The Samovar
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
Author: Subject: Pen and Ink Cancellation on No. 1
hlovitz
Czarist
**




Posts: 12
Registered: 11/2/2002
Location: Philadelphia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

[*] posted on 8/20/2003 at 20:18
Pen and Ink Cancellation on No. 1


(I hope this posting fits in this forum.)

Why are Pen & Ink cancellations valued less than stamped cancellations? It is a legal post mark on a verified no. 1, which came from a limited printing. Do values increase when on envelope?

I will show the stamp on cover of a letter of "Rechnung", dated Jan 17, 1858 as an illustration of legitimate use before the decree of 2/26/58 specifiying the requirements of the cancellor.

File0002.jpg - 65kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
GregMirsky
Rossica Librarian
*********




Posts: 244
Registered: 11/2/2002
Location: Palo Alto,CA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Still Optimistic...

[*] posted on 8/21/2003 at 09:03


As far as I remember pen cancels were required and used from Jan 1, 1858 to Feb 26, 1858 (2 months). From Feb 26 till May 31 (3 months) pre-stamp time cancels were used on stamps and after that there was a period of numeral dot cancels.
So, statistically we can say that number of pen-cancelled stamps should be smaller than number of stamps with pre-stamp period cancels, BUT in reality - pen-cancels are two-three times easier to find/buy. So, from my point of view it is simple "supply and demand" market situation.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
oldteddy
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 237
Registered: 12/31/2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Perplexed

[*] posted on 8/21/2003 at 10:04
Exclusive or inclusive?


After the pre-adhesive cancels and dot cancels were ordered to use - were pen cancels outlawed or were they being used along with postmark cancels?

I've read somewhere (do not remember where) that #2 is more valuable with pen cancel than with postmark cancels because there are just fewer of them. I wonder if the same is true about #1.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rusalka
DownUnder
**




Posts: 25
Registered: 2/25/2003
Location: Canberra, Australia
Member Is Offline

Mood: Usually Content

[*] posted on 8/24/2003 at 02:33
# 1 and # 2 pen and ink cancels


Kiryushkin and Robinson in "Russian Postmarks" at p 16 state the following:

"With the introduction of postage stamps....it was required to cancel them with a cross written in black ink....This method was too complicated, and also unreliable....postmarks could be washed off and the stamps re-used....Circular # 138 of 26 February 1858 stated that special cancellations comprising circles of dots with the numerals 1 and 2 be introduced....for SPb and Moscow....and other towns...until special cancellations could be introduced."

The authors continue:

" The introduction of numeral cancellations for post offices in the whole of the Empire was announced in Circular... 31 May 1858...and Circular # 157 of 17 August 1858."

It may be suggested that there may have been a combination of pen cancels and dot cancels were used at the same time at different postal locations in the Russian Empire, before complete standardization occurred to use just the dot cancels.

I have also heard that a # 2 stamp with a pen cancel is more valuable than the ink cancel. Is it because Circular # 138 was so effectively enforced, that fewer # 2's (issued in January 1858) were actually cancelled by pen before the 26th February edict?

The # 1 pen cancels are less valuable according to Michel, than the ink cancels. The reason may lie in that since they were released in December 1857, more of them were pen cancelled than those with ink cancels because the February Circular was enforced, and that the supply of # 1's (3 million) were becoming exhausted by then.

There would have been an overlap of using either # 1 or # 2 stamps, which could further explain that fewer # 2's were actually cancelled by pen before the postal changes were enforced.;)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hlovitz
Czarist
**




Posts: 12
Registered: 11/2/2002
Location: Philadelphia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

[*] posted on 8/28/2003 at 21:25


Rusalka and others,

Consider the following ponts:

The decree of Feb 26, 1858, ordered cancellations with postmarks to show town name and date. This group contained the town post marks used before No. 1 was issued. My illustration, first above, shows the Riga mark that was used previously. There are about 200 known different post marks on the unperforated No. 1-- showing the wide distributionof the first issue.

Also, pursuant to a number of decrees, begining with the Feb 26 decree, the P.O. Dept. introduced a systematic series of special numerical cancellors. There was no date requirement. The only way to tell when they were first issued on a No. 1 would be by being tied to a cover with dates. It would be interesting to see if anyone has such a dated cover to determine when they were first used.

In any event, given the vast usage of the 3 Million stamps of the first issue, that had post marks, and that only 10, 510 were issued in Dec. 1857, which did not have the perforation (because the perforation machine broke) and that the unperforated stamp is legitimate proof that it is a No. 1 (and not being a perforated stamp cut back as a forgery), THEN why is it valued less?
Also, per my first question asked above, is it worth more on cover?

