Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
A stamp for every country (Standard) talks about things everyone interested in this endeavor would be interested in like typos on the pages or how to find a particularly elusive stamp.
This thread is for those who are interested in expanding beyond the stamps featured in the Smithsonian pages.
My proposed changes to Canada and Cuba were discussed extensively in the prior thread. I made a small change to St. Kitts as well. I can post what I settled on in a future post, but I want to discuss Central America first so we can finalize the North America, and by extension, South America, since many of the issues that affect South America applied to Central America in a more profound way.
After analyzing Europe and the enhancements that seemed to make a lot of sense there, I tried to go back and apply a similar logic to Central America. I broke down each country's history and tried to identify each era as democracy, oligarchy, military dictatorship, junta, etc. There we so many changes over short periods of time, and many administrations started as one thing and devolved into something quite different. With all of the undue influence from the CIA perverting the process, I decided to try categorizing each country as a "Banana Republic" until a certain point and then recognize them as a stable democracy. That seemed a reasonable approach until I saw that some countries (like Haiti) probably never emerged from Banana Republic status, and others are at risk of heading right back to Banana Republics.
I finally gave up and decided to stay with the Smithsonian presentation for those countries. If someone can come up with a logical treatment other than the Smithsonian pages that no more than doubles the number of stamps needed for Central America, I'm anxious to hear about it.
I will publish my amended pages (including fixes to the typos explained in the other thread) when I have them completed.
Lars
Login to Like
this post
As I mentioned in the other thread, I have started on this project. Although I will use the Smithsonian Album as the core, I wanted to make some changes (including error corrections). There are some inconsistencies in the original version which it may not be possible to remove, so I don't mind doing it the way that makes sense to me even if I add new inconsistencies.
Primarily, I didn't like the landscape format, so have reworked it into portrait.
There are other issues I am still struggling with. One is: "What is a precedent country?"
So, for Canada, I now have the country 1867-Present, and the precedent countries as: Province of Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, British Columbia, and Vancouver Island. I have moved Newfoundland to the next page as a country on its own.
Jan
Login to Like
this post
Jan,
Let's talk about that. Here is what I finally came up with for Canada:
Why would you move Newfoundland to a separate page? Granted, Newfoundland was separate until the 20th Century, but it's an integral part of Canada now.
I'm still a bit fuzzy on all of the meanings of "Precedent Countries" in the Smithsonian pages, and I think there are a few that are uncertain, but Canada seems fairly solid to me. I expanded to include two additional stamps (British Province of Canada and United Crown Colony of BC and VI).
What are your thoughts on this?
Lars
Login to Like
this post
Hi Lars,
It came down to a formatting question. I can easily put only 6 precedent countries on a single page. As Canada needs 7 or 8 (depending on BC), to include Newfoundland would have required splitting Canada over two pages. Thus Newfoundland has to be on page 2 (for me) no matter what. It looks nicer to me to leave it as its own country.
As a further rationalization, Canada was created out of the original 5 provinces (they "preceded" Canada) and Newfoundland was added later.
None of this really matters, as we both agree that Newfoundland has to appear somewhere. Both options are consistent and inconsistent with the Smithsonian Album.
This issue does come up later, though. For example, Curacao (the Dutch colony) is a precedent country for 4 current ones, but is only included under one. West Irian could be considered a precedent country of Indonesia, but is on its own. Timor (Portuguese Colony) is a precedent country for Indonesia, but could also be a precedent country for Timor Leste.
And I don't even want to get started on Germany.
Jan
Login to Like
this post
"This issue does come up later, though. For example, Curacao (the Dutch colony) is a precedent country for 4 current ones, but is only included under one. West Irian could be considered a precedent country of Indonesia, but is on its own. Timor (Portuguese Colony) is a precedent country for Indonesia, but could also be a precedent country for Timor Leste."
I like the way Smithsonian treats this. Curacao Territories became Netherlands Antilles and then Curacao and Aruba became independent (Bonaire is not - yet). There is a note under Aruba to see Netherlands Antilles for prior to 1986. Perhaps it should say "see Netherlands Antilles UNDER CURACAO". That seems a very workable plan, especially when we get to the former USSR. If you feel like there are some notes missing, please let us know.
Did you notice any other errors in North or South America?
Login to Like
this post
I agree that the comments are useful.
