Grill-Like Marks On A 11A - Just Someone Experimenting With Fake Grill Machine?

Anyone want to venture a guess as to how these grill-like marks got here?

I'm going to speculate that the stamp was likely affixed with a wax seal and that is the remnant from it.

When I was a kid someone at church gave me his old collection, and it contained a quite a few stamps with a very similar pattern on the back. I ask him about them. He said that after soaking stamps he would lay them face up on a towel inside a book press. I resoaked and pressed them, and most of the dents went away. ;)

Interesting ideas so far. The wax seal idea seems somewhat more probable, but the area covered by dots seems to be in the center of the stamp. A seal there wouldn't actually affix it to anything. But ok. Could be that. I think the dots are too sharp to be from a towel - but sounds like a good lesson on how not to dry stamps.

The stamp was affixed with two drops of wax and pressed on with the same tool used to seal letters, folded letters usually. Pretty common really.

ok, now I understand. So the seal press has points on it and those pressed into the stamp. Thanks for that explanation. I feel just a bit wiser today.

I have one just like it, in the bank (no photo - sorry!), and always thought of it as some type of 'environmental' damage, like someone was rolling a pointy thing (for some unknown reason) and the stamp/envelope happened to be underneath. It doesn't look anything like a real PO grilling device, nor even a very early attempt at such a device. It also has been in my family since the 1930's, so it doesn't seem to be a 'modern' attempt at underhandedness. Although, in the 1930's, the 1930's probably seemed modern (if you know what I mean) and they were not above doing underhanded things for a few bucks. Anyway, you and I have the 'same' thing. It is nice to see some new ideas here about what caused it/them!!

hi,

some people did not trust the gum on stamps and attached by wax.this is what might have caused it.

below see my PF certified example of scott 1 on RR cover

Interesting that the PF typo'd on the cert. Editing is a lost art.

I can't see a typo. Maybe I need another caffeine.

In the final statement of opinion the word "with" is entered twice. ...with with ...

Aha! That is like one of those YouTube "Spot The 7 Errors" puzzles. I can only ever spot 6.

That's why it is better to point out the exact error, rather than a casual mention which makes it into a game.
Why not just initially say: "Did you notice the 'with with' typo on the cert"?