Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
A case in point is the Czechoslovak set, issued 20 March 1973 - six stamps, each depicting two people, and described in the Stanley Gibbons catalogue as "Czechoslovak Martyrs during World War II".
Well, up to a point. If the Czech postal authorities in those communist days described their stamps thus, then that sends us a message worth considering. If the Gibbons catalogue editors (unnamed in my 1977 edition) supplied the attribution, its accuracy leaves a little to be desired.
To be specific, of these six pairs, the first features two army officers who 'turned' their units on the Eastern Front so that they ended up fighting on the Soviet side (of whom one was killed in action). The third shows two non-combatant politicians who survived the war (one in Britain, one in the USSR) only to be purged in internecine squabbling in the 1950s.
An attribution supplied by the Czech post under the heavy-handed post-Prague-Spring Husak government might describe Clementis and Smidke (the politicians) as 'martyrs', though 'during World War II' is stretching a point. Sochor, the turncoat army officer who survived the war, perished five years later in a road accident, or, given the tenor of those times, 'a road accident'. If these three were 'martyrs', done away with by hardline Stalinists, then that softens the image of the Husak regime.
If, though, it is all a matter of catalogue editors, then all bets are off. So the question is: how do Messrs Scott and Michel describe this set?
Clementis and Smidke - martyrs of World War II, or victims of Stalinist purges?
Login to Like
this post
08:00:31am
Interesting post.
Scott gives the names of each, and the summary of the set as "Fighters against and victims of Fascism and Nazism during German Occupation".
Michel describes the set as "Widerstandskämpfer", which I would translate to Resistance Fighters.
Roy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
"Are they provided by the stamp-issuing entity (in which case you could say they are authoritative, even if you might cavil at their accuracy), or do the catalogue editors take a look at the stamps and come up with their own description (in which case they may be susceptible to the occasional carelessness)?"
I have wondered this myself. Researching newspaper articles for early Australian stamps, some titles are just plainly wrong. Seems that once tagged, all the other catalogues just simply follow each other.
My favorite is this one...
Seems to be generally titled "Marriage of Princes Elizabeth". But where is the groom? Then I did some research and found this article from "The Age" 12th March 1947...
(Just discovered this site does not allow png files!)
Few articles later, apparently there was some toing and froing, (apparently the King wanted the word "The" added) and it kind of missed the birthday deadline. When it was released, newspapers just had the stamp as one of the princess, no mention of her birthday.
But 50 years later, there is another stamp celebrating 50 years of the Queen's birthday stamps.
So I guess all the catalogues have it wrong. The stamp has nothing to do with the marriage of the young princess!
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Colnect (online catalog) provides an easy means of submitting enhancements (including corrections) to their data - there is a link in every listing - and, in my experience, often accepts them.
Stampworld not so much.
Cheers,
/s/ ikeyPikey
Login to Like
this post
As I've been creating my USA album one stamp at a time, I've noticed that the title of each stamp in Scott's Specialized is lacking, and not what I want in my album over the stamp.
For instance the 1957 Scott 1089 is titled "Architects Issue". Where the text below, and on the stamp itself, is "American Institute of Architects Centenary". That's what I put in my album as it better describes why the stamp was issued.
Login to Like
this post
Thanks, Roy, for that information. Scott's somewhat inelegant attribution nevertheless seems more accurate than either Gibbons or Michel. The soldiers Nalepka and Sochor certainly fought against Nazism, and the eight unfortunates featured on four of the remaining stamps were all victims in one way or another. That leaves the communist officials Clementis, interned in a British camp, who broadcast anti-Nazi messages across the airwaves from London, and Smidke, who did much the same to Czech troops in Russia from Moscow.
For what it is worth, the latter two just about scrape into my 'Resistance' category, but the soldiers do not.
The other posts on this thread support the idea that it is catalogue editors, rather than Postal Administrations, who are responsible for some of the more irritating examples of misattribution. Colnect, for the set under review, has "Fighters Against Nazism and Fascism", better than Gibbons, but not as accurate as Scott.