One last issue for me was the matter of dates - should they be philatelic or political? The Smithsonian is inconsistent. Example: Newfoundland is 1857-1947, although it didn't join Canada until 1949. (1947 was when the last stamps were issued.) Netherlands Antilles is 1948-2010, although the first stamps with this name didn't appear until 1949.
Looking closer at this, I realize that it would be a nightmare to resolve this fully. I did some looking into the Netherlands Antilles case and found the following:
Colony of Curacao and Dependencies 1873-1936
Territory of Curacao and Dependencies 1936-1948
Territory of Netherlands Antilles 1948-1954
Country of Netherlands Antilles 1954-2010
Country of Curacao 2010-Present
and I may be leaving out some details. I don't see going to this level as I'm happy with the way the Smithsonian does it, except for whether the date should be 1948 or 1949. (Both can be justified.)
Jan
Login to Like
this post
"One last issue for me was the matter of dates - should they be philatelic or political?"
I suppose they SHOULD be whatever you want them to be, but with Smithsonian they ARE philatelic. Otherwise, USA would be WAY off! It looks like a mistake when you look at Canada, but when you see 1847 for USA, it's obvious that the dates are philatelic.
"Netherlands Antilles is 1948-2010, although the first stamps with this name didn't appear until 1949."
The dates are philatelic, but that isn't based solely on the words on the stamp. Perhaps the date change was due to a change in the issuing authority. Perhaps more research is in order.
Lars
Login to Like
this post
Please see "Stamps Free For The Asking" post if interested.
Login to Like
this post
While working through the Caribbean Islands, I noticed that Leeward Islands were not there. This was a Colony that included Antigua, British Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Montserrat and St. Kitts-Nevis. It issued stamps from 1890 to 1954, and would be a precedent country for all of these.
Jan
Login to Like
this post
I can't believe you posted that! I came here to post the same thing!
I think the reason Smithsonian left it off is because each of the islands issued their own stamps. The Leeward Islands was the Colony and the islands (or island groups) were Presidencies. These Presidencies became Colonies. Smithsonian made the break at the transition from Colony to Associated State (before Independent Country) for the Caribbean. However, I was going to ask if anyone else though Leeward Islands should be included. I think I have my answer already!
I plan to add it to Montserrat because I am re-doing that page to remove Guatemala anyway. I can just add a note to the other islands to see also Montserrat.
One note you may wish to add: Dominica was transferred from British Leeward Islands to British Windward Islands in 1940.
Lars
Login to Like
this post
We discussed this earlier, but I also added Spanish West Indies to Cuba. The Cuba stamps numbered 1-3,9-14,17-21,32-34,35A-37,39-41,43-45,47-49,51-53, and 55-57 were also used in Puerto Rico.
I couldn't find anything similar for French West Indies.
Login to Like
this post
I have scanned all of my new expanded pages for North and South America and will offer then up for critique later, but I posted some observations relevant to all OFEC collectors on the Simplified thread.
Lars
Login to Like
this post
I have FINALLY completed my first cut at the EXPANDED version of the Smithsonian pages! On the first iteration I tried to gain consensus for several decisions and I quickly found out that leads to chaos! Instead, I took many of the inspirations I got from several contributors and set out to create an expanded (and hopefully consistent and coherent) set of pages. I didn't want to expand the number of stamps too much (at last count I have a 16% increase over the Smithsonian pages), but I wanted a bit more complete picture. I also didn't want to expand into multiple volumes, so I kept with the Smithsonian practice of only showing selected examples of Offices Abroad, Local Stamps, Occupations, International Organizations, and Military Stamps. I also carefully selected which stamps to use in an effort to minimize the number of additional pages needed. I will create 6 different threads to cover the different areas:
North and South America
Europe
Africa
Asia
Oceania and Antarctica
Other Entities
Cheers!
Lars
Login to Like
this post
I was looking over my early French stamps, and realized that France consists of several more "countries" than I had realized.
France 2nd Republic: Scott 1-11.
2nd Empire:Scott 12-37.
Provisional Government based in Bordeaux: 38-48
French government in besieged Paris: Soctt 54, 57, 59. These were the stamps used on the balloons flying over the German army to get the mail out.
3rd Republic
Vichy
Free France
4th Republic
5th Republic.
Login to Like
this post
You should definitely bring that up when we get to France on the Europe page. I hadn't planned to load those pages to Europe until Tuesday to give everyone a chance to make their points on what we have so far, but I can go ahead and load France now so you can post your comments there. Look for the Europe thread.
Thanks!
