A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Stamps » General Discussion
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

(RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 5th 08, 06:26 AM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
Joshua McGee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887

Hi,

Can anyone help with this? I have what appear to be two Princess Wilhelmina
stamps of the 1894 issue that are postmarked in 1887. They are cancelled
exactly a week apart in the same city. The 8s do not appear to be modified
9s.

Image: http://www.mcgees.org/img/netherlands43.jpeg

Do people think these are authentic, and, if so, is there any premium to
them?

Regards,

Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org



Ads
  #2  
Old January 5th 08, 06:47 AM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
Joshua McGee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887

The image link is now fixed.

Sorry for the double-post, new news program.

- Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org

"Joshua McGee" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Can anyone help with this? I have what appear to be two Princess
Wilhelmina
stamps of the 1894 issue that are postmarked in 1887. They are cancelled
exactly a week apart in the same city. The 8s do not appear to be
modified
9s.

Image: http://www.mcgees.org/img/netherlands43.jpeg

Do people think these are authentic, and, if so, is there any premium to
them?

Regards,

Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org





  #3  
Old January 5th 08, 02:55 PM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
Jay T. Carrigan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 116
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887

To me, both appear to be '97' with overinked 9's. Note
that while there is an indentation on the left side of
the figure, the right side is perfectly straight. Also,
if they were 8's, the top circle should be smaller than
the bottom one. Here it's the opposite.

Jay Carrigan change domain to mchsi
www.jaypex.com


In article , says...

The image link is now fixed.

Sorry for the double-post, new news program.

- Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org

"Joshua McGee" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Can anyone help with this? I have what appear to be two Princess
Wilhelmina
stamps of the 1894 issue that are postmarked in 1887. They are cancelled
exactly a week apart in the same city. The 8s do not appear to be
modified
9s.

Image: http://www.mcgees.org/img/netherlands43.jpeg

Do people think these are authentic, and, if so, is there any premium to
them?

Regards,

Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org






  #4  
Old January 5th 08, 06:37 PM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
A. van Reenen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887

I agree to Jay Carrigan's comment. To support it further: the type of cancel
used on both stamps was issued to Rotterdam on August 31, 1895.

Ton

"Jay T. Carrigan" schreef in bericht
news:__Lfj.286474$Fc.215367@attbi_s21...
To me, both appear to be '97' with overinked 9's. Note
that while there is an indentation on the left side of
the figure, the right side is perfectly straight. Also,
if they were 8's, the top circle should be smaller than
the bottom one. Here it's the opposite.

Jay Carrigan change domain to mchsi
www.jaypex.com


In article , says...

The image link is now fixed.

Sorry for the double-post, new news program.

- Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org

"Joshua McGee" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Can anyone help with this? I have what appear to be two Princess
Wilhelmina
stamps of the 1894 issue that are postmarked in 1887. They are
cancelled
exactly a week apart in the same city. The 8s do not appear to be
modified
9s.

Image: http://www.mcgees.org/img/netherlands43.jpeg

Do people think these are authentic, and, if so, is there any premium to
them?

Regards,

Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org








  #5  
Old January 5th 08, 06:40 PM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
A. van Reenen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887

I agree to Jay Carrigan's commet. Even more so since the type of cancel used
on both stamps was issued to Rotterdam on August 31, 1895.

Ton

"Jay T. Carrigan" schreef in bericht
news:__Lfj.286474$Fc.215367@attbi_s21...
To me, both appear to be '97' with overinked 9's. Note
that while there is an indentation on the left side of
the figure, the right side is perfectly straight. Also,
if they were 8's, the top circle should be smaller than
the bottom one. Here it's the opposite.

Jay Carrigan change domain to mchsi
www.jaypex.com


In article , says...

The image link is now fixed.

Sorry for the double-post, new news program.

- Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org

"Joshua McGee" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Can anyone help with this? I have what appear to be two Princess
Wilhelmina
stamps of the 1894 issue that are postmarked in 1887. They are
cancelled
exactly a week apart in the same city. The 8s do not appear to be
modified
9s.

Image: http://www.mcgees.org/img/netherlands43.jpeg

Do people think these are authentic, and, if so, is there any premium to
them?

Regards,

Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org








  #6  
Old January 5th 08, 06:44 PM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
hvschaik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887

This stamp was issued first in 1891 ! Dutch Catalogue NVPH # 37
So 1887 is impossible!
Regards,
Hans

Jay T. Carrigan schreef:
To me, both appear to be '97' with overinked 9's. Note
that while there is an indentation on the left side of
the figure, the right side is perfectly straight. Also,
if they were 8's, the top circle should be smaller than
the bottom one. Here it's the opposite.

Jay Carrigan change domain to mchsi
www.jaypex.com


In article , says...
The image link is now fixed.

Sorry for the double-post, new news program.

- Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org

"Joshua McGee" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Can anyone help with this? I have what appear to be two Princess
Wilhelmina
stamps of the 1894 issue that are postmarked in 1887. They are cancelled
exactly a week apart in the same city. The 8s do not appear to be
modified
9s.

Image: http://www.mcgees.org/img/netherlands43.jpeg

Do people think these are authentic, and, if so, is there any premium to
them?

Regards,

Joshua McGee
http://www.mcgees.org





  #7  
Old January 6th 08, 12:16 AM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
Rodney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,814
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887

Hans,
I took it that the OP knew this,
but sought opinions as to their being genuine cancels.
and not engineered.

This stamp was issued first in 1891 ! Dutch Catalogue NVPH # 37
So 1887 is impossible!
Regards,
Hans



  #8  
Old January 6th 08, 03:06 AM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
Joshua McGee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887

Thanks, Rodney. I thought there were three possibilities:

1) Wrong decade slug in the cancellation die
2) Forged cancel
3) Over-inking leading to a '9' appearing as an '8'

Ton's comment, while fascinating, does not necessarily rule out any of the
possibilities. But upon advice, I examined the 8 in the '18" to see how a
proper '8' appears in the slug font. And I think it's pretty clear it's
option 3 above.

Thanks, everyone.

- Joshua McGee

"rodney" wrote in message
...
Hans,
I took it that the OP knew this,
but sought opinions as to their being genuine cancels.
and not engineered.

This stamp was issued first in 1891 ! Dutch Catalogue NVPH # 37
So 1887 is impossible!
Regards,
Hans





  #9  
Old January 6th 08, 04:02 AM posted to rec.collecting.stamps.discuss
Rodney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,814
Default (RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887


"Joshua McGee"
And I think it's pretty clear it's option 3 above.


That was my opinion too,
it is still quirky that you have two, just a few days apart
and even having being struck at a similar jaunty angle.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
(RCSD) Netherlands Scott #43 postmarked 1887 Joshua McGee General Discussion 0 January 5th 08 06:25 AM
(RCSD) Scott numbers are still strange Ralphael1 General Discussion 5 August 24th 07 12:10 PM
(RCSD) UN vs Scott Ralphael1 General Discussion 8 August 13th 07 12:44 PM
(RCSD) Was: Scott v Showgard mounts. Rod General Discussion 0 August 8th 07 03:16 AM
Netherlands Scott #43 Alan W. Craft General Discussion 16 September 11th 04 03:19 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.