Looking For Help To Identify This 17 Proof

This came as part of a recent acquisition from a collection purchase from Siegel. It has a PF and APS cert both old and both just say it is a proof.

But I can't find a proof listed that matches. the 17P1 and 17E1 are both super rare, but neither seems right.

Fingers crossed it's a rarity, but looking for input.

Have you looked at the "44's" such as 44P3-5? What kind of paper is it printed on?

Also 36BP5 plate proof on stamp paper, sometimes confused for a #17 unused.

If you have certificates, do they give a catalog number of the proof?

Rog, yes, I looked at the 44s. They all say greenish black - this one has no sign of greenishness.

Zebra, good hint. Could be, but Scott says "broken frame lines" - so maybe not.

The APS cert says 17P. The PF cert just says 1851 12c black and "it is a proof".

That would indicate to me that the PF did not think it one of the listed proofs. There is no reason to think that every proof is currently listed, though.

What type of paper is it printed on?

The paper doesn't seem like stamp paper - though I'm not sure what stamp I should compare it to. It seems very light and thin - more likely india. From the back the design is very clear and sharp when held to the light.

Regarding the PF cert, it is dated 1963. So I'm just not sure we should read too much into it.

44P3 seems like a really good match. The position dots and frame lines all compare well. I would not get too hung up on the greenish part of the color name.

Well, if resubmitted, you should get much more detail today. If it is in fact, for today, an unlisted proof you could contact Scott and then get it listed. As has been pointed out, not all proofs have been listed. I personally hold two such, one on an unlisted die proof paper and the other an unlisted essay die proof both in my specialty area. I have also had essay die proof material added to Scott after I purchased the item and Scott became aware, specifically Q12h-E1. It came to the public at a different time than the large essay die proof set, Q12a-E1 through Q12g-E1.

Edit:



I will use myself as a prime example. I purchased and put together a seventeen item set of P2a. After my purchases, much work and publication of the work was undertaken by a philatelic postage due scholar. When I finally took notice that my copy of one item was not mentioned by him, I asked him why? Well he did all of his research on that value after I owned it and thus he did not know it existed. I had gotten it via private treaty from Stanley Pillar circa 1980 as part of a five proof purchase. Now I was not surprised at his answer. The other set of twelve I had purchased prior (from Phil Bansner) was also via private treaty and its existence was not really generally known. Jim Lee was even unaware of it until I advised him.

My point is if the folks doing the research and listing/documentation of items are not aware of the existence of an example because it was hiding in a collection long term it is fully understandable. My examples have not seen the light of day in the market in over 40 years and both were unpublished private treaty sales under the normal radar of researchers. The example in your OP could have been hidden for the last 60 years, since the 1963 cert.

Those look closer to mine than anything I've found so far. I see the weak inner frame line at the right side below the rosette, which apparently is on the die and only a small percent of the plate positions. I'm definitely not an expert at die proof paper - or ever really fooled around with india much. If there are any tricks you can pass along on figuring out the paper type, I'd love to hear. Thanks.

After staring at this a bit, 44P3 seems like what it is. I think this is the answer. In which case a resubmit is not needed. As usual, not a rarity. The good news, there are some rarities in the lot I bought. It is going to be fun. Cheers and thanks all.

James Lee was my trick. You just need to have an expert look at it. Since Jim retired, you can't plan to have him look at it at a show. The other names which come to mind are even less available.

Edit: If paper type was/is an issue then staring at it does not solve your dilemma unless you were touched by the paper fairy while staring. Oh, can you send her my way?

Parcel, thanks for your comment. I understand that many proofs and essays are still undocumented. I tried looking into those stamps often sold of Scott #1 and #2 with hash marks decorating the paper away from the stamp. There are so many varieties and colors and very little documentation about which came from which time period. I have one of each - both in black - they appear to be the same design / style. But one is cataloged as an essay and one as a proof. I was pretty sure I didn't have a real "17Px" - but it looks like it wasn't as mysterious as I imagined.

I told you my paper secret. The unlisted large die essay had a clue, "unfinished" was in pencil on the item, at the bottom right, under the image but on the backing card. As to how "unfinished?" We are talking just a few engraving lines.




On Q4, there is a clearly seen dot of color aka period in the tail of the right numeral 4. This exists and originated on the die. However, when the transfer rolls were made, some transfer rolls had the dot removed and others did not. Thus Q4 is found with and without the dot of color. To be clear, on the stamps with the dot of color, it is NOT a layout dot.

Scott does not list that dot of color as a variety which was the actual approved design. Cloudy French listed it in his plate variety encyclopedia. He did not know that was the correct image and he should have listed the removed dot of color as the altered image. Some day I will bring it up with Scott. I needed to do significant work on the subject as the plate numbers listed by French were not good for my purposes. I set out to find a plate number that went to press prior to 1-1-1913 such that the printed stamps were available for sale on 1-1-1913. I eventually found one such plate number with the original dot of color version. Since stamps with the dot of color showed up on cover dated 1-1-1913, my work was needed to validate the use of the stamps on that date. Otherwise the only documented plates as listed in French all went to press after 1-1-1913 clearly bringing question to the date on the covers.

The only place I submitted my written work was my private files and the PF as supporting documentation for their certification of the 1-1-1913 covers. Alas, my file documentation was destroyed in an act of vandalism. I am hoping the PF still retains the original documents. I have been in conversation with the PF regarding this.

Edited: To add a single "s" to a word.

Did a casual comparison of your proof with the block of 4 posted by rogdcam. There are many picayune differences between all 5 examples, but a few stood out. Don't know if they're meaningful, so take this FWIW... In the attached image, your item is the larger of the two. I note:

a) the spot or dash of color on left frame line not present in your example

b) (not indicated) the entire left frame line of your example looks a bit 'scabby,' not ruler-straight as seen in the opposite frame line or the other proofs in that B4

c) lower LH corner, the diagonal dash is missing in your proof, and the filigree filling in the LH corner below the rosette has more lines in it than in the examples from the B4

d) upper RH corner, the frame lines don't looks square.