Lars
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Was the Duchy of Limburg (1839-1867 version) a country? It appeared on maps, and was formally a member of the German Confederation, but as far as I can tell was not an administrative unit. For all practical purposes, it was an integral part of the Netherlands including its postal system. Maybe there was some customs arrangement.
When Belgium broke off from the Netherlands, it took 2/3 of Luxembourg, a German Confederation member with it, so in compensation, a chunk of Dutch Limburg with an equivalent population was added as a German Confederation member state, with the King of Netherlands taking on the title of its Duke. The main cities, Maastricht and Venlo, were excluded, though Maastricht remained its capital.
It did not issue stamps, but I am including postmarks from non-stamp-issuing states in my own collection of all countries, so figure I should find Netherlands stamps postmarked in one of the towns that were part of the duchy.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Hi Greaden,
That was a thought-provoking post on Limburg. Thanks for that.
This German wikipedia article is a good read on the power politics relating to the duchy:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herzogtum_Limburg_(1839%E2%80%931866)
Login to Like
this post
Thanks to Google Translate, that German Wikipedia article answered a lot of my questions. The English Wikipedia piece was not so helpful.
The Duchy of Limburg was an ambiguous entity, but those ambiguities were very much a part of the story of the German Confederation, so I will include it in the scope of my collection.
Login to Like
this post
Please post your comments to the relevant continents where possible. This will turn into a tangle rather quickly otherwise.
Look for these threads:
A stamp for every country -
North and South America
Europe
Africa
Asia
Oceania and Antarctica
Other Entities
Login to Like
this post
I understood that the continent threads were for comments on the Smithsonian framework, while this thread was for discussion on larger questions for those attempting a geographically and historically comprehensive collection beyond the Smithsonian parameters.
Login to Like
this post
I'm sorry for the confusion!
Initially I split the thread into (Standard) and (Expanded). I only post things on Standard that even those limiting themselves to the Smithsonian pages would care about. I was about to dump a LOT of data on Expanded so I placed a note to see the individual sections so discussions didn't become impossible to follow. ALL of the sectional threads are for expanded. I am placing my expanded pages out there as a starting point for discussion. (Only about 10% of the pages are original Smithsonian pages). All comments are welcome, but in the end we all get to decide what we want to include in our own expanded version.
Lars
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Thank you. the whole discussion fascinates me, as I am looking for all countries, very broadly defined, and including a sampling of their key historical moments. I look at the Smithsonian pages to see if I missed some place or interesting time, but I am not looking to collect only one of each, but to make sure I do not omit any regime.
Login to Like
this post
I am not sure where to draw the line for locals. Pre-protectorate Moroccan locals are a fascinating moment in postal history, but if I start tracking down all locals, I would have to deal with Russian Zemstvos, and those would require an extremely long life and a very deep pocket.
There is a blurry line between locals and outright fantasy issues. For my own collection, I go for the fantasies for pure amusement, but they do not count towards my goal of a comprehensive collection of all countries, regimes,and occupations.
Login to Like
this post
"I am not looking to collect only one of each, but to make sure I do not omit any regime. "
That's pretty much where I'm coming from. That's why you will see me split EVERY Eastern European country between Socialist Republic and Republic, and why I split Cuba in 1959 even thought the name didn't change. It's why I COMPLETELY reorganized Europe to keep the Balkans together. Please contrast the Smithsonian pages from what I am displaying. I think I may be displaying a first cut at what you are looking to do. Hopefully this will at least help a bit.
The pages I am showing on the other 6 threads are mostly pages I altered myself. I've added over 100 stamps to the Smithsonian pages so I had to mostly re-print everything.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
"I am not sure where to draw the line for locals."
You draw the line where you WANT to draw the line. The Smithsonian pages have three pages of local stamps, with a total of 22 stamps. I plan to pursue them all on the blind assumption that they knew what they were doing selecting those 22 stamps to be key. However, I already have an entire page worth of locals that I plan to ADD to my collection (page 123A, I suppose), and I also plan to add a page of fakes that I have found in my endeavors. There could be more, who knows, but the only thing I won't do lightly is REMOVE something from Smithsonian base. Those are few, far between, and for a damned good reason!
We all want to feel validated in our choices, but if you START with Smithsonian, only subtract stamps with well documented cause, and add a few more to boot, how can you go wrong?
Come join us in the 6 threads and see what you think!
Lars
Login to Like
this post
I split the prior thread (A stamp for every country) into two threads.
