July 1907 Anomaly

[Melvin L. De Vilbiss]

Re: “original” map supplement

I have previously noted on this forum that the 1964 National Geographic Reprint map supplements are not “all” marked as reprints.

Two loose supplements, provided as such in both the original and 1964 reprint, do not include the word “REPRINT” anywhere in their 1964 reproduction.

But for the purpose of this discussion, it is important to note that all supplements bound within, and not included as loose supplements in the reproduction, are without the word “REPRINT” marked anywhere.

In an attempt to validate a map being sold as an original, that in both its original and reprint issue was bound within the issue, I searched for other ways to differentiate between an original and a 1964 reprint.

In my search, I discovered an anomaly within the original production. I came across supplements that had the words “Supplement to the National Geographic Magazine, July 1907, Washington, D. C.” printed in the upper right margin of the map. I also have originals without these words, i.e. nothing in the margin.

My bound reprint supplement has these words in the margin making me believe I had discovered another discerning feature between the reprints and the original, that is, until I discovered two original, one still tipped in to the original issue and one loose (removed from the original), map supplements that did not have these words in the margin.

Just another validation that at first what appears to be the standard for the older issues isn’t really that at all.

Never stop searching for the truth – it’s really slippery!

[Philip Riviere]

Of the 3 1907 maps I have 2 originals  and 1 reprint,  all have the supplement to the national geographic magazine in the upper right hand margin. All 3 are from bound issues.

Phil

[Melvin L. De Vilbiss]

Thanks for the input Phil!

Mel