Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 In place of an editorial; combined...
 Correspondence with Canada
 Zemstvo varieties - seventh...
 The postal history of South Russia...
 Comments about the "three triangles"...
 Further on the article "The mysterious...
 Some peculiarities of postage-due...
 Some peculiarities of the postage-due...
 Special note: The work of court...
 The Moldavian and Romanian posts...
 Commentary on the article "The...
 The military censorship of rank-and-file...
 The Russian post on the Island...
 Classic Swiss letters sent to the...
 The fourth (April 1920) issue of...
 Revisiting the stamped double letter-card...
 Finnish nationalism
 Postage stamps of the Zemstvos
 Philatelic shorts
 Announcements about new litera...

Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076781/00047
 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: VID00047
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.


This item has the following downloads:

00047 ( PDF )

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Table of Contents
        Page 1
    In place of an editorial; combined warning of the CSRP & Rossica Society of Russian Philately
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
    Correspondence with Canada
        Page 5
    Zemstvo varieties - seventh instalment
        Page 6
    The postal history of South Russia 1917-1920: Issues and rates
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        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
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
    Comments about the "three triangles" postmarks
        Page 54
    Further on the article "The mysterious triangles on Soviet datestamps"
        Page 55
    Some peculiarities of postage-due mail from the army during World War I
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
    Some peculiarities of the postage-due mail in Russia
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
    Special note: The work of court jeweller and goldsmith Peter Carl Faberge
        Page 65
    The Moldavian and Romanian posts in Southern Bessarabia 1856-1878
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
    Commentary on the article "The KbZbL a, b & c postmarks applied in Tuva"
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
    The military censorship of rank-and-file mail in Russian navy during WWI (1914-1918)
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
    The Russian post on the Island of Crete
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
    Classic Swiss letters sent to the Russian Empire
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
    The fourth (April 1920) issue of Armenia on covers
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
    Revisiting the stamped double letter-card of Russia
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
    Finnish nationalism
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
    Postage stamps of the Zemstvos
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
    Philatelic shorts
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
    Announcements about new literature
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
Full Text



No. 47
November, 2000


Printed in Canada


P.O. Box 5722, Station "A",
Toronto, Ontario, M5W 1P2

CSRP Web Site: http://www3.svmpatico.ca/postrider/postrider/
E-mail: postrider@sympatico.ca
FAX: (416) 932-0853

"THE POST-RIDER" No. 47. November 2000.


2 In place of an Editorial; Combined Warning of the CSRP & Rossica Society of Russian Philately
5 Correspondence with Canada Andrew Cronin
6 Zemstvo Varieties: Seventh Instalment G.G. Werbizky
7 The Postal History of South Russia 1917-1920: Issues and Rates Alexander Epstein
54 Comments about the "Three Triangles" postmarks Alexander Epstein
55 Further on the article "The Mysterious Triangles on Soviet Datestamps" Eric Jirvlepp
56 Some Peculiarities of Postage-Due Mail from the Army during World War I Alexander Epstein
59 Some Peculiarities of the Postage-Due Mail in Russia Meer Kossoy
65 Special Note: The Work of Court Jeweller and Goldsmith Peter Carl Faberg6
66 The Moldavian and Romanian Posts in Southern Bessarabia 1856-1878 Andrew Cronin
73 Commentary on the article "The KbZbL 'a', 'b' & 'c' postmarks applied in Tuva V.N. Ustinovskii
76 Military Censorship ofRank-and-file Mail in Russian Navy during WWI-V.Berdichevskii & M.Kossoy
87 The Russian Post on the Island of Crete G.V. Andrieshin
92 Classic Swiss Letters sent to the Russian Empire Erling Berger
96 The Fourth (April 1920) Issue of Armenia on covers Dr. Arkadii M. Sargsyan
99 Revisiting the Stamped Double Letter-card of Russia Professor A.S. Ilyushin & Jean Walton
104 Finnish Nationalism Charles Leonard
108 Postage Stamps issued by the Zemstvos Alex Artuchov
113 Philatelic Shorts
120 Announcements about new literature

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.

Copyright 2000. Copyright by The Canadian Society of Russian Philately. All rights reserved. All the
contents in 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.
ik *

In place of an Editorial

(A scarce, but completely bogus CP CC7
pair imperforate-between, line-
perforated 11 1/2 in Berlin from
originally imperforate stamps!).

Dear Members,
In the last few months, members of the CSRP and Rossica have repeatedly asked when we were going to do
something about the flood of questionable material offered on the Internet. Preliminary analysis indicates that our members are
bidding on material that is either questionable or could be bogus. While it is impossible to render solid opinions based solely on an
image on a computer screen, it is possible to give an opinion based on what is seen, in conjunction with knowledge and expertise
from our membership. Set out below is the action that the CSRP and Rossica will initially take to provide assistance to our
respective memberships. Please read ALL of the words before asking questions.

When asking for assistance, please bear in mind that not all the requested items will yield an answer. For example, repeat for
example, if you cannot see enough in the picture to ask, then we definitely cannot see enough to answer. Not all scans are legible.
Some are too small. Some items have no picture, so no questions can be asked or answered.

This is a volunteer effort and the people who have indicated a willingness to help also have to work and be with their families. We
will make every effort to answer all enquiries within the time frame listed. Items about which a member has a question must
include the URL for the item (i.e. http://....), the auction item number, etc. We need enough information to find the item. The
information is solely for the member to use in his/her decision process. Members requesting an opinion MUST include in their
request a statement to the effect that they will not release the information provided to any other person. Failure to include this
statement will result in the member not receiving an acknowledgement of their E-mail or an opinion on the item. Failure to follow
this policy will result in the removal of a member's name from the list of those eligible for this assistance. Why such harsh
language? Human nature; think about it.

Philatelically, Andy and Gary.

Combined CSRP/Rossica Effort

For those of you who have been following the auctions on Internet auction sites, you will have noticed some rather interesting
items. It appears that some sellers do not understand the nature of an auction, wherein the price starts at a nominal figure, in the
hope that it will go higher. Rarely does the item begin at its actual value. That is normal in a market-driven business. The buyers
make the value of the item rise or fall. That may be O.K. for speculators, but can be a real problem for inexperienced collectors.

We have reason to believe, but no absolute proof yet, that there are sellers who engage in what is known as shilling. Such
individuals make a bid with no intention of purchasing the item, solely to drive up the price. That is fraud, illegal and carries some
fairly stiff penalties. Unfortunately, fraud must be proven by the accuser and not the alleged perpetrator.

Another form of deception or fraud is deliberately misidentifying an item in the hope that the buyer will pay a good price for an
item, solely on what the seller states in the description. An inexperienced collector can pay a lot of money for an item that is worth
nowhere near the hammer price. In such cases, the collector may have the option to return the item IF the collector can prove that
the lot is not as described. Here again, the burden of proof rests with the buyer. The seller most often will say that he/she was
misinformed, or did not know. If they offer the same item again without any disclaimers, you have your proof.

The last category of fraud is when a seller knows that the item is fraudulent and sells it anyway without any warning to the buyer.
That is the largest category observed to date on the Internet, not to say that it does not also happen off the Internet. We know that
there are sellers who do this without any reservation. We cannot disclose names as that may leave us vulnerable to a lawsuit, a
weapon fully understood by these unscrupulous characters.

Another clue is when the seller quotes catalogues that are not necessarily in every collector's library, i.e. Russian catalogues,
because the price is higher. Sellers will often state that their item has been "signed" or bears the expertisation mark of so-and-so,
without naming the owner of the mark. Stating that a stamp has been expertisee" by a famous Russian expert is the same thing as
any American applying an ownership mark to a stamp from the USA. If the name is not recognized by the international philatelic
community, it should indicate caution with the item.

November 2000

The Canadian Society of Russian Philately (CSRP) and the Rossica Society of Russian Philately believe that it is time to warn our
respective members of what may be fraudulent activity on the Internet auctions. The information provided is to be used ONLY as
reference material. It is not to be used as the "gospel truth" about anything covered. Out of fairness to the sellers of questionable
material, we must state that even those who routinely fall into this category, not everything they sell is fraudulent. It is impossible
to determine if an item is genuine or not, based solely on a digital image on a computer screen. However, it is possible to render an
opinion that must be considered as ONLY AN OPINION AND NOT AN EXPERTISATION. The decision to purchase the item
remains with the buyer and our opinions cannot be the basis for return with the name of either Society attached, or the name(s) of
anybody rendering this opinion. If you want an item expertise, you must first acquire it and follow the procedures already in

Starting in August 2000, a committee made up of members from the CSRP and Rossica will begin offering opinions, NOT
expertisations, to our members on items in Internet auctions. We will not be able to continue this forever, since state-of-the-art
digital imaging and reproduction capabilities continue to drop in price. We believe that there are sellers who are either
"manufacturing" bogus items, using computers and printers, or functioning as conduits for those who do manufacture bogus items.

To explain better the kind of opinions we will be offering, some examples are provided immediately below. Forgeries of the
Imperial and early Soviet periods have been well documented in the past, but collectors should now be especially on the lookout
for the following categories:-

(a) Deceptive forgeries of Russia Used Abroad postmarks, copied from the volumes issued by S.D. Tchilinghirian & W.S.E.
Stephen (the so-called "Shtempelgate Forgeries"). In fact, postmarks that can be found illustrated in any published work should be
compared with that work. Get your postmarks expertise!

(b) Digital forgeries of overprint varieties for the early Soviet issues.

(c)The notorious line-perforation 11'/ forgeries made in Berlin on original imperforate Dirigible Construction and North Pole
Flight sets of 1931, producing BOGUS fantail margins and pairs imperforate-between. They are scarce, but know what you are
buying and LABEL THEM AS SUCH, otherwise you will suffer when exhibiting or trying to sell the items! See the illustration.

(d) Remember that complete forgeries exist of the 10th Anniversary of the Soviet Civil Aviation set of 1934. They are poor photo-
lithographic copies, line-perforated 111/2 on thicker paper and WORTHLESS!

(e) Recent perforation forgeries made on original Soviet Medals imperforate issues of the 1940s. In general, if any stamp or sets
already exist imperforate, then there is ALWAYS the possibility that bogus perforation varieties may be produced.

(f) Pairs imperforate-between exist for many Soviet issues and some have been trimmed to produce apparent IMPERFORATE
PAIRS. That is philatelic vandalism at its WORST, as it destroys varieties that were originally very interesting in the first place!

(g) Beware of digital certificates, as they are subject to manipulation. Ask for original signed certificates.

(h) Digital forgeries of postmarks on otherwise legitimate covers. These are very difficult to detect, even with the item in hand.
However, there are certain "red flags" that may be observed.

(i) Removal of and/or replacement of the original franking.

(j) Beware of photocopies of original works. There may be copyright violations involved.

(k) RUSSIA No. 1: Some thoughts:-
Beware of copies of Russia No. 1, for example, that are listed as "mint" or "unused". These are probably items from which
the cancellation has been removed. No. 1 MINT is a great rarity and we only know of one pair in the SPB State Museum and
one other copy reported by Z. Mikulski.

Beware of Russia No. 1 without reasonable margins all around, or at least on three sides. We have noted an increasing
number of trimmed Scott Nos. 8 & 15 and possibly No. 2 stamps being offered as Number Ones. Cut down copies of Nos.
8 & 15 should be recognized by the reddish-brown colour of the frame plate, as No. 1 was printed more in a chocolate-brown

Some copies affixed to mail missed cancellation and have been soaked off, so they are, "unused", technically speaking.
Theoretically, they should be very slightly scuffed, having gone through the mails.

Used copies with postmarks must be put under ultra-violet, to show if the original pen cross has been removed and a
forged cancel then applied.

November 2000

Check for forged postmarks applied on stamps that were already pen-cancelled.

Check for postal fraud where the pen cross has been removed and the stamp affixed to another piece of mail, receiving
thereafter either another pen cross (!) or a postmark.


1. This service is available ONLY to CSRP and Rossica members with Internet access and for whom we hold a valid E-
mail address.

2. Andy Cronin, postrider@sympatico.ca (CSRP) and Gary Combs, gcombs@(cablespeed.com or
gary.combs@rossica.com (Rossica) are the focal points for their respective societies.

3. Opinions from the committee are provided solely for informational purposes. It remains the decision of the individual
whether to buy an item or not. The CSRP/Rossica opinions will not be used as an endorsement to buy or not to buy.

4. Requests for opinions must come via E-mail to Andy and Gary, so that we have a record.

5. Whoever gets it, Andy or Gary, passes it to the other and requests assistance from committee members. Requests for
opinions will be sent to all committee members (by Andy or Gary only), even if it is not their specialty.

6. Andy and Gary will ensure that the pictures (JPEGS/GIF etc.) are captured and stored. In that way, should one system
fail, the other has it. We need to keep all correspondence as well. We have a feeling we will see some of the same material
surface again.

7. All responses will go out under the heading of "Joint CSRP and Rossica Committee on Internet Fraud".

8. The CSRP will maintain information in printed form. Rossica will maintain a list of items about which members have
enquired and the opinions of the committee at the Rossica site, but it will only be available at the Rossica site to Rossica
members or in a restricted area (TBD).

9. The Committee will provide opinions within 72 hours. Each member seeking an opinion will send the enquiry to
Andy and Gary, who will respond to the original request for an opinion.

10. The names of the committee members who provide opinions will not be published with the opinions.

11. The committee will not address revenue or other Cinderella items. Zemstvo items are considered philatelic for this

12. Individuals to whom opinions have been provided must agree that the information will not be sent to the seller as
evidence or proof of any decision not to bid, or as a basis for the return of an item.

from Petroskoi (Petrozavodsk), performing traditional Karelian, Finnish and Russian Folk Music.

If you enjoy listening to Karelian incantations from the Kalevala, bouncy polka and pelimanni-style music,
instruments like the jouhikko, kantele, parre and Estonian bagpipes, then you will love playing the new CD
by Mylldrit: "In the Light of the White Night"!

To order this CD, send US $18.00 in a cheque or money order payable to Project Harmony / Myll~rit and
mail to:
Mylliirit Folk Band, P.O. Box 153, Post Mills VT 05058, U.S.A.

For further information, please contact us at:
Myllarit Web Site: www.onego.ru/mvllarit E-mail: mvllarit(,vahoo.com

November 2000

"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 Andrew Cronin.

Mail from any of the scientific bases in Antarctica is generally blatantly philatelic, but this Soviet item is

Sent by A. Yantselevich as a New Year greeting card with an imprinted 4-kopek definitive on the front
and an appropriate New Year design on the back, it was postmarked at the Bellingsgauzen Station in
Antarctica 21.11.75. A pictorial cachet in red was also applied at front top left and it translates as:
"Station BELLINGSGAUZEN / Named in honour of Admiral Faddei Bellingsgauzen / Leader of the
Russian Expedition discovering Antarctica on 28.1.1820".

The 4-kopek rate would have been sufficient for surface postage to Montreal, had the card gone via the
USSR to Canada. However, the sender, who was now on board the Scientific Expedition ship "M.
Somov" presumably thought that he could save time by adding a 2-p. Falkland Islands stamp when calling
at Port Stanley on 10 December 1975. That office applied an unframed black cachet in three lines, reading
"INSUFFICIENT POSTAGE / FOR TRANSMISSION BY / AIR". One wonders if the card still arrived
in Montreal just prior to 1 January 1976. Quite a conversation piece!

November 2000

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 details of their discoveries from that and other
Zemstvos. What is shown here is what I have in my collection.

VOLCHANSK, Khar'kov province.
Chuchin No. 2. Block of four imperforate horizontally.

VOLCHANSK, Khar'kov province.
Chuchin No. 2. Pair with additional
perforation through the middle.

' iiHT)1AP dldI

C.i -
Z~Al rn W2

GDOV, St. PeteSlbur roine

GDOV, St. Petersburg province.
Chuchin No. 7a. Tete-bache pair.


VOL'SK, Saratov province.
Chuchin No. 1. Blue colour
missing in the lower left-hand
corer around the numeral "3".

GDOV, St. Petersburg province.
Chuchin No. 9. Horizontal strip of four,
imperforate vertically between the
second and third stamps.

* *

November 2000

by Alexander Epstein.
The Russian Civil war left quite appreciable traces in philately with its numerous issues of stamps and postal
stationery, among which those of South Russia occupy an important position. The areas of the Northern
Caucasus (the former Kuban', Black Sea, Stavropol', Terek and Dagestan provinces), Don and the Crimea, as
well as Ukraine and a part of Central Russia during the period of their occupation by the White forces under
General Denikin are understood here under the term "South Russia". With regard to the postage stamp issues
of 1918-1920, they were quite well described and discussed in various general and special catalogues,
handbooks (e.g. see reference [1]) and articles or notes [references 2-23]. Considerably less attention has
been given to the postal rates in force there during the period under consideration, as well as to other postal
history aspects. Unfortunately, the necessary documents are still waiting to be discovered by researchers in
the archives of Russia and Ukraine. This paper, which aims to fill the gaps in our knowledge of this subject,
is based mainly on a statistical evaluation and analysis of the available postal history in the form of items of
mail posted in South Russia during the years of the Civil War. It puts the stress first of all on aspects of
postal history and devotes less attention to the philatelic peculiarities of the stamps, which are well described
in the above-mentioned special literature, to which the reader is referred.

A few words about the dates. As is well known, the Gregorian Calendar (New Style) was introduced by the
Soviet Government as of February 1918, when the 1t. of February according to the Julian Calendar (Old
Style) became the 14th. of February. This calendar was used henceforth also in the areas of South Russia
under the Soviets, including in the postal service. However, the new calendar was not recognized by the
White administrations, which continued to use the Old Style. This circumstance causes confusion when
studying the postal history of South Russia during the Civil War; the 13-day difference in the dates on the
postmarks should be taken into account. The dates hereunder are indicated according to the O.S. prior to and
in the N.S. as of February 1918.

Pre-Soviet South Russia (end of 1917 beginning of 1918)
When the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd at the end of October 1917 and then also in some other
towns or regions of the former Empire, the administration of the Don Province then resident in
Novocherkassk and headed by General Kaledin, the elected ataman of the Don Cossacks, refused to
recognize the authority of the Council of People's Commissars over that province. On the other hand, the
Bolsheviks consolidated themselves in Rostov-on-Don, the largest town in the Don Province, which had
been captured by a detachment of Black Sea Fleet sailors and where the majority of the population was non-
Cossack. As the Soviet Central Government sent its Red Guards and other troops under Antonov-Ovseenko
into this area, an armed conflict started in December between the Reds and the forces loyal to the Cossack
administration. At first, success was on the side of the Kaledin forces, which temporarily took control over
Rostov-on-Don. However, the large numerical superiority of the Soviet forces and the withdrawal of
considerable numbers of the Cossacks from the struggle ultimately won the day. Soviet troops entered
Rostov-on-Don and then Novocherkassk on 25 February 1918. General Kaledin had committed suicide a few
days before and the Don Province became a Soviet republic for a short time.

Soviet power also began to be established no earlier than December 1917-January 1918 in the Crimea and
Northern Caucasus. During the whole period under consideration, the postal communications with the Soviet
parts of Russia were not interrupted and the same postage stamps and postal stationery were used as before.
The All-Russian postal rates of 15 August 1917 for domestic mail and of 1 September 1917 for foreign mail
were applied, as follows:-
Local Domestic Foreign
Ordinary postcard 5 k. 8 k.
Local ordinary letter, per 30 grammes 10 k.
Ordinary domestic letter, per 15 grammes 15 k. 20 k.
Local ordinary printed matter, up to 1 lot = 12.794 grammes 2 k.

November 2000

Local Domestic
Local ordinary printed matter over 1 lot: per 4 lots or part thereof 2 k.
Ordinary printed matter (per 2 lots domestic or 15 grammes foreign) 2 k.
Registration fee 20 k.
Money transfer by post, up to 25 roubles 15 k.
26 r. to 100 r. 50 k.
over 100 r.: per 100 r. or part thereof 50 k.
Money transfer by telegraph, up to 500 r. + 3 r.
Over 500 r. +4 r.

Some items of mail from this period are shown hereunder in Figs. 1 to 3.

Fig. 2: Picture postcard franked with imperf.
5 k. Imperial Arms from Armavir, Kuban'
Province 13.12.17 to Revel'/Tallinn 29.12.17.

: :" ----.~ --f :i -;- '-'' '

Fig. 3: Picture postcard with perf 5 k. Imperial
Arms from Sevastopol' Rlwy Stn. P.O. 1.12.17
to Petrograd. Censored in Sevastopol'.
1: ^^^ < ;\ d^^
^.iv?-'^ *^^4*-*- l~ l^ ^ *^

to Petrograd. Censored mn Sevastopol'.

Fig. 1: 3 k. Imperial PS card with additional
franking by 2 x 1 k. perf Arms stamps to
total 5 k. from Rostov 8.12.17, then under
the Don Cossack Admn. of Gen. Kaledin,
to Kozlov. No arrival postmark but manual
notation "20" in red pencil indicates routing
by TPO/RPO No. 20 (Rostov-Khar'kov).

Fig. 4: 15 k. paper money token in postage
stamp form issued by the Terek Soviet Republic.

November 2000


20 k.

The Soviet republics.
The first half of 1918 is characterized by the creation of Soviet state formations in the form of semi-
autonomous republics in South Russia as parts of the Soviet Russian Federation. The Don Soviet Republic
proclaimed on 23 March existed only up to the beginning of May. In that latter month, the Cossacks rising
up against the Bolsheviks captured Novocherkassk again and, with the help of a detachment of the old
Russian Army which had come over from the former Romanian Front under the command of Colonel
Drozdovskii, also Rostov-on-Don. That latter place, as well as some other towns in the Don area up to the
Rostov-Voronezh railway line were occupied also by the German troops going through Ukraine.

In the Northern Caucasus, the Stavropol' Soviet Republic was first proclaimed in January 1918 on the
territory of Stavropol' Province. Then the Soviet republics of the Kubarn and Black Sea were created on the
territories of the corresponding provinces: the first in April after the Red forces had captured Ekaterinodar,
having expelled the Government of the Kubari Cossacks ((Kuban' National Rada) from its capital and the
second one still earlier in March, while the Soviet power had been established in Novorossiisk as early as
November 1917. Both republics were united soon afterwards in the Kubar/Black Sea Soviet Republic.
Moreover, the Terek Soviet Republic was proclaimed in March on the territory of the province with the
same name, being populated by Caucasian mountain dwellers (Ossetians, Chechens, Ingush etc.), as well as
by local Cossacks. That latter republic was the one most isolated from the central areas of Russia and, as a
result, it even had its own issue of paper money tokens similar in appearance to postage stamps and the
issue of banknotes was also allowed there. The tokens (Fig. 4) with three different face values had no postal
use. The Kubari/Black Sea and Stavropol' Soviet Republics were united in the North Caucasian Soviet
Republic in July, but the Terek Republic did not join that union. Soon after that, the Red Army of the
Northern Caucasus under Avtonomov and then under Sorokin (who later raised a mutiny against the
Government of the North Caucasian Soviet Republic, was proclaimed a traitor, arrested and ultimately
shot) was numerically superior but badly disciplined and began to suffer heavy defeats at the hands of the
combined forces of the White Volunteer Army and the Kubain Cossack Army, united under the command
of General Denikin.

The Volunteer Army, a far from numerous force then created at the end of 1917 on the Don territory by
Generals Alekseev and Kornilov (who had occupied the highest military posts in Russia during WWI)
came first into the Kuban' early in 1918 under the command of the last-named and, after joining up with the
White Kuban' Cossack forces, tried to recapture Ekaterinodar in mid-April. However, that attempt failed
and General Kornilov was killed at his command post by a chance shell explosion. The Volunteer Army
then retreated again to the Don by mid-May. This so-called First Kuban' Campaign, which took place under
severe climatic conditions, is also known under the name of the "Ice Campaign". The Volunteer Army
returned to the Kuban' at the end of June (the Second Kuban' Campaign), after taking a rest and having been
reinforced. It joined its forces there with those of the Kuban' Rada under the overall command of General

On 17 August, the White forces recaptured Ekaterinodar and began to press the Red Army to the east and
south-east. The Government of the North Caucasian Soviet Republic was transferred from Ekaterinodar to
Pyatigorsk. However, during the autumn and winter of 1918 the Red forces were driven out of the
Stavropol' Province and the major part of the Terek area. Finally, by February 1919, the Volunteer Army
occupied at last the whole territory of the Terek Soviet Republic and later also the northern part and the
whole coastal area of Dagestan.

The Crimean peninsular was sovietised at the beginning of 1918 and the so-called Soviet Socialist Republic
of Tavrida was proclaimed in March as part of Soviet Russia, in the vain hope of avoiding occupation by
the Germans. This short-lived formation ceased to exist at the end of April, when the whole of the Crimea
was occupied by German troops coming down from Ukraine.

The Soviet Russian postal rates of 28 February 1918 were valid on the territories of the Soviet republics of
November 2000

the Northern Caucasus and the Crimea, as follows:-
Domestic Foreign
Ordinary postcard 20 k. 12 k.
Local ordinary letter, per 4 lots 30 k.
Ordinary letter, per 2 lots domestic or 15 grammes foreign 35 k. 30 k.
Local ordinary printed matter, up to 4 lots 10 k.
Over 4 lots: per 2 lots or part thereof + 2 k.
Ordinary printed matter, per 2 lots domestic or 15 grammes foreign 10 k. 6 k.
Over 2 lots: per 2 lots or part thereof + 2 k.
Registration fee 70 k. 30 k
Money transfer by post: 0.5% of the sum transferred with a minimum of 25 k.
Money transfer by telegram + 12 r.

Editorial Comment: Note that the foreign rates were appreciably lower than the internal charges, but the
amount of mail going abroad during that turbulent period would have been minimal.

Postage stamps and postal stationery of the Arms issues, also other issues on occasion (the Romanov
Jubilee stamps, War Charity) and Postal Savings Bank stamps legally permitted for postage continued to
remain in use. Figs 5 to 11 show some items of mail posted in the Northern Caucasus and the Crimea under
the Soviet administrations.

Fig. 5: 3 k. Imperial PS card without
additional franking, sent by a German POW
from Stavropol' 22.1.18, i.e. during the local
Soviet Republic, to Stockholm.

S F ig. 6:4 k. Romanov PS card with additional
franking of 5 k. imperf. Arms, surcharged 10 k/
j ._. 7 k. Romanov & 1 k. War Charity to total 20 k
Sent locally in Ekaterinodar 24.4.18 during the
SKuban' Soviet Republic.
Fig. 7: 5 k. Kerenskii PS card with additional
franking of 5 k. perf. Arms & 10 k/7 k- Arms,
totaling 20 k. Sent from Novorossiisk 27.8.18
during last days of Kuban'-Black Sea Soviet
Republic, via Rostov 31.8.18 to FellinViljandi
in Estonia. Censored by the Germans in Breslau.
November 2000

Fig. 8: Double-weight registered letter with pair
70 k. Arms and sent from Kislovodsk 29.3.18,
then in Terek Soviet Republic to Hanko, Finland
19.5.18. Censored in Petrograd.

4: -. \, ,* r if. .
-10 ^- It- 'I rl-' 'I .
Fig. 9: Picture postcard franked to 20 k. with 10k./
7k. Arms & 2 x 5k. imperf. Arms from Essentuki
18.4.18, then in Terek Soviet Republic and sent to
Stavropol', centre of another Soviet republic.

Fig. 10: Picture postcard from Zheleznovodsk
21.5.18 to Vladikavkaz 24.5.18, both in Terek
Soviet Republic. Franked with a 10k./7k. Arms,
hence 20k. postage due (double the deficiency).

Fig. 11: Picture postcard with 20k. Arms perf. from
Gurzuf 13..3.18, then in Tavrida Soviet Republic, to
Slavyansk, Khar'kov Prov. 18.3.18 in the part of
Ukraine still under the Soviets.

November 2000


Kuban Territory: The Cossack Government (1918-April 1920)
The Republic of the Kubari Cossacks with the Kraevaya (Regional) Rada as the legislative body and the
Regional Government residing in Ekaterinodar came into being in November 1917 as an autonomous part
of Russia on the territory of the Kubad Province oblastt'). In March 1918 the Rada and Government were
forced to abandon Ekaterinodar under the pressure of the Red forces and returned to their capital in August
with the Volunteer Army.

The Rada and Regional Government recognized the superior authority of the Volunteer Army Command
first in military affairs and then also in the field of administration, when the Armed Forces of South Russia
with their main administrative body "Osoboe Soveshchanie" were formed on the basis of the Volunteer
Army, Don Army and the Caucasian Army, the latter consisting of the forces of the Kuban' and Terek
Cossacks. However, the striving of the Kuban' Cossack leaders for greater autonomy and especially the
leading part taken by those of Ukrainian stock who called themselves "Chernomortsy" (approximately
translated as "Black Sea People") who pressed for unification with Ukraine, led to numerous conflicts with
the Supreme Military Command, operating under the slogan of a "United Indivisible Russia". In the
autumn of 1919, these conflicts expressed themselves in the arrest of some Kubain Rada leaders and the
execution of Kalabukhov, one of the most uncompromising persons among them. The Rada leadership was
replaced by a more moderate one, but the Autonomous Kuban'Republic continued to exist until the spring
of 1920, when the area was finally occupied by the Red Army.

It seems that the postal service on the Kuban' territory was resumed soon after the Rada and Government
returned to Ekaterinodar. The Kuban' Post and Telegraph Department was formed as part of the Ministry of
the Interior. New postal rates were introduced in the autumn of 1918, although the precise date for this
event is not known (probably in September). With some differences concerning the transfer of money, they
were probably similar to the current postal rates of Ukraine, with which the Kuban' aspired to establish
close relations:-

Ordinary postcard 10 k.
Local ordinary letter, per 15 grammes 20 k.
Ordinary letter, per 15 grammes 25 k.
Local ordinary printed matter, up to 15 grammes 5 k.
Over 15 g.: per 30 grammes or part thereof 10 k.
Ordinary printed matter, per 15 grammes 15 k.
Registration fee 25 k.
Money transfer by post, up to 25 r. 25 k.
25 r. to 100 r. 50 k.
Over 100 r.: per 100 r. or part thereof 75 k.
Money transfer by telegraph, up to 500 r. + 3 r.
Over 500 r. + 4 r.

These were the domestic rates, which were applicable also for the mail to the neighboring areas outside
the borders of the Kuban, such as the Don Province, Ukraine, etc. There were no official postal connections
with abroad and occasional mail to the West was prepaid according to these and later domestic rates.

One of the main problems that hampered development of the postal service was the shortage of postage
stamps of higher face values, from 25 kopeks upwards. As a result, the Head of the Ekaterinodar post &
telegraph office turned to the above Kalabukhov, then the member in the KubarI Government responsible
for Internal Affairs (including the postal service) with a proposal to surcharge the abundant stocks of the
stamps of low face value. The corresponding permission was obtained and in November 1918 the first set
of stamps surcharged at a governmental printing shop in Ekaterinodar appeared on sale at post offices,
although some values of this set were released at later dates up to February 1919. Perforated and
imperforate Imperial Arms stamps with face value from 1 k. to 4 k. were used for this issue.

