New Zealand: Chalons - 1855-1873

It's a great book.  I like it a little more than the Odenweller book but that's great too.  I really like the separations chapter - very good.  Apparently they (Bob and John) started the project together before splitting up on a point of difference or two.  Not a nasty separation just artistic.

Neil

Agree, great looking website and commendable objectives.
Hopefully will be a "go to" site for general information as well as detailed facts and images of source material.

I was just thinking on the idea of 'repatriation' and although I am always pleased to see objects relating to this country, in this country, I am in some ways of two minds as I feel that many items have equal place in the history of either country, NZ or the respective destination. After all once posted is not the mail ultimately now a part of a larger story, assuming we are dealing with postal history items that have been posted abroad. Internal NZ mail that now resides overseas is probably more straightforward as it would clearly relate to NZ postal history. Though it may have a personal or family history that could justify its place.

Something I was looking at the other day relative to this puts one in mind of just what connections there were at the time and how many items of post went to various parts of the world from the young colony of NZ.




Clayton

Thanks Clayton,

Some good information there on destinations.  I'll take a closer look at that.

I agree with you on the 'repatriation' objective - it's not an 'us against them' scenario - there's plenty to go around - but a lot of items are held in collections because of their status as items rather than any emotional connection.  Two of the covers I just bought from the Italian based Enzo Carnia Postal History Collection a case in point.  So for me it's just about bringing back pieces as they become available and enjoying them as NZ originated pieces of historical interest, and making them available to others to enjoy as well.  

Cheers,

Neil

Hi Phillip,

The website is working, it's just the slack owner.  I need to set it up so it alerts me to messages - I'll try and do that now.

Neil

Hi Folks,

What's wrong with this certificate?  Any thoughts?  Actual stamp at top.

Neil

Ok good news on the 4d Yellows/Orange

Found a great '14' and a few others so looking good.  The fourth row down are SG139.  The reversed one has a great papermakers watermark which you can make out.  I left a space for that '1' 

Neil

I quess it's in the way you read it. I read it as the stamp was submitted as SG139 and Odenweller is saying that the stamp is a genuine SG139, in other words bright orange-yellow on watermark, but the cancellation is fake. If it was submitted as a postally used example it might read differently. Here's mine.




Philip

With regard to Neil’s certificate the cert says it is a 4d yellow with large star Wmk. That would make it SG120 not SG139.



Dave

Yes exactly - it says large star watermark which means it was never 139.  And the watermark is there as I checked.  So why would someone put a counterfeit postmark on a stamp that decreases its value?

The first stamp in the second row looks like it might be SG139.

I hope you had a nice early night Philip!  Definitely has the watermark.  Image below.  The funny thing is the certificate says it has a Large Star Wmk but then completely mis-categorises it.  It is also the wrong colour - it is yellow not orange yellow which was what made me suspicious in the first place.

Yes I trust the Odenweller certificates but everyone is human and I just put this down to a mistake - maybe too focused on the postmark.  I wonder why Klaus submitted it in the first place? 

I have another stamp from Marcel Stanley's collection that the Royal NZ says is fake - but I don't see it.  I'll share that too for your views.

Neil

This is the Ex Marcel Stanley stamp.  It's always hard with roulettes and serrates because they were experimental and so we tend to go with what we know and can consider anything slightly different as counterfeit.  

On a different note, and I have mentioned this before, but the APS distinguish between forgeries and counterfeits and I like the distinction.  Forgeries are trying to rip off the postal system whereas Counterfeits are trying to rip off collectors.  We tend to use the terms interchangeably here.  Anyway image below.

Neil

Snap!  You read my mind.  Apparently Marcel thought this was genuine.  Hard guy to argue with.

Looking at the large scan I think the expert committee have been a bit harsh. The indents at top look OK, the ones on the left look to have been enhanced or possibly forged and the rest looks OK so an option which says genuine but enhanced/forged at left might have been fairer.

Going back to the 4d yellows here's a good scanned together to show the subtleties of the shade variations.






Top row, no watermark bright orange-yellow with forged postmark, star watermark orange-yellow late print with cert, and the rest are all considered variation of yellow.

Neil you've probably already found it but the large T postmark is Temuka used for a short period between manuscript cancels and the introduction of the Temuka star.

Philip