3d. KGV Levant Stamp - Case Of Overinking ?

Can someone please say is this a case of overinking or other error which occurred during the printing process ?
The ink used for preparing the stamp and the smudging have the same color.
I will be grateful if someone could help with information about this stamp.

Looks like light or other damage.

Nope, that is no overinking. It is either a cancel, an attempt to remove the cancel or some kind of colour transfer.

The stamp appears to have a bleached colour.

Scott# 49 A7 3d Violet. (1921) 1913-1921

I do not see any reason to try and remove the cancel (if any) as the used price is more valuable.

I am not sure, but the picture of the reverse seems to show gum.
Those LEVANT overprints are popular among forgers.

The height of the overprint letters and the base of the L being level with the E would make me look for a certain genuine example to check whether the overprint is a forgery.

All mine show the L and E sharing the same baseline.

Jean Mirza 2010 PDF
(click image to expand)

On the 3d, the L and T appear somewhat elevated. But that could be what I am seeing, not what there is.

NSK: and a raised L on the 4d value, I think.

The colour anomaly would appear to have happened after printing and perforating as, in the left margin, the edges of the "added" colour very neatly follows the outline of the perfect holes.

I agree with rod222. He's opinion is logical.
Why would someone bother to remove a cansel from a stamp when the stamp has a bigger value when used ?
The stamp also has gum applied on it's back,a nother argument in favor of rod222 post.
If the stamp have's some type of color transfer ,how could be explained that it has the same color as the stamp ?

Regarding the question, concerning it's authenticity l cannot determine whether it's forgerie or not. I would need to look it closer .

Speculatively: if the stamp was an ordinary British stamp cancelled for fiscal use (the value was used for that and the colour of fiscal cancels often are purple, matching the stamp) someone may have tried to wash it, apply a forged overprint, and regum it to make a worthless stamp look like a valuable stamp. The cancel would have given it away, so you do not want that.

The overprint looks very close to those shown by reliable sources, but they just raise a question.
The 'overinking' looks like someone tried to wash the stamp. And the remainder of the stamp looks too pale.

NSK , l don't know whether this is the case here, but when l both the it from the stamp dealer as an original or to be more accurate the price asked for it was based on it's catalog value. I can't be certain but it's possible some of it's previous owners may have tried to wash the cansel of . In both cases the question about the need of removing it still remains without answer.

Where rod222 writes:


You should consider this only holds for a used stamp with a cancellation applied at Constantinople during 1921-1923. Such would add value over the price of a mint stamp. It requires a legible cancellation.

Any other cancellation, immediately, raises a question about its use. Rod's remark, then, will not be correct anymore.

I am not sure what


means. 5% of catalogue price and 90% of catalogue price both are prices based on the catalogue value.

Edit: I am not stating it is a washed cancellation, merely that it appears that way. It looks like someone has been rubbing or cleaning it. But it, as you suggest, could also be a transfer from another object.

From the pictures, I cannot determine whether it has gum or not. It looks like it. Maybe the stamp has been soaked and the ink has run. But that would be odd if it has gum. The solid shading at the top right appears much paler than the solid shading on the right side of the value tablet as if it has been exposed to sunlight. But that would not cause the strange colour.

The stamp is from a period when double impressions no longer have been reported. Also, the angle of the discolouration does not fit a double printing.

Your remark is appropriate , l must apologize for not been precise in my answer.
I bought the stamp with other, some time ago. The seller wanted a bigger price for it but he made my a discount ,so l bought it for 2-3 euros or something like that.
I assure you tath the stamps has gum on it' s back but l don't know if there was a cancel on the stamp before l bought it.
Did someone of it's previous owners make efforts of rubbing it or cleaning it's cansel l can't say if this is the case here.
As you've pointed, it would be strange if it has been soaked it in water and after putting it out to see tath the gum is not washed out from the back of the stamp.
If it was also affected from the sunlight ,probably the color would fade away in some degree. The color at left is more noticeable than other parts of the stamp.
I cant tell if this is a double impression stamp or something else. This was the reason for asking my questions .
I'm posting a image of a stamp thath has some sort of smudging at it's outern frame,but the color doesn't look me so different from other parts of the stamp a on the KGV ,LEVANT stamp.

There appears to be dirt from under George's ear to the top of Levant. Just a hard life stamp?