November 2000

The typographic printing method was used for this and the following two issues, all surcharges being
effected in black on perforated and imperforate Imperial Arms stamps of the 1908-1917 issue, as well as on
postal savings bank stamps legally used for postage.

First Issue: November 1918 (Figs. 12-14)
1. 25 (k) /1 k. orange-yellow (shades)
2. 50 (k) / 2 k. green
3. 1 r. / 3 k. carmine-red (shades) smaller thin overprint
4. 1 r. / 3 k. carmine-red (shades) larger thick overprint
5. 3 r. / 4 k. rose
a. on 4 k. red

6. 25 (k) /1 k. orange-yellow
7. 50 (k) / 2 k. green (shades)
8. 1 r. / 3 k. carmine red (shades) smaller thin overprint
9. 1 r. / 3 k. carmine-red (shades) larger thick overprint

Surcharge inverted: known on all values.
Surcharge double: known on all values (on Nos. 1, 4, 6 8 & 9: double surcharge, where one is inverted and
on No. 3 both inverted also exist).

Among the other known varieties are: wide "0" in "50" (the 9t. stamp on the sheet for Nos 2 & 7), comma
for stop (the 7th. and 8th. stamps on sheets of a part of the printing for Nos. 3 & 8), "6" instead of the
Russian letter "6" (No. 5, one stamp on the sheet), surcharges shifted upwards to the center or top of the
stamp (Nos. 1 & 3-9, also with inverted surcharge), surcharges shifted to side or downwards so that the
surcharge is between the stamps, or one stamp in the row remains without surcharge, forming a horizontal
or vertical pair with and without surcharge (Nos. 3, 4, 7 & 9). The 1 r. stamps with thick overprint are
found with the stop missing, or as a square or comma, which is rather a result of bad imprinting or a
deformation of the plate. A lot of other minor plate varieties exist for almost all surcharged stamps. There
are also offsets or even overprints on the back of a stamp (e.g. Nos. 1 & 6).

A quite particular variety, probably the result of a trial, has a double surcharge "25" on the 3 k. imperforate.
There was a single sheet produced of this variety, but this stamp is nowhere to be found nowadays.

According to the official data, the numbers of stamps surcharged were the following [reference 16]:-

Nos 1 & 6: 5,600,000 in all.
Nos 2 & 7: 4,932,200 in all.
Nos 3,4, 8 & 9: 5,689,900 in all.
No. 5: 2000 (10,000 according to another source [14]).

There is no division between the perforated and imperforate stamps, as well as between the principal
varieties of the 1 r. surcharge. However, the number of the "-25" surcharges on imperforate 1 k. stamps is
assessed as 0.1% of the total number. On the other hand, the number of perforated 50 / 2 k. stamps is
believed to be no more than 15 sheets, i.e. 1500 copies. The number of the 1 r. / 3 k. stamps with the thin
overprint was considerably less than that of the stamps with the thick overprint, while the numbers of
perforated and imperforate stamps were nearly equal for Nos. 8, 3, 4 & 9, their scarcity being shown here in
descending order (see reference [15]).

November 2000

Fig. 12: Set of stamps of the First Kuban' Issue


Fig. 13: Stamp varieties of the First Kuban' Issue.

Fig. 14: Some cancellations on stamps of First Kuba

November 2000

n' Issue.

.-sr '.

.- -


Fig. 14: Some cancellations on stamps
of the First Kuban' Issue (continued).

It can also be seen from the above figures that some stamps of this set are underestimated in the standard
catalogues. That concerns, first of all, stamp No. 5 as unjustly valued much lower than other stamps issued
in approximately the same numbers, e.g. No. 19 (or even No. 21, if the information from another source
about the number issued of stamp No. 5 is true). The majority of copies in dealers' stocks are actually
forgeries, especially those in mint copies and in the rose shade, bearing in mind that, in contrast to No. 19,
the bulk of these stamps was used on money transfer and parcel forms.

Prior to being transferred to the post offices, the stocks of stamps were thoroughly examined and, as far as
possible, all sheets with abnormalities, such as inverted or double surcharges etc. were taken out. Together
with printer's waste, they were later sold very cheaply to private persons, such as the former senator Som
and Petrograd stamp dealer Ewald Eichenthal, who found themselves in those days in Ekaterinodar. There
was a greater number of inverted and double surcharges, etc. on the 1 r. / 3 k. stamps with thick surcharge
and a considerably lesser amount of those abnormalities on the other stamps.

Apart from the surcharged stamps, unoverprinted Arms stamps of lower stamps (mainly the 5 k., 10 k., 10
k. / 7 k. and 20 k.), as well as the 5 & 10 k. postal savings bank stamps continued to be used for postage,
e.g. to prepay postcards, printed matter and local letters or, in combination with other surcharged mail,
other kinds of mail. Also, Imperial postal stationery, mainly the 5 k. postcards of the Kerenskii issue, were
used at face value. Figs 15 & 16 on the next page depict items of mail posted during that period.

In January 1919, new postal rates common to all territories occupied by the Armed Forces of South Russia
were introduced by their Head of the Administration of Military Communications, to which the entire
postal and telegraphic service in these territories was subordinate. They were basically the pre-WWI
domestic rates effective in Imperial Russia until 21 September 1914, but increased five times:-

November 2000

.. .. ', Fig. 15: 5k. Kerenskii PS card additionally
L.a.- 'i- franked with 5k. PSB stamp for the 10k. card
-- ,, .- rate and used locally in Ekaterinodar 10.12.18.
.. ..r -. "' : -7 / : '. .. .... .-. b

L <(< ; d r I Vi. -< _7

Fig. 16: Registered letter with pair 25/1k. imperf. Pec a Pg

-ha ( .pyo3

(He A*x py .e -:pon c *o tE ^
omEkaterinodar8.12.18toOdessaYeisk 14.10.19 to Khar'kov 20.10.19 with pair2.18.
S- "aTep iiH

Slr.13k. perf stamps of the First Kuban' I .
'16 THE POST-RIDER/.IMI.' No. 47

Fig 17: M oney transfmer 2d fr l00a
Yfisk 14.E10.n19 to Khar'kov 20.10.19 with pair
lr./3k. perf. stamps of the First Kuban' Issue

November 2000

Ordinary postcard 15 k.
Local ordinary letter, per 4 lots 25 k.
Ordinary letter, per 2 lots 35 k.
Local ordinary printed matter, up to 1 lot 5 k.
Over 1 lot: per 8 lots or part thereof 10 k.
Ordinary printed matter, per 4 lots 10 k.
Registration fee 35 k.
Money transfer by post, up to 25 r. 25 k. (?)
26 r. to 100 r. 70 k. (?)
Over 100 r.: per 100 r. or part thereof 70 k. (?)

The same stamps and postal stationery as before were used in the Kuban territory during this period (Fig.
17) and also later on 1 July 1919 (see reference [25]), when the postal rates were increased on the average
as much as twice as before:-
Ordinary postcard 35 k.
Local ordinary letter, per 30 grammes 50 k.
Ordinary letter, per 15 grammes 70 k.
Local ordinary printed matter, per 15 grammes or part thereof 10 k.
Ordinary printed matter, per 15 grammes or part thereof 20 k.
Registration fee 70 k.
Money transfer by post, per 25 r. or part thereof 20 k.
Money transfer by telegraph, up to 1000 r. + 11 r. 50 k.
Over 1000 r. + 15 r.

By that time, postage stamps of original design with the inscription "Edinaya Rossiya" (United Russia) had
been issued by the Postal Administration of the Special Consultation, but those stamps were not sent to the
Kuban', because of the strained relations between the Kubadi Government and the Armed Forces of South
Russia mentioned above. Thus, to overcome a new shortage of stamps of high face value connected with
the new postal rates, a second issue of surcharged stamps was effected in Ekaterinodar. This time, the 4 k.
and 5 k. postage stamps of the Arms issue, as well as the 1, 5 & 10 k. postal savings bank stamps were used
for surcharging. i

Second Issue: September 1919 (Figs. 18 & 19). '
Perforated. .
10. 70 k. /5 k. purple (shades)
11. 10r./4k.red
12. 10 r. / 1 k. red, postal savings bank stamp
13. 10 r. /5 k. green, postal savings bank stamp
14. 10 r. / 10 k. chocolate, postal savings bank stamp
15 70 k. I 5 k. brown-lilac
Varieties: Fig. 18: Set of stamps of the Second Kuban' Issue.
Surcharge inverted: known on Nos 11-13, may exist on No. 10.
Surcharge doubled: known on No. 13.

Among the other known varieties are surcharges shifted to the center or to the top of the stamp (No. 12).
The basic postal savings bank stamps exist with the lozenge watermark arranged vertically or horizontally.
The surcharged 1 & 5 k. stamps are found in both versions, the horizontal watermark being much scarcer.

The numbers surcharged of the stamps were (reference [16]):-
Nos. 10 & 15: 848,000 in all.
No. 11: 60,000 (100 with inverted surcharge)
November 2000


Fig. 19: Some cancellations on stamps of the Second Kuban' Issue.
No. 12: 28,700 (100 with inverted surcharge)
No. 13: 8,000
No. 14: 1,200
Again, there is no division between the perforated and imperforate stamps of the same face value in the
official data. However, a statistic assessment indicates that the number of imperforate stamps surcharged 70
k. / 5 k. is only 0.5% of the total number.

Unsurcharged stamps were applied now only in addition to the surcharged ones: for instance, to comply
with the 35 k. postcard rate, a 10 k. stamp was used in combination with a 25 k. / 1 k. surcharged stamp.
Some items of mail from this period are shown in Figs. 20-23.

Fig. 21: Registered letter from Yasenskava 12 12 19
to Pavlograd, Ukraine 22 12 19 with four perfd 25k /Ik
stamps First Kuban' Issue plus four 10k /7k Imperial
Arms to make up the Ir 40k rate then in force
(Robert Taylor collection)

November 2000

Fig. 20: 5k. Kerenskii PS card with 10k. surcharge of Fig. 22: Back of an ordinary letter from Ekaterinodar
Ekaterinoslav Trident and franked with single 15k. Arms 27.3.19 to Rostov 28.3.19 with 2 x 10k. & 3 x 5k. PSB
perf. for postcard rate, i.e. the Ukrainian surcharge not stamps in accordance with the 35k. letter rate.
taken into account and card used as a blank. Sent from
Tikhoretskii Khutor 30.6.19 to Batalpashinsk 5.7.19.

1 Fig. 23: Money transfer card
for 4700r. from Ekaterinodar
-" L .. 6.11.19 to Rostov 10.11.19
S- with 8 x 10r./lk. PSB stamps
.z'in ... :of Second Kuban' Issue (one
stamp removed) + 4 x r./3k.
i- mperfs of the First Kuban'
S-- r Issue to total 84r. for 2% rate.

.fj-. -.." -... ...

-- ---- ?- ....... ......... .......... .. *: ~--- w'' "

There are known cases of genuine postal use of Kuban' stamps outside the borders of Kuban'Province by
persons who took those stamps with themselves (Fig. 24). However, Kuban' stamps were sometimes even
sold at post offices outside the Kuban', e.g. in Novorossiisk. All this took place mostly during the final
Soviet period. On the other hand, occasional use of the "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps is known in the Kuban'as
November 2000
November 2000

Fig. 24: Ordinary postcard
from Petrovsk, Dagestan
25.6.19 to Ekaterinodar
30.6.19 with a single 25/1k.
stamp of First Kuban' Issue.
Overfranked by 10k. relative
to the postcard rate in
force, as the Kuban' stamp
was used outside the Kuban

Fig. 25: Set of stamps of the Third Kuban' Issue.

Fig. 26: Stamp varieties of the Third Kuban' Issue.

Fig. 27: Some cancellations on stamps of the
Third Kuban' Issue applied while still under
Cossack Administration

Fig. 28: Stamps of the Sochi Issue.

November 2000


W~E TtP L-'

~~i J..rr l 1

-~ ifur -i -L~
it 1 r_~

n Iy~.* C .-*---..*. -.-z AZ
0: '.t
I ~'c ~ 41. 4.1~'
~L' ~f~~ CL~tL C. Ir %
Y CMYI;1~iC~~iJ

:- I "~.DRT ~ rlHT TBA I(. G:Cs6D'PHH A o.
--.1 rH' 1'"-~

Finally, the third issue of Kuban' surcharges was effected at the end of 1919 and the beginning of 1920.
Third Issue: December 1919 / January 1920 (Figs. 25-27).
16. 70 k. / 1 k. orange-yellow
17. 10 r. / 15 k. blue and purple-brown
18. 25 r. / 3 k. carmine-red
19. 25 r. / 7 k. light blue
20. 25 r. 14 k. carmine and blue
21. 25 r. / 25 k. violet and green
No. I: 70 k. / 1 k. red, postal savings bank stamp (special numbering for this item)
22. 70 k. /1 k. orange-yellow
23. 10r. / 15 k. blue and purple-brown
24. 25 r./ 3 k. carmine-red
Surcharge inverted: known on Nos. 18 to 22 & 24. It may exist on No. 16. No. I is found only in this state.
Surcharge double, one of them inverted: known on Nos. 17 & 22. It may exist on No. 16.
Among the other known varieties are surcharges shifted to the center or top of the stamp (Nos. 16 to 18);
double surcharge, one without "10", the other without "rublei"; or one with inverted "10" only (both on
stamp No. 17; triple surcharge one complete, the second without "10" and the third without "rublei" (No.
17). These and many other varieties of all stamps come from printer's waste, although some are known sold
over the counter and even used on mail. There are a lot of minor plate varieties, particularly on Nos. 16 and

The numbers of stamps surcharged (reference [15]).
Nos. 16 & 22: 257,000 in all; 400 with inverted surcharge or double surcharge, one of them inverted *.
No. 17 : 300,000 in all; 300 with double surcharge, one of them inverted.
Nos. 18 & 24: 500,000 in all; 700 imperforate with inverted surcharge.
No. 19 2,000 (100 with inverted surcharge).
No. 20 1,000 (100 with inverted surcharge).
No. 21 :10,000 (200 with inverted surcharge).
*Figures for inverted and double surcharges are unofficial.

While the figures concerning the total numbers of issued stamps are based on official documents, the data
on the inverted and double surcharges are somewhat in doubt. For example, a comparison of known copies
of No. 20 with inverted surcharge shows that there were at least two sheets with such a surcharge, differing
in the position of the overprint. The perforated and imperforate 10 r. / 15 k. and 25 r. / 3 k. stamps exist in
approximately equal quantities.

No. I was never sold over the counter. It is stated that two full sheets, i.e. 200 copies were overprinted, one
of the sheets being with inverted surcharge (reference [16]). According to another source, there was only
one sheet of No. I in all (reference [15]). Up to now, only inverted surcharges are known on this stamp.

According to assessment data, there was about an equal quantity of perforated and imperforate 70 k. / 1 k.
and 25 r. / 3 k. stamps. Contrary to the first two issues, speculation by some postal officials also took place
in this case. There is evidence that major parts of printings of stamps Nos. 19 to 21, as well as the stamps
with inverted surcharges were not sold over the counter but directly to some private persons, members of
the British Mission in Ekaterinodar and to local dealers. .It is interesting to mention that, in the mid-sixties,
while tearing down an old building in Krasnodar, (the former Ekaterinodar), a cache of a great number of
mint Kuban' stamps in sheets was found there, including among them the rare Nos. 19, 20 and No. I with
normal and inverted surcharges (No. I only with inverted surcharge).

November 2000

There exist numerous forgeries of all Kuban' stamps, as well as forged cancellations from rather crudely
produced to very finely executed and difficult to recognize (reference [1]).

This issue was probably necessitated in connection with one more increase in postal rates, virtually
confirmed by some available items of mail from the Northern Caucasus, including the Kuban' and dating
from the first few months of 1920. These probable rates seem to be the following:-

Ordinary postcard 50 k. (?)
Local ordinary letter, per 30 grammes 70 k. (?)
Ordinary letter, per 15 grammes 1 r.
Local ordinary printed matter, up to 1 lot 15 k. (?)
Over 1 lot: per 8 lots or part thereof 30 k. (?)
Ordinary printed matter, per 4 lots 30 k. (?)
Registration fee 1 r.

However, it is interesting to note that the items of mail from the Crimea posted at the same time, at least
until July 1920, were franked according to the former rates of July 1919.

There should also be mentioned here the so-called Armavir issue of two stamps surcharged 10 r. / 15 k.
and 25 r. / 3 k., which are very similar to the stamps Nos. 17 & 24 of the third issue. There are still disputes
as to whether it is a genuine provisional issued by the Postal Service, or a forgery made originally to
defraud the post but genuinely used later for postage as well as to whether this issue was effected before
or after the occupation of Armavir by the Red Army. This issue will be discussed in the section devoted to
the final Soviet period, since all known cases of postal use of these stamps are related to that era.

The drive for unity between the Kuban' and the Don regions among the leaders of the Kubad Republic,
which they aspired to put into effect during the last few months of 1918 contrary to the wish of the
Volunteer Army Command, also called into being essays of postage stamps for that planned state union.
These stamps were to be printed in Novocherkassk, the capital of the Don Republic, so the corresponding
essays will be treated in the "Don Territory" section of this paper.

Our intention was initially to present lists of post offices.functioning in the Kuban' and other South Russian
regions during the period under consideration, together with their postmarks found up to now on the South
Russian and other stamps, which would have expanded the corresponding lists published first in an article
by A. Artuchov and A.M. Rosselevitch (reference [10]) and supplemented later by Dr. R. Ceresa (reference
[1]). However, the number of such post offices as recorded in the Russian Postal Guide of 1915 and
subsequent supplements in the form of publications in the official Postal & Telegraphic Journal for 1916-
1917, turned out to be so great that their listing would have taken up a lot of pages. It was therefore decided
to omit these listings in the present article and adduce them later as a separate publication.

Used copies of Kuban' stamps and especially covers from the Kuban' franked with these and other stamps
valid for postage are far from being common, although not rare. That concerns, first of all, the postal use of
Kuban' stamps during the final Soviet period from April to the end of 1920. Used stamps and covers from
the time of the Kuban'Republic are much scarcer (see Fig. 27 on p. 20).

The Sochi District
By the end of 1918, the Sochi resort district in a part of the Black Sea Province, including a few villages or
small towns with Sochi and Adler the most significant of them, was actually cut off from the rest of the
world. The railway ended at Tuapse, the surface roads were impassable during the winter period and the
only communications maintained by sea, but there were very few ships calling at Sochi in 1918-1919.

The Sochi district was outside the area of military fighting between the Reds and the Whites, with only

November 2000

the so-called "Greens", consisting of army deserters and other elements who did not want to join the main
fighting parties and were based in the neighboring mountains, occasionally took over the area. Under
those circumstances, Georgia, which had its own pretensions to this area, occupied the coastal strip from
Adler to Tuapse during July 1918. That led to a worsening of relations between Georgia and the Volunteer
Army Command. The latter ordered a complete mopping-up of the entire Black Sea Province up to the
Bzyb River (the border between the Sochi district of the Black Sea Province and the separate Sukhumi
district) and its troops were moved to the district borders. In September, the Volunteer Army recaptured
Tuapse and Lazarevskaya. Only after the intervention of the British Military Mission in the Caucasus did
the Georgian Government agree to abandon Sochi and Adler, while the Volunteer Army forces completely
occupied this area by 10 February 1919.

During the period under consideration, the Sochi district was administered by a Town Committee, in the
presence of a detachment of Georgian troops. The Town Committee was formally subordinate to the
Government of the Republic of Georgia through the commander of that detachment. The postal service
seemed to function over the greater part of this period, although its activities were limited to the territory of
the district (postal connections with Georgia, while possible theoretically, at least with the neighboring
Abkhazian localities such as Gagry, Gudauty and Sukhumi, hardly existed due to the lack of transport
communications mentioned above). Also, it is not known whether other post offices apart from those at
Sochi and Adler were functioning at that time. The latter office applied the current postal rates of Georgia,
in particular 40 k. for postcards, 60 k. for letters and 60 k. for registration.

To meet these rates under the condition of shortages of postage stamps, at least of those of higher face
values, the post office at Sochi effected a local issue by surcharging with "60" (k.) in black by a
typographic process three different stamps of the Imperial Arms issue.

Sochi issue. December 1918 (Fig. 28 on p. 20).
1. 60 (k.) / 1 k. orange-yellow, perforated.
2. 60 (k.) / 1 k. orange-yellow, imperforate.
3. 60 (k.) / 3 k. carmine-red, imperforate.
The total number of stamps surcharged was 2500 copies, which is believed to be divided between the
particular types of stamps as follows: No. 1 500 copies (800 according to another source), No. 2 1500
copies (1200 according to another source and No. 3 500 copies.

Due to the primitive typographic process of overprinting the stamps, a sheet of 100 is composed of 7
different types of the surcharge (large and small "60", with or without a horizontal bar of different sizes
under the "60" (see for example reference [11]). Also, plate errors "90" and "09" exist.

It is believed that no more than 4 or 5 genuine covers franked with the Sochi stamps have been preserved,
all of them being envelopes of ordinary or registered letters mailed locally at Sochi or between Sochi and
Adler (see Fig. 29 on the next page). Used copies ofNos. 1 to 3 exist on pieces, as well as in blocks of four
or other multiples, all cancelled (partly c.t.o.) with a serial "b" Sochi postmark. It still remains unknown if
other postal establishments in this area (Lazarevskaya, Khosta etc.) were functioning and using Sochi
stamps during this period.

It also remains unknown whether the postal service in the Sochi district dealt with other classes of mail and
specifically postcards. No special surcharges were made on stamps for those purposes. For example,
postcards could have been franked with a pair of 20 k. Arms stamps, if such were available at the post
offices. Postcards franked in that way may well exist and remaining still unnoticed by collectors because of
their franking with very common stamps.
Taking into account the political background of the Sochi issue, collectors are free to decide whether they

should collect these stamps under South Russia or Georgia.

November 2000

Fig. 29: Registered letter from Adler
25.12.18 to Sochi, franked with three
perforated 60/1k. stamps to total
Ir. 80k. (Robert Taylor collection).

Fig. 30: Set of
stamps of the
Don Issue.

Fig. 31: Stamp varieties
of the Don Issue.

-I ---II

"- .>f 3
* .- -...-
* ~

- ; -

Fig. 32: Some cancellations on stamps of the Don Issue.

24 November 2000

b- t
'4 .-

The Don Territory: The Cossack Government (May 1918-December 1919)
The uprising of the Don Cossacks against the Bolsheviks meant the end of the Don Soviet Republic.
General Krasnov was elected "Ataman" of the Don Cossacks (Head of the Autonomous State) and a
government was formed. General Krasnov tried to maintain good relations with Germany, whose troops
occupied a part of the Don Province, while supporting at the same time with arms and ammunition the
Volunteer Army in its fight against the Bolsheviks. Nevertheless, rather cool relations remained between
the Don Government and the Volunteer Army Command. General Krasnov repeatedly rejected
subordinating the Don Army to the latter Command and the Volunteer Army did not help him in his
repeated attempts to capture the important town of Tsaritsyn on the Volga, then in Soviet hands. However,
by the end of 1918, the position of the Don Army became almost desperate because of the increasing
pressure of the Red Army from the north-east and north after the evacuation of German troops from the
Don and Ukraine. Only in January 1919 was there an agreement reached, placing the troops of the Don
Army under the command of General Denikin for strategic reasons. Soon after that, General Krasnov was
replaced by General Bogaevskii as the Ataman of the Don Cossacks and left the Don forever.

The Don Government organized a regular postal service within the province and to the neighboring areas
such as Ukraine, the Kuban' and Stavropol' Province. In the autumn of 1918, the same postal rates as in
Ukraine and the Kuban' (see the first set of postal rates of the Kubai') were introduced in the Don territory
and a postal and telegraphic agreement concluded between the Don and Kuban' administrations that
included mutual recognition of their postage stamps.

Postage stamps of Imperial design continued to remain in use. However, as in the Kuban, the shortage of
stamps of higher face value, which were required to meet the new increased postal rates, began to manifest
itself. Therefore, a decision was taken on 26 September 1918 by the Don Government (see reference [19])
to surcharge the stocks of Imperial Arms stamps of the lower and now useless values, as well as postal
stationery cards. The overprinting was effected in black by the typographic process at the printing works of
the newspaper "Pryazovskii Krai" in Rostov-on-Don.

Don Issue of Stamps: November-December 1918 (Figs 30-32 on p. 24).
1. 25 / 1 k. orange-yellow (shades)
2. 25 / 2 k. green (shades)
3. 25/3k. red
4. 25 /4 k. carmine-rose
5. 50/7k. light blue
6. 25 / 1 k. orange-yellow (shades)
7. 25 / 2 k. green
8. 25/3k. red
Inverted surcharges known on all values, except for No. 8.
Double surcharge found on No. 6. Also, surcharges shifted up or sideways, on the back as well as a double
print of the basic stamp for No. 7 are to be found.
The numbers of stamps surcharged, according to reference [12]:
No. 1 100,000
No. 2 250,000
No. 3 150,000
No. 4 200,000
No. 5 50,000
No. 6 1,400,000
No. 7 10,000
No. 8 20,000
November 2000

Compared to those of the Kuban', these numbers were considerably smaller on the whole, such that the
stocks of Don stamps were mainly used up by mid-1919. Also, the fact that large quantities of the Don
stamps were bought by German soldiers, who sent or brought them to Germany and which were sold there
to stamp dealers contributed to the fact that genuinely used stamps are rather rarely found these days even
loose and cancelled-to-order, not to mention covers franked with these stamps (see Fig. 33 on the next
page). Moreover, most of the covers are of philatelic origin (mainly from Taganrog). Also, stamps exist
with forged surcharges, as well as genuine stamps with forged cancellations, mainly of Rostov-on-Don. It
is also worth mentioning that any item of mail posted in 1918 and into the first half of 1919, even if franked
only with stamps of the Arms issue, is far from common (Fig. 34).

The lowest face value of the surcharges was 25 k. and that corresponded to the ordinary letter rate prior to
1919. Mail such as postcards or printed matter continued to be franked with unsurcharged Russian stamps,
which were also used as a supplement to or the entire franking for letters, money orders and parcel cards,
especially from January 1919, when the postal rates were increased. Moreover, the remaining stocks of
Imperial postal stationery cards of the 1909-1910 issue were also surcharged to 10 k., which was the
postcard rate. Although the relevant decree mentioned only the 3 k. Imperial postal stationery card, three
different basic cards have been found surcharged up to now.

Don Postal Stationery Card Issue:
P1. 10/3 k. red
P2 10 + 10 / 3 k. red (double card)
P3 10 /4 k. red

As there was a political trend for the unification of the Don and Kubafn actively supported by some leaders
of the Kubarf, an issue of stamps common to both areas was also intended. Accordingly, essays for four
stamps (5, 10, 25 & 50 k.) with the name of the state as "Don-Kubari" were prepared in Ekaterinodar and
another series of essays with a design similar to that of the future "Edinaya Rossiya" issue but having the
inscriptions as "Dono-Kubatr" or "Don-Kubari" were prepared in Novocherkassk (see references [19, 20]).

The above-mentioned decree also provided for printing and issuing stamps with a face value of 25 k. in an
original design depicting Ermak, a legendary Cossack leader who had conquered Western Siberia for
Russia in the 16th. Century. Actually, this order was not implemented, as the political situation had
changed. However, a money token, in the same design but with a face value of 20 k. in grayish green
colour, had been issued even earlier, probably in July 1918, by the Rostov-on-Don section of the State
Bank (Fig. 36). This token is occasionally found postally used, but it was never intended for that purpose.

The Don territory maintained postal communications with the Kubanf as well as Ukraine and, via the latter,
probably also with the Central Powers. Such mail was prepaid according to the domestic rates, which were
initially common for these territories. However, as of 15 November 1918, the postal rates were raised in
Ukraine. It appears that the mail from the Don to Ukraine had to be franked in accordance with the new
rates of Ukraine (Fig. 37).

In January and July 1919, new postal rates (see under "Kuban4Territory") were put into effect also in the
Don area. The Don stamps and postal stationery remained in use until complete exhaustion of their stocks,
jointly with the Imperial stamps of the Arms issue. Since the number of stamps overprinted and issued was
considerably less than that of the Kuban' stamps, that had essentially happened already by the summer of
1919. As for the postal stationery cards, they are also found used later under the Soviet administration, but
as "blanks". Starting from the summer of 1919, the stamps of the "Edinaya Rossiya" issue were used in the
Don territory on a par with the Imperial Arms stamps.

When the German troops started to leave the Don territory and the neighboring Donets Coal Mining area,
which was a part of Ukraine, the latter turned out to be defenceless against the bands of local
November 2000

4 .


-. -

,- .- .

'imperf 25/1k. stamp of the Don issue and in accordance
ith the rate then in force .
.,,." --- .'

' Fig. 33: Ordinary letter fom Starocherkasskaya 11.12 18
lo Aleksandrovsk-Grushe\,sk 12 12.18 \with a single
'"imperf. 25/lk. stamp ofthe Don Issue and in accordance
\wilh the rate ihen in force

Fig. 34: Ordinary letter from Aleksandrovsk-Grushevsk
13.3.19 to Romanovskaya, Kuban' 16.3.19 with a single
perf. 35k. Arms in conformity with new increased rate.



Fig. 35: "10"/3k. & "10"/4k. postal stationery cards of the Don Issue.

Fig. 36: 20k. money token in stamp form issued by the Rostov Office of the State Bank.

November 2000

il SA PIKb




Fig. 37: Ordinary postcard from Rostov, ?.1 1.18 to Kiev. Fig. 39: Ukrainian PS card surcharged for use in the Donets
The franking consists of a 10k. Imperial Arms & 10/7k. Coal Mining Area.
Arms with Odessa II Trident. Although the postcard rate
in the Don area remained at 10k. until the end of 1918,
this rate was raised in Ukraine on 15 November and
necessitated that the Ukrainian stamp also be affixed. | R l I

Fig. 38: Ukrainian stamps
surcharged for use in the
Donets Coal MiningArea.

-x A" -, T ?-.. ,.--,--- ...

Fig. 41: Ordinary postcard from Evpatoriya 2.7.18 to
Khar'kov, Ukraine 6.7.18 with a single 10k./7k. Arms
in accordance with the rate then in force.

Fig. 42: Ordinary letter from Evpatoriya 25.7.18 to
Koreiz 7.8.18 with perforated 10 & 15k. Arms in
accordance with the 25k. rate then in force.

Fig. 40: Set of stamps of the so-called Novocherkassk
Issue considered as bogus.


e. -
S.... '- .- "<- l ...-

Fig. 43: Registered postcard from Simferopol'25.10.18
j --- "-...

to Kiev, Ukraine with a single perf. 35k. Arms in
accordance with the rate then in force.

*-A^ ^ & ,..

