THE STAMPS OF GREECE

by P. L. Pemberton

Transcriber’s Preface

The following article was transcribed from a monthly series of articles that appeared in the Philatelic Journal of Great Britain starting on January 20, 1911. Although this series covers issues of Greece beyond the large Hermes head printings, only those articles describing these first issues of Greece from 1861 to 1886 are reprinted here.

The reason for presenting this work is to make this important early detailed description of the large Hermes head stamps more readily accessible to present-day students. Mr. Pemberton is recognized as an expert researcher who published many important studies of these issues. Although several corrections have been made to the classification of these issues in the many years since its publication, there is still much useful information that can be acquired from this valuable source.

The primary changes made in this transcription are: 1. replacement of a few English spellings to American usage, such as colour to color, shew to show, etc.; 2. replacement of the illustrations by more legible copies (in color, when available); 3. addition of, or change in, a few section headings to make the text more easily read; 4. addition of sequential numbers for the illustrations; and 5. addition of “transcriber’s notes” in a few instances to explain changes in terminology or to correct some erroneous assumptions of that early period. In general, no other attempt was made to include the many new findings since the almost 100 years from the original publication of this series of articles.

              Louis Basel
                    Stamford, Connecticut
                 September, 2006

INTRODUCTION

Exactly ten years ago I wrote a series of articles on the Stamps of Greece, which appeared in the pages of this journal. I have reason to believe that those notes were much appreciated by the somewhat limited number of collectors who, at that time, specialized in the stamps of the first type of head. There has lately been a large accession to the ranks of Grecophiles and I have often been asked to write another history of the stamps embodying information which was not available ten years ago.

So much has been learned about the stamps during the past decade, both as to the chronology of the printings and the methods by which the printers obtained such varying results from the same plates, that I think the time is now ripe for a further treatise on the subject. It is true that there is still very much to learn, but I believe that this will always be the case, the very nature of the stamps precluding the possibility of a “last word.” This being so, there is no particular advantage in delaying the publication of the results of my further study of the difficult and fascinating problems presented by these stamps.

The bibliography of the subject is a very limited one. By far the most important works—the one which laid down the lines on which Greek stamps will always be studied—was that of Mr. W. Dorning Beckton, published in The Philatelic Record, in 1897. We may safely say that the study of Greek stamps dates from the publication of that work; before then there had been nothing to guide would-be specialists, with the exception of occasional notes in the Philatelic Journals, and one useful, but short article by Lieut. Napier in one of the volumes of The Stamp News Annual published in the early '90's.

Continental collectors were better off, as an important work was published by Mr. Glasewald in 1896. This was a most useful work but did not go so deeply into the subject as did that of Beckton, and was, of course, of no use to the great majority of English collectors, as it was written in German with obsolete spelling.

The only other important treatise in English on Greek stamps is that of Mr. T. W. Morris, which ran through the pages of the Stamp Collector, in 1907. This is much on the same lines as Beckton's and contains little that is new, except a study of the minor flaws which abound in all values. Flaws and scratches are not, in themselves, of great interest, but in the case of Greece they are of some use in helping us to fix approximate dates to some of the printings, as I will explain later on. In this way, therefore, I have been able to get some assistance from Morris's articles.

About eighteen months ago a very ambitious work was published in France by M. Georges Brunel whose treatment of the subject was original though often inaccurate. The classification there set forth involves the acceptation of the theory that there are eight types of the stamps, of which the Paris print is one and the different stages of the Athens prints provide the other seven. I confess I am unable to find eight (and eight only) different states of printing; a very slight acquaintance with the subject will show anyone that the variations are almost infinite and that it is impossible to make all of them agree with one or other of the so-called eight “types.”

