Latvia KM#1-2-3 with or without mint name? [opgelost]

Here's a question to the referees for Latvia (Eagle68, Florino28, martins.lv).

I was curious which of the Latvian 1st Republic copper santims (KM#1-2-3) had the mint name below the ribbon, and which not. The Numista pages are not very clear on this.

So, I browsed the internet, looked at dozens of images of these coins and recorded the result if an image was 100% clear. Doing this 'research', I stumbled upon this post by Mikhail Bozhko ('medved') on worldofcoins:
http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php?topic=28114.0
which links to:
https://world-coins.weebly.com/latvia-with-and-wo-name-varieties.html (in Russian)

The author appears to be very well informed, and concludes that all of the KM#1-2-3 from 1922-1924, which were minted in Switzerland by Huguenin Frères & Cie, carried the mint name under the ribbon. From 1926 onwards, the coins were minted in England, and these don't carry a mint name.
According to Numista and Krause, 1 santims 1928 exists with and without mint name, which seems unlikely if it was minted in England. Nevertheless, quite a number of Numista members have one or more with mint name listed for swap). Searching the internet, I found four clear images without mint name, and none with mint name.

Then there are the double listings of 2 and 5 santimi 1922, with and without mint name. Mikhail explains the absence by wear or die filling, which is kind of acceptable seeing the feeble letters in the first place.
Searching the Internet, I found several images of 2 santimi 1922 with mint name, as well as without. No conclusive numbers here...

As for the 5 santimi 1922, I found 15 images with mint name and only one without:
http://om-munten.nl/LATVIA.HTML (click the camera symbol in the applicable line)

I tend to follow Mikhail's reasoning, and conclude that Numista and Krause are not adequate: 1 santims 1928 can't (and doesn't) exist with mint name, and the 1922 varieties without mint name are actually not a structural variation, but due to wear or improper minting.

Does anyone have more information which would shed some light on this issue?

In his post, Mikhail further brings up a difference in weight of the earlier vs. the latter coins. This isn't documented on Numista or Krause at all, and complicates the matter slightly more.

Arno
Only thing I can help with, I have 2 of the 1922 2 santimi. The one in XF has the clear mint name, but the one in VF is already very difficult to find even in hand and with good magnification. So none without mint name, but I agree it can easily be overlooked with even a bit of wear.

The 5 santini you refer to as being without mint name (http://om-munten.nl/images/l/36847b.jpg), I do get the feeling there is some worn of something there ... would need better picture of that coin!

Thanks for bringing up the issue!

The pages on Latvia KM#1-2-3 are now updated to reflect the attested and historically documented situation.

I want to express my thanks to Mihails Božko, who generously shared his materials and insights, and to Numista referee martins.lv and catalog admin jarcek for their swift action.

It's my pleasure to provide these interesting reads to the Numista community:
1 santims, KM#1: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2397.html
2 santimi, KM#2: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces4919.html
5 santimi, KM#3: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces4481.html

Aux lecteurs francophones: j'ai ajouté la traduction aux pages françaises, mais ma commande du français est médiocre et rouillée. S'il y a des choses dans le texte qui nécessitent une amélioration urgente, n'hésite pas à coopérer!

The article by Mihails Božko is temporarily available here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20180518192247/http://world-coins.weebly.com/latvia-with-and-wo-name-varieties.html