The original die was engraved by Herr Fickenscher, a Hanoverian engraver, and the plate was made and the stamps printed by hand presses at the type foundry and printing works of Senator Culemann, in Hanover. As is usual with stamps manufactured by this process, there are plenty of minor varieties, consisting chiefly of breaks and flaws in the frame and other lines, and defective letters.
A peculiarity of this and other Hanoverian stamps is the red gum which was used until about 1864. The exact reason is possibly for quality control as the gum was hand applied. It is a very important factor in determining originals from reprints. On the originals used examples still retain a rose colour even if the gum is gone.
Some very good forgeries of the Hannover stamps exist. However, the more difficult task is to distinguish between the many reprints of official and of private origin. Collectors are also fooled by many proofs, usually taken for originals, but differing from the latter in many respects.
Special care should be taken to avoid the fake of the red gum of originals; for this gum may be reproduced in order to transform reprints into originals and to hide repairs.
Several articles indicate that only certain issues were forged. However my research indicates that ALL of the issues were forged and in great numbers.
1850 Mi 1
No watermark
High CV in unused
CAUTION Mi 2 is found chemically altered to resemble this issue
Mi 1 Genuine Features
1 Ggr. black/gray-blue, blue.
Imperforate. Typographed.
Paper : colored. Watermarked: Square in size of stamp design.
Gum: rose to red.
1. The letters 'F" and "N" are often incomplete.
1a. Front hoof nearly touches the shield.
2. A large dot after the "R". There are 2 shading lines with one shorter.
3. The right side of the banner line is thick.
4. A large dot after the "N" which is actually an error not seen in the forgeries.
5. 2 shading lines and a 3rd very short with the "E" connected to the banner outline by 2 short thin lines.
6. 4 vertical lines
7. Thick outside frame line.
8. 2 shading lines on the left, with a shorter inside line, and 3 on the right.
9. Point leaning to the left.
9a. 4 equal lines and a short 5th one.
10. Thick line.
11. 2 equal shading lines.
12. Rear hoof made up of 3 roundish shapes.
13. The tip of the left leaf points to the left.
1864 Reprint.
Official. Unwatermarked. gum white or missing.
The color is somewhat brighter than in the original.
The gum of the early Hannover stamps was colored red and was applied by hand. The color allowed for better quality control.
Beware that unused reprints were applied a colored gum to fool collectors
Forgeries
1850 Sc 1
Sold by Fournier but probably from another source
None of the letters match.
The shield scroll-work is very different
No period after EIN
The crown, lion & unicorn are completely different.
Fournier full sheet
Numerals touch the scroll
Bottom letters are shorter
Mouth of unicorn wide open
Side letters are taller
Lion mane lacks detail lines
Full "Fournier" sheet possibly from Spiro (5X5)
The lion appears to be wearing sunglasses
Again very crude overall with lack of fine shading lines.
Thick letters
No dot after EIN
1851 Sc 2 and 2a – same genuine features as the 1850 1Ggr
NOTE: It is not uncommon for the 2a or 2b unused stamp to be chemically altered to resemble the much higher CV Mi 1 unused.
NOTE: It is not uncommon for the 2a or 2b unused stamp to be chemically altered to resemble the much higher CV Mi 1 unused.
Forgeries
Similar to the Mi 1 Type I forgery above
Sold by Fournier
1851 Sc3 & 3a
Imperforate. Typographed.
Gum : Red.
1. 3 main points in the mane.
2. 2 shading lines with one shorter.
3. “F” and “N” generally incomplete.
4. Large dot after “R”.
5. Hoof slightly away from the shield.
5a. A small oval shape here.
6. The right leg of the “R” is shortened.
7. The inclined leg of the 2nd “N” is heavier than the first “N”.
8. 2 shading lines that do not touch the bottom frame.
