The 1922-D Lincoln, Missing D cent - what often is listed as the 1922 "plain" cent - did not always have the recognition it does today, and more than 40 years would pass from the time of its minting until research overtook speculation about the circumstances of its creation.
Collectors were aware from the beginning that officially, all 1922 cents were struck at the Denver Mint and should carry the D Mint mark. That this mark was not readily apparent on some mushy-looking examples did not appear to cause a ripple in collector circles.
During 1928, a few letters appeared in The Numismatist. At least two writers thought the D was absent altogether. Another said every "red" (Uncirculated) example showed at least a trace of the D.
During the 1950s, the Whitman company's blue folder for Lincoln cents contained a hole for this variety and helped create demand. The company's Guide Book of United States Coins gave higher values for "Part D" and "Plain (No D)" varieties of 1922. The more established Standard Catalogue of United States Coins, published by Wayte Raymond, did not list the variety until the 18th (1957) edition, when the 1922 "Without D" was valued at $5 in Fine vs. $1.50 for the variety with the D Mint mark. In Uncirculated, the No D variety was valued at $100 (vs. $12 for the normal cent). The $100 was set in italics, meaning the valuation was "flexible, or questionable."
|
Click on image to enlarge
|
|
DIE PAIR 2 is the variety of 1922-D Lincoln, Missing D cent that brings big money. It is believed two dies clashed in the press, the obverse was ground to remove signs of damage, and the reverse was replaced with a brand-new die.
|
Multiple theories, multiple dies
In 1962, collector Al D. Craig wrote an article in Numismatic Scrapbook Magazine asserting that at least two distinct dies were being called the "plain" variety. Pursuing his research, he wrote a two-part series in the Aug. 30 and Sept. 6, 1967, issues of Coin World. Now he said he had discovered that there were four varieties of 1922-D Lincoln, Missing D cent, involving three obverse dies and four reverse dies. He numbered his varieties 1 through 4 and said Nos. 1 and 2 never were punched with the Mint mark (the obverse of his No. 2 was simply the same as No. 1 but worn to a later state).
In 1982, the American Numismatic Association Certification Service completed its own study and published results in the July issue of The Numismatist, as part of a series on counterfeit detection that later was compiled in book form.
ANACS found that Craig's Nos. 1 and 4 were simply die states from the same pair of dies. They were consolidated as the new ANACS No. 3. It, and ANACS die pair No. 1, appeared to lack Mint marks because they were "filled" (obstructed with grease and associated material) and also because the dies were becoming very worn, ANACS said.
A die pair that ANACS newly designated No. 2 was a different story. As ANACS reconstructed events, a pair of dies producing normal 1922-D Lincoln cents clashed; i.e., came together without an intervening planchet to stamp as a coin. The reverse die shattered and was replaced with a brand new die. The obverse die, not so badly damaged, was abraded (ground) to remove clash marks and put back in service.
|
Click on image to enlarge
|
|
DIE PAIR 3, like Die Pair 1, uses a worn reverse and has a second 2 in the date that is weaker than the first. Lines are hardly present in the heads of wheat, and the lower left of the O in ONE is starting to become distended. Contrast both this reverse and the Die Pair 1 reverse to the strong reverse on Die Pair 2.
|
This scenario accounted for the combination of weak obverse, strong reverse that would emerge with legitimate claims as a "plain" cent; it truly was missing a Mint mark, because Mint workers, in their zeal to rework the damaged die, had removed the Mint mark.
Premiums for some
Today, popular guides make clear that high values given for 1922 "plain" cents are for the "strong reverse" variety. Sometimes it is even designated as "No. 2," without crediting ANACS with assigning the number. Those from other die pairs do not carry the same high premiums.
Specimens from the other die pairs, even when no Mint mark is discernible, wind up classified as "Weak D" coins or, if appropriate, "broken D" or "partial D." Both these die pairs, Nos. 1 and 3, show definite wear to the reverse die.
Collectors need to beware of genuine 1922-D Lincoln cents that have been altered to weaken or remove signs of the Mint mark, and this is true even for Die Pair 1 or Die Pair 3 "Weak D" cents.
Die Pair 1, late in its life, developed a crack from the base of the L in PLURIBUS through the O in ONE CENT. Early strikes from the same die do not have this crack, but some collectors do look for it as diagnostic for at least part of the production run. Collectors should beware, however, of a similar crack on some genuine 1922-D Lincoln cents, with clear Mint mark, that could be targets for alteration. On the "Weak D" cent, the crack jogs to the left when it comes to the O, then continues through the letter on this offset path. The crack on the genuine 1922-D Lincoln cent keeps going straight.
One characteristic that sets Die Pair 2 cents apart from Die Pair 1 and Die Pair 3 is that on Die 2, both 2s in the date are fairly sharp; in fact, the second 2 is even a little sharper than the first. On Dies 1 and 3, the second 2 is weaker.
Coin World Trends gives valuations for the normal 1922-D Lincoln cent, beginning with $8.50 in Good 4, and for the "1922 Missing D, Die Pair 2," beginning with $375 in the same grade. In Mint State 60 red brown, the Missing D variety is valued at $5,500; the 1922-D, at $75.
A Guide Book of United States Coins values a "Weak D" variety at $30 in G-4, $300 in MS-60.
Any collector aspiring to acquire a 1922-D Lincoln, Missing D cent should consider authentication to be, as researcher Walter Breen used to put it, "mandatory."
