Is there a chance this is really from 1792New York Journal and Patriotic Register

Found this in yet another box,,Unfortunately it ripped at some time during its life I have tried to research but it seems most are in museums or a library, Any information greatly appreciated. ,

 

Normally, things like this are usually a reproduction printing published much later than the date on the issue for free distribution to the subscribers on some important date. Is this a single sheet folded down the middle? What is the white paper behind it?

 

Why not. Certainly possible. Did you compare it to this issue?

Debora

 

1792 - it should be hand made paper. The tear looks like later machine made paper. If you can hold it up to the light, can you see any pattern of lines, or a woven texture? Early paper molds created impressions of the wire "laid and chain" lines in the paper. Woven wire molds were introduced in the mid 1750s, and created a more even woven texture. In each case, the fibers in the paper pulp are oriented randomly, as the paper maker would shake/swirl the pulp in the mold. In machine made paper, the paper pulp was poured onto a moving screen, resulting in the paper fibers being more aligned in the direction of movement.

 

Is that the same issue date, Debora?

 

Yes there are straight lines from top to bottom

 

Traditional laid paper will look like this:


Paper made with a woven mold will have a more even, uniform appearance. Paper made on the fourdrinier machine (after 1803) will have fibers more aligned along the length of the paper, which may be what you are seeing. There is the additional complication that paper makers could use a "dandy roll" on the machine (after 1825), which could impress lines intended to imitate traditional laid and chain lines. Before the 1840s, paper pulp was made primarily of linen and cotton rags, and was quite durable. After 1840, paper began to be made with wood pulp, resulting in a loss of strength and longevity.
It is hard to tell from here. I am still suspicious about the way your paper has torn. But I don't know why any reproductions would have been made either.

 

No. Don't think so.

Debora

 

I agree. I've done some research in original newspapers from the 1820s, in a library setting. They were printed on the hand made paper... or at least, were not the type that is brittle and turns into what I call "cornflakes"!

So if Nancy's is hand made paper, maybe it's just the photo of the tear that is not showing it in a way we can analyze?

EDIT -- this note added: @Nancy Neal , here is bibliographic information about the newspaper, provided on the Library of Congress website. (You asked for information and I wasn't sure what you had already.) https://www.loc.gov/item/sn83030568/

 

Thanks for the great explanation!

 

The paper is enclosed in a plastic cover ,which is also torn in same area as rip in paper, I dont know if that means something, It looks exactly like the pic Figtree posted when held up to light,,Is this worth trying to sell in this condition, and whsat kind of price range difference is there between hand made and machine made paper, Thanks for all the wonderful information.

 

Just to give proper credit, @2manybooks posted the picture that I think you're talking about.

It might be worth trying to sell if it's an authentic paper from 1792. And right now I don't see real evidence that it's newer, except that paper where it is torn does look different in the picture than it should.

I don't know if older newspapers go for anything much. If you can find some articles in the issue that might have historical interest, that might attract some people.