French West Africa Area Transition Chart - Input Requested

Thanks florian - You are correct. The last post was the almost final draft, where I was most concerned about the dates and relationships of the countries and hadn't yet confirmed all of the stamp and banknote issue tabs.

I have just "officially" uploaded the Transition Chart to DCStamps and you can find it here: http://www.dcstamps.com/?page_id=6970 (if the last revision date isn't 22 May, 2015, you need to refresh the page).

Thanks again everyone for your help. Also, as with all of my transition charts, I am always open for comments and corrections. Updating them is rather easy (unless of course I need to redesign the whole thing).

Michael

greaden said:




Hi greaden

The answer was yes, but its complicated. Primarily because it was a German Colony which was split and mandated to France and Britain from the League of Nations after WW1. After WW2, the two Togolands became United Nations trust territories.

According to the book: Colonial West Africa: Collected Essays from Michael Crowder, Togo was placed as part of French West Africa with certain restrictions in terms of limiting forced labor, conscription into the army, and the region was to be kept open for free trade with no protective tariffs. Togo used French West Africa currency until 1958, however important to stamp collectors: Togo did continue issuing its own stamps and never seemed to adopt the FWA common stamps.

Hope this helps.
Michael

I have already added it as a link for the upcoming Senegal post on my blog.

Michael- you are the best!

Absolutely a great graphic! Now for the rest of Africa. :)

billsey - to date, I have completed:

Libya Area
British Nigeria Area
French West Africa Area
Mozambique Area
Rhodesia / Nyasaland Area
South Africa Area

Check them out at the DCStamps Transitions page.

My next one will probably be the Yugoslav Balkans, but not for a while.

Thanks, I hadn't seen the others. Yes, the next one will be complex, but not as bad as the Ottomans and Austria/Hungary. :)

Michael - all your work is simply first class.

I'm working on Transvaal/ZAR these days, and have admired your South Africa chart. Suggestion - what about adding Mafeking? You have probably considered it already, so my question are if such a 'make-shift postal entity' are deliberately excluded on your charts?

Blaamand

When I was developing the South Africa Transition Chart, I similarly posted a draft of the chart on the forum for input and discussion. (for some reason I can't find the discussion via search). As I recall, I originally included the various siege issues (Mafeking is only one of them), but after a good discussion decided to not include them primarily because they are considered as local issues, printed primarily to offset lack of supply. Also, these charts are complicated enough, so unless there is a real historically important reason, I don't include all of the various local issue stamps. Other local issues for other charts might include Concentration Camp issues, Russian zemstvos, or commercially issued stamps like the Russian Steamship Company.

Michael

Michael - Yepp, what you're saying makes perfect sense, now I understand what approach you have for such entities. I absolutely understand the charts are complicated enough without including all the local issues. Keep up your good work!
Jon

Great reference! One option for the local issues is to add a square indicator "L" next to the "S" and "B" ones in cases where there are local issues. This would not clutter the transition charts and provide completeness of coverage. One could then select the Stamps link for the country in question to examine the local issues.

Hi medoc - thanks for the suggestion.

When I began constructing these transition charts, I wanted them to be a tool that transcends stamp or banknote collectors. I wanted them to be important for people (including amateur historians)quickly see the relationships and movement of political and government entities within region.

When developing a chart, I first construct it to be historically accurate well before I look at which entities issued stamps or banknotes. Normally I include major things such as empires, kingdoms, nations, colonies, military occupations and historically significant revolutions. Therefore you will see that the charts include non stamp issuing entities, as not all countries, or wannabe countries issued stamps.

Once I know I have the history right, only then do I really take the time to figure out which entities within that history issued stamps and banknotes. For the vast majority of collectors, this fully meets their needs.

However, just because an entity issued a stamp or a banknote, doesn't mean that it will be included in the chart. This would only dilute the original purpose of the charts. There are many stamps and banknotes which were issued for other purposes. For example, these charts do not include items such as:

NOT INCLUDED IN THE CHARTS
For stamps: local issues, private issues, propaganda labels, or provisionals issued for economic or stamp shortages.

For banknotes: emergency money or notgelds (which frankly I really love), banknotes issued by banks which were non-governmental entities.

If I added all of these entities to the charts, they would be massive, and no frankly no longer useful for broader general use.

Hope that helps explain the philosophy behind the charts.

Maury gives a separate listing for stamps from Rivieres du Sud, but the stamps listed are general colonies stamps (Alphonse Dubois) with clear postmarks.

Hi Greaden
I only include the [S] symbol for places that actually issued stamps, not every place we might find a postmark. If I did that, the chart would be overwhelming.

Micheal

Great new chart! I am actually working on this very complex French West Africa history myself at the moment and this will be great input. From the research I have done so far I would suggest two thing you might consider for your chart.

1) To my knowledge when breaking up French Sudan in 1899 the French created an entity called Upper Senegal & Middle Niger that was in 1902 transformed into Senegambia & Niger.
2) In 1933 Upper Volta was broken up and divided between Ivory Coast, French Sudan and French Niger. In 1947 Upper Volta was recreated to further develop into Burkina Faso as shown on your chart.

Curious to know what you think.

Hi SWH

The name French Sudan is a little complicated, primarily because there were two separate times that a colony was named French Sudan. With this, I have tried to capture its changes with a note in my published chart (undated from the one originally posted in the thread) at http://www.dcstamps.com/?page_id=6970 Press the pdf link to get a good close up view.

To answer your question, originally French Sudan Territory was a vast area with very loose borders which changed as the French expanded north and east. From the timeframe of 1894 to 1904 there was a big reorganization of the colonial structure and administration of the French colonies in West Africa. In 1894, they created the overall Federation of West Africa. In 1899, they continued to restructure its colonies and borders, and much of the area which was in French Sudan Territory was divided across French Guinea, Dohamey, and Côte d'Ivoire. In 1902, what was left of the Territory was renamed as Senegambia & Niger. That name was again changed in 1904 to Upper Senegal and Niger.

Hope this helps.