Scott 279Bc, Does This One Have Dot In S????

No, it is an inclusion.

I think we need the word 'inclusion' included in the glossary here. No pun intended,

Peter

with Peter. Would be a worthy addition I believe.

Philatelic Foundation.


Natural Faults
Inclusions. Any substances incorporated in the paper web during fabrication, and normally different in color from that of the stamp. These are mentioned only if easily visible on the front of the stamp and are not a normal characteristic of the issue.

I agree, "inclusion" should have inclusion in the glossary!

That said, since the cert is silent on the black speck in the S of CENTS, it makes me rather suspect a speck of dirt on the scanner glass and not a part of the stamp.

Also, 279Bc is now type IV. The "dot in S" occurs on Type III stamps. (Note the recent reclassifying of the triangle types and die types of this issue, since the issuance of this certificate, assuming it is accurate.)

A cert from that time period probably would not have included the word inclusion. There was a tendency to not include condition descriptions at the time. It does appear to be an inclusion.

This does not appear to be a typical "dot in "S", but it appears to have a "black foreign object" paper inclusion simulating the "dot in S" variety. Only Bargain Bill could be able to manage to get a "foreign shard" or "sliver" included in his Foundation Certificate and market the stamp at a higher value.

I have a wood sliver lodged in my philatelic tong finger, after going through a box of old of Sc# 379Bf advertising covers. I wonder if I could get the "sliver plus a drop of non-HIV blood certified and aside a cover from the PF and have Bargain Bill sell it for $2,000 as a unique - one and only cover with blood & sliver??? Hmmmmm. Just thinking: this could open a whole new area of Philately.

The PF policy at the time of that certificate was that "natural paper inclusions" would not be mentioned on stamps prior to Scott 300 unless large and unsightly. Additionally, natural paper inclusions on the bluish paper issue (Scott 357 to 366) would not be noted due to the nature of the paper.

Here's a 'Dot in S' as it should look (on a 265).