Jen B
Member 
Inactive
Posts: 367 
|
Post by Jen B on Aug 15, 2014 1:08:04 GMT
I've been going through some modern Belgium stamps and noticed that most have the year of issue in small print somewhere on them. Starting around the mid-70s there is additional information printed with year. I've searched all over the web and in my Scott's but can't find any reference to what these extra numbers mean. Do any of the good folks here know what this stands for? I'm guessing maybe the order in which the same was issued during the year, but not sure. Here's an example of Belgium Scott #915 from the Ghent International Flower Exhibition series.  And a closeup of the printing.  So does any one know what the "(2c)" stands for? And the "M.S" and "C.S"? Is it the initials of the designer and engraver? Thanks  |
|
Jen B
Member
Inactive
Posts: 367
|
Post by Jen B on Aug 15, 2014 1:26:58 GMT
Here's another example. Belgium Scott #955, 1976 - Commemorating the opening of the first line of Brussels subway. This one has "(16 bis or bls)" after the year. ??   |
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 9,871 
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
Member is Online
|
Post by rod222 on Aug 15, 2014 1:38:27 GMT
I've been going through some modern Belgium stamps and noticed that most have the year of issue in small print somewhere on them. Starting around the mid-70s there is additional information printed with year. I've searched all over the web and in my Scott's but can't find any reference to what these extra numbers mean. Do any of the good folks here know what this stands for? I'm guessing maybe the order in which the same was issued during the year, but not sure. Here's an example of Belgium Scott #915 from the Ghent International Flower Exhibition series. So does any one know what the "(2c)" stands for? And the "M.S" and "C.S"? Is it the initials of the designer and engraver? Thanks Hi Jen, I will stand corrected, but I think the 2c refers to the position in the set, albeit in this case it doesn't fit, as this value stamp, is the 3rd in the set. So perhaps it is stamp "C" (3rd) in the second set of floral designs? The MS stands for the designer (generally on the Left hand Side) MS M? Designed by F. Severin, The CS (right hand side ) the engraver CS = C. Spinoy On older stamps we often see "Del" left hand side Delineavit (he/she drew it) and "Sc" Right hand side = Sculpsit (he / she carved it) Hope that helps a bit. |
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 9,871
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
Member is Online
|
Post by rod222 on Aug 15, 2014 1:52:08 GMT
I'll go out on a limb here  Guess only 16bis = 16a (first stamp of the 16th issue) It's the 16th commemorative stamp (design issue-single or multiple) of the year (not including, definitive series or Miniature sheets) So that works right, Your Floral stamp is the third stamp (C) of the second comm issue of 1975. So, we got that sorted |
|
Jen B
Member
Inactive
Posts: 367
|
Post by Jen B on Aug 16, 2014 1:59:24 GMT
Hurrah!!
I think you've got it, Rod.
Been working with some 1970s on Belgium and checking the numbers in Scott based on your theory.
For example, 1975 Scott #912 was the first stamp issued in 1975, so it has "1975 (1)".
And for series in the stamp issue the pattern of (3a, 3b, etc) is holding.
But if I only count commemoratives the issue order is off. For example, the 1993 History series Scott #1473 - 1475, has 2A, 2B & 2C on them. But if you look in Scott's it looks like the first stamp issued in 1993. I wonder if they also count definitives, which Scott's lists as a group by design not not by year of issue. However, I don't see any definitive with this type of notation.
Thanks Rod!
