It is currently Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:22 am (UTC [ DST ])



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
 Post subject: 6d pale buff SG123 J79(5) earliest use
PostPosted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 6:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:15 pm
Posts: 31
Location: Buckinghamshire.
I have a J79(5) with cds 1 Oct 1872 but SG Specialised gives 19 Oct 1872 for J79(5) pale buff. It really looks pale buff rather than pale chestnut (see my pale chestnut attached). Does anyone know where the 19 Oct date comes from that SG are stating? Could this be an approximate date, earliest known date or is it based on printers evidence?
Attached I show the pale buff in question 'FA' with another pale buff 'LE' and a pale chestnut 'NI' for comparison.
Regards
Phil


Attachments:
File comment: SG123 J79
SG123 plate 11 J79.jpg
(709.61 KiB)
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 6d pale buff SG123 J79(5) earliest use
PostPosted: Thu Oct 30, 2014 9:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 8:59 pm
Posts: 4
Keep in mind that the dates in cancels are not 100% reliable. For example, in the one you've got, there could be a digit missing (1, 2 or 3) in front of the 1, meaning it was actually cancelled on Oct. 11 or 21 or 31, rather than Oct. 1. This could happen if the little metal number was set wrong in the hammer and didn't make contact (or else it could have fallen out altogether). I have examples from smaller towns where the clerk actually filled in the date in manuscript ~ talk about a conscientious employee!
Looking in my older (10th) edition of the Victoria Specialized, I see the date for J79(5) is given as 25 Oct 72. So I'm guessing it's an EKU, and that a slightly earlier example must have come to light between editions. Perhaps you've trumped them all with an Oct. 1 date, but I wouldn't be 100% certain of it.
Of course, it could simply be a pale chestnut example, too.
Hope this helps a little.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 6d pale buff SG123 J79(5) earliest use
PostPosted: Thu Oct 30, 2014 10:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 8:59 pm
Posts: 4
As you can see from these two examples, dates could be faulty. The one on the left is a Dublin cancel missing the year date altogether (most likely 1872, but who knows?) and the one on the right has had the date (24) inserted in pen-and-ink, presumably by a conscientious postal clerk.
File comment: 1s Green SG 117 plate 6 with CDS date errors
1s cds date errors.JPG
(600.48 KiB)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 6d pale buff SG123 J79(5) earliest use
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2014 4:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:15 pm
Posts: 31
Location: Buckinghamshire.
Matthew
Thanks so much. You may be right it could have lost a digit so maybe 11,21,31 as you state. I suppose it's not definitive enough to push for a new EDU. Were the regs to precede a 1 with 0 as 01? Rather than a single 1.
I doubt the shade is other than pale buff as the experienced dealer discounted that idea as it was my very first question. Also I have other pale buffs and pale chestnuts and it's not like a pale chestnut.
Again thank you for sharing your knowledge.
Phil


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 6d pale buff SG123 J79(5) earliest use
PostPosted: Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:15 pm
Posts: 31
Location: Buckinghamshire.
I can now answer my own unanswered question.
It is an "earliest used date " on the pale buff in SG catalogue comes from a cds strip with 19 Oct 1872 acknowledged by Gibbons. That ends that. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group