Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 Editorial: Modern Soviet issue...
 Correspondence with Canada
 Postage stamps of the Zemstvos
 Mailcoach sorting of postal...
 Lithuanian posts in Western Belorussia...
 Report on "Bulgaria '89"
 The letter that may have cost a...
 The K. K. von Schultz correspo...
 Polish forces in the Soviet army...
 Auction notes
 Philatelic shorts
 Review of literature
 The journal fund
 The collectors' corner

Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076781/00024
 Material Information
Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider
Series Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider
Physical Description: Serial
Creator: Canadian Society of Russian Philately
Publisher: Canadian Society of Russian Philately
Place of Publication: Toronto
Subject: Stamp collections -- Russia   ( lcsh )
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076781
Volume ID: VID00024
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.


This item has the following downloads:

00024 ( PDF )

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 1
    Editorial: Modern Soviet issues
        Page 2
    Correspondence with Canada
        Page 3
    Postage stamps of the Zemstvos
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
    Mailcoach sorting of postal correspondence
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
    Lithuanian posts in Western Belorussia in 1919
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
    Report on "Bulgaria '89"
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
    The letter that may have cost a grand prix
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
    The K. K. von Schultz correspondence
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
    Polish forces in the Soviet army 1942-1945
        Page 70
        Page 71
    Auction notes
        Page 72
        Page 73
    Philatelic shorts
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
    Review of literature
        Page 77
        Page 78
    The journal fund
        Page 79
    The collectors' corner
        Page 80
Full Text

Printed in Canada

I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -* .r.i..____~ _

P.O. BOX 5722 Station 'A', TORONTO,


July 1989.


2 Editorial: Modern Soviet Issues
3 Correspondence with Canada
4 Postage Stamps of the Zemstvos
19 Mailcoach Sorting of Postal Correspondence


Lithuanian Posts in Western Belorussia in 1919
Report on "BULGARIA '89"
The Letter that may have cost a Grand Prix
The K.K. von Schultz Correspondence
Polish Forces in the Soviet Army 1942-1945
Auction Notes
Philatelic Shorts
Review of Literature
The Journal Fund
The Collectors' Corner

Andrew Cronin
Alex Artuchov
M.I. Belyaev &
I.G. Kuznetsov
Andrew Cronin
Andrew Cronin
Dr. R.M. Stevens
Dr. H.L. Weinert
Dr. P.A. Michalove

COORDINATORS OF THE SOCIETY: Alex Artuchov, Publisher & Treasurer
P.J. Campbell, Secretary
Andrew Cronin, Editor
Rev.L.L. Tann, CSRP Representative in
the United Kingdom
The Society gratefully thanks its contributors for helping to make
this an interesting issue.

.. Readers are reminded that all three coordinators of the Society are fully
engaged in earning their livings and thus do not have the time to
answer individual requests or queries. Where such questions are of
general interest to the readership, they will be taken up in subsequent
issues of "The Post-Rider". Please bear with us!
The views expressed in the articles contained 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 the source is quoted and a copy
sent to the Society at the address given above.

*~ u r



Prior to the invasion by Nazi Germany, the Soviet stamp-issuing policy
was moderate and most of the commemorative stamps tastefully designed.
The first half of the 1930s may, in fact, be regarded as the Golden Age
of Soviet stamp design, most of the issues having been produced by a
beautiful phototype collotypee) process.

With the onset of war in June 1941, the average number of new stamps has
gone to over 100 items annually. Some of the commemoratives of the decade
following WWII have turned out to be philatelically interesting, as they
exist in what the Soviets call "repeated issues", i.e. they were later
reprinted in distinctive ways.

Apart from that, the record since then has been somewhat less than
distinguished. In contrast to the adhesives of Imperial Russia, all of
which were issued primarily for postal purposes, there have been many
stamps produced for reasons speculative, frivolous, irrelevant or what
have you. Issuing them also in sheetlets in limited printings has not
helped matters. Cne point to remember here is that, for many years, the
USSR has not been a consumer-oriented society. For too long, there has
been too much money chasing too few goods. Making available many new
issues and items of postal stationery has been one way of mopping up
surplus purchasing power.

All of which does not help us to cope with the more than 5000 different
Soviet stamps issued over the last 72 years, not to mention the equally
huge variety of postal stationery. Those of us who do collect Soviet
issues generally restrict ourselves to a specific period and ignore the
remainder. Reading the contemporary Soviet philatelic press makes it
clear that, when it comes to marketing their stamps abroad, the Soviet
,.postal authorities are running into the problem of diminishing returns.
First of all, too many new stamps are still appearing each year.
Secondly, competing for attention on the world philatelic market is
becoming increasingly difficult, as many countries now print beautiful
and colourful stamps.

When it comes to mail volume, the United States leads the world, by far.
However, the USSR has even more post offices and agencies in operation
(over 70,000), so the need for stamps in that country is enormous.
However, its stamp-issuing policy needs drastic revision. There should
be far fewer new issues, no speculative or restricted emissions and
with the face values covering the basic postal rates. The USSR is a super
power that is always in the news, so its stamps will always be collected.
Sales abroad would be maximised if it became easier for more philatelists
to keep up with Soviet new issues.



"C0 respcnrence with Canada" is a regular feature
of this journal. Anyone possessing interesting
Russian mail to Canada is invited to share it
with the readership, by forwarding a photograph
or xerox copy of the item, along with sane expla-
natory text to the Editor.


By Andrew Cronin

In this example of a letter from the Russian Empire to Canada,
attention is drawn once again to the mysterious spade-like marking
applied in violet. It always incorporates a number and is associated
with registered foreign mail coming into Canada in the approximate
time-span of 1910 to 1916. We have seen two examples in THE POST-RIDER
No.23, pp.3 & 71 and now this one from Moscow 3.2.13 O.S., back-
stamped Montreal 1 March N.S. and Ottawa on the 3rd., thus 15 days in
transit. All three examples had entered Canada at the port of Montreal
and it would seem that this spade marking was a re-numbering procedure
for incoming foreign registered mail at the office of entry.


by Alex Artuchov

IRBIT (continued from No. 23) 0
10. 2 kop. mauve, light or dark 0.35

11. 10 kop. red 1.50

Proofs of this issue are known. They are printed in black on
white chalky paper. The 2 kop. proof is perforated 11.75
and the 10 kop. is imperforate.

21.25 x 27.5 mm lithographed in colour on a coloured paper
0.08 mm thick, white gum, sheet unknown, perforated 11.25
and also known imperforate.

12. 2 kop. blue or light blue on a green-blue paper 3.50

Proofs of this issue are known in an emerald green colour.
They are perforated 11.50 and are also known imperforate and
are without gum.

1901 1902
Provisional issues, printed locally, 19.5 x 33.5 mm
typeset in black on lilac gray paper 0.09 mm thick, brownish
yellow or brown gum, perforated 11.25 or imperforate, 2


I? ell&I
~Bt !COI.

First Edition (1901)
Sheet of 5 x 4, with a transfer block of 1 x 5 and 5 types,
the brown gum causes the paper to have a gray brown tint,
the stamps were cancelled with blue crayon.

13. 2 kop. black on lilac gray paper 50.00

The Five Types
Type 1 Damaged letter P in the word MPBETCKH break in
top of 2 in NE corner .
Type 2 Break in top frameline above the letters KA of the
word MPMHTCKAA similar break in bottom
frameline, break in the right frameline 2/3 of the
way up.
Type 3 Dot on bottom of the letter 0 of the word ntOTA
letter B of the word lBb is broken, 2 breaks in
bottom frameline on the right side.
Type 4 Upper left corner of letter M of 3EMCKA is
broken, letter n of the word KOn is placed low
and the period after this letter is very small,
break in top frameline over the left 2 and in the
bottom frameline under the right 2.
Type 5 The letter C of the word MPBmTCKA. has a thick
head, break in the top frameline over the right 2
and in the bottom frameline under the left 2.

P Second Edition (1902)
Similar to first edition except that corner numerals are
shorter and wider, typographed in black on lilac gray paper,
brownish yellow gum, sheet of 10 x 10 with 10 types, the
sheet was probably printed one horizontal row at a time
because the distance between stamps varies from one sheet to
another, the 10 types are repeated in the top 2 horizontal
rows and the bottom 80 stamps each contain a deliberate
error resulting in what is really 90 types, the error was
done deliberately with the idea of offering the stamps to
collectors for high prices, the source offering the stamps
for sale was in Yekaterinoslav and was the same one that was
responsible for the reprints of Belozersk, these stamps were
however postally used, the 4th 5th and 6th vertical columns
of the sheet are inverted, perforated 11.25 and imperforate.

14. 2 kop. black on gray lilac paper 20.00

The Ten Types
Stamps 1 10 can be distinguished from stamps 11 20 by
the wide top margins of stamps 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9 and 10 and
by wide bottom margins on stamps 4, 5 and 6 on the
perforated stamps. The types are distinguished by damaged
letters of the word HPRFTCIA

Type 1 Normal


Type 2 -
Type 3 -
Type 4 -
Type 5 -

Type 6 -
Type 7 -
Type 8 -
Type 9 -
Type 10-

Damaged P.
Part of the square period after word TOT'A
Broken C.
2 breaks in P at the bottom of the left leg of the
letter H .
Damaged top of the letter n of the word nOqrTA
Break in the letter A.
Short 2 in NW corner.
Broken letters P and K.
Damaged letter T.

The Sheet

1 2 3 t S 9 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 PT ST 9T 17 18 19 20

21 22 23 PtZ 2 9Z 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 PV SC 9C 37 38 39 40
41 42 43 V SP3 9 47 48 49 50

51 52 53 VS 5 95 57 58 59 60

61 62 63 99 9 99 67 68 69 70

71 72 73 VL SL 91 77 78 79 80

81 82 83 S 598 99 87 88 89 90

91 92 93 V6 56 96 97 98 99 L00

The Errors

Stamp 21 Inverted 2 in
NW corner.
Stamp 22 Inverted 2 in
NE corner.
Stamp 23 Inverted 2 in
SW corner.
Stamp 24 Inverted 2 in
SE corner.
Letter P larger
than on other
Stamp 26 MHHTCKAq
Stamp 27 HPMBHT~ A
Stamp 28 HMPE~CKAT


- 3E:tA1H
- AO~
- HOn

vertical 2
in NE corner.

Stamp 43 Vertical 2 in
NW corner.
Stamp 44 Vertical 2 in
NE corner.
Stamp 45 Vertical 2 in
SW corner.
Stamp 46 Vertical 2 in
SE corner.
Stamp 47 Vertical 2 in NW
corner, inverted.
Stamp 48 Vertical 2 in NE
corner, inverted.
Stamp 49 Vertical 2 in SW
corner, inverted.
Stamp 50 Vertical 2. in SE
corner, inverted.
Stamp 51 Horizontal 2 in NW
corner, facing up.
Stamp 52 Horizontal 2 in NE
corner, facing up.
Stamp 53 Horizontal 2 in SW
corner, facing up.
Stamp 54 Horizontal 2 in SE
corner, facing up.
Stamp 55 Inverted 2 in both
bottom corners.
Stamp 56 Inverted 2 in NW
and NE corners.
Stamp 57 Inverted 2 in NW
and SE corners.
Stamp 58 Inverted 2 in NE
and SW corners.
Stamp 59 All 4 numerals 2

Stamp 60- Horizontal 2's in
NE and SW corners
facing down.
Stamp 61 Horizontal 2's in
NW and SE corners
facing down.
Stamp 62 Horizontal 2's in
SW and SE corners
facing down.
Stamp 63 Horizontal 2's in
NW and NE corners
facing down.
Stamp 64 Horizontal 2's in
NW and NE corners
facing up.
Stamp 65 Horizontal 2's in
SW and SE corners
facing up.
Stamp 66 Horizontal 2's in
NE and SW corners

Stamp 67

- Horizontal 2's
in NW and SE
corners facing

Stamp 68 All 4 numerals
2 horizontal,
facing up.
Stamp 69 All 4 numerals
2 horizontal,
facing down.
Stamp 70 Normal.
Stamp 76 HPEHTOKAq
Stamp 78 OEMCKA
Stamp 79 3MC2KAM
Stamp 80 3EHCKAS
Stamp 81 3E~MKAQ
Stamp 82 3EMCHA
Stamp 83 HOqTA
Stamp 84 IOHTA
Stamp 85 r'FA
Stamp 86 13P
Stamp 87 HOU
Stamp 88 RCn
Stamp 89 KCT
Stamp 90 HOn
Stamp 91 90b
Stamp 92 nOqOA
Stamp 93 nUOTA
Stamp 94 HFqTA
Stamp 95 3ECHAq
Stamp 96 3EyOKAq
Stamp 97 3EHCKAE
Stamp 98 OEMCKAq
Stamp 99 MPERTCHAg
Stamp 100- MPEHTOKAH

facing up.

21.75 x 27 mm 3 values, lithographed on white paper 0.09 -
0.12 mm thick, white gum, different sheet for each value,
perforated 11.5 .

The 2 kop. Value
Sheet of 84 with 7 x 7 group on left side and 5 x 7 group on
right side, transfer block of 2 x 2 without types, some
differences are however as follows:
Stamp 2 Coloured spot on outer white oval over letters KA
Stamp 3 White thorn like projection under numeral 2 in SE
Stamp 17- Retouch in background in right bottom corner of
rectangle with shield.

15. 2 kop. brown


The 4 kop. Value
Sheet of 6 x 5 transfer block of 2 x 2, this value was
created by changing the numerals and inscription of value in
the bottom part of the oval on the transfer block of the 2
kop. stamp resulting in 4 types which can be distinguished
through differences in the shape and position of numerals
and inscription.

16. 4 kop. blue, light or dark


The Sheet

2 KOn

2 3 4 1 2 3 4 3 4 1 2 3
1 1 2 1 2*"1 2 1 2 1 2 1
3 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3
2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1
4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3
1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1
3 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4.3 4 3

Stamp with Retouch


1 2 1 2 1 2

3 4 3 4 3 4

1 2 1 2 1 2

3 4 3 4 3 4

1 2 1 2 1 2

The 8 kop. Value
Sheet of 6 x 6, transfer block of 2 x 2, this value was also
created from the transfer block of the 2 kop. stamp and has
4 types differing in the shape and the position of corner
numerals and inscription.

17. 8 kop. blue, red and light blue 3.00

The Sheet

1 2 1 2 1 2
3 4 3 4 3 4

3 4 3 4 3 4
1 2 1 2 1 2
3 4 3 4 3 4

The 4 Types
Type 1 Break in SW corner under 8, shield under crown
broken, dot after X, right frame damaged.
Type 3 Cross on crown mutilated, H of HPE4T blotted.

Quite a few proofs of this issue have been reported as

2 kop. (in the accepted design)
- On white chalky paper 0.12 mm thick, no gum, imperforate.
2 kop. black

- On smooth white paper 0.09 mm thick, white gum,
2 kop. dark brown and red orange
2 kop. black and greenish blue

2 kop. (in slightly changed design with wider crown)
- On smooth white paper 0.05 mm thick, no gum, imperforate.
2 kop. black, yellow and light blue
2 kop. black, light blue and yellow
2 kop. black, carmine red and yellow
2 kop. black, carmine red and blue
2 kop. black, blue and carmine red
2 kop. dark blue, yellow and carmine red
2 kop. dark blue, carmine red and yellow
2 kop. dark blue, yellow and blue
2 kop. dark blue, blue and yellow

- On white paper 0.06 mm thick, smooth yellowish blue white
gum, perforated 11.5.
2 kop. sepia brown

- On coloured paper 0.07 mm thick, white gum, imperforate.
2 kop. black on gray green paper
2 kop. black on rose paper

4 kop. (in an unaccepted design)
- on smooth white paper 0.05 mm thick, no gum, imperforate.
4 kop. black
4 kop. gray lilac

8 kop. (in an unaccepted design)
- smooth white paper, no gum, imperforate.
8 kop. carmine red and gray

1905 1912
Very similar to issue of 1893 but in a slightly larger size
of 18.25 x 23 mm corner numerals and inscriptions are also
larger and the background is different, lithographed on
white paper, white gum, perforated 11.5, 4 editions.


First Edition (1906)
White paper 0.07 mm thick, space between stamps 5 mm with
small corner angles.

18. 2 kop. red RR
(? known)

Proofs in a somewhat different design are known in 2, 4 and
8 kop. values. The design is similar to that of the issued
stamps except that a large numeral of value is located below
the central oval with two circular strips on either side
with the value inscribed in letter form. The proofs are on
coloured paper, have no gum and are imperforate.

2, 4 and 8 kop.
- indigo blue on light green paper

2 and 4 kop.
- indigo blue on rose paper

2 kop.
- red on brown yellow paper

Second Edition (June, 1906)
Space between stamps 4.5 mm unclear print, without corner
angles, sheet of 9 x 11 this stamp is known bisected and
used as a 1 kop. value.

19. 2 kop. red 0.50

Third Edition (Nov. 22, 1908)
On bluish white paper 0.06 mm thick, space between stamps
3 3.5 mm white gum, sheet of 7 x 11, issue of 300,000,
known bisected and used as a 1 kop. value.

20. 2 kop. brown lilac 0.35

Fourth Edition (1913)
On white.paper 0.07 mm thick, yellowish white gum, sold in
panes of 12 x 7 but printed in 4 such panes spaced 20 mm
apart and with thin separating lines between them, Schmidt
indicates that the transfer block was 4 x 3 and that the 1st
and 5th transfer block are inverted on the 1 kop. sheet and
that the 6th transfer block is inverted on the 2 kop. sheet,
multiples of these stamps however indicate a 4 x 4 transfer
block on the 1 kop. value and inverted stamps on the 2 kop.
sheet in one row only, perforated 11.5.

21. 1 kop. red orange 0.25

Variety: Dot before 1 in SW corner on 63rd stamp.

22. 2 kop. red brown 0.25

Schmidt lists this issue as the being No. 22 surcharged
15 in black.

23. 15 on 2 kop. red brown ?

Schmidt/Chuchin Catalogue Cross-Reference

Sch Ch Sch Ch Sch Ch
1 1 9 9 17 17
2 2 10 10 18
3 3 .11 11 19 19
4 4 12 12 20 20
5 5 13 13 21 18
6 6 14 14 22 21
7 7 15 15 23
8 8 16 16




Gdov is located in the province of St. Petersburg on the
eastern shore of Lake Pskov some 100 miles away from the
former capital. in 1897 the population was 2,254.

Gdov was an agricultural community with products which
included potatoes and vegetables and dairy farming. There
are oil shale deposits in the area.

Gdov issued stamps between 1874 and 1912.

Coat of Arms Colours:
Top: Blue background with a black cloud and a brown animal.
Bottom: Golden background with earth and wheat.

1874 1876
17.75 x 24.5 mm lithographed on white paper, stars at the
beginning and end of the inscriptions, period after the word
3t3b 4 editions.

First Edition (1874 April, 16)
Space between stamps 3 mm yellowish white paper 0.1 mm
thick, brownish gum, sheet of 21 x 10 with the 189th and
210th stamps inverted, irregularly perforated 12.5 13.25.

