tps.org.au

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 4:43 pm**

Notice to all eBay sellers of Tasmanian barred numeral postmarks ...

This is not MONTACUTE (rated RRRRR or RRRR)

,
[attachment=0]bn59.jpg[/attachment]
this BN59 is GORMANSTON (very common!)

During the last 12 months alone I have seen at least 4 copies of this particular BN
allocated to Montacute rather than Gormanston by three eBay different sellers!

If you have any problems identifying the correct allocation of a particular barred
numeral cancel, please post an image and we'll check it out for you.

Just about every other week, someone lists an incorrectly identified barred numeral on eBay.
Many of the buyers assume that the seller "knows their stuff" so when they receive the item
they duly annotate the item in their collection incorrectly identified.

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 6:39 pm**

Here's a barred numeral postmark recently offered (initially as a as a RRRRR rated cancel)
and sold on eBay. Definitely a top strike but ......
[attachment=0]BN213.jpg[/attachment]
..... this is this the second type of the BN213 obliterator used at Deep Lead
and is only rated R. Fortunately, Randall Askeland informed the vendor of the error before
the auction closed and bidding responded well to the correct information provided.

Posted: **Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:30 pm**

Hello to all, this is my first time on this forum. I have recently started to collect Tas numerical cancels and have found some great info on this site relating to numbers and towns etc. I am somewhat perplexed as to how I can tell 1st, 2nd and 3rd re-allocation cancels from each other. From what I can see the 2nd allocation was in 1861 but subsequent re-allocation occured in 1882, 1887 and 1891, the last having 4 bars. What the? I can see that some cancels have 2 bars, some have 3 but what do they mean. I hope someone can help.

Posted: **Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:05 am**

Code: Select all

Hi Ron,
Yes, its a bit confusing. There were only two so-called "allocations" of barred numeral cancellations, the first in 1853 and the second commencing in 1861 as you say. The second allocation went in fits and starts until 1900 with different patterns bars and fonts as more and more new post offices were opened, and some were closed. I would suggest the best way to understand the complicated issue and re-issue of numerals and the various styles of cancellors that were used is to either look at the 'Green Books' which are currently the standard reference for Tas postal History, or better still check out the current edition of The Courier, which is the journal of the Tasmanian Philatelic Society. The Courier is running a 3-part up-date of the second allocation barred numerals( the first major up-date since the 1970s), and the current edition has a good introduction plus a listing of the earlier barred numerals. This will cost you $15 from the TPS. plus postage.
I would be happy to give you the references for the "Green Books" if you are interested. They are out of print but become available from time to time at auction etc.I can also time organize a copy of the latest 'Courier' if you would like to buy a copy.  
If you would like to follow this up send me a "PM" via this Bulletin Board and I'll get back to you with more information .

Cheers,
Pete

Posted: **Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:19 pm**

Two Second Allocation barred numeral cancels often mistaken for each other (especially
by eBay sellers) are BN6 used at Bothwell and BN9 used at Bridgewater.

Here are images of both as "tied" cancels as well as the same inverted so that you can see where
the confusion stems.
[attachment=1]BN 6&9.jpg[/attachment]
[attachment=0]BN 6&9 inverted.jpg[/attachment]

Posted: **Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:09 pm**

aaaaaahhhhhh!!! ......it's still happening !!!
[attachment=1]gggrrrrrr it's not montacute.jpg[/attachment]
(noted recently offered for direct sale on a stamp website and the fourth vendor I
have seen to incorrectly assign this BN cancel to Montacute)

Just to recap .....

1) Montacute finally closed sometime in 1888. This stamp was issued after
the post office closed!

2) this particular BN59 was the third type issued (see below) and was only used
at MOUNT LYELL and GORMANSTON
[attachment=0]bn59 types.jpg[/attachment]
QED (I hope)

Posted: **Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:50 am**

I am struggling with the BN51 cancels. I came across a strip of three 1d Chalons (Watermark '1') with BN51 cancels in a collection. The '1' has short serifs with rounded entry at the top and bottom, which makes it look diffent to the '1' in either of the second allocation BN51s used at Latrobe, which are also shown below. The serifs look more rectangular in either of the Latrobe cancels, but the '5' in the Latrobe(1) cancel looks similar to the '5' in the Chalon cancel. I have never seen a first allocation BN51, although I would have expected taller numbers. Can anyone provide an example for comparison with the Chalon cancels?

: BN51,Chalon.jpg (40.84 KiB) Viewed 41923 times

: BN51,Latrobe(2).jpg (43.62 KiB) Viewed 41923 times

Posted: **Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:22 pm**

The key is not the shape of the serif of the "1", but whether it points due West (flat on top) or slopes to the Southwest. The "5" should slant slightly to the right. I think the attached is BN51 First Allocation for Prosser's Plains. Quite scarce.

: BN51.jpg (50.9 KiB) Viewed 41918 times

Posted: **Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:17 pm**

Thanks, David. That's helpful. I noted the description of the '1' in the first Green Book, but wasn't quite sure whether this applied to all the first allocation cancels containing a '1'. The Green Book description of the first allocation '5' as having a down stroke with a distinct slope from right to left, as well as a ball extending further to the left, applies to some second allocation cancels, like the Latrobe BN51(1). I note that your 4d Chalon has a sloping end to the horizontal stroke of the '5'. Is that significant? It looks as though the strip of three 1d Chalons has the Latrobe BN51(1) cancel, perhaps with an early type of ink having different viscosity/surface tension characteristics to later supply.