9. A thick inside frame line.
10. The left leg of the “N” is noticeably inclined down.
11. The inside bottom groove is thicker and wider.
12. Both leaf tips point inwards.
13. The white inner frame line is continuous and comes to a point in the center.
14. the 2 curved frame lines do not touch
Note also that the “AN” of “FRANC” and “HANNOVER” are joined in all 3 values
Forgeries
Top leaves point in wrong direction
Unicorn has wide open mouth
Small inscription above shield all one word
Short serifs on 1's
3 has a flat bottom
E of EIN not inclined
Lion has dog head, unicorn closed mouth and no mane
Flat top crown
1 has a thick taper
Unicorn mouth very open
Lower letters are short
Billigs Forgeries
Fake Proofs
Reprints
1851 Sc 5
1/15 Thaler black/gray-blue to blue.
Imperforate. Typographed.
Paper: Watermarked: Wreath of 0ak leaves.
Gum: Red.
1. Left leaf tip is inclined inwards noticeably more than the right one.
2. The inner white frame line is not joined together in the middle.The space is the widest of the 3 values and is wider than the tip of the "1"
3. 2 short shading lines.
4. A large dot after the "R"
5. The letters of 'ZWEI" are joined together.
6. 2 short line joins the "Z" to the banner frame.
7. 3 short lines join the "Z" to the banner frame. One continues through the "Z".
7a. 2 small shapes joined together.
8. The left leg of the "N" is inclined to the right.
Forgeries
The white line at the top of the shield has only a small break on the left
The inscription above the shield is all one word
The bottom of the “5” is flattened as is the top.
The leaf tips point out instead of in.
Face of unicorn very crude
1851 Sc6
Gum: Red .
1. Hoof is near the shield and has 2 shading lines
2. The inner white frame line is not joined together in the middle. The gap is narrower than the 1/15.
3. Prominent dot after the “R”
4. The “D” is joined to the scroll frame by 2 small lines top & bottom. One runs through the “D” but is generally
broken.
4a. Short line in this shape left and right.
5. “HAN” joined together
6. Note the shape and serifs of the “R”
Forgeries
The inscription above the shield is all one word
Small dot after “R”, many other faults
Sold by Fournier but probably from another forger
Frames uneven and broken in several places.
End letters of “THALER” tilt down
10 tilted to the left
Mouth of unicorn open too wide
Side, bottom letters and numerals distorted.
Letters of banner above shield too small
Animals lacking a lot of shading lines.
Letters and numerals in shield tilt down to the right.
Crown tilted to the right
Letters above shield illegible and not separated
3's do not match
All the letters are different than the original
Reprints
Mi 3-Mi 5 were reprinted in 1864 in different colors on various colored papers
Also there is a private reprint of Mi 5 (Black on Yellow) in 1890
NOTE – although less valuable than the originals, reprints are sought after by specialized collectors, especially full sheets
Also there is a private reprint of Mi 5 (Black on Yellow) in 1890
NOTE – although less valuable than the originals, reprints are sought after by specialized collectors, especially full sheets
1853 Sc7
Imperforate. Typographed.
Paper: Watermarked: Wreath of oak leaves.
Gum: Red.
1. 32 vertical evenly spaced lines
2. Tips point slightly outwards
3. Large white space in both left and right. Also the lines are continuous from top to bottom.
4. 5 even length lines decreasing in thickness
5. Bottom loop of the “3” is wider at the bottom than the top
Forgeries
The tips of the scrolls are too small
The Last bottom E is not inclined enough
The right upright of the “N” of EIN is too short.
