COVERS (1950 TO 1959)
Part 5 of the covers pages, covering the monarchy’s final years. The confusion as to rates, introduced in the last page, continues here — see the rates page for further remarks.
Baghdad 🠚 London, 22 January 1950
Terribly droll recipient name. The sender, a Mr Albdulkader M. Adamjy, was a wholesaler or import agent or what have you — he can be seen in the Iraq Times advertising floor polish, radios, insect repellent and much else.
Postmarks: Baghdad sorting office 22 January 1950, three times.
Franking: 51 fils. 28f postage and 23f airmail.
Tax: underpaid! At 4 fils.
Basra 🠚 New York, 31 October 1950
A scarily large franking for Halloween 1950.
Baghdad 🠚 Hradec Králové, 13 November 1950
If the reader is of a certain persuasion he’ll know the destination better as Königgrätz. Anyway this is very fun. Some helpful material has been written about these covers in the March 2006 and December 2011 issues of the Journal of the Czechoslovak Philatelic Society of Great Britain, and I draw on these articles heavily. In short, Czechoslovakia was at this time (and, no doubt, at later times) subject to import-export controls of such rigour that the mere exchange of postage stamps, not just the sale of them for profit, was caught. The procedure seems to have been that exchanges could only be made through the single authorised Czechoslovak philatelic society, and the incoming halves of any exchanges were, on arrival in the country, diverted to Prague so an inspector could confirm the trade was a balanced one.
This explains most of the markings here. On the obverse a large green stamp reading something like “CUSTOMS / to be opened at the central bureau for posts, Prague”, then a description of the contents and a 4 December 1950 date stamp. the envelope has been opened and resealed with official tape, reading “Echange Réciproque” in French and “Evidenční Kancelář” in Czech — oddly, these mean different things (“reciprocal exchange” and “records office” respectively). The tape is tied with, on the obverse, what I assume is the inspector’s seal, and another date stamp on the reverse. The purple “beze cla a davek” handstamp on the reverse means “free of duty and tax” or similar.
Postmarks: Baghdad As-Samawal 13 November 1950, twice on the obverse and once on the reverse. A Baghdad roller cancel also dated 15 November 1950 on the reverse, for whatever reason. A few miscellaneous numbers etc on the reverse. No Czechoslovak arrival marks, as one would probably expect for an unregistered letter.
Franking: 68 fils, which could well be a correct franking rather than a philatelic overpayment. However there’s no airmail endorsement and the Czechoslovak postmarks are dated some weeks from the date of posting — though, of course, this could reflect the time needed to clear Czechoslovak customs rather than transit time.
Tax: 5 fils, as required for an external letter.
New York 🠚 Amarah, 30 April 1951
A tragedy in two acts: it seems Mr Latif Nuri wrote, perhaps, a slightly brusque and uncharming letter to Mrs Sherborne — she, in turn, seems to have been slightly affronted by his businesslike approach, and replied both to decline his offer to trade stamps, and to regret the friendly exchange of information on Iraq which, had things started on a better foot, might have taken place. Nuri, unfortunately, was unable to receive this admonishment, having died before its arrival.
Latif Nuri isn’t an uncommon addressee, going back at least to the 1930s — he was a member of correspondence clubs and, as we see here, interested in stamps. He seems however not to have been a dealer or recipient of contrived self-addressed covers, I should note for the record.
Postmarks: Flushing, N. Y., 30 April 1951 for departure on obverse, Amarah 23 May 1951 for arrival on reverse. Then the other markings: the Baghdad dead letter office, 26 and 29 May and then, the letter having not been claimed, “Return to Sender” on the obverse. I assume the “Deceased” stamp was applied at the same time.
Franking: 5 cents, on which I can make no comment.
Baghdad 🠚 Addis Ababa, 13 December 1951
Fun desintation.
Postmarks: Baghdad [something else — Janoubi?], 13 December 1951. Addis Ababa arrival mark on the reverse, 21 December 1951.
Franking: 34 fils. This was carried by air only partially, something one sees fairly commonly on covers of the late 1940s/early 1950s, or circa. 28f for postage leaves 6f for airmail. The 1 November 1949 airmail tariff had Iraqi Airways and Misr Airlines offering airmail to Egypt for 6f, so presumably this still applied a couple of years later.
