Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;messydesk, post: 2429501, member: 1765&quot;]You have a couple things backward here.&nbsp; The 1922 No D is a result of a worn and polished die, and is considered a die variety, as are other coins struck from dies that have been effectively changed by preparation, wear, and/or maintenance.&nbsp; A filled die is when mint schmutz finds it way into the recesses of the die and the coin is struck through the schmutz, resulting in the design element being missing.&nbsp; As this is not in the die itself, it is considered a striking error, much as if the coin had been struck through a wire, sawdust, or schmutz not precisely filling a design element.</p><p><br /></p><p>Perhaps, but there were many other obverses in use for 69-D, all of which had the mint mark punched by hand, so there are probably others with the bottom of the D weak.</p><p><br /></p><p>This still was probably a polished die, just not as heavily polished as the OP coin, and wouldn&#039;t really be considered either a variety or an error.&nbsp; A filled die leaves a different look on the coin, as the schmutz interferes with the way the luster is supposed to look on a struck coin.&nbsp; Take a look at the 1921-D VAM 1A or 1921-S VAM 9A on VAMWorld and you see this funny, mushy shadow of the missing letters.&nbsp; These used to be listed in the VAM catalog as varieties, but this practice has been discontinued, as they have been acknowledged as being striking errors.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in