The worth of a polar philatelic piece initially is determined by two things we own: our eyes. As with beauty, something's worth is in the eyes of the beholder. We have our own perception of what we consider to be valuable.

For example, I highly value the piece to the left. It is one of my first receipts when I began sending for polar covers. The signer sent a very nice personal letter that enthralled me. I can recall my awe at holding an envelope that I knew had come right from the bottom of the world. It has great value. B U T - - only to me. Its enormous sentimental value is not enough to bolster its intrinsic stature when it is given a more objective appraisal by others. It would fall short when measured against an impartial criteria that would weigh those characteristics that generally are accepted as imbuing a polar cover (or related item) with more acceptability than another. Such a standard would help explain why a one-of-a-kind something-or-other might be viewed as virtually worthless in comparison with something that's one of a thousand. It also would make evident why perhaps an aged polar philatelic item actually might have less worth than something contemporary. Of course, such a guideline also would justify why a highly regarded polar philatelic gem indeed does glisten.

The criteria might resemble the following Polar Philatelic VALUE FACTORS. You will notice that it does not significantly differ from a criteria that might be used to evaluate material in other, comparable philatelic areas.

There only are four factors:

• Age
• Scarcity
• Significance
• Popularity

Knowing the categories is not enough. The judgment challenge is to accurately assess the degree to which each factor contributes to the worth of any item. In effect, how popular, scarce, significant or old would the rest of the collecting body consider a piece under consideration? The total would be its "value" relative to that which it is being compared. Using this scale only to assess an individual item in the absence of any others would give a general, rather than a specific sense of a particular piece's polar philatelic worth.

Keep in mind that this valuation system does not mean that anything not scoring very high is without value. Most polar philatelic material probably would not score very high under this system. Most philatelic material in general would not get high marks when compared similarly. But this guide does give us an ability to sense a piece's relative stature relative to other material in its field. This is what philatelic show juries have to do with material in competition.

AGE: This factor has two possibilities. The first one is easy to determine. Is it contemporary? Generally this would include material spawned between 1954 to the present.

The other age parameter can be a bit troublesome to accurately assess. Is it classic? That from the 17th century into the early 20th century would qualify as "classic". It isn't difficult to determine the classic sub-category's beginning. Go back as far as you wish. It is the other end that is a dilemma. Some might conclude it at the beginning of the so-called polar "Mechanical Age" (1928). You can be excused for being more flexible.

Some will wish to carve out a neoclassic middle period that bridges the classic and contemporary eras. Others may simply feel more comfortable with extending the classic period up to the beginning of the contemporary epoch. This decision frequently is a function of how much classic material to which one has been exposed.

The key is understanding whether something is relatively new or old. Having it situated in one of the accepted periods helps to formalize this decision. The verdict depends on at least two people agreeing.

Just about anything old has value in excess of most polar material that is very recent. However, this is not always true. We are dealing with a total value equation that has four components. Age is only one. No single factor can be considered in isolation, though one might be so important that it predominates in determining a piece's intrinsic value.

SCARCITY: This has to do with volume. Few versus many. This does not only gauge how many exist. It also compares this with how many might be wanted relative to how many exist. Supply versus demand. Someone might have the only one of something. But if nobody else wants it (or only a few), then it would not have much impact in this category.

A sub-element of this category is "difficulty of acquisition". This is regularly applied in exhibit judging. How much trouble might it be to obtain a certain piece? Whether one has the necessary capital for acquisition is not a consideration. Something may be scarce, but may still be available if one is patient and perseveres. This can be said for certain scarce, classic items. Even though they are rare, these regularly can be found in one of the world's auctions.

However, there are some items that hardly, if ever, are found at such a venue. They have to be obtained another way -- if at all. That way may place them out-of-reach of even the well-heeled, because their means of being found and obtained is so challenging. That which presents a great degree of acquisition difficulty would be viewed more highly than that which simply is scarce.

SIGNIFICANCE: Organized philately has gotten very pompous with this term. The essence of "significance" is vital to understanding the value of polar philatelic material. However, it must be used carefully to avoid inadvertently giving it an elitist connotation. "Significance" to us involves examining the events surrounding both the polar philatelic item - - and the material's inherent characteristics - - to determine its total philatelic and / or polar historical importance.

Courtesy of the Pierson Collection -- SCOTT II

Let's look at the first part of "significance"; the polar events that gave rise to this piece of polar material. Most would agree, for example, that just about all postal material from the pre-WW I British Antarctic Expedition known as "Scott II" has "importance". It came from one of polar history's premier events. However, something similar can be said about a flown cover from an emergency flight on 12 January 1986 that evacuated 21 from the sinking expedition vessel Southern Quest (misnamed "Ocean Quest" in the annotation). It was supporting several expeditions from Europe when it foundered. What must have been an heroic aerial rescue by a USA Coast Guard pilot (LCDR Carlson) then at McMurdo, surely must have narrowly averted an even larger disaster. Fortuitously, this pilot had just put some collector mail in the pockets of his flight suit that he intended to wear on what had been anticipated to be routine flying the next day. These few fortunately carried covers suddenly were elevated beyond the level of normal polar flight mail.

