Cape of Good Hope Serifed Circular Datestamp - 1882
The Serifed Circular Datestamp
The Serifed Circular Datestamp is a mystery that both Goldblatt and Putzel say was in use in January 1882. Goldblatt makes bold to claim that it was in use for just six days.
A cover submitted by South African Philately Club member Yannis Lazarides has pushed that date back by one day. However, Franco Frescura in 'The Post Offices of the Cape of Good Hope 1792 - 1910' (Vol. 1, Page v 146, 2002), states that the earliest date of use of the Serifed Circular Datestamp is the 30th December 1882. Thus it appears that this datestamp was used for a period of just eight days.
Tempting as it is to include the Serifed Circular Datestamp among the Experimental Cancellers of the Cape of Good Hope, we do not know enough about it yet to be confident of declaring it as such and including it here. However, as the recorded examples of this Datestamp are from the beginning of the Experimental era, it fits neatly into the start of the chronological sequence of Cape Experimental postmarks. For that reason, I include it in this section as a mysterious and diverting precursor to the known Cape Experimental datestamps.
Until new information becomes available, I cannot include it in the Experimental category. However, it is worth considering the features of the Serifed Circular Datestamp that suggest its experimental use. They are:
- Usage restricted to the GPO in Cape Town ie. limited trial.
- Very unusual use of serifed letters at this time - it has a unique new design.
- CAPE COLONY at base - the Squared Circle, first true Experimental datestamp had 'Cape Colony' at base.
- Very limited period of use - the trial, test or experiment failed or was aborted.
- Earliest known use 31 December 1881 - the accepted start date of the era of experimentation is 1882.
Regarding the use of Serifed letters, this was common practice in almost all the early Cape datestamps. It is therefore possible that the Serifed Circular Datestamp is an old single circle datestamp that has not been recorded in its original capacity, whatever that was.
With only one cover out of a possible seven survivors known used as a Cape Town proving piece dispatch datestamp and none known used where it cancelled a stamp, it is unlikely that the Serifed Circular Datestamp was being tested as an obliterating datestamp. All but one of the examples we have show that it was being used as a receiving datestamp on the reverse of covers. If it was not being tested as a postage stamp obliterator and datestamp, it could not have been one of the Experimental datestamps intended to fulfill this function.
Numbers Known on Cover
Regarding the number of covers known to bear this postmark, Goldblatt states he has seen two examples from "1 and 6 January 1882". Despite Putzel showing two covers both from '4 JA 82'. (The Postmarks of South Africa.... Page 41, Vol 2 C-D), he does NOT record the postmark chronologically alongside the known experimental datestamps but relegates it to 'Sundry and Unusual Styles of Cape Town Postmarks' on Page 78 where he gives it the inglorious number of Type 380x and adds that "only 4 specimens have been seen".
As both of Putzel's two displayed covers are different to the two below, (Bob Hill's and mine), we know of four covers that are different. Yannis Lazarides has three covers that are also different to Putzel's two, making a total of seven covers known to show the Serifed Circular Datestamp. The SAPC is proud and privileged to show five of these seven covers here. Putzel rates the Proving cover piece at 20,000 points. The relatively small number of seven known covers makes them 'extremely scarce' rather than 'rare'.
Comments will be revised to take on board the advice and research of members. In the unlikely event of this postmark being found on more covers, we must hope that some examples of this postmark might be found on stamps. If some proof of its use as an obliterator of stamps was found, the question of this datestamp being experimental will need to be re-examined.
SOME OF THE INFO ON THE DISPLAY SHEET BELOW IS REDUNDANT AND WRONG!
Uploaded files:
Steve
I am posting the three examples I have.
You make some thoughtful comments but I still have some doubts as to being experimental. If the post-office wanted to experiment with a circular datestamp why make another one? What type of experiment were they running, would a few days be adequate to make conclusions?
One can certainly can say with confidence that the Experimental Period started in 1882 with the promotion of Somerset French as Postmaster General after the death of his predecessor. Aitchison died after a brief illness on 26 January 1892 and Somerset French must have been appointed shortly afterwards, perhaps outside the period we are discussing for this datestamp.
