Quote from yannisl on July 6, 2023, 1:03 pm

Error this time belongs to me! I misread the 1-17-94. So all clear. Yes a small but useful result!

I will see what I have for Grahams Town in terms of covers. No earliest or latest though. 

Quote from Steve on July 6, 2023, 6:07 pm

They do not all have to be 'scarce' covers! I am more than happy to receive stamps that have a partial name but ideally a full date. A Month and Year is also useful. Please send whatever you have to hand. Thanks.

Quote from Steve on July 7, 2023, 12:12 pm

Note: I have updated the PDF to include covers sent by Yannis Larides AFTER this original post was made.

Grahams Town throws up several issues, one with Franco Frescura's 'Post Offices and Postal Markings of the CoGH' (2021. My main beef here is his identification of the HC type. He uses Jurgens' debunked example from Queens Town. As a result, Frescura proceeds to identify HCDs while perpetuating Jurgens' nonsense. He gets off on the wrong foot and, I suspect, never gets back on the right.

Another beef is that Frescura provides a list of ER and LR in his book. However, he has homogenised these dates into the uniform format of Day, Month, Year. (Many of his ER / LRs do not use this format.) It would have been much more helpful to this project and our understanding of the HCD had they been presented in the format in which they are seen on the postmark, (many of which, perhaps a majority, are presented as Month, Day, Year.) Indeed, this is the Date format  shown in Jurgens' and his Queens Town example.

I start here with the GRAHAMS TOWN (Dot). I will do the other Grahams Town examples shortly.

GRAHAMS TOWN (Dot)

• We show the Grahams Town (Dot) ER. 'xx MY 88'.
• The only drawn unprovenanced examples shown are from Jurgens and Frescura.
• The text size in the Hood is introduced. I do not want to investigate it yet. 
• Until I see it, I question the QUEENS TOWN (Dot) shown here as an example of the HC type .
• We have a good run of early HCD with Dot from 1888 - 1890.
• This includes my new ER 'xx MY 88', now accepted by Alex Visser.
• Putzel's example, his No. 12, is a 'Dot' dated '23 NO 89', It show the same format used 18 months later.
• There is remarkable continuity among these early GRAHAMS TOWN (Dot) HCDs.
• All have the Date as Day, Month, Year.
• All  but one example has an Asterisk Vertical.
• All have a Time Code Letter bottom.

INITIAL CONCLUSION BASED ON AVAILABLE DATA

There are two types of GRAHAMS TOWN HCD, one with a Dot and the other without. The Hoods text size would appear to vary.

• The Dot variety was introduced when the HCD was first issued and was used from 1888 to 1891/2 in the format Asterisk top; Date as Day, Month, Year; Time Code Letter at base. There are no exceptions.

This conclusion is made on the basis of a very small sample set. Further examples are needed before a Final Conclusion can be made.

Quote from yannisl on July 7, 2023, 4:08 pm

Here are some more examples on covers Steve, hope they help. 

Quote from yannisl on July 7, 2023, 4:19 pm

This one is No Dot, Letter O on top blank at bottom

Quote from Steve on July 8, 2023, 10:50 am

Yannis, again, thank you very much for your contribution.  These help our understanding of the HCD quite considerably.

Your top two covers show the GRAHAMS TOWN (Dot) HCD. The top is dated '25 NO 89', the next 'xx NO 89'. The Asterisk is Vertical in both with a Time Code letter at the base. They do not contradict my research. They confirm it.

I have made an interesting observation - the GRAHAMS TOWN (Dot) HCD is the only one to use an Asterisk.

This is surprising because I thought that the Asterisk was vital and indispensable part of the design. In the GRAHAMS TOWN (No Dot) the Asterisk has been discarded. Frescura tells us that its ER is '19 SP 1892' and its LR is 7 JA 1899. So, it appears that for just over 6 years, NO Asterisk was included in the GRAHAMS TOWN (No Dot). Was it lost and never replaced? Clearly, the Grahams Town PO did not regard it as important.