Baghdad 🠚 [USA], March 1952
Interesting combination diplomatic bag/dead letter office cover. The issue here seems to have been that the sender neglected to write the destination town on the address. The manuscript, which should not be difficult, vexes me terribly — the recipient is given as being “in” another individual. There was an American P. W. Ireland who wrote a book about Iraq in the 1930s — perhaps the same individual as the “Am. Embassy” sender here.
Postmarks: in what I take to be the order, and on the reverse except where indicated.
As one would expect for diplomatic mail, the stamps weren’t postmarked in Iraq.
Obv: postmarked on arrival in the USA: Washington D. C. 15, 31 March 1952, and violet “This article originally mailed in country indicated by postage” handstamp.
Obv: violet “Reclamé (Unclaimed)” handstamp.
Boston Dead Letter Office, 10 April 1952.
Obv: elaborate violet “Retour (Return to Writer)” handstamp. The reason for failure to deliver is given as “unknown” instead of “for better address”, I note.
A mostly illegible “… N. Postal…” postmark which I think must be US.
Baghdad Dead Letter Office, 12 May 1952 (twice).
I think at this point the sheet of paper was affixed to the front. It reads something to the effect of: “Sent from the Baghdad Dead Letter Office to: [in manuscript] Basra”. The word in black to the left of “Basra” seems to be in the same hand and reads “American” I believe.
Basra, 13 May 1952.
Basra Sorting Office, 13 May 1952.
At this point (I think) Basra realised the letter had been sent there in error: someone crossed out “Basra” on the bit of paper and wrote “return to sender at Baghdad” or similar in red.
Basra, 14 May 1952.
Karradah, 15 May 1952.
Baghdad, 16 May 1952.
By 2021 this had drifted over to Ukraine, from where I purchased it(!)
Franking: one stamp has fallen off, and the other remains attached only tenuously. The missing stamp appears, from the small fragment still remaining, to have been blue — I think, thus, it was 20 fils, for a total of 28, which was the standard external surface rate.
Baghdad 🠚 New York, 22 December 1953
Cute stampless cover — evidently the Iraqi postal service was able to send mail to foreign postal services without stamps. No doubt this is provided for in some UPU regulation I’ll never be able to find. Anyway the markings here are all nice and legible, and I don’t really have anything else to say. The “AMF” was seemingly the “Air Mail Field”, later changed to the more modern “Airport Mail Facility”.
Postmarks: Baghdad Reg., 22 December 1953, on reverse.
Franking: none!
Baghdad 🠚 Baghdad, 1 February 1954
This is an difficult one. Let us explore together.
The cover is postmarked Karradah, a suburb of Baghdad, and addressed to a Mr C. W. Morris, an “English language inspector” at the Ministry of Education, at Baghdad. Below, in violet pencil is “Ministry of Education”, above presumably the sender’s signature. I don’t know what the regulations were in this period for the use of official postage stamps, but all of the official covers in my collection from the 1940s and 1950s, except this one, carry a government department handstamp on the obverse.
On the reverse we have a 4 fils official postage stamp. It has been postmarked, but also “isolated”, the traditional way of identifying a stamp as invalid (cf. 27.IX. 1934, 27.X.1942 and 19.VIII.1958). The text below the isolation reads “official stamp”. I’m not sure what the objection to this postage stamp might have been, assuming the cover was legitimately sent by the Ministry of Education, other than that the lack of a handstamp was objected to.
The postage stamp is 4 fils. I assume the relevant rate here, from a suburb of Baghdad to its centre, would be the local rate. I don’t know what this was in 1954, but the last tariff I am aware of (of May 1942) put it at 6 fils.
Back over to the obverse. Whoever at Karradah objected to the postage stamp applied the usual semicircular postage due handstamp. The same person then seems to have written a “4” in blue pen, then scored it out. Red pencil then scores it out again, more emphatically, and writes an uncertain number. “12” is my best guess. There is also, in red, what looks like an incomplete “4” further down.
If internal postage due operated on a “double deficiency” system at this time (it did in 1930), and the red number is a “12”, then this gives us a local rate of 6 fils — i.e., the May 1942 tariff was still in effect. This would seem to make sense to me.
