Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 Correspondence with Canada
 Zemstvo varieties - fourth...
 Memel Takca 1822
 Postage stamps of the Zemstvos
 A postcard from the First Balkan...
 Russian volunteers in the two Balkan...
 A tribute to collectors
 A mysterious Tete-Beche variety...
 An enigmatic Zemstvo item
 More items of postal and historical...
 Some notes about the introduction...
 Savings cards for deposits with...
 Two outstanding railway items
 The Odessa border post office
 Items to and from Mount Athos
 The journal fund
 Usages of the "Latvijas PSR" 10-santimu...
 The first issue of the Republic...
 Soviet "not in effect/invalid"...
 The stamp exists, but it was as...
 Further items of mail from the...
 A. S. Pushkin (1799-1837)
 Philatelic shorts
 Review of literature
 The collectors' corner

Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076781/00044
 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: VID00044
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.


This item has the following downloads:

00044 ( PDF )

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Correspondence with Canada
        Page 3
    Zemstvo varieties - fourth installment
        Page 4
    Memel Takca 1822
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
    Postage stamps of the Zemstvos
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        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
    A postcard from the First Balkan War
        Page 32
    Russian volunteers in the two Balkan Wars of 1912-1913
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
    A tribute to collectors
        Page 38
    A mysterious Tete-Beche variety of Blagoveshchensk/Amur
        Page 39
    An enigmatic Zemstvo item
        Page 40
    More items of postal and historical interest
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
    Some notes about the introduction of the first stamp of Russia and comments about some varieties
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
    Savings cards for deposits with stamps
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
    Two outstanding railway items
        Page 58
    The Odessa border post office
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
    Items to and from Mount Athos
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
    The journal fund
        Page 69
    Usages of the "Latvijas PSR" 10-santimu card
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
    The first issue of the Republic of Armenia: July 1919
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
    Soviet "not in effect/invalid" cachets
        Page 77
        Page 78
    The stamp exists, but it was as if it didn't
        Page 79
        Page 80
    Further items of mail from the Caucasian theatre of war
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
    A. S. Pushkin (1799-1837)
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
    Philatelic shorts
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
    Review of literature
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
    The collectors' corner
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
Full Text

Printed in Canada


P.O. Box 5722, Station "A",
Toronto, Ontario, M5W 1P2
www3. sympatico.ca/postrider
E-mail: postrider@sympatico.ca
New FAX Number: (416) 932-0853.


2 Editorial
2 Special Note: also on pp. 15, 41, 72, 80 & 83
3 Correspondence with Canada
4 Zemstvo Varieties: Fourth Installment
5 Memel Takca 1822
16 Postage Stamps issued by the Zemstvos
32 A Postcard from the First Balkan War
33 Russian Volunteers in the Two Balkan Wars of 1912-1913
38 A Tribute to Collectors
39 A Mysterious Tete-Beche Variety of Blagoveshchensk / Amur

Jean Walton
George G. Werbizky
Erling Berger
Alex Artuchov
Alexander EpStein
Andrew Cronin
Alex Artuchov
G. Kul'chitskii, V. Ustinovskii &
O. Forafontov

40 An Enigmatic Zemstvo Item
41 More Items of Postal and Historical Interest Profess<
44 Some Notes about the Introduction of the First Stamp of Russia Geo
and Comments about some Varieties
53 Savings Cards for Deposits with Stamps Profess<
58 Two Outstanding Railway Items R
59 The Odessa Border Post Office G
63 Makaronia G
66 Items to and from Mount Athos
69 The Journal Fund
70 Usages of the "Latvijas PSR" 10-Santimu Card
73 The First Issue of the Republic of Armenia: July 1919 Dr. Arkac
77 Soviet "Not in Effect / Invalid" Cachets
78 The stamp exists, but it was as if it didn't
81 Further Items of Mail from the Caucasian Theatre of War Al
84 A.S. Pushkin (1799-1837)
87 Philatelic Shorts
97 Review of Literature
100 The Collectors' Corner
Coordinators of the Society: Alex Artuchov, Publisher & Treasurer
Patrick J. Campbell, Secretary
Andrew Cronin, Editor
Rabbi L.L. Tann, CSRP Representative in the United Kingdom.
The Society gratefully thanks its contributors for making this an interesting issue.

P.J. Campbell
or A.S. Ilyushin
rg D. Mehrtens

or A.S. Ilyushin
abbi L.L. Tann
.V. Andrieshin
.V. Andrieshin
Derek Palmer

Andrew Cronin
ii M. Sargsyan
Robert Taylor
F. Vanius
mxander EpItein
P.J. Campbell

June 1999.


\IsII c- I) I I Editorial

Since the original editorial with the above title appeared in No. 42 of "The Post-Rider", there have been
some drastic and very disturbing changes in the international economic scene, starting in Asia, then
spreading to Russia and now to Latin America. We are hearing about the unregulated activities of hedge
funds and the necessity of controlling the sudden and huge outflows of money, caused by international
speculators and leaving behind massive economic disruption.

So far as Russia is concerned, the rouble has gone at the time of writing from 6 to 26 to the U.S. dollar, thus
losing about 3/4 of its international value as a convertible currency. The effect internally has been
devastating and it has also seriously damaged the Russian philatelic movement. By October 1998, the Union
of Philatelists of Russia was issuing an appeal for aid to the Russian philatelic societies abroad, as well as to
its fellow members in the Federation Internationale de Philatelie (FIP).

So far as the CSRP is concerned, we feel that it is up to the individual members to decide for themselves
whether or not to contribute. Your editor has already dipped into his own pocket and sent a donation in DM
to the German Coordinator of the Russian Philatelic Relief Fund. The relevant details are as follows:-

Coordinator: Herr Michael Adler, Bank drafts in DM Herr Michael Adler,
Konradstrasse 12, to be made out to: Sparkasse Forchheim,
D-91301 FORCHHEIM / BRD, Account No. 66316,
GERMANY. Code (BLZ) 763 510 40.

Herr Adler is a Director on the FIP Board, President of the Federation of German Philatelists and Chairman
of the Organising Committee for the IBRA '99 International Philatelic Exhibition. He has had trade relations
with Russia for the past 30 years and is in Moscow at least once monthly. Donations are already coming in
from other philatelic federations in Europe, as well as from Paul Jensen RDP, the former President of the
FIP Commission for Postal History. Herr Adler has ensured that the donations so far received have gone
where they will do the most good.

The CSRP appeals to its members to support this worthy cause, since such donations, together with the
massive food aid sent by the United States and other countries will contribute neatly to promote stability in
Russia. In short, we are being asked to give back to Russian philately what we have received over the years
from Russian philately and the nicest part is that there is nothing seditious about it!

1999. Copyright by The Canadian Society of Russian Philately. All rights reserved. All the contents of
this issue are copyright and permission must be obtained from the CSRP before reproducing.
The opinions expressed in the articles printed in this issue are those of the individual authors and are not
necessarily those of The Canadian Society of Russian Philately or of its Coordinators.

June, 1999

"Correspondence 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
to the Editor, along with some explanatory text.

by Jean Walton.

Early post-WWII foreign mail from Belorussia is scarce, as that republic suffered the most proportionately of
all the occupied areas. The 30-kopek postal stationery envelope shown here has had a 1-rouble postage
stamp added to make up the correct registered surface rate going abroad to Canada (50-kopekforeign surface
letter rate plus the 80-kopek foreign registration fee).

It left Bobruisk on 8? (18? or 28?) September 1948 and passed through the "BELORUSSKAJA SSR"
monitoring post office in Minsk on 30th. September. It was in Montreal on 22nd. October and handled two
days later by the WINNIPEG-MOOSE JAW RPO (TPO), to arrive in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba the same
day. One wonders what the letter had to say about those difficult times to the addressee (J. Rabkin), who was
obviously related to the sender (Goda Rabkina).

June, 1999

by G.G. Werbizky.

This is a continuation of Zemstvo varieties, started in "The Post-Rider" No. 40. When a given Zemstvo is
omitted, it means that I do not have varieties from that Zemstvo. It does not necessarily mean that varieties
do not exist. It is hoped that readers will send in their discoveries from that or other Zemstvos. What is being
shown here is what 1 have in my collection.

BUGUL'MA, Samara province.

Chuchin No. 6:
The lower two stamps
placed couches (sideways).

.. .. .. .... ^ b -

L 1
:=5:_" ..... : t-7 : .

Chuchin No. 11:
Horizontal strip of three,
imperforate vertically.
Handstamped "17" for
Kostyukino Zemstvo P.O.

Chuchin No. 13:
Tete-beche pair.

Chuchin No. 15a:
Pair, imperforate vertically.

Chuchin No. 7a:
The third stamp in the strip has
the "A" missing in "3EMCKA5I".

Chuchin No. 13:
Pair, imperforate vertically.

Chuchin No. 20:
Perforated block often, showing
five tete-beche pairs, caused by
turning the sheet around.

June, 1999

Memel Takca 1822.

By Erling Berger

The famous Memel Takca of 1822 was a tariff to be used in Russia 1822-1843 to determine the
postage from the Russian/Prussian border to several European countries.

For a letter to f.ex. France we shall see how the total postage is an addition of shares for
Polangen-Memel (border postage)
France, and that every share can be related to local tariffs in the involved areas.

The destination states were
* All Germany
* Denmark
* Holland
* Belgium
* Luxembourg
* France
These states were listed with postage to every individual post office.

Letters to other countries could be sent franked to an in-between point
* To the UK : Franked to the Netherlands Coast or to Hamburg
* To Norway : Franked to Altona (by Hamburg)
* To Spain and Portugal : Franked to the French/Spanish border.

The currency used in this table was the Kopek Assignats (paper money) of which
6 Kopek Assignats were equal to 1 Silver Kopek. Esa Mattila has reproduced the Memel Takca in
his book on the Finland Postal rates.

Selected offices:

Office Kop.Ass Office Kop.Ass. Office Kop.Ass.
Aachen 309 Emmerich 273 Norway -
Altona 285 England franco Franco Altona 285
Amsterdam 363 Netherl. Coast 369 Paris 495
Arnhem 297 Forbach 321 Randers 393
Berlin 201 Givet 333 Reims 465
Bordeaux 657 Hamburg 249 Rotterdam 363
Bremen 249 Henri-Chapelle 327 Saarbriicken 321
Canada fianco Kinigsberg 81 Schiedam 363
Netherl.Coast 369 Liibeck 273 St.Nicolaas 393
Copenhagen 393 Luxembourg 327 Switzerland -
Dinant 393 Lyon 621 franco Lindau 369
Memel 9 Trier 309

June, 1999


A 1S T E 2PA 0`F
0a10 rE

-.. .....
f ~i 7

~ X i~ J ~r~.u/

The Russian border office was Polangen, the Prussian was Memel. From the previous times Prussia
claimed an extrafee of 1 silver Kopeks (9 Kopek Assignats) from Russia for every letter to and
from the Baltics. Prussia maintained that Russia had the main benefit from the postal road from
Berlin to Memel, while Prussia had to pay the costs. From 1822 to 1843 all Russian letters paid the
fee. As with many other authors, I will say that thefee was a border postal rate for the distance

The currency in Prussia was the Gute Groschen (GG) which was a silver coin. 1 GG = 3.87 Silver
Kopeks = 23.2 Kop.Ass. To be sure to claim enough from the Russian correspondents, the Russian
Postal Service claimed 4 Silver Kopeks (24 Kop.Ass.) for even Gute Groschen.

Prussia had an internal tariff with typical steps of V2 GG = 12 Kop Ass., so in the first instance we
would expect the Memel Takca to go like this 12, 24, 36. 48 ...steps of 12 Kop. Ass: but we must
remember that the fee of 9 Kop. Ass. should be added: so instead the Takca goes:

9. 21, 33. 45, 57....still in steps of 12 Kop.Ass.

Examples: (Making a straight line from the East to the West):
KOnigsberg: 81 Kop. Ass. (9+ 3 GG x 24)
Berlin: 201 Kop. Ass. (9 + 8 GG x 24)
Magdeburg: 249 Kop. Ass. (9 + 10 GG x 24)
Aachen 309 Kop. Ass. (9 + 12 /2GG x 24)
June, 1999 -




____~_ ~_

1828 Unfranked letter
See Table 2 : "Amsterdam"
4 Stuivers = "20 cent s
Netherlands share

24 Gute Groschen
Netherlands share

Amsterdam-Polangen =
363 Kop.Ass =
363 6=
"60'" Kop. Silver.

Up to Polangen : 363 Kop.Ass
Up to Riga : "500" Kop.Ass
Up to Narva : "542" Kop.Ass.

The postal rate Polangen-Riga
of 137 Kop.Ass.
is not cleared up yet.

~' ~-
.I I~ ~P ,~j~!.iCCFj~


1-3~i' i "'

The weight progression was:
* In general: 1 simple letter per Prussian Loth; plus /2 simple letter per /2 Prussian Loth.
* Letters consisting of max. one sheet of paper
(an envelope was permitted) might weigh up to 1 '/ Loth.
* Letters that contained other sealed letters had to pay double postage.
* Letters via Prussia to France, Spain, Portugal + their colonies had their own weight progression,

Sometimes we need to use the Memel Takca to calculate backwards from a postal rate in Kop.Ass.
to the same postage expressed in Silver Kopeks or Gute Groschen. We see in the table that
Polangen-Cleve has a rate of 297 Kop. Ass. We first subtract the 9 for Polangen-Memel; the rest is
288. To find the number of GG we divide by 24 to get 12 GG (48 Silver Kopeks). The 1'/2 GG for
Aachen and the 12 GG for Cleve I can confirm from the tariff Netherlands/Prussia of 1817.

- =---= --;



- P I.

*'~- I

7). g -*-

_- ., "

-/ *
- .

-i i :

-- I

June, 1999

1821 St.Petersburg-Bordeaux
Double letter. "2"
Franked to the French Border
which since 1817 was
rejected by the convention of

Unfranked from Memel:
R.No.5 13 Dec.
Givet-Bordeaux 10 Dec.
Simple Letter "23" Dec.
1 D6cime = 10 centimes
Heavy letter "20"-25 grams
means 3 x Simple Letters:
23 x 3 D6c= 69 "6''"
f' = francs

Prepaid with 2 x 64=
"128" Kopeks Silver
List number "35"

The 64 Kopeks are the
postage to the French border
for a simple letter. The tax
point is not clear to me. It
could be Dinant in Belgium.
(This complies with the
Memel Takca) Only letters
from the Baltics paid the 1 V
SKop. border postage before

~i~Liaran~E~a~ I

, .*

The United Netherlands.

The "United" comes from the fact that the Nederlands, Belgium and Luxembourg were united 1815-
1830. The weight progression in the Netherland/Prussia relations was like that of PrussiarRussia;
but there are two other complications to clear up.
* The progression for distances in the local Netherland tariff in the Arnhem region was not adopted
unchanged in the Memel Takca.
* The equal steps in the local Netherlands tariff become unequal in the Memel Takca.

The currency in the Netherlands was the stuiver (always silver)
1 Stuiver = 2/3 GG = 2 2/3 Silver Kopeks = 16 Kop.Ass.

A. Northern Netherlands (nowadays Netherlands).

The interesting points at the Netherland/Prussian border in this region were:
1. Emmerich (Prussian Border Office)
2. The border line itself.
3. Arnhem (Netherlands Border Office)

The local 1817 Netherlands tariff for letters from Prussia was as follows:
From the border office (Arnhem) to:
Deventer 2 Stuivers
Utrecht 3 Stuivers
Amsterdam 4 Stuivers
Harlingen 5 Stuivers
Den Helder 7 Stuivers
Letters with final destination in Arnhem paid 1 Stuiver.

This system was not adopted exactly by the Memel Takca. It put Arnhem just on the border line and
pushed Emmerich 1 GG backwards. The result was that the total postage for Emmerich was 24
Kop.Ass. too low and for Arnhem 16 Kop.Ass. too low.

We now have a table of the deviations:
Post Office Memel Takca Should have been
Kop.Ass Kop.Ass
Emmerich 273 297
Arnhem 297 313
Elsewhere the Memel Takca adopts the local tariff

The reason why the local tariff of equal steps in Stuivers (2/3 GG) was not exactly copied in the
Memel Takca comes from the roundings of amounts of 1/3 GG up to first fraction of 1/8 GG.

This I found out because instead of the ideal steps of 16 Kop.Ass I saw steps of 15 and 18 Kop.Ass. The
difference of 3 Kop.Ass. is equal to 1/8 GG.

June, 1999

Making a table to clear things up:

Post Office Local GG Rounded ...which Difference Memel
1817 up to equalled relative to Takca
Tariff nearest in preceding Kop.Ass
Stuivers 1/8 GG Kop.Ass Office
Arnhem 297
Deventer 2 1 1/3 13/8 33 3 3330
Utrecht 3 2 2 48 15 345
Amsterdam 4 2 2/3 26/8 66 18 363
Harlingen 5 3 1/3 3 3/8 81 15 378
Den Helder 7 42/3 46/8 114 33 411
Table 2

"' f


r~";l ( A
r*J? K>
'" ~'~,/


P Jr-, i

"-. r,


1825 Riga-Schiedam (Holland)
Franked all the way.

Memel-Emmerich 12 GG
Amhem-Schiedam 2 % GG
From Memel 14 3 GG

= 14 3/4 x 4 = 59 Kop. Silv.
Polangen-Memel 1P -
Foreign share "60'/2" Kop.S.

"50" is a List Number.

The statement
opene Inclose..." would
prevent a doubling of the
postage; because sealed
enclosures were paid with
double postage.

(From collection of
Oddbjorn Solli).

June. 1999


- -



B. Southern Netherlands (nowadays Belgium)

The interesting points at the Belgium/Prussian border were:
1. Aachen (Prussian Border Office)
2. The border line itself.
3. Henri-Chapelle (Netherlands Border Office)

The local 1817 Netherlands tariff for letters to Belgium from Prussia was as follows:
From the border office (Henri-Chapelle) to:
Liege 2 Stuivers
Brussel 3 Stuivers
St.Nicolaas 4 Stuivers
Ostende 5 Stuivers
Letters with final destination in Henri-Chapelle paid 1 Stuiver.

In Belgium the system was not adopted exactly by the Memel Takca. Aachen was OK. Henri-
Chapelle was placed correctly at a distance of 1 Stuiver from the border line as described in the
Netherlands / Prussia convention of 1817. Finally all other offices in Belgium that were served from
Henri-Chapelle were placed correctly relative to Henri-Chapelle, which means that their postal rate
was 1 Stuiver too high in the Memel Takca.

Making a table of the deviations:

Post Office Memel Takca Should have been
Kop.Ass Kop.Ass
Aachen 309 309 OK
Henri-Chapelle 327 327 OK
Elsewhere the Memel Takca was 1 Stuiver too high.

Making a table to clear things up.
We see up-roundings like in the Northern Netherlands: that the equal steps in Stuivers (2/3 GG)
were not exactly copied in the Memel Takca, but were rounded up from amounts of 1/3 GG to the
nearest fraction of 1/8 GG.:

Post Office Local GG Rounded ...which Difference Memel
1817 Up to equalled relative to Takca
Tariff Nearest in preceding Kop.Ass
Stuivers 1/8 GG Kop.Ass Office
Henri-Chapelle 327
Liege 2 1 1/3 1 3/8 33 33 360
Bruxelles 3 2 2 48 15 375
St.Nicolas; Dinant 4 22/3 26/8 66 18 393
Ostende 5 3 1/3 3 3/8 81 15 408

In 1818 the Netherlands changed the local tariff to higher rates. This change was adopted in 1826 by
Prussia itself; but Prussia and the Netherlands agreed that states like Russia. Saxony and several
Thurn & Taxis states that had introduced the 1817 relations in their tariffs could keep them. The
Memel Takca was not changed neither in 1818 nor in 1826. Yet. some changes can be observed in
Russia for unfranked, incoming letters; but this was not the concern of the Memel Takca.
June, 1999



i`YI B- ic_?-I;.. ~~

'~ ii;t


~~LP-- --~~_-- --~--~ -~I---- _I

Memel -
Foreign share


"f2 2/3" GG is the
Belgian share = 4 Stuivers
According to the 1817 table
S, (not the 1818 table).

6 gram excl.
8 gram excl.
- 11 gram excl.
- 15 gram excl.
- 20 gram excl.
- 25 gram excl.
- 30 gram excl.

Simple Letter
Simple Letter
Simple Letter
Simple Letter
Simple Letter
Simple Letter
Simple Letter

+ 1 D6cime

The Memel takca had a special weight progression table for letters to France. It was as follows:

Example: Bordeaux

1 1/ 2 2V 3 3/ 4 42
Loth Loth Loth Loth Loth Loth Loth Loth
Single letter 657 x 1233 x x x x x
Sealed letters included 990 x 1899 x x x x x

There are two reasons why the amounts are not exactly double:

*In France the correspondents could include even sealed letters without surcharge; also if the letters came
from Russia. In Russia and Prussia this would mean double postage. An exact doubling for the total
stretch was therefore not justified (compare 657 and 990; this is not a doubling for the enclosure of
sealed letters)
June, 1999

A -


The weight progression in France was (1802-1827):

_ ~~_l~s~_~^_~

1825 St. Petersburg -
St.Nicolas (Belgium)
Franked all the way.

Memel-Aachen 12 V GG
HenriChapelle /4 GG
St.Nicolas 2 % GG
From Memel 16 GG

=16 x 4 = Kop.Silv.: 64


*If we in France compare the postage for a 14 gram letter with a 28 gram letter (with the purpose to see
how France looked upon two letters that both in Russia and Prussia were paid according to the levels of 1
and 2 Prussian Loths, respectively) we see that two such letters in France were paid as 2 and 3'/ Simple
Letters, respectively. This is not a doubling. The conclusion is that a Russia-France letter of 2 Prussian
Loths was not prepaid with the double amount of a Loth letter (compare 657 and 1233)

From Aachen (Prussia) there were two routes into France;
and the interesting points for border crossing were:_
Office To Eastern France To Western France
Prussian Border Office Saarbrticken 321 Aachen 309
Into Belgium (transit) No Belgian Henri-Chapelle 327
Out of Belgium (transit) Transit Dinant 393
French Border Office Forbach 321 Givet 333

The transit through Belgium was listed in the Netherland/Prussia convention of 1817 (Art 42).
Prussia paid for transit: 0.8 GG per 15 gram bulk weight. The Memel Takca included a full GG for
the Belgian transit per simple letter. This can be seen from the postage for Givet (333) and for
Aachen (309). The difference is 24 Kop.Ass. (= 1 GG). Dinant had a postage (393) that was higher
than Givet (333) even if the mail reached Dinant first. This came from the transport in closed sacks.

Before 1822 Russia sent letters to France "franco French border" for 64 Kopeks Silver (= 384
Kop.Ass.) which was the postage to Dinant. if we ignore the 9 Kop.Ass. which only was paid for
Baltic letters before 1822. Precaution: I have not double checked this statement. yet.

The local French tariff was:

Western France

For 0-6 g


For 11-15 g


Eastern France

The Memel Takca adopted the 11-15 gram level of postage.

The local tariff was adopted in the Memel Takca. The only deviation was that Givet and Forbach
(the two French border offices) were not provided with a French share.

The reason why the local tariff of equal steps in 2 D6cimes (4/3 GG) was not exactly copied in the
Memel Takca comes from the roundings of amounts of 1/3 GG up to nearest fraction of 1/4 GG.

This I found out because in stead of the ideal steps of 32 Kop.Ass I saw
steps of 30 and 36 Kop.Ass. The difference of 6 Kop.Ass. is equal to 1/4 GG.

June, 1999

0-6 g


For 11-15g


Western France
Post Office Local GG Rounded ...which Difference Memel
Tariff up to equalled in relative to Takca
Dec (x 2/3) nearest Kop.Ass. preceding Kop.Ass.
11-15 g GG office
Givet -33
Fumay 4 22/3 2 / 66 66 399
Mezieres 6 4 4 96 30 429
Reims 8 5 1/3 5 132 36 465
Paris 10 62/3 6 162 30 495
Fontainebleau 12 8 8 192 30 525
Orleans 14 9 1/3 9 / 228 36 561
Tours 16 102/3 10 258 30 591
Lyon 18 12 12 288 30 621
Bordeaux 20 13 1/3 13 /2 324 36 657
Bayonne 22 142/3 14 % 354 30 687
Fr. Colonies 24 16 16 384 30 717
Ajaccio 26 17 1/3 17 /2 420 36 753

Spain & Portu. 32 21 1/3 21 / 516 _849
Letters to French Colonies and to Spain were much more expensive

P ": P o ,rt'P a ,, "? -st" uc i. ... '^ Sr. n', .:ta..-,to f e ..Enl g n
.. 65 ..... 6V Beneit tFn 1 .. p5

d -. L

I / -, ". 7"- "/ .
Si _. ,
J/, I ,9 .
/ "I

_r 7/

1828. Riga-Bordeaux. Franked all the way. Transit mark from Memel P.MEMEL"
Weight :"8" 11 gram. : 1 / x Simple letter. AED = Affranchissement stranger a
"PP" : Port Paye, struck in Aachen. The statement offensee Einlagen"
would prevent a doubling of the postage.
From the Memel Takca:
Bordeaux 657 Kop.Ass = 657 + 6 Silver= Benefit to France 1'/2 x 10 Dec. "15"
"109'/2" Kop.Silver
"104" is a list number. (From Collection of Oddbjornm Solli).
June, 1999


;7~ C "
~- I- ",C..'

,..- -







z x2
1f4 1.
:: ......

'4 .. .
: :

^ ,' :
*' i ~f- '*sr "-
^ c .






Eastern France
Post Office Local GG Rounded ...which Difference Memel
Tariff up to equalled in relative to Takca
Dec (x 2/3) nearest Kop.Ass. preceding Kop.Ass.
11-15 g GG office
Forbach 321
St.Avold 4 2 2/3 2/4 66 66 387
Thionville 6 4 4 96 30 417
Strassbourg 8 5 1/3 5 132 36 453
Belfort 10 62/3 6%4 162 30 483
Pontarlier 12 8 8 192 30 513

June, 1999

St. Petersburg
Franked all the way.
Weight :"6" 8 gram.
French opinion

"PP" : Port Pave.
struck in Aachen.

From the Memel
657 Kop.Ass
657 : 6 Silver=
"109'/" Kop.Silver

"6" is a list number.

The Prussian opinion:
weight "2/3" Loth:
1/2 x Simple letter.

1' x10Dc: "10" GG

On the rear side:
Simple letter
benefit to France.
"10" D6cimes
(normally the actual
benefit of 15 decimes is

Denmark (incl. Schleswig-Holstein)

The local Danish table had steps of 1 Hamburg Schilling (0.6 GG). This was increased to 2/3 GG
and rounded up to nearest V2 GG (except for the smallest level of 1 Schilling that was rounded up to
3/4 GG, only.) In the Memel Takca for Denmark we see steps of 12 and 24 Kop.Ass in general. Still,
the first two steps are 18 Kop.Ass. As I never have seen examples of letters to Denmark franked all
the way I will give no more details.

