Cork Cancels On Bureau Stamps

Found a couple of trees, and one that looks like a featherduster.

Another interesting one. Either it's a man in a hat



or a locomotive...



Either way, there is a bug on it. Not sure when it met it's demise. But the forensic evidence is there, firmly attached to the stamp.




Looks to possibly be a Pharaoh Ant, entombed on the stamp, just outside the 'pyramid', for all eternity.

You may have a promising career interpreting ink blots! I see some really worn down corks, and a smear.

@cet_gg:

I'm sure you meant this for fun. It is tempting to imagine that identifying fancy cancels is nothing more than guessing at clouds. But on the sober side, can you show me anything in Cole or Skinner-Eno that was not the result of intentional design, irrespective of skill level?

Thank you both for looking, and for commenting.

essayk,

I have been pouring over the Cole and Skinner and Eno, Philamercury, Seigel, and Bill Weiss's Foreign Mail, as well as other sites, trying desperately to figure out what they might be. Gramps knew what he was looking at. I don't know why he kept the ones he did, but I would like to find out.

Since he is not here, for me to share, in delight, when I come across something close, or am puzzled, I share with the community. I know he would enjoy being a part of, if it were around during his lifetime.

I share in fun. My intent was never to make fun of, the cancels.I tried to be 'straight to the point' on this thread, as opposed to my other, I started, on Banknote Era Cancels, so it is understandable, the confusion of how serious I am taking this, and am I really only guessing at clouds?

While I do not believe I have an exact match, for what I posted here, I do believe someone made an attempt at trees, and another appears to be a featherduster. Probably not the ones in the catalog, but someone made an attempt to create/recreate it.

I didn't post the image from those catalog pages, as I did not want to infringe on any copyrights, but the link here, should get you to the pages, to show what I am looking at, and why I believe these are some version of what is there.

Cole's catalog, page 151, PI-37 through 39, are the trees I compared the above cancels to.

https://archive.org/stream/Cancella...162/mode/1up


The featherduster is on page 153, PI-69.

https://archive.org/stream/Cancella...164/mode/1up


I have at least four more pages to go through, I've not yet identified. I look forward to sharing any other cancels I might find. I already have three more I am looking at, and have in retroreveal and am attempting to see if there is an image in the catalogs, or websites it might correspond to, or come close to. These are only some of what I am finding and I have a few others that are even better than these.

My respect and admiration for the people who created these, grows, each time I see a new image, or see one on the actual stamp itself. The ones that appear in 3D just knock your socks off.

Not sure if this is going to come out right, but this is how I came to the conclusion I had some version of a tree.




This is the version of a featherduster, though it could also be someone's interpretation of a tree.

Man in a hat, using only Magic Wand, in Photoshop. I don't have anything for a reference from a catalog, anywhere close to this, but there are cancels of profiles out there. This one doesn't seem to be anything else, no matter how you rotate it.

Lastly, this is 'man on moon' one I posted on another thread, and why I think it is a version of the ones that are known as such.

cet_gg.....nice imagination.
Nothing more than a "blob" cancel

cet_gg,
These types of cancels are difficult for everyone to interpret. However, I do see some similarity to the listings that you have found.

I hope to encourage you in your endeavor to understand your forebearer's collection. In the end, your appreciation of your collection is all that matters.

Collecting is entirely based about one's interests, not anyone else's.

Your collecting interests seem to be currently most focused upon understanding the collection handed down to you. I wish you the best in understanding what you have been given and continuing it in the manner that you see as most appropriate.

Your interests are all that matters regarding what is now YOUR collection.

If I find any way to help you in what you desire, then I will gladly share it. Please continue to post what you find.

I don't have a history of philately in my family, but I do enjoy hearing about your findings about your family's history throughout time and your findings about your family's philatelic interests.

In essence, keep on doing you. That is all that matters. Deciding to share it with us is up to you for your decision. I can only speak for myself and I do appreciate you sharing.

Historical DNA Collector, than you for your time in composing such a kind and thoughtful post. I appreciate your encouragement and offer of support.

I do realize that unless there is some documentation to corroborate their true image, many 'blobs' cannot be considered an official 'fancy' cancel. They will remain 'blobs'. It is, as you said, a matter of perspective and everyone's is different... unless there is something official that says otherwise.

I did read, on pages x and xi, in the Cole catalog, how he went about deciding what to put in the catalog, and the tracings and images he had to abandon, for lack of official confirmation. Not only did he have more than could possibly be published, but not wanting to have his entire work questioned, he didn't put alot of them in, for fear they were the work of forgers.

Therefore, I know my blobs must be considered blobs, no matter what I think they look like. However, if I do ever hear of something surfacing, with images, or add to my resources, other catalogs, I have an inkling of which section to look, to find out if there is anything there.

I am examining every unidentified blob, even though there are four pages of them. I am intending to do so, since there are situations where, like the two images posted below, may look like blobs, but are actually not, according to Cole.






Had I one of these, I'd dismiss it out of hand as being a blob, if I were not so intent on trying to see what my great-grandfather saw, and being OCD to a degree, which I prefer to call 'detail-oriented' as I put in my resume.

I have studied ornithology for the past eight years. According to experts in the field, such as David Sibley, and others I have met, in my studies, the most important thing, the first thing, is to not rely on 'jizz' or your first impression, when you first see a bird. You study it, take note of many things, etc. then go back and try to ID it. I realize I 'bring that to the table' when looking at blobs. I do not want to dismiss the "Song Sparrow of cancels", out of hand, by a quick glance, because I never bothered to look for the "yellow of the Savannah Sparrow", on it, so to speak. If I dismiss a blob, I might dismiss something important that might set it apart from others.

So, like with my study of birds, I look at all the sparrows, or all the birds, and learn more about them, like I am looking at all the cancels, and learning about them. If I see something that looks similar to something in a catalog, not only am I more informed, I have a better label to put in the collection than 'Blob 1', 'Blob 2', 'Blob 3'... etc. Instead of 'Unidentified Cancels' I am going to rename it 'Unconfirmed' cancels and make note that I am not saying the blob is what I think it is... it my perspective of what it might be.

I am glad you, and others, are enjoying my blobs, and 'great imagination'.

I have more I will post soon and anyone who wishes, can also feel free to post their 'Rorschach tests'. You never know, someone might recognize it as something other than what your own personal perception of it may be.