempted to contact Mr. Harsche so that I could get him to sign his name to either or both of my copies of "Detecting Altered Coins." I found then that Mr. Harsche passed away a few years earlier. I expressed my condolences through the coin club in Bismark, North Dakota that Mr. Harsche was part of and let them know that if it wasn't for my reading about 1909-S cents in "Harsche" i would probably still be the proud owner of an old school counterfeit 1909-S V.D.B. that had been certified as authentic by PCGS. Yes, my first 1909-S V.D.B. was a counterfeit made well enough to get by the graders of our host here.
What I think happened is that die ② was used to make a relative few 1909-S V.D.B.s and then taken out of service because mint officials were not happy with what they were seeing. Later it returned to service to make some 1909-S without V.D.B. and even later than that a fresh 's' was punched over the lame 's' to make more 1909-S without V.D.B. in order to get more service from die ②.
@mr1931S said:
1909S-1MM-001 S/S NORTHEAST appears to me to have the repunched 's' over the 's' from die ②.
Anyone else seeing that? Die obverse ② was used for 1909-S with V.D.B. and 1909-S without V.D.B. In my opinion, die ② is the "lamest" of the six obverse dies used to make 1909-S Lincoln cents so it doesn't surprise me that a "fix" of it was eventually made by repunching the 's'.
@mr1931S said: All of this is nonsense. There are no RPMs known on the 1909-S VDB. Maybe some or all of the four obverses known for the issue were reused later and paired with the non-VDB reverse, but the two obverse dies with an RPM are not among them. Those dies came from Philadelphia with the mintmarks already punched, they were not used and reworked / repunched after striking coins.
Are you reading-with-understanding challenged? Show me where I said there are RPM's for the 1909-S V.D.B. That's right, I never said there are RPMs for 1909-S V.D.B. Since you seem to know a lot about the RPMs for 1909-S without V.D.B. why not start a thread about them instead of trying to hijack this one?
Mod, why is disruption like we are seeing here allowed to occur? Please advise.
@Old_Collector said:
I find it interesting that the San Francisco mint managed to make such a nice variety of mint mark placement and the 2 RPMs using the single S punch that they used from 1909 through 1915, and then starting in 1916 used the same punch for the rest of wheat Lincolns from that mint.
I suspect that gobs of 1916-S Lincolns suffered having their mintmark shaved off to make counterfeit SVDBs. Indeed, this date in higher (VF or better) grades is not seen in dealer inventories as often as it should despite having an original mintage of 22.51 million pieces.
@BuffaloIronTail said:
Isn't one of the mintmarks a carryover from the 1909-S VDB?
Pete
You will find that all 1909-S V.D.B.s come from four of the obverse dies seen above. Only Die 3 and Die 6 were not used to make 1909-S cents without V.D.B. Here's an image of all four 1909-S obverses for 1909-S V.D.B. I don't know who to credit for this set of images with the helpful reference lines and comments but far as I know it is accurate and can be used with high confidence to identify genuine 1909-S V.D.B.
@mr1931S said:
I don't know who to credit for this set of images with the helpful reference lines and comments but far as I know it is accurate and can be used with high confidence to identify genuine 1909-S V.D.B.
if it is not in the harsche book then why would i even want a harsche book?
To IkesT, MsMorrisine and others: This is not the place to work out your anger issues. Let the past go. What went down in earlier days is not particularly important to what is going down now. It's a new day, a new dawn, if you will. Yes, I wrecked some of my own threads made in earlier days by deleting comments, changing thread titles and the like. I even changed the name I was using here. I once called myself mr1874 in these parts. I changed my name to mr1931s simply because our host here, PCGS, allowed me to do so. I have never, I repeat never, endeavoured to deliberately publish what I know to be false information with intent to mislead. If you catch me publishing some misinformation, something in your eyes that "don't seem quite right", then show me with YOUR evidence why you question it and I will respond in kind.
"if it is not in the harsche book then why would i even want a harsche book?"