Loth Weights ( around /2 Ounce)

Russian Loth 12.7 gram Danish Loth 15.5 gram
Swedish Loth 13.2 gram Prussian Loth 14.5 gram (Berlin weight)


Memel Takca. The Tammerfors version circulates between collectors.(I do not have it).
The Postal Museum in Helsingfors has the Jacobstad version. (Printed in: See next line).
Esa Mattila : "Suomi Postimaksuja 1810 1875" has the Memel Takca reprinted.
Postal Conventions:
* Russia-Prussia 1821. Prussia-Netherlands 1817. Prussia-France 1817.
* No.64 p.8-21 No.69p.4-12 No.72 p.4-16 (correction in No. 74) No.75 p.4-21.
Postal History
* No.263 p.78-86 No.266 p.62 No.267 p.78-79.

POSTGESCHICHTE 1989 p. 4-10.

Recommended: BJRP No. 81 D.7-17.
A Zemstvo Transit Marking.
The card shown here sent to Moscow TKPbiTOE nHlbM 0_ TA LE. ,_'
was written in Ust-Sysol'sk on 20th. t "b .
I-t t- ir~in 11 ^ y) f BCEciPHbiR nosTOBMSafth 'r,^ I,.
December 1910 and bears two h J\ '*
indistinct strikes of the Imperial post P .

the Ust'-Sysol'sk Zemstvo postmark, .
dated 24 December. Among other ? ~ a '
things, it raises the question as to
which Zemstvo postal administrations 'S .
shared premises, or even personnel
with the Imperial Post in the Zemstvo, .
capital towns. In short, this card is _.,
interesting, but also very dangerous.

All that an intending forger needs to do is to add an Ust' Sysol'sk Zemstvo stamp and pen cancel it with a
cross, to create what would appear at first sight to be a convincing Zemstvo usage. Forgers are becoming
more sophisticated these days and one should always be wary when items look just too good to be true.

June, 1999

by Alex Artuchov

(Perm Province)


Shadrinsk is located on the eastern slope of the Ural Mountains near the boundary with
Tobolsk. In 1900, the population was 10,000.

Shadrinsk was an important commercial centre of western Siberia. It was an important
distribution centre for groceries, manufactured wares, tea, furs, corn and cattle for the
mining districts that were then starting to develop.

Shadrinsk issue stamps between 1870 and 1917.

Coat of Arms Colours:
Top: Red background with white sheep on green grass with a golden scripture
on its back and with a silver cross above.
Bottom: Silver background with a brown white throated animal.

29 x 27.5 mm typographed on yellowish white paper 0.12 mm thick, from the 7 known
copies 5 types can be distinguished differing in the composition of the frames and the
position of the the inscriptions, due to the moveable type used the same types also show
minor differences, imperforate.

c Kon-IeKc,

June, 1999

1. 5 kop. lilac blue RRR
(7 known)
Although many forgeries are known, they are easily distinguishable, they are lithographed
on a light yellow or dark blue paper and the letters of the inscription are different from the
genuine copies, some of the forgeries are even known overprinted diagonally with the
word rIPOBA (proof).

1871 1879
During the 8 years that this issue was in existence the stamps were printed with the same
handstamp, 20 x 25.66 mm the stamps were printed in black and various other colours
on different papers, imperforate, many editions.

First Edition (1871)
On smooth white or yellowish white paper 0.08 mm thick, without gum, paper for letter
writing was used and was carefully divided into squares using a pencil and ruler, sheet of

2. 5 kop. blue 25.00

Second Edition (1871)
On thin paper 0.09 mm without gum, characterized by poor impressions that are often
smeared so that the design is unrecognizable, half printed stamps are also known, sheet of
10 x 7.

3. 5 kop. black 3.00

Third Edition (1871)
On horizontally laid paper 0.09 mm thick, without gum, a new stamp pad was used which
contained more oil so that the printing is very oily and with little black colouring so that
in some catalogues the colour is referred to as being golden or metallic gray.

4. 5 kop. yellow gray with an oily and permeating print RRR
(7 known)

Fourth Edition (1874)
On smooth white or yellowish white paper 0.07 mm thick, no gum, sheet of 9 x 9.

June, 1999

5. 5 kop. rose, yellowish rose

Fifth Edition (1874)
On smooth white paper 0.07 mm thick, without gum, sheet of 5 x 7.

6. 5 kop. ultramarine 1.00

Sixth Edition (1875)
On smooth white paper 0.07 mm thick, without gum, sheet of 5 x 7.

7. 5 kop. slate blue, gray lilac RR
(? known)

Seventh Edition (1875)
White paper 0.09 mm thick, without gum.

8. 5 kop. mauve, gray lilac RR
(? known)

Eighth Edition (1876)
On white paper 0.09 mm thick, without gum, sheet of 5 x 7.

9. 5 kop. lilac rose, dirty rose 10.00

Ninth Edition (1877)
On yellowish paper 0.09 m thick, without gum,.

10. 5 kop. black, black gray 3.00

Tenth Edition (1878)
White quadrille paper 0.1 mm thick.

11.5 kop. bright violet RRRR
(4 known)

Eleventh Edition (1879, beginning)
White paper 0.08 mm thick.

12. 5 kop. dark blue RRRR
(3 known)

June, 1999


Some stamps exist that show traces of the violet colour which gradually changed to dark

The original handstamps found their way into private hands and reprints appeared in 1894
and continued to be in production until 1917.

Sharp Clear Print in Bright Colours:
A. On white paper 0.11 mm thick, without gum.
5 kop. greenish blue
5 kop. rose
5 kop. carmine
5 kop. red
5 kop. indigo
5 kop. black
5 kop. green
5 kop. gold

B. On white, horizontally or vertically laid paper.
5 kop. violet

Less Carefully Printed:
(Since these reprints appear much more like the real stamps they are considerable more
C. On yellowish whte paper 0.1 mm thick, white gum.
5 kop. red lilac
D. On smooth white writing paper 0.07 mm thick, without gum.
5 kop. light blue
E. On horizontally lined yellow grayish white paper 0.09 mm thick.
5 kop. black
F. On yellowish white paper 0.17 mm thick, without gum, printed in strips with all
stamps in all of the various colours.
5 kop. rose
5 kop. emerald green
5 kop. ultramarine
5 kop. violet
5 kop. black

1879 (May ?)
19.25 x 25.75 mm, lithographed on yellowish white paper 0.12 mm thick, grayish or
brownish yellow gum, sheet of 6 x 6.

June, 1999

13. 5 kop. red lilac

- 5 kop. dark green
- 5 kop. dark carmine red

1880 (January 1)
The postal rate was reduced from 5 to 3 kop. and the available stock of the stamps of the
May 1879 issue were overprinted with the new value using 2 different overprints, on
stamps that were in stock in district offices the new and reduced postal rate was written
by hand in ink.

A. Written by hand in ink
14. 3 kop. on 5 kop. lilac RRR
(5 known)

B. Handstamped Overprint 3 kop. With the Numeral 3 with Rounded Top and Bottom
Bluish black or violet black overprint. Sheets are reported with some of the stamps left
without the overprint while others have a double overprint.

15. 3 kop. on 5 kop. bluish black 20.00

16. 3 kop. on 5 kop. violet black 10.00

C. Handstamped Overprint 3 kop. With the Numeral 3 in Block Type
Bluish black or violet black overprint, usually oily.

17. 3 kop. on 5 kop. bluish black 15.00

18. 3 kop. on 5 kop. violet black 10.00
Variety: Without a period after the letter k .

Schmidt reports that the following overprints exist:

A. Large Overprint 3 k in Blue
- 3 kop. blue on 5 kop. slate blue
- 3 kop. blue on 5 kop. light blue

B. Black Overprint 3 KOII. or KOII. 3 in 2 lines
- On 5 kop. lilac

June, 1999


1881 (January)
Similar to the issue of May 1879 but with a different background and larger lettering,
19.66 x 26.33 mm lithographed on white or yellowish white paper 0.09 mm thick,
smooth white gum, sheet of 5 x 7 with 35 types differing in size shape and position of the
corer numerals, imperforate.

19. 3 kop. blue, light or dark 2.00

Plate Flaws
From available sheet material, the following flaws on stamps have been found to be

Stamp 2 White line across the O of 1IOHTbI.
Stamp 5 There is a white scratch across the numeral 3 in the SE corner which appears
to be a continuation of the scratch across stamp 10.
Stamp 7 There are damage in the background and the breaks in the thin outer oval
frameline to the right of and just below the star on the right.
Stamp 8 The top of the letter H of the word 3EMCKOR has a white spot on it and
there is another white spot to the right of it.
Stamp 9 There is a white vertical scratch across the background under the NW corner
numeral 3.
Stamp 10 There is a white vertical scratch across the NE corner 3 and the background
that is below it.
Stamp 15 The small spiral ornament over the SE corner 3 is damaged.
Stamp 16 There is a white spot inside the letter O and a white line connects it to the
letter I of the word 3EMCKOH.
Stamp 17 There are several blue spots on the letter C of the word IIlAAPHHICKOI.
Stamp 18 The thick frameline on the right and the background beneath the letters CK
of the word 3EMCKOH4 are damaged, in the same area there is a blue dot
outside of the thin frameline.
Stamp 19 A white spot connects the left leg of the letter M of the word 3EMCKOf
to the oval beneath it.
Stamp 20 An irregular white line runs across the letters PIHH of the word
IIIAAJPHHCKOH, the letter 14 is poorly formed, there is a long blue spot
in the background above the letter O of the word 3EMCKOI.
Stamp 21 There is a break in the left outer frameline and there are white spots over the
letters IfIAA.
Stamp 23 There is a break in the centre of the top thin outer frameline, a white spot
connects the O and the H1 of the word 3EMCKOH.
Stamp 24 There is a break in the thin outer frameline at the top near the NW corner.
Stamp 26 The background on the left is retouched, the letter A of the word
IIIA) PHHCKOHf is damaged.
Stamp 27 The NW corner is open, there are 2 white spots above the numeral 3 in the
NW corner, a thin blue line connects the upper thin and thick outer

June, 1999

Stamp 30 -

Stamp 31 -

Stamp 33 -

Stamp 34 -

Stamp 35 -

There is a large blue spot on the third leg of the fox, there is a break in the
top of the right vertical stroke of the letter 'I of the word KOI.
There is a break in the top thin outer frameline over the NW corer 3, there
are 2 white spots on the white oval line above the J of the word
There are several breaks on the left side of the thin outer frameline on the
The is a white spot between the letter I and T of the word nOHThI, the
lower half of the numeral 3 in the SW corer is closed and has the
appearance of the lower half of the numeral 8.
There is a very small blue spot on the letter bI of the word IIOTbI, there
is a white spot after the H of the word 3EMCKOIH.

1882 1887
Similar to preceding issues, 18 x 25.75 mm, lithographed on white paper, perforated 12.5
- 13.75 in all possible combinations.

First Edition (1882, April 1)
The background spirals consist of very thin lines and the background appears quite light
and the oval sharply defined, both of the letters H are without the stroke above, the
stamps are spaced 8 mm apart horizontally and 8.5 mm vertically with 2 rows of
perforations between them, sheet unknown, on white paper 0.09 mm.

20. 3 kop. green

(19 known)

Second Edition (1882, ?)
The letter f is with the stroke above which sometimes disappears on overinked plates,
the space between stamps is 3 mm the spirals in the background are thicker and darker,
on white paper 0.12 mm thick thickly applied gum, sheet of 10 x 10 .

21. 3 kop. blue green, light or dark


For reasons that are not clearly known the stamps of this issue were not used for postage.
Because they were issued by the actual zemstvo and sold by the sheet to dealers and
collectors they are not considered to be forgeries.

Similar to the stamps of the previous issue, the oval is rounder and the stamp is smaller,
17.75 x 22 mm lithographed on white paper 0.12 mm thick, white gum, sheet of 10 x 10
+ 10 x 10 in 2 panes side by side, perforated 12.5 x 13.5 in all possible combinations,
there are also stamps with diamond shaped perforations and perforations through stamps
both horizontally and vertically.

June, 1999

Unl. 2 kop. violet, light or dark ??

Varieties: retouchess)
1. Upper frame on 2nd stamp in the 6th horizontal row
2. Right outer side of oval on the 2nd stamp in the 7th horizontal row.

Similar to the previous issue but executed with much greater care, the inscriptions are
smaller and the value is in block letters, the background consists of very small spirals, the
fox is standing instead of running, 17 x 22.25 mm lithographed on white or yellowish
white paper 0.1 mm thick, white gum, sheet of 10 x 10, perforated 12.5 13.5 in all
possible combinations, 2 editions which were issued simultaneously or in quick

First Edition (1886)
On white paper.

22. 3kop. lilac brown 0.75

Second Edition (1886)
On yellowish white paper.

23. 3 kop. reddish violet 0.50

The following 2 proofs are reported by Schmidt with thick brown yellow gum and

- 3 kop. dark green
- 3 kop. dark red

1889 (November)
Similar to the previous stamps but with minor differences including corer numerals that
are poorly shaped, 17 x 22 mm lithographed on yellowish white paper 0.1 mm thick,
brownish yellow gum, perforated 11.5 This stamp only became known to collectors
after an edition printed in a small quantity became was used up.

June, 1999

24. 3 kop. brown lilac (used) RR
(14 known)
(unused) RRRR
(1 known)

1890 (May)
New design with no period after TPIH KOII., 17 x 22.25 mm, lithographed in 2 colours
on white paper 0.14 mm thick, shiny brown yellow gum, sheet of 5 x 5, perforated 11.5
and imperforate, also known imperforate vertically and through the middle, the space
between stamps is 6 6.5 mm, a total of 2,000 stamps were issued.

25. 3 kop. blue and red 25.00

On thin paper 0.07 mm thick, without gum, imperforate.
- 3 kop. carmine red and green
- 3 kop. green and carmine red

Similar to the previous issue but the colours are reversed, the frame is in red and the
central oval with the fox is in blue, the distance between stamps is 3.5 mm there are no
separating lines between stamps, lithographed on white paper, perforated 11.5, 3 editions.

First Edition (1890, June 1)
On white paper 0.08 mm thick, brittle dull white gum, sheet of 6 x 4, with guidelines in
the centre of the side sheet margins.

26. 3 kop. rose red and blue 2.00

There are many minor varieties on these stamps. Some of the most notable are:
- The right hind leg of the fox is broken
- The letter II of the word KOII at the bottom of the stamp is damaged, there is a thick
blue horizontal line in the sky at the bottom of the horizontal cloud lines.

Second Edition (1890, November)
Differing from the first edition by its shiny yellow gum and some minor details and plate
flaws, sheet of 6 x 4.

June, 1999

27. 3 kop. rose and blue

- Inverted centre
- The lower part of the letter A of the word IIIAAPHHCKO is connected to the white
eoItlere is a thick blue horizontal line in the sky at the bottom of the cloud lines.
- Similar to the above but placed lower so that it touches the head of the fox.

Third Edition (1890, December)
With a period after 3 KOII and many retouches and improvements particularly in the
word 3EMCKOI as well as in the centre of the stamp, almost every stamp shows some
differences, plating has not been possible due to the absence of unused block and sheet
material, on white paper 0.09 mm thick, shiny yellow gum.

28. 3 kop. rose or carmine red and light or dark blue R
(? known)

1891 1893
Similar to issues of 1890 but with minor differences, corer numerals are slightly larger,
dotted line on the corer panels, the word IIOqTbI is in thicker letters, lithographed in 2
colours, on white paper, perforated 11.5, 2 editions.

First Edition (1891, October)
On white paper 0.14 mm thick, shiny yellowish gum, sheet unknown.

29. 3 kop. rose red and blue 1.00

New printing done in October of 1892 with a strongly permeating print of the centre in

Second Edition (1893)
Differing in several ways from the first edition the left line in the S/W corer ornament
with the numeral 3 is thicker, there is a wider space between the words TPH and KOI,
the fox has a spot of colour on its neck, on white paper 0.09 mm thick, shiny brownish
yellow gum, sheet of 5 x 5.
On 1st edition

Thicker on 2nd

30. 3 kop. rose red and blue 1.00

June, 1999


This zemstvo became popular with collectors who were continually requesting stamps of
the 1890 issue (No. 25) which became scarce, as as result it was decided to reprint the
second edition stamp of the previous issue in reversed colours, there were 2 editions of
these reprints, none were postally used and all of the stamps were sold to collectors.

First Edition (1893)
On yellowish white paper 0.17 mm thick, shiny brown yellow gum, perforated 1.5.

X. 3 kop. lilac blue and dark red 1.00

Second Edition (1893)
On thin white paper 0.08 mm thick, shiny white gum, perforated 11.5.

X. 3 kop. blue and dark red 1.00

1893 ( December)
17 x 22.25 mm lithographed in 3 colours on various paper, white gum, background in
carmine rose or brick red and centre and inscriptions in blue and numerals of value in
green, sheet unknown, perforated 11.5 .

On white vertically laid paper 0.08 mm thick
31. 3 kop. carmine rose, lilac blue and green 1.00

On white wove paper 0.08 mm thick
32. 3 kop. carmine rose, lilac blue and yellow green 1.00

33. 3 kop. brick red, lilac blue(mostly strongly permeating) and yellow green 2.00

1897 (November)
17.25 x 22 mm, lithographed in 3 colours on white paper 0.09 mm thick, white gum,
sheet of 10 x 10 in 4 panes of 5 x 5 with a 10 mm space between the panes, this space is
usually perforated on both sides and occasionally on one side only, perforated 11.5 and

June, 1999

34. 3 kop. black, light blue and carmine

Black on white chalky paper 0.12 mm thick.

Imperforate and ungummed stamps in the colours of the originals are printers' waste
which got into the hands of collectors through indirect means.

The Sheet

17 x 22.5 mm lithographed in 4 colours on white paper, sheet
11.5, 3 editions.

of 10 x 10, perforated

First Edition (1901, August)
White or yellowish white paper 0.09 mm thick, brownish yellow gum, the print is
permeating occasionally, the word KOIIEIKH1 is spelled with the letter E, imperfectly
perforated 11.5 .

35. 3 kop. dark brown light rose, blue and dark red 1.00

June, 1999


tin ;rL~~
~c'l sI

Second Edition (1905, November)
Similar to the stamps of the Ist edition except that the letter E of the word KOHIEIIKH
is replaced by the letter 'B, lithographed on white paper 0.08 mm thick, shiny yellowish
white gum, sheet of 10 x 10 with a transfer block of 3 x 2 and 6 types, perforated 11.5 and
also known imperforate.

36. 3 kop. dark brown, light rose, blue and red brown


- gray black on white paper 0.08 mm thick, imperforate and without gum.

The Sheet
The sheet the the transfer types were identical for both the second and third editions.

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

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

The Six Transfer Types of the Second and Third Editions
Type 1 A break in the thin frameline at the top under the 5th pearl from the left, a spot
on the outer oval outline over the left half of the letter bI of the word IIOHTbI.
Type 2 A brown spot under the 7th pearl from the left at the top of the stamp, a break in
the thin frameline on the top under the space between the 2nd and 3rd pearls
from the right, a broken top frameline just to the right of the NE corner circle.
Type 3 A short diagonal line under the 5th pearl on the top from the right, a spot on the
outer oval outline to the right of the star.
Type 4 A brown spot inside the pearl on the top of the stamp above the letter K of the
word KOnI, a spot on the outer oval outline over the right half of the letter bI
of the word nIOTbI.

June, 1999

Type 5 A spot inside the pearl on the right over the letters Oil of the word
Type 6 A short diagonal line on the right above the letter O of the word KOI'IBfKH
over the 13th pearl from the either the top or bottom.

Type 1

Type 4

Type 2

/Type 5


Third Edition (1908, end)
Similar to the second edition but with black instead of dark brown, paper gum and
perforations are as on the previous edition, known imperforate vertically and perforated
vertically through the middle of the stamp, on a sheet of 10 x 10 with a transfer block of 3
x 2 and the same 6 types as on the 2nd edition.

37. 3 k. black, light rose, blue and dark red


1909 1917
Printed in St. Petersburg by the State Printing Office, a design very similar to the issues
of Bakhmut, 21.75 x 28.66 mm typographed on white paper, sheet of 5 x 5, perforated
13.25, 6 editions of the lower value and 4 editions of the higher value.

June, 1999

Type 3

Type 6



First Edition (1909, February)
White paper 0.08 mm thick, perforated 13.25, the 3 kop. value has both large and small
perforation holes while the 6 kop. value comes only with small holes, the total number
issued of both values was 58,300.

38. 3 kop. light green 0.50

39. 6 kop. sepia brown 1.00

Second Edition (1910, August)
As previous edition but with large perforation holes only, 46,750 stamps issued.

40. 3 kop. yellow 0.50

Third Edition (1911, beginning)
With small perforation holes only, overinked printing which causes the the letters to
appear smaller, the 6 kop. stamp was issued in December 1911, 200,000 stamps were
issued for both values.

41. 3 kop. orange 0.35

42. 6 kop. carmine rose 0.75

Fourth Edition (1912, January)
With small perforation holes only, 7,650 stamps issued.

43. 3 kop. light blue 3.00

Fifth Edition (1913, July)
With small perforation holes but the 6 kop. value also comes with large holes, the total
issued for both values was 126,200.

44. 3 kop. mauve 0.50

45. 6 kop. dark green 1.00

Sixth Edition (1914, November)
With small perforation holes, the total issued for both values was 227,000.

46. 3 kop. carmine rose 0.35

June, 1999

47. 6 kop. dark blue

Seventh Edition (1917, October)
A new value that was issued shortly before postal service was terminated, the 1 kop.
value was intended for printed matter, on yellowish white paper 0.07 mm thick.


1 kop. yellow

On very thick yellowish white cardboard paper 0.18 mm thick.
- 3 kop. blue

Schmidt/Chuchin Catalogue Cross-Reference:

Sch Ch Sch Ch Sch Ch Sch Ch Sch
1 1 11 12 21 19 31 27/27a 41
2 4 12 11 22 20 32 27/27a 42
3 3 13 13 23 20 33 27/27a 43
4 2 14 -- 24 22 34 28 44
5 7 15 14 25 23 35 31 45
6 8 16 15 26 24 36 -- 46
7 9 17 16 27 26 37 29/30 47
8 10 18 17 28 26 38 32 48
9 5 19 18 29 25 39 35
10 6 20 19 30 25 40 33

June, 1999

The Zemstvo Post of the Poltava District
by P.P. Ganko

The CSRP is pleased to announce that a limited amount of copies of
this very rare publication have been reprinted and are available for
sale to our readers. This publication of approximately 100 pages is
the notorious postmaster's own catalogue which even to this day
remains as the most detailed accounting of the issues of the Poltava
Zemstvo Post. In Russian.

Send $25.00 (US) payable to the Canadian Society of Russian
Philately to the Society address for your postpaid copy.


____ 1

by Alexander Epstein.

The First Balkan War broke out in October 1912 after Serbia, Montenegro, Bulgaria and Greece had entered
into a mutual alliance against the Ottoman Empire to free the ancient Slavonic or Greek territories in
Macedonia, Thrace and Epirus from Turkish domination. The Allied Armies achieved rapid success and a
decisive victory by the end of 1912, having occupied the towns of Skoplje, Salonica and Adrianople
(Edirne), among other places. Russia did not take part directly in this war but assisted with volunteers, e.g.
with medical personnel within the ranks of the Serbian Army.

L, I' ~ .aS'r4L1e
^ -

4k.. & 7

, 71- 14t4F

A d &


The postcard shown here with a view of Skoplje is a souvenir of these events. It bears a circular cachet with
the Red Cross in the centre and the inscription: 3SanHbifH Ja3aperb nMeHH I.? M. TepemueHKo ch
ceMbefi"(Line-of-Communication Field Hospital named after I.? M. Tereshchenko and family) applied
around the Cross in red colour. In the Russian Army during a war, such a cachet would have been a
confirmation of the free franking privilege. However, the card is franked in this case also with a Serbian 10-
para postage stamp, cancelled on 15 December 1912 by a marking of the field post office of the Serbian
The card is addressed to St. Petersburg to the Sister of Charity Vera Trofimovna Matveeva, a medical nurse
of the Elisabeth Community of the Red Cross. The message, written a day earlier and probably by a former
colleague of this nurse, reads as follows:-
"Hello, Vera Trofimovna! My greetings to you and the other nurses from the blessed South, where belated
flowers and green grass are blooming in the first half of December. There are only 6-8 hours of travel from
us (the town of Skoplje or Uskfib) to Salonica. There are not too many wounded men (we have 85, most of
them are lightly wounded); we are taking our time. We do not expect to return before the end of January. All
the best. Greetings to the nurses. Yours, M. Sakharov".
This card is a rather curious postal history item pertaining to Russian philately.
Editorial Comment: In his usual ground-breaking way, Mr. Ep'tein has opened up a very important new
chapter in Russian postal history, as we shall see from the article that follows immediately. The card would
have enjoyed the free franking privilege, but for the fact that it was going abroad. Skoplje has often been
occupied and the various versions of the name are as follows:- Shkup (Albanian); CKonne (Bulgarian); T&
lKOtcot (Greek); CKonje (capital of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia); CKOub e (Serbian) and
Uslkib (Turkish). *
June, 1999

91~R A,, r~

~~ le


by Andrew Cronin.

Your editor already had two pieces in this category and the preceding article by Mr. Epstein prompted the
present author to write to the Archives Division of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva
for any information in their files. M. Martin Morger of that Division very kindly confirmed that there had
only been one letter of three pages received from the Russian Red Cross Society, in the file entitled
"Balkan Wars, Correspondence with the Central Committees (of the Red Cross and Red Crescent)",
Reference ACICR A AF 25.2. Typed in excellent French, the photocopies of this letter are reproduced
overleaf and the text may be translated as follows:-

"Society of the Red Cross under the patronage of Her Majesty the Empress of Russia Maria Fedorovna,
Central Committee, Inzhinerskaya 9, St. Petersburg, 13/26 December 1912, No. 38191.

To the International Committee of the Red Cross.
In reply to your Circular No. 142, the Central Committee of the Russian Red Cross Society has the
honour to advise you about the aid which it has hastened to lend to the victims of the war between the
Balkan States and Turkey.

Since the beginning of hostilities, the Russian Red Cross Society has assigned one million roubles, the
equivalent of 2,650,000 francs, for relief to the belligerent armies.

In order to avoid delay, medical detachments of our Society had already left for the Balkans on 4/17
October, mostly in special trains and following two routes: across the Austrian frontier and via the port of

The trains transported the personnel of the detachments, together with complete base and field
hospital equipment supplied by our newly established central warehouses, thus enabling our detachments to
set up our hospitals and ambulances without delay on arrival and immediately to receive the wounded.

