Kelly,
I just looked through my Scotts Specialized Catalog. If found no direct reference to "What is a U.S. classic". In my opinion its any stamp issued prior to 1900. Hope this helps.
Ross
Hey Kelly,
The designation "Classic" is more or less defined by the collector. For me, I consider the U.S.Classic to be between Scott Cat.#1-600.
Best,
Dan C.
Thanks guys - I appreciate it
Personally, I go with Dan's definition. However, most specialists in "US Classics" I have encountered (personally, online, or by reputation through research) cut off the "Classics" era with the Trans-Mississippi issue of 1898, so Ross is probably more accurate.
I kind of disagree with Dan, albeit he is a US collector perfectionist, I vote for any stamps prior to the 1902 definitives. The Washington/Franklin series of stamps were so numerous and varied I find it hard to classify them as classics. Trans-Mississippi's yes would be classics but even the 1890-94 definitives although very old are still just definititives used for everyday mail between the average folks of the day. Since I enjoy collecting all US stamps I do not really care if it's a modern stamp or one of those oldies. My first stamps of old were MNH copies of the Norse Americans. These are not unusually rare or valuable but I always just thought they were beautiful. Happy Stamp Collectng Everyone! Perry
I agree with you, Perry.
The Washington-Franklins could even classify as "transition era" as the Post Office Department did plenty of experimenting with that issue to try to find the best combinations of paper, perfs and colors to use on stamps, not to mention the watermarks.
So Kelly, trouble maker that you are,do you see what I mean?
To all you other folk-my work is done
Best,
Dan C.
Lol Dan - I was just thinking the same thing! Here we have a great debate based on my ignorance I love it!
I do not know when the classics end, but I've seen several references to the "modern" era starting with the Prexies (~1938).
Josh
I believe some collectors consider the Classic Era beginning with 1847 and ending at 1869. I am hard pressed to counter that but I would go with anything upto 1898.
Bruce
Personally, I consider US Classics to end with 330 (1907).
I consider the 3rd Bureau (and interlaced Commemoratives) to be a transition period: 331-550 (1908-1921).
551+ (1922 to present) would be Moderns.
Obviously, opinions vary. Some may consider Classics to end with the 1st Bureau (1894).
eBay arbitrarily splits US up as 19th Century, 1901-1940, and 1941 to present. BidStart uses the same breakdown.
Pick your poison, I suppose!
Lars
Here is what James Mackay, one of the most prolific of philatelic authors has to say in his book "The World of Classic Stamps 1840-1870"
(I actually won my local stamp club's award (by popular vote) at our Christmas meeting for my 10 page exhibit "A Taste of the Classics", and I defined it as he does -- the first 30 years.)
Roy
Roy,
Since the original question was about US Classics, that would end US Classics just before the Banknotes. That's certainly as reasonable a cutoff as any, but how would you break down periods in the US: Classics, Banknotes, Early Bureaus, Moderns?
Not a bad plan, really.
Lars
"Classics, Banknotes, Early Bureaus, Moderns? "
By "Early Bureaus" in that context I meant through the 3rd or 4th Bureau. Not just the first two.
Obviously you can define "Classics" as synonymous with pre-Banknotes and then break it down as banknotes, 1st B, 2nd B, 3rd B (Wash/Frank), 4th B, 5th B (Prexies) and go as far as you want before you call the stamps "moderns". I was considering a higher level definition with only 3 or 4 categories. That seemed to be in the spirit of the OP.
Lars
The only problem with the James Mackay definition is that it completely bypasses Japan, whose first stamp wasn't issued until 1871. (That's one way to avoid the early forgeries )
-- Dave
Pre-1894 according to the tastes of the US Philatelic Classics Society:
http://www.uspcs.org/
But that doesn't mean you can't define "classics" anyway you want.
I recently found a number of older US stamps in the world lot I sorted. I know nothing about US stamps so can anyone tell me what is considered "classic" era? It varies with countries so I'm at a loss here - what is generally used as the cut off year?
Kelly
re: Time frame of US classics
Kelly,
I just looked through my Scotts Specialized Catalog. If found no direct reference to "What is a U.S. classic". In my opinion its any stamp issued prior to 1900. Hope this helps.
