Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 Correspondence with Canada
 Zemstvo varieties
 Some letters from Russia to...
 Russian Bar Code registration...
 More about Port Arthur
 Postmarks of the Tuvan ASSR
 New philatelic literature
 Development of commercial air service...
 Official PS Formula Cards centrally...
 Russian Imperial Air Unit Free...
 German "Mit Luftpost befordert"...
 New data about the postage stamps...
 Postage stamps issued by the...
 Comment from G.G. Werbizky
 Posts of the Volga Germans
 Two further railway station...
 Towards the anniversary of the...
 Inquiry postcards
 Postmarks of the suburban trains...
 Posts in Magnolia
 Special warning about Zemstvo-to-Zemstvo...
 Back Cover

Group Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider
Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider. No. 55.
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076781/00058
 Material Information
Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider. No. 55.
Series Title: Yamshcik = Post-Rider
Physical Description: Serial
Language: Russian
Creator: Canadian Society of Russian Philately
Publisher: Canadian Society of Russian Philately
Place of Publication: Toronto
Publication Date: 2004
Subject: Philately
Stamp collections -- Russia   ( lcsh )
Spatial Coverage: Europe -- Russian Federation
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076781
Volume ID: VID00058
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front cover
    Table of Contents
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Correspondence with Canada
        Page 3
    Zemstvo varieties
        Page 4
    Some letters from Russia to Denmark
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
    Russian Bar Code registration labels
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
    More about Port Arthur
        Page 15
    Postmarks of the Tuvan ASSR
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
    New philatelic literature
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
    Development of commercial air service to/from Leningrad and vicinity in the 1930s
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
    Official PS Formula Cards centrally or locally issued
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
    Russian Imperial Air Unit Free Franks of World War I
        Page 42
        Page 43
    German "Mit Luftpost befordert" cachets applied on airmail from the USSR 1922-1941
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
    New data about the postage stamps of Russia
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
    Postage stamps issued by the Zemstvos
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
    Comment from G.G. Werbizky
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
    Posts of the Volga Germans
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
    Two further railway station postmarks
        Page 88
    Towards the anniversary of the Russian Academy of Sciences
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
    Inquiry postcards
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
    Postmarks of the suburban trains of St. Petersburg with the designation of their times of dispatch 1876-1900
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
    Posts in Magnolia
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
    Special warning about Zemstvo-to-Zemstvo covers
        Page 120
    Back Cover
        Back cover
Full Text



2 55
November 2004


Printed in Canada



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

'CSRP Web Site: http://www3.sympatico.ca/postrider/postrider/:
E-mail: postrider()sympatico.ca
2 Editorial: Nothing succeeds like success
2 An imperf. "B" label, black on blue paper
3 Correspondence with Canada: A postcard from Podoliya/Podillya province
3 Special Note: also at 54 & 120
4 Zemstvo varieties: Fifteenth Instalment
5 Some letters from Russia to Denmark
10 Russian Bar Code registration labels
15 More about Port Arthur
16 Postmarks of the Tuvan ASSR
21 New Philatelic Literature: also at 36 & 93

November 2004.

N.J.D. Ames
Andrew Cronin

G.G. Werbizky
Natalie Krasheninnikoff
Natalie Krasheninnikoff
Colonel Asdribal Prado

24 The Development of Commercial Air Service to/from Leningrad and vicinity in the 1930s Dr. G. Adolph Ackerman
32 Official PS Formula Cards centrally or locally issued Alexander Epstein
42 Russian Imperial Air Unit Free Franks of World War I: Additional examples Alexander Ep'tein
44 The German "Mit Luftpost befdrdert" cachets applied on airmail from the USSR 1922-1941 R. Taylor, Dr. G.A. Ackerman
Dr. Ivo Steijn & A. Cronin
55 New Data about the postage stamps of Russia L.G. Ratner
65 Postage Stamps of the Zemstvos Alex Artuchov
68 Comment from and also latest news about his state of health G.G. Werbizky
69 Siberian View Cards sent to Finland during the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 Andrew Cronin
71 The Posts of the Volga Germans (conclusion) M. Kosoy & V1. Berdichevskiy
88 Two further railway station postmarks Rabbi L.L. Tann
89 Towards the Anniversary of the Russian Academy of Sciences Gregory Epshtein
94 Enquiry postcards Meer Kosoy
100 Postmarks of the Suburban Trains of St. Petersburg with the designation of their times of despatch Dr. V.G. Levandovskiy

110 The Posts in Mongolia
115 Sharashkiniana (Mail from the "sharashkas")
120 Special Warning about Zemstvo-to-Zemstvo covers
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

O.P. Sel'nikov
Andrew Cronin

Copyright 2004. Copyright by The Canadian Society of Russian Philately. All rights reserved. All the contents of this issue are
copyright and permission must be obtained from the CSRP before reproducing.

The opinions expressed in the articles printed in this issue are those of the individual authors and are not necessarily those of The
Canadian Society of Russian Philately or of its Coordinators.

JT.1" Editorial

It seems evident that most editors of specialist journals have to beg their readers to send in articles for
publication. Your editor can think of at least two cases where such a society is facing extinction because of a lack of
contributions. The popularity of the Internet probably has something to do with it.
Anyway, we in the CSRP are most certainly not in that dire position. Quite the contrary, as we have a
backlog of comprehensive and scholarly studies waiting to be published. We are also most appreciative of the very
kind reviews of our work, which appear in the other journals devoted to the philately and postal history of our areas
and we apologise that we cannot return the favour, as we have had to eliminate some of our features, including the
Review of Literature and we have had to reduce our font sizes to 10- and 11-point because of space limitations.
Members will have noticed that we do not waste space in "The Post-Rider"; every nook and cranny counts. Also, we
have consistently expanded our journal to 120 pages per issue. That is the maximum limit that our financial resources
will permit and any further increase will depend on whether we can enrol more members (hint, hint!).
There are several reasons for our pre-eminent position. Ours is the only journal, which includes substantial
Russian text and it circulates extensively in the mother country. We also provide competent and accurate translations
from a variety of languages, we do not have a political axe to grind and we strive to be as objective as possible. In
short, ours is a journal of record. We publish the articles we receive as best we can in the order of arrival and try to
combine that policy with balancing the contents of each journal; not an easy task.
Many thanks should go first and foremost to our contributors, as our high international reputation is due to
them. Any suggestions regarding the betterment of our Canadian Society of Russian Philately would be most
welcome and we definitely need the services of a competent Web Master. Let us hear from you!

Y r.


by NJD Ames. J9 '

Further to this type |? ,- ,: I.. .'
of "Important" Mail : ,f -
as treated in No. 54,
pp. 67-87, we see
here in actual size a ... "
total 75-k. card rate
from Leningrad-8
"B" No. 187, 11.7.32 A. ,
to Moscow 12.7.32. .

November 2004

"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 clear Xerox copy of the
item to the Editor, along with some explanatory text.

TO MONTREAL, CANADA by Andrew Cronin.

77 -- -A. --n J-
S Sent by surface mail
from the village of
-- Staraya Sinyava 7/20
_.. .. November 1904, this
.. postcard took 15
days to reach
Montr6al. The
S. . address and message
by D. Russell are
entirely in English,
except for two words
in French at top back
S"Russie Mridionale
S= South Russia. As
can be seen, he sent
Xmas and New
...Year's greetings, but
gave no indication as
to what he was doing
;Z}; .-" : in such a remote
area, where the only
f; industry even in
Soviet times was a
sugar refinery. One
5 .may also speculate
that he did not speak
Russian, as his
address and that of
the recipient do not
contain directions in
-, _that language.

"e' had postal services
since October 1876.

SPECIAL NOTE: New Russian Web Site
Beslan Atrocity www.beslan.ru In English and Russian

November 2004 3

by G.G. Werbizky.
This is a continuation of Zemstvo varieties, started in 'The Post-Roder" No. 40. Where a given Zemstvo is
omitted, it means that I do not have varieties from that zemstvo. It does not necessarily mean that varieties do not
exist.. It is hoped that readers will send in their discoveries from that and other Zemstvos. What is shown here is what
I have in my collection.

Luga, St. Petersbur! province.

... '...*

I .:

Chuchin No. 9. Block of four above at left: note the white dots on the lower right side and near the star at bottom on stamp No. 4.
The dot on stamp No. 1 is spurious, but that on stamp No, 4 is a constant variety. Of greater interest is the double embossing of
the crown and the coat of arms, as indicated by the arrow in the illustration at centre. That is a rare error, which occurs on stamp
No. 4. Other stamps with the same dot do not have double embossing.
Chuchin No. 13. The illustration at top right shows it in a vertical pair and imperforate between horizontally.

HOTh9l Il0VTbt

I[09Tbl IOM TbA
Y163HA. aYEsAA.

Chuchin No. 17a. Block of four,
imperforate horizontally and vertically.

Chuchin No. 17c: Pair
Imperforate vertically.

November 2004


E hHATP K0n.


LHA TPH K 1f. i

Chuchin No. 17b: Pair
imperf. horizontally.

)716 3kA A.
---- --- -*-*-*--*-*-*-
*% HfcHA TPH Kon.^ |

Chuchin No. 17d: Pair
partially perforated

in No. 8: ChuchinNo. 9a Horizontal o9Aditional B of
cal pair pair imperforate-between ChWil.0 96: inal Chuchi 14b Block of four
fa. between., pair impe e. horizontal perforation at top. imperforate horizontally.
,* *

Natalie Krasheninnikoff
In my collection of classic Russia I have some letters sent to Denmark prior to the rates of
the International Postal Union.
The first one is a business letter from Riga to Copenhagen sent on 4 September 1798 via
Memel. and prepaid to Hamburg with 40 kop. silver + border charge of 1 V2 k. silver written
412 after list No 174. The Danish charge from the Danish post office in Hamburg was 12
Liabeck killing (Lsk). A single weight letter had to be paid with 6 Lsk., a letterheavier than
12 g or % Danish lot (= 15,625 g) was charged double: 2 x 6-12 Lsk. to be paid by the
addressee (written after list No 364 and also in the upper right corer). The RIGA postmark
was only in use that year.


Norway. I have included it here, as it was sent the whole way through Denmark to Norway:

Laurvig to Christianssand 10 sk.

Christianssaned to Mandal 4 sk.
e next assent by ship on 1 ov September 18004 9 from St ersurgg.

Norway. I have included it here, as it was sent the whole way through Denmark to Norway:
In Hamburg it was postmarked and re-addressed to Mandal:
Transit through Denmark 38 Rigsbankskilling silver = 29 killing species (Norwegian)
Sea charge to Laurvig (Norway) 16 sk.
Laurvig to Christianssand. 10 sk.
Christianssand to Mandal 4 sk.
59 sk. species rounded up to 60 sk.
species, as odd numbers were not used.
Quite a journey and rather expensive for the addressee.
November 2004