1. 2 kop. ultramarine, dull of bright

Second Edition (1875 ?)
Space between stamps 3.5 mm white wove paper 0.11 mm
thick, yellow brown gum, thin separating lines between
stamps only 2 mm from stamp design, only single copies
known, evenly perforated 13 and imperforate.

2. 2 kop. dull ultramarine

(10 known)
(2 known)

Third Edition (1875 ?)
Space between stamps 3.5 mm, on thin white paper 0.07 mm
thick, white gum, oily print permeating unevenly at times,
sheet unknown, 2 types, unevenly perforated 13 13.25.

-3. 2 kop. blue or light blue


SType 1.*


Type 2.

(19 known)

The Two Types
Type 1 The foot of the Y in the word YA3)rb extends to the
right, the extension appears as a dot or as an
irregularly shaped bar.
Type 2 The foot of the Y does not extend to the right.

Fourth Edition (1876)
Space between stamps is 2 mm paper gum and perforation
same as for third edition, sheet unknown and without types.

4. 2 kop. ultramarine


1882 (Jan.)
18 x 23.5 mm design similar to previous issue but with
eight rayed, the letters in the inscription are larger and
the word KOT is smaller, the stamps are separated by thin
lines, lithographed on yellowish white paper 0.08 mm thick,
brownish gum, sheet unknown, tete-beche pairs known,
perforated 12.5.

5. 2 kop. slate or gray blue




1883 (Sept.)
Similar to issue of 1882, larger corner numerals, centre 2
shorter and wider, heavier letters of inscription,
lithographed on thick gray white paper 0.13 mm thick, gray
gum, sheet of 22 x 10 with a transfer block of 11 x 1
arranged horizontally, 11 types, imperforate sheet margins,
perforated 12.5

6. 2 kop. blue or indigo blue 0.50

The Eleven Types
The differences between the types are minor but the
following are noted:

Type 1 Small white triangle over the word
Type 2 Oval outline on the left side is broken by a white
Type 4 There is a white spot to the right of the head of
the numeral 2.
Type 5 The foot of the left bottom corner numeral 2 is
Type 6 A white vertical lilne at the foot of the centre
numeral 2.
Type 9 A large white spot is to the left of the centre
numeral 2 .
Type 10- Two white spots one near the NE corner circle
the other in the right outer frameline.

1887 (April 9, 1887)
17 x 22.75 mm lithographed in black on coloured paper
0.07 mm thick, white gum, sheet of 13 x 13 with the first
three vertical rows inverted, transfer block of 5 x 2 and 10
types, perforated 12.

7. 2 kop. black on rose paper 0.50

7. 2 kop. black on rose paper 0.50

The Sheet

The Ten Types
Type 1 Black dot left of the numeral 2 in the SW corner.
Type 2 Break in the top of the numeral 2 in the NW corner,
black dot under r of rIOB- 2 dots after second
Type 3 Black dot under letter IL of YII A, an angle shaped
line instead of a dash after IOB-
Type 4 Black spot at top inside n of ]O .
Type 5 Black dot under foot of numeral 2 in NE corner.
Type 6 Black dot left of 2 of 2 KI. .
Type 7 Black dot left of A of rROB black dot right of
2 in NE corner.
Type 8 Small bulge at bottom of 0 of IOB-
Type 9 Small spot on the lower horizontal bar of A of Bt
Type 10- Small black dot over B of nOqTOB (this does not
seem to be constant).

S2l< 6 n 0
T. 1 T. 2 T. 3 T. 4

Similar to. issue of 1887, coarser appearance, 17.75 x 23.25
mm lithographed in black on coloured paper 0.07 mm thick,
brownish yellow gum, sheet of 10 x 10 in 4 panes of 5 x 5
with 3 types, perforated 12.

8. 2 kop. black on gray blue paper

The Sheet

1 2 1 2 3 2 3 1 2 3
2 3 1 2 3 2 3 1 2 3

1 3 123 1 2 12 3
13 12 3 1 2 12 3
1323 122

The Three Types
Type 1 The head of the centre numeral 2 is wider than the
other two types, the letter B in the word ABE
leans to the right.
Type 2 The letter K of MAPKA has a thick right foot with a
ball like end.
Type 3 The letter a of XBf is short and wide.

Similar to issue of 1890 but with an even coarser
appearance, letters almost slantinng, 18.25 x 23 mm,
lithographed in black on coloured paper 0.09 mm thick,
brownish yellow gum, sheet pf 12 x 10 with a transfer block
of 3 x 1 repeated four times in each horizontal row,
perforated 12 and imperforate vertically.


9. 2 kop. black on gray paper

The Three Types
Type 1 Letter b of XBb different fron the other types.
Type 2 Numeral 2 with smaller head and wider foot.
Type 3 Similar to T2 except that distance between MBb and
K is greater.

24.5 x 17.5 mm lithographed on white paper 0.09 mm thick,
yellowish white gum, sheet unknown, perforated 11.5 and
imperforate vertically.



10. 2 kop. green 0.50

Similar to issue of 1895, inscription is slightly smaller,
oval with numeral 2 is narrower, lithographed on white paper
0.07 mm thick, white gum, sheet of 10 x 10 in 2 groups of 5
x 10, groups 36 mm apart, perforated 11.5 and imperforate.

11. 2 kop. light blue 0.50

1909 1912
17 x 24.75 mm similar to issue of 1882, larger corner
numerals, letters of inscription smaller and closer
together, word KOf in thin letters, lithographed on white
paper 0.07 mm thick, white gum, perforated 11.5, two

* Y


First Edition (1909)
Sheet of 14 x 8 with a transfer block of 6 x 1, poorly
printed, issue of 10,000 stamps.


12. 2 kop. dark blue

The Sheet

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 4
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 4
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 4

Second Edition (1912)
Change of colour, whi
13. 2 kop. green

te paper, brownish yellow gum, sheet


Dot over the centre 2.

Schmidt/Chuchin Catalogue Cross-Reference:

Both catalogues list the stamps identically.
l|||Iignllll.uu u|I h*lEll||i*IhIim|lll l |||| i|iRllhgEillIEih**hi 1ll |ulnI nu11ig ius|II aIuII


featuring the issues of CHEMBARY through KOLOGRIV is in a mature state
of preparation with publication expected i late 1989 of early 1990.
Advance orders are invited at $ 25.00 (US] The post-publication price
will be $ 30.00 [US). Dealer terms are available. Please make cheques or
money orders payable to Alex Artuchov and forward them to the Society

----.--X)i~^.l~si ;.r.: iii-;~hiilbi---


by M.I. Belyaev & I.G. Kuznetsov.

(Excerpted from the manual of the same title, published by
Svyaz'radioizdat, Moscow, 1938, in an edition of 10,000 copies. The
manual appeared at the height of the Great Purge and its text reflects
the tone of those times).

The Construction and Geographic Distribution of the Communications
Network of the USSR.

In examining the subject of the distribution of the network of
communications throughout the Soviet Union, it would be necessary to
concern ourselves in brief with the postal situation in pre-
revolutionary Russia.

The economic backwardness of Tsarist Russia and the state of its ways of
communication reflected directly upon the condition of the posts. Because
of the poor development of the railway network, the movement of mail
within the country was performed under the most unsuitable conditions.
The transmission of mail was generally carried out on roads between
villages, with a total length of 162,779 verst (173,685 km. or 108,555
miles) and on all other routes, such as railways, highways and waterways
with a total length of 126,862 v&rst (135,362 km. or 84,600 miles), of
which the railways took up 58,309 verst (62,215 km. or 38,885 miles).

* The development of the network of post offices under the Tsarist
government was determined mainly by fiscal and financial considerations.
Post offices were opened either in thickly populated commercial or
industrial centres, where the income of a postal establishment could be
reckoned in advance as being advantageous, or a post office would be
opened only on the basis that the local population would assume the
obligation of providing premises free of charge for a length of three
years for postal operations and, in some instances, covering the
expenses for the maintenance of the personnel. Only in cases where the
government was guided by political or strategic considerations in the
opening of an office were subsidies not required from the local

Because of such policies of the Tsarist government, most of the
population of Russia and especially in the villages and hamlets could
only use the postal services to a limited extent. Newspapers did not
get to the villages at all and letters arrived "as the occasion arose".
Such "servicing" of the provinces by the postal communications resulted,
in conjunction with the government mail service, in the establishment of
the so-called Zemstvo Posts, which were very characteristic of the
agricultural and economically backward parts of the country. For the
majority of the hamlets and villages, the Zemstvo Posts were the only
means of postal communication, the focal points of which being the
district administrations (volostnye pravleniya)

The organisation of the Zemstvo Posts was quite simple. The Zemstvo
postmen picked up the mail at the regional centre and conveyed it for a
special fee around the district administrations, without the
responsibility of delivering it directly to the addressees. An exception
was only made for country squires, priests and wealthy village peasants

and, in view of the services they rendered, for educated people in the
villages (doctors, agronomists etc). This was not done for any other
village residents who offered personal services and the mail addressed
to them was carried around the district administrations and laid aside
until such time as someone could give it further transmission to the
addressee on a suitable occasion.

The distribution of the network of post offices was motivated
exclusively by economic factors, i.e. to serve commerce and industry.
Since both the commerce and industry of Tsarist Russia were concentrated
mainly in the central provinces, far away from the sources of raw
materials and fuel, there was a dense and growing network of post
offices in those regions, while the outlying areas were not provided
with postal services. We are speaking here not only of the outlying
areas in our North, Central Asia and Siberia, but even of districts
close to the central provinces such as the Rybinsk district of
Yaroslavl' province, the Novgorod and Vologda districts adjacent to the
St. Petersburg province, the districts of the Perm' province in the
Urals etc., all of which were obliged to organise their own Zemstvo
postal services.

The interests-of the public were by no means taken into account. The
chief aim of the Tsarist government was to make the postal service one
of the mainstays of the state budget. By contrast, the tasks
established by Soviet power were diametrically opposite. The interests
of the working masses were built upon the basis of organising postal
communications, beginning with the first steps taken in socialist
construction. The People's Commissar of Posts and Telegraphs, Comrade
V.N. Podbel'skii, wrote in 1918 that "the postal policy of Socialist
power must be based on the following position: a postal apparatus with
the most up-to-date technology, so as to serve the broadest spectrum
of the working population under the most accessible conditions. We
therefore have here three problems to resolve as a consequence: (a)
technology modernisationn of the postal service); (b) the question of
organisation (availability and proximity of the mail service to the
public) and (c) the financial question (accessibility of the postal

The division into districts of the USSR has facilitated as never before
the task of the fundamental question of organisation, i.e. bringing the
postal service to the public. In connection with this task, the
district has been taken as the basic unit, on the territory of which
there is distributed a network of postal facilities (offices and
" agencies), subordinate to the district post office, located in the
district centre.

The distribution of the subordinate postal facilities in the territory
of the district would be set up in such a way that, depending on the
density of the population, there would be one post office per 12,000 to
15,000 persons in the cities and one postal agency per 3000 persons in
rural locations, living within a 5-km. (3-mile) radius of such an
agency. Moreover, where settlements are situated more than 5 km. from
an agency, then postal agencies are also being opened to serve a
smaller number of persons. In localities which are especially distant
from a district centre (as in the Far North and Siberia), where the
population density is quite insignificant, agencies are being opened
independently of the number of residents. Post offices in the villages
are being established on the basis of an office per 8000 to 10,000

persons, living within a radius of 10 to 12 km. (6h to 7k miles).
Letter boxes, as receptacles of mail from the public, are being
Allocated in the cities on the basis of one box per 1300-1800 persons
Depending on the population density) and one box per 500 persons in
rural localities.

Thus, taking into account the fact that the district centres are
situated by preference in rural localities and that in these district
centres district post offices are everywhere to be found supervising the
subordinate offices in their territories, with facilities available to
the public, it can be stated that the problem of organisation has been
basically solved.

Looking at the distribution of district centres and also, as a
consequence, at the allocation of district post offices, we see that,
out of 2932 district centres investigated by the Central Administration
of the National Economic Accounting Service of the State Planning
Commission of the USSR (see "The Proceedings of the Central Executive
Committee of the USSR and of the All-Union Central Executive Committee"
for 11 January 1937), 1116 of them (38.06%) are situated along railway
lines. The majority of the remainder are located at distances 20 to 50km.
(12 to 31 miles)from a railway line and 28 of them 500km. away (312
miles). As an exception to the foregoing there are the district centres
in our Far North, Siberia and the Far Eastern Region, where the distances
of the district centres from a railway station run to thousands of

Thus, for example, in the Kamchatka province, the distances of the
district centres from a railway run from 1646 to 3161 km. (1029 to 1976
miles); in the Koryak National Area from 1100 to 3866 km. (688 to 2417
miles), while Anadyr, the centre of the Chukotia National Area, is
located 4450 km. (2782 miles) from Vladivostok. In the Yakut ASSR, the
district centres are especially far away from a railway (from 800 to
4800 km. / 500 to 3000 miles), while the districts of the Taimyr National
Area are 2300 to 3320 km. (1438 to 2075 miles) away from Krasnoyarsk; the
Evenki National Area from 1433 to 2687 km. (896 to 1680 miles) and the
Turukhan district centre in the Krasnoyarsk Region is 1474 km. (921 miles)
away from Krasnoyarsk. Also, some districts of the Irkutsk province, as
well as the Ostyak-Vogul National Area of the Omsk province (1) and the
Nenets National Area of the Archangel province are thousands of kilometres
from a railway. The distances from railway stations to the district
centres in Central Asia are noticeably shorter and fluctuate from 600 to
800 km. (375 to 500 miles).

It should be borne in mind that the administrative centres were formerly
linked in the majority of cases with a bazaar or fair, while the Soviet
centres are based on the Machine and Tractor Stations (MTS). Of the 2932
district centres investigated'by the Central Administration of the
National Economic Accounting Service of the State Planning Commission,
1897 of them are situated in localities where there are MTSs.

All these data confirm that not only postal, but also telegraphic and
* telephone communications have been made available to the public, since
the district post offices, postal stations and agencies constitute
unified centres of communications, where the telegraphic and telephone
services are working together with the posts in serving the public.

The development of railway construction during Soviet rule (the total
length of railways as at 1 October 1936 came to 85,099 km./53,187 miles
as against 58,309 km./36,443 miles until the Revolution), as well as of
highways, the automotive industry and aircraft now provide all the means*
for the communications network to serve the public in an exemplary way(2).

EDITORIAL COMMENT: (1) The Ostyaks and Voguls are the nearest linguistic
relatives of the present-day Hungarians, who must have originally
emigrated from the Omsk area over a period prior to the 10th. Cent. A.D.
(2) The USSR is the only major industrial power still building railways.
That makes economic sense in the largest country in the world, covering
one-sixth of its surface and with eleven time zones. With its huge
distances and drastic climatic changes, an extensive country-wide
network of roads would be ruinously expensive to build and maintain.


EFR- can offer to fellow-philatelists a limited number of the
Album ESTONIA published by Votele Org many years ago. The album
contains preprinted sheets for all Estonian stamps (incl. occupation
issues) and is suitable for an advanced catalogue-collection. We can
recommend it.
The price is SEK 125 (incl. Postage within Europe). Orders to EFUR.
If payment by check please add SEK 35 for bank fees.

Advance payment only to our Postal Account in Sweden Stockholm 487 55 32.6
Nur gegen Vorauszahlung aul unserer Postglrokonto In Schweden -
Stockholm 487 55 32-6
OrtagArdsvagen 9,
Sweden Schweden

Dr Ross Marshall,
M.B.Ch.B.. Dip. Obst.
AUGUST LEPPA Family Care Specialist
Philatelia Fennica, POBox 202 Philatelist
SF-00101 Helsinki, Finland Specialist collector of Russia/USSR stamps and
SPhilatelist Postal History, Soviet Antarctica, New Zealand
SIn private life an ardent collector ofpostal history: Postal History etc.
Estonia, Latvia, USSR/Russia, and military mail.
Metsolantie 65 A 2, SF.04430 Jirvenpdi. Philatelic Exhibitor. Judge and Author.
Tel. (90) 289461 +358 0 289461 Editor "Pochta." Director
Editor "Pochta." Director
Philatelia Fennica r Stampways Ltd.
The leading philatelic magazine in Finland S P.O. Box 7 Otorohanga New Zealand
STelephone (08133) 7079/7063

Other readers are cordially invited to send in their visiting cards
with included photographs, as we will gladly publish them gratis!


Postal Communications.
1. Natural and artificial paths.

SNavigable rivers flowing in all directions within the territory of the
Union, lakes scattered in all corners of the land, seas and oceans
lapping the shores of the immense Soviet land,; have "served for a long
time and are continuing to serve man as natural paths of communication.
They were established by Nature itself. These natural paths of
communication are utilised.by the postal network wherever necessary and
when suitable for hastening the movement of correspondence and for the
delivery of printed matter and mail to the public. These natural
waterways were sometimes the only means of communication, because of the
lack of roads on almost impassable terrain. Thus, the link between
Vologda and Tot'ma during the autumn and spring seasons of bad roads is
maintained only along the Sykhona river, which is the sole and natural
path of communication during that period.

Apart from the natural paths of communication, which are far from
meeting the requirements of the ever increasing contacts among the
population, artificial paths were also established: railways, airlines,
water canals, highways, etc. The railway network on the territory of the
Union, which we have inherited from Tsarism,was unevenly laid out. Thus,
for instance, the densest network of railways is to be found in the
European part of the USSR.

This situation is gradually being corrected by the efforts of the Soviet
government. During Soviet rule, the main Turksib Line was constructed in
a short period of time, linking the Union republics with Siberia. Also,
* secondary tracks were laid along the Main Siberian Line (The Trans-
Siberian Railway). The Trans-Volga area was given access to Central Asia
through the newly constructed line from Ural'sk to Ilek and the line from
Karaganda to Bertys was also laid down, etc.

The weaker the development of the railway network, the greater the role
played in communications by highways and connecting rural pathways, as
.well as byways and passes. These paths of communication, which we shall
henceforth call surface routes, still play an important role in postal
communications at the present time and they stand in first place, both in
terms of numbers and lengths. Where the railway network is sufficiently
developed, the surface routes have been assigned an unimportant role in
serving the needs of even the local points of habitation up to now.

Thanks to the quick development of the network of well-established
highways in the USSR, both of local character (within the boundaries of a
district) and main highways, such as from Moscow to Kiev or Moscow to
Minsk etc. and also the ever increasing penetration into the economy of
communications by automotive transport, the character of mail delivery is
becoming more complex, since the post goes by rail to a particular point
and onwards by automotive means in the interests of quicker delivery,
even if the delivery of mail by truck or van also lies along the railway
route. In that way, the role of the surface route plays an important
part, even in cases of a highly developed railway network.

* With the growth of industry in our country and the rapid local
development of aircraft construction, aviation has assumed an important
role in postal communications. The air routes of postal aircraft,
growing year by year, carry a large amount of written correspondence and
printed matter. The links by air and their speed of communication,
especially on long distances in which our Union is so rich, will

naturally assume first place in postal communications in the not too
distant future.

The unequalled exploits of the Soviet pilots (Chkalov, Baidukov and
Belyakov'and, after them, Gromov, Yumashev and Danilin), linking for the
first time in the history of air communications the USSR and the USA by
a non-stop flight via the North Pole and thus establishing a new epoch
in the history of world paths of communication, gives us all grounds to
suggest that, in the very near future, a postal link from the USSR to
the USA will be in existence via the North Pole. The regular routing of
planes between the USSR and North America across the North Pole would
facilitate the transmission of international mail from Europe to the
countries of North America, as the route from the USSR to North America
across the Pole is the shortest way and the USSR, being now the
communications link between the countries of Western Europe and those
of Eastern Asia, it would become the hub also linking these countries
with America.

We thus see that all types of natural and artificial routes of
communication are utilised for the movement of postal correspondence.

2. Routes.

All the types of ways of communication utilised by the .postal service
are called routes. Postal routes have starting and end points. Such
points may be any inhabited locality with postal facilities and having
at its disposal means of transportation for the transmission of mail
(aircraft, park of railway mail coaches, automotive vehicles, horse
relay stations or other types of transport). Thus, for instance, the
Gor'kii-Astrakhan' steamship route consists of its entire journey from
Gor'kii to Astrakhan', with all intermediate stops and all the post
offices along the banks of the Volga river.

The railway mail coach route No.41 Moscow-Negoreloe (EDITORIAL COMMENT:
Prior to 17 September 1939, Negoreloe was the Soviet border station
facing Poland) would consist of all the intermediate stations and post
offices from Moscow to Negoreloe, with all the surface routes converging
on this main line. In the example of the Ural'sk-Gur'ev surface route,
it would comprise all the offices traversed on the way from Ural'sk to
Gur'ev. The separate routes of air communications utilised for the
transportation of mail, as distinct from the routes described above,
are called airlines. An airline has take-off and landing points for
aircraft: i.e. the Moscow-Tashkent or Moscow-Tbilisi airline etc. In
That particular case, the word "route" is taken to encompass all landing
places for the aircraft. The routes are often subjected to changes, e.g.
the mail coach route No.77 was formerly the railway line section with
all the post offices lying on it from Murom to Ivanov, but this mail
coach route now serves the section from Leningrad to Dubrovka. It should
be borne in mind that in one and the same train going from Leningrad to
Gor'kii, with short stops at various points for changing crews, it
became technically difficult to uncouple from the train a mail coach and
put another one in its place. Even if the mail coaches were not changed,
then the transfer of mail during the exchange of crews often led to
great misunderstandings, both in accepting mail and in keeping a tally
of the mail coach inventory.

In the example just described, the offices on the routes did not change
the existing order of exchange and despatch of the mail. The only result


was a change of number with another one for mail coaches of a specific

SChanges in the route of a mail coach often came about by reason of the
transfer of mail exchanges of any office whatever, from one station to
another. In the majority of cases, that resulted from the improvement of
surface routes in a specific locality, i.e. the construction of a new
highway not far from a particular office and going in the direction of
the road bed of a railway, or from the same office to a railway station,
which previously did not have such enhanced links with a specific point.
In such cases, the exchange of mail with the mail coaches would have
taken place at the station lying near the highway, even if that station
were located somewhat farther away from where the exchange of mail was
formerly carried out, but where the construction of a rural road was
going badly. Even if the new road were longer, it would be well made and
thus more suitable. In some cases, the transfer of mail exchanges to
another station has come about upon redistricting, when some office has
been transferred from one district to another, which latter receives
mail from another mail coach. For example, the postal agency at Kurtino,
which was in Kolomna district, received its mail via Kolomna (mail coach
No.215) and, on being included in Malino district, began receiving mail
via Malino (mail coach No.43), etc.

We thus see that postal routes are not distinguished by their stability
and that, in order to keep pace with the resulting changes, it is
necessary to take note of them and update the routing manual at the
same time.

* 3. The establishment of postal routes.

A railway conference takes place at the end of each year in Moscow, at
which representatives from the Mail Movement Department of the People's
Commissariat of Communications are also present. This conference
coordinates train movements for the coming year (the new train timetable
comes out annually on 15 May) and the communications representatives,
drawing on the ideas for organising the fastest movement of mail
throughout the Union, assign suitable trains for postal communications.
The question of including a mail coach in an assigned train is
coordinated at the conference with the railway representatives, as well
as the quantity (in units of weight) of mail bag sending, despatched on
a specific train. The postal administration of the People's Commissariat
of Communications distributes to all post offices the worked up schedule
of train movements for which mail transportation has been assigned, as
well as proposals for setting up the flow of mail along the surface
routes, so that these flows are fully coordinated with the assigned train
movements. If two or more trains with mail coaches in them are proceeding
upon the territory of the postal service, then the postal service must
specify which of the mail coaches must exchange mail with the post
offices. These data must be sent to the People's Commissariat of
Communications and to the particular post office in which jurisdiction
the mail coach is located, in good time before the introduction of the
new timetable. The post offices processing the mail flow along surface
* routes should take into consideration steamship as well as train
movements, where the former pass through the territory served by a
specific office.

The despatch of mail from a starting point.and its arrival at a
destination should be set up in such a way that the appointed times


coincide with the arrival and despatch of trains with mail coaches.

There are instances where one office or another will receive mail from a
route traversed by rail in winter and from a route in summer open to
navigation, going from a shore office and carrying out mail exchange with
a steamer. Thus, for the post offices, which are obliged to serve the
postal needs of the public as well and.as quickly as possible, it is
necessary to take into consideration every moment to facilitate the most
rapid transportation of the mail. For the intermediate junction offices
on the surface route, from which offices branch out on the side surface
routes, the mail flow on them depends upon arrival from a starting point
to a specific node. If the complete coordination of mail flow is not
arrived at, then help in setting up such coordination should be rendered
by the largest industrial and administrative centres.

4. Time-tables of mail flow.

Each inhabited point in the country (district, village council, state
farm or collective farm) must be made aware of the arrival and despatch
times for mail to and from their respective localities. For this reason,
the postal service must ensure that it sets up in good time an exact
timetable of the mail flow for all its postal outlets. Such a timetable
should be displayed in a prominent place at each post office. This
timetable gives the public the means of controlling the work of the
postal service and to require that the delivery times be met in
accordance with that particular timetable. In addition, the timetable
for each post office allows the postal management to verify the adherence
to such a timetable at the point of its application.

5. The types of routes.

The routes are divided into:
(a) Railway routes, which are served by mail coaches.
The mail coaches, in which the handling of postal correspondence they
contain is carried out (sorting, filling in documents, etc.) have, in
addition to starting and end points which specify the route, a numbering
system assigned to them. Thus, an uneven number is given to a mail coach
being despatched from its starting point, while an even number (resulting
in a pair of consecutive numbers) is assigned to the mail coach returning
from the end point to its starting point. Some examples: No.321 is
assigned to the mail coach despatched from Moscow to Archangel and No.322
to the mail coach returning from Archangel to Moscow; Nos.l-2 are
assigned to the mail coach running between Moscow and Leningrad. The
starting point of this latter mail coach is located in Leningrad, which
means that the mail coach goes under No.l from Leningrad to Moscow and
under No.2 from Moscow to Leningrad (return trip) etc.

The starting point of a mail coach depends upon many factors: the
importance of a specific railway line to an appointed centre; the
locations of the postal directorates to which the mail coach is
subordinate; etc. Except in rare instances, the living quarters of the
crew of postal workers serving a specific mail coach are situated at the
starting point and the way documents of that particular mail coach are
also kept there. There are at present (1938) a total of 191 numbered mail
coaches running in the country and since each mail coach has a double
numbering, that gives a grand total of 191 x 2 = 382 numbers. The numbers
have been assigned to the mail coaches in the order of their going into
service and this order is derived from the construction of a specific

railway line. That is the only way it can be explained why in one and
the same part of the Soviet Union we have differing and scattered
Numbers for mail coaches. For example, mail coaches No.l Leningrad-
Moscow, No.183 Pskov-Bologoe and No.353 Pskov-Slantsy are all situated
in the Leningrad province and subordinate to one and the same postal
directorate. The haphazard numbering of mail coaches makes the effort of
remembering them more complex.

The double numbering of mail coaches is necessary, not only to
distinguish the departing and returning routes, but it is also
especially needed for the.despatch of mail in the most expeditious
fashion. In the case where a specific mail coach has a route many
kilometres long, crossing highways along which basically heavy streams
of mail are moving and where at the junction points a complete
coordination of trains can take place, we have the possibility of
directing mail from the route of this mail coach simultaneously via
different nodes and redirect it according to the various destinations.
Thus, the mail coach No.103-104, which runs between Minsk and
Dnepropetrovsk, is crossed at Bakhmach by mail coach No.17-18 going from
Moscow to Kiev, met at Gomel' by mail coach No.118 (Moscow to Gomel')
and in Minsk by mail coach No.41-42 (Moscow-Negoreloe).

The despatch of mail on mail coach No.103-104 from Moscow and places
lying to the east of that city is carried out by mail coaches Nos. 17,
118 and 41, as referred to above. Moreover, the one and the same office
of the mail coach route No.103 may be despatched,,, according to the plan
of despatch, on one and the same day but at different times, via mail
Coaches Nos. 17, 118 or 41. If the mail coach No.103, leaving the
evening before from Minsk, can coordinate its arrival in Bakhmach with
mail coach No.17, then the sections of the mail coach route No.103 can
be divided into two parts: the section from Bakhmach to Kremenchug and
the Minsk-Bakhmach section. In such cases, the mail from the Bakhmach-
Kremenchug section is despatched via mail coach No.17 and from the Minsk-
Bakhmach section via mail coach No.41 by the same office on one and the
same day. In addition, mail from the routes of such mail coaches may be
despatched through one and the same junction in various directions, in
accordance with the plan of despatch.

For example, mail may be sent simultaneously via Bakhmach by one and the
same train on the mail coach route No.103: Bakhmach-Kremenchug section
and also on mail coach No.104: Bakhmach-Minsk section. Such despatches
may also be carried out via Gomel', if the movements of mail coaches Nos.
103-104 and 118 are coordinated at that junction and then the mail coach
route No.103 is divided from Gomel' towards Minsk and Kremenchug.

In specific cases, some mail coaches, which also sort mail en route, do
not always have a conventional numbering designation. These are the
coaches for suburban communications, which have been put into service to
supplement the basic mail coaches of a specific line. The routes of such
coaches are designated by the starting and end-points of their
movements, i.e. un-numbered mail coaches, such as Khar'kov-Likhachevo,
Moscow-Uslovo, etc. Mail coaches of this type are assigned at large
railway junctions, where the train movements are frequent and where long
distance trains go without stopping at stations in the suburban zone.

With the exception of the supplementary coaches in the suburban zones of
large railway junctions, un-numbered mail coaches do not handle mail on
the way'. Such un-numbered mail coaches receive all their mail at the


starting and end points, as well as that exchanged with the post offices
along the route in closed and sealed mail bags, addressed specifically
to all offices along the route of such mail coaches. The function of the
un-numbered mail coaches boils down to exchanging, i.e. the receipt
and handing over of closed articles between the offices along the route,
holding the items handed over to them and checking for correctness both
in acceptance and handing over. As a rule, un-numbered mail coaches run
on dead-end lines of local character, or on siding routes such as, for
example, Rzhava-Oboyan', Golutvin-Ozery, Nadezhdinsk-Sos'va, etc. The
routes of un-numbered mail coaches are not specifically taken into
consideration for sorting. They are included in the numbering of that
particular route from which they take their origin. The accompaniment of
the mail in un-numbered mail coaches, the surveillance of the work in
them, the establishment of the norms and the qualifications of the
working personnel are all the responsibility of the post office, from
which that specific mail coach is directed. The numbered mail coach,
upon whose line the un-numbered mail coach operates, hands over all mail
going on the route of the un-numbered mail coach in an open state at its
starting point (i.e. of the numbered coach), where it is processed and
sorted into mail bags, addressed to places along the route of the un-
numbered mail coach.

Note: In exceptional cases, some un-numbered mail coaches, proceeding
through industrialized and heavily populated territory'for tens and
sometimes even hundreds of kilometres will, upon orders of their postal
directorate, carry out the handling of correspondence along the way, in
the same fashion as numbered mail coaches. Where necessary and upon
coordination between the offices and postal directorate, or office of
mail transport, the mail destined for un-numbered mail coaches may be
handed over directly to them by the numbered mail coaches, bypassing the
main post office of the specific mail coach.

(b) The surface routes are similar in activity to the routes of the un-
numbered mail coaches. Both on the surface routes and the un-numbered
mail coaches, the mail is processed at the starting point and is also
conveyed along the route in closed bags. The only difference between the
surface routes and the un-numbered mail coach routes is that the former
proceed along a highway or rural road, etc., while the latter goes along
a railway line. Every surface route, taken by itself, enters wholly or
partially into the route of that mail coach from which it starts. Thus,
for instance, the Ural'sk-Gur'ev surface route, extending for more then
500 km. (312.5 miles), is not regarded as a separate accounting unit for
sorting purposes. It is completely included in the mail coach route
No.151, i.e. in that mail coach from which this surface route makes its
start. We thus see that all surface routes and un-numbered mail coach
routes are like tributaries of a river, flowing to the railway route of
a numbered mail coach, through which they hand over and receive their
mail (printed matter, letters, parcels, etc.). And it follows from here
that a knowledge of the numbered mail coach routes has very important
significance for sorting purposes and other duties to'be carried out in
the handling of mail. The mail coach numbering system not only
facilitates the work of despatching mail, but it also has a great
advantage in putting together manuals and plans. For example, in order
to specify the location of any region, it is sufficient to give the mail
coach-number of the route which is situated there, in order for one to
have a clear idea as to where it is to be found. Where the number of the
mail coach is not known, one might be tempted to write in the manual

just the starting and end point of, for example, the Moscow-Kuibyshev
route, a designation which would not be exact as two mail coaches go
. from Moscow to Kuibyshev on different lines and with different numbers
(Nos. 215 and 219).

(c) Un-numbered main-line mail coaches, served by travelling crews.

On long main lines, where the trains do not run along the full extent of
a specific railway line, but move from one region of the USSR to another,
the People's Commissariat of Communications arranges for the despatch of
of the mail coach, accompanied by its specific crew until the end of the
train journey, so as to avoid excessive overloading of the mails, their
handing over from one postal crew to another and also for the security
of the mails and the contents of the mail coach. In such cases, the mail
coaches proceed along several routes as, for example, the mail coach
straight through from Moscow to Vladivostok runs along the routes of Nos.
33, 81, 115, 185, 187, 197, 241, 243 and 265. Such mail coaches do not
bear the numbers of any of the routes they pass through. They go without
a number, just the starting and end points and the train number, in
whose composition they are proceeding. Thus, this particular mail coach
from Moscow to Vladivostok goes under the following designation: "Mail
Coach Moscow-Vladivostok, Train No.2", or another example: "Moscow-Baku,
Train No.47", etc.
EDITORIAL COMMENT: A list of mail coach numbers and their routes as at
1938 is set out at the end of these excerpts.

(d) Air routes.

SAs has already been stipulated, we take all landing stops of the aircraft
as the route of the airline. But that does not mean that mail is only
despatched along any airline to the stopping places of the aircraft.
Mail is normally also sent via the landing stops along the mail coaches
and surface routes leading from such stops and thus facilitating the more
rapid movement of mail to the offices along the relevant routes.

(e) Steamship routes.

All shore offices, with points lying on surface routes and which carry
out the exchange of mail with a steamer, enter into the route of the
steamship line. The steamship routes are the most stable ones, so far as
the despatch of mail along them is concerned. For example, a newly
constructed railway line would influence even more the exchange of mail
despatches on the steamship route, when the railway line crosses a water
route at any point. The offices located along the steamship route carry
out exchanges of mail with the postal steamers in the same way that the
railway offices do. In the winter time, these offices make exchanges of
mail with the nearest mail coach at one of the stations, or receive
their mail through a railway junction along the surface route.

A knowledge of the administrative divisions of the USSR and of the
territorial layout of all the mail coach routes, i.e. through which
provinces, areas or specific republics the mail coaches run, would help
* us in gaining an understanding of the mail coach routes.

6. The division of the routes.

The activities of the numbered mail coaches are not unique. They depend

on their territorial location, the length of the run, the density of
the population, the development of industry, etc. All numbered mail
coaches may therefore be divided into separate groups. There are in fact a
four such groups at the present time:-

(1) Mail coaches on main lines or long-distance routes.
(2) Mail coaches on lines of secondary importance and branch lines.
(3) Mail coaches on dead-end lines of local importance or siding routes.
(4) Unclassified mail coaches.

To the first category belong the lines that link the centre of the USSR
with the boundary centres of any specific republic, area or province,
cutting through or linking two or more large administrative or industrial
cehtres, becoming transit routes for other lines and serving not only
their own routes, but also handling the correspondence for other mail
coaches which lay in their path. In addition, lines with heavy traffic
are sometimes included in the main line category, even though they do not
meet all the specifications for main lines, as stated above.

To the second category belong lines with little activity, as well as
feeder lines, which link the main lines. The role of feeder lines boils
down to serving a small district located along the route of its path, to
handing over the mail collected along the route to one of the main lines
and also to accepting mail from a main line for its own route. In cases
where the main lines are: overloaded or where there are train accidents
on them, the secondary lines sometimes also serve as a means for moving
the mail by a detour.

To the third category belong all dead-end lines of local character and
railway siding routes. Their role derives from serving local needs,
which often do not go outside the boundaries of a district. Un-numbered
mail coaches belong to this category.

Finally, to the unclassified category belong such mail coaches which, by
the nature of their activity, have an especially important meaning in
the working of communications, or which by the loads they carry somewhat
exceed those of the mail coaches, or are equal to them in length of the
run or other conditions, characterising a line of the first category.

Surface postal routes are divided into three groups, in the same way as
the railway line routes. To the first group belong all surface routes
which go from a provincial, regional or republican centre to other such
. centres or routes,linking provincial, regional and republican centres.
To the second group belong surface routes, linking the centre of one
district with that of another district, as well as circuitous routes,
going through two or more district centres. To the third group belong
surface routes, linking district centres with village councils, state
and collective farms, as well as circuitous routes not going outside the
boundaries of their districts.

In areas where the railway network is insufficient, there is great
activity on the surface routes. These latter routes play an important
part in providing the population with postal communications and such
routes stretch for hundreds of kilometres. These routes, starting from a
railway junction, proceed to their end points a long distance away. Such
routes are especially numerous in the north of the European part .of the
USSR and in Siberia. The majority of them are dead-end, e.g. from
Irkutsk to Yakutsk and Archangel to Mezen'. The situation is different


where one and the same tract, taking as its starting point from the line
of one mail coach, has as its end point another main-line railway with
* another mail coach on it. The composition of such surface routes is
reminiscent of secondary mail coach lines, linking two main lines. In
cases where there are no daily movements of mail along these routes, the
correspondence is despatched on one of the six-day periods by one mail
coach and, on another day, by a mail coach going in the opposite
direction along the same route. The mail of such routes, by contrast, is
not made up going to its destination, but is despatched processed only
to the points of address for the mail coach of the neighboring surface
route. This latter mail coach also.regulates the despatch of mail in
accordance with the timetable of mail movements of the specific postal

As an example, let us look at the Kirov-Malmyzh-Vyatskie Polyany surface
route. Here we have Kirov as the starting point of the route for mail
coaches Nos. 33 or 82, Malmyzh as the intermediate junction of the
surface route and Vyatskie Polyany as the end-point of the route,
exiting onto another main line (mail coach No.25). Thus, having Malmyzh
in the given example as the intermediate junction of the surface route,
going from mail coach No.33 to mail coach No.25, we have the possibility
of sending from Moscow according to the despatch plan, both via mail
coach No.33 from Kirov and via mail coach No.25 from Vyatskie Polyany.

A surface route, starting at some junction and, after passing through a
series of points, terminates at the same junction, is called a
circuitous surface track. The circuit of such routes must be set up in
* such a way as to have the complete possibility of serving expeditiously
the offices of the inhabited places along the route in one working day
and during the daytime. These routes are served by postmen who, being
sent on a tour of their rounds, accept newspaper subscriptions, sell
stamps, envelopes and other postal articles to the public, in addition
to exchanging mail with postal agencies en route and accepting from the
public postal sending to be forwarded to their destinations.

7. Postal junctions and their variations.

Postal establishments (post offices, stations or agencies) situated at
the crossing points of several mail coaches or of several surface postal
routes or are at points on a railway line where surface routes start,
are called postal junctions. Postal establishments located between the
junctions of surface routes are called intermediate offices.

Postal junctions are not similar in the work they carry out nor in their
geographic location and they are therefore divided into three separate
(a) Railway line postal junctions, which are to be found either in a
railway station building or not far from it and bear the name of that
same railway station in which, or near which, they are situated. As
stated before, these junctions are located at the crossing points of two
or more mail coaches, as well as at their branching points.
(b) Postal junctions near railway lines in.the form of post offices,
* stations and agencies, in the vicinity of and sometimes far from a
railway line. In the main, they bear the name of the adjacent railway
station, but sometimes their names do not correspond. They are the
starting points of the branches of surface routes and have direct mail
exchanges with mail coaches or steamers.
(c) Surface junctions in the form of post offices, postal stations and


agencies located at the crossing points or branches of surface routes.
These junctions carry out direct mail exchanges with junctions near
railway lines.

8. The designation of junctions.

The management of a railway line junction or office of mail transport
organises the despatch of mail in mail coaches, which have their routes
starting from that particular junction and arranges for the scheduled
appearance of working crews for duty on the mail coaches. On the basis
of the information received from the postal service (in accordance with
the decisions of the annual railway line congresses, etc.), the
management works out the plan for the despatch of correspondence on its
mail coaches and, if the movements of mail coaches are insufficient for
serving the route, it arranges for the baggage despatches of mail on
the departing and arriving trains for those places where a sufficient
amount of mail and printed matter is being collected. It organises and
supervises the exchange, loading and transfer of mail from one mail
coach to another. It is responsible for the maintenance of the fleet of
mail coaches, as well as for the necessary equipment of the auxiliary
postal property (wheelbarrows, sleighs, toboggans etc.). It thoroughly
sorts and processes for the mail coaches all the-mail that it holds,
both received by itself and that arriving on the incoming mail coaches.
It carries out the control of the activities of the mail coaches
arriving at the sections assigned to it by the postal service, as well
as at the extended sections of the mail coaches, which have their
routes starting from that particular junction.

The junctions near railway lines located at the branching points of
surface routes and having direct exchange with mail coaches absorb all
the mail received from the mail coach and collected within its area of
activity and they despatch that mail to the surface routes. The mail
collected in the area and arriving from the offices along the surface
routes is handed over to the mail coaches.

The junctions near railway lines sort mail for the intermediate offices
on the surface route and for the junctions where the surface routes
cross. The mail requiring transfer to a mail coach is sorted by
destination and mail coach. Thus, the role of a postal junction near a
railway line in the handling and despatch of mail on the surface routes
is similar to the role of the railway line junction, serving the
arriving mail coaches.

The surface junctions at the crossings or branches of surface routes
may be regarded as the auxiliary cells of the postal junctions
attached to the railway lines, from which they receive directly all
the mail for their routes. As with the junctions attached to railway
lines, the latter also carry out the sorting of mail on their branch
lines. The mail from offices on the branch lines and collected within
the territory of a district for despatch by a mail coach, is sorted
only by destination and sent to the nearest junction attached to a
railway line, where it is also incorporated in the mail requiring
despatch to that or any other mail coach.

9. The means for despatching the mail.

For the despatch of mail on railway lines, the People's Commissariat of

Communications has at its disposal the right to select trains for which
it.suggests the inclusion of mail coaches. The requirements of postal
* communications in the despatch of mail and printed matter by railway
routes are often not satisfied with the inclusion of just one mail coach.
That is especially the case on important main lines or on long transit
routes. The requirement for mail coaches depends on the volume of mail
handed in by the cities (printed matter, parcels and other classes of
mail). For example, on the Moscow-Khar'kov main line in one and the same
direction, the People's Commissariat of Communications is obliged to
despatch mail coaches on 7 or 8 trains, in addition to the mail coaches
for suburban links. On a low volume line, one mail coach is generally
despatched with one of the trains, which stops at all the railway
stations. In cases where the necessity does not arise for adding a
supplementary mail coach because of low volume, but where there is a
requirement for sending mail to various industrial or administrative
centres, then trains are assigned whereby the post offices would be able
to despatch mail (printed matter and letters) in the luggage vans.

Depending on their loads, mail coaches are accompanied by crews of two,
three or more postal workers. The selection of the workers according to
the qualifications and numerical composition of the crew is determined
by the administration of mail transport, in accordance with the volume
and other working conditions of the mail coach.

So far as its internal work is concerned,, the function of the mail coach
differs little from the duties of post offices and it can therefore be
regarded as a post office on wheels. All classes of mail are forwarded on
* mail coaches, where the relevant processing of each class is carried out.
The mail forwarded in the luggage vans of passenger trains (printed
matter and written correspondence) must be packed in closed receptacles
(mailbags or sacks) and bear the exact address of that office to which
the mail is being forwarded (the despatch of international and declared
value mail is not permitted). In addition to the address of the post
office or mail coach, the words "to be handed over at .....station" must
be inscribed on the bag label and the railway station specified when the
mailbag must be handed out from the luggage van.

The despatch of the post in the luggage vans is carried out under the
supervision and responsibility of railway agents (baggage handlers). As
an exceptional case, large packets of printed matter may be handed in at
luggage vans in instances where they are delivered to the railway station
by a publisher's despatch office. In such cases, the publisher's
despatch office must specify on the packages or bags sent as baggage on
passenger trains the station where the handing over is to take place,
while the post offices for their part must control and carry out the
execution of this regulation. The despatch of mails to shore offices
during the period of navigation is carried out by steamers, cutters and
motor boats, where such services have been set up. Steamer routes on
large waterways, such as along the Volga, Dnieper etc. are utilised for
the despatch of mail, accompanied by postal workers (travelling crews on
steamers). In such cases, special cabins are set aside for the postal
crews and mails on steamers; separately both for the crew and the storing
* of the mails. The exchange of mail between a steamer and shore post
offices on main waterway routes is carried out in the same order as that
established for mail coaches. The People's Commissariat of Communications
has at its disposal its own cutters and motor boats on waterways of local
character, thus ensuring the links of a region with its offices. Where
the despatch of postal crews is not strictly necessary because of the


unimportance or paucity of the post offices along the steamer route, the
transmission of written correspondence and printed matter may be set up
in sealed bags addressed to the shore post offices and under the
responsibility of the steamship administration. This type of despatch is
similar in character to the sending as baggage on railway lines.

For the transmission of mails on surface routes, all the possible types
of transportation available are utilised, starting with buses and
finishing with sledges pulled by reindeer teams. This variety of
transmission depends above all on the natural conditions in a specific
locality, on the state of the ways of communication and sometimes on the
facilities at the disposal of the postal service. Greater attention is
devoted to high volume surface routes linking important centres and, of
course, where such routes have excellent means of communication
(highways or well-surfaced rural roads) or especially where there is the
possibility of going on a route served by buses. In cases where a
surface route is to be utilised for the delivery of mail from a railway
line to a junction or any other type of post office of sedentary
character, an agreement may be concluded for taking advantage of
transport by a state or collective farm, etc.

The transmission of mail by air is carried out on all air routes by the
civilian airline. The People's Commissariat of Communications contracts
with the administration of Aeroflot separately for each route about the
conditions of mail transmission and the amount of load per route. The
transmission of mails on aircraft is carried out not only to all landing
stops, but also via the stops for other offices and mail coaches, as the
despatch by air to them gives an advantage in time.

10. Direction plans.

For the correct direction of mail, the postal facilities (post offices,
offices of mail transmission, mail coaches and postal stations) are
regulated by a direction plan for mail and separately for parcels.
The direction plans for mail are set up from the following materials:-

(a) The plans of train movements in the USSR, issued by the postal
administration of the People's Commissariat of Communications.
(b) The Guide for the despatch of mail in luggage vans, on steamers and
aircraft, also issued by the People's Commissariat of Communications.

The direction plan surveys the quickest transmission of mail to its
- destination by mail coaches, steamers, aircraft or in the luggage vans
of express and passenger trains.

The direction plan for parcels surveys their direct despatch in the body
of mail coaches, avoiding the clogging of railway junctions. That permits
the possibility of preventing damage to the loads of parcels when being
transferred from one mail coach to another.

The direction plan for mail is calculated in such a way that all
possible means of mail despatch are utilised, not only on mail coach
routes, but also sometimes at specific points on a particular route.

11. The study of mail coach routes.

A good grasp of the administrative divisions of the USSR acts as a key
to the study of mail coach routes. In order to obtain a more


comprehensive view of the routes in the present manual, the entire
network of railways in the USSR, with the mail coaches running on them,
has been split into sections and, in addition, the schematic movement of
mail coaches of the Moscow junction has been given separately. In the
* diagrams of the mail coach movements, the railway junctions have also
been shown where they have the mail coaches crossing over onto their
branch routes. For the routes of these mail coaches, there are listed all
district post offices, new settlements of the USSR and offices of
highly specific importance in postal communications. Where post offices
in one and the same district.are located on different mail coach routes,
then they are enumerated by name. For instance, the Kuntsevo district
lies on the routes of mail coaches Nos. 41 & 17. The district centre of
Kuntsevo is found on the No.41 mail coach route and several agencies in
the Kuntsevo district are located on the No.17 mail coach route, where
they are shown by name. All the remaining offices in the Kuntsevo area
are classified by location for mail coach No.41 and they are not given-
in the manual, with the exception of the Moscow suburban zone and for
other large junctions, where there exist supplementary mail coaches for
suburban area. CXEMA rPYHTOBOrO TPAKTA

... ,

I If

F* R E
0* ,, .: P SSS

r.. \ 'DIAGRAM C/F A
1-%I, .W .. ROUTE.

Cxexa 1S 1

The station network in Moscow.

Moscow had nine railway stations in 1938, as follow:-

1. Kazan' Railway Station (i.e. for trains going to Kazan')
(a) With mail coach No.13 Moscow-Ramenskoe
(Editorial Comment: This was an un-numbered route in
Imperial times).
(b) Mail coach No.13 Moscow-Voronezh-Rostov.
(c) Mail coach No.135 Moscow-Kazan'.
(d) Mail coach No.135 Moscow-Kurovskaya.
(e) Mail coach No.193 Moscow-Voskresensk-Orekhovo.
(f) Mail coach No.215 Moscow-Ruzaevka-Kuibyshev.
(g) Mail coach No.215 Moscow-Sasovo.
(h) Mail coach No.217 Moscow-Ulyanovsk.
(i) Mail coach No.225 Moscow-Stalingrad.
(j) Mail coach No.259 Moscow-Penza-Kuibyshev.

2. Yaroslavl' Railway Station.
(a) Mail coach No.33 Moscow-Kirov.
(b) Mail coach No.33 Moscow-Zagorsk.
(c) Mail coach No.71 Moscow-Monino.
(d) Mail coach No.223 Moscow-Kineshma.
(e) Mail coach No.321 Moscow-Archangel.

3. Leningrad Railway Station.
(a) Mail coach No.2 Moscow-Bologoe.
(b) Mail coach No.2 Moscow-Leningrad.
(c) Mail coach No.2 Moscow-Vysokovskaya.

4. Kursk Railway Station.
(a) Mail coach No.11 Moscow-Gor'kii.
(b) Mail coach No.11 Moscow-Noginsk.
(c) Mail coach No.15 Moscow-Khar'kov.
(d) Mail coach No.145 Moscow-Shchekino.
(e) Un-numbered route: Moscow-Balashikha.

5. Pavelets Railway Station.
(a) Mail coach No.43 Moscow-Kashira.
(b) Mail coach No.43 Moscow-Saratov.
(c) Mail coach No.91 Moscow-Elets.

6. Kiev Railway Station.
(a) Mail coach No.17 Moscow-Kiev.
S(b) Mail coach No.17 Moscow-Nara.
(c) Mail coach No.118 Moscow-Gomel'.

7. Belorussian Railway Station.
(a) Mail coach No.41 Moscow-Minsk.
(b) Mail coach No.41 Moscow-Minsk-Negoreloe.
(c) Mail coach No.41 Moscow-Mozhaisk.
(d) Mail coach No.41 Moscow-Zvenigorod.
(e) Un-numbered route: Moscow-Usovo.

8. Savelov Railway Station.
(a) Mail coach No.245 Moscow-Dimitrov.
(b) Mail coach No.245 Moscow-Leningrad.
(c) Mail coach No.245 Moscow-Sonkovo.

.-- Y-3JIA.

CxeMa MH 2


CxeMa AJ 3

9. Rzhev Railway Station.
(a) Mail coach No.209 Moscow-Sebezh.
(b) Mail coach No.209 Moscow-Volokolamsk.
(c) Un-numbered route: Moscow-Pavlovskaya Sloboda.

Consecutive list of numbered mail coaches of the USSR with all railway

functions as at 1938.

MC Nos.

1-2 Leningrad-Chudovo-Okulovka-Uglovka-Bologoe-Likhoslavl'-Kalinin-
3-4 Leningrad-Gatchina/Warsaw Station-Mshinskaya-Luga-Pskov-Ostrov.
5-6 Leningrad-Pavlovsk-Novgorod-Staraya Russa.
7-8 Bryansk-Zhukovka-Roslavl'-Smolensk-Vitebsk-Polotsk.
9-10 Orsha-Krichev-Unecha-Khutor Mikhailovskii-Lokot'-Vorozhba.
11-12 Moscow-Reutovo-Fryazevo-Pavlovskii Posad-Orekhevo Zuevo-Vladimir-
13-14 Moscow-Lyubertsy-Voskresensk-Golutvin-Lukhovitsy-Ryazan'-Ryazhsk-
15-16 Moscow-Tula-Gorbachevo (!)-Orel-Kursk-Rzhava-Belgorod-Khar'kov.
17-18 Moscow-Nara-Tikhonova Pustyn'-Sukhinichi-Zikeevo-Bryansk-Navlya-
Suzemka-Khutor Mikhailovskii-Makovo-Tereshchenskaya-Konotop-
19-20 Khar'kov-Krasnyi Liman-Yama-Artemovsk-Nikitovka-Khanzhenkovo-
Khartsizsk-Ilovaiskaya-Martsevo (Taganrog)-Rostov/Don.
21-22 Kiev-Fastov-Popel'nya-Brovki-Kazatin-Kalinovka-Vinnitsa-Zhmerinka-
23-24 Nerekhta-Kostroma.
25-26 Kazan'-Agryz-Druzhinino-Sverdlovsk.
27-28 Kazan'-Zelenyi Dol-Kanash-Krasnyi Uzel-Ruzaevka.
29-30 Chernigov-Ovruch'-Korosten'.
31-32 Zverevo-Shchetovo-Shterovka-Chernukhino-Debal'tsevo-Khatsepetovka-
33-34 Moscow-Mytishchi-Sofrino-Zagorsk-Alelsandrovsk-Vspol'e-Filino-
35-36 Leningrad-Mga-Volkhovstroi-Lodeinoe Pole-Petrozavodsk-Kem'-
37-38 Khar'kov-Lyubotin-Poltava-Kremenchug-Koristovka-Znamenka-
39-40 Leningrad-Ligovo-Gatchino/Baltic Station-Volosovo-Veimarn.
39-40 Volosovo-Mshinskaya.
.41-42 Moscow-Kuntsevo-Golitsyno-Mozhaisk-Vyaz'ma-Durovo-Dorogobuzh-
43-44 Moscow-Kashira-Kremlevo-Troekurovo-Ranenburg-Bogoyavlensk-
45-46 Minsk-Radoshkovichi.
47-48 Kiev-Fastov-Popel'nya-Brovki-Kazatin-Kalinovka-Vinnitsa-
Zhmerinka-Grechani-Yarmolintsy-Kamenets Podol'sk.
49-50 Leningrad-Vaskelovo.
51-52 Tbilisi-Navtlug-Gurdzhaani-Telav.
53-54 Kazatin-Berdichev-Shepetovka-Grechany-Zhmerinka-Vinnitsa-
55-56 Argryz-Izhevsk-Votkinsk.
57-58 Chudovo-Novgorod.
59-60 Khar'kov-Merefa-Lozovaya-Pavlograd-Sinel'nikovo-Zaporozh'e-



Czema A4


61-62 Ryazhsk-Kremlevo-Uzlovaya-Tula-Kaluga-Vyaz'ma-Rzhev-Torzhok-
63-64 Ryazhsk-Kenzino-Vernadovka-Pachelma-Vyglyadovka-Penza-Syzran'-

65-66 Rostov/Don-Bataisk-Kushchevka-Sosyka-Tikhoretskaya-Kavkazskaya-
Armavir-Nevinnomysskaya-Mineral'nye Vody-Georgievsk-
Shamkhal-Makhach Kala-Baku.
67-68 Kiev-Fastov-Mironovka-Tsvetkovo-Ezhovo-Znamenka-Koristovka-
Khartsizsk-Ilovaiskaya-Martsevo (Taganrog)-Rostov/Don.
69-70 Kuibyshev-Kinel'-Orenburg-Ilek-Turkestan-Arys'-Tashkent.
71-72 Moscow-Mytishchi-Monino.
73-74 Kiev-Darnitsa-Nezhin-Bakhmach-Konotop-Vorozhba-Basy-Boromlya-
75-76 Gor'kii-Tonshaevo-Kotel'nich-Kirov.
77-78 Leningrad-Mel'nichnyi Ruchei-Dubrovka.
79-80 Mariupol'-Volnovakha-Dolya-Rutchenkovo-Yasinovataya-
Konstantinovka-Kramatorskaya-Slavyansk Kurort-Krasnyi Liman-
81-82 Kirov-Yar-Chaikovskaya-Perm'-Kuzino-Sverdlovsk.
83-84 Bologoe-Valdai-Kresttsyi.
85-86 Sverdlovsk-Sinarskaya-Kurgan-Petropavlovsk-Omsk.
87-88 Tula-Likhvin.
89-90 Shepetovka-Lepesovka.
91-92 Moscow-Kashira-Uzlovaya-Volovo-Elets.
93-94 Gomel'-Vasilevichi-Kalinkovichi-Starushki-Zhitkovichi.
95-96 Baku-Alyaty-Navlug-Tbilisi-Stalinisi-Sharopan'-Rion-Samtredia-
97-98 Samtredia-Mikha Tskhakaya-Poti.
99-100 Khar'kov-Lyubotin-Poltava-Kremenchug-Koristovka-Znamenka-
101-102 Sharopan'-Sachkheri.
103-104 Minsk-Vereitsy-Osipovichi-Bobruisk-Zhlobin-Gomel'-Nizkovka-
105-106 Stalinisi-Borzhomi.
107-108 Orel-Verkhov'e-Elets-Gryazi-Oborona (Mordovo)-Povorino-
109-110 Ershovo-Pugachdv.
111-112 Tbilisi-Navtlug-Leninakan-Ulukhanlu-Dzhulfa.
113-114 Okulovka-Lyubytino.
'-115-116 Sverdlovsk-Bazhenovo-Bogdanovich-Omsk.
117-118 Gomel'-Novozybkov-Unecha-Bryansk-Zikeevo-Sukhinichi-Tikhonova
119-120 Elets-Kastornoe-Valuiki-Urazovo-Kupyansk.
121-122 Stalingrad-Sal'sk-Tikhoretskaya-Krasnodar-Krymskaya-
123-124 Kuibyshev-Kinel'-Krotovka-Chishmy-Dema-Ufa-Vyzovaya-Berdyaush-
125-126 Orel-Bryansk-Zhukovka-Roslavl'-Smolensk-Vitebsk-Polotsk.
127-128 Kiev-Fastov-Popel'nya-Brovki-Kazatin-Pogrebishche-Khristinovka-
129-130 Vapnyarka-Zyatkovtsy-Khristinovka-Tsvetkovo.
131-132 Kerch'-Vladislavovka-Dzhankoi-Armyansk.
133-134 Pyatikhatki-Dolgintsevo-Apostolovo-Zaporozh'e-Pologi-Kuibyshevo-



C 147 ---
I" ,. "T-,t + "

I. 7. D I A G R A M O F T H /SE


Cxema M 7

135-136 Moscow-Lyubertsy-Kurovskaya-Cherusti-Murom-Mordovshchik-
Navashino-Arzamas-Kanash-Zelenyi Dol-Kazan'.
137-138 Tashkent-Arys'-Lugovaya-Alma Ata-Raz'ezd (Stopping Place) No.35-
139-140 Kislovodsk-Beshtau-Mineral'nye Vody-Georgievsk-Budenovsk.
141-142 Gomel'-Chernigov-Nezhin-Priluki.
143-144 Bryansk-Navlya-L'gov-Gotnya-Khar'kov.
145-146 Moscow-Serpukhov-Tula-Patochnaya.
147-148 Zhmerinka-Mogilv Podol'skii.
149-150 Michurinsk-Tambov-Tavolzhanka-Balashov-Kamyshin.
151-152 Saratov-Urbakh-Ershovo-Ural'sk.
153-154 Krasnoarmeiskoe-Rutchenkovo-Yasinovataya-Larino-Mospino-
155-156 Atkarsk-Vol'sk..
157-158 Krasnyi Kut-Aleksandrov Gai.
159-160 Penza-Rtishchevo-Tavolzhanka-Balashov-Povorino-Liski-Kopanishche-
161-162 Kupyansk-Loskutovka-Kaganovich-Debal'tsevo-Khatsepetovka-
163-164 Voronezh-Liski-Talovaya-Kalach.
165-166 Krasnodar-Kavkazskaya-Petrovskoe-Divnoe.
167-168 Chelyabinsk-Kurgan-Petropavlovsk-Omsk.
169-170 Perm'-Komarikha-Kalino-Chusovskaya-Goroblagodatskaya-Nizhnii
171-172 Leningrad-Mel'nichnyi Ruchei-Ladozhskoe Ozero.
173-174 Tatarskaya-Pavlodar.
175-176 Vorozhba-Lokot'-Makovo-Tereshchenskaya-Pirogovka.
177-178 Voronezh-Kastornoe-Marmyzhi-Okhochevka-Kursk-L'gov-Korenevo-
179-180 Belorechenskaya-Knodzhakh.
181-182 Semki-Kholonevskaya-Kalinovka-Gumennoe-Vinnitsa-Gumennoe-
183-184 Pskov-Dno-Staraya Russa-Valdai-Bologoe.
185-186 Omsk-Tatarskaya-Novosibirsk.
187-188 Novosibirsk-Yurga-Taiga-Achinsk-Krasnoyarsk.
189-190 Korosten'-Belokorovichi-Gorodnitsa.
191-192 Leningrad-Pavlovsk-Batetskaya-Dno-Novosokol'niki-Nevel'-Vitebsk-
Orsha-Mogilev na Dnepre-Zhlobin-Gomel'-Chernigov-Nezhin-Darnitsa-
193-194 Moscow-Lyubertsy-Voskresensk-Kurovskaya-Orekhovo Zuevo.
195-196 Orl-Verkhov'e-Marmyzhi.
197-198 Krasnoyarsk-Taishet-Irkutsk.
199-200 Bryansk-Dyat'kovo-Lyudinovo-Fayansovaya-Zanoznaya-Vyaz'ma.
S.201-202 Krasnoyarsk-Achinsk-Abakan.
203-204 Khar'kov-Merefa-Krasnograd-Novomoskovsk-Dnepropetrovsk-Apostolovo-
205-206 Krasnovodsk-Merv-Kagan-Ursat'evskaya-Tashkent.
207-208 Tashkent-Ursat'evskaya-Proletarskaya-Mel'nikovo-Kokand-
Gorchakovo-Andizhan-Karasu-Dzhalal Abad.
209-210 Moscow-Nakhabino-Volokolamsk-Rzhev-Velikie Luki-Novosokol'niki-
211-212 Rudnitsa-Dokhno-Gaivoron-Podgorodnaya.
213-214 Leningrad-Ligovo-Kotly-Ust' Luga-Khamolovo.
215-216 Moscow-Lyubertsy-Voskresensk-Golutvin-Lukhovitsy-Ryazan'-Sasovo-
217-218 Moscow-Lyubertsy-Voskresensk-Golutvin-Lukhovitsy-Ryazan'-Sasovo-
219-220 Kirov-Kotlas.

___________ ___ ________________-


~-4. ~ f E-4

Is, E-1 09

o 0
o o



I a
%t M.l
44 igl



221-222 Dnepropetrovsk-Sinel'nikovo-Chaplino-Pologi-Verkhnii Tokmak-
223-224 Moscow-Mytishchi-Sofrino-Zagorsk-Aleksandrov-Bel'kovo-Tekstil'nyi-
225-226 Moscow-Lyubertsy-Voskresensk-Golutvin-Lukhovitsy-Ryazan'-Ryazhsk-
Bogoyavlensk-Michurinsk-Gryazi-Oborona (Mordovo)-Povorino-
227-228 Merv-Kushka.
229-230 Kalinin-Likhoslavl'-Torzhok-Soblago-Ostashkov.
231-232 Kiev-Korosten'-Novograd Volynsk-Shepetovka.
233-234 Petropavlovsk-Karaganda-Bertys.
235-236 Smolensk-Zanoznaya-Sukhinichi-Gorbachgvo (!)-Ogarevka-Volovo-
Lev Tolstoi-Ranenburg-Michurinsk.
237-238 Sol'sk-Bataisk-Rostov/Don-Gornaya-Krasnyi Sulin-Zverevo-Likhaya-
239-240 Atkarsk-Balanda.
241-242 Irkutsk-Chita-Karymskaya-Otpor.
243-244 Chita-Karymskaya-Priiskovaya-Kuenga-im. L.M. Kaganovicha-
245-246 Moscow-Dmitrov-Kalyazin-Sonkovo-Krasnyi Kholm-Ovinishche-Mga-
247-248 Gor'kii-Kud'ma-Arzamas-Shatki-Krasnyi Uzel-Ruzaevka-Penza.
249-250 Vladimir-Ryazan'.
251-252 Belgorod-Kupyansk.
253-254 Kiev-Darnitsa-Grebenka-Romodan-Poltava-Lyubotin-Khar'kov.
255-256 Novozybkov-Novgorod Seversk.
257-258 Belgorod-Gotnya-Basy-Vorozhba.
259-260 Moscow-Lyubertsy-Voskresensk-Golutvin-Lukhovitsy-Ryazan'-Ryazhsk-
261-262 Vladivostok-Voroshilov-Foaranichnaya.
263-264 Vladivostok-Ugol'naya-Smolyaninovo-Kangauz-Bukhta Nakhodka.
265-266 Kuibyshevka-Bureya-Khabarovsk-Kruglikovo-Manzovka-Voroshilov-
267-268 Kiev-Korosten'-Zhitomir-Berdichev-Kazatin.
269-270 Svobodnyi-Kuibyshevka-Blagoveshchensk.
271-272 Chudovo-Volkhovstroi-Mga-Leningrad.
273-274 Ilovaiskaya-Chistyakovo-Chernukhino-Debal'tsevo.
275-276 Vernadovka-Kustarevka-Sasovo.
277-278 Krasnyi Liman-Yama-Sentyanovka-Rodakovo-Likhaya.
279-280 Leningrad-Mga-Volkhovstroi-Efimovskaya-Vologda-Bui-Kotel'nich-
281-282 Sverdlovsk-Shurala-Nizhnii Tagil-Goroblagodatskaya-Verkhnyaya-
Vyya-Nadezhdinsk-Shakhta-Ugol'nyi (Bogoslovskii Zavod).
283-284 Leningrad-Chudovo-Okulovka-Uglovka-Bologoe-Ostashkov-Soblago-
Velikie Luki-Nevel'-Polotsk.
285-286 Pskov-Idritsa-Polotsk.
287-288 Saratov-Urbakh-Krasnyi Kut-Verkhnii Baskunchak-Astrakhan.
289-290 Kuibyshev-Kinel'-Krotovka-Surgut.
291-292 Lev Tolstoi-Elets.
293-294 Kazatin-Pogrebishche-Zhashkov.
295-296 Rostov-Bataisk-Kushchevka-Starominskaya-Eisk.
297-298 Leningrad-Gatchino/Warsaw Station-Volosovo-Veimarn-Kingisepp.
299-300 Leningrad-Chudovo-Okulovka-Uglovka-Bologoe-Sonkovo-Rybinsk-
Chebakovo-Vspol'e-Yaroslavl'-Nerekhta-Sereda Upino-Ermolino-
301-302 Osipovichi-Slutsk-Timkovichi.
303-304 Ul'yanovsk-Chishmy-Ufa.
305-306 Chelyabinsk-Poletaevo-Troitsk-Kartaly-Orenburg.


.'.. -.^ .... ...... .-. ...

1'm I "tl: .j"

o0 P E-i

C ^ .
CO f Q

oI ^ __ ft
I '" "
ci *




CxeMa a 1 .




sssa srf=' W

:. ~~.' ~~': .-'~' '' ~' -' : '-'.~~. '. ~'- r.











Kokand-Namangan-Uch Kurgan-Andizhan.
Novosibirsk-Yurga-Topki-Proektnaya-Belovo-Stalinsk (Kuznetsk).
Kazan'-Zelenyi Dol-Yoshkar Ola.
Staraya Russa-Novgorod-Batetskaya-Luga-Mshinskaya-Gatchino/
Warsaw Station-Leningrad.
Dnepropetrovsk-Verkhotsevo-Dolgintsevo-Krivoi Rog-Dolinskaya.
Nizhnii Tagil-Alapaevsk-Egorshino-Bogdanovich-Sinarskaya.
Minsk-Vereitsy-Osipovichi-Mogilv na Dnepre-Krichev-Roslavl'-
Khar'kov-Krasnyi Liman-Yama-Artemovsk-Nikitovka-Khatsepetovka-
Sverdlovsk-Shurala-Nizhnii Tagil-Goroblagodatskoe-Chusovskaya-
Baku-Alyaty-Kafanskie Zavody.

of the un-numbered mail coaches, running on main lines and served

by travelling crews.

(a) Moscow-Vladivostok, Train No.2 (Moscow-Kirov-Sverdlovsk-Novosibirsk-
(b) Moscow-Khabarovsk, Train No.2 (Moscow-Kirov-Sverdlovsk-Novosibirsk-
(c) Moscow-Manchzhuriya,Train No.2 (Moscow-Kirov-Sverdlovsk-Novosibirsk-
(Manchouli) Irkutsk-Chita-Manchouli).


I~ I I -



*1'*~* ~ ~ ~C I) --

-. ..~ :. i Z47 s /:
-; .4Vlr

9~~~ .~ p:yg *1 (,.~
'. T P, ,

.Ce & 2.- .' u"-.'";'
xn~~~ .-.*... __ : ;. NXP~j ~ I~d4 ~ ~. 2


FIG. 13. "r


ex ma 13


(d) Moscow-Irkutsk, Train No.2 (Moscow-Kirov-Sverdlovsk-Novosibirsk-
(e) Moscow-Dnepropetrovsk, Train No.5 (Moscow-Khar'kov-Krasnograd-
(f) Moscow-Mineral'nye Vody, Train No.27 (Moscow-Khar'kov-Lozovaya-
Nikitovka-Rostov/Don-Mineral'nye Vody).
(g) Moscow-Baku, Train No.47 (Moscow-Khar'kov-Lozovaya-Nikitovka-
Rostov/Don-Mineral'nye Vody-Baku).
(h) Moscow-Vladivostok, Trains Nos.63 & 97 (Moscow/Kursk Station-Tula-
(i) Shepetovka-Baku, Train No.33 (Shepetovka-Kazatin-Kiev-Grebenka-
(j) Moscow-Sochi, Train No.21 (Moscow-Khar'kov-Lozovaya-Rostov/Don-

* *

We regret the illegible illustration in Fig.32 .on-p..31 of THE POST-RIDER
No.23 for the article by Sr. Salvador Bofarull Planas' article on the
Spanish Blue Division. An improved reproduction is shown here of the
sole recorded example of a bilingual Spanish-German letter-card, in the
collection of Sr. Armando FernAndez-Xesta of La Coruna, Spain. It
repeats the original Croatian design and slogan EUROPE KNOWS BOLSHEVISM
AND FIGHTS IT UNTIL THE FINAL VICTORY. Such an item would also fit into
a thematic collection of The Holy War against Bolshevism.

~E~ir, .f


by Andrew Cronin.
SI. Historical Outline.

The modern history of Lithuania is unusual in that a nationalist
organisation "Lietuvos Taryba" (=The Lithuanian Council) proclaimed in
Vilnius (Vil'na, Wilno) the independence of the country on 16 February
1918, while it was still occupied by the armed forces of the German
Empire. Count Wilhelm of Wurttemberg was to rule it as king, but
nothing came of that plan. Soon afterwards on 3 March 1918, the young
Soviet Russian government was forced to sign the Treaty of Brest-
Litovsk, imposed upon it by the German Empire and its allies and giving
up all the western territories of the former Russian Empire. That was
done on the insistence of V.I. Lenin and against the vehement
opposition of many other Bolsheviks in the Soviet government, as he felt
he had to have peace at any price, in order to safeguard the results of
the October Revolution. His prescient tactics were successful since, a
mere two days after the WWI armistice on 11 November 1918, the Soviet
government was able to repudiate this iniquitous treaty.

The German forces started evacuating the Western Russian territories and
the Ukraine soon thereafter, with the Belorussian capital of Minsk
being abandoned on 8 December 1918. In the last week of that same month,
the Lietuvos Taryba took over the administration of Lithuania and parts
of Western Belorussia, all of which had formerly been administered as a
sector of the "Postgebiet Ob. Ost" postal area. The Germans had left the
Lithuanian capital of Vilnius by 26th.December 1918, but the Lietuvos
Taryba was forced to move the seat of government to Kaunas on 5 January
1919, when Vilnius was taken by the Red Army. The First Lithuanian
Soviet government was then formed under Vincas Mickevicius-Kapsukas in
Vilnius, but parts of Western Belorussia and Lithuania proper remained
under the control of the nationalistic Lietuvos (Valstybes) Taryba
(Lithuanian State Council).

The situation changed abruptly in April 1919, when the Polish Army
launched an offensive in Western Belorussia. The Poles took Grodno on
17 April and Vilnius on 22 April, putting an end both to the presence of
the Lietuvos Taryba nationalists on Belorussian soil and to the First
Lithuanian Soviet Republic.

II. The Lithuanian postage stamps circulating in Western Belorussia.

The period of rule by the Lietuvos Taryba of Western Belorussia from
26 December 1918 to 22 April 1919 coincided with the appearance of all
the Lithuanian type-set provisional issues. They comprised the First and
Second Vilnius Issues and the First, Second and Third Kaunas Issues.
These are most interesting stamps and their main characteristics are
worth noting, as follow:-

(a) The First Vilnius Issue.

When the Germans left Vilnius, they took everything with them, including
the remaining stocks of the "Postgebiet Ob. Ost" overprints and the
corresponding cancellers. The Lietuvos Taryba therefore had to produce
stamps in a hurry. This type-set issue of 10 and 15 skatik4 was conceived


by a printer employee Juozas Strazdas and printed by Martynas
Kukta on the night of 26/27 December 1918 in sheets of 20 stamps (5
across and 4 down).Only 250 sheets were printed of each value, so these
stamps are rare. The values were in the skatikas/auksinas currency, at
par with the pfennig/mark system, but only the latter money was then in
circulation. The rates were a carry-over from the "Postgebiet Ob. Ost"
administration, i.e. 10 skatiku for inland cards and 15 skatiku for
inland letters.

We now have to digress into the intricacies of Lithuanian grammar. The
word "skatikas" is a noun in the first declension and, after most
numerals, Lithuanian nouns have to be put into the genetive plural
case. The genetive plural ending was originally "-un",but it was later
contracted into a nasal "u". The problem was that the printer only had
sufficient "4" type for seven stamps on the sheet (positions 1,5,11,12,
14,15 & 16). For positions 2,3,4,6,7,8,10,13,17,18,19 & 20, it inserted
an inverted "h", thus:q and for position No.9 it inverted the Polish
palatal letter "i", thus:u (I). That last unusual variety is much
sought after, as it obviously occurs only once in the sheet of 20 units.

(b) The Second Vilnius Issue.

The numerals in the first issue were thin and inconspicuous. It was
therefore decided to substitute thicker type and also to expand the
range of values to cover other rates. The rest of the printing forme
remained unchanged and included the inverted "n" variety in position
No.9 on the sheets of all values. The Second Vilnius Issue, which was
printed 31.12.18 before the Lietuvos Taryba withdrew to Kaunas on 5th.
January 1919, therefore consists of the following values and quantities:

10 skatiku: 15,960. 20 skatiky: 23,000. 40 skatiky: 13,780.
15 skatiki: 16,080. 30 skatiky: 20,000. 50 skatiku: 17,700.

All six value of this issue were sent down td one post office in
Western Belorussia and four of the values distributed to another office
down there.

(c) The First Kaunas Issue.

The stamps bear a four-line inscription, reading "Lietuvos / value /
skatiku / pastas". They were produced in the printer of Saliamonas
Banaitis in four values, still in sheets of 20 units and in the
following quantities:-

10 & 15 skatiku: 20,000 each. 20 & 30 skatiki: 19,800 to 19,880 of each.

There were two printings of this issue and all four values of the first
printing of 29 January 1919 were sent down to one post office in Western

(d) The Second Kaunas Issue.

The type-set inscription reads "Lietuvos / pastas / value sk.", now in
three lines for seven values: 10,15,20,30,40,50 and 60 skatiku. There
were four printings, as follow:-

1st. printing: 18 Feb. 1919 10sk. 15sk. 20sk. 30sk. 40sk. 50sk.
2nd. printing 26 Feb. 1919 10sk. 15sk. 20sk. 30sl. 40sk. 50sk.
3rd. printing 26 Feb. 1919 20sk. 30sk. 40sk. 50sk.
4th. printing 3 Mar. 1919 60sk.

-- 50 .... -- -----.-----. -...

All these values were sent down to Belorussia to just one post office.

(e) The Third Kaunas Issue.

The type-set inscription now reads "Lietuvos / pastas / sk.value sk." in
three lines for two printings, as follow:-

1st. printing: 1 Mar. 1919 for the 10, 15 & 20 sk. values in sheets of
20 stamps each. These were also sent down to Belorussia,
to just one post office.
2nd. printing: 3 Mar. 1919 for all values, i.e. 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50sk.
in this new setting, all together in the same sheet with
the 60 sk. in the setting of the Second Kaunas Issue (!).
The sheet size was thus 20 across and 8 down to total 160
stamps. There were 20 of each of the first six values and
40 of the 60 sk. value, the latter being the only value
in this printing to be sent down to Belorussia. Tricky!

It should be noted here that all the Lithuanian type-set issues
described above are extremely rare on commercial mail and thus very
desirable property.

III. The Belorussian post offices and their markings.

The "Lietuvos Taryba" had only two post offices functioning in Western
Belorussia, as follow.

(a) Grodno (Gardinas in Lithuanian).

It would seem that, upon evacuating Grodno, which had a post office in
the administrative area of the "Postgebiet Ob. Ost", the Germans took
away all the former German and Russian cancellers. For a .short time in
the early Lithuanian period (during the first few days of January 1919),
the only marking applied was a straight-line unframed "Grodno" 10.5 x
20.5 mm. in violet on the First Vilnius Issue, as shown below at left.
Very soon thereafter, a Russian post office cachet with a diameter of
and always applied in violet. It is shown below at right on the First
Vilnius Issue.

All six values of the Second Vilnius Issue were sent down to Grodno. An
interesting example of such usage is illustrated overleaf in the form
of a now invalid "Postgebiet Ob. Ost" 7h Pfg. card, with the 30 sk.
value affixed for transmission to Berlin. The handwritten message in
German is informative and the first part of it reads as follows:-
Grodno, 15 January 1919.
Messrs Jaeger & Kiesslich, Berlin.
By the time your letter of 18 December last year had arrived here, the


A2nd.hsidns 6I

a Ofic ini^ 0^ :Q existence e A

.....,tdfr -

S .*?. r d, -. ,m J ,,`v <,: ,

^B^^Lt Otuv 1 i*^>^'-^i^n^'^

or registered sending, whereupon I cannot send you the 500 Marks..."
Normally, such Lithuanian mail going abroad was censored en route at
K8nigsberg in East Prussia and a boxed MPmark applied but, as this was
a card which could be openly read and also showed a German Field Post
marking dated 20 Jan. 19, 10-llam, that was apparently deemed sufficient
reason to let the item go forward.

/_ r ,' i ". *; | L +.'--* -Jl '---' --I --- I" ~-.,...^ ,., -.. I
The first printing of the First Kaunas issue was sent down to Grodno
and all four values may be found cancelled with the circular Russian
cachet in violet. A 10 sk. example is shown just above at left.

4PON a 0

Zm~0 -Zuia0
'* *~ii4S u~o .~q, -e~

7- Al

0, 0

Ire SAM",


0 Irv104 0~

0 o io ..jd ~ ~ :.

o 8* -
a *


0l 0 o o

Sr --RP~'P'?--

3 o o~ ow~
&ilo eff.

0 a m p r -0

In a
os o ar

i in
.3.. t

0 :0


"o for a
alo 9a rz d
k---.. .;o
-. hua o 0"2, -
g~~ 0~31tI~~rY *I~./P I~ Iap~ma Sakizi ~ --

0. oy s.* ud ui
jn 0

n -o Sza0o
ae a .ro 0 r
~c(~b .. -.

0-Yde~: .sQ 3~~
0.r 1* _
Jh 0:

*4' 4~,. ~ ..BaT~e .. j0/
~ .M~d..k0 .t o
*0~~~\y soryVR Yvn fPi. YZ. 4'4' EB~) IC 7

All six values of the Second Kaunas Issue were supplied to Grodno & some
examples are shown at the bottom of p.52 with the circular_postmark.

.4. S Only the 10, 15 & 20 sk.
*- -* -'r o. P values of the Third Kaunas
ii ri _'' O,
U i *E roIssue reached Grodno and they
Slet uv os ?i8 are shown herewith at left
o o w. with the circular Russian
0-sk.lO 10 s s- S o o cachet applied in violet.
0sk. s0. 0 0 0 00
.0 o-'.:,.: o 0 0 0 o000
*g o o o'o o o o o o' -

The Grodno Local Issue.

This consists of the 11 bilingual Lithuanian/Belorussian overprints
listed in all the general catalogues and issued on 4 March 1919. They
were therefore only on issue for 44 days, as the Poles had by then taken
the city. Pieces of mail that have properly gone through the post must
be great rarities, as the examples so far seen by the writer bear the
printed address of the well-known Berlin stamp dealer Philipp Kosack,
with sets of the overprints affixed and cancelled, but without any
markings to show that such envelopes had ever left Grodno. Some
copies of these stamps are illustrated immediately below.

(b) Lunna.

Known as Lunna to the Poles, this town is 40 km.(25 miles) S.E. of
Grodno; see the map on p.53 for orientation. Once again, the only
marking that had survived was a Russian postal cachet, again applied in
violet and inscribed LUNNENSKAYA POCHT.-TELEGR. KONTORA, with a
diameter of 31 mm. and the Russian postal & telegraphic insignia in the
centre. The only stamps to reach this office were the 10, 15, 40 & 50sk.
of the Second Vilnius Issue. They have so far been seen only on pieces,
cancelled by favour, as shown immediately below. All are hard to find.

eibwo /ute ss

0 apaita !
k. "' 0c"c ocoo

Any item of commercial usage must obviously be of great rarity.

Comments on this subject from our readers would be most welcome.

by Andrew Cronin U

This international exhibition under the patronage of the Federation
International de Philatelie(FIP) was held in the Bulgarian capital
of Sofia 22-31 May 1989 at the National Palace of Culture. That
location is a beautiful 8-storey building with two further basement
floors, situated in the city centre, fully carpeted and air-conditioned
throughout and including numerous conference halls, boutiques, lifts,
escalators and all modern conveniences. It is illustrated on the 1-lev
stamp shown at top left.

The exhibition was very well organised and expertly run by our
Bulgarian colleagues, the hospitality was most generous and it was
obvious from all the activity then going on throughout the country that
our hosts have had a lot of experience in running shows of all kinds,
not just philatelic exhibitions. In addition to being a member of the
International Jury, your editor was also the commissioner for the
Canadian exhibits and the Canadian alternate delegate to the crucial
FIP Congress, which took place on 31 May-1 June.

Other members of the jury with interests in our spheres of collecting
included M.V. Liphschutz RDP of France (the leader of our particular
judging team), G.B. Lindberg of Sweden and V.V. Sinegubov of the USSR,
together with Dr. A. Ross Marshall of New Zealand (editor of POCHTA,
* the journal of The Australia and New Zealand Society of Russian
Philately) and Aleksei Borodin of the USSR, both as jury apprentices.
Ross was also the New Zealand delegate to the FIP Congress. This has
been your editor's third visit to Bulgaria, a beautiful country with a
very strong folkloric tradition and where he has several philatelic
correspondents. He was kept very busy throughout the show, including
the task of giving two philatelic interviews for Radio Bulgaria (one in
Bulgarian, the other in French).

The more important results in our areas were as follow:-

Boris Kaminskii (USSR):
Sven Kraul (FRG):
Dr. A. Papaioannou (Greece):
G. Adolph Ackerman:
Stephan Frater (USA):
Ants Linnard (USSR):
Dr. James Mazepa (USA):
Nikolai Mandrovskii (USSR):
Dr.Jan Rompes.(Holland) :
Dr. Bl4a Simady (Hungary):
Dr. Richard M. Stevens (USA):

Salvador Bofarull (Spain)i
Peter Elbau (Switzerland):
Per-Anders Erixon (Sweden):
Martin Holmsten (Finland):

Russia till 1917 (Court of Honour).
Latvian Forerunners(FIP Championship Class)
Postal History of Crete 1419-1913.

Soviet Air Mail The Early Years.
Austrian Posts in Hungary 1850-67 (+SP)
Development of the Estonian Posts.
Poland 1858-1875.
First Issues of the USSR.
Hungarian Pre-Philately.
Carpatho-Ukrainian Postal History.
Bulgarian Covers & Postal History.

Russian Civil War 1918-1922.
Bukovina Postal History 1797-1906.
Russia 1812-1875.
Russian Maritime Mail 1714-1929.

Arnold Levin (USSR):
Dr. Vasile Popescu (Roumania):
Vsevolod Pritula (USSR):

Aleksei Shvedov (USSR):

Salvador Bofarull (Spain):
Dimit'r Diamandiev (Bulgaria):
Gerhard Hahne (FRG):
Hans-Jurgen Meyer (FRG):
Dr. P. Sch&fer-Wiegert (FRG):
George Shaw (USA):
Moshe Shmuely (Israel):
Nerva Tirnaveanu (Roumania):
Karmi V&ino (USSR):

Dimit'r Angelov (Bulgaria):
D. Iain Fraser (UK):
Aleksandr Galileev (USSR):
Aleksandr Ilyushin (USSR):
Walter Johansson (Finland):
Vladimir Pantyukhin (USSR):
Pravlenie VOF (USSR):
Pravlenie VOF (USSR):
Jacqueline Tsvetkova (Bulgaria)

Povilas Barbataviuius (Canada):
Mieczyslaw LubiAski (Canada):
Kiril Osyatinskii (USSR):
Algis Preikga (USSR):
Lev Ratner (USSR):
Carole Steinmetz (Luxemburg):
Joseph Taylor (USA):

Suren Arakelov (USSR):
V.Kartsev & V.Vznuzdaev (USSR):
Iosif Levitas (USSR):
Pravlenie VOF (USSR):

Lev Kolosov (USSR):
I.Krivoruk & Yu.Grekov (USSR):

Russian WWI Mutes.
Roumania 1858-1872.
Russian Imperial Air Navigation Mail
and ODVF Labels.
Postal Rates of the USSR.

Russia in WWI.
Russian Empire Postal History.
Central Lithuania.
Airmail History of the USSR.
Soviet Postal Rates 1917-1923.
Russia 1917-1922.
Bukovina Postal History 1807-1890.
Estonia 1918-1940.

First Bulgarian Cancels and Routes.
Helsinki-SPB Railway Pmks 1875-1881.
The Post in Russia.
Russian Postal Stationery 1872-1917.
Russian Stamps in Finland 1882-1918.
Postal Usage of RSFSR Postcards.
Large Philatelic Dictionary (Literature).
"Soviet Collector" Annual (Literature).
:Russia 1915-1918 (Juvenile Section).

Russian Imperial Censorship 1914-1917.
On the Roads of Russia (Juvenile).
Lithuanian Airmails 1921-11940.
The Post in Petrograd-Leningrad.
Russia (Juvenile).
Allied Intervention in Russia 1918-20.

Philately for the Young (Literature).
Animals on Asian Stamps (Literature).
With Stamps to Land of Knowledge (Lit.).
The 22nd. Olympics in Philately (Lit.).

Belorussia in Philately (Literature).
The Magic Window (Literature).

Looking back over the exhibits, one could see that Boris Kaminskii has
probably the best collection in existence of the Russian Posts in
Bulgaria 1877-1879 (two frames, including many glorious field post items)
as well as almost one frame of the Russian Posts in Moldavia and
Wallachia 1808-1878, Sven Kraul's Latvian Forerunners were absolutely
superb and in his Postal History of Crete gems Dr. Papaioannou had one
of the two known strikes of the AN2FEIA (Anogeia) postmark, on the two-
metallika yellow of the 2nd. Russian (trident) issue.

Adolph Ackerman's gold for his Soviet Airmails was well deserved and
Stephan Frater had a beautiful letter with the 1861 issue of Austria in


pairs of the 2 & 3 Kr., postmarked SZEREDNYE 8/12 (Seredne in the
Carpatho-Ukraine and a great rarity) and addressed to Kassa (Kogice).
* Nikolai Mandrovskii amazed us with a brilliant showing of probably
unique essays for unissued values of the 1921 Soviet pictorials, Dr.
Rompes had a beautifully clear strike of the 1814 oval marking in red
of UNGHVAR (Uzhorod), which is the rarest pre-stamp marking of the
Carpatho-Ukraine and Dr. Richard M. Stevens had a letter of the Russian
Post in Bulgaria, which caused great controversy. He himself tells the
story in the article immediately following this one.

Salvador Bofarull's Civil War material was much admired and Peter Elbau
had lovely Austrian items from Bukovina, particularly a couple of rare
two-line travelling post office markings: POSTCONDUCTEUR IM ZUGE /
No.2754. Martin Holmsten had rare maritime mail items from 1714 to 1918,
Arnold Levin's WWI Mutes were glorious, Dr. Popescu had a rare Roumanian
letter from Bolgrad in Southern Bessarabia where many Bulgarians live to
this day and Dimit'r Diamandiev backed up that presence with two covers
from Durkary 2.2.1901 and Volontirovka 22.3.1902. Nerva Ttrnaveanu had
many items of Ukrainian interest from Northern Bukovina and Dimit'r
Anqelov a frame of Russian Posts in Bulgaria 1877-78 in his exhibit. One
of the major surprises was the inclusion in his display by Walter
Johansson of complete mint sheets 8 x 5 of the Russian 1905 Charity
stamps with the OBRAZETS overprint on the 5 kop. perforated and on the
other three values IMPERFORATE! The A.S. Popov Museum of Communications
in Leningrad had a non-competitive display of Imperial Russia and proofs
of the first issues of Bulgaria, approved by Perfil'ev, the then
SDirector of the EZGB (the State Printing Works in St. Petersburg).

It was very pleasant finally meeting Dr. Marshall in person and it must
be some sort of a record to have had two editors of Russian philatelic
journals on an international jury. Our subscriber Moshe Shmuely was also
there with his wife; we had last met in Paris for PHILEXFRANCE '82. They
are both Bulgarian-born and we communicated in that language. In
addition to the vermeil for his Russian Civil War, Moshe also garnered a
well-deserved gold for a beautiful display of.19th. century Bulgaria.

Among the souvenirs for the show was a special Soviet 5-kopek envelope,
with two appropriate commemorative postmarks in red (see the
illustration overleaf). The FIP Congress, aided by an expert Bulgarian
team of interpreters in the five official languages (English, French,
German, Russian and Spanish) was a miniature United Nations and
witnessed a second attempt at membership by the philatelic federation
formed in the northern part of Cyprus, which has been under occupation
by the Turkish Army since 1974. This problem has had serious political
consequences, both for the FIP Board of Directors and The Royal
Philatelic Society of Canada. Anyway, the Turkish Cypriote motion for
membership was put to a secret ballot and defeated overwhelmingly.
Interestingly, the Turkish Cypriote delegation distributed a
presentation pack of FDCs, one of which bore a 400 T.L. stamp showing
Presidents Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan! It is featured on the
next page, with a printed cachet of the two leaders at left in blue and
* below that a quotation from Kemal AtatUrk, reading "Peace in the
country, peace in the world". The commemorative postmark translates as
"Anniversaries and Events, Nicosia, 17.10.88". This is the first item
of "Gorbach&viana" that your editor has seen. It should be noted here
that the stamps of the Turkish zone of occupation are not recognized

ill ~ILI -

by the UPU, nor can they be shown at FIP exhibitions; they are mentioned
at the back of the Scott catalogue "for the record".

The point system now enforced by the FIP for international shows also
affects the exhibits in our areas and will be the subject of a special
study in No. 25 of "The Post-Rider".
58 *

Kuzey Kibns Tilrk Cumhuriyet
Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus

Yurtta barn,,dOnyada bartn.

Ilk GUn Zarfi Post Office F.D.C.


by Dr. Richard M. Stevens.
SAndrew Cronin has asked me for my comments regarding this letter, which
appeared on the first page of my exhibit at BULGARIA '89. Firstly, I
must emphasise that this exhibit was prepared and entered at
BULGARIA '89 because I had decided to sell this part of my collection
and felt that I wanted to show it internationally at least once before
doing so. Since it had not been shown before at an International, it
was allotted only five frames. It was my objective to cram as many
covers into those five frames as I could. As I was showing Bulgarian
covers to a Bulgarian audience, I eliminated most of the write-up I
had used previously in a U.S. show.

This was essentially an exhibit of Bulgarian stamps on cover. This
letter was one of two items that fell outside that category, but which
I felt to be of sufficient interest to include anyway. I deliberately
placed it on the first page, because U.S. exhibitors are told that they
may place an item on the title page, which might otherwise be
considered extraneous and will not be marked down. However, I did
include it as a featured item in the outline of the exhibit, which I
placed on the second page.

I must make it clear that the maximum award I was expecting for this
exhibit was a small gold. I have felt very flattered that it was
considered for the Grand Prix National. It remains my opinion that the
exhibit is too limited, both in size (five frames) and scope
S (including no off-cover stamps and essentially no forerunner covers) to
receive a large gold and therefore even be considered for a Grand Prix.

This letter was Lot No.2171 in the Corinphila sale of 9 May 1979, made
up of material from the estate of Franz See. I attended the sale. This
was not a letter I expected to buy; I had sold all my Bulgarian
forerunner covers earlier. However, when there was little bidding for
what I felt to be one of the key pieces in the sale, "fools rush in..."
and I bought it. I have no recollection of giving the letter more than
a cursory inspection. Clearly, the stamp is not tied. There can be no
certainty that it originated on the letter. The Franz See estate is
known to have contained rather obvious fake covers. This was not one of
those items. For better or worse, I had bought the letter and
have since owned it primarily on the basis of the Corinphila-Franz See

Since this letter has now been seriously challenged, it must be
examined much more closely. It is obviously my duty to defend it. In at
least portions of what follows I will be moving on very shaky ground.
I am reasonably knowledgeable regarding Bulgaria. I am virtually
ignorant regarding Russia and this is basically a Russian letter. The
genuineness of the letter and its markings have not been questioned,
only whether this stamp originated on it.

