Quote:
Originally Posted by Leon
First of all there are no other cards in T206 that are on as thin of stock as T213-1. I don't think it should be labeled as T206 because of that and because Burdick put Coupons in their own designation. For me, that's enough, though I am probably in the minority.
I have never really heard of T215-1 being classified as T206 nor very many arguments (unlike T213-1) thinking it should be. I am aware of at least 1 T215-1 that has a bit of a different background than it's T206 counterpart, that being Griffith batting. FYI, T215-1 is normal cardstock from what I remember. I have owned several but only own 1 now....regards
|
Leon... I respect your opinion about the T213-1 series. However, if Uzit had printed white borders again in 1914-15 and once more in 1919, Burdick probably would have given them their own designation, to say nothing of the fact that without the continued series, we now consider the Uzit 1910-11 series to be a part of T206.
In the end, T206 is a label placed onto the set 20+ years after its creation. In 1909-12, were one to get one of these cards in a tobacco pouch or cigarette pack, you would have had an un-numbered Piedmont card or Uzit card. And in the case of Coupon cards, the 1910-12 series was funded by ATC and printed by ALC, distributed in an area that no other T206 back was distributed. Had there been no T213-2 or T213-3, no one would even be arguing that series 1 was a part of T206, irregardless of paper stock. It just would be.
As for T215-1, I've only seen around twenty different cards, either through online scans, at card shows or in auction catalogues. I honestly don't know about background variations, as each series 1 card I've seen from the Victory set has been exactly like its T206 counterpart. I may have jumped the gun on saying that series was another T206 back, as I really haven't studied it enough to know for sure. Gut shot guess.