Overprinted... Or Not?

I've a question. A few years ago a re-known expert refused to give me a COA for the following piece. I've my doubts. He said he found remnants of an overprint on these stamps, but never said where.

The piece in question is this one:
FRONT:


BACK:


Let me attach a couple of images of two regular stamps of this printing and value in two of the different shades that it could be found, both showing how the overprint usually looks like:


And this is 1200dpi image of the stamps:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Z...Ewn-1VP9tMN6

I do see a couple of... something that could be considered rest of an overprint... or of whatever else we want to. I don't think it's been washed. The pen marks are intact and the fragment is not affected either. So it wasn't washed on or off the paper.

I'd like to know what do y'all think.

Thanks in advance,

*** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***

Well,The two stamps you added look like forged overprints.I know their
tiny letters.pic below with an authentic "Junio"overprint,


1871 50R green
block:

Whose signature is on the back?

On the right stamp, I can see a trace of a gray band starting at the R of FUERTES going all the way across the stamp. There is also a similar trace starting above the S of FUERTES that can be seen in places going across the stamp. These are in the position of the overprint bands. Even greater magnification is what's needed. It would also be useful to put a blacklight on this to see if the overprint is there or not.

What is the partial handstamp above the two stamps? Does it go under the stamps? You might be able to see that if put in watermark fluid.

I don't like the feathering/run particularly visible in the tail of the S in the cancel. This can indicate writing added to aged old paper. However, the back show a lesser amount of feathering in 2 spots, so the paper was not the best quality to start with.

Chemical erasure could always be possible while not affect writing or stamp ink. I don't know what that would be for the overprints here.

Also, is "Solon Ramires" (or whatever it) a known postal cancel? This looks more like a revenue usage.

@staff: Thanks for moving it to a more appropriate place!

@Perf12: As far as I know there are no forged overprints in this series. The one you're showing belongs to the First Printing, which is very distinctive from the other 8 printings, including the Second Printing which is the closest one in similarities to the one you showed. The overprints shown in the couple of pairs I posted belongs to the Seventh Printing and 80%+ of the time they have that blurred look.

@hy-brasil: Thanks for your explanation! I've a COA from 1977 from José Roura, a known and respected local authority. The COA says this is what I hope it is. So the initials you saw are from him, JR.

"What is the partial handstamp above the two stamps?"
You mean the lower part of the J from "de Jose"?

Blacklight... good point. I'll do that tonight.

The "J" could be behind the stamp. As you correctly guessed this is a fiscal usage. Placing the stamp on the documents, and cancel every stamp on them was the last part of the process.

Not sure what do you mean by feathering, sorry :(

@perf12: Where did you get the picture of the B10?

That piece is mine :)

B10 from this forum:
http://www.filaposta.com/foro/viewtopic.php?t=6119

Thanks.. That explains it. I started that thread years ago.

It is an interesting thread.The different printings do make a difference as you said.Are you a specialized collector of Venezuela?

"Specialized collector of Venezuela" sounds too big for me. I'm a specialized collector of the first Three ESCUELAS Series, but I do know a little bit of Venezuela up to 1903, locals included.

Will: Could you post some forgeries + real stamps of the escuelas
issue ? The points of interest too differenciate the stamps.

See red arrows in a copy of the image.



It is the ink running/bleeding in tiny amounts, usually due to poor quality paper or ink. See blue arrows. I don't think the stain, original or not, would cause that. Not important at this time, I just wanted to clarify.

Will's being modest. He's the author of an excellent book on the Escuelas stamps entitled "Introducing Venezuela's 1871-1880 ESCUELAS Stamps":

http://escuelascollectors.com/

@perf12: As far as I know, there are zero fake stamps on the First ESCUELAS Series. There are plenty of fake cancels and forged cancellations, though. Any postal mark on a 3R+ must be considered forged.

@revenuecollector: Thanks! I really appreciate your words! Glad you liked the book!

@hy-brasil: Thanks for the clarification. The "partial handstamps" are actually pen marks on the back of the fragment.

I made a copy of that specific segment on the back, circled them in red and put them one above the other. That should make more evident what they are.

Will is really modest..

Ok, I put the fragment under UV light. Pictures taken from a Celestron MicroCapture Pro.

At 375nm:





Just in case, at 254nm (this one was really hard to get a good image):



Can't see any traces of alteration :(

Will, it's a bit complicated for me... but I love your 'forensic' work!!