Login to Like
this post
Hi Guthrum,
I see from Wikipedia that Karol Shmidke was sent back to Slovakia in 1943 as a communist party/resistance organiser.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
To complicate things further: not only catalogs, but also designers and stamp issuing authorities may go wrong in their attributions.
Here's a stamp from Ghadames - a part of Libya occupied by the French after WWII:
A set of these stamps was issued in 1949. The designer has identified the cross as the ‘Croix d’Agadem‘ as you can see on the stamp. However, the cross is actually the cross of Agadez – a symbol used by the Tuareg, a nomadic people living all across the Sahara. Michel, Scott and Stanley Gibbons in their description also refer to the ‘Cross of Agadem’ – only Yvert & Tellier seems to have noted the apparent error and in it’s description refers to the ‘Cross of Agadez’.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
That's a lovely stamp SWH. 
Once catalogues get things wrong they can stay wrong a very long time!
As a Crete collector, one attribution (by Scott, Michel and others) that annoys me is the description of Austro-Hungarian Post Offices in the Turkish Empire stamps in French currency using names such as "Austrian Post Offices in Crete".
I guess that when they were issued it was assumed they were for specific use in Crete (as they appeared in 1903 not long after the stamps for the British (1899), Russian (1899), Italian (1900) and French (1902) administrations/post offices in Crete.
However, there had been Austrian Lloyd postal agencies and then Austro-Hungarian post offices long before the events of 1898 in Crete.
Austria-Hungary was not one of the western powers that guaranteed Cretan autonomy as, like Germany, they didn't want to offend the Ottoman government.
Many of the Austro-Hungarian post offices in the Turkish Empire (including those in Crete) has initially used stamps in the Lombardy-Venetian "soldi" currency and then in both Turkish and finally French currency.
It is easier to find these French Currency stamps used in post offices outside of Crete and I believe at least one of these stamps is only known used from Jerusalem.
However, I guess these catalogues will continue to refer to them with names like "Austrian Post Offices in Crete" for a long time to come.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Nice bit of history nigelc.
"However, I guess these catalogues will continue to refer to them with names like "Austrian Post Offices in Crete" for a long time to come."
I think you are very right. At some point, in the Michel, I discovered the listing of a local issue for the Russian city of Kutais dated 1884. The issue was listed in the section for the 1920-1922 inflation issues. So I sent an email to Michel asking them whether they had listed the issue in the wrong section - they also have a section for regular local issues - or whether the date was wrong. The answer was that the date was correct and that it was indeed in the wrong section - but they were going to leave it there, because it had always been listed there.
I sent two more, similar, emails receiving similar responses. And decided it made no sense to send any more 
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Colnect has accepted damichab's evidence, and corrected their listing of the 'wedding' stamp, to wit:
http://colnect.com/en/stamps/stamp/138400-Birthday_of_Princess_Elizabeth-Definitives-Australia
Cheers,
/s/ ikeyPikey
Login to Like
this post
"Colnect has accepted damichab's evidence,"
LOL, it has only taken 50 years to put my mark on the world!
Here is another one...
It is generally labeled as a painting by Daryl Lindsay "The Overlanders"
This is "The Overlanders" by Daryl Lindsay
...and this is "The Stockman Returns" by Daryl Lindsay
Login to Like
this post
Per Damichab, I have updated my album page. GRATS! And good eye on "The Stockman Returns."
Eric
Login to Like
this post
That 'Rob1956' variation of the Hermes Globe, very nice.
I had a post on Stampboards with the errors some time ago (back before I decided this was a better home and that Stampboards could go <insert words here that would have this post deleted!> ).
While we are on this page, here is something else of interest...
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Per Damichab, I have updated my album page. I am praying there is nothing wrong with the Hereford bull or the crocodile, as I am running out of room.
Eric
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Well, are we sure that that's a bull? 
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
"I am praying there is nothing wrong with the Hereford bull or the crocodile"
Well um.. er..