The next two letters are written by the same sender to the same addressee with an interval
of 5 years. Both are sent as Porto letters. The first one was posted on 26. 12. 1862 at station
No 1 after St. Petersburg on the Petersburg/Warsaw railway line and sent to Baekkeskov per
Roennede in Denmark.
Postage: Russia 3 Sgr. + Prussia 3 Sgr. = 6 Sgr. = 25 2/3 killing roundedup to 26 skil.
Denmark 9 skil.
To be paid by the addressee 35 skil.
* -- -- --- - -- .--



~~~, zr..~ L

; ) 67~3L-)t~-lL-L ~Z

* r""


November 2004

; -"A


I, c-.,-~--- ,

-- I,
I (



The second Porto letter was posted at Warsaw railway station in St. Petersburg on 28. 01.
Postage for Russia and Prussia should again be 6 Sgr for an unpaid letter, but Denmark
had negotiated an agreement with Prussia which reduced the Prussian share to 2 2/3 Sgr.,
totally 5 2/3 Sgr. = 24,18 killing
Danish share 6 killing
30,18 killing rounded down to 30 killing to be paid by the addressee.

The sender Carl Rudolf Emil de Vind had been appointed secretary of the Danish legation
in St. Petersburg in 1861.
In 1865 the Danish princess Dagmar got engaged toTsezarevich Alexander. Their wedding
took place in 1866. De Vind took active part in the wedding arrangements. In 1868 he was
appointed envoy extraordinary and authorized by the Danish legation and stayed in this
position until 1884. He was a bachelor and the letters were to his mother who lived on the
family estate Baekkeskov some 60 km south of Copenhagen.

The next item is an offer of philatelic material from a dealer in Moscow sent as printed
mater to a stamp shop in Copenhagen on 11. 08. 1872 and contains a price-list of Russian and
Finnish philatelic material per dozen and also per 100 pieces.
Postage: Russia + Germany 2 kop.
Denmark 1 kop.
Totally 3 kop.

November 2004


Sias a i*

*. CT ca io o -~ .0210T ]
o a 0

0o: 'e 0
* l -- ;| a -V a 1 :^ g o

T D c a> "" M rS fl f

g *| -a a.s& W

co t- ^^ i- c '
0 0 010~0
s-~a 01Wa ~

l ...1 0 g
( a a a m l Q '-
0 g g a t s0 p<
.5 1 o 1 *0 00

gS *z^ S

goo 10 03 <

a aa 1-4

a~c I- ~ n ~ c I i'
s~~~ g a i-l:'l K1i i i 'i 0
i iJ~ ~ i of^ss,~-.^^g o
I; g' f-~ 0fA i i a' LY^ '
"" "N srifk. L'. >*' ^'l
0101 010101{tkt L I I00.LIL

1 ~ U '.~- E$. ; :'& 'p" g|
- 0-.
a 0 o5aatt

SS .. 0 *

Q a a r a a

10SS *O **cS 10 .Zlo
g g s
2 ic
GL '**.

hjl m 5

r _: _d ..S .'^


If only this material could be available at the mentioned prices today!

November 2004



Irarr I

The Postal treaty of 1865 between Russia and Prussia opened the possibility to send mail
in closed mail bags through Prussia which made postage cheaper. Russia negotiated postal
treaties with a number of countries in Western Europe. The Russo-Danish treaty came into
force on 6. 08. 1872 and reduced the rate of a stamped letter up to 15 g to 10 kop.

The last two letters are again from the same sender to the same addressee. The first one
was posted in St. Petersburg on 15. 05. 1875 and went in a closed mail bag through Germany
to the sea-fort Trekroner outside Copenhagen and was correctly franked with 10 kop.

The second letter also to Fort Trekroner was a double weight letter (2 in blue crayon) and
had to be sent the ordinary way. It was posted in. Warsaw and further postmarked in TPO
27/28 (Warsaw/Alexandrov) on 27. 05. 1875.
Postage: Russia + Germany 20 kop. (Postal treaty in force from 1/13 July 1972)
Denmark 10 kop.
Totally 30 kop.

November 2004

Fort Trekroner had been built between 1713 and 1860, but was demolished in 1922.

Erling Berger has kindly assisted me with some of the Danish postal rates.


Natalie Krasheninnikoff

In No 44 of RUSLANDSSAMLEREN, the Russian/Danish journal of Russian philately
I wrote a small article on registration labels with bar codes used in The Russian Federation. At
that time I had only a few of them. Now I have studied bar code labels from 239 different
localities spread over 77 administrative areas.

Bar codes were invented by an American, N. J. Woodland, who was granted a patent in
1949. Bar codes were primary developed to mark articles and goods, but their importance
reaches far beyond the cash registers in supermarkets, as the system contains innumerable
possibilities to accumulate data.

A bar code is a binary technology with dark bars and light spaces between and with a
number of digits in a numerical system, of which the bar code is the optically readable
expression. The straight bars vary from thin to fat. To decipher a bar code is a task for a
scanner which then transmits the information hidden in the digits to a data bank for further

In recent years Post Offices in a number of countries have become aware of the
possibilities in bar code technology as a reliable and quick way of data processing.

The Postal Service in Russia has also chosen .the bar code technologyprimarily as
registration labels. They were introduced in September 1999. On top of the bars is written:
IIOHTA POCCHH (Post Office of Russia) and below there is a number of digits divided into
The earliest two bar codes from Russia which I have are: 1). From Saratov used 1.05.01
(fig. 1) and 2). from Moscow used 14.06.01 (fig. 2).

1111 00111 III 11II11 11111 111
410000 00226 1


107553 00182l ll lllllIIll1

Fig. 1 Fig. 2

Below the bars these two labels had 12 digits divided into three blocks. The first two
figures of the first block constituted the number attributed to the region, the nextblock-was
the registration number and the last bldck consisting of only one figure was a check figure.
This system with 12 digits divided into three blocks might be called forerunners, as it was
soon abandoned for a system consisting of 14 digits divided into four blocks, which increased
the possibility to incorporate more data. The earliest 4-block bar code in my collection was.
used on 23.11.01 in Preobrazhenie in Primorsk territory (fig. 3). From then on all bar codes
have 14 digits divided into 4 blocks. The first two figures of the first block again constitute
the number of the region, the third block is the registration number proper, and the last block
is a check figure. nOTA kc 1

692998 21 00246
Fig. 3
November 2004

The region numbering system starts in Moscow with number 10. Moscow and Moscow
region have been allocated numbers 10-14; number 15 stands for Ivanovo region etc until
number 69 allocated to The Far East. Two or even three of the more sparsely populated areas
are sharing the same number, while some numbers such as 25-29 and 50-59 seem to be kept
in reserve. The autonomous districts (ABTOHOMHIaie oxpyra) share the number of the territory,
in which they are situated.

The minor differences between the bar code labels make them interesting for the
collectors. They occur because labels are manufactured locally. These differences do not
affect scanner readings. Ever since registration labels have been introduced at the end.of
1890-ies, they have been manufactured locally, but according to a prescribed norm resultng
in minor differences which always have appealed to collectors, and this tradition is carried'on.

The same kind of bar code labels are used either the registration letters are sent abroad
or used inside the country. The letter "R" for registration which previously was used on mail
going abroad, seems to be abandoned altogether. Its Russian counterpart the letter "3"
(3axas3oe) intended for domestic mail is now used for international mail as well, if it is used
at all. Out of the mentioned 90 towns only 7 are using a "3" in front of the bar code. In figure
4 is shown a bar code label from a registered letter sent on 5.11.03 from Moscow to
Copenhagen. The ring around the registration number has been applied by arrival in Denmark.


No 1t81753 47 00380 3
380 ./

Fig. 4

Six of the towns that use "3" are shown in fig. 5-10. Some of them also write the name
of the town. A number of towns print the registration number in bold digits or repeat it once


N- 103104 37 00243 8

Moscow: 5.01.03
Fig. 5

3 rIIll~llllB i rllllllf ill
N2 125438 37 00870 2

Khimki, Moscow reg.: 5.10.03
Fig. 6

_^^^^_______________________ flona POC
3 1Hlll MlA l II i
Ne ,196653 21 00433 5 e
433 KonnnHo 3 Ne 46290 enropoA 014

Kolpino, Leningrad reg.:
Fig. 8

'-"*-- -
Fig. 9

S lii1 l il IIlillllll I
N 194017 39 00125 8
125 CaHKT-neTep6ypr 17

St. Petersburg: 27.06.03
Fig. 7

No 664003 44 61684 8
Fig. 10

In Tatarstan below the bar code is added a framed rectangle with a "3", the digits of the
bar code and the name of the town and underneath it the date and hour (fig. 11 and 12).

November 2004


1 111111111 11 111i 111111il 111i flO11TA POCCf
420039 35 02660 8 liIlll il 1 1111 .

423450 29 29615 4.
-- ---- 420---5 0263 1 i N 42-150.(04 29615 B
I 42003 ,(-02660 i A BTbBBC PY

0 .' U2003 14:47 05.01.2003 16:03:57

Kazan' Almetievsk
Fig. 11 Fig. 12

In Kemerovo region is printed a whole "cash bill" in violet colour with date and hour,
registration number, weight and the name of the postal clerk (fig. 13). In Prokopyevsk,also in
Kemerovo region,bar code labels are used together with the lower part of the "cash bills" and
with the Russian coat of arms in front of the bars (fig. 14).
KKM"fOH-3MiHHH IA 4200000157 653004 38 03008 0
650000 Kacca N0040017

"':- ,;f?
###904 6,.,8 e,5
05,es03 11 3 6550000- *-' "
*3aKa3Hoe ntCbMO 00055
Macca ;.0.020
OnepaTOP n a IRMHa 1524
'd ;K- ... E. ...;3HOI I ItE-A #030

Kemerovo Prokopyevsk
Fig. 13 Fig. 14

Some bar code labels have undergone changes. The bar code label from Moscow shown
in fig. 2 had no "3", while all later Moscow labels have a "3". In fig. 15 and 16 are shown two
bar code labels from Novosibirsk both of them used in post office 90, the first one sent
10.11.02 has the registration number in ordinary types and a small "3", while the other one
sent 17.11.03 has the registration number in bold types repeated once more and a big fat "3".
S3 11111111 li lI II II I 13 3I l9 5 I 0 11 11111I AIIII 2 I
630090 31 04175 3 N 630090 45 04962 2
04962 Hooc u6MpCK 90
Novosibirsk: 10.11.02 Novosibirsk: 17.11.03
Fig. 15 Fig. 16

November 2004

- IIIll III iii 111111 liii III ii Ii ll 111


Sometimes when bar code labels used in the same town differ from each other, it is
difficult to make out whether it is because they have undergone changes or whether each post
office orders their labels separately. In fig. 17 and 18 are shown two bar code labels from
Volzhski in Volgograd region used within a range of only one day:


07689 404102 29 07689 8

Volzhski: 8.01.03
Fig. 17


404133 27 01266 9
Volzhski: 9.01.03
Fig. 18

In fig. 19-23 are illustrated variations in bar sizes:

*IO'4TA ?OCM.I4.
|1111111111 1111111n1iIIf I1 1111111
i40100 42 05748 4

Ramenskoe, Moscow
reg.: 20.06.01
Fig. 19

I 111111H 1 11 11111111111 I 11
216400 32 00114 4 II
Desnegorsk, Smolensk
reg.: 8/01/03
Fig. 20

426070 42 09722 5

Udmurtiya republic.
Fig. 21


1111 ilt l 111 i ll i I lii 1111111111111l!
369 11-4 -24 C04061 S

Udarny, Karachaevo-Cherkessiya
Fig. 22


1II I I 111 IIi
462635 42 02065 9

Gaj, Orenburg reg.
Fig. 23

Bar codes labels are also used on insured mail, but without the "3". In fig 24 is shown
an insured printed matter with the value of 600 rbl. sent 18.09.02 from St. Petersburg to
Moscow; another printed matter with the value of 1 rbl sent locally in Moscow has a detailed
information about weight and costs (fig. 25).

1 i 1 8 I 14EHHAR B AH EPOj"b


H/nn: WECTbCOT PYSBlEI' 0 ohee
S. -(py6ni nponm

Fig. 24

November 2004


111I 111aHgepoJ1 C 0o6b Bl HeHHo A LkHHOCTbO or j I
111537 47 17020 1 (BE3 HAJ1OKEHHOrO nJ1ATEKA)
CyMMa o6 baneHHOi .leHHOCTM: 1,00 py6. 24 HOA
OT Koro: OpicwKc O,4MH py6nb 00 KOneeK
OTKyWa: MocKaa a/a opMCIMC, 105275
Macca: 0,038 Kr. KoMy: HHKaHoposa M A *K* C\
CyMMa onnaTbl: 12,55 3a Maccy Kyga: yn. 3eMnjIHoi Ban, A.46, KB. 45, r. Mocisa, 105064 0
0,03 3a qBeHHCTbi
HToro: 12,58 pyS.
peKnlaMHa npoAyKiI4 H (noTasuo eAc)


Post offices in many towns examined combine bar code labels with the "old' type of
registration labels and write the registration number inside them. Two examples are shown
below in fig. 26 and 27.

M_9|5-JL.'# c OBEIc# _
N2 -~.*4

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

Sergiev Posad,
Moscow reg.: 4.04.03
Fig. 26

....-.-- ...-.........-- .-. M y ------
'nowTA POCCmH l ll

238750 40 02349 1

Kaliningrad reg.: 1.08.03
Fig. 27

During a period of time senders had to pay a surplus of 30 kop. for bar code labels
affixed to their registered letters. This practice was abandoned in December 2003 for private
senders, but is still valid for limited companies and other private enterprises. In fig 27 is
shown a receipt for a registered letter with the value of 2,35 rbl. with an additional charge of
30 kop. V .. .1 .. ..... ... ......

YTBepxcaneta npHKa3soM MuHHTepcTBa c)HHaHlcoB
POCCHrCKOfJ )e.Aepaunw or 29.12.2000 NeX24H
DOopMa J1l no OKY,~ 0752003
HHH 7701029593 OKIIO 0116604

NX 082777
(Bsul oTnpaBnenHH)

Cep.i 107061 -43
B npHeMe "/

(K 17/7, i f

(cyMMa o6ba SriiH a-cT i-fao] io)
HajioKeHHbiA rtnaTe., v t, / J
Koly. ; /.. ,
Kv.aa I l o -'.

- .

-' e-7

n Bsa /e / -
J] 3 oo'bsneS yo UeMHOcTbV




(pyvini nt Sc; Konefii uint)paii /0

(IaoK"HOCTb. noanilcb) (/ (aia)
/ Tim. MocnotrraMTa


(= bar code)

Fig. 28

November 2004


Bec PacumHpOBKa cOZ -


. (//lu


- -- I -


H-lToro | _/ .// 7



Finally it only remains to say, that when registered letters arrive from abroad either from
the CIS republics or the rest of the world, a bar code label is affixed to the reverse of the
envelope in order to facilitate the automatic letter sorting. These labels naturally have no "3".
Below are shown three such bar code labels attached in Moscow:


III Illlllllil11 I11l I IIl 111111111
131000 16 37915 3 104007 46 13221 3

From Ukraine From Chechnya
arrived 6.01.03 arrived 22.10.03


From Kazakhstan
arrived 18.06.02

The label from Kazakhstan is in Latin lettering where RU stands for Russia. This kind
of big sized labels are used in one of Moscow's post offices.

All bar code labels in this investigation originate from mail sent either locally in
Moscow or from other towns to Moscow except the one shown in fig. 4 which was sent from
Moscow to Copenhagen.
by Colonel Asdribal Prado.

IAb r n. ApTypa \\

Further to my note in
P-R 54, p. 112, Kun-
dom:lin was actually
Kungchuling, served
U. by TPO/RPO 265-
266. See T & S, Part
V for the map facing
p.480.Also noted by
Dr. Raymond Casey
in BJRP No. 91,p.47.
See also p. 69 herewith.

13nh H3 3anaAIblli SBaCCinHib 80 BPCMFI HMnIIH.Ul0 CyA061. PyccHar

The French text says the card shows the illuminated Russian Fleet in Port Arthur 2 to 3 days before the Japanese attack.
Card posted at Chefoo 17.VI. 1906 O.S.(?) at 4-kopek rate.
November 2004

by Alan Leighton.

Place-name Russian Ser. Dates Notes
Inscription Let.

Aldan-Maadyr AJI)JAH-MAAbIP TYB. a 19059210 Black. Three postcards franked with "Friends of
ACCP Tuva" cinderellas, arr. normally in West Germany
without postage due.

Bai-Khaak BAHI-XAAK TYB. ACCP a 11028900 Violet.

Chadan HA,~AH TYB. ACCP 2 07099011 Black.

Erzin 3P3HH TYB. ACCP a 26079008 Black. Reg. nos. 63 and 64, delivered in Germany
without arr. cds.

Khovu-Aksy XOBY-AKCbI TYB. ACCP a 13101[9]20 Black; one digit is a blob, the next is a poorly struck
"9" the year was shifted one figure to the right.
Letter was sent in 1992; reg. no. 31; delivered in
Germany without arr. cds.

Kochetovo KO-ETOBO TYB. ACCP 6 14[0]89[1] Shiny black; two numerals in the date line are
(see also Sug- rectangular blobs (I ). Many covers and postcards
Bazhy) were postmarked with this cds on this date using
shiny black ink from the USA, remains of which
were donated to the post office. (The postal
employees were using another canceller,
presumably "a", with blue-purple ink.) One of
these postcards was received in Kb13bhij "p" on

Kyzyl KbI3blJI TYBHHCKOII a 156493 Letter sent via Moscow (25 Jun) to Elizabeth, NJ
(arr. 17 Jul 1949). Alevizos auction no. 119 (2002),
lot 1036.

KbI3blJI TYB. ACCP none 17119324 Blue-grey machine cancel (arrival stamp); no serial
letter; placement of"ACCP" different than in the
Khb3bum "a" machine canceller. Letter was sent
from Kiev 04119314.

30129324 Blue-grey machine cancel (arrival stamp). Letter
was sent from Kiev 19129315.

21029424 Black machine cancel (arrival stamp). Letter was
sent from Moscow 170294174.

04049424 Black machine cancel (arrival stamp). Letter was
sent from Kiev 18039412.

a 16098321 Black machine cancel (with wavy lines) applied to a
letter postmarked with Ki,13bin ";u" handstamp on
same date.

10108414 Black machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
rporIHo nIqTaMT "e" 01108420.

27018621 Black machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
rpoano nor4TaMT "e" 22018620.

27028619 Black machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
FpoA11o InoHTaMT 24028820 (! year should be

29108714 Black machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
rpoano lnoMTaMT "6" 22108720.

November 2004

Place-name Russian Ser. Dates Notes
Inscription Let.




Black machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
KbMIast-MaxKajiLK ";I" 19118701.

21018814 Black machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
Bo6pyicK 25 MorrnjiB.O. "e" 18018810.

23018814 Black machine roller (arr stamp); "a" did not print.
Letter sent AOKOCOBO TIOMeH. 06rJ. "a"

14028814 Black machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
KI3basI-MaKcaJIIK ".iW" 14028891 (! -
impossible time of day).

01058814 Purple machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
KbI3LuI-Ma.aaJbIK "6" 01058814 (! sent and
arrived at the same hour).

15088814 Purple machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent [------
----n]rm HpKyT. O "a" 12088907 (! the year of
the sender's cds or of the arr. cds is wrong but
which is right cannot be determined).

07128824 Purple machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent Cyr-
BaxmL "6" 06128810.

17028924 Purple machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
HoBOCH6pCHK IDKATI "x1" 15028922.

01108917 Purple machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
KapKainafi yAM. ACCP 23-98910.

13108924 Purple machine roller (arr stamp). Letter sent
AMHTpOBrpag OnI YJImbHOB. O. "6" 05108911.

12079124 Purple machine roller (arr stamp); the "9" is a
rectangular blob i. Letter sent IIepMb IDKII "z"

29079124 Purple machine roller (arr stamp); the "9" is a
rectangular blob I. Letter sent AJMa-ATa [--------]
"6" 25079122.

19059224 Purple machine roller (arr stamp); the "9" is
indistinct. Letter sent AxsaM6yiJ On6acTHO1 "a"


I_ I 1





Purple machine roller (arr stamp); the "9" is a
rectangular blob I. Letter sent KpacHoSpcK-17
meter 19 05 92.

Black arr. cds. Letter sent LEIPZIG (DDR) (date

Black arr. cds. Letter sent NIESKY (DDR)

Black arr. cds. Letter sent Leipzig 1.12.85.

November 2004


Place-name Russian Ser. Dates Notes
Inscription Let.




Black arr. cds. Letter sent KbI3hJI 2 "a" 17098710,
reg. no. 44.

16118714 Black arr. cds. Letter sent ToMCK 31 "a" 11118753
(! impossible hour).

26058802 Purple arr. cds. Sent IIIaroHap "6" 26058814, reg.
no. 87.

31058802 Purple arr. cds. Sent IIIaroHap "6" 31058814, reg.
nos. 336 and 358.

25068814 Purple arr. cds. Letter sent Delitzsch (DDR)

09088814 Purple arr. cds. Letter sent PancmHo HoBocH6.
o6ji. "a" 02088820.


Purple arr. cds. Letter sent Bochum I (BRD) -3.-

e 25118719 Black; last digit of date line indistinct. Reg. no. 914,
no arr. cds which is a pity: the letter was sent to
the village of Khairakan in Ulug-Khem Kozhuun.

17089115 Black.

S ? 26 67219 Black. Seen on a cover on eBay (2003); cds is
smudged, and the date is not clear.

16098315 Black. Letter cancelled also with KLI3LIJI "a"
machine roller on same date.

o 31087715 Black. Seen on eBay on an unaddressed prepared


Purple arr. cds. Postcard sent from KoqeToBO "6"

16119124 Purple arr. cds. Letter sent Long Beach, CA, 30 Oct
1991, transit machine roller Emporia, KS (date did
not print).

01089224 Purple. (NOT arr. cds.)

24129324 Oily dark bluish grey arr. cds. Letter sent from
Horby Island, BC, [-] XI 1993.

12019424 Grey arr. cds. Letter sent from Sittand (NL)


Black arr. cds. Letter sent from Utrecht (NL) -2 III

KbI3bIJI 2 TYB. ACCP a 17098710 Black; penultimate digit is a blob probably
should be a "1". Reg. no. 44, arr. KHI3blJI "g"

November 2004


Place-name Russian Ser. Dates Notes
Inscription Let.

Kyzyl 4 KbI3bIlJI 4 TYB. ACCP 6 070494[?]0 Black. Reg. no. 14, "arr." MoccKa M. 35 "6" /
15141914. The cover is obviously bogus is the
cds fake too?

Kyzyl 14 KbI3bIJI 14 TYBHHCK. a 27[09]9410 Purple. 30 mm diameter instead of the usual 25 mm.
ACCP Reg. no. 316, "arr." Bbl6opr 1 JIeHHHr. o6J. "i:i"
02109411. Another bogus cover is the cds fake

Kyzyl- KbI3bIJI-MA)KAJIbIK 6 01058814 Black. Letter arr. KIaJI "a" 01058814 (!- sent
Mazhalyk TYB. ACCP and arrived at the same hour).

a 08089111 Black; penultimate digit is a blob. On receipt for

z 13099007 Black.

WK 19118701 Black. Letter arr. KI3iLIJI "a" 19118714.

14028891 Black; penultimate digit is obviously an error -
should probably be "O". Letter arr. KbM3bJI "a"

Mugur-Aksy MYTYP-AKCbI TYB. ACCP 6? 23071991 Faint strike in purple; four digit year, no time of

Naryn HAPbIH TYB. ACCP 6 17081008 Black; blob should be a "9". Reg. nos. 53 and 54,
delivered in Germany without arr. cds.

Samagaltay CAMAFAJITAl TYB. ACCP 6 04098907 Black; the "8" is more of a dirty blob. 30 mm
diameter instead of the usual 25 mm.

Saryg-Sep CAPbIr-CEII TYB. ACCP 6 31089009 Black.

Shagonar IIIAFOHAP TYB. ACCP e 14089620 Black. Cancelled to order on an otherwise blank
greeting card.

Shagonar 1 IIIATOHAP 1 TYB. ACCP 6 26058802 Black. Reg. no. 87, arr. Kbl3bui "g" 26058814.

31058802 Black. Reg. nos. 336 and 358, arr. KbI3IJI "g"

Sug-Bazhy CY[r]-BA)KH TYB. ACCP 6 06128810 Black. Incomplete cancel. Letter arr. KI3bJI "a"
(see also 07128824. Proper Tuvan Cyrillic spelling should be
Kochetovo) Cyr-Bax Bi.

TBli T93JII TYB. ACCP 6 04099009 Oily grey-blue.

Toora-Khem TOOPA-XEM TYB. ACCP a 03128903 Black. Reg. nos. 1 and 2, delivered in Germany
without arr. cds.

e 19068808 Black.

Turan TYPAH TYB. ACCP e faint- ?? Purple.
30109000 ??

22129000 Purple.

Xi 08069000 Black. Reg. nos. 603 and 604, delivered in
Germany without arr. cds.

November 2004

Kyzyl Tuvinskoi "a"
25 mm

Aldan-Maadyr "a" 19.5.92
25 mm

Bai-Khaak "a"
25 mm


Erzin "e"
25 mm

Khovu-Aksy "a"
25 mm

Kochetovo "6"
24 mm

Kyzyl "a" machine roller arrival stamp (black) 27.2.86
26 mm

Kyzyl "a" machine roller arrival stamp (purple) 1.10.89
25 mm

17 T'B'

Kyzyl "g"
26 mm

Kyzyl "e"
25 mm

Kyzyl "i:"
25 mm

Kyzyl (no serial) machine roller arrival stamp (black) 21.2.94
26 mm

Kyzyl "o"
25 mm

r_--,-_ "

Kyzyl "p"
25 mm

Kyzyl 2 "a"
25 mm

Kyzyl 14 "a"
30 mm

"6" 1.5.88
25 rmn

"a" 8.8.91
26 mm

"z" 13.9.90
25 mm

..'C. .

"A-K" 19.11.87
25/2 mm

November 2004



Chadan "z"
25 mm

Kyzyl 4 "6"
25 mm

Mugur-Aksy Samagaltai "6" Saryg-Sep "a" Shagonar "e" Shagonar 1 "6" Sug-Bazhy "6"
"6"? 23.7.1991 4.9.89 31.8.90 14.8.96 31.5.88 6.12.88
25 mm 30 mm 25 mm 25 mm 25 mm 25 mm
-V- .-.- '

Tli"6" Toora-Khem "a" Toora-Khem "6" Turan"e" Turan ""6" S "6"
.19914.9.90 3.12.89 19.6.88 22.12.90 8.6.908 6

25 mm 25 mm 25 mm 25 mm 25 mmmm

Pocket Forgery Guides of Russian Postage Stamps 1917-1923
by Dr. R. J. Ceresa.

These Guides are a supplement to the Five Volumes of "The Postage Stamps of Russia,
1917 1923", published from 1977 to 2002 in 44 sections of 119 Parts consisting of over
7000 pages including approx. 10,000 illustrations. The sections are available separately or
collectively from Trevor Pateman, the sole distributor, and his price list is published at
www.trevorpateman.co.uk or request by e-mail, trevor@trevorpateran.co.uk or write to Trevor
Pateman Unit 10, 91 Western Road, Brighton, BN1 2NW.
25mm 25SY2mm 25 mm 25 mm 25 mm

"The Postage Stamps of Russia, 1917 1923"
Vol.l. Armenia 13 parts in 7 sections. (buff binding)
Vol.II000 pages. Ukraine 20 parts in 11 sections (grey binding)
Vol.collectively from Armies & P.O's 24 parts in 8 sections, (white binding)

Vol.IV. Transcaucasia (less Armenia) 16 parts in 8 sections.(blue binding)
Vol.V. R.S.F.S.R. 40 parts in 10 sections. (pink binding)

in A5 size will also be available in library A4 format for those who prefer this size in
matching bindings to the above five volumes.

Revised Schedule for 2004/5, (God willing)

No.1. North Western Army, Kopeck Values. Published Jan. 2004.
No.2. Ruble Values. Published Feb. 2004.
No.3. Armenia, Erivan 60 kop. Types 1-4. Available Mar/Apr. 2004.
No.4. Ukraine, Odessa Types I & 2. April 2004,
No.S, Northern Armies. May 2004.
No. 12. South Russia, Don Territory. June 2004
No.6. Armenia, Small Framed HP monograms. July 2004
No.7. Ukraine, Odessa Types 3 & 4. Sept. 2004
No.8. Western Army Overprints. Oct. 2004
No.9. Armenia, Medium Framed HP monograms. Nov. 2004
No.10. Ukraine, Odessa Types 5. Nov./Dec. 2004
No.11. Ukraine, Odessa Types 6. Dec. 2004

It is intended to keep these guides at the lowest price consistent with quality and to limit the
size to 48 pages maximum for saddle stitching.(Planned content may have to be adjusted to
comply). Due to fluctuating currencies the series will be priced in Pounds Sterling and
payment in sterling or Euros or US $ at the prevailing rate of exchange at the date of placing

Recommended cover price: A5 8.00 A4 10.00.

November 2004

Kyzyl Tuvinskoi
25 mm

Aldan-Maadyr "a" 19.5.92
25 mm

Bai-Khaak "a"
25 mm

Chadan "r" 7.9.90
25 mm

25 mm

Khovu-Aksy "B"

Kyzyl "a" machine roller arrival stamp (black) 27.2.86
Kochetovo "6" 26 mm
24 mm

fu, .f-r Sl' -. -
.| ",h .,^ --

;?!"^:;<^ "*i. ; ^ --^_ -~

Kyzyl "a" machine roller arrival stamp (purple) 1.10.89

;~j.*I "*. i*'. .

Kyzyl no serial machine roller arrival stamp (black) 21.2.94
26 mm

November 2004

~*jrne;oiilt -~


Kyzyl "g" 17.9.87
26 mm

Kyzyl 2 "a" 17.9.87
25 mm

"xc" 19.11.87
25 mm

Shagonar "e"
25 mm

Toora-Khem "a"
25 mm

Kyzyl "e" 17.8.91
25 mm

< 1 ,I

"6" 1.5.88
25 mm

Mugur-Aksy "6?"
25 mm

Shagonar 1 "6"
25 mm

I -

!-- *j

Toora-Khem "6"
25 mm

t I 4

Kyzyl "" 16.9.83

Kyzyl-Mazhalyk "B"
26 mm

Samagaltai "6" 4.9.89
30 mm

Sug-Bazhy "6"
25 mm

Turan "e" 22.12.90
25 mm

Kyzyl "p" 20.8.91
25 mm

Kyzyl-Mazhalyk "r"
25 mm

Saryg-Sep "a"
25 mm

T&&li "6" 4.9.90
25 mm

Turan "x" 8.6.90
25 mm

November 2004

The Development of Commercial Air Service to/from Leningrad and Vicinity in the 1930s
by Dr. G. Adolph Ackerman.

Some outstanding Soviet air mail covers go unrecognized by collectors, perhaps due to the fact of the collectors'
unfamiliarity with the more obscure air routes and smaller towns having air mail service during the early
development of the Soviet commercial air network.

Although I have basically put my airmail collecting activity on hold, I noted an interesting Soviet airmail cover from
Petrozavodsk (1934) being offered on eBay a few months ago (figure 1). There were no bidders and the opening
price was barely more than postage and handling. Since I happened to have a similar cover (figure 2) dispatched in
early 1933, I did not bid. However, these were the only two apparent airmail covers I had seen from Petrozavodsk
during twenty-plus years of collecting. The same cover appeared again; I proved to be the only bidder. Similarly, an
airmail cover sent from Murmansk to London in 1937 was offered (figure 3). This was the first commercial flight
cover from/to Murmansk that I had seen prior to the beginning of the Russo-Finnish War (end of November 1939).

The question arises, was there a commercial air service operational in the early 1930s to/from Petrozavodsk, a small
town of about 40,000 and 200 miles northeast of Leningrad near Lake Onega? And, when did commercial air service
begin to the North between Leningrad and Murmansk?

A basic outline concerning the development of air mail service to/from Leningrad prior to WWII has been presented
earlier (1). Additional perspectives and information are presented herein with supporting flown and non-flown cover
documentation. A summary map shows both air and rail networks in operation to/from Leningrad in the mid-1930s
(figure 4).
The Leningrad Air Network and Hub in the Early 1930s
The Leningrad-Moscow and Leningrad-Riga-Berlin Routes: Prior to 1931, Leningrad had two small airfields the
Komendantskii and Korpusnyi airfields (3). These airfields handled the first regular commercial flights between
Moscow and Leningrad. The Leningrad-Moscow air service officially began on 6 June 1928 (1, 5, 7). However, a
registered airmail cover from Leningrad to Vienna via Moscow and Berlin (figure 5) predates the reported official
opening of this route. This flown cover is inscribed "First Postflight Leningrad-Berlin-Vienna" with the Leningrad
cancel/backstamps of 3 and 5 May 1928 and Moscow transit dated 5 May 1928, indicating that this cover was flown
between these two cities.

The Leningrad-Moscow route was operated by Dobrolet until its transformation into the Aeroflot organization
during the early 1930s. Initially, only mail and freight were carried on these flights. Regular passenger service did
not start until the spring of 1932 with the first mail-passenger flight taking place on 27-28 May 1932 (figure 6). The
Izvestiya newspaper reported that the first mail-passenger flight from Moscow north to Leningrad occurred nearly a
month later on the 24th of June, a flight of about 3.5 hours (3).

The Russo-German (Deruluft) air line began flights between Leningrad and Riga via Tallinn on 7 June 1928 (figure
7), the day after the inauguration of the Leningrad-Moscow air service (1, 2, 5, 7). Flight service on this line was
curtailed during the winter months. Same-day air service Leningrad-Berlin became operational the next flight season
(1929) and mail carried on these flights during the first years were usually cancelled using a special decorative
"biplane" canceller. Examples of mail carried on this international route during its first years of operation are
illustrated (figures 8, 9).

In February 1932, all Soviet aviation and its activities were placed under control of the Chief Directorate of the Civil
Air Fleet. This organizational complex assumed the name Aeroflot a month later (1, 6, 7). During this period, the
government decided to intensively develop Russia's civil aviation and air industry as part of a formidable five-year
plan. It was projected in the late 1920s that Leningrad was to become a major air hub. Thus, a large aerodrome and
ancillary facilities were needed to replace Leningrad's older air fields in order to accommodate the projected
expansion of the Leningrad air service. Construction began in 1930 (3).

The New Leningrad Aerodrome: The new Leningrad (Shosseynaya) aerodrome was to be equipped and organized to
dispatch and receive dozens of mail and passenger planes connecting with important towns/cities in Russia and
surrounding countries. However, during the construction phase, shortages of building materials, bureaucratic
problems and pillage of materials impacted on the completion and quality of construction (9). A hanger, an auxiliary

November 2004

landing strip and taxi way were available by 1931. The air control facility and two staff buildings, as well as facilities
for gasoline and water storage and an oil heating unit were completed by the end of the summer of 1932 (3).

The Leningrad Shosseynaya airfield is illustrated during its construction phase in 1931 (3); a Tupolev ANT-9
aeroplane in operation at the time is also shown (figure 10).

Both the Leningrad-Moscow and Leningrad-Riga-Berlin air services were transferred to the new airfield in 1931.
The 400-mile Leningrad-Moscow air route was additionally supported by an increase in the number of landing fields
and weather stations along its course (3). However, flying still proved hazardous because of faulty navigational
equipment and aircraft upkeep (9).

Excerpts from Unishevskii's narrative (9) gives an interesting prospective of problems faced during the building and
early operation of the Leningrad air facility. Unishevskii served as Head of the Meteorological Service at the
Leningrad Aerodrome between 1932 and 1934. Later, he briefly became the Manager of the airport at Krestsy on the
new Leningrad-Novgorod-Krestsy-Demyansk line which saw only minimal activity during his tenure.

"At the time of my arrival the Leningrad airport certainly made a very inhospitable impression. The trenches dug for the
foundation in the first enthusiasm of 1930 were half-filled with dirty-brown, clayey water. The foundations in so far as they had
been actually laid looked more like crumbled ruins than the ground-work of a new monumental erection. The dumps of
building materials were reduced to a chaotic mass of fragments, which lay about in a shattered or rotten condition. The
machinery, left to the mercy of wind and weather, was covered with a thick layer of rust and so were the big iron girders.......

"The aeroplanes on landing left deep furrows behind them; there were only patches of grass to be seen; the whole place
had a deserted look....... During the summer the planes were left in the open, tethered by rotten ropes to pegs, which were always
driven in wherever the planes happened to have stopped on landing. In the autumn the whole place took on the appearance of one
of those country roads so well known in Russia, on which one sinks knee-deep in mud.......

"A shelter was then knocked together out of the remains of the boards and grandiloquently called a 'hanger', although it
did not possess so much as a door, and the roof let the rain through... Later on, it became necessary to divide the 'Staff shed by
partitions, so that it could accommodate in addition the officers in command of the Airport, the kitchen and mess-room, the
