Nederland Queen Wilhelmina Original And Reprint

I didn't see any discussion on this topic, or at least my search terms didn't find anything. So I thought I'd throw it out there. No questions, just point of interest.

The first print, 1899 - Perf. 12 1/2 - NVPH #62, Sc. #67, of Queen Wilhelmina 10 c stamp has smaller narrow lines behind the the portrait.



The second picture, 1922 - Perf. 12 1/2 - NVPH #81, Sc. #110, of Queen Wilhelmina 10 c stamp is the 1922 reprint.



Ken

Thanks Ken, and just for the heck of it - very dangerous fakes have been made by perforating the imperforated stamps.

Peter

Could these be fakes?!? How would you tell?

The background lines around the queens head show a very different pattern ,lines are closer together and more of them on the original .

In addition to Peters be aware notice

In 1923 due to a strike, 2 values were issued imperforated: the 5 cent red and the 10 cent grey(1922 issue)




Many "personal" perforations exist, most of them cruedly done.

However some are very well done, an example is shown below. The block of 4 on the left is from a imperforated sheet which was partialy perforate to create stamps which were imperforated on top. The pair on the right is a correct pair with an imperforated top, As you can see it is not easy to tell the fake one from the real one.




Pictures from a article written by Cees Janssen in Passie voor postzegels 2008.

Ken, they are most likely not fakes. The used stamps are very cheap, it is the mint ones that are expensive.

Peter

I love this stamp series. Another variety to look for is on the 1 Gulden stamp. They were printed both with thin and thick lettering. The thick lettering is the more common of the two.

Does anyone have a fake Queen Wilhelmina 10 c stamp? I'd like to see how it is determined to be a fake. I find determining the forgeries interesting.

Ken

Two remarks,

First: to Moyock 13. There is no specific fake 10 cent stamp. As shown in my first reply from imperforated examples semi perforated stamps were created, that is were the "fakes" may be found.

Second: to Jenny2U. The stamps with the thicker 1(type 1) are the more uncommon ones.
The 1898 issue(type 1) has thiner letters and the 1 is positioned closer to the line underneath. Visible between the 2 examples shown.

Kind regards, Johan.

Jenny, one more remark on the 1 gulden. This stamp was actually issued twice. The first stamp was issued to commemorate Queen Wilhelmina assuming the throne. The stamp was issued on 6 September 1898 and had the thicker word "gulden".
The stamp with the thinner "gulden" was issued as part of a definitive set on 1 August 1899.

Peter

Thanks for the correction - I meant of course to write UNcommon. I just wasn't paying attention to what I wrote

Back to the subject of the Queen Wilhelmina, I believe your second stamp is a POSTAL FORGERY ,as a real used stamp it was very common and not likely it was created to fool a philatelist. My collection contains two postal forgeries and yours has what looks like a real cancel . The Postal Forgeries in most cases have a far greater value than a normal stamp .

Floortrader, I'm listening. What makes you think the second stamp is a forgery? Can you post a scan of your postal forgeries?

Thanks.
Ken

To my opinion both your stamps are correct and very common to be found as used and not expensive stamps. That is why faking used ones makes no sense to forgers.

The 1922 issue of the 10 cent with the wider lines in the oval has a certain value but only mint or hinged.

Mint examples taken from the 1923 imperforated sheets were used to make fake 1922 issue ones.

Shown are 2 stamps, the one on the left is a fake the one on the right is correct(i know used, but it is there for comparison). A trained eye will detect the smaller perforations holes on the left stamp. An untrained eye might not.

Johan, thank you so much. That is very interesting.

Even mint value of the 10 cent stamp can't be that much, I find it interesting that a forger would take the time to produce a fake.

Thank you again for the explanation and comparison.

Ken, I do not have a recent NVPH ( Dutch ) catalog, but the 10 cent mint with the wide lines cataloged at about fl 200.00 back in 1999.

Peter