The Hereford bull and the crocodile are actually a pair (part of a stamp competition). The Hereford bull and Crocodile are from 1948 and Hermes & Globe Airmail stamp is from 1949, so two stamps are in the wrong order. Try as I might, I could not find anything at all on the airmail stamp.
Another stamp from that period is the 1949 stamp Sir John Forest which is often mislabeled "Lord Forrest of Bunbury". Whilst he was all set to become a Lord, he died before this could be legally established. So he was never a Lord.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forrest
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
"Well, are we sure that that's a bull? "
How does the saying go.. "As useful as...".
Login to Like
this post
Hi Eric,
I know there is a certain amount of liberties in displaying a page of stamps and I do not know what resources you have at hand for Aussie stamps, but the following page is basically in order with the exception of the "Coat of Arms" which should be just before Henry Lawson. But I think the page looks better this way.
And I know, I need to update some of the text.
Cheers,
David.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Well I finally found an article on the 1949 Airmail stamp. Turns out that I was doing my searches on Hermes, while it was in fact, Mercury. Oh Damm (or words to that effect)!
I have lost count of the number of errors in my page.
Well Erik, as you have not labeled this one, you are safe.
Login to Like
this post
I am on a bit of a roll...
Turns out that the 1934 stamp in my catalogue has been mislabeled too.
Login to Like
this post
Damichab, this is what you get when you start poking into things. As for Hermes vs Mercury you are not really incorrect -- they are essentially the same God. The original Greek is Hermes, the Roman is Mercury. The following excerpt from Robert Graves, "The Greek Myths,"
Zeus speaks to Hermes, "...Your duties would include the making of treaties, the promotion of commerce, and the maintenance of free rights of way for travelers on any road in the world." When Hermes agreed to these conditions, Zeus gave him a herald's staff with white ribbons, which everyone was ordered to respect; a round hat to protect against the rain, and winged golden sandals which carried him about with the swiftness of wind..."
The Latin description of "Mercury" is almost identical. The use of the name Mercury seems to be more popular, but I think Hermes is more correct. At least in this case.
Hermes also invented the Lyre (take note Ireland collectors).
Cheers!
Eric
Login to Like
this post
I've noticed that catalogue descriptions of stamps aren't necessarily inauthentic but are often incomplete, general when they could be specific, and inconsistent from stamp to stamp.
Obviously, there's not space to mention every design attribute of a stamp, especially if includes multiple elements that speak to the heart of topical collectors, the "planes, trains, and automobiles" crowd, but to use a generic word like "plane" to describe an clearly identifiable aircraft? Nah.
I collect aviation-related stamps that feature propeller airliners and early jets, some fighter aircraft, airplane parts (engines, propellers, wings, empennage, airline logos), airports, and air crew. I've found that the Scott catalogue (the only worldwide catalogue I have) often errs in its descriptions or commits the sin of providing too little information. Here are three examples from my collection:
Hungary
Scott informs us that this Hungarian airmail stamp, C156, pictures "Jet planes". Well, yes, they are jets. Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15s, to be precise, iconic Iron Curtain fighters that made history.
When the Brits sold their Nene jet engine to Russia after the Second World War, the U.S. almost died of diplomatic apoplexy, not understanding that Great Britain desperately needed foreign currency to pay its huge war debt to the U.S. and that the Brits, quite rightly, had much less fear of the Soviet Union than did the U.S. The Russians faithfully, and illegally of course, copied the Nene engine, installed thousands of them in MiG-15s which went on to be flown in virtually every Communist Bloc air force in the world for he next decade or two. In the Korean War, the MiG-15 engaged American jet fighters in the world's first jet-powered dogfights.
Canada
Canada's 1951 "Stamp Centenary" stamps, issued in connection with the Canadian Philatelic Exhibition (CAPEX), included #313, picturing a stagecoach and, according to Scott, a "Plane". The airplane is a Canadair DC-4M Northstar airliner, powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin engines instead of radial piston engines to achieve a faster cruising speed; Merlins were the engines used in the famous Spitfire fighters and Lancaster bombers of the Second World War. The Northstar was based on the Douglas DC-4 airliner, but shortened by 2 meters (more than 6 1/2 feet), utilized parts from the C-54 transport (the military version of the DC-4), had the nose section and cockpit of the DC-6 airliner.