The final item on the reverse is another postmark, dated 2 February. I can’t read the top word but the bottom is “missing”, or some such. Combined with the non-circular shape, this suggests some kind of postage due stamp, applied at Baghdad.
Habbaniyah 🠚 Bristol, 8 April 1955
This begins a small run of 1955 items related to the military installations at Habbaniyah — entirely coincidental, all acquired at different times. Anyway this one is in visibly sub-optimal condition, and it’s a philatelic franking, but it was being offered with its original contents still inside, so I couldn’t resist. The sender and the recipient seem to have been relatives — I can find nothing for either. How a corporal had access to paper headed with the national arms I couldn’t guess.
Postmarks: Habbaniyah 8 April 1955 twice on obverse.
Franking: 82 fils, which reflects the sender putting a pair of each of the three stamps of the issue on the cover rather than any applicable rate.
Dear Alan,
The stamps on this envelope are the set of special issue to commemorate the ending of the Anglo-Iraq Treaty yesterday. The arabic inscription reads “Ending of the Treaty, 6.4.55.” I am sorry the postmarks will be one day late [note: actually two days late] for the first day of issue but not to worry!
Cheers, Rory
Jalawla 🠚 Habbaniyah, 13 July 1955
Charming “economy envelope” made from a fragment of a “Government of Iraq” brown envelope (printed text not visible on the scan) and some lined paper. The addressee is, I am given to understand, the commander of the “Amal” (“Hope”) Regiment stationed at Habbaniyah. The RAF base was still open at this stage, but evidently Iraqi troops were also quartered in the area. The purple stamp at bottom-left I cannot read.
Postmarks: three strikes, oddly dated different dates (13, 15 and 17 July 1955) of Jalula Camp, a postmark I can find no record of in English. ".معسكر جلولاء" There’s a charming story about Nuri al-Said bestowing a swimming pool upon the soldiers billeted there at some unspecified date. Habbaniyah arrival mark dated 19 July.
Franking: 10 fils. Down from 14 fils from October 1953.
Ramadi 🠚 Habbaniyah, 12 September 1955
Nice neat “Government of Iraq” envelope. The RAF base at Habbaniyah was in its final years at this point, not that anybody would have suspected. Purple RAF administrative stamp of some sort on the obverse.
Postmarks: Ramadi 12 September 1955 on obverse, Habbaniyah 14 September on reverse. The other postmark on the reverse, also Ramadi, is actually the offset of a different cover’s postmark.
Franking: 10 fils for basic-weight internal mail.
Baghdad🠚 Bahawalpur, 28 November 1955
Unusually distinguished addressee. Bahawalpur, of course, was known for emitting its own stamps back in the day.
Postmarks: All on the reverse. Baghdad Al-Mansur four times on the reverse. The right two seem to be dated 28 November 1955 and the left two 29 November, curiously. At the top-right is a Bahawalpur arrival mark (text indistinct) dated 1 December. Without making any enquiry into the matter I take the faint blue item to be some sort of Pakistani arrival or censorship(?) mark.
Franking: 94 fils. Conceivably a correct total, despite the decorative appearance of the franking. 28f postage and either 20f or 40f for registration (unclear) gives us 26f or 46f airmail. More likely the former — Pakistan seems to have attracted relatively low airmail fees.
Baghdad, 21 April 1956
A parcel tag or some such — with a high franking. I’m not sure if Baghdad was also the destination or, if not, what the text on the obverse signifies.
Postmarks: Baghdad As-Samawal 21 April 1956 twice on the reverse.
Franking: 1 dinar, which I must assume was correct for whatever article this was attached to.
Baghdad 🠚 New York, 2 February 1958
Point of interest here the curious intaglio-style postmarks. I’ve seen these, rarely, for Baghdad as-Samawal, and nowhere else (not that I’m keeping a close eye out, granted). The purple mail-room docket is also intriguing, at least to someone as ignorant of printing techniques as I am — it looks mimeographed (or etc.) onto the cover rather than typed.
Postmarks: Baghdad as-Samawal 2 February twice on obverse. I take the year from the purple text.
Franking: 58 fils. 28 for postage and then, by elimination, 30 for airmail.
