Anping
Departed
Rest in Peace
Posts: 533 
What I collect: Hong Kong, Aden & States & odd stuff I like.
|
Post by Anping on Oct 11, 2017 17:09:03 GMT
I realise this is perhaps a hopeless case, but I'm putting this up here on behalf of someone else for possible identification. I'm hoping someone in the US may recognise the location of this terrible quality postmark. It was applied to a block of KGVI Hong Kong definitives and may be dated around 1949. It would appear to be a 'STAtion' cancel. I'm afraid this is the best quality image that could be supplied, but then again I don't think anything of higher resolution would help: EDIT: I shouldn't bother with the likes of Retroreveal, as it makes no difference. |
|
Beryllium Guy
Moderator 
Posts: 5,654
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps 1840-1930
|
Post by Beryllium Guy on Oct 12, 2017 19:34:09 GMT
I realise this is perhaps a hopeless case, but I'm putting this up here on behalf of someone else for possible identification. I'm hoping someone in the US may recognise the location of this terrible quality postmark. It was applied to a block of KGVI Hong Kong definitives and may be dated around 1949. It would appear to be a 'STAtion' cancel. You always come up with the most interesting and challenging stuff, Anping, and this is a tough one. Here is the best I can offer after studying your scan for awhile: On the top portion of the cancellation, I think it is a city and state, and it looks like the state begins with the letter C. If that is correct, there are only three possibilities: California, Colorado, and Connecticut. Personally, I think it could be "CONN.", which is the old-time abbreviation for Connecticut (today it is CT). The city name is extremely hard to read, and I looked under Connecticut town names and found PUTNAM and DURHAM, which looked about the right length, but I could not guess beyond that. As for the bottom portion, I completely agree with the STA. for STATION. And it looks to me as if the letters in the station name are something like: XXXXXXESTER STA. Before the ESTER is less discernable. It almost looks like XXXWYLESTER, but I am not sure that would make much sense. I tried doing an internet search using the partial letter combinations, but did not get too far. Hope maybe this helps a little. |
|
Anping
Departed
Rest in Peace
Posts: 533
What I collect: Hong Kong, Aden & States & odd stuff I like.
|
Post by Anping on Oct 12, 2017 21:41:16 GMT
Beryllium Guy , a very impressive attempt. Your reading of the bottom part fits in with mine. I didn't want to influence anybody, so kept quiet. But I can only find Manchester, Winchester and Colchester. As for the upper section, your interpretation of CONN may be on the button; I thought it started with CO. But as I am not familiar with the format of US postmarks of this type, I felt I was too much out of my depth, so 'retired' at that point. Looking at a map of CT, little seems to tie up though. But then again, 70 years have passed. Thanks for looking at this.
|
|
tomiseksj
Moderator
Woodbridge, Virginia, USA
Posts: 6,265
What I collect: Worldwide stamps/covers, Cinderellas, Ohio Prepaid Sales Tax Receipts, U.S. WWII Ration ephemera
|
Post by tomiseksj on Oct 12, 2017 21:47:57 GMT
I'm curious as to why a U.S. CDS would be applied to a block of Hong Kong definitives that are void of other markings.
With regard to the postmark's quality, could it be that the ink bled while being soaked?
|
|
Beryllium Guy
Moderator
Posts: 5,654
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps 1840-1930
|
Post by Beryllium Guy on Oct 12, 2017 22:03:40 GMT
I'm curious as to why a U.S. CDS would be applied to a block of Hong Kong definitives that are void of other markings. With regard to the postmark's quality, could it be that the ink bled while being soaked? An excellent question about the CDS, Steve. Maybe Anping can tell us. This type of CDS hand-stamp is still used at post offices today, and I agree that it may be that the ink bled during soaking. I also think that it may be that the hand-stamp was over-inked in the first place, or a combination of both. Whichever way it came about, it is extremely hard to read! |
|
Beryllium Guy
Moderator
Posts: 5,654
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps 1840-1930
|
Post by Beryllium Guy on Oct 12, 2017 22:13:57 GMT
Beryllium Guy , a very impressive attempt. Your reading of the bottom part fits in with mine. I didn't want to influence anybody, so kept quiet. But I can only find Manchester, Winchester and Colchester. As for the upper section, your interpretation of CONN may be on the button; I thought it started with CO. But as I am not familiar with the format of US postmarks of this type, I felt I was too much out of my depth, so 'retired' at that point. Based on your additional comments, I did another search. I wonder if it could be WINSTED, CONN., WINCHESTER STA.? When I looked up the station names, this is the only one for which the station name was different than the town name, and it appears to me from the CDS that they are different, so I would probably rule out Manchester and Colchester, if we are right in thinking this is in Connecticut. |
|
Anping
Departed
Rest in Peace
Posts: 533
What I collect: Hong Kong, Aden & States & odd stuff I like.
|
Post by Anping on Oct 12, 2017 22:50:47 GMT
I'm curious as to why a U.S. CDS would be applied to a block of Hong Kong definitives that are void of other markings. With regard to the postmark's quality, could it be that the ink bled while being soaked? The image I showed was a cropped version of the original, which had been cancelled in Hong Kong with four partial postmarks on a block of eight. None of these postmarks showed either the month or year. I suspect that being a block of eight of low values (totalling 16 cents), these were affixed to the back of the envelope and the higher values making up the correct rate, were on the front. So this would explain a receiving mark, which was central to that block. I should add that a separate circular mark is evident to the left of the CDS. This is in the same ink. The mark just looks to be of totally indistinct lettering, which is smaller in diameter than the inner ring of the CDS. But as it is placed at about 10 o'clock to the CDS, it could not be a duplex marking. As for ink bleed: I guess this is possible if that type of stamping ink was fugitive. While I appreciate this is quite a challenge, I wouldn't want anyone to expend too much time and effort on this. After all, it will only turn out to be a common receiving mark and not an uncommon foreign postmark. I just thought I would direct this at an audience that is probably more familiar with US postmarks. Thank you all for looking at this. |
|
Anping
Departed
Rest in Peace
Posts: 533
What I collect: Hong Kong, Aden & States & odd stuff I like.
|
Post by Anping on Oct 12, 2017 23:01:39 GMT
Based on your additional comments, I did another search. I wonder if it could be WINSTED, CONN., WINCHESTER STA.? When I looked up the station names, this is the only one for which the station name was different than the town name, and it appears to me from the CDS that they are different, so I would probably rule out Manchester and Colchester, if we are right in thinking this is in Connecticut. Now that does look promising, Sherlock (err, I mean Beryllium Guy). I'll ask Mrs Hudson to bring you a fresh pot of tea and crumpets  . Seriously though, I think I shall submit this as a potential candidate to the original poster. I think you have done enough with this, so thank you again for your all your effort. Now I shall have to look out for over another equally horrible challenge for you. |
|
Anping
Departed
Rest in Peace
Posts: 533
What I collect: Hong Kong, Aden & States & odd stuff I like.
|
Post by Anping on Oct 12, 2017 23:23:49 GMT
Beryllium Guy , I have submitted your findings. We shall have to wait for the response. No doubt others will crawl out of the woodwork to tut and mutter!
|
|
.