✅ SOLVED 43 Mercury Dime with a "2" Mint Mark

[Ed-D]

'43 Mercury Dime with a "2" Mint Mark

I had previously posted this in the Coins forum, but didn't get much info in response. So I thought I put it in this forum hoping more people would see it and maybe give me some more info.

I searched to see if there is such a thing as a "2" mint mark and came up with nothing. I also looked at it every which way thinking it could be a "S" or maybe a "micro s" that's been distorted by damage, but I can only see it as a "2". I have no other mercs with an S mm to compare it to. I've also looked into "repunches", but have only seen that term to mean repunching a typical S or D or O mint mark, not using a number.

Let me know...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Ed-D]

I appreciate all the comments. I'm going to hang on to it and see if I can find an expert to look at it. Not sure when, but I'll update this post with whatever I find out.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Ed-D]

Just for kicks. Here is the "2" along side a D and an S from other mercs...

 

[Pork King]

The only possibilities are:1. damage, there is a lot of damage on the coin in other areas, 2. a small piece of foreign material on the coin, or 3. a small die chip.

I'm no coin expert, but could it be a counterfeit? Why punch a counterfeit out of silver, but still...

 

[Reed Lukens]

Being that it is obviously a "2" is should be added to the list of rare finds. Take it in and get it registered for what it is. If it's a one of a kind mistake, then it should be photographed and put into the coin books for all to see. Great find

 

[Mackaydon]

Similar to the 1945-S dime with the 'microscopic' S as being an unexplained use of a punch originally intended for Philippine coins of 1907 through 1920, my guess is this is either an intended or un-intented misuse of a number "2" punch. I'm in agreement with "Reed", above, I'd submit the coin to a professional grading service; for example PCGS--http://www.pcgs.com/. I'd also submit the coin and the PCGS report to the ANA (Money.org · Money Org) and ask for their opinion.
Don.....

 

[Mackaydon]

Ed,
I asked a friend, a collector of Merc for any explanation. His reply:

"Hi Don,
I would assume that the coin is under weight since its well circulated and damaged, if you have pure acetone I would try to soak it for a few minutes to see if the mint 'number ' mark was glued to it. If it is, than it would fall off. Also, when you view it to a side, do you see whether the mint 'number' mark is actually part of the coin? This required a 20x higher jewelry loop to see. And my last thought is that this can be tooled to make it a number mark."

 

[Breezie]

Ed,
I asked a friend, a collector of Merc for any explanation. His reply:

"Hi Don,
I would assume that the coin is under weight since its well circulated and damaged, if you have pure acetone I would try to soak it for a few minutes to see if the mint 'number ' mark was glued to it. If it is, than it would fall off. Also, when you view it to a side, do you see whether the mint 'number' mark is actually part of the coin? This required a 20x higher jewelry loop to see. And my last thought is that this can be tooled to make it a number mark."

Hey Don, this is really good information, but could you ask your friend this: Where would you get a perfect silver 2 to glue onto a dime and why would someone do that to a coin that is not that valuable? This is such an interesting mystery. Breezie

 

[cw0909]

ed interesting,could you post a img of the other side
does anyone know if the mint mark was,is part of the die or a separate operation

 

[cudamark]

It's part of the die.

 

[Ed-D]

All good info. I'll post a picture of the face as soon as I can. Regarding the"2" being glued on, we'll I found the coin while detecting at the lake shore. So it's been under sand/clay for probably a minimum of 50 years +/-...

Also, I took the picture looking through an 8x magnifier. I am looking for a more powerful one to use.

 

[Erik in NJ]

"...And my last thought is that this can be tooled to make it a number mark."

I've often been curious about how it is possible to tool a coin as to alter a letter, number, &c. I have seen a few large cents that have been found where the "E" in the word "CENT" has been changed to another vowel. Was this done by tooling the coin or are they "tokens" that were stamped this way?

I routinely use a 10X jeweler's loupe and would think that would be sufficient magnification to determine whether the "2" is part of the coin or not. I found a solid silver sweetheart pin in England last summer with the letters "DORA" soldered to the pin. Of course they are bigger than the numeral in question, but are flat in appearance and must have been cut from a thin sheet of silver. Even from the photo posted it does appear that the "2" is part of the coin.

Looking forward to learning more about this interesting and enigmatic find!

 

[Mackaydon]

At the cost of repeating myself, IMO, placement of mint marks on Mercury dimes vary because the mark was hand stamped onto the die. This coin was either intentionally or unintentionally hand punched with a "2" versus an 'S' or a 'D' mint mark. I suggest the coin be submitted to PCGS for authentication. I'd also submit a pic to the ANA for their opinion. I don't believe the number was glued on and I find it hard to believe 'the coin was tooled to produce the mark'.
Don........