The Northstar is easy to identify: large air intakes below each engine are very unlike the round cowlings of the Douglas airliners. The reason for the large air intakes? The aircraft would be flying in hot tropical areas for Trans-Canada Airlines, so the engines needed additional cooling.
On a clear spring morning in 1954, Canada's worst aviation disaster to that date occurred when a Northstar collided with an RCAF Harvard over Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. See my web page, North Star Falling
Upper Volta
The West African Republic of Upper Volta, a former French Colony, issued its first set of airmail stamps 1961. According to Scott, the 200fr value shows a "Plane at airport, Ouagadougou". According to me, it shows a Lockheed Constellation -- I'm not sure of the model, bu tI'm one of the lucky few still around who flew on a "Connie," all the way from San Francisco to Tokyo in 1963, courtesy of the U.S. Navy and the Military Air Transport Service. The Constellation is certainly among the most famous of propeller airliners, but I guess the editors at Scott don't know that.
To me, at least since I resumed collecting as an adult, stamps are historical artifacts, not just coloured bits of paper to be stuck in albums if the pictures match. It doesn't seem that Scott has any historical perspective at all.
Bob
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
"but to use a generic word like "plane" to describe an clearly identifiable aircraft? Nah."
I guess that would depend on on the set. If the set was "Modes of transport" then "Plane", "Car", "Ship" etc is all that suffices to describe the stamp.
But your stamp looks a bit more specific, so plane type would be more appropriate.
If the set was "Cars of the 20th Century", I would not expect the descriptions to be "Car", "Car", "Car". I would expect to see the make and model, even if abbreviated.
But maybe the catalogue makers use the absolute minimum to describe each stamp and if "Jet Plane" clearly separates it from the rest, that is all they will use.
Login to Like
this post
David:
On the page of Australia (lovely looking) the stamp you have labelled as "Boy Scout" is actually a Rover Scout.
David Giles
Ottawa, Canada
1st Ottawa B-P Rover Knight Scout Crew
Login to Like
this post
To be fair to the catalog publishers, the descriptions can't be all that long.
For example, in the Canada 1951 “Stamp Centenary†stamp (above), identifying the make & model of the aircraft should be followed by the breed(s) of the horses, the style & architect & purpose of the building, and the ethnicity & immigration status of the driver.
Never mind that stamp designers need not be true to their originals.
A simple rule-of-thumb - eg, ten words or less - does not leave room for much, let alone a count of how many rooms there are in that house.
My teeth hurt when people suggest things for other people to do with other people's time and other people's money, but I am going to shame myself by hoping aloud that Bobstamp publishes a list of Identified Aircraft Types on Stamps.
Cheers,
/s/ ikeyPikey
Login to Like
this post
10:34:51am
In about 1066 I got a two volume World Wide Minkus Catalog and immediately noticed that the information about the listed stamps was much greater than what you would find in Scotts.
I can't say it was more accurate but the identifications ere far more informative and often I would refer to the Minkus to expand my knowledge. It seemed a shame thatth brand declined after Jacques Minkus pass away.
Login to Like
this post
CDJ1122, was that just before or after the battle of Hastings?, I did not realise that you had kept so young looking.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
03:19:58pm
Hasting, pshaw ! I was with Hardicanute., the official navigator and photographer.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Hardicanute? wasn't he the one who wrote the Doomesday book while sitting on Brighton beach in a deck chair, paddling his feet. Alternate title was "Fables for rich people", how to keep your serfs in order without execution.
Login to Like
this post
I've often wondered about the brief headings to a set of stamps in a catalogue; not all of them seem to apply very accurately to the stamps listed beneath them. Are they provided by the stamp-issuing entity (in which case you could say they are authoritative, even if you might cavil at their accuracy), or do the catalogue editors take a look at the stamps and come up with their own description (in which case they may be susceptible to the occasional carelessness)?