meteorological and wireless stations, the infirmary, the latrines and 'Lenin's corner', i.e., the Political Club."

"In my time the planning of these (airways) and for completeness sake of further lines, was being busily pursued. This
planning was actually so thoroughly performed that even today the main lines are still in course of being organized. For the aerial
communication provided by the above-mentioned lines can hardly be termed regular. I heard only last year, if not at the
beginning of this, that cases in which the mails and even the passengers were obliged to leave the planes half-way through the
journey, and be transferred to some wayside railway station, were daily occurrences in the Soviet Air service. In 1933 a mail-
plane, working to a time-table on the Leningrad-Moscow line, was delayed for seven days because the engine could not be made
to function. Only after a week's work on it could the plane take off. In winter the hot water for warming the engines was brought
in buckets over a distance of two hundred yards, and in sharp frost it often happened that the water froze on the way. In a
moment the radiator, the pipes, and the water-pump would be frozen."

The Opening of the Leningrad Satellite Routes to the North and Northeast According to Unishevskii (9), the main
task of Airdrome Management was the organization of airways to the south, in particular the Ukraine; to Moscow and
to the north, to Petrozavodsk and Archangel'sk. However, he did not specify dates for the opening of these air links.
Magruder and Zacharoff in their 1937 article (8) list both the Petrozavodsk and Vytegra lines as operational while
Unshlikht and Eidermann (1934) depict only the air link between Leningrad and Petrozavodsk (10).

In contrast, the report outlining the history of the Leningrad airport (3) indicated under the October 1932 subheading
that air connections from Leningrad to Petrozavodsk via Lodeinoe Pole and Leningrad to Vytegra were operational in
1931. It further stated that "the airport soon started service to Murmansk, Archangel and Vologda, linking Russian Far
North and North-West with the central part of the country."

However, the Unishevskii report (9) implies that scheduled air connections between these cities, e..g., Petrozavodsk
and Vytegra, were not in operation until at least 1933 and were in the planning stage in 1932. Unishevskii describes
the poor flying conditions, especially fog, met by pilots flying the Leningrad-Petrozavodsk route; malfunctioning
navigational equipment compounded these problems. Significantly, I have an air mail cover (with first flight
endorsement) flown from Leningrad to Vytegra in the Spring of 1933 (figure 11). Therefore, based on the above
information, the most reasonable date for the opening of both the Leningrad-Petrozavodsk and the Leningrad-
November 2004

Vytegra routes would be the spring of 1933. The map (figure 4) illustrates the similar routes and distances of these
two routes.

Definitive information regarding the opening of an air extension between Leningrad and Arkhangel'sk via the
Petrozavodsk route to Arkhangel'sk has not been found. However, Davies' air map for 1940 (6) illustrates the
connection; this air link is notindicatedon earlier air route maps available (6, 10). I have not found a cover that was
potentially carried on this route prior to WWII.

The Leningrad-Petrozavodsk Route:
The 1933 Petrozavodsk cover is cancelled 28 January 1933 and it has a bilingual airmail label (figure 12). This cover
is addressed to California and the postage is consistent with the international non-registered airmail rate (65 kopeks)
in effect at this time. Unfortunately, there are no receiving or transit markings, although the cover would have passed
through Leningrad for subsequent transit by rail or air. The bilingual airmail label has been pencilled out either at
Petrozavodsk or Leningrad. The marked airmail label, the absence of transit markings and the fact that the cover was
dispatched in mid-winter strongly indicate that this cover was not flown, but travelled by rail at least as far as
Leningrad. Information provided above indicates that the Leningrad-Petrozavodsk route was not operational until
later in the year (1933).

In contrast, the second cover routed Petrozavodsk-Leningrad-Helsinki (figure 1) is similar to the first cover.
However, the Petrozavodsk cancel is dated 29 June 1934 (1700 hours). The reverse has a 3 July 1934 Helsinki arrival
postmark and a Leningrad transit postmark dated 2 July 1934. The bilingual airmail label is unmarked and the
postage totals 65 kopeksagain correct for non-registered international air mail letters. There is an indistinct oval
postage-due handstamp on the cover front but there is no notation as to the amount of postage due.

Since the Petrozavodsk-Leningrad route was in operation by the Spring of 1934, it is concluded that this cover was
flown from Petrozavodsk to Leningrad. It is unknown if daily fights were in effect or if a flight delay explains the 2-3
days transit of this item between the two cities. Transit time seems of little value in determining transit if the mode of
transmission was by air or rail, since both normally would have taken about one day to cover the 200-mile distance.
Transit from Leningrad to Helsinki again would have been about one day by either air or rail. If the cover was
relayed by air from Leningrad, it would have been flown on the Leningrad-Tallinn-Helsinki route available through
the German-sponsored airline. There was no direct air connection between Leningrad and Helsinki.

The Leningrad-Vvtegra Route: Vytegra is located 200 miles east of Leningrad on the southern edge of Lake Onega
and about 90 miles south-east of Petrozavodsk. An air mail cover from Leningrad to Vytegra is illustrated figuree
11). It has bilingual air mail and express mail labels and a typed 2-line notation "Inaugural Flight Leningrad-
Vytegra Line / First Flight." The cover is cancelled 31 May 1933 with a Vytegra arrival backstamp dated 1 June
1933. The map illustrates the similar but divergent easterly routings of the Leningrad-Vytegra and Leningrad-
Petrozavodsk airlines and would suggest further that both lines became operational near the same times,

The Leningrad-Murmansk Air Connection: Specific references to the initiation of the scheduled air service between
Leningrad and Murmansk (about 700 miles) have not been found nor was this route depicted on referenced air route
maps (6, 8, 10). However, a brief report (4) mentions that the first airport in Apatity, about 170 miles south of
Murmansk, was built at Tik-Guba in 1933 allowing access to the Kola Peninsula. It further mentions a first flight
from Kirovsk to Leningrad was made in 1935. This would suggest that a Leningrad-Murmansk flight service with
intercity stops began about this time, e.g., during the spring-summer of 1935-1936.

A registered airmail cover is illustrated (figure 12) originating from Apatity in Northern Karelia in the summer of
1930. This cover was sent to Austria via Leningrad and bears both an airmail label and written air endorsement. The
lengthy transit time (4-5 days) between Apatity and Leningrad indicates that the cover was transmitted to Leningrad
by rail rather than air. This conclusion is supported by the information above stating that no air service was available
from Apatity until at least 1935 or later.

Similarly, another registered airmail cover posted from Murmansk 4 July 1934 was sent to Budapest and arrived six
days later (10 July). It has a Berlin air transit and postmark dated 9 July. There is no Leningrad transit marking.
Again, air transmission between Murmansk and Leningrad would have been by rail with subsequent air routing from
Leningrad to Berlin (figure 13'; courtesy of Robert Taylor).

November 2004

In contrast, the 1937 registered air express cover from Murmansk in Northern Karelia dispatched to England is
cancelled 11 May 1937 (figure 13). Unfortunately, there are no transit or arrival postmarks to verify transit times or
routings. However, available information indicates that the Murmansk-Leningrad airline probably became
operational a year or two earlier (1935-36). It is concluded that this cover was flown on the new air service available
between Murmansk and Leningrad. From Leningrad, the cover would have been forwarded by air to Berlin and

A second cover carried on the Leningrad-Murmansk air line was dispatched in the spring of 1940 during the Russo-
Finnish War (figure 14). This cover originated in the Siberian Far North at Srednekolymsk and is canceled on 24
March 1940. It has a Murmansk arrival backstamp dated 30 March 1940. The cover is marked (top. left) for airmail
and is correctly franked. Again there are no transit markings. Presumably, the cover was flown from Srednekolymsk
to Yakutsk, Irkutsk across Siberia to Moscow and northward to Leningrad for subsequent air transmission to
Murmansk (1).

Summary: The evidence presented indicates that the Petrozavodsk-Leningrad-Helsinki cover and the Murmansk-
Leningrad-London (Royal Shields), England cover were indeed flown on early flights between these Russian cities.
Additional covers were presented to complement information regarding the opening of flight service to/from the
Leningrad air hub during its early days of operation.


1. Ackerman GA: Via the Red Skies. The Development of Soviet Air Mail 1922-1945. GA Ackerman,
Worthington, OH, 2001.
2. Andersson L: Deruluft. Story of the joint Soviet-German airline between the wars, part 1: 1921-1928.
Air Pictorial Nov, 430-435.1988.
3. Anonymous: Pulkovo: Pages of history. 2002. httpJ/eng.pulkovoru/main/history
4. Anonymous: The history of Apatity. http://www.hjampis.kiruna.se/-mzac/mz/apattoml.htm
5. Davies REG: A History of the World's Airlines. Oxford Univ Press, Toronto, 1967.
6. Davies REG: Aeroflot: An Airline and its Aircraft. Paladwr Press, Rockville, MD, 1992.
7. MacDonald H: Aeroflot. Soviet Air Transport Since 1923. Putman, London 1975.
8. Magruder PM, ZacharoffL: Soviet aviation today, part II. Aero Digest, Apr. 1937, p. 24-27.
9. Unishevskii V: RedPilot. Memoirs ofa Soviet Airman. Transl. VMMacdonald, Right Book Club, London, 1940.
10.Unshlikht J, Eidermann RP: Aviation development in Soviet Russia. Aero Digest, 24:20-24, 1934.

..~R -,= .-i \"
I------....------~ ,.. ~,- ----.-- I -'I7t! ..--

"," ,. -

; .. A_
f ,,/ ,. '_-,
,"-/_L. -. 1...L -,-.t.

Figure : Non-registered air mail cover from Petrozavodsk 29 June 1934 to Helsinki 3 July 1934 via Leningrad 2 July 1934.
Cover has a bilingual air mail label and 65 kopeck postage correctly paying the non-registered international air mail rate at this
time. However, an oval postage due handstamp is also present but is without indication of amount due.
Addressed in Finnish to the Head Office of the Swedish-American Line in Finland at Helsinki.

November 2004

S Figure 2: Ordinary cover from
Petrozavodsk 28.1.33 via
Leningrad 30.1.33 to Eureka,
California; no arrival
'. .. postmark. 65 kopeks paid the
non-registered international
.. air rate in 1933. Note the
bilingual airmail label that has
been crossed out. No other
transit or routing markings.

S Figure 3: Registered air
express mail cover from
Murmansk 11.5.37 to Royal
Shields, England. No transit
or arrival postmarks. Cover
endorsed "Per Air Mail", with
an express label and English
boxed 6d. express fee cachet
also applied. Note the unusual
collection of express fees at
: both ends, as also shown in
"The Post-Rider" No. 54, p.
87, Fig. 59.

Figure 4: Commercial air services to/from
Leningrad and vicinity from the mid-1930s to
1940 have been indicated. These routes
basically followed those of the regional rail
lines. Internal flights to/from Leningrad
connected with Moscow (1928), Petrozavodsk
and Vytegra (1933-1934) and shortly thereafter
with Novgorod and Murmansk. By the late
1930s, an air link joined Leningrad with
Arkhangel'sk via Petrozavodsk. International
air service linked Leningrad with Tallinn, Riga
and Berlin in 1928.

November 2004

ni.p,. LI L ( *

,* .. .......; '*I

SR t. /

r m ,j.G

..... .. j no
..g .. ..*,' ,'.,,,** "-.. ,' ,- ..P r avion. ,.

,i .
** ,' .. "**-" "

._. ,' -7 .... | .-?

- ; ' .


4'-- 4


Figure 7a: Airmail cover from
Leningrad 9 & 11.6.28 to Berlin
12.6.28, sent during the first week of
operation of the Leningrad-Riga-Berlin
air service.

C: I--nr Pehl~oIA pe.TY:~r)lh 921I! TI)C-1oC 7lr-IIaco.Kcjro 4~al1.,leH~:'
Oko~uroTn a B PnDg' .IH!IPr-i,'Sk-

. .. .. ... .'.'*,./, ..< ..*4 I ,;.

'.' ''. .." ... .

Figure 7b: Airmail
cover originating
from Riga 7.6.28 and
carried on first flight
to Leningrad 8.6.28.
Note the Deruluft-
Riga handstamp.

ul 0 C K a 9

:a L.en"r i ;i L AJ

I: itr a 0 o Ap er y

Figure 6: First mail and passenger flight from Leningrad 27.5.32
to Moscow 28.5.32 as a backstamp. The notation at top reads
"First Mail/Passenger Flight Aircraft Vogvf; Leningrad-

Figure 5: This registered airmail cover sent from Leningrad to
Vienna has inscriptions reading "First Postal Flight Leningrad-
Berlin-Vienna" and "Mit Luftpost/Poste aerienne". The Leningrad
cancel and backstamp are dated 3 & 5.5.1928 respectively. There
is a Moscow transit dated 5.5.28 and a Berlin transit backstamp is
dated 5.5.28. Flown on the Leningrad-Moscow air route. This
cover predates the official opening of this route in June 1928.


I -K 2'' ....-'.t*.$ W

Figure 8: Early use of of special Leningrad biplane cancel applied for same-day air I &
service Leningrad-Berlin. Leningrad cancel dated 12.10.29, with LeningradLeinrad

Sbackstamp 14.10.29 and Hamburg, Germany train arrival 17.10.29, via Berlin
16.10.29. The insert shows a stylised Leningrad biplane roe facility with ha and
ri: .. several ancillary buildings in the background (1933).

Z( Figure 8: Early use of of special Leningrad biplane cancel applied for same-lay air
service Leningrad-Berlin. Leningrad cancel dated 12.10.29, with Leningrad
backstamp 14.10.29 and Hamburg, Germany train arrival 17.10.29, via Berlin
16.10.29. The insert shows a stylised Leningrad biplane cancel, as used on mail
carried on same-day air service Leningrad-Berlin. early 193roplane used in the late 1920s and

5s I ------------.--.-----------.------- --.-------------

Figure 11:R Regisstered air express cover from Leningrad 13.5.33 to Vytegra 1.6.33. Eighty
Figure 9: Registered postcard from Leningrad 4.5.31 to Berlin 5.5.31. The kopeks paid the proper rate for an internal registered express letter at that time. The typed
card has the large biplane cancel, plus a two-line hand-stamp at top, endorsement at top reads: "Inaugural Flight Leningrad-Vytegra /Inaugural Flight".
reading "First Flight 1931; Reopening of the Leningrad-Berlin Line". The cover has both airmail and express labels.

Figure 12: Registered
airmail letter originating
in Apatity (Northern
Karelia) 31.7.30 and sent
to Leningrad 1.8.30, for
despatch to Leoben,
Austria. Cover has a
bilingual airmail label and
is inscribed at top left
The cover was sent by rail
from Apatity to
Leningrad; air service
to/from the north did not
start until 1935-1936.

a /
c -rlqrpFl iq v g n-'ts

~5 1'Td, HLINC7831

zss I -j;

Figure 13: Registered airmail
cover from Murmansk 4.7.34 to
Budapest, Hungary 9.7.34, via
Berlin same day. The cover has a
boxed "Par Avion" and Berlin
Luftpost handstamps, but no
Leningrad transir markings. The
Murmansk-Leningrad air service
was not in operation at that time
(courtesy Robert Taylor).

Figure 14: Airmail cover from
Srednekolymsk (Northern
Siberia) 24.3.40 to Murmansk
30.3.40. The cover is marked
"Aero" at top left and was flown
by air across Siberia to Moscow,
then north to Leningrad and by
air to Murmansk.

November 2004

I. */ '

r ..'' .

I~.. f ''

<~. .4 r

.4... 44

S 4,



1. ~-

by Alexander Epstein.

PS formula cards as such are often ignored by collectors as being "without an imprinted stamp".
Nevertheless, they are legal postal documents and the FIP regulations allow them to be exhibited in the Postal
Stationery Class, on an equal footing with the imprinted cards. The kinship between the imprinted and formula PS
cards is manifested particularly by the fact that official PS cards for post-free classes of mail, i.e. those for soldiers in
wartime, are issued in some countries. In the paper by V. Vinokur and M. Lam (V&L)[1], they describe a lot of PS
formula cards, which were issued both centrally and locally. The present article sets out a generalised review of local
and some special issues of the PS formula cards.
Six types of PS formula cards were issued by the Central Postal Administration (CPA; later 'TYIInT" =
Central Administration of Posts & Telegraphs) in the following years: Nos. 1 & 2 in 1872; No. 3 in 1878; No. 4 in
1884: No. 5 in 1886 and No. 6 in 1889 (in [1] the pictures of Nos. 5 & 6 erroneously changed places; see also [2-4]).
It should be noted that the general design of the PS formula cards Nos. 2 to 6 coincided with that style of the
imprinted PS cards issued at the same time. The PS formula cards Nos. 1 to 3 were printed in black and Nos. 4 to 6 in
brown. The latter was in use for over 10 years up to the beginning of the 1900s, so it had several printings, differing
by the number of dots per unit of length in the address lies, as well as by distances between some elements of the
The transfer from centralised to local manufacture and the issue of PS cards is only indirectly connected with
the abolition of the State monopoly in the issue of postcards, as stated in the order of 19 October 1894 by the
Minister of Internal Affairs. The issues of local PS formula cards retained official status. The first issues of this kind
are known used in 1900, but they were specific issues with illustrations on the reverse, which are discussed later in
this article. The first cases of usage of "normal" local PS formula cards are known to me from 1902 in Riga (Fig. 1
reproduced from [5]) and then in 1905 in Russian Poland (Fin. 2), but they could have been issued earlier.
The early local issues tried strictly to follow the pattern of the CPA issue of No. 6 both in design and colour
(Figs. 2 & 3). Nevertheless, there are some minor differences in the dimensions or shape of the different elements of
the design. The elements are: 1 the main text "OTKPbITOE IIHCbMO" (later on: "IIOITOBAA
KAPTO'KA") at the top; 2 the Imperial coat of arms at upper left; 3 a rectangle for the stamp with (later also
without) the corresponding text inside at upper right; 4 a note in Russian at bottom, meaning "This side is only for
the address" and 5 with five address lines. However, the differences became more evident in the subsequent years;
e.g. the brown colour was replaced in some areas by red, ochre or black and the shape of some elements was also
changed noticeably (Figs. 4 & 5).
Up to 1909, the main text in both CPS and local PS card issues remained as "OTKPbITOE IIHCLMO",
i.e. "Open Letter". They can be regarded as postcards of the first period. However, new postal regulations introduced
as of 1 May 1909 provided for another definition for postcards: "IIOqTOBASI KAPTOrKA", i.e. Post Card.
From that time onwards, all subsequent postcards were issued with the new text and the former postcards were
withdrawn from use. However, during WWI, the remaining stocks of the old PS formula cards inscribed
"OTKPbITOE IIHCbMO" were turned over to the military authorities and widely used by soldiers for their post-
free correspondence.
As mentioned above, there existed some locally issued illustrated PS formula cards of the first period. Two
such postcards are shown in Figs. 6 & 7. Both have a photographic view of Kiev arranged vertically in the upper half
of the reverse side (Figs. 6a & 7a) and one of them was used in Priluki, Poltava province, which was in the Kiev
Postal & Telegraphic District. The front sides in brown colour look a little different from each other (as well as from
the CPA PS formula card No. 6), so they are from separate issues or printings. There are two possibilities as to the
status of these PS cards: either they were issued as such by a local administration, or the pictures were added
privately to normal formula cards at a later date. The fact that both postcards were manufactured on some special
thick and glossy stock vouches rather for the first version. However, it should be mentioned that the PS formula card
issued centrally is found also with pictures on the reverse, but they are clearly of private origin.
One more peculiar PS formula card from the first period in shown in Fig. 8. That card, used in Yur'ev ,
Liflyand province in August 1905, differs from most of the local PS formula cards of this period, not only by the
bottom note missing, but also by the presence of the additional word Postkaart (postcard in Estonian), printed under
the main text in the same reddish-brown shade on the front of the postcard. The text also shows that the card was
used as a blank for orders by the printing shop and bookstore of K. Soiot in Tartu (Yur'ev), but that inscription was
printed in a much lighter shade of red-brown, evidently in a private way. It remains only to speculate whether this PS
card in that form, i.e. with the word Postkaart was an official local issue of the Riga Postal & Telegraphic District, to
which the Yur'ev post office was subordinate.

November 2004

Almost all the PS formula cards of the first period were intended for inland mail. However, there are known
at least two cases of issues for mail going abroad and where the additional French text "CARTE POSTALE" was
printed above the main Russian text: one used in Moscow, the other in Riga (Fig. 1); note the grammatical error
"POSTALLE" in the latter.
Up to 1909, the local PS formula cards of the first period had no evident indication as to the specific
administration or place where they were issued. As was justly pointed out by V&L [1], that can be determined only
approximately by the postmarks on used items (I would like to add in this connection also the sender's address in the
message). However, that gives no firm guarantee, since those PS formula cards could be used anywhere throughout
the country. Therefore, one needs several (at least two, but from different independent senders from the same region)
used items of a particular kind of PS card to determine its origin with certainty. Soon after the new postal regulations
were introduced, the CPA issued on 3 June 1909 a circular under No. 56 [6] requiring that information be printed in
small fonts in the lower right corner of every official PS formula card as to what administration had issued a
particular postcard. Such information began to appear on the formula cards of the second period with the main text
However, the St. Petersburg General Post Office still succeeded in issuing PS formula cards of the type in the
first period ("OTKPbITOE IIHCbMO") with a posthor emblem (see ig. 8 in [1]). The Moscow General Post
Office overprinted additionally its stock of the latest issue with an abbreviated text to read "Moscow General Post
Office" and with the date "1909" in black, while the colour of the original card was brown (Fig. 9 Later on, the St.
Petersburg//Petrograd General Post Office printed its formula cards with the emblem (later on, an abbreviated text
meaning "Spb" or "Petrograd General Post Office" was added) always in the lower left, rather than the lower right
corner as demanded by the circular and the Moscow General Post Office seems to be the only one that indicated also
the year of issue. The corresponding text is found in the lower right corner arranged both horizontally and and
vertically (at least for some years from 1913 to 1917), thus probably pointing to different printing shops (Figs. 10 &
Circular No. 56 was implemented by a number of local postal/telegraphic administrations in many regions.
Nevertheless, some local administrations seem to have ignored this order, since there are still found a great number
of local PS formula cards issued after 1909 without the required indicia. That can be explained partly by mere
negligence on the part of the local postal authorities, but some other reasons could exist as well. It still remains
unknown whether only the administrations of the postal/telegraphic districts and equally with them the General Post
Offices at St. Petersburg/Petrograd and Moscow were entitled to issue these postcards or whether that could also be
done, for instance, by postal and telegraphic offices at provincial centers and even merely in large towns. At the very
least, the Warsaw General Post Office did issue its own formula cards (Fig. 12).
The PS formula cards of the second period are considerably more varied in the design, colour and stock used
in their manufacture (Figs. 13 to 15). Some of them had no notes at bottom. Red colours prevailed in a wide variety
of shades (e.g. St. Petersburg/Petrograd, Arkhangel'sk, Omsk, Perm', Riga,, Tambov, Tiflis and Warsaw) and in
shades of brown (at Irkutsk, Kiev, Moscow, Orel, Samara, Turkestan and Vil'na), but there are found also formula
cards printed in ochre (e.g. Smolensk), blue (e.g. Kiev) and in black. Some administrations generally retained the
same colour (with considerable variations in shade, however) during the whole period, while others changed it (e.g.
Kiev, Nizhnii-Novgorod and Vladikavkaz). There were attempts to make the design of the formula card similar to
that of the imprinted PS cards of that period, e.g. in Omsk and Perm' (V&L Figs. 17 & 20), which were probably
manufactured at the same printing shop, as they are very much alike. Also, individual PS formula cards of some other
local administrations strikingly resemble each other, e.g. those of Samara and Turkestan (Figs. 16 & 17) and
Arkhangel'sk and Riga (Figs. 14 & 18). Almost every administration prepared several issues or printings of PS
formula cards; some of them did it every or almost every year (e.g. St. Petersburg/Petrograd and Moscow General
Post Offices and the Riga Postal & Telegraphic District).
Let us specify the terms used. PS formula cards differing in the design and/or colour are considered as
separate issues. If the design is the same or where there are only minor differences (e.g. the year in the Moscow
formula card), or different in the stock (thin or thick, smooth or rough, shades) or in the shade of the printing colour,
then they are regarded as different printings. Often, the difference between issue and printing is rather conventional
For example, PS formula cards in the same design for the Kiev P/T District were printed in the mid-1910s, first in
lighter or darker shades of brown on thin or thick stock and later on in blue. The transfer to another colour could have
been caused in this case merely by the lack of brown ink in wartime conditions; nevertheless, it is regarded as a
separate issue. It is also difficult to judge if the formula cards in brown of this particular P/T District on thin or thick
stock were from different printings, or whether they were printed at the same time. PS formula cards of the Omsk P/T

November 2004

District are another example. Those cards were first printed very accurately on a stock of good quality, but during the
war both the printing and the stock worsened considerably, although the design remained the same (Figs. 19 & 20).
Leaving a more detailed listing of the PS formula cards issued by various administrations and recorded up to
now for future publication, we add such lists for the St. Petersburg General Post Office and the Riga Postal &
Telegraphic District at the end of this article. There is also a table giving a general review of the number of issues
recorded for every possible administration. The number of issues assumed to have been made by particular
administrations, i.e. PS cards having no indicia (except those whose origin has been firmly established) are shown in
brackets. The table compiled on the basis of my collection, as well as information contained in [1] and other sources,
includes all local administrations (postal & telegraphic districts and main/general post offices) that existed according
to the official information as at 1889 and 1909. In the meantime, there were abolished the postal & telegraphic
districts of Baku, Lyublin, Orenburg, Penza, Poltava, Transbaikalia, Tver' and Yaroslavl, as well as those equal to
district status at the Odessa Frontier Post Office and the Warsaw General Post Office; however, postal & telegraphic
districts were created at Ekaterinoslav and Samara. Also, the independent Postal & Telegraphic Administration of
Finland was replaced by the Finnish Postal & Telegraphic District, subordinate to the CPA. The Murmansk Postal &
Telegraphic District was also created in 1917, but it hardly had time to issue any formula cards.
There are some local formula cards that deserve particular attention. The PS card shown in Fig. 21 is printed
in red colour on thick stock. It was issued in 1915 by the Finnish Postal & Telegraphic District in a printing of
393,000 copies [7], mainly for the mail of the soldiers of the Russian Army quartered in Finland, although it could of
course have been used by civilians as well. Another special PS formula card also printed in red is shown in Fig. 22 It
is peculiar that the rectangle for the postage stamp is missing in the upper right corer. That postcard is found only in
the post-free soldiers' mail from the South-Westem Front. One may therefore assume that it was not issued by any
civilian postal administration, but by the Postal/Telegraphic Section of the Main Military Communications
Administration of the South-Western Front especially for this purpose. Also, a great variety of local formula cards of
the second period were used for soldiers' mail during WWI. They were sometimes supplied with a corresponding
overprint, e.g. "From the Army on Active Service / POST-FREE" (Fig. 23). At least one formula card was issued in
black for the free mail of the Active Army (Fg. 24), although it remains unknown whether it was a CPA or a local
issue. Finally, there exists an official PS formula card in red that, instead of the rectangle for the stamp, had a double
oval with the text meaning "Storehouse of Her Imperial Majesty Aleksandra Fedorovna" That card, which cannot be
considered local, was destined also for the post-free soldiers' mail Fig. 25.
There further exists a PS formula card in brown with the new coat-of-arms adopted by the Provisional
Government in 1917. It is still unknown whether it was issued by the CPA or some local postal administration, e.g. in
Petrograd or Moscow. Anyway, this formula postcard is known to me used only during the Soviet administration in
the early 1920s Fig. 26.
Some local PS formula cards were later provided with overprints or surcharges. For instance, formula cards
of the Petrograd General Post Office, as well as those with the Provisional Government coat-of-arms mentioned
above, were issued in 1919 with the surcharges "10 KOI." or "10" (Fig. 27). In 1923, the remaining stocks of
formula postcards, together with other blanks, as well as imprinted PS cards used then as blanks, were provided with
handstamps of the postal/telegraphic administration that sold them (Figs. 26 & 29). Formula cards of the Petrograd
General Post Office and of the Riga Postal & Telegraphic District are also found with the privately or semi-officially
applied overprint of the Phrygian cap in March 1917 (Fig. 28). Finally, during the early years of Soviet power, there
were also issued local formula cards of original design with the RSFSR coat-of-arms (Figs. 29 & 30).
The following listings are arranged in the supposed order of issuing the formula cards, which is determined
mainly by the earliest date of cancellation found. Of course, such a method is not quite safe and errors are therefore
possible. Also, no numbers are attributed to the postcards; the finding of items still unknown to the present author
and which should be placed among those listed here, are in no case excluded. Also, the sequence of listing can be
changed when the earliest date of use is specified more exactly. Stock thickness of 0.1 to 0.2 mm. is considered
medium; under or over it, thin or thick respectively.
Issues of the St. Petersburg/Petrograd Main Post Office
Colour/shade of print Thickness/shade of stock Indicium Earliest Fig.
date of
1 st period
ochre medium/buff no 24.08.06 31
ochre medium/buff no 30.09.06 32
ochre medium/buff posthor ? V&L 8
November 2004

2n period
brick-red medium to thick /yellowish posthorn 04.01.11 V&L 7
or brownish buff 33
brick-red medium/yellowish buff posthom + 13.12.14 V&L 11
SPB.-P-t 34
brick-red to rose medium/whitish through posthorn + 21.02.15 35
yellowish to brownish buff P.-P-t
deep lilac medium/brownish buff posthom + 30.05.17 V&L 9
P.-P-t 35,
brick-red medium/brownish buff posthom + ? 36
I INumber of recorded PS formula cards (to 191711


I" rnrind


Post/Telegraph Districts
Arkhangel'sk (1) 1
Ekaterinoslav 1
Finland 1
Grodno I
Irkultsk 1(1)
Kazan' I
Kiev (3) 3
Kishinev 1)
Nizhni Novgorod 3
Odessa (1)
Omsk 4 (1)
Orel 2 (2)
Orenburg -
Pemi' (2) 1 (1)
Poltava ,
Priamur (3)
Riga (3) 9
Rostov 2
Samara 2
Saratov 1
Smolensk 1
St. Petersburg/Petrograd
Tambov 1
Tiflis 1
Turkestan 1
Vil'na _
Vladikavkaz 2
Main Post Offices (Pochtamts)
SPb/Petrograd 1(2) 5
Moscow 1(2) 6
Frontiers or Central Post Offices
Warsaw (1) 1

Note: there is shown in brackets the number of issues, which have no indicium but can be with certainty attributed to a
particular local administration.
November 2004

n2" nprinrl

Issues of the Riga Post/Tele~raoh District

Colour/shade of print Gradelshade of stock Indicium Earliest Fig.
date of
1s period
brown medium/yellowish buff no 29.11.02 1
