| Author |
Replies: 8 / Views: 1,054 |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
1375 Posts |
|
|
|
Hello,
I just saw this article from 1999:
---edit: ok, this link is not allowed, so: it's a story about the orange-brown KGV 5d stamp with watermark 7 (small crowns and A), but with overprint OS which was (and is) not listed. ---
It's written quite confidently that it was a genuine new find and was even published in Linn's as front page.
But I don't find this stamp anywhere, not in Scott and not in SG. Was it actually a fake then?
thank you.
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by stamperix - 08/07/2019 04:29 am |
|
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
578 Posts |
|
|
Probably a fake.
Brusden White only list punctured OS for the 1930-38 5d Die II light orange-brown on small multiple watermark paper.
Brusden White is silent on an OS overprint. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
578 Posts |
|
|
Ah, found it.
"A used stamp on Small Multiple Watermark paper, cancelled at Alexandra (NSW), 29 MR 32, was discovered in 1998. Most authorities consider this to be a forgery."
I recall the stamp now. Interestingly, it was discovered by an old friend of mine, the late Jim Manson. |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by Plateflaw - 08/07/2019 05:24 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
1375 Posts |
|
|
Thank you, that's what I wanted to know and also supposed.
I only wonder how it could have happened that it was in the news with all that positive reputation and even got a certificate of the Royal Philatelic Society of Victoria, but then at some point in time it was considered as a forgery? Would be interesting to read an article about how it was discovered as forgery. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
578 Posts |
|
|
I agree.
The editor of Brusden and White who makes the remark that "most authorities consider this to be a forgery" is the same gentleman quoted some years earlier in the article attesting to its genuineness. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
1375 Posts |
|
|
Yes, but an opinion, probably under impression of the big news and the great new discovery is still something different than a certificate of the RPSV, this is what is a bit surprising. So there must have been another certificate saying it's forgery, probably of another organization? Which expertising company has also good reputation for Australian stamps? |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
New Member
Australia
1 Posts |
|
|
The OS overprint was a primitive forgery.
I wrote a "counter" article about it in December 2000.
I hen issued a negative certificate for it in May 2001 when it was formally submitted to me for expertizing.
Based on that it was then deleted from the Stanley Gibbons catalogue etc.
Chris (Krzysztof) Ceremuga member: AIEP - International Association of Philatelic Experts
www.ceremuga.net
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
Nice to have that cleared up, thank you Chris. Saved this to my Sideface folder.
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
1375 Posts |
|
|
Thank you very much for the information. I am not a longterm collector for Australian stamps, but expertising of them seems to be difficult sometimes, or maybe choosing the right expertiser :). |
Send note to Staff
|
|
| |
Replies: 8 / Views: 1,054 |
|