Great Britain Stamp, Sg#: 212 ,1 Pound ,1891- Control Number At Right Corner?

To be clear on my thought about the possibility of an "S" on the right side - obviously, it would not occur on a genuine stamp.

I would still want to rule out that this was a souvenir reproduction of some sort to which perfs were added. If it was a flat out forgery, the "S" wouldn't be there, but if it is a trimmed and perfed souvenir, maybe? If that's the case, someone should be able to post the original, unmolested piece.

Hopefully the seller will provide an image of the back.

Yes 240 crowns three per stamp, 80 stamps in two panes of 40 as per the registration sheet.




There is no such variety listed in the 2001 edition of Volume 1. Only the frame break from two positions from plate 2.

£11,000

1891 (Jan 28): £ 1 green, Plate 2, wmk. Crowns, lettered SA / TA, an unused vertical pair, corner marginal from lower left of sheet, TA showing the "Broken Frame" variety clearly at base, minor corner crease in margin only, fresh vibrant colour and fine, unmounted og. A rare and most attractive multiple Gi K17+K17a = £ 11'000.rnProvenance: Spink, 11 June 1997, lot 250.

Bib : Corinphila Auction 284-290 27th May 2022

There are few small green ink dots on the lower part of the margin between ONE and POUND at this stamp. Could the stamp which has been offered to me and the one at the image have the same type of error ,but just in different parts of the stamp ?
The images are, from the Postal Museum archives.

No, your green spot has nothing to do with the frame line. Its shape does not suggest minor damage to part of the raised surface from which the stamp was printed. It must have been on the surface of the plate and at some distance from the frame line.

In this 'JB' stamp, you also see some thinning of the frame line near the small extra line.




The ink dots are not what the note refers to. It mentions the roughness of the frame line and not the small extra line.

It looks I have misinterpreted the note over the stamp. The stamp does have a rough appearance in this part of the frame.

How does one identify the difference between the plates, please?

As far as I could see, the QV specialised offers nothing at all on this Rod.

Thanks for responding Bobby, ....surprised!

I think, if it is green, it is plate 2.

Strangely, my old version states plates 2 and 3 were used for the brown-lilac stamps, but plate 3 only for the green one. It lists the two frame-break positions for both printings. It, further, states these come from plate 2. Also, it states the registration sheet for the green version is plate 2.

I think the statement at the start of the £1 section contains an error. Plate 2 and not plate 3 may have been the only plate used for the green stamp.

The error only shows on the green registration sheet identified as plate 2. It must have occurred after registering the brown-lilac stamp.

Alternatively, the exhibit is correct and the registration sheet has been mis-identified, or both plates were used for both printings.

I keep seeing plate 3 referenced by dealers selling non-broken frame examples of SA-TA green one Pounder's.

Since the break is not visible on the brownish lilac registration sheets but is visible on that for the green one, it must have occurred after registration for the first but before that for the latter.

Unless it was repaired, a green TA stamp without the break in the southeast corner of the southwest square would imply a second plate was used.

It would be interesting to see what the new Volume 1 Part 2 says. Maybe they corrected the error.

Five Reigns says JC and TA with broken lower frame line are Plate 2. Robson Lowe's Encyclopedia agrees and says that Plates 2 and 3 were used for a total of 701,750 stamps printed (in green), with no marginal markings distinguishing them. (If I'm reading it correctly.)

RL also states that Jubilee lines ("rules") were added to all values over time, starting with the 1/2d in 1888, and finally finishing with the 3d and 6d in 1897.

Going back to the asking price of €1,700 for this stamp, Provincial has an example with an estimate of £950 at lot 1279 in its forthcoming sale.

https://www.provincialphilatelics.c.../03/337a.pdf

https://www.provincialphilatelics.c...l-23rd-2023/

The post of GeoffHa, remind me to look the photo of the stamp again and a nother suspicious feature popped out which I haven't seened when I posted my question.
The line infront of the portait looks to be closer to the nose than in other stamps.
I don't know if it is of any importance but thise difference can be observed there.