Help/Question Center

Thank you very much for the information Gabriel. It helped me a lot to clarify my doubts.

Greetings and Merry Christmas

Thank you very much Glen. Definitely now I see something strange in the block of 6. With this information I will try to verify the authenticity.

Greetings and Merry Christmas.

Hello Luis, the case of the 1894 surcharges instead of the 1895 surcharges is stated in Guatemala-1 pages 155 to 157. For some unknown reason some sheets received both 1894 & 1895 surcharges. According to the previous mentioned book at least two complete sheets of 100 were found, in which 80 stamps received 1894 surcharges and only 20 stamps received 1895 surcharges. You need to know that the surcharge setting (2x10) in this issue was applied in two vertical rows (20 stamps) at the same time, which was applied five times to the complete sheet of 100. That said, it is necessary to check if your stamps are bogus or not.

Hello again Luis, Happy Holidays. There is an excellent write up regarding this error in the newest version of "The Postage Stamps and Postal Stationery of Guatemala" published both on the ISGC website and in hardback version (available through Amazon.com). In the volume 1 of 3 books, this information is found on pages 269-71. There is no definitive answer to the question but there certainly are educated guesses provided in those pages. As I look at the scans you provided, I see some "red flags" about the block of 6 stamps when compared with the block of 4. The positioning of the 6 stamps are not uniform. The printing of the surcharge is more crude (compare the "8" from the block of 6 to the one in the block of 4.) Be it known that I am not an expert on this issue and will not offer a verdict on whether either of the blocks are original or forgeries. Other members may have more to say on the stamps. Happy collecting. - Glen

Hello everyone, I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

I just want to try to better understand the information about this error of ("1894" instead of 1895).

My doubt comes from when I got these blocks with all the stamps that say "1894" before this, I only believed that this error could be found on par with another stamp that did not have the error, that is; I thought that the error was in one or a couple of positions on the entire sheet.

Now my question is if there were actually full sheets with the error that said "1894".

I have already read the book "Guatemala 1", but I think I don't understand it well because my English is still not perfect.

I would be very grateful if someone who knows this information could help me understand.

Greetings to everyone