Ross
re: Time frame of US classics
Hey Kelly,
The designation "Classic" is more or less defined by the collector. For me, I consider the U.S.Classic to be between Scott Cat.#1-600.
Best,
Dan C.
re: Time frame of US classics
Thanks guys - I appreciate it
re: Time frame of US classics
Personally, I go with Dan's definition. However, most specialists in "US Classics" I have encountered (personally, online, or by reputation through research) cut off the "Classics" era with the Trans-Mississippi issue of 1898, so Ross is probably more accurate.
re: Time frame of US classics
I kind of disagree with Dan, albeit he is a US collector perfectionist, I vote for any stamps prior to the 1902 definitives. The Washington/Franklin series of stamps were so numerous and varied I find it hard to classify them as classics. Trans-Mississippi's yes would be classics but even the 1890-94 definitives although very old are still just definititives used for everyday mail between the average folks of the day. Since I enjoy collecting all US stamps I do not really care if it's a modern stamp or one of those oldies. My first stamps of old were MNH copies of the Norse Americans. These are not unusually rare or valuable but I always just thought they were beautiful. Happy Stamp Collectng Everyone! Perry
re: Time frame of US classics
I agree with you, Perry.
The Washington-Franklins could even classify as "transition era" as the Post Office Department did plenty of experimenting with that issue to try to find the best combinations of paper, perfs and colors to use on stamps, not to mention the watermarks.
re: Time frame of US classics
So Kelly, trouble maker that you are,do you see what I mean?
To all you other folk-my work is done
Best,
Dan C.
re: Time frame of US classics
Lol Dan - I was just thinking the same thing! Here we have a great debate based on my ignorance I love it!
re: Time frame of US classics
I do not know when the classics end, but I've seen several references to the "modern" era starting with the Prexies (~1938).
Josh
re: Time frame of US classics
I believe some collectors consider the Classic Era beginning with 1847 and ending at 1869. I am hard pressed to counter that but I would go with anything upto 1898.
Bruce
re: Time frame of US classics
Personally, I consider US Classics to end with 330 (1907).
I consider the 3rd Bureau (and interlaced Commemoratives) to be a transition period: 331-550 (1908-1921).
551+ (1922 to present) would be Moderns.
Obviously, opinions vary. Some may consider Classics to end with the 1st Bureau (1894).
eBay arbitrarily splits US up as 19th Century, 1901-1940, and 1941 to present. BidStart uses the same breakdown.
Pick your poison, I suppose!
Lars
re: Time frame of US classics
Here is what James Mackay, one of the most prolific of philatelic authors has to say in his book "The World of Classic Stamps 1840-1870"
(I actually won my local stamp club's award (by popular vote) at our Christmas meeting for my 10 page exhibit "A Taste of the Classics", and I defined it as he does -- the first 30 years.)
Roy
re: Time frame of US classics
Roy,
Since the original question was about US Classics, that would end US Classics just before the Banknotes. That's certainly as reasonable a cutoff as any, but how would you break down periods in the US: Classics, Banknotes, Early Bureaus, Moderns?
Not a bad plan, really.
Lars
re: Time frame of US classics
"Classics, Banknotes, Early Bureaus, Moderns? "
re: Time frame of US classics
By "Early Bureaus" in that context I meant through the 3rd or 4th Bureau. Not just the first two.
Obviously you can define "Classics" as synonymous with pre-Banknotes and then break it down as banknotes, 1st B, 2nd B, 3rd B (Wash/Frank), 4th B, 5th B (Prexies) and go as far as you want before you call the stamps "moderns". I was considering a higher level definition with only 3 or 4 categories. That seemed to be in the spirit of the OP.
Lars
re: Time frame of US classics
The only problem with the James Mackay definition is that it completely bypasses Japan, whose first stamp wasn't issued until 1871. (That's one way to avoid the early forgeries )
-- Dave
re: Time frame of US classics
Pre-1894 according to the tastes of the US Philatelic Classics Society:
http://www.uspcs.org/
But that doesn't mean you can't define "classics" anyway you want.