Misplaced mint mark, or is it?

[wavysteps]

We have seen our share of die anomalies that appear to be one thing but turn out to be another. Fine examples of these occurances are the 1980 D & S Lincoln cent and the 1956 D & S Lincoln cent, where both the supposed S mint marks were in fact something else. So, how about this one?

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f292/Wavystep2003/1954a.jpg

This is a 1954-D Lincoln cent with what looks to be a misplaced mint mark. Plainly visiable are the two serifs and also peeking out from the middle of the 4, the continuation of the D's loop. Looks great, UNTIL!!!!

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f292/Wavystep2003/1954b.jpg

Yes, James Wiles has seen this one and it is not a misplaced mint mark, just a darn good mimic of one.

BJ Neff

[JamesWiles]

I readily agree this is some type of die damage. It is too small to be a mintmark and there is no hole in the center. It is definitely a fooler.

[livingdinasaur]

BJ, please excuse the large type. I am getting to where if it isn't huge, I only see part of it! That looks like it might be a dropped letter, that happened to be in the right place, at the wrong tiome, and got "mashed". It is too small for the "current sized MM in use at that time".
Dick

[wavysteps]

Hi Dick - Actually the letter, if it is that, is to small for anything on a Lincoln cent. I tend to believe that it may be a lamination error or some sort of weird die break.

BJ Neff

[diamond]

Since the defect is raised, it would not be a lamination error. It's too low and flat for a die chip, so I would assume it is a die dent of some kind. Another, less likely, possibility is a patch of die erosion, which sometimes forms in very late die states. However, the die doesn't seem particularly worn here.