Scott catalogue mentions that there are reprints, and also mentions that there are excellent counterfeits made.
Being ignorant on the subject I would also like to understand if "reprint" means counterfeit?
Any help provided is greatly appreciated.
Moderator: Volunteer Moderator Team
Hi Clive,Clive King wrote:A reprint is normally ordered by the applicable postal authority to full stock or replace damaged stock. A forgery is an auathorised printing of a stamp value to deprive the postal authority of revenue.
No, the reprints were authorized by the South African government.Being ignorant on the subject I would also like to understand if "reprint" means counterfeit?
Yes, there is a way to determine genuine from reprint, though very difficult on single stamps. I believe it was a man named John Kaupe (not sure of spelling) who used to expertize these using a perforation scheme. It was not the measurement of the perforations but the type of comb used. He noted a difference from the originals and the Mirza Hadi reprints. There were a dozen or more comb types established, some from the originals and some from the reprints. Somewhere I have the articles from the Transvaal Philatelist that were sent to me by him quite a few years ago. My eyes were not able to tell the differences and I gave up trying. The "real" specialist in this field can do it though.ottawasteve wrote:Consider these as all reprints. They outnumber genuine examples many thousands to one.
The journal of the Transvaal Study Circle had a superb dissertation on these a few years ago. They are very hard to sort out, but it can be done. If/when I find my copy, I'll post it here.
There is a sticky thread on most sub-forums answering this very FAQ.berniestamps wrote:How do I put pics on here?