Thursday, 23 January 2014

Flaws of the 1953 Coronation issue

Some people might have seen this recently in the Sarawak Journal. These are flaws which were noticed last year. It is really surprising for such a relatively recent issue. I supposed there are quite a bit of a rush to print the omnibus issue for so many countries. These flaws should be similar for the other countries. 
The most obvious flaw is the "lighter left eye" which should be present in all coronation stamps. 

 Note the "lighter left eye"

 "freckle forehead"
"no lock of hair" close to left eye (the exception)
"pimple on chin"

 "lock of hair"
"gash and pimple on chin"

"lock of hair"
"pimple on chin"
"tattoo on neck"

"mole above left eye" 
"lock of hair"
"pimple on chin"

"lock of hair"
"no pimple on chin" 

Here are two Sarawak Coronation stamps where the "pimple on chin" is more obvious on the right stamp and not on the other stamp.

Thursday, 16 January 2014

An error on cover. NB 1954 10c "extra chimney" variety

This is one of two covers with this error that I know of. There may be others of course. Both are FDCs with a date of 1 MR 54 which was also the date of issue. This led to the conclusion that this error was present on the first printing run of these stamps. Whether it was present on subsequent runs is unknown.
This stamp is common as 10c was the rate for local mail but the error can be elusive. It has now been included in the latest 2014 Stanley Gibbons catalogue. The prices are £35 for mint and £10 for used. There is every prospect that the prices would rise subsequently.
From a part sheet, the position has been noted as the 10th stamp on the first row, R1/10 but possibly present in other positions as well. You can see my previous post on the adhesives by clicking the link here.

Thursday, 9 January 2014

A "new" Brunei curved year cds??

Just to continue with the recent theme of controversial cancellations, this is a smaller version of D2 with respect to the numerals and letters.

The 1c adhesive has Brunei D2 on the Proud's classification with the curved year date of 13/NOV/1907. D2 is one of those strange fixed date cds probably made of rubber from the graininess of the cancellation. It was thought that it was held in reserve and used on occasions when the current canceller was not available for whatever reason. It is possibly of doubtful status and I have yet to come across a cover. My impression is that it was probably reserved for cancelling ahdesives per favour purely for philatelic purposes.
The 1907 2c adhesive has an unrecorded version of D2 with smaller letters and numerals in a similar font with the date of 19/NOV/1907. Again it seems to be a rubber type canceller. I would argue that it has the same type of ink with also graininess of the imprint. This was shown more than a year ago at the SSS AGM and then in the journal disappointingly without any response. This "worldwide" forum is hopefully more forthcoming in comments.

To show that it is no fluke, we have the 1c and 4c adhesives here on either side of a 3c with D2 with the "new" cds.

These two adhesives have one of  the other  fixed dates of D2 of 17/NOV/1908. I hope readers understand why the term "adhesives" was used instead of "stamps".  The term "labels" is sometimes used but it is rather misleading.

Friday, 3 January 2014

A "new" Lahat Dato cds??

Lahat Dato

Lahat Datu D2

This Lahat Dato cancellation measures 27mm across, the same as the D2 Lahat Datu cancellation and also has the year in two numerals. The D5 Lahad Dato measures 29mm across and has the year in four numerals.
This is actually a contrast enhanced image and the original looks too patchy to be a fake. Usually fake cancels are partial unless it is a Madame Joseph in an effort to make things less clear. Madame Joseph fakes are so confidently detailed as to be able fool many philatelists. If it turns out to be unique, the jury will of course be out to judge.
One thing has been pointed out. The "O" should have been a bit larger and taller. But dust or debris could not have accounted for the curved and circular nature of the impression. In contrast where it should have been curved as at the bottom of "U", it is also relatively flat. But it is still quite possible what we see here is the result of a damaged D2 canceller. Who was it that said the art and joy of philately would include the uncovering of errors, flaws and imperfections? Me included of course!