The assistance of our Society was apportioned as follows:-
(1) for Bulgaria: a base hospital of 200 beds and 7 field hospitals of 50 beds each. Personnel: 29 doctors, 9
orderlies, 62 Sisters of Charity and 105 ambulance staff.
(2) for Serbia: a base hospital of 200 beds and 5 field hospitals of 50 beds each. Personnel: 27 doctors, 7
orderlies, 50 Sisters (of Charity) and 87 ambulance staff
(3) for Montenegro: 2 field hospitals of 50 beds each. Personnel: 4 doctors, 12 Sisters (of Charity), 20
ambulance staff and 2 orderlies.
(4) for Greece: 2 field hospitals of 50 beds each. Personnel: 4 doctors, 2 orderlies, 12 Sisters (of Charity)
and 20 ambulance staff.
(5) for Turkey: a field hospital of 50 beds. Personnel: 2 doctors, 6 Sisters (of Charity) and 2 ambulance

Thus, the medical personnel consisted of 462 persons selected by the Communities of Sisters of Charity
and other institutions of our Society in St. Petersburg, Moscow, Odessa, Kiev, Khar'kov, Tver' and
Kishinev. 1250 hospital beds were despatched, although this figure exceeded 1500 in the battle areas.

Our detachments are located in the following towns: Sofia, Belgrade, Nish, Constantinople, Philipopple,
Lozengrad, Mustafa-Pasha, Uskub, Piraeus, Volos, Dulcigno and other places according to the distribution
of the armies.

June, 1999

OCIATt *Au Comitd International 'de la Croix-Rouge.
DE LA -.

ru des IXgnlean, M 9.
& t.-Pbterbour. En rdponas 'A" Totre biroulaire No 142 le
j('~6oembre 19IS Comitd Central de la Sboi6td Rtsse de la

J/ f i Croix-Rouge a l'honneur de vous fair part
S du oonooure qu'il beat empress de prater

aux viotimes de la guerre entire les Etats
balkaniques at la Turquie.
D~e le commencement dea hostilit4a la
Soci6td Ruase de la Croix-Rougs a assign un
million de roublee 2.650.000 franas 1 l'oeuvrs
dn seaoour aux blesses des armnes belligdrantes
Evitant le retard, A partir du 4/17 ootobro
S lea ddtachements sanitaires de notre Sooidtd
se dirigealent vera lee Balkans la plupart
par des trains opdoiaux at suivant daux
itindraires:par la frontier autriohienne at In
port d'Odessa.

Los trains tranoportaient ensemble le per-
sonnal des ddtaohoments aveo l'dquipoment

aomplot don h3pitaux at lazareta fourni par

nos entrep8ta oentraux nouvellements organisds,oe qui permit
Snos detaohements dae leur arrive sur place d'6tablir
nos hepitaux et ambulances sans ddlai et d'y recevoir
imm6diatement lea blesses.
LLassistance de notre Socidt6 fat rdpartie de la ma-
nitre suivante:
I) pour la Bulgarie: un h8pital a 200 lits et 7 lazarets
a 50 lits.Personnel: 29 mddeoins,9 agents, 62 soeurs de chari-
td, 105 ambulanoiers;
2) pour la Serbie: un hbpital a 200 lits et 5 lazarets
a 50 lits.Personnel: 27 mddecins,7 agents, 50 soeurs, 87 am-
5) pour le Montenegro: 2 lazarets & 50 lits.Personnel:
4 mddeoina,I2 soeurs, 20 ambulanciers, 2 agents.
4) pour la Grace: 2 lazarets & 50 lits.Personnel: 4 m6-
deoins, 2 agents, 12 soeurs, 20 ambulanaiers;
5) pour la Turquie: un lazaret a 50 lita. Personnel: 2
mddeoins, 6 aoeare,.2 anbalanciera.
De oette maniere le personnel sanitaire se composait
de 462 personnes,ohoisies par lea oommunauted de soeurs de
oharitd et antres institutions de notre Sooidt6 & St.P6-
terabourg,Mosoou.Odessa, Kieff,Kharkow, Twer et Kiohinew; le
nombre da lite exp4di4a s'dlevait 1 1.250 mais sur sl
thditre do la guorrs os ohiffre a du ^tre augment et
il dJdasaa 1.500.
lBo ddtaohements se trouvent dano lee villa anivanteae

Sophia,Selgrada,Bisoh, ,onntantinople, hilippopol ,LoaSnerad,

Mustaphapaoha,Ouskub,Pirde,Volo,Duloignio et diffdrents autrea
endroite suivant la iaelooation des armies.
II eat a remarquer que noe dEtachements no firent pas
inoorpore dans- lee services eanitaires des dtats belli-
g6rants, chaque de nos detachements reprdeantant une forma-
tion ind6pendante dtait en etat de deployer son aetivit4
tout-l-fait a part sanea tre foroe de s'assOoier a nne
autre institution sanitaire.
L'expos4 general conoernant l'aotivitd de nos dtaohe-
ments ne peut etre communique qu'apres l'aoaomplissement
de leurs missions.
Veuillez agrder,Eessieurs,les asauranoes do notre haute
consideration et de nos sentiments dietingu6s.
President du Comit6 Central,
Raltre de la Cour de S.M. I'MPERE iUR ./ ^_-_

Secr6taire General

It should be noted that our detachments were not incorporated in the medical services of the belligerent
States, each of the detachments representing an independent formation in a position to carry out its activity
entirely apart, without being obliged to associate itself with any other medical institution.

The general statement concerning the activities of our detachments cannot be communicated until after
their missions have been completed.

Please accept, Sirs, the assurances of our high consideration and of our distinguished sentiments.

(signed): A. Il'in, President of the Central Committee, Master of the Court of H.M. the Emperor.
A. Chamanskii, Secretary-General".

The above letter raises several important points. First of all, while the sympathies of the Russian public at
large were with the Orthodox Christian nations in the Balkans, the Russian Red Cross Society displayed
great humanity in extending medical aid to both sides of the conflict during the First Balkan War (October
1912 to March 1913). A second factor is that Bulgaria and Serbia received the largest share of aid,
presumably in the name of Pan-Slavism and also because they had the largest land forces on the Allied side.

Unfortunately, because of interference by the Great Powers, Bulgaria felt that it had been cheated out of its
fair share of the liberated territory and, in the Second Balkan War of June 1913, it attacked its former
Allies and was soon quickly defeated. That most ill-advised action, due in part to the fact that the Bulgarian
King Ferdinand was of the German Coburg dynasty, was a great shock and embarrassment to Russia. It
would be important to know if Russian medical aid had been withdrawn as a result. The situation was most
painful, as Russia had liberated the Bulgarians from Turkey in 1878 and the two Slav languages are very
closely related. While the First Balkan War got rid of feudalism in the area, the Second Balkan War led to
an embittered Bulgaria joining the Germans in both WWI and WWII, with disastrous results.

June, 1999

The letter from the Russian Red Cross Society lists 11 towns in the Balkans, to which Russian medical
detachments had been sent. These latter must have generated a fair volume of mail going back to the home
country and there must be examples still floating around unrecognised in Russia to this day. In order to
help in the search, we will look at each of these towns in turn, as some of them were also known in 1912 by
other names for political and/or historical reasons. They are as follows:-

Belgrade: the capital of the Kingdom of Serbia. Your editor will describe below a cover from there.
Constantinople, or Stamboul: (the latter name is a corruption of the Greek phrase "eis ten Polin" =
"in the City").
Dulcignio, or more correctly Dulcigno: This is the Italian name for the Montenegrin port of Ulcinj, hard
up against the Albanian border.
Losengrad: More properly JIoseHrpag Lozengrad, meaning "Vine Town" in Bulgarian. In Eastern
Thrace and soon taken by the Bulgarian Army. A multilingual town, the Greek name for which
is "Saranda Ekklesiai" = "Forty Churches", hence the Turkish equivalent "Kirkkilise". The
Turks got it back with Edirne (Adrianople) during the Bulgarian defeat in the 2nd. Balkan War
Mustapha-Pacha or Mustafa Papa: Captured by the Bulgarians from Turkey and renamed CBImenrpan
(Svilengrad = Silk Town). It has remained inside Bulgaria.
Nish: A well-known town within Serbia proper.
Ouskub or UskUb: The Turkish name for Skopje, now the capital of the Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia. There was an Imperial Russian Consulate there during the last years of
the Ottoman period. The card described by Mr. Epstein comes from here.
Philippople or Philippoupolis: A famous and ancient town in South Bulgaria, known to the Bulgarians as
Pirie or Piraeus: The port for Athens. The two towns were distinctly separate in 1912. An item from
Athens is listed below by your editor.
Sophia or Sofia: The capital of Bulgaria.
Volos: A Greek port on the coast of Thessaly.

The details are now given of the two items in the collection of your editor.
A. Greece:
The first part of the message on the back of the 20-para / 4-kopek postcard shown on the next page is self-
explanatory, is signed by "Koka" and reads as follows:-
Athens, 5 December 1912.
Dear Kolya, Lelya and Liza,
I have arrived in Athens. Unbearable boredom. I have enrolled as a volunteer in
the army. When the war ends and God willing, I will be alive and we will see each other. I am writing by
postcards, since in the barracks here they are only selling postcards with Russian stamps, but with an
overprint "20 para". I am being drilled daily from 7am to 9am, 9:30am to 11am and 2pm to 4pm, after
which I am free.....".
The card bears on the front the Greek machine postmark of ATHENS KENTPIKON (= G.P.O.) 6 Dec.
1912 and was received in Odessa on 12.12.12! All the Orthodox Christian nations in the Balkans were still
using the Julian Calendar, in common with the Russian Empire and it seems in this case that there was also
an agreement with the Greek postal authorities for the Russian volunteers to use Russian Levant postage!
B. Serbia:
The envelope shown on the next page has Russian imprints at bottom of the Tver' Red Cross Silver
Community and of the Line-of-Communications Field Hospital named after the City of St. Petersburg. It
was used in Belgrade on 6.3.13 as a free frank by a Serb writing to a farmer friend in the village of Kusid!

In summing up, it is obvious that a lot of work still remains to be done in this unusual and historic field and
further details would be most welcome. Happy hunting to all interested parties!
June, 1999

S ff .. .. .... ...... ......... ...........--
..... .epe6pRiaf P6 a. HMeii' ropoa p.-peTep6ypra.

.. ep a '
.. "" "* -- .. "' -' ... .

?ai, ,;,^,/ ^."" ""' Pepe6pnHan p6mnHa.

/. ,P^ / ^T etnsef' t^ } TanHbli JIaa3apeT
//$3.*'0<' 40 10 ti'< ,do ,Meiim ropoga C.-neTep6ypra.

7^/.c' Ef f/fc^
e,' ./.. / ,n e40. .s' Actual size of the two
S&t U Q / 4. inscriptions at bottom.

*** Toenca DCfh~H KBa pe

I __

lTantib i JlaSapeT'b

By Alex Artuchov

Georgii Andreevich Woda is a veteran philatelist
and a longstanding friend of mine. Readers
familiar with issues of Rossica dating back to the
1950's and early 1960's will remember Georgii
Andreevich as George Rozday-Woda, the ,
Society's representative in Canada. -

Georgii Andreevich was born in Rostov, in April
of 1913. He was educated as a geologist and
worked as a hydro-geologist in the Black Sea
area. As a result of various circumstances, he
found himself back in Rostov where he found
employment at the university as an assistant to a
professor. During the Second World War, when
Rostov was occupied by the Germans, the captors
took hold of the young German speaking
geologist and dispatched him to Berlin where he
worked at the university for the duration of the
war. From Germany, Georgii Andreevich found
his way to England before finally arriving in
Canada. From 1955 on Georgii Andreevich was
employed as a geologist at the provincial ministry
of transportation here in Toronto.

Some of my initial exposure and inspiration to serious philately came from Georgii
Andreevich who was always pleased and available to share his time and offer a glimpse
of his collection. He had Russia No. 1, 3, 4, 39 and 40. At that time these stamps were
still philatelic fantasies of mine. Georgii Andreevich exposed me to his philatelic
literature and always related a rich variety of interesting philatelic information. He was
and remains to be a philatelic mentor of mine. Although he sold his extensive collection
of Russia some years back and passed on his superb collection of Canada to his son,
Georgii Andreevich speaks about philately with great enthusiasm and great enthusiasm
with a bright twinkle in his eye when the discussion turns to Russian philately. Georgii
Andreevich is healthy, sharp witted and physically active. When I asked him in June of
1997 if he had been at Capex, he replied that notwithstanding the distance from his home,
he had already been to the show several times.

Georgii Andreevich is a philatelic friend that we are going to have here for some time to
come. We wish him MHOFOE JIETO!

June, 1999

by G. Kul'chitskii, V. Ustinovskii and 0. Forafontov.

Quite recently in the past year and thanks to A. Cronin, we have been made
aware of unusual tete-beche pairs of the 30-rouble Blagoveshchensk-on-Amur
issue in violet (Far Eastern Republic, Scott No. 46a). They are remarkable in
that they show margins, both at left and at right (see the illustration here).
The source of these mysterious pairs is the USA. There thus arose the
necessity of trying to solve this riddle. At first glance, we assumed that,
if they were not forgeries, they could actually be genuine pairs, but not taken out of the sheets, as they must
have been specially prepared. In order to accept or reject such a suggestion, it would have been necessary
to conduct an investigation. That task was carried out by us.

A tete-beche pair was subjected to examination and measurement by means of an MBS-9 microscope (x
56+ magnification) and the results compared with the corresponding characteristics of the issued stamps in
the same face value. The measurements coincided completely with those of the issued stamps in the
majority of examples, while some of them had insignificant differences, similar to those for other copies of
the issued stamps.

The measurements by a philatelic micrometer with fiat and curved micrometric screws, of the thickness of
paper with gum along the perimeters and centres at ten positions on each stamp, showed after comparison
with the results obtained from the issued stamps that the thickness of the paper was the same in all cases,
but that the gum had been applied more evenly on the tete-beche pair.

The examination of the subject tete-beche pair and of the issued stamps under an Austrian quartz lamp
showed that the colour of the tete-beche pair glowed as lilac-brown and did not differ from the colour of
the issued stamps. The characteristics of the reaction of the ink with the paper were the same as on the
genuine stamps. There were no traces of erasure of the design on the left and right margins of the
mysterious tete-beche pair. The invalidating bars of blue crayon (grey under the lamp) corresponded both
in colour and characteristics with those of the issued stamps, which had been invalidated similarly.
However, the paper of the tete-b8che pair glowed as more white (actually as pure white), while on the
issued stamps it was greyish-brown. Such whitening of the paper was not found on any of the issued
stamps, including on all the other values. More than 16 issued stamps were examined in all.
Conclusion: The tete-beche pair was printed from a genuine transfer, but did not come from a sheet. It was
prepared separately from the issued stamps on specific strips of paper of improved quality.
How could that have come about? It would appear that this tete-beche pair was produced especially on
better-quality paper and for commercial purposes by the printers, apart from the issued stamps, since there
is no way that such a variety could be regarded as a proof. There is reason to believe that it was prepared
for presentation purposes, or for the sale of such unusual pairs. A further question arises as to whom some
of them would have been presented, although these pairs have not been found without the invalidating
crayon marking. The basic stock of these varieties appears to have been set aside until such time as the
unsold remainders were invalidated by crayon, together with the rest of the issued stamps. After they were
discovered by someone while they were passing through official organizations, they were sold and
eventually popped up in America. Of course, that is just a hypothesis and there could have been other
possibilities. However, the general conclusion that these are tete-beche pairs produced specifically for
commercial aims is probably close to the truth.
Editorial Comment: Credit should go to veteran philatelist Oleg Vladimirovich Forafontov for spotting
the significance of the margins at left and right after receiving the pair from your editor. Fellow Muscovite
Vadim Nikolaevich Ustinovskii and your editor have similar pairs and American sources are now being
combed to see if further examples turn up. The crayon bars must have been applied in Blagoveshchensk.
June, 1999


by P.J. Campbell.

One is always seeking information in philately and one cannot have too many catalogues. A case in point is
an item in my collection shown in the illustration here, but folded in half. It consists of a red Zemstvo
stamp on a long, narrow strip of yellowish paper, the stamp being imprinted on the strip and thus it is not a
separate adhesive stamp.

It was clear that this was an issue of the Bogorodsk Zemstvo, but reference to the Schmidt catalogue, the
Chuchin (1925) and the Barefoot reprint of the Chuchin did not show such a design. Alex. Artuchov's "The
Zemstvo Postage Stamps of Imperial Russia", Vol. 1 of 1987 was a little more helpful when it stated:-
"Bogorodsk issued....envelopes, newspaper wrappers and postage-due wrappers between 1869 and 1879",
but there were no listings for such items.

I went on to search my J-B Moens catalogue of 1893 and found an illustration No. 8133 to match my
stamp. It was listed under "Bandes des postes rurales" in blue, indigo, red and bright red and it gave the
dimensions as 428 x 28 mm. The word "taxe" was added for the red stamp, Moens No. 7902, which
matched my copy.

Finally, I turned to my William Herrick catalogue, published by the Scott Stamp & Coin Co. of New York
in 1896 and I found what I was seeking. Herrick first listed the envelopes of 1872 with the same stamp
design but in blue, imprinted on the flap of the envelope and with various papers. It went on, out of
chronological order, to state that the same stamp, but in red, was to be found on postage-due envelopes. So
I was getting there! Also, in 1869, Herrick lists a postage-due wrapper, 485 x 28 mm. with the same 5-
kopek imprinted stamp, in red, at the end of a long yellowish wove-paper wrapper. In my case, the wrapper
had been cut to a length of 261 mm. and the width, measured with an engineer's scale, was 30.9 mm. The
back of the strip, behind the stamp, showed some 70 mm. of a crackled brownish gum, while the rest of
the strip was ungummed. Herrick also lists a similar postage-due wrapper issued in 1871, but on white
wove paper and only 222 mm. in length.

Reference to the Higgins & Gage Catalogue of Postal Stationery Vol. 15 in my 1979 reprint, listed the
envelopes of 1869 as having red stamps and the 1871 & 1879 envelopes with blue stamps, without stating
that the red stamps signified postage-due and that the blue were for regular postage. For the wrappers, the
catalogue cites the wrong Figure No. and again does not differentiate between the two usages set forth by
My somewhat battered copy of E.L. Pemberton's "Stamp Collector's Handbook" of 1874, which was
essentially contemporary, lists the 5-kopek value as the first true issue of Bogorodsk, listing the blue-
stamped newspaper band, as well as the red-coloured version with the word "Unpaid" beside it, which
confirms what Herrick told us.
So, it seems that, for the envelopes and the newspaper bands, the blue imprinted stamp was for normal
postage and the red stamp signified that the item was unpaid, indicating that postage was therefore due.
Does anyone know how this worked? Did the recipient pay the postage, or some additional fee? And do not
throw away your old catalogues!
June, 1999

by Professor A.S. Ilyushin.

Following upon the pieces described in "The Post-Rider" No. 40, pp.38-44, some additional examples will be
found illustrated on the next two pages.

Fig. 1 tells quite a story, as it is a card from Honolulu 11.12.1900 O.S. to Moscow 28.12.1900 O.S. and with
what should have been the correct 2-cent foreign surface rate. However, it was apparently treated as a
foreign surface letter (note the large figure "5" at centre, possibly standing for 5 cents U.S.) and the
deficiency noted at top left as "T / 15 CENTIMES" = 3 cents U.S. = 6 kopeks. Moscow collected double the
deficiency = 12 kopeks, as shown in the oval postage due marking. Comments are invited.

Fig. 2 has an unpaid card from St. Petersburg 9.11.08 to Tula 12.11.08 with an unusual circular cachet
reading in four lines : "KOHTponJb / nonjiaTHOi / KoppecnoH- / genuine (Control/checking of underpaid
mail), with double the deficiency (= 6 k) noted by St. Petersburg in the oval just below.

Fig. 3 is an unpaid card from Orel 2.11.10 and with double the deficiency noted there in the oval ("6"). Upon
arrival, it received the large Moscow 5th. Despatch Office marking of 3.11.10, with "HE BIIOJI.
OnIJIOM." (NOT FULLY PAID) at bottom. That marking appears to have been unrecorded so far.

Fig. 4 is a Siberian item from Biisk 16.3.11 and is underpaid by 1 kopek, hence "2 k" = double the
deficiency in the oval. It was received in Barnaul on 18th. March.

Fig. 5 features a final unpaid card during the Soviet period, with the Simferopol' Vokzal bilingual Russo-
Crimean Tartar marking and two oval "TO PAY" strikes, one of which denoting that 30 kop. had to be
collected as double the deficiency on arrival in Moscow 19.7.36. Re the bilingual postmark, the numeral
"21" is not a year date error, but an indication of the hour = 9 pm. It would be interesting to know if more
otherwise normal postal markings exist with the year omitted.

Fig. 6 has a card from L6dO 16.8.08 and a very unusual Sosnowiec arrival marking at left, reading in Russian
SOSNOVITSY / P.T.O. / 17.8.03 MORNING / No. 2 / PETROK. PROV. Much work remains to be done on
the postmarks of Russian Poland, especially after the classic period.

Finally, Fig. 7 demonstrates a WWI military card, written in Latvian and sent through FPO No. 50 (?) on
19.2.17. It also received a strike of a circular rubber cachet, reading: "IHbeK1 ioHHbIfH OTpa5Ib X2 133"
(Infectious Diseases Detachment No. 133). Other numbers and types doubtless exist.

(a) Complete sheet of 50 c.t.o. perf. 12 1/2 Zeppelin C13 with many plate varieties. SHOWPIECE !
(b) Partial sheet of 40 c.t.o. perf. 12 1/2 Zeppelin C13 with corresponding plate varieties. COLOURFUL !
(c) 50 mint copies of the A.S. Pushkin souvenir sheet Scott 596.
(d) 20 sets c.t.o. of the Chelyuskin Rescue set Scott C58-57.
(e) 20 copies c.t.o. special cancel of the 1 r. Franz Josef Flight perf. 10 1/2 Scott C35.
(f) Some copies of the mint souvenir sheet C75a Aviation Exhibition.
Please submit your best offers to: Horst Taitl, Kiesquellenweg 1, A-6850 DORNBIRN, Austria.

June, 1999

.... (......

' 3 ":~ ,
k e .... .. .........

cy ..... .. .........

i I fiI~k IIt ......1 .1. .. ......
i. .... .. .....
Fig.; 3. C~IC
c~f ,f; o~Olt," ~

11,OE l.fCIbMO. CAP' 1 )o0N -

1-f 4?4,e ig. 4
s~- aL. `~

&,~t~f~E/ i y
La e..~wL~~3r
a ~ ig. 4.


-.. / ,OB .2
O LTOB. ; J i-,
-.--- .; ; 7 T2 .

S.... le-
* "- "-". V _
) .. / 'J .

i- ,.-:-', .,..).. -


c osa/"tc arte postate
Weltposi.eh Unio/0 ostale universelle
Levelez6flp Correspond kkatte Dopisnice
Karta kvspol cyjo- Knespondendni listek
riefkad -Car napostale .ost card- Brefcort
OTKpI AfHC m& I4nIHCn a KxapTa
"* b
r/^f^ y ^ ^e

Fig. 6.

.Tpfartr ma JiHCTiBla

June, 1999

-, '
^ ...

Fig. 7.

.. I
1.1. 39 i;.

-^^ ,^L .-- <
4^'' ''/ J \

I' '~3T &fIV~
4 .i Jb*13'(
2. Q Q
-&- t9

Fig. 5.

- -





by Georg D. Mehrtens.
(Translated from the magazine "Philatelie", issue for September 1997, pp. 33-38, by kind permission of
the publishers: The Federation of German Philatelists. The article had originally appeared at Bremen in
1995 in a special publication, honouring the 49th. anniversary of the Federation and the 96th. Day of the
German Philatelists. Many thanks also to Arge Russland/UdSSR for permission to translate and reprint).
Prominent collectors and experts in the past and also at present have concerned themselves with this
stamp. The author undertakes with this contribution an attempt based on what has been published in the
past, together with new knowledge, partly with the help of the material held by him, so as to present a
summary of the course of events leading up to the issue of the first stamp of Russia.

As is known, Russia was the fourth country, after Great Britain, Brazil and Switzerland, to issue postage
in 1845, in the form of stationery envelopes for St. Petersburg and Moscow. There followed on 1/13
December 1848 (*) postal stationery envelopes for the entire country in the values of 10 kopeks (up to 1
Russian lot in weight = 12.794 grammes or just under 1/2 oz.), 20 kopeks for 2 lots and 30 kopeks for 3
lots. The decision to utilise stamps also came comparatively later. Finally, on 12/24 November 1856 (*),
Tsar Alexander II gave his consent to the proposal by his government to permit the issue of postage
stamps. There would have had to be stamps in the values of 10, 20 & 30 kopeks, for the franking of
sending weighing up to 1, 2 & 3 lots. The supervision and determination of the timing of the issue was
assumed by the leading Director of the Russian Postal Service, in conjunction with the Minister of

The Russian Postal Service had already concerned itself for several years with the subject of issuing
stamps. The "HaRBopHbiH coBeTHHK-b" (Court Councillor) Charukovskii had travelled for two years from
1852 to Germany (and according to W. Rachmanow also to England) to familiarise himself with the
methods for preparing postage stamps, their utilisation, etc. Upon his return, circular essays with the head
of Mercury (Hermes) in the centre (see Fig. 1) and with the Imperial Eagle (Fig. 2) were subsequently
prepared in 1854 in the State Printing Office, in accordance with the ideas of Court Councillor
Charukovskii. The engraving was carried out by Mr. Kirchner in the State Printing Office. The essays
were prepared on white paper, in blue with the centre in black, as well as in black, carmine, dark green
and blue. Some of them were affixed to envelopes and cancelled with a special embossed marking. These
essays were rejected.

The succeeding proposal (Fig. 3) had similarities with the design of the postal stationery then in
circulation. They were also circular and impressed in black on white, yellow, straw-coloured, green, red,
rose and blue papers at the State Printing Office. In accordance with the ideas of Court Councillor
Charukovskii, bicoloured essays were also prepared in the following combinations (frame / centre):-
Brown / gray carmine / lilac green / olive-brown
Brown / rose carmine / lilac-rose green / rose
Brown / yellowish green carmine / yellowish green
These essays, which were presented on 10/22 August 1857 (1), also failed to gain approval.

