1917 Przedborz – Local Post

Przedbórz Forgeries

If you have comments/additions/corrections, please post them HERE
Additional Quality Images would be welcome.

Local Przedbórz stamps were issued during World War I by the municipal authorities under the authority of the Austrian military commander. During World War I, civilian mail in Przedbórz was dealt with by the Austrian military post office (Etappenpostamt) on the Konsk railway station. A local post office was set up by the Austrian army, which also provided the couriers.
Mail was franked with the Austrian occupation stamps as well as the local issues, which paid the delivery charge.
Forgeries abound which probably accounts for the relatively low prices on genuine stamps given that so few were issued.
This stamp issue is a long study. I am only including a few examples of genuine & forged stamps. More will hopefully be added.


This table will help to identify the of the 1917 Eagle issues – lower value tablets


Another common trait is in the left wing.
The genuine left has a dash attached to the frame, the forgery does not or may have a small dot attached to the feather as shown in the forgeries below.

1917 (Dec. 18) . Type 1. Litho. in sheets of 32 in two panes of 16, with 8 types in each horizontal row. Perf. 111/2. Imperfs. of each. bisects are known
Mi 1, 2 groszy carmine (shades)
Mi 2, 4 groszy light blue & a) dark blue
Proofs exist of the 2gr in red, green and of the 4gr in brown and olive.
This issue was demonetized on February 15, 1918.


Mi 1 & 2 Proofs

Genuine


Mi 1 Type 1


Mi 1 Type 5
1. Dot in wing
2. Nick in the R – also shows up in several Mi 4’s
3. Distorted line
4. No serif on the 2

Forgeries


Mi 1 Forgery Type 1
1. Large R
2. Open G
3. Short S
4. No serif on 2
5. No dot


Mi 1 Type 3 Forgery


Mi 1 Type 4 forgery
Open G
Long S
Egg shaped O
Dot near the feather


Mi 1 Type 5 Forgery
1. Slanted 2 and no upward point on bottom right
2. Wide open G
3. Short top Z
4. Head different see forgery left, genuine right above

Genuine


Mi 2 Type 5
1. Closed G
2. Dot in wing
3. Notch in R
4. Straight edge 4 – this is the Type 4 main feature

Forgeries


Mi 2 Forgery Type 3
1. No dot in left wing
2. Narrow opening in G
3. Short middle stroke in E


Mi 2 Type 4 forgery
1. Very little slope in the 4’s
2. Open G
3. Long S
4. Egg shape O

1918 (Feb. 26) . Types 2 and 3. Litho. in sheets of 25. Perf. 111/2
Perfs 10 of each are rarer
Mi 3, 2 grosze grey-green on greenish
Mi 4, 4 grosze claret on rose
Mi 5, 6 groszy blue on greenish
Mi 6, 10 groszy red on rose

Genuine


Mi 3 Type 3
1. Broken Z – also whole words shifted to the right
2. O bottom cut off
3. Dot between Z and E

Forgeries


Mi 3 Type 1 forgery
Overall very little detail in buildings
Yellow green color
1. Note where frames end
2. Words slope down from left to right, Z bottom slopes up
3. Left 2 higher
4. Left leg of M shorter

Genuine


Mi 4 Type 1
1. Complete arc
2. Frame offset on both sides
3. Middle bar is low – not sure if this is consistent
4. hook on top of the I


Mi 4 Genuine Type 3
1. Line under the foot of R
2. A dot between Z & E
3. Broken corner frame line
4. The complete wording is pushed to the right compared to Type 1 & 2
5. The outer frame line sticks out, the inner one has a space at the bottom

Forgeries


Mi 4 Type 3 forgery
1. Z attached to frame
2. Z has short top and long bottom
3. Space between frames

Genuine


Mi 5 Type 1 genuine
1. Faint line above letters
2. Dot after O
3. 2 dots before M

Forgeries


Mi 5 Type 1 Forgery
1. Dot looks like an apostrophe
2. Many breaks in the line
3. Thick letters, some touch the frame
4. No shading in buildings
5. 2 dots below the M
6. Tree is a crescent
7. Odd mark probably not consistent


Mi 5 Type 4 forgery
1. Dot looks like a comma
2. Crescent shape tree
3. Dot over left top pf M
4. Offset  frame
The Type 1 and Type 4 can be found in se-tenant examples.