A case in point is the Czechoslovak set, issued 20 March 1973 - six stamps, each depicting two people, and described in the Stanley Gibbons catalogue as "Czechoslovak Martyrs during World War II".
Well, up to a point. If the Czech postal authorities in those communist days described their stamps thus, then that sends us a message worth considering. If the Gibbons catalogue editors (unnamed in my 1977 edition) supplied the attribution, its accuracy leaves a little to be desired.
To be specific, of these six pairs, the first features two army officers who 'turned' their units on the Eastern Front so that they ended up fighting on the Soviet side (of whom one was killed in action). The third shows two non-combatant politicians who survived the war (one in Britain, one in the USSR) only to be purged in internecine squabbling in the 1950s.
An attribution supplied by the Czech post under the heavy-handed post-Prague-Spring Husak government might describe Clementis and Smidke (the politicians) as 'martyrs', though 'during World War II' is stretching a point. Sochor, the turncoat army officer who survived the war, perished five years later in a road accident, or, given the tenor of those times, 'a road accident'. If these three were 'martyrs', done away with by hardline Stalinists, then that softens the image of the Husak regime.
If, though, it is all a matter of catalogue editors, then all bets are off. So the question is: how do Messrs Scott and Michel describe this set?
Clementis and Smidke - martyrs of World War II, or victims of Stalinist purges?
Login to Like
this post
BuckaCover.com - 80,000 covers priced 60c to $1.50 - Easy browsing 300 categories
30 May 2016
08:00:31am
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Interesting post.
Scott gives the names of each, and the summary of the set as "Fighters against and victims of Fascism and Nazism during German Occupation".
Michel describes the set as "Widerstandskämpfer", which I would translate to Resistance Fighters.
Roy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
"Are they provided by the stamp-issuing entity (in which case you could say they are authoritative, even if you might cavil at their accuracy), or do the catalogue editors take a look at the stamps and come up with their own description (in which case they may be susceptible to the occasional carelessness)?"
I have wondered this myself. Researching newspaper articles for early Australian stamps, some titles are just plainly wrong. Seems that once tagged, all the other catalogues just simply follow each other.
My favorite is this one...
Seems to be generally titled "Marriage of Princes Elizabeth". But where is the groom? Then I did some research and found this article from "The Age" 12th March 1947...
(Just discovered this site does not allow png files!)
Few articles later, apparently there was some toing and froing, (apparently the King wanted the word "The" added) and it kind of missed the birthday deadline. When it was released, newspapers just had the stamp as one of the princess, no mention of her birthday.
But 50 years later, there is another stamp celebrating 50 years of the Queen's birthday stamps.
So I guess all the catalogues have it wrong. The stamp has nothing to do with the marriage of the young princess!
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Colnect (online catalog) provides an easy means of submitting enhancements (including corrections) to their data - there is a link in every listing - and, in my experience, often accepts them.
Stampworld not so much.
Cheers,
/s/ ikeyPikey
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
As I've been creating my USA album one stamp at a time, I've noticed that the title of each stamp in Scott's Specialized is lacking, and not what I want in my album over the stamp.
For instance the 1957 Scott 1089 is titled "Architects Issue". Where the text below, and on the stamp itself, is "American Institute of Architects Centenary". That's what I put in my album as it better describes why the stamp was issued.
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Thanks, Roy, for that information. Scott's somewhat inelegant attribution nevertheless seems more accurate than either Gibbons or Michel. The soldiers Nalepka and Sochor certainly fought against Nazism, and the eight unfortunates featured on four of the remaining stamps were all victims in one way or another. That leaves the communist officials Clementis, interned in a British camp, who broadcast anti-Nazi messages across the airwaves from London, and Smidke, who did much the same to Czech troops in Russia from Moscow.
For what it is worth, the latter two just about scrape into my 'Resistance' category, but the soldiers do not.
