Sarah Bernhardt Postcard Standard Series A

I found this at an estate sale this morning mixed in with a wide variety of postcards (travel souvenirs, holiday greetings and RPPCs) just because she's a famous face (the only one of this type in the box.)

I have questions, but first some oddities. First, her name is spelled wrong (lacking the final t.) Second, the caption is in French - translates as "Her most recent photograph." On the undivided back, it does not have the Standard PostCard Company identifying info on the left side that I have seen on other "Standard Series" cards on the net.

So here are the questions.

1. I've seen another exact copy on Amazon dated as 1901-1907 because of the undivided back. Is that correct? Do you know of a way to get more specific?

2. Any thoughts about why it doesn't have the Standard PC Co. information? It definitely feels and looks like an "original" and not a repro (as best I can tell) but is it or not? Does this in some way relate to the misspelling?

 

There are undivided cards that are newer also. The back of this one looks different, in that the stamp box is one that is not datable by some of the usual methods. My perception is that that type of stamp box might be later than the first decade of the 20th century.

That being said, there is a general sense that undivided backs are early.

Another thing I notice is that the photo of Sarah B. does not appear to be a real photo. If the light diagonal lines that seem to go all across it are really there, that generally happens when a printed, not photographic, process is used. The lines might not really be there, but there will be some evidence of a printing process (grids, dots, etc.) if you look under magnification. And I tend to think those are a little later (maybe 1910s or later?) but I may be incorrect.

This is all from my general observations from collecting and reading about postcards. I did find this page where somebody talks a little about the type of stamp box that this has, but the person doesn't really know the dates:
http://www.ajmorris.com/roots/photo/postcard/pub.htm

I'm going to look through my collection and see if I have anything like this.

 

If I'm reading this discussion of domestic and foreign postcard rates correctly, this card must date from after 1917. But please confirme, as I just read very quickly.

http://www.stampcommunity.org/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=39422

Additional information: This item from Google Books appears to be from 1912 and does refer to the 2 cent foreign rate:
https://books.google.com/books?id=2...ne cent" "foreign two cents" postcard&f=false

 

Those lines are not apparent to the eye, Fig. But I scanned the card, so I'll see if my rather inadequate magnifying glass reveals anything like dots.

 

Often they are not visible unless one looks under magnification. If it is a real photograph if will not have anything like that, generally.

 

Dots are present under magnification, so with the combination of printed image and postal rate we're talking late teens?

 

Now I've seen the second link in post 3, maybe a few years earlier?

I'm still wondering about the missing Standard Post Card Co info and what impact that difference has on age. Any ideas?

 

I just took a look at my postcards and realized that I have one or two from the first decade of the 20th century that were made with a printed process. I also have some with undivided backs that can be dated as late as the 1930s. So, it's confusing. There is nothing here that pins it down, exactly.

Maybe if the date of the image of Sarah Bernhardt could be confirmed, that would help? I mean, the date the photo was taken? I know she died in 1923.

I'm not familiar with the Standard Postcard Co. and their printing practices, but the missing imprint should also be considered a clue. Of what, I don't know!

And I don't know why her last name is spelled incorrectly, or why there is a caption in French when the rest of the card is printed in English. Interesting conundrum!

 

I found at least one more picture of her in the same dress, but seated and petting a big dog. Unfortunately it was on Pintrest and had been scoffed from another site - in Russia! There are a couple others that look like it might be the same dress, but not close enough or straight enough on to say for sure.

 

Ah -- I see it near the bottom of this page from a Russian Sarah Berndhardt fan. Scroll almost all the way down. And the one they have online has 1906 penciled on the front, and the note is written in English. Maybe this is where the Pinterest person got it?

http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/bo4kameda/post242934422/

So I think 1906 is a good possibility! This one does not show the back of the card, though... but it does appear there is a grid on the photo, so it could be made through a printed process, perhaps? (I was wondering whether yours was a reproduction of the other... but maybe they are both the same.)

 

And according to the inscription, the person had seen her playing Camille (La Dame aux camélias). I don't know if this photo was from that... she had played her on stage in the late 1890s and on film in 1911.

She might have played it between, or maybe more research could be done. I don't see this being a late 1890s card.

 

Here's the one I saw on Amazon. Does show the back with the Standard info.

http://www.amazon.com/Bernhardt-Portrait-Actresses-Original-Vintage/dp/B00UEARFKY

 

Hm.... hard to say. The print on the back of yours looks like a dark blue. Is it really?

Oh, and... I just realized I have some other things to get done this evening, so... I'll have to leave. Hope this is resolved!

 

Have a good one! And thanks for your help!

 

And yes, the printing on the reverse of mine is a very dark blue in good light. In less light it looks black.

 

Nice postcard, Bakers.

Undivided backs were normally published before 1907, to conform to postal regulations, but I've had some that were actually mailed a bit later.

It looks to me like your card was printed using photolithography, which could have been done in the early 1900s.

I can think of a number of reasons why the cards don't all have the same info printed on the back. Could be a printing error, or maybe the distributor of your card ordered it with a plain back, or maybe different lots were just done differently for some unknown reason.

It's also possible that it's a later reproduction, but then I think it would have a divided back to enable it to be mailed without a problem.

I didn't look at the linked info, so apologies if I repeat anything. The postal rates shown on your card are correct for undivided cards in the early 1900s. Your card doesn't date from before 1901 because it would have said "Private Mailing Card" if it were earlier.

 

Thanks for weighing in, Pat. I was getting a bit confused as I went back over the information in all the different resources. Particularly the postal rate discussion which got quite convoluted.

 

Interesting postcard, Baker! I have no help on dating, and really no help on the spelling of her name. I suspect it was a misspelling that was soon spotted and corrected orrrrr a way around a copyright infringement lawsuit?

Sarah Bernhardt was her stage name. She was born Bernard, Rosine Bernard, to an Hungarian Jewish immigrant woman in France. She is credited by some as the world's first superstar. This postcard may have been printed in France for an English market or the other way around?? Anyways, the use of a French phase gave it a little more glamour, intrigue, to an English market - pick me up and buy me.

--- Susan

 

That it did, Susan!