Baghdad 🠚 London, May 1958
An attempt at paying postage with a revenue stamp. The offending stamp was postmarked, although it seems to have then been quickly identified, “isolated” with pencil and subjected to some critical handwritten comment. Nevertheless the letter seems to have made it into the mails, albeit the surface mail and not the air mail (note that “by air” at the bottom-left has been struck out), and it was assessed for postage due. Interestingly, there’s no British postage due stamps to be seen, though I’m insufficiently familiar with British procedures for dealing with deficient postage to know what this may mean. There’s also no British postmarks, although for an unregistered surface letter this is probably to be expected. My ignorance of the prevailing rates at this time means I decline to try to “double-check” the postage due calculation.
Postmarks: Illegible. I get Baghdad from the return address.
Franking: purportedly 58 fils.
See also: 27.X.1942; 13.IV.1945.
Al-Diwan 🠚 Alexandria, 12 July 1958
Evidently, from the purple censor triangle, this hadn’t left Iraq by the time the post-coup censorship was introduced.
Postmarks: “Al-Diwan” on the obverse. Whatever exactly this is or was — I don’t think it’s a place name. I read the date as 12 July 1958 — I think 2 July would be too early.
Franking: 16 fils. Since 1 July 1954 post to Egypt was charged at domestic rates — 10 fils, the next weight step 6 fils. This is endorsed for airmail in red at the top-left, so I think here we have 10 fils for the first weight step and 6 for the Misr Airlines airmail fee introduced in 1949 (see the rates page). If not, it was carried in the surface mails at the second weight step.
Censorship: purple no. 4 stamp of “Baghdad Type 1”, as per Parren’s classification of these. The black circular mark with crescent is Egyptian.
13 July 1958
The final day of the monarchy — the following morning it would suffer a force majeure event of existential proportions. The duty paid here is 270 fils, which suggests a tax of 0.5% on the value of the premium. In a former life I had something to do with the legals behind 68 King William Street, London — a rather grand building right at the north end of London Bridge.
Baghdad 🠚 Alexandria, 13 July 1958
And a cover from the same date. Like 12.VII.1958 above, this was still in Iraq at the time of the coup.
Postmarks: on the reverse, “Karkh (Baghdad)” 13 July 1958, and an illegible Egyptian arrival mark.
Franking: 16 fils. I think, here, for the second surface weight step, absent any airmail indications.
Censorship: purple no. 4 stamp of “Baghdad Type 1”. The remaining marks and tape are all Egyptian.
Baghdad 🠚 Raunheim, 17 July 1958
A few covers follow from the small period bookended by 14 July (the military coup) and whenever stamps with the royal portrait were demonetised — 26 July or perhaps a day or two after. See 29.VII.1958 below for some thoughts on this. These covers aren’t so easily found, and I’ve never seen one where the seller has been aware of their particular interest.
Postmarks: The Iraqi postmarks, fortunately, have a legible date —17 July 1958— but the location is beyond me. I take Baghdad from the reverse address. Also on the reverse, Frankfurt Airport and Frankfurt, both 26 July 1958.
Franking: 40 fils, which is consonant with adjacent covers here. I’m not sure why the “express” label was applied — there’s nothing else to indicate that this was an express delivery, and, having required nine days to be delivered, it wasn’t.
Censorship: purple no. 5 stamp of “Baghdad Type 1”.
Baghdad 🠚 Raunheim, 17 July 1958
Same addressee and, no doubt, sender as the cover immediately above. This item is particularly interesting — it seems (see the covers immediately above and below) that Faisal II stamps were used post-coup without modification until the “Iraqi Republic” stamps were issued, but in this case the royal head has been obliterated by (what I assume must be) the individual zeal of some postal clerk. The portrait has been scribbled over in pen, and some sort of large, heavy handstamp applied. It seems to have had some sort of design, but I can’t work out what it was (having stared at it from all angles). No doubt there was some very eye-catching graffiti on the stamps on the reverse, causing some philatelic vandal to snip them off. Still a fascinating object, and one which attracted remarkably stiff bidding(!).
Postmarks: Sadly illegible, but the date (17 July 1958) can be read. On the reverse, Frankfurt 26 July 1958, and a second Frankfurt postmark (with obliterated bottom text) of the same date.
