Please explain the method of applying the “rolled” edge to the 1907 eagle $10 gold coins.
The coins have a beveled edge rather than the square-cornered edge with wire rim found on other gold coins. The difference is due only to the different shape of the die surface. “Rolled” is a misnomer, although over the years many attempts have been made to alter (other denomination) coins by actually rolling them through a die to round the edge.
Why is there so much stress on the “large” and “small” mintmarks on the 1945-S dimes when there are numerous other examples that are ignored?
The ’45-S dimes got all the publicity and the glory, with the nicknamed “micro S” dime. Collectors are human, and they head for the brightest lights and the loudest noise. If the other varieties had received the same amount of publicity, they too would be sought after.
What’s the “reverse of 1838-O” referred to in charts for the 1839-O dime?
I’d answered this question several times in the past, quoting Kamal Ahwash as to the 1838-O die being identified by some prominent rust spots. However, Breen has the correct answer in his Encyclopedia. The mintmark used for the 1838-O reverse is a large, round “O,” while that used for the 1839-O is either a tall, narrow “O” or a small, round “O.” The “extremely rare” 1839-O dime with the 1838 reverse shows a large, round “O” that is 1.2 mm tall. The more common varieties have either a tall, narrow “O” or a small, round “O” that is only 0.8 mm tall. The rusted die is a variety of the 1838-O No Stars date.
I have several coins that I bought several years ago that have tilted mintmarks and some out of the normal position (low and high, etc.) Are they worth more today?
Unless you paid face value for them, they are probably worth less, as minor tilts and mintmark locations are too common to have any collector value. If the mintmark is tilted more than 45 degrees, repunched or touches some other part of the design, then the collectors will be interested.
The mintage for the 1823/22 dime is listed at 440,000 for both overdates, but the mintage for 1822 is only 100,000. How can an overdate have a larger mintage than the total for the date?
The 1823/22 dimes are from different dies than those used to strike the 1822 dimes, so there is no connection between the two mintage figures. They are considered to be 1823 coins, not 1822, as the 1823 is on top of the 22.
When was the 1880/79-CC dollar variety first reported?
If my records are correct, it was first brought to public attention in 1965. There are several different dies with overdates for this date and mint. Veteran dealer Harry Forman reportedly discovered the overdate in 1964. Since then, several dies for the date have been identified as overdates.
Are there any U.S. dies that were used in one year to strike coins and then repunched to use them in a subsequent year, producing an overdate?
Our sources list four such dies. In 1806, single dies for the quarter, half dollar and quarter eagle were retained from 1805 production and were repunched or recut for use in 1806, giving us the three overdates for that year. The usage was blamed on a critical shortage of die steel.
When were the 1922 no-mintmark cents first reported?
In The Numismatist, March 1928.