Also, it was also very common for those early Columbia records to also be issued, sometimes with pseudonymous artist credits, on various client labels that Columbia pressed - for example Harvard and Oxford which were in-house labels for Sears, Roebuck and Company as well as the Standard, Harmony and United labels, all of which had over sized spindle holes designed to fit phonographs made by specific manufacturers.Phonographs with the odd sized spindles were sold at a discount or given away as premiums because, to use them, owners had to buy their brand of records with the correct sized hole (or drill out wider holes in records from other labels - which was not uncommon for people to do).So, if I understand it correctly, while my record dates from 1905-1906 the recording it features is indeed from 1901, but this particular record is a reissue? Had the Columbia label design not changed, there would be no way of being able to date the pressing.
But my understanding is that, in most cases, the label design that was current when the record was initially issued is usually considered to be the more collectible.
Those very early Columbia recordings can also be confusing in that, when Columbia came out with its double disc records in 1908, a great many of those early recordings were paired up and issued under a new catalog number.
The very early blue wax discs still used the old black Viva-Tonal labels, and when those labels ran out, a blue label was used.
When Columbia discontinued the blue shellac, the blue label continued to be used but on black shellac.
So, if I understand it correctly, while my record dates from 1905-1906 the recording it features is indeed from 1901, but this particular record is a reissue?