I have not yet met anyone who could make head or tail of the arrangement, and though it has been adopted, (most unwisely, I think), by Messrs. Yvert et Tellier in their Catalogue, I think I may safely ignore this system of classification, which, according to its author, disposes of all difficulties in the arrangement of Greek stamps. There is, however, one section of Brunel's work which is excellent, and that is his chapter dealing with the manufacture of the plates and the preparation of the roller used in the actual printing. The information which he gives under this head accounts in a precise and satisfactory manner for the extraordinarily different results obtained at different times from the same printing plates, and proves that those appearances of some of the values, notably the 1 lepton and 20 lepta, which were hitherto regarded as due merely to the cleaning of the plates, in reality owed less to that cause than to the manner of printing.

While I have been able to take much information from the three principal works which I have mentioned, I find myself able to pursue quite an independent line in my classification. I have been studying the stamps for the past fifteen years and have gathered together a large number of dated specimens, from which believe, I am able to compile a list of printings which is more complete and more accurate than any that has hitherto been published. I am also greatly indebted to Mr. Maurice Jonas who has very kindly placed his magnificent collection at my disposal for study.

PREPARATIONS FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF POSTAGE STAMPS TO GREECE

Transcriber's note: The title of this section in the original was “CHAPTER 1”, but, since no subsequent chapter headings were used, the title was changed to the one used here.

Greece was rather backward in organizing its postal service, and it was not until 1853 that a law was passed which provided that letters should be prepaid by affixing adhesive stamps. Another article of the same law prescribed the form that the stamps should take. For some reason or another nothing more was done, and several other enactments were made before the stamps finally appeared in 1861. Before the actual type was agreed upon it is only natural to suppose that there should have been many suggestions as to the subjects that should be depicted upon them. Yet there are no essays extant which we can say for certain belong to this period.

One or two essays are known; some of them are still by no means rare. Though their status is not above suspicion, a description of them will not be out of place. The one most frequently met with is a transverse rectangle (21 x 25mn.), bearing a portrait, in an upright beaded oval, of King George I, with a representation of the Parthenon for a background.

This design is found engraved and also lithographed, in a great variety of colors. The engraved ones are scarce, but the lithographs are quite plentiful. The following is a list of the colors in which I have found these stamps:

It is likely that there are other shades, especially of the engraved set.

Another essay, in an almost identical design, but with the portrait smaller and with figures in the upper corners larger, the whole roughly lithographed on thin white card, is occasionally met with, but it is very much rarer than the one first described. It also exists in many different colors, of which I am unable to give a list.

A set of essays of the same period, comprising three values, 5, 20 and 40 lepta, also bears a portrait of King George I. The designs of this set are upright rectangles (25 x 20 mm.), rather larger than the average stamp.

      

Those I have seen are all lithographs and are not bad examples of the lithographic art, though the portrait, especially on the 5 and 40 lepta, is anything but artistic. These designs were the work of a Milanese artist. They were printed in strips, showing the three values side by side. They are not rare, but are nothing like so plentiful as the first one which I have described.

As in the previous set the stamps were printed on fairly stout but not very well finished white paper, though they are frequently found mounted on card. Again there is a great variety of color. Sets may be found in each of the following, and probably in other, shades:

Also on white card printed in gold.

These essays may have been submitted to the Greek Government before the issue of stamps in 1861, but from the fact that they were not known to collectors until 1864, when they were chronicled in The Stamp Collectors' Magazine, it is more likely that they were submitted after the issue of stamps in the vain hope that they would find more favor in the eyes of the Greeks than the beautiful design which was already is use. There is another possibility, namely, that they were made for collectors! In the 60's all kinds of essays were eagerly sought after by most collectors and many undoubtedly bogus sets, purporting to be genuine essays of various countries were put on the market and duly exposed. It is true that the authenticity of these essays was never seriously questioned, but a letter signed “No Essays" published in the Stamp Collectors' Magazine for December, 1864, contained the following passage:—' I am informed by Mr. Mavrogordato, most probably of the Athens post office, that the so-called Greek essays have never been seen in Greece, that they have not been suggested, and that it is not the intention of the authorities to issue other stamps than those in use at the present time." This is not conclusive evidence, of course, and whether the essays were submitted or not to the Greek Government, their age entitles them to a certain amount of attention from specialists, if only as curiosities.