A private proposal then featured the foundation for the stamp design, which was to prevail from the first
to the last issue of stamps of the Russian Empire. The firm of Gottlieb Haase Sthne in Prague presented a
design (Fig, 4), which served F.M. Kepler, the then Chief of the Engraving Section at the State Printing
Office as a model for the essays, which were placed before the Tsar by the Director of the Postal
Department and accepted by Imperial Ukase on 20 November/2 December 1857 (*). There were prepared
in this design some essays in the following colours (frame / centre):- blue / carmine-red; carmine-red /
green and green / carmine-red, as well as in the colours of the issued design: brown / blue.
June, 1999

The Austrian coat of arms, with an eagle similar to the Russian one, is featured in the design. Franz
Kepler had also drawn a stamp in accordance with the design by the Haase firm, which was practically
like the one issued later on. The double-headed eagle in this design looked just like the eagle featured in
the Russian coat of arms up to 1857. As with the drawing of the Haase firm and the No. 1 issued later, the
colours are brown and blue. This painted model soon found itself in the collection of A. Faberg6.

Franz Kepler engraved the frame and centre separately on steel dies. Three proofs of the frame are known
(Figs. 5-7). We find on the first example on normal white paper (Fig. 5) two handstamps in Russian,
reading: (D. KEnFJIEP'b (F. KEPLER) and a written notation in German at top left: "1. Abzug" (Ist.
pull). The second example (Fig. 6), on chalk-surfaced white paper, also shows two strikes of the F.
KEPLER handstamp and the German annotation "2. Abzug" (2nd. pull). It is noteworthy here that this
frame features the only known plate flaw on Russia No. 1 (dot between the "10" and "KOn:"). This flaw
is only found on the first die and we thus have here a "first pull" of the variety. There are only a few
pieces known with this flaw, two of them on letter. Such a letter is shown here from Dinaburg (Dvinsk,
now Daugavpils in Latvia) to Riga; see Figs 7a & 7b.

The third proof of the frame does not have the F. KEPLER handstamp and is a pull from the second die,
with a large numeral "1" to the "10" in the upper right corer (Fig. 7). We have Ing. Z. Mikulski to thank
for the discovery that Russia No. 1 was printed from two different (frame) dies. He is a truly excellent
expert in Russian stamps and pertinent comments are to be found on many of his certificates.

In addition, this frame was printed on normal white paper, with the sheet consisting of four panes 5 x 5
and with margins in between (Fig. 8), being perforated 15. Moreover, there were 20 colour proofs,
prepared singly and which appeared in the following combinations:-

1. dark carmine
2. shiny carmine
3. carmine
4. brown
5. brown
6. orange
7. orange
8. violet
9. violet
10. blue
The colour proofs Nos.

bright blue
2, 6, 9, 10, 12,

11. indigo blue
12. indigo blue
13. indigo blue
14. violet-blue
15. shiny yellow-green
16. dark yellow-green
17. dark green
18. dark green
19. bottle green
20. green
16, 17, 19 & 20 are illustrated

milky blue
dark brown
(Figs. 9-11). The colour

combinations Nos. 5, 10 & 3 were utilised for the values of 10, 20 & 30 kopeks later on.

As well as these colour proofs which are known in the literature, there were obviously similar types
prepared for the 20-kopek value. There are indeed perforated proofs known with a green frame and violet
centre on paper with the later watermark and also on so-called "Prussian" paper without watermark,
which was also utilised in the Prussian State Printing Office. They are not referred to here.

I have before me two colour proofs, namely in the blue / orange colour combination issued later on (Fig.
12), as well as in indigo blue / rose (Fig. 13). The latter is noteworthy as it features the sole die flaw for
No. 1, the dot between the figures of value and the word "KOnI:". This is also a case of utilising Die 1,
with only the indication of value being changed. The specific point in time when these colour proofs were
prepared is unknown to me. However, as the first die was utilised, it is evident that the printing process
soon became successful.
As a further colour proof recorded in the literature held by me, there is a 10-kopek value perforated 15

June, 1999

with a dark blue frame and carmine-brown centre. Among the definitive values, there were then plate
proofs printed on normal and thin chalk-surfaced paper (see Fig. 14 for a block of four of what was later
to be No. 1). There were in the Sir John Wilson collection an unfinished proof with a blue frame, as well
as plate proofs as noted above for the 10, 20 & 30-kopek values on various papers. Those printed on
chalk-surfaced paper show a round punch in the centre. All the work, including the preparation of the
paper with the watermarks "1", "2" & "3" for the values of 10, 20 & 30 kopeks was carried out at the
Russian State Printing Office (33FB). The thickness of the paper varied from somewhat under 0.07 mm.
to just over 0.12 mm. In addition, a stamp with an inverted watermark has been recorded (Corinphila Sale
in Zurich, December 1950).

The printing of the sheets of stamps was carried out on two typographic presses, one of them with the
design of the brown frame and the other having the medallion in the centre with the embossed coat of
arms of the Postal Service. The machines for the work of embossing were bought in Berlin. As there was
no suitable perforating machine available in St. Petersburg, one was ordered from the Imperial Printing
Office in Vienna. This was sent too late and arrived in such poor condition that extensive repairs were
required. In order that the stamps should go on sale punctually at the post offices on 1/13 January 1858
(*), it was decided to release a quantity of three million stamps without perforation. As a result, the first
stamp of Russia can thus be regarded almost as a Provisional. The printing was carried out on three pairs
of presses, which could produce about 700 sheets daily. The perforating machine could do about 2400
sheets daily. This information comes from an official document, which is also quoted in the Kritsch
Handbook. As has been noted above, the models for the stamps were accepted on 20 November (Julian
Calendar). The work of printing followed immediately thereafter. The preparation of the first three
million stamps of No. 1 thus lasted a good three weeks.

On 10/22 December, there then followed the communication to the post offices in the country regarding
the introduction of stamps. This circular informed the post offices that, upon delivery of the postage
stamps, they should immediately go on sale. The stamps had validity as of 1/13 January 1858 (in Siberia,
the Caucasus and Transcaucasia as of 1/13 March). They were valid for the despatch of ordinary inland
correspondence (Paragraph 29). For other classes of mail, such as letters going abroad, money letters etc.,
they were to be paid for in cash as before (Paragraph 33). The stamps were to be affixed on the fronts of
the letters, but frankings on the back were tolerated (Paragraph 25). Until the introduction of special
postmarkers, the postal officials were to cancel the stamps by crossing them with penstrokes in ink
(Paragraph 31).

According to official documents in the Russian Archives, there were 10,500 stamps sold in 1857. They
were valid from 1 January 1858 right up until 31 December 1884 (after the introduction of the 1883
issue). There are two copies known cancelled with the date 1 January 1857. This is an obvious case of a
mistake by a postal official, who had not changed the numerals for the year in his canceller. In any case,
one should be wary of postmarks dated 1 January 1858; forgeries and counterfeits are known to me.

The originally planned perforated values appeared very soon thereafter. There has been a lack of
uniformity so far in the catalogues and handbooks about the first day of issue of the perforated stamps. I
have before me a letter with the perforated 10-kopek stamp, dated 7 January 1858 in St. Petersburg (Fig.
15). We can thus specify that this stamp, which had been planned as the first issue, actually became
available at the postal counter in St. Petersburg on 7 January 1858.

No. 1 of Russia is very rare unused. It is practically unknown in mint with full gum, or with a large part of
its gum. Also, the Postal Service evidentally had not sent any samples of this stamp to the Postal
Administrations of other countries, as it had indeed been issued imperforate only as a "Provisional" and it
was very soon superseded by the perforated stamps.
June, 1999

There is only one pair of No. 1 known mint with gum, now in the A.S.Popov Museum of Communications
in St. Petersburg. Another pair has been noted in the literature, which A. Faberge obtained from W. von
Polanski. Unfortunately, that pair was stolen. Single copies are barely known. The item pictured here is
an exception; the embossing of the eagle is sharp, although it is difficult to say so from the photograph
(Fig. 16). Ing. Z. Mikulski wrote about it in 1991 as follows: "This Russia No. 1 is the second genuine
unused stamp that I have been able to expertise in the past 25 years. It has part gum; the other item was
unfortunately regummed". All of this shows just how rare an unused Russia No. 1 is. The stamps offered
in many quarters have been tampered with. Most of the items described as Russia No. 1 unused have no
gum and the embossing of the coat of arms is flat. The stamps were apparently affixed to letters, but were
not cancelled.

Eugen Lentz, who lived in St. Petersburg in the 1870s and 1880s, dealt with this subject in 1918 in his
stamp magazine (Volume VIII of "The Philatelic Gazette") under the title "Reminiscences of an Old
Philatelist". He had had the opportunity of going through the correspondence of firms for stamps and
reported the following facts, among other things:-

"I had found many imperforate 10-kopek stamps on letters and I especially recollect seeing the notation:
'30 kop. to be paid by the recipient'. In those days, the Russian Postal Service worked slowly but surely
and that was the norm for that purpose. Express letters between Kronshtadt and St. Petersburg had to be
sent by ship in both directions. There was a letter box on board the ship for that reason and when it
arrived at its destination, the letters were quickly handed over upon payment of the predetermined rates.
The Postal Service was not involved with that matter and if there were a stamp on the envelope, it was not

I had found such letters even later on, which had been provided in this way with 'unused' copies. It turned
out that there were only a few stamps that missed cancellation by oversight and they are the only unused
imperforate 10-kopek stamps. Also, neither (the Belgian stamp dealer) Moens, whom we have to thank
for so many mint stamps, had them, nor were there any remainders at all discovered in the archives of the
Russian Postal Service. As a result, I believe I can safely say that this stamp does not exist in truly mint

That last statement was, as we now know, somewhat presumptious. But Eugen Lentz, himself a well-
known philatelist, belonged to the St. Petersburg Section of the Interationaler Philatelisten-Verein in
Dresden. There were other well-known and competent philatelists as members in St. Petersburg, such as
Breitfuss, Notthaft, Kirchner, etc., but they also evidently were not successful in acquiring such an unused
stamp with gum.

As Russia No. 1, as well as Nos. 2 to 4, which were issued soon afterwards, had no validity at that time on
mail going abroad, they were not taken into account if they were affixed as frankings on foreign mail. I
have before me a No. 1 with a postmark reading "HANNOVER". This stamp had obviously been placed
on a letter going abroad. Thus, the cancellation is not that of the Russian postal service, but of the country
where it was received (Fig. 17).

As the envisaged cancellers were not ready when the stamps had been introduced, the post offices were
advised to cancel the stamps with crosses in ink. In cases where the office of despatch had forgotten to do
so, the office of arrival was ordered to rectify the omission by applying a handwritten cancellation.

With an order dated 26 February 1858, the post offices were instructed that, from then onwards, they were
to utilise a postmarker which gave the place-name and date of despatch, instead of cancelling by hand. As
a result, markings were applied, which had been used in the pre-philatelic period. Where a marking

June, 1999

lacked the indication of date, that had to be filled in by hand. Thus, there were various markings applied:
in one, two or three lines; boxed cachets; circular, oval and rhomboid postmarks; "FRANCO" markings,
etc. (Figs. 18 to 20). The predominant colour for the markings was black, but blue and red cancels with
shades in between are also to be found. In a later decree of 10 September 1858, it was advised that town
markings would be distributed, but it is doubtful that this came about as, even after that date, further older
and non-uniform postmarkers were utilised.

With its circulars No. 1817 of 31 May 1858 and No. 157 of 7 August, the Postal Administration
undertook the allocation of numbered markings. Experimental cancellers had already been prepared at the
beginning of 1858 and number "1" is shown here (Fig. 21). The canceller differs in the number and
arrangement of the dots from those issued later. These numbered markings come in six different types:-

(1) Circular cancellers of dots, numbered from 1 to 60. Nos. 1 & 2 had already been issued to St.
Petersburg and Moscow, in accordance with Circular No. 138 of 26 February 1858. The remaining
58 numbers were issued to the capitals of the various provinces (guberias), regions (oblasts) or
military areas.
(2) Rectangular cancellers of dots numbered from 1 to 619 for district (uyezd) towns. The Nos. 609 to
619 were allocated in the period from December 1859 to January 1861.
(3) Oval cancellers of dots numbered from 1 to 9 for border post offices.
(4) Hexagonal cancellers of dots, with the tips at top and bottom, for the railway stations in St.
Petersburg and Moscow, as well as for the Nikolai Railway Line, being numbered from 1 to 10. In
1861, this type with the Nos. 11 to 17 was issued to the Warsaw Railway Station in St. Petersburg
and on the Warsaw-St. Petersburg Railway Line.
(5) Hexagonal cancellers of dots, with the tips on both sides and numbered 1 to 103 for smaller towns
and villages. The Nos. 83 to 103 were allocated in the period from October 1858 to June 1862.
(6) Triangular cancellers of dots, flattened at top and numbered from 1 to 1700, for relay stations on
postal routes, railway stations and for Levant post offices. Nos. 623-1700 were issued after Oct.1858.

In addition, there were cancellers for post offices in Poland. The Russian Postal Service was responsible
for postal affairs in Poland and hence the stamps of Russia were utilised there. The first stamp of that
latter country was issued in December 1859 (Julian Calendar). As in Russia, No. 1 of Russia was valid in
Poland as of 1 January 1858. At the beginning, the cancellation of that stamp in Poland also took place by
means of crosses in ink and later with a postmark and a cross in ink. The first cancellers with four rings
and numbered from 1 to 269 were introduced by the Administrator of the Russian Imperial Post in Poland
by Circular No. 5951 of 15 March 1858. Subsequently, cancellers numbered from 270 to 345 were
allocated upon the opening of further post offices up to 1860. A mute ring marking (seven rings with a dot
in the centre) is very rare on Russia No. 1. That is also the case for all town markings, apart from
Warsaw, with one-line, framed, circular and oval cancellations. The colour of the postmarks in Poland
was also mainly black. Only occasionally is it in red. Two examples of Polish markings are shown (Figs.
22 & 23).
(1) Bochmann, E. v.: "Die Postmarken des russischen Kaiserreichs", Kr6tsch Handbook, Leipzig, 1895.
(2) Salisbury, Dr. G.B.: "Centenary of Russia No. 1", Rossica Journal No. 51, 1957, pp.5-8.
(3) Rachmanov, V.: "RUSSIA No. 1", The Collectors' Club Philatelist XXXII (5), pp. 229-240.
Reproduced in Rossica Journal No. 51, 1957, pp. 9-20.
(4) Wilson, Sir John: "The 19th. Century Issues of Imperial Russia", The London Philatelist, April-May
(5) Lobachevskii, V.V.: "Imperial Postage Stamps of Russia issued in 1857-1888",
Soviet Collector No. 14 (1976), No. 15 (1977).
(*) = date in Julian Calendar; 12 days behind the Gregorian Calendar in the 19th. century.
June, 1999

SFig. 3.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 6.

3T"" ; feKEnfEP-b.


Fig. 5.

Fig. 7.

June, 1999

Fig. 2.

KEMinnE ".

ID '

Fig. 7a.

Fig. 8.


Fig. 9.

Sr .- -" t ^ -- .

Fig. 7b.

Fig. 10.

June, 1999

Fig. 11.

Fig. 12. Fig. 13. Fig. 14.

,. ; ,.. .^

Fig. 15.

June, 1999

Fig. 17.

Fig. 19.

Fig. 20.

Fig. 22.

Fig. 23.

June, 1999

Fig. 21.

Fig. 16.

Fig. 18.

r----------- --

by Professor A.S. Ilyushin.

A new method of attracting small monetary deposits in the State Savings Offices from the public appeared
in 1900 in the Russian Empire, leaving its trace not only in the history of banking, but also in the story of
the Russian Postal Service.

Special "savings bank stamps" were issued in the values of 5 and 10 kopeks to facilitate the accumulation
of small deposits and they were affixed by the savings bank depositors themselves on special forms, which
were called "savings bank cards". Such cards were produced at the printeries of either the "3KcnemHuia
3aroTBoneHni rocyAapcTBeHHbix'b ByMarb" (State Printing Works) or of the Ministry of Internal
Affairs. Special savings card forms were set up for each category, such that when they were all filled with
stamps of one value or another, the total amount would come up to one rouble.

The savings bank stamps were sold by all outlets of the Postal-Telegraphic Administration of the Russian
Empire and the cards were handed out free of charge when purchasing these savings stamps, but no more
than one card for the corresponding face value of the stamp. When the cards were filled with savings bank
stamps up to the value of one rouble, they were not immediately converted into cash, but were regarded as
a deposit in the savings bank offices for transfer into the savings pass book, any withdrawal of money from
which was carried out in the normal way.

Upon presentation of the savings card, the stamps thereon were cancelled, either by ink, by special
markings or by rollers, leaving an impression in the form of a grid or lozenge. Cards which contained
damaged, stained or torn stamps were not accepted for deposit and were returned to the depositor for
replacement of the unacceptable stamps. A few years later, savings bank stamps of 1 kopek were added to
those with the face values of 5 and 10 kopeks.

The savings stamps were also allowed to be sold in other outlets, such as the State wine shops, the district
admininistrations (BOJIOCTHbIe npaBsaeHHn), at railway stations, etc.; it was not forbidden to buy savings
stamps by cash for resale. All savings bank offices, as well as middlemen were obliged to sell savings bank
stamps at face value and the savings cards had to be handed out free of charge.

The author knows of the existence of various types of savings cards, differing in sizes, computation and
colour of the stock, as well as in the details of the layout. The elements common to all issues are the
presence of the coat of arms, the designation of spaces for affixing the stamps, a special position for the
cachet of the savings bank office and also the texts with instructions for the usage of the cards (see Figs. 1
& 2 on the next page). Upon presentation of deposits at the savings bank outlets at postal-telelgraphic
offices, an impression of the postal marking was applied instead of the cachet of the savings office. The
completed and cancelled card remained in the files of the savings office, as it was regarded as a financial
document of strict accountability. As a result, completely filled-in savings cards are comparatively rare.

The application of savings stamps for small deposits in the savings bank offices was abolished on 2
December 1915 by a decree of the Minister of Finances of Russia and there began to be used in their place
ordinary postage stamps in the values of 1, 5 and 10 kopeks. There were printed for that purpose at the
State Printing Works (33FB) savings cards of a new type in three categories, intended for the application
of postage stamps of the relevant face value for a total sum of 50 kopeks.

Savings cards of the new type for 10- and 5-kopek postage stamps and presented under Nos.28686 & 28687
on 14 July 1919 at the savings bank outlet of the postal-telegraphic office in Tomsk are shown in Figs. 3 &
4 on p. 55. The date-stamp of the post office was used as a cachet of the savings bank office.

June, 1999

%0. &a Ao...IiZ 6u% npflpcI~jBcha s&ut. c' ra.
fnnlc.aI~eoib3p I6ep. 1T0iorxo,e.cpll opalIM~iehI
H44Iil..MB .EChCLMn.
AonoaMTez32n e oao cu c6ep. staprluan xIyT
6UTIm* 3110CRUM1 XE3i B1. y C6ep. XNCCy, .xtoqal
,RMAaan CdCp: KMaXKy, 2:o 10iA32kaill o1 9BO-
Telerpa4waax -c6ep. xaIz, Cm;'Hpi, ordr, .n!
noAAe)KamyD IeqpaAblyE c6ep'.:aycy *-D. /
B. B0CKlaU He npnliElDTCX cbeo-p2i.plJiaao-
pOIpau1it n1 oo6rme naCTOZnKO RCUopsjepJUU,'lTO
AoCTOHHCTSO nIL R c H o,1(ermamL 0:onpcAkaOH0.
C6ep. KapTowo,.v xoHxL o01aNere oiaflaj;R

Ha c6ep. .CKa ie AorcunL ia-
Kueii KuIs a -omnd6do ualxeernuua s* 0 im,
ue ariKra '*i... .
* IpOUCeTu Us biveoJ.. e ceB epH x .
MM BJIBl.J.ILTCB, MilLB B B~lrlmr 101 BlArNL M
,.enbIr1Bg,.CV.17Mo~5A .llAYK-Ul12O 31 NSH910
con% KM~saa ..%%I
Dct cfep. macc-a, A I~yp riocne~r. A=~3

M* .1 1p. cir. Uah p TOAino p. DOY 3m 6
-~M CIu. *0 BapKalramA IBoo S IS
3:0~ ---..-r raBMBJKTo:.' 1..~3C

* .-.

I L '.'4




Ha c~EYan~Y OAHHI~b PYB-;'z

:i...~ lq9 i~

: ~

1/ a

* 31 : ?

7. --.

N3V flpaflxin o-c6epiraTeAiwdh uap1xh.
SC6epeiarrentiw- XPK uija .1M7J1 )- 23F-
pRA0io, X S R 10 X., R UcI A N JsICTh
aoaxesflsl I" cero C~tenMe.XHhLx uKp".6
Kzpio'Kx 1Jalz."Tr 6eCnzrao npH =1T'Jqt ceep
x2pOXm R UpH TOs M~6OatC ojio2 K2ro'IKI S
o.Aj xIpxy oaorslTcrThyrvo zroxasnrlm. YIp-
Toqne, 3lnojsewnem cep. vuKxxa I rPT/h, Be
noziem2T BenOcptAOTWeAH Ofl.uT~ a epetcn-
BIITC SoB lla~LA Sm Cbep..a2IC 11i2 a.ueaiz
Ha Clep.RM*Ky. no KoTopor irt 32 .lcrC po03e

fOcpelxHKxx KROR KITP pI3prk11e31. -zEm-
noxnePsuria xap0 csnU c6cp-- x cpT0.l x
His R31, 'XCU C6epM. KIZH ..
,He zo36prxetcx coxpnm Lc6c, xul -aEa
IuxaJHqug JeRr AAR EPOIlXKR!:..
EcIR 73Anu, nz Hal KoTopawxior eTtl NiN W
c6ep. mpalaw, eme Re xxteycx c6ep. NEKxrx, To
c6ep. KIpT04Ka XoXem CInT npCACTItrz-lm
a16ym c6ep. xaccy; c6ep. K.pro.cm-rpKMxzeTcL-x
)II~CCOD K1r IftpMOKll~Ammfi X60cm% VrlwcN
* l "aecl cbrp. ml-a ro iovPOAxhxtk=e
w311ocia mory-r% duTL xtemlu AeaKu rA1;p:
M2ICKMK. Ilpli DIAR'WOCTM U e C6e3. m N72

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

June, 1999

I '

Ha 3TY Kap-ro'Iy ranaellOMfrCa noqITOnbUR NiapKI Bnb
10 Kotieicb.
KapTo'rroa, ia KoToptbl uar ireerro IteCSTirKonlheqHIX- WtapOKr.
poBHo ira 50 icon., np1immHialOTCR no nBmanbi c6eperaTrennrbrxh
cacCb, Kaih HarqHbillhj Jtetribr.
Ha KaPTO'IKY Ire fOJracrrbr rrdr(Jrernatbcr nlO'lrTOnbri iaprKIr
pa3opnaHHlrll. 3ana'KaTrHurr 1111t 11HHlM CroCo6omrh urcnop-
qeHinrbrr. TaKrN JcnopreHHrrll mipiar c6eperaureabrr lmn icaccahlm
He nrpinrHMatOTC9.
------------ ----

- "- Fig. 3.

M~CTO AAnRacelapIHnoObX1

CUepera-tembtiuj lcapTo'iIrI, 3arlontieHolbra n1O'rt1nblidi Map-
icamur, npitiHmmaioTC no BKariAjU BCIlMH rOCYJ~aPcTBeCHHUMH
c~eperaTeJlbHb]Mlf laccami, KcOJI aThpbrTbU 1rp yqrpe~iieHigiam
rocypapc~eHrrara BaHica, KaHaqeACtnarb, no'ronO -Tenrerparqi-
HbUb Hs TamomieHHb[X- y'rpewAefflirx-b, npir yflpaBjieHUisb H
3M11ortxrb cTaHufl~rb Ka3eHHbZXI. xicenr3Hbthb A~Oporb H 11pH
HtKOTOPbrX-b BOAIOCTHUX-h npa~nreiriaX- n-b.Cr6rrpu.
Ha nruiaji, Bitecemie n-b rocynapCmetimi c;epera-
Teriiruur Kaccbr c6eperaTenrbrrhrn Kanpo'iaMH. rrarHCJlReTCrI,
Kaib ia nI amAa. Brrowimbie rra.I~rUMH AeHbr3MH, 3i,.o rpouerra
(rfa.00 py6. 3 py6. 60 K-icn. n p ropb).

Fig. 4.

June, 1999

Ha \3T KapTO4KY rrarJerrnarOTcH noqrorbrrr MapKH 8-b
5 Kon-beK-b.
KaPTro4Kr, na KOTOPbUI HaKijeeno rlTnnKonrtenbHrx- irapoK-b
poriro ira 50 ion., npurmimraroTca no BKnaAu cbeperaTeAbfrblru
KaCCE, KaK-, Har'rImbra Aeulbrm.
Ha KapTOrKy ire AOJI)KHE HaicaelfraTbCa nOqTOBblrrI aprar
p'a3oprialrrb]R5, 3ana;i)(almrrr urim "IHmrin cnoco6oim trcnop-
'lerimbilq. arcaKin rnopqerrrrlf LiapicH c6eperaTenbnrlul-r Kaccarcr
rre rrprrnnMIarOTCr.


RJ 5 ni enum xar mapoiKb.

Az)644al Clepera muaa nccNr o .....

,2~ ]:~~r~-


AAR l0'.R'6nf.-6xmr ixL mapowL..

............ Ueperm llhuas Kacca A

..... .....

C6epcraTeCAM1rr0 KapTOqrr nl, 3ar nmenrrn rr o'ITosirrrLr map-
Kahirr, rrprrrrmmaimrcrr ro BRranm nrctmi rocyAapCrfeHHbAIaIf
c6eperaTeCrbHhlllt Raccamli, IKoj OlipbaiJ ripri yqpexKterrinxsh
roc'AapcTBcrrrraro IBairma, KarilarleACTRna, no'.onro -Teaerpa+~-
Ir1XIh 11 TlhlO;laCrlllrrrXl, Y'rpeenlellif", rIpri ynparrrereriixh It
MHOrrrX-b CTarirIX.b Ka3eHllbIX-h Iel-h3111MX.h AtOpOIr b irpit
frli-hoTopIAx no.locTrrIrIX- npan iejfiAx%, m. Crr6iHpu.
Ha rrcn.rarrr nlecerrrimr ne Ib cvmrapcTnenlJRr crelera-
Tejinrbrn maCCbr c6eperaTemnrirl1l NapTo4Kamrki, iiamircaieercrr ,
mK. Hra fiacimAnA, icocrimirhre rrarll'lliblu.nrr Aelrbrahlm, 31'. nrpolrefa
(Ha 100 py6. 3 py6. 60 ion. n-h rox.r).

.... --... ........ .... 19M

KaIrpo Cep e era3 *
AeBb.r, MUX. O l

AAA MAPOIHUX CEEPE)KEHfL .o ..m..r. ne.. no8....r. ..
Mapbl (noqTOBse) ansaeHarcNOTC a 06- 2m aapo. Oa or a 9 pou8e.os I rot.
1VrIOO 18y8V nol aIOor roIInuo..
Bylo cymy I py6. 8'=ll4 roa n .oyre O..b.AMO.
KapTo,., .ao.isellima o on-0o-0 Map- r1poE 118'.8a r0lt'0 1pyr1. 08.
a *,sonnesman artosh, a- TA cIlp*xasrllov ~a, #a CyuL Cqepr
K.1M 11aa cy I p., np.slIleMaTC. 0 8KIAU Boa.M HO Kop THao. I .enprl 0 Co"puacc .. o
cfnaiaocC OaK IlI.l aaIi he cairo. a o 'oi..,,., 0.0. -',
Ilteafll lal,8.181a8t uapli el. ae 01.80800 1.500407
y. .ler6n pr1c opl. u3 e ar COBJIOAAETCil t10'JIHAI TAAHA BKJIAJlOB
tKlpCry C ':.po us. ..p. ccy 0; ac II *AMHJIHH BKJIAfl.MKOB.
npanclcT cauoMy HM npn pcaart no nolTre, I RKJlAbl BblAAIOTC BECnPEngTCTHEHHO
trIeC nIapvy.n T Aosees .TU a avroay AnIv. no IIEPBOMY TPEBOBAHHIO.
.7 ro.rpa.p... -i. CP.?E. .TEJlbCTBO CCCP.
-I -A
'* '- ** '*

rOCTPY,, i

...... ...... ........ ; j. -)-i .

10 e. .
Sp (noa,

iyWo 1 :-.. ," Fig. 5. I "' ,
a o 0. 9 1' %' '. "'

n s. 0 -UCV ;., 0. .

rpKccT cauoay Ma np0coark no note, a BlJulAJbl OblAAIOTCO BECnPEIlRTCTBEHHO
-* 0 T e nov er108 cne aok a TO apvrov iIty. 0 IIEPBOAV TPEBOBAHHIO.
Ai.rXir $. T.p.o a.ooo.oo. .,7 '. 3 11J.,OCTbBKJIAAOB OTBEMAAET PABH-
J i 2pCrc tpyaeett.CP. (poeniOO 1. TEJIbCTBO CCCP.
Mp. .
... ... '. .*.. '* '.

m 'i. ; "i. .
r p A5ca nnacHO MA HEubiwD, nECMTE aK a C&EnTCTB.

3(5 it

b 4r ~praIcerrc oto I1+MIIWB~~Ill(B

Fig. 6.

n- I*O. *- I .Wa' a
r XrRnH.RX f .T br nai n ,,ol,0C HEC n asr B.ffr CCY. ,.

,i* .1

This method of applying postage stamps for monetary savings was also used in the first years of the Soviet
administration. The savings cards of the "'ocTpync6epKacca CCCP" (State Earnings Savings Office of
the USSR) are well known to Russian collectors. They consisted of forms measuring 120 x 175mm., folded
in half. The state arms of the USSR, the heading "FocTpync6epKacca TpyioBaH KonnHKa" (State
Earnings Savings Office Earnings money box [!]), advertising texts and "Rules for savings by using
stamps" were printed on the outer side of the form. The rules stated that:

- (Postage) stamps are to be affixed for a total of one rouble.
- The card, filled with postage stamps totalling 1 r. is accepted as a deposit in cash at the savings office.
- It is forbidden to affix stamps which have been previously used, are torn or are dirty.
- A card with stamps may be brought to the savings office by the person concerned, or sent by post or
another person may be asked to do so.

A space with a rectangular frame measuring 65 x 125mm. was designated on the inner side of the card for
affixing postage stamps. Outside the rectangle and along the perimeter there were printed slogans and
appeals in the spirit of those times:-
"The Savings Office trains us to disburse our resources economically".
"Keeping money at home is dangerous and not advisable; bring it to the Savings Office".
"The Savings Office is a powerful ally in the struggle to improve economic life".
"There are State Earnings Savings Offices on hand at post offices, financial establishments, banks, railway
stations, factories and workshops", etc.

In contrast to the pre-revolutionary rules, it was allowed to affix on cards of the Soviet type stamps of any
face value at all for a total sum of one rouble. Upon acceptance of the cards, the stamps were cancelled by
a straight-line cachet with the name of the savings office, at which the card had arrived, or by a marking in
cross-shaped form. The cards known to the author contain either definitive stamps of the USSR (1st. and
2nd. issues), or commemorative stamps of the 1920s (see Figs 5 & 6 on p. 56).

In spite of the numerous printings of the savings cards, they are now found only quite rarely and they would
serve as an excellent embellishment for a collection or for competitive exhibits.


For this illustration,
please see the article
^ .,: .. ^ "Two Outstanding
SRailway Items" by
Rabbi L.L. Tann,
immediately following
S- on the next page.


by Rabbi L.L. Tann.

I am grateful once again to our editor for allowing me space to show two very fine railway items recently
added to my own collection:-
Item No. 1: This is a postal stationery envelope with the imprinted 20-kopek die. It is marked at the top in
German and Russian: "Einschreiben 3aKa3Hoe" (Registered). There is also the Russian registration
marking of the Latin "R" in a circle. The cover is addressed to the Hotel Stadt Paris in Baden-Baden,
Germany (see the illustration at the bottom of the previous page). It was posted on TPO/RPO No. 99 and
cancelled by the circular TPO/RPO postmarker: POCHTOVYI VAGON No. 99, which ran from
Khartsyzsk to Dolinskaya. As required, the clerk on the railway post office has marked it in the top left
corer "PV 99 / No. 1" (Postal Van 99 / No. 1, i.e. the first item registered on the postal van that day). Sent
on 19 July 1903 O.S., it was backstamped on arrival in Baden-Baden. Another "registered-on-postal-van"
Item No. 2: This is a picture postcard sent from Bendery in Bessarabia (today in the Republic of Moldova)
on 22 April 1902. Franked with a 3-kopek of the current Arms issue, there seemed no doubt that it had paid
the proper postal rate, as with millions of other similar items. It was sent to Ostr6w in Poland, as it
travelled in transit on the Lublin-Lapy railway route No. 101 and since the postal clerk on the railway van
turned it over and noticed the long message written all around the central picture, as shown below, he
decided that this was "letter length" and thus should have had a 7-kopek stamp affixed for that rate. The
clerk then calculated that 7 kopeks should have been paid; 3 kopeks had been paid, leaving a deficit of 4
kopeks. The missing amount was doubled and so he added the "J.OnJIATHTb" (oval postage due
cachet) for route No. 101 and filled it in for 8 kopeks due, to give us another very nice railway "due" mark.

0I- I Y, V
-- a r". I-
i~ 1: I2
|") 1^a^ ^. r|AL/ ^ '< ;.a|i

'0 E

June, 1999

by G.V. Andrieshin.

"The Odessa border post office was opened in 1816. It directed the activities of the postal outlets on the
territory of the Odessa City Administration. Up to 1886, it came under the management of the Odessa
Postmaster. In January 1886, it was renamed the Odessa post office and placed under the direction of the
Odessa Postal & Telegraphic District, proclaimed on the basis of the Law of 28 January 1885 and
subordinate to the "FY-InT" (Main Administration of Posts and Telegraphs) of the Ministry of Internal
Affairs of Russia. The Odessa Postal & Telegraphic District carried out the direction and control of the
activities of the outlets of communications on the territory of the Kherson and Tavrida provinces. The
Odessa Postal & Telegraphic District was abolished in 1920".
(from material in the State Archives of the Odessa province; folio 308, single file 571, schedule 6).

However, postal service had been organised significantly earlier. Thus, already with the replacement of the
former town-name Khadzhibei by the name "Odessa" in a decree of January 1795, a "noqTroBa
3KcneniHuia" (postal despatch office) had been opened a year earlier, offering postal services and the
despatch of passengers and mail twice weekly.
The following examples of mail are known of letters sent from Odessa:-
- To the Furlough Outpost at Nikolaev, letter No. 312 of 6 January 1805.
- Letters Nos. 477 and 486 of 12 September 1806 to the same address.

All these letters of official character were on coloured, thick and porous laid paper, with a watermark of
the paper factory. The doubled sheet, where the outer side served as the cover, was folded such that one
third of the sheet showed two flaps sealed by wax with an impression of the despatch mark. The address
was specified on the front of the packet, together with the mail number and also a weak impression in relief
of the word OJECCA (Odessa see Fig. 1 on the next page).

- A similar example, but much later and by now from the period of activity of the border office, is in the
form of a postal sending No. 130 of 23 March 1823 to the Customs Outpost at Kherson, folded as before
and bearing an impression of the word O)ECCA in colour (Fig. 2 on the next page).

- An item in similar format, but on paper of improved quality, being a letter from St. Petersburg and
arriving in Odessa in May 1833, struck with a circular postmark of arrival. Also, a letter from Kherson 26
December 1834 to the Odessa City Administration, which has a two-line arrival marking reading:
"OAECCA nony. / 28 neKa6. 1834" (Odessa received / 28 Dec. 1834). See Fig. 3 for both arrival marks.

- Apart from the circular postmarks, two-line markings were also applied for a longer time, in frames of
various sizes, with the inscription OJECCA and dates of despatch (Fig. 4 on the next page).

It should be noted that, during the period of circulation of the stamped envelopes, their cancellation was
carried out as a rule with crosses by pen or by postmarking.

Postage stamps were introduced into the Russian Empire for the prepayment of mail by Circular No. 3 of
10 December 1857 and, by a stipulation of the Postal Administration, they were to be cancelled by pen and
somewhat later by cancellers. The latter were introduced by directives of the Main Administration of Posts
No. 147 of 31 May 1858 for first-class post offices and No. 157 for second-class post offices and postal

These so-called "dots" postmarks had six configurations, with numbers assigned for each category of postal
outlet. Thus, for example, the type with a oval of dots and numbers from 1 to 9 were for border post offices
June, 1999

Examples of postal markings and cachets applied on mail going through the Odessa post office.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 3.

Figs. 1 & 2 have
been enlarged.

Fig. 2.

. r ..ll8 iS O

Fig. 4. Ty 1

Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 7...




t. ..Sk

.OtS^S &.
XI ix~

Fig. 9.

Fig. 8.

Fig. 10.

Fig. 12.

Fig. 13.



Fig. 14..



- C6,
./ 'c-r**\

and specifically "6" for Odessa (Fig. 5 on p. 60).

The triangular markings of dots with clipped comers for postal stations and outlets at railway stations were
especially assigned to the following places in the Odessa province:-
Nos. 314 Kodintsevo; 315 Podgorinovskaya; 316 Severinovskaya and 317 Tiligul'skaya.
Simultaneously with the "dots" markings, postmarks of the pre-stamp era were also applied with the date
and specific point of posting. The "dots" cancellers for post offices were abolished by a Circular of the
Main Administration of Posts in February 1863 and for postal stations and outlets at railway stations as late
as October 1877.

By Circular No. 58 for 12 April 1860 of the Main Administration of Posts, new uniform cancellers were
prepared at a central point and put into use: the so-called circular postmarkers in three lines (Fig. 6 on p.
60). This type of canceller was in use for about 30 years and, in the case of replacement because of wear
and tear or by loss, the preparation by local resources resulted in some deviations from the standard type.
That was especially evident in the lower part of the cancellers, where the ornament was changed, or when
numbers and inscriptions such as TOP. IIOMT. OTA. (city post office), yTpo (morning), Beqep (evening)
etc. were added. In seeking to avoid the wide variations in cancellers, the Postal Administration specified
in its Circular No. 12283 of 2 June 1877 the uniformity of the postmarkers and especially that the lower
part of the cancellers should show crossed posthorns (Fig. 7 on p. 60). This type of marking, as well as
some previous ones, were in use practically up to the beginning of the 1890s.

A special place in the work of the Odessa border post office was held by the handling of foreign mail, both
by steamer and overland. The application of two types of oval markings is known in the 1846 to 1856
period. The cancellers may be distinguished by the sloping or horizontal line within the oval, where there
was to have been written the date of acceptance of the mail (Fig. 8 on p. 60). Later, from 1856 to 1866, two
postmarkers were applied in rhomboid form, differing from each other in sizes and configurations (Fig. 9
on p. 60). The period of use for these markings has been taken from the work by S.V. Prigara: "The
Russian Post in the Empire, in Turkey, in China and the Kingdom of Poland", New York, 1941. Cachets or
notations by hand, reading PORTO, FRANCO, 4PAHKHPOBAHO (prepaid) etc. were also widely
applied in this period.
Cancellations with the following inscriptions were applied in Odessa after the abolition of the dots marks:-
"OnECCA nOFP. nOqT. KOHT.", known with Nos. 18, 26, 27, 33 & 36 (Fig. 10 on p. 60).
"OAECCA nOrPAH. FIOqT. KOHT.", known with Nos. 40 & 41 (Fig. 11 on p. 60).

The steamship mail of the Black Sea and Sea of Azov Basin served by the Odessa border office has been
described in detail in the magazine "iHnaTenjn", Nos 3 & 4 for 1992. One should also remember that the
first postmarks for this mail went into use at the beginning of 1874 (Fig. 12 on p. 60). In connection with
the incorporation of Batum into Russia in 1878, the cancellers were replaced by new ones inscribed
OgECCA-BATYM'b and BATYM'b-OgECCA, with Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4 (Fig. 13 on p. 60). These
postmarkers were in use until the beginning of the 1890s.
The field of the conveyance of mail to the Near East (Levant) is both big and complex and should be the
subject of a separate inspection. We need only note that, as a result of an agreement between Russia and
the Sublime Porte (Ottoman Govt. in Constantinople) about the establishment of postal relations, Russia
opened a postal agency in Constantinople in 1773. In spite of a series of conflicts and wars, postal
communications were developed further, both on land and by sea. They were carried out by State and
private steamers. Two frigates were especially assigned by the Russian Government with this aim in view
for regular communications between Odessa and Constantinople. That has been confirmed by a find in a
St. Petersburg archive by a well-known collector and investigator, M.A. Dobin, of letters from Odessa to
Constantinople, dating from 1834 and 1838, with the marking shown in Fig. 14 on p. 60. This information
was first published in the St. Petersburg journal "CTaHnapT-KojineKUHa", No. 3 for 1997.(concluded at the
top of the next page).
June, 1999

However, regular passenger and postal communications with Constantinople and Near Eastern ports
were established with the beginning of sailings of the ROPiT steamers in 1857.

To round off, examples of foreign mail connected with Odessa are shown hereunder:-

-.. y a e "* n -
I OT-'T '
.8 Fro m. .. .. a.... teD nb n ia.Vie.na "

.: 1deSs t o '' p'
,15 :,/a m island of ---..,-S ,,y

--- ---

.un, 1 .9 ,

KoppecoAenl" c oUaaTO. :

,. :, .1- .5,y0, j":
... .- >- k "- aTezeu;

4. 1866: By steamer from Odessa to Constantinople.

4 By t .. r June, 1999
58 B e O oo i

m s o o y e e "

June, 1999

by G.V. Andrieshin.

Makaronia is the Greek name for a small fishing village on the western coast of the Asiatic part of Turkey.
The Turkish name of the hamlet is Ciftlik, meaning a "farm". It is located at the same latitude as the island
of Lesbos, 6 1/2 miles (11 km.) to the north of the port of Dikili and 10 miles (16 km.) south of the port of
Ayvalik. Such an emplacement leads to the situation that, on the maps in general use, Makaronia is not
shown as a rule and the primary source is a map from an atlas issued in Germany ("Stielers Hand-Atlas",
issued by Justus Perthes in Gotha). The interest in this spot is connected with the fact that S.V. Prigara
included it "on the basis of trustworthy information" in the listing of Middle Eastern agencies of the ROPiT
(Russian Company of Navigation and Trade); see his book "The Russian Post in the Empire, in Turkey, in
China and the Kingdom of Poland", New York, 1941.

In a subsequent work by English investigators, who examined in detail the Russian Posts in the Middle East
(S.D. Tchilinghirian & W.S.E. Stephen: "Stamps of the Russian Empire Used Abroad", Part Two, p. 127;
Aberlour, 1957-1960), the authors expressed great surprise at the presence of a ROPiT agency in such an
unimportant place, which did not have moorings, port facilities or road connections with the adjoining
territory. They labelled the establishment of an agency at Makaronia as a puzzle, as it had not been
confirmed by documents. However, the suggestion was expressed that the stopping place at Makaronia
could have come about in connection with the work in this area undertaken by the well-known
archaeologist H. Schliemann, who was engaged in diggings for ancient Troy.

Schliemann had worked for a long time in Russia, became rich and had received the title of Merchant of
the First Guild and it is possible that he used his connections to conclude an agreement with ROPiT for the
conveyance of supplies required by him and also mail. However, this assumption does not hold water, as
Schliemann began his investigations on the mound at Hisarlik in 1870 and, according to the timetable of
sailings for the ROPiT steamers, a stopping-place at this point had already been envisaged in 1867 (see the
1867 timetable for the ROPiT Alexandria Line in the illustrations overleaf), i.e. three years before
Schliemann began his investigative diggings.

Regarding this much later period of work, even then it would have been more convenient to accept supplies
at places closer to Hisarlik, rather than at Makaronia, which was situated 60-80 miles (108-128 km.) away.
Unfortunately, it has still not been possible to find a documented basis for this stopping-place, although it
had actually existed for some time according to the timetables, until the establishment of the ROPiT
agency at the port of Mitylene on the island of Lesbos (12-15 miles [19-24 km.] to the west of Makaronia).
Apart from the timetable of fixed ports of call, the cargo and passenger steamers of the ROPiT also stopped
at other points because of the presence there of freight and they therefore hugged the shoreline.

As a rule, the steamers called at the bigger ports by dawn, clearly trying to shorten the arrival times and the
corresponding port fees. The stopping-place at Makaronia on a roadstead without port charges facilitated
the stay at Smyrna (Izmir) at dawn. Later on, the role of this "stopover" as noted above, was played by the
port of Mitylene. It is feasible that this stopping place could have permitted the possibility in one way or
another of becoming acquainted with the trade potential of the area and of bypassing the markets of
Smyrna and other ports. It is possible that commercial ties were concluded, which were confirmed on the
return trip, when the steamer called at Makaronia on Thursday night and shortened the departure on Friday
to 2 pm. The cargoes could have consisted of skins, olives, dates, etc. The possibility cannot be excluded of
utilising the services of a pilot on the stretch from the Dardanelles to Makaronia, because of the presence
of the many navigational hazards on this route. There may also have been other reasons for such a
stopping-place, but they would have become irrelevant quite soon.
Editorial Comment: Dots 823-827 were assigned to unknown ROPiT ports, also possibly to Makaronia.
June, 1999

B aba
Bab a



jenitce -.lca
;o6 o

CL'lIlOS) .
FortaMe it-j

AI ,t D rIj ts-
3, L *~l^ uv



64 ,o

;n. ),

June, 1999

Russian map and
timetable referring



Mecy OAECCOIO, CXpnoIo, Bespy-rox,, R4

qPE3 AnB HEAaH. -.I


Hla OXECChI a Cy66oTy, isi 4 xeeporb. Bsi
S(Huap 14, 28; 4'spula l,25;Mapa 11,
25; Anpliu 8, 22; Mu 6, 20; IvN 3,
17; ImD. 1,15, 29. ArtcTr 12, 26; Ce-
Tix6p 9, 23; Orrt6ps 7, 21; Hoisps 4,
18; ,(,eups 2, 16, 30).
SXOI01ICTAIITH110110.nl i Cpezy, meiep.
*i JFpluanu na. esBepn, =cxopr nDcuj 4va

>falapP# 3 r. 'Iere l-pri, zoLo. a 3
CMHPnIU a Cy66to7, as nsoJaL. *
(lzaupt 7, 21; 4'eipaui 4, 18; Maprm 4,
S18; Anpizs 1, 16,29; Max 13,27; Iho
10, 24; Inru 8, 22; Aarycra 5, 19; Cez-
S T6ps 2, 16, 30; OTr6ps 14, 28; Hox6pl
11, 25; Aexadpl 9, 23).
Xloea n. Cy66ory, 9 oaso oX. o.
a PoSoca n Bocipec, cxooph noci .pap. I
v Mepesui sDo Bropuni., aeepo. .
AAexarcwpemmu as Cpexy, saeeporx.
Ilamaidan s erseprs, yTpoWt.
a T2uno.m si. mersepr, neiepor.,
a BERPYTA na Cy66ory, sevpoms. b
*IIp 6jarouplnotl noroxh napoxoAs 6y.
A .". aer azops ns Axp.
4;: 4li a t. eocpr.cen.,no o. rn. otpapnId. i
S(RIeasl, f, 15, 29; 'cnp.I 12, 21; ManIjr
12, 26; AnplLi 9, 23; Ma 7, 21; loea
4, 18; Io.a 2, 16, 30; ABrycra 13, 27;
Ceurs6ps 10, 24; Onrtpsr 8,22; Hoz4ps
.5, 19; ,Iea6p 3, 17, 31).
11apoxs. 6yAvers 3axoAsTI T. n0opT.
CatS, IOrAa 6yAers ntaii TYa rppyu.

BIs AA~FEICANIAPII Cy6fxry, neieporn. eI i 14,4" In, I
(fltimnin 7, 21; 1fcnpas 4, 18; Mflpra 4,18;
Anglrhl 1, 15, 29; bMas 13, 27; loul 10,
24; lu l 8, 22; Anrycra 5, 19; Cerrrx6ps
2, 16, 30; Orrtaps 14, 28; 1Ho plt 11,
256: APn1a,[ 9, 23).
llnuotJi. '.AI, a ytr oAUT. i Ian nolyr
'CaIIp., olAfn GyAern. uamrT. TyAs rpyIu.
S ,l'14,' hb IwIonexfA.u ., no oionL.ouepadlu. *, LEPYTT
IlpU 6arTonpirTnoa noroxt nnpoxoAl 6y-
S er. 3x zoxlss ra Axpy.
-r-BEIpyTkA-s-CpeXTr,7o yunofu aw
a, TpuAo a as qTneprs, a 10 4ac. yTpa. a Jumarim a
a Jlimwii a1. 'letaepr iiocepO,.. A.v.escaci7pe
a AA.4nrilpemmu Irt. llIlHHny, ncI'llrpni. ArFpcwy ir
A AlrpemM ji. Cy(4uy Ini. l aitr noIwiyLAi"I. a fAOe'. ai, I
S'o,, in. 1 IIIIIA. Orsoph nocjii alxo1A. a Xioes so Dr
a X| Nla so ItruIIIUIIx,, nrxnil IocA.h nciixou. CMIPII'IY i
SCMll '1ll 31. 'lCrieprn., as 4 yacan'Iepa. a Magapoiia
(nfusaps 6, 19; 1eupai. 2, 16; Mapra 2,
16, 30; AnptrJ 13, 27; Mal 11, 25; Io-
as 8, 22; IDos 6, 20; AerycTr 3, 17,31;
Cerrrz6p 14, 28; Oxrs6pi 12, 26; Ho-
x6ps 9, 23; AezS6px 7, 21).
lairposl ar IntHN, 2 .ionofl.yiuOt. a Japat.im l
S a0NMeJ. IallTrtr,3c3olh noerhniHIo-a. *, KOHCI'AW
(IS rrors I
Aimr arb I

osexiupa o rj Tpon. -.

so Bropwan.

'lcmieprs, c. patir.
h stqseprs., 301epow. .
nmy IfiTIRiNuy, Cai pacxwt.
. Cyf' r, pano TrpOrs.
IonexstjLinu ppoari.
opIrI1, pano Yrpork.
o DropunIn, iepork.
a Herseprn, Uo'in.

1pTs AToiep ., KTp U )
I. Hersepr, yrpoir .

June, 1999


rlrrrlrll I '

EOHCTA=BTHOIIO. a nozexinam .

'a7 e 3s 'eTspr. f, Tpp".

is sev ~ o-
daoapea v 1. ernepr, ieepoM- .

CMIPHYl a Israrny, ac pcstion. .';
XoiM an Cy66ory, sespom. .

Poou o Bocxpecene, erpo -
eftqsay so BTOpaan, L noue ..
_A.ucwudpiamy Cpef, a Pc~ OXr .
amarrio as esepnr, paac~kroxi .
Tpmau a 'Iernepra, a epOK ''
BEEPyTL IT Ilrrzy, ck p acrow "..'
I1Ty a. Boc.peceie., 3 ono7-'."

.. : : -

S AA.UA, O ... r
.; .


by Derek Palmer.

(Editorial Note: While we are still in the Levant, we take great pleasure in presenting these notes by
Derek. At the age of 91 years, he is our 2nd. oldest member and active in acquiring literature and in writing
up pieces in his many fields of interest. He has lived in Santiago, Chile since 1924 and keeps up a steady
correspondence with us on various aspects of philately and postal history).

Fig. 1 on the next page shows a cover sent at the 10-kopek foreign letter rate by Z.K. Maltsev of St.
Petersburg and handled on 30 November 1891 by Crew No. 2 of a postal station on a TPO/RPO (illegible
route No.). It passed through Odessa-18 on 3 December and arrived at Mount Athos four days later. There
is a notation added on the back after arrival that Mal'tsev had sent five roubles, presumably in a banknote.
He was obviously well educated, as he addressed the letter in Russian and French: "Via Odessa to
Constantinople, to the post office of the Russian Company of Navigation and Trade, for delivery to Mt.
Athos to the Cell of St. John Chrysostom. To the Prior and Priest Cyril and brethren". We will see below
that this form of address has been copied from a printed envelope, circulated by Prior Cyril to facilitate
donations, as such examples are headed "Lettre Charg6e" and "JEHE)KHbI".

Fig. 2 does not reproduce well because of the colour of the envelope, but it was sent from Mt Athos some
time in May 1894. It passed through Odessa-36 on 14 May and arrived in St. Petersburg five (?) days later.

Fig. 3 is interesting as it was sent by Aleksei Timofeevich Shcherbakov in the village of Smirnovo,
Zhilyakovskaya district and posted as an insured letter containing five roubles at Ishim, Tobol'sk province
on 7 December 1900. It was in Tyumen' two days later (note the inverted year date!), in Khar'kov on the
16th. and Odessa-55 on the 18th. There are notes on the back that the money was received on 8 January
1901 and a reply sent on 17 February. This insured letter is addressed to the Il'inskii Hermitage, for delivery
to the Abbot Archimandrite Father Gabriel and brethren. The rectangular cachet at top front centre is dated
20/XII 1901 and is probably connected with a filing procedure.

Editorial Comment: It would be useful now to record the settings on the printed envelopes circulated by
various Russian religious bodies on Mount Athos and in the Holy Land, so as to obtain a clear picture of
this practice.

Fig. 4 on p. 68 features a front of an insured letter, which originally contained five roubles and is now held
by Mr. Palmer. It shows the printed address in Russian and French already referred to in Fig. 1.

Fig. 5 on p. 68 is completely in Russian and reads: "To the city of Odessa, to the (St.) Andrew Church
Complex on Athos, to be forwarded to Athos, to the Russian St. Andrew Social Hermitage, to the Prior and
Priest Jerome and brethren". It was sent unpaid through the Terovskaya (?) District Administration on
20.9.06 and was struck there with a corresponding postage due oval marking for double the deficiency = 20
kopeks. The letter passed through Odessa-38 the next day. There is a note in red pencil at front bottom,
reading "B- 06wrTejb" = "To the Cloister".

Fig. 6 on p. 68 has a printed address, reading in Russian: "Via Odessa to the Holy Mount Athos (Turkey),
to the Prior of the Cloister of St. Nicholas the Worker of Miracles at the Filofeevskii Monastery, to the
Priest George and brethren" and in French: "Via Odessa, to Mount Athos (Turkey), to the Reverend Father
George and brethren".

Fig. 7 on p. 68 reads in Russian: "Via Odessa to the Holy Mount Old Athos, Russian Post, to the Prior of
the Social Holy Trinity Cloister, to the Priest and Father Niphont with brethren, from....." and in French:
June, 1999

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2. Fig. 3.
June, 1999


/7 1 '4 -.

s iepeaaelio I a AeoK ^-1

,,.]&z PyCC:iii lG li;. I pA((clf:ii' O Liii;I;. Gl;tlTTk
HA~~ofTeJIo ApxmiaaspuHTy IEPOHM MY
S. O paTieto.

Fig. 5.

Pyccnui na)rl. H.tcr wTF.'o ycctoa OGrETxreTr

11. 3J72,,/ot d-im Cum,



Fig. 7.

68 Fig. 8.
June, 1999

Fig. 4.

Fig. 6.


Fig. 8 on p. 68. This final example refers to the Holy Land and first reads in French: "VIA ODESSA,
TURKEY, HAIFA OR NAZARETH, The Superior Priest DIODOROS of Mount Thabor" and in Russian:
"Via Haifa, Turkey, to Haifa and Nazareth, to the Right Reverend Prior and Priest of the Thabor Monastery
to the Archimandrite Diodor. With enclosure".

Conclusions: Many other settings must obviously exist from both areas, including those circulated by
Jewish religious bodies in the Holy Land and details would be much appreciated. An interesting point is the
array of Odessa cancellers used as transit markings: ODESSA 18, 36, 38 & 55. Does anyone have an
explanation for these variations in numbering?


All orders should be made out to the CSRP, Box 5722 Station-A, Toronto, Ont., Canada M5W 1P2.
Previously advised titles are all regretfully sold out.

P.C. Q.C.P. Cneuuaana3upoBaHHnib KaTaaor HnoqTOBblX MapoK 1918-1923 (RSFSR Specialised
Catalogue of Postage Stamps 1918-1923). A 140-page soft-cover study on high quality paper with many
details including in colour, postal history and extensive foreword in English. Price postpaid US $40.00.

page study with clear photos, including in colour and available at publisher's price postpaid at US $20.00.

OhECCKAH HOHTA (The Odessa Post), by V. Kofman & R. Kalin. A detailed 58-page study in
Russian and English of all aspects of Odessa postal history from 1803 onwards, including occupations,
markings in Ukrainian, postal code data etc. Fascinating! Limited supply! Price postpaid US $10.00.

CSRP reprint of this 1932 Kharkiv work on the world's first postal code system. Thousands of postal codes
listed alphabetically and numerically.Ideal for Ukrainian postal historians. Price postpaid US $20.00.

KOJIJIEKlUHOHEP No 33 ("The Collector" No. 33). A 320-page manual in Russian with authoritative
articles on philately, incl. Tridents, postcards, numismatics and paper money. Price postpaid US $12.50.

B nOMOIIb PYKOBOAIHTEJIIO HH30BOfI CBI3H (To the aid of the Director of Lesser
Communications), by M.B. Matlin, Moscow 1931. A 96-page reprint in A5 format, serving as a guide to
the inner workings of the Soviet Postal Service. Interesting! Price postpaid US $ 6.00.

HOPE ABANDONED, by Nadezhda Mandelshtam. Candid reminiscences by the widow of the noted poet
Osip Mandelshtam and of their literary contemporaries in a paperback edition of 692 pages. Originally.
published at US $14.00. Of great historic interest. Price postpaid US $10.00.

SOVIET DIARY 1927 & OTHER WRITINGS, by S.S. Prokofev. An absorbing book by this great
composer with interesting photos and notes re growing terror. Limited supply! Price postpaid US $ 9.50.

LEARN TO SPEAK RUSSIAN WITHOUT A TEACHER, by the Rapid System. This excellent manual
gives you all the basics of the language, to help you appreciate your material. Price postpaid US $ 3.00.

June, 1999

by Andrew Cronin.


Papers -1 santimu.
K UR ....... ............................... ...............
KYaA (pasta isttdes. apgabala vai novada rajona. ciema vai sddias nosaukums. bet dz. stac. ari
dzelzcela nosaukums Maumenos. xecma. zde Haxodumcn noNma, u o6.iacma .Lan xpat. a
czi cmaHnuu nHaaenosanue w. 0)w

(rajona, apdzrvotds vietas vai majas nosaukums palon. ceao u dOepeena)

(ietas nosankums. mijas an dzlvokla numurs y.tuLga. 2 do.va a Ksapmapb)

K A M .......................................................................................................................................................__. .
KOMY (pilns adrdsata nosaukums nodpo6doe axMertnoeamue adpecama)

SilTtdia nosaukums un adrese ---
S.ttj.a nosa.ikums un adrese ..................... ................ ..... ..... ... .
Haumenotsanue u aOpec omnpaeumejif

Fig. 1.
One of the results of the incorporation of Latvia into the USSR as a Union republic on 5 August 1940 was
the subsequent issue towards the end of that year of a bilingual Latvian-Russian postcard with a face value
of 10 santimu. A note below the die impression stated that the cost of the paper stock itself was one
santims; that was a convention carried over from the previous Latvian Republic. This well-designed card
on light brownish stock measures 145 x 102 mm. and bears at bottom right an imprint in Latvian, which
above). Herr Harry von Hofmann has noted in his recent book "LETTLAND Die Ganzsachen und
postamtlichen Formulare 1918-1940" that there is a variety on the impressed die of this card: a spot in the
sun above the middle wave. The date of issue has not been specified in the literature, but we know that two
postage stamps in the same design first appeared on 21 October 1940.

In the experience of the present writer, we are faced here with two main questions. First of all, when was
this Soviet-style card originally issued and, secondly, why is it that mint cards are relatively easy to find
and used examples are so scarce? To find the answers, we would have to consider at least two factors:-
(a) The rate of exchange between the latss" and roublee" currencies after incorporation. It was one-for-one.
(b) Look at the postal rates of the Latvian Republic and of the USSR, the latter coming into force after
incorporation. The comparison is as follows:-
Latvian Republic rates Soviet rates as
Type of mail 15.4.1935 to 5.8.1940 of 1 February 1939
Greeting card: maximum of five words 3 santimi 3 santimi / kopeks (*)
Local postcard 5 santimi 10 kopeks
Domestic postcard 10 santimu 20 kopeks
Foreign postcard 20 santimu 30 kopeks
Local letter 5 santimi 15 kopeks
Domestic letter 20 santimu 30 kopeks
Foreign letter 35 santimi 50 kopeks
(*) Not strictly a Soviet rate, but apparently tolerated as two examples seen with Latvian Arms stamps.
June, 1999


KUR ................. ..
KYAA (pasta islddri. aprabaa vsa nada ajon ema dabi slas nosaukms. bet ds. sir .

-.-, -. -... ._... .............
KOMy (p adi resr nfssaatams anopodoe a6* aa eoeanae adpcama)
Saimtaja nosaukums an adrese a-a .-7, 13 ..l i .
lHau.enosamue a adpec omnpaeume. T *

Fig. 2.

S -PA--Ri F

11 0 / B. 5 ( ...... ..... ....
; 170 .-A p .

tel::'a? nhs,.ka rs a > a. t o c ma a a

4aja, Ud ista (. -

ticsl nosanktanes majas an d a^ 'i' -aru no .s s X o.n a .aepmapaJ

KAM < --- -^ ,-
KOM.V ,pilea adaresula noasiivm mnqpi Hnoesiaan i me aftlarams) s

,esa emcno e u aspec omnpcaumeo. a gP -P
.... -

Fig. 3.


KYIA (pasta Ittia apsbl vato a p a as Ia

K.~ as aZ tk -41 -1. -1.

(itea nasaebamsi. sias a daleaila umers y.Paie M / o as Uaparapm )

KAM /u4. __

Saltdja noasaakums an adarese _&r OI L 6. e 1 4
HaaMosaue aa apec omnpasumeA

Fig. 4.

_^o a m sa .* a i.7 u.C prC a

i rasL, uhsmass atls Do Cs d .a am es pas... .a doas aC I Cpt *e.* -

KAM 4' aJS
KOMY ^ (psa r sia-s assaa.lanats noa -ar-nemmsetsna apmn)

SFig ....... 6..l

Fig. 6.

Rigas pasta izzira. tOBA5 KAPTOqKA
Adresats K* 0/

"nedvr -U i"ms --- name"". .
psrg jis uz nezinamu viettl a"" 5" a a a .;
.... ....... ...... ..
/ "' "... i' o. ..
1es5' /i ssai- A nas paia. s~ seana 0 ) f s
Pastnieki: a
....... ... .... ...
Adresu biroji' izina aap "- -"
KOA-Y ..p.. .... i s as.is._.aspa. o a." 4 .mfYy
Suldja nosauksums an adrese e CAFie. f

Fig. 5.

KUR .y.-- .. .

... l... .. .... x..... ai. -... .o r S i
/--' -'" mmw "*--'--^-nr-- -----.- ------- --- L'^
*s5raju, iFwods vi M a a ansenias pss a m s --

(ietar noaskamsa.. Snaian r cbl es a nmas yaea. .M iaee paip. '
KA M. ,A ._ :
--..... / e_-.. .__ r__2r_ _.._..L-:_......._ ___
ACOMY vpilnisitaam asaa*insa nasdn .p C u iuprtamS
SOtltIja noiaukams an adrese -
Haunenosasue a opec omnpasumeA.a
---..- I_._ .__~~ ~__~_

Fig. 7.

June, 1999


i. ... ;Y~e


Local and domestic registration fee 20 santimu 30 kopeks
Foreign registration fee 40 santimu 80 kopeks

In looking at these data, it is difficult to understand why the card was issued in the first place, as there
would have been limited demand for local sending and other categories of mail would have required
additional postage. We can also see that the Soviet rates were as much as double the previous Latvian
Republic charges and that leads to the suspicion that the 1:1 currency conversion was in general unfair,
deliberately or otherwise. It may also be postulated that senders in Latvia resisted these rises in the rates
and kept on prepaying their mail at the tariffs of the former Latvian Republic. That must surely be one of
the reasons why usages of this Latvijas PSR 10-santimu card are so hard to find and, among other things,
the result was payment by the addressees of double the Soviet deficiency. We will now examine some of
the usages to see what happened in each case.

Fig. 2 on the previous page shows this card sent from Riga 19.12.40 to Tartu, Estonia 22.12.40 and thus
unpaid by 10 santimu/kopeks. Riga noted double the deficiency = 20 kopeks in the oval marking at top left.

Fig. 3 was first noted by the late Andrejs Petrevics in the journal he edited: "Latviesu Filatelists un
Kolekcionars" No. 3-62, June 1966, p. 8 and kindly brought to the attention of the present writer by
Valentins T. Dibols of California. It was sent from BRIEZI 31.12.40, apparently by an interned Polish
officer to the police authorities in L6di (General-Government). A 20-santimu adhesive was also affixed to
the card to help pay the correct 30-kopek foreign rate and the item was censored en route by the Germans.

Fig. 4 has a card with a 10-santimu Latvian Arms stamp added to pay the correct domestic rate of 20
santimu from Liepija 12.2.41 to Vainode.

Fig. 5 illustrates a properly used local card from the Valentins T. Dabols collection, sent within Riga
24.3.41 and bearing an attached slip because of inability to deliver the next day.

Fig. 6 features a nice non-philatelic example of a card upgraded to pay the domestic rate of 20 kopeks,
with a mixed franking of Soviet and Latvian postage from Riga 30.3.41 to Liepaja three days later. The
new Soviet canceller is entirely in Russian: FOP. PIHFA F.)K.3. (City of Riga, Newspaper and Magazine
Despatch Office [?])

Fig. 7 has a curious non-philatelic usage during the early part of the Nazi occupation from Majori 17.9.41
to Riga the next day. Note that the Latvian SSR arms insignia at top left has been crossed out, also the
addition of 10 kopeks Soviet postage and the oval marking at centre right of Majori, showing 20 kopeks as
postage due. What was the correct rate then: 20 kopeks or 30 kopeks, as the OSTLAND overprints on the
Hitler heads were not issued until 4 November 1941 to cover the corresponding German tariffs?

To sum up, it would be helpful to have details of further usages of this unusual card. We will also look at
other frankings and the distribution of postal supplies during the period of the Soviet Posts in Latvia 1940-
1941 in a forthcoming issue of "The Post-Rider".

An Unusual German Label
The item shown here in actual size at right is printed in yellow, blue and brown.
It reads "Your letter builds bridges in the Soviet Zone" and was obviously
intended to encourage correspondence with the eastern part of Germany.
Does anyone have it affixed to inter-zonal mail, together with any Cold War
notations, or even know when it was issued ?
June, 1999

by Dr. Arkadii M. Sargsyan.

60 Kopeck surcharges on 1 Kopeck Imperial Arms
Overprinted by four types of single metal handstamps in black or violet ink. Introduced for this value to cover the postal rate
for ordinary local and intercity letters in the earliest period of July 1919, but not in October 1919, as previously recorded
and catalogued. Remained in use up to June 1920.
Type 1. Introduced at Aleksandropol' P.O. and brought into use in July 1919.

Early stage with oily black ink

K 60 K

Inverted with normal

7,~ -

B.1fr rilI

Late use: diluted grey-black ink.

Note variations of the surcharge, due to the degree and quality of the ink and the angle of handstamp strikes.

A single 1-kop. Arms bearing the 60 k. surcharge Type 1 in black to make up the required fee for an ordinary intercity letter
up to 1 lot (12.8 grammes), sent from Aleksandropol' on 10.7.1919 (three months earlier than catalogued) to Erivan'
An unlisted earliest recorded entire with the first issue of Armenian postage stamps. One cover known.

June, 1999


July, 1919. First issue. Republic of Armenia

60 Kopeck surcharges on 1 Kopeck Imperial Arms
Type 2 (the first "K" and the "60" followed by a stop), introduced at Erivan' P.O.

^ 1 !%ioi -.,.
W.DT'. .... ... .

"K" missing Inverted Triple in In violet.
at right, in black, black.

Note the variations of the surcharge due to the human factor (incomplete, inverted, multiple strikes).

K. 60. KF

i ... -.- "

-4 P
marking n scr p on reverse -' -- : .--

.. ,. ..-.,,^__., ..._- ."

Two copies of the 1-kop. bearing Type 2 in black on a registered Urgent (manuscript note '"Cpoinoe" in Russian on the
back) intercity letter, sent from Aleksandropol' 16.9.19 to Erivan' 17.9.19 at the correct rate of I r. 20 k., which consisted of
60 k. for an ordinary intercity letter and 60 k. for the registration fee. No charge for being urgent No other genuinely
used urgent cover is recorded within the stamp emission period of 1919-1920. This is an unlisted earliest usage of the
Type 2 surcharge on a commercial cover, a month earlier than catalogued.
June, 1999
lI ..' -\" '' :;: "6 ':" '"" "" '%
'' : '- "''- :;' '"-' :" i

Twocopesof he1-kp.beaingTye 2inblak n areisedUrnt(auritoe"pooeinRsannth

June, 1999

July, 1919. First issue. Republic of Armenia

60 Kopeck surcharges on 1 Kopeck Imperial Arms

Type 2 (the first "K" and the "60" followed by a stop), introduced at Erivan' P.O.

in black

In black: "k"
missing at left

In violet:

Note the variations of the surcharge, due to the human factor (displaced, inverted and incomplete strikes).

A rare use on cover of the 1-kop. revalued with the 60-kop. Type 2 surcharge, being a mixed franking with an unoverprinted
10-kop. Arms, used at face on a registered intercity letter from Kars 7.11.19 (an Armenian town at that time) to Erivan'
15.11.19. The correct 1 r. 30 k. total rate consisted of 70 kop. for an ordinary intercity letter up to 15 grammes (i.e. more
than 1 lot), plus 60 kop. for the registration fee.

June, 1999

In black: "k"



July, 1919. First issue. Republic of Armenia

60 Kopeck surcharge, Type 3 (no periods after the first "K" and "60"), introduced at Erivan' P0

| /- ^--- "

Scarce use of Impert.1 kopeck Arms bearing Type 3 in black franked mixed with the Third issue stamp on an over.ve:ght
Registered intercity letter (1.5 lot marking in script) from a small town Echmiadzin, 20.02.1920 to Envan. 20.02 1920

Scarce late use of 60 kop. Type 3 surcharge in black on an underfranked Ordinary intercity letter sent
from Elenovka. 21.06.1920 to Allaverdy, franked at the 4 Rouble 80 kop. total rate with 20 kop.deficiency

* *. *
June, 1999

by Robert Taylor.

7. / : .... /- -.:,_------.

S J. X u

cachet pH B B3blCKT CMM / yK3HH a onaT apKe" ("Upon handing over,

ovAs examples of a correctional practice, we may examine the "He eTeTTCTBHTebHO" ("Not in effect" or "Invalid") cachet.

"toinvalid") markings noted on postage-due covers of the 1925n forwarded to Kislovodsk. The cover was cme into use in32
koApril 1925. First of all, postage due, with the-due covers utilizing tb" cahe issue of 1925bably appll bear the well-known two-arrival in
Kiscollect the sum specified k. and on2 x 14 k.the postage-due stamp"), indicating that the ceaddntresse of the flhad to pay the blamountck
equal to tcahe postage-due stamps. Then, if stamps" added below. Howevt were applied incorrectly, the over was addressed to

Poste Restante, it was returned to the Kislovodsk Vokzal post office, where the original postage-due stamps
were overstruck in violet "He aeiAcTBcTejbHo" and additional postage-due stamps: 2 x 2 k. at upper left
and 2 x 14 k. at lower right were affixed and cancelled Kislovodsk Vokzal.

The small cover at right is from Ostashkov, Tver' province 24 October to Leningrad 26 October and is
correctly franked at 7 k. but somehow got the "to pay equal to the stamps" marking in violet, which was
then overstruck with the "Not in effect / Invalid" cachet in red. Apparently prepared locally or regionally as
they have small type differences, I have only seen these two cachets used in the period of the 1925 postage-
due stamps, except for a 1924 postage-due cover with an example of the "He nefitcTBHTeajbHo" cachet on
the Chainbreakers overprinted "RonnaTa", so I presume that the cachet originated in that period.
Comments on these usages would be appreciated.

June, 1999

29 HOR6pn 6 AeKa6ps 1996 r Ng 115 (144)

il -01 1! I AWl14 :!'Il 111 11 :

Ta KapMnHOBRa MapKa B TpH KO-
neiKM npeAcTaBneHa Ha pHcyH-
Ke. Mano KTO ee BMAenI, OAHaKO
OHa CyL eCTByeT. 3pR cCacTnmBble
ee o6naaTenw 6yAyyr KOnaTbCf B
KaTanorax. Ee TaM noKa HeT.
Euge B 1928 rosy B BblnycKe II
((( w3BecTHorO KaTanora nog pegaKLiM-
e O.r. HyMHHa Ha CTpaHM41e 11 B
npuMeqaHMH K BbinyCKy MapOK
((BocT04HaR KoppecnOHAeHL4RA))
1868 roAa cocTaBMTenb 3TOrO pa3-
Aena KaTanora OnblTHbili c inaTe-
nfCT A.. ronbuwTere yKa3an, 4TO
TorAa 6birnH ((H3roTOBneHbi K Bbiny-
CKy, HO He BblnyULeHbi B o6paLIeHHe
MapKH a 3 Kon. RpKO-KapMHHOBaR
Ha P030BOM POHe, 6e3- 3y6QOB).
CaMa no ce6e

o cyuAeCTBO-
pegKOR Map-
KM O4eHb LieH-
Ha. OAHaxo
H eKOTO p be
Bonpocbi. npe>
pap3ene r Pycci
A.R. eas3He
CCCPN, 1990 r.)
HyneM nepeA H
o6paAeeHMe H
KaTanore, AaHb
HMM K BblnyCKy
HanbHblM -K
onnaTblD, T. I,
MapKa npHBeAe
MMeHHO K Bbiny
TOPOM yxe 6bil
neeMHaR MapK
flonyqaercR, Iq
3aroTOBMIn A
MapKM: 3eneHy
3aTeM, no HeHM3
BblnyCTMnIM nep
BTopylo? Ecn
MapxM, TO 6po
3eneHbi TpexK
TanbHble HOMM
OTnearTaH Ha
CKOnbKO pblxno
TanbHblMM non
3HaKe, Torfa Ka
ToBneHa Ha yT
rnalKOA 6yMar
neqaTaHMR Map
rogy euLe He n
OTeeTbI Ha n(
Cbi nOnblTaeMCI
Bcero o6pau4ae
TOT 8caKT, 'TO

ro0a MMeiOT LIBeTa, TpagIqLOHHO
npHHATbte c 1843 roAa pAnn poccuCi-
CKMX KpeAMTHblX 6wneTOB py6ne-
neiKy M KpeAMTKa B 1 py6nb MMeloT
KopHMHeBbi l LBeT. TpexKoneeqHaR
MapKa, KaK M 6yMa>KHble TpW py6nR,
- 3eneHam. MapKa B 5 KoneeK no-
BTOpReT IBeT nnTMpy6neBorO Kpe-
Hel,, AeCRTHKoneeqHaR MapKa OTne-
qaTaHa, KaK M 6yMa>KHaR AgeCRTH-
py6neBKa, KpacHO-KapMMHOBOI
STO (OH BblnOnHeH CBeTnol 3ene-
HOBaTo-rony6oR KpacKoL (4TO, K
cnoBy, M AnJn AecRTMpy6neBOK 6o-
nee nO3AHMX BbinyCKOB CTajio Tpa-

1888 roAOS, KYK H pocc
qaTaHbl Ha 6onee ma
nponepcopmpoBaHbI H
$opaTope H nueirT He
teHHbie nonR An J 3y6L
BceMMpHOFO noqTroB
opaH)KeBo->enTble, 2 K
3eneHble, 5 KOn. -jI
Bble M, HaKOHeLt, 7 KOn.
anbHO BblnyLUeHHbiX MP
JleBaHTa, B ornsTIe oT
Bbinan OAlH HOMMHan
BaR MapKa B 3 KOn. A
JleBaHTa?.. BTr paccMar

MapKa cyuIecTBye,

HO ee KaK 6bl lOT

KaR no4Ta Ha BEnLI- 3aeTD KpaCHO- i aer c TpeXKoneeylHOA
)ypHanbHoro KaTa- KapMHHOBaR C1HM M34aH1HMR-1884 rog
MKa nog peAaKLMe4 TpeXKonee'rHa's HOBa MapKa B 3 KoneA
!pa (<(( 3TOM MapKe He npm- Bonee no3s- HOM B 1868 roAy, OHa

MM, KaK BCRKOI Map- MapOK- (BOC- lo -leMy )Ke 3ra Ma
iCR K BbinycKy, HO B TOLHOii Koppe- F OTT Bbinyu4eHa B noTOBoe
e nocTynhBLUwe, a CnoHAeHLH,1MM4 Ecn npocnefMTb H
i, KaK M' B'yHHCKOM no i4BeTy KaK 'PRAbl MapoK PyccKOr
Ii nHMb B npuMeqa- 6bi OTcne)KmBa- xpOHonorFH4eCKOI no
1868 roAa (CM. xyp- lOT y)Ke He 6y- HOCTM, TO HeTPYAHO 3
aTanor-cn'paBOqHMK MaKHble AeHbrH, a noqTOBble Map-- HOMMHan B 3 KOn. HOM
S3HaKOB nOqTOBOA KH POCCMiCKOA MMlnepMH. OHM no- BbinyCKa 1872 roAa. 3r
c. 56)? noqeMy 3Ta BTOpRIOT MapKM POCCMM He TOnbKO CR AByMs npuM4HaMIM.
CKy 1868 roAa, a KO- TenRM (copTy 6yMarn, no nep(4opa- HblM 8 MIOHF 1872 roA
la cepHwHaR TpexKo- LtMM, Kneio). BbinycK PyccKorO fle- MeKAqy Io4OTOBbIM le
a 3eneHoro BeTa? BarTa 1879 roAa aHanorHieH.Bbiny- POCCMM M PycKL M 06
rT K 3TOMy BbinyCKy CKaM POCCMI 1864-1875 m 1879 ro- poxAcrTBa M ToproBnn
Be TpexKonee6Hbie AOB. TaK, MapKH B 1 Kon. qepHble nm M3MeHeHbi nOrTOBb
IO M KapMMHOByIK, a c )KeJTblM q)OHOM, B 2 KOn. tep- OCTpOi HaAO6HOCTH B
BeCTHblM'npH1MHaM, Hble C KpaCHO-pp30BbIM Q OHOM, Ce- KoneeqHoro HOMMHar
ByIo H yHl4WTO)KMn MLMKoneeHHaR MapKa JleBaHTa BO-BTOpblx, npH nepec
cpaBHMBaTb 3TM ABe (KpacHaR C cepblM (OHOM) COBna- neeK a TypeL4Kyio ear
caeTcR a rna3a, uTO p.aeT no BeeTaM c pOCCGlMCKOit Map- nacb Heylo6HaR Pf1R p
oneeqHMK, KaK M OC- KOM B 7 Kon. (cepaR c KpaCHblM LteH- pa. rio STHM npHLnhatB
IHanbl 3TOI cepnn, TpoM). ipH 3TOM nepeM cneHHble Ka3a8nocb OT 3aroToBnt
O6blKHOBeHHOI, He- MapKHMPyccKoro JieBaHTa, KaK M Co- roAy KapMHHOBOLI Map
A 6yMare c rop430H- BpeMeHHble MM pOCCMICKMe, Bbiny- CneflOBaTenbHO, p
OCKaMM B BOARHOM CKanHcb Ha 6yMare M C ropM30H- MaR t4apKa Aon)KHa H
K KapMMHOBaR M3ro- TanbHblMM, wM C BepTMKanJbHblMM no- nore CBeo nopRAKOBb
OH'eHHOi- 6onee nOCKaMM B BOARHOM 3HaKe. cne MapKH PyccKoroJ
e..TaKaR 6yMara R HaKOHeL OAHOqBeTHbie MapKM roAa C HOMMHanOM B
)OK B POCC1n B 1868 ((BOCTOqHO KoppecnOHAeHiLHMM) KO nepe HOM
)HMeHRlaCb. 1884 ropa KaK 6bi OTcne)KMBaloT poc- ycTaHOBMBLUeCR c fln
OCTaBneHHble Bonpo- CN CKMe MapKM1 3TorO Ke roAa BbinyC- KaTanorOB TpaAp,1HLV
r nonyqMTb 143 cono- Ka. TaK, ace OHM 6bIBaioT 1MUlb Ha MapKa B o6pauieHMe
I H MapOK POCCMM H ynyqLUeHHOi 6yMare c ropW30HTanb- nyuLeHa, oonJxKeH 6bi-
o J1eBaHTa. rpeKAe HblMH nOnOCKaMM, nep4opmpOBaHbi HOnb, a BO BTopoH
T Ha ce6n BHMMaHMe Ha OAHOM m TOM me nepooparope w (AnR raueHbix 3K3eM
MapKM (BoCTOHHOli MMeIOT Manble nonR Anfl 3y6iQOB. naH npoHepK.
q4MM BbinyCKa 1868 MapKM nOBTOpHOro BbInycKa 1887-

June, 1999

;iCKIIe, OTre-
A oi 6ymare,
a ApyroM nep-
M.Horo yBe ;--
LOB. 4TO KaCa-
6paHbl B COOT-
>ro Colo3a ,
IT: 1 KOn. -
on. TeMHO-
- CHH"e pa3-
pRAy ot 1nin-
apOK PycxKro
MapoK POccin
: cpepA poc-
43 W KapMIHO-
cpeai MapOK
pHBBeMaR He-
ebinyu eH-
HaR KapMH-
B 3 KoneKia
B -3TOHr .Le-
noqKe. .TeM
6onee rTO
OHa H no 6y-
o KneiO coBna-
SMapKOM Poc-
a. 3ra KapM-
111 HeRBNReT-
KM, BblnyuLeH-
pKa He 6bmna
o rleBaHTa B
3MeTMTb, 'TO
,e3aeT nocne
u 06bRsHReT-
Bo-nepBbix, B
3b 3aKnlioeH-
[a AoroBopoM
iuecTBOMr na-
(POnMT) 6bi-
le TapHcbl, M
MapKax Tpex-
la He CTanio.
-ere Tpex KO-
!Ory nony-a-
ac-eTroB 14h-
eHHOI B 1884
MeTb B KaTa-
H HOMep no-
leBaHTa 1884
2 KOn. OAHa-
epoM, no
, noKOnbKy
He 6bina Bbl-
b nocTaBneHl
nnIpoB) cAe-



by F. Vanius.

This carmine stamp of 3 kopeks is shown in the illustration on the previous page. Very few people have seen
it, but it exists. Its fortunate holders can dig into the catalogues at random, but it is not there so far.

Back in 1928 in Part II ("Imperialist Russia") of the well-known catalogue edited by F.G. Chuchin and on
page 11 in a note regarding the 1868 issue of stamps of the Russian Levant (inscribed BOCTOqHA5I
KOPPECHOHAEIEHIJIi), the compiler of that section of the catalogue, the veteran philatelist A.P.
Gol'shtege, stated that, at that time, "there were prepared for issue, but not placed in circulation 3-kopek
stamps in bright carmine on a rose background and imperforate".

This information about the existence of such a quite rare stamp is very valuable. However, some questions
pop up involuntarily. Above all, why is it that in the section "The Russian Posts in the Middle East" of the
catalogue-handbook edited by A. Ya. Pevzner (see the insert in the magazine "FrnwaTerin CCCP" during
1990), this stamp was not assigned its own number prefixed with a zero, as with every stamp which was
prepared for use but not placed in circulation and why were the data about it given from the note to the 1868
issue, as in the Chuchin catalogue (see the "Catalogue-Handbook of Russian Postage Stamps", Part I, p. 56
of the insert) ?

Why was this stamp linked to the notes specifically with the 1868 issue, in which there was already a green
3-kopek value in the set ? Can it be that two 3-kopek stamps were prepared for this issue: in green and
carmine and then, for reasons unknown, the first was issued and the second destroyed ? If we compare these
two stamps, what strikes the eye is that the green 3-kopek stamps, as well as the rest of the set, were printed
on ordinary and somewhat porous horizontally laid paper, while the carmine stamp was prepared on delicate
and smoother paper. That grade of paper had still not been utilised in Russia for printing stamps in 1868.

We will attempt to get the answers to these posed questions from the juxtaposition of money vouchers and
stamps of Russia and the stamps of the Russian Levant. What attracted attention specifically was the fact
that the stamps of the Russian Levant issue of 1868 (BOCTOMHAI KOPPECHIOHJJEHUIII) were in
colours which had by tradition been accepted from 1843 onwards for Russian banknotes (currency bills) in
the rouble values. Thus, the 1-kopek stamp and the 1-rouble banknote were in brown. The 3-kopek stamp
and the 3-rouble banknote were in green. The 5-kopek stamp repeated the colour of the 5-rouble banknote
(blue). Finally, the 10-kopek stamp and the 10-rouble banknote were both printed in carmine-red and the
stamp was also characterized by having a bright greenish-blue background (which, incidentally, became
traditional for later issues of the 10-rouble banknotes). The carmine-red colour of the 3-kopek stamp had in
no way crept in.

The later issues of the BOCTOtHAA KOPPECnOHIZ EHIJII stamps would approach in colour not
those of the banknotes, but rather the postage stamps of the Russian Empire. They repeated the stamps of
Russia not only by colours, but also by other indications (grade of paper, type of perforation and gum). The
1879 issue of the Russian Levant was analogous with the 1864-1875 & 1879 issues of Russia. Thus, the 1-
kopek Levant stamps in black with yellow background, the 2-kopek in black with rose-red background and
the 7-kopek in red with grey background corresponded in colours with the Russian stamps (e.g. the 7-kopek
Russian stamp in grey with red centre). The enumerated stamps of the Russian Levant, as well as their
Russian contemporaries, were issued on horizontally and vertically laid paper.

Finally, the single-colour stamps of 1884 inscribed BOCTOHHAAI KOPPECnOHAEHIIJI would
approach those of the Russian stamps of the same year. Thus, they all appear on paper of better quality,
horizontally laid and are perforated by one and the same perforator, with narrow margins between the stamps

for the perforations. The Russian Levant stamps reissued in 1887-1888, as well as their Russian counterparts,
were printed on smoother paper, perforated on another machine and have somewhat wider margins between
the stamps for the perforations. Regarding the colours, they were selected in accordance with the agreement
reached by the member-countries of the UPU and corresponded exactly: 1-kopek orange-yellow; 2-kopek
dark green; 5-kopek lilac-violet and, finally, the 7-kopek in various shades of blue. One value dropped out of
this series of officially issued stamps of the Russian Levant by contrast with the stamps of Russia; among the
Russian stamps there was still the 3-kopek value in carmine. But among the Levant stamps ?

Upon examining the unissued 3-kopek carmine stamp of the Russian Levant, we see the missing link in this
little chain. So much the more that by paper, colours and gum it corresponds with the 3-kopek stamp of
Russia of the 1884 issue. This 3-kopek value in carmine is not a colour proof of the stamp issued in 1868,
but is a stamp which came out independently in 1884.

Why was this stamp not put into postal circulation ? If we investigate the range of values of the Russian
Levant stamps in chronological and consecutive order, it is not difficult to notice that the 3-kopek value
disappears after the 1872 issue. That can be explained by two reasons. Firstly, in accordance with the newly
concluded agreement of 8 June 1872 between the Postal Department of Russia and the Russian Company of
Navigation and Trade (ROPiT), the postal rates were changed and there was therefore no urgent need for
stamps of the 3-kopek value. Secondly, in reckoning 3 kopeks in Turkish currency, an inconvenient
equivalent was obtained in accounting. For these reasons, the ROPiT also refused to accept the 3-kopek
carmine stamp of 1884.

As a consequence, the stamp we have been looking at should have its own consecutive number in the
catalogues after the stamp of the Russian Levant 1884 issue with the face value of 2 kopeks. However, in
accordance with the tradition established for Russian catalogues, a zero should be placed in front of the
number, as the stamp was not put into circulation and, in the second column for used stamps, there should be
a dash.

Editorial Comment: The above article is a model of philatelic investigation and it is hoped that it will also
spur research into these modest stamps inscribed BOCTOHHASI KOPPECHIOHJEHLI5I. They are
much sought after on covers and cards, for reasons of postal history. However, loose stamps are a different
story, as they are small, often printed in dark colours and cancelled with pale blue postmarks, which are
difficult to read. Very frustrating Moreover, one wonders where all the sheet material has gone to, as there
must be all sorts of varieties in plate numbers, flaws and markings, narrow and wide settings of the cliches,
paper and watermark differences, etc. In short, seek and ye shall find; this is virgin material, pregnant with
possibilities, as the late Robson Lowe once said.


OBITUARY Ryszard Poddubiuk

It is with deep regret that we announce the death on 22 September 1998 of our member of long standing in
Montreal. Mr. Poddubiuk was an ethnic Pole and a native of Lwow (L'viv in the Western Ukraine). He
specialised in the postal history of the Congress Kingdom of Poland and your editor was privileged to carry
his exhibit of that material to several international exhibitions, where it obtained excellent awards. Our
sincere condolences go out to his wife and family. Niech spoczywa w pokoju !

June, 1999

by Alexander EpStein.

As an addition to the notes by Alexandros Galinos ("The Post-Rider" No. 43, pp. 71-74), here are some more
examples of mail from the WWI Caucasian theatre of war, which were not shown in my "Rossica Journal"

Fig. 1 below features one more postcard from the Janis Melders correspondence and addressed to Mrs M.
Melders. The message in Latvian was written in Rize on 30 June 1916. The postmark of Reserve Field Post
Office No. 161, serial "g" with the same date, had been placed there somewhat apart from the 3-kop. stamp,
which was later cancelled on arrival of the postcard in Moscow on 12 July. There is also an incomplete
boxed censorship mark in black with the letters "j. LU." (~o3BoneHo ULeH3ypoil = Permitted by
Censorship), without indication of the place of censoring. As a matter of fact, an item of mail could be
censored at the post office of despatch as well as at the destination, or at a transit post office.. However, this
marking surely belongs neither to Moscow, nor to such possible transit points as Batum or Baku, where
black ink was never used for censorship markings. Thus, there remains either the Reserve FPO No. 161 at
Rize, or the transit post office in Tiflis as the actual place of censorship. The latter seems more probable,
since there could well have been censors with a command of the Latvian language among the numerous
censorship personnel.

Fig. 2 here depicts a postcard to Volmar (the present Valmiera in Latvia), with the message also in Latvian.
The free-frank cachet reads: "nOCTPOI4KA BOEHHbIXb )KEJI. AOP. TPAnE3OHACKAFO
PAIOHA / AJim niAKETOB'b" (Construction of Military Railways of the Trebizond Area / For
Packages). Such construction of a railway line between Batum and Trebizond took place in 1916-1917, but

RE ',5TLE.f2-"..

I In

,'.E d _. ....... ... .

Fig. 2. Fig. 3.
June, 1999

Fig. 4. Fig. 6.
was never finished. The poorly applied strike of the despatching postmark is that of Reserve Field Post
Office No. 159, serial "a" in Trebizond and dated ?.7.17 (the message written on 3 July).

Fig. 3 on the previous page shows a postcard to Krasnoe Selo, Petrograd province, with a message also in
Latvian and written on 14 (or 19) July 1916. It has a free-frank cachet "TPAHCnOPTb JX 2" (Supply
Ship No. 2) and no date postmarks at all; that was not uncommon for this kind of mail and was in conformity
with the corresponding regulations. Indeed, the message begins with the words in Russian "t(own) of
Trapezond'"so if an FPO postmark had been applied, it would have pointed to the location of this FPO a
matter of secrecy. As to the arrival postmark, it is often found missing on ordinary postcards during those
years in Russia.

Fig. 4 above is a 3-kop. postal stationery card from Sarykamysh to Riga, which actually could have been sent
postfree, as it had the corresponding free-frank cachet in red, reading: "JIasaper- KaBKa3CKaro CoIo3a
Fop. / CapbIKaMblu-b" (Hospital of the Caucasian Union of Towns / Sarykamysh). Again, there is no
despatch mark, but one can see an arrival postmark in the form of four parallel lines, which seem to be
portions of one of the Riga machine cancellations. The postcard was readdressed to Moscow, but there is no
Moscow postmark. Unfortunately, the message in Latvian also gives no indication of the date of mailing for
this card.

Fig. 5 above has a picture postcard with a view of Tabriz, Persia and a free-frank cachet reading:
"nIyJeMeTHna KoManaa 602 To6onbCKOfi apy>K. / .JIna laKeTOB-b" (Machine-Gun Command of the
602nd. Tobol'sk Detachment / For Packets) and is addressed to Vladikavkaz. It was censored at the same
detachment with an applied cachet: "nPOCMOTP-BHO BOEHHOI UIEH3YPOIf / 602fi
To6onbcKOif apyX>KHa / fIpanopIumnK'....(with signature)" = Examined by the Military Censorship / of
June, 1999

the 602nd. Tobol'sk Detachment / Ensign....). There is no despatching postmark, but a trace of the arrival
marking of Vladikavkaz. There exists another and similar postcard from the same correspondence, also with
a view of Tabriz, thus pinpointing the place of mailing for both cards. It is known that no Russian field post
office functioned in Tabriz (the Russian consular post office in that town did not deal with soldiers' mail)
and mail from that town was handled at Dzhul'fa, where it was delivered by the Tabriz-Dzhul'fa railway.

Fig. 6 on the previous page. This item was described earlier in my note in the BJRP, but it is worth featuring
here as well, the more so as it should also be of interest to railway-post collectors. The postcard to Moscow
has the postmark reading: "mIOTOB. BAFOH-b MAKHIH(CKO4 X)K.) J." (Postal Van of the Maku
Railway), serial "b" and dated 27.7.17. A free-frank cachet of the same postal van confirms the right to free
postage. This postal van, a TPO/RPO as a part of the Russian field post system on the Caucasian Front ran
along the railway line built for military purposes in 1916 and connecting Shakhtakhty on the Aleksandropol'-
Dzhul'fa line on Russian territory, with Karakilisa in Turkey and with the main way-stations at Maku, Persia
and Bayazid, Turkey. There was also a branch line from Bayazid to Amis on the shore of Lake Van. This
postcard from the same correspondence as that from Bayazid in Fig. 31 of my "Rossica Journal" article was
probably written by a field post official.

A comment to Fig. 5 of the article by Alexandros Galinos ("The Post-Rider" No. 43, p.72) as a warning to
collectors. This seemingly genuine item of mail originally had no date postmarks (see the description for Fig.
3 in the present notes). Unfortunately, it was later spoiled by two strikes of an Astrakhan' "arrival" postmark
of a design never used in pre-1918 Russia, but which was typical of the later Soviet period. It is known that
such strikes have been applied as despatchh" or "arrival" postmarks to various different covers, genuine or
completely faked, by a certain person in Moscow.

Another comment concerns the Editorial Comment and Fig. 9 in "The Post-Rider" No. 43, p. 74. That cover,
certainly emanating from the Caucasian theatre of war, has a typical serial "a" cancellation of FPO No. 159
in Trebizond, with a slightly deformed figure "9" making it look like an "8". This cancellation could not have
been applied at FPO No. 158, which was attached to the HQ of the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol' and where
postmarks of a different design were used.


HARRY v.HOFMANN VERLAG 22551 HAMBURG POSTFACH 560156 TELEPHON(040)817799 FAX(040) 817799
LATVIA Handbook of Philately and Postal History
The Stamps, Ruble Period 1918 1922
Bilingual German/English edition, 232 pages 24 x 16.9 cm. With 430 illustrations,
softbound, DM 68,-- (approximate 28 or US-$ 45) plus postage
I am pleased to announce the new volume of the Latvia-Handbook series, dealing with the early
stamps of Latvia issued between 1918 and 1922. These are described in detail on the basis of new
researches carried out since previously closed archives became accessible, and with revised
valuations based on the current situation.

The book is the result of research made by many collectors over a long period, compiled on behalf of
the Latvia Study Group (Bund Deutscher Philatelisten) by Harry v. Hofmann FRPSL and translated
into English by Philip E. Robinson FRPSL.The new book will encourage many collectors and
researchers to look more closely at their material, thereby bringing to light things that have
previously been unknown.
June, 1999

A. S. PUSHKIN (1799-1837)
by P.J. Campbell

On 1 February 1937, the USSR issued a set of six stamps and a souvenir sheet to mark the centenary of the
death of the writer and poet Aleksandr Sergeevich Pushkin. The stamps (Scott Nos. 590-595) were designed
by the prolific V.V. Zav'yalov and were usually printed by typography on chalk-surfaced and unwatermarked
paper in a bewildering variety of line perforations. In July 1937 a final variety came out on unsurfaced paper
for all the kopek values and with a comb perforation. The reason for all these shenanigans is unknown- A
checklist would look something like this and prove a good reason to dig into your trading material:-
PERF (thousands)
11 11 x 121 12 1 14 x 121 14 121 x 14 121 x 11 12 x 12

10-kopek X X X X X X 7,500
yellow-brown X X

20-kopek X X X X X X X 18,100

40-kopek X X X X X X 16,700

50-kopek X X X X X 980

80-kopek X X X X 6,200

1 rouble X 810
green __

The final item in the set was a souvenir sheet measuring 105 x 90 mm., also typographed on chalky paper
and having a copy of the 10-kopek value with a head-and-shoulders sketch of A.S. Pushkin after the drawing
by O. Kiprenskii and a 50-kopek stamp with the statue of the poet in Pushkin Square, Moscow by the
sculptor A. Opekushin. The 105 x 90 mm. size is that stated by the Soviet catalogue; other sources have
slightly different figures and measuring several copies does indeed give slightly different sizes. However, the
Soviet format is the usual and largest size; other examples may have been trimmed a little.

The souvenir sheet was issued for the A.S. Pushkin Exhibition in Moscow, with the date of issue stated as 10
February by H.L. Aronson (Ref. 1 below). Nevertheless, a more likely date is 16 February, as that was the
date of the opening of the Pushkin Exhibition, which Aronson says was in Leningrad, but the Soviet
handbook of cancellations (Ref. 3) shows it in Moscow, as does the one illustrated in Ref. 4 with the date
16.2.37. The exhibition was open from 16 February to 30 May and the special black cancel has two
concentric circles (outer diameter 41 mm.) and the words: "BCECOK)3H*rlYIIKHHCK*BbICT"
between the circles, a bridge with the date and the words "MOCKBA" above the bridge and "CCCP" below.
This cancel can be found on either the stamps or the souvenir sheets. Some 140,000 sheets were printed.

An interesting variety of the sheet is worth looking for and it is illustrated in Fig. 1 on the next page. The
difference to look for is in the 10-kopek stamp on the left, where the top of the stamp normally has the
inscription "A. C. nYlUIKH 1837", but the variety seen on the sheet says "A C. HIIYKIH 1837". Note

June, 1999

FORGERY: Yellowish paper.
I. Line between H and I.
S-, q 1 _. 2. Double lines of the figure 1937 smeared.
3. Fourth sheet of the music is marked only with points.
~ IA' m}i i I 4. Curved line in the ornament broken.
S .. ......y ,1118.....1.. 5. White lines smeared.
Fig. 1. Fig. 2.

that the period after the initial letter "A" is now missing entirely. An enlarged view of the omission,
indicated by an arrow, is also included in Fig. 1 above. Aronson says that the "missing period" variety is also
to be found on stamp No. 35 in a sheet of 50 of the 10-kopek value and possibly on all perforation varieties.
Perhaps someone holding a full sheet can confirm or disprove this statement.

The life ofA.S. Pushkin was as fanciful as any novel. His maternal great-grandfather was an Ethiopian, who
had been presented to Peter the Great by the Sultan of Turkey. Pushkin was educated at the Lyceum at
Tsarskoe Selo, an aristocratic boarding school under the patronage of the Emperor Aleksandr I. As a poet
and a minor civil servant, he became involved in the social whirl of St. Petersburg. His writings at the age of
21 included "Ruslan and Ludmilla" and "Ode to Liberty", which earned him banishment. In Pskov, he wrote
"Prisoner of the Caucasus", "The Gypsies", "The Fountain of Bakhchisarai" and part of the narrative poem
"Evgenii Onegin". On the death of Aleksandr I and after the December 1825 rebellion, Emperor Nikolai I
allowed Pushkin back into the capital and granted him a pardon. A play, "Boris Godunov", and "The Bronze
Horseman" followed, as well as "Tales of Belkin" and "The Captain's Daughter and Other Stories", which
included "The Queen of Spades" and "The Negro of Peter the Great". His 1831 marriage to N.N.
Goncharova, a society beauty, was not a success and finally led to a duel with Baron Georges d'Anth`es, in
which Pushkin was fatally wounded and he died on 29 January 1837. He is the greatest poet and stylist in the
Russian language and his tragic death was an irreparable loss to Russian literature.


1. "The Pushkin Issue", H.L. Aronson, "The Russian-American Philatelist", Vol. 1, No. 1. September 1942.
2. Introduction to "The Captain's Daughter and Other Stories" by Natalie Duddington, Heron Books.
3. "KaTanjor fnoToBbIX MapoK CCCP 1918-1974", "Soyuzpechat"' Publishers, Moscow, 1976.
4. "The British Journal of Russian Philately" No. 39 of October 1966, article by A.S. Waugh.
5. Scott, Stanley Gibbons and other catalogues and the World Book Encyclopaedia.

June, 1999

A.C. H IK yiHH

i -" 1.,i 1 -I YAC y IiiiH It I 1 :S

f, &2, 14 9- .

Editorial Comment: Your editor was a child in the 1930s, when souvenir or miniature sheets really came
into fashion and one of the results was that the A.S. Pushkin sheet was forged (!). The first data about that
initiative was given by a well-known stamp dealer and philatelic publisher in the U.S., the late Fritz Billig.
Writing in the magazine "Stamps" of 25 January 1941, p. 115 under the title "Russian Pushkin Souvenir
Sheet", he illustrates both the genuine version on chalky white paper and a forgery on yellowish paper (see
Fig. 2 on the previous page for the details). He stated that the forgery appeared around 1939 in Europe. Your
editor has what appears to be the first stage of the forgery (106 x 91 mm.), as described by Mr. Billig with a
line at top on the 50-kop. value between the "H" and the "1" of 1837 and a second version (106 x 92 mm.)
with most of that line removed, but still leaving the "1" of 1837 with a deformed top. The irony of the whole
exercise is that this particular souvenir sheet has not gone anywhere, as even now it is catalogued in Scott at
only $4.00 mint and $17.00 used, so that the forgery was a wasted effort. On the other hand, it turns out that
the forged item is rare and your editor was able to get his two copies only after considerable effort from a
source in Prague, Czech Republic. The members of the Russian Study Group in the Czech Republic were
well aware of the existence of this forgery and, while no one knows with certainty, it appears that it
originated either in Czechoslovakia or in the Protectorate of Bohemia & Moravia in 1939. The forgeries are
typographed, as are the genuine sheets. Does anyone else have copies of this or other imitations ?


HMIEPATOPCHAO IHeHlaro flaTpioTMa ecHaro 0O06 ecTBa

faTpiorTHecKin no4TrosBhr MapnK naTpioThmecKin noTOBauR MapKH
1, 3,7 10 K. AOCT. npHHHMBIOTCM r Jl l I nponaiOTCn Cs HafaaBKOloTonbKO
AnR onnaTbl BCMKaro poAa KOP- Oa K ap
On[ Hoa KOnaTHKH Ha KaW ytO mapy.
pecnoHAemHiH (npocTon 3aKa3-
HOB, daHAeponefi H npom.), HA.- M- crMiA aoxona BupyWeHmUMn cmi
PABHK Cb OBbIKHOBEHHbl- J 1 cei HaAnaBKM, nocrynaerT Bs

nM-fl.Tr p9.p .. .0 *w... I r. r nerporpsew. f pl.so.a. n n r K. rp .m t Tirrpa*le A. H. 7IOL L Ite. p ?. f m. Jt 9L

June, 1999


Is there a question that you would like to put across to the
readers ? 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 !

Matt Hedley, California, U.S.A.
Advertising the WWI Charity Stamps.
The reduced illustration on the previous page shows the poster issued in 1915 to promote the sale of the
well-known charity stamps in large format. The production of this poster, measuring 42 x 33.5 cm. was the
main reason for the "OBPA3ELIL" (= SPECIMEN) overprints, which may be found on these stamps. The
the values of 1,3,7 and 10 kopeks are accepted for the payment of all classes of mail (ordinary, registered,
wrappers etc.) ON AN EQUAL BASIS WITH ORDINARY POSTAGE STAMPS. The patriotic postage
stamps are sold with a surtax of only one kopek for each stamp. The net income realized from this surtax
The imprint at bottom left reads: "Permission to print granted on 20 January 1915 for the Petrograd Mayor.
His assistant: Chamberlain Lisogorskii." and at right: "Printery of A.N. LAVROV & Co., 9 Gogol' Street".
Quite a conversation piece !

P.J. Campbell, Quebec, Canada.

A Soviet Latvian cover of 1944.

J, .- ~ C


2I 1 -lvil! ~l


By September 1944, the German forces had been driven out of most of Latvia, except for the Kurland /
Kurzeme bridgehead. The cover shown here appears to have been sent from Daugavpils 10.10.44 to Pavels
Petersons at the "Predis" farmstead in Vol'mar / Valmiera. The censorship mark on the back shows the Soviet
coat of arms and is numbered 26385. The word IENACIS in the boxed cachet on the front is not a postal
name, but may mean "ripe" (ienicies). The cover was apparently received on 14 October. Comments invited,
as October 1944 seems too early for postal resumption. Should the year be 1945 ?
June, 1999

. .

