Tete Beche Test Strip?

Any help on a this little gem, not listed anywhere in SG. Half the strip reverse and inverted watermark

Reversed?
Please, use a black background to make the watermark better visible. As far as I can see, the crown is upright. I am not sure what I am seeing. They should be print letters reading GviR.

My guess would be that when you look at the stamps as they are - i.e., from the front with the margins left, top, and right -, all watermarks are the same.
Is the watermark seen from the front reading GviR topped by a crown?

What it looks like is the top row of two columns of a printer's sheet used for making stamp book panes of six ½d stamps.
The sheet would be perforated and cut between the third and fourth stamps. The right half would be turned around, so you had two columns of booklet panes with selvedge at left. Half the panes would have the watermark upright (normal) and the other half inverted.

This is how all British inverted watermark varieties after the 'large' photogravure MacKennals came into beeing.

Since the stamps have not been perforated, I would be a little suspicious. If genuine, it, probably, is a major find. It could be worth quite a lot.

How's this?

Assuming - from the position of the margin - these are rightmost stamps from the earlier picture, this is the normal watermark.

All points at this being part of a sheet used for the production of stamp books, panes QB1 (upright) and QB1a (inverted), The panes of six were catalogued at £35 and £75, repectively, some years ago.

The printer's sheet would have had more than two columns (see below). This looks like the top left of the printer's sheet. My issue with this piece is that it would have been perforated before cutting. Your piece is cut from a sheet. This may be (waste?) material illegally taken from Harrison & Sons' printing works. That would be a reason not to list it.

I suggest you contact Stanley Gibbons, sending them a scan and asking their opinion on what it is. They will not certify it, but they may be interested to list it. If the piece is genuine, it must be quite valuable.

* Catalogue: Stanley Gibbons Specialised, Vol. 2.


From the 'GB Stamp Booklets' website
https://www.gbstampbooklets.com/she...erforations/

Many thanks for the advice, the only thing that's drawing me away from your example is the crude manner in what appears to be the way it has been detached, there is a remnant of the stamp below (stamp 1) left hand margin?

I think you are right though, I'll send an enquiry to Stanley Gibbons and see what they say.

Again spot on for all your knowledge!

Indeed, there is part of an adjoining stamp below stamp 1. Below stamp 2, you can see the cross on the crown of the adjoining stamp from the second row. I have no doubt it is part of a sheet of stamp book panes, or made to look like it. I am not discarding the possibility it is a fake, but I think this is a genuine item.

I cannot tell from your picture whether it is the printing that is bad. I would not be surprised if this is part of a sheet that was destined for destruction. Some member of staff may have 'liberated' it from the waste bin.

Imagine the left half of the sheet I posted an image of. Imagine all are ½d dark green (1937) stamps. Your strip was torn from the top of the left half of that sheet. It looks like it was cut in the margin between pane columns 2 and 3. - That and the lack of perforations, together with what appears bad quality printing makes me think it was waste. - It looks like it was then torn from that part of the sheet. The lower edge reminds me of a strip of paper torn from a sheet, using a ruler.

Please, let us know when you receive an answer.

I've sent the enquiry so will await their response and for sure will post here what they say.

Again many thanks NSK

Very interesting piece ... can't wait to hear what they say.