Franking: I assume 40 fils, of which only 10 remains on the cover.
Censorship: purple no. 1 stamp of “Baghdad Type 1”.
Baghdad 🠚 Mülheim, 20 July 1958
This was a good find — acquired in an Ebay group lot where the photo was wholly insufficient for reading the postmark dates with any confidence. But “faint heart never won fair maid”, as they say.
Postmarks: Junoubi Baghdad 20 July 1958, thrice on the obverse and once on the reverse. The rectangular datestamp on the obverse was applied by Deutsche Bank rather than the German postal service. The very faint, mirrored text on the reverse near the top of the censorship triangle stamp seems to be an offset impression one of these Deutsche Bank stamps.
Franking: 120 fils. 40 for registration and then 80 divided in whatever amounts between the postage (28f or 44f) and the airmail.
Censorship: This looks like a “Baghdad Type 2” (Parren) but the impression is too weak to be certain.
Baghdad 🠚 East Berlin(?), 29 July 1958
A strange one. Postmarked 29 July — the first overprinted “Iraqi Republic” stamps had appeared on the 26th. We have one here, plus three un-overprinted stamps across which the sender has, not inelegantly, written “Republic of Iraq”. These the post office declined to postmark. Evidently, then, by the 29th the Republic stamps were the only ones valid for postage (at least to external destinations — see 4.XI.1958 below). Whether the Kingdom stamps became invalid immediately on the 26th, or there was a grace period of a day or two, is an important question to which I don’t have the answer.
Would be interesting, also, to know the motivations behind the sender writing over the unoverprinted stamps — whether this was a pure trying of luck, the seller trying to use up stamps which had suddenly become valueless, or whether it derived from something — perhaps, a loosely-worded announcement that only “stamps superscribed ‘Republic of Iraq’” were valid for postage, the reference to the officially overprinted stamps being implied but not explicitly made. Strange, as well, that the handwriting should be in English and not in Arabic.
No actual post town is given on the address — from a few seconds of searching this entity seems to have been headquartered in (East) Berlin.
Postmarks: Baghdad as-Samawal 29 July 1958 twice on the obverse. In rather curious condition, the date line sharper and seemingly struck over a weaker impression of the same date.
Franking: 41 fils. This seems to have passed through the mails — presumably on the basis that the 30 fils of valid postage met the 28 needed for surface postage. No postage due charged on the remaining 11, whatever that means.
Censorship: purple no. 2 stamp of “Baghdad Type 1”.
Basra 🠚 Alexandria, 29 July 1958
A more conventional cover of the same date.
Postmarks: Basra 29 July 1958 (obverse), Basra sorting office 29 July 1958 (reverse).
Franking: 10 fils, the basic surface rate.
Censorship: two purple “Baghdad Type 1” stamps, unusually — nos. 2 and 3. The black circular stamp with crescent is Egyptian.
Unknown 🠚 Alexandria, 5 August 1958
Postmarks: two Iraqi postmarks, the place-name wholly illegible, on the obverse. I take the date as 5 August 1958. On the reverse, Egyptian “Aerodrome du Caire”, 8 August 1958. I had to cross-refer to other examples to work this out — literally, it’s “8 AU 58 4-5P”.
Franking: 16 fils — 10 fils postage and 6 fils airmail (see 12.VII.1958 above).
Censorship: a “Baghdad Type 1” stamp, no. 3 — here, unusually, in black. The black circular stamp with crescent is, again Egyptian.
Sulaymaniyah 🠚 Landau, 19 August 1958
A second attempt at using pre-republican commemoratives after the revolution. Here the stamps managed to get postmarked, but an attempt was then made to reverse it by “isolating” the stamps in pencil (though, not a very good attempt, as the pencil line encompasses the entire franking, not just the commemoratives). Some sort of postage deficiency notation is evident. There’s no markings to suggest the postage due was collected on arrival in Germany, but what markings they employed to indicate this —if any— I do not know.
Postmarks: Sulaymaniyah 19 August 1958 twice on the obverse.
Franking: 40 fils. If 28 fils was still the external rate then this was under-paid even for surface postage. I note also that the ostensible franking of this cover is 1 fils lower than the one immediately above, despite the identical destination countries.
