I've had this coin for some time now. Still i can not figure it out. So now I would love to hear your thoughts on it. The error is the big raised humps between the eagles wings and legs. Thanks!!!! @paddyman98 @Fred Weinberg All opinions welcome
It's certainly interesting, although it's not an error. It does look like a clash of some sort, but I can't figure out what the clash could have been. Whatever it is it was dug out of the die because it's raised on the coin.
I have a seen this posted on the forum before. I don't remember what the out come was. Or something like it. I am not sure myself, unless the die got chipped. I was reading about Radical MAD die clashes, and they talk about the dropping of the hammer die obverse onto the rev. during installation this could be an example? http://www.maddieclashes.com/19-2/
If you found another, I would have to say that only then could it become a variety, Otherwise if my theory is correct, it is only classified as die chips Or an IDB.
on die chips i have seen the interior is smooth. The interior of this seems to have detail. Also every major die break i can think of is on top of the design. This is under it. I would imagine a die break would take away some feathers or something. Just strange. I need to get it in the hands of an expert. Any other ideas? Please reply.
May be a counter clash of some sort. It looks like there are also other rotated rays in the field near the eagles head. I used your picture to indicate.
Yes. That is what got me thinking too!!! Im gonna send some photos to cuds on coins and see what they think.
I'm completely stumped. I can't see how they could be clash marks. Their symmetrical appearance seems to fly in the face of any kind of random die damage. They're not die chips or die erosion pits. You can send the coin to me for a closer examination and a possible write-up in Coin World.
You found a good one if you have Mr. Diamond stumped! If you send it off, keep us informed of what is found. Interesting!
If this is not considered any kind of die damage, would it then be classified as a minor Reverse Design Variety for the 69D? Larry Nienaber