The illustration to the right demonstrates the value of "significance" in a modern-era cover. Its high "importance quotient" dispels any negative value connotations that might be attached to its relatively recent vintage. It was carried on a landing at the South Pole. The very FIRST landing at the South Pole! Many landings since have been made at Amundsen - Scott South Pole Station. However, only one (carrying a few pieces of mail) was the first. This cover postally documents this polar and aviation landmark.

The second part of this factor concerns the intrinsic philatelic importance of the material. Some of it gains enhanced distinction because of their purely philatelic features. Most polar items have little or none of this commodity. A few, however, have more than enough to elevate quite highly their status that otherwise might be rather mundane.

Not many of us would be that excited about mail from a 1932 (primarily) feature film-shooting expedition to Greenland by a Nazi Germany motion picture company (Universal Tonfilms). Nobody on the "Universal Greenland Expedition" died, sustained a great calamity or discovered a missing link on a map of Greenland. Dr. Ernst Sorge did some science, but this expedition principally filmed a story, had some under-the-tent romance and went back to Germany with SOS Eisberg in the can. 1 B U T - - they also had a famous pilot (Ernst Udet) with them. He flew some of their mail to the outside world. Pieces are known bearing an air mail vignette, as illustrated here, designed by famous artist and writer Rockwell Kent, then residing nearby in Greenland before writing his personalized account about this experience. This adhesive can be considered Greenland's first air mail stamp. This semi-official stamp may even have been the first adhesive specifically designed and used for polar air mail. That bestows heightened philatelic significance to much of this Greenland filming adventure's postal material from what otherwise would have been a less than epic event in polar history.

"Derivation" is a sub-category of "significance". This would contrast third-party or "manufactured" postal material from that bearing inherent expedition markings. Third-party material is that produced by a source outside, and unrelated to, the expedition. Generally these are not serviced from within the expedition, neither by an authorized agent nor by expedition personnel. Sometimes they are prepared elsewhere and have a remote expedition connection (e.g., taken aboard a returning expedition vessel to be canceled at its post office after the expedition has ended). Someone producing his own Operation Deepfreeze cachet for posting at USARP's South Pole Post Office, for example, would have bona fide mail from the South Pole, but it would be little different from any other ordinary mail that just happened to have found its way into the post box at South Pole Station. Certainly it would be expedition "associated", though not really FROM the expedition or any of its party. The difference between this and more desirable mail dropped in the same post box is that the other mail most likely would have markings placed by someone affiliated with the expedition.

Typical contemporary seasonal sendings to the various national Antarctic expeditions and their project groups for servicing on the expedition would not be third-party material. It is fully serviced by someone on the expedition and contains markings sanctioned and used by that expedition or its personnel. Such mail really is virtually the same as mail expedition personnel would send to anyone on their own. This would not apply, however, if the outside requester's envelope had any marking (other than a delivery address) that were not authorized or provided by the expedition doing the servicing.

Also not considered "outside" or third-party material is that which is done with the approval of the expedition or the expedition's servicing source, even if the expedition's source applies a marking in the course of handling that mail. A marking or imprint also could be expedition-related if it is not applied by expedition personnel, but is sanctioned by the expedition or its personnel.

The illustration to the left shows a printed envelope produced by Gimbel's philatelic concessionaire at the behest of Admiral Byrd for his second Antarctic expedition. Though obviously produced by a philatelic merchant and sold by this retailer to its customers who wished to have mail serviced from the "Little America II" Post Office, these so-called "Minkus" envelopes unquestionably are expedition-related (and in the case here, also used for official purposes by the expedition). 2 Third party or outside submissions unrelated or only loosely associated with the expedition would not be as highly regarded as that which was expedition used, sponsored or fully serviced by the expedition organization or privately by any of its personnel. Expedition-related material would have expedition (or expedition personnel) produced or sanctioned stationery and markings. This would apply to all impressions on the material, whether printed or not (other than the recipient's address block).

POPULARITY: This is among the most difficult factors to evaluate. One reason is that it is so personal. It has less to do with the material and events surrounding it than how most of us choose to accept it as something desirable. Very often this factor is tempered by our familiarity with the event to which a certain piece is related.

Illustrated to the right is the only existing, real-posted mail on expedition legal-size stationery from the 1937-8 MacGregor Arctic Expedition to to Etah, Greenland. It is the only known piece posted from aboard the expedition vessel, having been mailed via a passing fishing boat off Umanak. It was motivated by the expedition's radio operator that was having difficulty communicating with the expedition's short wave relay station (in upstate New York). He was telling that station's operator to adjust the orientation of his antennae (not being able to make contact, he couldn't tell him over the air waves).