November 2000

15 .


i "

insurgents, "Father" (Bat'ko) Makhno as the one most well-known among them and Bolsheviks from
Soviet Russia preparing to invade from the North. As a result, Pavel Skoropadskyj, the Hetman of Ukraine,
who had too few troops for that purpose, made a request to General Krasnov to take this area under the
protection of the Don Army. An agreement was reached and, in the second half of November, Cossack
troops from the Don occupied the area with the towns of Lugansk, Yuzovka, Debaltsevo, Mariupol' etc.
Military governors from the Don were appointed and it was explained to the local population that it was
only a temporary measure "until a permanent and universally recognized power was set up in Ukraine".
Also, the postal-telegraphic offices in this area, which were subordinate earlier to the Ekaterinoslav Postal
& Telegraphic District, were now administered from Rostov-on-Don. Later, during January-March 1919,
the northern parts of the Donets Coal Mining Area were invaded by the Red Army and a delaying action
could only be fought on the Debaltsevo-Yuzovka-Popasnaya line with the help of Volunteer Army units
transferred from the Northern Caucasus and under the command of General Mai-Maevskii.

Under these conditions, a stamp issue appeared, which all modern catalogues ascribe to Mariupol', a
seaport in the Donets Coal Mining area. The issue consists of two stamps of the definitive issue of the
Ukraine in shahy, surcharged typographically in black with new face values in kopeks. However, there are
serious doubts as to whether these stamps were actually a local issue made in Mariupol', so we prefer to
call it the "Issue for the Donets Coal Mining Area", ordered by the Don governmental authorities and list it
here. The reasons for such a decision are given hereunder.

Stamp Issue for the Donets Coal Mining Area: March (?) 1919 (Fig. 38).
1. 35 k. / 10 shahiv yellow-brown
2. 70 k. / 50 shahiv carmine
No. 2 with inverted surcharge.

These stamps are far from being common, even in mint condition. Genuinely used copies are very scarce,
to say nothing of covers, of which only a few items are known. The earliest cancellations known to me are
from Mariupol', dated at the end of March 1919. However, postmarks of other towns within the Donets
Coal Mining region, such as Khartsyzsk, Kramatorovka, Sartana, etc. are found as well. The most
intriguing thing is that these stamps seem to have been used at the end of March or the beginning of April
in the areas which were at that time under both the White and Soviet administrations. There exist dangerous
forgeries of these surcharges, especially of the 70 k. value.

There is a very good reason to suppose that these stamps form a common issue with the Imperial 3 k. and
Kerenskii 5 k. postal stationery cards, which had a primary overprint of a Ukrainian trident applied in
Ekaterinoslav in July 1918 and then supplied with a secondary 15 k. surcharge. The similarity in the design
of this surcharge and those on the postage stamps is striking. In the postal stationery catalogues, e.g.
Michel, these postal stationery cards are usually listed under Ukraine.

Postal Stationery Card Issue for Donets Coal Mining Area: March (?) 1919 (Fig. 39).
P1. 15 k. / 10 k. with Ekaterinoslav 1 trident / 3 k. red
P2. 15 k. / 10 k. with Ekaterinoslav 1 trident / 5 k. lilac-brown
P3. 15 k. / 10 k. with Ekaterinoslav 2 trident / 5 k. lilac-brown
P4. 15 k. + 15 k. / 10 k. + 10 k. with Ekaterinoslav 2 trident / 5 k. + 5 k.lilac-brown.

It is worth mentioning also that a number of sets of stamps issued during the Civil War in Russia appeared
on the philatelic markets soon after the end of that war, or even during its final years. These stamps, some
of which were originally included in such famous stamp catalogues as Michel, Stanley Gibbons and Yvert-
et-Tellier up to WWII, are now regarded as bogus, although some of them might have had a more subtle
origin. The so-called "Novocherkassk Issue" was one of them. That set includes imperforate Imperial Arms
stamps surcharged "25" on the 1 & 2 k., "50" on the 3 & 5 k. and "1 P" (two types) on the 3 k. (Fig. 40).

November 2000

Little is known about their true origin and no genuinely used stamps have been found. Some Soviet sources
ascribe these stamps to a gang of forgers from Novocherkassk (hence the designation of the set), two
members of which, Lamtev and Popov, were convicted in 1924. Actually, they did forge overprints of the
legal Kubari and Don overprints, as well as Ukrainian tridents. However, the same Lamtev, a notable stamp
collector and journal editor at the same time, treats this set in an earlier article (reference [13]) as a bogus
issue, thus proving that he was not implicated in that affair. On the other hand, these stamps are often found
signed by Trachtenberg, a stamp dealer with a shady reputation and who resided in Odessa during 1918-
1919. The fact that each of these stamps has a great number of varieties, including double and inverted
surcharges (completely or only the "5" of the "25" figures), does raise suspicion, but the quite legal Kubari
and Don territory issues also have a lot of such varieties as well. Moreover, the face values of these
surcharges comply with the postal rates in force in South Russia and Ukraine at the end of 1918. Therefore,
a possibility cannot be excluded that this set was actually prepared for issue by some South Russian postal
authorities, but by either reason not released for counter sale and later sold in gross to Trachtenberg.

The Crimea: the Tartar and later the Russian Regional Government (1918-1919)
In May 1918 and upon completing the occupation of Ukraine, German troops also entered the Crimea,
where the Russian Black Sea Fleet was still lying at its main base of Sevastopol'. The Crimea was also
occupied without problems and the bulk of the Black Sea Fleet left for Novorossiisk upon orders from
Moscow. The Crimean Regional Government formed under Sulkevich, a Russian general of Tartar origin,
consisted mainly of Crimean Tartar politicians and became the administrative body for the Crimea on 25
June. That government was in power until November when, upon the evacuation of German troops, it was
replaced by another government, this time of liberal representatives from the non-Tartar population of the
peninsula. The new government was oriented to the Allies and also maintained close relations with the
Volunteer Army Command. On 25 November, an Allied squadron came to Sevastopol' and French troops
were landed there. The so-called Crimean/Azov Volunteer Army (as distinct from the Caucasian Volunteer
Army, but under a common General Command) was formed there. However, its forces were too meagre to
withstand the Red Crimean Army under Dybenko, which had invaded the Crimea at the beginning of April
1919 and occupied almost the whole of the peninsula by the middle of that month, including Sevastopol',
the French warships with all troops having abandoned this port within a few days. However, the Whites
managed to consolidate their positions on the Kerch Peninsula, which was separated from the Crimean
mainland by a narrow neck of land. The rest of the Crimea found itself under Soviet rule for slightly over
two months.

When the postal services in the Crimea were restored in the summer of 1918, the postal rates of Ukraine
were introduced there (see the first set of postal rates under "Kuban' Territory"). These rates were in effect
within Crimean territory, as well as for mail exchange with Ukraine. Postage stamps of Russia without any
overprint or surcharge continued to be in use (see Figs. 41 & 42 on p. 28). The postal service was
controlled from Simferopol', where a local Postal & Telegraphic Administration had been created which
refused to be subordinate to the Odessa Postal & Telegraph District of Ukraine. As a consequence of this
refusal, the latter interrupted any communications with the Crimea as of July, but they were restored in
October (see Fig. 43 on p. 28 and reference [21]).

It would appear that, in the second half of November (the exact date is not known), new postal rates were
introduced in the Crimea. Actually, these were the postal rates of Ukraine as of 15 November 1918:-
Ordinary postcard 20 k.
Local ordinary letter, per 15 grammes 25 k.
Inland ordinary letter, per 15 grammes 35 k.
Local ordinary printed matter, per 15 grammes 5 k.
Inland ordinary printed matter, per 15 grammes 10 k.
Registration fee 50 k.
Money transfer by post, per 25 r. or part thereof 25 k.
Money transfer by telegraph up to 500 r.: + 5 .r; over 500 to 3000 r.: + 8 r.; over 3000 r.: + 10r.
November 2000

A new postage stamp was issued in this connection, being the only one prepared by the Crimean Regional
Government. For this purpose, large stocks of the now useless 1 k. Imperial Arms stamp were utilized to be
surcharged "35 KOn." in black. The typographic process was used for overprinting, but the sources differ as
to the place where this work was effected. According to some sources (reference [18]), it was done at the
former provincial printing works in Simferopol'. According to another source (reference [22]), the
"Progress" printer in Sevastopol' was stated as the place of overprinting.

Crimean Regional Government Issue: November 1918 (Fig. 44)

Fig. 44: Mint and used stamps of the Crimea
Regional Government Issue, including a
variety: comma instead of stop.

1. 35 kop. /1 k. orange-yellow.
Double surcharge
Comma instead of stop after "Kon," (the 81st. stamp on the sheet).
Also surcharge shifted to the top and surcharge on the back.

The number of stamps issued remains unknown, but it should be very large, as this stamp in unused
condition is far from being scarce. However, genuinely used copies are found to be very much scarcer and
the entire franked with this stamp are quite rare. The stamp is known used throughout the Crimean
peninsula up to the autumn of 1920 (Fig. 45).

Hei^ey^I M-iUiyaj-br HOMIep9OCK iK

5 : .i KI %_..,.,
." -. ;'" :- "'.4 ':
-:-: -r-- o : -- -. ," ,' "' : -.- ..a_-,- ." .
-"';..-: .-: --- tr ".''2'" 3 '; '

Fig. 45: Registered letter from Feodosiya 18.11.19 to
Rostov 24.11.19 mailed under the Armed Forces of
South Russia Administration and franked with a block
of four 35k./lk. stamps of the Crimean Issue to make up
the Ir. 40k. rate then in force (Robert Taylor collection).

November 2000


Fig. 46: 50k. currency

stamp of the Crimean Fig. 47: 5k. Kerenskii card sent as ordinary mail during the Crimean Soviet Republic from Yalta
Regional Government. 15.5.19 to Latvia with additional franking of a 7k. & 3 x 1k. Arms to make up 15k- rate then in force.

All the standard stamp catalogues also list a 50 k. stamp in large format and brown colour, printed on card
and issued probably at the end of 1918 as well. This imperforate stamp has an inscription stating that it is a
postage, currency and fiscal stamp all at the same time. However, the text on the back clearly shows that it
is a paper money token (Fig. 46). Indeed, this stamp is sometimes found franking letters, mostly philatelic.
A purely postage stamp in the same design was probably planned, but never issued. Trials of the currency
stamp in black are also found.

The Crimean Soviet Republic (April-June 1919)
After the occupation of the Crimea by the Red Army, a Soviet republic of somewhat indefinite stature was
proclaimed there with Dmitrii Ul'yanov, a brother of Vladimir Ul'yanov-Lenin, at the head. This republic
was rather short-lived. On 18 June, troops of the Volunteer Army landed at Koktebel and, by the end of that
month, the peninsula was freed of the Red forces.

During this period, the Crimea had an internal postal service, as well as to other territories under the
Soviets. However, while in other Soviet republics ordinary mail could be sent free of postage, the former
postal rates seem to have persisted in the Crimea under the Soviets, together with Imperial Arms stamps
and the only stamp issued by the Regional Government; all were used for franking the mail (Fig. 47). There
seems to be vagueness about the status of the latter surcharge; the very few items of mail from that period
found up to now have not given a definite answer to the question as to what face value this overprinted
stamp should have been sold. While there exists an ordinary letter to Khar'kov franked with a single 35
kop. / 1 k. stamp, i.e. fully in accordance with the corresponding rate, I have also seen a postcard to
Moscow franked with a mix of unsurcharged Arms stamps and a few Crimean stamps, where the latter
were taken at a face value of I kopek each (i.e. the surcharge was ignored) and thus totalling 15 kopeks,
which was the ordinary postcard rate.

The Government of the Armed Forces of South Russia (1919-May 1920)
Having freed the Kuban, Stavropol' and Black Sea provinces from the Red troops, the Volunteer army
entered into final contact with the forces of the Don Republic. After its unification with the Don Army
under the supreme command of General Denikin, the so-called "Armed Forces of South Russia" were

November 2000

U 'r7.';~l~h '`-st~i-~~

SFig. 48: 3k. Imperial PS card sent as ordinary mail from
Zheleznovodsk 27.4.17 to Novocherkassk 9.5.19,
additionally franked with 4 x 3k. perf Arms to make
' up the 15k. rate then in force.

Fig. 49: Postal money
order transfer of 1000r.
.., from Groznyi 18.3.19
~ :} to Rostov and franked
with 28 x 25k. Arms
-' >1 perf. to total 28 roubles.

.* ..^ -

-"-.:-. .-. .- -- -, -., h --

A. ot __

Fig cr wtth C .'/ u a r y i o tie'' c
27 .1 :S f er o 1 -_ 'p" b 5- '-a' -o'3k -- tap a 'labl :l .
.. ., -o -T ,' .. ...

Fig. 50: 5k. .-Kerensk card with the Crimean 35k. lk used as ordinary mail from Evpato,. skie Dachi

2.7.19 to Simferopol' 4.7.19. Overpaid by 5k., as no 30k. stamps available (Robert Taylor collection).

November 2000

- ~ 1. Ni V-lo.,~ EA

formed. By February 1919, the Terek Province and a part of Dagestan also fell under their control. Soon
afterwards, the now free forces were transferred from there to the Donets Coal Mining region to oust the
Red troops also from those areas. In May-June, a general offensive was started of the White forces in a
northerly direction, having Moscow as the ultimate goal. This offensive reached its peak by September-
October, when the White forces captured Orel and advanced on Tula. A great part of Ukraine, including the
provinces of Tavrida, Kherson, Ekaterinoslav, Khar'kov and Poltava, together with parts of the Kiev,
Chernigov and Podolia provinces and the Russian provinces of Voronezh, Kursk, portions of the Orel,
Tambov and Saratov provinces were occupied by the Armed Forces of South Russia. However, a counter-
offensive by the Red armies which started in October led to a swift recoil of the Whites during November
and December 1919. By February 1920, they were forced to abandon the whole of Ukraine and the Don
region. After violent, but unsuccessful counter-attacks in January and February 1920, the resistance of the
forces under General Denikin was ultimately crushed and, by May, the Reds had reoccupied almost the
whole of the Northern Caucasus, including the Stavropol', Kubar, Black Sea and Terek Provinces. The
remnants of the Volunteer and Don armies were evacuated in April from Novorossiisk to the Crimea,
which continued to remain in the hands of the Whites, while the majority of the Kuban'troops was captured
by the Reds in the Sochi area.

The same problem of shortage of postage stamps in the values necessary to meet the postal rates in force
also had to be faced by the Postal & Telegraphic Administration of South Russia. Unsurcharged Imperial
Arms stamps continued to remain in use in the areas occupied by the Volunteer Army (e.g. in Terek
Province; see Figs. 48 & 49 on p. 33), as well as in the Don area, but their stocks were gradually coming to
an end. The 35 kop. / 1 k. surcharged stamp continued to remain in use in the Crimea (Fig. 50 on p. 33).

As has already been mentioned above in the "Don Territory" section, a definitive stamp issue was being
prepared for some time and certain essays were printed (see references [8 & 20]). However, after the
political situation was finally consolidated by the signature of the agreement between the Volunteer Army
and the Don Government, the final designs of these definitive were also approved. Printing facilities for a
lithographic process at the State Printing Works of the Don Republic at Novocherkassk ( SKcneigmmi
3aroTosBeHisI L~HHHX-b BJIaHKOB- B.B.A. or Despatch Office for the Preparation of Valuable Blanks
of the All-Powerful Don Army) were made ready for the "Edinaya Rossiya" ("United Russia") stamp issue.
The design for the kopek values was reminiscent of the 1908-1917 Imperial Arms issue and even the
combinations of face value and colour (with the exception of the 70 k.) were chosen such that each stamp
would correspond to the basic rate for the same class of mail as the Imperial Arms stamps of the same
colour. These were the rates of January 1919 (see the "Kuban' Territory" section). As to the stamps of the
rouble values, their colours corresponded to those of the Imperial Arms stamps of the same face value,
except for the 2 r. and 3 r. stamps, which were missing from the 1908-1917 issue.

Definitive Stamp Issue of the Armed Forces of South Russia: 2 Ma/16 July 1919 (Figs. 51 & 52)
1. 5 k. yellow to red-orange "" 0 L
2. 10 k. emerald to bronze green _g
3. 15 k. carmine-red to scarlet
4. 35 k. blue to slate-blue
5. 70 k. indigo (shades)
6. 1 r. brown & vermilion (shades) y
7. 2 r. lilac & yellow (shades)
8. 3 r. red-brown & myrtle
9. 5 r. deep blue to gray-blue & violet (shades)
10. 7 r. bronze green & salmon (shades)
11. 10 r. vermilion & gray
Line-perforated 11 /2 Fig. 51: Set of"Edinaya Rossia" stamps.
12. 3 r. red-brown & myrtle
November 2000

Fig. 52: Cancellations on "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps.

November 2000

Fig. 52: Cancellations on "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps:

November 2000

12. 5 r. deep blue to gray-blue & violet
13. 10 r. vermilion & gray
No. 5 tete-beche.
No. 6 with the centre shifted.
No. 9 with the centre missing.
Nos. 12 to 14 with the perforation missing on one or even two sides.
These are the only varieties believed to have been sold over the postal counters.

While the kopek values already went on sale on 2 May, the rouble stamps were released only after 16 July.
This information was given by Lamtev (reference [13]) and seems to be the most reliable, since the author
lived at that time in Novocherkassk, so he was an eyewitness of this issue. Another source (reference [17])
gives 10 January as the date of issue of the kopek values, while the rouble stamps were issued later.
However, that date seems very improbable, since the postal rates, which this set had to cover, had only just
been adopted, so there was no possibility of preparing the issue in such a short time. Besides, the available
postal material in no way confirms such an early date of issue.

The authorities differ also about the number of printings of this issue. It seems that the information given in
reference [13] is the most reliable in this matter as well. According to his information, there were three
principal printings. The first included 36 million copies in total of the imperforate stamps only and this
quantity was apportioned as follows:-
Nos. 1 to 3: 3,200,000 copies each
No. 4: 15,000,000
No. 5: 5,200,000
No. 6: 1,200,000
Nos. 7 to 11: 1,000,000 copies each.

This printing was effected on very different sorts of thick paper (mainly gray, but also white for No. 4)) and
with different inks, so there exist a great number of paper and shade varieties for each individual face
value, especially the 35 k. The gum, from dark brown to yellow, is characteristic for this printing. For
instance, Rosselevich (reference [3]) distinguishes between the following kinds of gum:-
(a) brown with large grains
(b) brown with small grains
(c) brown, nearly without grains
(d) dark muddy-yellow
(e) as "d", but with vertical lines
(f) lemon-yellow
(g) cream, with traces of brush lines
The kopek values were printed in sheets of 100 and the rouble stamps in sheets of 120.

The second printing was made in August/September 1919, in connection with the new and increased rates
in July 1919 (see the "Kuban' Territory" section). Not all the face values were printed this time, but there
were also perforated stamps in this printing. These rates also called for the distribution of a total amount of
49,600,000 copies for the following individual face values:-
Nos. 1 to 3: 3,200,000 copies each
Nos. 4 & 5: 15,000,000 copies each
No. 6: 5,000,000 copies
Nos. 8 + 12: 2,000,000 copies altogether
Nos. 9 + 13: 2,000,000 copies altogether
Nos. 11 + 14: 1,000,000 copies altogether
The numbers of perforated stamps were considerably less than those of their imperforate counterparts.
According to reference [13], a few sheets of the 15 & 70 k. stamps were also perforated, but they are not

November 2000

known postally used, although mint copies do surface. Also, other kopek values exist with the same
perforation: they are probably proofs (reference [19]). Moreover, stamps with private or postmaster
perforations are found as well, not to say about the forgeries.

This printing was effected on a thinner paper with a white gum. The kopek values were printed in sheets of
400 and the rouble stamps in sheets of 240. M. Rayhack (reference [6]) came to the same conclusions as in
reference [13] as to the kopek face values of the first and second printings, having investigated the
complete sheets of 400 (16 panes of 25 stamps) or 100 (4 panes of 25 stamps) in his collection. However,
he insists on sheets of 100 (two panes of 50 stamps) for the rouble values.

A.M. Rosselevich (reference [3]) and Dr. R. Ceresa (reference [1]) present different data about the printing
sheets. According to Ceresa, the kopek values were actually from 200-plates in 8 panes of 25 units. For sale
at the post offices, the sheets were halved into two sub-sheets, with 4 panes of 25 arranged either normally,
or occasionally as a horizontal strip. As to the sheets of the rouble values, they were cut for sale into panes
of 30 (5 x 6), either from 120- or 240-sheets. A printing of the 70 k. stamp was made in sheets with
adjacent panes inverted to form tkte-b&che pairs.

The third and last printing was effected in October 1919, with a total of 100 million copies distributed as
Nos. 1 to 3: 5,000,000 copies each
No. 4: 10,000,000
No. 5: 60,000,000
Nos 6 & 8 5,000,000 copies each
No. 9: 3,000,000
No. 11: 2,000,000
This printing probably did not differ from the second and no perforated stamps were reported. However, it
is very probable that a great part of this printing was destroyed after the Red Army entered Novocherkassk
in December 1919.

A.M. Rosselevich (reference [3]) also suggests that there were additional printings allegedly effected in
Ekaterinodar at the end of 1919 and at Simferopol' in 1920. However, there is no confirmation as to this

Because of strict controls at the printing works, there are almost no important varieties on stamps released
for sale at the post offices. However, all rouble values do exist with centres missing, strongly shifted,
inverted, double, triple etc.; doubled frames, as well as copies partly perforated or in colours differing from
those officially approved (Fig. 53). All these originate from the printer's waste officially sold to collectors
on 12 August 1919. There were 22 such defective sheets and each of the 12 collectors who applied to be
supplied with this waste received 220 stamps (10 copies from each sheet of 120).

The perforation missing on one or two sides of the 3, 5 & 10 r. stamps is explained by the fact that the
perforating machine was set up for panes of 25 (5 x 5) and not 30.

Some entire franked with the "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps and mailed during the White administration are
shown in Figs. 54-59. In some regions, particularly the Crimea, the shortage of postage stamps led to cash
frankings (Fig. 60).

Another "Edinaya Rossiya" set, consisting of 8 stamps with face values from 1 r. to 50 r. and in different
colours, but with the design very similar but differing slightly from that of the official issue (rosettes
instead of figures at the sides; see Fig. 61) is now regarded as bogus by most authorities. However, it seems
that nobody has paid attention to the fact that these stamps were printed on the same grade of paper and
covered with the same white gum as for the second printing of the original set. In connection with the

November 2000

Fig. 53: Printer's waste varieties of"Edinaya Rossiya" stamps.

Fig. 54: 5k. Kerenskii PS card sent as ordinary mail
from Novocherkassk 31.10.19 to Zheleznovodsk
3.11.19 and additionally franked with 2 x 15k.
"Edinaya Rossiya" stamps, in accordance with the
35k. rate then in force.

"'............ .. ... ..-' ".. .. .. .... ....}...

~.... .--..
" N "

Fig. 55: 5k. Kerenskii PS card with two 15k. "Edinaya Rossiya"
stamps initially added in accordance with the 35k. rate then in
force and sent as ordinary mail from Essentuki 25.8.19 to
Krasnovodsk, Transcaspian Province. However, the addressee
was not found there and it was forwarded to Petrovsk with a
35k. Arms perforated stamp affixed.

;C; t;~ 'CFIX-
.~caucc~~s~+'1i t

i O"~max~

02.- ~ .- I

'V LWkA~1if~~;alc' I I


Fig. 56: Ordinary letter from Nakhichevan 5.10.19 to
Khar'kovlO. 10.19 with a single 70k. "Edinaya Rossiya"
stamp in accordance with the rate then in force.

Fig. 57: Registered letter from Novyi Simeiz 27.9.19 to Odessa
30.9.19 with a pair of 70k. "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps to total
Ir. 40k., in accordance with the corresponding rate then in force.

November 2000


lefrBO-b no nOT. ,- .

CnynmeObi ar

lot. .
a c.-- -.- .. ( -.. .-

'Fig. 58: Postal money order transfer for 250r. from
Aleksandrovsk-Grushevsk 22.11.19 to Sulin 23.11.19
with a single 5r. "Edinaya Rossiya" imperf. in
accordance with the rate then in force.

* .4A-: ,,, P..... / ... g.i..

7k^A.2tf L2-h faacu ^ h pi
' + -'~ -- .- -

.- I+ Id 'i tH-I -I -

Fig. 61: "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps regarded as
bogus, but which might be a trial printing of an
unissued set.

Fig. 59: Ordinary letter from Vladikavkaz 26.2.20 to
Apsheronskii with a Ir. "Edinaya Rossiya" imperf.
affixed according to the rate supposedly introduced
in the Northern Caucasus at the beginning of 1920.

Fig. 60: Registered letter from Alupka 31.8.19 to Evpatoriya
3 & 4.9.19, with the Ir. 40k. rate collected in cash as
confirmed by a special cachet on the back.


Fig. 62: Imperial 15k. "For the
benefit of the mailman" stamp
overprinted "Armed Forces of
South of Russia" (bogus or
real?) on piece with pair of 35k.
"Edinaya Rossiya" stamps
cancelled Poltava 18.11.19.

40 November 2000

i. -

. I .

rumours that there was a special printing effected in Ekaterinodar and bearing in mind also the set of
increased postal rates introduced in the Northern Caucasus in January 1920 (see the "Kubar Territory"
section), one may compare these rates with the face values of this set of stamps and the possibility cannot
be excluded that this was a trial printing of a new set of stamps, prepared for use but never issued because
of the collapse of the White armies.

One more question that is still open concerns a probable usage of special stamps to pay postmen delivering
court mail. As is well known, such stamps with a face value of 15 k. were issued twice in Imperial Russia,
the second of these issues being a definitive stamp. These stamps were affixed to court covers, in addition
to the usual stamps paying the normal postage. Fig. 62 shows a piece where, in addition to a 35 k. "Edinaya
Rossiya" adhesive, a "For the benefit of the mailman" Imperial stamp, but overprinted "BoopyxeHHble
CnjbI IOKra Poccin" ("Armed Forces of the South of Russia") is affixed, both being cancelled "Poltava".
Unfortunately, the cancellation does not cover the overprint, so it is impossible to say if the overprinted
stamp had actually been issued, or if the overprint had been applied later to a normal Imperial stamp, i.e.
that this might be a fake.

There is evidence that a field postal service functioned at the Armed Forces of South Russia. Postmarks of
the Main Field Post Office of these forces are recorded on "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps. Evidently, the main
purpose of that FPO, the location of which still remains unknown (Rostov-on-Don?), was directing and
forwarding the mail to army units, as it had been doing during WWI. However, nothing is known about the
existence of other types of field post offices, such as those attached to armies, corps or divisions; at least no
postmarks of such FPOs have been recorded. On the other hand, the free mail of soldiers was handled by
civilian post offices (Fig. 63).

The South Russian Government in the Crimea (May-October 1920)
Soon after the remnants of the White forces from the Caucasus were evacuated to the Crimean peninsula,
which was held by another remaining part of the Volunteer Army under General Slashchev, General
Denikin was replaced by General Baron Wrangel as the head of the White movement in South Russia and
he left Russia forever. General Wrangel formed in April 1920 the so-called "Government of South Russia",
with A.V. Krivoshein as its head, which carried out some social and economic reforms, including an
agrarian reform. All attempts by the Red forces to invade the Crimea were unsuccessful until the end of

In June-July 1920, the forces of the Russian Army (an official designation of the White forces in the
Crimea, including troops of the former Volunteer, Don and Caucasian Armies) used the involvement of the
main forces of Soviet Russia in the war against Poland to occupy a considerable part of the Northern
Tavrida Province, as well as to make troop landings on the northern shore of the Sea of Azov and the
Taman' Peninsula, trying to raise the Don and Kuban' Cossacks once more against the Bolsheviks. An
ultimate advance of the White troops, reinforced and reorganized into two armies in October was initially
successful; a number of localities in the Ekaterinoslav Province was captured. However, by the end of
October, the Soviets drew up their forces that had become free after the end of the Soviet-Polish War and,
using their large numerical superiority, ultimately defeated the Wrangel forces. The strong fortifications at
Perekop were breached during the first ten days of November and the Red armies invaded the Crimea. By
mid-November, the remnants of the White forces were evacuated on French and other ships, mainly via
Sevastopol' and firstly to Turkey.

During the first half of 1920, the post offices in the Crimea continued to use the "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps
for franking the mail, concurrently with the remainders of the Imperial Arms issue and the 35 kop. / 1 k.
stamp surcharged in 1918 (Fig. 64). It seems that the South Russian postal rates of July 1919 remained in
force in the Crimea also during this period, although a new set of higher rates was introduced in the
Northern Caucasus at the beginning of 1920. As the shortage of postage stamps continued to be felt at some
post offices, payment in cash was sometimes used (Fig. 65). Also, the use of surrogate stamps such as
November 2000

--7. .4 "- "
'27 ''sOT'IQrO BAgp
---1? _

t (4 .,/...,.. ', ; .....
I, .... .. .,. / ,.. .... u .C .S ^i -..: ..!
j? O' ; RTE POST* ,' -..-. --

'It.' ,ri- / A a _iJ.. ... ia ".

t"'" "_ ,. ,,. ,,. ,,, le"O c a H.tlerpao' a a
,*//y., e .'- f' ,,*. .. _. -. ,. .

Fig. 63: Soldier's postcard with a free-frank unit
cachet from Ishcherskaya, Terek Province 16.7.19
to Konstantinovskaya, Stavropol' Province.

no c

- 4.: .. .... ..t. .. I,

_.*....'- .. *,* .ti.

Fig. 66: Ordinary letter from Simferopol' 11.6.20 to
S14.6.20 ... The r. rate in force was met with
27 x 15k. & 2 x 20k. Arms perf, i.e. overfranked by
5k. (Robert Taylor collection).
'. ........... ... '. .....'. .
.. ... ..... ... .. ,. t
-~~ ~~~~~ ~~~ ... _.. .. ,,- .;. ."_-." -
._. .. ..... .., .. .

I /'"7/' '-
;, ,:..,.. o ..
.. ............... ,p t .f ... X... ... :_:.:

....e i :~iyRL
o "'-". .
... ..... ....

Fig. 65: 5k. Kerenskii PS card sent as ordinary mail from
Sara 7.7.20 to Simferopol' 10.7.20. The 2r. 95k. sum
missing in the 3r. rate was collected in cash per the cachet. Fig. 68: Some

November 2000

64: 3k. Imperial PS card with 35k. "Edinaya Rossiya" affixed
sent as ordinary mail from Sevastopol' Rlwy Stn. 27.3.20 to
eiz 3.4.20. As in the first months of 1920, the July 1919 rates
persisted in the Crimea and the card is slightly overfranked as
either stamps available for 32k. rate (Robert Taylor collection).
r o te n.1


cancellations on Wrangel Army stamps.


fiscal, was recorded (reference [12]).

