| Author |
Replies: 14 / Views: 3,267 |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
571 Posts |
|
|
Good Day to all. Can someone please assist me. I recently received a bundle of mint, unused and used Russian stamps. I found 2 Russian 1906- 5 k dk blue, green pale blue, mint with original gum imperforated with watermark noted on both stamps (Wmk 171 Diamonds for each stamp seen). Both stamps checked with Rononsol for watermarks. I only see in Scotts that they have the perforations 13 1/2 including, nothing with discussion pertaining to imperforations or watermarks. Does another specialized Cat. other than Scott's discuss about these imperforated ones? Would like to know what is cat. number and current market value for these two mint stamps. Appreciate any assistance or reference information that can be provided. Thank you in advance. Blazenstar 
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
8579 Posts |
|
|
Gibbons lists this in pale blue and deep blue/green and pale blue and indigo/green (numbers 123 and 123a respectively in my oldish catalogue) and also with the yellow background of the 10 rouble (123d). Issued 1917-18. It adds that the imperforated issues appeared because there was a strike at the printing works - and the perforating amchines were also damaged. Only the variant with the yellow background seems to have any value.
Geoff |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
8579 Posts |
|
|
Further to this, I don't think the stamps I refer to came with a watermark. However, my reading of the catalogue is that the 1906 issue had the wavy lines watermark, not diamonds. A varnished diamond pattern did, however, appear on the surface of later issues. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
571 Posts |
|
|
these stamps definitely have diamonds water marks..i took a picture of it and I am trying to get it placed on this site for others to see..Thank you both for your responses.
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
571 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
571 Posts |
|
|
Sorry, that the pic is on its side..my camera is not so great, but you get view it. I tried the best way to let all see what I was speaking and expressing it had been expressing..smiles |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
571 Posts |
|
|
Now, I must ask this important question. Are these 2 stamps considered rarities due to the watermarks seen in the photographs are not the same as the wavy lines as noted with other imperforated 1906? please comment..Has anyone seen the diamond watermarks on this stamp before other than these photos? These stamps do not appear neither to be the wmk.169 or 226. Any comments would be helpful. Geoff, thank you so much for your wonderful information.Thank you for taking the time to look things up.Appreciate it.smiles
I read in Scott that the Vertical Lozenges of Varish face occurred with the later issues between 1909-12.Which is later than the 1906 issue. Warm regards, Blazenstar |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
572 Posts |
|
|
Have you tried asking these folks for help http://rossica.org/? I was able to get some copies of articles from their journal about some WW1 vintage Latvian stamps from them. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
571 Posts |
|
|
Thank you, John so very much for the your thoughtful suggestion. I never heard of this Rossica society before and will definitely contact them. It would be interesting to see what also they might be able to inform me about the watermarks. Appreciate your suggestion very much! Thank you again..smiles..
Blazenstar |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
235 Posts |
|
|
blazenstar is correct about his>> 2015 post regarding russia imperforated stamp scott #71 ..because today I located a similar stamp in my russia collection..see image.  |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
6756 Posts |
|
|
I didn't see this thread when it was first started. The lozenge pattern you are seeing in the watermark fluid is actually the vertical lozenge of varnish. If it were a watermark, the lozenge lines would appear DARK in watermark fluid using a black tray. In your picture, the lozenge is white -- it is the varnish lozenge not the watermark.
Blazenstar's stamp is actually Scott Russia #133(1919).
(EDIT: Sorry, made a typo. The year should be 1917. Thanks Tim H) |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by khj - 04/03/2017 03:56 am |
|
|
Valued Member
235 Posts |
|
|
khj..you are everywhere in the stamp community.wow.can you tell me if there is actually a SG number variety for the imperf version of this stamp? I can only locate scott #71..please help?
ok Scott Russia #133(1919).there is an imperf stamp there! regards.. |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by edw_kim - 04/03/2017 02:16 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
6756 Posts |
|
|
I'm not on SCF as often as I used to be, but I try to check out as many threads as I can when I drop by. I only have access to my Scott catalogs right now. In the Scott catalog, it is Russia #133(1919). My SG catalog set is at the office.  I won't be able to access it until tomorrow. Sorry. (EDIT: Sorry, made a typo. The year should be 1917. Thanks Tim H) |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by khj - 04/03/2017 03:56 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
1255 Posts |
|
|
Hi edw.kim, to help you with the SG query, there are two SG numbers for the imperf. 5r, depending on the colour. You have 123B pale blue and deep blue on green paper, and 123Ba pale blue and indogo on green paper. They are both catalogues at GBP0.65 mint and GBP1.00 used.
Perforated varieties were issued in 1906 (unwatermarked perf. 13 1/2, SG90), 1912-1918 (harsher and brighter colours and a more worn impression - see note before SG107A - unwatermarked, perf. 13 1/2, SG123A and SG123Aa).
The stamps shouldn't be listed as 1919 because they were issued before the 1918 October revolution. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
6756 Posts |
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 3,267 |
|