The Reply Paid Post Card 'AP 19 97' and the Post Card 'AP 24 93' (?) are both 'GRAHAMS TOWN (No Dots). Both are consistent with the data I have already compiled, namely that the Asterisk has been dispensed with and that only a Time Code letter or nothing at all are seen variously top and bottom. I will include these in the next PDF on the Grahams Town (No Dot). Thanks again.

You have some very nice HCD covers which should combine to make a very interesting HCD display.

Quote from Steve on July 19, 2023, 4:29 pm

Kelly has identified two types of GRAHAMS TOWN (No Dot) HCD, those with either a ‘Broad H’ or a ‘Narrow H’. Jurgens, Putzel, Goldblatt and Frescura do not make this distinction. As with all things new, this is debatable. You may disagree. Your advice, comments and examples will be greatly help our coming to terms with this woolly new category or dismissing it all together.

GRAHAMS TOWN (No Dot, Broad 'H')

• At present we have no ER for. All contributions welcomed.
• There are no drawn examples.
• We have a good run of HCD with Dot / Broad 'H' from possibly 1890, certainly 1892 - 1893.
• The Grahams Town HCD appears not to have been used for all of 1891. Examples please.
• A feature of this postmark is the absence of an Asterisk.
• Putzel's example, his No. 12c, is a 'No Dot' dated 'JU 22 92.
• All have the Date as Month, Day Year.
• None include an Asterisk.
• The Time Code letter appears randomly in either the top or bottom segments.

GRAHAMS TOWN (No Dot, Narrow 'H')

• At present we have no ER for. All contributions welcomed.
• There is only one drawn examples show from Goldblatt.
• We have a good run of HCDs with Dot / Narrow 'H' from possibly January 1893 to April 1897.
• The Grahams Town HCD appears not to have been used for all of 189. Examples please.
• A feature of this postmark is the absence of both an Asterisk
• From 1894 on we increasingly see the absence of a Time Code letter alswo, ie. blank top and bottom.
• All have the Date as Month, Day Year.
• None include an Asterisk.
• The Time Code letter appears in the top segment in examples seen.

This conclusion is made on the basis of a very small sample set. Further examples are needed before a Final Conclusion can be made.

Quote from Steve on July 20, 2023, 3:46 pm

KIMBERLEY

There are a two odd things about this lot, almost certainly due to the limited nature of the accumulation that I have of KIMBERLEY HDCs. First, I have no examples after '3 JU 90'. Its almost like that is the end date of its use in Kimberley. But it is not. Frescura lists the LR (Last Recorded) as '27 MR 1900'. So, it appears that I / we are missing 10 years worth of Kimberley HDC postmarks.

The second thing is quite gratifying given that when I have mentioned the rotation of the Asterisk I have been told not to waste my time on it. What is curious but easily explained, no doubt, is that in our supplied examples the rotation of the Asterisk is Vertical until ‘6 JA 89’ whereupon it is Horizontal until ‘30 JU 90’.  There is a consistent run of both. Nerdy  but interesting.

• We have a new ER for Kimberley. Updates welcomed.
• Our only drawn example is accompanied by the postmark on stamp.
• We see a run of Asterisk Vertical followed by one of Asterisk Horizontal.
• The Date format is consistently DD/MM/YY.
• The Asterisk is in the top segment in all examples.
• The Time Code letter is in the bottom segment in all examples.
• NO Blank bottom segments are seen between 21 MY 1888 - 3 JU 90.
• As we are missing examples from 1891 - 1900, we expect this format to change with time.

Quote from yannisl on July 20, 2023, 7:08 pm

The reason you do not have examples after 3 June 90, might be the Siege of Kimberley during the South African War! In October 1899 the Siege started. Finally the 124-day siege was  relieved on 15 February 1900. The latest I have in October is 28th October 1899. Need to do a bit more reading on this. All the covers I have are for 1899-1900 all addressed to Perkins all with asterisk on top time code below. Will add some scans tomorrow. Wikipedia has a reasonable amount of information on the Kimberley Siege.  Would you please check the wiki Steve to confidently determine a date range that the postmark was not expected to be seen? Images are from pages I have written, that obviously will need some revision. Really grateful for this thread. I am not too sure how the letters were transported though, as the range is within the Siege period if Wikipedia dates are correct.