I trust my facts are accurate. If not, please let me know. (Did I need to say that?)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
oldteddy
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 237
Registered: 12/31/2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Perplexed

[*] posted on 8/29/2003 at 05:55
Other factors not taken into account


I think those who participated in this interesting discussion failed to take into account the following factors:

Factor #1: Even if we know when this or that regulation was issued it doesn't mean that it was actually enforced. Are we sure that usage of pen for cancelling stamps ACTUALLY ended on the dates when regulations about usage of postmarks and dot cancels were introduced? I challenge participants of the discussion PHILATELICALLY prove it. Are we sure that no covers with pen cancels dated AFTER those regulations exist? Knowing how things were (and are) done in Russia I doubt it.

Factor #2: Even if those regulations were enforced and NOT A SINGLE STAMP was canceled with pen after those new cancelling regulations were issued - are we sure that the percentage of survived stamps is the same for both groups (with pen cancels and with postmarks)? If "x" number of stamps were canceled with pen and "5x" with postmarks but only 1/10 of postmarked survived (for the reasons unknown) but 50% of pen-canceled - then it would change the whole math. And no abstract observation or meditation would tell us the truth, only real PHILATELIC statistics.

Anyway, watching different auctions and sales for the last few years I noticed that more #1's with pen cancels are being offered than with postmarks. It doesn't prove anything but it fits well into that FACTORS ##1&2.

Factor #3: May be the most important one. Market value (assuming that catalogs reflect it to some degree) is not determined by regulations, it's determined by supply and demand, and it's just less demand for pen cancelled stamps than for postmarked, because postmarked look better, because they carry additional information (on postmark itself) etc. etc.

Conclusion: There is no direct functional relationship between number of stamps issued during different periods and MARKET VALUES of stamps with pen and postmark cancels.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 1626
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8/29/2003 at 08:06


I think oldteddy is on the mark. Market values are relative and change more often than sand dunes in the dessert. Catalogs are but a snapshot in time and vary greatly sometimes by geographical location of the compiler.

If I have it and you want it, then the only factor is how large is your wallet. The downside to this is there are collectors just like me who have paid using this method only to find out that the next person does not have such a large wallet.

If a person is purchasing as an investment, then I wish them all the best and hope they are successful. Lest we forget that expectations are but frustrations in the creative stage.

Most of us have observed particular items that suddenly appear as an archive exits the back door for a few rubles. At first they are expensive due to supply and demand. After a short period, the supply is greater than the demand.;)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hlovitz
Czarist
**




Posts: 12
Registered: 11/2/2002
Location: Philadelphia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood.

[*] posted on 8/29/2003 at 08:32


I also agree with Old Teddy's conclusion. The market is certainly affected by factors of its own.

BUT, now as philatelists, has the Pen & Ink cancellation been given enough respect? (To quote Rodney Dangerfield, a comedian who always claimed that he "got not respect.";)

It is genuine proof that it is a No. 1. (No need to search for the elusive watermark.)
It may not have enough information on it, but neither do many of the post cancelled items that can't be read at all.

Is a recognition of respect by members of Rossica and others the key factor in making it a desirable item for a collector?

The laws of supply and demand will then reach its own level.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
oldteddy
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 237
Registered: 12/31/2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Perplexed

[*] posted on 8/29/2003 at 09:41
Case closed?


AMEN!
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 1626
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8/29/2003 at 09:43


Is it possible to give any item too much respect? Probably not.

It is absolutely fantastic, at least for me, to hear other people's ideas and opinions about philatelic matters. Invariable, I learn from every thread started. Keep 'em coning!

IMHO, when the thread enters through the gate of "value" the thread heads into never-never land. Perhaps w should use rational like "scare, hard to find, etc.," but not "rare" or some form of the word? Finding number ones on cover is not easy, so the item is definitely hard to find. The keyhole variety is probably scarce, but if I had one it would frighten me. :-)

It would bevery nice if the philatelic community considered respect by Rossica members for an item a factor. This is already true in many cases, but applies to individuals rather than the Society as a whole.

Whether an item is desirable or not is an individual and personal choice. A warm feeling can be had if anything said or displayed opens the eyes of another collector who then contributes in kind. Egads!!!!! We could all one day be collecting Moscow.:o
View user's profile View All Posts By User

  Go To Top

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