 

[Ed-D]

ed interesting,could you post a img of the other side
does anyone know if the mint mark was,is part of the die or a separate operation

CW0909 - For what it's worth, here is the front of the coin. I am real busy with work stuff right now, but will look at contacting the ANA as others have suggested.

 

[cw0909]

Ed-D,thanks for the face img,i thought maybe that side would be damaged from the
stamping too,its in bad shape so cant see if it was or not.
Mackaydon is right , about the Mmark hand stamped onto the die,so i had a idea that
maybe whoever stamped the die,had a vison prob,and stamped the die wrong,i did img
of worn yr1942 stamped coins,to see if the #2 stamp of that yr would be a close match
to yours,and i read about a 1943-S Trumpet Tail Mintmark.and did an img. i know the
idea is flawed,as the mints prob has,hundreds of#2,and S Trumpet Tail Mintmark stamps
FWIW,it looks like a 2 to me,wish the results had been better on the idea

thanks for the info Mackaydon,on the Mmark it mentions here about the hand stamp and
it also mentions a 1943-S Trumpet Tail Mintmark.
Grading Mercury Dimes
1943 S Trumpet Tail FS 501
1943 S Trumpet Tail FS 501 | dimeguru

 

[Ed-D]

Thanks for the extra effort CW. The thing is, I see that in the upper left of the number "2" on my coin starts off with more of a vertical line than the 2s in the examples seen in the other coins.

I emailed the ANA and got a quick reply from a numismatic educator named Rod Gillis. He believes the coin was altered and indicated what someone else in this thread suggested; 1) to use a tooth pick to make sure there is no crud adding to the way it looks, and 2) soak it in acetone and see if the number falls off. The first suggestion is reasonable, and after doing that no crud was there. The second suggestion just doesn't make sense to me since the coin was found buried at the beach. If someone took the time and effort to alter the coin they would have tried to pawn it off on an unsuspecting buyer as a rarity, not carry it around with them while they go out to lake for a swim.

Two final thought on this. First I have a friend with a microscope and I hope to view it at 16x or greater very soon. And lastly my gut tells me when I do see it really magnified I'll find that it might just be a damaged "D", somehow, or maybe it's a repunch of a D with damage[FONT=&quot].

[/FONT]

 

[cudamark]

Yes, the mintmark was hand stamped into the die, but not each coin. Once the die has the mintmark, it would stamp Thousands, possibly millions of coins before the die became unusable. If that happened, there would be LOTS of them around. Nobody would have glued a 2 to that particular coin. They would have picked a better specimen. Sending that coin in for authentication would cost more than the coin is worth IMO. Get an opinion from a local coin shop or two.

 

[hursst]

If you look closely at the photo, you'll see that the diagonal part of the "2" is raised slightly from the rest of the portions of the "2." You can also see that the design continues outside of the "2." Let's use clock positions to describe... The "diagonal part of the "2" runs from about 7 o'clock to 1 o'clock. The continued part of the design runs from about 7 o'clock to almost 9 o'clock. At this point, it almost connects to the upper left part of the 2 at 9-10 o'clock. Getting back to the diagonal part of the "2," you'll see at about 1-2 o'clock that there is some extra metal which does not conform to the upper curved part of the "2." When you really look at this, the diagonal portion of the "2" is on top of the rest of the "2" and does not conform to the lines of the rest of the "2" in width and elevation. My opinion is that it is a "D" mint mark and something has happened to the die when the "D" was stamped into it, either during or after the process. Regarding the fact that no one else has a bunch of dimes with the "2" mint mark is that this particualr die may have had more damage done to it in a short period of time around the mint mark area, so the pattern was not repeated as a "2" more than maybe a few times before the die was more severely damaged and replaced.

 

[DJWEHAGE]

I can only see a 2. My only thought is, with how worn this coin is, it had to be in circulation for YEARS. You would think someone else would have notice it long ago and saved it.

 

[hikerdude]

Since you asked......... I believe it is one of a kind. Send it to an expert grading place and let them make a determination.

 

[Ed-D]

Ok. I borrowed a microscope from a friend and I am going to say it is a damaged "S". It looked so much like a "2" to the naked eye all the way up to a 10x loupe! But looking at it under the microscope I believe the top arc is the top of the S and there is damage that runs along the bottom at an angle.

Here is what I see: