Printed In opod
THE CANADIAN SOCIETY OF
P.O. BOX 5722 Station'A', TORONTO,
ONTARIO, CANADA, M5W 1P2
"THE POST-RIDER", No. 17.
Editorial: Scott Catalogue Pricing
Correspondence with Canada
The Riga-Dfnaburg-Or8l Railway 1861-1917
Old and New Cancellations in Occupied
Western Karelia 1940-1941
The curious case of Uncle Arthur
The Cancellations of South Russia
Unlisted Varieties of South Russia
The Romanovs used in South Russia
Review of Literature
The Collectors' Corner
Ruud W. van Wijnen
Patrick J. Campbell
Alex Artuchov and
A. M. Rosselevitch
COORDINATORS OF THE SOCIETY: Alex Artuchov, Publisher & Treasurer
P.J. Campbell, Secretary
Andrew Cronin, Editor
The Society gratefully thanks its contributors for helping to make
this an interesting issue.
CORRECTION TO OUR No. 16, P. 5:-
The paragraph beginning "In any case," was not written by Mr. Elias
and should be included in the Editorial Comment below. The xerox of
the back of the envelope was incorrectly read, as the Berne-Vevey TPO
is dated 18 June, thus 15 days in transit. The single weight was 15g.,
not 1 Lot = 12.8g.; the Prussian Lot was never less than 14-15g.
The misunderstanding is regretted.
Members are reminded that all three coordinators of the Society are
fully engaged in earning their livings and thus cannot answer any
queries. They will be taken up in following issues of "The Post-Rider".
9 -EP6ST ER
I '-' I
SCOTT CATALOGUE PRICING
In the opinion of the Canadian Society of Russian Philately, the Stanley
Gibbons Part 10 is probably the best catalogue in our field and, by
comparison, the Scott listings leave a lot to be desired. Pricing seems
especially at fault and we will now quote some examples.
In the 1986 edition, Scott No.11, the 5-kop. City Post stamp, is priced
used at $650. IT IS NOT WORTH IT! Copies regularly go for about of
catalogue at auction. The only known cover of the Tiflis bisect (Scott
36c = $22,000) was bid for $7000. In the Soviet area, C7a with
the wide "5" variety is priced at $800 and normally goes for about $150.
C23a, the 50-kop Dirigible steel-blue "error", is valued at $500, while
copies sell for $150 Probably the most blatant example is in the 1920
Kharbin "Cents" surcharges for Russian China, Scott 72-80, cataloguing
$625 mint and even more used. Dear God, those stamps are as dead as
We are not the only ones to notice overpricing in the Scott listings;
"The Stamp Wholesaler", in its issue of 25 February 1985, p.12, makes
the same comment. Overpricing is dangerous, as it encourages would-be
auction bidders to think that all our area can be bought cheaply. The
bad apples send the rest of the barrel bad. It is far better to price
conservatively and see auction realisations reach or exceed the
The Scott catalogues have recently been bought by Linn's Publications
of Sydney, Ohio and that change would be a good opportunity to make a
fresh start in pricing policies. We in the Canadian Society of Russian
Philately are ready to supply an annual input to help determine
realistic prices in our field, without necessarily supplanting the
persons) now doing the work. In short, we want to be part of a
consensus and not the final arbiters.
Objectivity is the name of the game.
The views expressed in the articles herein in this issue of "The Post-
Rider" are those of the respective authors and not necessarily those
of the Society or its coordinators.
Anything contained in this issue may be reprinted without permission,
provided that acknowledgement is made and a copy sent to the Society.
AITH CANAQA h
S /," I
"Correspondence with Canada" is a regular feature a i
of this journal. Anyone possessing interesting V- ,
Russian mail to Canada is invited to share it :
with the readership, by forwarding a photograph
or xerox copy of the item, along with same expla-
natory text to the Editor.
EARLY COVERS TO HENRY HECHLER IN HALIFAX
." .'-. '"" ". An"drew
Mr. John Woollam, our English subscriber in the Merseyside, has in his
auction files the illustration of an early registered cover, sent with
three copies of the current 7-kop. stamp on 15 December 1882 O.S. from
Tomasz6w in the Piotrkow province of Russian Poland to Henry Hechler in
Halifax, Nova Scotia. Mr. Hechler was a well-known Canadian stamp
dealer and details about his background have already been given in "The
Post-Rider" No. 8, p.69. He would have been 29 years of age in 1882.
The present writer also has an early cover from Russian Poland to Henry
Hechler, as shown above. It is franked with one copy of the same 7-kop.
stamp, cancelled VARSHAVA 29 APR. 1883 (O.S.) 4.EKSP. PR. PROSTOI KORR.4.
(Warsaw, Despatch Office for the Acceptance of Ordinary Mail). There is
also a strike on the front of a marking reading VARSHAVA*EKSP. PR. i VYD.
INOSTR. KORR.* (Warsaw, Despatch Office for the Acceptance and Delivery of
Foreign Mail) of the same day. The last marking is repeated the next day
on the back, together with a strike at the top of Mail Coach (TPO/RPO)
No. 3. The letter reached New York on 25 May N.S. and was in Halifax two
days later. The total elapsed time was thus 16 days. Observe that the
*letter was franked at the internal rate of 7 kopeks, but no postage due
was noted or raised.
As a final note, we will study in detail the Russian postmarks for Warsaw
one of these days. It is a big and fascinating field !
TRAIN MAIL IN THE BALTIC AREA: THE RIGA-DtNABURG-OREL RAILWAY 1861-1917
by Ruud W. van Wijnen
(translated with grateful thanks and credit to the Dutch monthly journal
"Philatelie", issues of January to March 1985).
The Baltic area (Pribaltika) was formed from the joint territories of the
lands of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. These three countries on the
Baltic Sea, which were independent states between the two world wars, made
up part of Tsarist Russia until 1917. They have been incorporated into the
Soviet Union as Soviet republics since 1940.
We can distinguish the following periods in the transport of mail by train
in the Baltic area:-
Tsarist Russia 1861-1917 (see Fig. la).
The Memel Territory: The German Post 1875-1920.
French Trusteeship 1920-1923 (Fig. lb).
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (Figs. Ic, ld, le). t.Peersburg.
The German Occupation 1941-1944/45 (Fig. If).
The Soviet Union 1944/45-1984 (Fig. Ig). /
Fig.la. Fig.lb. Fig.1c. Fig.ld.
Fig. la: Tsarist Russia. Postal Waggon (Mail Coach) No. 40, 6 June 1914
from Riga to St. Petersburg (Russian postage stamp).
Fig. b: Memel Territory-French Trusteeship. Train No. 5 on 27 July 1920
from Pogegen to Schmalleningken (French postage stamp with overprint
"MEMEL / 10 / Pfennig").
Fiq. lc: Estonia. Mail Coach Pgrnu-Tallinn on 18 May 1932 (Estonian stamp).
Fig. Id: Latvia. Mail Coach No.55 from Riga to Liepaja on 10 October 1936
(Latvian postage stamp).
A 118. -192 .--
-. ,--: /..
- -" ,
Fig.le. Fig.lf. Fig.lg.
Fig. le: Lithuania. Mail Coach No. 6 from Klaipeda to Siauliai on 28
February 1929 (Lithuanian postage stamp).
Fig. If: German Occupation. Train No. 8426 from Riga to Windau on
23 April 1943 (German postage stamp with overprint "OSTLAND").
Fig. gq: Soviet Union. Mail Coach Ventspils-Mazirbe-Dundaga (in Cyrillic
letters) 20 July 1955*b (Soviet postal stationery).
EDITORIAL COMMENT: The entire Russian inscription begins with the initials
P/V (= Pochtovyi Vagon) and B/N (= ? Any suggestions from our Post-Rider
The study and description of train mail in the Baltic area have only been
covered in a fragmentary way up to now, as can be seen from the following
V. Hurt: "Estonian Forerunners 1636-1918", in Eesti Filatelist, 1982,
* pp. 237 et seq.
E. Ojaste & H. Osi: "Railway TPOs and Mail Transport on the Estonian
Railways 1918-1940", in Eesti Filatelist 1978-1979.
N. Jakimovs: "Latvijas Pasta Vagonu Zimogi", Riga 1979, Manuscript.
N2 ~xs I'
- R.W. van Wijnen & V. Doniela: "The Development of the Railway Network
in Lithuania", in Het Baltische Gebied, No. 2/1983.
- Various authors: "Train Mail in Lithuania, Routes and Markings", in
Het Baltische Gebied, No. 1/1983.
- H. Schultz: "Deutsche Dienstpost 1939-1945", 4te Lieferung, 1955, p.243
- E. Becker: "Bahnpoststempel des Memelgebiets", Turin, 1929.
The construction of the railway network and the introduction of mail
coaches on the Baltic routes in the Tsarist period were of real interest
prior to the development of the train mail service in the independent
Baltic States. This article about the Riga-Orel Railway Line has been
written from that point of view. It therefore deals with only 274 out of
the total length of 932 versty of the railway line (1 versta = 1.067 km. =
0.63 mile), namely the stretch from Riga up to the later frontier between
Latvia and the Soviet Union.
The first railways in Russia.
When a railway line 23 km. long (14.4 miles) was begun as a trial in 1835
between St. Petersburg and Tsarskoe Selo, 200 km. (130 miles) had already
been laid down in Great Britain and 1300 km. (813 miles) in North America
alone. The further expansion of the railway network in Russia proceeded
slowly, mainly because of the dependence on capital from abroad. After the
coming into service of the St. Petersburg-Moscow line in the spring of
1851, it was not until 1862 that the second great link could be put into
service: the 1027 vdrst route (642 miles) between St. Petersburg and
Warsaw, with a branch line from Vil'na to the German border. The
construction of this line, which connected in Warsaw with the railway to
Vienna, was begun in 1851 with the personal consent of Tsar Nicholas I,
which was mainly based on strategic considerations.
The St. Petersburg-Warsaw railway ran through the eastern areas across
what was later to be Latvia and Lithuania. There was a railway bridge over
the Daugava river at Dunaburg.(Many cities in the Baltic area have three
names: German, Russian and in one of the national languages of Estonia,
Latvia or Lithuania. A few examples:-
D~naburg Dvinsk Daugavpils
Libau Libava Liepaja
Reval Revel' Tallinn
Wilno Vil'na Vilnius
Wirballen Verzhbolovo Virbalis).
Dunaburg was an important junction on the Riga-Orel railway line, after it
had gone into service. Within ten years after the St. Petersburg-Warsaw
line had been laid, the following links to the port cities of Riga, Reval
and Libau came into being:-
12 Sept. 1861: Riga-DVnaburg.
9 May 1862: Wilno-Verzhbolovo/Eydtkuhnen.
24 Oct. 1870: Gatchina-Reval.
4 Sept. 1871: Wilno-Libau.
The Riga-DAnaburg-Orgl Railway Line.
The layong down of the 201-virsta length (126 miles) of railway from Riga
to Dunaburg began on 8 May 1858. The initiative for this project was taken
by the Riga Chamber of Commerce, which availed itself of the opportunity
to run railways as private undertakings (see: "A History of Russian
Railways", by J.N. Westwood, 1964).
iL'j~h~I~i 'Ald ;ag: Eo~
Fig.2 (above). The St. Petersburg
station at Dinaburg on the St. -- / ./ -. .--
Petersburg-Warsaw Railway Line.
Fig.3 (at right). Letter from Riga
27 Oct.1868 to Stettin with the
station marking at top left reading / -
RIG.VIT.ZH.D. = Riga to Vitebsk
3apon litK)ir n.i n.11 eseaIrMTin nuaMB e ,MCTIRHT1" ..
Knst- nd Cement- Stein- Fabrik ,,STIBLITE" ,
Fig.4. Letter from Stockmannshof Fig.5. The DInaburg station in Riga.
7 May 1900 to Germany, with printed
sender's address at top reading:via
With the realisation of a quick and cheap link with the hinterland, an
attempt was made to have the export of grain moved from Libau to the port
at Riga. The Russian government recognized the importance of the line and
put up a guarantee of 4s% interest on the invested capital for a period
of 75 years. The money for the Riga-Dinaburg line came in without
problems. That was in contrast to the financing of other concessions
which had been granted at the time. The link was put into use on 12
An English company obtained a concession in 1863 for a connecting line
from Dunaburg to Vitebsk and, two years afterwards, a concession was
granted under very favourable terms for ann ext io to Oril. The
Dptnaburg-Vitebsk line was ready on 10 Oct. 1866. Of the total length of
Dtlnaburg-Vitebsk line was ready on 10 Oct. 1866. Of the total length of
243 versty (177 miles), only 73 versty (46 miles) lay over the basic
territory of Latvia. Orel was reached in 1868, while the link with
Tsaritsyn on the Volga (Stalingrad, Volgograd) was a fact by 1871.
The Vitebsk-Orel route amounted to 488 v8rst (305 miles). The total
length of the Riga-Orel line, called RIGO-ORLOVSKAYA ZHEL. DOROGA in
Russian, came to 932 versty (520 miles). With an average driving speed
of 40 verst per hour (25 m.p.h.), it would take a train around 24 hours
to do the run from Orel to Riga. However, the waiting time at the
stations was long, so the run would well have taken a considerably longer
time (see K. Baedeker: "Russland; Handbuch fur Reisende", 1912).
We find on the station markings of Riga, Dunaburg and Balbinovo the name
of the line or sections thereof, as well as in the addresses on pieces of
mail. The station in Riga was the Dinaburg Station, which was also called
the Orel Station. (EDITORIAL COMMENT: The custom in Russian cities served
by railways is to designate the stations by the names of the destinations).
The Latvian Stations on the Riga-Orel Railway Line
German name Latvian name Russian name
K YPTEHNoz b
11C If t0f,.
PH HrN YHY, C=POt
KOKEH F'33 EH N5
iITO KMA HC fr
/PE i S yPrb
L A Pb rPALb 7
HM I4L A Xrb
S /(/ *
i J" 506
RI 0 A gare.
(RIGA gare) 27
H PEC/A 3 A
CA J6brMH 7b
The organisation of the transport of mail by train in Russia.
In 1838, one year after the opening of the line, an agreement was
concluded between the Russian Imperial Posts and the railway company for
the transport of mail between St. Petersburg and Tsarskoe Selo. That was
of great importance for the further development of the transport of mail
by rail since, by putting a new rail link into service, the railway
company was now obliged to transport the mail.
In 1857, the companies were required to make available a space of around
three metres (three yards) in a passenger coach for the transport of
mail. While that was not paid for, space for a greater clearance over
and above that area was paid for by the Imperial Posts. The transport of
mail by train remained under the control of the Imperial Posts until
1869, but in that year a special organisation was set up to replace it,
namely UPRAVLENIE PEREVOZKI POCHT PO ZHELEZNYM DOROGAM = Administration
for the Transport of the Mails by Railways which, from then onwards,
could be designated as "The Railway Posts". Russia was divided into nine
main divisions, which were set up at railway stations in the following
No. City Station
No. City Station
8 Moscow Smolensk Station
There was a main post office, from which the post offices on the
stations and in the mail coaches were managed. These postal divisions
were separate from the postal districts of the Imperial Posts.
The above distinction between the Imperial Posts and the Railway Posts
suggests a clear separation of functions. However, not all the post
offices at the stations came under the Railway Posts, as they also bore
in their cancellers the word VOKZAL (= station; see Fig. 6 on the
previous page). Riga came under the sixth main division of the Railway
Posts, the head office of which was in Orel. We find that confirmed in
canceller No. R8, with the text: RIGA 69 OTDELA ZH.D.
The Postal Waggons (Mail Coaches).
As stated earlier, the railway companies were obliged from 1857 onwards
to take care of the transport of mail on the lines run by them. The mail
coaches, which functioned as travelling post offices that cancelled and
sorted the mail, soon came upon the scene. This led to the use of mail
coach postmarks, in which a station number was designated. This number
showed at which station a postal item was handed in and the postmark
consequently had to be changed for each station. This required a slot
of a certain size and also the text POCHTOVYI VAGON = Mail Coach,
pointing to a separate coach to act as the travelling post office.
Mail coach postmarks with station numbers are known from the opening
year of 1862 on the St. Petersburg-Warsaw railway line. The oldest such
example recorded from the Riga-Dinaburg line dates from 1868. The mail
coaches were equipped with a letter box, wherein mail could be deposited
during the station stops. Mail was also taken out of the letter boxes
that were placed on the platforms of small stations which had no post
offices and handed over to the mail coaches for despatch.
The station numbers.
We find the station numbers placed next to the day designation, mainly
in front and sometimes after it; mostly turned sideways and sometimes in
the normal position. The reason for this diversity in position should be
clear; upon the cancelling of the mail on the train after coming to a
specific station, the station number had to be changed. The train swayed
and the clerk might well have been obliged to hurry up. The number of
postal items with a mail coach postmark bearing an incorrect station
number (often one or two numbers too high or too low) is substantial.
This usage came to an end in 1881.
station day station
number B indication number
2 HOB. d' MAP. rS
1891 o 1874 J )
( m/amail coach h(
-number mail coach
4R P, sl
Fig. 8. An official letter from the Clergy at Kokenhusen/Koknese to the
Clergy at Wenden/Cesis with the postmark of Mail Coach 9-10, dated 11
August 1878 and with the station number 10 of R8mershof/Skriveri. As
this letter was handed in to the mail coach at the station of Kokenhusen,
the number is incorrect. Kokenhusen was station number 9.
The station numbers on the Latvian section of the Riga-Orel Railway.
In the years that mail coach postmarks with station numbers were used
on the Riga-Dunaburg-Orel line, mail coaches Nos. 7-8 & 9-10 ran on this
route. Further on in this article, we will go into the matter in more
detail, but the following can be established here about the usage of
station numbers. Mail Coach No. 7-8 on the Riga to Dinaburg stretch was
numbered from Riga as station No. 1 to Dinaburg as station No.15.
However, Mail Coach No. 9-10 on the self-same stretch was numbered the
other way around: i.e. Dinaburg was station No. 1, going up to Riga as
station No.15. Mail Coach No. 7-8 on the Riga-Dunaburg-Or8l line had
Or8l as the final station numbered as 46.
Station numbers and the stations.
Mail Coach No.7-8. Mail Coach No.9-10. German
(1868-1869) (1870-1878) Name
(*EDITORIAL COMMENT: Many stations in the Empire were located some
distance from the towns they served. Lielvarde served the Latvian town
The numbering of the stations was independent of the direction of the
train line, so that each station had a fixed number.
After the opening of the DInaburg-Orel line on 21 November 1868, Mail
Coach No. 7-8 was installed thereon. At the same time, the Riga-Ddnaburg
stretch received Mail Coach No.9-10. Four postal items found from towns
lying on the D!naburg-Orel line had markings with the following station
Town Year Station Number
Polotsk 1876 7
Smolensk 1876 17
Roslavl' 1876 21
Kursk,via Or8l 1876 31
The situation with regard to Dtnaburg in the relative distances between
these four towns shows a numbering system starting from Dunaburg. But
what was the situation in 1879, when Mail Coach No. 7-8 travelled along
the entire Riga-Orel route ?
Up to 1881, station numbers were indicated in the mail coach markings.
What can we say about the years 1879-1881, when the numbering from Riga
to Dunaburg went from 1 to 15, as was done before 1868 and the numbering
past Dfnaburg went consecutively from 16 onwards ? I have two
indications for such an eventuality: letters from Rostov-on-Don (1881)
and Simferopol' (1879) to Riga, by Mail Coach No. 7-8 and both with the
high station number 46, of the city where these letters were handed over
to the Orel-Riga Railway. Looking at the rail connections, the town was
most likely Orel. The 1876 letter referred to earlier from Kursk had
probably also arrived in Ordl on the train going to Riga, but it bears
a station number 31 and was carried in the period when Mail Coach No.7-8
still ran to Dunaburg. The difference between both station numbers for
Or8l is exactly 15 (46-31), i.e. the number of stations between Riga and
In connection with the above survey of the station numbers between Riga
and Dunaburg, the following station numbers could be allocated for the
Latvian section of the Dunaburg-Or8l line:-
Mail Coach Mail Coach
No. 7-8. No. 7-8. German Russian Latvian
(1869-78). (1879-81). Name Name Name
1 15 Dinaburg Dvinsk Daugavpils
2 16 Josefowo lozefovo Naujene
3 17 Uschwalde Malinovka Izvalda
4 18 Kreslau Kreslava Krdslava
5 19 Baltin Bal'tin Baltigi
6 20 Balbinowo Bal'binovo Indra
31 46 Orel Orl
The mail coach numbers on the Riga-Dunaburg-Or8l Line.
A mail coach that ran on a specific railway line received two successive
numbers; one for each direction of the train. For the Riga-Orel line,
4; r -
g ^y -
\ e 9/
I Fig. 9.
A letter from
SRiga to Plyussa
on the SPB -
Note Mail Coach
No.7-8 of 4 Aug.
1880 & station
number 1 of
A letter from Riga to Finland via
St. Petersburg. Note the marking
of Mail Coach No. 9-10 of 26 Sept.
1874 and station number 15 of
A letter from
the Crimea via
Orel to Riga.
Note marking of
Mail Coach 7-8
of 7 Dec. 1879
number 46 of
mail coaches ran with the following numbers in the course of time: 7-8,
9-10 & 105-106. A survey follows below of these numbers with the matching
routes, as arranged by N. Luchnik (see his article "Zheleznodorozhnaya
Pochta Rossii", in Sovetskii Kollektsioner, No.11, Moscow 1974) after
consulting the official lists of Russian post offices for the years 1872,
1881, 1884, 1891, 1893, 1895, 1899-1902, 1905, 1907, 1909, 1910, 1912,
1913, 1916 & 1917:-
Mail Coach No. 7-8: 1872 Dinaburg-Or8l.
Mail Coach No. 9-10: 1872 Dinaburg-Riga.
Mail Coach No. 105-106: 1884 Vitebsk-Riga.
(*EDITORIAL COMMENT: It should be remembered here that,by 1895, attempts
were being made by the Imperial Government to lessen the influence of the
German language and culture in the Baltic provinces. Hence the
Russification of Dunaburg, which had previously been transliterated into
Russian as Dinaburg and finally Dvinsk).
The year dates mentioned here can cause confusion. A year number specifieS
the last officially known year when a mail coach numbering was still
applicable for a particular route. However, because Luchnik does not give
the mail coach numbers with the relevant routes for all the years between
1860 and 1917, we do not know when a specific numbering began and when it
was transferred to another route. Only letters and cards with mail coach
numbers struck on them can fill in the gaps in the Luchnik listing and
yield data on changes. The condition being that it can be determined
indisputably from such pieces of mail where they were posted and by what
route they reached their destinations.
I have used the Luchnik data, together with a listing of the postal
history material collected by me. Five routes have thus been classified:
Riga-Dunaburg; Dfnaburg-Vitebsk; Dunaburg-Orel; Riga-Vitebsk & Riga-Or8l.
The Riga-Verzhbolovo route noted in 1913 turned southwards at Dunaburg in
the direction of Wilno.
Explanation of the Listing.
The underlined year dates and the mail coach numbering given below come
from the Luchnik listing. The underlining line gives at the same time the
length of the route, for example:-
1881 Mail Coach No.7-8 runs from Riga, via Dunaburg and Vitebsk to Orbl.
1891 Mail Coach No.105-106 runs between Riga and Dunaburg; at the same
time, Mail Coach No.7-8 runs from Dunaburg to Orel.
The mail coach numbers not underlined come from pieces of mail that
satisfy the criteria stated earlier.
via Riga to
17 May 1869,
12 June 1870,
on the Riga-
No. 106 and
date 16 Nov.
1888 on the
V "-""" "
I I I-
In use: 12 September
Line markings 186
7- 8:31 August 186
7- 8:17 May 186
9-10:12 June 187
6 in use: 10 October
8in use: 21 November
1873 9-10 1873 7-8
1874 9-10 1874 7-8
1875 9-10 1875
1876 9-10 1876 7-8
1877 9-10 1877
1878 9-10:11 August 1878
1879 7- 8:18 June 1879 7-8
1880 7- 8 1880
1881 7-8:June 1881 7-8
1881 7- 8 1881 7-8
1882 7 1882 8
1883 8 1883
1884 8: August 1884 7
1884 7-8 & 105-106 1884 7-8 & 105-106
1885 106 14oktober 1885 7
1886 106 1886
1888 106 1888
1889 106 1889
1891 106 1891 105
1891 105-106 1891 7-8
Abbrevns IR = Riga D = Dwinsk O = Orel W = Weirbolowo
Let us run through the listing given above. Luchnik gives 1872 as the
first year date for both the Riga-Dunaburg and Dinaburg-Or&l lines, with
Nos.9-10 and 7-8 respectively for the mail coaches. However, postal
examples prove the usage of No.7-8 between Riga and DUnaburg in 1868 and
1869. A letter of 12 June 1870 gives 9-10 as the mail coach number. The
mail coach numbers on the Riga-Dlnaburg route would have been introduced
at the end of 1869 or the beginning of 1870. At the same time, Mail
Coach No.7-8 would have gone into service on the DUnaburg-Or8l route.
Luchnik pulls off a second "hat trick" before 1881: the entire Riga-Or8l
route was traversed by Mail Coach No.7-8. Two postal items shed clear
light on when the numbers were changed for the Riga-Dinaburg run;
between 11 August 1878 and 18 June 1879. Mail Coach No.9-10 then went
running on the Kalkuni-Radzivilishki route.
The year 1884 was a confusing one for introducing changes. Mail Coach
1892 105 1892
1893 106 1893
1894 105 106 1894
1895 106: October 1895
1895 105-106 1895 7-8
1900 106 1900
1909 106 R-D 1909
1910 1910 70-D
1912 105R-W 106R-D 1912 8D-O
1913 106 W-R 1913 70-D
1913 105-106 to Werlbolowo 1913
1914 105R-W 10 W-R 1914 70-D
1915 105R-W 1915
1915 7-8 1915 7-8
1916 1916 8D-O 7 0-D
ReprodukzP-chana It Oe ChnO.
Saileerut. A. e A postcard to
.(R La.- I 4i^ apca adre marking of M.C.
\3 ? -~ No.106, 3.9.12
on the Riga-
... Note printed
Stext on card
.... ....... .. in Latvian
<. .- .(old spelling)
lj issued by B.S.
