Standing Helvetia ID Help Needed

Hi-

I'm trying to sort two lots of Switzerland Standing Helvetia issues. I am working both with the Zumstein and SBK catalogs. (Scott doesn't appear to have enough detail in its listings for what I have here) I am finding this to be difficult work.

Reading the SBK catalog, the drill would appear to be centered on perforation counts, paper type and two different control marks.

Both catalogs place great emphasis on identifying the two types of control marks (kontrollzeichen). But, stupid me, I am not sure what these control marks are and how to find them on the stamps. (I don't seem to see a watermark, but maybe I'm missing it)

Could someone help fill in what I am missing about these control marks? My stamp deutsch is not good enough to figure this old from the catalogs and it seems like they assume I know what these are? Unfortunately, Zumstein's english language lexicon does help.

-Larry

Can you scan the Zumstein or SBK page(s) in question?

Otherwise, my best guess is that the 2 types of control marks are the width of the impressed ovals (9mm or 8.5mm). Scott has defined these as watermark 182 type 1 and watermark 182 type 2, even though they aren't true watermarks.

My "guess".

k

Thanks.

I've tried to get as good a scan as I can manage of a spiral bound book. Also given the limitations on uploading file size, these may not be clear.

The first scan is of the description for kontrollzeichen, which is in common for the Standing Helvetia as it is for the preceding numeral issues.

The second is the grid for identifying Standing Helvetia's. There, you can see a heading for WZ as distinct from KZ. WZ is wasserzeichen or watermark.

Your help is appreciated.

-Larry

Yes, from your scans, I can see the KZ1 corresponds to what Scott calls watermark 182 type I, and KZ2 corresponds to what Scott calls watermark 182 type II.

As I had noted, the Scott's use of the term watermark for 182 is actually a misnomer, because it really is NOT a watermark, but an impression (looks almost like embossed, but it is only a colorless impression).

The Zumstein and SBK are far more accurate in calling it a "control mark".

The marks are very easy to see, and once you have both types, it is pretty easy to tell without a ruler whether you have type 1 or type 2 because the differences in the width of the oval and the size of the cross are fairly apparent.

Have fun!

k

In the Scott catalog, watermark 183 (cross, no oval) IS a true watermark. The European catalogs correctly put that in the WZ section.

Remember, one thing about Scott is that they are consistent about being inconsistent.

Larry-
Is that scan/excerpt from SBK? I like the format.

Collin

Hi Larry......


Another thing to keep in mind is that perforations need to be measured with a perf gauge......not counted.

Colin,

No, the extract is from Zumstein. Nice isn't it?

(My SBK is hard bound and would be really difficult to scan)

-Larry

Actually, nr-notrare, that isn't clear to me. Both Zumstein and SBK specify the number of teeth to count in addition to use of the perf gauge.

I had found measuring the perfs with a gauge to be difficult and was intending to do counts as a way to confirm what I've got.

I have around 50/60 of the Standing Helvetias and I am pretty much intending to disregard previous id'ing done, to start with the perf count and then the control marks and then the paper to figure out what I've got. (Having lived in Switzerland and collecting Switzerland, I have got to be very organized in how I go about this)

The Swiss are amazingly precise in all matters of design and production. This extends to their stamps as well, and apparently to their collectors, too!

I'm not sure this is a good use of paper real estate, but it looks like you can hold the stamp up to the catalogue page to do your perfing and control mark measuring.

nr-notrare said:




You are absolutely correct, especially for this issue. Counting gets you close, but with perfs ranging all over with quarter sizes, the gauge was absolutely essential. I will never doubt you again.

I will say that figuring out whats what with this issue given control marks, water marks, different papers and who knows what, has been a pita. I've done my best, but I am not totally sure I've gotten it right especial wrt the control marks. The embossing is hard to see in used stamps that were soaked.

Wish I had a genie bottle with a stamp expert inside to take a look and double check my work.

I think I'll go back to my Machins.

-Larry