You need to answer that question for yourself, Morrisine. I can't help you with this. btw, thank you for so fastidiously documenting my writings like you have using the quote tool. Not only does this activity speak well for you but I feel greatly honored by you doing so.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
I have nothing more to add to this thread at this time. So, you all have a great Thanksgiving and give serious consideration to ordering yourself a copy of Tom DeLorey's (CaptHenway here, of course) book on 1922 Lincoln cents if you have not already done so.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
To IkesT, MsMorrisine and others: This is not the place to work out your anger issues. Let the past go. What went down in earlier days is not particularly important to what is going down now. It's a new day, a new dawn, if you will. Yes, I wrecked some of my own threads made in earlier days by deleting comments, changing thread titles and the like. I even changed the name I was using here. I once called myself mr1874 in these parts. I changed my name to mr1931s simply because our host here, PCGS, allowed me to do so. I have never, I repeat never, endeavoured to deliberately publish what I know to be false information with intent to mislead. If you catch me publishing some misinformation, something that in your eyes that "don't seem quite right", then show me with YOUR evidence why you question it and I will respond in kind.
"if it is not in the harsche book then why would i even want a harsche book?"
You need to answer that question for yourself, Morrisine. I can't help you with this. btw, thank you for so fastidiously documenting my writings like you have using the quote tool. Not only does this activity speak well for you but I feel greatly honored by you doing so.
I have nothing more to add to this thread at this time. So, you all have a great Thanksgiving and give serious consideration to ordering yourself a copy of Tom DeLorey's (CaptHenway here, of course) book on 1922 Lincoln cents if you have not already done so.
@mr1931S said:
Thanks for correcting me on this detail, Captain. Eighteen obverse dies used then for 1909-S Lincoln cents. It must be true then that the two 1909-S LC RPMs are included in the 18 number?
@mr1931S said:
Here's a close-up picture of date and 's' mintmark that purports to be of the four known 1909-S V.D.B. obverses. I found this picture several years ago and decided to save it. The image in the upper left corner troubles me. The 's' is showing in an even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP. Would like to hear your thoughts about the image in the upper left corner.
the op "die #1' and the upper left photo show the mintmarks in slightly different positions and with differing amount of rotation
since at least 14 obverse dies struck S non-vdb cents, don't be looking for the harsche 6 to be complete. even you have said the book only claims 3 obverse dies were used. (see below) so there is no need to be hunting s-vdb "position #4" in those op 6.
@mr1931S said:
Harsche identified three of the four known obverse dies used to make 1909-S V.D.B. cents. He never did see an example of what we now know to be the 4th one by the time his 5th edition or 6th, and last, edition of Detecting Altered Coins was published
@mr1931S said:
Here's a close-up picture of date and 's' mintmark that purports to be of the four known 1909-S V.D.B. obverses. I found this picture several years ago and decided to save it. The image in the upper left corner troubles me. The 's' is showing in an even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP. Would like to hear your thoughts about the image in the upper left corner.
the op "die #1' and the upper left photo show the mintmarks in slightly different positions and with differing amount of rotation
since at least 14 obverse dies struck S non-vdb cents, don't be looking for the harsche 6 to be complete. even you have said the book only claims 3 obverse dies were used. (see below) so there is no need to be hunting s-vdb "position #4" in those op 6.
@mr1931S said:
Harsche identified three of the four known obverse dies used to make 1909-S V.D.B. cents. He never did see an example of what we now know to be the 4th one by the time his 5th edition or 6th, and last, edition of Detecting Altered Coins was published
You need to get with the times, Morrisine. PCGS has identified four, and four only, obverse dies used for 1909-S V.D.B. Harsche identified 3 of those 4 by 1973, before PCGS, our host here, was even a twinkle in it's daddy's eye. Three of those four can be seen in Harsche's pictures in his book, the 5th Edition, copyright 1973. They are shown on a separate page from the six pictures for 1909-S cents that he pictures and can be seen in my OP, a picture I took of the page with my cell phone camera. I've got a 3rd edition Harsche coming to me soon. It's copyright date is 1964. IF that edition shows the three obverses for 1909-S V.D.B. that Bert Harsche has correctly identified then we can update HARSCHE's DISCOVERY to 1964 now can't we?
You said: "no need to be hunting s-vdb "position #4" in those op 6."
Harsche NEVER SAW the 4th position which happens to be ④, as seen in the OP pictures, ON 1909-S V.D.B.
Repeat, stated slightly differently,
NEVER SAW ④ON1909-S V.D.B.
