DWLange

I have a complete unbound set that I use frequently, and here at the office is a nicely bound set. That one looks great on a shelf, but it's impossible to make good scans from bound periodicals. And I agree with your comments about Bob Julian's articles. He was the only person doing such thorough research in the 1960s. Walter Breen did a lot of research during the 1950s, but he spent most of the '60s-'80s inventing dubious "facts" to fill in the blanks. He also saw "overdates" in every coin that had some minor repunching. We're still trying to get these clarified today, but too many persons have a vested interest in perpetuating them.

It may have been struck on the wrong kind of planchet, or it may have been plated with something that's responsive to a magnet. It's impossible to say without examining the coin. If you want to submit it for certification, be certain to check the Mint Error box so that it will go to the ME attributor.

That's just environmental damage from exposure to soil or chemicals. It was not made that way.

Any Franklin proof may be submitted to NGC for attribution of the Tomaska number. Of course, if the coin isn't at least Cameo it's unlikely to be assigned a number. You may submit your coins for grading at the Modern Tier fee and check the VarietyPlus box for the T number attribution. Be certain to indicate that it's this T number you're seeking, so we will know what to look for.

That is some material applied to the coin after it left the mint, so it would not be considered a mint error.

NGC will add varieties that are distinctive enough from others to be attributed consistently and are appealing enough that they would merit some premium. Which ones are added is determined on a case-by-case basis. If you furnish a list of the CONECA numbers as illustrated at the VarietyVista website, it will be easier to determine whether these varieties are worthy additions.

I don't know of any price guides for this variety. It's not a coin that's likely to appear in a major auction company's archives, but you may be able to find some sales data on eBay.

There's no fixed criteria, though certainly displaying the sharpness and surfaces of a proof coin go a long way toward assigning a Specimen designation. As with determining branch mint proofs, the graders often have to interpret the coiner's intentions and whether extra steps were performed to achieve a unique appearance.

What is missing, however, are the thoughts and activities of ordinary coin collectors... For that you need to read the Numismatic Scrapbook Magazine. From 1935 to 1976 it was the journal of ordinary collectors, the ones who searched through pocket change and filled coin boards. It was joined by similar publications with smaller distributions starting in the mid 1950s, but the NSM is really the history of the popular side of the hobby at mid-century. The letters to the editor reveal how little collectors knew about coin varieties and errors and the way they were made. If fact, editor Lee F. Hewitt didn't know much more than his readers. It's a shame that this publication is available only in snippet form at the Newman Numismatic Portal, but its copyright is held by Coin World, which has declined to make either publication's back issues available in full.

It's just a 1968 cent that has had its date smeared a bit as the die withdrew. It's a form of strike doubling.

That could be caused by die erosion, or it could be the result of polishing the die to remove clash marks where the dies struck one another without a planchet between them. The latter explanation is the more likely, since the two areas in question are directly opposite one another on the coin.

That circular mark is imparted by a counting and/or rolling machine. It did not occur at the mint, and so it is considered just damage.

Tom has been awarded this year's Lifetime Achievement Award from the ANA, and it is well deserved. His career has encompassed employment with Coin World, ANACS (when it was still run by the ANA) and a long tenure at Harlan Berk's Chicago coin shop. He retired just a few years ago but is continuing to contribute to numismatics as a researcher and writer. His current project is the definitive article on 1922 cents and their many die states (I hesitate to call "No D" and "Weak D" cents varieties). This will be quite revealing.