The mention of Mr. Mavrogordato in the letter which I have quoted above is interesting, as a fine collection of Greek stamps formed by a gentleman of the same name, living at Odessa, was bought by Mr. Jonas several years ago, and this Mr. Mavrogordato was also supposed to have had some connection with the Greek Post Office. Possibly he was the same, or at least a relative of the one mentioned in the old Stamp Collectors' Magazine — at any rate his collection included a fine lot of these essays, as well as several specimens of an essay which are undoubtedly French. This is the well-known Andrieu design, representing a head of Minerva to left in a pearled oval, with French emblems—the cock, scales. etc., in the angles. The size of these labels (38mm. square) shows that they were never intended for postage stamps, but they may have been submitted to the Greek authorities as samples of color; we know from M. Arthur Maury's book on French stamps that they were submitted to the French Government for that purpose. Finding them in a specialized collection, formed by one who held an official position in the Greek Post-office, makes it quite feasible to suppose that they were sent to Athens for the same purpose. They are printed in blue of the same tint as the 20 lepta Paris print, but in various shades—from pale to deep. One of them is obliterated with a lozenge-shaped impression formed of dots, with a number in the center.

The Stamp Collectors' Magazine for 1865 informs its readers that a new stamp for Prince George of Greece was being prepared at Munich. Needless to say, no such stamp was ever issued, nor do I know of any essay which might have been prepared there. Mr.Glasewald however, describes, on the authority of Dr. Moschkau, an essay which I have never seen, under the date 1866, This is said to be larger than the officially issued stamps, with a numeral in the center, no value expressed, with the abbreviated equivalent in Greek of the words “Greek Postage” (as it appears at the top of the issued stamps) on all four sides.

I know of no other designs which have any pretensions to be styled Greek essays. Proofs, color trials, and unissued stamps are numerous; I shall refer to them under their respective issues.

The official decrees which 1 referred to in the last chapter were not acted upon at once, and more than six years elapsed between the first reference to adhesives stamps and their issue on Oct. 1, 1861. During the intervening period several laws relating to the issue of the stamps, and the attendant postal reforms, were passed. Translations of' some of these were published by Mr. Beckton, in his article to which I have already referred. These decrees are somewhat lengthy; I will therefore content myself with extracting a few of the clauses which are of special interest.

The first clause of the law passed on May 24th, 1860, prescribed the rates of postage as follows:

All inland letters weighing up to 15 grams will be charged 20 lepta; if up to 30 grams, 40 lepta; if up to 60 grams, 60 lepta; and if up to 100 grams, 80 lepta.

Any letter weighing above 100 grams will be charged 80 lepta for every 100 grams or fraction of it.

Letters for delivery in the same town, viz., local letters, are to be charged half of the above charges.

Registered letters to be charged double.

Other clauses relating to postal rates are as follows:

Patterns, when posted in unsealed wrappers, are charged half rate of the letters.

Newspapers and periodicals, in loose wrappers covering not more than the third, are charged 1 lepton, if weighing 30 grams or less: 2 lepta, if weighing up to 50 grams, and so on, viz., 1 lepton for every 20 grams. But if weighing above 200 grams they are charged 10 lepta for every 100 or part thereof.

Circulars, price lists, music, etc., when posted in loose wrappers, and weighing not more than 10 grams. are charged 4 lepta; if not exceeding 15 grams, 6 lepta, and so on; viz., 2 lepta for every 5 grams or fraction thereof; but if the packet weighs above 50 grams, then the charge is 20 lepta for every 50 grams or part thereof.

Books are charged at the rate of 10 lepta for every 100 grams or part thereof.

Foreign letters are charged 20 lepta if their weight does not exceed 15 grams.

A consideration of these charges will show that the 5 lepta stamp would very seldom be required by itself, as the rates for letters were 20 lepta as a minimum, and additional 20's for heavier letters; for patterns the rates were 10 lepta and multiples of 10; and for circulars, price lists, etc., 4 lepta and multiples of 4. Only for newspapers weighing between 90 and 110 grams could the 5 lepta be used by itself, but no doubt it was used in fairly large quantities in combination with other values. It is evident, however, that some modification of these rules was made, as the 5 lepta is frequently found on entires used in conjunction with other higher values.