Points of scrolls are longer than Fournier but still too short
No white space between lines in bottom left scroll
PF shorter than EN
Base of crown is curved
Very large "3"
"EIN DRITTEL" short letters
Tall letters
Reprints
More likely unauthorized reprints
Listed by P. Ohrt (1906) as a Goldner reprint but realistically it is a forgery
Coarse thick lines and lettering
Key features are the tips of the scrolls that point directly downwards instead of to the sides
Julius Goldner (1842-1898) was a stamp dealer in Hamburg (Germany), who sold enormous quantities of reprints of Hamburg, Hannover, Helgoland and forgeries of Bergedorf, Transvaal, Ecuador and Romagna
1855 Sc8
1855 Sc8a
Lion has large head
H is not inclined
The leaves beside the crown are larger
The 3's are narrower
The S has no serifs
The top of the 1 is inclined
GPS Type I Fournier sold
Coarse thick lines and lettering
Key features are the tips of the scrolls that point directly downwards instead of to the sides
Julius Goldner (1842-1898) was a stamp dealer in Hamburg (Germany), who sold enormous quantities of reprints of Hamburg, Hannover, Helgoland and forgeries of Bergedorf, Transvaal, Ecuador and Romagna
1855 Sc8
First issue with a mesh background to prevent forgeries
Only the 1/10 Thaler (Sc 8) has a close-meshed net - in orange or yellow. All other stamps (Mi 9-14) have a wide-meshed net in different colors.
Actual mesh die
Forgeries
H is not inclined
The leaves beside the crown are larger
The 3's are narrower
The S has no serifs
The top of the 1 is inclined
Small space in the white frame line at the top of the shield.
The inscription above the shield is all one word
Probably the same forger as the last Mi5 forgery
The inscription above the shield is all one word
Probably the same forger as the last Mi5 forgery
Full Fournier Sheet
Reprint
The lion wearing shades seems fairly consistent with reprints.
Mi 9, 10, 11 and 12 were reprinted in sheet-lets of 4 stamps. Colors are dull and gum is colorless.
In 1890 a private reprint of Mi 12 was made on smooth paper with an orange network
1856 Sc 9 Large Network
Same characteristics as the Sc 7
Note that in genuine issues the ends of the mesh die may be visible.
This is a high value item both mint and used, so forgeries are bound to be plentiful.
Above, Fournier forgery with HANNOVER 1 MA I 64 cancel from his forgery offers.
Note the uneven mesh
Another Fournier unused
Note that in genuine issues the ends of the mesh die may be visible.
Forgeries
Above, Fournier forgery with HANNOVER 1 MA I 64 cancel from his forgery offers.
Note the uneven mesh
1856 Sc11
Forgeries
Awkward shape of mesh
Heads of animals crude
All the lettering is misshapen
1856 Sc12
Forgeries
Animal heads are crude and lettering misshapen.
Outer frame is uneven.
Crown and leaves very crude
Tiny letters in the COA banner
Crown and leaves wrong shape
Animal shapes crude
No serifs on the 1’s
1856 Sc13
Fournier forgery
Left leaf points outwards
Bottom of “5” flattened
Small inscription above shield all one word
Network is uneven particularly on the top right
Left leaf points outwards
Bottom of “5” flattened
Small inscription above shield all one word
Network is uneven particularly on the top right
Network is too large
Letters are distorted and unreadable
Crown and coat of arms very different
1856 Sc14
Small space in the white frame line at the top of the shield.
The inscription above the shield is all one word
Probably the same forger as the last Mi5 forgery
Reprint
The lion wearing shades seems fairly consistent with reprints.
Mi 9, 10, 11 and 12 were reprinted in sheet-lets of 4 stamps. Colors are dull and gum is color less.
In 1890 a private reprint of Mi 12 was made on smooth paper with an orange network
1859 Sc16
Forgeries
Top letters too short
Tips of scroll point in wrong direction
Bottom letters too large
3 much too large
Very well done
Top leters are thinner
Jewels in crown do not match
White space in bottom of scroll tip not in genuine
1863 Sc 17
Forgeries
As one of the highest CV stamps, it was a prime target for forgers
Crown too wide
Top letters too short
3 Much too large
Dividing lines showing - typical of forgeries
Top letters too short
Tip of crown points to I instead of S
HAN letters too far apart
The foot of the "E" is joined to the "H" of "ZEHNTEL"
The "L" and the "B" of "SILBER" are joined at the foot
Very ell executed
H too narrow
Crown too wide
1860 Sc 18
Paper: Beclouded, irregular in patches when looked through . Unwatermarked.
