The Samovar

Nikolaevsk revealed? HUH? Ya, right......

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/6/2004 at 23:03

A friend of mine helped me put this together. These are just some of the things that need to be compared on this issue.

together~2.jpg - 228kB

How about a cert that tells us?

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/6/2004 at 23:09

Yes, I did edit the details that don't matter in this forum.

cert.jpg - 92kB

Close up of the genuine on the cert.

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/6/2004 at 23:10



gen.jpg - 47kB

achlenov - 11/10/2004 at 15:53

What about these two? Borrowed from Raritan Stamps auciton. No frame break here.

Nikolajevsk-gen-15k.jpg - 23kB

achlenov - 11/10/2004 at 15:56

Here is the second one...

Nikolajevsk-gen-15k-2.jpg - 23kB

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/10/2004 at 20:47

In my humble opinion, the frame breaks on the kopeck issues are the easiest way to determine if a stamp should be considered. Mandatory comes to mind if you use the Certificate's description. :pumpup

I do not know about the Ruble or Semi-postal overprint. Does anyone have a picture? :study

Whoops, we aren't talking about that, huh!:devil

Maybe I worked too hard today, but the first image that you posted looks as though the frame on the left hand side as we look at it, is bent! mmmmm
:hair

Can you e-mail me a scan of each at, say, 300dpi or more? :hoho

achlenov - 11/10/2004 at 22:51

You are right, it does look that way for the first one. Unfortunately I do not have these stamps and those low resolution scans is all I have...

BIG SUPRISE!!!!!

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/11/2004 at 07:08

:study :study :study

And we thought this was easy.:hair

:study :study :study

Ok, check this out. Here are the 15/50k (barrowed image) and the 15/70k(mine). Sorry, no certs on these, just good provenance.

The 15k and 20k apparently do NOT have the frame breaks. So we need to find any consistancy's here and now.

What is an outstanding feature that you see on the back of the stamp?

Looks like the overprint should create an oily type soak through to me.

What else do you see?

15~50k.JPG - 80kB

achlenov - 11/11/2004 at 13:00

Here is a fake to compare with, although this one is way too crude.

Nikolaevsk-mine.JPG - 30kB

I can see clearly now the rain has gone....

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/11/2004 at 23:45

:hoho
It feels like Christmas has come early this year! Once again, I have had the benifit of some help with this. Thanks again!

Now with some images that we can see. :hop

First off, please note the marks on the back of these stamps. The most important one is that of Mon. Papadopoulus, in red. This is the gentleman that is refered to in Dr. Ceresa's certificate. This is the best mark that this series stamps could have. More on this later.

Second, low and behold, the oily residue on the back appears as suggested earlier. Could this be the "key" to unlocking the Pandora's box? Now what is really interesting to me is that this is the same type of oily residue that is found on the back of Podilia Trident overprints. Is this just a coincidence?

backs.JPG - 44kB

achlenov - 11/12/2004 at 11:08

Wasn't there a general tendency at the time to use oil-based ink that penetrated paper in this way? It's also often seen on provisionals.

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/12/2004 at 21:45

To the best of my knowledge, at the beginning of the Great War, Germany stopped exports to Russia. One of the things that Russia imported was black ink. Russia did not have the natural resources to produce a fine black ink.

Thus, as the war dragged on, the stockpile slowly depleted. By the time Russia had left the war, the stockpile was reduced to a few major cities.

Certainly the Provisionals, Tridents and Areas overprints during and after the Civil War prove that this general receipe for black ink was wide spread.

Any thoughts?:cool:

GregMirsky - 11/12/2004 at 22:51

Hey guys!
I think this document can add something to this thread. If somebody has better French then me - please translate. The stamp (10 kop.) BTW has breaks on the left side of the frame. Sorry for large image, but it is relevant.

Certificate2.jpg - 246kB

achlenov - 11/15/2004 at 13:54

"We undersigned Rene Andre, Consul of France in Vladivostok, Officer of the Honor Legion (???) certify and attest that the stamp included is of the series issued by ex-Government of Priamur in 1921 for the region of Nikolaevsk-on-Amur (Eastern Siberia).
This [document] is given to Mr. D.Scherbinin, Secretary of the Consulat, who purchased this stamp today at the Direction of Posts at Vladivostok, the Division of stamps removed from circulation.
[The document] issued at Vladivostok on the 5th of December 1922.
The Consul of France"

Quite an interesting piece. I have no idea why the Consul will issue such a document to his Secretary...

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/24/2004 at 20:14

:hop So :hop where :hop were :hop we? :hop

I know, how about the front....

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/29/2004 at 09:14

As promised.
Sorry about the size, but, I think it's important. One of the things that I noticed right away is the oily residue can be seen on the front of the stamp as well. :o

What else is notable?:study

1521.jpg - 256kB

achlenov - 11/29/2004 at 14:23

Sorry, I lost track. These last two are genuine? Frames are quite different..

Here is a new example from ebay by i.stets. Looks quite similiar... Oily residue is there...

34_1.jpg - 25kB

achlenov - 11/29/2004 at 17:45

One thing I noticed is that all genuine ones listed here have a thin stem 5. Both forgeries have a thicker stem. Also the frame looks a little smaller on this last one.

achlenov - 11/30/2004 at 18:37

Here is the back of the last one. Any ideas what are these markings on the back?

back.jpg - 6kB

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/30/2004 at 21:41

Here is a good list of marks. Just a list, nothing more, nothing less.
Please don't confuse it with a list of good marks, or a list of bad marks. It is just a list. Oh, ok. It is just a list with images of marks and certificates!
:study

http://www.filatelia.fi/experts/namesg.html

:study

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/30/2004 at 22:03

Could be Karl Hennig. Although this mark doesn't appear on the "list". :hair

Three items to consider

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 11/30/2004 at 22:09

The slope of the seriff of the "1". The shape of the "B"s' top curve. The base of the "1". As you said, the width of the 5's stem.

3 new spots.jpg - 48kB

achlenov - 12/1/2004 at 15:59

So what is it then, an early reprint? How long was this kind of ink in use?

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 12/2/2004 at 23:39

Alas these remain a mystery.:(

Another donated image.......

MICHAEL MACKENZIE - 12/3/2004 at 08:24

This is the back of the 20k/5Rub overprint. I think this is an extreme example of the oily residue, how about you?:hoho

20~5rub.jpg - 29kB

wtw - 9/30/2008 at 17:52

Re: French certificate. From what I have read, such certificates seem to have invariably contained forgeries upon closer examination. Yet this one seems to be genuine?
Does anyone know of other cases where a so certified
N on A stamp was genuine? This is interesting.

Re Mike's posting of 11/11/04, I'm not sure how comfortable to be with a Pappadopoulo marking on the back. He did instigate the set, to be sure. But, as I understand it, he also seems to have made his own version of it (and probably the N on A cancellor as well), carried around the geniune overprint stamper, and played havoc with one of the Vladivostok cancellors. He was a rascal, but I do love to learn about him. Did I read somewhere that he wound up in Japan and continued his business there? But I digress...

Thanks for the information about the inks. Can I guess that this might have something to do with certain other overprints - like the ones for Batum?

Alep - 10/1/2008 at 01:50

If the scan of the 50-kop stamp produced by achlenov shows the shades correctly, it should be a forgery, since stamps of this shade were issued in 1919 in Soviet Russia and could not be delivered to the Far East by 1921 because of the Civil War events.

Dr. Ray Ceresa - 4/25/2009 at 04:14

All the aforementioned points are discussed and summarised in Forgery Guide No.19/20, October 2008, "Russia-Siberia: Priamiur & Maritime Provinces & Soviet Far East Issues."

ANother Nikolaevsk-on-Amur Example 10k on 10k - or is it?

Jeff - 12/18/2010 at 22:20

Amazing, I had a few moments of my life that were not dedicated to work and I broke out an old stock book. I have had this stamp for years and really do not believe it is much. No reference to these type of stamps in Scott. Gibbons says it is Russia Civil War Issues - V. 1921 Nikolaevsk-on-Amur. I can attest to the 10 arms type stamp that is 14x 14.5 perforation, and there is no watermark. I am unable to isolate the overprint from the stamp, and the black overprint on dark blue is hard for me to separate. Any opinions on authenticity?

Thanks,

Jeff

img002.jpg - 256kB

David Jay - 12/22/2010 at 03:20

This is very much not my area. But if I recall correctly, the document(s) signed by the consul -- there may be several -- have been debunked, as some of the enclosed stamps were found to be "reprints" -- if a fantasy that was
never actually issued can be considered to have reprints.