light or deep brown medium/yellowish buff no 10.02.05 3
ochre medium/yellowish buff no 09.12.08 37
2nd period
reddish brown medium/yellowish buff Rizhsk. p.-t. ? 38
brick-red medium/yellowish buff Rizhsk. p.-t. 14.04.11 39
brick-red medium/yellowish buff Rizhsk. p.-t. 27.04.14 V&L 24
okr. 39
rose to red medium/yellowish buff Rizhsk. p.-t. 20.12.14 40
red medium/yellowish to Rizhsk. p.-t. 20.03.15 V&L 23
brownish buff okr. 41
red medium/yellowish buff Rizhsk. p.-t. 01.05.16 42
brick-red to dull medium (bad quality) Rizhsk. p.-t. 09.11.16 V&L 21
orange /yellowish buff okr. 43
red* medium/yellowish buff Rizhsk, p.- 20.03.17 44
tel. okr.
red** medium/yellowish buff Rizhsk. p.-t. 05.04.20 V&L 22
O___kr. 18
This card differs from that in fig. 42 only by a much smaller coat-of-arms.
** This card seems to be not released in Riga itself because of occupation of this town by Germans on 21 August 1917
(O.S.); its stock together with the remainders of previous issues was evacuated and known used later in South Russia
and Ukraine under the Soviets.
These lists do not pretend for completeness, so any additions or corrections by readers are welcome.
1.. V Vinokur and M. Lam. The local issues of formula postcards. "The Post Rider" No. 50,
June 2002, 105-110.
2. Ivo Steyn. The poor relations: Imperial Russian formula cards. "British Journal of Russian
Philately" No. 79, October 1995, 16-22.
3. A. llyushin. Formlyary otkrytykh pisem Rossii. ,,Filateliya SSSR" JX2 5, 1984, 36-38
4. Leon Nebenzahl. Es muss nicht immer ein Wertstempel sein. Hamburg 1994.
5. V. Marcilger. Riga: Die Postgeschichte bis 1919. 1987.
6. Pochtovo-Telegrafhyi Zhurnal, Otdel ofitsial'nyi, No. 56, 1909.
7. Suomen Postimerkkien Kasikirja, v. 5, 1970.
H3 HCTOPHH CAHKT-IIETEPBYPrCKOH IfI9ThI 1703-1914 (From the history of the St. Petersburg
Post 1703-1914), by M.A. Dobin & L.G. Ratner. A hardbound book of 344 + 12 pages, 16 x 19.2 cm. Issued in St.
Petersburg 2004 in Russian and English by CranjapT-KojuieKna, 191186 C.-IIeTep6ypr, n/a XM 103, E-mail:
stand-col(,poo3.rcom.r. Available direct at US $21.00 post-paid, or from your favourite Russian-area dealer.
This highly useful work basically complements the study "St. Petersburg: The Imperial Post its postmarks
and other postal markings (1765-1914)" by I.L.G. Baillie & E.G. Peel. The numerous clear tables and illustrations in
the present work are of exceptional quality and make it very easy to read. Among the many facets covered, the
treatment of the "IIO'S3JWb" and "I-IOTA" markings of the St. Petersburg Suburban Train Service is absolutely
outstanding. Do not miss this opportunity to obtain a magnificent survey by two renowned Russian postal historians!
36 November 2004

Fig. 1.

_ ...... .. .......... .... ... ... -9 -
. .. ......... ..... ............ ......... . .. ....

................. ...... ........
-- ..- -
ua maor eop.,pourmwe me dno M a'pcsa.

Fig. 3.

S All the 44 illustrations have been reduced to 65%.


lra smorcemi opoC n nfutteme m ,IOAtMO aspect.

Fig. 2.

...... ...... ..... ... ... ............ ......... .......

.. .... .... . ..... ......... .. .... ........ .. .. .

R Ha' smaiM campoIn nauicmce oa adpeci.

Fig. 4
1 TI ~dOE II jI0"-

Fig. 5. Fig. a.
Fig. 6a.

November 2004


a 9,Io c ig.lpo ln tlllUlfllCA llOAhO a7ilpat
Fig. 7a.

II -


:.- R.-^ oA,
#" :' "- 'lg

November 2004

Fig. 14.


Opa 6k/~~f zi~T i

*----~~~~-- /`-1- -`

Fig. 11.

IIoITOBa KIapTOfta. l
u -
m apitn.

PaOCOB. n.-re... OKp.

Fig. 12.


Apt. n.-2. Ozp.

Fig. 13.

Fig. 16.

Fig. 19. Fig. 20.

November 2004

Fig. 22.

nlOHTOBh i H PTOHhA. k. i.o

Ha smoai cmoponm nuawemca maoKo a pan.

Fig. 15.



Fig. 21.

-- --

D r

Fig. 25.


_.. .... ... .. .................. .. ... ..

............ .^ -..--.--. -..........--
... .. .... ..-.-................ -.....- .-.- .-- *.--- /-.- ----- --- -

n. n-T
Fig. 27.

I ............ s
,... .,. -: .

T-z ~ $$~eK

Fig. 29.


* :


Fig. 24.

Hn sm02r cmopoaro nwrimcrg mojaxe adpas.
Fig. 26.



November 2004

Fig. 30.

Fig. 28.

{4 r MaPRH

..... .......... T AL I- ----

Ha 3TOR CTOPOHB 1TwllueTCf TanbHD aJpec-
Ry6.acgo qep P.wopcKOD n- Ynpasn.

Fig. 31.

Flig. 33.


... ,-n.

Fig. 35.

Fig. 37.


Ha smoS cmopo.~ nuuemca maoxo aopecs.

Fig. 36.

Fig. 38.

November 2004



T ...........

......... ...... ..............

... ... .. ...... ..... ........................ .
S.... .... .. .... ..... ....

Ia flnoi Ccmfqonn num.clnct hmo.s.w adfpcr.

Fig. 32.


..... i ............................................................................................

cns. n--^

Fig. 34.


*' .W- -
'. .'" i -' '' .- '. -i -- .l ',-li
._ _." ? t.., ::;;-: 7.' -.:; .. 7 .2 .

-.ti ". ; = 7 : a ,
.. nr -' ..r'."' -. ,.: fl. '; : ,.L ., ?


------- -.......... ... ......... ..... ..... ................ ... I ........... .....L... ..... ............

......... ........................ ............ .. ... ........ ....... .. ..... ......... .... ................. ... ..... .. .....

..... ...... ........ ..................... .. ............. ................. ....... ........ ..... ........


Pnmcx. n.-T, QXp.

I, ----

7 .&,
jt--: .







../. .. .

Fig. 41. Fig. 42.


.. . . ..... ... ..... .....

^ ---- _- -- a------

Pu'cL f-?e-e. oIpp.

Fig. 43. Fig. 44.
by Alexander Epitein.
I am showing hereunder a few examples of air unit free franks as an addition to the generally well-informed
article by Dr. G. Adolph Ackerman (see "The Post-Rider" No. 53, pp. 7-25).
To combat the still quantitatively and qualitatively predominant enemy aviation, it was decided to start
manufacturing fighter planes. Ten fighter squadrons were formed by mid-1916 and their number increased to 12 by
the end of that year (*). Fig. 1 shows a postcard written on 3 October 1917 and addressed to Moscow from Field Post
Office "K". Violet free frank cachets reading "XIth. Aviation Squadron of Fighters" (XI :Aeiaz4ioHHibti Ompadst
Hcmpe6ume.Ae) were applied on both sides of the card. The FPO "K" was attached to the 5". Army Headquarters
in Dvinsk (Daugavpils) and that designated the approximate base of that squadron.

November 2004

The next two examples concern the naval aviation. Fig. 2 shows the back of a cover that arrived in Narva on
23.9.15 with a free frank cachet in violet reading "Naval Aviation Station" (MopcKcaa AeiaqioHnai Cmariw).
There is no postmark of the despatching post office, but as is evident from the message preserved with the cover, the
sender found himself in Revel' (Tallinn). Thus, this cachet belongs to the Aviation Station in Revel'.
The seaplanes were used also for the purposes of reconnaissance. A free-frank cachet in violet with the text "Aviation
Station of the B(altic) S(ea) Communications Service" (AeatioHuaa CmamHia CAyzS6bi CeR3u E.M.), applied on
the back of a cover to Leal 11.2.16, is featured in Fig. 3. Again no despatching postmark, but it follows from other
pieces in the same batch of correspondence that this station was located on Oesel Island (Saaremaa) near the town of
Arensburg (Kuresaare), or perhaps in Revel' (Tallinn). It was actually called the Naval Reconnaissance Aviation
Communications Service. It is interesting to note also that the first word in the text of the cachet is Avatsionnaya and
not Aviatsionnaya, i.e. both the words Aviatsiya and Avatsiya were used at that time in Russian for "Aviation".
Let me also correct some mistakes originating from the sources where the author drew his information (the
article by Vsevolodov in particular). Firstly, the lt. Aeronautical Squad, as the text in the cachet in Fig. 10d should
be translated, (they were balloon rather than glider squads) could hardly have been located in Kars (Vsevolodov calls
it Karsk, but there was no such town in Russia); that squad was most probably attached to the l't. Army. The text in
the cachet in Fig. 1Oa should be translated as the Aviation Squadron of the 23". Corps, similarly to those in Figs. 6a,
9b, 10c & 11. These squadrons had the same number or designation as the infantry corps to which they were
attached, i.e. the 6h. Guard and 1I". Siberian. However, the 23rd. Corps (and its aviation squadron) was never located
near Petrograd; at different times it fought on the North-Western Front (in Poland); later on at the West, North and
South-Western Fronts. Also, the postcard with the cachet in Fig. 10c could not have been sent in August 1915 from
L'vov, which was recaptured by the Germans and Austrians as early as June and the Guard Corps was never
quartered in or near L'vov. In the summer of 1915, it was located far away from Galicia, namely in Vil'no (Vilnius).
The rule regarding the numbers or designations applied also to the Aviation Divisions. In particular, the 7t. Aviation
Division was attached to the 7th. Army, but that Army with its Aviation Division was located in July 1916 in Eastern
Galicia (Western Ukraine, with the Headquarters at Buchach), rather than near Petrograd. By the way, the stamp
affixed to the picture side of the postcard in Fig. 9b is cancelled at the Field P.O. 'T", attached to the 7". Army HQ
The paper does not mention the aeronautical squads, which were formed in 1916 and attached to the Armies.
Fin. 4 herewith depicts the back of a cover to Estlyand province and posted at the F.P.O. No. 143 on 9.9.17. The free
frank reads"XIIth. Army Aeronautical Squad / For Packages" (XIII ApMeccwiiu Bo.byxonaaeameJlbHbib
Ompidsb / ,nrt HaIacemnoe). The general rule concerning the designations of numbers of the corps aviation
squadrons and aviation divisions applies also to these squads.
There were 12 numbered armies in Russia during WWI (the 13th. Army existed only for a short time in the
summer of 1915), but there were also the Special (Oco6an) and Caucasian Armies. This XIIIth. Aeronautical Squad
was attached to the Special Army on the South-Western Front. The Field Post Office No. 143 served the 4". Cavalry
Corps, which was a part of the Special Army in September 1917 and located in the Volyn' province of present-day
(*) JI.1. BecKpOBHisrm "ApMIa H qJIOT PoccmH B na'ane XXB.: oqepKH BoeHHo-3KOHOMH ecKoro
uoTeHmnaraa". MocKBa, "HayKa", 1986.


2November 2004
FU!. 1.- Reduced to 65 %.

November 2004

g. 2: Actual size. 3. Reduced to 65 %. Fi
S* *

by Robert Taylor, Dr. G. Adolph Ackerman, Dr. Ivo Steijn and Andrew Cronin.
[Editorial Note: The German phrase in the title means "Forwarded by Airmail" and it is important to divide this
subject into three distinct political periods, as follows:-
(a) The Weimar Republic in Germany from 1919 to 30 January 1933, when the volume of mail was at its peak and
there was close military and aviation cooperation between the two countries. Airmail service did not come. into
being until 1922, as we will see below.
(bM The hostile Third Reich period from 30 January 1933 to 23 August 1939, when the flow of airmail was at its
lowest point because of the deep mutual antipathy between the two political systems.
(c A very uneasy rapprochement between the two ideologies from 23 August 1939 when the Nazi-Soviet Non-
Aggression Pact was signed, until 22 June 1941 when Nazi Germany attacked the USSR. The continued application
of the German "Forwarded by Airmail" cachets was still theoretically possible in this last period, but no examples
have yet been seen by us.
Upon reviewing the data supplied hereunder by our esteemed contributors, it should then be possible to
assign approximate grades of rarity to the described material. It is realized that German aerophilatelists have already
studied the subject thoroughly on an overall basis, but we are dealing here with the special airmail relationships
between two specific countries. That affected accordingly the grades of rarity of the flown mail, the routings for
some of which were unusual.
Finally, it can be concluded that the fall of the Weimar Republic on 30 January 1933 turned out to be an
enormous tragedy for both countries, as demonstrated by what happened in the 1941-1945 period.
In recording the flown items, the card and cover illustrations have been reduced to 65%, but they are
accompanied by the relevant cachets and/or postmarks in actual size, together with appropriate comments where
necessary. Examples from our contributors now following chronological order].
Robert Taylor:
**-cfw ^0t ^ { ^ ^ *-\2,-,-.-
Moscow uflps be rt

V,3 0 13.6.22 1 .., I
Fifth Deruluft yy

... / Kd nigsberg ..

Correct total
i -::: -' postal rate of. -
-. 600,000 (old)
=60 r. (1922).

November 2004

Mit Luftpost befirdert.
Kinigsberg (Pr.) 1.

Berlin C/2

Mit Luftpost befdrdert
Flugpost Minchen 2

_,xalA .l ~g 26.6.22

Correct total postal rate of 600,000 (old) roubles =60 roubles (1922).
The 300r. stamps sold at 10 times face & Arms Type at 10,000r. per kopek. ? .

Mit Luftpost

Ofst befo rdert-
KBimgsbeieg (Pr.) L
Mit Luftpost befirdert.
Kdnigsberg (Pr.) 1.

Mit Luftpost beffrdert
Briefpostamt Berlin

Fig. 3. Franking: 32 kop.

MRit Lhnftp.C st bd frd

Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost befir
K6nigsberg (Pr.)
Note usage of an Imperial postcard<
with imprint "II. II-T" at bottom

Nizhnii Fig 4. Franking: 40kop. on back.
3.9.24. if j Iff f P
7j. Berlin- ^foe
rdert, Schtneberg: i 1#tta, Utt .
erI. 5.9.24 wt 4_... .

d blank Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost Applied in Berlin,
m left. befordert. according to
Bahnpostamt 4. ; Godfrey White.
See also Figs. 6 & 8,
November 2004

Moscow 8.5.24
Moscow 8.5.24


Boxed Boxed cachet:
cachet Mit Luftpost
Mit Luftpost befirdert / Flugpostamt Dresden N. 2 -- Bahnpostamt 4.

I 'irA
FnJ''1u:-1 .lk. S RBH H HH uo flAnn ^ i^^ pC ell fer l^

3pagyuIH' IoIo'ir- B:3filymAHR Air mai8l TiO 1
3aa88Hoe Par avion Enrgiaer.
~,...,.- 1 - .w ,. *", Boxed cachet:
r-Hy- PI'AAP_' l~errn Max Norgaard Mit Lufpost befirdert Uber
0*-7. 1g Flughafen Tempelhofer Feld
HioneHPraPH 14 I Ved Amagerport Postamt Berlin C 2
s Jr_:/ Kjobenhavx C0. '.

.. .f.i. aS Da.

Moscow 30.4.26 Berlin C2 Franking: 58 kop.

November 2004

Boxed cachet:
Mit Luftpost
Bahnpostamt 4.

Unsuccessful attempted delivery. Large boxed cachet also
applied in Moscow advertising air routes.

r.)1. Mit Luftpost bef~rdert
F Hu-amt CUit: e -Flugpostamt Braunschweig

November 2004

f64 I* -IA^e^-.O
v, *

Fig. 2.. Proletarskaya, Salskii Okr. 6.10.28
Berlin 12.10.28
Hannover 13.10.28
Y F m Franking:
e .,_, 75 kop.
UVL~L" *r ^^-^C/t

Sent from Krupp Agric. Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost bef"rdert.
Concession, Rostov prov.uftpostamt Berlin C 2.

Moscow 19 & 21.8.29 Sent ito well-known
Danzig 21 & 22.8.29 Baltic-German dealer
Tallinn 24.8.29 Eduard von Baggo.
Franking 68 kop.

Mit Luftpost betirdert
Flugpostamt Danzig C(?)

November 2004



Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost befOrdert.
Luftpostamt Berlin C 2.
Lenrd 2.9.9 C.d.s.: Ptrth-Ntirnberg
Leningrad 2.9.29 C5.9.29
Franking: 80 kop. Flughafen

Fig. 15.

..' -

Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost beftrdert
Postamt Mttnchen 2
(smaller than inFig. 2

Irkutsk 21.10.29
Moscow 28.10.29
Berlin 30.10.29
Munich 30.10.29

Franking: 61 kop.

l (-_-^ ___ --- '-' a C--"l DT' .../ ---... ..L .-- e ( ,.--.-.I
, .."'-,'.. _.., .-..,_'____________________________.

Fig. 16. Franking: 16k. + 28k.back. Moscow 2.7.30 Fig. 17. Franking: 43 kop.
1* Moscow red (unusual):
S" 25-26.6.30 10 Boxed cachet:
? -A '- Berlin 26.6.30 aL xMit Luftpost bef.rdert
.. -sseldorf 27.6.30 .. .- K nigsberg P- 1.

I -u "bef rdert: ....
PA .d. ..-of --1,. ., -.

Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost bef"rdert.
Luftpostamt Berlin C 2. Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost be ordert n Berlin C2/L
Luftpostamt Berlin C 2. 5.7.30
November 2004
25-26.6.30 Boxed cachet:
: Berlin 26.6.30 Mit Luffpost beifrdert
"-sseldorf27.6.30 6.7 -15 Knigsberg,(Pr.) 1.

t i~t PA. ~sddof ..~--...........--

Mit Ltfpost befrdert t q:

Luftpostamt Berlin C 2. cachet: t p d Berlin C2/L
Luftpostarnt Berlin C 2. 5.7.30
November 2004

OSJAD2Ak %I.H iT1 ~ n2 9014 iO

~errn L~rulviig hiedh-ner 4 t r~ ror-Qrc Urc~ePS
Ir cioetrieofenbavu F. I 1oTjrnr PInrapwep

"G El
.irau'etorgrhben dGt LC .L. .343.3

12 r. b 2 .tr Jfy a/,4'

e-21U ,O/ UARJ
A KlICTZT T T 9 7','-
e --j
-.L f, loa;on.. 44 -C**=0 AIt
2..?...~2~lih~ '~ ~3 I 0 ojI a,

Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost befbrdert
Luftpostamt Berlin C 2.

Boxed cachet:
( : [t -..f.1.t I i Mit Luftpost bef6rdert
i t i' Postamt MUnchen 2
S(smaller than in Fig. 2)

Leningrad 28 & 29.7.30
Franking: 67 kop.

Fig. 18.

M8 S -Moscow 29 8 30

Franking. 45 kop

.~4 .'-~'~~~B:-'='-'I
14U.;4~i ZADL8 S

~... .%,

Boxed cachet:

Fig. 19.

Mit Luftpost beft6rdert
Berlin Zentralflughafen

Branch airmail P.O.
Berlin Central Airport

Fig. 20.

Moscow 6.10.30
Franking: 65 kop.

Mit Luftpost befdrdert
Berlin C2

Tt7aIron. A2c7 .2
Dr A Joeh
'Qar. 'V16 K-7

Ldf ordI,

L Grappenhall,


November 2004

Warrington, -

Moscow-9: 19.6.31
Warrington 22.6.31

Franking: 65 kop.

Mit Luftpost bef6rdert
Berlin -

*L. -

~c~ r
~; r
..., .I-
)I'F "'
i;-Iift R1~ V I
k~i: ;



Ri' ~Btter-tr.6.1.


-3/ 001o0

W81it P?4t.),-s( bC!&dr

Leningrad 12.6.32
Franking: 80 kop.

1~.4 Figf. 22.
I T-1

Mit Luftpost
Postamt 1 Hannover
(smaller than in Fig. 12)

Bcecolo3soe 06'efnHeHHe Mf UI WH O HM nOPT
M C K B A, KaAarHeBxaa 15 -



- 'M o t or enwerxke
. vo rn. BE
5 /V


Moscow 18.8.32

Mit Luftpost befOrdert
Berlin C 2

?iia, i

Ma n n hoe;-i m.
-- -- = = =

Fig. 24.


Berlin 21.8.32 j M

f .'CZ' .. -*. 2 -. .- __ -

*i -,:,..,: _7-/4 4

Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost berdrdert
Flugpostamt -
Postamt 2 Mannheim

Franking: 75 kop.

Fig. 23. Moscow-5, 31.8.32

Mit Luftpost beftrdert
Frankfurt (Main) 2.
Mit Luftpost bef6rdert
Berlin -

i. nHit Luftpost ab Kglt und Vorausf lg .
nach New-york.
Catapult-ServTie. Par avio
ae ab Cherbourg am .september 1952.

I -as ,

Mr.Sanford BPolkann
_'______,__, '12977 CeBar Road
iiC 1 e v e 1 a n HeightsOhio

IU.I R Bur ..... de Po... 51
.r M 8, *

oscow 7.9.32 Fig. 25. Franking: Ir. 50k

Mit Luftpost befordert

November 2004

s -,:. t, ,.; +4.

Allemagnu Munidi Germany

Fg. 26. Moscow 4.2.33
Franking 50 kop.

Mit Luftpost beffirdert
Postamt Minchen 2
(unframed type!)

Dr. G. Adolph Ackerman:

Fig. 28.

Moscow 13926

B;.,, entn" R6ei~ Yorkl
1,/2. October 1933
i on VO'h L c ntc~ U.S.A.

V i-C f t in d.ut-
V N.Y.rkleb6

x Z

U. S--. A.~ --~~ IY
I: B.SY.

Mit Luftpost befordert
Postamt K'ln Flughafen

Berlin C2/L

Franking: 68 kop.

Franking 58 kon. Boxed

Addressed to the Ukrainian Baptist Immigration Rada, Saskatoon 26.9.26!
52 November 2004

- t w -C
I L. le

14 11
.z ~;"b~~F~13 9.f
i F' LV

,Y-. *ii, I.

Mit Luftpost befirderr tber
Flughafen Tempelhofer Feld
Berlin Postamt C2

Berlin C2

'4 .iidcj .

Gluchow r ruyxoe

-e I /?i. -I

a5 -C25Acc-Oo2z.

ohkulG v 10 9 26




j- /C~C 72 C~

F/ 19,
,A" 4Pt :
u4Ac- sr :X

Dr. Ivo Steiin:

iTATE BANr OP. THE U, S. -de f T.~SA iek .d.~S
UAI -I..i.p.. W~n e. .~gr -jI*** rip s Kantr. 6,
4C .
.. .. .. i
i Z.,
.............. -zf
ME 073-fs~j~
,r. %V
~'-.r~ :g
~~-~; ~ L4~- ~ tiJ~P~S~~ ~i--r ''~ 27

K'nigsberg (Pr.) 1.

Fig. 30.
1 3 "--
lit Lultpost befirde l'I

fostamtNfrnberg 2 Flihaf J

Berlin C2/L Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost befirdert
1.3.33 Postamt Nirnberg 2 Flughafen


The greater the number of airmail cachets applied, the greater the interest of the flown item
November 2004

) 1 *.- *

Boxed cachet: Mit Luftpost befbrdert
Luftpostamt Berlin C2.

Leningrad 25.5.30

Franking: 2r. 58k.

This large bank cover has
been reduced to 50%.

Fig. 29.

SPar avionR EXPEDITION -,- Mfit Luftpost beflrdert
2.d pIl., y-L R l,32,13 \ I
""" _. T IUFTPOST Luftpostamt
.6 e Berlin C2

I- Herrn Mit Luftpost ,-
:-lSOd!fl a Rechnungsrat Eduard Vieide, beftrdert "--' f-.f
6_... ~Langenforth.a Postamt 1 Hannover S ,.*
*w'sc os t Lagiagen b. Hannover. *

Special Note: The cover shown here in Fig. 31 and referring to the International Polar Year of 1932 is purposely out
of sequence, but highly unusual, as the first leg of air transmission (Franz-Josef Land 26.VIII.32 to Arkhangel'sk
28.8.32) never took place !! Our Secretary and airmail specialist, P.J. Campbell, pointed out that the distance from
Franz-Josef Land to Arkhangel'sk could not have been covered in two days by the aircraft available in 1932. The
well-known Russian Polar specialist E.P. Sashenkov could find no record of that particular flight in the Soviet press
or official publications and it appears that the original point of posting was organised by the Soviet Philatelic
Association at Arkhangel'sk. Most of this mailing went to Europe via Germany and the only air service we can be
sure of would have been Moscow-to-Berlin, plus onward air transmission from Berlin as required (see E.P.
Sashenkov: "llojpiaA IToTrra", Svyaz' Publishers, Moscow 1975, pp. 72-76). The example above proves air
service from Moscow to Berlin and Berlin to Hannover. Airmail cachets applied for further flights to other
destinations should exist on similar covers, thus being in combination with a non-existent flight. Quite a conversation
piece and who has other such examples?
Editorial Comment: Looking back over the material kindly furnished here by our contributors, the following
tentative conclusions would appear to be in order:-
(a) The "Forwarded by Airmail" cachets applied by Berlin and KRnigsberg are relatively common, as most of the
airmail from the USSR was funnelled through those two cities. The best Berlin item would appear to be the marking
of the Tempelhof Airfield (see Figs. 7. 9 & 28).
(b) The cachets struck at Hannover unboxedd), Munchen (Munich) and Nt~naberg-2, with their sub-types (see Figs.
7. 9 & 28) are scarce and desirable.
(c) The markings applied at DIlsseldorf (ig. 16), boxed Hannover 1 Fig.6), Frankfurt (Main) 2 and Frankfurt
(Main) Flugplatz (Figs. 11 & 23) are relatively rare.
(d) The "Danzig" cachet (Fig. 13) is exceptional because, although inscribed in the same Germanic style, the city and
surrounding district legally constituted the "Free City of Danzig", including an official Polish presence (Port
Gdafisk), as set out in the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. That status was ended by the Third Reich in September 1939.
(e)_The markings of Braunschweig (Fg. 0, Dresden 2 (Fig. 5), K'ln 2 & Postamt Koln Flughafen (Figs. 25 & 27),
as well as Mannheim (Fig 24) are rare.
It is surprising that the cachet for Disseldorf (Fig.16) seems to be rare, as the city is in the heart of the Ruhr
district and it would have received enquiries regarding industrialisation from many Soviet enterprises. Also, the
application of varied and numerous airmail cachets certainly adds to the value of any particular flown item.
This survey is relatively small and it is obvious that more data are needed from CSRP members to fill out the
picture. There is no doubt that collecting this material could lead to the formation of an interesting philatelic exhibit.
SPECIAL NOTE: The Turkish Army in Batum
This unrecorded marking was featured as Lot No. 4292 in the 197". Karamitsos Sale of 6
November 2004, being signed by Yakup Nakri and estimated at 350 Euros. As one result of
the various treaties signed at Brest-Litovsk in March 1918, the Turkish Army subsequently
occupied the Georgian port of Batum until probably after the Armistice to some time in
December 1918. The British 27th. Division plus a small French contingent disembarked in
the port on 22 December.
The inscription on the piece shown here reads at top: "Batum Mevki" (=Batum Outpost) and
at bottom "Kumandanligi" (= Its Commander). In short, it was the official cachet of the
Turkish Commander there and we need to see it applied on mail, so as to determine if it
could also have served as a postal or post-free frank.
54 November 2004

by L.G. Ratner.
In his legal investigation of "The Convention of Postal Transmission", N. Sokolov wrote:"The postage stamp
may be viewed as a item of value, such as a means of payment....With regard to the Postal Service in forwarding
mail, the postage stamp has the meaning of money. In cancelling a postage stamp... it is sufficient if it is carried out
in such a way that the postage stamp is deprived of its character ofvalue" [1].
The Postal Service clearly understood this and always tried to exclude the possibility of a repeated utilisation
of stamps in going through the mail. However, in preparing the issue of the first postage stamps and confirming with
the Ministry of Finances the listing of expenses in introducing the same, the Postal Department did not take into
account the expenses for the preparation and distribution within the country of the means of invalidation
(cancellation) of postage stamps by applying postmarks.
This omission was first noted in the Despatch Office for the Preparation of State Papers (93rB) and it
suggested to the Postal Department to utilise for the cancellation of postage stamps the same method which had been
applied on envelopes with impressed dies. In a letter dated 13 June 1856 from the Administration of the 3rFB, it is
stated: "Would it not be possible to order... upon the submission of 'printed stamps' (Author's note: Up to 20 October
1857, when the designation of 'postage stamps' was sanctioned by His Majesty, they were often called 'impressed
stamps'), to cross them out by ink, as is being done on the envelopes with impressed dies and thus would not be
included in the enumeration of expenses for the introduction of 'impressed stamps' with the avoidance ofpreparing
cancellers?" [2].
The Postal Department accepted this proposal and there were references to the cancellation by crosses in ink
on stamps in the documents, which appeared thereafter. However, the Postal Service foresaw the subsequent
application of cancellers to postmark postage stamps.
In the "Rules for the presence of postage stamps at the post offices", which were sanctioned in November
1857, it was stated: "In order to render impossible the secondary usage ofpostage stamps and until the introduction
of special cancellers, the postage stamps placed upon letters are to be cancelled by the application of a cross in ink,
as is now the case with envelopes bearing impressed dies" [3]. As it turned out in practice, the cancellation of
postage stamps by applying a cross in ink did not guarantee that they could not be used a second time.
In January-February 1858, letters about the utilisation of stamps, which had previously gone through the
post, arrived repeatedly at the Postal Department, together with suggestions for excluding such a possibility. The
authors of several letters advised the application of cancellers for that purpose. There was an interesting letter from
N. Bocharov, a chemist in Sudislavl', Kostroma province, in which he revealed one of the ways of turning used
stamps into unused ones. On 22 February 1858, he sent a letter to the Postal Department, in which he enclosed
cleaned stamps and he stated that: "After soaking in water, I took the enclosed stamps off letters received by meand
..removed the inked crosses so completely that they could be used again after affixing to letters and sending them off.
Removing the crosses in ink was very easy: all I had to do was to cover them with a layer of oxalic acid Iput
11/2 zolotniks (1 zolotnik = 4.266 grammes) of oxalic acid in a tumbler of hot water and when soaked then with a
brush or the tip of a pen I covered the inked cross, washed with water and then dried; after that, the stamp was again
suitable for application. Mr. Bocharov suggested further 'either use ink which would be impossible to dissolve and
did not damage the paper or... apply cancellers directly across the stamp; when applied properly, it would be very
difficult to remove' [4].
In the letter of reply sent at the beginning of March 1858 from the Director, N. Laube, and after some words
of thanks, it was stated that relevant measures had already been taken to prevent misuse. One of such measures was
the introduction of cancelling devices. An order No. 138 dated 26 February 1858 of the Postal Department refers to
the application of pre-stamp postmarks for cancelling postage stamps. Dotted cancellers were introduced for these
purposes at the General Post Offices of St. Petersburg and Moscow.
Private persons repeatedly suggested to the Postal Department, and also from 1884 to the Main
Administration of Posts and Telegraphs (FYIIT) various and, for those times, exotic types of postage stamps
(registration stamps with coupons, etc), together with methods for defending them against secondary usage. At the
end of March 1886, a certain Mr. Denevich offered to rYIHHT the sample of a canceller, which would pierce the
stamp. The Postal Director of the St. Petersburg G.P.O. was ordered to try out such a canceller and he reported on 5
July 1886 to the Director of frYIHT as follows: "The canceller invented by Denevich is worthy of attention... The
method of cancelling stamps by piercing them could block the misuse ofpostage stamps". As a disadvantage, which
would prevent the application of such a canceller, the Postal Director noted that the canceller: "would not only pierce
the stamp, but also the envelope and would leave a prominent trace on the enclosed letter" [5].
The Denevich canceller was tested at the St. Petersburg G.P.O. from April to July 1886. It would be
interesting to find a letter, which had gone through the G.P.O. during this period and which bore pierced stamps. On a

November 2004

one of the documents there is a notation: "The canceller has been handed over to the FYTIIT Museum / 9.2.87"
(now the Central Museum of Communications named after A.S. Popov).
..A letter from Titular Councillor Gurskii arrived at FYIrHT on 18 March 1887. He
Y; proposed that stamps should be provided with coupons to prevent their secondary
S usage. Two of such stamps were affixed as samples to the first page of the letter (see
Fig. enlarged).
SAs stated above, private persons often directed samples of postage stamps to the
attention of the Postal Service and among them there was a specimen on the basis of
S the first postage stamp, which F. Kepler as a private person proposed on 21 October
', 1856 to the Postal Department. This fact was confirmed by documents and rejected
-- as stated in the article by B. Kaminskii: "The story of the preparation and
." .. t "_ introduction of postage stamps in Russia" (see the magazine "(ImHJaTeJIH CCCP,
PHcyHOK 1 Fig. 1. No 6-7, 1970').
For information: Franz Michael Kepler was a citizen of the Duchy of_Hesse-Kassel and, as of 1 January 1853, he was accepted
"into the Despatch Office for the Preparation of State Papers (933B) as an engraver to help another engraver Kirchner".
According to the contract concluded by F. Kepler with the 933B, he could, "in his spare time when released from official
duties, accept and carry out commissions, with the proviso that private commissions would not be performed in official
workshops, but in private premises and not with official instruments". F. Kepler was discharged from the 93FB in 1888 and
appointed Manager of the Technical Section of the Third Department of Workshops.
In writing the present article, the question arose as to which prints of designs suggested for postage stamps
and prepared by any method whatever, would be of interest to collectors and which ones would just ordinary
drawings. It was not possible to find an exact answer to that question in the Russian-language philatelic literature. In
surveying the numerous formulations, it seems most likely as a basis to take into account the relationship of prints to
the Postal Service: i.e. their preparation upon a request from the Postal Service, or their scrutiny by the Postal
Service, etc. For example, a similar evaluation was given in the late 1920s in a note: "The story of two essays" in the
magazine "CoBeTcKHfi (DHiaTeJIacr, No 5 of 1928", namely:...there are two essays of 00r. with the portrait of
Lenin in 1921 one of them was viewed by the HKHuT (People's Commissariat of Posts & Telegraphs) and not
accepted and the second one was not even presented for confirmation... This second essay is of no philatelic interest
As a rule, it is characteristic for the Russian Postal Service that specimens of stamps prepared for
examination by the Postal Service would have accurate and carefully prepared designs. It was with cause that N.
Nosilov in the article "The first postage stamps of Russia" set out the opinion of A. Reinheimer, written in 1893 to
the effect that: "At that time, as well as in the majority ofEuropean countries, the proofs of stamps generally had an
ordinary design, which was not especially prepared carefully and I often was not able to observe a similar case in
the printed proofs ofRussian stamps "[6].

'' ""'nm m l *tn-<. ,.; t

PHcyHOK 2 Fig. 2.

PHCVHOK 3 Fig. 3.
November 2004

It appears that the stamps of Gurskii are the only ones preserved up to now among those examined by the
Postal Service of Russia, with the design in a rough draft of poor quality. Two envelopes with such stamps were
enclosed with the letter; one of the envelopes bearing a complete stamp and the other with the coupon torn off (see
Figs. 2 & 3 at the bottom of the previous page). The stamps were cancelled by an official cachet with a circular
inscription reading: "3K3eKyr. qacTa FjaBHoe YnpaBneHie noH b H Tejeerpa)poBa,. AnA nxceM'".The colour
of the strikes is black. The stamps were printed on thick white paper. The printing has a faint impression of a band on
a level with and below the word "KynoTb". The stamps are roughly perforated 10 V2 and only vertically between
them. The colour is ultramarine. Enumerating the stamps on documents one and two, it is possible to specify the