*2'., j~

Derek Palmer, FRPSL, RDP, Santiago de Chile.
An Underpaid Bulgarian Letter-Card.

although t BtJtrAPHt. : fU y r f- t3

"." by 15 -oni .. -ol \' D the de'ic was/ /3 c 6 "
4 --

,i -- 6' /. ... // -

*: --- .,- -,- -.-.- -.---."--- .-* -. f ^w ^- ; .- : .-.-- -

Bulgarian letter-cards are scarce in a used state and the one shown here paid the internal rate of 10 stotinki,
although it was addressed to Russia. The Bulgarian lev was in the gold franc zone in 1905 and the letter-card
was thus underpaid by 15 stotinki = 15 gold centimes. Double the deficiency was 30 gold centimes = 6 cents
U.S. = 3d. sterling = 12 kopeks. It was sent from Vrattsa 15 November 1905 via Ruse / Rustehouk 16
November to St. Petersburg 11 December (why so long ?) and the corresponding oval "gOHJIATHTb"
cachet was applied there with the indication of 12 kopeks postage due. Addressed to the Russian-American
Rubber Manufactory, the text is in Bulgarian, with a translation into German in the Suderlin script written
above (!).The message in Bulgarian translates as follows: "Vrattsa, 15 November 1905.
Dear Sirs, Since I have need of your galoshes, kindly send me your catalogue of your trademark
"Treugol'nik" with all kinds of galoshes for ladies and men as soon as possible by the first post.
With respect, Koto S. Buzov, Vrattsa (Bulgaria)".

V.B. Kofman, Odessa, Ukraine.
Soviet Machine Cancels with Informative Texts.
Xy,)a inln 1LK IH.I ConiUn it 3. H- .lfXpo(hl 't4 .

of Soviet machine cancellers in the 1960s with informative messages, directing senders to specify the
number of the city post office in their addresses (see the example above). We here in Odessa have been able
to identify more than 150 different markings from 40 places in the USSR, together with their periods of use.
It is proposed to publish a study on the subject and data from colleagues abroad would be much appreciated !
Please write to us care of The Canadian Society of Russian Philately.

Rabbi L.L. Tann, County of the West Midlands, England.
Four More Railway Items.

- (V -e,(M~rI1MrL2-.4t4I

(c) (d)
As shown above in chronological order, they are as follows:-

(a) A card posted at the Urbakh (Urbach) Railway Station P.O. 20.6.1903 in the German enclave on the
Volga and addressed to Moscow, where it arrived two days later. The district was to become the Volga
German ASSR in the Soviet period up to August 1941.

(b) Next we have a nice card from Mariehamn (Aland Islands) 24.8.03 N.S. to Oranienbaum 13.8.03 O.S.
and receiving en route a circular marking at centre with a diameter of 20 mm. and reading: "4 / HOHTA".
The latter was presumably applied on a train on its way to Oranienbaum.

(c) On this item, the message is headed 11/9 1909, the oval postmark ABHlHCK'b / PIHF. OP. BOK3. "a"
is the next day and the Kazan' arrival of 16/9 seems alright, but why the oval jIOnIJIATHTb /
AIBHHCK'b )KEJI. f.O. marking? My only suggestion is that the postal clerk thought that this should be
franked at the letter rate of 7 kop. and he therefore charged double the deficient amount. However, that does
not make sense, as one can find postcards paid at the 3-kopek rate and with wads and wads written thereon,
before that was allowed.

(d) This last item, with the same originating markings as for above, was mailed on 24.2.10 at the Dvinsk
(now Daugavpils in Latvia) Riga-Or6l Vokzal Office and rightly taxed at 6 kopeks = double the deficiency,
as it was completely unpaid.

June, 1999

V.V. Pritula, Moscow, Russia.
Two more bisects of the 10-kop. 25th. Anniversary of the 1905 Revolution.

/ o. ,c

.. .. .... .. ..-......

Editorial Comment:
Writing in "HnJaTejnm No. 12/1998, p. 14 under the title A SOVIET "VINETA"? (thus referring back to
the very rare bisecting of 5-Pfennig German stamps on 13 April 1901 on board the cruiser "Vineta"), Mr.
Pritula records two further usages of the bisected 10-kopek Soviet stamp in honour of the 25th. Anniversary
of the 1905 Revolution (Scott 440). They are illustrated above and he suggests that the example at left on a
piece of the 5-kopek postcard is cancelled DNEPROPETROVSK VOKZAL 5.11.31. However, careful
examination of the postmark shows that it actually reads ALEKSANDROVSK VOKZAL "e" 5.11.31. When
we compare this item with the complete postcard addressed to Berdyansk and held by Robert Taylor (see
"The Post-Rider" No. 43, p.57), we see that it is the same marking, down to the serial letter "e" The
piece is addressed to Rostov-on-Don and the point of writing is given on the back as Dnepropetrovsk. That is
entirely feasible, as Dnepropetrovsk is not far from the railway station at Aleksandrovsk.

Summing up, we now have records of two usages of this bisect on 17.7.31 & 27.1.32 at Khortitsa (see "The
Post-Rider" No. 42, p. 63) and a further two at Aleksandrovsk Vokzal, which was the main post office in
Postal District No. 439 (Zaporozh'e Province) and dated 1.8.31 & 5.11.31 respectively. Note also that the
example on card held by Robert Taylor is bisected diagonally from top left to bottom right, while the one
described here has been divided vertically.

Mr. Pritula goes on to show an envelope made from a newspaper, franked with a single plus a vertical bisect
of this 10-kopek commemorative, so as to make up the new 15-kopek rate for an internal letter (see the two
illustrations above at right). It is postmarked NERCHINSKII ZAVOD SRET. "b" 12(?).8.31, to arrive in
Irkutsk on the 13th. Nerchinsk in the Sretensk district is in the Chita Province on the Trans-Siberian Railway
and about 1200 km. (750 miles) east of Irkutsk.

V.M. Mohilnyj, Kyiv, Ukraine.
A postcard from Bessarabia to Occupied Odessa in Transnistria.

June, 1999

-. ... ra an de
T a a. ti on ro "o c pyf"c" th s c l T .' : .ransisri period I cannot

Jojiyaio. TaEOK xonI) pyMyHCbKOi JIXICTtIDJ{ MaCfB T,3.B TpaHCHiCTpti,
F He reoeH 3Po3yMiTH, MOMy 'oSJOBfiK, Ha-edi.o He py MyI nocMjiaK i,,
SI' "o Ozaec ruicaB iYY pyM1yHCbi1oo MOBO? ie roAeii Ao JiaaHo po3sipa-
THCA i B noMITobsia an peci nociJja a. r i riste B-i nc ccarere? oT a mhaib,
A He riyn, imo6- sorocb B Y o paiHy i nKa uim~arn noaitrH peyi.
Translation: "I am irked about the photocopy of a card from the so-called Transnistria period. I cannot
understand how a man, although not a Roumanian, could write it in the Roumanian language when sending
to Odessa. Also, I cannot make out exactly the postal address of the sender. Can you say something about it?
Unfortunately, I have not heard whether similar items would interest anyone in the Ukraine"

Editorial Comment: The address of the sender is certainly obscure, but he was Oleksandr Hrybenyuk.
According to the postmark, he sent the card on 27.7.43 by registered mail apparently from somewhere in the
Covurlui county in Bessarabia (?) to Nikolai Hrybenyuk, Limannaya Street No. 6 in Odessa, which was then
occupied by the Roumanians as part of Transnistria. There is a machine marking: CENZURA EXTERNA /
ROMANIA on the back (applied at Bucharest ?), as well as the cachet of Roumanian Censor No. 12 in
Odessa on the front. As an arrival postmark, a modified Soviet canceller reading ODESA 4.10.43 is struck
on the front in the top right comer. We can also notice that the staff in the Odessa postal service at that time
was still Russian-speaking, as the street name and number have been written in at the bottom of the card in
Russian. Assuming that the point of origin of the card is correct, the reason why the Ukrainian sender also
knew Roumanian must be because Bessarabia was under Roumanian rule from 1918 to 1940 and the
Roumanian Army reentered the area in 1941 as a German ally during the Nazi attack on the USSR.
Comments on this item would be appreciated, as the supposed point of mailing may be wrong and
confirmation would be needed that the card had to go first to Bucharest for the machine censorship marking,
before proceeding to Odessa in Transnistria.

Helmut Weikard, Hamburg, Germany.
Two examples of "Latvijas PSR" postal rates 1940-1941.

Since Mr. Cronin has listed the rates on pp. 70 & 72 of this issue, I will now show overleaf two usages, as
(a) A surface letter from Riga serial 7'if '(?) to Denmark (unusual destination) and paid with a 35-
santimi Latvian Arms at the pre-Soviet foreign letter surface rate. A German censorship tape was applied
after examination at Konigsberg in East Prussia and that was overstamped in red on arrival with a circular
marking, reading: "Post ogTelegraf..../ crown in centre / i Danmark".

June, 1999

.K ..-. --
NJ' ~..... ..
.2 r~flWT

(b) The item here at right is a registered letter, sent from Riga, serial '.j" to Vienna. It was also
censored en route by the Germans and it has a green label affixed to the front, reading "Der Zollstelle
vorfiihren" (To be shown at the Customs Point). The letter was not released from there until 12 May 1941
and it probably was a multiple-weight item, containing stamps. At triple weight (3 x 50 sant./kop. for 60
grammes) plus 80 sant./kop. registration fee, the total rate should have been 2 r. 30 k., hence underpaid by 10
sant./kop. Note the mixed franking of 6 x 35-santimi Latvijas PSR stamps and the 10-kop. Soviet
commemorative. A showy item!

Dr. Denys J. Voaden, Maryland, U.S.A.
A surface card from Odessa to New York.

One does not often see the stamps of the 10th. Anniversary of the October Revolution used on mail going
abroad. We have here the beautifully engraved 7-kopek value affixed to a view card from Odessa 1.1.28,
with Christmas and New Year's greetings in German from a card collector, Helene MUlliner, Perekopskaya
Pobeda (Victory at Perekop) Street No. 27-3. She also asked for a copy of the U.S. Lindberg stamp to be sent
to her on a card. She probably meant the U.S. airmail stamp Scott No. C1O.The "KIAIB BOK3. KIEV gare"
marking at top centre is often seen on foreign mail in this period and it may have been a "monitoring" office.

Andrew Cronin, Ontario, Canada.
Two Levant Items.
The first piece at right shows a total franking of 20 kopeks in r7 *..-.
Imperial stamps, indicating that it originated from either a
double-weight letter going abroad, or a registered single-
weight item of foreign surface mail. Either way, the stamps
missed cancellation at the point of posting and were
postmarked at the destination on 28 September 1905 ""
by the French post office at Trebizond on the Turkish ".
Black Sea coast. There was a ROPiT office functioning
there, so why was the letter handled by the French Post e
I^- i ..;' ""-
In their seminal work "The Stamps of the Russian Empire
Used Abroad", W.S.E. Stephen & S.D. Tchilinghirian looked at ship mail, but mainly in a cursory way.
However, one needs to know more than the Russian language to get the full story, especially in the Middle
East. The piece above at right bears a 20-paras Turkish stamp of the 1909 issue (Scott No. 103) cancelled in
violet in Greek, as follows:-

This would have been a wonderful item as a complete cover but, in any case, it points the way towards
further investigation. The headquarters of this steamship company were probably in Odessa or some other
Russian Black Sea port. Greek merchants and navigators have been active in the Pontos Euxinos (Black Sea)
for about four millenia and much of the Russian Levant mail was generated by them.

A View Card sent by Pavel Petrovich Gan'ko.

mtc ......... .........

. . . N .

We have already been made aware of his questionable activities in the Poltava Zemstvo (see "The Post-
Rider" No. 41, pp. 12-16) and it is worthwhile to collect other items of "Gan'koviana". We see here that he
was exchanging with a correspondent in Montevideo, Uruguay a view card of the Russo-Japanese War on
1/14 June 1905. The picture shows Major-Generals Levestam and Pleshkov before a battle at a mountain
pass at Ta-Lien, more commonly known to the Russians as Dal'nii and to the Japanese as Dairen. As there
was no written message on the card, Pavel Petrovich was able to send it at the foreign printed matter rate all
the way from Poltava to Montevideo for a mere two kopeks = 1 cent U.S. = 1/2d. sterling !

Postmarks of Balaklava in the British Empire and Commonwealth.
Following upon the declaration of war by Britain and France on Russia on 30 March 1854, the small but well-

June, 1999


-- -

187 97' -

sheltered harbour of Balaklava in the Crimea was occupied by British forces on 29 September 1854. That
was regarded as a notable victory in the British Empire, although Sevastopol' held out for another year until
8 September 1855. Two places in the Empire were named Balaklava, the first being in South Australia in
1877. Actually, Balaklava is not a Russian name, but a version of the Italian term "Bella Cava" = "Beautiful
Cave". Three Balaklava postmarks are shown above from South Australia and Jamaica. The Jamaican office
has the place-name spelt with a "C", not a "K". Does anyone have other strikes ?

Two "Aurora" Items.

to assume control during the October Revolution (25 Oct. / 7 Nov. 1917). It has generally been stated that

ineffectual that power was flat on its back on the floor. All that the Bolsheviks had to do was to pick it up,

with a loss of only six men. By contrast, about 1500 people were killed in the previous February Revolution.

through the Italian post office at La Canea (Chania), Crete on 31.1.1910 N.S. to a relative in St. Petersburg.
The Russian cruiser "Aurora" has gone down in history as firing a blank to ive the signal for the Bolshe.iks
to assume control during the October Revolution (25 Oct. / 7 Nov. 1917). It t has general been stated that
the Bolsheviks seized power on that day but, in fact, the Provisional Government had steadily become so
ineffectual that power was flat on its back on the floor. All that the Bolsheviks had to do was to pick it up,
with a loss of only six men. By contrast, about 1500 people were killed in the previous February Revolution.

Anyway, the registered cover at left was sent by a Russian naval officer V. Belly on the cruiser "Aurora"
through the Italian post office at La Canea (Chania), Crete on 31.1.1910 N.S. to a relative in St. Petersburg,
where it was received on 26.1.1910 O.S. (9 days in transit). The arrival marking of the Saint Petersburg Cit
Post with serial "k." is shown in actual size (diameter of 27 mm.) and struck in deep lilac.
The Cuban 75-centavos multicoloured stamp at right was issued in 1997 to commemorate the "80th.
Anniversary of the Socialist Revolution of October". It shows the Soviet flag, which exists no longer, a head
and shoulders portrait of V.I. Lenin and, below him, the cruiser "Aurora". A lot of history is encompassed by
that design !


Propaganda Forgeries of the Romanov Currency Stamps.
It appears that two values were prepared in pairs; 20 kop.+15 kop.
by the Germans in WWI, as shown here. They may be quickly
identified by the mocking inscriptions in Russian on the backs, which
have been matched here with the corresponding face values.
For the 15-kopek value, the text reads: "It has circulation on a par
with the plundering deceit of the rulers". There is a grammatical
mistake: "rpa6exKomrb", instead of"rpa6e>KHblMN ".
On the 20-kopek stamp, the inscription reads: "It has
circulation on a par with the bankruptcy of silver money".
Once again a grammatical mistake: "6aHKpoTOM'b" instead
of "6aHKpOTCTBOM".
These propaganda forgeries are rare and bring high prices
at auction.
A registered airmail letter to Vienna
Apparently a multiple weight article, the letter
here at right bears 1 r. 15 k. postage and -"m /
two Russian cachets in violet: a boxed
one with an unusual Russian word:
"PEKOMEAOBAHHASI" (= Registered) ''
and an unframed "Bos3ymnHa noqia"
(= Airmail). Sent from Moscow on/"/ (
26.9.30, it was in Berlin the next day.
It received there a violet three-line unframed
cachet in German: "Bef6rderung mit
Flugpost unterblieben / Flug nicht ausgefihrt / '
BERLIN C2. Briefpostamt" (Forwarding
by airmail discontinued / Flight not carried out
/ BERLIN C2. Letter Post Office). Can
any of our German readers tell us why the
airmail link was discontinued between Berlin
and Vienna ?

The Volga Germans had their own bank !
The illustration here at right features a badly
damaged front with a missing stamp, but
it still tells quite a story. Originally a
registered airmail cover sent from Pokrovsk
(now Engels) some time in 1931, there is a
bilingual printed text at top and the German
version reads "Volga German Bank /
Pokrovsk on the Volga / Autonomous
Socialist Soviet Republic / of the Volga
Germans". There is a grammatical mistake
in the last line of the German text: "des"
instead of "der". With the onset of
collectivisation, it is highly doubtful that the
bank continued to function. Much work
remains to be done in the postal history
of the Volga German ASSR.

- .' u adeut71'. j .1 H Ilk'A d1
Jkacname SalhIliiche F~.~e RepNr.ik i~, I.0'Cfl~e
des Wo.lgaieLt.c~hen- .*'

*b*,.' I *




June, 1999

I .1

H6 3PaH r b Hie HapasHm cm
6a:ePOTOM ce ; rpa6emoRM 00
pe6pmH o MoHe-O anHmb npaan
Tbl. Teneii.

Recognising Obscured Varieties

SIt pays to know the characteristics of
", -" varieties, even when postmarks mask
,- il. their presence. Two good examples are
;2 l shown here. magnified to 150% for
greater clarity. together w ith the normal
stamps for comparison.
t The first example is of the 10-kop.
Th Rnn A stamp issued 15 Aug. 1930 for the Atl-
Union Paedagogical Exhibition (Scott
scc v t 435). On the 10th. stamp in the sheet,
so there is a white flaw affecting the
".te, .. ... .- thtis rl hyphen and the 1 of 15 in the inscription
at bottom. It was soon spotted by postal
Checkers and taken out of the sheets; it is
--- therefore very scarce. Actually, there
M 10 "swas further damage to that clich&
...... ... ? namely to the letters "BKA" of
"BbICTABKA" in the right panel. The used example shown here has full gum and a cancellation-to-order,
apparently of "MIHCK ECCP", dated ...6.37 and with the "K" of a-K" (meaning "for collection") at right.
It has been carefully applied to blank out the variety, but careful comparison with the normal stamp confirms
the damage to cliche No. 10.
The second case concerns the 60-kop. stamp for the 1958 Astronomical Congress (Scott 2093) with another
scarce variety: UAU instead of UAJ in the top right comer of the design (No. 62 on the sheet).The used copy
shown here definitely has the variety, as the left arm of the final "U" letter continues upwards. By the way,
the "J" in the initials is really a stylised "I" internationall Astronomical Union-Union Astronomique
Internationale. The variety may well have been corrected during printing, as it is very hard to find.

A card from Latvia per the Diplomatic Pouch.

It has been the practice for
Se e 16 Ts? iAmerican missions abroad to send
c t mail in the Diplomatic Pouch
when the political situation in a
particular country is such that
STH ,- items sent to the U.S. may be
tampered with. A notable
example in our field is mail sent
from the USSR to the U.S. during
____ the Great Purge of the 1930s. The
rule was that the correct rate had
to be paid in stamps of that
a, [ 7/ .S.. 0. particular country and, on arrival
in Washington, the mail would be cancelled and also struck with an unframed cachet reading: "Washington,
D.C. / This article was originally / mailed in country indicated / by postage".

Please note here such a usage with 15 santimi postage from Riga, Latvia and a Washington arrival of 8
September 1926. This is the only example ever seen by your editor from Latvia and is very surprising as the
country was peaceful between the two world wars. Comments are invited.

June, 1999


THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF RUSSIAN PHILATELY No. 82 for 1998. A 52-page soft-cover magazine
produced by a Committee of The British Society of Russian Philately. All enquiries to the Hon. Secretary,
Norman Ames, Ashton House, Ashton Keynes, SWINDON SN6 6NX, England.

The contents include an Appeal for a New Editor; 1866 Telegraph Form of St. Petersburg, by J.V. Woollam
(unusual find!); Domestic "Banderol" Rates of Imperial Russia & RSFSR, by A. Epstein; Lodz Kolyushki-
TPO or Station, by G.S. Miskin; For Want of a Censor, by D. Skipton; Romanov Postal Stationery, by Rabbi
L.L. Tann; British Armoured Car Division in Russia 1916-1918, by P.E. Robinson; Russian Perfins, by G.G.
Werbizky; "Greycoat" Division postcard, by I. Kuzych; "Harburg '98" & 1921 Covers with PSB & Control
Stamps, both by T. Page (the card on p. 38 is doubtful); Letter to L.P. Beria, by P.A. Michalove; Letter to
Editor about Currency, by J.L. Whiteside and terminating with Obituaries, Library Notes and Reviews.

THE ROSSICA JOURNAL OF RUSSIAN PHILATELY, Double Number 131-132 for Oct. 1998 to
April 1999. A spiral-bound soft-cover magazine of 224 pages, issued by The Rossica Society of Russian
Philately. All enquiries to the Secretary, G.G. Werbizky, 409 Jones Road, Vestal, N.Y. 13850, U.S.A.

This bumper issue has Editorial Corrections; A Forgery Alert (very pertinent!); Shlissel'burg Hard Labour
Prison, by D. Skipton; Czar on Stamps, by J. Geraci; Zemstvo Bisects (very useful!) & Additional Comments
on Gan'ko, both by G.G. Werbizky; Stamps of Simbirsk Magistrates' Court, by J.G. Moyes; Fake Postmark of
SPB, by N. Mandrovskii; Forged 1911 Omsk Exhibition Cancel, by P.E. Robinson; Texts on Envelope Backs
(excellent study), by J. Reichman; Forgeries of RSFSR 2nd. Standard Issue & Library Notes, both by G.
Seiflow; Weights, Rates & Routes (great reference), by A. Epstein; Podillia Tridents (a complex field), by I.
Kuzych; Siberian Surprises, by I. Steyn; Russia's Northern Sea Route (wonderful!), by G. Adolph Ackerman;
Pre-War Soviet Batum-Odessa Mail, by P.A. Michalove; Collecting Soviet Stamps on Cover, by G. Shaw,
Postal History Notes, by E.N. Lurch; Transnistria, by J. Guberman; Modern Ukrainian Imperforates, by V.
Zabijaka, to terminate with Society Notes, Advertisements and Literature Reviews. An absolutely superb job.

64-page soft-cover work in A5 format with front and back covers in colour and text in English, obtainable
for US $20.00 postpaid from the author at Sluizenkaai 29, B-8930 MENEN, Belgium.

Based on his collection of Crimean War postal history, which had gained Large Gold Medals at GRANADA
'92, BANGKOK '93, POLSKA '93 and FINLANDIA '95, where it also received the Grand Prix International,
the author shows great facility in presenting many interesting facts in a concise way. The many rare pieces
illustrated make it clear that this war was not just local, but had effects world-wide, including blockades.

bound book in A4 (legal size) format, with 92 illustrated cards reproduced with great clarity, including 18 in
colour and supporting text about this monumental and longest railway in the world. This simply charming
work is available at US $20.00 postpaid either from the author at 2 Rydalhurst Ave., Sheffield S6 4BG, UK
or from us at the CSRP at the same price postpaid; see The Journal Fund on p. 69 for details. A great buy!


HIOTA Ni 25 for January 1999. A 60-page soft-cover journal of The Australia & New Zealand Society of
Russian Philately. All enquiries to the Secretary, N. Banfield, 14 Rata Road, Wellington 6450, New Zealand.

This 25th. Anniversary Issue has an appropriate Editorial; Correspondence Russia-Australia & New Zealand,
Yu.F. Lisyanskii-Russian Navigator, Rossica Catalogue of the RSFSR and Christmas Cards & New Year
Cards, all by Dr. A.R. Marshall; Soviet Antarctic Tripod-Type Date-Stamps, by R. Marshal! & R. Bazika:
Collecting, Researching & Exhibiting Postal History & Literature Reviews, both by N. Banfieid: Value of
Philatelic Literature, by P.E. Robinson; Zemstvo Mail Revisited, by G.G. Werbizky: Military Postal
Censorship in Civil War, by A. Ep'tein; Glued Paper Webs on Russian Stamps, by L. Hovest; March 1992
Azerbaijan Definitives, by R.A.M. Gregson; Pskov Local Issues & Forgeries, by S.A. Chudakov & P.V.
Florenskii; 60th. Anniv. City of Korolev, Russian Report, World Youth Games Moscow July 1998 &
Oddities in Russian Post, all by S.A. Chudakov, to terminate with Russian Mail stopped in its tracks, by I.
Billings. Congratulations to both N. Banfield & Dr. A.R. Marshall for becoming Fellows of the Royal PSNZ!

THE ROSSICA CATALOGUE OF THE RSFSR, by Gerald Seiflow. A loose-page and highly specialised
catalogue in this area in standard North American format, produced unbound and thus with provision for
inserting corrective and/or supplementary pages in the future. He has used the latest computer and scanning
techniques to format the project. This section alone will eventually total 1000 pages and the author intends
to include Imperial Russia and the USSR to the end of 1960 in this encyclopaedic endeavour. Our readers
will get some idea of the scope of the work by reading the announcement on the inside back cover herewith.
The only suggestions one could make are that the text should be double-sided, less attention given to
varieties which are accidental and not constant and also ensuring that the pages may be easily punched.

OJECCKAI IIOITA (pparMeHTbl H4cTOpmi) [THE ODESSA POST fragments of history], by
Viktor Kofman & Rostislav Kalin, under the editorship of Vsevolod Furman. A 60-page soft-cover booklet
in A5 format with parallel Russian and English texts, it was published in an edition of only 500 copies and
the CSRP has secured the last ten copies. Please see ordering details in The Journal Fund, p. 69 herewith.

Copiously illustrated and well written, it includes Trident usages, Ukrainian postal code data, Romanian
occupation in the Transnistria period, including when the Odessa G.P.O. had been destroyed in October
1941 and the ODESA-1 Romanian office was set up on 22nd. of that month at K. Marks Str. No. 37,
bilingual Russo-Ukrainian markings, early postal history from 1803 onwards, etc. etc. Due to the small
supply, the early bird gets the worm and intending buyers will never regret obtaining this highly useful study.

P.C.4.C.P CneHnaaI3nHpoBanHHnbi KaTaJor IIo'lTOBix MapOK 1918-1923 (R.S.F.S.R. Specialised
Catalogue of Postage Stamps 1918-1923), issued by Standart-Kollektsiya, St. Petersburg in 1997 and
compiled by I. Brun, M. Dobin, N. Mandrovskii & V. Zagorskii. A 140-page firm-cover book 16x23.5 cm.on
surfaced paper with many illustrations of stamp varieties and postal history, including in colour. There are
excellent Tables of Contents and Prefaces in English to aid the non-Russian collector. Strongly
recommended and ordering details for our limited supply are given in The Journal Fund on p. 69 herewith.

POSTAGE STAMPS OF THE USSR 1923-1992), by Ing. Alois VAvra. A 206-page loose leaf compilation
in A5 format, entirely in Czech, but easy to follow because of many illustrations. Available postpaid from
the author for US S15.00 (a bargain!) at Na Stezce 3 / 1330, 100 00 PRAHA 10 VRSOVICE, Czech
Republic or c/o Svaz Ceskqch Filatelistli, Pfibenicka 1, 130 00 PRAHA 3.

The Soviet reissues of certain stamps, definitive and commemoratives, constitute an absorbing study which
would fill volumes and this book is the ideal source for conducting such investigations. There is still a lot to
be learned, particularly in determining exactly the dates of reappearance from new plates, etc.
June, 1999

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