The other posts on this thread support the idea that it is catalogue editors, rather than Postal Administrations, who are responsible for some of the more irritating examples of misattribution. Colnect, for the set under review, has "Fighters Against Nazism and Fascism", better than Gibbons, but not as accurate as Scott.
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Hi Guthrum,
I see from Wikipedia that Karol Shmidke was sent back to Slovakia in 1943 as a communist party/resistance organiser.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
To complicate things further: not only catalogs, but also designers and stamp issuing authorities may go wrong in their attributions.
Here's a stamp from Ghadames - a part of Libya occupied by the French after WWII:
A set of these stamps was issued in 1949. The designer has identified the cross as the ‘Croix d’Agadem‘ as you can see on the stamp. However, the cross is actually the cross of Agadez – a symbol used by the Tuareg, a nomadic people living all across the Sahara. Michel, Scott and Stanley Gibbons in their description also refer to the ‘Cross of Agadem’ – only Yvert & Tellier seems to have noted the apparent error and in it’s description refers to the ‘Cross of Agadez’.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
That's a lovely stamp SWH.
Once catalogues get things wrong they can stay wrong a very long time!
As a Crete collector, one attribution (by Scott, Michel and others) that annoys me is the description of Austro-Hungarian Post Offices in the Turkish Empire stamps in French currency using names such as "Austrian Post Offices in Crete".
I guess that when they were issued it was assumed they were for specific use in Crete (as they appeared in 1903 not long after the stamps for the British (1899), Russian (1899), Italian (1900) and French (1902) administrations/post offices in Crete.
However, there had been Austrian Lloyd postal agencies and then Austro-Hungarian post offices long before the events of 1898 in Crete.
Austria-Hungary was not one of the western powers that guaranteed Cretan autonomy as, like Germany, they didn't want to offend the Ottoman government.
Many of the Austro-Hungarian post offices in the Turkish Empire (including those in Crete) has initially used stamps in the Lombardy-Venetian "soldi" currency and then in both Turkish and finally French currency.
It is easier to find these French Currency stamps used in post offices outside of Crete and I believe at least one of these stamps is only known used from Jerusalem.
However, I guess these catalogues will continue to refer to them with names like "Austrian Post Offices in Crete" for a long time to come.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Nice bit of history nigelc.
"However, I guess these catalogues will continue to refer to them with names like "Austrian Post Offices in Crete" for a long time to come."
I think you are very right. At some point, in the Michel, I discovered the listing of a local issue for the Russian city of Kutais dated 1884. The issue was listed in the section for the 1920-1922 inflation issues. So I sent an email to Michel asking them whether they had listed the issue in the wrong section - they also have a section for regular local issues - or whether the date was wrong. The answer was that the date was correct and that it was indeed in the wrong section - but they were going to leave it there, because it had always been listed there.
I sent two more, similar, emails receiving similar responses. And decided it made no sense to send any more 1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Colnect has accepted damichab's evidence, and corrected their listing of the 'wedding' stamp, to wit:
http://colnect.com/en/stamps/stamp/138400-Birthday_of_Princess_Elizabeth-Definitives-Australia
Cheers,
/s/ ikeyPikey
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
"Colnect has accepted damichab's evidence,"
LOL, it has only taken 50 years to put my mark on the world!
Here is another one...
It is generally labeled as a painting by Daryl Lindsay "The Overlanders"
This is "The Overlanders" by Daryl Lindsay
...and this is "The Stockman Returns" by Daryl Lindsay
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Per Damichab, I have updated my album page. GRATS! And good eye on "The Stockman Returns."
Eric
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
That 'Rob1956' variation of the Hermes Globe, very nice.
I had a post on Stampboards with the errors some time ago (back before I decided this was a better home and that Stampboards could go <insert words here that would have this post deleted!> ).
While we are on this page, here is something else of interest...
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Per Damichab, I have updated my album page. I am praying there is nothing wrong with the Hereford bull or the crocodile, as I am running out of room.
