Another Washington #492 Question. 3 Lines In Left Ribbon??

So this cover has I assume Scott 492 but it has more shading lines in the left ribbon. ??? everything else points to type III.

It is #492 or #455 depending upon whether or not there is a watermark.

I agree but please comment on the additional mark in the left ribbon.

It's a Type III. There are lots of odd variations in these varieties. Many, many, many things can cause such oddities to appear. This is commonly referred to as "Flyspeck philately", where you notice every tiny variation from "the norm". The guide for type in this case, points out the primary characteristics of this type. Given it's 1917 post mark, it is most likely a 492 (issued from March 20, 1917).

Hi Classic,I am familiar with fly speck philately. I have the book on bureau plate varieties. That is not necessarily the case, since in this series, many little variations add up to a lot of money and even a different listing. I already stated that I assumed it was 492. that is not the issue. The issue is, has anyone else seen this variation? .

Classic Philatelist-- Just an FYI, Max Johl in his works gives the "issue" date as 11/17/1917. Below is the current EDU, unless another has been discovered since I sent this one into Scott (which is certainly possible--2017 is the most current Scott Specialized that I have.)

3193zd, I don't recall seeing what your referring to on.

Thanks Gator. Wow! Thats pushing the date back. Nice cover. How were you able to determine this was not 455? Did you have to take the stamp off the cover? And what would you speculate might be the actual issue date?

Yes, the stamp had to be lifted, With the W/Fs, sometimes that's the only way to establish the correct Scott number.

so why did you do this with this particular stamp? Or do you lift many off cover?

If I find good candidates for EDUs and acquire them, and if the cancellation is such that it isn't questionable that the stamp(s) belong on the cover, I will lift the stamp to verify watermarking, if that is what is needed to verify it. If there's to be uncertainty in that regard, I'll first send a scan into whoever will be certifying it and getting their approval to lift it first (only done so with the APS and Bill Weiss to date). I currently have EDUs for #374, #377, #408H (in Berkin-Siskin data base--but that won't hold up for long), #409H, #500 (not the discovery copy, but a tie) and #492. I have a new EDU for #489 in at the Philatelic Foundation; just waiting for it to come back--no need to lift that one since thats all it could be. Some collectors do not recommend lifting stamps. With the W/Fs, sometimes its necessary.

Al E. and 3193zd,
My point was the cover has a cancellation of November 1917, and since the 492 was being issued since 1917, it was likely that the cover is a 492. It's possible someone just held onto a 455 before they started issuing them in 1915. So I'm just suggesting that balance of probability based on his cancel being from late 1917 puts it most likely as a 492. If EDU got earlier than my source, that doesn't change my statement at all.