My Two Cents With Ken 210, 211B

Just got to this. I checked the Berkun/Siskin listing, and it references an item on piece that sold in Siegel auction 543 as lot 608 back in 1979. I have that sale cat in my collection and was able to check directly. Unfortunately, the Berkun/Siskin listing is in error, since the item Siegel sold is a vertical imperf pair used on piece dated 2/21/90 of Scott 213a, the 2c green imperf on stamp paper now listed as a proof, but with no note about used examples. It is illustrated, but is not a 211B.

The only other listing that B/S has for 211B is the pair I showed you above. On that let me offer one slight corrective. B/S does not list it as an EDU but as an EDC, earliest date cancelled, I believe.

In this case the difference may be of some significance, since the pair is indeed cancelled, but not used (still bearing its original gum). However, on the principle that the usage of proof samples may constitute "use" in the philatelic sense, there are three items bearing 211B which ought to be of some interest. These are blocks of 211B of 36, 28, and two blocks of 6 affixed to three sheets of paper with an inscription hand written on the backs of the pages stating the purpose of these samples. However, they are not dated and do not have any kind of stamped marking. As far as I'm concerned, they are not documentable from a dating standpoint, but it seems they were earlier uses of the samples than the documented pair with the handstamp. And that explains why it matters to say that the pair is an EDC rather than an EDU.

Wow! quite the debate. If we are debating what the experts say, may I remind you that for more than a generation Scott # 66 was considered a postage stamp by the experts as proven by my copy of the 1958 Scott specialized catalog. So there you go experts don't know it all.

@wash 500

Your point being that if experts don't know everything, then they don't know anything?

Or are you suggesting that in this hobby there is no such thing as an expert?

From what I have seen of #211B which has only been one, is that the printing seem to be very crisp and clean as if it were a proof or a trial color on stamp paper. The only other stamp that has struck me that way was a #66 which is also a trial color proof on stamp paper.

I know I am new to stamps but I have a question about my 211 I have three but one is not perf on one side? Is that common?

The stamps that you are showing in the scan are 210s, not 211. The straight edge just means that the stamp was at the position in the pane where the knife cut the panes into sheets.
Glenn Estus

hi all, I know the odds of a used 211b but I wanted to post a picture and gather opinions...

It should be remembered that special printings were not highly thought of or sought after for several years after printing. It's entirely possible that a dealer used some to send mail to a few of those collectors who actually cared.

Revcollector +1

Ahh, the Hunt for the Red October*. Didn't they make a movie about that?

* -- Red Brown October 1883 special printing.

In my specialized color study there are several ranges: Metallic Red Brown ('83), Metallic Red Brown with Brown ('83-'84), Orange Brown ('84-'85), Orange Brown with Brown ('84-'85), Red Brown (anline) ('85-'87), Red Brown with brown (anline) ('85-'87).

Below is what to look for--a dealer cover with metallic red brown stamps. This pair is clipped at the bottom, which is something the clerk who dispensed the special printings sometimes did. Good luck getting a cert though.

Allen, what are we supposed to make of the cover you are showing here? It has a better shot at being a first day cover than a special printing on cover, especially if you are claiming an 1883 year date.

When is that cover dated?

A cert would be possible; the PF has a 211B in it's reference collection. And it has the VSC6000 to do a range of different studies as well; inks paper, etc.

Besides having a distinct color, the fine background lines within the vignette are clear and reasonably complete on 211B examples I have examined. Regular printings lack the fine detail, especially in the lower part of the vignette background.

It's a Newmarket NH postmark for sure, but can't be sure of the date. It just seemed unusual to me that a stamp dealer would take scissors to separate stamps, even ones as off-center as these.

Note, I seriously doubt this pair is a special printing. "Just saying" that various stamp dealers bought the special printings in 1885, and we don't know what happened to them afterwards. The only certified 4-cent 1883 special printing has provenance, otherwise we wouldn't know it from the regular issue either.

So far as the certified 211B examples go, I have two of them in my collection. These are the aniline inks of 1885-6, so definitely a later printing.

Taking a stab at the 211b. I think the one on the left is but maybe just color fade.