Genuine


Mi 6 Type 3
1. Right inner frame goes all the way down, left ends before bottom
2. 0 lower than the 1
3. Short left leg on the M

Forgeries


Mi 6 Type 1 forgery
Very coarse overall
1. Heavy line of shading
2. Break in frame line


Mi 6 Type 3 or 5 forgery
1. Z attached to frame
2. Short top, long bottom on Z
3. 0 higher than the 1

1918 (Mar. 15) Types 4 & 5, Litho. in sheets of 25. 3 transfer types. Perf. 10, imperf of each.
Mi 7, 2 grosze green
Mi 8, 4 groszy red
Mi 9, 6 groszy violet
Mi 10, 10 groszy blue


Genuine Mi 7 Type 1
Dot after S

Forgeries


Mi 7 Type 1 forgery
1. Rays pointing in wrong direction
2. Wording slopes downwards
3. Numerous breaks

Genuine


Mi 8 Genuine Type 3
2 long dots shown

Forgeries


Mi 8 Forgery Type 1
1. The R is higher than the last A. Overall the type is much smaller than the genuine
2. The rays point in the wrong direction
3. Overall the printing is coarse

Genuine


Genuine Mi 9 Type III
1. Left frame line sticks out (Type III trait)
2. Thin broken faint line under the IA
3. Lines meet up perfectly  (Type III trait, Types I & 2 do not)
4. Frame line is broken (Type III trait)
5. The ray between the DA is broken

Forgeries


Mi 9 Type 2 Forgery
1. Top letters are larger than genuine
2. Large break in frame
3. Lower letters are thinner than genuine
4. Bottom frame is offset
5. Heavier dots and dashes, overall the image is more dense than the original

Genuine


Mi 10 Type 2 genuine
1. Left side of M taller
2. Dot in lower left corner
3. Small dot above 1

Forgeries


Mi 10 Type 1 forgery
1. P instead of R
2. Line above 10 and notch in top right corner consistent ?
3. Frame narrows on the right side

1918 (March 27) as types 4 & 5 but currency changed to halerzy. Litho. in sheets of 30. 2 transfer types, perf 10. Imperfs. of each.
Mi 11, 5 halerzy red
Mi 12, 10 halerzy light green
Mi 13, 15 halerzy blue
Mi 14, 20 halerzy violet

Genuine


M 11 Type 1 genuine
1. Small dot besides the large one
2. Line broken leaving a small dot
3. Dots and dashes on both sides of the 5

Forgeries


M 11 Type 3 forgery
1. Long ray between DA not broken
2. Break – not sure if consistent
3. Short top 5 appears to be leaning left

Genuine


Mi 12 Type 1 genuine

Forgeries


Mi 12 Type 3 forgery
Long Rays

Genuine


Mi 13 Type 2 genuine

Forgeries


Mi 13 Type 2 forgery
Rays in wrong direction

Genuine


Mi 14 Type 1 genuine
1. Break in frame line
2. Faint line onder OR
3. Open corner

Forgeries


Mi 14 type 3 forgery
1. Pointed top A
2. Wide R
3. Open frame

1918 (July 27). Same types but rays removed in the 5, 10, 15 halerzy and RADA MIEJSKA is slightly smaller. Litho. in sheets of 60. Perf. 111/2. also a) Perf. 10. Imperfs of each.
Mi 15, 5 halerzy red
Mi 16, 10 halerzy green (shades)
Mi 17, 15 halerzy dark blue
Mi 18, 20 halerzy violet This stamp has a large dot under the A of MIEJSKA which is absent in the March 27, 20 halerzy.

Genuine


Mi 15 genuine

Forgeries


Mi 15 Type 1 forgery
1. Misshapen dot
2. White tower clock
3. Crescent shape
4. R leaning right

Genuine


Mi 16 Genuine
1. There is a dot above the I and a hook on the right side
2. There are breaks in the thin arc
3. Not sure if this dot is a plate variety
4. Line is complete but ends above the tree
5. Flat bottom 0, plate flaw?
6. This spot seems fairly consistent
7. The R leans away from the frame line.

Forgeries


Mi 16 Type 5 forgery
Lack of detail, thick arc, inner frames different but main issue is the missing dot

Genuine


Genuine Mi 17
1. R is slightly higher than the last A
2. A slight bulge that may not be consistent.

Forgeries


Mi 17 Type 4 forgery
1. Main feature of an otherwise well done forgery are the crosses instead of dots
2. Numerals are slightly thicker and top of 5’s are shorter

Genuine


Mi 18 genuine
1. Large and small dot below the A, the right leg of the A does not touch the frame as with some forgeries.
2. Small dots above the R

Forgeries


Mi 18 F3 forgery
1. Curve in background line
2. Top of A pointed instead of flat
3. Crosshatching not visible
4. Top of 2 much smaller than original

Cancels


This is one of the more common type cancels used in 1918 on.
Genuine cancels are 31½ mm diameter; forgeries are 30½ mm.
There are probably variations in the genuine cancels so other than size I have no other information.
Fake cancels can appear on both genuine and forged stamps.

Covers with genuine stamps



References;
Billig’s specialized catalogues Vol 6 1945
Schroeder, Arthur, Forgeries of the Polish Locals, 1954
Stiedl, Otto,  Falschungen der polnischen Stadtpostmakren von Przedbórz 1913
Fischer Polska Katalogue, 2010
Bojanowicz, The Kingdom of Poland, 1979
Dr. Kronenburg exhibit, Polonus Philatelic Society
Various auction sites