RWB

It is unclear how much label information is retained by any TPG. Do they retain everything plus all the metadata indefinitely? Further, there is likely a large percentage of coins of a specific variety or error type for which no label information exists. It might be more productive to scan digitized auction catalogues from NNP for key words relating to errors....at least it's a starting point.

The JNR issue is #3, Here is the abstract for the specific article. “U.S. MINT & NAZI GOLD, MERKERS KAISERODA SALT MINE TREASURE, WORLD WAR II: JUNE TO AUGUST 1945.” Under orders from Nazi leadership, primarily Hermann Goering and Heinrich Himmler, conquered people and nations were systematically stripped of art, gold and other valuables. Recovery of the treasure after the end of the European war had an unexpected connection to the U.S. Mint.

Ground penetrating radar will show if the edge is lettered or plain.

Only if the data exists and you have access.

Right. That was completed in 2006 (I think) and includes some details not in the SG book.

Copies are available from Wizard Coin Supply.

That was the US Mint standard. This is discussed in my JNR article. The coins were inventoried by nationality/type, quantity, disposition plus other data from the Reichsbank records.

Several points: 1) Your photo is not sharp enough for detection of any alterations to the surface; also show both sides. 2) "Tooling" usually refers to alterations made to the coin in order to strengthen or restore details. Usually this is done to deceive a buyer into thinking the coin is of a higher, more desirable, grade. A workman uses a sharp steel engraving tool to move metal on the coin. This is easily detected by expert authenticators. Tooled coins will be rejected for authentication because they have been altered. 3) Changes to a working die are called "reengraving" in deference to the work being done by a mint employee, usually an assistant engraver. Reengraving is part of a working die and is not, alone, cause for rejection. The confusion of usage mentioned by other posters is a strong argument in favor of clear, unambiguous numismatic terminology. My personal suggestion is to limit "tooling" to post-mint alterations to a coin; and use "reengravijg" only for mint-made engraved alterations to a working die.

Thanks for the correction....

Gold coins were routinely rebagged in Europe. The standard US value was $25,000 per bag. The Tripartite Gold Commission records show composition and repatriation of these. See the article in JNR issue on the Merkers mine coins.

Possibly French 10 centime brass token or work ticket. US usage typically has the " c " level with the basline of the digit.

The coin is not one that it is advantageous to own. Polishing ruins coins and few collectors want a polished example. If a 1928-P is needed for a collection, most will opt for a real About Uncirculated (AU) coin. A certified AU-58 from PCGS or NGC might run about $475; your pictured coin (first post) --- maybe $300, but you'd have a lot of difficulty selling it for that. Here's an uncirculated example for comparison. Hopefully, you can see the kind of surface difference that Mark mentioned.:

Agreed. The only thing "gem" on that are the staples. Get you money back...and get as far away from the seller as possible.

I've been trying to find the name of the turnip truck driver, from whose truck all the buyers at inflated prices fell...but no luck so far, and I've looked under a lot of rocks and fallen trees.....

Thanks for posting that!

Also check: https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/book/562548

I completed the last two folders this evening. They should be posted Wednesday.

Several interesting insights!

I'm sure others will offer opinions, too. It's a nice 1/2-p.

Enhanced files for folders 1-4 are already on NNP. I hope to have the remaining 2 folders up on Wednesday.

The harp has not been tuned, and has gone flat.

It's a circulation strike. Has no characteristics common to a proof coin of that era.

The original (at left) is a good example of what not to do when photographing documents. The photographer wasted fully 85% of available image resolution by placing the page across the image frame and then using only half of the frame width. The correct procedure is to rotate the original so it matches the camera frame orientation, then get close enough to fill the frame with the original. Depending on proportions of the original, that means extending the image almost to either the horizontal or vertical frame edge. (Note: Most cameras show only about 95% of the frame in the viewfinder. This allows for differences in eye orientation/viewing angle.)

One has to know tare weight of the container.

Type 2 has the greatest diameter. The planchet was simply too thin to allow the relief to be brought up over the entire coin. Type 3 is intermediate in diameter and die relief is lightly lower - but still not enough to produce uniformly detailed coins.