Error or Variety?

Humans developed language to share our thoughts with each other and communicate effectively. In order for words to communicate our exact meaning, we must define them. However, some words may have different definitions based on their shared use within a culture. For example, error-coin collectors use a definition that separates errors from common varieties. This can be confusing to the average collector and maybe even the seasoned numismatist because a variety can be an error, but not every error is a variety. Say what?

Varieties

To illustrate this concept, let me use a coin that most hobbyists are familiar with—the 1955 doubled-die Wheat cent. We can all agree that this is an error coin. The U.S. Mint never intended for all 1955 cents to have a doubled legend and date that year. The error occurred during the hubbing process—at least to my knowledge—which meant that the finished die was able to strike several thousand pieces that all share this same error. If you had two or more of these pieces in similar levels of preservation, they would all look exactly the same. This is what error collectors call a variety. Varieties are more widely collectable as more collectors have the opportunity to own one. This is similar for overdates, die clashes, and repunched mintmarks, which are both an error and a variety.

Errors

So then, what is an error coin? An error is a one-off specimen, and no two will be exactly the same. Granted, you could have a clipped planchet where the missing piece is at a similar position on the same denomination of coin, but the chances of it being the exact same size in the exact same location are pretty small. Likewise, finding two coins with off-center strikes that are absolutely the same is hard to imagine, especially considering the speed at which coins are struck today. I hope that clears things up a bit.

A Collecting Conundrum

Recently, I added another 1968 error to my collection that makes me question whether my latest acquisition is truly an error. The coin that has caused this conundrum is a 1968 misaligned-die cent. For those unfamiliar with the term, a misaligned die may look like an off-center strike to the casual observer, but it is not. The easiest clue is that the reverse is centered, whereas the obverse is not. The other clue is that the coin is round and not misshapen, which occurs when a planchet is struck outside of the collar and gives the off-center coin the appearance of sliding off the planchet. In the case of my cent, there was no problem with the planchet dropping into the collar. The only issue is that the upper die was not in the correct alignment when it came down to strike the piece.

With this in mind, there is a good chance there could be another cent out there that looks exactly like mine. It’s not like these were created with a screw press and carefully inspected after being struck, so it is possible that quite a few went into the hopper before the misalignment was discovered. So, when using the definition of error that I’m familiar with, it would seem my 1968 “Freak Show” collection now has a variety in its midst.

Will that force me to now include a 1968 “No S” proof dime in my collection? Unlikely, unless by some chance I am lucky enough to find one hiding in an unchecked proof set some day. Anyway, I hope you enjoyed my rambling where black and white became gray (or is it grey?).