Posted: **Fri Apr 15, 2011 11:47 am**

BN 51 of Latrobe was issued in 1861 and it appeared to wear considerably during its long life - Latrobe would have been a relatively busy post office, and as a result the impression becomes progressively coarser and less clear. Randal has provided TPS with scans from his excellent BN collection and I am assuming he will not mind if I show 4 strikes here which illustrate various states. Maybe this explains the sometimes varying impressions seen.

: BN51.jpg (68.81 KiB) Viewed 41907 times

Posted: **Fri May 13, 2011 8:32 pm**

I think that the attached scan is an example of 60 (1) rated RRRRR in John Hardinge's recent articles (Courier 49/50). The stamp is a 4d pale blue imperf, issued from 1857 to 1869. Numeral 60 was allocated to Mt Direction, a post office from 1.1.64 until closed on 31.12.72, and then re-opened much later in 1893. John's article states that numeral 60 was probably re-allocated to Bradshaw's Creek on 1/7/83. It's most unlikely that a 4d imperf would have been used for postage in 1883.

Comments welcome as this cancellation is pretty rare. Should we have a forum topic for 4R and 5R numeral cancellations?

Observation: surprising that Mt Direction is so scarce given its location en route to George Town which is not at all rare.

Posted: **Fri May 13, 2011 10:13 pm**

You may be correct. Here is an image of BN 60, Second Allocation which I believe is correctly identified. It looks similar to me. I have never come across this BN but have been confused by BN 60, first allocation at times. The "6" in first allocation is a bit more elongated and your copy looks more squat to me.
Why Mt Direction is so rare I dont know, except this was after all a very small town. I am sure others will have some ideas
Its a good idea to start a topic on 4 and 5R BNs. Feel free if you wish to do so and I will transfer this thread across.
A very nice find !
Pete

: BN-60-Second.jpg (45.68 KiB) Viewed 40132 times

Posted: **Sun May 15, 2011 5:20 pm**

shatten wrote: Observation: surprising that Mt Direction is so scarce given its location en route to George Town which is not at all rare.

Until the late 19th century, the vast majority of 'trips' from George Town to Launceston and vice versa, would have been by
ship/launch/steamer on the Tamar River rather than using the rough dirt track, now transformed into the East Tamar Highway.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2011 3:56 pm**

Ross Ewington wrote:Until the late 19th century, the vast majority of 'trips' from George Town to Launceston and vice versa, would have been by
ship/launch/steamer on the Tamar River rather than using the rough dirt track, now transformed into the East Tamar Highway.

It's still a dirt track most of the time with the roadworks Ross!

On another note, the 60 on the 4d Chalon is the first allocation of 60 used at Launceston 1853-Feb 1861 and is consequently common sorry to say. The difference in wear of the BN and the width of the "0" are good indicators.

To confuse the issue still further, the very scarce 60 at Mount Direction 1861-72 was not reissued and when there was need of a new 60 in 1883 the old first allocation numeral, although well worn was reissued and it can be found on sidefaces late issues(ie perf 14). It's very scarce in this era(although not as scarce as 60 at Mount Direction). It remains uncertain as to exactly which office it was reallocated to, although there are theories of course!

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2011 7:31 pm**

What a shame........ I note from the Green Book vol II that the shape of the "6" is not a good indicator. Noting John's comments, it's not surprising that mis-identifications occur.

Posted: **Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:25 am**

Hi
Can anyone confirm that this numeral obliterator is the type used at Molesworth and is correct.Thanks

Posted: **Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:22 pm**

Daryl ...can you identify which printing of the stamp this is please? The SG number or a verbal description (perf, wmk and shade) should help determine the approx. period of usage.... Ross

Posted: **Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:42 pm**

It is the 317 used at Molesworth. very nice item indeed.

Posted: **Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:10 pm**

Ross
It appears to be perf 11.4 with wide TAS watermark(1871-76 ?),as for the shade i am unsure.Thanks for reply Ross and John

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:06 pm**

This 2nd Allocation barred numeral is currently
being offered for sale by a Sydney-based auction
(closes November 1st 2012)

: bn224.jpg (53.6 KiB) Viewed 39758 times

BN224 used at Scottsdale West is rated RRRRR
...nice, if it is indeed an example .... what do you think?!?

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2012 12:50 pm**

Ross, here is another example for comparison. The "4" is clear.

: 224.jpg (468.36 KiB) Viewed 39821 times

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:04 pm**

: bn224.jpg (53.6 KiB) Viewed 39820 times

The "4" which is of course the key letter looks a little weak
but the format is entirely consistent with 222, 223, 224 and
225 which were all from a batch issued in 1891.
If OK is a very rare number.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:46 pm**

thanks Pete and John ...... this example of BN224 does appear to be the real thing.

Posted: **Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:56 pm**

It certainly looks right to me as well.
Pete

Posted: **Fri May 03, 2013 10:34 am**

This lovely example of BN161 on an 'inverted 3d Platypus' has been offered
for a second time on well-known online auction website as BN191 (Okehampton - rated RRRRR)

: bn191 or 161.jpg (27.53 KiB) Viewed 39668 times

.....now on a 'normal' 3d Platypus

: bn191 or 161.jpg (25.43 KiB) Viewed 39668 times

...and now, another example with the distinctive top to the '6'

: bn 161 for real.jpg (37.18 KiB) Viewed 39668 times

There is partially good news however, BN161 (used at Turner's Marsh and later at Karoola)
does have a rarity rating of RR (but definitely not worth the starting price of AU$99.99)
I have offered the example above (on a reconstructed 1d QV S/face) a couple of times
on my online auction website but I think it still remains 'in stock' with a starting price of $3!

tps.org.au

CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Numerical cancels

Re: START HERE - INFORMATION and RULES for ALL BOARD MEMBERS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS

Re: CORRECT IDENTIFICATION of BARRED NUMERAL POSTMARKS