1911 George V One Cent Possible Re-Punched "91"

In Jack Griffin book he write's of a few 1911 several with the numbers doubled. I haven't found anything the same as your coin in his writings

Yes, Jack describes a couple 1911 dies as doubled, but refers to them as Die Deterioration in the Charlton reprint as Monograph 3 . As with Griffin's original text , which Charlton reprinted as "monographs", all of Jack's major and minor varieties are listed and filed by the date spacings between the digits. The digits starting in 1911 were smaller than the Eds and the last "1" in the date is usually repunched. The photos in monograph 3 are very little help in Id'ing anything. The group of us who submitted corrections to the error-ridden Monograph 1, where the wrong photos were shown with the wrong written description/number, did NOT submit any corrections to Charlton's Monograph 3, so we don't know how accurate that it is. And not every description had an accompanying photo. Of the 9 Griffin varieties listed for 1911 in the original and the Charlton reprint, only 3 have photos and are of little use.

JW 007... Since you are always nibbling around newer cent varieties, and this is for Ed Large Cents, I recommend that you try to find a copy of Jack Griffin's "Some Die Varieties of the Large Cents of North America and Canada" from 1992. It was put out in more of a large, thick pamphlet, with help from Charlton with the forward written by Brian Cornwell (ICCS owner). About 10 years ago, Charlton issued a reprint of it called "Monograph One for the Vickies and Monograph 3 for the Eds/Geos", but with the same Griffin title. There's great info in the work, but Jack was somewhat non-definitive in the written descriptions and the Charlton reprint was a disaster with the wrong photos matched to the original descriptions. DO NOT use Monograph 1 to ID any coin with a photo.

Jack categorized/listed all the "varieties" by digit date spacings and vertical positions. If doubling was involved, then only sometimes was it mentioned. He was a greet researcher, but verbiage was somewhat suspect. You might find close, near, very close, very near, far, very far, etc that separated each variety when compared to another coin. He listed "rarity" also in his descriptions. With no photos, it is/was very hard to see what the difference between close, very close, near, and somewhat close meant through just the wording.

He worked long before professional binocs and loupes were available and examined his coins with 2 lenses put together from a WWII pair of binocs. He was at most of the T.O. coin shows as just a walking customer and was always available to discuss any variety with you. Yo'd see him walking the aisles, with his elderly son following close behind him with 2 large, heavy briefcases. He had to be 90 when I used to see him. He wrote many articles for the RCNA, so all his stuff should be in the RCNA library to look at. For 1911 in Monograph 3, he listed 9 varieties, only 3 with photos. There should be 2 with the E in One doubled and all of the last 1 doubled. He made no mention of the N being doubled. Three of the griffin numbers have the 9 repunched or recut. In monograph 3, he denotes Die Deterioration as the cause for 2 of the doublings. We lost a great guy and researcher when he passed some years ago. Sorry, I can't help more with your 1911