^^ '. A ~ ****'- x. --^Iic3>. ;...'L. ...j.....I- .....h r
31 Weinberg in
ii 9 iii
marking of M.C.No.7, 10.12.10 on Dvinsk with oval marking of M.C.105,
the Or-l-Dvinsk route. 13.4.15 on the Riga-Verzhbolovo line.
year, Mail Coach No.105-106 was also put into service between Riga and
Vitebsk. Which one of those mail coaches ran to Oral is not clear, but on
26 September 1885 a letter went from OrlK to Riga by Mail Coach No. 7.
Furthermore, it is notable that the numbers 7-8 are no longer encountered
after 1884 between Riga and Dnnaburg and only postmarks of Mail Coach
No.105-106 are to be found on that route.
The conclusion that Mail Coach No.7-8 no longer ran between Riga and
Dinaburg appears to be correct. Mail Coach No.7-8 would have taken care
of the Or 1-D8naburg stretch and Mail Coach No.105-106 would have perhaps
ran on a section of this route, from DDnaburg to Vitebsk. More postal
items are needed to clarify the matter.
Luchnik's listing is again clear for 1891: Mail Coach No.105-106 going
between Riga and Dinaburg and No.7-8 between Dfnaburg and Orel (a postal
reorganisation possibly put an end to the double journey over the
There are no changes in the listing up to 1913. However, a new route was
named in that year for Mail Coach No.105-106: Riga to Verzhbolovo, the
latter being a station on the Germano-Russian border. Two postal items,
both from 1912, have in their oval mail coach markings different place-
names for the numbers 105 and 106: Riga-Verzhbolovo and Riga-Dvinsk. The
route of Mail Coach No.105-106 may thus well have been changed in 1912.
According to Luchnik, Mail Coach No.7-8 again ran on the entire Riga-Orel
route in 1915. I do not know of any pieces of mail from the years 1916 &
1917 to confirm this change. That Mail Coach No.105-106 no longer ran
through to Verzhbolovo is clear; the southern part of the Baltic area had
been occupied by German troops in 1915.
The mail coach markings used on the Riga-Or&l railway line.
In type, form and time of introduction, the mail coach markings are
similar to those of the Imperial Posts. The indication for mail coach
(POCHTOVYI VAGON) was also not altered after the formation of the Railway
Posts. Originally, the railways only had names that were also mentioned
on the markings, used in the mail coaches on the relevant route. Also,
after most of the mail coaches had received numbers, there were still
markings being used with route indications. In such instances, it was a
case of a temporary usage on a newly opened route or part of a route, in
expectation of the assignment of numbers. Such cases are not known on the
aFig. 17a.p jop A3oTV pUmn x3 X
Fig. 17a. o 1865raa 26 inOb 1866 rq
Before the standard markings came into use, provisional unframed two-line
type-set handstamps were applied in 1865 & 1866 between Riga and DUnaburg,
as shown above in Fig. 17a.
There is a manuscript indication known from the Vitebsk-Ddnaburg line,
with date 29 December 1866. This beautiful item from the Sven Kraul
Collection is shown in Fig. 17b at the bottom of the previous page. The
handwritten marking came about because the Vitebsk-Riga stretch, which
had been opened on 5 October 1866, still had no mail coach postmarker.
The first standard mail coach markings had a double number, i.e. 7-8
(see type 2a in the tables below). It was used during both directions of
of the train. They were replaced in 1881 by cancellers with one number
(type 3). The numbers were interchangeable, so that the same canceller
could be used for both directions. The numbers often stood slanting or
lying in the cancels; they were also often indistinct. The oval markings
(type 5) also gave the places between which the mail coach ran, in
addition to the route number. This postmark type was officially
introduced on 3 February 1903; markings of this kind actually came into
use only after a previously applied canceller went out of order.
Survey of the mail coach markings on the Riga-Orel Railway Line.
Mail Coach No. 7-8 Pmk.type 2a.
A I ,(2)
6 3 (3)
Mail Coach No. 7
M MA P
Mail Coach No. 8
Mail Coach No. 7
*:* 1 *:
S*:* 2 *:*
:* .3 *:*
*: *. 4 .
*:* 6 **
*. .7 *-,
S:. 1 .*:
. :* 2 *:*
* :. 3 .:
. 4 .*
.:* 6 **
.:. 7 *:*
23. 1. 1903
Pmk.type 4a. (Not yet found).
Mail Coach No. 8
Mail Coach No. 7
Mail Coach No. 8
Mail Coach No.9-10
Mail Coach No. 105
(1) z 27 mm.
(2) 0 27 mm.
(3) 0 27 mm.
S(4) z 25 mm.
M (5) 6 25 mm.
S(6) 0 25 mm.
(7) 0 25 mm.
(8) 6 25 mm.
*:* 1 :.
-:- 2 -C-
- 3 -:
-- 5 3
-- 6 .:-
+- 7 -:-
Mail Coach No. 106
Mail Coach No. 105
*-- 1 -:-
--- 2 *:-
-:- 3 *:-
-:* 4 *:-
-:" 6 -:-
-:- 7 -:-
*- 8 -:-
-:- 1 -:-
*> 2 *-
.-- 3 -=-
-- 1 :-
-- 2 *:-
.:- 3 -;-
Mail Coach No. 106
Mail Coach No. 105
SMail Coach No. 106
Mail Coach No. 105
Mail Coach No. 106
VE RZ HB OLOVO-RIGA
Pmk.type 5a (no markings found yet).
(to be continued)
OLD AND NEW CANCELLATIONS IN OCCUPIED WESTERN KARELIA 1940-41
by August Lepp&
It may seem ridiculous to ask for more information from the other side of
the Atlantic, when the matter in question was located inside the old
Finnish border, or on Russian Imperial ground, if you wish. But postal
history material from the ceded territory is scarce here in Finland, for
reasons that I will try to explain.
Certain parts of Finnish (Western Karelia) were occupied by the Soviets
as a result of the Winter War between Finland and the USSR in 1939-1940.
The new border in the south east, where this article is located, was the
same then as it is now. As an exception to the usual European practice at
that time, the areas ceded to the USSR were practically completely
evacuated by their Finnish inhabitants. This first Soviet occupation of
Western Karelia lasted just over one year, from the end of the Winter War
in March 1940 until the Finnish entry into WWII in June 1941. Finnish
troops advanced into all of Karelia during the summer of 1941, including
the eastern section, which had always been Soviet. The presence of
Russian soldiers in Western Karelia is self-evident in the period of
peace between the two wars but, according to the covers available, mail
was also delivered to civilians there.
All the mail that I have seen relating to this area has been sent from
other parts of the USSR or circulated within Western Karelia. There may
be more such items floating around in the USSR, but there has been no
commercial interest in them up to now and so they are not available in
the Western market. The area was evacuated once again in the summer of
1941, this time by the retreating Soviet forces. It is quite easy to
imagine that very few of the advancing Finnish soldiers had any
interest in dirty Soviet covers or that returning Finnish civilians
would be interested in enemy letters. But some looted material is still
available in the philatelic market. The items upon which this article
is based were addressed to Viipuri (Vyborg), or to the area to the
north of Sortavala, i.e. to the north-western point of Lake Ladoga.
There is not enough material yet for comprehensive conclusions, but
some remarks are possible:-
S ./ .. (1) At least two of the old
Finnish postmarks for
S" Viipuri/Vyborg were used by
_I : "' -1j the Soviets in 1940-1941. I
i --V // / have only seen them so far
as arrival marks as they
S". "-- were used at the same time
as new bilingual postmarks.
S- 5.^ -. :. -.-'-:-. The illustration herewith
is that of a cover from
Zvonets, Leningrad province
S / 13 5.41 and showing on the
-: back an arrival impression
..^ ....'---. .'- -'-"'- of the old Finnish machine
-rV marking of VIIPURI the next
: .- day.
An even more interesting cover is the registered item shown at the top
of the next page. It was posted at the Lipetsk Station on the South-
Eastern Railway Line, where it received the cancellation:STALINGRAD-108-
ORPL.g.14.4.41 and confirmed by the notation by hand at top left,
reading "84 / PV 108" (Mail Coach 108, i.e. TPO/RPO). It was addressed
to the city of Vyborg, where it was backstamped with the bilingual Russo-
Finnish postmarker, reading VYBORG KFSSR ViiPURi.k.17.4.41. The initials
KFSSR are significant, as they show that Viipuri and other towns in that
coastal area of Western Karelia that had been ceded to the Russians were
then included in the territory of the newly formed Karelo-Finnish SSR.
This particular SSR was demoted back to the Karelo-Finnish ASSR in 1956
and the post-WWII postmarks seen from Vyborg (Viipuri) show that it is
now included in the Leningrad province.
S The new bilingual postmarks were already being put into use by the
latter half of 1940 and as the cancel engravers did not have a
thorough knowledge of the Finnish language, errors in spelling may be
expected to occur on occasion. There were more than 600 Finnish post
offices of varying size in the ceded areas in 1940, some of them in the
northern sectors of Petsamo and Salla. Some bilingual examples are
shown hereunder, while one named "PIshkki 20" (definitely mispelled,
as "'" is rendered by "y" in Finnish) probably ought to be
included. A lot of work therefore remains to be done and new
information is more than welcome.
y. .. .... f .. .. .
,. ..< .,. .. so/ ldier\
-',..,. '. '
/ : -., -,Q" ,. ...._'. / ..
...--'"" ,' / .... /^ ^ _..'.;- A typical
/y\ "i' ":;" "^ k ;soldier'
, ;- .-; C-, .- ," I .., ,. -" "t, 7 M a
- -~`---~-- -'--
A letter from
on the eve of
attack on the
USSR,, in which
because of its
r ,. .9. .
II ( i -
-1 ~ ~ -' .Ic*" 4; U
V. .4 ** Q. b*. i *,p.
15 ~ JL-T;
I .. *1
.t.', : 4.*
-~~r -. ...w _
14 ; '
,',' : *.;. -,.' -
.!i "; ;- r "S
-5 .-1 -~55~~*
: The Postal History of Territories ceded to USSR; Karelia,
Petsamo and Salla (Lahti, 1980).
: Neuvosto-Karjalan leimoja 1940-1941 (Soviet Karelian
postmarks 1940-1941; in the journal KERFIL 1/1982).
: Lis&& leimoja Neuvosto-Karjalasta (Postmarks from Soviet
Karelia once again;in the journal KERFIL 2/1982).
THE CURIOUS CASE OF UNCLE ARTHUR
by P. J. Campbell.
"Is there any point to which you would wish to draw my attention ?"
"To the curious incident of the dog in the nighttime".
"The dog did nothing in the nighttime".
"That was the curious incident", remarked Sherlock Holmes.
("Silver Blaze", from Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes).
It is relatively easy to do research on some recorded event, but much
more difficult to establish the facts concerning something that did not
take place, particularly if the non-event occurred in Russia in the 1930s
at a time when news was managed by experts and where unsuccessful events
were glossed over or not reported at all.
This story began germinating some time ago, when I was doing research on
the airmail stamps of Soviet Russia. I came before long to Scott C34-35,
an attractive set of stamps with a map of the polar regions, an aeroplane
flying over an icebreaker and an inscription above. The Scott catalogue
commented that the set was issued "to commemorate the Second
International Polar Year, in connection with the flight to Franz-Josef
Land". That fitted in well with my interest in Arctic flying, so it only
remained to identify the details of the flight, the type of aircraft
used and the pilot and/or crew. Various catalogues described the stamps,
of 50 kopeks(red)and 1 rouble (green) values as being printed by the
photogravure process, line-perforated 12, with line-perforation
varieties of 10h for both values and a comb perforation variety of 10 x
12 for the 50-kopek value. V. Karlinskii, in "Soviet Collector" No.9 for
1971 (see BJRP No.60), says that there were special rates created for
this flight: 50 kopeks for a registered postcard and 1 rouble for a
registered letter; it was described as SPESHNAYA POCHTA or Express
Correspondence, rather than Air Mail. All the catalogues agreed that the
stamps were printed on the watermarked paoer with the pattern known as
"Greek border and rosettes",or "Maze and flowers", or by the Russian
name "carpet". A couple of catalogues identified the icebreaker as the
"Sibiryakov" and Stanley Gibbons and Minkus agreed that the flight
being celebrated was from Franz-Josef Land to Archangel. The date of
issue was given as 26 August 1932 by SG and simply as August by others.
