Covers (to 1919)
Seeing as by this point I've got most of the lower-value stamps I'm looking for, and kicking my heels in hopeful anticipation of the high values appearing for a decent price isn't especially productive, I've decided to try to branch out into covers, which is an area I'd previously rather neglected. My stock of these at time of writing is very slight, so my intention is to populate this page with new acquisitions as I acquire them.
Anyway this page will go down to 1919, a date which has no particular relevance to the history but which will keep this from getting too lengthy.
These covers, being mostly Ottoman and military mail, touch on a profusion of areas obscure to me, so the descriptions in each case will be less organised, more discursive, and considerably less certain compared to the other pages. I hope this isn’t too annoying.
Basra 🠚 Bombay, 22 May 1876/7
Handsome product of the Indian post office in Basra. Postmarked 22 May and arrived at Bombay on 8 June. The year is more challenging: it’s entirely unreadable on the Basra postmark and the lovely clear Bombay one doesn’t deign to provide it. Proud gives the Basra mark (his “D2”) earliest and latest dates of 1870 and 1874, based on covers seen by him. I think I can make out a manuscript Islamic date ١٢٩٤ on the bottom-left of the cover, which coverts to 1876/7 by the Gregorian reckoning. This is a little outside Proud’s date range but, I think, not implausibly so.
The Indian post offices in the Gulf were treated as part of India proper for rates purposes, hence the half anna stamp paying the basic letter weight.
As a digression, the Anglicisation of “Basra” was charmingly unfixed at this early stage: 19th-Century Indian postmarks can be found reading “Busreh” (as here), “Busrah”, “Bussora” and the very emphatic “Bussorah”.
Mosul 🠚 Diyarbakir, 3 May 1880
Covers of the Ottoman post are something of an “investment” for me, in that I someday hope to be wise enough to understand them much more than I currently do. I am of course entirely ignorant of the scripts and the underlying languages, but the rates and postmarks are at time of writing almost equally mysterious. So unfortunately my analysis of these items will be rather superficial until I can become more intelligent.
This was written up by its previous owner as posted at Mosul, with a manuscript date of 3 May 1880. The Mosul postmarks are legible, the destination I take at face value, but the date eludes me a little. The postmark date is an immobilised ٨١, Gregorian 1865, which can’t be the actual date of postmarking, because the stamps used here (of the charming “Duloz” design) weren’t issued until 1870 or 1871. In the top-right corner of the reverse inscription I think I can make out a “٩٧” (i.e. hijra year 1297, i.e. 1879-1880 AD), in which case the full date as given by the previous owner is presumably written nearby in longhand.
Total franking is 60 paras or 1½ piastres. From 1 April 1879 to 12 March 1884 the internal rate was 40 paras for 10 grams, with an additional 20 paras per extra 5 grams. This is a small, flimsy cover, and it’s hard to imagine it having been overweight. At p. 149 of Postal History of the Ottoman Empire by T. Turgut, the author notes that some post offices seem to have applied the previous postal rates until the end of 1880, based on surviving specimens. Possibly this is what we have here, I would speculate. Under the previous tariff, letters at the basic weight (up to 10 grams) sent internally and inland to somewhere up to 100 “postal hours” away attracted a charge of 60 paras. Following the modern roads, Diyarbakir is about 210 miles away from Mosul, so under 100 hours’ transit time sounds right.
Mosul 🠚 Isleworth, 11 December 1881
A very agreeable cover. Everything in nice “UPU” style, with stamps of the new French-inscribed issue and French “Mossoul / Turquie” and Constantinople postmarks. Having got to Constantinople this needed only a week to get to its destination, per the arrival mark on the reverse — by modern standards that’s still a very decent speed.
The month line of the postmark is unfortunately obliterated. We learn from the Proud book that in 1798 a mounted courier, with frequent changes of horse, etc., could reliably travel from Baghdad to Istanbul, via Mosul, in 20 days in the winter. Eighty-odd years later one would hope that the roads would have improved somewhat; and for a shorter journey, starting at Mosul, departure on 11 December for an arrival at Istanbul on 4 January feels entirely plausible.
