Sg Numbering Question, Elementary I'm Afraid....

Silly question perhaps, but since I don't have a Stanley Gibbons catalogue.....looking in the Stamp Store (APS) it looks like what they label as #6 and #7 for instance, are postal stationery pieces. Is that Scott or does SG assign catalogue numbers on a chronological basis, even if they are not definitive "stamps", per se? Or are my eyes deceiving me and numbers 6 and 7 are stamps that just look like stationary!

P.S.- I am referring to Great Britain.

I don't have my Scott at hand but I think those are the 'embossed' issues. They look a bit like envelope cut squares but were actually stamps, separated by perforations. I think the idea was that re-use of these would be more difficult due to the raised features on the surface of the stamps.

Thanks 1962, I need to look closer as I couldn't see the perfs in the scans. Seeing as they are pricey...I didn't purchase any. A 3 1/2 margin #4 was all my wallet could muster. Perhaps an SG Queen Victoria Specialized catalogue will be in the cards.

These are SG 10-12. They weren't perforated. To have value, these should be cut square, preferably with margins clear of the stamp. But the same design also exists as postal stationery. Tread with care!

Oi vay! I think these will deserve some of my attention.

I see now where the embossed stamps cut close to the design sell for much, much less. I followed my own advice and have picked up the SG Victorian period V.1 catalogue, and an unused, but older, SG "GB" specific album for cheap. Another philatelic side trip....