 XII-The First Issue
|
| Introduction | 123 | Retouches | 148 |
| Essays | 123 | Errors and Major Plate Varieties | 149 |
| Printing | 126 | Multiples, Covers and Uses | 151 |
| Proofs | 127 | Cancellations | 152 |
| Layout and Types | 145 | Bisects | 153 |
| Issued Stamps | 145 | References | 154 |
| Watermark | 145 | Retouches | 156 |
| Perforation | 146 |
The first issue of Egypt had a rather long gestation period, which began on 7 June 1864 when Giacomo Muzzi, Director of the Posta Europea, requested permission from Ismail Pasha, the Viceroy, to issue postage stamps. The proposal was overtaken by the purchase of the Posta Europea by the Egyptian Government, consummated in January 1865. Muzzi Bey, who was retained as Postmaster General, was directed to proceed with dispatch to have stamps prepared and in April 1865 he was given authorization to arrange for the printing abroad. Offers, in some cases accompanied by essays, had already been received from several firms, among them Pellas Brothers of Genoa, the firm ultimately selected. The correspondence relative to these events is preserved in the Postal Museum in Cairo; the more important documents have been published in full in the original Italian and in English translation by Ibrahim Chaftar Bey1.
A description of the essays for this issue, including colors recorded and general information, has been published by Byam2. Some essays by Negroni and by Prevost have survived (Fig. 1). The similarity of the designs to the issued stamps and to the model sketch (Fig. 2) prepared by the Egyptian Government suggests that they were solicited, directly or indirectly. The Negroni essay was printed on glazed card. Moëns3 lists nine color combinations (background stamp and overprint). There was only a single denomination, 10 paras, and the overprints were all of 1 piaster (bir ghrousb). These essays are very rare; none was in the Byam collection. Three were in the sale of the Palace Collections, but were not explicitly noted in the catalog.
The Negroni essay was imitated at a very early date (one might even say it was forged). The Prevost imitations differ from the Negroni essays in many qualitative aspects which are easily apparent when the two are compared side-by-side. A simple quantitative difference occurs in the concentric circles on which the stars are drawn. On the Negronis there are three thin circles between two thick ones, whereas the Prevost essays have four thin circles between two thick ones. Furthermore, the pearls are all properly aligned in the Negroni essays, but one pearl is displaced noticeably inwards in the Prevost design (between 8 and 9 o'clock, or 2 and 3 o'clock, depending on viewing orientation.
Moëns, writing in 1881, stated that the imitations were commissioned by Commander Antonio de Tedesco who had them printed by Prevost of Paris. However, one should recognize the possibility that the imitations were not made for sale to collectors, but to demonstrate to the Egyptian Government the virtuosity and capabilities of the Prevost firm without having to go to the trouble of creating a new design. An example of a Prevost essay imprinted on an envelope exists actually used in Egypt in 1869 addressed to France (the essay had no franking power, of course, and the cover was treated as stampless)4. This shows that the Prevost essays were at least close to contemporary with the First Issue, and that they actually reached Egypt.
Fig. 1 Essays by Negroni (above right) and by Prevost
Fig 2. Sketch from Egypt.
They were prepared in a variety of colors, on ordinary paper, white or tinted, on thin, glazed card, and on envelopes. All were denominated 10 paras. Some of them were printed without an overprinted inscription and value, which were printed next to the basic design, with a denomination of 1 plaster, inside a thin circle in the same color. These essays are often found without the adjacent overprint, but it cannot usually be said whether they were so printed or were cut apart afterwards. The Prevost essays also exist with the overprint directly on the stamp in black or other colors. With these, the overprinted denomination is either 20 paras or 1 piaster.
The essays by Pellas Brothers also had designs extremely close to the issued ones (Fig. 3).
