Help Identifying This Great Britian Stamp.

Is this an 1883 - 1884 83A? Also what is the blue line across this stamps? Thanks!

Not sure what you mean by 83A. If you're referring to the Stanley Gibbons catalogue number, it's probably 183a , judging by the colour of the stamp and of the paper. It would probably qualify for the premium of 50% for well-centred and lightly used, but the stamp itself looks a bit faded, especially the southwest quadrant, and I believe the diagonal blue crayon mark which crosses the base of Queen Victoria's neck, and which, I believe indicates a registered post usage might knock a bit off the value, still, very nice stamp. The Scott number would be 109

Lovely socked on the nose postmark.
WARRINGTON code at top A (A new discovery for the database)
Codes Known P

The blue wax crayon, as suggested by wadds, is indeed indication of
Registration of cover

Being as the stamp is 10/- I am also wondering, if these crayons were used to cancel stamps on parcels, of this, I am not aware.

The History

Looks like a pretty decently centered stamp and clear/clean cancel. It may be an artifact of the scan, but it looks like maybe the stamp was repaired? Is that a long tear I see going from to through the "A" in POSTAGE and into the cancel area?

I've been looking for a good copy of the 10/- for several years now. Most that turn up have worse cosmetic issues.

Many suffer at the hands of a heavy datestamp or parcel cancellation, and for actually being on a parcel.

Finding nice examples is a challenge, but be prepared to pay a little more.

I agree with KHJ ........That stamp was also played with ,the blue crayon line looks cleaned away from the cancel and away from areas were ink is present .

If your question is whether this is the bluish paper or whitish paper stamp:

Although it is not possible to be certain from the scan, I think it is the whitish paper stamp.

The 1892 cancellation is extremely late for bluish paper that was used for a very short period just after it was first issued. The "it is a very expensive stamp that saw little use and may have been lying around" argument sometimes used is not impossible, but extremely unlikely.

The issues with the quality and the blue line have been addressed.

EKU earliest known use 23rd May 1889

Rod,

What EKU? The stamp was issued in 1884, and you, earlier, wrote




If it is a newly discovered cancellation, where does this EKU come from?

Oops. I always quote from impressions in a database.
The Warrington 1889 was the only stamp thus far in record

The single ring WARRINGTON (code at top) only submitted example was Code A (1889)

Now we have a code P. (1892)
Has nothing to do with stamp date emission.

It is / was a community enterprise to locate all GB pmks (and... heaps of fun)

I had a suspicion, that is why I asked.
I expect there will be quite a lot of cancellers that may have an earlier or later date of use than those identified so far.
The chance is the earliest and latest uses have not survived or, if they are, do not have a clear or full date.

Absolutely, but where community input is strong, esp with the early Queen Victorian, it is always nice to see "dates of usage known" no matter how flawed that may be.

It is not unusual to find a hammer impression 5 years earlier or later, than that known.

I have found in excess of 40 postmarks (known to exist) but not seen digitally prior.

Appreciate all the help. This forum is a fantastic source of information. Thanks.

Hi Rod,

In your earlier post it looks like you reversed the code versus year.

Just to keep your database cortect, it should be - Code A = 1892 and Code P = 1889.

Thanks Stamporator.
Sheesh, I am human after all.
Apologies for typos