Cape of Good Hope & Mafeking: Postmarks

Happy collecting!

530 (first stamp) is MOLTENO. A smal town in the middle of nowhere ...
824 (second stamp) is BURGHERSDORP, innside Johannesburg.

Thanks for the help stanley64 and blaamand

Thanks for that link clivel , I have just bought a large collection of S Africa ......... a mad spur of the moment decision as I have never handled these in detail before . It will be a learning situation and I do hope you and Beryllium Guy ,  might help me from time to time.
Thanks also to Vince stanley64 for the link in April to S. Africa postmarks.

I bought the collection for two reasons , there were examples of the two Baden Powell and Goodyear stamps used which I did want for my Wartime interrupted mail , and there was a challenging dozen triangles. The rest , is a mysterious area much of which I may or may not keep. Some will have to be turned into cash to recoup at least part of the purchase price .

Once I have checked the barred ovals I’ll do some posting.

Probably need to confirm the roulette gauge. I don't know if multiple roulette gauge was used, but on the genuine rouletted triangles I've see, there were 1-2 fewer slits per side

Thanks for your responses, Kim (khj ) and Alex (vikingeck ).

I agree with both of your comments that the rouletting is, indeed, suspicious in appearance.  I have actually not tried to investigate it.  I have some photos of genuinely rouletted Perkins Bacon issues from the Maxwell Joseph Collection auction catalogue, and at some point, I could try to size them for side-by-side digital comparison.

Alex, I don't know about the watermark.  Are you wondering if it is an SG22 with sideways Crown CC versus the usual anchor?  The seller only posted an image of the front of the stamp, but he identified it as an SG18, which I accepted when I saw the image.  I think it is a genuine stamp, but the question is: what happened to it since then?

At the moment, I am actually more interested in the "D" cancel and figuring out if that is identifiable or meaningful in any way.  I feel certain that I saw this cancel once before on an item offered for sale, but I cannot remember where, and I don't seem to have kept a record of the image (I checked).

Thanks for your comments, JeffS .  I think this should be the link to the original listing:

www.ebay.com/itm/224565750135?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2047675.l2557&nma=true&si=Vk%252Bt5OjpRA6vxZTAV9pG26YPt68%253D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc

I suppose I should add that I do think that the underlying stamp is absolutely genuine.  It is the "D" cancel and rouletting that make this item unusual.

Beryllium Guy - I disagree. Compare top ornaments.

My question regarding watermark, for which there is no answer , was not whether it was anchor or crown CC , but whether there is a watermark at all!

It just does not feel right somehow. Absence of a watermark would confirm my doubts.

I'm sorry @wert, they are just variations in the ink around the O making the Os appear to be at different heights.



Here's an example from my pair of the same De La Rue printed stamp, the ink has bridged the gap in the 'P'.

Thanks for your posts, michael.  I agree with your comments.  There was a lot of over-inking and colour variation in the Cape triangles.

Sorry for the dual discussion.  That is my fault.  I just wanted to have a record of my original post in a COGH-specific thread in addition to the catch-all ID thread.  I didn't expect to get responses there.  Perhaps I should just move all the posts over to the catch-all thread for now and then once the discussion dies out, move everything back to the COGH thread where it can remain.

I have already heard back from the eBay seller:
So, Alex (vikingeck), the seller confirms that he could see the watermark, so at least we know that much now.

Let's see if I can get lucky twice in the same day and get a quick response from Richard, too.