$5 Indian 1909 S

Hi Folks,

to the Specialists of this Series.
Do you see red flags?
If so, which are the signs?

Thanks a lot for help!

Yours Rheingold

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I would get in trouble fast if I tried to collect these.

 

Tell me about it!!

 

Okay, upon enlarging the Picture. It's apparent that the Mintmark looks added Post Mint.

 

That was my first thought, too.

 

Yeah, me too. Sounds like these really need advanced knowledge or slabs. I usually dislike slabs except for some instances such as this.

 

Coin might be a genuine 1909P with an embossed MM. There appears to be a depressed area around the MM that could be where the embossing tool depressed the field. Look at the edge to see if there's any evidence of drilling and hole repair.

Is there a big price diff between the P and the S?

 

Not until you get up to MS. If you were going to be adding a MM, you'd want the O, which apparently goes for about 10X the P price.

 

SensibleSal66, posted: "Okay, upon enlarging the Picture. It's apparent that the Mintmark looks added Post Mint."

Rheingold, posted: "That was my first thought, too."

Publius2, posted: "Coin might be a genuine 1909P with an embossed MM. There appears to be a depressed area around the MM that could be where the embossing tool depressed the field. Look at the edge to see if there's any evidence of drilling and hole repair."

Before I respond, would anyone else like to correct these opinions giving reasons? Hint: What's the difference between an altered coin and a counterfeit?

 

I agree the mint mark looks off.

What's the difference between an altered coin and a counterfeit?

An altered coin is a genuine coin that has been messed with a counterfeit coin was not made by the US Mint or the mint it should have come from.

 

ifthevamzarockin, posted: "I agree the mint mark looks off."

What's the difference between an altered coin and a counterfeit?

An altered coin is a genuine coin that has been messed with a counterfeit coin was not made by the US Mint or the mint it should have come from."

I guess I assumed too much. If you didn't know this "cocked S" was commonly seen on counterfeits as stated later in the thread, guessing it was an added "S" was actually a very good guess. The coin is too thin to have an "embossed S."

Any Indian gold having an actual added Mint mark that has been placed on the coin would be EXTREMELY RARE. A few MUST (?) exist; but with over a century of combined authentication work at ICG, one authenticator (not me) thinks he MAY HAVE seen one put on a 1911 $2 1/2.

 

I guess I am the one that has
I'm just kinda confused with your response.

I responded "the mint mark looks off" I didn't say if I thought it was altered or a counterfeit. I did see where it was stated "it is commonly seen on counterfeits."
I didn't question or challenge that.
The mint mark could look off if it was added or counterfeit.

You asked the difference between altered or counterfeit and I responded.
Was my response wrong?
I agree the folks that guessed added "S" was a good guess.
I think anyone that saw a problem did good no matter their guess.

Then you start talking about how a mint mark can or can't be embossed.

Did I miss your point?
What does any of that have to do with your question of the difference between altered or counterfeit?

 

ifthevamzarockin, posted: "I guess I am the one that has
I'm just kinda confused with your response.

I responded "the mint mark looks off" I didn't say if I thought it was altered or a counterfeit. I did see where it was stated "it is commonly seen on counterfeits."
I didn't question or challenge that.
The mint mark could look off if it was added or counterfeit.

You asked the difference between altered or counterfeit and I responded.
Was my response wrong?
I agree the folks that guessed added "S" was a good guess.
I think anyone that saw a problem did good no matter their guess.

Then you start talking about how a mint mark can or can't be embossed.

Did I miss your point?
What does any of that have to do with your question of the difference between altered or counterfeit?"

No, I'm the dummy. I was not clear enough. You said the mintmark looked off. Is that correct? I posted and then: "actually (that is) a very good guess! So as "rookie authenticators, those members get a participation trophy.

You are correct again when you wrote: "The mint mark could look off if it was added or counterfeit."

Next you asked: "Was my response wrong?" What gave you that idea?

Next: "I agree the folks that guessed added "S" was a good guess.
I think anyone that saw a problem did good no matter their guess."

You missed this part completely. The coin does not have an added "S." It is a die struck C/F but most here are not expected to know that! Mintmarks are not added to genuine $2 1/2 or $5 Indians. The shape of the mint marks are changed on genuine coins OR surface metal is "chased" into the desired shape.

An embossed mintmark guess is incorrect. I hope I have done a better job with this post. Nevertheless, I feel like you are arguing with yourself so I'm going to let you continue without me.

 

The dull, matte finish is totally inconsistent with a business strike half eagle from this era. It’s either a counterfeit coin or that has had its surface totally altered.

 

You might call it an added mint mark counterfeit. Either way, it’s not genuine.

 

Look guys. You cannot take a "science-like" endeavor such as numismatics and start making up things to suit yourself. Words mean certain things. Collectors can become informed by reading, taking classes, etc. OR they can roll along in their own world and frustrate or confuse those both more knowledgeable or less knowledgeable. This thread is an example. According to the first post after the OP's, the coin is a die struck counterfeit. Unfortunately, that was not stated directly until later in the thread. It does not have an added mint mark!" It is not an "added S counterfeit" either. Writing that the coin has an added "S" because it is in the wrong position and is not the correct shape is also incorrect. I crapped all over the thread when I said that was a good guess. It was not. What was good is the fact that members knew something did not look right with the mint mark.

There is one more thing that might be confusing. If I take a genuine coin and attach a tiny mint mark to it - it is an altered coin with an added mint mark. If I take a genuine coin with a "D" mint mark and tool the "D" into the shape of an "O" or "S" it becomes an altered coin with an altered mint mark. If I take a genuine coin and tool the mint mark area up into a raised bit of metal I can then shape into an "S," it is an altered coin - period. Some could call that an "added mint mark" but many would not know exactly what it was without seeing the coin in hand. That was one point I was making. The same is true when parts of any coin's design are reengraved to add details that are missing due to a weak strike or circulation wear. The coin is either reengraved, tooled, or altered even though someone "ADDED" the missing ___________ derail. Are you as confused as you think I am.

 

Get the "S" outta here....

Don't hit me. C'mon, that was funny.....