| Author |
Message |
 RhubarbSenior Member
Posts: 856
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Location: West Georgia
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:35 pm |
 |
|
The D has a split to the SW. It is a worn coin and die abrasion around the digits and MM but the split is there. It isn't the 008 the location isn't correct.
David
_________________
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding
out.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 coopExpert Member
Posts: 3402
Joined: 17 Sep 2003
Location: Arizona
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:57 pm |
|
|
If it is a split lower serif, it would be considered a very, very minor one. The mark at the top looks like damage or die movement. Any other evidence of this on your coin? The question about the machine doubling is because that is one of the years with the common machine doubling on them.
_________________
Richard S. Cooper
You may be only one person in the world, but you may also be the world to one person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
RhubarbSenior Member
Posts: 856
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Location: West Georgia
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:02 pm |
|
|
Thank's again Coop.
_________________
There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding
out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 coppercoinsSite Admin
Posts: 2809
Joined: 29 Jun 2003
Location: Springfield, Missouri.
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 6:05 am |
|
|
The mintmark on this coin is definitely damaged - whether it be from the die that made the coin or the detriment of circulation is rather unimportant. The important part to take note of is that the letter is flattened at the top. Repunched mintmarks add to the letter, they do not flatten part of it.
_________________
C. D. Daughtrey
owner, developer
www.coppercoins.com
cd@coppercoins.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