Uploaded files:
Yannis, thank you for re-posting your three covers here. This Forum now shows 5 of 7 known examples of the Serifed Circle Datestamp. (Your examples, Putzel's, Bob Hill's and mine are all different, making seven!) Not bad for a website that is only now turning six months old. Thank you for helping us achieve this milestone so quickly.
Collectors who own a Serifed Circle Datestamp are please asked to post a scan here for our edification and delight.
There are several tricky mysteries within Cape philately. An obvious one is whether the VOC handstamp was used at the Cape or not. I am more inclined to leave that open-ended despite my gut saying it was not than I am about making a decision on the Serifed Circle Datestamp. Given that we only have seven covers on which it was only used on one as a dispatch datestamp and none where it was used to date and obliterate a stamp, I must agree with you that at this moment in time it certainly does not look like an Experimental datestamp.
We are now able to show you SIX of the 7 known examples of the Serifed Circle Datestamp. The new addition is the one shown in Putzel's 'Postmarks of SA....', the one which is the only example of the datestamp being used as a dispatch date stamp.
The cover was found on the website of Michael Hamilton, the well-known specialist postmark dealer, who states:
"CAPE TOWN unique code "D" Temporary Rubber Datestamp, Cape of Good Hope postal history. 1882 to Kimberley, Diamond Fields with 3d pale claret (SG.39) pmk'd "1" barred oval numeral with superb CAPE TOWN CAPE COLONY temporary rubber datestamp for D/JA 4 82 alongside, flap removed clear of JA 9 82 arrival cds. Putzel Volume 2 Page 78 confirms the existence of four other examples of this Temporary Rubber Datestamp. These are all found backstamping covers for JA 1 82 to JA 6 82 but with code L. £1500."
http://www.michael-hamilton.com/best.php?sb=&ct=&st=80&q=&sort=reference%20DESC&t=&
This cover was brought to my attention by Bob Hill who remembered seeing it cancelling a postage stamp. In much haste and excitement I immediately went to Michael Hamilton's website. It is well worth visiting, most items are much more affordable than this wonderful Cape of Good Hope philatelic rarity addressed to 'Kimberley, Diamond Fields'. I was disappointed to not find it cancelling a postage stamp but relieved to not have to change my mind about it not being an Experimental datestamp and rewrite the foregoing.
Michael's statement that this is a "Temporary Rubber Datestamp" is interesting and insightful. It certainly looks as though it could be a 'wonky' rubber datestamp. The impression of its postmark is not as sharp and crisp as that of a steel datestamp. However, in the absence of proof it is a statement that needs to be proven. Still, his suggestion that this is a temporary rubber datestamp has merit given its short working life.
He also refers to its "unique code "D"". He can be excused for making this assumption as Putzel, the postmark authority, states only one cover, Michael's, is known with a 'D' while there are four known with an 'L'. We can now add to that one with an 'A', one with an 'O' and most importantly, two more 'D's. This makes 'D' the second most common of all after 'L'. This is not to cast any aspersion on Michael but the use of 'unique' in philately is often the quickest route to an embarrassing U-turn. I know. I've been there!
Finally, assuming the two 'L's shown here were known to Putzel, that leaves another two 'L' cover's unaccounted for. With Frescura's 30th Decmber cover we are now looking at possibly TEN covers showing the Serifed Circle Datestamp. Is this cover now out of the 'Rare' category!
Uploaded files:
Thanks to Bob Hill's memory and Mike Hamilton we got to see the 6th cover.
The cover provides some clues as to the reason of the usage of the "temporary" datestamp. The stamp is cancelled by the obliterator part of a duplex canceller. The thin bar duplex was in use for most of the year 1881.
This particular canceller probably came into use some time in 1878 or 1879 according to what I have. Now and then over the years one can find the two parts being used separately. I am posting two covers used just prior to the "temporary" one with the duplex proper. The one just a couple of days earlier. Possibly the dater part of the duplex was being repaired? Broken?
Mystery solved?
Instructive is that the earliest recorded date for the squared circle is the 25 January 1882.