dimensions of the stamp design:-
The first stamp: 35 x 16.5 mm.; The second stamp: 35 x 16 mm.; Stamps on letters: 35 x 16 mm

Directions for their application were set out in the letter: "the gum in the lower part of the stamp is to be
moistened, not completely, but only in part (2/3 of the stamp). The stamps are to be affixed to the mail, as is now
being done, with the difference that the part of the stamp without gum is not affixed Upon posting the mail, the
stamps are to be postmarked with a canceller in the normal way. Upon receipt of the mail at the destination, the part
of the stamp which is not affixed is to be detached and the mail delivered to the addressees with just the affixed
portion of the stamp."
Unfortunately, the document has been poorly preserved. The sheets were badly affected by fungus and kept
in a formalin chamber. The text is blurred in a number of places and in restoring the sheets (including with the
stamps), they were covered with a paper of cigarette quality, thus giving the sheets a yellowish appearance.

/ .._ '

PHCyHOK 4 c -" Z...,. .-;. r
<--a err ne.o. Fig. 4
OparMeHTr nepBoro f-. ._ -.4 ej_
APTcra HChM8 ^e -. / w. (./,,c/,p .. A A fragment of the first page
rypcKoro HaSab HNKy a t / of the letter from Gurskii to
ST / the Director of ITIHT.

FYH.L. Z.5"-. -- y ..q

A report for the Director of FYHlT is given in the margins of the first sheet of the document (F. 4):
"There was a proposal made by Sub-Lieutenant German in June 1886 about the introduction of a new method of
cancelling the mail in a way completely identical with the current method of Gurskii. The proposal. y Mr. German
regarding the non-acceptance of his method by the Postal Director of St. Petersburg....is declined In view of this,
,the proposal by Gurskii should also remain without results". The decision of N. Bezak, the Director of FYIIHT and
written as "Agreed" is at the bottom of the report [7].
It has not been possible to discover any data about the stamp with coupon, as proposed by German. In any
case, it was yet another stamp proposed for examination by the Postal Service by a private person.
The reference to the report set out above only about the stamp with coupon in 1886 can be expanded by
turning to a much earlier period, namely to 1864. That year is noted in the article by V. Lobachevskii: "The Country-
wide Stamps of Russia" in the manual "Soviet Collector No. 14", referring to essays of postage stamps. There is
among them a stamp with a coupon. The illustration of such a stamp, including with the date of issue has often
appeared in auction catalogues (see Fig. at the top of the next page).

November 2004 57

PHCYHOK 5 KoMnt.oTepHbIA MOrTax( nJora

1864-65 Essays for Inland Postage

ayKIHOHHorO KaTanora PHCyHOK 6 KoMn'boTepHuiU MoHTa JIOTOB ayKcHOHHOTO KaTanora
Fig. 5. Fig. 6

It should be noted that the process of enquiry was organised in a superlative way by ryYITT. The reports to
the Director of rYIInT were prepared with specifications of all details regarding any question whatsoever.
Therefore, the absence of any mention shown in the report in Fig 4 about the stamp of 1864 with coupon evokes
some doubt that the design of such a stamp had been ordered by the Postal Service.
A more careful study of the text by V. Lobachevskii is now in order: "With the designs of the stamps of the
fourth issue, it was proposed that stamps with the values of 1, 3,5 & 10 kopeks would also be placed in circulation,
apparently only for internal mail and with the capital letters 'B' and 'K' on the stamps. The question was also looked
at regarding changing the procedure for cancelling stamps by the means of tearing special coupons offthem, so as to
exclude the possibility of defrauding the Postal Service by the repeated utilisation of stamps with postmarks which
had been removed". However, this statement gives rise to some discrepancies.
In talking about this matter, it should be noted that, judging from the design of the stamps and their face
value, it is most likely that the stamp essay (in Fi. 6) actually appeared in the middle of the 1860s. The discrepancies
are as follows:-
In the first place, the issue of stamps was never planned by the Postal Department, for which there was no
need. In 1864-1865, the rates for internal mail (ordinary letters) were multiples of 10 kopeks (for the City Posts in St.
Petersburg and Moscow: multiples of 5 kopeks). It was thus useless to pay in I & 3-kopek stamps within the country.
The necessity for those latter values arose in 1866 on an experimental basis for the introduction of paying for internal
wrapper sending, at a time when there were already 1 & 3-kopek stamps in circulation. However, by July 1864, the
Postal Department confirmed that all the stamps, which had been issued, could be utilised for the payment of
ordinary letters, both foreign and internal.
Secondly, because of the mass illiteracy of the population, the introduction of various stamps with the same
face value would have been unreal; most of the senders of letters could not read the capital letters "B" and "K". It is
clear from the documents : that the Postal Service constantly took into account the illiteracy of a portion of the
population of the country.
In the third place, there is not even any mention in the archival documents of the Postal Department and the
33rB about the preparation of proofs of special stamps for internal mail, with coupons, etc.
Fourthly, the proposals for the cancellation of stamps by tearing coupons off them arrived at the Postal
Department in a textual form up to 1864, but for country-wide stamps, this question was looked at, as can be seen
from the previously noted documents, for the first time only in 1886.
The uncertainty in deciphering the capital letters "B" and "K" as "BnyrpenHHa KoppecnoHaeuna"
(Internal Mail) leads to looking at other variants. One of the possible decipherings of these letters is "Bocroqiaa,
KoppecnoHngeRu (Middle East Mail).
In explaining the reasons of such a preference, it is necessary to go out of this particular subject and look at
the early period of postal communications with the Middle East from the viewpoint of the Russian Company of
Navigation and Trade (POI-TI). This will be done in a separate article. Meanwhile, it can be said that, during the
1861-1867 period, POIINT repeatedly proposed to issue special stamps for Middle East Mail. For example, a request
from the Board of POIHnT was addressed in December 1866 to the Director of the Postal Department, stating:
"... wouldyou not be able to order the preparation for the Company ofpostage stamps with a special marking to

November 2004

A 3k. essay in black with brown background network, incorporating the letters
"B.K" (Inland Correspondence)
A 5k. essay in black and lilac, a design veryclose to the issued stamp except with
the letters "B.K"
A 10k. essay in chestnut and blue, virtually as issued except for the incorpora-
tion of the letters "B.K."
Two 10k. essays in green and in brown, using the same frame as the last essay
but withoutthe embossed eagle in thecentre and with the letters "P.M."

distinguish them from the State issues". The essays of stamps referred to above resemble greatly the essays of such
stamps "with a special marking", namely the capital letters "B" and "K". It is known from the activities of the 33TFB
that in February 1867, the Director of the Despatch Office ordered that there should be furnished "in the form of a
proof' the preparation of a die for postage stamps of the Middle Eastern Mail, and so forth.
In 1889, the Postal Service of Russia prepared the issue of letter-card forms. There then arose the question
about safeguarding the impressed die on the letter-card, not against secondary usage, but against forgery. In the
report presented to the Minister of Internal Affairs on 18 November 1889, the Director of FYIIT wrote that, during
the preparation of "new forms for letter-cards, the rTlYuT has put into practice such a method of guarantee
(Author's note: i.e. of protection) by printing the impressed die on the form after transfer to the stone and being
photographed, which has been adopted in preparing postage stamps. The method takes into account that the design
of the stamp or die is covered with a grid, i.e. with shaded lines or dots in bright brown colour, slightly observable to
the naked eye. In transferring the design to the stone or during photography, the grid takes on a darker colouration,
as a result of which the design takes on a speckling of black dots or lines and its contours are covered completely"
In describing this method of protection, the Director of VYIInT is quoting from its utilisation in the
preparation of postage stamps. The data about the designation about the thin lines or dots are lacking. V.
Lobachevskii mentions their presence on the stamps in describing the 1884 & 1889 issues of the postage stamps of
Russia In his sub-section "Special Data", he writes: "the basic difference between the designs of the new
stamps....and those of the previous issues is to be found in the background, set up in the form of a rhomboid grid of
tiny dashes and dots and, under the coat of arms, in the form of thin horizontal strokes. The background was printed
separately from the frame ofthe stamp and in the same colour...."; "Under the design of the frame of each stamp, the
background is partly provided with strokes of thin horizontal lines and, on the stamps of the kopek values, also partly
composed of tiny rhomboids" (see the manual: "Soviet Collector", N 15, 1977, p. 64).
It is interesting that the Director of FYIImT pointed out the application of protective lines above the design
of the stamp and V. Lobachevskii writes about the distribution of these lines under the design of the stamp. The
surface examination of about ten stamps shows that the lines could have been' printed either way. On some issues of
the stamps, the lines and dots cover up various parts of the design. The stamps with such a background actually have
a heightened level of protection. To illustrate them with more or less clear lines and dots (see Figs. 7 to 9 below),
scanning would be required with high resolution.

PIHcyHOK 7 Fig. 7 PicyHOK 8 Fig. 8. PIICYHOK 9 Fig. 9.

On what stamps was there such a protection? How it covered the design of the stamp is unknown and
investigations have not been carried out in that area. Such lines and dots formed an ordinary background, but the aim of
its application: the protection of the stamp from copying, had hitherto been unknown. At the very least, even advanced
collectors, to whom one could have turned for an elucidation, could not specify anything about this question.
Upon a request at the beginning of 1890 from the Minster of Finances to the 33FB, a Commission was set up and
work began on averting the secondary utilisation of fiscal stamps. At the same time, the Despatch Office began once
again to find ways of protecting postage stamps from repeated usages.
According to the opinion of specialists at the 331rB, the durability of the union of the printed colour with the
stamp was influenced by (a) the colour in printing the stamps and impressed dies; (b) the paper and (c) the design and
background of the stamp. Work was carried out at the Despatch Office in all three areas.
On 19 May 1890, a chemist at the 333E, I Tugolesov, sent to the Management of the Despatch Office a
document under the heading: "Considerations regarding the printing of fiscal and postage stamps". In writing about
the poor protection of fiscal stamps, he went on: "Even more imperfect are the postage stamps in this regard".
November 2004 59

In describing the possible methods of removing postmarks from them, I. Tugolesov affirmed that the chalk-surfaced
paper, utilised in printing the stamps, was a weak defence. He noted that: "The postmark ink lies even on the
uppermost layer and does not penetrate through to the fibres of the paper. The layer is not affected by the application
of substances such as alcohol or benzine and therefore the washing and cleaning of the canceller can be performed
without hindrance".
I.Tugolesov believed that, for this problem to be solved, it would be necessary to use inks in the printing of
stamps, which could be changed by the reaction of chemical substances.. With that aim in view, he was investigating
organic inks. A booklet containing stamps, which had been affixed, was enclosed with the report. We see below in
Figs. 10 & 11 pieces of two pages taken from this booklet. I. Tugolesov wrote as follows:-

PncyHOK 10

Fig. 10.

"the attached specimens of stamps were printed as trials in organic inks; they are altered by the action of such
substances, which are ordinary inks (containing iron) and thus corrode the paper .Such inks are suitable for printing
fiscal stamps... These inks may also be appliedfor printing postage stamps as, in such a case, a postmark ink may be
prepared, which would even destroy the colour of the stamp" [9].

PMcyHOK 11

Fig. 11.

November 2004

_-* 2-1e47 L &

* 'K^^^^J i y^Let L^-^

- '-

I FtF Z5

I. Tugolesov also noted that the stamps shown in the booklet had been printed on different grades of paper.. Several
stamps are missing on the pages and, at the present time, there are 21 stamps on 6 pages. The stamps were printed in
ultramarine, olive and brick-red inks etc. on paper with ordinary gum and lightly pasted in. The black-and-white
illustrations herewith give a poor idea of the particulars of the action by chlorine and oxalic acid on the ink, with
which the ink inscriptions (postmarks) have been cleaned off.. In the original state, it is clearly evident that this
action depends heavily on the colour and, as a consequence, on the composition of the ink and also on the thickness
of the gummed side of the paper.
The Commission of the 33FB, which was concerned with the problem of guarding against the secondary
usage of postage stamps, examined at the end of May 1890 the results of the work of the Despatch Office specialists
regarding this question. I. Tugolesov was ordered on 15 June to continue his work in searching for other inks and
colours and "on termination, to print stamps in accordance with instructions".
It is apparent from some indications that organic
inks were not used for the preparation of postage stamps. In
a report of the 33IB on 17 July 1890, it is stated that the
printing of stamps in fugitive inks did not lead to the
required results.
The examination of the design for those postage
stamps utilised by I. Tugolesov in his experiments is of
interest. In the previously noted article by V. Lobachevskii,
these stamps were regarded as essays and the design is
A a noted under the index letter "E" in the manual "Soviet
S, Collector X2 15, p. 73. The same source gives the
^*' illustration of yet another five essays (Fig. 12 herewith)
I with index letters A, B, B, r and J. The text of the article
,4 1.i states that: "Essays are known in types A-E, issued in 1896
with and without perforations. Printed by the typographic
/ ^ method on paper of various grades and in inks of different
a colours".
r A E It was not possible to find the primary source from
which V. Lobachevskii took the date of 1896. The design of
cyK 12 ig. 1. Essay type A (with a change in the face value) was actually
utilised for a stamp printed on the formula card of a postal
money order in 1896. Moreover, as shown above, Essay Type E was adopted in 1890. I. Tugolesov considered that
stamps on paper with a coloured grid on guillotined paper were a better defence against secondary usage. Most of the
essays in Type E affixed in the booklet were printed on such papers.
The essays referred to here in Types A to E are to be found in the State Collection of the Postage Stamps of
Russia at the Central Museum of Communications named after A.C. Popov. The essays were printed in inks of
various colours on paper of two grades: (a) of ordinary thickness and (b) on very thick card, almost like half-
cardboard. An examination of of these essays showed that they could be clearly divided into three groups: (1) with a
smooth coloured background over the entire design of the stamp, (2) with the design of the stamp, including the
smooth background, covered with a grid of tiny dots and (3) with the design of the stamp, including the smooth
background, covered with thin horizontal lines.
Taking into account that:-
in 1889-1890 the 33FB performed the task of strengthening the defence of stamps against secondary usage
with the utilisation of a background in the form of thin horizontal lines or grids of tiny dots and also that
experiments were being carried out at that time to find papers and inks for the best defence of postage
bearing in mind that V. Lobachevskii specified that the essays in Types A to E "were printed ... on paper of
various grades and in inks of different colours",
it can be postulated with a great amount of probability that the essays in Types A to A were also prepared at the end
of the 1880s-beginning of the 1890s in the course of finding the best colours for inks and grades of paper and, above
all, to set up the design of the background to strengthen stamps from secondary usage.
The Postal Service of Russia possessed a monopoly in the issuance of Russian postage stamps. It is therefore
of interest to examine how their designs were reproduced by printeries, not connected with the Postal Service. In
February 1891, 1. Kreving, a publisher of albums with illustrations of stamps of various countries got in touch with
the General Administration (FY) for Printing Affairs (Author's note: This was an Organ of the State, carrying out

November 2004

censorship functions regarding printed papers, including those prepared in the printeries of the country). He asked for
permission to prepare clichess with illustrations of Russian postage stamps and postmarks for their presentation in
black colour in albums". The General Administration for Printing Affairs (FY) asked for the opinion of FYTIiT,
which permitted the preparation of the cliches with the proviso that they be not less than three times greater than the
dimensions of the postage stamps.

*7 ': ,.,.,. '

.A ...

.t_ .... .- 4 .-. .... ....

. ,. y/a- t -r^f ,, ,,.. .. .- ..i ..
As -.
^4.' '^ ^ '' <-<- >>-< s Itf -Ct

Xg'- -'>-/ .
-~Z~- l~ '~d~rc

PHcyHOK 13 Fig. 13. PHcyHOK 14. Fig. 14.
It was not possible to issue an album with the illustrations of the stamps in such a size and, in November
1891, I. Kreving turned again to the General Administration for Printing Affairs (TY) with a request that would
allow him to print cliches in black colour at half the size of the existing stamps (Fig. 13). The notation of the agitated
censor can be seen on Kreving's petition, namely: "What kind of literature is this! What does it have to do with us!"
This time I Kreving received permission to prepare cliches for an album of Russian stamps, on the condition
that they be reproduced in "double the size or reduced to half their actual dimensions" [10]. Such an album was
evidently issued. In the recollections of P. Lyadov in his article: "Russian philately at the end of the XIXth. Century"
(see the magazine "Soviet Collector" Nos. 1 to 3, 1929), it is stated that: I. Kreving: "was known as the initial
compiler of the first and only album for stamps in the Russian language".
Upon applying in December 1892 to the General Administration (FY), E. von Baggo explained that he was
involved in the purchase, sale and exchange of postage stamps and wanted to print on his mailing sheets price-lists &
also an illustration of the Russian 3V2 rouble postage stamp. He wrote that: "The insertion of such a stamp constitutes
an advertisement and a indication of my speciality". He was permitted to apply such an illustration on the condition
that it would be two times smaller than actual size. Von Baggo turned again to the FY in July 1893 for permission to
use as seals on his envelopes labels simulating at two times smaller size the 7-rouble postage stamps (F 14).
November 2004

'*ZSc+ac'o 0011. ^8aqc}. -CO(~iOOS9
'r, u an e- ff
S: &Ai. d

:-'.AU -^.f A., ..r..... 4Z
? *; *t;^ry ita 3So -'y.ilKd: \ [. -
-Piijtv, Ci(uUi* *
'* ^XouJH^4M. d~~(H.lj H, 9|*l etI-

__ K ..S2^> di7 7^
\~~ *i j

*~~~ ldl1~ wv^i y a-^^-r^-* vyi-Mc^t w /-

\. .1 ^fitA -^/^^w^^ttA. *'(i^Le'~U-f^~. ~/W ^*-./

i; ( ,,/{^^f ~t fsfM /'itfi^^-^iLjt--^i^

'.: LaMgs~ v <

** /i.-(^ /-~A-t /t ^id^V^^e^iL^
HA^/U^.^J^fjf ,,^/)i ^ifn L l e <<_ylihr -
** 4'y~s ti^~/i^ufni ^f'-e ^iMt-t,
;. _.*^Ht 6 <^ -

The Y7 (General Administration for Printing Affairs) replied with a refusal,
V believing that the preparation of such labels "could entail misunderstandings in sending
r envelopes through the post". What subsequently happened philatelically shows that von
A11 Baggo printed and utilised the labels, which differed in design from the Russian postage
94 1 stamps, but had a resemblance to them in outward appearance. He utilised them (possibly
lby avoiding misunderstandings with the Postal Service) together with his date-stamp,
v which "cancelled" such labels. We see in Fig. 15 the label and cachet of von Baggo,
S Iplaced on the back of a cover, sent in September 1894 to Germany (see "The Post-Rider"
76 52, p. 30).
PUcyHOK 15 Fig. 15.
The postage stamps of Russia were printed in sheets by the 933E on flat-bed
presses. There are no data about their preparation on rotary presses, using rolls of paper.
There are also no references in the literature about the utilisation of postage stamps of Russia in rolls. However, it is
known from the documents that, in the 1912-1914 period, the Postal Service was utilising strips of stamps, wound on
reels. Such strips were prepared from the sheets of stamps by the same Postal Service. The pre-history of this
question was as follows. At the end of the 19t. and the beginning of the 20". centuries, automats began to be utilised
in several countries (Germany, U.S.A., etc) for the sale of postage stamps. Thus, in the spring of 1906, "The Postal-
Telegraphic Journal" announced that: "At the present time in Berlin... seven automats have been installedfor the sale
ofpostage stamps in the values of 2, 5 and 10 Pfennigs" [11].
To secure the operation of such automats, stamps in strips were used. They were originally prepared as
follows: "a sheet of postage stamps was attached and matched with another sheet.... they were then torn into strips
and wound on the reels" [12]. As of 1 May 1911, postage stamps went on sale in Germany, which had been printed
on a rotary press. That type of press printed stamps in rolls, which were 1000 stamps long and 10 stamps wide. A
special attachment then divided the stamps into strips of one unit wide and wound them on the reels.
Automats for the sale of postage stamps in Russia were suggested to the Postal Service by Engineer A.
Tupal'skii in the autumn of 1911 and the St. Petersburg G.P.O. received permission in December 1911 to purchase
one such automat.
On 6 February 1912, the Director of FYIIRT turned to the 33FB with a proposal about preparing 3- and 7-
kopek stamps in the form of endless strips. The Management of the 33'r replied with a refusal, pointing out that
the Despatch Office: "was busy at the present time with the preparatory work for producing the Jubilee stamps of
1913 and that such work would continue throughout the whole of 1912...The Despatch Office cannot now enter upon
the preparatory workfor printing stamps in roll form" [13].
As a result of the refusal of the 33FB to issue stamps in rolls, their preparation was passed on to the St.
Petersburg G.P.O. On 15 February 1912, the St. Petersburg Deputy Postal Director wrote to the Board of the
newspaper "Beqepnee BpeM~" about the agreement of the General Post Office to install in the premises of the
newspaper office: "an automat for the sale of 7-kopek stamps... under the following conditions:
(1) The automat constitutes the property of the General Post Office.
(3) Stamps in rolls would be provided by the General Post Office, whereby....at the same time there would be
provided in advance two reels with one thousand stamps on each.
(4) Upon the expenditure of the advance, the office could obtain new reels from the Executor of the General Post
Office upon presentation of the money for the stamps sold" [14].
On the same day, confirmation arrived at the General Post Office from the office of the newspaper
"Beiepnee BpeMa" about the receipt of 2000 stamps on reels.
The operation of the first automat in Russia for the sale of stamps began on 1 March 1912.
At the middle of March of that same year, the Director of the 1". Office for the Transmission of the Posts on
Railways requested the permission of FYIInT to buy 5 automats for the sale of stamps and he stated that, until rolls
of stamps could be printed by the 331B, the St. Petersburg General Post Office could prepare them. The Director of
FYIInT permitted the purchase of the automats and proposed to solve together with Engineer A. Tupal'skii the
question about their renewal in 1913, when the sale of Jubilee postage stamps would begin to take place.
Some interesting data are contained in a letter from the Postal Director in Moscow, which was sent on 21
March 1913 to the Director of the Despatch Office for the Receipt and Distribution of Postage Stamps at FYTIaT.
The Postal Director stated that two automats had been delivered to the Moscow General Post Office for the sale of 3-
and 7-kopek Jubilee stamps; he also noted that the 93FB had already obtained machines for the preparation of
stamps in strips and: "presenting a sample of Jubilee stamps on reels for sale in the automats"; he therefore asked
that such strips be sent upon their receipt from the 33FB. In the reply of FYIInT to the Postal Director of Moscow,
it was stated that the preparation of postage stamps in endless strips would begin no earlier than in 1914.
In replying at the beginning of September 1913 to a request of the Michelius Society, rYII T stated that:
November 2004

"the postage stamps in the form of an endless strip have not yet been produced in Russia, but there is in view the
preparation of such strips of stamps in the future" [15].
Automats for the sale of postage stamps were utilised at St. Petersburg, Moscow, Riga, Saratov, etc. It is
known from the documents that the 7-kopek stamps of the 18th. Issue and the 3- and 7-kopek stamps of the Jubilee set
of 1913 were sold from the automats and that strips of 1000 such stamps were subsequently prepared. The documents
also confirm the preparation of strips of stamps at the General Post Offices in St. Petersburg and Moscow.
It seems most likely that the 33FB (Despatch Office for the Preparation of State Papers) did not succeed in
bringing about the issue of postage stamps in the form of a strip because of the military hostilities, which began in the
summer of 1914. Moreover, it has not been possible to discover if proofs of strips of stamps were printed in the
process of installing and adjusting the rotary presses.
Author's note: The above article is not devoted to just one subject. Everything written here constitutes an assembly of data about
the postage stamps of Russia. Many details in the article could evoke remarks and refitations. The documental data set out in the
text are irrefutable, but the comments on several subjects are open to question, because of the small amount of information.
If any of the readers of the journal has verifiable documentary or philatelic material regarding questionable subjects, it
would be desirable to hear their opinions in the pages of "The Post-Rider" L. Ratner.
1 H. COKOJIoB "]oroBop IIOrTOBoIl nepecuInc". nlorTOBo-Tenerpa4)HIi mYypHaJn, Heo4)mnaJhlHrii, leKa6pL 1906 r., c.
947 949.
2 PoccHitICidi rocynapCTBeHHaLI HcropHqecKHR apxHB (PIHA), doim 1289, onHcL 1, Aeno 1249 "O BBeAeHHH MapoK A n
npHeMa npocrTix nrceM ...", n.45.
3 "IIpaniana An eiecrnBH no yqpe2leHamo noqroB ix MapoK", C-1leTep6ypr, 1857r., n. 7.
4 PFHA, 4. 1289, on. 1, A. 1249, i1.322.
5 PFHA, 4. 1289, on. 2, A. 1216 "O BBegeHHH npncnoco6neHHoro mTeMnenx AAi noraueHHam MapoK", n. 5.
6 H. HocmuoB "HepBnie no'ToBHIe MapKH POCCnH". fIpinoHmeHre K xcypHany "CoBeTCKHir KOJIjreic9OHep", 1931 r., c. 6.
7 PrHA, Q4. 1289, on. 1, A. 1216, n. 20 -22.
8 PFHA, 4. 1289, on. 2, A. 1888 "O BBeemnHH B ynoTpe6neHHe InoHTOBLrx 6aHweponei n 6namcoB AnJ saKpuaITX IHceM",
x. 17.
9 IleHTpanrHuMr FocynapcTBenrsHH HcropurecKHu apxaB C-fIeTep6ypta (IUHA ClI6), 4. 1458, on. 2, A. 658 "O npons-
BoAcTBe onUrTOB K ycTpaHeHnmo BlTpaBJiHBaHH 3HaIKOB noraUmema... ", n. 45 48.
10 PFHA, d. 776, on. 20, A. 1225 "O pa3pemeHai KpeBimry H3roTOBjnaTr Kcnme Ain HaneHaTarTHH arm6oMa pyccrKx noe-
TOBLIX MapoK", n. 12.
11 HosoBo-Tenerpa4Hir i xypHajr, Heo main.rHHui, anpejin 1906 r., c. 327.
12 0IonTOBO-TenJerpa4fnuir xypnHaj, neomI HanmbHLil, arycT 1911 r., c. 823.
13 PrHA, (. 1289, on. 12, A. 25 "06 aBTOMarax Aim npo0taxc MapoK H npHnea 3axa3Hirx nIHceM", n. 36.
14 IHA CII6, 4. 1543, on. 2, A. 792 "O nocTraHoBe aBTOMaTa nAs npoAax H 7 ioneeqmlix Mapox B noMeuenHHH XOHTOpM
ra3erTI "BenepHee BpeMx", J. 1, 2.
'5 PrHA, 4. 1289, on. 12, A. 25, n. 113.


The Zemstvo Post of the Poltava District

by P. P. Ganko

The CSRP is pleased to announce that a limited quantity of this
very rare publication has been reprinted and is available for
sale to our readers. This publication of approximately 100
pages is the notorious postmaster's own catalogue which even.
to the present remains as the most detailed accounting of the
issues of the zemsto post in Poltava. In Russian.

$25.00 (US) postpaid, payable to the Canadian Society of
Russian Philately, at the Society address.

November 2004

Postage Stamps Issued by the Zemstvos
by Alex Artuchov

(Vyatka Province)

Urzhum is a river port in the south central portion of the province. It is located about 110
miles southeast of the provincial capital. In 1900, the population was about 4,000.

The main economic activities of Urzhum were the growing of hemp and the raising of
pigs and poultry.

Urzhum issued stamps between 1891 and 1912.

Coat of Arms Colours:
Top: Golden background with blue shirted hand holding a bow and arrow from a
dark gray cloud.
Bottom: Blue background with a gray wild goose on brown and green ground.

1891 (November 29)
17.33 x 24 mm lithographed on white paper 0.09 mm thick, white gum, sheet of 5 x 5,
perforated 12.5 .



1. 2 kop. blue

2. 3 kop. blue green

November 2004

The 2 kop. stamp is known to have been bisected and used as a 1 kop. stamp.

1893 1896
17.33 x 22.5 mm, lithographed on white paper, perforated 12.5 2 editions.

First Edition (1893, December 14)
Space between stamps 3.0 3.25 mm white paper 0.08 mm thick, yellowish white gum,
known imperforate horizontally, sheet of 10 x 5 ? without sheet margins.

3. 2 kop. bright lilac 0.50

Second Edition (1896)
Space between stamps is 5.0 mm printed on thick paper 0.12 mm thick, brownish
yellow gum, known imperforate horizontally.

4. 2 kop. rose lilac RRR
(6 known)

It is suspected that there are more than 6 copies known of this stamp, as the Baughman
collection alone had 4 copies.

24.66 x 21 mm, lithographed in 2 colours on white paper 0.12 mm thick, on white or
brownish yellow gum, sheet unknown, largest known multiple 8 x 4, imperforate sheet
margins, perforated 12.5, 2 editions.


First Edition (1898, January 25)
With imperforate or perforated sheet margins.

5. 2 kop. dark brown and blue 5.00

November 2004


Second Edition (1899, January)
Similar to the first edition except that it is slightly smaller (24.33 x 18.5 mm ) and differs
in minor details, lithographed on white paper 0.07 mm thick, yellowish white gum,
perforated 11.5.

6. 2 kop. rose

(4 known ?)

(18 known)

1899 (April)
Similar to the previous issue, single line oval, the squares with numerals of value extend
into the dark background only slightly, 26 x 19.33 mm lithographed on white paper
0.09 mm thick, brownish yellow gum, sheet unknown, perforated 12.5.

7. 2 kop. carmine


1901 (September)
Similar to the previous issue, the squares with the numerals of value extend further into
the background with the oval, the side panels with the inscription of value are narrower,
lithographed on white paper 0.09 mm thick, white gum, sheet unknown, only a very few
connected copies are known.

8. 2 kop. carmine
- Unused

(9 known)

(23 known)


1902 -1912
Printed by the State Printing Office in St. Petersburg, typographed on white paper 0.07 -
08 mm thick, white gum, sheet of 5 x 5, perforated 13.25 10 editions and a total of
682,225 stamps issued of which only 3 can be distinguished definitely by the colour used.

November 2004

- Used

Edition of 1902
Perforated 13.25, with small and large holes.

9. 2 kop. yellow brown 0.50

Edition of 1909
Change of colour.

10. 2 kop. mauve R
(1 known)

Edition of 1911
Perforated 13.25 with small and large holes.

11. 2 kop. brown 0.35

Printed in the design of the "Bakhmut" type, typographed on yellowish white card stock
0.17 mm thick, without gum and imperforate.

2 kop. blue

Schmidt/Chuchin Catalogue Cross-Reference:

Sch 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Ch 1 2 3 3a 4 7 5 6 8 --

Prohibition of mail in the occupied USSR
Re the Editorial Comment in "The Post-Rider" No. 54, p. 48, stating that "...the local Slav population
stopped communicating by mail", I would like to point out that the reason for the lack of mail was because, in all
areas of the occupied Soviet Union, the local inhabitants had no telephone, telegraph or postal services. The
occupying powers decreed that those services were forbidden for the local inhabitants. In all other occupied
countries, the local population was allowed to use telephone, telegraph and postal services.
As an exception, the "Ostarbeiters" or workers from the East (forcibly recruited labourers from occupied
parts of the Soviet Union) were allowed to send home and receive two postcards per month. I have narrated the
"Ostarbeiter" story in my book "Ostarbeiters: Byelorussian, Russian and Ukrainian forced labourers in Nazi
Germany WW2". For further details, readers are invited to contact me at 409 Jones Road, Vestal NY 13850-3246
USA, Telephone (607) 748-4606, Fax (607) 757-9358.
Upon going to press, we have just learned that our Zemstvo enthusiast G.G. Werbizky hasnowundergone an
operation for a quadruple bypass. Needless to say, we wish him all the very best and a speedy recovery, so that he
will continue to provide us with his discoveries in Civil War philately and Zemstvos.

November 2004

by Andrew Cronin.
By the beginning of the 20". Century, the Japanese and Russian Empires were vying for the control of Korea
and Manchuria, with relations steadily worsening between the two competitors. Finally, the Japanese attacked Port
Arthur on 9 February 1904 N.S. (see Fig. 1 for a rare actual print of the .site : in postcard format, which was taken off
a negative) and Japan declared war on a totally unprepared Russia the next day. The Japanese had the advantage of
being much closer to the scene of hostilities and they maintained the initiative in the campaign, taking Port Arthur on
3 January 1905 N.S. Peace talks started on 9 August 1905 under U.S. auspices in Portsmouth, N. H. and a relatively
mild Peace Treaty was signed on 5 September 1905. Figs 2 & 3 show a Russian 10-rouble souvenir sheet and
supporting postmark for the centenary of the defence of Port Arthur, issued and applied on 12 May 2004 in Moscow.
Your editor has four postcards sent during the last days of the war, which demonstrate several unusual
features (see Fi. 4 on the next page). The cards are numbered 198, 385, 386 & 432 consecutively at top left front,
showing a continuous undated message in Russian and addressed as follows:- "Finland, Kuokkala Stn., Silleampe
Cottage, to Evgeniya Evgenievna Nadar'eva". Kuokkala was in the Terijoki district in the Duchy period and close to
the Soviet border until the Winter War. Both places are now in the Russian Federation, presumably under changed
names. The neat handwriting has a feminine look about it and is hard to read, as it is very individualistic.
All four cards bear at top right front a strike in violet of a circular free-frank cachet of the Machine Gun
Company of the 22nd. Infantry Division. The obviously very literate sender was possibly a nurse or matron attached
to that unit. The transit and receiving dates in Kuokkala were as follows:-
No. 198: TPO/RPO No. 186 Novo-Nikolaevsk-Omsk 27.VI. 19-05 O.S. and Kuokkala 16.VII.05 N.S.
Nos. 385 & 386: Very faint postal wagon marking at bottom right front and Kuokkala arrival of 8.VIII.05 N.S.
No. 432: Faint Kharbin 262 Man'chzhuriya TPO oval, dated 14.7.05 O.S. and Kuokkala arrival of 14.VHI.05 N.S.
We can now start making some tentative deductions. In the period from 16 July to 14 August 1905 N.S., a
total of 304 (!) cards arrived in Kuokkala, so the sender must have been writing an average of 8 cards per day. What
did the Machine Gun Company think of such activity? Also, your editor has only four cards; where are the other 428?
Turning now to the views, card No. 198 is No. 43 in the "Grand Chemin de la Siberie" set, while Nos 385,
386 & 432 have scenes of the Trans-Baikal Railway Line. The first card was collotyped by Scherer Nabholtz & Co.
and the others by Otto Renard in Moscow, while all of them were issued by D.P. Efimov. There is a reference to
Kharbin in the third line of the message on card No. 432, giving us a rough idea of the whereabouts of the sender. It
would seem that the recipient in Kuokkala was collecting view cards and the sender must have spent a tidy sum in
providing at least 432 of them! Comments are welcome and our Russian readers are invited to decipher the message as
your editor simply does not have the time!!
"-.--i ^ ^T\ 1U .- m i esi
T.,i,'la. fa iLiIh iffl n t11. t-m1 ... '

F--? (--fl U I N B A

(somewhat ungrammatical!) THE POST-RIDERISMIBIINK N~ 55
November 2004

/ C-
OTKpblToe 11nCbMO.-ARE P
BCEMIPI I I0Hb T000 C0 bPO C '> PCl f /

,' c,,, ., ,nv ,- -

BA .9 o Itep l o

.U... ..... H.. a. .. ............. ..... .... ..... '.
,... .f .- E- .. .. .

i. C- ( l ..1 ., ...... ..... ..... .
" 't ia l i ; .Q.ir,; -, .O... l.,. .'. '.... ,',

,, ,,',, ,,.'. ',.. .. .'' -'. ...... .. ,.* ,'." .. .. "
"; "e '4 r ; .. ,'., -- ] 1 i -. i,1,' ,* *

UL A ( A *U ...................... ..... .. **- .................... I.......
A a iA P, ..i. ... ..-. ..

?f a AU jnj _ii!L. ^_ V "j '>L K L ''
....... .......... .............. .... .

t ,., ,,, ,_ g ,,lT .-' "*..\ .-: .-.
~~8-",'J-IC~--e ..d.'/ .. .. ***_

AlbCino (.in koppecnI Olnleiiu.

$QL~Lak---- ---- --

S" s ~ ... ... .... .... ......-.-.-....;. ..- .. .

HA An n. Fr)'Mooa- OjT . ^, .64

.-ajjLi < )RSo~ao-A-,


Mibcmo o&n lkoppccnoindLu.iuni.

'- ^y^.U E ruos>a s^^j^jIi
*L&ha-e-a" ri~-~

^ToeraysulEtoa~x AloTO^rn1I OTPa. -
a-o' tPirM~ ojjiA--iSLL 3 Bc *^J



... .... ..... :. .... :

..... ......... ....................... ......,.............. I....;................

.......... ........... ...........

410TOTHnig Orto Pe~apb. Mockoe..


by M. Kosoy & VL Berdichevsidy.
The present material constitutes the completion of a cycle of articles published in "The Post-Rider" Nos. 53
[reference 34] & 54 [351. During the time that has passed since the appearance of the previous number of "The Post-
Rider", information has come into the possession of the present authors about some further postal sending referring
to the present subject and they are described below. The authors have maintained the previous sequence in setting out
the material demonstrated here, being based on the attributes of the cancellations on postal sending in three distinct
periods. The illustrations have been numbered in ascending order from "1" and with the letter "B" added.
Description of the postal sending and cancellations of the First Period

------ ----

Q ^ ThO TQE kCB^O) lnS\F

*1i L.. i a -..........p LY ^ :

..........po........... a pe a H... ...eTe n....ro ..p ....ro fnl.canTI j y-.
S...... .... .. .. ..... ...

We see in Fig. Ba postcard of the State-wide type and headed as an "Open Letter", with the postmark of
despatch reading "Pokrovskaya P(ostal) S(tation) Samarsk. (province), 24 Dec. 1883 (date in three lines and with
serial number "1"). The card was addressed to Germany, but there is no arrival marking. The transit postmark of
Moscow dated 26 Dec. 1883 in three lines is on the address side and we have already described the Pokrovskaya
cancellation in Eig. [34].
However, we are showing the present card in this article, as there is some quite interesting information on the
back: at the top, where the date and dwelling-place normally appears, the word "Osinowka" is written in German, as
is almost all of the text. In the middle of this side, the sender gives his address in fact in Russian, to read: "Via the
town of Saratov and Pokrovskaya Sloboda, to the village of Osinovka in the Tonkoshurovka District". That village
was in the Krasnoyarsk Canton (according to [17], it was in Kanton Mariental) and its population was German. For
that reason, it also had a German name: Reinhardt, which is listed in [15].
S' Fig. 2B shows a very interesting postcard,
,, nu. n Coii a Puon ccui. sent from Russia to Germany from the
UM .9i1i F u:TALM .E UMNE tEU tti village of Rovnoe and cancelled with two
uTIiIn irro (tCLMO. CtAIr (. strikes (one on the impressed stamp and the
other just below), to read "Rovnoe Samar(a
I province), 10 Sep. 1901, with serial number
4 9 w "2".The same day, it at the Astrakhan'-
18iIe ) Kazan' steamer route, as shown by the
,.J, marking of that line: "Steamer Astrakhan'-
.... .--..- Kazan', 10 Sep. 1901" at bottom right.
... .. _.. ,.J- .- Upon arrival in Kazan', it received the
-. t f / same postmark, but now dated 11 Sep.
S..... 1901 at centre right. It was then delivered
.a. ,i .. "-Vf cad- M to Moscow 13 .XI.01 and on to Germany:
("Gschwend 29.9.01").
Fig. 2B.
November 2004

Fie. 3B.
Fig 3B has a postcard (data from an Internet auction), which was specially issued for POW mail and bears a
postmark of despatch reading: "Ust'-Zalikha Sar.(atov province) 26.5.16 with serial letter "a". The card bears a three-
line censorship marking in violet, reading: "Examined by the military censorship / SARATOV / Military censor J
5". Ust'-Zalikha was a village in the Kamenskii Canton (according to [16] in the Golyi Karamysh Canton) and its
population was German. It therefore also had a German name: Messer, which is listed in [15].
The name of the village where it was written: Bobrovka can be read on the back of the card, where there
apparently was a POW camp. That village was in the Balzer Canton (according to [16], it was in the Golyi Karamysh
Canton) and the population was Russian. It can be conjectured that there was no postal outlet in the village of
Bobrovka and, for that reason, the card was sent to the nearby village of Ust'-Zalikha.. It was addressed to Lemberg
(Galicia, Austria, now L'viv in the Western Ukraine) and there is no arrival marking. However, there is a strike in red
of the triangular cachet of the Austrian military censorship in Vienna in the upper right corer.
In [35, p. 99Q, we came to a deduction: "In analyzing the POW mail dispatched from the territory of the
Volga Germans (Figs. 40, 12A and 13A), the following conclusion may be arrived at: (as known at the present time),
all of it was collected from various camps and sent to Pokrovsk, where examination by the censorship was carried
out, after which it was dispatched to the addressees". Looking at the card described above (Fi. 3B), it can now be
said that the POW mail sent from the territory of the Volga Germans, was subjected to examination by the censorship
not only at Pokrovsk, but also at other places, e.g. at Saratov.
(Translator's note: The written text is entirely in Polish and the sender was apparently a conscript in the Austro-
Hungarian Army, who had been taken prisoner by the Russians).
M-7 2J& 444 "
.. -, '

^ .1 -.^ ,9

Fig. 4B.
Fig. 4B shows a registered international cover, which was sent from Russia to Sweden. It was franked on the
back with 2 x 20-kopek Arms Type stamps (Michel X2 108), to total 40 kopeks. The stamps were cancelled with a
despatch postmark, reading "Ryazanovka Samar.(a province), 7.9.17 and with serial letter "a". A registration label in
paper was placed on the address side, with a frame and the capital letter "3" in red, together with the text in black,
reading: "N- 444 /Ryazanovka" and a further strike of the dispatch postmark. Although this was an international
sending, the text on the label is in Russian. Ryazanovka was a village in the Unterwalden Canton (according to [16] in
the Marksshtadt Canton) and the population was German. It therefore also had a German name: Neb, which is listed
72 November 2004

i ::~~~';"d'.-. ..~r -9i cX
- J I'I(I4 -

i~~jPL;CL;~~~~~fg 2'4.y~ C La.~1C~ ~~~~
~los~a, ~..z ~Z~;IZ 2'z~'t;;E-2r31

The cover bears on the address side a circular cachet X__ 93 in violet of the Moscow military censorship. An
analysis shows that the franking of the letter to a total of 40 kopeks corresponded to the postal rate for an
international registered letter in the period from 1.9.17 to 9.3.18 [29, p. 58]. The letter was addressed to Stockholm,
Sweden and the arrival marking on the back is dated 6.10.17.
F. B demonstrates the cover of
an international registered letter,
sent from the RSFSR to the USA
(information from an Internet
auction, thus the somewhat blurred
reproduction). The cover is franked
on the back with 50 copies of 100r.
(Michel X2 156) and 25 x 1000r.
(Michel Nq 161), to total
30,000r.The stamps were cancelled
with the despatch postmark of
"Prival'noe Samar.(skoi) province-
illegible date. A paper registration
label with red frame and red capital
Letter "3", has been affixed with the
S. text in black reading "JI2 569 /
[ ~i Prival'noe" in Russian letters,
Although this was an international
sending The New York arrival
Fi. -5B. marking on the back reads "NEW
YORK /??.1922".
An analysis shows that the franking of the letter to a total of 30,000r. corresponded to the postal rate for the
transmission of a registered international letter in the period from 1.3.1922 to 31.3.1922 [26, p. 120].

i ;.'," -0..0 4 [36], which was
%A0 w0i h le20r .
Sent to the U.S.A.
SIt is franked on the
Q2 'k% ^i/ ^4 <^-2^ *back with 5 x 200r.
------. RSFSR stamps
S(Michel 207A) to
1 total 1000r. (1922).
t a .,. ,/. *c. r r,. The stamps were
S- cancelled with a
ItT cy/ Cf^^f- despatch postmark:
S- reading "Staraya
Poltavka Samar.(skoi) 31.3.23", with serial letter "6". A strike of the despatch postmark is also on the address side,
but with a different date (5.4.23), together with the impression of a registration cachet, reading "R / Star.Poltawka /
X2 30", i.e. in Latin text, as it was an international sending. Staraya Poltavka was a village in the Staraya Poltavka
November 2004

Canton and the population was Russian. The return address on the envelope reads: "From a citizen in the village of
Friedenberg in the Staraya Poltavka Canton of the Province of the Volga Germans". Friedenberg was a village in the
Zelmann Canton (according to [16], located in the Staraya Poltavka Canton) and the population was German.
In defining the rate, it should be borne in mind that, as of 1.1.1923, a new scale of pricing went into effect:
100 roubles 1922 were exchanged for 1 rouble 1923 currency. The total face value of the stamps on the envelope was
therefore 10 roubles (1923), which corresponded with the postal rate that was in effect in the period from 25.3.1923
to 5.4.1923 [26, p. 123] for the transmission of that class of mail.
The arrival marking of "La Junta, Colo(rado) / Apr. 30. 1923" is on the back of the cover.
r-^-. .-^ fal ^HiF n~fl ^M'^t

Som el -prenom o EK '-.
y1ac nACK8aTCt' TObtO.B. p 'odu destinataire:

." .-postal sdinding with a
6ier;.Pri~D~~ ^;GnP.O. i 1917o (seeK- mprint
iA.oA Eo foont)
tog e we fo- cacM Fig. 7B demonstrates ar

............ i............. and the text "Blank form of

o adn ,the Moscow G.P.O." has
.'""" sed Ta id o been placed over the
Kaalf i notation at front left
regarding POW mail, as
.s.o o t.. ,-,, sIg -. nPA&O1 issued by the Moscow
We.s.e e -. i B-. o wh Acno.e7- d/.-to G.P.O. in 1917 (see imprint
S a-. Y m l.u.. A r... .-." a~ ~ at bottom right front).
h M ....... ha b p- ..t- ..... ... .. ... A w The "Acknowledgement"
together with a money order was despatched from Moscow as a registered sending. That was confirmed by the
"3AKA3HOE" cachet and the postmark "Moscow 8.6.23 on 2 x 100r. stamps (1922) of the RSFSR (Michel J.N
206A) and also the 5r. stamp (1923), such that the total franking on the "Acknowledgement" was 6r. in 1923
currency. That corresponded with the postal rate then in force during the period from 20.5.1923 to 9.6.1923 [26, p.
122] for the transmission of an internal registered letter.
The text on the back of the "Acknowledgement" states that the "postal sending to Lesnoi Karamysh in the
Saratov province and accepted under receipt NJ2...., has been received in person (signature)". The arrival postmark of
"Lesnoi Karamysh Sar.(atov) 16.6.23" with serial letter "a" is also on the back of the card.
Upon handing over the money order to the addressee (recipient), the "Acknowledgement" was returned to
the sender. That is confirmed by the postmark of Lesnoi Karamysh (being the same one as that applied on arrival),
seen on the address side, together with the paper label for a registered sending, reading: "3 / N2 745 / JItcH.
KapaMbimri" in the pre-revolutionary spelling. Such a label was not encountered up to now on the known postal
sending from Lesnoi Karamysh.
Description of the postal sending and postmarks of the Second Period
We see in Fig. 8B on the next page a postal sending with an "Acknowledgement of Receipt" (taken from an
Internet auction and thus somewhat blurred). A rectangular cachet with a coat of arms and the text: "Blank form of
the Moscow G.P.O." has been applied at the upper left of the form. The "Acknowledgement", together with a money
order, was despatched from Moscow as a registered sending, as confirmed by the "3AKA3HOE" cachet and the
postmark of "Moscow 13.1.25" on 2 x 7-kopek stamps of the USSR (Michel JX2 248), to total 14 kopeks. That
corresponded with the rate at that time for the transmission of an intercity registered letter.
The text on the back of the "Acknowledgement" states that the postal sending to Lesnoi Karamysh and
November 2004

,r.- ~had ove, r ,m he o oo th-drse (re cp.iet, t .. .. r t t
1' b h 0

and uil o

Fig. 8B.
accepted under receipt _o ... .has been received in person (signature)". The arrival marking of "JIT CHOiLI
KAPAMbIIIIb CAP.(ATOBCKOIf) 20.1.25" with serial letter "a" is also on the back..
After handing over the money order to the addressee (recipient), the "Acknowledgement" was returned to the
sender. That is confirmed by the despatch postmark: "JIECHOfI KAPAMfIII OBJL(ACTb) H.(EMIUEB)
fIO,(BOJDKb5I) 21.1.25" with serial letter "a". That same marking was described in [4, p. 60] and the paper label
for a registered sending, which had been affixed at top right front, is now missing. The postmark of return to the
sender: "Moscow 26.1.25", is on the "Acknowledgement". The latter is interesting in that the postmarks of Lesnoi
Karamysh are present together from the First and Second Periods, ie. in the pre-revolutionary and Soviet spellings
and unrecorded thus until now.
Description of the postal sending and postmarks of the Third Period

JCrp l

A K43 H 0

K I a. .

Fi.9B. 9

II" :ISap prIspflfiers de .

1.0 JLO iaPYCCKO0Th,;

SoBaH. B P A 0 P, A GA~fL/I"'
Carte pos,1k-iWi'A P '
~o~A-. Vi a- H.-

A 7:

p, n =r T
pp. r_ r I.:

P 7 7 T H A J 'E2D V 1 KYZ1T: `-1 -1
'j'r P
.-; ii
) -.UTI7l rcT -~r jI~Ais

Fig. 9B shows a postal sending with an "Acknowledgement of Receipt". There is in the bottom right of the
pre-revolutionary formula card, originally intended for the despatch of POW mail, an imprint reading
"MOCK.(oBCKHi) loTr.(aMT) 1917r,". We see also in the upper left comer a rectangular cachet with a coat of arms
and the inscription: "BjIaHK MocK.(oBCKoro) 1.(oqTaM)-Ta" (Blank Form of the Moscow G.P.O.). This is a
formula card of the "old type", i.e. of the issue up to 1922 [27]. The "Acknowledgement", together with a money
order, was despatched from Moscow as a registered sending. That is confirmed by the "3AKA3HOE" cachet and
the postmark "Moscow 22.6.25" applied on a 4-kopek stamp of the USSR (Michel NM 245A). That franking
corresponds to the postal rate in effect during the period from 1.9.24 to 31.1.26 for the transmission of an ordinary
local letter (why?) [29, p. 58]. The text on the back of the "Acknowledgement" states that: "The postal sending to
Nizhnyaya Dobrinka in the Province of the Volga Germans and accepted under receipt MX ....has been received in
November 2004

person (signature)". The arrival postmark "Hl KH531I5-OBPHHKA P.H./INISCHNAJA-DOBRINKA R.N.P.
27.6.25" with serial letter "a" is also on the back.
After handing over the money order to the addressee (recipient), the "Acknowledgement" was returned to the
sender on the very same day. That is confirmed by the despatch postmark ofNizhnyaya Dobrinka (the same as the
one applied for arrivals), while there is on the address side an outlined handwritten inscription: "N. Dobrinka / XS
7"in the place of a label for a registered sending. Nizhnyaya Dobrinka (or just Dobrinka, to distinguish it from
Verkhnyaya Dobrinka or Dreispitz), was a village in the Dobrinka Canton (according to [16] located in the Kamenka
Canton) and the population was German. The Moscow postmark 30.6.25 of sending back the "Acknowledgement" is
on the address side.

Fig. 10B.

i, $ --

-if 1V60 Ar

Fi~r. 11B.

Fig. 10B demonstrates a cover
from an intercity letter, sent from
Engel's to Moscow (data from an
Internet auction, thus rather
blurred). The cover is franked on
the address side with a 30-kopek
stamp (Michel M 682, which
bears a despatch postmark:
ENGELS 23.3.40" with serial
letter "3". The rate paid was
correct for sending that class of
A similar marking was
described in [8, p. 39], but the
serial letter was illegible. It is
very clear here.

Fig. 11B shows an international
registered postcard sent from Engels,
USSR to Samobor, Yugoslavia. In
addition to the impressed 20-kop. die,
an 80-kop. commem. (Michel JM 707)
and 2 x 5-kop. stamps (Michel JN 676)
were added for a total franking of Ir.
10k. The stamps were cancelled with
the despatch postmark: "ENGELS
3HTEJIbC (?) ACCPHII 20.8.40".
A boxed cachet reading:
"ME)KAYHAPOJHASI" (i.e. for an
international postcard) has been
applied, as well as a two-line
registration marking in violet with the
text "R / 184 / ENGELS" and also in a
rectangular frame. The R-number and
name of the town were written in violet
ink. The address of the sender is
interesting: "UdSSR, Engels,
ASSRNP, Deutsches Staatstheater,
Schwarz Rudolf." Note that it

is written m German and Russian (!), The franking agrees with the rate for sending that class of mail [29, p. 59].
Fir. 12B on the next page shows a "triangular" military letter, sent from Engels to the address: "The Army
on Active Service, 301". Field Post Station". The letter was franked on the address side with a 30-kopek stamp
(Michel J' 682); unfortunately, only a part of the marking can be read on the postmark of despatch. However, it can
be said with certainty that, according to the diameter and external appearance, it also corresponds in text to an
analogous postmark, which was shown in Figs. 35 & 36 [34], the only difference being in the number of the postal

November 2004

Fie. 12B.

30/ fllo t'ogo-f1Oed& 4qc C

33 075.C

J ^Fz44ecCa-WjCiL1 22' V Fie. 13B.
S.. .station in the town of Engels. In Figs.
SK35 & 36, it was "3 rOP.(OHCKOE)
I nOTOB.A~ KAP 1TO '-l- OTA.(EJIEHHE) and in Fig. 12B: "1
-4 The text can then be set out in the
Following sequence: "CCCP (star) /
S' .- VF 3H9 EJIbC 1 rOP.(OACKOE)
"- -l ENGELS 1 STADT ABT. / 6.12.41"
S, with serial letter "6". Military mail was
... normally sent free of charge and the
origin of the letter was designated by
-7- the return address: "Engels 1, Saratov
SY l: province, P.O. Box 22". However, it
-. -- was frankedin this case at the rate for
SJ. .. an ordinary intercity letter. The arrival
Fig. 13B. marking "TIOJIEBAqI IIOHTA JX
301, 17.12.41" and the cachet of a military censor are on the back of this "triangular" letter.
Description of the Railway Postmarks
A postcard is demonstrated in Fig. 13B, which was placed for transmission in the letter box of Postal Van XJ
287. That is confirmed by the oval postmark in black with the text "CAPATOB'B 287 ACTPAXAHb
20.10.11".The card was addressed to Leipzig, Germany, but there is no arrival marking. The route of Postal Van XN
287 partially went through the territory of the Volga Germans and, on the back of the card, the point where it was
written was noted as Fresental. That village was in the Mariental Canton (according to [16], it was located in the
Tonkoshurovka Canton, but in [17] already in Mariental Canton) and the population was German. It therefore also
had a German name: Neu-Scheffer, under which it is listed in [16].


RIff*R (tHMIIKllkIL 13.tk5. p 7A-92.
RILER IrnfillIn i 2 4H .N".'4 p97-103.
36.NAGL AUKTION BAMBERG, J 9, 27 March 2004, lot M530.
MIUIII l N in p1 I
SSMiHiIIFI'. 10,p.65,
(1MIlHK), .X 10 r,
l.'IMU Hli N-11.1t.,l.
RIL33 l0I.IHIiki I.' -, I -.64.
J33, p.75 -76.
RMIlllki I1M4,R35,p.75.
RII. R I K llSMI JI 'I .* .lh p W'M

BT [flM5 I JlI RN 'M OF RI I',IAN P II.lA 11.I Y, IooQ n'. p 13 -35,
(Rl.MlIl'l. 3'13 1, ?p9 I I
(AMIHMK),2004, 54, p.6 -22.

I illlll 1.h')lanl q lli':rr oplp p .:fTTr1: I MlCIC IlI A11p.dUM .ul.nrnrln ~lIll tpB 4
ThePOS' -RIUDER.' ,1 r 1 ] no[ 30 ;
ThePOST- RIDER S4 -or (31 ] o [ 331;
The POST-RIDER J55 -orl 34 ] no 44 ],

November 2004

IIpwaioxeme X2 1.


Teppa7opHn a B Tc.KCn.KM-28,2 qIHCIO aAMHlHIICTp
HaceaeHHe-605.542 .ea. CTOJIA- r. 3HrEJIbC eanuHl
roponcKoe-131647 e. .. ncebcosetonon) ..
cejbc oe --473895 n ec. ropo TOB .. ..
PaccrosHHe 'O MoCKBsH P ropoaon pe
no CTOJnIwn pecny6anKH-S46 KM KaHcKoro noHiHHel
flara o6paooanHs l'pynoBolA pa6o'lar nocejaKOi
KoMMyAyn HeMUes noBOnoRaKb-
19 oxic6pn 1918 rona
ara npeo6pasosaHHo B ACCP-
19 AeKa6pS 1923 rona
KaHTOHbl (paiOHbl) A KaHTOHHbie (paftoHHble) uIHTpbl

CeAeHHnn o0 K

HaRMeOBHai iaiinMeHOBaHHe
KaT1roHa (pafoHa) KaHronnoro
o (paiomHoro)
1S _______


rfsae H xopcxnKH







r Bansbqep

c EraaeHi4uop
c fo6pHHKa

c 3eanbuan

c 3onoroT
c 1noBaTKa
c rpiMM

pn KpacHbin KyT
c Kpacnbifi lp

c KyKKsyc

c Bes3blMHlina
c MapHeHTraab
r MapecmatTar

pn ilaniaconB(a
cCTapan nonTaBiC
C YETepsBanab


.... 282
. . 3
iHn 1
.J. 5

alITOHHOM (paAoHHOM) Ue.rpe en l n o."T

6nHsaflyeA O K.-. : =
CraTuHt H paccTO0- r
Hue ao Hee

4 5

somnKCKHf P-Vp 72 72
rMeJIHHCKaR -176
naec 30 166
KaMbanH nfle 35 646
(cpHcraui HHHINCH
CKHat P-Yp 110 110
(npHCTaHb 3exbMas)
CaparoB P-Vp 100 103
(npHcTraHb 3oaoroe)
FrenHHCKaR P-Vp 85 261
CaparoB 100 103
(npHcraHb Mop-
noso 36)
KpacHbnRi Kyr P-Yp- 122.
CKHi P-Yp 28 28
Capao 61 64
(npHcTaHr 3eab-
MaH 52)
Be3auSHnan P-Yp 38
oHaxol n, 18 81
lnoKpOBCK-npwBoon -
c ani P-Yp 50 50
(npaCra.Hb Map;cc-
Iannacosaa P-Yp 1 214
a rMenHc:ta 50 226
AnHCOBKa 3 7
CKlIf P-Yp 76 76
(npHcTaumb Mapic-
mrTaT 25)

I 0 I o
o 0 c8 o a

6 7 81 9

1,4 12 1
li6 9 -
1,7 21 -
1.3 15 -

Attachment JMN 1.
8o1 00u O ea


2 -

) Kpacun ii Kyr
2 KpauKe
3 flnnnacOBKa
4 ripHBopn CKini

26 1st

3 4

'138 ron put
,19S8 -
1q33 pa
1939 -



KpacHbri Kyr




CleeielHR o KaRTOHIOM (paAoHHou) neHnpe CDeie.(. o xarooe.

1-aanennOnse -naensane
KH eHOBaHTOHa Ta aMeHoBaHHe i a r
KRTOHa KaHlTOHiloro 6nKaflmeR .-A. = 0. =.
oT :aHIHH .H p aCCTOR- 4
S (pa oHa) (pafionaoro) HHe no Hee a o- : o 0 o
,i .ueHTpa 0 K K 001- 0. 1a u 0S

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
n19 4eAopoECKa n MoKpoyc MoKpoyc P-Vp 116 1,3 14 -
20 paHKCKHil c rycceH6ax MeaBeanHLa nen3 12 510 1,1 13 1
21 K1re8clK.i! c 4'pmneo)jenbA THMoepeeo P-p 2 133 1,4 12 -
22 .3p.ieH6axciia c O6ep.op) JlanmaHHcKan neH3 567 0,5 9 -

SropoacKHe noceneHHB
a) ropona pecny6 unHanciHoro .noAnHeHHSl

0 HaIeHola- 4aTa I HaHMeHoBaHHe 6nH-
SIaHMeoaa- -i C iHMeHOBaHHe ame C- o0
o o6pano- HaceneHie ,"-A CTaH- .
aHe ropoaa BannA Ipaficoeon tunH Hn peacrowne
*. fno mlee B KM m
1 .2 5- 4 -5 6 -7

1 3arenbc 1920 rox 73279 nen. r1oKppoaCI-nlpH-
2 Kpac .fi BOA)ICKHAf P-Vp -
2 Kpacnsn8
mHK pn 1929 ; /,ec HernHa 25 -

6) ropoa KaoHTOHHoro (pafioHnoro) nonisHHens

1 Banbnep 19t18 ron rx BqbuepcxH IToxKpOBCK-npH-
2 Map6curaT 1918'; p MapKcmTaATCtli nTIoKpK-npH-

B) pa6eoHne nocejiKH KaHToaHoro (paaoHHoro) H ropoAcKoro nonsHHeHHn

e HaMneHoBaHHe laTa BKaK KRHanTOn HaHMeOBaHRe 6Bam. o
Spa6 I odpa e soie3- A' v -raomeal .2A m
Sp CaJoero nocea. -f, 1 g (paoni) xon CaHin
t3 6 ,

Hpo emie J' N 1.

: 'Saxepcmifi KaHTOHt
(' pafoH)-
1. ACOHCrnia
2. AXiaTCKuH
s3. aetijeXCeIHl
4. Bo6jJoBcKHfk
5. ytKKCKin*
6.:d *lero4icxHAi
7. 'K'Yq:repCKH9
8. Moopcxce9
9.-MopnOA nnCtcA
10. HOptHHCKHjt
11. CT"toI6OBCKH
'12. wnannnrciadi

rirenHHcncil uaHTOH

1. nmoienoeaenmbceei
2. Pmernicycice
3. KanoectcA
A4. b.opreHTaycKa
5. H. onaRcUHR
.J flocenmobls COBXO34a,:
M 98.
7. P oce i. o E k i cosxosa
~.M99 -
..8. TpnnineanbbopimcmA.,
- 9. XapbKOBCKHA .

reniaey.(PcopcKnll eaHTOH

'1. AarbT-U1OpHXCKHfi
2. Boomcacfi
:4. BocepeceHcKH ic -
5. rHEACeHeIIopcxHi
6. AmHTpHeecee8
7. 3axenb5eprucmi
9. Kapnoncee9
11. .JlanoncKg8
13. Mapnen6yprciadi
16. He9.1Jjop~uctcn
17. flontAeBOnaACtA
18. Cnapraicctiii nc
19. 4yryHCacHA
20. LUTpa3em4)eabAC1cC1fA


I. ranKHicnfn
2. roarfinTeRHcKaef
3. re6enbcicut
4. rH,,bAma!CKISI4
5. Ilo6pHCKHii

CenbcKHe COneTw

6. f.pe9mrniqc~nAk
7. Kpa4 rcKH R
8 KexepcKldl
9. IleriXTJimHCKui1
10. Mzoanepcwiil
11. Momb6eeprcx1fl
12. CeMeAoBcKHri
13. WBb6cxHm1
14. LUhe4)aHCKHfi
5S. Ulep6arcoecKHA

3eJanbm ammi KaflToH

1. BpynaeranbrncKwrt
2. BH3eHuHJIAepCKHfl
3. renauenbcicu9
5. MalpHee6eprcjcxd
6. HeR-Bape.i6yprce(lH
7. Heft-KencdHiucICiH
9. cppuiejix eprcKHR
12. LTpeiKcepaycclce9


' '2. ryceecxff
3. .IaHaxomo(IIH
4. Jly6oecxell
5. 3ono0oecT01CH
6. JlaaTeBCsXHf
9. 060ornIneeOECKHf
10. P1'emicKHRi
14. CyBopoecKliff

14aosaTc(HR xaHToe

1. BenoiaJeecKHR
2. Mi'osaTcHe9
3. KornbrmRuice
4. I((pacHO-51pcHN
5. Kypnaeeaiti
6. no~reMMnUIricKHR9
7. 4epejaenacmii

{amemcf(nR icaHTOH

I B.1v pcKFT.
& fycgcapecHAd

CelbC.tK e COeR

4. .EerorcKHr
5. KameHcxHii
6. Meccepceaii
7. 14Ae(cepcKH
8. foaibmeptmil
9. 1pa3uuo0eHKHff
10. 1LyXcKHA

KpacHoKyTrcY(HA laHT0o

2. ropew(Hft
3. ro?4ieHTaAbctai
4. IycceH1aTcKdHf
5. ExarepaineeRaabctcni
6, I4AiRRcKIll
7. Kapnemcmllf
& 1ajoreeciejjbAcdHfl
9. fe6eae-jcuRii

12. floceaaoshi~i coaxo3a
X-i 591
13..Po3earsaaclbC R
14. Po3eH4)eJfbJdMiC
15. PYAnenceft
.Ia. IIeRnopeclung
17. WmewraabCKdi
18. 1UenqpeabnCKH0I
19. UWHjmHHrckHfi
20. WLTpacemptol)cRHcR
22. SroA.oecKHR

KpacHompcT{H1A KaRTOR

1. Arnbr-Ypbaxcixi
2. pacHospcKHii
3. 1HAepMOHeyiICtae9
4. Poseareimcxadk
8, PeAerapA~rcr11
7. PoneAepCKHR
9. Ule~epcuntt
10. IUrajjbcxHFT
11. tLynbcK1111
12. 9*AepcKnl

KyKICYCCWH fl e gaflT

1. 5n.repTcRHA
2. Spae6anepci HR
3. 5apen6yprcrrik
4. AleepcKicia
6. WOCTCxfii
7. Kylc(ycrCICII
8. Aaq26o rfl
9. JAayueeau;

rlO.jrajmcr Ta. ',K .flanaicoicenlt tateToB

1H, ai~eprefl CIfrad aTo *: 1. AnmT-BefiiapaKmfl
: (pafloc) 2.'Bypcmeccmfl.
3. Hefl-Be~eapcCKHf
1. Beahl bjl1 4. CaBHHCKefi
2.. Bocicpecewcual S. rlocenimoir r Bosa
.-3.jCenneRcanbcaXKr 13'
-4. 01134mneprelictrR 6. Opacpeflxcemil
5. Mewewancanei 7. W1.paicoyprcxaa
6. He9.IlTpay~cictdl
*7. leil-Jlay6cKxiiI CTapo-noITaecallo icanHTOB
*8. flocenatobadi couxooa. (papoH)
M 103
9. floceztonbdl tO'X03a
M 592 1. eneeecCKHR
flocejaoeaaablf coexosa 2. BaayjeBteail
A 105 3. riaianeTayc2HA
11. c~paA~xdpqjcjcHA'4..Epycnae~ccnf
12. 'PpHAeereiiecKaS 5 KaS. nlHHCaadi
6. I lapneHTaJnbcKHRd RaHTrO 7, YlATO1MHHcgtt
.~ (patio H) s ii ooo-noxmaseR' g
g..H. Kuacangoocnil
1. -ApxcamaepreftAicxui 0. flecqauctcafl
1 3. repilorcx~il 12.CawaoHCKH1I.\'.
4. FEBAeH.MPo(ClCH81 13. 1UImijrnrmtctaa
S. Ipa4cxKH1
6.XareficKHR Tepeocemil k aHTOe
,T--Ky YPHWA~hli (patiou).
&8..H6eanm jmcxci
*9.'J1uneeu8e mncra8 I reHJj3BflbCKK
10. JIYA1CKrd1 2. re(acaeoaciuRi
3. DloceaeKOrnlf coexo0a
-12.MapHeReTa cKeii. M 104
I3. HeIiYp6axcKaad 4
,14. H O6eo A T pnoac
pmO-iti MOPCKH~I
.5..HeA9-Boap~oecxHa6ll frocn
18.-He9-UIfyabllcxn9~yel~~ft~~ _i
18. CT. Yp6axctxii YHTrepeajibeiecxf KaHToMi
.19. 'pe~eRTaanbcKHR (pa8oH)

MapCIcmTaATCKH)I eaeTOH 1. BaejbCK xr8
(pagoa) 2. &eTrTHrepctaid
3. I3aoemerefilcicHA
1-,eRKxepAopqcc-li i 4.-8mTmaucKHA
2. 5OapCeil 5. r-artyHrcKHf
3. BbprapXcK3al .r'apycctanR
4. Epoxray3eHCXar9 7. FPenTarABCIl
s5. roKiepeprcCKH9 8. KIii1CxA 9
6,KamnHHl4eAbaclcn9 9. KHpOac4aejjbACfiuli
7. Keposmufl 10. Hefcradi
8. Hefl-BpyaaencvcI 11. Heaii1op4)cen
9. OepelyaTICIc111 12. PcmnepcKnA
10. OpnoRcKriiR 13. CytaHMarInaTGE-Cem
11. layalcblnl 14. YairepeaBAnnenctcsi
12. flepsromarcimil 15. ~ioperpcumnm
13. A)!mHnnc4nbbAcxmfi I U.1ao1-rayaeHcacail
14. 41Huoepcxns 17. .UeaxmcKanis

Attachment JNq 1.
f 0 A 0 a H( AR 2
tI'eioponcKA0 uaHToi
1. M-BaHommcKi
2. KananeAcee
3. Kaaywcictif
4. KpacaacHniA
5. MHTpo0aHoBcKH1
6. MoKpoyccacetB
7. Hneonaescxail
8. fneeeHOCiU
9. jloceAKoa,1H Co13xoaa

10. PoaenxaacincH
13. TaM6oscKHfi
14. cDeAopoBcicHr
2. ryccensaxcaadl
8. J11riTenbc CKH
4. 3eeaajiAcKH11
5. (ayuetMii
6. Konk6 mial
9. HeIe-MeccepcicHA
-10. Helr-L9eero4cCKHf
11. lIeiA-BannxbepcxHR
12. POcraMMeA6bCREi
13. 4lpaHXCKHcl
-.9refkMcmfR I TaaHTOR
1. ranenqHeabncxKe8

.3, 2*ypaansccnc l
4. JlenemecHHcxH
5. Heg-Baaypcicall
'G. Heii-lAnmnnnrccef1
7. Hel-Beiiaeiccxal.
8. rlocenaoBrR COBXO3&
9. YcaToBcXel
10. 'PpfaeHq~enbAC1cfAl
12. DpempeaibAcKH
Bpj7eH~axcKHA HaHTOS
1. Anexca1oAepraaorcmA9
2. Bm~eHoenpeaa aC1Cnl
3. MocucaranHacicd
4. MapnemujenzcsHell
5. Hef-Hopcimfi
6. O6epiop)CcKRH
7. Poeaj6cprcimf8
8. YVrep-aop(cPc'im
9. 9pneHNIcxail

piuX J-& 2. Attachment X2 2.


I p 0e 4 coep.a ftea .' ... ..
K P. C .1 CCfl'.
EOPrli M9 Chi -11 M f1( lM~~~'-S.,*

Tp..e ih flD1Ib .....

01 .: -: -
.0--c- 01- i

C -q

F .. .. .


-i H--- T.

w-- ....!

1922: Map of the Volga-German Province in Russian. H.... rIt,

November 2004



Attachment J& 3.

03 30'o 4or .00 n JO'

i. lutonnomn SDZialitisEhen

te-Repubiik d.WnlgadeufAchen

Maastab: 1i400000 oder 1 cmd 4 hm ----

*I 'P, S 0V,.s
a0 sowo s I

her thoho Beresalki o

Ust Hardf

00h9 assoj 0.1,? o shjnoj s

; ~ NITOdN..
*0tirm aa""


\^ ^: "'. e"

- O0- -----A d

V I f s o O r Uh o .

Osl 10 10--0-00
I 450. 0 0.0.000-0-0II :-
r d H Op h-

-'d .r_ o\-ish

Olstrmtrdlr~arter n.rorersrmarmrlhlr~r ined~YI ldermlhaddat y An~d)YlV~rorperomme

re6 Wo/g

* a 0fIo Oath0oh
-- . 00..... .

Al I aJ -
Wa *0fai00


0 -S l A 1000
S10 '10

o ., ,., ..oo .
o to 1 a

.. a ~- ta.0 0 se0atOreO J e

Sre rree r
--G efasmirtrrard
ffO a0 d 0n010r 4 000004

rnlaun- l
3.hlr vltte.*0ar
\ ,Ir0U d rlar n a^l0

\ 0 lcd.lva. n :hr titiit
o ~~r w
El oaurd~ola
o 3119003003010

JO 3----- 0'

Zentral-V6lKer-Vsrlg der U.S.RR.te' lung in PoKrowsk,AS.RRdWD.Ig319-
1930: Map of the Volga-German ASSR in German.

Preisl Rub.

Price 1 rouble.

November 2004

-,, llpluno~eHI~e M 3.

g000 0" g 0000r


3 nliao1


k -

ksnycftethew ^

Kam tk^e

"""' YU. Iri~ *11Rl).~l!101)(L

IIoacHemHH K Ta6inm aM ITiDpmiOXCe N 4
3a ocHOBy B3M nepereaa KaTOHOB H cejibCKKa COBeTOB corjiacHo 'cnCKa [ 15 ]
(TIpimoMeHHe f?1; amBHre 1940 rosa). KaaXaa Ta6mnua (Bcero Hx 22) nocBumena
orzTAeiMOMy KaHTOHy mB aroro cmacra H coOroHr H3 4-x cron6ioB. ECJI npmnaHB neAaoc-nT
