Maybe they were used in 1962. Many older issues were still valid as postage many decades after their issue date - that's true for many countries. If I'm not mistaken, I believe almost every USA stamp issued is still valid for postage - excepting CSA issues of course! Although I doubt many folks would want to use classic 19th century mint USA to mail the electric bill.
Theresa is correct for general issue postage stamps.
The primary exception is US postage stamps issued before January 1, 1862 were demonetized and no longer valid for postage.
Yes, I would agree that the postmark is 1962 on those Swedish stamps. That is the correct circular date postmark for that time period, and the stamps used are still near minimum value stamps when in unused condition.
Thanks all, I hadn't thought of 1962
John
I have some Swedish on piece that have me perplexed.
I'm obviously reading the postmark incorrectly because I'm getting the year as 62 (1862?) but to the best of my knowledge the stamps are from one of the 1910/12 Coat of Arms issue.
Scan 1 The Piece
Scan 2 The Postmark
My Thanks if anyone can explain this.
John
re: Help required reading Swedish Postmark
Maybe they were used in 1962. Many older issues were still valid as postage many decades after their issue date - that's true for many countries. If I'm not mistaken, I believe almost every USA stamp issued is still valid for postage - excepting CSA issues of course! Although I doubt many folks would want to use classic 19th century mint USA to mail the electric bill.
re: Help required reading Swedish Postmark
Theresa is correct for general issue postage stamps.
The primary exception is US postage stamps issued before January 1, 1862 were demonetized and no longer valid for postage.
re: Help required reading Swedish Postmark
Yes, I would agree that the postmark is 1962 on those Swedish stamps. That is the correct circular date postmark for that time period, and the stamps used are still near minimum value stamps when in unused condition.
re: Help required reading Swedish Postmark
Thanks all, I hadn't thought of 1962
John