Page 1 of 1
1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Tue May 23, 2023 3:29 am
by Galveston
I have this used FA and am curious about the gum. Looking for thoughts re: the gum - re-gummed? Surely cant be original gum? Also, I cant remember now, was original gum whitish or more clear or yellowish?? The back is actually a gloss sheen when turned in the light. Would not show as scanned, so I took this bad cell phone picture. Lastly, thoughts on the writing interpretation ? Thanks for looking & thoughts.
- Front FA
- Back FA
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Tue May 23, 2023 8:14 am
by admin
Not my particular area, but from memory, the gum was usually pretty thick and yellowish and probably quite glossy when dried -- and not always that good at attaching the stamp unless thoroughly wetted!
So it could be some of the original gum left over, although you'd better see if somebody who collects line engraved can offer a more definite answer.
You could also check the old classics on GB stamps -- Philbrick & Westoby, Wright & Creeke, and Denny Bacon, the first two nearly contemporary -- all available in the downloads section:
https://www.gbps.org.uk/downloads/postage-stamps.php
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Tue May 23, 2023 1:26 pm
by Galveston
Will do. Thank you.
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Tue May 23, 2023 1:40 pm
by Galveston
admin wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 8:14 am
Not my particular area, but from memory, the gum was usually pretty thick and yellowish and probably quite glossy when dried -- and not always that good at attaching the stamp unless thoroughly wetted!
So it could be some of the original gum left over, although you'd better see if somebody who collects line engraved can offer a more definite answer.
You could also check the old classics on GB stamps -- Philbrick & Westoby, Wright & Creeke, and Denny Bacon, the first two nearly contemporary -- all available in the downloads section:
https://www.gbps.org.uk/downloads/postage-stamps.php
In contrast to this one which I got marked as "unplated and O.G." Rear bottom right corner yellowish a tad and crackly.
- 1d red Queen Victoria PD
- 1d red Queen Victoria PD - Back
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Tue May 23, 2023 7:47 pm
by petrod
Personally I should be surprised if there is any of the original gum left on this used example. But in my experience the original gum on unused stamps is nearly always of a yellowish tinge and cracked (from old age like me).
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Tue May 23, 2023 8:03 pm
by Galveston
petrod wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 7:47 pm
Personally I should be surprised if there is any of the original gum left on this used example. But in my experience the original gum on unused stamps is nearly always of a yellowish tinge and cracked (from old age like me).
yes , agreed. The used one does seem unusual. However, the unused example does look to be yellowish and crackled.
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Sun May 28, 2023 12:41 pm
by AB1961
Hi Galveston,
Had a look at some of my early Queen Victoria with original gum , mid 1840s. The gum appears to have a greenish tinge, especially when on paper that is less blued.
Most of these issues have strong bluing and this shows through the gum and gives a misleading impression .The sheets were double gummed so it should be thick . There should be some cracking, the paper is never white by today's standards and it varies in thickness. The general impression of the colour of the gum is murky green . I hope that this is of some assistance.
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Sun May 28, 2023 2:45 pm
by AB1961
Hi Galveston,
I have reason to believe that not all the early One Penny Red imperf stamps were double gummed, it was only done when the first application was unsuccessful as the gum could lose its adhesion quite quickly.The gum did need to be thick but did not always adhere evenly so there was instances of areas that had no glue.
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Sun May 28, 2023 2:50 pm
by Galveston
AB1961 wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2023 12:41 pm
Hi Galveston,
Had a look at some of my early Queen Victoria with original gum , mid 1840s. The gum appears to have a greenish tinge, especially when on paper that is less blued.
Most of these issues have strong bluing and this shows through the gum and gives a misleading impression .The sheets were double gummed so it should be thick . There should be some cracking, the paper is never white by today's standards and it varies in thickness. The general impression of the colour of the gum is murky green . I hope that this is of some assistance.
Thanks for taking the time to look - and the reply. It’s good to have a second comparison. Also, can you by chance make out the handwriting on the top rear example?
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Sun May 28, 2023 3:00 pm
by petrod
I think it says “late”
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2023 3:38 pm
by jimw
I think this stamp (FA) is from plate 119 first printed 20 May 1851 so the London District postmark 75 for Edmonton which came into use in 1844 is fairly late use.
Your other stamp (PD) you got marked as unplated is from plate 98.
Re: 1d red Queen Victoria gum question
Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2023 3:26 am
by Galveston
jimw wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 3:38 pm
I think this stamp (FA) is from plate 119 first printed 20 May 1851 so the London District postmark 75 for Edmonton which came into use in 1844 is fairly late use.
Your other stamp (PD) you got marked as unplated is from plate 98.
Hi Jim - appreciate the follow up. I wish more people used these boards! I had the FA as Plate 118 which is similar to the 119. But in re-visiting it, ill go with 119. The vertical on the F looks better, possibly the stars too, but, I dont see the WSWX from 119 on mine? The PD I had as plate 80 - not sure how, haha. But im a beginner. Its now 98. Thank you again.... Wm