cemBcKxoro coBera HmI Bcero KaiHTOHa 3MeHiwacB B CPOKH, KOTOPLe MOxIO upocnieg m (1922,
1930, 1940 r.r.), To aro ynaano B cHocrax non Ta6MJ~EnM. Ecn B [ 16 1 a3BaHH r-Ier-poB
cejnbcK x coBerTB IupHeaeHa B lanyx Bapnawrax (nanpanep, pyccKoe B HeMeiKcoe), TO 3TO
noBTOpeno B TperaeM cTOj6ige. B HOe TamKe yXa3aHo Hpox)HBaamee B nenrpe ceaJECKor
conera HaceiemHe (HeMegroe, pyccKoe, 3croHcKoe).
JI~F HeKoroprx celrmcmIx coBeroB Ha~aBHHa no KapraM He HaleH, T, rTO yKa3aao B
Ta6jnitax. HHorna MelIOTca TraIKue Mejmie paaHmam B Ha3BanHHx cejiCKHX COBeTOB H HX
ITepetx Ta6iaam am npneaei Ha3BaHHm KanroHoB, cygmecrOBaBanmx B 1922 roay (a
cooTBercTBHH c [ 16 ]) H cymecrBOBaBnmH B 1930 rony (B cooTBeTrBHH c [ 17 ]).

CInrmco KiraHTOOB no Kapre 1922 roga

1. KaMeHcKiHt KarOH (c.KaMeKna)
2. POBHeHCKHi iKarBTc (c.PoBHoe -3eJIMan)
3. CTapo-nonracBKacR RaHTOH (c.CTapaa rnorraBKa)
4. IIanraco~BCKu~ KanrOH (c.Hek-rFanca ?)
5. 3onoTosBcKii KxaTro (c.3onITOe)
6. MeegamA~nit ranTon (c.MeaB.-KpecroBoI F yepaK OpaHK)
7. rono-KapamuinamcM KaHrOH (c.Fo~aTi Kapamnn EB ajIep)
8. KaHTro BomBcKoe (c.BoJccxoe Kyxyc)
9. HoKpoBCKxl KanTron (rInoxpoBCK Ko3aKeHInragr)
10. KpacHoapcxat a KHTOH (c.KpacHoap).
11. MapxcTrrarrci u KaanOH (r.MapKcurraOr BapoHcK)
12. TomKomyponBCxHi KaaToH (c.ToaKonmypoBia MapHeranr ) -
13. cDefopoBcKmit KaHTOH (c.QDeopoBKa)
14. KpacHo-KyrcKHRd KarHOH (c.KpacwsAit Kyr)

1. Kanton Kamenka (Dobrinka -?)
2. Kanton Seelmann (Seelmamm)
3. Kanton Staro-Poltawka(Staro-Poltawka)
4. Kanton Pallassowka (Pallassowka)
5. Kanton Solotoje(Solotoje)
6. Kanton Frank (Frank)
7. Kanton Balzer (Balzer)
8. Kanton Pokrowsk (Pokrowsk)
9. KantonMarxstadt (Marxstadt)
10. Kanton Mariental (Mariental)
11. Kanton Fjodorowka (Fjodorowka)
12. Kanton Krassny Kut (Krassny Kut)

Ta6mJIHm nflpnoxceHam 4

1. BajmnepcKsai KaHroH (*1)

HasaauHe cejncKoro coBera HaBaEHHe ieHTpa cejmcKoro coBera Ha3Banne ioeHTpa
no [15 ] (IpanomeHHe X1) no Kapre 1922 r. [ 16 ] cen2cKOro coBera no
(IIpuioxemae N2) Kcapre 1930 r. [ 17 ]
S(IlpHmoaKeH e 3&3)
3 4

Attachment JX2 4.

.1 AnmoUHCt ,CeBacrB moBra (ABTron) He-n Anton
2 Axuarcn I'AxMar pyc. Achmat
3 BeeieKCKBg TanoBw a (EefigK) He. Beideck
4 Bo6poBc Hgn Bo6poBKa pye. Bobrowka
5 FymCgt CiuaByxa (FyK) HeM. Huck
6 leHrod)CKMA Fonojio5oBIa (LgeHromb) HeM. Donnhof
7 KyrrepcKat rIonoBKa (Kyrrep) He. Kutter
8 MoopCKK K.moK (Mp) HeM. Moor
9 MopAOBHHCKAft Mop~oBo pyc. Mordowo
10 HopmKHCKHa Hopca HeM. Norka.
11 Cr. ToroBCKaT TonoBia pyc. Alt-Topowka
12 II nuarcgCocoBrKa (IHm Hnr) Re Schilling

*1 Bce 12 ceimcxax coBeroB aroro KawRoHa no Kapre 1922 r. ozrociamch K Fono-
KapaMuscKolry KaToary, a no Iapre 1930 r. K Kanton Balzer.

2. rMeijnamcxu KaHTOH (*1)

1 EmoMneHejmAclKH EmoMeH4ena nHeM. Blumenfeld
2 rMeJinHcKHH IMeFeimKas \a cr. Gmelinski
3 KaOBacrKa KanH HeM. Kano
4 Moprenraycclat Moprewray Hex. Morgentan
5 H.BormcmK BoaiKca ? Wodjanka
6 IocenKOBnAt coBxo3a MN98 He nakeen He HaRieH
7 1IocemcOBaiR coBxo3a N99 He H ea#en He nafaeH
8 Tpmefncxopcia Tpmmescopop nex. Trippelsdorf
9 XapbKOBCKHi9 XapaKOBKa pyc. Chajkowka

*1 Bce 9 cemiacunx COBiroB aToro KamroHa no xapTaM 1922 r. a 1930 r. OTHOCHmmHC K
nlanracoBCKOMy KaTroBy (Kanton Pallassowka).

3. rHaaeH4imopcKHit KaHoH (*1)

1 Auir-lT-opxcpnct Anar-IIopax (*2) pyc. Alt-Zurich (*2)
2 BEo6oBCKm / Bo60Ba pyc. Bobowo
3 Bo3HeceHcix Bo3HecemKa (Meenlca) pyc. Wosnessenka
4 BocKpeceHcuat BocKpecemxa (CanoBna) pyc. Woskressenka
5 arHaeHH4mopcKHit LHage Hmop neM. Gnadenflur
6 AmarrpmeBKg He HamAeH He naaen
7 3=xem.6eprcKfn 3Hxei6epr HeM. Sichelberg
8 KaseamHCKg. KaseiHKa pyc. Kawelinka
9 KapnoBaick~ KapnoBaa pyc. Karpowka
10 KemnneuranmcKE Kemneraim HeM. Koppental
11 JImoBcKri~ JImoBKa pyc. Lipowka _
12 ManareimcKHzc Mamarei He Mannheim
13 Mapnen6yprcKcu_ MapHeg6ypr HeM. ienb
14 MayccRKg MAyc pyc. Mius
15 Moprenayccica Moprenray (Cyerano) ne. Morgentan
16 Her-L~-opHxcKtg He-UibopHx (*2) HeM Neu-Zurich (*2)
17 IIoaeBogmacIcoli IlojreoguAEo pyc. Polewodino
18 CnapraTaKcKt nc. He HariteH He HariWeg
19 qyryMCK ryymKa pyc. Tschugunka
20 IlTpasenHejCKHa i IITpace4ensj neHM. Strassenfeld
21 3pjea6axcKHca 3pjien6ax nHe. Erlenbach

wasum*V _MIVZUD I1u ^""^"C IIJ IUC""



IlpHJioxeHme JX 4.
*1 Bce ceJacKHe coBermT, xpome B aenemawxx cHocKaME no KapTaM 1922 rH 1930 r.
OTHocMlcL K OeAlOPOBCKOMY RKaroHy (Kanton Fjodorowka).
*2 -no xapraM 1922 H 1930 r.r. naxogwgac Ha TepparopaH CaparoBcKoftry6epanH
(o6nac'r), HO BHe AOHnI H ACCP HII.

4. Ao6pmHHCKHs KaSroH (*1)

1 FaimKHHCKHgi Ycr-Kynaj (Famna)K HeM. Galka
2 Fonlrefihcaj a BepxaHm KynamHKaa (FojmiamTel) Holstein
3 Fe6enmcKsa Yc6-rpe3sayxa (Fe6e-m) HeM Gobel
4 eifm aacKe nIaHOBKa (FiM aH)) HeM. Hildman
5 o6pCancAt go6pHama geM. Dobrinka
6 ApeinmicsKHKi Bepxan ,o6ppana (ALpeMmanm) Dreispitz
7 KparcKAER BepxHns rp3yxa (Kpa4r) HeM. Kraft
8 KexepcKxM Kapaynar, t ByepaK (Kenep) HeM. Kohler
9 JIeAcrmacHnlR HnoBi (JIexIrM Ir) HeM. Leichling
10 Mso.epcXSni Kpecronot EyepaK (Mmep) HeM. Muller
11 Mioia6eprcamgt H.iep6aKOBra HeM. Muhlberg
12 CeMeHoBcKA CeMenHOBKa HeM.(?) Semjonowka
13 IBlla6cKat Byf#gaKOB EyepaK (JIIa6) neM. Schwab
14 llre(aaCKBa Bosmof ByepaK (IIlTeqaH) HeM. Stephan
15 IlepSaKOBCKHfA PyccKraslIep6axoKBa pyc. Schterbakowka

*1 Bee 15 cenjmcax coBerTB 3roro KaHoHna no KapraM 1922 r. H 1930 r. oTHocPuHcM K
KaaencKOMy KauTOny (Kanton Kamenka).

5. 3ejnaMacscKB KxarTO

1 EpyHeH-rancKHif Kpnof .p (pyEneura~n) (*1) HeM Brunnental
2 Benanuiiepcni BseMnmRg uep (*2) HeM. Wiesenmuller
3 FemnejnicKaE i Koiremoe (TFexJage) (*1) HeM. Holzel
4 3ejanmanc aB PonBoe (3eJaa) (*1) HeM. Seelmann
5 MapHeH6eprcnKt Bror (MapneH6epr) (*1) neM. Marienberg
6 HeAl-Bapen6yprcma3 HoBo-IIpBnamHoe (*1) HaeM Neu-Warenburg
7 Hell-KojioHncIcai KycrapeBo-KpacHopBaoiBHa Neukolonie
(HoBaa KonooHH) (*1) HeM.
8 IIpeiccKE9 KpacHoonome (Ipegc) (*1) HeM. Press
9 OpgaeH6eprcKH DpHwen6epr (*2) neM. Friedenberg
10 XoMyrHHnace XoMyrmaa (*1) pyc. Chomutinka (*3)
11 LInKBCKB a He nHar'A He HafeH
12 RITpeKKepaycc aK I-ITpeKKepay (*1) nei. Streckerau

*1 no Kapre 1922 r. OTBocumac K PoBHenCKOMy KarioHy.
*2 no Kapre 1922 r. orTocmHIHC K Crapo-IIojrraBcKoMy KanroHy.
*3 -no Kapre 1930 r. oTaocenJca Kanton Staro-Poltawka.

6. 3ojIrosCBcKH K KaHrH

I BayjnamHCn Baymmo pyc. Waulino
2 FyceecxniE ryceno. pyc. Gussewo
3 anmnoncKHEA gHamoBa pyc. Danilowka
4 &y6oscamA Ay6osna pyc. Dubowka
5 3oxoroo crcA 3onoloe pyc. Solotoje
6 JIatrr reBcK JIanorpyc. Lapotj
7 MewioBmacs i MenuoBoe pyc. Melowoje

Attachment MN 4.
8 HBaHMHOBCKMi HH)aHa EaHHoBKa pyc. NiznijaBannowka
9 6OoamaIHBHOBcKH OS6omaaHoo pyc. Oboljaninowka
10 PeBHacrxa PesHHo pyc. Rewino
11 PorTarMKBHCKR PorarmH o pyc. Rogatkino
12 PoManonBCft POMaHOBKa pyc. Romanowka
13 CTygeHoBcxsKf CryneHKa pyc. Studjonka
14 Cyoponcmc CysopoBo pyc. Suworowo
15 YmaxxcKHRf YmaxEno pyc. Uschachino

7. HInoBaTacK a KaTOH (*1)

1 BeeojxaMencat e BeoKaiMenma pyc. Belokamenka
2 HmoBaTCKu# HnosaTKa pyc. Ilowatka
3 Kojnumomnacman KonsmKHHO pyc. Kolyschkino
4 Kpaco-MpcxHfi Kpaca sitp pyc. KrassnyJar
5 KypgaeacRiBaf KypaaeBKa pyc. Kumajewka
6 HoTeMKHHCK IIoTeNMKao pyc. Potomkino
7 -Tepe6aeBCKH qepe6aeBo pyc. Tscherebajewo

*1 Bce 7 cejrCKHx coBerOB 3Toro KaHroHa no Kapre 1922 r. orTocmImcI K PoBHencKOMy
Kaarroy, a no Kapre 1930 r. K Kanton Staro-Poltawka.


1 Eay3apKHR KapambmeBKa (Eayp) (*1) HeM. Bauer (*3)
2 pH MMCKHaE .IJecHoi Kapamanm (TFpa ) (*1) Grimm (*3)
3 ryccapencKHa Emmana (yccapen) neM Hussaren (*2)
4 Ierosx~Hcet KaMema 0t OBpar (erorr) HeM. Degoott(*2)
5 MeHC KaeaMeCxa HnesM. Kamenka (*2)
o0 ieccepcKnm YcTI.-anxa (j Mccep) (I) HeM. Messer('5)
7 1 IIeflfcepCKH F mHyn (IT)eatep) HeM. Pfeifer(*2)
8 OojmMepcaKg 'KoneHma (QomMep) HeM. Folmer*2)
9 Opauos3eHCKl Poccoma (QpamoseH) HeM. Franzosen (*3)
10 ycaH FpaHOBaoKra (IIlyK) HeM. Schuck (*2)

*1 no Kapre 1922 r. oraocanacT K Fono-KapanmuHncKOMy Karnony.
*2 no Kapre 1922 r. orTnomnBnC K Kanton Frank.
*3 -no xapre 1930 r. OTHOCmaBHC K Kanton Balzer.

9. KpacHOKyrcIrCB KaHToH

1 AxMaKrcKna AxMaT pyc. Achmat.
2 Fopemmarf Fopeang -crt. Goretzkoje
3 Fo ,eHrajnmcx n Fod4eniraim HeM. Hoffental
4 TycceH6axccKat ycceH6ax HeM. Hussenbach
5 EKaTepaHenTra cKH KaTepHHearaiTm HeM. Katharinental
6 HImHHCIHca HTHmma pyc. Jljinka
7 KapneHncKim Kapnem-a pyc. Karpjonka
8 JIaHreH4ejisacKH JIare beJi HeM. Langenfeld
9, Jle6eeacK:Ai JIe6eAesna pyc. Lebedjowka
10 JIonaoBCKHEi JIoraHOBKa pyc. Loginowka
11 Mxal iinoBx Maixam~oaa pyc. Michailowka
12 InocejioBsM coBxo3a ~ 1 591 He natAeH He na len
13 Po3eRTa~iacai Posenran~ HeM. Rosental
14 Pon3emen. cKuHf Po3eHndea I HeM. Rosenfeld
15 PyyeHCKH Pyagn pyc. Rudnja



S pHIIpioxeHHe N 4.
O 16 IIIenopicriadK gmeIeHAopcp nea. Schondorf
A 17 IIearamncrc IIIeHnaj nHeM. Schontal
18 IIIenejncAcK a IleIIeHie n HeM. Schonfeld
19 nIImmamrcRKnt KoncramHnrOBKa ReM. Schilling
20 1iTpaceHHop)CKgat IIiTpacceHaop) HeM. Strassendorf
21 3croHCKaA 3croKa 3cr. Estonka
22 mjroAnoscrHa SA -o oe ne-. Jagodnoje

10. Kpacnospcxnft KarroH

1 AumT-Yp6axagi JInoBKyr (Yp6ax) HeM. Urbach (*4)
2 KpacHoqpccak Kpacnosp neM. Krassny Jar (*3)
3 Hu epMomcycar_ -HBgepMOHy (*1) HeM. Niedermonjou (*3)
4 Po3sereimcia IfIocremnoe (Po3enre) HenM. Rosenheim (*3)
5 Pemaajmac icKgr Orapgma (Petinaaim ) hnem Reinwald (*4)
6 Pertmraprcrat OcHaOBxa (Pefmrapgr) neaM Reinhardt (*4)
7 Pojexepcm PaciKaTIr (Poaegep) (*2) neat Rohleder (*4)
8 IIIBecrUni 3BoHapeana (1leA) Heat Schwed (*3)
9 MIe(epcxoiA JimnoBxa (EIe ep) nHe. Schefer (*4)
10 IIIrTaJmcrla 3onapea xyr (UIlTam) HeaM Stahl (*3)
11 IlIyjaxcKai Fpa3nyxa (Illys) nHem. Schulz (*4)
12 S13 epciot Ycm-KapaMai (3Egepc) neM. Enders (*3)

*1 no Kapre 1922 r. orTocHnca K MapKCnmTaTrcKOMy KanTOHy.
*2 no Kapre 1922 r. ornocancx K ToHKomypoBcoMy RanTony.
0*3 no Kapre 1930 r. omocanca Kx Kanton Marxstadt
*4 no rapTe 1930 r. oTHocIiHC K KantonMariental.


S 1 BanreprcKI 3ayMop e (Ea-repr) (*1) neM. Bangert,(*3) -
S 2 Bpa6a=aepcxeA Kasmroe (pa6aep) (*1) .HeM Brabander(*3)
3 Bapen6yprcKimn IIpnananmoe (Bapen6ypr) (*2) neM. Warenburg (*3)
4 esaepc.KB BepesorKa (Aeniep) (*1) neaH Deller (*3)
5 mceaBczm ..C TapmncoBra (Gfaresm) (*1) neM. Dinkel(*3)
6 Hocrcra k IIonoBKHo (Hocr) (*1) Hea. Jost (*3)
7 KymyccKo .A Bomcroe (Kyyc) (*1) neM Kukkus (*3)
8 JIay6craK Tapan (JIay6) (*1) nea. Laub (*3)
9 JIayacicnat GjiXooaa (JIayBa) (*1) nex. Laawe (*3)
10 IIrarcicmna CTremoe (ITaan) (*I) ete. Stahl (*3) .
11 ITpay6ca __ CKraoBK a(IIpay6) (*1) neM. Straub (*3)

*1 no Kapre 1922 r. orTocHamc K KaErTOHy BoJ Lroe.
*2 -no Kapre 1922 r. ormoHncxs K PoBHeacKOMy anTrony.
*3 no Kapre 1930 r. OTHOCHJIHCa K Kanton Seelmann.

12. Jl n3aH epreftcIKm Kanron

1 BEe~a Bme3 maaa (*1) \ cr. He Hamenaa
2 Bocxpecencmn Bocipeceasa (*2) pyc. Woslkessenka (*4)
3- KennemnranCKnri Kennemram (*3) eaM Koppental (*5)
4 JI anepreioKBat 13na epre (*3) neM. Lysandemoh (*5)
5' MegeaMascran MeAearan (*3) Hea. Medemtal (*5)
6 Heft-IITpay6cscit He HatAeR He HaAen a
7 HeA-JIay6cKnAt He Hafien Neu Laub (*6)
8 Iloce icoBni coaxo3a N103 He, naaen He naiAeHn.
9 IloceiacoBir coaxosa ?J592 He naftien He HarIren

Attachment M 4.
110 o110ce coB coB3as l05 He nae e na-Me
11 Qpao9AopcKHf HeHaerMAH He HaARAe
12 OpzaerefMe cKHm# He mn eAH Friedenheim (*5)

*1 no Kapre 1922 r: orTocanacL K rIOKpOBCKOMy KaEroHy.
*2 no rapre 1922 r. ornocTnacs K Kpacno-KyrcKOMy Karnroy.
*3 -no Kapre 1922 r. ornocarac K arrTOHy Bojmcxoe.
.*4 -no Kapre 1930 r. onocmaacs K Kanton IKassay Kut
*5 no Kapre 1930 r: oTHocmmjC r Kanton Seelmann.
*6 -no xapre 1930 r. orTocamca i Kanton Mariental.

13. Ma~nemrajmiscint K HRTO (*1)

1 AneKcagaeprefiMCKrA A.eKcaaap-Fe neM. Alexanderhoh
2 Beine#eniacKran BeieH em HeaM. He nafiAeC
3 Fepsxorcram Cycmas (epgor) heaM Susly
4 EIaeBaopccg~nA FnHageaopi neM. Gnadendorf
5 Erpadjaca Kpyroapolar (Fpa4) HeM. Graf
6 laregmcaR, He naf#e Daleatm
7 Kya'rypnrxi He narenA He HariAen
'8 JI6emajri aKHa JIR6eHraim eaHM. Liebental
9 JIanmeenacmcra JIsneHnlemAH nem. Lilienfeld
10 J.IyttOKHRi Orporoma (JIyA)H neM. Louis
11 MafrAop)CEft He nEaaeHh Maidorf
12 Map#Henranicrda t Tomoomypoaa (Mapnenramn) neaM Madental
13 Heft-Yp6axcaxt Het-Yp6ax nem. Nei-Urbach
14 Hel-O6epMomKygcr He#l-O6epMnomy eHM. Neu- Obermonjo
15 Het-BoapoBCKmr HeA-Eoapo neaM Neu-Boaro
16 Heft-IIIyjnbcKHt He Sagge Neu-Schulz
"17 Po3e 4)enscmaa. Po3seeaJE eM. Rosenfeld
18 Cr. Yp6axc ia Yp6ax HeM. Urbach
19 1 Ope3enTa.JiCKmg pe3enrma (Hea-nedwep) HeM. Fresental

*1 -Bce Hafteanie cejzicKre coBewH Soro KanTOHa no KapTe 1922 r. ornocHiac x
TonKomaypOBCKOMy rKanrony, a no iapre 1930 r. yze K Kanton MarientaL.

14. MaprKcnragfrctCu KaHiroH

1 Beaeepaop4)Cxr6 BeaKKepaopdb nea. Enestinendorf
2 1 oapcKita Boapo. HeM. Boaro
3 BoprapacIar Boperapar nea. Boregardt
4 BporcrayseHncsar Epoi-aysen (WFy~ez) HneM. Brockhausen
5 Foxncep6eprgcr Forep6epr (BoH) Hne. Hockeberg
6 KaimmnH4em.eci xt He HatfeaS He Haf ieH
7 Knapoacial He Hatgen He nafMen
8. Hen-Bpy HeHncxi Hoaeonwe ioar HeMn. Neubrunnen
9 06eprMOMccxiO 06 epmoncy HeM. Obermonjou
10 OpO iBCKit OpnoaBCKoe nem. Orlowskoje
11 .HaynrmcKat IIaynBCKoe HeM. Paulskoje
12 Hepomaracxkat He nataen He Hafiren
13 mngnc 4ejmAcKrH InmmncemnS HeaM Philippsfeld
14 1c mepcKHt Temysaa (lpmep) HeM. Fischer

15. IIannacocsna KaHTOH

1 AnErT-Beapr .AT-tnBeK fiap- B neM. Alt-Weimar
2 B ypcHCKrat x Xancrca (?) Bursy

ITpHioxcenHHe NM 4.
3 HeR-Begmapcxna Heft-Beriap HeM. Neu-Weimar
4 CaBHHcm CaBma pyc. Sawinka
5 Iocem=oBr coBxo3a N13 'IHe HaiBeAn He nalAenH
6 eOpapeBxcIKi epaHKperx HeM. Frankreich
7 IIIpac6yprc Ki 11 rpacen6ypr nex Strassburg

16. CTapo-IIojrraBCKHe KamOH

1 BeneeBcmI t BenmeBra pyc. Beljajewka
2 Banyes.KH BaanyeBKa (MHXQffoBKa) pyc. Walujewka
3 FHaeAmaycmKB f aFemray HeM. Gnadentau
4 EpycmancKa He mateH He aTJu _e
-3 Ia mHHHHCHHa He Hafge Kalinin
6 KoxymmOBCBHK Koaymxon pyc. Koschuscha w
7 JIHTonHHc ramHa pyc. Ljatoschinka (*1)
8 HoBo-IojrraciKTmc HoBa IoiaBarra pyc. Nowo-Poltawka
9 H. KBacaMKOCKHi KBacnHKOBKa pyc. Nowo-Kwassnikowka
10 T'IEecqaHcKRa Ilecqma pyc. Pestschanka
11 OCrapo-IIojraBCxKr Capa HIoJrarBsa pyc. Staro-Poltawka
S 12 CanroBcKa CairroBo pyc. Saltowo (*1)
13 1iMjmancrkt : errpeBxa (IIH mjmo) pyc. Schmyglin (*1)

*1 no iapre 1930 r. oTrocHimcH c Kanton Krassny Kut.


1 FeHepanmcKmR FTeepa.mcKoe pyc. Generalskoje
2 aIacHKOBCIH KacHHKOBaxa pyc. Kwassnikowka
3 IIocejconaB coBxo3a ?2104 He Ha4eH He HafAieH
4. TepHoacnrt TepHOaa pyc. Tjemowka
5 YaMopeCHH Y3Mope pyc. Usmorje
6 IllyMeltKOBCKH IymefliKa. pyc. Schumejka.

*1 Bce HageamHH e ceJmcrHie coBerl 3TOTro KaREoHa no apTaM 1922 r. H 1930 r.
OTHocHmmHC K IIoxpOBCRKOy Kamaoay (Kanton Pokrowsk). Tyr xe no Kapre 1922 r.
Haxo aHnc n ropoA IIOKpoBCK (KosaKeHanragr).

18. YEmepBajan eHCKHR KaHTOH (*1)

1 Ee.eMreCKIHcx Ba3eRm (Fpaq) HeM. Basel
2 Berrmiepcmg Eaparaeaca (BeTrrmep) HeM. Bettinger
3 EmoMeHrefiMcKn Em oMeHretri HeM. Blumenheim
4 Bm ranHCKeA CoaoTypH (Bmrman) HeM. Wittmann
5 Frary Ilyr (raryr) HeM. Gattung
6 rEapyccxa Fizapyc (EH6epmreTr) .HeM. Glarus
7 -FpmrramCKHEfHenafeH He HaileH
8 KHnZgcKat EacicaxoaBa (Kmf ) HeM. Kind
9 KnoBcbejtmtcKxat He Haenife He nafieH
10 He6cruKH PP3aHOBna (He6) HeM. Nab
11 HetaopC4exi He naM e' He HaitgeH
12 PeMnepcan JIongepH (PeMep) HexM Remmler
S13 CycaHHea mTw KHi CycaHHeHTaim (BHHKenjMaH) HeM. Susannental
14 YnHepBamAeHcKHai YmiepBajngeH (Meirmapgr) neM. Unterwalden
15 Lfopxcir Iiopax (Exxepr) HeM. Zurich
16 maIrayseHcKf lIajrayen -3HeM. Schafihausen
o 17 LUmeHxeHcKargi l8HHHCKoe (IIleHxeH) Hec Schonchen

Attachment J.o 4
*1 see HairgemH e cenhcKHe COBeTh 3Tror KaImHan no kapraM 1922 r. H 1930 r.
oTHocaHic x MapKcmranATcOMy xaTroHy (Kanton Mrxstadt).

19. cefopOBCKHm KaHmro

1 HBaHOBCKHeM HMHOBKaa pyc. Iwanowka
2 KajwnacKH He H-aetrAeH Kaldino'
3 KanyAcan Kajyra pyc. Kaluga
4 KpacaBCKag KpacaBaa pyc. Krassawka
5 Murpo4aHOBCKHa MurpojaHOBaa pyc. Mitrofanowka
6 MoKpoyccRgc-: MoRpoyc pyc. Mokrous
7 HHKOm aeBOHCKe A Hmcona a pyc. Nikolajewka
8 Ilemencrag Ile emH a pyc. Pensenka
9 IoceniKOBnt coBxoBaI3Jf2 COBxo3 N2 pyc. Sowietwjrtschaft 2
10 Po3eHraMcrKHa Po3egHaM HeM. Roseadamm
11 POMaHOBicKH POManoBxa pyc. Romanowka
12 CeMeHnoCKaH CerMHOBra pyc. Semjonowka
13 Ta6oBacat TaM6oBKa pyc. Tambowka
14 DeaopoBcKE OeAopoBaa (*1) pyc. Fjodorowka

*1 -no Kapre 1922 r. xKaronmart neemp.

20. OpanHKCat KawmOH

1 BaamTepcxHA FpenagaJIyKa (BanrTep) (*) HeM. Walter
2 rycceH6axcrcKs JIbHeBo-Oaepo (FycceH6ax) (*1) Hussenbach"
3 ArreEmct Onei ni (Irgrreni) (*I) e HeM Dittel
4 3eeBanacrngk Bepxoae (3eBaJn-) (*1) HeM. Seewald
5 Kayc K a 'BepnHHKar (Kay- ) (*1) HeM. Kautz
6 KoJmscKua IIecKOBanca (Kon6) (*1) HeM- Kolb
7 KpamITog Homnaoe (Kpaice) (*2) HeM. Kratzke
8 MeprcexmcxR MaxapOBKa (MepKerm) (*2) HeM. Merkel
9 Hefl-MeccepcKati .JnBaaH epgopg(Hek-Meccep) (*I) Neu-Messer
10 Het-AeltrodcKH aR He#-femo4) (*1) HnM. Neu-Donnhof
11 HefR-EajainepcKHa Herf-Ba1iep (*1) HeM. Neu-Balzer
12 PoTraMMReicKBja 1naMranoe (PoTraMMeim) (*1) HeM. Rothammel
13 OpaaHcxcai MeAB.-KpecrOBof ByepaK (OpamK) Frank
_(*1) .HeM.

*1 no xapre 1922r.. orHocHmum x MeA setmacoy KaaHTHy.
*2 rio Rapre 1922 r. ornocimca K KaMeHCroyrcMy-KarroH

21. S3refHMCKH xaRTOH (*1)

1 FHaexiejmsflACKRa FeHaeH-,ejm neM. Gnadenfeld
2 ~I~,KOBCKBf ,_tYKrOHOBna pyc. Djakowka
3 )XypaBjieBncKxc )KypanieBaa pyc. Schurawljowka
4 JIenexancxacm JIenexancga pyc. Lepechinskaja
5. Het-EayapcKam He-Eayp nesM Neu-Bauer
6 Hei- ;iHm cKH Hei-IlmnjairM HeM. Neu-Schilling
7 HeAt-BEel eKcKmig Hek--BeZteK HeM. Neu-Beideck
8 IIocemonait coBxo3a Je97 He nagieH He Haktaen
9 YcaroaBCKa YcaroBo pyc. Ussatowo
10 OpHaenHej cimcHi OpgeHAdejm, HeM. Friedenfeld

IIpuioxceHme XN 4.

11 3icre~McKni 9 3reiM HeM. Eckheim..
12 9peH ejmIacK 3peH ejBWA HneM. Ahrenfeld
-w ce HaieHHue cejaCKHe COBmTm 3TorT KawrOHa no KapTaM 1922 r. H 1930 r.
OTHocHn3Mcs KpacHo-KyrcKoMy KarTOHy (Kanton Krasny Kut).
22. 3pjeH6axccEi KaHTOH (*i)
1 AJIeKcaHepTaWMEcKHH AneCalAepranm HeM. Alexandertal
2 Bneeaea ensacixRa ABEIOBO.. : .HeM. Wiesenfeld Attachment N 4.
3 HocaHo1o it3eranJm. HexM. Josephstal
4 MapaeHb emnKzt Mapnesiiex He eM. Marienfeld
5 Heli-Hopcxmf Het Hopra eeM. Neu-Norka
6 06epgopbcmit KynmoBo.(O6epgopd) HeM. Oberdorf
7 Po3en6eprcKmt Poseni6epr' HM. Rosenberg
8 Yarepop4ccmi Yr-ep op nHeM. Unterdorf
9 3jpneHnaxcE 3'9pjeH6ax (PeeHma)' HeM. Erlenbach

*1 -Bce 9 cenicKHx cOB'TOB asoro xaHTroHa n6 KapTan 1922 r. n 1930 r. ornOCHmaaC K
KaMeHcKOMay KaoTy (Kanton Kanienka).
HIpUJoxeHme JX 6.

R151.1 R152.1 R152.2 RI

R158.2 R158.3

Attachment 6 6.

A 0

5 87


R287.1 R288.1

Updated listing of postmarks from TPO routes 151-152, 158 and 287-288

September 2004

POCHTOVIY VAGON No 151 (crossed date)
POCHTOVIY VAGON No 158 (3-line date)
POCHTOVIY VAGON No 158 (octagonal)
ASTRAKHAN 288 SARATOV (larger lettering)

32 x 27
31 x27/2
31 x 27/2
32 x 28


25 22.8.93
28 17.11.00
29 12.3.05
32 x 27 15.4.13
32x24 7.6.12
31x26 28.2.09
32 x 28 21,9.13
32 x 28 22.3.12
32 x 27 27.11.07

13.8.17 E
26.3.09 E
26.4.12 E




Editorial Comment: Special thanks are due to P.E. Robinson of the U.K. for forwarding the information set out
above in Attachment JM 6, updated to September 2004 from the work originally done by A.V. Kiryushkin and him in
the study "Russian Railway Postmarks", Sheffield, 1994.

November 2004


IIpuaoxreme Ma5

Bwaenemhue )apHm~ mpIpHTOM HOMepa 4nryp orocsrrcr K Hacromefi CT care, npwHqM:
HMeonmae HHLeKc "A" nanearaTai B nypHanie N54, aAnexc "B" a maypnaie N55, a 6e3
3TrX HBaeXcoB a m~ypHaie N53. I#ppi 1, 2, 3 B Kpyrjmx CKO6xax, croaime nocie HoMepon
Qmyp HuH ccuJor na jnrepaTypy, o6o3HaaaIOT nepHOIAl, K KoTopul oTH(OCrc
cooTBerTByiowIHe nrreMmneja.

I YPEAX [3, p.p.54 55 ](1), [4, p.p.56
57 ](1)
2 FOJIblI KAPAMbIIU (BAJIbEP) [ 3, p.p.55 56 ](1, 3), [ 4, p.59
](3), [ 12, p.p.111 112 ](3),
[37, p.65 ](3), I4r.12(1)
3 EAPATAEBKA (YHTEPBAJIbaEH) [ 3, p.p.56 57 ](1)
4 BEEHJEK [43, p.75 ](3)
5 EKATEPHHOrPAA HA BOJIE [3, p.p.57 58 ](1), [ 5, p.p.40
(EKATEPHHEHIITA,~T, BAPOHCK, -41 ](1),[ 6, p.41 ](1), [ 10,
KATEPHHEHIIITAg, MAPKCUITAIT, MAPKC) p.p. 18 119 ](2), [42, p.p.75
76 ](3), Du>r.7(1), Im'.13(1),
IDnr.29(3), 4ur30(3),
6 3HTEJlbC (nOKPOBCKAA CJOEOiA, nOKPOBCK) [ 3, p.p.58 59](3), [5, p.39
](), [ 7, p.70 ](3), [ 8, p.p.36 -
40 ](3), [9, p.95 ](3), [12,
p.p. 111 112 ](3), [43, p.75
](3), [45, p.31 (1), 0Hr.l(1),
QSnr.2(l), 0urJ3(1),
Qur.23(2), Onr.24(3),
Qnr.25(3), Q4~r.26(3),
Q(Pr.5(3), ur.36(3),
tnr.3A(l), Qtr.7A(1),
PHr.lB(1) Qir.l0B(3)
Q nr.11B(3), t3r,.12B(3)
7 5E)LOPOBKA [3. p.59](3)
8 KAMEHKA [3, p.59 ](3), Q u.1A(1),
Qurr.9A(1) .
9 KPACHbIR KYT [ 3, p.59 ](2, 3), [ 13, p.p.1 12 -
113 ](1,3), Qmr.4(1),
QVr.9(1), 4nr.34(3),
10 KPACHbIl IP HEMELU(KH [3, p.p.59- 60 ](1, 2), [4, p.60
](1), ehr.17(1), fDar.18(l),
11 JIECHOH KAPAMbIII (FPHMM) [3, p.60 ](1), [4, p.60 ](2), [41,
p.p.62 64 ](3), 0ar.14(1),
Ont.16(1), Qm-.12A(1),
cDnr.7B(1), tmr.8B(1, 2)
12 MEABE,1~HLP O-KPECTOBbIi EYEPAK (QPAHK) [ 3, p.p.60 61 ](2), [4, p.60
S]1(1), Q4,r.20(1)
13 BE3EHQEJIb'" [3, p.61 ](2)
14 TYCCEHEAX (JMHEBO 03EPO) [4, p.60 ](3), QIur.19(1)
15 TOHKOIIYPOBKA (MAPHEHTAJIb) [4, p.61 ](2), [44, p.p.79 -80

Attachment X. 5.

](2,3), Sm-.32(3)
16 3PJIEHEAX (PEMEHHAI) [ 4, p.61 ](3), [ 38, p.p.65 66
17 CAPEIITA [5, p.p.38 39 ](1), [6,p.41
](1), eHr.11(1), e r.2A(1)
18 KAJIHHHHO [39, p.66](3)
19 KErIHEHTAJIb [5, p.39 ](1), [ 11,p.112](1)
20 HAXOR [5, p.40](1)
21 PYMHL HrT.5(1), q nr.6(l)
23 MAPrEHTAY m-r.9(1), 1nr.10(1)
24 POBHOE (3EJTIMAH) Omr.15(l), unr.8A(l),
n-r.13A(1), qmr.2B(1)
27 HIAJUIACOBKA Vnr.27(3), QPr.28(3)
28 PIPHBAJIbHOE (BAPEHEYPr) Pir.31(3), mnr.5B(l)
30 JIH3AHAEPER *mr.35(3)
31 .nOnOBKA (KYITEP) 4~r.37(3)
33 CTEnHOE (UTAJIb) .mr.O1A(l)
34 YCTb 3AIHXA (MECCEP) Our3B(l)
37 CTAHUHI AHHCOBKA(?) [41, p.61 ](3)
38 qPHJEHOEJIbX [41; p.62 -63 ](3)
39 CTAPAR1 nOJITABKA [39, p.66 ](3),OHr.6B(1)
40 YMETb (?) 40, p.66 ](2?)
41 nOKPOBCKA3I CJI.(OBOJA) BOK3.(AJI) [46,p.124 126 (1)
42 YPAJIbCK 151 nOKPOBCKAA [46,p.127 ](1)
43 YPAJIbCK 152 nOKPOBCKASI CJL(OBOA) [46, p.127 1(1)
44 YPBAX BOK3.(AJI) [46, p127 1(1)
45 YPAJIbCK 152 YPBAX [5, p.40 1(1)
46 nOqTOBbIl BATOH J 157 (Yp6ax AnejcaAMpoB [46, p.128- 130](1)

47 rlOqTOBbfl BArOH No 158 (AjieKcaxqpo raR [46, p.129- 131 ](1), QPr.9(1)
48 IB AJIEKCAH)POB rFAf 158 KPACHbll KYT [47, p.101; 48, p.8 ](3)
49 CAPATOB 287 ACTPAXAHb [46, p.132- 133-1(1),
50 ACTPAXAHb 288 CAPATOB [ 46, p.132-133, 135 ](1),
51 "HIpocMoTpeHo BoeK. uemHypori r.nOKPOBCK/ 0Qr.40(1)
Boemmiu ueHop M199"

LIpHjioxeHe Mo 7.

Krlegsgefangenen. P.O.W. '.

TyI Art Farbe Zeitraum Erliuter
TIe Kind Colour Period Notes
1 Z V 3.16 GeBffne
2 Z V 3.16- 8.16 Gepriift
3 Z V 9.16 GeBffne
4 Z V 9.16- 3.17 Gepriift
S Z V 1.17 GeBffne
6 P V 3.16 Initialen
7 P V 3.16- 9.16 Inltlalen
8 P V 7.16 Initlalen
9 P V 9.16- 1.17 Initialen
10 P V 9.16 Initalen
11 P V 3.17 Initalen

BCKpblTO BoeHHo0 I ueH3ypoR
Boenbil Q((eH3oppb KN 205.

POKROVSK (Samara).


*t.../- Opened....../Nr. 205
..../- Examined.../Nr. 204 206
t.../- Opened...... / Nr. 199
..../- Examined.../Nr. 192 199
t.../- Opened...... /Nr. 2S7
. O.A.O. Initials O.A.O.
O. K.O. Initials O.K. O.
SE.F. Sch. Initials E.F. Sh.
K.S.M. Initials K.S.M.
A. K. F. Initials A. K. F.
K.N.K. Initials K.N.K.



r. nOHPOBCi-b
BoenHbHw QeHfopb N 204.

B(KpblTO BoeHHO uq eH3ypoi
BoeHht UeH30op NT 199

Typ 3

Attachment Je 7.

npocMOTpttHb BOeHHOR HeH3ypoi
Bo0HHb61 4eH30pb NX192

Typ 4

BcHpblTO BoeHHoii esH3ypoi
r. noHPPOeBi
BoeHHbill eH30op-b Js 257.

Typ S

O. A. O.
Typ 6


O. K. o.
Typ 7

A. K. c.

E, 4b. l.
Typ 8

I Typ 9 Typ 10 Typ 11

POKROV8K (Samarw Editorial Note: The excerpt above is from the outstanding work
4 V-B 46-617 Adtionalcolor ad e ionpeod ofue "Russische Postzensur 1914-1918", p. 176 and, at left, from its
12 B 6.7 Iriftols NYO. not Mustt.&
1s V 1016 Initials FB. -ot i1awtt.& Supplement, p. 22, by kind permission of the author, Antoine
Speeckaert ofVilvoorde, Belgium, to whom many thanks are due.
* ** *

by Rabbi L.L. Tann.

(a) We have here above a picture postcard of Ottawa with a Canadian 2c. King George V "Admiral Type" stamp and with the
Montreal machine postmark dated Aug. 3 / 1913 N.S. Beside it is the transit mark of Spirovo Tver'Province 5.8.13 O.S. and at
bottom right the arrival postmark in violet of OKSOCHT Station, Nikolai Railway Line 6.8.13 O.S. It is believed that this is the
first recorded listing of this station canceller. Both Spirovo and Oksochi were in the "yt3 -" (county) of Vyshnii Volochek and
Oksochi was a tiny halt on the main St. Peterburg-Moscow Line, as shown in the accompanying sketch (many thanks to Philip
Robinson for placing it exactly!).
(b) The postcard here at right is franked with a 3- P/ 1" / // I 7 ,S .', .t."'--...'
kopek Romanov stamp and was sent from OREL/ / / i
VOKZ. (station) 23.9.14 O.S. to Petrograd. The TKpbiToe nJiCbMOQ ?
message written in Hebrew/Yiddish went across the C
top of the card and intruded into the space reserved /
for the address. It was therefore assessed as a letter, 0 // / t
to be charged at 7 kopeks. A reddish-mauve I /
"ROIJIATHTh / OPEJI-' BOK3." oval cachet /~ / '
was added and filled in for "8k.", being double the
assessed deficiency, but then scribbled out as it was '/ '# '-,/ ,
finally thought that the 3-kopek postcard rate was 1 / ~- /
valid. In other examples where the message had ". 'T /
"trespassed" over to the address side, the postage- /K T,. n.. c..
due charge was allowed to stand.

November 2004

o Sr. PEFTes3e


Y~a /L~~7 / --r

/i Q, SfC,_^ fi^-:~ CL~_S(L;- .4 4

/^ ^^ ^ 57^ <%? ^. C. / *
^ ^> ^, d',^)/- *if r -Il-
C-1"'Cle t-. y i i^/ "
X^ Z.


by Gregory Epshtein.
The 280h. Anniversary of the Russian Academy of Sciences took place this year. The Academy was founded
upon an order of the Emperor Peter I [Peter the Great], (see Russia Scott Nos. 91, 6169, 6407, B3 as shown in Fi. 1)
and also by a Ukase of the Governmental Senate dated 22 January 1724.
At the beginning of the 18th. Century and for a variety of reasons, there was not a single establishment in
Russia, which could be classed as a scientific institution. It is believed that the idea of founding a State Scientific
Centre, as it would be designated these days, was proposed to Peter I by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz during the
period of the tour by Peter around Europe. Leibnitz was an outstanding mathematician, engineer and philosopher,
who promoted the development of science in several countries. The main stimulus for the development of science
and education in Russia was defined at that time by the requirements of industry, transport and trade, as well as the
necessity of raising the educational level of the people and of completing tasks that strengthened the Russian State
and its geopolitical position. After Peter I had visited a series of European countries, he tried to involve Russia in the
general process of cultural and industrial development of Europe. According to the intention of Peter I, the Academy
of Sciences was envisaged to become not only a scientific, but also an educational institution. Peter ordered that: "an
Academy should be set up to seek out from among the Russians whoever is scholarly and inclined to learning". The
task of establishing the Academy was entrusted to the Royal Physician L. Blumentrost, who also became the first
President of the Academy.
One of the best buildings in St. Petersburg at that time was placed at the disposition of the newly established
Academy, namely the house of the disgraced Vice-Chancellor P. Shafirov. It is shown on the postage stamps devoted
to the 200~h. & 220th. Anniversaries of the Academy (Russia Nos. 326-27, 988 and also on the First Day cover see
Fi 2). The house had been built according to the plans of the well-known architect C. Rastrelli. According to the
intention of Peter I, the greater part of the lives of the academicians had to be spent in the building of the Academy.
Two adjoining buildings were incorporated with the house of Shafirov for official and living quarters. That was how
the first "Academic Township" came into being. The Academy of Sciences was granted at its disposal the very rich
collections of the Kunstkammer (Cabinet of Curiosities) and a library consolidated from private holdings, including
books owned by Peter I. An Academic Printery was organised in the first years of operation and, as of 1728, a
scientific journal "Commentaries of the Petersburg Academy of Sciences" began to be published in Latin.
The first session of the "Imperial Academy of Sciences and Arts" took place on 27 December 1725, just after
the death of Peter L The constitution of the Academy was adopted at that session and a university and high school
were also established. The scientific activities of the Academy were limited by the small number of its members. In
treating the project for founding the Academy Peter I saw to it that its activity was at the scientific level of those
times. With that aim in view, leading European scientists were invited to work at the Academy, namely the
mathematicianLeonhardEuler(Russia Nos. 1932; GDR 2371, 353, 358; Switzerland B267) and Daniele Bernulli (Fig
3), as well as the astronomer and geographer Joseph Delisle, physicist Georg Kraft, the historian Gerard Muller and
others. There were in the original composition of the Academy 15 full members who were assigned to scientific
matters and also determined the fate of the academic assistants, who were candidates as future academicians, among
them being M.V. Lomonosov.
In the first years of the existence of the Academy, work was directed into three directions or "classes":
Mathematics, Physics and the Humanities. The Mathematics Class included four chairs: Theoretic Mathematics and
Astronomy, Geography and Navigation, as well as two chairs in Mechanics. There were also four chairs in the
Physics Class: Theoretic and Experimental Physics, Anatomy, Chemistry and Botany. The Humanities Class
consisted of three chairs: Rhetoric and Antiquities; Ancient and Contemporary History; Law, Politics and Ethics.
The development of Mathematics and Mechanics during the first stage of operation of the Academy was
connected most of all with the name ofLeonhard Euler, He began his activities at the Academy at the age of 20. From
then until the end of his life, the scientific activity of that great scientist was linked with the Academy of Sciences of
Russia. Euler published 109 works in the "Commentaries" issued by the Academy. He made a fundamental
contribution to the elaboration of Mathematical Analysis, the Theory of Numbers, the Theory of Special Functions
and the Variation of Computation. The mathematical investigations of Eiler were closely connected with the
problems of Mechanics, Physics, Ballistics, Shipbuilding and Navigation. Together with D. Bemulli, they laid out the
basis of Analytic Mechanics and Hydrodynamics.
M.V. Lomonosov was accepted into the Academy of Sciences in 1742 (Russia Nos. 1903, 5509; Romania
B360 and Cuba 3717: see Fin. 4) and did work on polyhedrons, encompassing an entire era in the history of Russian
science. He organised at the Kunstkammer the first chemical laboratory in Russia (Russia No. 1322) and a museum
devoted to Lomonosov is housed today in that building. M.V. Lomonosov was the first to mark out in 1748 the
principles of the the conservation of matter and motion. The varied activities of Lomonosov took in the problems of

November 2004


M.V. Lomonosov.

Fig. 1,


iil iUiS I darS SI OS

--ie -----i, ~a snaii

Leonhard Euler

A B 1-1 A ^U

^ctn; gL~~

ay;,,p.,,aj AilS SO cC

November 2004

Fig. 2.
Lomonosov honoured in
Arkhangel'sk (Archangel).

TAWuHer- Lid.

ilaer JusiitlllpluTn n 11f I SaIl-lc imSllpHlTlun

D. Bernulli.

Peter the Great.

05BUECTBA MATE.trH4tECk0o C.r rCrKLt

l.am sn..c pne.nphnmc cn a m .n Ma.

-- I


F M.-c'

200 \em
Mockonekoro opAena AernHna
Iocy.3apcmBekntoro yliHBepcHmerna
Hmemi M. B. Aomontocosa

.......................... :.. ..................... ..:

- .
...................... .............................V


200 Aem
Mockonckoro opAeHd Acmntnd
roCyAd0cMt eHH1or ywiBeocitmema
r mmcmt M. B. AoMoNboom

...................... ... .........1755- .1955..


S.I. Vavilov.

A.P. Aleksandrov. THE POST-RIDER/MBHHK JX 55

November 2004

A.P. Karpinskii.


astronomy and geography, mining and metallurgy. He was also known for his contribution to the development of
Russian literature.
Beginning in the 1720s in Russia and under the guidance of scientists of the Academy of Sciences, an
expedition was organised to the furthest reaches of the country. A.D. Krasil'nikov and one of the first Russian
academicians S.P. Krasheninnikov (Russia No. 1572) participated in and carried out the first thorough investigations
of Kamchatka during the second expedition of Vitus Behring (in 1733-1734) to that peninsula. Various
Investigations in Siberia were begun, including the study of its native conditions and natural resources, flora and
fauna and also the ethnic demographics. In utilising the data of the scientific expeditions, a "New General Map of
Russia" was compiled in 1776.
Through the efforts of M.V. Lomonosov and the financial support of the Shuvalov brothers, the Imperial
Moscow University was founded in 1755 and it now bears his name. Two stamps in miniature sheets were issued in
1955 in connection with the 200h. Anniversary of the university (Russia Nos. 1786, 1787). The 40-kopek value
shows the first building of the university in the centre of Moscow. The new building of the University in the Lenin
Hills is featured on the 1-rouble value (Fig). Two high schools were opened for the preparation of future students
and attached to the University. Lomonosov worked on the constitution and structure of the University and prepared
several courses of lectures.
The first half of the 19h. Century became for the Academy of Sciences an epoch of reform. At that time,
Russia did not have a tradition of organising scientific institutions, and searches for the best type of structure were