Developing inflation led to an urgent necessity to change the postal rates. It seems that they were
drastically raised in June 1920:-
Ordinary postcard 3 r.
Inland ordinary letter, up to 15 grammes 5 r.
Registration fee 5 r.

For some time and in some places, it was still possible to make ends meet with remainders of the Arms
stamps (see Fig. 66 on p. 42). However, such a situation could not last long. To meet these rates under the
conditions of stamp shortages, it was decided to surcharge some stamps of small face value, still remaining
in sufficient quantities in the postal vaults. Imperial Arms stamps with the face values of 5 & 20 k., as well
as the 35 k. "Edinaya Rossiya" stamp were surcharged five roubles in black by the typographic process at
the printing works in Simferopol'.

First Wrangel Army Issue: 20 August/October 1920 (Figs. 67 & 68 on p. 42).
1. 5 roubles / 5 k. Arms, lilac-brown
2. 5 roubles / 20 k. Arms, blue & scarlet (October 1920)
3. 5 roubles / 5 k. Arms, lilac-brown
4. 5 roubles / 35 k. "Edinaya Rossiya", blue to slate-blue (15 September)

Inverted surcharge: Nos. 1 (one sheet) and 2 (three sheets).
Double surcharge: Nos. 1 (at least three sheets), 2 (at least five sheets), 3 (one sheet) and 4 (one sheet).
All four stamps exist with various displacements of the surcharge upwards or downwards, as well as
sideways. No. 4 is found in two distinctly different shades, probably because of different printings of the
basic stamp.
The numbers of stamps surcharged, according to reference [18]:-
No. 1: 140,400; No. 2: 100,500; No. 3: 140,000; No. 4: 26,000.

While the stamps Nos. 1 to 4 could be used for franking ordinary and registered letters, there were no
appropriate stamps for the postcard rate. Therefore, postcards were often paid for in cash (Fig. 65 on p. 42)
or sent overfranked (Fig. 69 on p. 44), as was also done before. These stamps are known used in the whole
of the Crimean peninsula and probably also outside it in the northern part of the same Tavrida Province.

The inflation was developing at such a rate that the above postal rates already became quite out of date after
a few months and the ordinary letter rate was raised to as much as 100 roubles by mid-October.
Unfortunately, there is no information about the other classes of mail. The only cover known to me from
this period is shown in Fig. 70. The Crimean Postal Administration made preparations for another stamp
issue that would meet this rate. The full history of this affair was reported by A.M. Rosselevitch (reference
[3]); see also reference [1]. In essence, this issue had to include perforated and imperforate 1 k. Arms
stamps, overprinted in four lines: "IOTb / POCCIHI. / 100 / py6jiefi." (i.e. THE SOUTH / OF RUSSIA. /
100 / roubles.). The stamps were overprinted in November 1920 at the Army printing works in Sevastopol'.
Although all the standard stamp catalogues list these stamps as a normal issue, i.e. under their own ordinal
numbers 5 and 6, they were actually never put on sale because of the pressing evacuation of troops and
governmental bodies in the face of the Red forces, which had already penetrated into the Crimea.

Second Wrangel Army Issue (not released for sale at the post offices; see Fig. 71).
I. 100 roubles / 1 k. orange-yellow, perforated.
II. 100 roubles / 1 k. orange-yellow, imperforate.
November 2000


4) e4 614?44

^ ^ ^^^ -ou 1. C11 t...
- Fig. 69: Ordinary postcard from Yalta 5.10.20 to Medvezh'e
9.10.20 with 5r./5k. of 1". Wrangel Issue, thus overpaid by 2r.


Fig. 71: Unreleased
stamps of the Secon



Fig. 70: Ordinary letter from Simferopol'
15.10.20 to Evpatoriya 16.10.20 with two
50k. Arms perf. and 6 x 70k. "Edinaya
Rossiya" stamps, to total Sr. 20k.
However, the letter rate was increased on
that very day to 100r. and a postage due
mark for single deficiency of 95r. was

Fig. 73: Set of "Yug Rossii"
stamps considered as bogus.

November 2000


Inverted overprint: Nos. I & II.
Double overprint: No. I.
The numbers of stamps overprinted were allegedly 10,000 for No. I and 20,000 for No. II.

It is probable that the entire or almost the whole printing of these stamps was taken over privately by
the official responsible for supervising the printing process (Shredinskii, who was later also the main
person active in the affair about the stamps of the so-called Wrangel Army Refugee Post and the covers
franked with such stamps) and later sold to stamp dealers in Europe. A part of the printing was
cancelled in sheets by a genuine circular date stamp of Sevastopol', also taken by this official (Fig. 72);
he claimed that the stamps had been officially released for sale and used on mail.
(Editorial Comment: The late Emile Marcovitch of Paris and New York once told your editor that the
surname of this person was ;Sretinskii, whom he knew personally in the French capital).
Preparing the plates for printing these stamps was not a long process, as there were already plates of the
same design prepared earlier for some "proofs" with the face values of 10, 15, 25, 50, 100, 200, 400 and
500 roubles, overprinted on stamps of the Imperial Arms and "Edinaya Rossiya" issue from I to 70 k.
A small number was actually printed of such proofs, among them 10 roubles / 3 k. Arms imperforate
and 10 roubles / 5 k. "Edinaya Rossiya". It remained only to add a "0" to the 10 r. plate to effect the
printing of Nos. I & II (see reference [1]).

There also exists a set of stamps which is generally considered to be bogus (Fig. 73). These are stamps
of the definitive issue of Ukraine with face values of 10, 20, 30 & 50 shahiv, diagonally overprinted
"IOrn Poccini' ("The South of Russia"). However, there is also a version that these stamps were
prepared for issue by the Wrangel Administration during the occupation of the northern part of the
Tavrida Province in the summer and autumn of 1920, but not actually released. That version has some
plausibility, taking into account the fact that no complete set was overprinted; the 40-shahiv stamp is
missing. A common forger would have used all the stamps of the set for overprinting, as these stamps
are very common and easy to get. On the other hand, the stocks of the 40-shahiv value were exhausted
at many post offices on the spot.

The Soviet Administration in South Russian areas (from January 1920)
The new change in power, i.e. the return of the Soviet Administration led initially to no changes in the
postal rates in effect. The former postal rates still remained in use for a few months, although this time
varied somewhat for different areas. They were then superseded by the Soviet domestic postal rates.

It seems that the Soviet postal rates of 1/5 November 1919, with the alterations for printed matter of 13
December, were first introduced in South Russia in February or March 1920. They were as follows:-
Ordinary postcard free, but 1 r. if registered.
Ordinary letter, up to 15 grammes free, but 1 r. if registered.
Over 15 grammes and up to 30 grammes 2 r.
Over 30 grammes + 1 r. for each 15 grammes.
Ordinary printed matter 25 k. for 1 lot, minimum of 50 k.
Registration fee 3 r.
Money transfer by post, per 100 r. or part thereof 1 r., minimum of 3 r.
Money transfer by telegraph + 8 r.
This set of rates remained in force somewhat longer than in most other parts of Soviet Russia,
depending upon the particular region.

The rates of 10/20 March were introduced only during April-May 1920:
Ordinary postcard free, but 5 r. if registered.
Ordinary letter, up to 15 grammes free, but 5 r. if registered.
Over 15 grammes and up to 30 grammes 10 r.
November 2000

Over 30 grammes + 10 r. for each 15 grammes.
Ordinary printed matter 50 k. per lot, minimum of 1 r.
Registration fee 5 r.
Money transfer per post, per 100 r. or part thereof 2 r., minimum of 10 r.
Money transfer per telegraph + 60 r.

Also, the postage stamps issued by the non-Soviet authorities, i.e. stamps of the "Edinaya Rossiya" set, the
Wrangel Army and the Kubain remained in use in the respective regions for some time, being different for
various regions, until they were replaced by the unoverprinted Russian Arms stamps. There existed a
circular of the People's Commissariat of Posts and Telegraphs under No. )K-142 concerning these so-
called "trophy" stamps and reading as follows (reference [24]):-

"All stamps by Red Army units from the White Guards will go to the UGUBs (provincial administrations -
A.E.) from the Heads of Communications at the fronts. It is proposed in these cases with the participation
of State Control representatives to draw up the corresponding amounts about the numbers and face values
of the received stamps in types in use in the Soviet Republic, even if with an overprint, as well as other
types. The first category shall immediately be handed over to the post offices at the provincial centres,
together with a copy of the statement to be written in as income and stored while awaiting a special order
and the others shall be subject to sending them to the Moscow People's Bank to be destroyed. The same
order shall be applied to the stamps in postal establishments in the areas abandoned by the Whites".

It follows from this circular that the "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps should have been among the stamps to be
sent for destruction. However, before this circular had been issued, these stamps were being widely used
throughout almost the whole territory abandoned by the White armies, as stocks of no other stamps were
available at the post offices. Evidently, this circular was not implemented with regard to sending some
"trophy" stamps to Moscow until "normal" stamps were received. Stamps of this set should have officially
been withdrawn from use as of 15 May 1920, at least in the Don Province (reference [17]), but they are
actually found used at later dates, both in the Don and other provinces (Terek, Ukrainian provinces).
According to reference [6], stamps with Kuban' surcharges remained officially in use in that province until
31 July 1920, although copies cancelled on later dates are found as well, even in 1921. Some examples of
use of trophy stamps at their face values under the Soviet administration are depicted in Figs. 74-77.

Naturally, the stamps of higher face values were the ones used most often, as being more suitable for the
Soviet postal rates. Thus, the "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps with face values of 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 & 10 roubles were
widely used during 1920. As to the face values of the kopek stamps, the 5, 10 & 15 k. are those found most
frequently used under the Soviets, being revalued at 100 times face on a par with unsurcharged Arms
stamps (Fig. 78).

Large remainders of the Kuban' stamps were used in Kuban' Province, as well as in some neighboring
areas, e.g. the Black Sea Province. Almost all these stamps are found used under the Soviet administration,
except for those with the least numbers issued, such as the 25 r. on 7 & 14 k.; 10 r. on the postal savings
bank stamps; the 3 r. on 4 k. and the "50" on the 2 k.; also, probably the 70 k. on 5 k., stocks of which
were exhausted by that time.

Moreover, the stamps surcharged 5 r. by the Wrangel Army remained in use also under the Soviet
administration, while there were almost no remainders of the Don stamps, although the corresponding
postal stationery cards remained in use, but as blanks.

Contrary to the situation in the White armies, numerous field post offices of the Red Army were
functioning in South Russia during 1919-1921. Their postmarks are found not too seldom on registered
letters, money order and parcel cards from that area, franked with both "Edinaya Rossiya" and Kuban'
stamps (Figs. 79 & 80).
November 2000


Fig. 74: Some cancellations on "trophy" stamps
applied under the Soviet Administration.

November 2000 47



3 s


FM r

Fig. 75: Registered letter from Ekaterinodar Rlwy Stn.
3.4.20 to Moscow 19.4.20 with 4 x lr./3k. perf. stamps
First Kuban Issue, to total 4 r. in conformity with RSFSR
rate of 1/5 November 1919 and superseded on 10/20
March 1920 by a new set of rates.


r~.231 ?it-

i LAA Ct~,c(. C Ae /etC-


-~ .. .


j.'j Fig
4-7 ... .. Pro
:A and

i12 W G H


November 2000

,. 76: Registered letter from Vinogradnoe, Terek
ivince 20 4 20 to Moscow 14 5 20 with 5 x 70k.
1 one each 15 & 35k. "Edinaya Rossiya" lo total
per the 1/5 Nov rate (Robert Ta\lor collection)

." .. [ : -'.2r' 2 ."-' -; -"-" -'- ,
-. l. k .. .. ._-- --..-.; : -,-, -... "

t ; -I: .. ..

a I-L

No. 47

i--i I--





Fig. 77: Registered parcel card with a 39-pound sending from Rostov 26.5.20 to Moscow 12.7.20 and franked with
10 x 10r. imperf. & 1 x 3r. "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps to total 103r., thus overfranked by 50k. (Robert Taylor collection).

Fig. 78: Parcel card for a 29-pound sending with
declared value of 300r. from Groznyi 10.6.20 to
Pyasha 24.6.20 and franked with 6 x 5k. "Edinaya
Rossiya" stamps revalued to 5r. each to total 30r.,
i.e. overfranked by 50k. against the sum of 29r. 50k.
required by the rate.

Fig. 79: Parcel card for a 35-pound sending without
declared value from FPO No. 71, 4.10.20 to
Bogorodsk 24.11.20 and franked with 15 x 50/2k.
imperfs of First Kuban' Issue + 4 x 20k. Arms perf.
revalued at 20r. each to total 87r. 50k.
(Robert Taylor collection).

November 2000

Fig. 80: Parcel card without declared value from FPO No. 38, 31.7.20 to Pintrovka 4.8.20 and franked
with 3 x 10r. & 2 x 5r. "Edinaya Rossiya" imperf. stamps to total 40r. (Robert Taylor collection).

Fig. 81: Tal'noe provisionals.

Fig. 83: Parcel card for a
9-pound sending with
declared value of 500r.
from Petrovsk 24.10.20
to Gagino and franked
with 9 x 20r./20k.
Petrovsk provisionals
+ I x 5r. Arms imperf.
to total 185r., i.e.
overfranked by 2r.
(Robert Taylor

Fig. 82: Petrovsk provisionals.

November 2000


b fOCl0YP-. (e'A4)Zi1- ee

ED... waifs a tap ...
O'nD rr.. -.
S P-tiU~ ui .,.,


1.~ .e.., cpr.i.I it. nYR 6bP. O I
V ..r .
91/. r'--: i w -o s' f -


I ~ .... C -
4 ir. -1 '

/ I
* A.' F ,. ~ ci.
- ? .g' ..-~rl .

<4.! ~
Panzcr. 14 7IGL 2
I~ L.pt'enjyi In LIe5 n pn6 uz*d'yIC

-,, dL % 7
$row y OIU.I&*

Fig. 84: Armavir provisionals.

Fig. 85: Parcel card for a 45-pound sending without declared value from Armavir 19.8.20 to
Balashov 7.9.20 and franked with 4 x 25r./3k. Armavir provisionals + 5 x 50/2k. imperfs. of
First Kuban' Issue & 1 x 10k. Arms revalued at 10r., i.e. totaling 112r. 50k. for the rate in
force (Robert Taylor collection).

November 2000

The other side of Fig. 83.

As was mentioned before, the "Edinaya Rossiya" stamps of the lowest face values, i.e. 5, 10 & 15 k. were
upgraded to 100 times face in the general run of the 1 to 20 k. stamps to be revalued during a few months
from March 1920, under the corresponding decree of the Soviet Central Postal Administration. In some
places, this revaluation was made by means of manual surcharges or inscriptions, thus creating
provisionals. Such provisionals are known particularly from Zheleznovodsk in Terek Province, as well as at
Tal'noe and from some other post offices, which have not been identified exactly in Kiev Province
(Olshanka, Mankovka etc.?); see references [1 & 23]).

Zheleznovodsk Provisional Issue, 1920.
Manual surcharge in violet ink on "Edinaya Rossiya" stamp.
1. 10 r. / 10 k. green.

Tal'noe Provisional Issue, 1920, (Fig. 81).
Manual surcharge "p" in black ink on "Edinaya Rossiya" stamp.
1. (10) r. / 10 k. green.

Provisional surcharges on Imperial Arms stamps were also recorded
from South Russia:-
Ekaterinodar Provisional Issue, 1920.
1. (3) r. / 3 k. red, imperforate with black surcharge.
2. (3) r. / 3 k. red, imperforate with violet surcharge.
3. (10) r. / 10 k. deep blue, perforated with black surcharge.
4. (10) r. / 10 k. deep blue, perforated with violet surcharge.
5. (10) r. / 10 k. light blue, perforated with violet surcharge
These stamps are found cancelled in Ekaterinodar, Pashkovskaya (a suburb of Ekaterinodar) and Anapa
(reference [1]).

Some other provisionals might have originated from still earlier times. Two such provisional issues are
known, the status of which has not yet been fully ascertained. The first of these is ascribed to Petrovsk in
Dagestan and consists of two stamps of the Imperial Arms issue revalued 100 times by means of a
handstamped surcharge in violet or black, the latter being scarcer:-
Petrovsk Provisional Issue, end of 1919 or beginning of 1920.(Fig. 82).
1. 20 r. / 20 k. red and blue, perforated with violet surcharge.
2. 20 r. / 20 k. red and blue, perforated with black surcharge.
3. 35 r. / 35 k. green and violet, perforated with violet surcharge.
4. 35 r. / 35 k. green and violet, perforated with black surcharge.

All the catalogues which include the Soviet provisionals ascribe this issue to the 100-times revaluations of
1920, although the 35 k. stamp was not officially subjected to such revaluation. Indeed, the 20 r. / 20 k.
stamp is found used on money order and parcel cards during the Soviet administration (Fig. 83), while mint
copies of this stamp are rare. By contrast, the 35 r. / 35 k. stamp is not too scarce in mint condition,
especially with a violet surcharge, as its remainders were sent to Moscow, where they were sold later
through the state philatelic trade channels. However, used copies of this stamp are extremely rare. It was
reported (reference [23]) that the 35 r. / 35 k. stamps, together with their 20 r. / 20 k. counterparts had been
found on a money transfer card cancelled in Petrovsk as early as 20 December 1919, when this town was
still under the Denikin administration. In this case, the Petrovsk provisionals should be considered as a
local auxiliary issue, effected by that administration to meet the lack of higher value stamps. Unfortunately,
the present whereabouts of that money form are unknown (if it does exist at all) and, as far as I am aware,
no other entire that would confirm this version have surfaced up to now.

Another mystery is in the form of the so-called Armavir Provisionals, the handstamped surcharges of
which are of a design very similar to that of the corresponding stamps of the Third Kubad Issue.

November 2000

Armavir Provisional Issue, 1920 (?). (Fig. 84).
1. 10 r. / 15 k. blue and purple-brown, perforated.
2. 25 r. / 3 k. red, imperforate.

These stamps are found used on money order and parcel cards only in the summer and autumn of 1920, i.e.
under the Soviet administration (Fig. 85). While these stamps might represent a genuine provisional issue,
probably effected while Armavir was still under the Whites, there is another version treating them as
forgeries to defraud the post and manufactured illegally by the Armavir post and telegraph office clerks
themselves, or by an individual clerk. Of course, it is hardly possible now to prove or disprove either version,
but the fact is that the stamps were used on genuine mail.
The numbers issued of these stamps (unofficial information, reference [14]) were: No. 1 300; No. 2: 500.

In conclusion, the author expresses his deep gratitude to Robert Taylor for providing photocopies of many
very interesting entire from his collection.

Literature References:
1. R. Ceresa. The postage stamps of Russia, 1917-1923. Volume 3: The Armies, Parts 6-12, 1988; 22-
24, 1991; Volume 5: the RSFSR, Section B1, Parts 6-9, Section B2, Parts 10-12, 1997.
2. S.D. Tchilinghirian. Rostov Surcharge. BJRP 8, 187-190, 1952; 9, 217-221, 1952.
- 3. A.M. Rosselevitch. Postal issues and overprints of South Russia 1918-1920. Rossica 57, 9-16, 1959;
58, 14-21, 1960; 59, 25-29, 1960.
4. A.M. Rosselevitch. Beware of counterfeits. Russian Philatelist 5, 4-13, 1964; 6, 11-21, 1965.
5. M. Rayhack. South Russia through a camera. The Post-Rider 5, 27-32, 1979.
-(6. M. Rayhack. Notes on the South Russia Denikins. Rossica 83, 35-42, 1972.
7. M. Rayhack. Unlisted varieties of South Russia. The Post-Rider 17, 58-68, 1985.
8. M. Rayhack. South Russia Essays? Rossica 96, 115-117, 1980.
9 -. I.L.G. Baillie. 100 r. / 1 k. Crimea (Wrangel) Surcharge. Rossica 57, 42-45, 1959; 58, 46-49, 1960.
10. A. Artuchov & A.M. Rosselevitch. The cancellations of South Russia. The Post-Rider 17, 33-57,
11. P.T. Ashford & R. Taylor. Sochi: the 1918 surcharge a further look. BJRP 77, 24-31, 1994.
12. V. Indra. Denikin revenues with postal cancels. Rossica 72, 92-93, 1967.
13. N. Lamtev. Pochtovye Yugo-Vostoka Rossii. Russkii Kollektsioner, 1922, Nos 3-4, 2-3.
14. B. Krivtsov. Marki Kubani. Sovetskii Filatelist, 1923, Nos. 5-6, 5-10.
15. B. Krivtsov. Opechatki v kuban'shikh provizoriyakh. Sovetskii Filatelist, 1923, Nos. 7-8, 16-18.
16. Borisov I Konstantinov. O markakh Kubani. Sovetskii Filatelist, 1924, No. 2(18), 9; No. 3(19), 8-9;
No. 4(20), 11-12, No. 6(22), 12-14.
17. Vl. Sokolov, V. Kutilin. K voprosu o vypuske marok "Edinoi Rossii", Sovetskii Kollektsioner, 1928,
No. 2(84), 11-12.
18. S. Manzhelei. Marki, vypushchennye v Krymu. Rossica 22, 189-192, 1935; 36, 213-216, 1939.
19. P. Gortsev, A. Belyavskii, S. Yur'ev. Proekty, esse i probnye marki "Dono-Kubani" i "Edinoi
Rossii". Ukrainskaya i rossiiskaya filateliya, 1992, No. 1, 17-20.
20. A. Ivakhno. "Dono-Kuban'" i "Edinaya Rossiya": voprosy i otvety. Ukrainskaya i rossiiskaya
filateliya, 1992, No. 1, 21-22.
21. A. Ivakhno & G. Andrieshin. Istoriya vypuska znakov pochtovoi oplaty Ukrainy 1918-1919 gg. -
Odesskii pochtovo-telegrafnyi okrug. Ukrainskaya i rossiiskaya filateliya, 1992, No. 1, 3-5.
22. Krymskii Kollektsioner, 1923, No. 1, 16.
23. S. Parkhomovich. Pereotsenki pochtovykh marok RSFSR i SSSR i provizorii 1918-1923 gg.
Sovetskii Kollektsioner, No. 1, 80-85, 1963.
24. Sbornik postanovlenii i rasporyazhenii po Narodnomu Kommissariatu Pocht i telegrafov, No. 6,
25. V. Mohyl'nyj: Z diyal'nosti poshty na nashykh terenakh za bilykh rezhymiv. Ukrayins'kyj
Filatelistychnyj Visnyk, ch. 1(41) 7-12, 1997.

November 2000

by Alexander Epstein.
Indeed, the "three-triangles" postmarks used in the early Soviet period (1920-1924) remain something of a
mystery. There are several theories as to their true purpose, but the "censorship" theory still seems to me
the most probable, notwithstanding the assertions of V.B. Kofman (see "The Post-Rider" No. 46, pp. 103-
104). The latter person did not succeed to find any documents in the archives and his only argument against
the "censorship" theory is based on the sole postulate that no censors could operate in such a small town as
Bakhmut. In truth, "this cannot be, for it cannot be"!

It appears that the "three-triangles" postmarks are known to Mr. Kofinan only from a few large towns.
Actually, a rather large number of such postmarks have been recorded up to this day. Those known to me
are listed hereunder:-
Arkhangel'sk Kazan' Rybinsk
Armavir Kiev (two types) Samara
Bakhmut Khar'kov (two types) Sevastopol'
Baku Kremenchug Simferopol'

Batum (in Georgian)
Ekaterinoslav (two types, one
in Ukrainian: Katerynoslav)
Field Post Office "D"
Field Post Office "S"
Field Post Office "Z"
Field Post Office No. 27
Field Post Office No. 103
Field Post Office of 1st. Army

Nizhnii Novgorod
Odessa (two types)
Petrograd (three types,
one as "Leningrad")

Tbilisi (in Georgian = Tiflis)

Sometimes, there is something like three asterisks instead of triangles in the markings. As one can see,
there are not only large towns in this list but also smaller ones. Apart from Bakhmut, Kremenchug Uman'
and Yalta were similar in size and not large towns, as they are nowadays. It is worth pointing to the fact
that these postmarks were applied even in Transcaucasian towns such as Baku, Batum, Erivan' and
Tiflis/Tbilisi, where a separate postal system existed up to 1924 (although finally subordinate to Moscow).
It is noteworthy that there are also field post offices in this list. Surely, this list is very far from being
complete, as the "three-triangles" postmarks on covers are not found too often, with the exception of those
from the largest towns of Moscow and Petrograd. The rather negligible numbers of such postmarks from
smaller towns can be explained by the simple fact that the volume of mail from such towns was smaller
too, so the number of covers available to collectors should be fewer as well.

There is no reason to suppose that censors could not operate in smaller localities. For example, Bakhmut
was a district centre and towns with one or two tens of thousands of inhabitants were not considered as
negligible in those years.

Of course, we still have no documented evidence that the "three-triangles" markings were used just by
censors. However, the fact that no corresponding documents have been found in the archives of the former
USSR up to now notwithstanding an intensive search by some philatelists shows in itself that there was
something hidden in those markings. Usually, such a search is conducted in the archival files of the Postal

November 2000

Administrations. However, if this were a matter of secrecy, there is little chance to find the corresponding
information there.

As far back as 1919, the Soviet military censorship was still applying to the covers the same types of
markings as during WWI: either cachets preserved from the pre-Soviet period, or newly manufactured
ones. However, such markings vanished completely in 1920, although the Civil War was not yet finished
and the Soviet-Polish War had broken out as well. Instead, we see these "three-triangles" postmarks. This
practice continued also after the termination of large-scale military activities, up to 1924 inclusively. The
fact that such markings are found applied to the foreign as well as inland mail and not only at the
dispatching points but also during transit and at the destinations, supports rather contradicts the censorship

Anyway, some change in handling the mail did take place in 1920. The question is: where to look for a
possible explanation of the "three-triangles" markings? Personally, I would advise Mr. Kofman and his
associates to look in the archive files of the Cheka/GPU and/or those of the Red Army, if accessible.
by Eric Jr'rvlepp.
Mr. V.B. Kofman, the writer of that article in "The Post-Rider" No. 46, suggests that the postmarks with
three triangles could not be censorship handstamps, because one was used in Bakhmut, a small place of less
than 20,000 people. For comparison and a few years earlier during WWI, Russia had 19 censorship offices
in Estonian towns, which were mostly smaller than Bachmut. There were 87 offices in all the Baltic
provinces and only 10 in the more populous and larger Finland. Strategic location was what governed the
choice of office sites, not the size of any city or town where censorship was being carried out.. The
presence of the hard sign "'b" or its absence in a place like Bakhmut had nothing to do with censorship.

The author shows in Fig. 3 of his article a cover from the USA to Archangel, Russia. The postmarks are the
arrival date of 16.12.22 and the censorship date of 18.12.22 (with triangles), in perfect sequence. I have a
cover with the same Moscow censorship handstamp with the triangles. It was mailed from Kostroma
17.4.22 to Warsaw. It was postmarked Moscow-5 on 5.V.22 and censored on 8.V.22 (date is somewhat
unclear). Again, it has a proper sequence of dates.

I bought another censorship cover from a Finnish mail auction. The catalogue stated that the triangles
indicated censorship. As Finland is so close to St. Petersburg, the former capital of Russia, they should
have known about that. This cover was mailed from Viipuri (Viborg) Finland 30.XII.22 to Sevastopol'
10.1.23. It was postmarked in Petrograd 2.1.23 on arrival, again Petrograd 3.1.23 (pre-censorship),
Petrograd 3.1.23 with triangles and Petrograd 4.1.23 (post-censorship). Again, the postmarks, all different,
are in perfect sequence.

The triangles are a hidden sign of censorship used in 1920-1923. The Russian authorities obviously
favoured hidden markings. From 1946 to 1949, censorship markings were in the form of certain letters in
regular cancellers. The letters used in Tallinn, Estonia for marking mail were "S" for incoming and "N" for
going abroad. Obviously, such mail was tabulated.

In 1950-1968, "Mezhdunarodnoe" and "Avia" handstamps were used. The censors filed narrow slits in the
frames of these handstamps, according to their own personal pattern. "Mezhdunarodnoe" handstamps
struck in red were used in Latvia at the very beginning of that censorship. That was a caution against the
person in question corresponding with the "Capitalist World".

As the author's search for official documents is continuing, I suggest including the files of the Cheka and
the subsequent GPU of 1922 as well.
Editorial Comment: Many thanks to Alexander Epstein and Eric Jarvlepp for their pertinent comments!
November 2000

WORLD WAR I by Alexander Epstein.
Following upon the discussion about postage-due mail in Russia published in "The Post-Rider" Nos. 45 &
46, I would like to add the present notes concerning such mail from the Army in the Field during WWI.

From the very beginning of the war, Russian servicemen were granted the post-free privilege for ordinary
postcards and letters of normal weight (up to 30 grammes) sent by them. However, certain formal rules
(that were changed in some details during the course of the war) had to be observed when posting such
mail. For instance, there had to be a unit cachet applied on the cover confirming this privilege (later, that
requirement became somewhat less strict) and the mail from the rank and file was to be handed over to the
post offices only by persons specially appointed for that purpose, etc. If those rules were broken, the item
of mail was charged postage due, equal to the corresponding doubled postal rate according to the general
postal regulations in force and a "OIIJIATHTb" (= to pay) marking was applied on the cover. It is just
these markings that are the subject of my notes.

As early as 30 July 1914 O.S., a decree under No. 3830 was issued by the Head of Staff of the Supreme
Commander-in-Chief, which, among other things, directed that dated postmarks should not be applied on
the mail handled by post offices in the area under army control. That decision was taken to rule out any
possibility of disclosing an important piece of information of military character to the enemy through the
combination of the date-stamp and such elements of the item of mail as the message, the cachet of the
military unit, etc. At the sedentary offices of the State and Railway Posts, where it was necessary to cancel
postage stamps on mail sent by civilians, that led to the introduction of "mute" cancellers. As to the free
mail of the soldiers, there was no such necessity and it could remain without postmarks at all. However, the
postage-due mail of soldiers, although far from being common, had to be marked in a proper manner,
although nothing was mentioned in that connection in the above-mentioned decree.

Starting from about the middle of the first decade of the 1900s, oval postage-due markings with the place-
name gradually replaced at the post offices the former ones without name. Only a few post offices still used
the old "to pay" markings in 1914. However, the circumstances described above evidently forced the post
offices that handled the mail of servicemen to resume using these former devices which had no post office
name, or they had to apply manuscript "to pay" markings (Fig. 1 on the next page). New postage-due
handstamps with the post office name remained in use in the rear areas, which were not under direct
military administration (Fig. 2). Sometimes, the post offices formally implemented the decree by applying
not a dated postmark, but a "to pay" marking with the full post office name (Fig. 3).