Censorship: a purple “Baghdad Type 1”. The digit on the bottom row is an illegibly truncated 2 or 3, to my eyes.
Baghdad 🠚 New York, 1 September 1958
The government under the Hashemites had employed envelopes inscribed “Government of Iraq”, as here. This wording, to me, would seem “neutral” politically, but evidently it was too ancien régime for the republicans, and they ordered new envelopes which read “Iraqi Republic” (see II. 1973 for an example). It seems that, in the interim, there was an order that stocks of “Government…” envelopes should be used up, but with “Iraqi Republic” or some such added. Here we have the somewhat non-standard “Republiq Iraq” (sic).
Postmarks: Baghdad 1 September 1958, obverse.
Franking: 88 fils. Presumably 28 for postage then six increments of 10 for the airmail fee.
Censorship: a purple “Baghdad Type 1”, bottom digit 2. There seems also to be a central device (a star in “intaglio”?) which I don’t believe I’ve seen before.
Basra 🠚 Baghdad, 4 November 1958
Highly intriguing. I had been under the impression that, once the Republic overprints were introduced, un-overprinted stamps with the royal portrait became invalid for postage more or less immediately. See, for example, 29.VII.1958 above, where only the overprinted stamp was treated as valid. And yet, here, we have four undefaced stamps which passed through the mails entirely without incident. I lack the knowledge needed to comment intelligently on this — either this cover was simply missed, at both departure and arrival, or the requirement to use Republic stamps only applied to foreign mail. The latter perhaps more likely — the Republic required to be “advertised” to foreign destinations in a way it didn’t to the home country, and the general dearth of internal Iraqi covers, from this and all other periods, makes it hard to comment authoritatively on any peculiarities they might have had. Perhaps this cover reflects a common practice for domestic covers and, thanks to the scarcity of internal material on the market, this is simply the first I have seen in some years of collecting.
Postmarks: Basra sorting office 4 November 1958 twice on obverse. Baghdad arrival mark 6 November 1958 on reverse.
Franking: 8 fils — back down, apparently, to the pre-WWII internal rate. To my best knowledge, it seems that the internal rate stayed at 10 fils down to at least July 1958, absent evidence to the contrary. If so, the new revolutionary government must have instituted a reduction as a matter of some urgency.
Censorship: Purple circular “Military Censor / Basra” handstamp on the reverse.
Basra 🠚 Montreal, 25 February 1959
As with earlier periods, official stamps are scarcely seen on cover — curiously so, compared with how common they are off of it. The purple handstamp at top reads “Iraqi Republic / Official” and at bottom is, presumably, the title and signature of the relevant official of whatever government department sent this.
Postmarks: all on the reverse — Maqil 25 February 1959 (twice), Basra 25 February 1959.
Franking: 82 fils, presumably 28 for postage and the remaining 54 for airmail.
Censorship: Purple circular “Military Censor / Basra Region / 1” handstamp on the reverse.
Baghdad 🠚 New York, 14 November 1959
Interesting to see the railways and the national carrier under the one administration. Noteworthy also to see official mail employing regular postage stamps, rather than official ones — this was fairly commonly done, though why it was done I do not know. I find covers like this uninteresting compared to ones with official stamps, though this one is rather pleasant.
Postmarks: Baghdad sorting office 14 November 1959.
Franking: 5 fils, presumably for the printed matter rate, although this isn’t endorsed as such and is sealed.
Censorship: Purple no. 808 stamp of “Baghdad Type 2”.
And finally…
I recently acquired a small lot of covers, all addressed to the Ercole Marelli company of Milan. Most were sent by the prominent Baghdad car importer Hafidh Al-Kadi, whose signage was a prominent feature of Faisal II Square in those days. Al-Kadi evidently held some kind of “royal appointment”, which he proudly displayed on his envelopes. This all became rather awkward after the revolution. The earlier post-revolution covers, of which the middle cover here is an example, cover up the royal appointment with stamps. On later covers —e.g. the third one here— things become more relaxed, and the appointment is merely scribbled over.
I’ve only bothered to scan the fronts of these — the backs have the typical censor marks, etc.