1901-1903

[Dylan Rhodes]

Ladies and gentlemen,

A topic for discussion for anyone who cares about paper.

I have come into possession of a catalog and barring its absence in TPS I have no reason to question its legitimacy. There was a thread on this catalog about a decade ago from my searching but it never reached a public conclusion. This is NOT a reprint of TPS #26 1903 catalog, which I also possess. The font is different, and verbiage is moved around. It is a standalone item. Inside of that catalog was tucked an ejector's introduction insert, an item where I also have no reason to question its legitimacy. The insert is identical in description to the folder mentioned in item #25 in TPS but it's just a touch slimmer at 9 7/8" wide when opened. Now, we all know that Cornell Publications has long had a repro of what they claim to be a 1902 catalog with a green cover (Anyone know how they come to that conclusion?). Assuming that they copied their original in its true form and it possess a green cover, that would make this catalog different than that. Being that this catalog was furnished with ejectors insert and TPS has that folder listed as 1901, can we postulate the following?:

1. Black Cover w/ ejector insert - 1901 catalog
2. Green cover - 1902 catalog
3. Crimson Cover - 1903 catalog

Or do we think all three versions of this catalog were co-existing and any version may or may not have had the insert in it? This time period is getting blurry....

The black catalog still states "after 35 years" on the opening page, but we have long known Parker Bros to embellish their history here and there.

[Dean Romig]

Hmmm… the rarest of the rare…?





.

[Dylan Rhodes]

Dean, not really sure to be honest. Everything checks out for it to be legitimate to me. Staples are well rusted, aging and staining throughout, looking at the text under a magnifying glass would show random lithographic errors you would expect. However, the most compelling evidence is in the changing of verbiage and page layouts. At that point, it seems highly unlikely to be a reproduction.

[Bill Murphy]

Two questions. Do all three catalogs contain the 35 year claim? Question #2. Are we sure that everything Cornell prints was copied from an original? I see no reason to think that your black catalog is not original since it has major changes from the others.

[Dylan Rhodes]

Bill, I know the bonafide crimson catalog contains the 35-year verbiage. I was contemplating purchasing the Cornell version as an academic study. Perhaps someone on this forum has one floating around that could save me a few bucks and check the first page?

I think there is some merit to the Cornell piece taking some liberties in the color. Both the crimson version and the black version are essentially two colors with the stock of the gun on the cover matching the primary color of the image. The cornell piece has at least 5 different colors present.

[Bill Murphy]

What do you want to know about the "first page"? The first page of the crimson original or the Cornell copy? Do any of the three mention ejectors in the booklet itself? My crimson edition does not mention ejectors.

[Dylan Rhodes]

Bill, does the Cornell version have the 35 year verbiage or mention ejectors?. My black and my crimson both have the 35 year verbiage and both do not mention ejectors.

[Bill Murphy]

I don't think I have a Cornell copy of any of the three.

[Dylan Rhodes]

Thanks Bill,

I’ll pick one of their green ones up for an academic comparison. For posterity and to avoid anyone having to rehash this, I think the conclusion is this is an undocumented legitimate catalog from the 1901-1903 timeframe.

I don’t know how many newly discovered pieces of paper there have been since TPS, surely this version isn’t the only known undocumented. If TPS volume 3 comes to reality i would be interested in an addendum or a “new since” type chapter on paper, and would gladly loan this catalog out for inclusion.

[Bill Murphy]

OK, Dylan, I have a pocket catalog with prices dated November 18, 1916 that is described in a thread from November where I corresponed with Bill Zachow. It is a Clown Catalog without the Clown cover. It is not described in TPS, but it is a legitimate Parker catalog. I assume the date of the catalog is 1916, rarer than the Clown, but not as interesting.