(Articles Main)
(Home)
The
Danger of Wishful Thinking
by John Valenti
Let’s
face it. We all love a bargain. Who among us isn’t excited to
find that great cancellation item, unidentified and underpriced, in a
dealer’s stock. That one item can make our whole day spent at a
bourse. Not only do we have something to add to our collection, but we
have a success story to share.
And
then, who among us has not also discovered, belatedly, that our great find is
something less than the bargain we thought, a fake, an alteration, something
created to fool the collector. If only we had taken greater care
examining the item. If only we hadn’t let our wishfulness get in
the way of our better judgment.
As
a dealer with a specialization in cancellation material I examine thousands of
“fancy” cancels, both legitimate and fake. Nevertheless, I
admit to succumbing to wishfulness like any collector. So, I write this
article to help the casual cancellation collector avoid (and to remind myself
of) the pitfalls of wishful thinking.
First,
there is the “toolset” that a collector needs to bring to
cancellation collecting. Of course, we all know the physical tools that
allow us to examine and verify. These include tongs, perforation gauge
and 10x lens. There are other tools, such as ultra-violet lamps that can
help detect alterations, bleached pen cancels, and the like, but we generally
do not have such tools available to us when we are examining potential
purchases at a show.
Next,
the cancel collector should develop a good basic knowledge of the killers used
in his area of interest. Reference materials are invaluable. Some
of the basics are Skinner-Eno1, Whitfield2, and Cole3.
It’s not that you need to carry your philatelic library with you to every
stamp show, but publications such as these can provide a good sense of killers
used during different periods. Specialized cancellation references are
also important. I, for one, always carry a copy of the Weiss4
NYFM tracings. Yet knowledge acquired through our repetitive viewing of
volumes of items in our regular search efforts is easily the most valuable.
Perhaps
the most important thing that a cancellation collector can bring to this hobby
is skepticism. Is the item or bargain “to good to be
true?” (Remember, not all fakes are offered cheaply.) Why has
no one else noticed this item? (Am I the only “expert?”)
I do not know that much about this particular item, but surely it is worth more
that what the dealer is asking for it. (Hasn’t the dealer shown
this to someone who does know?) We all so much want our “find
fantasy” to be true that it is easy to fail to consider such questions.
To
illustrate how tools, knowledge and skepticism can help avoid the pitfalls of
wishful thinking, I have selected two examples of my own mistaken wishfulness.
Figures 1a, 1b
Figure
1a shows a Scott #147 bearing what appears to be a VF, nearly SOTN strike of NYFM
fancy killer, Weiss type GE-S6. This is a rare NYFM, only known used on
the National issue Banknote stamps. This NYFM cancel is, however,
fake. This can be ascertained principally by two observations. (1)
The stamp shows clear evidence of another cancellation that appears to be a
light quartered cork killer, obscured by the NYFM. This killer, almost
certainly the original, can best be observed under the chin of Washington
and along the left edge of the stamp. The fake NYFM only partly obliterates
the earlier cancellation. (2) As is apparent in Figure 1b, the ink of the
NYFM killer bleeds through to the back of the stamp. The inks used to
apply the real NYFM killers did not do this.
I
discovered this stamp on a sheet of 3 cent greens in a dealers stock,
apparently previously unnoticed by casual collectors. Other, obviously
genuine but less rare, NYFM killers were also on this page of
cancellations. This was an item that I hoped to buy cheap. And I
better buy it before someone else recognizes its scarcity. I knew several
customers who would very much want this stamp, a real potential money
maker. Moreover, I had never previously encountered this rare killer in
decades of collecting and dealing.
My
encounter with this stamp is a perfect example of how my own wishful thinking
clouded my judgment (and eyesight). My wishfulness would not let me
believe what technically I knew, that this was a fake. Let’s look
at the facts:
1)
Two inconsistent killers on the same stamp. Most fakers of fancy
cancels are amateurs and cheap. A used 3 cent green can be acquired for
pennies. Selling the faked item for just a few dollars provides a
significant return on investment. More serious fakers may buy higher
value used stamps and clean the original cancel (often a pen cancellation)
before adding the new killer. Same formula for deception for a little
more money. Close examination, using a lens if high detail is required,
should help dispel the power of wishfulness.