They were lithographed. They included a 20pa. blue, 2pi. blue, 5pi. blue, 5pi. red, 10pi. blue, and 10pi. yellow, all on unwatermarked paper, imperforate, as
well as a 10pa. yellow (perf. 13), a 10pa. lilac, a 1pi. lilac with overprint of the 10pa., and a 2pi. yellow-orange with overprint of the 20pa., these four being
on the watermarked paper as issued. The Pellas essays are very rare, and some may be one of a kind, but multiples of the Pellas 1pi. overprinted 10 paras exist.
The Prevost ones are not so difficult to find and they were evidently printed in a moderate quantity, but the combinations of colors, papers, and surcharge colors
led to a very large variety of them. Any specific combination can fairly be labeled rare (I cannot recall ever having seen two alike).
The Egyptian Government prescribed paper watermarked with a pyramid surmounted by a rayed sun (some call it a star). The required paper was ordered by Pellas Bros. from
the firm of Bondi, of Turin. It was to be the cause of much trouble to Pellas Bros.
Printing
As the general catalogs note, there were three different combinations of printing method used for the issued stamps: typographed basic stamp and typographed overprint (1pi. only),
lithographed basic stamp with typographed overprint (2pi. only), and both parts lithographed (5, 10, and 20pa., and 5 and 10pi.). The rationale behind this seemingly erratic mixture
cannot now be established, but two circumstances provide a plausible possibility. Pellas Bros. had no experience printing stamps and the job of printing seven different basic designs
with seven different overprints required fourteen printing surfaces, each large enough to accommodate sheets of 200. Lithographic stones of good quality and large size were expensive
and tying up so many could well have strained the printers' facilities. Pellas Bros. perhaps experimented with stereotyping, but after having produced three plates, decided that the
process of making 2800 stereos was too tedious. Alternatively, they may have begun with lithography, but after having prepared eleven of the required fourteen stones had no more available
and so were forced to turn to stereotyping for the three remaining plates. One can only speculate.
The correspondence describes the printers' unhappy experience with the paper. The supply was improperly sized, so that it absorbed the gum (applied after printing).
This stained and disfigured the stamps so badly that they were unacceptable.
The printers therefore did their best to deal with a bad situation and dipped the printed sheets (and presumably the paper not yet used) in an alum solution to harden
and size the paper. Although this measure solved the gum problem, it created a new one, so Pellas Bros. claimed, by shrinking the paper to a variable degree.
Consequently, they claimed, it was difficult to perforate the sheets with the desired precision. However, that claim is not entirely credible, for the 1pi. stamps, printed on
unwatermarked paper not requiring the alum treatment, seem to be no more accurately perforated than the values on watermarked paper, and the dimensions of the printed stamps do
not vary. The alum treatment was evidently undertaken before all the stamps had been printed. Much spoilage occurred, depleting the stock of watermarked paper so that there was
not enough left to complete the order. To meet this problem the printers resorted to plain, unwatermarked paper for the 1pi. value. This smooth paper produced a clearer image
than the watermarked paper, which had a rough, fibrous surface.
Despite the difficulties, the order was completed in time for dispatch to Egypt on 30 September 1865. The quantities invoiced are shown in the table.
The very small consumption of the 5 and 10pi. stamps is notable, and is consistent with the scarcity of used copies of these stamps. The large remainders of the 2, 5, and 10pi. pose
the question of their fate. The 5 and 10pi. are admittedly easier to find unused than used, but their overall scarcity is so great as to be inconsistent with the possibility of the
remainders having been sold to the philatelic markets (only two unused blocks of the 5pi. and one of the 10pi. are known). Presumably, therefore, the remainders were destroyed, although
one cannot rule out the possibility that a few were pilfered before destruction.
QUANTITIES OF THE FIRST ISSUE
| Value | Supplied by Pellas | Consumed by use |
| 5pa. | 300,000 | 299,800 |
| 10pa. | 250,000 | 238,600 |
| 20pa. | 250,000 | 240,199 |
| 1 pi. | 1,200, 000 | 1,190, 657 |
| 2pi. | 500,000 | 165,400 |
| 5pi. | 300,000 | 18,400 |
| 10pi. | 200,000 | 7,600 |
Proofs
A presumed die proof of the 10pi. (i.e., a pull from an original lithographic stone or drawing) is known in grey-black without the overprint. Examples of the 1pi. in black without overprint, originating from a sheet, are also known.