Certainly this one-of-a-kind piece is imbued with "age" and "scarcity". The expedition had some "significance" value, since its weather reporting work is considered to have been at least a part of the impetus for a ring of Arctic weather stations to help better forecast northern hemispheric weather (before the days of weather satellites). It also has added philatelic value, since it is a nice example of relatively uncommon pre-WWII "commercially-posted" Greenland mail.

But the MacGregor Arctic Expedition is virtually unknown. Very little is published about it. Ice Cap News contains more about it than any other polar literature. Its obscurity adversely affects its total value, because it can't be "popular" (i.e., desired and respected by many), if it's hardly known.

A sub-category of "popularity" is the philatelic nature of the item. Was it prepared for philatelic purposes, or did it become philatelic (i.e., collectible) after having seen non-philatelic use (sometimes referred to as "commercial" mail, which would include mail intended for official and personal communications)? Some would contend that commercial mail is more popular than philatelic mail under identical circumstances. Many would be justified in challenging this as a blanket contention.

Courtesy of the Smith Collection

This cover is a good example of such a successful challenge. An "Oleona Base" canceled cover has long been regarded as one of the foremost gems in USA polar postal history. It is doubtful that any of the few pieces from the Ronne Antarctic Research Expedition (1946-8) with this cancellation are other than philatelic. Though one or two may have been produced for political reasons, all seem to have been made for the purpose of saving their postal strike on an envelope.

In contrast, the cover illustrated to the right, also from the Ronne Antarctic Research Expedition, is bona fide "commercial" en route mail from an expedition member. There probably are fewer "commercial" pieces than philatelic ones from this expedition's mail. But this has not seemed to tarnish the luster of any covers like this one.

In fact, collection-inspired material occupies a respectable place in polar philately. Many of our most exalted pieces wouldn't exist without this having been their motivation. Even that which had been posted for personal communications purposes often can be found to contain a plea or suggestion that the recipient not dispose of the mailed envelope or card.

Collection-inspired material should not be scorned, especially since it is really an extension of a long and socially honorable tradition. The sending of non-polar travel or event-recording postcards serves a similar function. That practice began with the first postcards about a century ago. Mailed greetings by travelers certainly predate this. So philatelic postings from polar expeditioners actually maintain a long tradition of using the mail to document travel as well as exposure to notable current events.

These are polar philately's VALUE FACTORS. Together these elements comprise a standard that can be used to establish the philatelic character or "value" of polar material. No single factor in the above list should be considered without also including the others. However, one characteristic can have such a powerful effect, that it would overshadow any influence by the others. B U T--

there is yet another "worth"-determining element that has not been discussed. That's because it really doesn't belong in any VALUE FACTOR criteria. However, there are times when this component can be the most important of all in deciding a polar object's value.

The Allies formed ship convoys off the United Kingdom for runs to Arctic Russia - - terminating at Murmansk. This was some of the most hazardous duty of World War II (for all sides). Many of the convoy participants were civilian sailors aboard the merchant ships. They would man their ships as they ran the gauntlet through icy waters to Murmansk, be only at Murmansk until their ship was unloaded and ready to leave, then head back from where they had come.

Although the Arctic convoys technically left for Arctic Russia from Europe, many of the merchant vessels came from the USA. Their sailors probably would have returned there after making a convoy run (either to ship out with another vessel or take leave).

There probably wasn't much for a merchant seaman to purchase in Murmansk at the height of the war. No doubt some simply bought a cheap postcard for mailing home as a memento of their having survived another convoy. Since their stay at Murmansk wouldn't have been that long, those mailing postcards probably wrote them very soon after arriving.

Convoys to Russia weren't that frequent. #JW57 (outbound convoys in 1944 bore a "JW" designation) started 20 February 1944. The next one (JW58) sailed from Loch Ewe 27 in March 1944. It arrived, less one vessel (and after seeing combat action), at the Kola Peninsula on 4 April 1944. Most of JW58's surviving ships departed Russia later that month in RA59 (inward convoys in 1944 were designated "RA"). ³

This (probable) American writing on 4 April 1944 from Murmansk surely had come on JW58. That would crown this piece as one of the elusive pieces of polar mail that document a World War II Allied Arctic convoy to the Kola Peninsula.

Applying polar philately's VALUE FACTORS helps determine the relative market worth of a piece of polar material. B U T - -

first one may need to exercise an even more critical valuation factor. That would be the unmasking of a potential polar piece's provenance. It might reveal an exciting polar substrate buried beneath a deceptively tepid surface.

Appreciation to George Hall for his assistance and advice.

NOTES

¹ An English translation exists of Dr. Sorge's book about this motion picture filming expedition (Dr. Ernst Sorge, With Plane, Boat, and Camera in Greenland [N.Y.: D. Appleton-Century Co., Inc., 1936].

² See Hal Vogel, "B.U.T.," Ice Cap News, 151 (Jan-Feb 1982), 36-40 for details about this "Byrd II" stationery.

³ Bob Ruegg and Arnold Hague, Convoys to Russia 1941-1945 [U.K.: World Ship Society, 1992), 62.

Back to the ASPP Home Page   |   Back to the South-Pole Home Page  |  Next Page