A stamp for every country (Standard) talks about things everyone interested in this endeavor would be interested in like typos on the pages or how to find a particularly elusive stamp.
This thread is for those who are interested in expanding beyond the stamps featured in the Smithsonian pages.
My proposed changes to Canada and Cuba were discussed extensively in the prior thread. I made a small change to St. Kitts as well. I can post what I settled on in a future post, but I want to discuss Central America first so we can finalize the North America, and by extension, South America, since many of the issues that affect South America applied to Central America in a more profound way.
After analyzing Europe and the enhancements that seemed to make a lot of sense there, I tried to go back and apply a similar logic to Central America. I broke down each country's history and tried to identify each era as democracy, oligarchy, military dictatorship, junta, etc. There we so many changes over short periods of time, and many administrations started as one thing and devolved into something quite different. With all of the undue influence from the CIA perverting the process, I decided to try categorizing each country as a "Banana Republic" until a certain point and then recognize them as a stable democracy. That seemed a reasonable approach until I saw that some countries (like Haiti) probably never emerged from Banana Republic status, and others are at risk of heading right back to Banana Republics.
I finally gave up and decided to stay with the Smithsonian presentation for those countries. If someone can come up with a logical treatment other than the Smithsonian pages that no more than doubles the number of stamps needed for Central America, I'm anxious to hear about it.
I will publish my amended pages (including fixes to the typos explained in the other thread) when I have them completed.
Lars
Login to Like
this post
11:17:38pm
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
As I mentioned in the other thread, I have started on this project. Although I will use the Smithsonian Album as the core, I wanted to make some changes (including error corrections). There are some inconsistencies in the original version which it may not be possible to remove, so I don't mind doing it the way that makes sense to me even if I add new inconsistencies.
Primarily, I didn't like the landscape format, so have reworked it into portrait.
There are other issues I am still struggling with. One is: "What is a precedent country?"
So, for Canada, I now have the country 1867-Present, and the precedent countries as: Province of Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, British Columbia, and Vancouver Island. I have moved Newfoundland to the next page as a country on its own.
Jan
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
Jan,
Let's talk about that. Here is what I finally came up with for Canada:
Why would you move Newfoundland to a separate page? Granted, Newfoundland was separate until the 20th Century, but it's an integral part of Canada now.
I'm still a bit fuzzy on all of the meanings of "Precedent Countries" in the Smithsonian pages, and I think there are a few that are uncertain, but Canada seems fairly solid to me. I expanded to include two additional stamps (British Province of Canada and United Crown Colony of BC and VI).
What are your thoughts on this?
Lars
Login to Like
this post
12:03:41pm
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
Hi Lars,
It came down to a formatting question. I can easily put only 6 precedent countries on a single page. As Canada needs 7 or 8 (depending on BC), to include Newfoundland would have required splitting Canada over two pages. Thus Newfoundland has to be on page 2 (for me) no matter what. It looks nicer to me to leave it as its own country.
As a further rationalization, Canada was created out of the original 5 provinces (they "preceded" Canada) and Newfoundland was added later.
None of this really matters, as we both agree that Newfoundland has to appear somewhere. Both options are consistent and inconsistent with the Smithsonian Album.
This issue does come up later, though. For example, Curacao (the Dutch colony) is a precedent country for 4 current ones, but is only included under one. West Irian could be considered a precedent country of Indonesia, but is on its own. Timor (Portuguese Colony) is a precedent country for Indonesia, but could also be a precedent country for Timor Leste.
And I don't even want to get started on Germany.
Jan
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
"This issue does come up later, though. For example, Curacao (the Dutch colony) is a precedent country for 4 current ones, but is only included under one. West Irian could be considered a precedent country of Indonesia, but is on its own. Timor (Portuguese Colony) is a precedent country for Indonesia, but could also be a precedent country for Timor Leste."
I like the way Smithsonian treats this. Curacao Territories became Netherlands Antilles and then Curacao and Aruba became independent (Bonaire is not - yet). There is a note under Aruba to see Netherlands Antilles for prior to 1986. Perhaps it should say "see Netherlands Antilles UNDER CURACAO". That seems a very workable plan, especially when we get to the former USSR. If you feel like there are some notes missing, please let us know.
Did you notice any other errors in North or South America?
Login to Like
this post
11:15:40am
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
I agree that the comments are useful.
