On the reverse in front of the eagle's beak appears to be a dropped element the image of the eagle's head. The image is incused. On the obverse at the hairline of the baby on mother's back is the image from the strike through. All opinions welcome.
I do not see a dropped element or a strikethrough. It is a heavily circulated, 20-year old coin. ~ Chris
My bad, I forgot that if a coin is damaged it can't have an error on it. I will try to remember. Why we even look at circulated coins?
That's not true.. Plenty of circulated coins with circulation wear have true Mint Errors. You just need the knowledge to determine the difference.
The image on the reverse in front of eagle is incused. Did PMD cause the image to become incused. I am really trying to understand why you guys say it is just wear with no reason why. I thought a dropped element can be a letter, number or part of the design.
Here is what confirmed to me that this is possibly a struck through dropped filling/element error. First image is reverse and the second is it's opposite obverse. There is a wire or something entering the back of image head and the same is visible on opposite side of coin.
At the risk of being accused of pareidolia, I uploaded a better pic of the obverse image. It shows the beak of the eagle. I don't believe circulation wear and/or damage can cause this impression. As i stated the image on reverse is incused. Non if this matters if PMD negates the error.