Plate proofs on watermarked paper, without overprint and imperforate, are known for the 2 and 10pi. in the issued colors (with the 10pi., the shades are different). It is, however, not easy to tell which are proofs and which may be
printer's waste, for all such residual material is said to have been sent to Egypt accompanying the ordered stamps. No proofs of the overprints are known, although purported examples have been offered (they are merely proofs of the
5pi. from which most, but not all, traces of the rose background design have been removed).
Proofs of all values in the issued colors, on smooth, unwatermarked paper, without gum, mostly imperforate, are plentiful, and complete sheets have survived, as well as numerous pairs, strips, and blocks. I have seen examples with gum,
and it is reasonable that Pellas Bros. would have made some gumming trials, but I cannot say whether the gummed examples may not be the result of philatelic inspiration long after the time of the issue. It is these proof sheets that made
possible the comprehensive studies by Dr Byam6 of the printing procedures. They also enable single stamps to be plated to their original positions in the sheet.
The quantity of these proofs raises the question of whether their preparation actually preceded the printing of the issued stamps or whether they were an afterthought, or even a kind of reprint. The 1-plaster denomination provides the
evidence that they were, indeed, true proofs, printed ahead of the quantity of stamps contracted for. The typographed basic stamp had a complex design and the plate was subject to wear and clogging by accumulated ink crusts.
These factors led to a loss of detail as the printing of the contract order proceeded; some of the smaller white areas became filled in, giving a blotted appearance. The proofs, however, show all the fine detail, without any blotting,
and it is clear that they were printed from a pristine plate, and therefore before the main order. Perhaps they were made to test the substitute paper eventually used for the 1pi., although there is evidence that the proof paper is of a
slightly thicker stock7 (see below under Perforation).
Less commonly, the unwatermarked proofs are found perforated variously 11½, 12½, 13, 13½, combinations of these gauges, and 12½ x15. These are presumably perforation trials, although
perforations have also been forged in order to pass off
the cheaper proofs as the issued stamps. A complete sheet of the 1pi. perf. 13 throughout was offered in a Feldman auction in 1995.
Layout and Types
The layout of the proof sheets is generally assumed to be the same as the issued stamps although there are some discrepancies that imply either two stones or substituted transfers. To understand it, the designs of the stamps have first to be considered.
The superficial impression is of designs having a two-fold axis of symmetry (if the designs are rotated 180º in the plane of the paper they appear the same). The designs are in fact without any symmetry, and rotation by 180º produces a detectable difference.
Consequently, when the basic stamps were overprinted, two types resulted according to the orientation of the overprint to the background. These have traditionally been called Types I and II (assigned arbitrarily).
The two types for each value are identified in Figure 4.
The designs were probably intended to be symmetrical and the small deviations are presumably the result of drawing the designs by hand. If the printers noticed the differences, they evidently considered them to be of no account and the individual
subjects were assembled in the stones and plate haphazardly. Consequently, every sheet was a mixture of Types I and II, which in many positions were tête-bêche to each other. Furthermore, in the overprinting step, there was no concern about orienting
the sheets in a particular direction and Types I and II appear to be equally common for all values and are of little philatelic significance. Dr Byam has described6 the rationale by which he assigned `upright' and `inverted' to the designs of the six
lithographed backgrounds. He took the upper right corner subject of the sheet as the key on the assumption that the Italian printers would have built up the stones starting from the left side (which would have printed the right side of the sheets).
Byam originally studied the 20pa. proof sheet and subsequently found that his conclusions derived from it applied as well to the other lithographed values. The process he deduced was that a single die was impressed ten times on a strip of lithographic
transfer paper to make a vertical column. The transfer paper was then laid down on a matrix stone. Very small flaws were introduced at each impression, such that each of the ten can be individually recognized. These flaws recur across the sheet, in
principle twenty times (except for some substitutions). These he considered to be the primary types (the designs were oriented more or less randomly, `upright' or `inverted', on the matrix stone). Twenty impressions were taken from the matrix stone
and these were laid down side-by-side on the printing stone to make a sheet of 200 subjects, 20 x 10. This was done on the para values without regard to what might be the `top' or `bottom' of each strip; but with the 2, 5, and 10pi., the strips of
ten were all the same way up. Some minute secondary flaws were introduced during this stage, but these do not recur.
As a result of this procedure each design has ten primary types (except the 10pi., see below); they are numbered with arabic numerals to avoid confusion with the old Types I and II. Byam illustrated them with drawings for the 5, 10, and 20pa. and the
10pi. (Figs. 5 to 8). The types of the 2 and 5pi. have been described but not yet illustrated8 (Figs. 9 and 10). It is possible to assemble a collection of each of the types, but it is a very difficult task. Apart from the scarcity and cost of 5 and 10pi. stamps,
there is also the vexation of identifying the characteristic flaws, which are often obscured by cancellations or punched out by perforations (it is easier to work with proofs). The yellow 2pi. is especially difficult to work with because the eye does not
distinguish details in that color readily. For this value it is advisable to resort to black-and-white photographs, as the photographic film is more sensitive to yellow and converts the image into a more easily examined form. The layout of the types is shown in
Figures. 11 to 14.
The 10pi. is a special case because there are only nine types. What would have been Type 10, across the bottom row of the sheet, is replaced by Types 1 to 9, more or less in order from left to right (Fig. 14). Probably there was a defect in Type 10 on the
matrix stone and the transfers from it were discarded. From the layouts it can be seen that there were also other cases of substitution of individual transfers, thereby interrupting the order of types.
| 5 para | 10para | 20para | 10piasters |
1 Small break in central loop of chain on left.
2 Small break in left upper white central circle just to right of uppermost point.
3 Small break in outer side of lower left white triangle level with foot of "2".
4 Small coloured projection outside lower frame line opposite left angle of triangle in right lower corner. Break as on Type 6.
5 Small coloured dot outside upper border to left of right upper angle of hexagonal chain frame.
6 Marked break in left outer coloured frame line level with lower portion of "P".
7 Small break in upper white frame line to right of stop after "E" in left upper corner.
8 Small break in upper white frame line at inner angle of triangle in right upper corner.
9 Small break in lower outer coloured frame line with fragment turned outwards to the left.
10 Fifth pearl from the top in the lower of the two left upper diagonal columns is broken and appears white to left.
1 Loop of band touches N.E. circle. Flag of "5" in N.E. corner indented above. Lower white frame line broken I mm. to left of S.E. circle.
2 Coloured flaw in circle round "P.E." in S.E. corner. Break in right outer frame line three-quarters of the way down.
3 N.W. ray of central rosette fails to reach the centre. Break in outer border of S.E. loop of band at extreme right.
4 Minute coloured flaw on looped band just above S.W. loop.
5 Broken "5" in S.W. corner.
6 White flaw in background between lower frame line and curved white line above it, to left of mid-line.
7 Design inverted: Space between loop and N.E. circle. Break in outer frame line just below junction with circle in N.E. corner.
8 White break in outer coloured margin of circle in S.E. corner.
9 Circular coloured flaw in white circle at N.W. corner below "P.E.".
10 Design inverted: Coloured flaw projecting upwards into upper transverse portion of looped band to left of mid-line.
The overprint stones for the 5, 10, and 20pa., and the 5 and 10pi. were made up similarly, with the difference that the matrix stones consisted of vertical strips of five rather than ten. Two impressions from the matrix stones were laid
down one above the other to make an intermediate stone from which twenty transfers were taken to make the printing stone. Since flaws were introduced in these steps, there are five primary types for each overprint, each of which exists in
two minor variants which recur across the sheets. The types of the 20pa. are shown in Figure. 15.The overprinting stones and plates had another feature: marginal inscriptions. These were in large serifed capitals (smaller on the 1 pi.) reading
across the top of the sheet VICE REALI POSTE EGIZIANE, across the bottom, MINISTERO DEI LAVORI PUBBLICI, and on each side, FRANCOBOLLI and the denomination (Fig. 22). Only a few pieces of the issued stamps have survived with parts of these
marginal inscriptions attached, but they are less rare in the proofs.
Bearing in mind that the overprints were not necessarily applied uniformly in `upright' or in `inverted' orientation, we can conclude that a given primary type of overprint might be found on at least four different types of the background stamp.
For example, consider a column of ten of the basic stamp, consisting of Types 1 through 10, and a column of ten of the overprint, consisting of Types 1 to 5 and again 1 to 5. Type 1 overprint would fall on Types 1 and 6 of the background.
If the sheet had been turned before overprinting, Type 1 overprint would fall on Types 10 and 5 of the background. Additional possibilities might arise where a substituted transfer occurs. Such combinations can, of course, be collected, but an
exhibit of them would be unlikely to engage the enthusiasm of any but the hard-core devotee. The significance of these types and combinations of them is primarily in protection against forgeries. For potential reference, not only do complete
proof sheets exist in some private collections, but photographs of them, in normal size or enlarged, are in the hands of other collectors and expert services.
| 5 para | 10para | 20para | 10piasters |
| Fig 15. the lithographed overprint |
The foregoing discussion of the lithographic types does not, of course, apply to the typographed impressions. The overprints of the 1 and 2pi. and the basic design of the former have been studied with great care.
There seem to be no flaws that recur within the sheets, and thus no recognizable types. This situation implies that there was a single die for each, which was replicated 200 times, presumably by stereotyping.
Many flaws, some of them quite prominent, resulted. They consist mostly of broken or distorted lettering or framelines. Their plate positions can be determined from the proof sheets and they are constant.
Many of them have been described and illustrated9,10.
Some examples of the 2pi. have an overprint that has a quite distinctive thin appearance, with many small skips in the inking (Fig. 16). 1 have seen them only unused, either imperforate or pert. 12½ x 15.
Some have been plated, and they were clearly printed from the same stone and plate as the other 2pi. stamps. They may be from a trial printing of the overprint in which the make-ready blanket was too hard, resulting in poor contact.
Fig. 16 "Thin" overprint on the 2pi.
The plate for the 1pi. was laid out differently from the other values. It consisted of two panes of 100 separated by a vertical gutter of about half the width of a stamp. The gutters were framed by two rows of vertical
perforation, and wing margins are therefore not known. Some pieces exist with gutter attached but separated by a row of perforation. No example of a horizontal pair of the issued stamp with gutter between is known,
although they may exist. Gutter pairs and blocks of the proofs are known, however.
Issued stamps
The stamps were received in Egypt in adequate time to distribute them to all post offices. A long decrees11, Rules for the Internal Postal Service, was issued on December 21st 1865 to come into effect on January 1st.
The following section excerpted from it announced the impending stamp issue.
The stamps went on sale as promised, and there is no evidence of any prior sale. The colours were:
| 5pa. Slate green | 1pi. claret-rose |
| 10 pa. Brown - Dull to Bright | 2pi. yellow to orange-yellow |
| 20pa. Light blue to light greenish blue. | 5pi. carmine-rose |
| l0pi. deep slate to deep slate blue |
These colors are not as bright as those of the proofs (except for the 1pi.); the very different nature of the paper surface may be the cause.
Watermark
The issued stamps are further complicated by the watermark and perforation. The watermark design (Fig. 17) has no symmetry whatever, and consequently it can have four orientations: upright, with the
leading edge of the pyramid to the left or to the right, and inverted, leading edge left or right. All of these exist on each value (except, of course, the lpi.), but not by any means in the same
quantities. Upright watermarks (with respect to the overprint) are surprisingly scarce on the 5pa. and the 2pi., but the 20pa. is scarcer with inverted watermark. The 5pa. with upright watermark is in fact a rarity.