|
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 9,871
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
Member is Online
|
Post by rod222 on Aug 16, 2014 2:42:39 GMT
Hurrah!! I think you've got it, Rod. Been working with some 1970s on Belgium and checking the numbers in Scott based on your theory. For example, 1975 Scott #912 was the first stamp issued in 1975, so it has "1975 (1)". And for series in the stamp issue the pattern of (3a, 3b, etc) is holding. But if I only count commemoratives the issue order is off. For example, the 1993 History series Scott #1473 - 1475, has 2A, 2B & 2C on them. But if you look in Scott's it looks like the first stamp issued in 1993. I wonder if they also count definitives, which Scott's lists as a group by design not not by year of issue. However, I don't see any definitive with this type of notation. Thanks Rod! Aha! be careful Jen. You may have fallen into a trap. (assuming issue dates of the Belgian Cat and Scott will match up, they probably won't, we have to work with the Belgian Catalogue) My contention is they do not count definitives, because Scott groups by design (A fabulous idea! try working with Gibbons and their issue date...Ugh!) then split issues may be detected by Belgium. I am trying to work with you, using the "Officiele Catalogus 1987" of Belgium, and all things hold thus far of our prognosis. With 1993 I cannot comment, if you find an oddity 1987 or before, I'll match it up and see if we can sort it. With the Train issue of 18th sept 1976, the hierarchy of stamps issued, included 2 (part definitives) of the King Boudewin type. (11F and 14F) These cannot be counted, if we want to get the Train at #16. Cheers |
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 9,871
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
Member is Online
|
Post by rod222 on Aug 16, 2014 2:59:22 GMT
PS: If you are digging around Belgium, I'd be interested to know if Belgian "Tab" stamps are marked at all with the Alpha subset
I notice the 1976 Belgian US Bicentenary issue, has an attached "tab" which doesn't appear to be recognised,
I guess those organising emmissions consider the labels as selvedge.
But years hence new collectors will be continually asking, "is this a stamp? what is it?" when they come across these labels as singletons.
|
|
Jen B
Member
Inactive
Posts: 367
|
Post by Jen B on Aug 18, 2014 1:20:51 GMT
Thanks for sticking with me on this one Rod. And thanks for looking these up in you Belgium catalog.
Here's one prior to 1987 that I can't get to fit the pattern by looking at the dates in Scotts.
It is SC# 920. 1975 St. John from the Last Supper, by Bouts. 6.50f. Scott has the date listed as April 26th.
The numbers printed on the stamp are "1975 (8a)". Counting down in Scotts from the start of 1975, I would have guessed that this would have been "1975 (7a)". The first design (a) of the 7th commemorative of the year 1975.
What has me even more confused is that a later stamp in 1975 that I have (SC# 931 - Library Louvain University, Ryckmans & Cerfaux - June 7th), has "1975 (10)". If I count down from the beginning of the 1975, this one is the 10th commemorative for the year.
Other 1975 stamps I have:
SC# 912 - Feb. 15 - "1975 (1)"
SC# 915 - Feb. 22 - "1975 (2c)"
They fit
Peering closely at the illustrations in Scotts, it looks like there isn't a "1975 (6)". And there is another "8" - SC#922, Liberation of Concentration Camps, 30th Anniv - May 3. It looks like it has "1975 (8 bis)".
I haven't run across any modern tab stamps yet from Belgium. I just have some of those old ones with the label that the sender was to leave on if they didn't want the letter delivered on Sunday.
|
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 9,871
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
Member is Online
|
Post by rod222 on Aug 18, 2014 3:42:06 GMT
Hi Jen,
I see your point
#7a would appear correct, (working from the Officiele Catalogus)
So we have to find out by elimination, by establishing the number on the stamps to which stamp is the interloper.......... (or the missing stamp number)
Here we go
1 loupe (proven)
- King boudewin 13f 25f definitive
2 flowers (proven)
3 school (I think I can see 3 on this stamp)
- Boudewin definitive
- 5f numeral def
4 davids foundation
5 King Albert
- culture (semi postal)
- madonna semi postal
7 postman (proven)
8 bouts (proven)
We shall have to check stamps 4-5-6 for numbers.
The only other explanation, is that Belgian Post planned an issue somewhere between 4-6 , then withdrew the issue.
Only us checking numbers will point to the missing issue.
|
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 9,871
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
Member is Online
|
Post by rod222 on Aug 18, 2014 3:46:05 GMT
We shall have to find out what "bis" refers to, this may be our fly in the ointment.
Using ebay images, looks like #6 is missing
King Albert is #5
Postman is #7
There are only definitives and semi postals between
I can only suggest a Belgian Post anomaly at this stage.
|
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 9,871
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
Member is Online
|
Post by rod222 on Aug 18, 2014 8:48:07 GMT
Solved : Belgium Post must count semi-postals in the hiearchy. Ergo, Bouts is #8 a+b Nice link to Belgium Philately.... www.belgianstamps.eu/ |
|
Jen B
Member
Inactive
Posts: 367
|
Post by Jen B on Aug 19, 2014 2:17:10 GMT
Bravo!! You solved it!  I hadn't even thought of semi-postals. And that site you found is a great resource. To confirm I snagged their image of the Madonna semi-postal and looky there.. "1975 (6c)"... Hurray!  |
|