The rate I am confused by. Per Turgut, the rate for mail to Europe at this point was 50 paras at the basic weight, not falling to 40 until 1882. This is franked at 40, and Turgut (p. 505) pictures a contemporary international cover also franked at 40, with no explanation of the discrepancy so far as I can see. I miss some nuance here, perhaps.
Baghdad 🠚 Bombay, 21 April 1882/3
As usual, none of the postmarks has a year, but I think I see a “1300” Hijra date on the reverse — so, 1882/83 by the Christian count. I have another Baghdad to Bombay cover (too similar to this one to be worth scanning) dated December 1301, where the Baghdad postmark still has the acute accent-esque flaw over the first “A”.
Baghdad 🠚 [Somewhere], 7 November, 1880s
No doubt an educated man could read the destination in a second, but I am not an educated man. The dating is a separate difficulty. I see no manuscript date on the cover, and the date on the postmark is mostly illegible. I think I can make out “188-” but the final digit has left no impression. Coles & Walker date the earliest known use of this “BAGDAD / TURQUIE” postmark to 1878, and give no latest known use. The franking is 1 piastre, or 40 paras — this was the basic-weight rate for an internal, inland letter from 1 April 1879 to 12 March 1884. It then increased to 2 piastres, until 4 September 1888 when it reverted to 1 piastre. This rate was maintained until 1918. The underlying stamp was issued at some point in 1881. So our range of dates would appear to be 1881 sometime to 12 March 1884, or 4 September 1888 to the end of the decade.
If this was sent to a foreign destination, which I think is less likely from the lack of foreign markings, 1 piastre was the applicable basic rate from 19 June 1882 until into the 1900s.
Baghdad 🠚 Amarah, c. 1889
Ultimately a philosophical question as to whether this is an excessively large piece or an excessively reduced cover. More pertinently, there isn’t room on the “Ottoman Iraq” page for another image, so I put it here. As I discussed on that page, the Baghdad bisects seem to have been sincerely issued, although not without escaping the notice of local collectors. This one is perhaps slightly better than some rather philatelic-smelling examples one sees: the recipient seems to be some kind of postal official in Amarah, though of course he could have been a collector or speculator. The cancellation is a Baghdad negative seal with an immobilised date of 1299 (1883 by the Christian count), and I note it carefully avoids the overprint. This particular type of overprint (there were three in total) seems to have mostly been used in 1889, so I date the piece accordingly. The other seal isn’t listed in Coles & Walker and so I assume it isn’t a postmark. 1 piastre was the applicable basic-weight internal rate at this time.
Kerbela 🠚 Tehran, 1898/9
Large purple Kerbela (or Karbala, if you prefer) postmark cancelling a pair of the unattractive 1892-1898 issue. I can’t read a date on it, but there seems to be a manuscript ١٣١٧ on the reverse: this works out as 1898-1899 and thus accords neatly with the date of the stamps. Smudgy “TEHERAN” postmark on the reverse, in the distinctively seriffy Iranian style. Franking is a total 40 paras or 1 piastre, the applicable rate for a basic-weight external letter.
Baghdad 🠚 Edinburgh, c. May 1900
Pleasant, fairly self-explanatory item. Main point of interest is that the sender, presumably a Briton, has patronised the Ottoman post office instead of the British one — more touristic value in the former course, perhaps. The postmark date is illegible to me but, I assume, for it to have arrived on the 14th June it must've been posted in late May. As above, the franking is 40 paras or 1 piastre, the correct external rate. Note the “via Beyrout” at top-left. Misses Cowan seem to have operated a small boarding school or something of that nature, from a brief search.
