World Classic Doppelgängers

These, and part of the set, the high-values, were easy enough for me to find and identify, but difficult at times...

The values from 1d to 9d have been much more difficult, admittedly.

Thank you for looking.

Using a quote from our IT: "PICNIC!"
* Those catalogues do not say that. You assume that, if no date is given, it is 1912. It, exactly, is the other way around: if a date is given, that stamp colour range was issued at that time. If no date is given, it is not identified but never earlier than the earliest date given for the value.
* I have both explained the IRS first printed (most of) the stamps and then Harrison. Above your Concise listing are the Somerset House (IRS) controls that show the year in which they were printed. Just look at those, and you will see these always precede or coincide with any of the years mentioned after any individual listing.
* I mentioned a proof from 7 June 1913 for the 10d. This is a die proof; i.e., before the plate was finalised. For the 5d, there is one as late as 6 May 2013. No stamps have been printed from a plate before such a date.
* The SG Specialised catalogue lists the issue dates per value, not just a first and last date for the series with some individual years (most of which) added in the Concise, precisely to identify when a value was first issued. The SG Specialised lists all the controls.




The stamp was issued in an olive colour. Variations exist. The 1915 and 1917 colours are wartime stamps that have been linked to years through printings. Some colours had marked differences during the war. Germany was an important supplier of pigments for the printing inks. As the supply was cut off, the ink formula had to be changed. The olive is dated 1913, because the value was issued in 1913. The SG specialised lists a fourth colour in the olive range.

I also wrote that having three stamps in different hues when your Concise lists three is in no way a question of putting them in the correct order. You may be correct with the 7d stamps.
Your two 10d stamps are a dull turquoise-blue or dull greenish blue and a bright turquoise blue. As for concise, all fall in the colour range turquoise-blue. If you can find more 10d values, the probability is high you will find yet very different shades.

Most of these stamps were printed several times a year during a longer period. I already remarked in relation to my remark about "first issued in 1906."
An example:
The 7d comes from controls C.13, C 13, D 14, F15, G 15, H 16, J 17, and L 18.
It tells you it was first printed in 1913 at Somerset House. Then it was printed by Harrison and Sons. Harrison and Sons printed the 7d at least once a year from 1913 until 1918. In 1915, there have been at least two printings. After 1918, no further printings occurred. There is a good chance the bronze-green stamp was printed in 1916. The date in the catalogue states it was first issued in 1915. For the reason explained above, it may be the case that the ink for the H 16 printing(s) used a similar mix and will also have been bronze-green.

Thanks for all of the information, NSK. I was not aware of the extent of the printings, obviously. I did see some dated 1912 specifically, therefore, in turn, my bad, as I've just begun to delve into these, and within the last year. I have a few to several of each value, from the 1/2d, to the 10/- as shown.

This trio seemed easy enough to identify online, chalk printings per my 1982 catalogue, and it shows somewhat with used examples, smearing, but there is no control indicated. They were printed by a division of Somerset. I've removed the "1912" for the one on the left...

The other two, at center and right, are listed as being of 1913 within the catalogue(s). My worldwide catalogues are base, the least informative.

The problem with mint copies of these issues is that I cannot implicitly trust sellers to identify them correctly, only rarely, and on both sides of the Atlantic. The vast majority do not illustrate the backsides, mint or used, so you have to inquire. No, I had to have those used, with dated postmarks, when present, and to identify them as bearing the simple, script cypher.

Here is one upon which I took a chance, undated, not a clue. It was advertised as being of 1924-34, block-cypher, but it arrived otherwise...

There is at least one other colour, paler, therefore I may have that one misidentified. Indeed, it may be the pale variant instead. I haven't pursued getting both of those, as they're akin to these two...

...and later releases.

SG Specialised is a Stanley Gibbons catalogue.

There is reality with many shades.
Then, there is the Stanley Gibbons Great Britain Specialised (Vol 2) with a considerable number of shades.
Then, there is the Stanley Gibbons Concise with some shades.
And then, there is the SG Collect British Stamps, that basically is a check list for one-of-each collectors.

If you want to go into depth and know more about the history of the stamps, get a Stanley Gibbons Specialised Vol. 2, and maybe Vol 1 for your Queen Victoria stamps.
Naturally, new information comes available and further varieties are found. However, an old edition will be cheap and you will not miss a lot of information. Most had been written a few decades ago.