As time went by, the requirements for postmarking the mail, as set forth in the decree No. 3830, were
losing some of their urgency. For instance, the use of "mute" postmarks on civilian mail was found to be of
little efficiency. On the other hand, many post offices merely forgot about these requirements when
handling the mail of servicemen, even if it was not always necessary (Fig. 4). The Head of Staff of the
Supreme Commander-in-Chief therefore issued a new decree under No. 55 dated 10 June 1916 (repeated
by the Main Postal & Telegraphic Administration in its circular No. 21 of 2 July 1916). Apart from the
former directions not to postmark the mail at all (it concerned this time only the soldiers' mail and only at
sedentary State or Railway post offices), there was also an alternative proposition of using date cancellers,
but without indication of the place-name. Again, nothing was said about the postage-due markings.

As before, such cachets of the old type (without the place-name) were used most often (Figs. 5 & 6).
However, some post offices manufactured semi-mute cachets by cutting out their names at the bottom (Fig.
7) or by cutting off or covering the bottom part (Fig. 8). Postage-due markings of non-standard types were
also used (Fig. 9). Again, there were cases of purely formal application of the latter decree (Fig. 10).
There surely exist other peculiarities connected with the postage-due mail of servicemen and readers are
invited to contribute items from their collections.

November 2000

Fig. 1: Manuscript marking demanding 6k. postage due Fig. 2: "To pay" handstamp of Petergof with the doubled ordinary letter
on a soldier's postcard to Staro-Fennern, Liflyand rate of20k. written in, applied on a cover to Yur'ev endorsed "From the
Province, sent in September or October 1914 from the Army in the Field and which broke some rules in mailing. The cover also
Sandoierz area of Poland. has a manually written Cyrillic letter "D" (due) and postmark of Petergof
dated 5.10.14.

X ,W,':
if. Y, 2 -'

Fig, 3: "To pay" handstamp of Smolensk Vokzal (Railway Station), but without indicated amount of postage due, applied on a
cover to Veisenshtein, having also a cachet of the 16". Siberian Rifle Regt. No despatch mark, but the presence of the postage-
due mark with place-name, together with unit cachet, give away the regiment location, probably in transit to the front.

Fig. 4: Postcard to Fellin, endorsed "From the Army in the Fig. 5: Old type "To pay" marking without place-name on a
Field" and posted free, but taxed for some reason and free postcard, written on 6.11.17 and addressed to Revel'.
provided both with a date-stamp 29.1.16 and a "To pay" The cachet is of the Engineering Admn. of the Western Front
marking of Zdolbunovo (without amount due), contrary to Construction/Technical Section, located probably at Minsk.
Decree No. 3830. No unit cachet on the card, so the place- The figure "4" written in the due marking and representing
name does not give out any secret information, a doubled 2k. rate raises some questions, as the ordinary
postcard rate was 5k. at that time.

November 2000

Fig. 6: Old type "To pay" marking without place-name on a
free postcard addressed to the 274t. Izyum Regt. As can be
seen from the message, the card was sent from Dvinsk. The
postage-due marking was crossed out by pen as wrongly
applied either at the dispatch or arrival point.

.. S 4,.,'
r --

*,k'- 'W /
.., :, ,

.. .,:-;. .#.. ;, t.C
= -,. -, .: ..- .- --' .4
,,, ,. ,_, ', 0 .,_-. / ,- ",.' ',, .'

Fig. 7: Postage-due handstamp with place-name cut out at

. C-. -, _.s- ,
..- ."4,.-1 _"-WL J ; elli _

,_:.-- -.-<2.--<0 .
.. v "; :- -
Fig. 7: Postage-due handstamp with place-name cut out at
bottom and amount 6k. written in on a card endorsed "From
the Army in the Field". This handstamp was applied at Yur'ev,
i.e. at the arrival post office, together with its postmark dated
5.1.17, but there are also the dated postmark 3.1.17 and a
further "To pay" marking of the Petrograd 33". Town l P. O.!

'.. '. ". .' .' ": '. :- -T ._- -T : -

-. : .- ." "t- ; Z .. :. J.,._ -.. -"
It Pel
iS '
^'',^^ ^*--~ ..;..' '^ -^' ,'*".'~ '" ^'--^ *-

Fig. 8: "To pay" handstamp with the bottom (name) part cut offor covered on a "From the Army in the Field" cover, addressed
to Torgel, Liflyand Province in November 1916 from an unidentified place, as there is no dispatch mark. The "20k." written in
corresponds to the doubled ordinary letter rate.


Y'I "-! .* .""... .. J

:L ,. .. ... -:: I .a : .:

Fig. 9: Non-standard circular postage-due marking
with "6" written in (double the ordinary postcard
rate at that time) on a postcard from Dvinsk, having
also a semi-mute postmark dated 6.4.17.

,- .. "." '--,-"' ?

1* 1* I '-"" '4-

at the Northern Front Armies There is no dispatch mark, in

accordance with Decree No. 55 and the censorship mark does not
include the place, in conformance with requirements in force, but
the Pskov postage-due marking reveals the dispatching post office.
the Pskov postage-due marking reveals the dispatching post offie.

November 2000

by Meer Kossoy.
The subsequent publication of articles in "The Post-Rider" devoted to the postage-due mail in Russia shows
that this particular subject has provoked a definite interest among the readership. I have therefore decided
to supplement with new material what I had published in my first article [see literature reference 1] and to
show in addition some interesting examples of postage-due mail.

.r .o
OE~~ IA ? _6.-

r .r J!4ement *

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

It is generally known that the postage-due markings of Russia had an oval shape and surprise is therefore
evoked by the "non-standard form" of the cachet for Baku (see Fig. 1). The postcard was sent from Baku
and received by the addressee in Hrubiesz6w, Lublin province on 31.3.09. The address portion on the card
occupies less than half the overall area, thus being an infraction of Article 96 of the Postal Regulations [see
reference 2]. In accordance with my exposition in "The Post-Rider" No. 46, pp. 76-83 [reference 1], it was
determined on the basis of a specific violation of Article 99 of the Postal Regulations that such a card had
to be sent at the letter rate of 7 kopeks. Taking into account the franking of 3 kopeks, the amount still
owing for the letter rate was 4 kopeks and thus the postage due at double the deficiency was 8 kopeks. The
extent of that latter amount was also inserted in the red cachet of non-standard form and reading

A postage-due cachet of non-standard form was also applied at Askhabad, Transcaspian Province (see Fig.
2). The postcard was sent from Askhabad 20.3.09 and received by the addressee in St. Petersburg 26.3.09.
The card was not franked, as the stamp was missing and a cachet in violet with the amount of "6k." was
applied, reading "AOnIJIATHTb / ACXABAJTb".

o l? Drucksache.- Inmpr'irm
iversella. We. tl

Fig. 3.

While the postage-due markings applied for the violations of Article 96 of the Postal Regulations [reference
2] regarding the texts on postcards are not rarely found, as for example in Figs. 1 & 4, where the postage-
due cachet has been struck because of violations of Article 96 regarding the size of the cards, there is also a
sole example known to the author of the size shown here in Fig. 3 above.

In accordance with Article 96 of the Postal Regulations [reference 2], postcards had to have a standard size

November 2000

of 14 x 9 cm. The postcard shown in Fig. 3 on the previous page has a size of 14 x 4.7 cm. It should be
noted that the postcard in Fig. 3 was printed in such a way that it was part of a series of landscape
panoramas which opened out either vertically or horizontally and that resulted in this size. The card was
sent from Rostov-on-Don 3.4.14 and received by the addressee in accordance with the arrival marking,
reading ".KIEB'b- BOK3AJIb" 5.4.14. In conformance with Article 99 of the Postal Regulations
[reference 2] regarding an infringement of the size for postcards, a postage-due marking in red was applied,
reading "fOFnJIATHTb / POCTOB'b HA JOHY" and, once again, the amount due at double the
deficiency was written in as 8 kopeks.

from Tula 1.7.11 and received by the addressee in Moscow 2.7.11. There is in the upper part of the address
side a text which is a violation of Article 96 of the Postal Regulations [reference 2]. It could be argued that
there were mitigating circumstances which would explain the presence of the message on the address side,
namely that it occupied not a half of the card, as required by the postal regulations, but almost two-thirds.
In spite of the presence of "mitigating" circumstances, a cachet in black reading "lROfIJATHTb" was
Fig. 4. Fig. 5.

struck on the card, in accordance with Article 99 of the Postage Regulations regarding violations of the
requirements for messages and the amount of "8k." written in, as for the previous examples.

By contrast, a postcard is shown in Fig. 5, which was sent from Koreiz, Tavrida Province 17.10.09 and
received by the addressee in Moscow 21.10.09. On the address side of this card, there is not only at top but
also in the bottom portion a text which is a similar violation of Article 96 of the Postal Regulations
[reference 2] as that given in Fig. 4. In accordance with Article 99 of the Postal Regulations [reference 2], a
postage-due marking in black and reading "RORTIATHTb / KOPEH3'b" was applied and the amount
due written in as "8k.". However, this amount of deficiency was regarded in Moscow as unjustified and
cancelled, whereupon a violet cachet of dots and reading "CHATTA" was applied.

In comparing the cards in Figs. 4 & 5, we note that they were received by different addressees, but in the
same city of Moscow. Both cards have the same violation of Article 96 of the Postal Regulations [reference
2] and while the addressee in Fig. 4 had to pay the postage due, it was abolished for some unexplained
reason for the addressee in Fig. 5.

Most post offices did not have a marking with the text "CHaddressTA". In cases where the postage-due cachet
had to be annulled, that was ordinarily done by it being crossed out by ink or pencil. Some interesting
examples are shown hereunder of cancelled postage-due cachets and an attempt has been made to explain
the reason for abolition.

A postcard is shown in Fig. 6 on the next page, which was sent from Volchansk, Khar'kov Province 3.9.11

November 2000

Fig. 6. Fig. 7.

and received by the addressee in Pokrovskaya (Sloboda), Samara Province 6.9.11; see the postmark at
right. The card was not franked, as the stamp was missing and a cachet in black was therefore applied,
reading "gOHJIATHTb" and the amount "6k." written in, corresponding to double the deficiency. The
addressee had gone away and so the address "Sloboda Pokrovskaya" was crossed out and the new one
written in as "C. HeTep6ypr'b" (St. Petersburg). Two stamps in the values of 2 & 2k. were affixed to the
card for further dispatch. The card was forwarded on 7.9.11 (see the postmark at right) to the new address
in St. Petersburg, but there is no arrival marking. In order to avoid paying the postage due a second time,
the cachet was crossed out with black ink.

We see a postcard in Fig. 7, which was sent from Tambov 27.8.14 to St. Petersburg (no arrival marking).
The card has a cachet in red, reading: "COfIJIATHTb/ TAMBOB'b", which was subsequently crossed
out by means of an indelible pencil. The card had been sent to a member of the Army in the Field, which
was confirmed by a cachet reading: "60-ro ITBXOTHAFO 3ArlACHATO BATAJIIOHA / 8-51
POTA" (60th. Infantry Reserve Battalion, 8th. Company). It is difficult to explain the application of the
postage-due cachet, if we take into account that, from the beginning of WWI, an instruction dated 29.7.14
of the General Administration of Posts & Telegraphs (rFYFHT) had been issued, on the basis of which
postcards and letters weighing up to 30 grammes (one ounce = 28.35 grammes) sent to members of the
Army in the Field by other servicemen were forwarded free of charge [see reference 3].

It should be noted that, in cases where the postal official had made a decision to change the amount of the
postage due, he would apply a new postage-due cachet and cancel the old one. In this particular case of a
postal sending, we see a rare variation: two postage-due cachets.

.. ~UNIO .P .....UB D .-, K ...
," ... 'i OTHPbITOE -nMCbMO. -- C

& .. ., ,, .... ---- ,-.

.. l o,., .. ..;- '1,': ;'e'
d" .... $ "_.. .. ...._- '.*- ** .' -'- .d_ __" -

Fig. 8. Fig. 9.
November 2000

A postcard is featured in Fig. 8 on the previous page, which was sent from Schierke, Germany 14.8.06 N.S.
(Gregorian Calendar) and received by the addressee in St. Petersburg 6.8.06 O.S. (Julian Calendar). The
card was not franked, as the stamp was missing and, in order to direct attention to the necessity of
collecting the postage due, a framed marking was applied with the capital letter "T" (the first letter of the
French word "Taxe", i.e. to pay). A cachet in black and reading "AOIJIATIHT" was struck at St
Petersburg and the amount due written in as "10k.". That marking was subsequently crossed by a blue
pencil and alongside it was written in pencil the amount due as "T" and "12 C" ("C" stood for gold
centimes). A new cachet reading "jOInJIATHTb" was applied in place of the cancelled one and the
amount due was now written in as "8k.", corresponding to double the deficiency for sending a postcard
abroad (the rate was 4 kopeks).

We see in Fig. 9 on the previous page a postcard which was sent to Ivanovo-Voznesensk 24.12.09 and
received by the addressee the same day. The card was franked with a 1-kopek. stamp and so a cachet in
black was applied,to read HOnJIATHTb / HBAHOBO-BO3HECEHCK'b BJI.( A3IHMIPCKOI )
F.(YBEPHIH). The amount due was written in blue pencil as "4" kopekss), corresponding to double the
deficiency in the rate of 3 kopeks, i.e. 3 1 = 2 x 2 = 4k.. It should be noted that this particular cachet
differs from most of the others, the latter of which did not specify the province after the name of the town..
Anyway, the postage-due cachet was then annulled, as it was crossed out with a blue pencil.. It can be
assumed that the postal official regarded this particular sending as a "greeting card", the rate for which was
not 3, but 2 kopeks. A new cachet was therefore applied in place of the cancelled one and the amount due
now written in as "2" kopekss), corresponding to double the deficiency in the 2-k. rate: 2 1 = 1 x 2 = 2k.

The Postal Administration put into operation a checking service to ensure the accuracy of the postage-due
charges. Such a verification was denoted on the mail by a special marking. The verification was carried out
on a selective basis and such cachets are thus known in occasional examples, thus demonstrating an
important philatelic interest. As an indication of the rarity of the material, the author has found it possible
to show not only strikes of the markings for the verification of postage-due sending which were covered in
his previous article [see reference 1] under Figs. 8, 11 & 12, but also to show postal sending with these

Wteltpostherin Union posta!e qniverselle 3 O EC
L ., -l Crtl.O s p-t.,,t. P, .rt S ,
C a spC... arkrt-..rta -..he.r yn L ..- .ARll E P. _

,y s: J ... I. ,t.. ......... ) .l .. .. -. ._ ^ ; l-
'.- '- ":". -I '- -- -

.. ...... : .- .... -... .

Fig. 10. Fig. 11.
A local card is given in Fig. 10, which was sent within Tiflis 9.12.11. The item was franked with two
stamps of 1 kopek, to cover the greeting card rate. However, a postal official regarded that prepayment as
being insufficient and therefore applied a cachet in red, reading: "AOInJIATHTb / THkQJIHClb" and
wrote in the amount due as "2" kopekss), which corresponded to double the deficiency in the 3k. rate: 3 2
= 1 x 2 = 2k. In order to direct attention to the necessity of collecting the amount due, a handwritten
notation was placed by red pencil in the form of a large capital letter "D", being the initial letter of the
Russian word "AOnJIATHTb". This card went through the verification process for postage-due mail, as
confirmed by the single-line cachet in violet, reading: "KOHTPOJIb".

November 2000

The verification of postage-due sending was carried out not only in Russia, but also in the RSFSR period
of 1917-1923. That is confirmed by the local postcard shown in Fig. 11 on the previous page, which was
sent within Poltava 10.4.18 and received by the addressee the following day. The card was franked with
three stamps of the 2-k. value to total 6 kopeks. It should be noted that, up to 28.2.18, the rate for sending
postcards was 5 kopeks, so the prepayment of 6 kopeks would have been more than sufficient. However,
because of the catastrophic inflation in the RSFSR era, the rates were often changed (24 times from 5
kopeks to 20,000 roubles) and in the period from 28.2. to 15.9.18, the tariff was no longer 5, but 20 kopeks.
It is possible that the sender was not informed about that. Taking into account the change in the rate, the
card was judged as insufficiently franked. A postage-due cachet is missing from the card for some
unknown reason, but the amount due of 8 kopeks was written in black pencil, inside an oval done by hand
with a blue pencil. The card went through the verification process for postage-due sending, as noted by the
circular marking struck in black and reading "KOHTPOJIb / nOJITABA". The author cannot explain
the reason why the amount due on the card was calculated on the basis of a 10- and not a 20-kopek rate. It
is possible that a local tariff was in force in the Ukraine, or only in Poltava. The double deficiency on the
card was calculated on the basis of 10 6 2 x 2= 8 kopeks.


Fig. 12. Fig. 13.
Z- U

.. !........ .

Fig. 12. Fig. 13.

A card is featured in Fig. 12, which was sent from the Baltic Railway Station in Petrograd 24.7.17 and
received by the addressee in Kaluga 27.7.17. The card was not franked and, for that reason, a partial strike
in red was applied at bottom left to read "OHlJIATHTb / BAJIT, (:IICKII4) BOK3AJI'", with
double the deficiency properly written in by indelible pencil as "6" kopekss). The card went through the
checking point for postage-due sending, as denoted by the circular red cachet reading "KOHTPOJIb /

We see in Fig. 13 a card which was sent from Kerkyra (Corfu), Greece 3.4.02 O.S. and received by the
addressee in Odessa 9.4.02 O.S. (the arrival mark is on the back). The Greek postcard was intended for
internal mail, but was dispatched as an international sending, which would have required a correspondingly
higher rate. An unframed marking in black in the shape of a large capital letter "T" was therefore applied to
direct attention to the necessity of collecting the postage due, together with a cachet in black, reading
"A1OnJIATHTb / OJECCA and enclosing the amount of "4k". The card went through the checking
point for postage-due mail, as shown by the partial oval strike in red at centre left and reading

In accordance with Article 70 of the Postal Regulations [see reference 2], postage stamps which were
recognized as invalid had to be denoted with the figure "O", as was also shown in my original article
[reference 1] in Figs. 19 & 20. It should be noted that this rule was not followed in many instances and
another method for separating invalid stamps was used in the form of drawing an angular frame around
them, as shown in Fig. 20 of my previous article.

November 2000

Fig. 14. Fig. 15.

As a supplementary example, we see in Fig. 14 a postcard which was sent from Berlin, Germany 23.4.10
N.S. and received by the addressee in Moscow 13.4.10 O.S. The card was franked with a French stamp,
which was denoted as invalid in Germany. For that reason, the stamp was isolated by an angular frame in
blue pencil and crossed out, the capital letter "T" being also written in by hand. A cachet in violet was
applied, reading "HOnJIATHTb / MOCKBA" and the amount of "8k." written in to correspond with
double the deficiency for sending a card at the international rate of 4 kopeks.

The Postal Regulations made provision for the necessity of applying a distinguishing mark in the form of a
large capital letter "J", so as to separate postage due sending from the general volume of mail. Such an
example was shown in my previous article [see reference 1] under Fig. 21. We now note in Fig. 15 a
postcard, which was sent from Izhevskii Zavod, Vyatka Province 4.4.14 and received by the addressee in
Perm' 9.4.14. In order to separate it from the general volume of mail in Perm', a violet cachet in the form
of the capital letter ")I" was applied on the card at top centre. The height of the cachet was a bare 8
millimetres and could hardly be regarded as being of a large size! The card was not franked and thus a red
oval cachet was also applied at top centre, reading fOnIJIATHTb" and showing a large figure "6"
inserted by hand, thus corresponding to double the deficiency.

The markings in the form of a capital letter "A" did not enjoy a wide distribution and handwritten notations
by coloured pencils in the form of a large capital letter "D" were normally added. For example, see Figs.5,
7, 10 & 17 in reference [1]. A handwritten note of the amount owing was sometimes made instead of the
capital letter "D".

Union Postale Universelle Rusie. L;
THrpbTObe nHcMO. Postal T.

... ....... ...... .. ..... ., r;l .

": w Phottypi. SKh.r.. bh l. N C., ... oc
S:!n zroi opout neT roITo a peS. Ctt r se e d ih e~t
Fig. 16. Fig. 17.

November 2000

Please see Fig. 16 on the previous page for a local postcard, which was sent within Moscow on 18.2.02.
The card was not franked and, to direct attention to the necessity of collecting the amount due, a notation
was made by blue pencil in the form of a large figure six, which "for assurance" was even crossed out. A
"OnIJIATHTb" cachet was applied in black and the amount written in as "6", corresponding to double
the rate.

Special labels, which explained the reason for postage due, were affixed in St. Petersburg to the separated
mail that was insufficiently prepaid. Such labels were described in my original article [see reference 1
below] in Figs. 22 & 23. In addition, Fig. 17 herewith shows yet another earlier type of such a label. It is
known to the author in only one copy and thus its period of circulation cannot be specified. It is surmised
that it was applied only in 1903. The label is known on a postcard, sent through the St. Petersburg 6t. Post
Office on 2.3.03 and received by the addressee in Yur'ev the next day. The card was not franked and this
label was affixed to direct attention to the necessity of collecting the amount due. The label is on blue paper
and has the following text:-
"C.-neTep6ypra, 190...r. St. Petersburg, 190...
BblHyTo H3"b aIIiKa B'b pagoHn3 Taken out of a letter box in the district of the
...... OTASn 6e3s MapKH ... .Office without a stamp
II.- Ten. nHHOBHHK1 ............ Postal & Telegraphic Official............".

There is a handwritten notation by blue pencil in the form of a large capital letter "D" and the amount due
is also specified as "6k".

Literature References:
1. Kossoy, M.: "Some Distinguishing features of Postage Due Mail in Russia", "The Post-Rider" No.
46, June 2000, pp. 76-83.
2. rocraHOBJieH1i no IIOMTOBOH TBacTH, qacTb 1, C.-neTep6yprb, 1909 r.
3. HnoToBO-TennerpaaHbfiH -KypHaj-b, OTA- 'n- OmnianaabHblii, 1914 r., N2 34.
Special Note:

In continuation of the CSRP policy to popularize an appreciation of Russian culture, we are very pleased to
announce to our readers that a magnificent display of his masterpieces opened at the Riverfront Arts
Centre, 800 South Madison Street, Wilmington, Delaware, U.S.A. on 9 September 2000 and it will run up
to and including 18 February 2001. The admission price at USD 14.50, with discounts for students,
children and seniors, includes an orientation of his art and a recorded tour lasting 45 minutes. The
Riverfront Arts Centre is open Tuesday to Sunday, 9am. to 7pm. Further details are available from the Web
Site at http://www.fabergeexhibition.com and also by telephone at (888) 395-0005.

This is one of the largest exhibitions ever mounted of these glorious objects, featuring more than 1000
works from private collectors, such as the Duke and Duchess of Westminster, as well as from various royal
families and from museums, including the world-famous Kremlin Armoury Museum in Moscow and the
State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg.

Peter Carl Faberge was the official Court Jeweller to the Romanov Dynasty in Russia and catered to the
luxurious tastes of European and Russian royalty in the latter part of the 19 and early 20th. centuries. His
artistry has never been surpassed and at least ten of the renowned Imperial Easter Eggs are on display in
this exhibition.

This accumulation of great wealth had great historical consequences, the effects of which are still with us.

November 2000

by Andrew Cronin.
As already noted by Vladimir Babici in his article on Bessarabian prephilately in "The Post-Rider" No. 46,
pp. 5-65, several districts of Southern Bessarabia were ceded in 1856 by the Russian Empire to the
Principality of Moldavia. This was one of the penalties paid by Russia for losing the Crimean War and six
former Russian post offices were involved in the change: Bolgrad, Izmail/Ismail(u), Kagul/Cahul,
Kiliya/Kilia/Chilia, Leovo/Leova and Reni.

In 1859, the Principalities of Moldavia (capital: Iasi or Jassy) and Wallachia (capital: Bucuresti or
Bucharest) joined together to form the United Principalities of Romania. The unified postal service also
operated in Southern Bessarabia until October 1878. The southern districts were then returned to the
Russian Empire, as a result of its successful war of 1877-1878 against Turkey and Romania was
subsequently recognized as a completely independent country.

Mr. Babici has pointed out that the postal history of this area in the 1856-1878 period was covered at length
by an eminent Romanian philatelist, Kiriac Dragomir, in a monumental study: "Stampilografie Postala
(Romania 1822-1910)", issued by the Mureq Philatelic Association, TTrgu Mures, 1990. The book is not
under copyright, but your editor decided, as a matter of elementary courtesy, to request permission to quote
from this seminal work. Unfortunately, Mr. Dragomir passed away 19 March 1999 and the data assembled
hereunder, including items from the collection of the present writer, will be forwarded to specialists in
Romania, so as to bring further material and archival documents to light.
A start will now be made in classifying the postal markings applied in Southern Bessarabia:-

(a) Oval cachets for postal receipts.
These are dated "1858" and are
inscribed in a mixed Cyrillic-
Latin alphabet, about which
more later. The examples shown
here are from Bolgrad and
Izmail. Examples should exist N
for Kagul, Kilia, Leova and Reni. BOLGRAD IZMAIL

(b) Framed "@PAHKO" (Franco) markings in Cyrillic, applied at least up to 1859.
The two examples shown here are from P.- P 0
Kagul and Izmail. Similar cachets should K ) PA H
exist for Bolgrad, Kilia, Leova and Reni. CAHUL ISMAIL

(c) Framed "Franco" markings in Latin letters, apparently introduced in 1859.
The three examples shown here
are from Bolgrad, Ismail and Kahul. FRANCO FRANjO FRANCO?
Kilia, Leova and Reni should also BOLGRAD ISHALu KA IHT
exist. All the "Franco" markings are
different, even in the rest of the Principality of Moldavia, so they may have been engraved locally!

(d) Latin double-circle day/month datestamps with MOLDOVA at bottom, introduced in 1859.

2, 4

27.04.1859 27.04.1859 27.04.1859 27.04.1859
27.07.1862 05.12.1865 61.09.1865 nentilizat
November 2000

The dates quoted at the bottom of the previous page are the earliest and latest seen for the offices at
Bolgrad, Ismail and Kagul. The marking for Kilia was not used, but those for Leova and Reni should exist.

(e) Latin double-circle day/month datestamps with ornament at bottom, introduced in 1865.

215 97X 9.1

Kilia/Chilia should also exist. Your editor has official mail from Cahul 5/1 and Ismail 28/6, addressed in
1866 to the Prefect at Tecuci, but they are not shown here, as the Dragomir illustrations are clearer!

(f) Latin double-circle day/month datestamps, with "DIM." or "SERA" at bottom.
Only one such type recorded so far: CHILIA / DIM., as shown here. The other offices CJ ~
should exist. The inscriptions at bottom appear to have been in the form of individual plugs,
which could be inserted as required. "DIM." = dimineata = morning; "SERA" = evening.

(g) Latin single-circle complete datestamps, introduced in 1871.

13 26 1 a I 5 C 20 OCT
7 72 is 72 72 71 72

All six offices are represented here, including Ismail in two spellings. Strikes are shown below from the
collection of your editor, namely Bolgradu (contradicting Mr. Dragomir), Cahul and Leova.

November 2000

(h) Latin double-circle day/month markings for rural postal agencies.
Mr. Dragomir illustrates only one example, from Costangalia in Cahul district, -A
as seen here. However, he was apparently also able to determine from the
archives that the following agencies also existed:-
Bolgrad County: Cahulo-Prut, Domeniiloru, Ismail.
Cahul County: Costangalia (herewith), Cotul Morii, Tigheci.

(i) Latin single-circle complete datestamps for rural postal agencies.
Mr. Dragomir shows strikes from the first two place-names B1
in Bolgrad County: Cohulo-Prutu and Domeniiloru, as' 21 '1
shown here. There is no doubt that all the markings of the APR JUL.
rural postal agencies are great rarities. 78 74

(j) Postage due markings.
Only one example recorded so far, from Ismail. rn R
It follows that the other five offices would have
been provided with similar markings, or other
cachets denoting the postage due. ISMAIL

(k) Latin single-line unframed dispatch cachets, applied on mail going abroad.

Cahul and Leova should also exist and all of them would be found on international mail with associated
P.D. (Paid to Destination) and P.P. (Postage Paid) markings.

Note: The possibility is not excluded that markings in other categories were also applied in Southern
Bessarabia during the Moldavian/Romanian Administration. We will now pass on to another important
function of the postal service in that area.

The inscriptions found on postal markings, receipts and way-bills featuree" or postal invoices).
During this period, the Romanian literary language was in a critical phase of transition from a mixed
Cyrillic-Latin alphabet to a purely Latin version. That stage becomes evident from studying the material
seen so far, which also demonstrates a conscious effort to emphasise the Latin roots of the language and to
replace where possible the words of foreign origin. That policy has been followed right up to the present
day and Romanian has constantly moved ever closer to the other languages in the Latin family.

A tabulation is set out hereunder of the mixed Cyrillic-Latin alphabet, as deduced from the philatelic
material on hand and together with modern Romanian and English equivalents:-
Modem English
Letter Romanian Equivalent Notes
A, a A, a a as in hard
B, 6 B,b B,b
B,B V,v V,v
F, r G, g before a, o and u
D,d D,d D,d
E, e E, e e as in "met"
K, x J, j s as in "measure"
I,i I, i i as in "hit"
K,k K,k K,k
JI, n L, 1 L, 1

November 2000

Modern English
Letter Romanian Equivalent Notes
M, m M, n M, n
H,H&} N,n N,n
N,n }
O, o O, o o as in short
I, n P, p P, p
P,p R,r R,r
C, c & S,s S, s
S,s }
T,t T,t T,t
U, r U, u u as in put Derived from a contraction of the Greek vowels "ou".
F,f F,f
I, ,t T,t
I,1, i g before J, j Serbian alphabet uses the same letter for the "j" sound.
b, ib a e as in
Z,z Z,z Z,z
I, q c before Ch, ch
III 1, Sh, sh
III, uA St, t Sht, sht Bulgarian alphabet uses same letter for the "sht" sound.
A, A a, muffled "i" Similar to the Russian vowel "bI".

Readers will notice that it is easy to get confused when using this mixed alphabet. That was also the case
for the local educated people, as will become evident when we examine the various settings found on the
way-bills for sending letters, money and parcels featuree" or postal invoices).

These way-bills are most interesting, as they bear postmarks and, so far as your editor knows, the various
settings have never been classified in the philatelic literature. It would appear that such way-bills were all
produced by the Moldavian State Printery in lagi (Jassy) for use in the entire principality, not just for
Southern Bessarabia.

The four type-set way-bills for letters shown on pp. 70-71 fall into our area of interest and the details are as
(a) From Husi, 20 November 1860 to Kahul on the next day. Note the imprint at bottom: "Imprimeria
Statului" (The Printery of the State).
(b) From Ismail 22 March 1861 to Kahul two days later.
(c) From Husi 8 November 1861 to Bolgrad three days later.
(d) From Kahul 11 January 1862 to Iasi (Jassy), apparently via Vaslui 12 January.
Each of these forms is denoted as "Posta No. 5" at top left and every setting is different. The possibility
cannot be excluded that other settings also exist, including for those listed below.