Baghdad 🠚 Mosul, 9 December 1901
A few agreeable aspects here. A nice example of up-rated postal stationery: here a total of 40 paras (1 piastre) to meet the usual internal rate. Cancellations are of the charming BAGDAD-in-oval type, and we have a clear dated bilingual postmark that gets a little tortuous once you peer into the date line. I think I can discern “9-12-901” on the Gregorian side, and the stamps (the 1901 issue) don’t contradict this date, but I could well be wrong. The sender is some official of the Baghdad branch of the British and Foreign Bible Society, writing to his colleague David Yusuf at the rather militaristic-sounding “Bible Depot, Mosul”. A 1910 History of the British and Foreign Bible Society (available online) describes modest successes, and considerable hazards, in evangelising to the locals. An encounter with hostile Arabs left one party of missionaries "robbed of all they had, barbarously ill-used, and left, hungry and naked, to find their way after a day and two nights into Mohammerah." Another missionary was "beaten by a sheikh and left tied to a tree."
Kerbela 🠚 Tehran, 2 November 1910
Another difficult postmark. This one seems to read “2-11-910”, but that doesn’t fit at all neatly with the Iranian arrival postmark which appears to be dated 3 September 1911. I suppose the thing could’ve taken ten months to reach its destination, but that hardly seems likely. The previous owner dated the Ottoman postmarks as 19 July 1911 but, respectfully, I don’t think I can agree with that reading. This mystery aside, we have two blocks of 4x5 paras for the usual total of 40 paras or 1 piastre.
Basra 🠚 Bombay, 12 April 1913
Please ignore the horrible hinge remnants along the top of the obverse — the paperclip stain, meanwhile, was no doubt honourably earned. Postmarked Basra, 12 April 1913, arriving at Umarkhadi, south Bombay, on 19 April. Lovely square postmark on the stamp.
Kadhimiya 🠚 Isfahan, 1913
Handsomely calligraphed and handsomely postmarked cover from Khadimiya (a northern suburb of Baghdad) via Kermanshah to Isfahan. The markings, again, are less straightforward than they might be. Here we have:
Kazimié
Baghdad No. 4, 10 September 1913
Kirmanchah arrivée, 2 October 1913
Isfahan No. 5, 13 October 1913
The Khadimiya postmark (in violet, uncommonly) appears to read “14-3-13”. A March date doesn’t fit in at all with the three later ones, so at this point I throw my hands up. The tughra handstamp on the reverse is curious: does it suggest this was sent on some kind of official business or other? I do not know. Franking is, again, 1 piastre.
Baghdad 🠚 Vienna, 9 April 1914
An Ebay seller had a small cache of these splendid covers in September 2024, and I was pleased to be able to acquire one. Fairly self-explanatory, but a rich and attractive object. Much old-world resonance in the phrase “Austro-Oriental Company” as well. The franking is 8¾ piastres, or 350 paras. Subtract 40 for basic-weight postage and another 40 for registration, gets 270, which is 9 extra weight steps at 30 paras each. Thus, a letter between 200 and 220g.
Baghdad 🠚 Frankfurt, 27 May 1914
Generously uprated registered envelope. Here we have an extra 70 paras’ worth of stamps, giving a total franking of 2¾ piastres or 110 paras. The registration fee was 40 paras, so 70 for postage — in 1914 a basic-weight (now 20 grams) letter cost 40 paras, and a letter up to 40 grams cost 70 paras. The stamps are postmarked 27 May 1914 and on the reverse is a Frankfurt (am Main) arrival mark dated 11 June 1914. The handstamp on the obverse I take to be a registration label. Recipient is one Ferdinand Blecher(?) and the sender is evidently a relative.
Something I do not understand. The registration fee had been 40 paras since 1898. Why, then, in 1913 or circa, did Harrisons produce a 40 paras registered envelope, when 40 paras was sufficient only to pay the registration, and not any postage? Answers on a postcard.
Basra 🠚 Cambridge, 13 April 1916
Happily, quite a lot of background information on our sender, one Lieutenant Reginald William Macfarlane-Grieve, is available. He arrived at Basra with the Black Watch on 31 December 1915 and had the misfortune to be wounded almost immediately, on 7 January 1916, during the attempt to relieve Kut-El-Amarah. He was invalided to India for a couple of months but arrived back in Basra on 13 April 1916, the very day he sent this latter. He was invalided to India —a second time, this one permanent— on 26 November 1916, for reasons unknown. He recovered, was awarded the Military Cross in 1918, and went on to enjoy a solid career as a schoolteacher before drowning to death in 1934. The recipient of the letter is presumably his wife.
Anyway, moving to the postal-history side. This is an “on active service” letter and is, accordingly, stampless. The startling “OPENED UNDER MARTIAL LAW” tape on the reverse seems to have been a peculiarity of the Basra base office, based on other specimens I’ve seen, although I’m not well-read enough in this area to confirm. The “Base Office / F” postmark is, again, particular to Basra. The other base offices were elsewhere — G and H were in Egypt, for example.
Basra 🠚 Bombay, 2 November 1916
Rather “salty” condition-wise, but this engages an area of which I am ignorant. Military mail in this period was free, unless the letter was overweight, or registered, or etc. In such cases, Indian stamps overprinted “I.E.F.” were used. Meanwhile, mail transmitted via the civil post offices used regular Indian stamps. Here we have a regular Indian stamp postmarked at a field post office — does this indicate that the sender was a civilian able (for whatever reason) to avail of the military posts? I do not know. Half an anna was (I think?) not a weight step for regular letters, which would suggest this is printed matter paid in full.
Anyway this was postmarked on 2 November 1916, at F.P.O. 329 — located at Maqil, Basra. On the obverse we have a circular “Passed Censor / Bombay” mark, and on the reverse “Opened by Censor” tape, mostly destroyed. The cover immediately below shows better examples of both. Finally we have a Bombay arrival mark, mostly destroyed, but November 1916 can be read.
Baghdad 🠚 Paris, 25 April 1917
Three very interesting items follow. None had been given any useful description by their vendors but, I think, they must be survivors of the period where civil mails posted at Baghdad were carried for free without stamps. This lasted from 29 March to 31 August, the Baghdad stamps appearing on sale the day after the latter.
This is the only dated specimen, the other two being without postmarks. What the actual procedure was remains somewhat unclear to me — this cover has an FPO postmark and no censor markings, whereas the other two lack postmarks and are visibly censored (this work having seemingly been done at Bombay). I would imagine, therefore, that this cover was opened and read with no visible formalities at the FPO itself, or some military censorship office elsewhere. This, of course, doesn’t explain why this cover ended up at an FPO in the first place, while the other two did not — those presumably passing through the civil mails in the typical way. The British military post in Iraq went to Bombay anyway for onward transmission (this having also been the usage of the consular post offices before WWI) so diverting the civil Baghdad covers for censorship while at Bombay was presumably no particular hassle. More evidence will hopefully clarify the point.
No cover has an arrival postmark — one wouldn’t expect there to be one, seeing as they were all sent unregistered, but it leaves the date of arrival (and, thus, the transit time, not an uninteresting question) unknown. But see the cover below this one, perhaps. To take the part of the devil I must note that the lack of arrival postmarks makes it impossible to confirm any of these covers actually arrived at its destination — but, I would note for the other side, the Indian censorship marks on two of them suggest those two successfully left Iraq, at least, and —for what it may be worth— I acquired all three of the covers from French sellers.
Anyway to move away from generalities, this particular item was sent by one David Fetto (unclear, but he was evidently in business) to Dumani Frères of Paris, who seem to have dealt in antiquities. Postmarked on the reverse F.P.O. No. 57, 25 April 1917. This was the postmark assigned to General Headquarters — Proud fails to note where exactly this happened to be located, but I would assume it followed General Maude around and was, thus, at Baghdad at the relevant time.
A somewhat tremulous handwritten note on the back reads: “39 envelopes received without stamps during the war”. The identity of the writer I couldn’t guess — someone with the Dumani Brothers would be in a position to know, alternatively a collector.
Baghdad 🠚 Paris, c. July(?) 1917
This cover is without postmark — presumably, then, it was carried in the civil postal system and avoided the military one. Having reached Bombay it was put aside for censorship (from which we can assume no censorship was performed in Iraq) — we see, accordingly, “Passed Censor / Bombay / 33” on the obverse. I assume the “Opened by Censor” tape on the reverse was also applied at Bombay.