Before proceeding further, I must introduce an additional piece of
* evidence, one that was not shown at BULGARIA '89 and one that is not
particularly helpful to my case. This was Lot No.2174 from the same
Corinphila sale. It appears to me to be the receipt originally given to
the sender of this letter and it appears to show that the postage was
15 kopeks (see at the top of p.62).

:',::7 ~: ^^ p":-^- ja-':" ,"- -

S ." ;..- .. "- .- -- --
r ,,, *--.-- ..; .. ,- ...-i .
"..'- ,* ,i ., ,' ,. ^ *2 r -" '" '. .; :. "- -, ,,'. -- .' :- .. v.
* ", -. ', ,- .- '- "- ; ,.,'.., ^ ; .l "; *.'lk : --* "; % '' ... ,*- ,-*- "!;" -._,;- !
,,p, d b-. b.?EJ..a...a:,,.r.*n- ": -., :;- -. 1 S.. ..' .- ", ,-. ,-
; : . ;- : -.- '-- ." ,Q 4' -" : ". : .- : .

4." u-.
*.'-;. .* "** -o*: ^ ^ ,, .-' "<.... :. :.../,-' ..^ : ,- ..., ...."- ^- -'--"-"j* ?f':^ f .*~* .-. :' "- '
"" '-. "' .. ,.,.. t. ,, ..,., ,. _. .
": ;,.-;L # ':.:i .: 1-i;"'" '" .. '" +" ... ..
.~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~? ... l,!... '.;, '-:" ,'. ,..
-' i: -. .-.. t '. ... _'' ,,--..._ ","'' :+.- ',"
>: :; ; ; ;.., ... ; .. "; "' : "* "" '"""
J #I .l '-... '
d',,. ,!. ,..:' ,;L L L." ;" '
1 .. . _'

' -~'~ir 5-* Thi~.;ftrrJUI n~Fr( r.-l~rrr-rntd -r rr r
.... .. .... G i: "- : -
-- t;.JE
"* 't," W" !tWih...t.flh,.-9." J,)kP..
.- I .r r ... .

