What Do Proof And Essay Experts Think Of This Stamp?

I took a chance and bid and won this stamp at the German "Christoph Gärtner" auction on SAN. From the description you'd think this was a Roosevelt proof, 235P2. But the margins are too narrow for that. The margins look more like a 235P2a but those are most often on yellowed paper (though not always). The bottom edge is rough which further confuses me. Any thoughts? I couldn't find any other proofs or essays to match in Scott. Here's the description from the auction house (1893, Columbus 6c. violet blue imperforate PROOF on thin white wove ungummed paper)

It is a beautiful stamp.

I know nothing on the proofs, so no comment there.
But I am waiting for some responses to soak up more info.

you might ask Jim Lee. He's the essay and proof expert.
http://jameslee.com

I don't know about proofs from the Columbian era, but I've studied some earlier ones. One key clue is that the item is not in the issued color - thus Trial Color proof of some sort. Just from memory, I want to say that both the Roosevelts and Pan-Pacifics tended to be pulled in a color at least close to the issued stamp color. Unless the Columbians are different, I'd hedge against either of those for this.

Interesting item by the way - I can understand why you took a shot at it.

what did Gärtner tell you about this? Had they any background or reasons for defining it as they did? This would be my first step.

Thanks. What I posted is all I have from Gartner. Maybe I can ask them if they have any info. Regarding color I agree that Roosevelts are usually closer to the original colors. I haven't found any Pan Pacific Columbian proofs on line to compare.

This is the true color, on a card proof, from my collection.





The USPOD had five printings of proofs which were sold to the public in the latter part of the 19th century. These were on both India paper and card. These sold as sets and mailed in specific envelopes designed to hold the proofs. While I do not have an example of the envelope for the Columbian set, here's an example of the envelope used for the first issue proofs, Scott 40-47. The same type of envelope was used for the Columbian series, with printing which would have identified it as such. Here's the envelope:





Comparatively, the designs are a match, so both are complete. The only listed essay for Scott 235 is for an essay which exhibited incomplete design of the horse's head and the four corners. This is ruled out.

There are no trial color proofs listed for this stamp, but there are a series of trial color proofs for the two cent and the four cent listed in Brazer's book on essays. There is a listing for dim dusky blue, which this might be. These, however were printed on thin hard card and you state your example is on thin white wove ungummed paper. That presents a problem.

Given that the color is supposed to be purple, what you likely have is a color changeling on India paper, Scott 235P3. If this is India paper, you should notice that it is very thin, and white. This type of paper was used particularly for proofs as it readily absorbed the ink, providing a clear impression of the stamp and color. These are also plate proofs as an entire plate would be made up and printed, as opposed to a die proof which used a single die to create the image.

It is possible that this is an unlisted trial color variety, which Brazer was unaware of. To determine which it is, you will need an opinion from an expertization service. The best one for this piece would probably be the Philatelic Foundation.

Before doing that, I would do as chipg recommended and contact James Lee. Get his opinion and if he feels it might be a trial color proof, then go with the certificate.

Hope this helps.

Fascinating discussion so far. I am amazed at the knowledge shared by this forum. Thanks to everyone that participates.

Thanks Stampman. I won't have the stamp in my hands for a couple weeks yet. I will certainly check the paper type then. I think that is going to be a critical part of the answer. I will chime back in then.

Found something interesting. There is a set of Trans-Mississippi proofs that are in the upcoming Kelleher sale that are listed as "printed for a purpose other than placement in a Roosevelt album" with a PF cert. (Lot #1528) I looked up the cert and found one for the 1c. It is cert #528924. Here is the language in the cert: "WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT
IT IS NOT SCOTT 285P2a, RATHER IT IS A SCOTT 285P2 VARIETY, SMALL DIE PROOF ON WHITE WOVE, BUT PRINTED FOR A PURPOSE OTHER THAN PLACEMENT IN A ROOSEVELT ALBUM"

So it looks like a similar situation. Something resembling a Panama-Pacific proof, but not yellowed. The PF chose calling it a "P2 variety". A possibility.

As I mentioned, there are essays and proofs surfacing in the last few decades which Clarence Brazer was not aware of, and which are not listed in the literature.

As rlsny noted in the Kelleher listing, the existence of such raises questions even for the Philatelic Foundation.

I'm looking forward to finding out what the OP discovers when the proof is in hand.

So I received the stamp today. Here's what I can see:

- margins are 2-2.7mm - similar to the Panama-Pacific Proofs. Too small for Roosevelts
- paper is off-white - not lily white and not really yellowed either
- it does appear to be wove paper as was used in both Roosevelt and Panama-Pacific proofs

This article: https://siegelauctions.com/enc/p2a.htm

describes research showing that stamps similar to the Panama-Pacifics were made after 1914 in small numbers.

Since the color doesn't match the regular Columbian 6 cent it could have been a color test print that was put aside and not used in an album.

So, my understanding is that this might be either a color test for the Panama-Pacifics or somewhat more likely, a later proof printed for an unknown reason.

Condition-wise: The image is super sharp and the color is a somewhat brighter and darker blue than shown in the auction scan. The bottom edge is rough - not sure what that means. Stamp seems sound - no thins. There is a light hinge mark.

I'm quite happy with the purchase even not really being sure what I've got. I might bring it to the PF at some point but I have a feeling there is just limited information available to base a identification on.

fresh scan:

Nice item.
Small die Trial Color proof of some sort seems to apply, which would be consistent with the post 1915 printings that Ronald Burns refers to.