Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
I sent the picture to Mystic stamp company ID service. They recommended sending it to the Philatelic foundation.
What do you all think of it?
Login to Like
this post
I am not a San Marino specialist but here are some general comments regarding bisect stamps.
To be legitimate, bisect stamps have to have been authorized by the post office and have an identifiable cancel applied during the correct period.
So first you must ascertain if San Marino PO allowed bisects and if the cancel is legitimate. Post offices typically only authorized bisect provisional usages if there was some sort of shortage of stamps. San Marino is a small country, so distribution issues seem unlikely.
Was there a legitimate postal rate for a 1C usage in this period? (Look at the denominations in the catalog and note that there were no 1C stamps from 1877 through 1907, this points to it being unlikely that there was a 1C postage rate.)
Lastly, you have to consider if this was a philatelic contrivance (as were the majority of bisect stamps).
Perhaps someone in the community is San Marino specialist and can provide more info before you spend money on a cert.
Don
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
12:25:46pm
So if a post master is out of a 1 denomination and decides to bisect and post mark a 2 denomination it is not considered to be a legitimate bisect. I guess that makes sense since a postal worker could do one for me for philatelic purposes. How about the early bisects we see occasionally? Are they only to be considered legit if we can find a catalog listing? I wonder where Canada's Port Hood Provisional fit into this. They are considered philatelic items since they are denoted 88b and 88c. I must check out the story to see if permission was given to the post master in Port Hood.....I just checked, the Canadian Post Office declared them to be illegal but relented since several had already been used - a fascinating story, by the way! So what does someone do if they find an early bisect tied to piece or cover that does not have a catalog number?
Edit:Canada #4b (3d red beaver) on cover as a diagonal bisect lists for $40 000. Early bisects tend to very expensive. I very luckily have an NS#3a (bisect) tied nicely to a large piece with an 1860 Liverpool N.S. postmark. The jewel of my collection so far!!
Login to Like
this post
12:37:20pm
Here's what Boggs has to say:
The postage Stamps and Postal History of Canada
Roy
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
There is a short thread from 2008 on Stampboards discussing a cover using this bisect. Apparently Michel notes the bisect but doesn't give any information.
Login to Like
this post
08:46:06am
I know this stamp is a San Marino Scott catalogue #1. It is not listed in my 2011 Scott catalog or the 2017 catalogue that the stamp club of which I am a member. It is not listed in 2003 Classic Specialized Catalogue that one of the members has.
I sent the picture to Mystic stamp company ID service. They recommended sending it to the Philatelic foundation.
What do you all think of it?
Login to Like
this post
re: San Marino Diagonal Half
I am not a San Marino specialist but here are some general comments regarding bisect stamps.
To be legitimate, bisect stamps have to have been authorized by the post office and have an identifiable cancel applied during the correct period.
So first you must ascertain if San Marino PO allowed bisects and if the cancel is legitimate. Post offices typically only authorized bisect provisional usages if there was some sort of shortage of stamps. San Marino is a small country, so distribution issues seem unlikely.
Was there a legitimate postal rate for a 1C usage in this period? (Look at the denominations in the catalog and note that there were no 1C stamps from 1877 through 1907, this points to it being unlikely that there was a 1C postage rate.)
Lastly, you have to consider if this was a philatelic contrivance (as were the majority of bisect stamps).
Perhaps someone in the community is San Marino specialist and can provide more info before you spend money on a cert.
Don
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
22 Feb 2020
12:25:46pm
re: San Marino Diagonal Half
So if a post master is out of a 1 denomination and decides to bisect and post mark a 2 denomination it is not considered to be a legitimate bisect. I guess that makes sense since a postal worker could do one for me for philatelic purposes. How about the early bisects we see occasionally? Are they only to be considered legit if we can find a catalog listing? I wonder where Canada's Port Hood Provisional fit into this. They are considered philatelic items since they are denoted 88b and 88c. I must check out the story to see if permission was given to the post master in Port Hood.....I just checked, the Canadian Post Office declared them to be illegal but relented since several had already been used - a fascinating story, by the way! So what does someone do if they find an early bisect tied to piece or cover that does not have a catalog number?
Edit:Canada #4b (3d red beaver) on cover as a diagonal bisect lists for $40 000. Early bisects tend to very expensive. I very luckily have an NS#3a (bisect) tied nicely to a large piece with an 1860 Liverpool N.S. postmark. The jewel of my collection so far!!
Login to Like
this post
BuckaCover.com - 80,000 covers priced 60c to $1.50 - Easy browsing 500 categories
22 Feb 2020
12:37:20pm
re: San Marino Diagonal Half
Here's what Boggs has to say:
The postage Stamps and Postal History of Canada
Roy
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
12:39:50pm
re: San Marino Diagonal Half
There is a short thread from 2008 on Stampboards discussing a cover using this bisect. Apparently Michel notes the bisect but doesn't give any information.
Login to Like
this post