I was going to leave these parts for a time, to possibly return after the Thanksgiving holiday but I couldn't bear seeing your comment about "no need....in those op 6". If you are still confused, ask some pertinent questions and maybe I can clear things up for you.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
@mr1931S said:
Here's a close-up picture of date and 's' mintmark that purports to be of the four known 1909-S V.D.B. obverses. I found this picture several years ago and decided to save it. The image in the upper left corner troubles me. The 's' is showing in an even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP. Would like to hear your thoughts about the image in the upper left corner. lyu6
what troubles you about the upper left photo?
is the "even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP" related to the troubles you have with the upper left photo?
Just as an aside, a comment on the distribution of die varieties within a low mintage year. When I started at ANACS, when it was still just doing Authentification, I learned the die varieties and diagnostics of all of the key dates that we saw a lot of. For 1928 Peace Dollars, there were three obverse dies, Period. This was after the service had seen a few hundred 1928 plain dollars. A couple of years later we identified Obverse #4.
One reason why my book took so long was that every once in a great while I found something new. I had already submitted my "finished" manuscript for consideration when I found a Die Pair #4B coin that was a long-suspected but never proven "No D" die state, and I had to do a quick rewrite of certain sections.
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Author "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," due out late 2025.
@mr1931S said:
Four of the six obverse dies used to make 1909-S Lincoln Cents without V.D.B. were used to make 1909-S cents with V.D.B. The four obverse dies used to make 1909-S with V.D.B. are:
① ② ④ ⑤
from the op pic showing 6 position locations for non-vdb positions: 4 s-vbd: positions are also said to be from positions 1, 2, 4, 5 of the op pic (reposted below) :
@mr1931S said:
Here's a close-up picture of date and 's' mintmark that purports to be of the four known 1909-S V.D.B. obverses. I found this picture several years ago and decided to save it. The image in the upper left corner troubles me. The 's' is showing in an even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP. Would like to hear your thoughts about the image in the upper left corner. lyu6
what troubles you about the upper left photo?
is the "even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP" related to the troubles you have with the upper left photo?
Upper left photo does not appear to show the "chip" in the 's'. The chip manifests as a tiny dot and is clearly visible in the other three pictures. ALL 1909-S cents should have the dot within the upper loop of the 's' mintmark although it may not show in examples with heavy wear. Dirt within the mintmark and damage to the mintmark could prevent one from seeing the dot as well. My genuine S V.D.B. is only PCGS F15 but the dot can be clearly seen. All four of my 1909-S without V.D.B. (PCGS F12, ANACS VF20, raw XF ⑥ ,and raw AU ①) have the dot.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
I acknowledge that Harsche's photographs are poor. They are from the 1960s-1970s and were likely taken with a Polaroid Instamatic (invented 1937). Needless to say, one is not going to see any dots in Harsche's pictures of 1909-S cents even if he knew about them which I'm almost certain he did not. Harsche was a pioneer in S VDB identification. I'm pretty sure his first writings about 1909-S cents both with and without V.D.B. show up for the first time in the 3rd Edition of his pamphlet "Detecting Altered Coins" , copyright 1964. I expect to be able to confirm that when I receive the 3rd edition copy I ordered recently. Copies of "Harsche" are getting harder and harder to find as the years go by. I typed in Harsche first edition and got "huh?" from Google which is supposed to know everything. So I've heard anyway.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
Eve of 11/11/25 and with last post reached 6500 milestone here. Where's the cake, champagne and balloons? I deserve a celebration party doncha all think?
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
The dot is a common characteristic seen in the mint marks on all 1909-1916 “S” Lincoln Cents and is a great first step in authenticating a 1909-S VDB. The notch is very well defined on some examples, but it is often not as strong on others. So, the lack of this dot is, by itself, not a reason to condemn a coin as counterfeit.
The dot is a common characteristic seen in the mint marks on all 1909-1916 “S” Lincoln Cents and is a great first step in authenticating a 1909-S VDB. The notch is very well defined on some examples, but it is often not as strong on others. So, the lack of this dot is, by itself, not a reason to condemn a coin as counterfeit.
The lack of certain characteristics on this mint mark, while not enough to condemn the piece, would have made me give it a second and maybe even a third look back when I was authenticating these. The graininess in the field around the S is also grounds for a closer look. Had I had this under my microscope I would have tipped it up almost on edge and examined where the mint mark met the field, all around the S.
So yes, this coin was not an automatic "Genuine." Might still be, but I would want to see it first.
TD
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Author "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," due out late 2025.
Maybe, in light of the information we now have that there are 16 (presumably, some of which are nearly identical) obverses, a different approach in identifying the S V.D.B. obverses must be taken. I mean, i've been working with poor photographs as seen in Harsche and it may be that I'm trying to get too much out of Harsche considering, especially, that the photographic technology that we have now was not available to researchers like Harsche in the '60s and '70s.
Tom DeLorey, known here as CaptHenway, was successful in identifying the V.D.B. reverse used for 1909-S V.D.B. His work in this area can be found, far as I know, in this very forum. It's a fact that my counterfeit S V.D.B., at the end of a long day, could not pass the V.D.B. test. Mine was a pretty good counterfeit, all things considered, but was exposed at the end of the day as counterfeit because of it's less than perfect V.D.B. However, to this day, I marvel about the precise roundness of the dots on my counterfeit. All three there, albeit faint, but perfectly round. Three perfectly round dots made by using asphalt paint (to resist the acid) and then coin dipped in concentrated nitric acid to make a V.D.B.? Are you kidding me!?
The best approach to take for those of us who want to know for sure how many of the 16 obverses were used for 1909-S V.D.B. might be to first collect a digital database of V.D.B. reverses that have the proper characteristics known to be for 1909-S V.D.B. only.Then subject the obverses with the correct V.D.B. to analysis for 's' position and tilt. Find the obverses one by one, in other words. Then and only then will we be able to solve the S V.D.B. mystery once and for all.
I think what I'll be doing in coming days is looking for more "far out 's'" Lincolns 1909-1916 and continue to work on making a subset to my "complete" Lincoln collection 1909-1974. That'll keep me busy enough and the activity will be a lot more affordable for me than acquiring expensive photographic equipment and 1909-S V.D.B. Lincolns to analyze.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
@MsMorrisine said:
coinfacts has a few hq and high pixels images
Good point. Nab those images and do some overlays. Won't be me doing this work though as I don't have the time, the photographic equipment, not to mention the expertise. I struggle with my cell phone camera for col.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
Comments
Have seen many pieces from that die under a microscope, some of them high grade from an early die state. It is UNQUESTIONABLY an S over a horizontal S.
I would be very interested in seeing the pictures of a known counterfeit, especially one good enough to get slabbed.
#38363500 purchased March 2020. Old school counterfeit. Was made from a genuine 1909-S cent with obverse ⑥ having a "new" or "style of 1910" reverse. The V.D.B was etched on using concentrated nitric acid. #38363500 has been removed from PCGS' verification database. ALWAYS buy PCGS certified, especially for expensive key date coins and get their forever "money back" guarantee of authenticity.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
That 20 obverse dies used figure includes the two Indian Head obverses. Also we don't know how many of the 1909-S obverses used to make 1909-SVDB coins were also used to make 1909-S Lincolns.
Somebody could have fun shooting hundreds of 1909-SVDB and 1909-S Lincolns in the exact same enlargement and then overlapping them using the date as the common denominator just to see how many position there really are.
Thanks for correcting me on this detail, Captain. Eighteen obverse dies used then for 1909-S Lincoln cents. It must be true then that the two 1909-S LC RPMs are included in the 18 number?
Here's a close-up picture of date and 's' mintmark that purports to be of the four known 1909-S V.D.B. obverses. I found this picture several years ago and decided to save it. The image in the upper left corner troubles me. The 's' is showing in an even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP. Would like to hear your thoughts about the image in the upper left corner.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
what happened to the whispering vdb thread(s?) ?
They still exist; mr1931S just tried to cover his tracks by deleting his comments, changing thread titles, and changing his user name.
They’re whispering threads now.
For those of you who wonder about where I got the idea to refer to my unbeknownst-to-me-at-the-time counterfeit 1909-S V.D.B. as having a "whispering V.D.B" I refer you all to Harsche 5th edition, page 13 where Mr. Harsche discusses "faint V.D.B." pieces:
"...It is well known that some 1909-S V.D.B. pieces exist with faint V.D.B. initials (faintest at the bottom of the letters)..."
To learn more, and there is more, a lot more, you all are going to have to purchase your own personal copy of Harsche 5th (or 6th) edition and read for yourself. Anyway, I decided to swap out Harsche's word "faint" with my word, "whispering", to describe the V.D.B. on my piece, a V.D.B. which, indeed, was very faint.
