Leaderboard

Not if use of the alternate letter was intentional, as I explain above it’s just part of day to day maintenance of a die. And also difficult to prove it’s not just partial die fill of the lower limb of the ‘E’ . But it’s a grey area in that some collectors enthuse about mis-strikes and die flaws, incidental dots and dashes and the like. To my mind a true variety is a deliberate planned change in the design on the die, the flan (weight, metal composition, polishing ) or a significant accidental change through the act of man. Obvious date width differences might just creep in in the later years when die to die differences were rarer. And not all variations even if rare attract a premium, desirability to collectors plays a major part along with whether published or acknowledged by an accepted expert in the field (Freeman, Gouby, Sessions et al). Jerry

Yes I know, was too late to edit once I noticed my mistake.

That's a fairly long die crack. I imagine the obverse die would be used for multiple years until it's too damaged. But the reverse die has the date and so needs to be replaced each year.

Very poignant and caught me out for some reason. I’m 60 next year and been reflecting a lot upon the last 40, so maybe something to do with that?

I agree that halfs and quarters are often in almost perfect condition because they were easily lost soon after they entered circulation. I too look for nice examples, scarcer mints, errors, etc. and enjoy the challenge of identifying them. This is one of my favourites. Walter (Waltier error) on Northampton, square E's on obverse (round on reverse), class 1a2/1a5 mule, possibly Mass 148, although the X looks different.