Is This Right?

I'm dubious about the star cancel on this stamp. Those of you who work with the 1851s: does this look like a legitimate combo to you, or did someone get busy after the fact?

I'm no expert on the 1851 issue, but the purple star screams "Fake" to me.

Appears pen cancel is over top of star; but I am a bit dubious on the deep black color of the pen cancel. I would expect to see it brown with age after 100+ years, looks a bit too fresh to me. That then leads me to think that it was added to add legitimacy to the cancel underneath.
That said, the stamp looks quite fresh, perhaps it has just been stored in a way that prevent oxidation of the pen cancel. Can you scope r high res scan the pen cancel and see if it has any 'rust'?

I'm sure the pen cancel is fine. The purple star cancel is an obvious fake IMO.

@studebaker51 - I'll give you the best my scanner can do. The problem with determining which cancel is on top is complicated by the relative difference in densities. This image attempts to show a spot where they are about on par that way.





As for the "rusting" or "browning out" of the pen cancel I tried looking for some spots that might show it, and didn't really find much.

The best I could do was a close look at the upper right curve in this mark of Zorro:



Which looks like this:





I don't know what you can tell from that, but that's about all I can do with this gear. My initial impression was nicely summed up by Sinclair, hence the need to bring it to the list for affirmation or condemnation as you see it. Did they have star cancels like this in the 1850s?

Thanks, looks like some age on the pen cancel close up. Still looks to me like pen is on top on star.

Perhaps someone could explain why the stamp would be canceled twice. To me, the texture and consistency of the purple ink and the soft granular appearance of the star is a red flag. Is any of the purple ink visible from the back? That would be another red flag. I believe the purple is on top of the pen cancel ink and I do see some places where the ink may have faded a bit.

Clark

There is no star cancel even remotely like this in the Simpson Alexander book US Postal Markings 1851-1861. There are several star cancels but they are all much cruder than this.

The pen cancel is genuine, the star cancel is a bad fake.

You are correct Don...as the picture below shows..The blue arrow shows deeper penetration over the star cancel...was probably inked after the star was placed..in my opinion.

Wert, I'm not familiar with that analysis method. Can you describe it or provide a link?

Historical DNA Collector...No problem...Here is the link even if you use Mac or Windows...haha.
I will have to write a quick PDF explaning how to get there...if you need it...can be confusing.

best of all, it is open source and it is FREE

OH OH..I think I can hear my buddy Don lurking in the background...haha

http://gwyddion.net/download.php

Wert my friend,
I believe that your image shows the pen mark to be darker, not deeper or shallower. An image cannot reveal the z-axis using colors or light/darkness. Your image simply assumes based upon darkness of colors.

Think about it... you are taking a 2d thing, one that only has an x and y axis, and asking the computer to artificially add the third axis. (Obviously the image does not have any 'height' or 'depth' at all.) So while it seems to support the idea that the one cancel in above/below the other, I don't agree that it does.

We could draw a line of the image to add a new, third cancel. Depending on which colors we used, we could get your application to pick it up as being deeper or shallower.
Don

Essay -
Excellent analyses but if there are ballots to be cast, I'm in with CF and BW - normal ms cancel, howlingly fake star.
The only real question is "why" and probably because someone was simply playing around.
Perhaps some similar painfully bogus cancels can be contributed tomorrow. Til then my vote is this item is done.
Bill

Thanks everyone. You've pretty well confirmed my suspicions about that star. As for the pen cancel, I think it's original and genuine. Why? A couple of things that are not evidence.

1. Only one of the cancels was necessary.
2. The star is not "correct for the period"
3. Placing a fake star cancel, even as a practice piece, on an unused stamp would cost more than on a used stamp. Why risk it?

It seems to me to be more likely that the stamp had already been pen cancelled before it was selected to be given a fake purple star. And since pen cancels are not regarded with the same esteem by collectors as handstamped marks, it was all but worthless. Perhaps the fake artist thought to increase the desirability of the stamp with an unusual hand struck star. Or s/he may have just needed an expendable test subject. Who knows?

Anyway, here's the back of the stamp for those who wanted a glimpse of that.






[Oh, I should have mentioned that the stamp came in with a large lot of other items, so I am not out anything to mark it as a fake and forget about it.]

The fact that it also bleeds through to the back only solidifies the conclusion that the star cancel is fake.