The piece, made from a genuine 1909-S cent, would not have been immersed in C.P. nitric acid for very long to make the V.D.B. since too long an immersion of the entire coin in concentrated acid would have resulted in an overall unnaturally grainy appearance creating unwanted suspicion about authenticity to a coin buyer. That said, I consider that the counterfeiter definitely knew what he was doing with regard to making a fake V.D.B. on my piece.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
Nitric acid is harsche.
I would be very interested in seeing the pictures of a known counterfeit, especially one good enough to get slabbed
I prefer the simplicity of the third edition.
if it is not in the harsche book then why would i even want a harsche book?
To IkesT, MsMorrisine and others: This is not the place to work out your anger issues. Let the past go. What went down in earlier days is not particularly important to what is going down now. It's a new day, a new dawn, if you will. Yes, I wrecked some of my own threads made in earlier days by deleting comments, changing thread titles and the like. I even changed the name I was using here. I once called myself mr1874 in these parts. I changed my name to mr1931s simply because our host here, PCGS, allowed me to do so. I have never, I repeat never, endeavoured to deliberately publish what I know to be false information with intent to mislead. If you catch me publishing some misinformation, something in your eyes that "don't seem quite right", then show me with YOUR evidence why you question it and I will respond in kind.
"if it is not in the harsche book then why would i even want a harsche book?"
You need to answer that question for yourself, Morrisine. I can't help you with this. btw, thank you for so fastidiously documenting my writings like you have using the quote tool. Not only does this activity speak well for you but I feel greatly honored by you doing so.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
I have nothing more to add to this thread at this time. So, you all have a great Thanksgiving and give serious consideration to ordering yourself a copy of Tom DeLorey's (CaptHenway here, of course) book on 1922 Lincoln cents if you have not already done so.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
I think that my 1909-S/horS is a pretty early die stage, looks similar to stage A at Variety Vista.
"if it is not in the harsche book then why would i even want a harsche book?"
yes
the op "die #1' and the upper left photo show the mintmarks in slightly different positions and with differing amount of rotation
since at least 14 obverse dies struck S non-vdb cents, don't be looking for the harsche 6 to be complete. even you have said the book only claims 3 obverse dies were used. (see below) so there is no need to be hunting s-vdb "position #4" in those op 6.
You need to get with the times, Morrisine. PCGS has identified four, and four only, obverse dies used for 1909-S V.D.B. Harsche identified 3 of those 4 by 1973, before PCGS, our host here, was even a twinkle in it's daddy's eye. Three of those four can be seen in Harsche's pictures in his book, the 5th Edition, copyright 1973. They are shown on a separate page from the six pictures for 1909-S cents that he pictures and can be seen in my OP, a picture I took of the page with my cell phone camera. I've got a 3rd edition Harsche coming to me soon. It's copyright date is 1964. IF that edition shows the three obverses for 1909-S V.D.B. that Bert Harsche has correctly identified then we can update HARSCHE's DISCOVERY to 1964 now can't we?
You said: "no need to be hunting s-vdb "position #4" in those op 6."
Harsche NEVER SAW the 4th position which happens to be ④, as seen in the OP pictures, ON 1909-S V.D.B.
Repeat, stated slightly differently,
NEVER SAW ④ ON 1909-S V.D.B.
I was going to leave these parts for a time, to possibly return after the Thanksgiving holiday but I couldn't bear seeing your comment about "no need....in those op 6". If you are still confused, ask some pertinent questions and maybe I can clear things up for you.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
what troubles you about the upper left photo?
is the "even higher left position than ① as seen in the OP" related to the troubles you have with the upper left photo?
Just as an aside, a comment on the distribution of die varieties within a low mintage year. When I started at ANACS, when it was still just doing Authentification, I learned the die varieties and diagnostics of all of the key dates that we saw a lot of. For 1928 Peace Dollars, there were three obverse dies, Period. This was after the service had seen a few hundred 1928 plain dollars. A couple of years later we identified Obverse #4.
One reason why my book took so long was that every once in a great while I found something new. I had already submitted my "finished" manuscript for consideration when I found a Die Pair #4B coin that was a long-suspected but never proven "No D" die state, and I had to do a quick rewrite of certain sections.
from the op pic showing 6 position locations for non-vdb positions: 4 s-vbd: positions are also said to be from positions 1, 2, 4, 5 of the op pic (reposted below) :
list which of 1, 2, 4, 5 pair with the below?