As to "unique" or 1 of three or five, I am also being skeptical of such statements; also statements such as "the only one I have seen in so many years ... ". The only statement that one can make which is true, is that they are rarer than "woodblocks!"
Mike Hamilton is a great authority on anything postmarks, especially West Indies, if anyone collects that area and prices are reasonable. Remember dealers also have families and need to make a profit for their time research and in investing and holding the stock.
Uploaded files:
Yannis, that is a great piece of detective work - but where is the body? It is all circumstantial, sadly.
However, we must thank Michael Hamilton for describing the postmark as a "Temporary Rubber Datestamp". That's a breakthrough that never entered my mind. The impression of the Serifed Circle Datestamp certainly looks different to your typical steel datestamp. Additionally, the ink is more slate-grey than black, suggesting a non-standard ink pad.
You were right when you said "If the post-office wanted to experiment with a circular datestamp why make another one? What type of experiment were they running, would a few days be adequate to make conclusions?" These questions are best answered by your previous suggestions that this was a short-term ad hoc solution to a problem that the Cape Town Post Office had in the awkward holiday period immediately before and after New Year 1882, (a celebration that lasts for two days in Cape Town, a legacy of slavery, apparently).
Add a BONC 1 detached from a (broken?) duplex canceller used alongside this temporary rubber datestamp and one begins to sense a wafer thin pattern emerging of a cobbled together short term solution. The last recorded date of use we have for the Serifed Circle Datestamp is Friday, 6 January 1882. Is it conceivable that whatever the cause of this temporary problem it was resolved on Monday 9th (even Friday 6th) when the Post Office's holidaying management returned to work after the Christmas / New Year break?
You have sown enough doubt for me to concede that on balance, taking the facts we have, the Serifed Circle Datestamp was not an experimental datestamp but something else. As the owner of one of the cover's above, I also appreciate your insightful comment that scarce or rare, there are less of these curious covers than there are Cape Woodblocks. Thank you for putting that so neatly in perspective. I will bear it in mind when trying to sell it one day.
Steve
Thanks for your response. As you say it is circumstantial, and in the absence of any written records we can only speculate.
The rarity obviously relates to the survivability ratio of covers and the span of use. For any particular day in a particular post office it is really hard to find more than 1-2 covers dated the same day and sometimes none, with the exception of the earlier days of the post when there was a rush to get mail on a departing ship. You can see this in our case with the serified ODS. This is also why ERDs and LRD are hard to pin.
With the exception of the error of colours, Woodblocks are not really rare, except with good margins which artificially boosts the rarity. Ditto for unmounted mint. The American dealers have turned this into an art with their complex grading system multiplying the value of a common stamp by thousands. Same also with the craze of unmounted mint (in many cases used stamps are rarer).
One of the most in my opinion difficult to find and scarce cancellation is the Cape Town horizontal BONC 1, used on cheap mail and apparently also some 20-30 years into the Union as well, possibly as scarce as the "serified", another is the similarly used Kimberley 227, found 1 in a mixed lot in the past.
Yannis, many thanks for helping me shed my callow illusiions about the Serifed Circle Datestamp.
I am lucky because I quickly fell out of love with mint stamps. I offended a collector once when I unkindly said that "mint stamps were like women who had never had children, they had not served their function in life". At the time of that utterance I was a homesick South African struggling to live in the UK. I had been collecting stamps for a few years, mostly every Saturday at the Embankment, Charing Cross, London. It was there that I began to concentrate on postmarks, particularly ones of the places I had known and loved as a boy in the Western Cape. This quickly led me into postal history. I believe that there is today an emerging field of collecting called 'Heimat', a German word that describes an almost spiritual love for a part of a country and your relationship to your place in it. Something like that. I guess it describes me. "My hart verlang na die Boland?" (Afr. My heart yearns for the Boland - Western Cape.)
I have a vertical (sideways) Kimberley 227 on stamp somewhere. I have a block of 8 x 1896 5/- BONC 227 horizontal but not vertical. My pal Bob Hill mistook them for vertical ones and spent a year green with envy until he saw them again. I think a weight lifted from his shoulders.