Finally, on p. 72, we see the relevant sections of three appreciably larger forms for sending money and
parcels. The first and third are type-setwith "Posta No. 19" at top right and the second is lithographed:-
(a) Sent by coach from lasi (Jassy) 14 May 1859 to Bolgrad four days later.
(b) Sent from Kahul 8 June 1859 to Husi.
(c) Sent from Kabul 16 January 1862 via Vaslui to Iasi (Jassy) with "drapery" arrival cancel 20.1.62.
Note: rponVpi (Gropuri) were sealed bags, used for sending money through the post (see p. 72).
Corrections and additional data for this period in Southern Bessarabia would be most welcome!

November 2000

llocta No.5 -'

SEKcueduit 186 a 'itu
Cocit 186. .Isnia

Coxotiaxm Anume Fpaniw ilopto
jel.. Inap lei. jIuap

C6picopl pexomandate...
O cannrate
,Cupe Ipadape. de um.int') -
Tpanuit *. .
Cimble de Aa atuspa
EiopouAi1 din

Adaocu Aa

Citadepi ja

dCmn Admiits' cat iCizst *. -
Camn ndcwmpati-.... -
'I I
U* Emccuedult dmni~ nl

0- 1 4ifp lr o ia C atB bl

-i ----



"De -A

Essnedvit 186/
Cosil. 186 lulia -

-Cosotes'is flme. EQ .opt
lei 'I a ei g1p.ze
."CRJipisopt'jiomemonflte I I

,, Cnpe.tpadape de miaty, -

SCu7i)teC 'deaa, *alIpa
liiapoan '.. din


h( ,~ofltpoai7.nrUie.
,.II. -----T- -------

Adaosi m .

I I~d~t If,

N phir' 'A

..- ,...
II Val%.:i

i '

I. flom .o
'~ ~~ Rc~iPll~oa..1-i'


) -

I/ -


; ~9b; .a; I II(Dijinp. .

Crpi p~Piomolli[.III

Cr,, .,(hipcbdpe de iar s t1.

,, Cib'j'zt~tC deaen sl vi
JijlpouinT: diii i -

(.ibliii1 -r

Adau.J .a -

Cpldcpi .ia

Colua~ ai! l m-iiIr, S iZ ssi.Zim.

d ;:,j- c h tic 11 A 11,

Ad*osg mi

SaiLdepi aa.x

011nln3(a'r s i s nra .7

Easuedtl do

_ __




_ ___ __



, l


ii -'

i~-- :



_I _I I

De aa a -7 ax4 'L)
EEsneduit 1849 2 1una
COSsit.186. mma i i

cos'Otea.1% allme .

CRIA8op4 peRomncnd.to

,, Cupe tpadapc de maats'.

CCnLzate de aa oatupa
Bitqpoua dii


,, -I

~ ;

; ,: r

Qnlapn; sr;l~fopian).


I# P -Fa in l aw fl 'O
I -
-. -'~-6i~-, ir Dcaixa~vn r e ,
_________ -t /;3' VQ7
-.18il18a .
r)Tpn i8.. 777'>c
lr' it 1, ,C f1