Upper left photo does not appear to show the "chip" in the 's'. The chip manifests as a tiny dot and is clearly visible in the other three pictures. ALL 1909-S cents should have the dot within the upper loop of the 's' mintmark although it may not show in examples with heavy wear. Dirt within the mintmark and damage to the mintmark could prevent one from seeing the dot as well. My genuine S V.D.B. is only PCGS F15 but the dot can be clearly seen. All four of my 1909-S without V.D.B. (PCGS F12, ANACS VF20, raw XF ⑥ ,and raw AU ①) have the dot.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
I acknowledge that Harsche's photographs are poor. They are from the 1960s-1970s and were likely taken with a Polaroid Instamatic (invented 1937).
Needless to say, one is not going to see any dots in Harsche's pictures of 1909-S cents even if he knew about them which I'm almost certain he did not. Harsche was a pioneer in S VDB identification. I'm pretty sure his first writings about 1909-S cents both with and without V.D.B. show up for the first time in the 3rd Edition of his pamphlet "Detecting Altered Coins" , copyright 1964. I expect to be able to confirm that when I receive the 3rd edition copy I ordered recently. Copies of "Harsche" are getting harder and harder to find as the years go by. I typed in Harsche first edition and got "huh?" from Google which is supposed to know everything. So I've heard anyway. 
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
Eve of 11/11/25 and with last post reached 6500 milestone here. Where's the cake, champagne and balloons? I deserve a celebration party doncha all think?
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
i don't see the dot. perhaps that one is not n s-vdb but a plain s instead
The dot is a common characteristic seen in the mint marks on all 1909-1916 “S” Lincoln Cents and is a great first step in authenticating a 1909-S VDB. The notch is very well defined on some examples, but it is often not as strong on others. So, the lack of this dot is, by itself, not a reason to condemn a coin as counterfeit.
The lack of certain characteristics on this mint mark, while not enough to condemn the piece, would have made me give it a second and maybe even a third look back when I was authenticating these. The graininess in the field around the S is also grounds for a closer look. Had I had this under my microscope I would have tipped it up almost on edge and examined where the mint mark met the field, all around the S.
So yes, this coin was not an automatic "Genuine." Might still be, but I would want to see it first.
TD
Maybe, in light of the information we now have that there are 16 (presumably, some of which are nearly identical) obverses, a different approach in identifying the S V.D.B. obverses must be taken. I mean, i've been working with poor photographs as seen in Harsche and it may be that I'm trying to get too much out of Harsche considering, especially, that the photographic technology that we have now was not available to researchers like Harsche in the '60s and '70s.
Tom DeLorey, known here as CaptHenway, was successful in identifying the V.D.B. reverse used for 1909-S V.D.B. His work in this area can be found, far as I know, in this very forum. It's a fact that my counterfeit S V.D.B., at the end of a long day, could not pass the V.D.B. test. Mine was a pretty good counterfeit, all things considered, but was exposed at the end of the day as counterfeit because of it's less than perfect V.D.B. However, to this day, I marvel about the precise roundness of the dots on my counterfeit. All three there, albeit faint, but perfectly round. Three perfectly round dots made by using asphalt paint (to resist the acid) and then coin dipped in concentrated nitric acid to make a V.D.B.? Are you kidding me!?
The best approach to take for those of us who want to know for sure how many of the 16 obverses were used for 1909-S V.D.B. might be to first collect a digital database of V.D.B. reverses that have the proper characteristics known to be for 1909-S V.D.B. only.Then subject the obverses with the correct V.D.B. to analysis for 's' position and tilt. Find the obverses one by one, in other words. Then and only then will we be able to solve the S V.D.B. mystery once and for all.
I think what I'll be doing in coming days is looking for more "far out 's'" Lincolns 1909-1916 and continue to work on making a subset to my "complete" Lincoln collection 1909-1974. That'll keep me busy enough and the activity will be a lot more affordable for me than acquiring expensive photographic equipment and 1909-S V.D.B. Lincolns to analyze.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
coinfacts has a few hq and high pixels images
Good point. Nab those images and do some overlays. Won't be me doing this work though as I don't have the time, the photographic equipment, not to mention the expertise. I struggle with my cell phone camera for col.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.---Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America, 1801-1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.
not going to spend the time either