Two catalogues identified the designer as I. Dubasov, a man with a good
track record for accuracy in the attractive Graf Zeppelin North Pole
flight stamps (Scott Nos. C26-33), the 10-kopek airship stamp (C15) and
the fine Express Mail set (El-3); all showing a good eye for technical
As a further reference, I turned to the official Soviet stamp catalogue
1918-1974, which confirms the above, saying "map of the northern oceanic
basin, with aeroplane and icebreaker in the Arctic, text in Russian and
French, airmail, Second International Polar Year, phototype (i.e.
collotype) process, 'carpet' watermark" and adds that "stamps on letters
sent to the mainland from Franz-Josef Land for the First Polar Air Route
in 1932, were cancelled with a special cancel and there was also a
Special cachet for the flight". My final reference was the "Soviet
Catalogue of Special Postal Cancellations 1922-1961". This illustrates
the two special markings mentioned above. The first of these is circular
with double rings 20.5 & 30mm. in diameter; see Fig. 20 on p.42 of "The
Post-Rider" No. 16 for the illustration. There is a miserable
representation at the top of a high-wing single-engine monoplane with a
ski undercarriage. Between the two rings are the words "Franz-Josef Land"
and two five-point stars. In the centre is the date "26.VIII.32". It is
significant that this cancel, or part of it, can be found on most used
copies of Scott C33-34, always in black, so it must have been used to
"cancel to order", as there just could not have been so many stamps in
The second marking (designed by S.N. Novskii) was triangular; see the
illustrations in Figs. 16 & 17 on p.41 of "The Post-Rider" No.16. This
special cachet,in red, shows a ski-equipped aircraft flying over the
Northern Icy Ocean (quoting from the Soviet literature; that is the
Russian name for the Arctic Ocean) and the phrases "Second International
Polar Year 1932-33" and "First Polar Air Flight, 1932". The aircraft,
strangely enough, is now a low-wing monoplane, almost certainly a Junkers
F.13 or perhaps a Junkers W.33. Both of these were used extensively in
Russia, including for operations in the North on skis, but I feel there
is enough evidence to rule out these types for reasons stated below. It
may be of interest to identify the three-engined aircraft on the envelope
(Fig.17) as a Junkers G.24 (military version K.30). This aircraft was,
like the F.13, built under licence at Fili and was also utilised in the
Arctic, but it can also be ruled an unlikely contender in this study.
We have established at this point that the stamps were prepared for a
planned flight from Franz-Josef Land to Archangel, a distance of some
1750 km. (1092 miles), mostly over open ocean in an extremely inhospitable
region of the world. It is also believed that the stamp designer has
probably given us an accurate sketch, albeit very small, of the aircraft
selected for the event. The reasoning here is that such a flight would
have been unusual in 1932, but politically desirable after the euphoria
following the long Polar flight of the Graf Zeppelin in 1931. So the
stamps had to be designed before the flight and a cachet designed so that
they could be used together on the first-flight covers.
A search of the catalogues to identify the aircraft gave only one response,
for Minkus lists the machine as a Fokker F.3 (the same aircraft as shown
on Scott C2-9). This could be feasible as DERULUFT, when founded on 11 Nov.
1921, bought eight Fokker F.III aircraft and later added three more (two of
which were Fokker-Grulich VI modifications). It may be of interest here to
note that DERULUFT's first revenue-paying flight was with a Fokker F.III,
registered RR.4, from K8nigsberg to Moscow on 1 May 1922. It could be added
that the other leg of this service was from Berlin to Kinigsberg and was
flown by DEUTSCHE AERO-LLOYD, with the first through-flights commencing on
15 June 1925. Returning to our search,however, it is unlikely that Minkus
is correct, as the Fokker F.III aircraft were withdrawn from service in
1926 and replaced by Dornier Merkurs. If we trust Mr. Dubasov, the Fokker
F.III should also be ruled out because, although it is a high-wing
monoplane, it has a cantilever wing, a most unusual and prominent
characteristic, while the aeroplane we are seeking has a wing, braced by
two parallel struts, clearly visible on the stamps. We can therefore make
a list of high-wing monoplanes with parallel struts in the inventory of
Russian airlines at about that period. Taking these in ascending order of
likelihood, there were five: the Aleksandrov/Kalinin/Cheremukhin AK-1; the
Kalinin K-4; the Kalinin K-5; the Dornier Komet III & the Dornier Merkur.
The AK-1 was quite a successful two-passenger aircraft, which first flew
on 8 Feb. 1924. It was powered by a 160-h.p. Salmson engine and was one of
a group of six aircraft of various types that flew from Moscow to Peking
Sto Tokyo in 1925. There seemed to be only a single type, registered RR.DAX
and it may have been operated on some domestic flights by the DOBROLET
airline, which merged with UKRVOZDUKHPUT' in 1928 and was dissolved on 29
Oct. 1928. The AK-1 can, therefore, be ruled out as being rather too early.
The Kalinin K-4 is a possibility, the prototype RR.UAX of 1928 being
powered by a 240-h.p. BMW IV egine, with a small number being built in
Khar'kov and operated by UKRVOZDUKHPUT' on feeder lines. So it was
available, but it seems to have been a little light to have attempted such
an arduous flight and the prominent elliptical wing design could hardly
have been missed by Dubasov.
The Kalinin K-5, our next candidate, came out in 1930 with a 480-h.p. M-22
engine (Gnome-Rh8ne Jupiter). Some 260 of these aircraft were built at the
GAZ-135 factory in Khar'kov during 1931-34 and it could be a candidate,
except for the same elliptical wing. These aircraft were also operated by
UKRVOZDUKHPUT but we will have to trust Dubasov on the wing shape.
Our final selection has to come from two rather similar aeroplanes, both
made by Dornier in Germany. The first was called the Komet III, which
first flew on 7 December 1924. It carried six passengers with a crew of
either one or two and the engine could have been a 360-h.p. Rolls-Royce
Eagle, a 400-h.p. Liberty or even a 450-h.p. Napier Lion. UKRVOZDUKHPUT'
purchased seven of them for commercial passenger use and for survey
SA new derivative of the Komet III had its first flight on 10 Feb. 1925.
It was called the Merkur and was very similar to the Komet III, but with
a two-foot (60 cm.) greater wingspan, a larger fin and an unbraced tail-
plane. The Merkur had a 450/600-h.p. BMW VI engine, but some Komet III
aircraft were retrofitted with the same engine, so it gets difficult to
keep them separated. DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA used some 22 Merkurs on the
Berlin-K8nigsberg night service, which was part of the Berlin-Moscow
route and DERULUFT (the Germano-Russian airline) had at least 9 Merkurs,
some having been transferred to them from DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA's total of
36 in service. Records indicate that some of the Merkurs were later
transferred back to DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA, but some certainly took on Russian
registrations, of which four have been identified as RR.30, RR.34, RR.35
and URSS D.306. I have the name, German registration and works numbers of
13 aircraft involved in the transfer process. All the LUFTHANSA Merkurs
had names like Silberl8we (Silver Lion), Blaufuchs (Blue Fox), Prairiewulf
(Prairie Wolf), etc. As far as I can determine, some of the DERULUFT
Merkur aircraft were equipped with the 660-h.p. BMW VI-U engine, had a
four-blade propeller (consisting of two twin-blade units mounted at right
angles to each other) and had a closed-in flight deck, rather than an open
cockpit beneath a parasol wing, as was found on most of the Merkurs. One
of my sources stated that DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA, up to 1932, had flown over
10 million kilometers (6,250,000 miles) of regular scheduled flights with
the Merkur and, apart from a fatal crash in 1927, the Merkur seemed to
have achieved an enviable safety record.
* The Merkur was therefore widely used in the right period and was a well-
proven design, thus seeming to be the most likely choice for an aircraft
to attempt the Franz-Josef Land to Archangel flight. It can also be
assumed that one of the Merkurs with an enclosed cabin, rather than an
open cockpit, would have been selected for the flight.
The Shmuely Postcard.
My research to determine the aircraft would have ended at this point
with an unproven hypothesis, when an unexpected piece of evidence turned
up. This came in the form of a postcard, clearly postally used, as
illustrated in Andrew Cronin's article "The Stamps and Postal History of
Franz-Josef Land", in "The Post-Rider", No. 16, p.42.
The front of the card, slightly creased, showed a
Dornier Merkur with the usual DERUFUFT lettering on the
engine cowling; the card stated that it was a transport
aircraft of the K8nigsberg-Moscow route. Unfortunately,
no registration can be seen. Soviet Russia has never
issued a stamp illustrating the Dornier Merkur, but
here is Colombia C473, showing SCADTA's Dornier-Merkur I
float plane "Sim6n Bolivar" with registration No. C 32.
The reverse side of the card was even better. It was headed "Greetings
from DERULUFT" and bore the 50-kopek stamp (C34)that is the subject of
this article, it being the correct denomination for an airmail, or air
express postcard (the 1-rouble value being proper for a letter in an
envelope). The stamp was cancelled with the double-circle postmark
described above and a second such added below for good measure, both
being dated 26.VIII.32; also with the second, triangular, cachet noted
above, but this time in blue, not in red. To the left there is a
receiving marking of BERLIN C, L2* (Airport) dated 25.9.32, or 30 days
after mailing. This is most interesting, because it clearly indicates
that the card was delayed in transit and the one-month delay looks more
like mail delivered by ship and rail, rather than by aircraft. The (
little aircraft in the BERLIN C cancel is of no significance for this
study, so it has been ignored.
The final icing on the cake is the message, for the card was addressed
to Mr. Gerd Perlis in Berlin,Grinewaldstrasse 29a and reads as follows:-
Silent Bay, 22.8.32,
Kaiser Franz-Josef Land.
Heartfelt greetings from this glacier nay. It is grandiose.
Unfortunately, picture postcards are not available here, therefore this
is one out of my supply. Greetings to Minna.
Your Uncle Arthur*.
Mr. Shmuely reads the name as Lothar rather than Arthur, but I will
stay with Andrew Cronin's version for this article.
Speculating on this card, it is from Tikhaya (Silent or Calm) Bay,which
is on Hooker Island (see the map on p. 39, Fig. 14 of "The Post-Rider",
No.16) and Uncle Arthur is sending one of his own stock of cards that
were prepared for DERULUFT. Now DERULUFT was the airline set up with the
name Deutsch-aRssische Luftverkehrs-Gesellschaft in 1921, following an
agreement between the Council of People's Commissars and a group of
German airlines (later amalgamated to form DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA), so it
can be reasonable assumed that "Uncle Arthur" was a German employee of
DERULUFT writing home. Now, the only reason I can imagine for him to be
at Tikhaya Bay at that particular time would have been in connection
with the Second International Polar Year and, as he was carrying
DERULUFT postcards, could he not have been part of the crew to prepare
the aircraft for the flight? This to me is pretty good evidence that
the chosen machine was a Dornier Merkur.
Andrew's article assumes that Uncle Arthur was a German scientist, but
misses the point that the card, above the manuscript text, bore the words
"Greetings from DERULUFT", indicating that it was an official handout of
DERULUFT. So, when Uncle Arthur says "here is one from my stock", I am
sure he must have been a DERULUFT employee or, alternatively, someone
from the Dornier Company.
If the above interpretation is correct, my earlier hypothesis is
supported and the flight was planned for a Dornier Merkur of DERULUFT,
probably a Merkur II (Do-B Bal 2), with a BMW VI-U engine and an enclosed
cabin. One such aircraft was registered as RR.34, so that one would be on
our short list.
As to the pilot, my research has come up with only one name, suggested by
the late Kurt Adler in a 1968 article on this subject; see Rossica
Journal No.75, p.93. Mr. Adler said that the pilot was the celebrated
Chukhnovskii, but he gave no source for this statement. It would
certainly be a likely choice, considering Chukhnovskii's flying record in
the Arctic. His article illustrated the essay for Scott C34-35, but that
does not help our search. It may be of interest to note that the word
"Airmail" on the essay was changed to "Air express" on the issued stamps.
A 1972 stamp magazine suggests that Ernst Krenkel was aboard this flight,
but gave no source for the story.
* Having got that far with identifying the aircraft and crew, let us look
at the ship shown on the stamp, which was presumably the vessel that
delivered the aircraft and crew to Franz-Josef Land for the flight. Some
catalogues state that it was the "Sibiryakov", but T.A. Taraconzio's fine
book "Soviets in the Arctic" states (pp.93-94) that the "Sibiryakov" left
Archangel on 28 July 1932 with Capt. Voronin and Prof. Schmidt. It passed
Matochkin Shar on 31 July and went on to make the first transit of the
North-East Passage in a single season, so we can rule out the "Sibiryakov"
The same reference (p.84) states that the "Malygin" (see Scott No.4961)
twice visited Rudolf Island (Teplitz Bay) in 1932 during the Second
International Polar Year, setting up a meteorological station at 81o48'N
and, on the second voyage, got to 82024'N, the northernmost point
reached. The paragraph adds : "Improvement of the station at Tikhaya Bay
(Hooker Island) was likewise provided for; new equipment was set up for
taking of geophysical and other observations and new buildings for its
housing were erected". It is not clear from this whether the "Malygin"
set up the Tikhaya Bay extension, or some other ship, but the "Malygin"
is a possibility. The above extract is taken from another source:
"Fgdorov: Magnitnye opredeleniya 1932-1933 g. na Zemle Frantsa losifa",
from the publication Artica, 1935, pp.89ff, unobtainable by me. Can
anyone follow up on this?
Careful study of the stamps (Scott C34-35) shows a silhouette that looks
like the "Sibiryakov", but the article proves that the "Sibiryakov" was
elsewhere and indicates that the "Malygin" is more likely the ship used
to place the aircraft and crew ashore at Tikhaya Bay for the flight from
Franz-Josef Land. Several other possible ships have been ruled out as
unlikely, but this aspect of the puzzle remains to be solved.
The same source says that, in 1934, the "Taimyr" set up a novel
automatic meteorological station at Tikhaya Bay and a permanent air
station and base were simultaneously built there; so we know that the
1932 base was regarded as temporary.
Navigation in the North, based on statistics compiled over the years
between 1880 and 1929, show that Franz-Josef Land was reached in 23
seasons and that the best period of approach was from 15 August to 15
September, which was the exact time-frame chosen for the flight we are
investigating. Apart from ice conditions, operations can be carried out
24 hours a day at this latitude in mid-August, with the sun 330 above
the horizon at noon. By mid-September, the sun rises to only 120 above
the horizon at noon and, by mid-November, the sun at noon is 80 below
the horizon, at which point the polar night is advancing rapidly.
As to weather conditions in August/September at Tikhaya Bay, many
reports show that, although often foggy, flying was frequently carried
out in reasonable conditions. During the search for Levanevskii, the
pilots Vodop'yanov, Molokov and Alekseev flew from Moscow to Tikhaya Bay
in three ANT-6 aircraft and landed there on wheels! However, deep snow
made operating difficult and they changed Vodop'yanov's machine onto
skis for the rest of the (unsuccessful) search. It is significant that
both of the special markings and the stamps themselves show the aircraft
as being mounted on skis.
One last item we should consider is the route. The range of a Merkur II
is quoted as 900 km. (563 miles) with normal tanks, so we can almost
certainly rule out a direct over water flight to Archangel. The most
probable and sensible route would have been across to Mys' Zhelaniya
(Cape of Desire), down the length of Novaya Zemlya Island, across the
Kara Sea to Vaigach, then via Anderma to Naryan-Mar and on to Archangel
(ROUTE A), or about 2550 km.(1594 miles). That could have been flown in
about four days if the weather were favourable, or much more if less
lucky. ROUTE B, the fast route, could also have been done by a Merkur II,
taking at least three days and maybe more. Please see the map on the
Having shown up to this point that the flight was officially sanctioned,
having proved that the season and the weather conditions would have
made sense and also that suitable aircraft were available, we now ask,
as did E.P. Sashenkov, why none of the world's news media reported the
flight. The only answer seems to be that some form of unserviceability
of the aircraft, a crash on take-off or a forced landing en route
prevented the aircraft from reaching Archangel.
Another strong piece of evidence to support the Sashenkov story are the
statements of an extremely reliable person, who certainly would have
been in the know. The famous Arctic aviator M. Vodop'yanov, in his
classic book "Wings over the Arctic", includes a large fold-out map of
ship and aircraft operations in the Arctic, with no mention of the
flight we are studying, nor is it mentioned in the text. To add even
more proof for the Sashenkov case, Vodop'yanov gives a detailed account
of his flight from Moscow to Tikhaya in 1936, together with the pilot
Makotkin, in two ARK-5 aircraft (registration Nos. N.127 and N.128).
These were versions of the fine Polikarpov R-5 military biplane,
specially modified for Arctic use. They flew roughly along my ROUTE A
and took about 15 days to reach Tikhaya Bay. Of their arrival,
Vodop'yanov states: "This was the first time in the history of aviation
that aircraft had crossed the Barents Sea to Franz-Josef Land". He was
heading northward, of course, but this was in 1936, four years after the
flight Sashenkov questions and I think it hardly likely that Vodop'yanov
would have made that statement, unless there had been no previous flight
in either direction. It is of interest to note that Makotkin crashed his
machine at Tikhaya Bay, so both pilots and both mechanics got into
Vodop'yanov's aircraft and flew back to Moscow roughly along ROUTE B, the
return journey taking about 18 days.
With all the above, it only remains to look at a few philatelic items
from the alleged flight.
Date Franz-Josef Archangel Destination
written Cancel transit Berlin/Vienna
1. Shmuely card 22 Aug. 26 Aug. 25 Sept.
2. Adler No. 1 ? 28 Aug. 31 Aug.
3. Adler No. 2 ? 1 Sept.
4. Cronin Fig. 16A ? 23 Aug.(!) ?
5. Cronin Fig. 16B ? 28 Aug. 31 Aug.
6. Cronin Fig. 17 ? 28 Aug. 31 Aug.
From the above, it seems to me that the only piece that is believable is
the Shmuely card. The others, even allowing for the 23.8.32 date for
Archangel in Fig.16A (impossible) and what looks like 28.6.3 in Fig.16B
appear very much like items cancelled in Archangel, or perhaps even in
Berlin. It seems just too perfect to fly from Tikhaya Bay to Berlin in six
days, with the event to be unrecorded in any of the media. All the
evidence seems to indicate that Uncle Arthur's is the only credible item
in the batch and that the flight was not completed through to Archangel
for reasons undetermined.
"Eliminate all other factors and the one that remains is the truth".
(Sherlock Holmes in "The Sign of Four").
"...when all other contingencies fail, whatever remains, however
improbable, must be the truth".
(Sherlock Holmes in "The Adventures of the Bruce-Parkington Plans").
EDITORIAL COMMENT: Pat Campbell's article above is a model of
investigative deduction and we can clear up two points raised by him by
referring back to Sashenkov. The latter quotes from Hans Egon Vesper: Die
Postgeschichte der Arktis, Band 2, DUsseldorf 1973, p. 142; Herr Vesper
had received a reply direct from Ernst Krenkel that he had never heard of
a flight from Franz-Josef Land on 26 August 1932 and that Krenkel' had
also checked with B. Chukhnovskii, who also knew nothing about the affair.
It seems certain that the so-called 23.8.32 dates on either of the
Archangel transit postmarks are in fact poorly struck "28"s, while the
date 28.6.32 in Fig.16B is really an indistinct "8" for the month of
August. Sashenkov states that items with Moscow addresses were also
received there on 31 August, so it looks as if the whole operation of the
philatelic items was carried out in Archangel. Judging from the BERLIN C2
airmail transit, we can say that such items went by air at least part of
the way to foreign destinations; at the very least from K8nigsberg to
THE CANCELLATIONS OF SOUTH RUSSIA
by Alex Artuchov and A.M. Rosselevitch
This article is an edited and substantially expanded version
of an earlier work by the late A. M. Rosselevitch. The original
article came into my possession from a European correspondent.
Having been close to Anatolii Mikhailovitch Rosselevitch and
being quite familiar with his philatelic writings I was quite
amazed by the fact that I had never seen the article before. In
short order and through my contact with Michael Rayhack, I
discovered that it was in fact privately commissioned by him.
Mr. Rayhack has been kind enough to release this article to our
disposal and should also be credited for giving me access to
his voluminous quantity of cancelled South Russia material
from which I managed to reproduce the lion's share of the
The Rosselevitch article provided the basic historic data
relating to the occupation of South Russia by the White Army
and a hypothetical listing of the post offices he felt were
in operation at the time of the White Administration.
Rosselevitch clearly states that his listing of post offices
was in measure based upon speculation, using the major cities
and towns as the governing criterion. Your editor and I
decided to expand and in our opinion to enrich this article
by providing illustrations of the actual cancellations. In
the listings that follow,I have retained the original names
provided by Rosselevitch. Where possible, illustrations now
substantiate the actual existence of a post office at a given
location. When cancelled material was not available to
demonstrate existence, the post office is listed under the
assumed category. In many cases, cancellations from smaller
locations not accounted for by Rosselevitch were found. Which
would point to the Rosselevitch listing as being appropriately
conservative and accordingly plausible but not all inclusive.
I would also ask readers to note that I have knowingly diluted
the purity of what is actually an accounting of usage during the
White Administration by illustrating cancellations with dates
during the subsequent Red Administration. My redemption comes
from the fact that there is little doubt that the functioning
post offices under the Red Administration were little more than
mirror images of the proceeding White Administration. With war
and civil strife in the foreground,conditions were simply not
conducive to expand postal services. Conversely, it would be
hard to imagine that any post offices would have been closed,
thereby disrupting the very vital element of communication.
This article is by no means meant to represent anything more than
the opening of a very broad subject. An enormous amount of
as yet unrecorded material is still required to give this topic
justice. Readers are accordingly invited to provide further
information from their collections. Suppliments will be
printed in future issues as new information warrants.
Western perception of Russian history tends to understate the
significance of the Russian Civil War. While the Revolution
represented the fall of an old regime, the Civil War was the
lengthy battle for succession. This struggle raged all the
way to 1922, when the last of the White forces evacuated
The October, 1917 Revolution gave the Bolsheviks control of
Petrograd and shortly thereafter Moscow. Throughout the remainder
of Russia's vast expanses, many strong forces resisted the
new regime with fervour and passion. Anti-Bolshevik resistance,
which was assisted by the Allied forces, spread like wildfire,
developing into one of the greatest clashes of the national will
ever known to mankind.
A notion held by many respected historians is that a union of
of the various resisting armies would have unquestionably been
strong enough to overcome the Bolsheviks. This inability to
rally as a common force led to the eventual defeat of the
Whites. Instead of facing a concerted and massive White campaign,
the Red Army was able to extinguish the flames of White
resistance in progressive and successive order.
South Russia was a government that was created within the vacuum
of this political and social turmoil. The first inklings of
anti-Bolshevism came from the Don in the final months of 1917.
Initially weak and disorganized pockets of resistance were
assembled into an army by General Krasnov by April of 1918. A
Volunteer Army also sprang out from the Kuban Province. A union
of the Don Cossack and the Volunteer Army soon followed in June
of 1918. Under the leadership of General Denikin, the Whites
expanded their territorial control swiftly and extensively. By
the beginningof 1919 they had complete control over the Kuban,
Stavropol,Chernomorsk and Tersk Provinces as well as parts of
the Caucasus and Daghestan Province. Their advance and military
successes continued into 1919. By June,they had pushed north into
Kharkov and captured Kiev and Odessa in August. By October of 1919
the White campaign in South Russia had reached its peak. At this
point in time, the Whites controlled the cities of Orel, Tulchin,
Tsaritsyn, Kherson, Nicholaev, Poltava, Voronezh, Kursk and others.
It was at this point that the White advance towards Moscow was
abated. The Reds gained the upper hand at the front and the
Whites began to retreat faster than they had originally advanced.
By the beginning of 1920,the area of White occupation was
roughly half of what it had been in October of 1919. In April
of 1920,British military aid to the Allied Forces of South
Russia had ceased and General Denikin left his post,appointing
General Baron P. Wrangel as the Commander-in-Chief. The White
forces were swiftly reorganized and renamed as the Russian Army.
From their area of concentration now in the Crimean peninsula,
the Russian Army began its offensive in June of 1920. Until
October, they successfully continued to recapture some of the
previously lost territory. By this time however, the Soviet
Government had made peace with Poland and proceeded to throw its
entire military strength against the Whites. The results were
so devastating for the Russian Army that, on November 11 orders
were given to evacuate and by November 16, 200,000 refugees
were on their way to Constantinople.
For a fuller appreciation of the social, political and historical
events during this period of Russian history the author would
highly recommend "The Russian Revolution" (2 vol.) by W.H.
Chamberlin as a very comprehensive and scholarly but quite
readable account and Boris Pasternak's "Dr. Zhivago" to capture
a personal,documentary taste of the human condition during this
period of time.
A map depicting the greatest extent of White occupation in
October of 1919 is included on the next page. The provinces
occupied by the Whites were:
Military and postal activities in each of these provinces are
dealt with below on an individual basis.
Black Sea (Chernomorsk) Province
This province is located along shores of the Black Sea.
It was occupied by the White Army shortly after the capture
of the western part of the Kuban Province. Novorossiysk was
occupied on August 26, 1918 and held until March 27, 1920,
when this seaport was evacuated. Within the course of the
following ten days,the entire area succumbed to Soviet units.
The town and seaport of Anapa was originally administered by
the Black Sea Province. From June of 1919 Anapa was under the
authority of the Kuban Province.
(to June 1919)
Sochi C C
o 2553 20 )K3 15
0 0 000 @00
Only the southern part of this province was occupied by the
White Army. The occupation was brief, lasting only a few weeks
in September of 1919. Emphasis on military matters and the
short time of occupation did not permit the restoration of
postal services. The only cancellation illustrated is most
likely during Red occupation. Nevertheless, cancellations of
this province on stamps of South Russia must be considered as
extremely rare. The following list represents the largest settle-
ments to be occupied by the Whites.
Only the northern part of this province was occupied by the
White forces. Petrovsk was captured in early July of 1919 and
Temir-Khan-Shura on July 24 of the same year. Red forces
occupied this province in January and February of 1920.
This province was occupied in its entirety in May/June of 1918
by the Don Cossacks.The territory was held until the retreat of
the Whites at the end of November in 1919. The cities of
Novocherkassk and Rostov were abandoned on the 7 and 8 of
January 1920. Rostov was recaptured on February 20,1920 but
again lost on February 29. The list below accounts for the major
settlements but, cancellations are known from all post offices
in the province. The dates listed below confirm the time of usage
of cancellations known to the co-author.
SRR Stn. 28.11.19
The city of Ekaterinoslav was occupied by the White Army on
June 29, 1919. Conflict nevertheless continued as Bat'ko
Makhno, with his armed bands, kept on terrorizing the population.
On October 27,1919, Makhno managed to even occupy the city. The
struggle against Makhno was finally completed on December 8, as
both the city and the surrounding countryside were firmly in
White hands. The peace was,however, extremely short-lived. The
Red Army was very rapidly advancing, occupying Ekaterinoslav a
short week later on December 15 and 16, 1919.
Only the eastern portion of this province was occupied by the
White Army. This territory was held for only two months
during which conditions were restless and unsettled. The
occupied part of the province was held by the White Army
between November 15, 1919 and January 15, 1920.
The White Army occupied the city of Kharkov on June 25,1919 and
the remainder of the province by the following month. This
province was held until the end of November when the White
Army began to retreat. The city of Khaikov was occupied by
the Red Army on December 12, 1919 and the remainder of the
province a few days thereafter. All post offices of this
province are known on stamps.
29.9 19 7
This entire province was occupied by the White Army in its
entirety under rather complicated circumstances which are too
lengthy to describe in these limited confines. Odessa was
captured on August 23, 1919 and held until February 7, 1920.
In general,the whole of the province was occupied as of
September of 1919. The entire territory was seized by the Reds
between December 25, 1919 and January 25, 1920 with the
exception of Nikolaev and Kherson,which were captured on
January 31, 1920.
c6P04" This cancellation appears on many ruble "Denikin"
issues. The general consensus is that this
S712 cancellation is a forgery.
This province was held by the German Army until the capitulation
of Germany in November of 1918. Immediately thereafter, this
area became the scene of fierce struggle between the Soviet
Army and the Ukrainian Nationalists under the command of
Petlura. The White Army finally triumphed over both of these
forces,occuping the city of Kiev on August 30, 1919. The
northern portions of this province remained under Soviet
administration. The Red Army occupied Kiev on October 13 and
14 of 1919,for these two days only. The White Armed Forces
finally gave up Kiev on December 16, 1919. The entire area
between Kiev and Odessa fell to the Soviets in December of 1919
and January of 1920.
The province of Kuban was the scene of violent and bloody
struggle from February to November of 1918, when it was
occupied by White forces. Ekaterinodar was captured on
August 15, 1918; Yeisk on July 25 and Armavir and Maikop in
Shortly after the great White retreat, which began in the
latter portion of 1919, Red forces began to penetrate this
territory. Ekaterinodar was evacuated on March 17,1920 and
10 days later the entire province was in Red hands.
The post offices that functioned under the White Administration
were very numerous and accordingly not all are listed below.
(occ. Oct. 15/18)
(occ. Oct. 1/18)
(occ. Sept. 18/18)
(occ. Nov. 10/18)
(Occ. Oct. 15/18)
(Occ. Nov. 4/18)
The city of Kursk was occupied by the White Army on September
20, 1919 and abandoned in the middle of November. While the
White Army did control the entire province for this brief
period,many of the settlements fluctuated between Red and
White hands. While it is unlikely that there was any postal
activity under the White Administration, the major cities
and towns are listed below.
(occ. Sept. 17/19)
The city of Orel was occupied by the White Army on
October 14, 1919 concurrently with the southern portion
of the province. Due to the brevity of the occupation,
which was for a few days only,it is most unlikely that
any postal activities were restored in the occupied
portions of this province.
The major cities and settlements in the occupied portions
of this province were:
Dmitrovsk, Kromi, Livny, Maloarchangelsk, OrSl, Zmievka.
The White Army captured this province in July and August
of 1919. The city of Poltava itself was occupied in July.
Control over many of the settlements,however, kept shifting
between Red and White hands.
The city of Poltava and the greater part of the province
were abandoned by the Whites on December 10. 1919. Due to
the short period of occupation,cancellations of this
province are extremely rare. The largest cities and towns
are as follows:
Khorol 1C 9 P 720
2: 51119 ,
The White penetration into this province was only along
the narrow western edge of its boundary. This included
the cities of Tsaritsyn; which was captured on June 30,
1919 and abandoned on January 17, 1920 and Kamishin;
which was occupied on July 27 and abandoned in September.
This province was captured almost on the heels of the
occupation of Kuban Province. The eastern portion of this
province is more or less desert and is very sparsely populated.
The territory was captured by the Red Army during February
Alexandria assumed Mikhailovka assumed
Blagodarnoye assumed Moskovskoye assumed
(occ. Jan. 7/19)
Belaya Glina assumed
Derbetovskoye assumed Pelaaiada assumed
(occ. aov. 13/18)
(occ. Nov. 20/18) Peschanokopskaya assumed
Divnoye assumed Petroskoye assumed
(occ. Nov. 24/18)
(occ. Nov. 23/18) Shiskino assumed
Kugulta assumed (occ. Jan. 3/19)
Medvezhiye assumed Staromaryevka assumed
Stavropol Tuguluk assumed
(occ. Nov. 14/18) (occ. Nov. 21/18)
@ Vladimirovka assumed
The city of Tambov and the southern part of this province
was occupied by the White Army on August 18, 1919. The
occupation was very brief in duration and the area was
the scene of constant military operations. It is highly
unlikely that there are any postmarks of this province.
The major settlements of the occupied area were:
This territory lends itself into a natural division of two
parts; the Crimean Peninsula and the northern portion of
the province lying outside of the Crimea.
a) The Crimean Peninsula
The Crimean Peninsula was occupied by the German Army
until the middle of November in 1918. During this occupation
this area was under the Russian Regional Government of
General Sulkevitch until November 17, 1918. This Government
issued the #51 (Scott) postage stamp which remained in use
until the middle of 1920. After the capitulation of the
German Army the Crimean seaports were occupied by the Allied
The Allied Powers concluded a truce with the Soviets in April
of 1919 who in turn occupied the peninsula until the end of
June 1919 when they were defeated by the White Army of General
Denikin. The Crimean Peninsula was accordingly in Soviet
hands from April 15, 1919 to the end of June of the same
General Wrangel, who replaced Denikin, transported the
remains of the retreating White Army to the Crimea from
Novorossiisk on March 27, 1920. The White forces were
finally evacuated from the Crimea on November 11, 1920.
The largest settlements in the Crimean Peninsula were:
b)Northern Tavrida (outside of the Crimea)
This territory was occupied in its entirety by the White
Army from June of 1919 to the end of January of 1920.
The area was recaptured by General Wrangel from June 7
to November 2, 1920. The short interval before the
evacuation of the White Army did not permit the post to
restore its service.
Akimovka assumed Molochansk assumed
Aleshki assumed Nicholaevka assumed
Askaniya Nova assumed Nogaysk assumed
Genichesk assumed Novoalexeevka assumed
Gulay Pole assumed Orekhov
This province was held in its entirety by the White Army
from January/February 1919 to February of 1920 when it was
evacuated by the Whites.
Borgustanskaya assumed Georgievsk known
(occ. Jan. 21/19) ?.?.20
(occ. Jan. 20/19) Grozniy known
(occ. Feb. 5/19) 3.5.20
(occ. Jan. 20/19)
(occ. Feb. 6/19)
156 520 <
(occ. Jan. 19/19)
(occ. Jan. 28/19)
(occ. Jan. 25/19)
(occ. Jan. 27/19)
(occ. Jan 20/19)
Svyatoy Krest assumed
(occ. Feb. 1919)
The city of Voronezh was first occupied by the White Army
for a period of only a day or two on September 11, 1919.
It was again occupied on Sept. 30,only to be abandoned
again in two or three weeks time. The southern part of the
province was held by the White Army until the end of
November, but the northern part was captured by the Red Army
shortly after the beginning of October of 1919. This province
was the scene of constant military action and the operations
of postal services were not restored. Cancellations are
only known from some of the settlements in the southern
portions of this province.
Belgorod assumed Borisoglyebsk assumed
Biriuch assumed Buturlinovka assumed
Bobrov assumed Kalach assumed
Boguchary assumed Kalitva assumed
Oboyan assumed Valuyki assumed
Olkhovatka assumed Voronezh assumed
Ostrogozhsk assumed Zadonsk assumed
One of the main purposes of expanding and editing Mr.
Rosselevitch's original work was to clarify and confirm
which post offices were actually functioning during the
time of the Civil War in South Russia. In some cases such
as Kursk, Tambov, Orel and other provinces where the White
occupation was very brief and there was seemingly insufficient
time to restore postal services,only a listing of the major
settlements is included. If postal services were restored,
these are the likeliestpost offices that would have functioned.
A known cancellation from Novaya Otrada in Saratov dated
Nov. 1, 1919 indicates that,despite the doubt which is
reasonably cast,there may have indeed been some postal activity
in some of the provinces where the period of occupation was
In many cases,the period of occupation was clearly sufficient
for the restoration of postal services. In these instances,
the place listings are oriented more towards an accounting
of the major settlements which would have unquestionably
been the likliest to have functioning post offices. In
such cases,the locations are assumed and are accounted for
as such. From the cancellations that were found and
reproduced,the assumed list was in fact expanded. In some
other instances,the word known is used. This is to confirm
the existence of a known cancellation,which was only partial
or insufficently clear for a reproduction. Another notation
that merits a remark relates to occupation dates under
specific locations. This to the degree known is when the
particular place was captured by the White Army.
All dates listed are according to the Gregorian calendar,
which is 13 days different from the Julian calendar,which
was in usage at the time. The Julian calendar was 13 days
behind. The cancellations illustrated or indicated as
being known were taken from South Russia stamps only.
As a brief addendum, a cancellation from Sednevka in Kherson
is illustrated below. The other illustration is of an
either White or Red Fieldpost cancellation.
UNLISTED VARIETIES OF SOUTH RUSSIA
by Michael Rayhack
This article would have not been necessary had I not gone into
a deep philatelic slump after the death of my wife in September
of 1978. Six years had gone by since I received a letter
requesting me to submit suggestions for new prices and additions
to the forthcoming Scott catalogue. After placing 39c and 54 a
and b in Scott's, I had been hoping for anopportunity of this
kind for a long time. I was requested to make a presentation
to submit to Scott. Listed below are the items that I will be
putting forward for inclusion into the Scott catalogue.
No. 7-Imperforate with a Double Impression (Fig. 1)
This double impression is on the basic, 2 kopeck,Tsarist issue
of 1917 to 1922. Itis not listed in Michel, Yvert et Tellier
or,to the best of my knowledgerin the latest issue of Stanley
Gibbons. Since Scott's always prefer to have more than one
example of a new variety prior to listing it in their catalogue,
the above pair (Fig. 1) should be very satisfactory. I also
prefer all of my rare, imperforate issues of South Russia in
pairs. What is so exciting about collecting South Russia is
that you can still find such rare and previously unknown stamps,
probably printed in late 1918, emerging 67 years later!
No. 3- Inverted Surcharge (Fig. 2)
This variety is already listed in Stanley Gibbons as No. 30a.
I have always been partial to the accuracy of the Gibbons listings.
recording to a Stanley Gibbons issue of Monthly News published
in 1922, most of the South Russia stamps found themselves in the
West through England,as they were brought in by officers of the
British Military Mission in South Russia. As noted by Mr. S.
Tchilinghirian in BJRP No. 9, all inverted( surcharges must be at
the top of the stamps.
No. 20 Pair, One Stamp with
Surcharge Missing (Fig. 3)
Although listed as a pair, this
variety actually occurs in
vertical strips. On a full
vertical strip of 5,the fifth
surcharge would be in the margin
below the fifth and the lowest
stamp in the vertical strip.
No. 25- 6 Instead of 6 in Surcharged Word Py6nef (Fig. 4)
This is a very rare variety. It exists only once on every
sheet (position 76) on a stamp of which only 2,000 copies were
printed, meaning that a maximum of 20 copies existed. Examples
are known both mint and used.
*ggage o g 0 00 Qc 00 0so 00000
I. 0. & ^SS '
-so00aaa00 06 00 ac 0
iW B.,.; .--.. -fir'..
No. 21 Wide O in Surcharged Numeral 50 (Fig. 5)
This is an acknowledged but a rare and unlisted variety. The
variety exists on the ninth position of a sheet of 100. According
to an article by B. Kritsov in Nos. 5/6 of the Soviet Philatelist
published in 1923, it is surmised from official documents that
only 15 sheets of this stamp were ever put into use. Accordingly,
only 15 copies of this variety should have ever been released.
8 :" ~Ory
4/n : t;Aih
No.21-Wde0 i Srcare Nuea 50 (Fg.5
Thsisa ckoldgdbu ar n unlste aiey h
varet exsso h ith oiino aseto 00 cocic
toa rtil yB rto nNs / fteSve hltls
published: in 1923 iti umsdfo fiildcmnsta
ony 5 het o tisstm wreevr u into us. Acrigy
ony 5 oie o hi vret soudhae vr ee elasd
********************oeo o000 ee o0000 ooO0e Oom
**a 6*0**6*696******00 00000000 Ova 0000 Pe**@
No. 38 Comma for Period After Surcharged p (Fig. 6)
The illustration below (Fig. 6) is a block of four with the
upper stamps having a comma instead of a period after the
letter p. This variety is listed in Stanley Gibbons as No. 5d.
It is also acknowledged by A. M. Rosselevitch in his article
in No. 5 of the Russian Philatelist.
Fig. 6-- ., i
-ll.., .F -"g ... .i li< ," "6 .,- ;
,',-^ -:*, ,_ .. ,, A. >. ,.. ls' ,-y
.j.! '' 5 'ei i Pf', ," ," .
No. 39 Inverted Overprint (Fig. 7)
This variety is listed in Stanley Gibbons as No. 4a.
No. 36 Wide 0 in Surcharaed
Numeral 50 (Fig. 8)
As on No. 21, this variety occurs
on the ninth stamp in the sheet
of 100. It is listed in Stanley
Gibbons as No. 2d.
No. 36 Pair, One Surcharge Inverted, One Surcharge Omitted
This variety is listed in Stanley Gibbons as No. 2b.
No. 53 5 Missing from Surcharge
This variety is not listed in any
catalogue but is mentioned by A. M.
Rosselevitch. It is known with the
surcharge in the normal position,as
well as inverted,as illustrated
I -.- I ,
-$ ix u
No. 54 Double Surcharge, Both Inverted(Fig. 11)
There is concurrence from the likes
of Rosselevitch and Mangelei that
the entire stock of this variety
originated from one sheet.
0 + 0
I~ !K*; t ~~l
p~i J 4,
No. 55 5 Missing from Surcharge
This variety is not listed.
No. 57- Printed on White Paper
Superimposed in the upper left-
hand corner is a copy of this ;
variety. I hope that the i
illustration (Fig. 13) will do
justice to the contrast between
the normal and the white papers.
In his article printed in the
Chambers Stamp Journal of Sept.
28, 1942, D.S. Haverbeck states
that,in October of 1919, the
Denikin stamps from the 10 kop. i
to the 10 rub. were printed on
white paper with white gum. This .
would not,however, include the
7 rub. value,which was not printed
after the initial printing of the
No. 54a Used (Fig. 14) |
Although this variety is included J.
in Scott's as mint,it is not
listed as being known used.
Fig. 14 r
No. 58 6 Instead of 6 in
Surcharged Word Py6nef (Fig. 15)
I am not convinced that this
error was actually produced by
Postal Authorities. I would rather
suspect that this was a product
contrived by a "Mr. X".
No. 59 Surcharge
According to Rosselevitch and
Manjeley,only one sheet
with this error was printed.
The illustration is taken from
a pane of 25 in my collection.
If Rosselevitch and Manjeley
are correct, I have of the
World's supply of this variety.
P," jV! ,,ir
-. p 'v It l."
.,' 0OC .
" ,,,''A :-, ^ ." ': *"
;*:'i f*' "L i1 i-.,'.
?. p f^ .- 1?.-. -,.
*." -C v' *"
.- p.n,- .
'.: -. '
9 1 ,
. ;, ,. ,
,' "* .
I' '*.' .'.' "'^
,1 % a z
"'-) A *
a ^.. 0
No. 69 Centre and a Numeral of
Value Omitted (Fig. 17)
I have yet to see another example of
this error. It is accordingly not
possible to determine whether an
entire sheet with this error was
printed or whether a piece of paper
accidentally overlaid on top of this
stamp received the impression of the
centre and the numeral of value
located below it.
Armavir Provisionals (Fiqs. 18,18a)
The rare and elusive Armavir Provisionals
are my personal favourites. Although
Mr. Rosselevitch contends that they were
issued and used from May to Oct. 23, 1920,
most of my examples have Aug. 1920 dates.
I have yet to see of these provisionals in
mint condition and frankly do not think that
they exist. These provisionals are listed by
Michel and Cercle Philatelique.
THE ROMANOVS USED IN SOUTH RUSSIA
by Alex Artuchov
The stamp,which is the subject of this article,is a 7 kop.
value of the 1913 Romanov Jubilee issue (Scott No. 92),with
a cancellation of Kharkov dated July 8, 1919.
The subject item is interesting for a number of reasons.
The first relates to the fact that it was a late usage. The
Rev. L.L. Tann, in "The Imperial Romanovs", says that the
usaae of the Romanov issues declinednoticeably after the
March 1917 Revolution. Tann attributes this more to the
depletion of supply,rather than anti-Tsarist sentiment. Tann
coes on to say that usage in 1918 and 1919 is known and even
lists an auction lot with a 23.9. 20 date.
The July 8, 1919 date unquestionably makes the subject stamp
a South Russia item. In a proceeding article in the same
issue of this journal, co-authored by this writer, it is
brought out that the city of Kharkov was occupied by the
White Army on June 25, 1919. Since this date is given in
accordance with the current Gregorian calendar,the date
according to the old, Julian calendar was June 12, 1919.
Since the White Army used the Julian calendar,the usage of
the subject item occurred 26 days after the occupation of
Khar'kov by South Russia forces.
The above scenario would make this stamp what might be the
only known Romanov issue, cancelled in South Russia. The
date of usage is however, at question. The cancellation is
partial (Fig. 1). The whole cancellation depicted as being
the Kharkov railroad station,contains sufficient room for two
more digits to the right of the 19. Tsarist cancellations
found on the Romanov issues typically contained the full
four letters of the year of usage making the 19 the first two
digits rather than the last two.
This article unveils no great rarity. However,its purpose
is to share an interesting experience and to convey the broad
possibilities that can be identified through familiarity with
the diverse spectrum of knowledge that makes Russian philately
PHILATELIC SHORTS ,
Is there a question or point you would like to put
across to the readership; is there an interesting
stamp, cancellation or cover that you would like to
describe; is there an item in your collection that o
could use some clarifying information, or might there o- o
be some gems of wisdom that you could impart on some 00 l oo
newly acquired item ? .o o/
Share your questions, thoughts and wisdom, in the confines
of a couple of paragraphs with the rest of our readers
Arthur Brown, London, England. 54
FRAi^! J;^F, LANP- SIi
Re the article on Franz-Josef Land in .
"The Post-Rider",No.16, I wish to ......... .. -- t
advise that Argyll Etkin Ltd., of 48 ,. fr
Conduit St.,New Bond St., London
W1R 9FB England have just issued an A 7 Af /W .
illustrated list of offers, Lot No.54 -"
being described as follows:- .
ARCTIC; 1896 env. Registered from
* "Elmwood, Cape Flora" to "Arkhangel,
Russia", with a fine h.s. "FRANZ JOSEF
LAND" in violet and with 2d. and 2d. G.B. 'Jubilee' adhesives cancelled
in London in transit. With original contents. Very spectacular. 92,250.
EDITORIAL COMMENT: This very rare item was written by Frederick Jackson,
of the Jackson-Harmsworth Polar Expedition, at his base camp and during
the best season of the year to approach or leave the archipelago (Aug.-
Sept. 1896). The letter was taken by the annual relief ship to London,
where it was posted at the London W.C. office with 4d. postage (2d.
surface foreign rate and 2d. registration fee) to Henry Cooke, Esqre,
Her Brittanic Majesty's Vice Consul at Archangel, where it was received
16 days later on 6/18 Sept. 1896. The price (US $3200) is not cheap, but
well worth it, as this piece would be the most prominent item in any
collection of the postal history of Franz-Josef Land.
Andrew Cronin, Toronto, Ont., Canada
Continuing with the subject of Franz-Josef Land, the writer was able to
locate Michelstadt i. Odenwald, the birth-place of Navy Lieutenant Carl
Weyprecht, just as No.16 of "The Post-Rider" was going to print. This is
a charming mediaeval town,52km/33m.SSE of Frankfurt-on-Main
and 32 km. (20 miles) SE of Darmstadt. Carl Weyprecht was therefore a
German and that was obviously why the BIELEFELD '72 Philatelic
Exhibition had a special oval marking, commemorating the centenary of
the Weyprecht-Payer North Pole Expedition.
On another note, the colourful French philatelic magazine TIMBROSCOPIE,
which we had also reviewed in our No.16, p.62, featured in its Sept.'85
issue a survey of the philately of Franz-Josef Land, which was based on
the article in No.16 and with appropriate credit to our Society. That
was followed in the October '85 issue with illustrations in colour of
two of the Friedl vignettes, sent in by M. Paul Gady of Caen. There has
also been a favourable review of the article in No.16 by "Ice Cap News",
the organ of The American Society of Polar Philatelists.
I ..* I ...|
T:nnghistimt the oheenSS i i al S. R
S I h fwh h r1m aiMeCTad, re saXnT noTa onCT a ue, s-
f i e is.flhI ncTTaHl -IaI MeH ooan alke mcnelsol :a o :oporm '
i i s VE E .S'H GI '.. "...... .ppe.... .e.. .P...U. 'i'
co s l e l'd/': .' ., it h~as. ba l ,e pr .n e s. .c e. ,,1 3 N t that t
r-, ,"... :. ..',- yIH .....- ,
~." ~- .. -^..;..-.* .v ..:- .......'.. ..... : .. *. r'
/ Z . :. : .; ,,.| ,,,. : .; : : .* :^ .... .. -A . .... .
Turning thishe other end of the UR t is always nice to
find something from Sakhalin Island, in this particular case from the
War of 1904-05. It was sent by registered airmail to Amsterdam, with
the postmark in violet, reading VERESHCHAGINO SAKHALIN.OKR.* a. The
date i is tinct, but ethe recipient pencilled the iiyear 1936 on to
back. The 20-kop. postal stationery envelope was obviously not enough
for registered airmail abroad and the balance of the rate may have been
paid in cash. VERESHCHAGINO does not appear in the latest U.P.U. listing
consulted, so it has probably been renamed since 1936. Note that the
USSR regained the southern part of the island as one of the results of
the Japanese surrender in Manchuria on 20 August 1945 to the Soviet Army.
Patrick J. Campbell, Montreal, Canada.
The illustrations at left are of a recent find
/of the SHUANCHENPU Station postmark on the
C hinese Eastern Railway, on the 1-rouble 1902-
All: 1912 issue, perf.13, no watermark and with
.B |262l8 cd lozenges. Please refer to Tchilinghirian and
-- --4/ Stephen, Part 5, Fig.637. The marking is
unrecorded on this stamp, which I was able to
N buy for a nominal sum. The postmark has been
drawn separately, to show all details,
especially the buckle at the left end of the upper line of the bridge.
Colonel Asdrubal Prado, Campinas, Brazil.
Re the doubt expressed by Robert Taylor in "The Post-Rider",No.16, p.24
about the black-on-rose airmail etiquette of Kiev, I enclose photocopies
of both sides of a registered letter No.653, sent by airmail from Kiev,
2.12.22 and franked with 34 x 10-kop. and 1 x 5-kop. Arms, re-issue of
1918 and with lozenges pointing vertically, to make up the proper rate
of 300r. foreign registered plus 45r. airmail surcharge (1922 roubles).
It passed through Moscow on 4 Dec. and arrived in Berlin on the 8th. The
etiquette is in pale rose, with the "E" of "Envoye" and the "p" of
"poste" ALIGNED VERTICALLY. I have another registered airmail cover,
sent from Petrograd on 17.9.23 under No.363 and franked with 1 x 5r.,
1 x 10r. & 2 x 20r. of the peasant, soldier and worker issue of 1923,
which went though Moscow on the 20th. and arrived in London on the 26th.
The etiquette is in deep purple-red and the "E" of "Envoye" is NOT
aligned vertically with the "p" of "poste". So we have differences both
in the coloured papers and the settings used for the airmail etiquettes
in the two cities. Unfortunately, the xerox of the Petrograd cover does
not come out clearly, due to the deep colour of the etiquette. Readers
are also referred to an excellent article about these labels by H. L.
Aronson in "The Russian-American Philatelist", Vol.1, No.7 for March
1943, entitled "Airmail Labels (Etiquettes)"
REVIEW OF ,/
ZEITSCHRIFT FOR RUSSISCHE/SOWJETISCHE PHILATELIE (Magazine for Russian
& Soviet Philately). The official journal of the Russia-USSR Study
Group in the Federal Republic of Germany. All enquiries to Herr Joachim
Schneider, D-7000 STUTTGART 75, Melonenstr.76, Fed. Republic of Germany.
No.38 for August 1985 has 68 pages, with Society News; The Postmarks of
Russia 1857-1870,by L.Novotny,trans. by L.Dunda; History of the Russian
Post(Automatisation),by Dr.T.Rutkowska,trans. by W.Koelzer; Station
"North Pole-27",by E.S.Anasir; Post in the Land of Penguins, by E.P.
Sashenkov; New Soviet Exchange Control Rules, by H.Tobler-Sommerfeld;
Notes from Members; Modern Soviet Rarities, by J.Schneider; Soviet Post
in Lithuania 1939-41, by M.Shmuely (fascinating!); An 1860 Nizhnii
Novgorod Fair Letter, by W.Frauenlob; Report of 11 Feb.1863 by Berlin
G.P.O. and finishing with small advts. An excellent issue.
PHILATELIE, No.159 for January 1985. The official monthly organ for the
Federation of German Philatelists in the Federal Republic of Germany.
Copies available from Postfach 12 03 04, D-5300, BONN, West Germany.
This issue is of particular interest to us for an article about the
Cancellers of the German Reichspost used by the Soviet Postal Service
in East Prussia (the KBnigsberg/Kaliningrad area). K8nigsberg was taken
on 9 April 1945 by the Soviet Army after very heavy losses on both sides
and the postal service shut down for over a year until May 1946. The old
German KONIGSBERG cancellers were first used, then a Soviet equivalent,
reading KENIGSBERG, until the city was renamed KALININGRAD. Surviving
pieces of mail with KONIGSBERG or KENIGSBERG markings are great rarities.
SCHWEIZER BRIEFMARKEN-ZEITUNG (Swiss Postage Stamp Magazine), official
monthly journal of the Federation of Swiss Philatelic Societies.
The issue for September 1985 has on p.282 another interesting little
article in German by our Hamburg subscriber Helmut Weikard about an
Imperial postcard with a total franking of 5 kop., sent on 18 November
1917 O.S., i.e. during the early Soviet period, by the First Kievan
Society of Philatelists to V. Valter in Copenhagen, Denmark. Despite the
chaos of the times, it got to its destination by Christmas 1917, i.e.
it was 25 days in transit, being censored en route. A lovely item,
which is illustrated in the article.
LIETUVOS PASTO ANTSPAUDAI (Post Office Cancellations of Lithuania), by
Vytautas Fugalevi6ius (Witold Fugalewitsch). A soft-bound book of 331
. pages, 22 x 29cm, profusely illustrated and issued by the author in
Schlesen, Federal Republic of Germany.
This is the finest work in the field published so far and its cost has
been subsidized by monetary contributions from many patriotic
Lithuanians around the world. Written in Lithuanian, German & English,
it is in five parts, as follow:(a) Lithuanian Markings 1918-1944,
specially drawn by the author;(b) Postal History of Memel/Klaipeda 1800-
1945 (alone worth the price of the book!);(c) Russian Posts 1800-1915;
(d) Polish Posts 1800-1939, incl. Central Lithuania and (e) Cachets of
the Napoleonic Army, Lithuanian Slogans & Cancels abroad & DP Posts.
The edition is limited and interested readers may obtain a copy
postpaid by sending immediately a remittance of US $20.00 to VINCENT W.
ALONES, 217 McKee St., FLORAL PARK, N.Y. 11001, USA. This is a bargain!
HET BALTISCHE GEBIED(The Baltic Area), a soft-bound magazine issued
twice yearly in Dutch by the philatelic study group of the same name.
Enquiries in English about this group and magazine may be directed to
the editor, Mijnheer Ruud W. van Wijnen, Kalenderstraat 34, NL 7621 TA
BORNE, Holland. Six issues have appeared so far, since 15 January 1983.
The title speaks for itself, the contents are also easily understood by
those who read German, the profuse illustrations help those who know
neither language and the standard of research is very high. That is
confirmed by the depth displayed by Heer Ruud W. van Wijnen elsewhere
in this issue of "The Post-Rider", with his study of the postmarks of
the Riga-Ddnaburg-Ordl Railway Line. We are happy to announce that both
of our Societies are exchanging information and they are currently
serialising in Dutch translation by Joop van Heeswijk, with revisions
by Ruud van Wijnen, the article "The Postal History of the Wenden/Cesis
Local Service", from "The Post-Rider" No.14. Long may we cooperate!
POCHTOVYE DOROGI BELORUSSII (Postal Roads of Belorussia), by Lev
Leonidovich Kolosov. A 64-page booklet in Russian, issued by the
newspaper "Holas Radzimy" in Minsk, Belorussia in 1982. Priced at 20 k.
Written in a popular vein, the author traces the postal history of his
republic from the 9th. century A.D. to present times. As pointed out in
the article "The Soviet Posts in Western Belorussia 1939-1941", his
knowledge of that latter period is fragmentary, mainly because of the
lack of archival material. It should be remembered that, when Minsk was
liberated on 3 July 1944, the city was almost entirely in ruins, with
the exception of a few buildings in the city centre, which the Soviet
Army managed to demine in time. The booklet unfortunately has no
illustrations and is already rare, as it was quickly sold out. Any
reprint would only be worthwhile if it had the cooperation of many
philatelists and included an extensive study of the postal markings.
NACHINAYUSHCHEMU FILATELISTU (To the Budding Philatelist), by A.Mishin.
A 96-page booklet, issued on newsprint-quality paper by the
"Moskovskaya Pravda" Publishers, Moscow, 1983 in an edition of 100,000
copies. Price 20 kop.
The title speaks for itself and this pocket-size booklet is divided
into two main sections: POSTAGE STAMPS and the POSTAL SERVICE,
giving many definitions in handbook format. 73
SOVETSKII KOLEKTSIONER (The Soviet Collector). An annual compilation of
serious studies on philately, numismatics, postcards,badges, paper money
and philatelic literature reviews, issued in paperback format by the
"Radio i Svyaz' Publishers,in Moscow.
No. 21 with 160 pages, is priced at 95k. and covers The Mail in Saint
Petersburg after introduction of postage stamps in Russia, by M. Dobin;
Stamps of Transcarpatho-Ukraine, by Dr.Vasyl Petrets'kyj;From the history
of Zemstvo Posts, by D.Kuznetsov; Philatelic Specialities of Greek
Olympic issues, by V.Furman; Posts in Estonia 1940-41, by A.Linnard and
N.Mandrovskii; Kiev on illustrated postcards, by Verotskii, Zabochen' &
Kirkevich; Portrait stamps of the "Forward" Publishers, by M. Peisik;
Minting of Russian Coins with Indented Inscriptions, by V. Uzdenikov;
The Restruck Rubles of 1723, by V.Koretskii; Marx & Engels on Medals, by
Gdalin & Robinson; Soviet Commem. Medals, by A.Shaten; Aviation Theme on
soft metal badges,by I.Sud; Classification of Paper Money,by D.Senkevich,
terminating with book reviews. Dated 1983 and issued in 1984.
No. 22 with 168 pages, is priced at Ir.lOk. and includes Air Bridge to
Blockaded Leningrad, by I.Druzhinin; Markings of Ukrainian P.O.s in 1920-
1922, by V.Mogil'nyi; Postal Rates of the Empire, by B.Kaminskii; Mail
between SPB & Suburbs, by M.Dobin; The Verkhotur'e Zemstvo,by M.Minskii;
Olympic Philately 1900-24, by V.Furman; Gogol' Postcards, by I.Bugaevich;
Gogol' Portraits on Cards, by M.Zabochen'; Marx & Engels on Medals, by
Gdalin & Robinson; Soviet Commem. Medals, by A.Shaten; Coins of Fedor
Godunov, by Tindo & Kleshchinov; Bank coupons as Paper Money in 1918, by
D.Senkevich; Quartered Kerenskii Notes, by A.Babenko; GTO Badges, by N.
Ivanov, ending with book reviews. Dated 1984 and issued in 1985.
FILATELIAI SZEMLE (Philatelic Review), the monthly organ of the
Hungarian Philatelic Federation. Available for a yearly subscription of
US $15.50 from Postafi6k 4sz., H-1387, BUDAPEST, Hungary.
The November 1985 issue of this bright journal contains on pp. 13-16 a
detailed analysis of the Hungarian stamps overprinted in 1945 in the
Carpatho-Ukraine, bringing up to date the previous work in the field,
done by other foreigners, such as F. Taborsky, M. Blaha and Dr. W. J.
Rauch. Even Dr. Petrets'kyj of Uzhorod has had to rely extensively on
their work and he repeats the mistaken assumption that both Czechoslovak
crowns and the Hungarian pengo were in circulation in 1945, although all
the archival documents he consulted had the accounts in pengos only! The
present article here is by Dr. Bl4a Simady and he shows a letter from
Kostryny (Kostryno) of 9 May 1945, for which the postage was collected
in cash and noted as "0,40n." (0.40 peng6, i.e. 40 filler!). This study
by Dr. Simady is the best so far and we will be using data from it in
future articles on the stamps and postal history of the Carpatho-Ukraine.
EESTILRISTEN SOTILAIDEN KENTTXPOSTI SAKSAN ARMEIJASSA 1941-1945
(Estonian Field Posts in the German Army 1941-1945), by August Leppa.
A 56-page booklet, issued in Finnish by the Finnish Philatelic
Federation, Helsinki, 1985 as Volume 2 in a series of specialised works.
The title speaks for itself and the many illustrations and tables make
the text easy to follow, especially for those of us who cannot read
Finnish. Mr. Leppa wrote to this reviewer that Finnish is an easy
language and that is believable, but the word-stock is completely
different from those in the Indo-European languages which most of us
speak. Anyway, the last page is completely in English and gives an
excellent summary of the scope and research on the subject. Recommended!
7A .The Journal Fund
* .All sales benefit the Society and orders should be
made payable to the CSRP Box 5722 Station-A,
Toronto, Ont., Canada M5W 1P2. All previous titles
have unfortunately been sold out.
SOIM KARPATS'KOYI UKRAYINI, by Dr. Stepan Rosokha.
A fascinating eye-witness account of the birth of
the Carpatho-Ukrainian Republic by a former minister.
'' M .Published in Ukrainian, with an English summary
S. : and long out of print. Of great interest to the
Dr.S.Rosokha. Carpatho-Ukrainian collector. Price postpaid US$5.00
THE ARMS ISSUES OF 1902-1920, by the Rev. L.L. Tann. We have a few
copies of this ever-popular work with a xeroxed page pasted onto
one that failed to print,at the bargain price of POSTPAID US$15.00.
The contents are complete and this is a great opportunity.
FORGERY AND REPRINT GUIDE No. 3(Armenia, 1922 Pictorials), No. 4
(Armenia 1923 Pictorials) & No. 11 (Azerbaijan). All illustrations
are double-size and the differences clearly tabulated. Invaluable
for Transcaucasia collectors.Set of 3 booklets: POSTPAID US$ 6.50.
DIE POSTSTEMPELFORMEN IN ST.PETERSBURG VON 1766-1914, by Heinrich
Imhof. This is the definitive study of St.Petersburg postmarks and
is easy to follow, as there are many illustrations and everything is
tabulated. We have the last few copies left! POSTPAID US$ 7.50.
CATALOGUE OF THE GFR-USSR BILATERAL PHILATELIC EXHIBITION 19-22 Feb.
1981 in Essen. A 38-page booklet, mostly in German and a greeting
letter in Russian. Notable for a seminal article by Herr Heinrich
Imhof on the circular suburban train postal markings of Saint-
Petersburg, with latest findings. Price postpaid US $ 2.00.
NERVOUS PEOPLE AND OTHER STORIES, by Mikhail Zoshchenko. You won't
understand the United States of Soviet Russia, i.e. the USSR unless
you read this 452-page paperback in the Vintage Russian Library
series by one of the world's great writers.Price postpaid US $ 2.50.
LEARN TO SPEAK RUSSIAN WITHOUT A TEACHER, by G. Bronskii of Moscow
State University. A 192-page paperback, containing basic Russian
grammar, many phrases and sentences for home study. An ideal manual
for"us monolingual slobs", as one of our readers bluntly it. Great
value for the money. Price postpaid US $ 2.50.
:IN WAR'S DARK SHADOW (The Russians before the Great War), by W. Bruce
Lincoln, author of "The Romanovs". A 573-page fascinating history in
hard covers of the reign of Tsar Nicholas II by a Presidential
SResearch Professor at Northern Illinois University and invaluable for
:philatelists collecting material from that period. Published by The
:Dial Press, New York, 1983. Great photos Price postpaid US $ 12.00.
THE COLLECTORS' CORNER '' b
Are you still missing that elusive item in your
collection or philatelic library; do you have some
duplicate material that you would like to trade or /
sell ? We can publicise your want-list and/or your
duplicates for the most reasonable rate of 25 / line \
(minimum of $1.00 payment; maximum insertion of 16
lines), excluding name and address. Unless otherwise
stated, all the catalogue numbers quoted are from Scott.
Ads from collectors only will be accepted. Dealers are
invited to respond.
NOTE: The Society disclaims all responsibility for any
misunderstandings that may result between exchanging parties.
FOR a biography of William C. Bullitt (1891-1967), first ambassador of
the United States to the USSR and later its ambassador to France in the
days leading up to World War II, I would appreciate hearing from
anyone who has letters, anecdotes, memorabilia, opinions or any other
William Brownell, 2811 Pea Street N.W.,Washington, D.C.,U.S.A. 20007.
WANTED:1. Auction catalogues containing specialised and/or unlisted
Russian or related area material.2. Back issues of FRANCE-URSS
PHILATELIE(Journal of Cercle Philat4lique France-URSS);good quality
photo or xerox copies acceptable.3. Back issues of RUSSISCHE /
SOWJETISCHE PHILATELIE(Journal of BAG Russland/UdSSR); good quality
or xerox copies acceptable.4. Russian philatelic literature,preferably
in English. For any items 1-4 above, please write first, listing
material you have available and your asking price. Would also like to
correspond with English reading/writing member of Cercle Philatelique
and/or BAG Russland-UdSSR.
PAT EPPEL, 108 Pinewood Circle, Apple Valley, MN, 55124, U.S.A.
WANTED: Russian revenues,fiscals,vignettes,labels or Cinderella stamps,
plus revenue & legal paper,paper seals, bill of exchange cut-outs and
any revenue documents, intact or otherwise. All periods: Imperial,
Civil War or Soviet. Will exchange or purchase.
MARTIN CERINI, 90 Third Ave., Huntington Station, N.Y.,U.S.A. 11746.
WANTED: Imperial dotted cancellations on cover; buy, sell or trade.
Please write, describing covers) and asking price for desired trade.
MIKE RENFRO, Box 2268, Santa Clara, California, U.S.A., 95051.
A FEW original copies of "The Russian Philatelist" still available:-
In Russian: Nos. 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11.
In English: Nos. 5, 10, 11.
Nos. 5 & 7 US $4.00 each; Nos. 8 to 11 US $4.50 each.
MRS C. ROSSELEVITCH, 34 Henry Drive, Glen Cove, N.Y.,U.S.A., 11524.
SPECIAL NOTE: WE HAVE COMPLETELY SOLD OUT OF ALL PARTS OF "IMPERIAL
RUSSIAN STAMPS USED IN TRANSCAUCASIA". ALL FURURE ORDERS SHOULD GO
DIRECTLY TO P.T.ASHFORD,9 PENTRE CLOSE,ASHTON, CHESTER, ENGLAND
CH3 8BR.PRICE PER PART IS US$5.00 POSTPAID.CASH WITH ORDER, PLEASE.