One last issue for me was the matter of dates - should they be philatelic or political? The Smithsonian is inconsistent. Example: Newfoundland is 1857-1947, although it didn't join Canada until 1949. (1947 was when the last stamps were issued.) Netherlands Antilles is 1948-2010, although the first stamps with this name didn't appear until 1949.
Looking closer at this, I realize that it would be a nightmare to resolve this fully. I did some looking into the Netherlands Antilles case and found the following:
Colony of Curacao and Dependencies 1873-1936
Territory of Curacao and Dependencies 1936-1948
Territory of Netherlands Antilles 1948-1954
Country of Netherlands Antilles 1954-2010
Country of Curacao 2010-Present
and I may be leaving out some details. I don't see going to this level as I'm happy with the way the Smithsonian does it, except for whether the date should be 1948 or 1949. (Both can be justified.)
Jan
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
"One last issue for me was the matter of dates - should they be philatelic or political?"
I suppose they SHOULD be whatever you want them to be, but with Smithsonian they ARE philatelic. Otherwise, USA would be WAY off! It looks like a mistake when you look at Canada, but when you see 1847 for USA, it's obvious that the dates are philatelic.
"Netherlands Antilles is 1948-2010, although the first stamps with this name didn't appear until 1949."
The dates are philatelic, but that isn't based solely on the words on the stamp. Perhaps the date change was due to a change in the issuing authority. Perhaps more research is in order.
Lars
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
Please see "Stamps Free For The Asking" post if interested.
Login to Like
this post
12:22:02am
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
While working through the Caribbean Islands, I noticed that Leeward Islands were not there. This was a Colony that included Antigua, British Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Montserrat and St. Kitts-Nevis. It issued stamps from 1890 to 1954, and would be a precedent country for all of these.
Jan
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
I can't believe you posted that! I came here to post the same thing!
I think the reason Smithsonian left it off is because each of the islands issued their own stamps. The Leeward Islands was the Colony and the islands (or island groups) were Presidencies. These Presidencies became Colonies. Smithsonian made the break at the transition from Colony to Associated State (before Independent Country) for the Caribbean. However, I was going to ask if anyone else though Leeward Islands should be included. I think I have my answer already!
I plan to add it to Montserrat because I am re-doing that page to remove Guatemala anyway. I can just add a note to the other islands to see also Montserrat.
One note you may wish to add: Dominica was transferred from British Leeward Islands to British Windward Islands in 1940.
Lars
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
We discussed this earlier, but I also added Spanish West Indies to Cuba. The Cuba stamps numbered 1-3,9-14,17-21,32-34,35A-37,39-41,43-45,47-49,51-53, and 55-57 were also used in Puerto Rico.
I couldn't find anything similar for French West Indies.
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
I have scanned all of my new expanded pages for North and South America and will offer then up for critique later, but I posted some observations relevant to all OFEC collectors on the Simplified thread.
Lars
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
I have FINALLY completed my first cut at the EXPANDED version of the Smithsonian pages! On the first iteration I tried to gain consensus for several decisions and I quickly found out that leads to chaos! Instead, I took many of the inspirations I got from several contributors and set out to create an expanded (and hopefully consistent and coherent) set of pages. I didn't want to expand the number of stamps too much (at last count I have a 16% increase over the Smithsonian pages), but I wanted a bit more complete picture. I also didn't want to expand into multiple volumes, so I kept with the Smithsonian practice of only showing selected examples of Offices Abroad, Local Stamps, Occupations, International Organizations, and Military Stamps. I also carefully selected which stamps to use in an effort to minimize the number of additional pages needed. I will create 6 different threads to cover the different areas:
North and South America
Europe
Africa
Asia
Oceania and Antarctica
Other Entities
Cheers!
Lars
Login to Like
this post
09:38:11pm
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
I was looking over my early French stamps, and realized that France consists of several more "countries" than I had realized.
France 2nd Republic: Scott 1-11.
2nd Empire:Scott 12-37.
Provisional Government based in Bordeaux: 38-48
French government in besieged Paris: Soctt 54, 57, 59. These were the stamps used on the balloons flying over the German army to get the mail out.
3rd Republic
Vichy
Free France
4th Republic
5th Republic.
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
You should definitely bring that up when we get to France on the Europe page. I hadn't planned to load those pages to Europe until Tuesday to give everyone a chance to make their points on what we have so far, but I can go ahead and load France now so you can post your comments there. Look for the Europe thread.
Thanks!
