Victoria - Help With Barred Numeral Cancels Pls!

Can anyone pls identify the following Victorian stamps with barred numeral cancels?

Scarcity ratings would also be appreciated, if you happen to know them.

11 (SOLVED: Williamstown):



15 (Geelong?) Not a barred numeral cancel. This cancel has horizontal rather than the usual vertical lines next to the numeral. Does anybody know what kind of cancel this is?



355 (SOLVED: Warracknabeal):



This one could be rare: according to this website, the rating is 'RRRRR type 3. .....Rated S type 3R.' I'm not sure what that means, but it seems that type 3 is rare but not type 3R.

http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopi...f=33&t=17108

1384 (SOLVED: Clifton Hill):



Not sure if this is rare or not - the same webpage writes: 'RRRRR Non Duplex large figures.'

Thanks for looking!

jj, I'm at work - will be home in about 4 hours and then I'll get onto it.

Balf

Thanks, MmmmBalf!

I also have a couple more to add, as well as what appears to me to be something of an oddity, a three-ring cancel.

Jimjamtwo

15 = Gelong
355 = Warracknebeal
384 = Jan Juc
I'm not sure about the scarcity ratings

Two more barred numeral cancels:

98 (SOLVED: Malmesbury):



The website referred to above writes, 'RRR type A2. .....R 1st duplex. .....Rated SS type A2R.'

142(-):



And last, possibly also of interest, Melbourne cds with enigmatic information in the centre:

Thanks for looking in, Aussie Al!

It can't be '384' then, as the place name endd in 'hill.' It must therefore be '1384' (Clifton Hill).

With '15' (Geelong), the cancel seems to have horizontal lines, not vertical, next to the numeral. I'm also wondering what kind of cancel it is.

Ok, starting from the top :-

11 - Williamstown, 3rd duplex, issued around 1894. Not rated

The 2nd stamp is actually not 15, but MC over 15, which is 1115. When they reached numbers starting at 1000, they decided to change the format to half Roman numeral and half normal - so 1001 was M1, 1360 would be MCCC over 60 etc. The Roman numeral part represented the thousand and hundreds, then underneath would be the tens in normal numbers. Except for the 1000 series where the number was beside the M. For the Romans, the bars beside the numerals were horizontal. They later abandoned this idea, so you will sometimes see issues that had a Roman with a reissued normal numeral. Anything after 1600 was always just normal numerals, they'd decided by then to change. So your 1115 is Trafalgar, not rated.

355 - Warracknabeal. Unfortunately not the rare one. Type 3 has 2 side bars. Type 3R has no side bars but yours is the duplex, indicated by the sloping figures.

1384 - Clifton Hill. The non duplex RRRRR rated is the Roman numeral style, so MCCC over 84 with large figures. They later did a MCCC over 84 with smaller figures, then a straight 1384 duplex, which yours is. So not rated.

In your second group :-

98 - Malmsbury. Some better news here This is the 1st duplex and has an R rating. So not the RRR Type A2, which has 2 side bars, but better than nothing. I'll explain the ratings at the bottom of the post for those interested.

1427 - Korumburra (the 7 has a prominent serif you can just see.) Duplex, not rated.

All I can tell you about the next one is that it's a NSW cancel. After 13 October, 1910, all stamps became interchangeable and could be used anywhere in the Commonwealth. Why that date is a long story involving "book-keeping" clauses in the constitution so each state wasn't disadvantaged when Federation took place in 1901. So you sometimes see other state cancellations for stamps issued or in use from 1910 onwards. Not that common, although not specifically rated. May attract collector interest.

Can't help with the last one, I don't do cds

For anyone not familiar with the ranking system to rate rarity, this is how it works:

NNR - Number not recorded. Means none have ever been sighted.
RRRRR - 1 to 3 examples thought to exist.
RRRR - 4 to 12 examples thought to exist.
RRR - 13 to 24 examples thought to exist.
RR - 25 to 50 examples thought to exist.
R - 51 to 100 examples thought to exist.
SS - 101 to 200 examples thought to exist.
S - 201 to 300 examples thought to exist.

So you can see that even your R rated numeral is pretty rare! Rarer than most stamps.

Balf

Balf, I appreciate the opportunity to have had the benefit of your expertise. Even if none of the cancels have turned out to be that rare, I wouldn't have even been able to work out which duplex cancel was which (there seem to have been so many of them!)

For readers perplexed by the reference to a NSW cancel, I moved the stamp with that cancel to a new thread since it seemed an entirely different kettle of fish.

Balf, just one more, if I may!

I wasn't going to ask about this one, as it gives very little information to go on, but the digit seems to be a '7' and the legible letters in the placename appear to be 'AIN.'

As '7' is Creswick' Creek, I figure it must be a two-digit number. However, in the aforementioned list of Victorian bar cancels there is no place with 'AIN' in the name which has a two-digit numeral starting with '7.'

The five visible letters seem to spell 'MAINE' - if so, the only contender is 'CASTELMAINE,' but the only numeral for that location is '3.'

If it's a '3,' not a '7,' which is always possible, then it has to be 'CASTLEMAINE.'

What do you think?

I do not think it is a 7 as the bottom sideways bar prevents that. Not having any to compare to though I couldn't say whether it is a 2 or a 3.

Nice stamps and cancels, great thread.

You were right, it is Castlemaine. It's the fifth duplex, issued in 1886 & in use till 1900. Not rated. It's smudged so that the ball on the end of the bottom curl of the number has joined the downward stroke from the top bar.

Balf

Thanks for the info, Balf!