Is This A 129 Or 118 Or ?

A dealer has this stamp listed as a #129 but the shading lines behind the vignette look clearly like a #118. But it supposedly has no grill. Could this be a 118 with a lightly pressed grill, or a 118a (no grill), or are there other options?

What is going on with those perfs in the lower left?

Looks like it has been re-perfed.

You are showing a great picture! Could you also post a picture of the back? I see what looks like a blue Lay=out Line straight through the middle, with a dot under the "15"


Peter

Zebra - You are 100% correct that it is not a 129. It is a 118 and both the right and bottom sides are suspect IMO. I would not be surprised if this stamp was created from a plate proof and is entirely bogus. The centering screams out to be highly graded so you have to ask why it has not been submitted. This would be a mid to high five figure stamp.

Edit: Removed opinion on altered proof since vignette lines would be incorrect.

If you have the money, trust the dealer to allow you to get a certificate and refund money if need after the certificate buy it and send it in. If good, either as a 118 or 129, you have a stamp of significance especially if purchased at the 129 price. That said, this does not have the Type III shading need for a 129 nor the shading of the 119.

The clear, sharp blue layout lines indicate an early impression from the new plate. These layout lines and dot may allow the stamp to be plated as to position well. That plating would allow clear determination if one of the edges started as a straight edge. (I am writing this post in the order one, or at least me, consider such things).


Now as a 129 is a fraction of the 118 mint, you need to assess your conscience if the dealer really is listing this at the 129 price.




I show from Siegel Power search, sale 1188 lot 87 described in part as "The finest known block of the 15¢ Type I 1869 Pictorial Issue--acclaimed in the 1956 Caspary sale to be 'one of the most outstanding 1869 items known'" Your examples centering is on par with these six as well as the strength of the layout lines and dot. Yours as pointed out by Don is not from this block.

As to the OP 118 shown, WOW, just WOW! But a cert would point out any issues.

Here is more on the block shown.

15¢ Brown & Blue, Type I (118), horizontal block of six, original gum, each stamp superbly centered, bright colors and fresh paper

PROVENANCE

* Henry J. Duveen (listed in Phillips's November 1922 book; sold privately to Hind through Phillips)

* Arthur Hind, Phillips-Kennett sale, 11/20-24/1933, lot 386, to Colson for Caspary

* Alfred H. Caspary, H. R. Harmer sale, 11/19-21/1956, lot 388, to Weills for Phillips--featured as "A magnificent block and a great showpiece. One of the most outstanding 1869 items known"

* Benjamin D. Phillips (collection sold privately to Weills, 1968)

* Stephen D. Bechtel, Sr. (collection sold privately in 1993; block sold privately to Zoellner)

* Robert Zoellner, Siegel Auction Galleries, 10/8-10/1998, Sale 804, lot 288, to William H. Gross

CENSUS, LITERATURE AND EXHIBITION REFERENCES

* Lester G. Brookman, United States Postage Stamps of the 19th Century, Vol. II, p. 174

* Jonathan W. Rose, United States Postage Stamps of 1869, p. 108

* World Stamp Show 2016 Court of Honor (Gross)

CONDITION NOTES

* Extremely Fine; top left stamp has a few tiny thin specks in grill (one has pinpoint break)

What is "James Smillie Perforation"? I saw this term in StampWorld in regard to this stamp.

Jame was the engraver. As to the "perforation" attached to his name, I have no idea and that it also does not matter one bit. Your question is best direct at StampWorld as to why it did not use punctuation which is why you are confused Rob Roy. The quote is, " Engraving: James Smillie Perforation: 12"

(Note: This part (quote above) of PPG's post above has been removed by him, breaking the thread. I have added the original, now missing part of his post above.)

On the original posters image, the top layout line is slightly to the right of the peak as shown here


On the block of six, this line appears to be on orientated towards the left of the peak?


Don

You are correct, not from the block which is good news. Still a 118.

With everything else that is sometimes drawn in, are layout lines not known to be drawn in?

Well, this went off the rails fast. Not sure if I completely understand but I think that PPG is saying that the OP's stamp is from the block of six? No, not even a contender. Just look at the vignette placement. Now, we could go round and round about different things, but the question remains, does this stamp have a certificate? If not, there is a BIG problem here because it would if it was the real fault free deal.

PS: Forget the layout lines. You can find SCADS of these out there with the layout lines and it does little to help with determining reperfing other than muddy the already muddy waters.

The reason why no cert would raise a VERY red flag:

PPG no longer is saying the OP example is from the block. PPG was too quick on the comparison. I will see PPG goes to bed tonight without dessert.

Plate position determination would uncover if a stamp came with a straight edge. I am not sure if the 118 has been plated. That said, finding 1869s with SEs is tough as I have been looking for a position with a SE for a couple of years.

So now quality stamps must have hidden problems if they do not have a cert? C3a, are all 100 positions certified? Additionally, certification means little as to condition since condition can change as soon as if not before the cert is printed. Stuff happens.

Well, given the centering and overall appearance the OP's stamp would be Top of the PoP if genuine and unaltered not to mention what a condition rarity such a specimen would be in mint condition. It could be a mid-five figure stamp. IF it does not have a cert (being very repetitive here I know) there is a skunk in the building. Would love to have the dealer link.

The block went for $150,000.00 and does not show in the PoP reports.

Very few stamps of this (if genuine) caliber would not have at least one certificate because not many people are going to drop five figures on a "maybe". No?

If this stamp scored a grade 90 or even 95 the seller would base their ask off of SMQ rather than straight cv. No?

I don't understand the reticence in admitting that this makes no sense unless the OP comes back and says, "I forgot to mention that it has two certs graded 90". But that would raise the question of why the stamp is misidentified as a 129. No?