The Samovar
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
Author: Subject: Fly specking postmark style
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 2356
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

shocked.gif posted on 8/27/2006 at 13:11
Fly specking postmark style


This postcard was sent from Arensburg in Liflyand province to Rappel' in Ehstlyand province in 1906.

On the surface, the Rappel' postmarks appear to be the same. Take a closer look and see if you can spot the differences. Please post what you find for all of us to see.

Thanks and enjoy!

rappel.jpg - 46kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
jlechtanski
Moderator
******




Posts: 702
Registered: 7/7/2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

[*] posted on 8/27/2006 at 15:32


The obvious difference is the inverted 1906 in the upper postmark. It is correct in the lower postmark but slightly twisted clockwise. My first thought was that the device itself was corrected and re-applied to the postcard.

But it looks like the serial number 1 is maybe smaller in the lower postmark so they are different devices. In any case he day 2 also looks different in the two postmarks.

Were the serial numbers replaceable like the date was?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Alep
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 382
Registered: 5/21/2005
Location: Estonia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8/28/2006 at 01:49


Two receiving postmarks is a very unusual circumstance in itself. While even three dispatch postmarks of Arensburg are quite explainable from the point of view of the postal regulations, this is not the case on the arrival. It looks as the date insert was replaced. The serials were not replacable and '1' might be the same (more or less force of striking, ink etc).
View user's profile View All Posts By User
jlechtanski
Moderator
******




Posts: 702
Registered: 7/7/2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

[*] posted on 8/28/2006 at 09:42


Although I can agree that the increase in size of the serial "1" can be caused by over-inking, added pressure or differences in whatever was under the card at the time of postmarking, the "2" is definitely smaller and of a different shape.

If you will excuse some amateur cutting and pasting, please see the image below.

img151.jpg - 50kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Alep
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 382
Registered: 5/21/2005
Location: Estonia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8/28/2006 at 12:01


It is quite right that there is another '2' in the date. This can be explained by the replacement of the central insert with dates that was replacable. Probably, the clerk having noticed the inverted year decided that it would be quicker to put in a new insert than repair the former one.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 2356
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8/28/2006 at 14:11


Perhaps they are rally two devices and not one? One would be used to indicate receipt of the mail and the other to indicate dispatch for delivery of the mail?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Alep
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 382
Registered: 5/21/2005
Location: Estonia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8/29/2006 at 01:23


Rappel had by 1906 actually two devices of the same type with the serials '1' and '2'. However, the postal regulations allowed to manufacture a new device with the same serial only if the former one was damaged, lost etc. True, there are known cases when this rule was broken; however, I do not think this is the case. The outer part of the canceller appears to be the same, only the date insert is another.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 2356
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8/31/2006 at 16:55


Quote:
Originally posted by Alep
It is quite right that there is another '2' in the date. This can be explained by the replacement of the central insert with dates that was replacable. Probably, the clerk having noticed the inverted year decided that it would be quicker to put in a new insert than repair the former one.


So are we saying that the entire date plug was a single unit and not composed of separate elements?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Alep
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 382
Registered: 5/21/2005
Location: Estonia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 9/2/2006 at 07:41


I believe the date plug to be a single unit but I may be wrong as well.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 2356
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 9/2/2006 at 17:24


Can other members show if this is true or not? Got examples showing the day or month might be a separate part of the plug?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 2356
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11/25/2006 at 13:11
Follow up


Illustrated here is a letter from Moscow to St. Petersburg in 1870. Pretty standard markings. 1st Dispatch Office on the stamp (in black) and on the back (in red) to indicate departure and a St. Petersburg arrival mark from the next day. The stamp placement is interesting also.

However, the date plug is interesting. The device itself is a standard 3-line mark. These devices had the day of the month on top, the month in the middle and the year on the bottom. The one shown here from the front of the cover has the Month on the top, the year in the middle, and the day on the bottom. An extra treat is that the day is upside down!

Enjoy

====front

plug-front.jpg - 29kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 2356
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11/25/2006 at 13:12
back of cover




plug-back.jpg - 44kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 2356
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 11/25/2006 at 13:12
postmark 200%




plug-date.jpg - 71kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
jlechtanski
Moderator
******




Posts: 702
Registered: 7/7/2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

[*] posted on 11/25/2006 at 15:58


Doesn't this example prove that the date plug was actually three separate plugs?

There also should be other examples out there of inverted months and years.

Nice find.
View user's profile View All Posts By User

  Go To Top

Powered by XMB 1.9.11
XMB Forum Software © 2001-2017 The XMB Group
[Queries: 17]