A d u ca t: npinde e I 11.r10r rpeg l3T tl qpaflKo nOp TO Iop To ier ai3.a
d AaI .i. a1J n PnJ cealiem.e.i.op L.i4..

~~~` __ _ i. d n. dr~t n. .il In. ~r 1n
et 0- d.- n.
4 -!

Jill h o-Jra PA d. Al R')
,.r j L'~. i
4i I r /,~ & id 1 & iW a IA ;
Litho~*r6pvedS 'v Vb
&let'--, `--~~a

b) 4
s i 7a c~ZC~AW

a "

Type- set..JI t* 01Cp apOrnpizop i saIa

AO mr i -ii16 Dcaixtzanqr dd ~aet X41,-''e
aa ,/ 18

_________ lptilt 18 -COSjt 18

SI IjYl I7 C-.



N jjiLAopa. I petatc Dpnao :I2o1 _e t
dol I Iaa aaisa _________ I Iopto jI t;rmTtfdg
--' -a -pnn -r _mr.1_ l o.. O NOtp. nt
A"T I rn. I Ila'i 1..

-, Iwct

-----~ --


COMMENTARY ON THE ARTICLE "The KbZbL 'a', 'b' & 'c' postmarks applied
in Tuva" [see "The Post-Rider" No. 46, pp. 111-112], by V.N. Ustinovskii.

This particular article with material from the collections of A. Cronin, H. Weikard & R. Taylor, is
especially interesting and follows the worthy tradition of the journal in systematically publishing data about
finds of philatelic material in the Tuvan area. This tradition, carried out by the Editorial Board of the
journal, deserves the gratitude of the Tuvan specialists in Russia.

With regard to the appeal in the Editorial Comment for data and corrections, published in No. 46 of "The
Post-Rider", that has been made more difficult by the fact that full philatelic information had not been
given, especially regarding the colours of the markings, the backstamps etc. For those reasons, this present
commentary has a general character and does not pretend to be the last word on the subject.

First of all, starting from the end of the 1920s and the beginning and middle of the 1930s, the atmosphere
of falsification of philatelic material by the Soviet Philatelic Association and the blatant chicanery on an
international scale markedly impedes the analysis of genuine examples of collectable material. The SPhA
was transformed into a strong monopoly, which would not stop short of falsifying all sorts of Tuvan covers,
which "had gone through the mails" from Tuva, as well as offering cancelled stamps on piece and all kinds
of varieties in the overprints. It utilized its own messengers for regular journeys to Kyzyl and back,
involved itself in all possible kinds of speculation, which it had itself brought about. The workers at the
SPhA grew fat on these activities and the philatelists of the whole world suffered..

Let us now look closely at each of the four items shown in No. 46 of "The Post-Rider":-
1. The coupon from the money order shown in Fig. 1 gives the impression of being both genuine and a
quite interesting piece. A thorough examination of the illustrated impression of the Kyzyl postmark with
the letter "a" allows us to affirm that it is a completely genuine marking, which could not have been forged;
it should also be assumed that it was struck in violet (Editorial Comment: That is correct). Moreover, the
break in the outer circle near the left lower part of the letter "a" at left is also found as the cancellation-to-
order on sheets of the "Landscapes", "Zoological" and "Jubilee" sets and applied with dates in 1935, 1936
& 1937. This break is also found on genuine strikes up to the middle of 1939. It then gradually faded out,
probably as a result of checking the canceller and, by the end of 1939, it had disappeared altogether. In
other words, the strike on the money-order coupon was applied during the first period of existence of the

However, it remains unexplained how 277 roubles could have been transferred by post from one side of the
square where the post office was situated, to the other side where all the State and public organizations
were located in the Government House. It is a pity that we cannot see the back of this coupon, as that may
solve this riddle (Editorial Comment: Unfortunately, there is nothing on the back). Moreover, the date on
the marking gives rise to anxiety. The cancellers utilized at the Kyzyl post office in 1935 and 1936 for
postmarking mail were as follows: one with thick bars above and below the date-bridge and, somewhat
later, the well-known Kyzyl marking with the letter "c". During that time, the "a" postmarker was widely
applied in Moscow as a cancellation-to-order. These facts show that the first one pinpointed normal covers
with private letters and loose stamps with genuine strikes, while the second one was used in 1936 to create
cheap used stamps of Tuva for the retail trade. For that reason, further investigation of the coupon is
required in order to determine the reasons for the incongruity in the date of the canceller.
(Editorial Comment: Your editor has previously suggested that there may have been two cancellers with
the same letter, one of which would have been held in Moscow by the SPhA).

Still another small correction. The abbreviation "II.K.A.P.II" cannot be deciphered as the "Central
Committee of the Tuvan Arat (Herdsman's) Republic". The first two initials have been rendered properly.
However, if they did stand for the Central Committee, then the second last abbreviation cannot refer to a

November 2000

Republic (such an interpretation was frankly impossible in Soviet terminology) and, for example, it could
have stood for "ApaTcKaa Pa6osaa IapTna" ("Herdsmen-Workers' Party) or for a public undertaking,
such as "ApaTCKHAi PecnyG6nHKaHCKHi [Ipo)coos3" (Herdsman's Republican Trade Union). In short,
the initials "A.P.I." still remain to be divulged.
(Editorial Comment: Alan Leighton, a CSRP member in Germany, has suggested that these last three
initials stand for "ApaTcKaa PeBOJnIouIOHHaa IapTHa" [Herdsman's Revolutionary Party] and that
version certainly sounds feasible).

2. The cover shown in Fig. 2 in "The Post-Rider" No. 46, p.111 was prepared for philatelic purposes. That
is confirmed by affixing artistically the entire zoological set, without regard to the postal rate. The stamps
have been postmarked with the Kyzyl "a" canceller and it looks like the genuine cancellation. That
canceller was already in Tuva in 1937 and that leads to the impression that the stamps were actually
cancelled in Kyzyl and that the letter went through the mails normally. However, the cross made by crayon
over the entire cover and the registration cachet without the designation of the country, which was never
abandoned by the SPhA in the Nastas'inskii Lane in Moscow, confirms that this cover was handled not in
Kyzyl, but in Moscow. Similar covers with crosses in crayon are also known in earlier examples. Thus,
there were two such covers in the S.M. Blekhman collection, illustrated in his booklet in Figs. 68 & 69 and
a similar cover was also shown in the Parisian magazine "TIMBROLOISIRS", No. 18 for 1990, p. 31.

What was the nature of this cross? To answer that question, we must determine the approximate journey of
such a cover. The collector in Great Britain would have sent to Kyzyl the cover with the stamps and
address label affixed, with a corresponding letter of request. His letter arrived in Moscow and went to the
SPhA. A messenger from the SPhA would have taken the cover to Kyzyl and either with a cross in crayon,
or in an uncancelled state, in which case the cover would have been crossed in Kyzyl.. Upon instructions
from the messenger, the stamps would have been postmarked with a genuine canceller and a date specified
by him. The cover with the cross would have been cancelled not as a postal sending (as it had already been
crossed), but as an item of mail upon which a "favour" cancellation had to be applied. In several cases, as
in the one we have just been examining and, in agreement with the postal clerks, this cover was recorded in
the registration ledger and provided with a registration number (it is written loosely in the middle of the
cover).The messenger then carefully conveyed the cover to the SPhA, where it was "handled" by applying a
registration handstamp, assigning a number to it and adding a transit marking. Then, as if nothing had
happened, the cover was sent from Moscow to the addressee, who was naturally very satisfied. In other
words, the cross by crayon freed the Tuvan postal clerks from the responsibility of transforming the cover
into a nice collectable piece. It should be agreed that such a cover cannot be regarded as having gone
normally through the post and it is interesting, not as a philatelic rarity, but as a normal example of the
deception carried out by the SPhA.
(Editorial Comment: Mr. Ustinovskii has constructed quite a theory here, but he is unaware of the
registration procedure carried out in Great Britain and other parts of the British Empire and Commonwealth
until fairly recently. In Great Britain, registered mail was originally designated by having string tied around
it. That proved cumbersome and led to the practice of applying a cross instead by crayon. In Great Britain,
the colour of the crayon was normally blue; in Australia, it was red. The practice of applying a cross in blue
crayon on the front and back was also employed in handling registered mail incoming from abroad and we
have all seen such examples sent from the Russian area to Great Britain over the years. Many of us have
annoying examples of the disfigurement caused by this practice. Anyway, the point is that the blue cross
was applied in Great Britain on the Tuvan cover discussed here. We can also say that the cover, with a
request for postmarking and return, actually did get to Kyzyl and that all the markings, including the
registration cachet, were applied there. It is also highly unlikely that the SPhA would have gone to the
expense of sending a messenger all the way to Tuva for the purpose of servicing philatelic mail. It was
much cheaper, either to intercept such requests in Moscow and hand them over to the SPhA, or let them go
through to Kyzyl, as there had been mounting criticism in the international philatelic press of the period
about the stamp-issuing policies of Tuva, with accusations that there was no postal service there).

November 2000

3. The cover, featured in Fig. 3, p. 112 of "The Post-Rider" No. 46, also has a cross placed on the front and,
in addition, a complete set of perforated stamps is affixed. Moreover, the stamps were postmarked by a
genuine Kyzyl canceller, in this case with the letter "b" and which, as repeatedly pointed out by A. Cronin,
was applied only in Kyzyl. However, after a year had gone by in comparison with the previous cover, it
transpired that the Tuvan postal clerks were prevailed upon to apply on this cover a genuine Kyzyl
registration cachet. There is only one disturbing aspect here: why was it necessary to apply at bottom left a
strike of the genuine canceller with the letter "a" and even a day earlier than the date of the Kyzyl "b"
cancellations? That was also an unexplainable artificiality, where no postal regulations were followed..
This cover was apparently also conveyed with the help of the SPhA messenger and got to Tel-Aviv, not
direct from Kyzyl, but via Nastas'inskii Lane No. 50 in Moscow (the premises of the SPhA).
(Editorial Comment: Once again, the presence of the blue cross on the cover can be explained by the fact
that it was applied on arrival in Palestine, then under British mandate and therefore following British
postal practice. Moreover, it still seems hard to believe that the SPhA would have had on hand special
messengers to convey philatelic mail to and from Tuva. Former SPhA employees would know the answer).

4. The cover shown in Fig. 5 in the same issue of "The Post-Rider" is also philatelic. The way it was
handled is similar to the example described under Section 2 here. The Kyzyl canceller with letter "c" was
then still in the Tuvan capital and the cover, which had been prepared beforehand, was dispatched to Kyzyl
to cancel the stamps and then handled by the SPhA in Moscow. A perplexing question arises here about the
so-called "transit" marking, inscribed "YCI4HCKOE KPAC. KP.". That postmark, as featured in Fig. 6,
gives the impression of being genuine. However, the reasoning is incomprehensible as to why the SPhA
would have chosen the postmark of this inhabited point as a transit marking, not only for this cover, but
also for many others. The fact is that Usinskoe, as has been rightly pointed r .
out in the article, is linked with Ust'-Usa on the Yenisei River, as well as / -
with Verkhne-Usinskoe further above on the course of the Usa River and -
several farms. All these places were served by the comparatively modest 18 t7 1
post and telegraphic office named "Usinskoe". I have an illustration of the
comparatively scarce pre-revolutionary postmark with this name, as shown -'
herewith. I would therefore repeat that the strike reading "YCIHCKOE
KPAC. KP." is close to the truth and would surely have been in the arsenal of instruments of falsification
of the SPhA. But another perplexing question arises here: why was there not a Moscow transit marking,
rather than the postmark of this unimportant office, when there was no railway line in the area nor even an
airfield, which have handled large aircraft? It appears that, in the SPhA, they thought that "whatever way it
turns out, let us pick a point close to Tuva". This cover is similar to the two previously described. It was
handled partly in Kyzyl to cancel the stamps and partly by the SPhA, before being forwarded normally.

Regarding the design of the postmark shown in Fig. 6, this is of a well-known and incomplete marking,
erroneously reading "YCH4HOKOE" at bottom (Editorial Comment: This was also pointed out by Alan
Leighton in Germany, but the second "C" may have accumulated dirt, so as to read eventually as an "O").
The marking is semi-anonymous, as it does not specify the district, nor have a letter. It was on hand at the
SPhA and with which so-called "transit" markings were forged on the Blekhman covers mentioned above,
as well as on several others.

Finally, even a swift glance at the covers featured in "The Post-Rider" No. 46 allows us to affirm that none
of them went through the post in the normal way and that they were forged by the SPhA, applying both
genuine datestamps in Kyzyl and also other markings, which were on hand at the SPhA in Moscow.

Final Editorial Comment: We will only arrive at definite conclusions if we can examine further Tuvan
covers with transit markings, so as to determine how long it would normally have taken for mail to go from
Kyzyl to Moscow. Your editor also feels that Mr. Ustinovskii has given the SPhA far more credit for
deviousness than they were capable of achieving. Further comments from Tuva enthusiasts are welcome!

November 2000

S BoeHHaR ueH3vpa noqTOBOfi IKppecnoHAeHInHH HHOB


Bn. BepAHneBncKHi, M. Kocoii.


BoeHHaa ueH3ypa norToBofi KoppecnoHnCenHm nepHona I
norbi POCCHH. 3TrO MarepHan faBHO nrpHBneK BHHMaHHe
Q4HnaTeneCTroB-ccneloBaTeinei. HanpHMep, yae a 1940 r. no naHHoii
TeMe 6buia ony6nIHKOBaHa craTba Dr. A.H. Wortman [1].
OyHnlaMeHTaJIbHoe HccienOBaHHe O BOCHHOi neH3ype
nerporpana ony6najOBanr a 1968 rony R. Casey H B. Evans [2].
3HarHTrenbHbi BKJaIB B pa3pa6oTKy aaHHoi TeMbl BHecna
pa6oTa D. Skipton, P. Michalove [3].
HaH6onbImHi Bmaga B HccjienoBaHHe BOeHHO~H UeH3ypbl
norTOBoir KoppecnoHneHIman POCCHH 1914-1918 r.r. BHeC A.
Speeckaert [4, 5].
B 3THX pa6orax OH o6o6muHin aHHbe 26-nTH nrepaTypHbIx
HCTOMHHKOB, ony6nHKOSaHHb X B nepHno 1932-1990 r.r. H nonomnHHi
HX CBe;xeHHAMH H3 aHanH3a caoei KonJneKiHH H fOJIryeHHbIMH OT
MHOFHX KOJIeKLIOHepoB. B pe3ynbTaTe OH ony6JIHKOBaJ OKono 1800
ueH3ypHblX neaTeei H urreMenejie, ynoTpe6naBmIHXCa B yKa3aHHbiii
nepHon. Hb 3Toro KonaHeCTBa npHMepHo 1560 npHMeHanUCb B 196
pa33J1HHbIX ropoAax H HaceniHHbX nyHKTax, a OKOno 240 B
6e3 pa3HoBHAHOcrei KOTOpbrx TaloKe HMeerca 6oj nmoe KOJIHqecTBO.
AHajiH3 noKa3biBaer, 'rr H3 onHcaHHbix B pa6oTax A.
Speeckaert ueH3ypHbrx neiaTefi urreMnenei, rTOnbKO 24 oTHocATrc K
BMO. Ha cpaBHeHHaR UHp 1800 A 24 MOX HO CcnleiaT BbIBOf, HTO
HeH3ypHbie ne'aTn H urreMnena BMQ PoccHH Ha norroBofl
xoppecnoiienuaHH crpeialrrca Kpahtie penKO H 3TOT
n)HJaTenmHCTleCKHii MaTepnan noncen 6brrb orHeceH K Bbicwmei
KaTCeropH peltKOCTH.
Hacronama craTba HanHcana c uenblO AononJHHTb
nll(opMaunmo o Ue113ypHbix ne'iaTrx Hn mTeMnejia Ha
KoppecnoHlelluHH 4HHOD BMO Poccim, panIHee ony6nmiKOBamltyo a
pa6orax A. Speeckaert [4, 5], a TaKlKC B apyrog .mjnaTTcIncrT'ecKOtl
B oclloiy cTaTbHl nonowmKli MaTepHIanbi 3 KOJUICKUHII
anTopon. Mbi 6naronapiibi iH3ecTlblM (bH)naTCJIncraM H. Apy)Ktmily1Iy
(Poccia) n H. KpaumclhlHMKooilOO (aaili), KoTOpbme ajo6caIo
npeAocrannai tIbopMaulto no nalifoil TCMO 113 CBOHX KOnnICKHiH.

IIpaBaa nepecubmarH coppecnoHnenwqmn qno BMQ4
C HaianoM I MUpoBOi BOiHbI no pacnopm iemno rjaBHoro
YnpaBjieHmH norr Hn Tenerpa4OB (nanee a TeKcre IY) oT 29 mona
1914 r. npocrTe nHcbMa BCCOM ao 30 r H OT pbrnKH Ha HMx ItHOB
AeiicTyioumei apMHH H or nHHOB AeeHCTByrnoime apMHH
nepecbinanAcb 6ec iarTHo [6].
IIHcbMa BecOM CBlIIe 30 r, 6aHneponbHble oTnpaBneHa,
notrosBbe nepeBonbi, nocbLIKH nepecbuanHcb B apMMio c onuiaroi no
eieHCTBOBaBsmM o6rsHM nOTOBbIM TapH aM.
rIoTroBbie oTpaBjeHHR 3aKa3Hbie, C Hano2KeHHbIM
njIaTemoM, c yBaeoMneHHeM o nojnyeHHH, a TaoKce nepesoAbi no
TejierpaJy ami nepecbmuKH B apMHio He npHHHManaCb.
Io TaKHM ce 06umHM npasanaM nepecbuianacb H BCa
KOppecnoHneHNUHa qHHOB BM'D. B nanbHelimeM peb Huln r HMeHHO o6
3TOH KoppecnoHueHUHH.
Ajn ygoCTOBepeHHa npaBa Ha 6ecnnaTHylo nepecbulKy nucbMa
c(noTCKOi (6eperoBoii) 4acm. Ho HaJIHqHe BOHHCKOH nelaTH He 6buio
AocraTO4HbiM ycJOBHeM aa 6ecunnaTHOH nepecbl KH.
JonoJIHHTrebHO Tpe6oBaJIocb, 4To6bl nHCbMa H OTKpbrrKH, HMCIomlHe
Ha3HaCeHHbix npecTraBHsrenei, KOTOpbie jiHqHO nepenaaanru
KOppecnOHAeHUHIO a noneabiee norosie ypea eHHi.
Ha oTnpaBjeHHe, onyleHHoe B norrTOBbig IuHK, namKe npH
Heo6XOAHMO 6blInO HanaraTb mTaMn THna "BbIHyrO 143 HIIHKa" H 3aTeM
nepecbuiaTb KaK He #paHKHpoBaHHoe OTnpaBjieHHe, B3blCKHBaA c
noJnyaTenia noruiaTHsoi c6op B ABBOHHOM pa3Mepe or noIrooro
Cneayer OTMeTuHT, ,ro Ha nparKTKe 3TO Tpe6o0aHHe
BblnoJIHHJOCb He CJIHUIKOM crporo H nornaTHoi nrraMn penKO
HaJlaranIc Ha KOppecnoHnHeHuWiO, HMeC1lyIO OTrTCK BOHHCKOH
neqaTu, HO BbIHyTryO H3 nooroBoro sxuxaa.
Tpe6oaaHae oTnpaBnRTb BOHHCKyIO KoppecnoHAeHnIumo epe3
cneHf anJbHO Ha3HaqeCHHbx npeAcraBTreneji BOcnpHHHMaceca
HeCKOJIbKO a6cypnHblM, ecran yecrb, Tro onuepcKOMy cocraBy
6buMo npegocraBJneH npaBo onyCKaTb CBOH nnCbMa H OTKpbITKH B
nO'iTOBblC AUlHKH CaMocTORTreJblo, MHy4H Ha3Ballbl[x
npeacraBnnene i.
3a nepion noR lbl npaania nepecbunK Koppccnoinenuni
'sllon BMQ HIcoaloKpaTlO yro'sIi1nceb 14 H3MCIIJ1nCb.
B aarycre 1914 r. rY ononoMHHTrejbo m3ano pacnopaxeine,
cornacio KOTopOMy npocTbbI nlHCbMa DCCOM no 30 r i KapTo'IKII C
aapecoM eiicTaynyioIlt (noT", onnaTe ic n noancajn [7].
311a'rllrcJlbilo Gonce cymIcrCoTnc oe 3MIICIIIne a npaonna
cooToLrcTrnTi c TenerpaMMOii Ila'iasbilitKa ry OT 2 oimra6p 1914 r.
3a IOMCpOM 5271. Cornaciio ce, a nNciMax it KapTO'lKax IlHI0o



apMHH (comoTBeerseHHO H RHHOB BMO4) noaasaeMbx a nojneBue
norosBbe yqpecAmesH, He Tpe6osanocb HM erb TrHCK nearTH
BOHHCKOi HacrH (HIH KOpa6naU). ocraTroMHnM yenoBHCM arU
6ecunaTOii nepecbuKH TraKxoi oppecnoHneHumH awB ca uTrreMnejnb
noneBoro noqTOBro ytpeanleHsH.
HHcbMa H KaprTOKH, nofaBaeMbie He B noneBoe notHToBOe
yMpealeHHe, nojDKHbI 6bLnH HMerTb OTTrK neiaTH BOHHCKOiH aCTH
(HIH Kopa6nu) H 6e3 Hero 6ecnlaTHofi nepecbuiKe He noaieCajrIH. 3a
HX nepecbmiKy noJnKHbl 6bum B3blCKHBaTb oriamTHoi c6op [8].
Cneayer orMerr wro c Havana 1916 r. B CeBacrOnone, roe
HaxonHjnacb FiaBHaa 6a3a TepHOMOpcKOrO (JIora, 6btIa OTrpqra
noineBan noTroBaa KOrropa HOMep 158. OHa 6buma cneuHaanbHO
npenHa3HaHeHa an o6pa6orKH KoppecnoHaeHUHH WHHOB
qepHOMOpCKor o 4njOT BOT no9eMy OTTHCK 3TOii KOHTOPb
BCTpeHaerc3H Ha KOppecnoHfneHUHH coBMecHo c OTrHCKaMH neIaTeil
Kopa6jneii HnH acreii TOJIbKO epHOMOpcKoro 4niora [DHr. 1].
nlonyrHO 3aMeTHM, rTO H3BecrHble aBTopaM urreMneJIJ FPO HOMep
158 HMeIoT irrepbi "e" H "a", a nepHon o6pameHrH 27.3.1916 -
B Haxanie 1916 r. B npaB Ha nepecbumKH KoppecnoHaeHnHH
IHHHOB BMQD 6bunH BHeceHbi oiepeAHble H3MeHeHHa, HanpaBJneHHble
Ha coxpaHeHHe ceKpeTHocTH. HIeBiuHecA Ha KOppecnoHaeHrHH
OTTHCKH neqaTei c Ha3BaHHHMH Kopa6neii HJIH #nrTCKHX qacreri
no3BOJIJIH JIerKO onpeejiTnrb HX THHbI H MecTa Haxo)aeHHI.
or3TOMy 6bio o16baBjieHO 0 Heo6xoAHMOCTH 3aMeHbl yKa3aHHbIX
neHaTeii Ha nemaTH THna "geiiCTByIomHui nIOT" H "HpocMoTpeHO Ha
Kopa6je", OTrHCKH KOTopbIX TaKie o6ecneHHBanH npaBo Ha
6ecuraTHyro nepecbMcy [9]. C.neAyer OTMeTerhb. rT yKa3aHHe o
3aMeHe neaTeri He 6bno nonJHOCTbo BbInonHeHO H B BHrne
4norJTCKx macreI BCTpeHatoTcA Ha KoppecnoHjneHHu H no KOHiia
paccMaTpHBaeMoro nepHona (npHMepso Ao 4eBpanai Mapra 1918 r.).
AajbHeiimHii mar ana coxpaHeHHA CeKperHOCTH Mecr
lHcnJOKaLHH Kopa6jeii H nacreri BMO 6buI cAenIaH B COOTBeTCTBHH C
TenerpaMMOi HamanbHHKa r7 oT 2 Max 1916 r. 3a HOMepOM 4670.
HIIoTrBbIM y'ipemaweHruM nopTOBblX ropoAoB npeanaraniocb He
HanaaraTb KajieHgapHbie irreMneAs Ha norTBboie oTpaBjieHua c
6oeabIx cyaoB ~jora, HMeBmHe OTmHCKH cyAoBbiX nevaTeii [10].
3To yKa3aHHe Heo6XOIAHMO yHTbiBarb m 4)HaTenHcraM,
KOTOpbie o6blHHO CHHTaiOT OTCyTCTBHe KaneHgapHoro mTeMnej i
ornpanBeHHA, KaK HecOCTaTOK HnaJIaTeHCTHmecKoro MaTepHana.
Hy)HO 3HaTb nocJIe Maa 1916 r. Ha KoppecnoHCneHiMn c cyfao
BM( mUTeMneJLM oTnpa neHHu nonsJDHbi OTcyrcTBOBaTb.
Cnemyer rTMeTHTh, wro nocnegHee yKa3aHHe BbnojiHRJIOCb
nOBOJIbHO CTporo. C yKa3aHHoro cpoKa (Haarano Maa 1916 r.)
KaJieHAapHbie ImTeMnejn ornpaBjieHnH MecT crOHKH Kopa6neie (HnH
macrefi) HCse3Hn c KOppecnoH2eHJlHH.
rpaBaa. B TeKCTax (Ha nOrTOBblX OTKpblTKaX) ZIOCraTOHHO
m acro MOcKHO nposecrb 3TH Xe Ha3BaHHNI H naKe npeanojoraeMbie
-1l Mapinpyrb IlBH1CeHHR Kopa6jeTii f(ur. 1.8.] (3necb i nanee TeKCT Ha

juirnOCTpauHrrx Ha KoTopbli Heo6xoAHMO o6paTr-Tb BHmMaHie,
oTMeteH crpenKOfi H BbfmeneH noriepcHyr aaropaMH).
B PeBene Ha KoppecnoHneHuIMo 'IHOB BM4D npononmamn
craBuTb urreMnenb ornpaBneHrm. Ho rm coxpanHeHH ceKperHocrn
OH 6bm neperpaBHposaH c Hero 6bmo i Mrro Ha3BaHHr ropoAa. a
ocraaneHa TOJbKO laTa [ H'. 2 H 3]. T.o. urreMnenb npesparnnca B
OAHH H3 THnOB T.H. "HeMbIX" ImTeMnJeneii KOTopble IIHpOKO
HcnoJIb30BaJHCb B POCCHH B HataJIbHbii nepnoA BOHHbI C uenbio
coxpaHeHHa ceKpeTHOCTH Mecra ornpaBjeHHR KoppecnoHneHNHH.
Heo6xouHMo oTMerHTb. Hro TaKaa Mepa He Bcerna o6ecneqHBajia
/LocrHxeHHe ieJH. T.K. ecIH "HeMoni" IrreMnelb H He nO3BOJnu
onpeneamiT Mecro oTnpaBjieHHI KoppecnoHneHuHH, TO aacro a
TeKcre nIORTOBO KapTOiKH MO-cHO 6bIIo npofecTb Ha3BaHHe 3Toro
Mecra (cMoTpn TeKr "HpHBer H3 PeBena" Ha Qur. 2. HnH
""IpolanlbHblI npHBeT 1H3 P." Ha DHr. 3).

06umHe IaHHble o BOeHHOi UeH3ype H npDHrras B TraTbe
Ao Ha'ana I MHpOBOH BOHHbl B POCCHH yAe cyuectBoBana
ueH3ypa npHcbijaeMOH H3-3a rpaHHuhb neIaTHOH KoppecnoHneHLInH.
HaH6onee paHHHHii H3BecTHbli TaKoi IeH3ypHbIi mUTeMnenb
OTHOCrHTcS K 1876 roay. KpoMe Toro. cymecrBOBana H ueH3ypa
BoeHHaR IeH3ypa noHTOBOHi KoppecnoHaeHaWH
ocyluecrTBJa acb TOJIbKO B nepHox pyCCKO-alnOHCKOfi BOfHHbI 1904-05
r.r. B orpaHHmeHHOM o6beMe. TaKHe mTeMneJnr BCTpeHaOTrca
AocraTOHHO pelKO.
Y)e Ha cjeaeIyIonix aeHb nocne o6anBieHHS repMaHHeri
BOifHbl POCCHI HMeHHbIM (HMnepaTopCKHM) YKa30M OT 20 momJ
1914 r. 6buio BBeaeHO B aneHCBTHe "BpeMeHHoe ronoKerHHe o
BOeHHOHi ueH3ype" (a aanbHeuHIeM TeKre "noJoaceHHe") [11].
"HonojoeHHe" npeAycMaTpHBajio:
CT. 1. BOeHHaA ueH3ypa ecrb Mepa HCKJnoqHTejibHaA H HMeer
Ha3HaqeHe He HeAOlycKaTb ... BO BpeWM BOHHbl ornamueHHl H
pacnpocrpaHeHHr nyreM noqroBO-TenerpabHbIx cHomueHHH, ...
cBeAeHHii, Moryunx noBpearHTb BOeHHbiM nHTepecaM rocyAaprcTa.
CT. 6.. BoeHHaA ueH3ypa ycraHaBjHBaeTrc B nOJIHOM o6biMe
nHJH sacrsw[Ha. BoeHHaR ueH3ypa B nonHOM oa6eMe 3aKnnoHaerca ...
B npocMorpe KaK BHyrpeHHHX, TaK H MeZayHapOAfHbIX nOrTOBbIX
ornpaBneHHni H TenerpaMM. 4acrHiHaa BoeHHaR ueH3ypa
3aKj oHaercA B npocMoTpe Mexm~yHapoHblX noItTOBblx ornpaBneHHi
H TenerpaMM...
CT. 7. BOeHHa uerIH3ypa B nonHOM o6beMe Mo)er 6brrb
BBeenHa JIHmb Ha TeaTpe BOeHHbIX ;1eH1CTBHH. B npoHnx MecrHOCTlx
MO)KeT 6blTb BBelena TonbKO qacrHnHas BoeHHaR qeH3ypa.
CT. 20. 06a3aHHnoCH BOeHHbIX LeH3opoB B03jaraloTca Ha ...
tHHOB MeCTHblX norTOBo-Tejerpa#Hbtx yHpeeHHnii...
CT. 50. HpOCMOTp no'roBbix oTnpaBjneHHi ... npoH3BOnaTrc

CT. 51. ... Ha o60J0'Kx BCKpuThIx npocrux HHCem B3aMeH
CocraBJeHHx amia ejenaecTcx oierrxa "BCxpbzrO BoeHHOl lieH3Ypoii" C
npnoxeeHueM HmeHHoAi ne9aTH BoeHHoro IeH3opa.

C momeHrra o61msneHHa BOiAHM xIopa6nn H macnr BMD
HaxOMIAHCb Ha Tearpe BoeCHHLX AeiicTBHfi. H B cooTBerTBHH Co
craTbxMH 6 H 7 "HojoKeHHSI" wA= KoppecnoHfeHuIHH qHOB BM(D
ycraiaaaiuianacb BoeHHar ietiypa B nojiHoM o61,Me, -ITO
npeAlCMaTHBBanO npIBepKY He TonbKo MexcuyHapoAHbDL HO H BCeX
BHYCPeHHHX nO4TOBbIX oTupaaneHfiHi. OnAHaKO. MOxiO yrBep2K2nam.
ITO BS CHJlY pa3nH'HbIX fpwH'HH ixeH3ypy npoxoAuua He BCA TaKaxl
KoppednoH.eHIIHS. TaY. B KonneKIHH OZHoro H3 aBropOB. nom-roBbIe
nemaTH, cocTaBs15IoT Bcero OKOJIO 14% OT o6umero KoJlweCTBa
noao6HbIx oTnpaBneHHii.
CornacHo cramhH 51 "fonowoeHHH" KoppeCnoHweHUiHA.
npoteuneuaAi aoeHHyio iLeH3ypy. Aonxcia 6buxa HMCmb LuTeMnenb C
TeKCTOM THIIa "BCKpbrrO BOeHHOAi UeH3ypOri" H HMeHHyiO remaTm
BoeHHoro xeH3opa. IlTeMnef b CBH.IS reibcTBoBan TonbKo 0 BCKpbrTHH
KoppecnoHfeHIUH.L a nnanb y;Xocronepaia npocmoTp ed
(KoppednoHneHLrnI) UCeH3opOM H 11BiUI1Cb pa3peiueHHeM aml
nepecbinKH anpecary.
Heo6xonHMo oTMCenTb, To npH npoH BeHBHH BOeHHOR
ueH3ypbI Tpe6oBaHIHe 0 Hano)KCeHHH HCeH3ypHoro urremnena H
B 60nblJnHHCTBe cnytmaeB nocne npoBe.IeHHiM BoeHHOr l eH33ypbI
Ha KOppecnoHIeHLuno craTBHncC TosJnKo ueH3ypHblii IrermneJib,
HoHopbdni naTx-HwcH OAIHOBpemeHHO BbpnonHeARe H 4YH~t1 IC
oMeOpbIorli ea1Cr eH3opaH T.OK. XBJIMJICH pa3pef eHOJ iem ;na nepecbHnHH1
Hcxo~A H3 3TOrO, B AanbHeiirlun TeKM (B cnyqa=x Korga ia
KoppecnoHfeHliHH HMeeTCi ToJbKO OAIHH LIH3ypHblii LUTemlnenb)
TaKxH UeH3YPHbie I1TeMnenR Ha3BaHbI LieH3YPHbIMH fe'qaTAMH, T.K.
TOJlbKO rneman ieH3opa 3uleIrcsi pa~peiueHaem anr nepecbuuIKH
Tyr BHiAHa aHanortHR C raweHnem noIToBbix ornpaCneHHA1
POCC14H B nepnbi e rO~b1 nocne noBiCneHHA MapoK. B 3ToT nep1Oi
map~a rac~nachb To'etbiM UwTeMneneM C HOMepOM.
COOTBeTCTDOBaBUIHM IyHKry ornpaineHRAi, a pxIoM aonojiHHTejibHo
cTaBHJlCS KanleilIapfHblI RTCMuCnenb 3wTOF oe nytrKTa. Ta~oe
nonTopeIHC 6bIJo lIeuenecoo6pa3ibiM. B AanbJeiierwme oT ItCFo
TonbKo n BIJIe HCKuio'mIInU ita KoppeCnrizteolrlUI
npoweluueii Doelollylo uCIi3ypy B IICKOTOIb1X 6CepcroIbIX macrx
UeII3ypllbIl WTChMnrICJb ItanpHMcp. "rlpoCMorpello ooeiiiioii UC113YPOii
KoMaitlbi Maiimtnfoii LHKOnbl IjrnhilcKoro xjiloTa" i IIMCtIIIyIO
nC'Iam UeI3MOpa B DIIfC GYKBLI "'D" (npCenoncomInenhiio, naI'ianwiasi
6yixua (jaMiinllnI uciuopa) [f)isr, 4.9.].
T.K. TITonoxeiiiio' 6bino nuecJ1uo c iwia'ana 1o1lh1bI, TO MO)KIIO
npChflOnlOWITb. ITO tna KoppecCiooIlcimitu uLtion MID C 3T0F0 )KC

BpemeHH H IIOrBHJIHCb OTrHCKHI IuH3YPHLIX neqa-reii. Ho nona aRwopwz
o6HapyXC=fH JIHIub ABa (!) no'IToBux oTnpaBneHHa 1914 ro=a C
TaxHMH ueHIypHb1MH ne'aTRMH. HaH6ojnee aHHCee TanipowiHo
Hox6paM 1914 r. [HoMep 4.16.], a B OHHcaHHH neqaTH HoMep 2.37
yKa3aH TOjibKo 1914 r., HO HeT MecRxu [12]. 3To MO)IHo O61mCHmrrb
He6ojihiHM KonJHecCTM KoppeCnoHneHtxHH, npomenmeAi no'ry B
1914 r.
B 1914-15 r.r. Ha KoppecnoHAeHIHH, oTnpaBneHHoii C
Kopa6neii macro cTaBHJIHCb ueHiypbime nemaTH mHna wflpoCMoTpeHo
Ha AHHeiAHOM Kopa6lie "Iorraawa" [4DHr. 1.1.]. 3TH ne'aTH
xapaKTepH3ybO-Cs HanH1IHM B TeKcre Hu3BaRHR KOpa6nAR. COBMeCTHO
C nO-rTOBbIM UrTCMneneM oTnpaBjieHHS TaKasi nemam i no3BonoJia
onpenxejiHTb MeCTO XIHCAOKauHH KOHKpeTHoIo KOpa6nA, 'ITO 6buIo
HeronycTHMo c ytItTOM BoeHHOrO BpeMeHH. roI3TOMy B HaIane 1916
r. Ha OCHOBaHHH yKa3aHHfl [9] H C uenbto nOBbneHHA cecKperHocrH
ynoMRHyTb1C LieH3ypHbie neqaTH C Ha3BaHHHIdH Kopa6.eii BMb 6b1UlH
3aMeHeHbI Ha nema1TH c TeKCTOM THIa "rlpOCMoTpeHO Ha Kopa6aie" [9].
OAIHaKO yKa3aHHbIHi TM ue eH3YPHOi neraTH He noJn"'HJ unapoxoe
pacnpocrpaHeHne H 6bux 3aMeHeH nemaTbio C TeKCTOM THla
'HpoCMo-rpeHO ZyAOBORi ueH3ypoir" [1)Hir. 2.3., 2.7. H Ip.].
OAHOBpeMeHHO 6blfIH 3aMeHeHbi H nemaTH C Ha3BaHHAlMH Kopa6.leii Ha
neICaTH c TeKCroTM THina "AeHICTBy1OuIHri 4)jor EiaarriHiCKoro MOp"
[(DHr. 4.]. B ganseuirnem nojry4HJH paCnpocapaHeHHe nefITH c
TeKCTOM THna "AeiiCTByIOUIHrii 4jiOT" (6e3 ynOMHHaHHJI E]aGrrmCKorO
Heo6xonHMo OTMeTHTI., -ITO uH3YPHaR neqaTm THna
TrpocMoTpeHo Kopa6ejbHOii tieH3ypoii" ynoTpe6mluacb Ha iiHeiHioM
KOpa6ne "llerponaBnonCx" [4DHr. 2.22] eu1d a HIoHC 1915 r., T.e. Ao
nptIHHrTr YnIOMAHyrbiX BbiUIC YKa3aHHAi [9].
Ha KoppecnoHZIHLXHH 'MHHOB BM1) KipoMe 1iH3ypHb]X
neaneri BCTpenaioTcx Tar-Ke H pyKOIIHCHbie noMeTKI IxeH3opoB.
ABTopbi oTMe'aloT Hx nOsIBJiCH~e no40TH OllHOpeMeHHO C
IueH3YPHbiMH ne'aTSMH, T.e. C AHBaPqI 1915 r. HaM H3ecCTHbi
ra~ajrirCKcoro 4jioTa. fo-BHIIIMOMy Bce OH BblnOJ]HeHbl oI HuepaMH
Ha Kopa6sjlx 1111 B 6eperoabux 'acmqx. 06LL4IH CMbICJI InoeroMc
CBOII4TCA K TOMY, 14TO KOppecnOHie~uHA OcranaCb HenpOnpeH0oii. B
HeK0TOphIX Cjiy'IaSx [(1)14. 3.8.] B TCeKcTC IOMeCTKH ZaKe HMeecTcx
yra3auiiie 'Hpowuy oeCiniIo ueielypy npocmo-rpe-b". 3Aecb cneayer
HoppecnomlejiuHu, n ItaIIcanitorl iia OQIIOM H3 nPH6anlTItiiCKHX AI3bIKOB
(OCrolICKuIii, naTFilWCKHA II zp.). OmIeniZIIIo, IrO ttx HIcsiianlIe (a
npH6anTliiCKHw ry6cpilnifl POCCHII 3CTJIHIIIH14, Kypji~ii;kii.
JInH(JlInmllllf) it nocnywlwo nppit'iioii IiaIccceinni 3T1X PYKOnHCIIbIX
flOMCTOK ita KOppecnoflICIIU.IIIO. gononJiniTeC Ioii npitmliiil Morno
6bITI. II TO, 'ITO IS IIa-'IaImbIbliR ncpnog uoirhibi iie iia DCCX KOpaGlax It a
TOII,KO 1915-iA roji.

BMecre c TeM, cyr ecrayer 3HasWrenmHoe xonuecTBO
KoppecnoHneHUHH oHHOB BM0, HanHcanHHOl Ha n3Tx xe a3bi ax
(npH6anmmicKcx), HO BOo6me He HMeolHx cneAoB ueH3ypbi.

HrpenacraBeHne MaTepnajia

KaK yia3aHO Bbllme, aBopbi npH HaIHCaHHH CTaTbH
npecneaoBanaH uenb AononHHTb MaTepHan paHee ony6HHKOBaHHblH B
pa6oTax A. Speeckaert [4, 5]. Io3TroMy OHH crpeMHunHCb coxpaHHTb
npHHumblrl B HHX nopxIOK H naTb aHanJOHqHble CBeAeHH 06o6
OnHCblBaeMbIX ueH3ypHblX neIaTax: TeKCr neqaTH; Ha3BaHHe Kopa6JGl
HnH 6eperoBofi qaCT BMD; KaneHuapHbifi urreMneb ornpaBneHMH;
KaneHaapHbi urreMnejb npH6brrH; nepHOA HcnoJIb30BaHHa; uBeT
UeH3ypHOH neHaTH; opHeHTHpoBORHaR peAKOCTh (no 5-6anbHoii
CHcreMe); HOMep Fig. (HinjocrpauHH).
LeeH3ypHbie nemaTH crpynnHpOBaHbM H npecraaBneHbl B 5-TH
cnejyiloruHX Ta6Hnuax:

Ta6nHua 1
IeH3ypHbIe neIaTH c Ha3BaHHaMH KOpa6neHi.

Ta6nHua 2
YHHirHUHpOBaHHbNe ueH3ypHble cyosBbie neqaTH H iTureMneJi.

Ta6nHua 3
PyKonHCHbie noMenKH ieH3opoB.

Ta6nuHa 4
UeH3ypHbie neqaTH 6eperoBblx qacrei BMb.

Ta6anHua 5
rHoToBaa KoppecnoHreHIMu MHHOB BM( c ueH3ypHbIMH

BHyrpT Ta6JIHn npHMeHeHa TpX3HaqHaa HyMepaual. HepBaa
UH4pa o6o3Haraer HOMep Ta6nujiH, cjnelyiouHe (oaHa unIH
ABe UHpbi) nopaIfKOBbIl HOMep onHCbiBaeMOi ne'aTH (HJIH
LmTeMnejm) BHyrpH Ta6ajHii. "3B 3AOq9KH" (*) B03ne HOMepoB
o3HaqalOT Haj4lHqe noacHeHHH K 3THM HOMepaM B
"nIpHMeqaHHax" (CM. Aanee).
B cjnyqaax, Korga H3BeCTHbl HeCKOJIbKO OTrHCKOB
osHOHi H TOj ace neqaTH (B T.H. H H3 jnrepaTypb), npBonlrrca
nepHon ee npHMeHeHHA (HaqajlbHaA H KOHeIHaiA AaTbi C
yKa3aHHeM MecRua H roAa). ECJIH B croIn6e 6 nepnon
npHMeeHeHH npecTaBJneH TOJIbKO OA HOii aaTOH, TO 3TO
roBopHT o TOM, 'ro 2anHHa~ neqaTr (urreMnenb) H3BecrHa B
enHHCTBeHHOM 3K3eMnsIpe.
KorAa nepHoA npHMeHeHHq nereaTH HeB03MOKHO
onpeAejHrrb no KanJeHaapHbIM IITreMneJM (HX Her HIHn OHH

HeiTrKHe), TO B Croni6e 6 yca3biBaerca, eCCH BO3MO2HO, lara
H3 TeKca Ha norTTOBOH KapTroKe.
B canyaax, Korna Ha norTOBOM oTrnpaanieHHH
OTCyTcTByeT KaneHAapHii uTrreMnejib npH6biTHr B croi6ue 5
yxasano Mecro Ha3HaqeHH.
B Ta6nJIHax (no BO3MOxCHOCTH) aBropbl crapanHCb
crpynnHpOBaTb onHcaHHA ueH3ypHbx nea~are (H urreMnejieg)
no OaHOTHnHblM TeKCTaM Ha HHX, a BHyrpH rpynn no a'raM.
B Ta6AHuy 3 BHeCeHbi nOMroBbie OTnpaanejHH c
cjIyaHx, Koraa Ha oTnpaBneHHRX HeT apyrHx ueH3ypHban
B cjiyqaax, Kora Ha KoppecnoHaeHUHH MHHOB BMD
HMeIOTCH OHOBpeMeHHo ueH3ypHbIi urreMnenb H pyKOnHCHaa
nOMeTKa ueHo3pa, TaKHe BemH noMeCLeHbl B
cooTBercTBsyOIHe Ta6njiubI, a B Ta6aHue 3 06 3roM casanHo B
KorFna Ha HecKOJIbKHx nOrTOBbix ornpaBjeHHRX
HMeIOTcaI oAHHaKOBbie UeH3ypHbie TrreMnenJI o npocMorpe H
pa3Hbie pa3peumaiouHe noMeTKHH HnH noAnHCH ueH3OpoB, OHH
B Ta6njHuax onHCaHbi nog OaHHMH HoMepaMH, HO c ManMIbM
6yKBeHHbIMH HHAeKCaMH [4.7., 4.7.a. H T.A.].
B Ta6naHuy 4 BKJIOeHbi IleH3ypHbie nelaTH H
lrreMnen j, OTHocainHecA K 6eperoBbiM qacTaM BMQ).
B BHne HCKjoreHHS K 3TOI KaTeropHH TaioKe
oTHeceHbl H ueH3ypHbie neaaTH BOHHCKHX qacrei (HJH
yqpeKxeHHi) KpOHurraTra, XOTr B HeKOTOpbix cJywaax B
TeKcrax BOHHCKHX neqaTeI H HHer yKa3aHHii Ha
npHHaaneaKHOCTb K BM4. HanpHMep: "KpoHura frcIKH
KpenocTHOfi Focnurajb" H ap. TaKoe HCKJIOqeHHa caeJIaHO
noTOMy, Tro KpoHrTazra aBRXnnICa FJIaBHO 6a30o
BayrrmFCKoro 4)ira H npacKTraecKH Bce BOHHCKHe qacrH,
pacnojaraBsmHeca TaM, HMeJIH OTHOimeHHe K )JoTy. KpOMe
TOrO, TOJIbKO B MopCKOii KpenocrH KpoHurraAra 6bLuH
BBeaeHbl oco6bIe ycJIOBHs ueH3ypbI BOHHCKOi
KoppecnoHleHnHH, npn KOTOpbIX npaKrTHqecKH B KaMoiO
qacrTH. HanpHMep: H3BecrTHb neiaTH ueH3opoB 4-x pa3JiHnHbix
rocnHTainer, apTHnnepHi~CKOro nonKa, pa3nJHnHbnI BoeHHLIX
B ocranIbHblX MOPCKHX 6a3aX, HanpHMep,
FejIbCHHr4opc, CeBacronoJlb, PeBeJhb H ap., KoppecnoHfeHIUHH
pacnonaraBmwxca B HHX BOHHCKHX macTefi (B T.4. H
HeKOTOpbix qacTref BMQ) npoxomina BOeHHyIO ueH3ypy
o6bNIHbIM nOpxflKOM, T.e. qepes ropoICKHe nIyHKThb BOeHHOH
ReH3ypbI. TaKaa KoppecnoHneeHUHs HuHOB BMQ c
ieH3ypHbiMH neqaTAMH nOqrOBbIX KOHTOP Mecr ornpaaneHHaI
HAH (u) nojiyeHiH npeAcraaseHa B Ta6nHue 5.


Ilocne Kan=oii Ta6 nHLl nlaHiu "InpHMeqamu K Heni.
KaK yKce 6buno CKa3aHO, B HHX npHBeaeHbi noxCHeHHR K TCM
HOMepaM m1 Ta6nmu, Boae Koropb x croxr "3B3f lqKH" (*).
HyMepamiu B "HIpHMeaHummx" cooTrercr yer HyMepauHH B
cooTBeTcraylomHx Ta6nHuax. InoacHeHHa B "IIpHMeiamHHxx"
A aOT BO3MO)KHOCTh TO'HHee OniCaTb Kxa)AylO neqaTb,
cpaBHHTib x c npuHBeniz HbMH B alpyrnx HrTO'HHUaX H np.
3aTeM npeacraBneH cucoOK HcnoJIb3OBaHHOH
niiueparypbi, a naaee unmocrpaumn, KoropbIe npHBeaeHbl B
Macurra6e 1:1, KpoMe cnyiaeB oroBopeHHrIx orTejIbHo. In
HJunocrpaHHii, OTHOCsIIXCHI K TeKCTy craTbH, npHH3rra
o6b1iHaa nopRaKOBaa HyMepaLum. HnmocrpauHaM, B BHae
oTrnejbHbIx KoHHii eH3ypHbXx neqaTeii H urreMneneii,
npcaBoeHa HyMepa iua, coOTercTBytomuxa Ta6JInHHblM
HOMepaM c 6yKBOil "A".
HuocrpamuHAM, B BHae KonHfi no'raBbIx ornpaBneHHHi
npHCBoeHa HyMepauHa, cooTsercTByousas Ta6JIHIHbIM



BSN Black Sea Navy

V violet
R red
B blue
PB pale blue

1. Dr. A.H.WORTMAN. Russian Censor Covers of 1914-1919. The Philatelist,
2. CASEY R., EVANS B. Censor and control marks of wartime Petrograd. BJRP,
1968, No. 42, p. 4-16.
3. SKIPTON D., MICHALOVE P. Postal Censorship in Imperial Russia, 2 vols.

(Urbana, Illinois, USA, John Otten, 1987); vol. II, p. 464-465.
4. SPEECKAERT A. Russian postal censorship 1914-1918. (Koninklijke
Postzegel- vereiniging van het Land van Waas). St. Niklaas (Belgium), 1990.
5. SPEECKAERT A. Russian postal censorship 1914-1918. Supplement. 1997.
6. FlowTroBo-TenerpaHbrii amypHaji, oTaej oHIUHajibHbili, 1914, N2 34.
7. JIeHHHrpaacKHi rocynapcTBeHHbMli HCTopHecKHxu apXHB (JIFHA), 4ooHn 1543,
onrHc 9, aeno 49, JnCT 100.
8. JirHA, P4. 1543, on. 9, A. 49, n. 146.
9.; IorrOBo-Teierpa4Hbhui aypHaj, oTren o4HUHajibHrnfi, 1916, XN 27, cTp. 568.
1.OJrIHA, 4. 1543, on. 9, a. 69, n. 77.
11 .noFrHTOB-Teaerpa)Hbli mypHajn, oTaej O(4HUHajHIIHbIlt, 1914, 2 31, cTp.
12.CHERRYSTONE. Public Stamp Auction. New York, September 15-16, 1999. Lot
No. 2593.
13.KAJIMbIKOB B. (KALMYKOV V.). -ren3ypa Fepnott MHponoAi. (>
(MocKBa), 1993, XL, 3, CTp. 46-47.
14.KAHRS H., HURT V., OJASTE E. Russian Censorship in Estonia in the WWI.
"Ecsti Filatelist", 1979, No. 24-25, p. 120, No. QE-16.
15.JIFr A, (). 1432, on. 2, a. 113, n. 9.
16.105"h Corinphila Stamp Auction. Zurich. 16 September 1998. Lot No. 8448.

NAVY DURING WWI (1914-1918), by Vladimir Berdichevskii and Meer Kossoy.
The military censorship of mail during WWI is one of the most interesting aspects of Russian postal
history. That material has attracted the attention of philatelic investigators for a long time. For example, an
article by Dr. A.H. Wortman [Literature Reference 1 on p. 80] on that particular subject had already been
published by 1940. R. Casey and B. Evans [2] published in 1968 a fundamental investigation about the
military censorship in Petrograd. The work by D. Skipton and P. Michalove [3] resulted in a meaningful
contribution to the treatment of the same subject.

Antoine Speeckaert [4,5] brought about the greatest contribution to the investigation of the military
censorship of the mail in Russia during 1914-1918. In his two works, he incorporated the data of 26
literature sources published in the 1932-1990 period and supplemented their details and those received
from many collectors, together with an analysis of his collection. As a result, he published about 1800
censorship cachets and markings, utilized during that particular period. Of this number, approximately
1560 were applied in 196 various towns and inhabited points, as well as 240 in military units. These figures
only take into consideration the basic types without varieties, of which there were also a great number.

The analysis shows that, of the censorship cachets and markings described in the works of A. Speeckaert,
only 24 refer to the Russian Navy. In comparing the figures 1800 and 24, we may conclude that the
censorship cachets and markings of the Russian Navy are to be found very rarely on mail and such
philatelic material should be elevated to a high category of rarity.

The present article has been written with the aim of supplementing the information about censorship
cachets and markings on the mail of the sailors of the Russian Navy previously published in the works of
A. Speeckaert [4,5] and also in other sources of philatelic literature. Basically, the material laid out here in
this article is from the collections of us two as authors. However, we are also thankful to the well-known
philatelists I. Druzhinin of Russia and N. Krasheninnikova of Denmark, who kindly placed at our disposal
information on the subject from their collections.

The rules for sending the mail of the rank-and-file in the Russian Navy.
From the beginning of WWI and upon an order of the General Administration of Posts and Telegraphs
(FYrInT) dated 29 June 1914, ordinary letters weighing up to 30 grammes (28.35 grammes = 1 ounce)
and cards, addressed to the rank-and-file of the Active Army and also from them could be sent free of
charge [6].

Letters weighing more than 30 grammes, wrapper sending, postal money orders and parcels could be sent
to the Army only upon paying the general postal rates then in force. Postal sending, such as registered
mail, C.O.D., Acknowledgement of Receipt and telegraphic money orders were not accepted for dispatch to
the Army. All the mail of the Russian Navy rank-and-file was sent in accordance with the same rules. From
here onwards, the discussion will be about that latter mail.

As evidence of the right of free dispatch, the letters and cards had to bear a strike of the cachet of the ship
or of the naval or shore unit. However, the presence of a military cachet was not a sufficient condition for
forwarding without charge. It was also required in addition that letters and cards, bearing the strike of a
military cachet, could only be sent through specially appointed representatives, who personally handed over
the mail to the field post offices.

For sending deposited in a letter box, even with the presence on them of a strike of the cachet of a ship or
of an armed unit of the Russian Navy, it was also required to apply a marking inscribed "BbMHyTO H3'b
