1c 1851 Plate 3 Stamps

91L3. The Neinken drawing shows the mark in the E of ONE as well as the short NW-SE diagonal line outside the right side of the medallion, but not the slightly right-leaning line in the upper right margin partially obscured by the cancel. However, a stamp on cover offered in Siegel sale 1144 (Lot 27) described as position 91L3 shows this line clearly. The Siegel database is a great aid to plating.

dudley - very nice. 91L3 looks correct to me.
The color is also a nice 1856 printing, but used in April 1857 per the CDS.

Great find.

Send me the image to upload it.
Plate 3 needs a lot of images.

Here is something that I found this weekend...

The Neinken drawing for 26L3 is incorrect. The guide dot is wrong and the other marks shown do not exist on that position. Here is the Neinken drawing and a strip of 3 that is 24-26L3. The 24L3 has a plate crack that is undefinable at the bottom left.

Good to know thanks.

I know that there have been some significant corrections to the middle right part of the left pane, but I don't have a record of what they are.

Here is a nice pair that may be plate 3. I checked the guide dots on plate 1L and plate 2 with no matches for the pair. My best guess to match the guide dots at this point is 47-48L3 or 67-68L3 but other marks are not apparent for these two positions. Any opinions are welcome.

jaxom, another clue is the rather even vertical spacing between the stamps (on Plate 3 left pane vertical row 8 is noticeably lower than vertical row 7). This pair impresses me as Plate 2 (blurs at top, "walking stick" mark at lower right of right-hand stamp). Unfortunately, my eye is no good at making color distinctions--perhaps someone can weigh in on whether this pair has a Plate 3 color. I thought 66-67R2 might be a possible but am not sure that the placement of the guide dot on the left-hand stamp matches 66R2.

Jaxom, tho the 67/68L3 are the closest to those you listed (I couldn't find a comparable for the 64/65L3) I'm not comfortable calling them a match. There are certainly many similarities and the differences I see may just be inking irregularities. Plate 3 comparables are hard to find. The 67/68L3 pair in Siegel was what I was using (assuming it was correctly determined).

I don't believe dudley's suggestion of 66/67R2 is correct either.

Deep Cert informs me this is 47-48L3.
Good job jaxom.

I will post his reasoning at a later date.

I had noted the square guide dots as well.
I have often used that as a hint that something might be plate 3.
The dots themselves sometimes have a look to them. These have it.

Thanks a lot txstamp. I have been looking at this pair for days. My best choice was 47-48L3 but the Neinken plating marks are hard to find on this copy compared to the Siegel strip of 3, in which the plating marks are more well defined. I would be interested in Deep Cert's reasoning as well. Made my day. It is a really nicely centered pair for the issue.

Jaxom, the one mark (on the right stamp) which I had hopes of finding elsewhere is the horizontal line starting at the eyelash and moving left, but could find no equal in Plate 3 or 4.
Looking forward to hearing 'Deep Cert' rationale from txstamp! I only had Neinken's drawing of 47-48L3 to go by but ruled it out based on the drawings.

I had come up with 47-48L3 solely based upon the two guide dots. I could not find a match on plates 1 or 2 like it. There were a few other spots listed at top that I was considering but the guide dots were not as close. I was having problems finding the other marks to confirm the positions. I have a plate 3 guide dot chart in progress.

Txstamp, I would still be interested in what Deep Cert had to say on this pair. You never got back to it. Others expressed interest as well.

There has been a lot of rework to this part of the left pane of plate 3, since the Neinken book. Much has not been published, unfortunately, and so its a bit difficult to provide a full clarification, but I'll list some of it courtesy of Deep Cert.

jaxom's 47-48L3 pair marked up:



A pair, 67-68L3, for reference:



First off, Neinken's mats for 47-48-49L3 have been moved up to actually be 27-28-29L3.

Here's a markup of the pair in question, with a few distinctive features noted with red arrows.

- Blur inside orns A/B of 47L3.
- Blur inside orn H of 47L3.
- Unusually weak orn Q1 of 47L3.

- Blur to right of left plume of 48L3.
- Candy cane off orn R of 48L3.
- Blur in orn Z of 48L3.

67-68L3 can be eliminated for this, since 67L3 has a crack in orn A.

The following stamp is believed to be 47L3, and it matches the left stamp in jaxom's pair:



The following two stamps are believed to be 48L3, and match the right stamp in jaxom's pair: