What to look for in stamps?

Analyzing interesting stamps in order to emphasize important elements present

A nice example of a stamp that showcases two important philatelic subject matters i.e. an overprint of historical significance (depicting historical changes in a country) as well as markings on the back of a stamp is presented on a photo above. Although the two are rather different philatelic topics altogether, one striking example of a stamp presented i.e. Queen Liliuokalani I, 2 ¢ 1893 Hawaii stamp overprinted in red (Scott 57) sublimes them both.

• Overprints of historical significance in regards to country’s governing authority changes

• Marks on the back of a stamp in regards to authenticity and/or provenance of a stamp

On 17 January 1893, Hawaii’s ruling monarchy was overthrown by pro-American “Committee of Safety” whose main agenda was annexation of Hawaii by United States.

Queen Liliuokalani was deposed in a bloodless coup d’état and provisional government was formed, setting grounds for prospective annexation of Hawaii by the United States. In the series of events that followed consequently first led to proclamation of Hawaii as a U.S. protectorate on February 1st, followed by annexation in August of the 1898 and subsequently to finalization of formal entry of Hawaii into U.S. territory on 14th July 1900.

Due to the political changes taking place in Hawaii, stamps featuring portraits of former ruling monarchs were not suitable to the newly formed provisional government. However, under the circumstances, ordering of new stamps would have taken a lot of time and would involve considerable costs associated with it. Postmaster General Joseph M. Oat at the time recommended overprinting as a much faster and cheaper option in order to resolve the issue. His proposal was approved by Hawaii’s provisional cabinet and it was during Oat’s tenure and supervision that the process took place.

Color of overprint was either red or black depending upon which gave better contrast in relation to the color of stamp design and it should be noted that during the overprinting process many varieties have occurred that are highly prized among collectors.

Stamps are also often subjected to various fraudulent overprints in an attempt of increasing their value. In many instances, fake overprints are applied on genuine stamps, making proper identification a more difficult task. A collector should always be wary of “rare” overprints and should be acquainted with printing methods and specifics for particular area of philately.

In most cases, majority of marks found on the back of a stamp i.e. examiner marks indicate that the stamp has been examined by the expert and found to be genuine. However, besides examiner marks there are numerous instances of other similar markings applied to the back of a stamp such as owner’s marks or dealer’s marks that could cause misidentification and should be always taken in consideration when analyzing a stamp.

Examiner’s marks seen on the back of Queen Liliuokalani I, 2 ¢ 1893 Hawaii stamp (Scott 57)

In many instances it is very difficult to find and even more so determine the authenticity of expert mark itself as the available literature is scarce and rarely available to collectors. Also, many of examiner’s marks have not been properly registered during the history and unfortunately a lot of them are not valid in philatelic sense of view. Marks can be in various forms but most commonly are in a form of initials, symbols or combination of both. 

In order to prevent misinterpretation of marks and possible deceits due to the easiness of applying a marking in a form of a hand stamp i.e. in a case of an attempt to mislead a prospective buyer, experts today issue certificates of authenticity which are signed by the expert or expertizing committee/service.

Among collectors there is no overall consensus about the issue of examiner’s marks on stamps. While some collectors see it as very convenient way of presenting opinion of authenticity that is especially well suited for stamps of relatively low catalog values where the cost of obtaining a certificate of authenticity by expertizing services would be too high in regards to stamp’s overall value, others see it as a form of fault on a stamp. In some instances ink has soaked heavily into the stamps permanently damaging them.

Applied marks can also be used as a track of provenance, as large number of owners and dealers, especially in the late 18^th and early 19^th century, have extensively marked stamps. Major problem presents availability of relevant reference literature on examiner’s marks as it is scarce and incomplete to large extent.   

In general (although no final conclusion can be made due to lack of consensus among philatelists) any marks except expert’s marks are considered as faults despite the ability to potentially determine provenance of stamp, while expert’s marks in some instances, if not too obtrusive can considerably increase the value of a stamp.