amInKa" ("taken out of a letter box") and then forward the item as an unpaid sending, charging the recipient

November 2000

postage due at double the deficiency in the postal rate.

It should be noted that, in practice, this requirement was not fulfilled quite strictly and the postage-due
marking was rarely placed on the mail bearing a strike of a military unit and taken out of a letter box. The
demand that military mail should be sent through specially appointed representatives may be assumed as
somewhat absurd, if we take into consideration that the officer class had been granted the right to deposit
their letters and cards independently in letter boxes, thus bypassing the appointed representatives.

During the period of WWI, the rules for sending the mail of the Russian Navy rank-and-file were
repeatedly defined more accurately and also changed. In August 1914, the General Administration of Posts
& Telegraphs issued a further order, in accordance with which ordinary letters weighing up to 30 grammes
and postcards with the address kHACTBayioiiu (IAJIOT'b" {"The Active Fleet") would not be liable for
payment [7].

A markedly more essential change in the rules for sending military mail was brought into being in
connection with a telegram No. 5271 of the Head of the General Administration of Posts & Telegraphs and
dated 2 October 1914. In accordance with that, it was not required to have a strike of the cachet of a
military unit or ship on the letters and cards of the Army rank-and-file (and thus also of the Navy rank-and-
file) when handing them over to the field post offices. The postmark of the field post office would be a
sufficient condition for sending such mail free of charge.

Letters and cards, which were not handed in at a field post office, had to bear a strike of a cachet of a
military unit or ship and such mail was not allowed to proceed free of charge without it. The postal rate had
to be charged on sending such mail [8].

It should be noted that, from the beginning of 1916, Field Post Office No. 158 was opened at Sevastopol',
which was the Main Base of the Black Sea Fleet. It was especially designated for handling the mail of the
rank-and-file of the Black Sea Fleet. That is why the postmark of this office is found on mail together with
strikes of cachets of ships or detachments of the Black Sea Fleet (see Fig. 1). We are able to note that the
postmarks of FPO No. 158 known to us have the letters "A" and "e" in the period from 27.3.16 to 17.9.17.

Successive changes in the rules for sending the mail of the Russian Navy rank-and-file were introduced at
the beginning of 1916 and intended to preserve secrecy. The presence on mail of strikes of cachets with the
names of ships or of naval units made it easy to determine their types and places of origin. The necessity
was therefore announced of the change from such cachets to those of the types inscribed
(Examined on the ship), the strikes of which also ensured the right of dispatch free of charge [9]. It should
be noted that the order to change the cachets was not fully carried out and, on the contrary, strikes of
cachets with the names of ships or of naval units are found on mail up to the end of the period under review
and specifically up to February-March 1918.

The furthest step taken to preserve the secrecy of the locations of ships and units of the Russian Navy was
;taken in connection with a telegram No. 4670 of the Head of the General Administration of Posts &
Telegraphs and dated 2 May 1916. The post offices in port cities were advised not to apply their datestamps
on postal sending from the battleships of the Fleet, which had strikes of ship cachets [10]. This instruction
should be borne in mind by philatelists, who generally regard the absence of a datestamp of dispatch as a
faulty philatelic item. It is necessary to know that, after May 1916, dispatch postmarks should be lacking on
the mail from ships of the Russian Navy. It should be noted that this last instruction was carried out quite
strictly. From a specific time (the beginning of May 1916), the dispatch datestamps of places where ships
were anchored or units located disappeared from mail.

November 2000

It is true that, in the messages on postcards, it is possible quite often to read the names of these localities
and even the surmised routes of ship movements (see Fig. 1.8). From here on, the message on the
illustrations, to which it is necessary to direct attention, will be noted with an arrow and made to stand out
by underlining by the present authors.

The postmark of dispatch continued to be applied in Revel' on the mail of the Russian Navy rank-and-file.
However, to preserve secrecy, the canceller was altered by excising the name of the city and thus leaving
only the date (see Figs. 2 and 3). In other words, the canceller was transformed into one of the types of the
so-called "mute" markings, which were widely utilized in Russia in the initial period of the war, so as to
preserve the secrecy of the dispatching point of mail. It should be borne in mind that such a measure did not
always ensure the desired result since, if the "mute" cancellation did not permit the determination of the
point of mail dispatch, it was often possible to read in the message of the postcard the name of such a
locality (see the inscription "lprHB-STb H3- PeBeJns" ["Greetings from Revel"] in Fig. 2, or
"IIpoluaJIbHb1 npHBsTB H3I3a P." ["Farewell Greeting from Riga] in Fig. 3).

General data about military censorship and the terminology adopted in the article.
Up to the beginning of WWI in Russia, censorship had already existed for printed matter sent from abroad.
The earliest known example of such a censorship marking goes back to 1876. Moreover, there also existed
censorship of the mail of people incarcerated in prisons..

The military censorship of mail was carried out to a limited extent only in the period of the Russo-Japanese
War of 1904-1905. Such markings are found quite rarely.

Already on the day after the declaration of war by Germany against Russia, a "Temporary Condition about
Military Censorship" (from now on referred to as "The Condition"; see [11]) was brought into being by an
Imperial Ukase of 20 July 1914. The "Condition" took into account the following articles:-

Art.1. Military censorship is an exclusive measure and has the purpose of not allowing....during wartime
the publication and diffusion by means of postal and telegraphic communications of information that could
damage the interests of the State.

Art. 6. The military censorship is set up to a full or partial extent. The military censorship at its full extent
is included.....in the examination both of internal and international postal sending and telegrams. The
partial military censorship is included in the examination of international postal sending and telegrams....

Art. 7. The military censorship at its full extent may be introduced even in the theatre of military activities.
In other localities, only partial military censorship may be introduced.

Art. 20. The obligations of military censors are to be assigned to....the personnel of local post and
telegraph offices...

Art. 50. The examination of postal sendings....is to be carried out exclusively in the premises of the Postal
and Telegraphic Administration.

Art. 51....On the envelopes of opened ordinary letters, instead of drawing up a statement, a notation is be
made, reading "BCKpbITO BoeHHOiH IeHa3ypol" ("opened by the military censorship") and including in the
cachet the name of the military censor.

From the moment of the declaration of war, the ships and units of the Russian Navy found themselves in
the theatre of military activities. And in accordance with Articles 6 & 7 of the "Condition" for the mail of
Russian Navy rank-and-file, military censorship to its full extent was set up so as to take in not only the

November 2000

verification of international postal sending, but also of all internal mail. However, it can be affirmed that
not all such mail went through the censorship for various reasons. Thus, it has been determined from the
collection of one of the authors that only about 14 % of the total amount of postal sending of the Russian
Navy rank-and-file bore censorship markings and cachets.

In accordance with Article 51 of the "Condition", the mail going through the military censorship had to
have a marking of the type reading "BcKpbITO BoeHHOii ILeH3ypoi" ("Opened by the military
censorship") and a cachet bearing the name of the military censor. The marking only testified that the mail
had been opened and the cachet confirmed its examination by the censor, thus constituting the permission
for forwarding the mail to the addressee.

It should be noted that, in passing through the military censorship, the requirement about applying the
censorship marking and the additional cachet with the name of the censor was practically not carried out. In
the majority of cases and after going through the military censorship, only the censorship marking was
placed on the mail, thus in fact fulfilling at the same time also the function of adding the name cachet of the
censor, i.e. permitting the dispatch of the mail. On that basis and in cases where only a censorship marking
is found on the mail, such censorship markings will henceforth be called censorship cachets, as only the
cachet of the censor constituted the permission for forwarding the mail.

There is an obvious analogy here with the postmarking of the postal sending of Russia in the first few
years after the appearance of postage stamps. In that period, the stamps were cancelled with a numeral &
dots postmark and the datestamp of the same place was applied in addition on the mail. Such repetition was
inexpedient. It turned out that the stamps began to be cancelled with a datestamp.

Only in the case of separating out a piece of mail from some shore units of the Kronshtadt Naval Fortress
which was going through the military censorship can one see for example a censorship marking reading
"IIpocMoTpt'HO BOeHHOi ueH3ypoHi KOMaHAbl MamiiHHOi HIKOJILI BanTificKaro JioTa"
("Examined by the military censorship of the Command of the- Machine School of the Baltic Fleet") and
the name cachet of the censor in the form of the capital letter "(" (= "F", being apparently the first letter of
the surname of the censor; see Fig. 4.9).

As the "Condition" was introduced at the beginning of the war, then it can be suggested that from this time
there also appeared strikes of the censorship cachets on the mail of the Russian Navy rank-and-file.
However, the authors have barely found only two (!) postal sending of 1914 with such censorship cachets.
The earliest one is dated from November 1918 [No. 4.16] and, in the description of cachet No. 2.37, only
the year 1914 is specified and not the month [12]. This may be explained by the small amount of mail
going through the post in 1914.

Censorship cachets of the type "IIpocMOTptHO Ha JHHeifHOM Kopa6jnr 'llonTaBa"' ("Examined on the
battleship of the line 'Poltava'" see Fig. 1.1) were often applied in 1914-1915 on the mail sent from ships.
Such cachets are characterized by the designation in the text of the name of the vessel. Together with the
postmark of dispatch, such a cachet permitted the determination of the location of a specific ship, which
was unacceptable in wartime circumstances. Therefore, on the basis of instructions [9] issued at the
beginning of 1916 and in order to strengthen secrecy, such censorship cachets with the names of ships in
the Russian Navy and with the text of the type "IIpocMOTptHO Ha Kopa6nit" ("Examined on the ship")
were replaced [9]. However, that particular type of censorship cachet did not receive wide distribution and
was replaced with a text reading "rIpocMOTrptH cyoBofi uIeH3ypoi" ("Examined by the ship
censorship" see Fig. 2.3, 2.7 etc.). At the same time, the cachets with the names of ships and the text
"JJ~ticTByioiui1f (JInT BaJITi~icKaro Mop" ("Active Fleet of the Baltic Sea") were also replaced (Fig.
4). Markings with the text "'fIbHCTBYIOIIHI J Q1JIOTb" ("The Active Fleet") were subsequently
distributed, i.e. without the Baltic Sea being designated.

November 2000

It should be borne in mind that the censorship marking of the type "FIpocMOTpBHO Kopa6ejibHOH
ieH3ypoif" ("Examined by the ship censorship") was already being utilized on the battleship of the line
"Petropavlovsk" (Fig. 2.22) in June 1915, i.e. before the Instructions which came into force as referred to
above [9]

Apart from the censorship cachets on the mail of the Russian Navy rank-and-file, manuscript notations of
the censors are also to be found. The present authors have noticed their appearance almost at the same time
as the censorship cachets, i.e. from January 1915. Manuscript notations are known to us only on mail of the
Baltic Fleet rank-and-file. They were apparently all made by officers on the ships or in shore units. The
general sense of the notations leads to the impression that the mail remained unverified. In some cases (see
Fig. 3.8), there is even a request in the message, saying "I ask the military censorship to examine". It
should be noted here that all the manuscript notations were placed on mail and written in one of the Baltic
languages (Estonian, Latvian, etc.). It is obvious that they were unaware of the regulations (namely, many
men serving in the Baltic Fleet were natives of the former Estlyand, Kurland & Liflyand Baltic provinces of
Russia) and that contributed to the reason for placing these notations on the mail. A further reason could
also have been that censorship cachets were not available on all ships and fleet units at the beginning of the
war. It is interesting to note that the period of applying manuscript notations took place only in 1915,
according to the material we have on hand. Moreover, there also exists an important quantity of mail of the
Russian Navy rank-and-file written in these Baltic languages, but not having any traces of censorship at all.

The presentation of the material.
As pointed out above, the present authors have followed the aim in writing this article of supplementing the
material previously published by A. Speeckaert [4,5]. They have therefore tried to preserve the same order
adopted by him and to give analogous data about the censorship cachets being described, namely: the text
of the cachet; the name of the ship or shore unit of the Russian Navy; the datestamp of dispatch; the
datestamp of arrival; the period of use; the colour of the censorship cachet; the scale of rarity in the five-
point system and the number of the figure or illustration. The censorship cachets have been grouped and
presented in the five tables that follow:-
Table 1:
Censorship cachets with the names of the ships.

Table 2:
The unified censorchip cachets and markings for ships.

Table 3:
Manuscript notations of the censors.

Table 4:
Censorship cachets of shore units of the Russian Navy.

Table 5:
Mail of the Russian Navy rank-and-file with censorship cachets of the post offices of the points of dispatch
and/or receipt.

A numeration in triple form has been adopted in the tables. The first figure designates the number of the
table and the following one or two figures constitute the consecutive number of the cachet or marking being
described in the tables. An asterisk (*) beside the numbers signifies the appearance of explanations for
these numbers in the "Notes" (see further on).

In the cases where several strikes are known of one or the other of the cachets, for example also in the
literature, the period of their application is also given (the initial and final dates, noting the month and year)

November 2000

If in column 6 the period of application is provided with only one date, then it means that the particular
cachet or marking is known only in a sole example.

When it is impossible to specify the period of application with datestamps, on account of their absence or
because they are illegible, then there is noted where possible in column 6 the date taken from the message
on the postcard. In cases where the datestamp of arrival is absent on the postal sending, the destination is
noted in column 5.

Where possible, the authors have tried to group in the tables the descriptions of the censorship cachets and
markings by the similarity of texts on them and by dates within the groups. Postal sending with manuscript
notations of the censors have been placed in Table 3, but only in the cases where there were no other
censorship cachets on the mail. In cases when there are both censorship markings and a handwritten
notation of the censor on the mail of the Russian Navy rank-and-file, such items have been placed in the
corresponding tables, but the situation for Table 3 will be discussed in the "Notes"

Where there are only censorship markings about examination and various permissive notes or signatures of
the censors on some postal sending, they are described in the Tables under single numbers and with letters
in lower case (4.7, 4.7a etc). Censor cachets and markings referring to the shore units of the Russian Navy
are included in Table 4.

Also, there are exceptions for the category regarding the censorship cachets of military units or offices at
Kronshtadt, although in several cases there are no indications in the inscriptions on the military cachets
about any links to the Russian Navy, e.g. the Kronshtadt Fortress Hospital and other institutions. Such an
exception has been made because Kronshtadt was the Main Base of the Baltic Fleet and practically all the
military units stationed there had a relationship with the Fleet. Moreover, only in the Naval Fortress were
special facilities made available for the censorship of military mail. Indeed, practically every military unit
had its own censor, i.e. the mail of the rank-and-file of each military unit was verified by the censor of that
same unit. For example, there are known cachets of the censors of four different hospitals, of an artillery
regiment, of various military schools, etc.

In the remaining naval bases, namely at Helsingfors, Sevastopol', Revel' etc., the mail in them from the
military units stationed there and including from several units of the Russian Navy all went through the
military censorship in the normal way, i.e. through the military censorship points in those cities. Such mail
from the Russian Navy rank-and-file with the censorship cachets of the post offices of dispatch and/or
receipt is featured in Table 5.

Special "Notes" are given after each Table. As has been said already, clarifications are set out in them
according to the numbering in the Tables, which also bear an asterisk (*). The enumeration in the "Notes"
corresponds to that in the Tables. The clarifications in the "Notes" make it possible to describe each cachet
more clearly and to compare them with those set out in other sources, etc.

Moreover, a listing is presented of the literature consulted, as well as illustrations in natural size, except in
cases stating otherwise. Normal consecutive numbering has been adopted for the illustrations referred to in
the text of the article. For illustrations of the individual censorship cachets and markings, an enumeration
has been adopted corresponding to the numbers in the Tables and with the letter "A". The enumeration
adopted for the illustrations of postal sending correspond with the numbers in the Tables.
Abbreviations: Colours:
BSN- Black Sea Navy S black
(to be concluded in "The Post-Rider" No. 48)

November 2000

by G.V. Andrieshin.
The present article has as its aim to pose some questions about the operations of this postal service. An
attempt will be made in this study to bring together the data previously published: the works of S.D.
Tchilinghirian and W.S.E. Stephen, ofN. Zervogiannis in the Greek magazine "Philoteleia" and materials
from the Michel and Yvert-et-Tellier catalogues, as well as information from F. G. Chuchin and the
magazine "Philately of the USSR".

Situated strategically in the Mediterranean Sea, the island of Crete with an area of 8300 sq. km. (3235 sq.
mi.) and with a population of around half a million, most of it of Greek origin, was seized in the 17 .
century and incorporated in the Ottoman Empire. The severe administration of the invaders led to repeated
revolts by the Cretans. An especially large uprising erupted in 1896, when the Turks declared a "holy war
against the unbelievers" which could have led to the total destruction of the native population of the island.
This situation led to intervention by the so-called "Great Powers": Great Britain, Austria-Hungary, France
and Russia, the naval forces of which were based in the Mediterranean Sea so as "to observe order". Forces
were landed from the ships of these powers in 1898, so as to stop the bloodshed on the island.

The island was divided into spheres of influence of the military administrations of the Powers and measures
were taken which, by 1899, permitted the declaration of autonomy on the island, with a Greek governor
and self-government, while still remaining in the framework of the Ottoman Empire. The Council of
Admirals of the Fleets, in deciding on the administrative spheres of influence, awarded to Russia the
district of Rethymnon, the governor of which was confirmed as the Russian Colonel Fedor Shostak. The
Russian landing-party from aboard the squadron cruiser "Sisoi Velikii", the flagship of the Russian
squadron under the flag of Rear-Admiral N. Skridlov, consisted of soldiers and officers of the Lyublyanskii
Regiment transferred from Odessa.

The first order of Colonel F. Shostak was issued on 23 October 1898 about the assumption of duties by the
Governor "of the prefecture of Rethymnon and its districts of Milopotamos, Amari and Hagios Vasilios"
and about the establishment of the corresponding administrative services. An instruction was given later on
about the abolition of Turkish services and the exclusion of the use of the Turkish language for official
purposes. The Greek language was declared official on the territory of the entire prefecture as of 5
November 1898. The issue of the Greek-language newspaper "Anastasis" ("Resurrection") was permitted
from 1 December 1898. In the middle of February 1899, Colonel Shostak turned to the Director of the
Austrian Posts on the island for help in organizing postal services in the Rethymnon region. Upon receipt
of the necessary recommendations, the Governor issued an order on 24 April 1899 about the organization
of a postal service in the prefecture of Rethymnon. The main post office was authorized to be in the town of
Rethymnon, together with the first postal stations in the villages of Amari, Hagios Galinis, Melampes, Pigi,
Roustika, Selia and Spili, according to Tchilinghirian. All these offices began working on 1 May 1899, in
fulfillment of an order of the Council of Admirals and of the Governor. Later on, the number of postal
stations rose to 14.

The general supervision of the internal postal service was assigned to Lieutenant Selikov. The decision of
the Prefecture of Rethymnon regarding the postal rates was published on 25 April 1899, as follows:-
Ordinary letters 2 metallika
Registered letters and telegrams 3 metallika
Despatch of 1 to 5 newspapers 1 metallikon
(the "metallikon" was a small Turkish coin with a value of 10 paras, i.e. % of a grosion, which was the
Greek word for the Turkish piastre or kurus).
The stamps were made available at the main post office in Rethymnon and from the mayors in the villages.
Jumping ahead, we may note that the operations of this postal service were terminated on 30 June 1899, in
accordance with order No. 166.

November 2000

The basic data for all four issues of the provisional stamps for the Russian Postal Service on the island of
Crete are laid out in Table No. 1. This table was set up on the basis of the details given in Orders Nos. 166
& 178 of the Council of Admirals. The first and second issues of stamps were prepared locally, with the aid
of metallic dies, engraved by a Greek artisan. Oily inks diluted with oil were used in printing these stamps,
which were all of the same size, imperforate on wove or laid papers and without gum. A control marking,
consisting of the cachet of the Russian Detachment, was placed in lilac or blue on each block of four (see
Fig. 1 in Table 1).
* Stamp No. 1 has inscriptions in French. All the others are in Greek.
* Stamps 2 & 4 have shade varieties, due to differences in the thickness of the inks and the passage of time.
* Stamp No. 1 in lilac: is it a proof?
* Stamps Nos. 5-10 and 11-22 were prepared by the lithographic process in Athens.
* In contrast to the third issue, the fourth has little stars in the oval band, is on smooth paper & perf. 11 V.
* A control mark in blue or lilac with the Imperial eagle within a circle of diameter 11.5 mm. was placed
on each stamp of the third and fourth issues utilized by the Postal Service.

The stamps of the third issue printed in black in the values of 1 & 2 metallika and 1 grosion are regarded by
some catalogues as proofs. However, they are absent from Orders Nos. 166 & 178. Such stamps are found
with the circular datestamp of Rethymnon and with the control mark, apparently produced "by favour".

The stamps of all the issues were intended for mail circulating only within the prefecture of Rethymnon.
Mail addressed beyond the borders of the prefecture or to abroad had to be handled by the French or
Austrian post offices on Crete, which had their own special postage stamps for that purpose.

There are variations in the sources consulted about the names of the first seven postal stations, but the total
of 14 final offices is not affected. They were as follows:-
Amari, Anogeia, Damasta, Garazo, Hagios Galinis, Kasteli, Margaritais, Melampes, Phodele, Pigi,
Rethymnon, Roustika, Selia and Spili.
The locations of the stations are shown in Table No. 2 on the map, together with the illustrations of the
postmarks according to N. Zervogiannis.

According to the instructions, these postmarks with the names of the stations had to be half on the stamp,
with the other half on the envelope of the mail. The postmark colours were normally black and blue, but
green is also encountered. As the postmarks did not have the dates of dispatch, they had to be written by
hand. The circular datestamp for Rethymnon was received at the same time as the stamps of the fourth

Up to recently, strikes of some of the single-line markings, including on covers, were very rare or even
unknown. However, information has appeared in the past few years in the auction catalogues about the sale
of such rarities. The searches by philatelic enthusiasts have been aided by the reliable sources for this
material, together with data about the sale of these items from the widow of the late Governor of the
prefecture of Rethymnon. The widow of Satov, the former commissariat officer of the Russian Detachment
and who was living in retirement in Odessa, also sold these provisional stamps.

Apparently, there were also other sources, such as the archives in Rethymnon and the numerous
participants in the activities carried out on the island of Crete, According to some sources, people were
standing in queues for the stamps on the day the postal stations opened. It is doubtful that the local
population was present and it is much more likely that they were philatelists and enterprising dealers.

The existence should be noted of large quantities of forged stamps and also of cancellations "by favour".
The forgeries can be distinguished from the originals by comparing the designs, colours and especially the
papers. The possibility of reprints and restrikes can be excluded since, in accordance with Orders Nos. 166

November 2000

& 178, not only were the remainders destroyed but also all the dies and the lithographic stones, from which
the third and fourth issues were printed.

Some questions and postulations.
1. Some sources call the operation of the Allied landing party on the island of Crete an occupation, but the
aim of the disembarkment was the expulsion of the actual occupiers and the cessation of genocide against
the Greek population. The Russian Military Administration carried out a series of charitable actions and,
for example, donated with these aims in view the entire net income from the postal activities, etc. To
commemorate the arrival of the Russian "occupiers", the town square in Rethymnon was named after
Admiral Skrydlov. I suggest that the measures taken on the island by the Allies were a peace-keeping act.
2. It would seem to me that the allocation of the postal stations in the prefecture of Rethymnon was brought
about not only for postal requirements, but also as a means of gathering information about the general
situation in the prefecture.. I would also note that there are still no credible data about the postal activities
of all these stations.
3. I regard as untenable the suggestions about the utilization of these provisional stamps for sending mail to
Greece and Russia. Such letters have not been found and, moreover, the provisional stamps were not
intended for despatching mail beyond the borders of the prefecture.
4. Some catalogues do not specify that these temporary stamps were provisionals, although they were
inscribed as such at that time.
5. The designation of the stamps of the lithographed issues printed in black as "proofs" has not been
confirmed by documentation, bearing in mind that proofs were as a rule printed in single copies at that
time. These proofs were printed in three values and in some quantity, being present in many collections.
6. As stated in Orders Nos. 166 & 178, more than 2000 copies of stamps of the second issue were still on
hand at the postal stations of the prefecture at the moment the lithographed stamps were being issued.
Taking into account the short term of operation of the Russian Postal Service, there was no postal
requirement for the new stamps.
7. I suggest that the last two issues of lithographed stamps were the result of the activities of several
philatelists and enterprising dealers, including also in that number persons in the Military Administration. It
is hard to believe that almost 60,000 copies of these stamps were used up for postal needs within one
month. I further suggest that, because remainders of stamps of the second issue were still on hand at the
postal stations of the prefecture, the lithographed stamps were not available there, but only at Rethymnon.
8. And finally, there is no philatelic value for the "varieties" offered by various auction houses as double
prints, shifts and similar hocus pocus that never went through the post.
Editorial Comment: To round off the discussion, a picture postcard "* 4
is shown of Colonel Shostak and examples of postmarks half on the
stamp and the rest on the envelope from Garazo and Roustika.

G;,,Z-o TO ere

,d "~~~~~~ g \ 4.. ;:. : ; .,-._-

K*Legr^rI34WuzrI'I:7';i^;g *I*Y'*M 1C n i f IIINJ %-UIUIII ii nOSLaK, %.oAmanaer 01
the Russian troops at Rethymnon.
November 2000

Examples of the stamps:

en !* -

". -
p i

ME rThirOth "li:

101 TAU

TABLE No. 1 (according to N. Zervogiannis).
Stamp Date of I Face Colour Quantities .
Number Issue Value Issued Sold
.First Issue





Second Issue I




I Third Issue
5-10 15 May im 960 5760 5760
1899 2m copies 5760 5760
1Gr ofeach 5760 -5760
17280 17280
SFourth Issue
11 -- 22 27 May lm rose 6393 6393







Overall total 96216 93408
Totals 1m 48352
2m 34367
1Gr 13497

Fig. 1.

"Proof" stamps.

T...... v_ v-----... ---



November 2000

- ---



,,;,: I~it~ra~i~l

Oi 1F "I

'' `LlrC: )
-' i!
i .
r 4;r'
5.s. ri
'iY~~LP~b;r ~r;r3~T;;
,r :g









* *
November 2000

.^iL ^ "" '
) A


Classic Swiss letters sent to the Russian Empire
by Erling Berger

A. Single letters
The tariff for letters between Switzerland and Russia via the German Postal Union 1853-
1866 can be understood by observing this figure where the unit is Silbergroschen (SGr.):

Switzerland Germany Russian Empire
Rayon 2 Rayon 1 Rayon 1 Rayon 2
1 SGr. 1 SGr. 3 SGr. 1 SGr. 2 SGr.
Table Ia

For a single letter: The postage would be in principle:
Maximum: 8 SGr. (1 + 1 + 3 + 1 + 2 SGr.)
Minimum: 5 SGr. (1 + 3 + 1 SGr.)

The Swiss "Rayon 1" consisted of all offices which had a distance less than 47 miles to the
German Border. The Russian "Rayon 1" were the Russian Border Offices versus Prussia.

The currency used in Switzerland (before 1852) and Southern Germany was the Kreuzer.
The SGr. had a real value of 31/2 Kreuzers (Kr.), but in Germany and Switzerland the
relation (for postal affairs) was 1 SGr. = 3 Kr. The Russians would of course maintain that
their share of 1 or 3 SGr. should have the full value. Table Ia now can be changed into: (no
fractions in the Kr. amounts)

Switzerland Germany Russian Empire
RayoRayo nayon 1 Rayon 1 Rayon 2
3 Kr. 3 Kr. 9 Kr. 4 Kr. 7 Kr.
Table Ib

Since 1.1.1852 the Swiss currency was in Rappen. One Kreuzer was very close to 31
Rappen (Rp). The Swiss postage "module" of 3 Kr. was turned into 10 Rp. Table Ib now
can be changed into the final version (Kreuzers were still used in international accountancy):

Switzerland Germany Russian Empire
Rayon 2 Rayon 1 Rayon 1 Rayon 2
10 Rp. 10 Rp. 30 Rp. 15 Rp. 25 Rp.
Table Ic

The letter in figure 1 Ber-St. Petersburg, 1864 is an example of a single letter travelling
across all rayons. According to the table Ic the total postage was 10+10+30+15+25 =90Rp.
Prepaid by 3x30 Rp. postage stamps.
PD : Paid to Destination
"fr" : Franco
"f3" : Russian share in SGr (See table Ia)
"9/11": German share "9" Kr. Russian share "11" Kr. (See table Ib)

November 2000

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Figure 2. St.Gallen-St.Petersburg, 1860. From Swiss Rayon 1 to Russian Rayon 2.
We add from table Ic : 10+30+15+25= 80 Rp. This is 10 Rp. cheaper than in figure 1.
Prepaid by two postage stamps of 40 Rp. each.
PD : Paid to Destination
"Wfr 3" : Weiterfranco 3 SGr. Russian share (See table Ia)
"frei" : Prepaid

B. Double letters.
It is typical for the Swiss tariffs that heavy letters do not pay postage that is exact multiples
of the postage for a single letter. The deviations may arise from:
* Rounding of amounts
* Difference in the weight units. German weight limit is 16.7 gram; in Switzerland 15
gram. I must admit that I do not have the full understanding.
November 2000

To analyse the postage for a double letter we change table Ib:

Now double letters
Switzerland Germany Russian Empire
Rayon 2 Rayon 1 Rayon 1 Rayon 2
6 Kr. 6 Kr. 18 Kr. 7 Kr. 14 Kr.
Table II a
If we want to see the result in Rappen:

Switzerland Germany Russian Empire
Rayon 2 Rayon 1 Rayon 1 Rayon 2
20 Rp. 20 Rp. 60 Rp. 25 Rp. 50 Rp.
Table II b

Fig. 3.

Figure 3. Ber-St.Petersburg, 1863. From Swiss Rayon 2 to Russian Rayon 2.
Double letter: 15-30 gram.
We add from table II b : 20+20+60+25+50= 175 Rp.
Prepaid by five postage stamps of 100, 40, 20, 10, 5 Rp.
PD : Paid to Destination
"f6" : Russian share in SGr (See table I a, but multiply by 2)
"18/21": German share "18" Kr. Russian share "21" Kr. (See table IIa)

The next (and last) example is a little tricky (Figure 4). The Swiss Tariffs concerning
Russia were published in 1853 and 1867. As from 1864 Prussia lowered the transit postage
from 3 to 2 SGr. beginning 1.1.1864 with the Netherlands, Oct.1st 1864 with Sweden and
1.1.1866 versus Russia. By that occasion the Russian share fell to 2 SGr.

November 2000

In Switzerland some time before 1867- they must have been informed that Germany had
lowered the transit postage. This must have been done through postal circulars. The
resulting Tariff was not published until Jan. 1867.

Fig. 4.

Figure 4. Bern-St.Petersburg, 1866. From Swiss Rayon 2 to Russian Rayon 2.
Prepaid by five postage stamps of 100, 30, 30, 10 Rp. total 170 Rp. 5c are missing. The
post clerk must have advised the sender to spare the "missing" 5 Rp. because he found the
letter to be of single weight (this I can say because the foreign shares "9/11" Kr. are written
as for a single letter).
PD : Paid to Destination
"2f" : Russian share 2 SGr. normally written as "f2"
"9/11": For a single letter:
German share "9" Kr. Corrected to "7" Kr., which is the new rate of 2 SGr.
Russian share "11" Kr. (See table I b)

Richard Schifer: "Der Briefpostverkehr Schweiz-Ausland 1459-1907' (in German) p.364

Editorial Comment: The four illustrations above are from the files of the editor and have been
collected over the past 50 years from auction catalogues, etc. Material changes hands and the
current owners are not known. It is sincerely hoped that, whoever they are, they will appreciate the
excellent analyses given by Mr. Berger of these wonderful examples of classic Swiss postal
history, addressed to the Russian Empire. We would be most happy to publish details of other
such outstanding items, pertaining to our fields of interest.

November 2000

By Dr. Arkadii M. Sargsyan.
Rouble surcharges on Imperial Arms.
Overprinted by metal single handstamps in black or violet ink. In circulation up to July 1921.

,,24aWmy Tn,, ,' j zi"+: 3

MafaTOBCKaR yn. Jl 7,
al.Xa A. MapTMpOCHL 0, .t 24

The earliest known postal use on entire of the Fourth Issue adhesives.
Five copies of the 3-kop. Imperf. Arms with the "3r" surcharge in black, to pay the 15r. k '
multiple rate for an ordinary newspaper wrapper going abroad from Erivan' 25.4.20 to Tiflis -' U

Ma aTOncKa yunI 5r
[IXaxy A. MapT'xpOCAHi '-.rb." II tIIUlh kI% h h p

Type 2

The 2- & 5-kop. Arms surcharged "5r" with the Type 3 handstamp on an ordinary The "Sr" handstamps 5 r
newspaper wrapper going abroad from Erivan' 29.7.20 to Tiflis at the IOr multiple rate. were in three tppe S

November 2000

The Fourth (April 1920) Issue of the Republic of Armenia.

0 )' PI. 0 Ib P "(

* *W~~,flfl~ kW'.tV*~


-1. '1w102 m14 iM

Yl) 0P
IU3 u.P, OpIi b'Ul"Jkwk Jflf 7- ft


I- [W Q M L L A-n -k -I -
UJLLPA J',wnii<. ,1,U. .PW/F itnLjlULff bu[iwn., ifpinplb, lp ./iniunf ,.IP.4nfJtL,, IUL.nt-
bh k'iZ"pi 4 wnaual2 4Ul ifpnrL' 5(1 r. ^4L^i<'il---25 p.

Rare use of the 10/7-kop. Arms, surcharged in black "5r" in Type 2, to make up the correct rate for
an ordinary intercity wrapper sent from Kars 25.6.20 (Armenian town at that time) to Erivan'.

The 10/7-kop. Arms in a block of four, the stamp at top right with a double "5r" surcharge in
Type 2 used on an ordinary newspaper wrapper from Erivan' 29.5.20 to Tiffis at the multiple rate.

November 2000

.' ~ .' -" .
"-"'- :- "






The Fourth (April 1920) Issue of the Republic of Armenia.

ni,-:,r ki'no

I~ I C.

A. f


Two copies of the 10/7-kop. "5r" black surcharge in Type 3, used on a registered insured local
letter and bearing on the back a manuscript note lZ uwlmn/fj pwub in Armenian for insured mail.
Sent and received within Aleksandropol' 26.7.20 and franked at the correct 10r. rate: ordinary
local letter = 2r. 50k. + insurance fee = 2r. 50k. + 5r. = registration fee. Only three covers from
the 1919-1923 period are known franked with Armenian stamps and including the insurance fee.

A block of ten of the 25-kop. perf. Arms with the black "5r" surcharge in Type 2 for the
required fee at the multiple rate on an ordinary newspaper wrapper going abroad from
Erivan' 10.7.20 to Tiflis.

:* *

November 2000

_ ,,


kl i~i A


,a* 'Yn- 7,


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