-~~ .4 i,.
s ,. ... ,- //

-*.-. '.'-. ," : "> :"- r "*'. .
/- -' ^ ,, ^ -(_, ,.:. .^*. ... ., ..-...
..- ^ .. ....
~~~t .. ).. .,- :,. .,. ; '.-
,. 9 ..t ..-. i' c~
; ,,ti -...-.- .. ,_z ,. ;- .. ..... .* -; ,
.- --~h ~ y ; .... ... ,--:- -;


Ii .A, -.r

,. .2

'5 ,:~~

-*' .-. ci:i i,l^a^;-^-*/:;;; -
.- i s "" *. 2 -, ,,'i.' ,,' .' ,'^ 'i ."- .' '-; .,, '..* -.
.. i," .y4" '.,

.. .. ...' .. ..., ^ ^ -- .. :. -. -. il-^ ^ S .,.5 ...
". ... ** -, -, .; -' U ;.,^ 0- :,. ", X '.i" *-*. .-* ,, -
-.-'*.-*rg ::';4 ..A* l *' A ^. :-^
.- ,*' .- ". .. -

"... . .-' ,. -. _' ;- -
cr i; JX. j,
: ,,. .. :...., ., : ,CLs, 2 ,.. ,-,. r., :,

t;irTe z
**." -, -," *j" -.: j, k ." '';. ,>' .*'; *< .. ^.*':':\ Y< .-;-.^ : "" ." I,
.. .. .. .' ..- t
..~ ~~ -,"- .,-. '.. ':.. i," ..- ": -I
".-:' ,.,'; '.:::: o ) ::-.. ..' ,: .. .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ", ".e ; ,; ..t 1 .. .. r,. -
.. .. . ., : ". .. .:,, : ;

t '. .
ot ,

r*I' '

L* -,.

.5' ____-. i**


.,. U~I




* L


** :

4* 4. .1

-i:. -

-' "4 44. 4j
''~*' '
,~. 7....
.~* 1


* *



S. '' 4 4

-.rc .. 4 & q*'~r~1-
-:. wC4.w;..f... t

* ~ ~ ~ ~ 4, **,*, *:''-'
.. 4*r ~
-.4 p 4'** ..' t- a .' -

ltwb ,. ~


9' 1'C
~~1. -i 'b, tj,..{- 4 .
'4. ~ :"~.a.4 -.' 44' z;;. -
rrr Liir'rW f14~jlhh a ~...~

-A -. A ~ S.-----~


1~*~ '
... .. ,.
't-'. '.4 .-




. o r

.1~'' ''

ITyL1oTBoe',Ynpazejeze m. Eouarapiz.

SA 'R NA.: t

a -"

SiT'uu Ps i

BUTO seerv

*-- -~-; *. aI", a..-: .l~-

BSN CJ1A r YpaITH cTpaxoBof zoppecnonmendz, non-
*Vrooe. aiov4OCio OTSITcTuyers npe~s noiafta ezex,
orzacuo- A11 uasozaY% al N xonefftiaxi. 06%
YTPATV CTpaxosof Z]OppecnoHUeuRISf iaZATUe16 olor-
38HZ suashin, Be noaze deyXS JIMS 0 ARA VYOK5'%H
ea R n&SO', fa'a_.zuMx flo'rrOuro Ynpau-
zeuia 3sijA Nig zOer0 COCrO1ITh-IIOPTOBOe ypezXe-'
ide, ri E s1w H9Arj oppenouaeuujf, cs rpexcfan-
semexim H&cToaiUei pOCVCC IHI sacI nM TeWACTBO-
o s'a ot.Ids ei Ses.--Ecm noxa~aTeL nozezaen,
.i arpazr~ nie 6huzo uxao, He exy,'a a 8pe.
(/ JkTY 'Z1yrOXY XnEy,r TO AOJaCi Mo- oronopBTm





I must leave the postal historical analysis of this letter to those who
have more knowledge than I do. In its present form it is an outer
letter sheet with no message. There is one line of manuscript across the
top of the front in violet ink. In the Corinphila catalogue, it was
described as a "Paketbegleitbrief", or a letter accompanying a parcel.
In that case, the receipt may only show the charges for the package??
Prima facie, the 8-kopek stamp does not pay the correct postage.

There is a second postal history question of high relevance to this
letter. Were Russian postage stamps available for purchase at T'rnovo
and how much were they used there (and at other Russian post offices in
Bulgaria and Eastern Roumelia)? Tchilinghirian and Stephen (Vol.I, p.82)
say: "This office used ordinary Russian stamps. Examples of T'rnovo
cancellations are known, both on Russian stamps (on and off cover) and
on stampless letters. All are of considerable rarity". Similar remarks
are made about many of the other Russian post offices. As a long-time
collector of Bulgarian postal history, these statements do not match my
experience. The few covers one sees from the Russian offices are
normally stampless. Loose Ottoman and Austrian Levant stamps are
regularly offered with postmarks from Bulgaria. I cannot recall having
seen any such Russian stamps in exhibits of Bulgarian forerunners.
Perhaps they are all in Russian collections? In the book "Bulgarien",
Dragomir Zagorsky pictures on p.5 a cover with a Russian stamp used from
-Sofia; the stamp is cancelled in manuscript and not tied. On the basis
of my experience, I would say that no stamps were sold at the Bulgarian
post offices, that they were not equipped with any killers to cancel
stamps and that they were instructed not to cancel stamps with their
circular date stamps. If all that is correct, the only stamps used
would be those brought by visitors from Russia. That situation could
also explain why the stamp on this letter paid only part of the postage.
The sender had the one stamp with him and was allowed to use it to pay
part of the postage.

The stamp appears to have been cancelled with three strikes of the
month (YANV) portion of the T'rnovo postmark. Inspection of the two
T'rnovo postmarks on the letter and the one on the receipt leads to the
inescapable conclusion that they were applied in four steps, with the
outer circle and the three portions of the date each struck separately.


This is particularly obvious in the postmark on the back of the letter,
where the day has been struck twice and the year overlaps the inner
ring of the outer portion. If the postal clerk had used the date
Sections individually, it would seem reasonable that he might choose
one of them to cancel the stamp. Still, there are major problems. The
T'rnovo postmark next to the stamp appears to have been struck in a
single operation; the "3" projected too far out of the holder, causing
the month not to print properly. Even more troubling, the YANV on the
stamp does not appear to match the YANV in the postmark on the back
and on the receipt. The use of a second YANV as a killer would seem
much more likely if the first was incorporated in the c.d.s.

It has been reported that some of the judges at BULGARIA '89 felt that
there was a crease running across the letter where the stamp was
attached, even though the stamp was not creased. Firstly, it is clear
that the letter has been extensively cleaned. The stamp, if it is
original, has been removed in this process and reattached. This is
evidenced both by small amounts of gum visible around the stamp and by
extensive puckering of the paper on both sides of the stamp. There are
prominent vertical and horizontal filing creases, both well clear of
the stamp. Both side flaps show a horizontal wrinkle, which has
resulted in an impressed line across the front, but well above the
stamp. In addition to the puckering at the sides of the stamp, there
is a similar wrinkling at the right side of the letter. However, that
stops less.than an inch from the edge. I can see no evidence of a
continuous crease connecting it with the wrinkles around the stamp.
Folding the letter along the vertical filing crease (which is off-
centre) does not bring the wrinkles at the right into coincidence with
any of the wrinkles around the stamp. The paper behind the stamp shows
no evidence of any type of creasing or embossing. I would also note
that, although the ink has permeated the paper, there is also no
current evidence of any embossing of the postmarks.

I believe that one must observe the location of the T'rnovo c.d.s. on
the front of the letter. It is entirely logical, if the stamp was
there. If there had been no stamp, I would argue that it would almost
certainly have been struck farther to the left. If the stamp has been
added, there are two possibilities: the YANV killer could have been on
the stamp before, or it could have been added to an unused stamp. Here
I may be wrong, but I believe that is a very unusual cancel for this
stamp. Are other examples known of these Russian stamps cancelled in
this way? If the faker added the cancel, surely he would have tied the
stamp to the cover.

I have made a number of arguments above which may be refutable by
someone with more knowledge and reference material. At present, I see
no certainty that the letter is genuine or faked. Clearly, it has more
problems than I knew when I bought it. Should it have been in my
exhibit at BULGARIA '89? Not without a warning that the stamp might
not belong. Would I include it (with a warning) if I had it to do over
again? Yes, because my objective is to display my collection. If my
objective were to win a Grand Prix, then it should be left out.

* EDITORIAL COMMENT: Readers will agree that the comments by Dr. Stevens
are a model of objectivity and he has reacted as a gentleman in this
puzzling matter. What can we say about this puzzle?

Firstly, let us look at the receipt, which was prepared for the Russian


"Postal Administration in Bulgaria", as stated in the heading.
Furthermore, it was originally printed for the Russian post office at
Gabrovo, which has been crossed out and the word "Tyrnov" (T'rnovo)
written in.

Secondly, this outer letter may be regarded as a forerunner for a
parcel card, with the note in violet ink at top referring to the
distinguishing mark placed on the accompanying parcel. Such forerunners
without postage stamps affixed are known from other European countries,
before the introduction of printed forms. The German term for a parcel
card is Paketbegleitadresse or Postbegleitadresse; Begleitadresse means
an"accompanying declaration form". The Russian Imperial Postal Service
used the expression "Soprovoditel'nyi adres k posylke" (Accompanying
Address for a Parcel, i.e. a literal translation of the German term)
and in French this postal form is called a "Bulletin d'expedition".

Turning now to the usage of Russian stamps in Bulgaria during 1877-79,
almost none of the numerous items in the exhibits of Boris Kaminskii and
Dimit'r Angelov at BULGARIA '89 had adhesives affixed, Russian or other-
wise and the very few with stamps were cancelled with field post
markings. That may not be surprising as, from memory, almost all
examples fell into the category of official mail. Writing in FILATELIYA-
89, a philatelic annual published by the Union of Bulgarian Philatelists,
a noted collector, Ivan V'rbanov, gives an exhaustive treatment of "The
Establishment of the First Civilian Post Offices in Bulgaria during the
Russo-Turkish War of Liberation of 1877-1878", based on official sources
of the period. Gathering together data from seven documents, he has
established that the following deliveries of Russian postage stamps and
stationery had been made by April 1878 to the three post offices then
functioning in Bulgaria:-

Items Svishtov T'rnovo Gabrovo
supplied (Sistov) (Tyrnov)

1 kop. stamps 2500 1500 1000
2 kop. stamps 1300 1000 700
5 kop. stamps 1300 1000 700
8 kop. stamps 10,000 3000 2000
8 kop. stamped envelopes 8000 4000 3000
10 kop. stamped envelopes 3000 1000 1000
20 kop. stamped envelopes 1000 1000 1000
Blank postcards 3000 2000 1000
Note that the demand was greatest for the 8-kop. rate. There were
further deliveries to these offices on 18 June 1878.

At BULGARIA '89, your editor discussed this matter thoroughly with Mr.
V'rbanov, as the latter had hoped that examples of such usages would be
more readily available in the West. Such material does not exist in
Bulgaria, the logical place to look for it and your editor had to
confirm that such was also the case with us. What can be the
explanation for such a lack of material?

Coming now to the usage of the month slug as a cancelling device, your
editor recollects having seen at least one loose 8-kop. stamp so
treated and readers may be able to come up with further examples.

Looking at the possibility of a Russian visitor having the 8-kopek stamp


on him, the fact is that the letter is addressed in Bulgarian to the
Military School in Sofia. In short, the sender must have been a

Considering the evidence presented by Dr. Stevens, your editor finds it
most disturbing that the YANV strikes on the 8-kopek stamp do not match
those shown in the two strikes of the T'rnovo circular date stamp and
he also doubts that a duplicate set of date slugs was supplied to post
offices. If the stamp does not belong to the letter, then the faker
showed considerable ingenuity in selecting an 8-kopek stamp cancelled
only by a month slug, to match the month given in the T'rnovo
circular date stamp. Further comments on this problem from our readers
would be most welcome.


by Dr. H. L. Weinert

With regard to the artice on early Bulgarian covers in THE POST-RIDER
No.23, pp.65-67, I have three covers from the same sender and
handwriting to the same addressee and a fourth from him to another
relative. These covers were sent from Kizil-Arvat, Merv and Askhabad
during the period 1885-1889. The sender's name is actually K. K. von
Schultz K; K. 0OHb'L IyJIbrIVb) and in the PUTEVODITEL' PO TURKESTANU
1903 (Guide-book for Turkestan, 1903), he is listed as the Chief
Controller for the Transcaspian Military Railway.

S EDITORIAL COMMENT: Quite apart from the rarity of Transcaspian covers
during the stated period, these remarkable items which are illustrated
on the following pages also demonstrate some other interesting
features. All of them paid the same rate of postage (7 kopeks) and all
were money letters, with the obligatory five wax seals for insured
correspondence on the backs (large seal in the centre and four smaller
impressions in the corners). The individual characteristics for each
of these items are as follow:-

Page 66: Letter enclosing 100 roubles, sent from Kizil-Arvat 16 Oct.
1885 O.S. and received at Runalinna, Finland 14 Nov. N.S., thus 17
days en route. The commission was calculated at 2 1/3(?)= 21 kopeks,
plus 50k. insurance and 7k. postage to give a total fee of 78 kopeks.

Page 67: Letter enclosing 500 roubles (a staggering amount in those
days), sent from Merv 17 Jan. 1887 O.S. and received on 15 Feb. N.S.,
i.e. still 17 days en route. The commission was 21 kopeks, plus
2r. 50k. insurance and 7k. postage to give a total fee of 2r. 78k.

Page 68: Letter enclosing 275 roubles, sent from Kizil-Arvat 23 Nov.
1887 O.S. and received on 18 Dec. N.S., now 13 days en route and so
an improvement in the transit time. The commission was still 21 kop.,
plus Ir. 38k. insurance and 7k. postage for a total fee of Ir. 66k.

* Page 69: Letter enclosing 20 roubles, sent from Askhabad 28 June 1889
O.S. to Karis Station in Finland, but with no arrival notations. The
commission was calculated this time at 1 2/3 = 14 kopeks, plus 10 kop.
insurance and 7 kop. postage to give a total fee of 31 kopeks.

It can be seen from the above that the insurance fee was 1k. per 2r.

-4 ---~- 1 '~ C---





* A-
/();U / ------~.i~ ~ ---7-------
//[ E^ ^ ^^ ^ ^-^. /
iv j /r ^// ,/
\ -.^is-^^^--^^--^-^^>^--<_rfS--A-^ c-<^-

; /^ J^ /
i ^ t ^ < ^ ^ i--^ ^ j, f^ ^ ^

e^/^/ ^. ^B^

^-h^ ?*--^---^^-^-^--^

S. --... -- -- ------ -


; 6C> 3

I I-
N -' '

?~ Z

.~i. -~.. *r-.~ ~'A /

I l /. 4
II -*


__~___I_ I ___

-- 5 ~rS~;
.. ,. II.

i-- -- -------.--- --- ____-
~o)-1 //T


~4>7 r


-, vc .--..- f

r *
~ ;~. ; 'N-

. .





*~~-?~C --~------- YCI
i-. A---- -r
i4 .'

d -I f


-. ca.-'


R-'...~.l. ~g\O-v-- ..
\ h-



by Dr. Peter A. Michalove.

The fascinating article by Dr. Walter J. Rauch in THE POST-RIDER No.22
on the Czechoslovak Field Post in the Soviet Union is a reminder that
it is worth while keeping our eyes open for field post material from
Polish forces in the Soviet Army as well. While somewhat more common
than the Czech material, these covers have a story of their own to tell.
In fact, Polish material in the Soviet field posts of the period
consists of two distinct types of covers: those from the original Polish
forces, who had been held as POWs since 1939 and later field post
material from soldiers who were natives of the regions of the Western
Ukraine that had been incorporated into the Soviet Union.

The first class of material came about because the Soviets, facing a
desperate military situation in 1941, agreed to an amnesty in August of
that year, freeing the Polish POWs to form their own military units in
the Soviet Union to oppose the common German threat. Camps were set up
for the Poles in Buzuluk and Totsk in September 1941. However, because
of the continuing German advance, these forces had to be evacuated to
Central Asia in January and February 1942. They were stationed in a
number of camps in the area around Tashkent. Up'to that point, the Poles
used the civilian Soviet postal system and their letters were franked
with Soviet stamps.

In March 1942, these units were given Soviet field post cancellers with
the numbers 3000 to 3005 and some unnumbered cancellers. They were
entitled to use the free frank privileges associated with the Soviet
field post. That was the situation up to August 1942, when the Poles
were evacuated to the Middle East and the Russian episode of their story
came to an end. Bojanowicz and Droar describe the postal markings of
these troops in great detail. It was also in August 1942 that the
DOJDZIEMY ("We shall return") stamp came about, but I will steer clear
of that controversial subject.

Figure 1 shows a cover dated 14 Feb.1942 from a Polish unit in Central
Asia. It was mailed from Vrevskaya (later FPO 3005) to P.O. Box 35 at
Kermine, Bukhara province (later FPO 3003), where it arrived on the 16th.
Figure la shows the reverse of the cover, with Soviet postage and the
cancels of Vrevskaya and Kermine. According to Bojanowicz and Droar,
there was an officers' training centre at Vrevskaya and the 7th.
Infantry Division was located at Kermine.

The second class of material described here is from ethnic Polish
soldiers in the Soviet Army. After the Western Ukraine was liberated in
1944, the soldiers were able to write to their families in these
former Polish areas.

Figure 2 shows a triangular letter from a soldier at FPO 83498-1,
addressed to Zabolotiv in the Stanyslaviv province. The letter is
addressed in Ukrainian and the message inside is in Polish.

Figure 3 is a postcard from FPO 55425 to L'vov (L'viv), where it
arrived on 19 August 1945. This card is also addressed in Ukrainian,.
with the message in Polish. The triangular military cachet, reading
"Krasnoarmeiskoe/pis'mo/BESPLATNO" (Red Army letter/POSTFREE) is
unusual at such a late date.


5 N. ^ 1.^

S^~--s------ e^
7 '*
^^ *^^ ___ -_^___ |-

S-v ^^ ^ S^ ^ ^s-

C. -

And finally, to
supplement Dr. Rauch's
article, Figure 4 shows
a cover dated 2 Jan.1946
from Zigaza,in the
Bashkir ASSR to a Josef
Novak (a Czech-sounding
name if ever there was
one), village of
Dohalice, House No.17,
near Hradec Kralove,

The letter may never
have reached its
destination. It bears
no postage and there is
an oval Soviet postage
due marking on the
t front, but no amount
due is indicated. It
received a Moscow
transit marking as late
as 19 February, but there are no Czechoslovak receipt'markings.

Bojanowicz, M.A. & Droar, A. "The Polish Field Post Offices in the USSR,
1942". Rossica 71 (1966), pp.41-44. Reprinted from Gibbons' Stamp
Monthly (June 1946).

Bojanowicz, M.A. & Droar, A. "Russian FPOs for the Polish Forces in the
Second World War". British Journal of Russian Philately 43 (1969),
pp. 3-8 and 44 (1970), pp.7-13.

Gruszczyk, Winston. "The Soldier Letters". The American Philatelist,
October 1982, pp.903-904.

Rauch, Dr. Walter J. "The Czechoslovak Field Post in the Soviet Union".
The Post-Rider 22 (June 1988), pp.36-62.

The 265th. K8hler Auction, held 7-10 June 1989 in Wiesbaden, Federal
Republic of Germany, featured among other items the most important
collection ever formed of Soviet air mail issues, apparently by Ing.
Zbigniew Mikulski of Switzerland. A fair number of lots remained unsold,
indicating that the bids had not reached the reserves. The more notable
results in our areas of collecting were as follow, excluding VAT, etc:-

Lot 3634: 12M./2r. 25k. complete sheet Consular Airmail DM 12,000.-
Lot 3636: inverted overprint position 23 3,000.-
Lot 3638: 12M./3r. "repm." inverted; 4 copies known(DM 9000) UNSOLD
Lot 3641: 24M./3r. complete sheet Consular Airmail 7,500.-
Lot 3645: 24M./3r. "repm." inverted; 4 copies known 5,000.-
Lot 3648: 120M./2r. 25k. complete sheet Consular Airmail(DM.8500)UNSOLD
Lot 3649: 600M./3r. complete sheet Consular Airmail (DM 10,000)UNSOLD
Lot 3663: 1200M./50k. Consular Air;50 copies known (DM 17,500)18,500.-
(threeother lots of this stamp remained unsold)..

j ni I 1I m

I I II Ml[

- I 717 Im

IllI I III m




10 x Type I in sheet of 25
7 x Type II in sheet of 25
5 x Type III in sheet of 25
-2 x Type IV in sheet of 25
1 x Type V in sheet of 25

7-10 JUNE 89


H7 iP"a 1932 r.
7 *ummn 1932 r.




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
could use some clarifying information, or might there
be some gems of wisdom that you could impart on some
newly acquired item ?

Share your questions, thoughts and wisdom, in the confines
of a couple of paragraphs with the rest of our readers !
.... _4p_~ nccoj. w


MOCKEM, 1-A TiepPCxaAI-5McxaA

.oMXh2 3.

.1 *.~

S i-

the present envelope
to be used exclusively
for Air Mail.

Robert Taylor,

n-- P ~-3n P~"I~6Y~

vi- Verkhndoqddinsk

Lr. 3 u c h o u e


I1.At 1-1n301on1 s

.' -w-u~ j.- L~o`go lie' P
!i 'a iS

3696: 1200M./3r. Consular, type V,once in sheet (DM 2000) UNSOLD
3716: 15 kop./lr. inv. ovpt. on faulty reg. letter 6,000.-
3722: 40 & 80k. Zepps imperf.,reg. letter 25.6.36:(DM45000)42,500.-
3730: 50k.Dirigible imperf.violet-brown,24 known (DM 1500) 1,950.-
3731: Franz-Joseph-Land-5 proofs & on card (DM20000) UNSOLD
3751: Ir./10k.Levanevskii on reg.card to Bulgaria(DM20000) UNSOLD
3752: reconstructed setting of 25 stamps (DM 8500) UNSOLD
3753: block of 4 with 2 small "f"s (DM 3000) 3,000.-
3760: inverted ovpt. with small f;3 known(DM32500)32,500.-
3762: Complete set 19 Vladivostok 1923 airmails (DM37500)37,500.-

. ;4

Re the cover shown on the previous page, the standard Soviet Philatelic
Association flight was from Moscow 10 August 1928 to Ulan Bator,
Mongolia and backstamped there on the 18th. I have seen a few over the
* years addressed to Altan Bulak, also originating on 10th. August from
the SPA in Moscow. I remembered that they had no backstamps, but seeing
one recently at auction, I decided to put in a very low bid to add to
my special flights. When it arrived from Germany, lo and behold there
was a KbZbL "c" backstamp of Tuva which looked like it had been
tampered with to give the date as 12.8.28. Obviously, no flight in 1928
could have made it from Moscow to Kyzyl in one day and, as I recall,
this type of cancel for Kyzyl did not come into use until the mid 1930s!
Morris Gutenstein, California, U.S.A.

Re the note in THE POST-RIDER No.23, p.75 about the missing dot after
the "r" of 1933 r." in the overprint for the Leningrad philatelic
exhibition, issued in March 1933, I can now report that variety on the
30 kop./15 kop. stamp in a block of four, cancelled to order LENINGRAD
10.3.33, as shown in the enlarged illustration just below:-

;rA 1f911'3TA- 1CCP bb.CTA9CKBA% I


.. .....- *... ............. -.. .. .. .. .. -. r -
I also have this same stamp mint :C PM
with a dot instead of a comma after -Sci) -
LENINGRAD in the red overprint, as
seen here. It should also exist
on the other value and it would be JlIIII
helpful to know the plate
positions of both these overprint EBCCOK3HAgAUATEsM!NECKAM
varieties. IE BhICTABKA MOCKBA& 1932

EDITORIAL COMMENT: There is some confusion as to when these overprints
were actually issued in Leningrad. The Soviet catalogue says that the
exhibition opened in Leningrad on 20 March 1933, with a special cancel
applied in red and yet Mr. Gutenstein has come up with a cancellation
* to order dated 10th. March. Does anyone have firm information as when
the overprints first went on sale?
Andrew Cronin, Toronto, Canada.

(a) By April 1920, the Polish leader Marshal Jozef Pilsudski felt that


I~ -LI V
a.' At`;

his eastern neighbour was so weakened by the Civil War, he could now
reconstitute the Rzeczpospolita Polska (Polish Commonwealth),
especially by incorporating the territories of Eastern Belorussia and
the Ukraine in his domains. He announced on 26th. April that his army
had struck deep into the Ukraine and Kiev, its capital, was taken on
8th. May. However, the Red Army regrouped, struck back and recaptured
Kiev on 13th. June. By the 27th. July, General Tukhachevskii had
crossed the Curzon Line and the Red Army reached the Vistula river on
16th. August. We can therefore see that the Poles were in the Eastern
Ukraine for about five weeks and the cover shown above is a witness to
their presence. Bearing 20 copies of the 5-fenig6w stamp cancelled
KAMIENIEC-POD. -2.6.20, the cover bears on the front a rectangular boxed
cachet in grey, reading "Cenzura wojskowa/Kamieniec podolski" (Military
censorship/Kamenets-Podol'sk). There is another long rectangular cachet
in red applied on the front, but it is illegible and the letter went
through the Polish mail system on to Chicago, USA. Note the dotted
capital is in the postmark; it seems certain that the Poles took an
original Russian canceller of the town and modified it to read in Latin
letters. Does anyone.have examples from other towns during the Polish
occupation of the Eastern Ukraine?


520 PH4
1943 TAG DAY

O~h kiC10 NJ~ 4~~L

The machine
postmark is
and makes an
addition to
a Rossica &

- -----~ -


... Arnold Meckel,
X; France.
,The large postmark
on this air cover
,. :. ...-- reads VOZDUSHNAYA
S' BERLIN 6.9.30 and
". the backstamps are
BERLIN C 6.9.30 23-
..O- IKO 24 (late that
Sa. ,.. .. <.,, night) and PARIS
^'. n ", / ;' -.:;. ;( : ,:ib[ GGARE DU NORD-AVION
S8.9.30. The "Par
9 t-f avion" in writing
:-.. .. : on the front was
:- probably added at
L BO3" 0 ;.- -- Le Bourget airport.
S :- : .. : .. This is an
,- :;. envelope of the
S;; ... Blue Star Line.
%ww .. What is known
S..... about this Line
S- --...' and how long was
the large LENINGRAD-BERLIN postmark in operation?
EDITORIAL COMMENT: The Blue Star Line was apparently a steamship line
and your editor has this large postmark used at late as 1938. Perhaps
Robert Taylor of Malibu, California can give us further information.
O *



Ashford. An 118-page paperback in 20x29.6cm. size (A4 format), issued
by the author and available from him at 9 Pentre Close, Ashton, Chester
CH3 8BR, England for 97 / US$ 15.00 postpaid.

* This area has never been popular with philatelists, because of the
proliferation of forgeries and the rarity.of commercial mail. The
present study by the leading contemporary researcher in the field will
do much to dispel the clouds of doubt, as he examines in detail the
historical background, forerunners, postmaster handstamps, the Aloe Tree
issues, surcharges, forged datestamps, revenue and money stamps, the

British field post offices and topped off with a check-list,
bibliography and acknowledgements. The possibilities of making new
discoveries are pointed out and, if you like the thrill of the chase,
then this is the book for you!

IlTCTA No.5 for December 1988. A 54-page journal in A4 format of the
Australia and New Zealand Society of Russian Philately. Available from
the Hon. Secretary, Terry Archer, 313 Mahurangi East Road, Warkworth,
New Zealand as part of the annual subscription to the Society (NZ$30-00
for membership, newsletter and the journals).

The journal continues to make steady progress and break new ground. The
editor, Dr. Ross Marshall, shows a lovely N.Z. cover from Auckland 12
June 1882 via Poland, Lithuania and St.Petersburg to Finland, a 1903
card from Vladivostok to Melbourne and 1988 returned mail Russia to New
Zealand. Next follow a review of the SYDPEX'88, ROYAL-100 (NZ) and
EXPO'88 (Brisbane) shows; new Express Post link NZ-Moscow; Readers'
Queries; Russian items in Madagascar UPU Collection;Russian illustrated
envelope Moscow 1907 to Ancon, Canal Zone and philatelic playing cards
with Russian themes. Dr. Marshall comes back with with an unpaid Moscow
card 5.11.17 O.S., Soviet Antarctic Expdn.Stationery, Free Post Period
1919-21 with lovely Riga local letter 25.1.19 during 1st. Latvian
Soviet Republic, Insured Correspondence and Soviet-Canadian Transarctic
Expedn. Other articles are POW Camps & Hospitals in Russia 1916, by N.
Bansfield; Warsaw Time of Receipt Markings & Soviet Specimen Postmark,
both by Ivo Steyn; Postage Increase 7k. to 10k.,by Michael Carson; When
the Post was sent to Siberia, by P.Robinson; Postal Services in
Bulgaria 1877-79, by N. Gr'ncharov and a listing of Soviet New Issues
bringing up the rear. Something for everyone in this number!

I-IOTA (Journal of the Russia-USSR Study Group in the Federal Republic
of Germany). All enquiries to Wolfgang Nietsch, Spessartstr.5, D-5000
BONN-1, Federal Republic of Germany.

No.46 for December 1988 contains 48 pages, covering Society news; new
13th. set of Soviet definitive; Armenian Earthquake charity stamps;
Russian Empire gems of Z.Mikulski Colln; book excerpt about DERULUFT in
1922; Mysterious "f" on reg. air letters & DERULUFT Winter Flights,both
by H.Kupec; A.N. Tupolev, by I.Nekhamkin; Helicopter Post, New Space
Stamps and 1918 Bisects, all by P. Aerni; Soviet Postal Stationery with
Railway Theme & Literature Reviews, both by K. Schauritsch; GIS,Vilnius-
Wilno-Wilna & Moscow in Switzerland, all by N. Aerni; Wilna Censorship
1914-22 (wonderful!), by G. Hahne; Baikonur Cosmodrome Markings, by A.
Falk; Russian Waggons in 1854, advised by G.Unger; Pharmacy P.O. in
Simbirsk, by G. Nagolnov; First Soviet Stamps, by E. Obukhov, to end
with Queries and Adlets.

No.47 for March 1989 has 44 pages, with Society Notes; Wrangel Army in
Gallipoli, by J.Freese; Trans-Siberian TPOs on POW Mail 1914-18, by H.
Taitl; 1918-1919 Postal Rates, by Dr.A.Stollberg; Non-German POWS and
POW Mail from USSR 1941-56 (both excellent!), by H-W.Boddenberg; Soviet
Postcards 1923-77, by K.Schauritsch; Lloyd Ostflug Precursor of
DERULUFT?, by H.Kupec; Central Lithuanian Forgeries for Packets, by G.
Hahne; Numbers Printed of Soviet Stamps, by E.Fomin; Red Triangle, by H.
von Hofmann; Russian Postal Services in Bulgaria 1877-79, by N.
Gr'ncharov; Environment Protection Set, by P. Aerni, to end with Adlets
and Answers to Queries. Interesting information in both of these issues!


HET BALTISCHE GEBIED (The Baltic Area) No.13 for January 1989. A 39-
page journal in A-4 format. All enquiries to the Secretary of the
Group, W.R. Muller, Einsteinlaan 23, NL 2641 ZL Pijnacker, Holland.

SThis issue contains a literature review of the Lettland-Handbuch I-III;
Latvian Air Rates & Covers (comprehensive), by N.Jakimovs; Netherlands
Eastern Co. Mail in WWII & Third Kaunas Issue (including 2 lovely
covers), both by A. de Bruin; Latvia-Africa Air Stamps, by W.R. Muller,
to end with Society Notes. A truly excellent issue here.

EESTI FILATELIST No.32 for 1988. A 208-page paperback in A-5 format
(15x21 cm.), printed on high quality chalk-surfaced paper. All
enquiries to the editor, Elmar Ojaste, Mandolingatan 17, S-421 45
Vastra Frblunda, Sweden.

This is a very nostalgic issue, with an exhaustive study of the First
Estonian Set, by E. Ojaste & S. Roove; 100 Years Organised Philately
in Estonia, Estonian Essays and Warning about Proofs, all by V. Hurt;
First Organised Estonian Philatelists 1880 -90, by E.Ojaste & E.
Thomson; Postal History of Kuressaare & Saaremaa to 1944, by E. Ojaste;
Origins of Names Arensburg & Kuressaare, by J.Arens; Estonian Cigarette
Cards and Estonian Bank Cheques, both by H.Osi; Soviet Estonian Special
Postmarks; Society News, to end with Supplement II to the Estonian
Handbook, by V.Hurt & E.Ojaste. A wonderful job, as always!
*. *


* Orders should be made payable to the CSRP, Box 5722 Station-A, Toronto,
Ont., Canada M5W 1P2. All previous titles are unfortunately sold out.

ENTIRE VOLGA FROM TVER TO ASTRAKHAN. A photo-lithographic reprint of
84 pages, all in Russian, with many advts, ship's menu, illustrations,
schedules etc. Very nostalgic. Few only! Price postpaid US $ 5.50

WRAPPERS), compiled in 1889 and issued in Russian by I.I. Kreving in
St. Petersburg. A photo-lithographic reprint of 32 pages and of great
bibliographic interest. Passed by SPB Censor. Price postpaid US $ 3.00

48-page booklet compiled by M. Koljankiws'kyj & long out of print. Text
in Ukrainian with many illustrations. Few Only!Price postpaid US $ 6.00

LATVIAN MAP STAMPS of Dec. 1918, embodying the latest facts by four
noted researchers. A great subject for study. Price postpaid US $ 5.50

in Bochum. A 62-page booklet in German & Russian. Contains a fine ten-
page article by H. Meyer on the 1st. Soviet airmail stamp, plus
"Collecting Russia" by Prof. Richard Zimmerl and an insert of the J.S.
* Bach Soviet souvenir sheet. Interesting! Price postpaid US $ 3.00

mailed flat by air anywhere in the world. Price postpaid US $ 2.00


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 the British actor Laurence Harvey (1928-1973), who
was born Laruska Skikne in Jonigkis, Lithuania and spent his early life
in South Africa, I would appreciate hearing from anyone with
reminiscences, letters or photographs.
R. HARDEE RIVES,Box 296. Enfield, North Carolina 27823, USA.

LITERATURE WANTED. Collector seeking to purchase back issues of THE
POST-RIDER Nos.l-6 and Rev. L.L. Tann's THE ARMS ISSUES OF 1902-1920
(1980). Please write first.
PETER BYLEN, P.O.Box 411238, Chicago, Illinois 60641-1238, USA.

FOR a "St.George & the Dragon" topic, I need the following material:
Armenia Scott 265; Russian R.O.N.D.D. private issues; Wrangel overprinted
Denikin issues on cover; Russia St.George semi-postals used outside
Russia; Arms type covers in combination with stamps of other countries;
Georgia & South Russia Denikins on cover; Savings and Control stamps
postally used on cover; Errors; Varieties; Forgeries; Essays etc.
GEORGE B. LOAN M.D.,1306 South Barclay St.,Bay City,Michigan,U.S.A.48706.

MUTE CANCELLATIONS of Russia WWI. Information and listings required. Can
spare many duplicates in exchange for this knowledge.
JONAS MICHELSON, P.O. Box 9314, Johannesburg 2000, South Africa.
-.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.

WANTED:1. Auction catalogues containing specialised and/or unlisted
Russian or related area material.2. Back issues of FRANCE-URSS
PHILATELIE(Journal of Cercle Philatelique 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.


University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs