How does the mint mark get Pmd like that. It's the first one I've ever seen like this. Especially with the mint mark as unidentifiable as it is.
So I'm kinda guessing here but that probably wasn't even suppose to be a mint mark at all but just post mint damage?
Goodness... lol yes there was supposed to be a mint mark there. Something just hit the mint mark and made it look weird. Simple
@David Southerland 1978... Years and years of wear and tear is called Circulation Damage. PMD means Post Mint Damage. It could of occurred anytime it left the Denver Mint from 1978 until the moment you found it.
If you can answer the question of how the coin was worn and how each and every scratch, ding, hit ,scrap, wear on the quarter was initially done .. then you'd have your answer. other wise we just lump it all together as 40 years of circulation wear.
Coin facts: the 1978 Washington Quarter had either no mintmark (made in Philly), or a D (Denver) or S (San Francisco) mintmark. Although damaged, this mintmark is still readable as being a D rather than a S. So it is not unidentifiable. Just sayin'
Because why not? Lol. Guess I've been had on this one, I didn't even look to see when it had been posted by the OP.
Yours is also damaged also. Not a mint error of any kind. Just because something on a coin looks strange doesn't automatically make it an error. There are many ways a mint mark can be damaged or altered after it left the US Mint. Wow.. Some People on this thread just don't get it!