Comparison of known examples shows that at least two sheets must have originally been printed, however, to account for differences in the centering of the watermark with respect to the background design.
Some left-over watermarked paper eventually found its way into philatelic hands and part of it was used in making the Salama forgeries (see below). It should be noted that the sun has ten rays (some
positions have one weak or partial ray). The illustrations in the Scott and Gibbons catalogs, as well as the several editions of Zeheri, are in error, and were apparently made from forgeries.
Fig. 17 Watermark: sketch from Egypt, and actual.
Perforation
The perforations add a complication of their own. Most stamps are perf. 12½, but some have one, two, three, or even four sides perf. 13. Because it is possible to determine plate positions even of single
stamps, it has been found that the stamps of perf. 13 on four sides are overwhelmingly corner stamps. For the most part, those stamps perf. 12½ x 13 are from either the leftmost or rightmost columns, and
those perf. 13x12½ are from either the top or bottom row. It would appear that the machine that produced the 12½-gauge lines had some sort of mechanical limitation that prevented it from being used
to perforate the last two lines in each sequence of operation. Another machine, gauging 13, was presumably used to supply the missing four rows. The pattern that would result is shown in Fig. 18 for one of the
four possible orientations. The practical effect was to produce from each sheet of 200: one stamp perf. 13, two stamps perf. 13 on three sides, one stamp pert. 13 on two adjacent sides,
18 stamps perf. 13x12½, 8 stamps perf. 12½ x 13, 8 stamps perf. 13 on one or the other side, and 18 stamps perf. 13 at either top or bottom12.
The perforators were capable of doing only one line at a time, and it was thus easy for a row to be omitted inadvertently. Apparently, when such an omission was noticed it was rectified by use of the
gauge-13 machine. As a consequence, one or more edges of some stamps were perforated 13 in sheet positions other than the usual pattern. Stamps perf. 13 on all sides are the most eagerly sought.
All values are known in this condition, but it is obvious that they are rare. One should be wary of forgeries, but more wary of mis-measurement. The difference between perf. 121/2 and 13 is not large,
and a surprisingly high proportion of collectors and dealers (including auction describers) seem to be incapable of using a perforation gauge reliably. It is essential to make a careful check of any
perforation rarity that may be offered, beginning with a check of the accuracy of the perforation gauge that one intends to use by counting the number of perforations in 20mm.
| A 1 stamp perf. 13. B 2 stamps perf. 13 on three sides. C 1 stamp pert. 13 on two adjacent sides. D 8 stamps perf. 12.5 x 13. E 18 stamps pert. 13 x 12.5. F, G 26 stamps pert. 13 on one side only. (One of four possible orientations; the two pairs of lines of perf. 13 might be arranged so as to overlap in any of the four corners.).
Fig. 18 The pattern of perforation, which might be inverted, reversed, or inverted and reversed on different sheets |  |
The omitted lines of perforation were not always attended to, and the result was the delivery of sheets with some stamps partly perforated or imperforate. Multiples imperforate between, imperforate
horizontally or vertically, or even totally imperforate, therefore exist. All are more or less rare. Imperforate singles are less rare, but with them one must be very cautious as another consequence of
the use of a line perforator is variable width between the rows. Wide stamps and narrow stamps are not uncommon, and the former can be trimmed to make plausible-looking imperforates. Nearly all perforated
stamps are 19 to 20mm wide by 22 to 24mm high, measuring from the inside of the perforation holes. Imperforates exceeding the maximum measurements can reasonably be accepted as such, although it is not possible to have absolute certainty with singles.
The 1pi. imperforate presents another problem: how to distinguish it from the imperforate proofs. There are two ways to approach the task. One has already been described with respect to distinguishing perforated proofs from the issued stamp: the loss of
some detail of the design as the printing proceeded. The other is use of a thickness gauge7. The proofs are generally on thinner paper than the issued stamps; most proofs have a thickness less than 0.0027 inch (0.067mm), and nearly all issued stamps
are 0.0030 inch (0.075mm) thick or thicker. Only a very few stamps fall into the intervening range (the result of unevenness in the sheets of paper), and most of them can be identified by means of the first criterion, sharpness of impression.