Lars
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
04:32:05pm
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
Was the Duchy of Limburg (1839-1867 version) a country? It appeared on maps, and was formally a member of the German Confederation, but as far as I can tell was not an administrative unit. For all practical purposes, it was an integral part of the Netherlands including its postal system. Maybe there was some customs arrangement.
When Belgium broke off from the Netherlands, it took 2/3 of Luxembourg, a German Confederation member with it, so in compensation, a chunk of Dutch Limburg with an equivalent population was added as a German Confederation member state, with the King of Netherlands taking on the title of its Duke. The main cities, Maastricht and Venlo, were excluded, though Maastricht remained its capital.
It did not issue stamps, but I am including postmarks from non-stamp-issuing states in my own collection of all countries, so figure I should find Netherlands stamps postmarked in one of the towns that were part of the duchy.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
Hi Greaden,
That was a thought-provoking post on Limburg. Thanks for that.
This German wikipedia article is a good read on the power politics relating to the duchy:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herzogtum_Limburg_(1839%E2%80%931866)
Login to Like
this post
06:28:08pm
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
Thanks to Google Translate, that German Wikipedia article answered a lot of my questions. The English Wikipedia piece was not so helpful.
The Duchy of Limburg was an ambiguous entity, but those ambiguities were very much a part of the story of the German Confederation, so I will include it in the scope of my collection.
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
Please post your comments to the relevant continents where possible. This will turn into a tangle rather quickly otherwise.
Look for these threads:
A stamp for every country -
North and South America
Europe
Africa
Asia
Oceania and Antarctica
Other Entities
Login to Like
this post
11:50:10pm
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
I understood that the continent threads were for comments on the Smithsonian framework, while this thread was for discussion on larger questions for those attempting a geographically and historically comprehensive collection beyond the Smithsonian parameters.
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
I'm sorry for the confusion!
Initially I split the thread into (Standard) and (Expanded). I only post things on Standard that even those limiting themselves to the Smithsonian pages would care about. I was about to dump a LOT of data on Expanded so I placed a note to see the individual sections so discussions didn't become impossible to follow. ALL of the sectional threads are for expanded. I am placing my expanded pages out there as a starting point for discussion. (Only about 10% of the pages are original Smithsonian pages). All comments are welcome, but in the end we all get to decide what we want to include in our own expanded version.
Lars
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
10:16:19pm
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
Thank you. the whole discussion fascinates me, as I am looking for all countries, very broadly defined, and including a sampling of their key historical moments. I look at the Smithsonian pages to see if I missed some place or interesting time, but I am not looking to collect only one of each, but to make sure I do not omit any regime.
Login to Like
this post
10:48:40pm
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
I am not sure where to draw the line for locals. Pre-protectorate Moroccan locals are a fascinating moment in postal history, but if I start tracking down all locals, I would have to deal with Russian Zemstvos, and those would require an extremely long life and a very deep pocket.
There is a blurry line between locals and outright fantasy issues. For my own collection, I go for the fantasies for pure amusement, but they do not count towards my goal of a comprehensive collection of all countries, regimes,and occupations.
Login to Like
this post
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
"I am not looking to collect only one of each, but to make sure I do not omit any regime. "
That's pretty much where I'm coming from. That's why you will see me split EVERY Eastern European country between Socialist Republic and Republic, and why I split Cuba in 1959 even thought the name didn't change. It's why I COMPLETELY reorganized Europe to keep the Balkans together. Please contrast the Smithsonian pages from what I am displaying. I think I may be displaying a first cut at what you are looking to do. Hopefully this will at least help a bit.
The pages I am showing on the other 6 threads are mostly pages I altered myself. I've added over 100 stamps to the Smithsonian pages so I had to mostly re-print everything.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: A stamp for every country (Expanded)
"I am not sure where to draw the line for locals."
You draw the line where you WANT to draw the line. The Smithsonian pages have three pages of local stamps, with a total of 22 stamps. I plan to pursue them all on the blind assumption that they knew what they were doing selecting those 22 stamps to be key. However, I already have an entire page worth of locals that I plan to ADD to my collection (page 123A, I suppose), and I also plan to add a page of fakes that I have found in my endeavors. There could be more, who knows, but the only thing I won't do lightly is REMOVE something from Smithsonian base. Those are few, far between, and for a damned good reason!
We all want to feel validated in our choices, but if you START with Smithsonian, only subtract stamps with well documented cause, and add a few more to boot, how can you go wrong?
Come join us in the 6 threads and see what you think!
Lars
Login to Like
this post