2)
Ink from the cancellation bleeding through the stamp. Again,
most fakers are amateurs. They do not perform rigorous
analysis and study of inks used in different periods. Instead, they use
what is convenient and available. Thus, the ink pad becomes their tool of
choice. Unfortunately for the faker, the type of ink available for modern
ink pads is completely different from that used by 19th century
postal clerks. Black ink pad inks are generally less intense; the pattern
of the ink pad frequently transfers to the cancellation; and the ink used tends
to bleed, both through the stamp paper and around the killer, reducing the
sharpness of its impression.
3)
Is it the right stamp? It is often important to be able to
identify similar appearing stamps to verify the validity of a
cancellation. In the case of the Figure 1 stamp, the faker chose the
correct issue to fake this NYFM killer, a National issue stamp. Knowing
when and where certain killers were used is important. A similar
situation arises with identifying faked Banknote grills. I most
frequently see fake grills on soft paper stamps, such as the 15 cent American
issue (Scott #189) and the 10 cent re-engraved issue (Scott #209). Fakers
select the soft paper stamps because it is easier to impress the fake grill on these.
(A discussion of grills and the detection of their fakes are beyond the scope
of this article.)
Figures 2a, 2b
Figure
2a pictures a Scott #26 tied on piece by a Wataga, Illinois
postmark and an attractive diagonally split horizontal grid killer. Here
again, knowledge, references and tools can help one identify the killer on this
stamp as a fake. Figure 2b is an enlarged detail of the killer.
Again,
let’s apply our “toolset” to analyze this item:
1)
Attribution. Skinner-Eno5 lists this killer
design as SD-G 88 on 1861 issues from Oquawka, Illinois. Neither the
fact that Skinner-Eno attributes this killer to Oquawka and not Wataga,
Illinois, nor the fact that it is
attributed to 1861 issues whereas here it appears on an 1857 issue, is a
definitive problem. Misattributions and uses of killers across different
stamp issues are rather common events. However, it is the first
inconsistency.
2)
Killer design. With a copy of Skinner-Eno one notes that it
almost perfectly matches the tracing in the book. Real killers normally
show variations, the product of inking, angle of strike, wear to the killer
device, and other factors. Fakers do not have the real items from which
to make copies, so rely on published tracings for their models. Indeed,
it is typical for fakers faithfully to reproduce the published images, even
reproducing the known mistakes in these tracings.
3)
Killer placement. Note the location of the killer relative
to the postmark. It almost appears to be duplexed, although this is
highly unlikely since duplexing of killers with postmarks for this period is
only known from a few large post offices. What is more notable is the
proximity of killer and postmark. Why would the postmaster need to kill
the stamp with both the postmark and a separate killer? It is my
experience with covers and cancellations from this period that where a separate
killer is used, the postmark does not touch the stamp and is frequently well
separated to another part of the cover.
4)
Killer ink. Figure 2b reveals the most definitive
condemnation of this fake. First note the differences in intensity of the
ink used in the postmark as compared to that for the killer. The postmark
ink is darker and more opaque. A magnified examination of the killer
itself delivers the final evidence of fakery. Note the overall grainy
pattern of the killer’s inking. This and the lighter ink are clear
evidence of the use of an ink pad to apply this killer.
As
should be apparent from my experiences, even a professional can let wishful
thinking impair good judgment. I hope that sharing these provides you,
the reader and cancellation collector, tools to avoid the pitfalls of
wishfulness.
(Endnotes)
1
Skinner, Hubert C. and Eno, Amos, United States Cancellations 1845-1869,
American Philatelic Society, 1980.
2
Whitfield, Kenneth A., Cancellations Found on 19th Century U.S.
Stamps, U.S.
Cancellation Club, 2002.
3
Cole, James M., Cancellations and Killers of the Banknote Era 1870-1894,
The U. S.
Philatelic Classics Society, Inc., 1995.
4
Weiss, William R., Jr., The Foreign Mail Cancellations of New
York City 1870-1878, William R. Weiss, Jr., 1990.
5
Skinner, Hubert C. and Eno, Amos, op. cit., p. 28.