It is currently Mon Apr 19, 2021 7:56 pm (UTC [ DST ])



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
 Post subject: 1890 Jubilee Envelope Forgery?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 24, 2021 7:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:56 am
Posts: 2
Could anyone please comment on the status of this item? It appears to be a front from the 1890 Jubilee envelope stuck down on card but is too large overall at 144x111mm. Closer examination shows it to be in a duller grey-blue, more crudely produced and with many minor differences. Most obviously, the ‘Y’ of ‘penny’ falls over the’EU’ of ‘museum’, not the ‘M’ as on the issued envelopes. I assume it’s a forgery, or possibly some sort of ‘honest’ reproduction for philatelic purposes such as an exhibition souvenir, but can anyone tell me more?


Attachments:
98B6595E-8A5E-4983-AAA3-EA783F98B3A3.jpeg
(838.16 KiB)
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1890 Jubilee Envelope Forgery?
PostPosted: Thu Mar 25, 2021 12:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 6:00 pm
Posts: 3
This is an intriguing item. I have not seen it before and needs close inspection.
Most notably, there are ink marks in various aspects of the design (eg. above the train and below the VR cypher and stamp) which may indicate it was a trial printing of some kind. It appears to be on buff (thinner?) paper (or is it just discoloured from glue?), compared to the printed envelope. As it has been cut down and stuck to card, it may have come from a scrapbook or archive? Was it part of a collection that you acquired?
Thanks for sharing it, John Davies


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1890 Jubilee Envelope Forgery?
PostPosted: Thu Mar 25, 2021 7:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:56 am
Posts: 2
Hello John,
Many thanks for your reply. Sadly I can’t offer much background or context to this item other than to say it came from a general dealer’s cover box at a stamp fair three or four years ago, sold as a poor normal example. I bought it because I like oddities and thought it didn’t look right. So it has proved!
You’re right about the paper being thin but I’d describe it as cream rather than buff. It’s well stuck down and shows a diagonal laid effect. The printing standard is crude, including the various ink blotches you mention and the Queen’s portrait having fewer lines of shading, which, coupled with the many other minor differences, I take to be a sign of unofficial production rather than some sort of essay. I’ve just noticed too that it lacks the ‘1d’ in front of the 1890 postman! On balance I think it most likely an older forgery but would happily stand corrected.
David Hudson


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group