Ba careful of buying "mint" stamps online. It is sometimes used to describe anything without a cancel. I've had to return a few in the last several months.
Agree with John. Had the same experience. Mint---> never used, with original gum. Unused---> no cancel, no gum but appears unused. Re gums are not mint. That's how my simple mind defines this.
I spent some time this morning tracking down the philatelic definition of "mint" from several sources. No one seems to agree fully with others. Scott uses the term only in reference to gum condition; mint never hinged.
Linn's seems to contradict itself:"A stamp in the same state as issued by a post office....Over time, handling, light and atmospheric conditions may affect the mint state of stamps."
The wiki sez: "One which is in its original state of issue, is unused, has never been mounted and has full gum.. .Unlike other collectibles, a mint stamp may be in poor condition but still be regarded as being in mint state as long as it is apparently unused," which also seems a contradiction. But essentially that agrees with my own belief. To me, a mint stamp is a stamp which could still legitimately be used to post a letter, or used for revenue purposes. A mint stamp still has its franking value, regardless of condition. Leave aside observations that it may be demonitized, or whatever.
The condition of a stamp is a whole nuther ball game. Confusing mint with condition is an unfortunate overlap of the meaning of mint in other fields. I wish we could stop using the term. But we are all so used to it, and while most of us "know" what is meant, others are dragging those other definitions in. Remember "almost mint?"
Bah! I have bothered ya'll long enough. Thanks for your time...
That would depend on the country that issued the stamps and the stamps that were. Scott lists many stamps that were NEVER issued with gum.
China, The People's Republic of China and Taiwan were 3 of the bigger countries that did so. Scott's notes that the People's republic of China did not issue any stamps with gum until 1960 and any stamps issued after that point had gum applied that is translucent and nearly invisible. Taiwan had many issues until about 1965 that were issued without gum and are notated. China had many issues from about 1940-1949 that were issued without gum also.
Although originally and traditionally meant to signify stamps in MNH condition, today it appears to have, "on the street," evolved into only a partial description that requires additional qualifiers such MH, MLH, MNH, & MNG.
Ah! George got to the reason for my post. While it may be now commonplace to use MH, MLH, MNG,etc., is it actually correct to refer to any stamp as Mint in any other condition than "as newly purchased from the postal authorities"? In other words, is it correct or fair to describe a stamp that has been hinged in any way or had gum originally but does not now to even refer to it as Mint? Would not a term like "Unused" be a more correct description of such specimens? I know this may sound a bit like nit-picking but proper terms do matter especially in the online marketplace and even more so when many sellers do not provide an image of the back of an item when describing it as "Mint" instead of "Unused" if more correct. Actually, to me, the description of MNH is a bit redundant if "Mint" alone can describe the item as "fresh as bought from the postal authorities". This is an objective description to me and not , at least, somewhat subjective like centering and certainly color. Anyway, just a pet peeve of mine maybe.
Sorry, Greg, but there's no stopping this train. Although, of course, you're technically correct, philatelic jargon has evolved into what is today and it is...what it is.
“The only thing that never changes is that everything changes.” ― Louis L'Amour
Well my good friend...and you are just that...trains may difficult to stop in one direction, but they almost always have to go back in the other direction on the same tracks. I simply refuse to give in...I just won't. Things that don't make sense just because it becomes commonplace still don't make sense no matter what. In this case there are way too many examples of this in the marketplace, often to the detriment of the Buyer/Customer. I suppose though that if one buys a stamp that is advertised as being in mint condition without seeing the back or with any other description, it is to their own detriment. But it is not that difficult to simply describe an item correctly regardless. It's just not. MLH does describe the stamp to a degree, but to me and many, it is still not a mint stamp.
I don't mind change at all and I agree with Old Louis' quote but change for changes sake isn't always the best idea.
Devil's advocate query in the following (make-believe) scenario: I just put a newly acquired SMQ Jumbo 95 MNH $5 Columbian into a split back mount, readying it to go into an album. Mouse is bugging me to help so I, like an idiot, allow him to lick the back of the mount to activate the adhesive so I can place the stamp into its spot on the album page. Mouse, having no control of his tongue, slobbered on the mount and some moisture crept into the split mount, creating that horizontal glaze line we all abhor finding on the back of a stamp. Is this stamp still, using your (traditionally correct) definition, 'mint?' If not, how would you call it?
Hahahaha! Nothing is absolute I guess. If it was me, I would simply and succinctly as possible describe the stamp in its present condition and in this case...how and why it is in such condition...and more importantly who to blame....MOUSE!!!!!!
But you make a good point. It's not, technically speaking, mint anymore. But it remains never hinged...just slobbered.
You know...come to think of it...a description like that might actually help the item's interest. MNHOGBWDLS (Mint Never Hinged Original Gum But With Dog Licked Strip).
John, yes I am saying that I consider stamps which appear to be uncancelled ( especially the oldest US stamps) to be unused when they are without gum. Too many "cancellation erasures" attempted out there. I use mint to describe the presence of original gum. Used stamps can have gum as we have seen with the CTO's. But it describes a different level of presentation. I also see that the expertizers seem to follow that rule in using descriptive nomenclature.
Perhaps I should have stayed out of this discussion. I apparently misunderstood the point you were making. I thought you meant that all unused stamps have no gum and that if it has original gum it is mint rather than unused.
When I list stamps, I don't use the term "mint" unless it is MNH. I describe a hinged stamp as being "unused'. One with disturbed gum as "Unused-DG". Perhaps this is confusing to some buyers as I receive questions weekly asking if this "unused stamp" has been previously hinged. To me that should be self explanatory. If it had never been hinged, I would have listed it as MNH and the stamp wouldn't be shown by HipStamp as "Unused".
John, no problem at all, maybe I should have been more specific that's all. It is an important definition and I guess that's why many sellers have descriptive definitions.
For what it is worth when I search I select Mint (NH) and unused. I know there was a third option which I used to select as well. It was a challenge to learn just how to hit all three at once.
Comments
Mint---> never used, with original gum.
Unused---> no cancel, no gum but appears unused.
Re gums are not mint.
That's how my simple mind defines this.
Linn's seems to contradict itself:"A stamp in the same state as issued by a post office....Over time, handling, light and atmospheric conditions may affect the mint state of stamps."
The wiki sez: "One which is in its original state of issue, is unused, has never been mounted and has full gum.. .Unlike other collectibles, a mint stamp may be in poor condition but still be regarded as being in mint state as long as it is apparently unused," which also seems a contradiction. But essentially that agrees with my own belief. To me, a mint stamp is a stamp which could still legitimately be used to post a letter, or used for revenue purposes. A mint stamp still has its franking value, regardless of condition. Leave aside observations that it may be demonitized, or whatever.
The condition of a stamp is a whole nuther ball game. Confusing mint with condition is an unfortunate overlap of the meaning of mint in other fields. I wish we could stop using the term. But we are all so used to it, and while most of us "know" what is meant, others are dragging those other definitions in. Remember "almost mint?"
Bah! I have bothered ya'll long enough. Thanks for your time...
"Unused---> no cancel, no gum but appears unused"
Hopefully you aren't saying "Unused" stamps have no gum.
That would depend on the country that issued the stamps and the stamps that were. Scott lists many stamps that were NEVER issued with gum.
China, The People's Republic of China and Taiwan were 3 of the bigger countries that did so. Scott's notes that the People's republic of China did not issue any stamps with gum until 1960 and any stamps issued after that point had gum applied that is translucent and nearly invisible. Taiwan had many issues until about 1965 that were issued without gum and are notated. China had many issues from about 1940-1949 that were issued without gum also.
“The only thing that never changes is that everything changes.” ― Louis L'Amour
I don't mind change at all and I agree with Old Louis' quote but change for changes sake isn't always the best idea.
Rant....for now...is over.
Oh and I hope 'ol Mouse is doing well!!!!!
But you make a good point. It's not, technically speaking, mint anymore. But it remains never hinged...just slobbered.
You know...come to think of it...a description like that might actually help the item's interest. MNHOGBWDLS (Mint Never Hinged Original Gum But With Dog Licked Strip).
When I list stamps, I don't use the term "mint" unless it is MNH. I describe a hinged stamp as being "unused'. One with disturbed gum as "Unused-DG". Perhaps this is confusing to some buyers as I receive questions weekly asking if this "unused stamp" has been previously hinged. To me that should be self explanatory. If it had never been hinged, I would have listed it as MNH and the stamp wouldn't be shown by HipStamp as "Unused".