Eric
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Well, are we sure that that's a bull?
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
"I am praying there is nothing wrong with the Hereford bull or the crocodile"
Well um.. er..
The Hereford bull and the crocodile are actually a pair (part of a stamp competition). The Hereford bull and Crocodile are from 1948 and Hermes & Globe Airmail stamp is from 1949, so two stamps are in the wrong order. Try as I might, I could not find anything at all on the airmail stamp.
Another stamp from that period is the 1949 stamp Sir John Forest which is often mislabeled "Lord Forrest of Bunbury". Whilst he was all set to become a Lord, he died before this could be legally established. So he was never a Lord.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forrest
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
"Well, are we sure that that's a bull? "
How does the saying go.. "As useful as...".
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Hi Eric,
I know there is a certain amount of liberties in displaying a page of stamps and I do not know what resources you have at hand for Aussie stamps, but the following page is basically in order with the exception of the "Coat of Arms" which should be just before Henry Lawson. But I think the page looks better this way.
And I know, I need to update some of the text.
Cheers,
David.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Well I finally found an article on the 1949 Airmail stamp. Turns out that I was doing my searches on Hermes, while it was in fact, Mercury. Oh Damm (or words to that effect)!
I have lost count of the number of errors in my page.
Well Erik, as you have not labeled this one, you are safe.
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
I am on a bit of a roll...
Turns out that the 1934 stamp in my catalogue has been mislabeled too.
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Damichab, this is what you get when you start poking into things. As for Hermes vs Mercury you are not really incorrect -- they are essentially the same God. The original Greek is Hermes, the Roman is Mercury. The following excerpt from Robert Graves, "The Greek Myths,"
Zeus speaks to Hermes, "...Your duties would include the making of treaties, the promotion of commerce, and the maintenance of free rights of way for travelers on any road in the world." When Hermes agreed to these conditions, Zeus gave him a herald's staff with white ribbons, which everyone was ordered to respect; a round hat to protect against the rain, and winged golden sandals which carried him about with the swiftness of wind..."
The Latin description of "Mercury" is almost identical. The use of the name Mercury seems to be more popular, but I think Hermes is more correct. At least in this case.
Hermes also invented the Lyre (take note Ireland collectors).
Cheers!
Eric
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
I've noticed that catalogue descriptions of stamps aren't necessarily inauthentic but are often incomplete, general when they could be specific, and inconsistent from stamp to stamp.
Obviously, there's not space to mention every design attribute of a stamp, especially if includes multiple elements that speak to the heart of topical collectors, the "planes, trains, and automobiles" crowd, but to use a generic word like "plane" to describe an clearly identifiable aircraft? Nah.
I collect aviation-related stamps that feature propeller airliners and early jets, some fighter aircraft, airplane parts (engines, propellers, wings, empennage, airline logos), airports, and air crew. I've found that the Scott catalogue (the only worldwide catalogue I have) often errs in its descriptions or commits the sin of providing too little information. Here are three examples from my collection:
Hungary
Scott informs us that this Hungarian airmail stamp, C156, pictures "Jet planes". Well, yes, they are jets. Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15s, to be precise, iconic Iron Curtain fighters that made history.
When the Brits sold their Nene jet engine to Russia after the Second World War, the U.S. almost died of diplomatic apoplexy, not understanding that Great Britain desperately needed foreign currency to pay its huge war debt to the U.S. and that the Brits, quite rightly, had much less fear of the Soviet Union than did the U.S. The Russians faithfully, and illegally of course, copied the Nene engine, installed thousands of them in MiG-15s which went on to be flown in virtually every Communist Bloc air force in the world for he next decade or two. In the Korean War, the MiG-15 engaged American jet fighters in the world's first jet-powered dogfights.
