|GBPS Discussion Boards
|Real postal history
|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||robinT [ Wed Oct 19, 2011 7:00 pm ]|
|Post subject:||Real postal history|
when postage lables were introduced postal history changed its complexion.
REAL postal history must, of necessity, include a study (to some level) of stamps - because without stamps (as they became) no item would go anywhere.
Thus those who term themselves postal historians, without considering how stamps were introduced and produced are - like many philatelists - misusing explicitly definite terminology.
Unfortunately there are many such collectors but their ignorance is somewhat nullified by the records kept at the national postal museum. at least there is an official view of these matters, although it is not always true.
It is not true for areas outside GB - including areas which ARE british.
When are collectors going to do their collecting in the right way?
yes I know that everyone is entitled to a choice - but if this is poor, so is the collection
try explaining the attitudes please
|Author:||mozzerb [ Wed Oct 19, 2011 7:05 pm ]|
|Post subject:||Transfer from previous board: original post 1914|
If I could determine what attitudes you're referring to, maybe I could explain them. Unfortunately, the post seems to go all around the point without ever crystallizing into something definite ... What particular error or errors aroused your ire?
|Author:||agenteinrebus [ Thu Oct 20, 2011 7:00 pm ]|
|Post subject:||Transfer from previous board: original post 1915|
Like mozzerb I am a bit lost with whatever it is that is the nub of the discussion.
Judging by the initial statement I would seem correct in describing myself as a Postal Historian when my own interests lie in GB 1765-1799 and 1840-44 in particular yet would be incorrect if I limited myself to pre-stamp material only. To limit my interest to 1840-44 would suggest that I may be a Philatelist only but what about the associated application of stamps and postal rates etc - does this not allow me to call myself a Postal Historian?
As to collecting surely that must be a very individual choice so is there a right or wrong way to collect? To describe a collection as 'poor' needs clear definition as to what is meant whether by material condition, material value, collector's layout or whatever other criteria may apply.
Have I missed whatever point is being made?
|Page 1 of 1||UTC [ DST ]|
|Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group