Great Britain Scott #63? Six Pence, Queen Victoria Circa 1883

Trying to determine if the stamp on the right is the fabled Scott #63. The stamp itself is a little browner than what is depicted in the photo. It's certainly a different color than the clearly grayish version on the left, #62? And then there's the 6d overprint, which has me thinking that the stamp on the right is Scott #95. Your help would be much appreciated; thanks.

Both stamps look to be plate 18, therefore Scott 86 on the left and 95 on the right

Thank-you. What identifies the stamp on the left as belonging to Plate 18?

If you look at the small circle to the left of Victoria's nose, there is the number 18. Look at the stamp on the right where it is easier to see. There is a circle with plate number on both sides but the one on the right is obscured by the postmark.

I am not sure which that is. However, 'fabled' makes me think of the 1873 'pale-buff' from plate 13. That stamp is one of the 'abnormals.' It was printed from plate 13, and had the 'Spray of Rose' watermark.

The stamp on the left is the 1881 grey issue on Wmk. Crown paper. The stamp on the right is one of the two 'unified issue' stamps issued in 1883. The intention was to print stamps for unified postage, telegraph, and revenue use. Designs used for postage stamps were chosen to be printed in a new colour with the value added in large numerals. These large numerals would make it easier for postal clerks to recognise the stamps' values. The clerks worked in badly-lit environments that made it difficult to recognise stamps. Also, literacy was an issue. A few existing values printed from existing plates were printed in lilac and, subsequently, the value was printed in numerals. Black was found to clash with the cancellations. Carmine was chosen. In the end, only the 3d and 6d were issued.

The big "6d.." makes this a no-brainer. Comparing colours, not only, is useless. Also, it will not help. the right stamp was never intended to be issued in the original colour. It was a completely new issue.

Would it not have had the "6d.." included in the design, as explained by others, the plate number is a clue. Also, the watermark is a clue.




I understand what you are referring to. It is that stamp. But no 'overprinted' 6d exists. It was not an existing stamp that was overprinted. It was intentionally designed using existing designs. Using 'overprint' in this way would make any stamp printed in more than one run an overprinted stamp.

Stanley Gibbons calls it 'surcharged'. If you apply the French meaning of the word, you might use it. If you consider a surcharge a higher than original value, even that is not correct for the reason stated (not an existing stamp as it was printed with that 'surcharge' in a new colour), and the value is not changed by the 'surcharge'" the "6d.." was intended to identify the 'SIX PENCE' included in the original design.

This is the stamp we are talking about:


and this the watermark:


Edit:

Note the two circled '18' halfway down each side of the stamp. As Willwood42 wrote:

The stamp is lilac. The Inland Revenue was even more paranoia when it came to reuse of fiscal stamps than the post office. It required the use of double-fugitive inks. That limited the choice to lilac and green pigments.

Consequently, any other colour implies you have a damaged example. Of course, colours can be perceived differently from what they are. The colour of used stamps is even more difficult to determine than that of a mint stamp.

Dear NSK and Wildwood. Thank-you both for all the useful intel; it's much appreciated. Amazing that I missed seeing the # 18 lying right under my (and Queen Victoria's) nose. Yes, surcharge. I realized that I'd used the wrong word after sending the message way past my bed time.
A question about watermarks. What is the best way to view them without harming a valuable stamp? I hesitate using lighter fluid. I've got an excellent Stereoscope (microscope with two eyepieces) that with the right configuration should be able to do everything fancy watermark viewers do. Any suggestions? Again, my thanks. A pleasure to talk stamps with such knowledgeable folks.

Lighter fuel has been used by generations of stamp collectors, so you'll be fine. As long as you don't smoke in the vicinity.

As GeoffHa suggests, lighter fuel works well on most stamps and is safe to use with stamps when not used near open fire.

If you do not like to use it, normally, the Imperial Crown watermark is easy to spot, certainly on used stamps. A scan against a black background may help. Again, with the Imperial Crown, the black background, normally, shows it well to the naked eye.

There's no shame in (over)paying for watermark fluid, especially for your first attempts.

If you decide to try lighter fuel and have a choice of brands, and one of them is Ronsonol, that's the one I would pick.

Also, you might want to practice on stamps that you don't care about, first.

Many thanks, and hats off to the Pillars of the Community!

Yet another example of De La Rue's lovely work.

I tend to see stamps as finished creations, rarely taking into account the work and artistry that went into crafting them. Thanks for reminding me!

Easton's British Postage Stamp Design is well worth seeking out.