continued. In 1783, the Empress Ekaterina II founded the Petersburg Academy outside the framework of the
Academy and its tasks were restricted to the problems of the Russian language and literature. Ekaterina II appointed
E. Dashkov as Director of the Academy, which extended considerable aid to the Empress during a time of State
upheaval. As a result, E. Dashkov became the Director and President of the Academy of Sciences.
New Statutes of the Academy were adopted in 1803, as well as a new name: "The Imperial Academy of
Sciences". The basic thrust of activities of the Academy became the investigation of the theoretical questions of
science and also the solution of practical tasks. A new Constitution of the Academy went into force in 1836, which
was now named as "The Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences". The Constitution of 1836 designated the
members of the Academy as the "leading scientific elite in the Russian Empire". As a consequence, the financial
support to the Academy was increased and its publications were freed from the general censorship. In the 30s. of the
19 Century, Botanical, Zoological, Mineralogical and Ethnographic Museums were organised on the basis of the
varied collections of the former Kunstkammer of Peter I.
The structure of the Academy also underwent some changes.. The Academy now consisted of Departments
of Physics and Mathematics, History and Philology, as well as of the Russian language and Literature. In the
Department of the Russian Language, the members of the Academy were V.A. Zhukovskiii and LA. Krylov and, later
on, L.N. Tolstoi. The character of the activities of the Academy was also changed and it began to carry out scholastic
functions. It terminated its activity as an academic university. The questions of art were transferred to the Academy
of Arts, which was established in Russia. The main focus of the Academy of Sciences was the further development of
the emerging scientific trends. Moreover, the scientists of the Academy continued their activities in the universities
and scientific establishments. The number of Corresponding Members and Honoured Members increased markedly,
thus requiring their residence in St. Petersburg.
The second half of the 19h. and the beginning of the 20&. Centuries were characterized by the further
development of traditional and newly emerging scientific trends. The St. Petersburg School of Mathematics was
formed at first by P.L. Chebyshev, following upon the tradition of Euler. Leading achievements in the field of
physiology were linked with the names of I.P. Pavlov and I.M. Sechenov, while V.I. Vernadskii founded a new
scientific field: geochemistry. The formulation of the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements by D.I. Mendeleev also
belongs to this period. Unfortunately and for unknown reasons, Mendeleev was not accepted into the Membership of
the Academy.
The Academy was above all a guild, incorporating the scientists contributing to the development of science.
The Academy was assigned at that time a huge responsibility for the development of the scientific and technical
potential of the country, as well as for the elevation of the intellectual level of the citizenry. As a consequence, the
Academy of Sciences also certainly became a social institute. The scientists, even in their deeply theoretical
experiments, also in fact carried out the social tasks of society. In that regard and upon the changes of the political
structure, the structure of the Academy and the shape of its work naturally also changed. In May 1917 and in
connection with the fall of autocracy, the Academy was renamed from the Imperial St. Petersburg to the "Russian
Academy of Sciences" and elections for its President were carried out for the first time, voting for the leading
naturalist A.P. Karpinskii (Russia Nos. 1087-1088). As a result and on the basis of scientific and experimental
activity, the principles of the organisation of science by the State went into effect. In 1925, the 200h anniversary of the

November 2004

Academy was proudly celebrated and a new Academic Constitution was adopted. In it, the right of the Academicians
to elect the President independently was strengthened. In a special decree, the Academy was recognized as "a High
All-Union Institution of Scientists" and it received the name: "Academy of Sciences of the USSR". There was
founded in those days a series of new scientific and investigative institutions, including the Institute of Physics
named after P.N. Lebedev, the Institute of Mathematics named after V.A. Steklov, the Institute of Optics, the Radiev
Institute, the Institute of Physico-Chemical Analysis and others. The 220t. Anniversary of the Academy of Sciences
in 1945 was noted by the issue of a set of postage stamps (Russia Nos. 987-1988),
The problems of Social Planning in the Soviet Union at the end of the 1920s and the beginning of the 1930s
also involved the Academy of Sciences. After the "examination of the apparatus", there was fabricated "The
Academic Affair" (1921-1931) and many scientists were discharged from their work and subjected to repression.
Among them were the Academicians N.P. Likhachev, M.K. Lyubavskii, S.F. Platonov and E.V. Tarle. Severe
criticism of the Academy appeared in the press and there even appeared an absurd request for its abolition. In such
difficult circumstances, the Directors of the Academy and above all its President, A.P. Karpinskii, strove to preserve
it as the highest scientific establishment in the country. As the scientific centre of governmental rank, the Academy
of Sciences was moved from Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) in 1934 to Moscow. A whole series of academic
scientific institutions, their Presidium and many leading scientists were moved to the capital.
The development of science in the first half of the 20th. Century led to the foundation of new scientific
disciplines, which inevitably also affected the structure of the Academy. In 1938, there were formed in the Academy
Departments of Physics & Mathematics, Chemistry, Biology, Geology & Geological Sciences, Economics, History
& Philosophy, Literature & Language. The network of academic scientific institutions was quickly expanded in the
1930s. We need only note the Institute of Genetics and Plants, founded by N.I. Vavilov. That Institute had a unique
collection of specimens of plants of the whole world, but it was unfortunately destroyed in the years of controversy
over genetics. Of great importance for the development of Physics was the establishment by P.L. Kapitsa of the
Institute of Physical Problems. Branches of the Academy of Sciences were also established in a series of the Union
Republics of the Soviet Union, as well as scientific centres in several industrial regions of the country. Scientific
establishments with public and humanitarian profiles also entered into the composition of the Academy. In the post-
war years, the Presidents of the Academy were S.I. Vavilov (Russia No. 2501), A.N. Nesmeyanov (No. 891), M.V.
Keldysh (Nos. 4886 & 4906) and A.P. Aleksandrov (an issue of 2003 see Fig. 6).
In connection with the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Academy also obtained a new name: the
Russian Academy of Sciences. As of now, the Academy is not only the oldest, but also the largest scientific institute
in the country. A total of 114,000 people work in the Russian Academy of Sciences, among them more than 53,000
scientific workers: also 1130 active members and corresponding members, as well as 35,000 doctors and candidates
of science. The network of the Russian Academy of Sciences consists of 355 organizations of scientific investigation,
12 scientific centres and three regional departments, stretching across the entire expanse of the Russian Federation,
from Vladivostok to Murmansk.
The Russian Academy of Sciences is a member of the International Scientific Federation. Its institutes and
scientists are members of more than 230 international scientific organizations and 158 foreign scientists have been
chosen as members of the Russian Academy of Sciences. In connection with agreements about scientific, technical
and cultural collaboration, mutual investigations are being carried out with scientists of more than 50 countries,
among them from the USA, the United Kingdom, Germany, China, Ukraine and Sweden. Russian scientists
participate in large international projects, such as the UNESCO programme "Man and the Biosphere", in the
worldwide programme for the study of climates and in the publication of the Red Book and other matters.


This important new catalogue has been published at last. Usual Barefoot format: A4
size in two columns, with the basic listing priced and illustrated throughout. It covers the
revenues of Imperial Russia, Soviet Russia, Armies, Local Provisionals, Municipals (a large
section!), Border Territories such as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bukhara (the Revenue designs
were modified to produce the Horse-Post stamps!), Georgia, Tuva, Ukraine and also the
Russian Refugee Issues of Egypt and France.
A long-awaited book, as previous information consisted either of very sparse listings
Py! or of Russian-only texts. 108 pages + two colour plates, Index in English and Russian. The
price post-paid is GB Pounds 15, or convertible equivalent and available from J. Barefoot
S' :: Ltd., P.O. Box 8, York YO24 4AR, England. E-mail: JohnB2525(@aol.com.

November 2004

by Meer Kossoy.
Special postcards for enquiries received wide distribution in the Soviet Union at the end of the 1920s -
beginning of the 1930s. That came about because of the active propaganda for that type of postal services, which was
performed by the People's Commissariat of Posts & Telegraphs. The cards were in double form and both halves did
not have any impressed postage stamp, so that they were in fact postal formula cards. One half of the card with the
designation: "pJI5 CIIPABOK" (FOR ENQUIRIES) was intended for the search for information through the
medium of the Postal Service ("sepes HOHTY", as specified in the address) about the requested enquiry.
In spite of the wide distribution of the enquiry postcards during the period noted above, they are encountered
somewhat rarely and there are few references to the subject in the literature, especially that published abroad, even
though they had interested investigators for a long time. For example, A.S. Ilyushin [1] had already published an
article in 1986, where he showed the half of an enquiry postcard and had also described several cards, advertising
that type of postal services. In supplementing the information given by A.S. Ilyushin [1], P.F. Mazur [2] described
without illustrations yet another half of an enquiry postcard, which differed in the text and in the postal rate for its
transmission. A fact can be derived regarding the deficiencies in the noted references, to the effect that only one half
of a card had been shown, which was intended for the request for information and not the back of that half giving a
text with the rules for carrying out the search. However, the main deficiency in these examples was that there is no
data on them about the second half of the card, which would have been utilised in the reply to the addressee of the
enquiry. In such a situation, there is only an incomplete representation of an entire enquiry card, as it consists of a
double postal formula card, one half of which is not only not featured, but even not described. The aim of the present
article is therefore not only to supplement the known information about the enquiry postcards, but also to give
illustrations of them.
As an example, Fig. a demonstrates in an unseparated state the address side of a double postcard with the
designation: "AJIA5 CIIPABKH"and Fig. b shows the back of the same card with the heading "CIIPABKA".
Both halves of the card are unused and thus did not go through the post, but in Fig. l the half of the card in Fig. I
which is marked "AJI5I CITPABKH", was conditionally intended to go through the mails and that allows us to
study the rates and characteristic peculiarities of this type of postal service.
The double enquiry card was printed on thick greyish stock, with dimensions of 147 x 209 mm. As it follows
from the notation "3AKA3HOE" (= REGISTERED and underlined in the text, in order to draw attention), which is
printed on both halves of the card, they were to be sent only in a registered state. The necessary rate was printed in
the upper right corner of the card (the text is covered in Fig. l by a 20-kopek stamp) and reads: "Space / for a stamp
/ of 25 kopeks". It should be noted that the rate of 25 kopeks for sending the enquiry through the post was also noted
in the advertising text placed by the People's Commissariat of Communications of the USSR on postmarks or cards.
The half of the card shown in Fi. la as: "JIJI CITPABKH" was franked with a 20-kop. (Michel JS 349)
and 10-kop. stamps (Michel N2 380), to total 30 kopeks and they were cancelled with the despatch postmark:
TYMBATIHO HIDK.(EFOPOJCKAA) rYB.(EPHII) 26.5.29 (the year date should have been "30". That
can be confirmed by the fact that the 10-kop. stamp had been issued in October 1929, so the stamp could not have
been used on the card in that year. The card was addressed to the General Post Office in Leningrad. There is no
arrival marking, but there is on the card a rectangular cachet in violet applied for the registration of the enquiry and
reading: "The enquiry has been sent on.../ Reply received on...", with the heading: "Received on.../Completed
on..." and a date-stamp reading: 3 July 1930. That date is a further indication that the Tumbatino postmark had an
erroneous year, namely "29" instead of"30".
The rate specified by the note: "25-kop. in stamps" on the enquiry card gives rise to a series of questions,
mainly as to why it did not agree with the postal rate in effect for the transmission of a registered postcard, which in
the period from 15.7.28 to 1.6.31 came to 15 kopeks, when the card was going through the post. If we take into
account that both halves were sent in a registered state, the lowest rate for the transmission of the double card should
have been not 15, but 30 kopeks. It should be noted that the card was franked with a total of 30 kopeks in stamps.
A listing of questions was printed at left on the address side of the card, according to which in the text: "The
Postal Service delivers quickly and accurately to establishments, organizations or individual persons at any point in
the USSR and will give on the attached reply card a report on any question of interest to you, such as: regarding the
address and health of the persons of concern to you, about the prices of goods, machines and various objects, about
acceptance into educational institutions, about borrowings and winnings, about rural husbandry, agricultural, legal,
court, taxes and sundry other questions of concern to you (the national economy, education, labour, literature, the
arts, cinema, photography, sport etc.)". The text concluded with the details of the enquiry, which had been carried
out, namely: "For all this, it is necessary to look at the back". Short instructions were printed on the back of the card
(see Fig. lb) about the arrangements for the enquiry, together with a space for their insertion.

November 2004

T'X's Y 'd u D u un -

W)4hOdId)V VGOlhQU

hll~ _AO _~ll~Q)d~41 PL
Yo oxs~n r-lyow T nyAu160y@ *rblo no GAKA opoc

Re K
I... .. .


I UInpaTogN I

*OAga nI nlHO

stemy oloo pgo
P- npANTb4, 0 A
I" ennnx D sxjI

N pa3NUN 9pyl
30"101N TpyYp

CnpNN.J. knN I

.P. MO. 51.
ONN N. Ill,



xI =1.A ItnJSAA CCC? S P
'wa -"r Or
ArpmrmoR orse kto A-

p N0t-To: N jecA a .... ..:
Mpll, KaWHHM H PBH y
1Tpcy0~ Hac60 01011,CC

PH1mA N yIed~e6N01AOON
Ax m oN irP w Z no /l

cyAAeoIIN, mnOABnG -
ONMXApoox3Acy~ltlNNBM fl0y n L4 TA A
nlo mo Io, o' pcdoPlI


TrINN, ANN JW-)m 000? ,u1 1.1 l~-~

Fig. 3b.

Fig. Ib.

Fig. la.

Figi. 3a.

Fig. 2.


~~ gt

-' I 4 .........a

*Cpoqnbte cnpasl{It mo)IWo OIBcCTII no TeJ~erpa.ty.

November 2004


... 'P~YYL~Y'sU' ~Dly- -L---

_ -I-- ----I ---~--~-~~~-~~n-

The horizontal text reads: "Write your enquiry legibly here. Ask for only one question per card".
The vertical text states: "Upon affixing the stamps, hand the card over to the postman or deposit it in the
letter box. The card will proceed further as a registered item in order to ensure complete accuracy in its transmission
and delivery".
In connection with the listing of questions printed on the card about which a report may be received, see for
example Fig. la: "...Re being accepted in an educational institution, about which a question has been posed on this
card: 'to what address and what kind of documents should be sent there'...in order to receive an engineering degree
in a narrow specialty (signature)"
Hypothetically, enquiry postcards were regarded as being statistically accountable, hence the designation
"form 2A6" and that is confirmed by an imprint at the bottom left of the card, reading: "CrAT / 2A6 4b(opMa)
The half of the card headed: "CIIPABKA" had a text only on the address side: see Fig. lb. That text
designated the data that had to be specified in addressing the card. In accordance with the text printed on the card, it
was to be sent as a registered article, but stamps were not affixed. A postal marking took their place and there was a
directive in the upper right corer of the card, reading "Space / for the postal / marking". The back of the card was
blank, without a text of any kind (in Fin. l it takes up the upper half of the illustration). The report on the enquiry
received from the relevant organisation was written on that side, after which the card was forwarded to the addressee
who had sent in the enquiry
It has already been noted in this article that there is a discrepancy on the card between the amount due for the
enquiry, namely: "stamps to the value of 25 kopeks" and the franking on the card where stamps totalling 30 kopeks
had been affixed. It should be noted that such a discrepancy was not a unique occurrence and it cannot be explained
by the assumption that the sender did not have a 5-kopek stamp and that he therefore affixed one with the value of 10
kopeks; see Fin. l
As a supplementary example, an illustration is shown in Fi. 2 from the article by A.S. llyushin [1]; the half
of the double card with the heading: "JJISI CIIPABKH" was franked with stamps in the values of 18 kopeks
(Michel M_ 347), 7 kopeks (Michel NM 343) and 5 kopeks (Michel M 342), to total 30 kopeks and all cancelled with a
despatch postmark, reading ODESSA 7.6.29. It was now impossible to suggest that.the excess in the rate had been
caused by the sender not having a stamp in the needed value, as a 5-kopek stamp had been added to the franking of
25 kopeks.
It could be suggested that the cards shown in Figs. la & 2 had been authorised for use and printed in the
period from 1.2.26 to 15.7.28, when the rate for sending a registered postcard came to 10 kopeks. The cost of sending
the card there and back as a registered item totalled 20 kopeks and the balance of 5 kopeks was presumably the price
of the formula card itself or a payment to the Address Board. That is why a notation was printed on the card, stating:
"Space for stamps to the value of 25 kopeks". After the increase in the rate to 15 kopeks in the period from 15.7.28 to
1.6.31, when the cards in Figs la. & 2 went through the post at that time, they were franked correspondingly with
stamps to the value of 30 kopeks and the price of the formula card was presumably paid in cash when being
It should be noted that, with the passage of time, not only did the cost of the enquiry change, but also the
advertising text, printed at left on the address side of the card. The first version of the text was apparently printed as
shown in Fi 2 namely: "The card serves for the receipt by mail of an advice about the addresses of governmental,
Soviet, Party, educational, scientific and other institutions, corporations, organisations.... about the treatment in
medical establishments, sanatoriums and resorts, appointment times from medical specialists, payments for
appointments and similar reports".
Fig. 3a features the address side of the half of a double card with the heading of: "JJIUI CIIPABKH" and
Fig. 3b shows the back of that same formula card. In comparison with Fig. l there is an analogous text in Fin. 3
but it is printed in a different font. An addition has been inserted in the text: information printed in the bottom left
corer about printing data, i.e. the order number, printer and, above all, the issue, which totalled 500,000 copies.
Instructions were also inserted in the text in Fig. 3b regarding the composition of the enquiry, namely:
The horizontal text at bottom: "Urgent enquiries may be despatched by telegraph".
The vertical text at right: "In enquiries regarding an address, specify in addition to the surname, first name
and patronymic also the age, place of birth and profession of the person being sought".
The card in Fig. 3 has an additional text and it may therefore be postulated that it was printed at a later period
than the version in Fig.. The card in Fig. 3 was apparently printed up to 15 July 1928, since there is a note in the
upper right corer and under the stamp, reading: "Place for stamps to the value of 25 kopeks". As was stated above,
an increase in the rate for the transmission of a registered postcard from 10 to 15 kopeks went into effect after that
date. The card was franked with a 20-kopek stamp (Michel M 373) and it was cancelled with the despatch postmark of

November 2004

"HEPHOrOP.(CKHE) KOIH KPACH.(OaAPCKOrO) K(PAI) 21.6.36". The card was addressed to:
"Novosibirsk, Regional Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), or to the Post Office". There is
no arrival postmark, but a strike in violet has been applied on the card of the cachet recording the enquiry, with the
date written therein as 26.6.36.
In connection with the listing of questions printed on the card for which a report could be received and
specifically: "about the address and health of the persons of concern to you", an enquiry had been set out, stating:
"Please search for my son. I am his 68-year-old mother and unable to work I have no providers apart from my son. I
am together with strangers in a helpless condition (signature)"; see Fig. 3b.
In the period from 25.2.33 to 6.2.39, the postal rate for the dispatch of an ordinary card came to 15 kopeks
and for a registered item 35 kopeks. If we take into consideration that both halves of the card were sent in a
registered state, then the lowest rate for sending the double card would have come to 70 kopeks. For that reason, it is
hard to explain why the card was franked with a 20-kopek stamp. It can only be surmised that, in such a small
inhabited point, far from large towns, the postal rates were not always adhered to, as the card had been franked as an
ordinary, rather than a registered article and its transmission was paid for in one direction only.
The Enquiry Service of the USSR was constantly being updated, to correspond with the changes in the text
on the postcards for enquiries, as is evident by comparing the examples in Figs. la, 2a & 3a. Later on, not only was
the text changed, but even the designation: "IIOrTOBAI KAPTOTKA JJIA CIIPABKH" (Postcard for an
Enquiry) was replaced by a new one, reading: "CIIPABOHAI KAPTOTKA / 110 IIOTE" (Enquiry card /
By the Post). Such a double card in an unseparated state is shown in Fig. 4 and its back in Fig. 4b This double card
was printed on thick greyish stock and measured 145 x 203 mm.
Apart from the designation of the card, the organization to whom the enquiry was also changed. Instead of
the word "HOITA" (Postal Service), the card was now to be sent to the "Enquiry and Information Office". The
coat of arms and the text: "H.(apofhrii) K.(omuccapHaT) CaBsa CCCP" (People's Commissariat of
Communications of the USSR) was now printed in the centre,specifying that it was an official postal issue. The
required rate was printed in the upper right comer of the card, reading: "Space/for/stamps/ up to 1 rouble". Judging
from the price of the card and bearing in mind that it was sent as a registered article for the enquiry and reply, it is
possible to arrive at a suggested date for its issue. It was apparently placed in service after 6 February 1939, when a
new postal rate of 50 kopeks came into effect for the transmission of a registered postcard; it had formerly been 35
kopeks. A listing of possible questions was printed at left on the address side, for which: "The Enquiry and
Information Office would quickly attend to and give a report of the reply half of the card in the following areas:-
1. About regulations of the Government, of the Central and Local Organs of Power and regarding the laws in force
(without judicial consultations and conclusions).
2. About the addresses of local institutions, organizations and corporations, their hours of work, telephone numbers,
computing and current accounts, etc.
3. About the addresses of citizens, dwelling in a republican, regional or provincial centre, according to the point of
dispatch of the enquiry.
4. About transportation questions: routing, cost of the journey, conveyance of luggage, arrival and departure times of
trains and steamers, arrival and departure flights of aircraft, timetables.
5. About questions of administrative and territorial divisions, about governmental borrowings and sport".
The back of the card (see Fig. 4b was headed "IJISI 3AIIPOCA" (For the Enquiry). The vertical text at
left recommended : "Write the enquiry concisely and clearly and only about one question". The vertical text at right
stated: "Use the card yourself and recommend it to others !!!".
The second half of the double card is also shown in Fig. 4b and inscribed "CTIPABOHHAfl
KAPTOTKA / CnIPABKA OTBET" (Enquiry card / Report Reply). There is in the central area of the card
the coat of arms and the text "H.(apogurHi) K.(oMaccapHaT) CBa3H CCCP", thus specifying that it was an official
postal issue. The setting for the address was printed on the card, designating "To where" and "To whom". The card
was sent as a registered article but, instead of stamps, a postmark was applied, for which a space was set aside in the
upper right corer.
The back of the card was intended for the reply ("-JUII OTBETA"; see Fig. 4). After the reply had been
written in, provision was made for lines to bear the signature and date. The text in the lower part of the card is of
interest to philatelists, as it includes an imprint reading "DopMa 2a6 HapKOMa CBas"3 (Form 2a6, People's
Commissariat- Communications) and, above all, the amount printed of 1 million copies, as stated within the printing
details: "Smolensk, Printery named after Smirova, Order No 3076".
It should be noted that, in comparison to the card shown in Fig. 3 the quantity printed went from 500,000 to
1,000,000 copies. Such an increase confirms the great popularity and wide distribution of this type of postal services
among the population of the USSR.

November 2004

The increase in the quantities printed and the popularity of the postcards for enquiries facilitated their
widespread diffusion, which the Postal Administration carried out by the means of issuing special advertising cards,
envelopes and postmarks. As an example, we note in Fie. 5 on the next page an advertising postcard (Michel J'N P
103) with a face value of 5 kopeks and bearing the imprint: "H.K.II.T. 19/XI 1930, JM 10. Printing: 2,000,000
copies see [3; Je 95, p. 20).
There was printed on the address and front side of the card a design and an advertising text in large letters,
KPECTbhHIHHY" (An exact and timely enquiry is the best aid for the worker and peasant). A short list of
questions was then printed in a small font, as to which one could serve for the receipt of a report, e.g.: "For all
difficulties about the questions of labour, collective-farm installation, agriculture, Soviet law, taxes, insurance etc.".
The procedure for receiving a report was printed at the end of the text, namely: "Upon paying for the card
with stamps amounting to 25 kopeks, write down your request and hand it in at the nearest post office, or send it to
the address: Moscow, Central Section, Central Enquiry Bureau, You will receive an exact and comprehensive reply
by return mail".
Several postal authorities, primarily in the Union Republics of the USSR put into postal circulation local
cards with impressed stamps. Such cards were prepared by applying an advertising text to the general Soviet issues of
cards bearing impressed stamps. The Republican (local) postal organizations were subordinate to the People's
Commissariat of Posts and Telegraphs and the issue of overprints was sometimes carried out upon the express order
of the Central Organs of the Postal Administration, or with their concurrence. All the local cards with overprints were
sold only at the postal windows.
As an example, Fig. 6 shows a postcard of the USSR with an impressed stamp (Michel JX P 38, issue of
1928 with a face value of 5 kopeks), upon 1000 of which the Central Asian Enquiry Bureau in Tashkent had applied
in 1930 an overprint with the advertising text in the Uzbek (Arabic script) and Russian languages [3, M 4, p. 46],
stating that:"The report required by you from any town or village will be both RAPID and ACCURATE, You may
obtain for 25 kopeks at the post office a card intended "for enquiries".
Apart from the advertising cards, the Postal Administration also carried out the emission of advertising
envelopes. On one of them (Michel JV- U 50 with an impressed 20-kopek stamp, issued by Mosoblit X2 163 of
15/XII-33 in a total of 1 million copies) a text was printed with a listing of which reports were to be:
CBS3H CCCP" (given out by the Enquiry Bureau and Kiosks of the People's Commissariat of Communications of
the USSR). The text concludes with the recommendation, see [3, N_ 199, p. 81], to the effect that: "to receive reports
from other localities, utilise the enquiry card by sending it through the post".
At the end of the 1920s-beginning of the 1930s, envelopes without an impressed stamp were often adapted
by adding a printed advertising text. One such envelope is shown in Fig. 7. on which a 20-kopek (Michel JN 373) and
80-kopek stamps (Michel M 377) were cancelled with the dispatch postmark of ASHKHABAD 2.5.33. The cover
was addressed to Moscow and the arrival marking on the back is dated 8.5.33. An advertising text was printed at left
on the address side of the cover, reading: "JIIOBYIO CIIPABKY BAM HABEJET IIOHTA. TPEBYWTE
KOn.(EEK). nOJIb3Y~ITECb, BEPEFHTE BPEMI!" (The Postal Service provides you with any kind of
report. Ask for special enquiry postcards at the post office, price 36 kop. Use them and save time!).
Yet another type of an advertising envelope without an impressed stamp and sent through the post to Rostov-
on-Don 16.10.29, was described by P.F. Mazur [2], with notations on the back of the cover reading:
Text at top: "You may obtain at the post office a special postcard for an enquiry, if you need a report from any point
in the USSR'.
Text at bottom: "Ask for enquiry postcards everywhere at the post office and from postmen".
The author hopes that his article will attract the attention of philatelists and specialists to this interesting, but
little-studied area in the postal history of the USSR. Further searches and published investigations of the enquiry
postcards will perhaps allow us also to describe new varieties of them and define more exactly the rates for their
transmission. The text on the cover shown in Fig 7 confirms the possible future appearance of a hitherto unknown
enquiry postcard, for which the price was 36 kopeks. Also, the question of the cards described in this article with the
face values of 25 kopeks and 1 rouble needs to be cleared up.
1. A,C, HJ omnaH: IIONTOBbIE KAPTOIKH JJI, CTIPABOK;"mHJIaTejra CCCP" _9,1986,crp.34-36.
2. II,4,Ma3yp: CIIPABOHHAA KAPTOHKA II0 HOTTE; "nHJiaTejMa CCCP", JN 11, 1987, cTp. 40.
O]HOCTOPOHHLIX KAPTOIEK CCCP 1824-1980, CaHKT-IleTep6ypr, CraHaapT-KoojieKiga, 2002.
November 2004

Fig. 4b.

*,i~naadH gnu .46.1

flc~oreh CCCp

no nti Tt
Cn ...... ...i, )nptmrt Mu-

.n. ...A.."r .7=' "nn N "p.
n, urfipot*. rin, cywuy r y pfavf

"Tn ..'r.". V .aHH r opr4..
rT. .ra. anrl Aru- ,.
1'fnolUn nouinpe~foa*.a. .a~a.

3pV 11O ( T pU nipt pl
. 0o. npo... npo.o. 6. rmti, *pe
6. 0. ,onpot aN.a.epprrnp. auta.r,
aD sualrni *mnoprT.
*Ola*Mul rMpoK HI CfTrM I prytan. asArT B
Sahap, alcbMOuaj Ku oCfCThtE 0.0Cniud
*UIK .

KY-tA:,'" -
3 A A 3 O11 E''

: : ': -

KO' Y ~ Cnpaboso- BaiOpM&an eete
lonope e

Fig. 4a.

Fig. 5.

* I -_ :*_ -.
November 2004


...... ... ... ............. ............
i .. a. .lA ..- ..I .

.. .; -, .. z

- j n thr.u a aaait al.aai.n ot. r.o, rop ,o.a an r O r
-4 11baa qa.w yn'o 4 .
"* g ens nah srecra. )2 fimlnlikn en .y u..T. o*r. *
-* fr 4' Ba;-i.ln" tl k n r 'eia .E.. C.. E... H n;"..... ....a p .... ........
ahB aid. cnpaaay. Ias
-sbLsnfrf l-ujuD r iy fyr O" ff

a ;!e",-.'-'- Bu, Mo cre f ony-,*
tS .i Pt f 25 faTrprT ta ,; ;'..977 "r, O.pur. 711,t
1 an.1sikicsl., Kofn.,cnpBanO. H$as>.Cp..As.Caip ox.i. pc-TamwenT.HpuaBtua

Fig. 7.


C n p 3 K a a HA.-

"W;K n II 5
n ET'b.R H$ H Hi

Kyac ............... .....................................

Ko.uy ..... ...... ... .......................


- fu.r (danr 4lrmi. .laor ___o __**_ _'_"' _- _. __._
s d

a 30 ff.8 x V .
U 01 du i *' ..-u. .y h W -- d 3,
UhOld1x 15 oraf dui

"rd a O oc .+'E :: ,"- "

.. "a


: -


v. I 3 0a o B0 uf


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