|
Type "C" of Pettigiani is upposed to come from England in 1938. Called often "Mate Lustroso". In the typology of the watermarks it is of type II that we will also in the so-called Dutch paper..... What makes us wonder whether this paper is different!
Leopoldo Tenorio Casal gave some very accurately looking details about the typographed stamps of P&R I - the 1c Sarmiento, 5c Moreno and 10c Rivadavia. They are so detailed and measured in a completely different [from Merlo a.o.] that I tend to confide a lot in this! The 5c of 24.03.1940 has a diameter of 10mm, the vertical distance between 2 alternate rows of suns is 30mm and the horizontal distance between 2 suns is 17.2mm! This is in line with my earlier remarks about the horizontal heart-to-heart distance between 2 alternate suns is 35mm and the vertical heart-to-heart distance between 2 alternate suns is 30mm! Casal also refers to several other face values having been printed on the same type of paper and here we get confronted with the possiblilty of him referring to what we call the Dutch paper! I am still not sure whether we have just ONE Dutch paper in that period! The 1938 Pettigiani refers to is not clear to me! It refers to which stamp in particular???? MT 412 = 14.04.1940 Union Panamericana MT 417 = 05.12.1941 General Lavalle both printed in photogravure! |
| Pettigiani says there are no references
outside P&R I for the Austrian paper, the only stamps coming close are
the Airmail stamps of 1928!
I do not agree as I have said here above, but we also have the Housing Congress of 1939 October 2nd! The orthogonal watermark with symmetrical paper wire - direction of paper parallel to the short side of the stamp "m":
Measuring the horizontal distances between the 1st and the 3rd sun of this last version: 32mm, we may be quite sure that this type of paper belongs to the so-called: Austriaco or 1E2 !!! Otin 27 May 2010 01:06"] Rein, Undoubtedly it is papel austrķaco! A few weeks ago a member of my club told me a stamp unknown to be printed on such paper appeared. Upon your mail I called him to confirm what stamp it was and he confirmed it was the Housing stamp. This is a fascinating aspect of philately: it always surprises you with a new challenge. But what is strange for me is the contemporarity of this discovery, unless you knew of it existence from long ago. Do not be surprised if Kneitschel or Klass didn't mention these papers. It happens that JG finally accepted our 'preaching' of the importance of classifying different papers. I wrote my PyR I monography because I was tired of seeing collectors being cheated by dealers that sold them the common papers by the good ones, and to point out the existence of real rarities concerning papers. Saludos José |