I normally remove the pencil marks on covers I acquire but I’ve kept them here. The arrow is just the usual obnoxious collector arrow but the handwritten date (21 July 1917) is very curious. It falls within the period where a stampless cover like this was valid, and there’s no markings on the cover from which a date this specific could be derived, so I assume the date was written in 1917 and not added later by a collector. But whether it’s the date of posting, collection, opening in India, arrival in Paris or arrival at the recipient’s mail room, I do not know. The blue pencil I can’t guess the significance of. I don’t think it can be a registration number, and it also doesn’t look like a postage deficiency.
The recipient is the bank which would later be better known as the Österreichische Länderbank. The French rendering is ungoogleable. The Chukur brothers (Turkish, evidently) have disappeared from the record.
Baghdad 🠚 Paris, ??? 1917
Another of the thirty-nine covers of the Fetto-Dumani correspondence. This, like the cover immediately above, seems to have been in the sole care of the civil mails until its arrival at Bombay. This cover was also reviewed by censor 33 — whether this is coincidental or if he had some specific oversight of letters from Iraq, I cannot guess.
Baghdad 🠚 Basra, 21 December 1918
Strange little cover. Sent by field post, within Iraq, this I think ought to bear no stamps at all. The presence of stamps then suggests a philatelic franking but, if this is what it is, it’s a rather poor attempt at one — the stamps are placed inelegantly, upside-down, and on a cover of this nature and quality. That conundrum aside. “E. F. Park” was perhaps a civilian, seeing as no military rank is given — at any rate I can find no record of him online.
Nice clearish postmarks. On the obverse “Base Post Office / 8th Despatch / 21 December 1918 / M. E. F.” On the reverse, “Base Post Office D / Delivery / [illegible] December 1918 / 4pm / M.E.F.” When this new system of postmarks with “Mesopotamian Expeditionary Force” and different nomenclature for the post offices was introduced, I do not know. Contrast the 13/IV/1916 cover above where the Basra head office is “Base Office F”.
Basra 🠚 Baghdad 🠚 Bombay 🠚 Kirkee, 3 February 1919
Well-travelled cover sent by Lawrence & Mayo, opticians, to one Lieutenant J. E. Ogle, who turned out, after some diversions, to be resident in Kirkee (now Khadki, India, and seemingly still a place with strong military connections). On the obverse we have a single 3 anna stamp paying the 1 anna internal rate plus the 2 annas registration rate, and on the reverse a nice jumble of postmarks. These, as far as I can make them out, are:
Basra, 3 February (obverse);
Baghdad, 6 February;
Field Post Office 55 (stationary FPO, Baghdad), 7 February;
Field Post Office 55 (stationary FPO, Baghdad), 9 February;
Baghdad Base Post Office, 10 February;
Field Post Office 367 ("in Iraq"*), 14 February;
Bombay? [not easily read], 3 March;
[Illegible], 5 March.
The final item is probably the Kirkee arrival mark: the internet has it only a couple hours' driving away from Bombay. Most of the amendments to the address are self-explanatory, but I've got nothing on the small manuscript numbers (something to do with the registration?) and the word written in red at the top.
Of interest, the 21 November 1916 issue of the Basrah Times (at time of writing on sale at the Balkanphila website) contains this advertisement:
LAWRENCE & MAYO
OPTICIANS,
Have opened a workshop at 16
CHURCH STREET, ASHAR
—near the barracks—
————
Glare Protectors, Spectacles & Eyeglasses, etc.
————
Prescriptions & Repairs Executed.
*Per Proud: vagueness as in original.
Mosul 🠚 London, 4 June 1919
The Mosul issue is scarcely found on covers, especially ones which, like this one, appear uncontrived. This cover seems actually to have been under-paid: since 1 September 1918 the basic foreign rate had been 1½ annas. The recipient, one H. L. Ashford Esq., seems not to have been anyone in particular. No markings at all on the reverse, which isn’t surprising for an un-registered cover, but some hint that this had actually passed through the mails would have been reassuring.