Canada
Canada's 1951 "Stamp Centenary" stamps, issued in connection with the Canadian Philatelic Exhibition (CAPEX), included #313, picturing a stagecoach and, according to Scott, a "Plane". The airplane is a Canadair DC-4M Northstar airliner, powered by Rolls-Royce Merlin engines instead of radial piston engines to achieve a faster cruising speed; Merlins were the engines used in the famous Spitfire fighters and Lancaster bombers of the Second World War. The Northstar was based on the Douglas DC-4 airliner, but shortened by 2 meters (more than 6 1/2 feet), utilized parts from the C-54 transport (the military version of the DC-4), had the nose section and cockpit of the DC-6 airliner.
The Northstar is easy to identify: large air intakes below each engine are very unlike the round cowlings of the Douglas airliners. The reason for the large air intakes? The aircraft would be flying in hot tropical areas for Trans-Canada Airlines, so the engines needed additional cooling.
On a clear spring morning in 1954, Canada's worst aviation disaster to that date occurred when a Northstar collided with an RCAF Harvard over Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. See my web page, North Star Falling
Upper Volta
The West African Republic of Upper Volta, a former French Colony, issued its first set of airmail stamps 1961. According to Scott, the 200fr value shows a "Plane at airport, Ouagadougou". According to me, it shows a Lockheed Constellation -- I'm not sure of the model, bu tI'm one of the lucky few still around who flew on a "Connie," all the way from San Francisco to Tokyo in 1963, courtesy of the U.S. Navy and the Military Air Transport Service. The Constellation is certainly among the most famous of propeller airliners, but I guess the editors at Scott don't know that.
To me, at least since I resumed collecting as an adult, stamps are historical artifacts, not just coloured bits of paper to be stuck in albums if the pictures match. It doesn't seem that Scott has any historical perspective at all.
Bob
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
"but to use a generic word like "plane" to describe an clearly identifiable aircraft? Nah."
I guess that would depend on on the set. If the set was "Modes of transport" then "Plane", "Car", "Ship" etc is all that suffices to describe the stamp.
But your stamp looks a bit more specific, so plane type would be more appropriate.
If the set was "Cars of the 20th Century", I would not expect the descriptions to be "Car", "Car", "Car". I would expect to see the make and model, even if abbreviated.
But maybe the catalogue makers use the absolute minimum to describe each stamp and if "Jet Plane" clearly separates it from the rest, that is all they will use.
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
David:
On the page of Australia (lovely looking) the stamp you have labelled as "Boy Scout" is actually a Rover Scout.
David Giles
Ottawa, Canada
1st Ottawa B-P Rover Knight Scout Crew
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
To be fair to the catalog publishers, the descriptions can't be all that long.
For example, in the Canada 1951 “Stamp Centenary†stamp (above), identifying the make & model of the aircraft should be followed by the breed(s) of the horses, the style & architect & purpose of the building, and the ethnicity & immigration status of the driver.
Never mind that stamp designers need not be true to their originals.
A simple rule-of-thumb - eg, ten words or less - does not leave room for much, let alone a count of how many rooms there are in that house.
My teeth hurt when people suggest things for other people to do with other people's time and other people's money, but I am going to shame myself by hoping aloud that Bobstamp publishes a list of Identified Aircraft Types on Stamps.
Cheers,
/s/ ikeyPikey
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
09 Jun 2016
10:34:51am
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
In about 1066 I got a two volume World Wide Minkus Catalog and immediately noticed that the information about the listed stamps was much greater than what you would find in Scotts.
I can't say it was more accurate but the identifications ere far more informative and often I would refer to the Minkus to expand my knowledge. It seemed a shame thatth brand declined after Jacques Minkus pass away.
Login to Like
this post
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
CDJ1122, was that just before or after the battle of Hastings?, I did not realise that you had kept so young looking.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
09 Jun 2016
03:19:58pm
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Hasting, pshaw ! I was with Hardicanute., the official navigator and photographer.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Catalogue Attributions - How Authentic Are They?
Hardicanute? wasn't he the one who wrote the Doomesday book while sitting on Brighton beach in a deck chair, paddling his feet. Alternate title was "Fables for rich people", how to keep your serfs in order without execution.
Login to Like
this post