Double perforations are not rare, nor are severely misplaced perforations, which sometimes run through the middle of the stamps. In such extreme cases the stamps were usually separated from the sheet by use of a knife or scissors as though they had been imperforate.
These are, of course, in no way double perforations, but such stamps are often improperly described as "imperforate, with an extra row of perforations across the stamp".
One other perforation variant must be mentioned: 12½ x 15. This is the gauge of the Second Issue (necessarily turned 180º), and it is hypothesized that some imperforate or partly imperforate sheets delivered to Egypt may have been used for
perforation trials for the succeeding issue. T his gauge is known on the 10pa., 2pi., and the error stamp, 5pi. with overprint of the 10pi. They might be considered to be proofs except for the fact that at least one example of the last stamp is known
with an apparently genuine cancellation. These varieties are rare, the 10pa. being the most so. One copy of the 2pi. is known with perf. 15 on three sides.
Fig. 19 The 10pi. rouletted.
As an anomaly, the 10pi. exists partly rouletted. This is a very rare variety (I have record of only two examples) and its origin is not known. One can only speculate that it represents an attempt to deal with defectively perforated sheets,
officially or privately.
Retouches
Before proceeding, it is necessary to comment on the problem of designating positions in the sheets. The problem exists only for the background designs, not for the overprints. Since the overprint determines the top and bottom of the sheet, and
it can be applied to the background in two orientations, a given subject of the background design can appear in either of two positions in the final sheet. Thus position 11 (top row) becomes position 189 (bottom row) when the orientation is inverted.
To avoid confusion, all sheet positions referring to the background designs are given as they occur on the proof sheets. On the issued sheets the positions may be the same, but the features (retouches, plate flaws) being described should also be
looked for in the alternative positions.
| Fig. 20 Retouch to floral ornament at upper left. | Fig. 21 White spot on Type 1 SE part of oval, and as retouched on some positions. |
Some positions on the lithographic stones were evidently retouched before printing took place. On the 5pa., position 8 shows the result of apparent repair to part of the floral design in the upper left corner (Fig. 20).
Type 1 of the 10pi. shows a prominent white spot on the oval on twenty of the twenty-three positions of Type 1 (Fig. 21), but on positions 18, 19, and 20 the area appears to have been drawn in (Fig. 22). On the 20pa., position
198 exists both with and without a blob of color on the numerals in the lower left value circle (Fig. 22). It appears to be a case of a flaw discovered and repaired during printing rather than the result of damage that occurred
during printing. There is inconclusive evidence that a second stone or substitution of one or more subjects of the 2pi. and 10pi., and possibly other values, may have occurred during printing as some issued stamps do not seem to match the proof sheets.
Fig. 22 Numerals 20 joined and obscured in lower left corner. and as repaired.
Errors and Major Plate Varieties
The most outstanding error is the 5pi. with overprint (superscription) of the 10pi (Fig. 23). It occurs imperforate and perf. 12½ x 15 but not perf. 12½ (supposed examples have turned out to be forgeries).
It also exists as a proof on unwatermarked paper. Other errors of overprint, including tête-bêche overprints, have been reported in the past, but all have been shown to be forgeries.
A used copy of the 10pi. has been reported printed on both sides13. I have not seen the actual stamp and the illustration is not clear, so I cannot say if it is genuine or a case of a forged overprint on printer's waste.
Apart from the retouch already described, there exists on the 5pa. a major flaw in the overprint. The letter sad (the loop in the central word) is entirely missing in position 132 (Fig. 24).
The 10pa. has a remarkable variety in position 56: a small but bold circle (corresponding to an Arabic numeral 5 or terminal letter heh) is in the upper right corner of the overprint (Fig. 25).
|