The Indian States are usually divided into "Indian Feudatory States" or "Native Feudatory States." However, the term native was abandoned after WWI by the British Imperial Government itself; and students of Indian history, society or art have long ceased to use the term feudatory Princely States. Burton Stein writes in his 1998 "History of India" in Oxford's Blackwell series: "For India, the term feudal has no validity, except, perhaps, as a vague indicator of pre-capitalist /pre-modern societies."

The Feudatory States of India are preceded in the catalogues by the Indian Convention States. To appreciate the difference we must start from the fact, that there were more than six hundred states governed by Maharajas and Maharanis, Nawabs, Rajas, Sultans and other Princes and Princesses when the East India Company introduced its "double government": the policy according to which these dignitaries retained their styles and most of their privileges through a stipulated annual income, while the Company administered the government and collected revenues through Indian officials.

During the second half of the nineteenth century, the Imperial Government of British India pushed for postal unity with Indian stamps having franking power throughout the subcontinent. 629 states welcomed or at least accepted this arrangement; the six Convention States joined them on condition that they be allowed to overprint the Indian stamps with their distinctive state names; but an unspecified number of princes declined and produced their own stamps. Residents or visitors to these in philatelic terms more truly independent Feudatory States had to pay for the privilege for they were required to purchase and affix Indian stamps (or use Indian stationery) in addition to the local stamps if they wished their message to go outside the state. This resulted in the often colorful combination covers or cards that are one of the attractions of Indian philately

The collector of these stamps should keep three things in mind. First, a relatively lower standard of condition must be expected than we find in most modern issues. The key is never "never-hinged" and some entires and even stamps are somewhat ragged or miss minor pieces. The other side of the coin is natural dies, brilliant colors and designs, unfamiliar faces and coats of arms, mysterious symbols, calligraphies and other exotic features that attract aficionados. The Princely States also boast beautiful stamps produced by modern methods. The point about varying condition is often made in catalogues or auction sales of these stamps such as Robson Lowe's "L. E. Dawson" of January 10, 1967 or Harmers of New York's "Harrison D. S. Haverbeck" of June 26-29, 1973.

The second topic is forgeries which have existed in some states almost from the beginning and frightened collectors away. But forgeries, here as elsewhere, can be recognized with the help of explicit descriptions or standard tests, and show up readily when put next to the genuine items. A questionable item may have to be compared with every stamp on a sheet.

Third, there is the distinction between what Haverbeck called "Rarity and Fame." In this area, an unwealthy collector may yet be able to own a stamp that is as rare or almost as rare as some of the famous classical rarities of philately. The very real rarity of some of these stamps was not lost on the great philatelists of the past. Ferrari acquired the unique pair of the Poonch 1/2 anna red of 1879 (SG2;Sc1b) from Tapling by giving him in exchange an unused "Post Office" Mauritius 2d!