Define Classic Please

I am drawn more to the earlier stamps and I see the topic of this forum is US Classic Stamps Pre-1940. My question, is the classic era a matter of opinion ( I might stretch it to the mid 1950's for example) or is there a specific test that defines a classic stamp period. Is 1940 an agreed date? Does it relate to the method of stamp production? Thanks for your thoughts.

You might find other definitions, but Classic-era to me means the first 100 years, 1840-1940. The Scott Classic catalogue, which covers 1840-1940, extended the British Commonwealth listings to 1952 to correspond with the end of the reign of George VI.

The phrase has nothing to do with the merit of the stamp, itself.

Collin

This is interesting. Good question Scouter, because I've wondered that same question myself.

So Collin, "You might find other definitions, but Classic-era to me means the first 100 years, 1840-1940. The Scott Classic catalogue, which covers 1840-1940, extended the British Commonwealth listings to 1952 to correspond with the end of the reign of George VI.

The phrase has nothing to do with the merit of the stamp, itself."

Are you saying that the "classic era" really has nothing to do with the way a stamp was printed, but just the era it came from as it relates to an event or individual?

Donna

Classic: the designation classic is applied to a stamp or cover, which because of its beauty of design,
its age or rarity, is much sought after, generally only refers to stamps issued prior to 1900.

uh oh!I smell a debate coming on...lol

Well spotted Donna

My repsonse is just a quote from the Chicago Stamp collectors club "ask phil", which I have seen or read or printed many times,
but it is still only an opinion, with parameters stretching to suit the individual.

Reminds me of the debate when Pluto lost its title as a "planet"
The little fellow will always be a planet to moi.

Okay, I can rule out method of production, because all manner of methods were used to produce stamps during the "classic era."

It is tempting to say that the concept of classic era running through 1940 is Scott-centric, and it well may have started that way (among other things, the first volume of the Scott International runs through 1940), but Yvert's classic catalogue also runs through 1940. I think there is something about the first 100 years that has a nice ring to it.

Stanley Gibbons now puts its British Empire compendium out to 1970 (from 1952), just to further confuse the matter.

My 2d.

Collin

I was choked when Pluto got fired - I guess I grew attached to it because my grade four teacher kept asking me, "where are you, out on Pluto?"

...and are you still out on Pluto BeeSee?

(I think all collectors are, at least in the minds of other people)

An australian similarity was the coach of my son's footy team
when they were nippers and he wanted to focus their attention
he would enquire as to whether they wwanted to play footy,
or go live in "la la land"
That used to always crack me up.

Well here is how I see it.
Classics very in time from one country to next.
The US classic period goes to 1920, last classic issue being the Pilgrim Ter.
The Danish West Indies to 1903.
Mexico to 1910.
Japan to 1936.
Columbia to 1939.
Cuba to 1914.
Austria to 1919.
France to 1929.
Germany to 1920.
Italy to 1910.
For a few!
I would not consider any place the started issuing stamps after 1900!

I also think that the age of the collector has something to do with how the term "classic" is perceived.

Having starting to collect in the late 1950's, I have a hard time considering anything past 1900 as classic.

Since I am fascinated with the Washington/Franklins, and that fascination beginning at an early time in my collecting, I don't really consider them classic. I guess from the discussion here, they might just be.

I suppose a general consensus of the 1st hundred years might be a good definition.

This is an interesting topic. I guess there is also another way to look at stamps to determine if it is a classic or not. I once heard that term used for more recent stamps and it was described this way:

The earliest stamps of the People's Republic of China (PRC), those being the first dozen sets / singles or so were referred to as the 'classics' period for that country. The same term was referred to the earlier issues of East Germany (DDR) and they were sets and singles issued within the first 2-3 years years since they started issuing stamps.

So, to sum up, I guess you can take it in different eras and it can depend when a postal entity first began to issue stamps. I think the choice is really up to the individual.

My opinion of course

Chimo

Bujutsu

Here is a good link with a good explanation

http://www.philatelictidbits.com/be...lecting.html

The 'Machin' Head design has often been described as a classic design.

In 100 years time, when SCF is still going strong but with a different cast, they will be talking about the Machin as a classic.

So I am not of the opinion that the term is purely for older stamps.

Londonbus1....doesn't expect to be around in 100 years time !