A catalogue often has an introduction that defines the scope of the catalogue and contains information on how to read it.

Very nice that the 'Block Cypher' 9d olive turned out to be a 'Simple Cypher' stamp.

Indeed, ebay, Delcampe, etc. are problematic when it comes to these stamps. If shades are identified, many are incorrect. Watermarks are not always identified correctly, if at all. I also collect the overprinted versions. Both come with overprints for the Morocco Agencies. Many listings do not mention the watermark. On occasion, I enquired. The responses, usually, were they did not know. I have seen listings that showed the watermark and still were not correctly identified.

Indeed, the 6d stamps were printed at Somerset House by the Stamp Printing Branch of the IRS on chalk-surfaced paper. These saw very frequent revenue use. Check the perforations, as there are p 14 stamps, instead of p 15x14.

You cannot identify stamp shades online. You can compare if they were scanned together. But even then the exact shade may be very difficult to identify. You and I, very likely, are not seeing the same colours in any of your posts.

Your 9d agate is a nice illustration. Concise lists agate and deep agate. It appears you see two shades with one being deeper than the other, or the other paler than the one. The right stamp appears pale to me. SG Specialised also lists pale agate and very deep agate as shades.
From the Concise perspective, if the left stamp is a deeper colour than the right stamp, that must be deep agate. But that is not how it works.
Your right stamp is palish and might very well be the pale agate N29(2). Relatively, the agate stamp N29(1) has a deeper appearance than N29(2). But is that the deep agate stamp N29(3)?
I cannot tell. I am quite sure it is not very deep agate N29(4). I think you identified it correctly, but it could be the agate stamp.

I also think your 9d olive, indeed, is the olive one.

As for your 6d stamps: I am quite sure no, yes, yes. Actually, I am tempted to say the first is the true dull purple stamp, but it could be reddish purple. Deep reddish purple, I am almost sure it is not. The second would fall in the dull purple category but appears plum. The third looks pale and makes a shade of the reddish-purple stamp. Always with the caveat that it is difficult to be sure from an online picture. The plum stamp, however, is quite distinct from the reddish purples and even the dull purple.

Danstamps54 posted some eye candy for King George V 'Simple Cypher' enthusiasts.
https://goscf.com/t/53500&SearchTerms=ireland

Thank you again.

Oh, might a 1986 vol. 2 do the trick?

I think late 90s or later. I have not seen many changes in listings, primarily in prices. If I remember correctly, they were revised in the late 90s.

By the by, NSK, I have this pair, but not to present per the theme...

I've posted it before, with one to few replies, I can't exactly recall.

Naturally, I'm most, wholly, interested in the used example at right, that pale.

I think the left is from the original stereotype printings 1891 - 1893. The ink was made with earth pigments. It is carmine pink to pink carmine. The stamp on the right has faded, probably during soaking. It is from the period 1895 - 1899 plate printings. The ink is a synthetic one. The colour should be pink, but not this pale.

In essence, the answer is the same as you got earlier.
https://goscf.com/t/76041

Yes, they do revise them. My 1982 SG BC Part I has the GB issues listed at the beginning, basically, 1912-22, however it was within that the 6d was clearly indicated, of chalk paper, alongside each, with a "C". My 2009 Concise has it buried up there at the beginning of the list, in small text. Then the Concise states "1912-24", which runs right up to the block-cypher printings of 1924-34. Which value was printed in 1924, and with a simple, script cypher?

In any event, I've already placed the order, the 1986 "Four Kings", and I can't wait. Thank you.

That one came to me as you see it, the pale one. I never touched it, so that cause may be eliminated, by my hand at least.

1912 - 1922 is the issue period. 1912 -1924 is the printing period. The last stamp issued was the 9d olive in 1922.
The 'Block Cypher' stamps were a continuation. A change in watermark, from the GPO's perspective, is not a new series. The typo MacKennals were used from 1912 until 1938 (6d). In that period three basic watermarks were used. There was a fourth. Philatelists list these in three series, the GPO would not. Consequently, most values - all from 1/2 d to 2 d - were printed on the 'Simple Cypher' watermark up to 1924.

I was not there, but my guess is it did not jump off the envelope to which it had been affixed.




So, let's not eliminate the cause, just eliminate that it was caused by you.

In any event, I'd have to send it off to know for certain. Thanks.