Gum: White (1860), Rose (1862) on the imperforate stamp.
White (1865), Rose (1864) on the rouletted stamp.
1. The left branch of the “N” is inclined to the right.
2. The bottom of the “V” is cut at an angle.
3. The three-foil is clear and distinct both sides.
4. The connector is made of 2 straight lines only.
5. The right side of the mouthpiece is more angled outwards.
5a. Large uneven dots within the perimeter of the frame.
5b. The “1” is slightly inclined to the right.
6. There are 2 long shading lines and 1 very short here.
7. There are 2 heavy lines inside the band.
8. The center piece is shaped like a Y.
9. The 2 large end pearls both sides have a white inner (not always visible on all 4).
10. The top has a definite X pattern with an inverted T below it
Forgeries
Sc 18 is the most forged stamp in Hannover
Sperati Forgeries
There is a break in right frameline just below the "R" of "HANOVER"
There is a white flaw in the head of the "G" in "Groschen"
The first “N” and the “1” are not inclined
Large spaces in the pearls on the left side of the crown.
The mouthpiece is round instead of oval
The base of the crown does not flare out
Left side of the mouthpiece is flat
Crown is crude
Mouthpiece has no shading
The left side of the horn too narrow, the crown is also too narrow
All the elements are wrong
Many issues with the letters.
The fraction is very different
No detail in the crown
Letter C is smaller than the others
The AN letters are larger than others
The 1 is thicker
Base of the 2 is thicker
Mouthpiece is white
The top letters are taller & thicker
Mouthpiece is whiter
The letters do not match
The 2 is very different
Spacing lines are visible
Reprints
Goldner Reprints
The paper is thicker than that of the originals. Tete-beche are only known in reprint.
This “reprint” is very difficult to determine
Pearls in the crown are irregular
Shading lines are coarser
The paper is thicker than that of the originals. Tete-beche are only known in reprint.
Pearls in the crown are irregular
Shading lines are coarser
There are also private reprints (about 1890) on hard, smooth paper with light, smooth gum.
In addition, some fantasy prints in other colors and differently colored paper (see below).
In addition, some fantasy prints in other colors and differently colored paper (see below).
1859 Sc 19
1859 Sc 20
1859 Sc 22
1861 Sc 23
Imperforate. Typographed.
Paper: White.
Gum: Red, pink.
1. The “C” is slightly taller than the other letters.
2. There is 1 complete vertical line on the right side of the circle.
3. The middle stroke of the “E” is slightly below the center.
4. The right diagonal line of the “V” is thinner and shorter.
5. The first “N” is slightly wider than the second one.
6. There are 2 complete vertical lines on the left side of the circle.
7. A heavy hair line splitting into a v (not always visible)
Similar forgeries from unknown source
Trial proofs or essays?
Crude primitive forgery
Paper: White.
Gum: Red, pink.
1. The “C” is slightly taller than the other letters.
2. There is 1 complete vertical line on the right side of the circle.
3. The middle stroke of the “E” is slightly below the center.
4. The right diagonal line of the “V” is thinner and shorter.
5. The first “N” is slightly wider than the second one.
6. There are 2 complete vertical lines on the left side of the circle.
7. A heavy hair line splitting into a v (not always visible)
Forgeries
4 Spiro Forgeries? - a good forgery
Top O too inclined
Bottom 2nd N not inclined
Sad king
Bottom letters are too short
Many broken partial pearls
Sperati Forgeries
Reproduction A
In the right corner ornament there are: a break in the upper frameline, a white dot in the ornament in the extreme corner; next to this there is a green dot.
There are weak spots in the circular frameline just below "O" and "C" of "GROSCHEN" and just above the pearls,
Reproduction B
The "G" of "GROSCHEN" is split (looks like a horn)
In the right upper corner, the lower curly ornament (the end of the frameline) is also split.
Fournier sold forgeries
More Unlisted forgeries
Pearls uneven
2nr N not tilted
G larger than other letters
Reprints
.%20They%20were%20made%20in%201864.jpg)