By a decree of August 24th, 1860, the colors of the postage stamps were fixed as follows:

By an earlier decree (dated June 10th, 1860) the Greek Government had decided that the stamps should bear a portrait of Hermes—a very happy choice of a subject. Hermes (better known to us as Mercury) was the son of Zeus (Jupiter) and Maia, and is represented in the Greek mythology as the messenger of the gods; his claims to representation on a postage stamp do not end here, however, as he was also a titulary god of handicrafts, sports and learning. The advantages which have accrued to all handicrafts from cheap postage and efficient postal arrangements are patent to all, nor is the effect in the spread of knowledge any less apparent

THE PLATES

This device having been decided upon, the work of engraving the die was entrusted to M. Albert Barre, who had just succeeded his father as principal engraver at the French mint, and who, at a later date, designed the laureated issue of France which was issued. in 1863. The original die was engraved on steel. The head in its pearled circle was engraved first and some proofs of this were taken; one, at least, of these proofs is still extant—a very good illustration of it appears in Schroeder's book on essays. This having been approved the frame was added and the design completed, with the exception of the numerals of value, spaces for which were left blank.

From this original die the plates for all values were made, of that there can be no doubt, but opinions differ as to how the plates were constructed.

We know that these were not constructed by M. Hulot who made the plates for the French stamps. Mr. Beckton possesses a strip of three of the 20 lepta, Paris print, from the bottom of a sheet and showing an abnormally wide margin, at the foot of which is the inscription "Typographie Ernest Meyer, Rue de Verneuil, 22 A Paris," This does away with the contention that because the plates were made in Paris and the die engraved by H. A. Barre, the same method of constructing the plates must necessarily have been employed for them as for the French stamps. M. E. Meyer's process evidently differed in some respects from that of M. Hulot, as a study of the stamps will show.

It will be as well if I now outline the usual method employed in making electrotype plates. The original die is engraved, in relief, on steel or copper. Moulds or impressions are taken from this in some soft metal or other substance. For the first French stamps these impressions were taken in gutta percha (according to Maury) or lead (according to Westoby). In outer countries and at other times wax, plaster of Paris, and even type-metal have been used. A sufficient number of casts are made to complete a plate of the required size. In this case there were 150 impressions, arranged in fifteen rows of ten. The casts are arranged and clamped together in the form that the plate is to take, and a thin coating of copper is deposited all over the surface of the impressions by the electric process. When the copper coating is thick enough the moulds are removed, the copper, with its exact reproductions of the engraving of the die, is backed with type metal, and the printing plate is complete.

Before being put to press the surface of the plate is very carefully examined and any small imperfections may be put right. The casts, especially when taken in plaster of Paris, may show lines which run into one another where not intended by the artist; these can be put right on the plate itself by the skilful use of the burin or engraver's tool. White patches, or parts of the impression which have failed to show up in relief on the casts, and which would consequently produce defective impressions, can be filled in with metal which, when hardened, can be engraved upon to finish off the design. This process is laborious and difficult, so rather than resort to it a fresh cast is taken as a rule.

If, as in the case of the early French and Greek stamps, the original die has to serve for several values, differing only in the expression of the numerals, the space or spaces where these are to appear are left blank and the design is impressed on a block of steel, of which the surface has been softened. This is termed a secondary die and on this the numerals of the required value are engraved. It follows that an electrotype plate made from the secondary die would show no variations in the shape or position of the numerals. The French stamps printed by M Hulot show, by the uniformity of the numerals, that the plates were constructed in this way. On the other hand, a careful examination of a sheet or large block of any Greek stamps printed from the plates of 1861 will reveal minute differences is the shape and the position of the figures denoting the value. The letters ΛΕΠΤ are identical on every stamp and were evidently on the original die, but the numerals certainly vary, and this proves that the plate could not have been made from one, or even from several secondary dies on which the numerals were engraved. The two new values, 30 and 60 lepta, which were issued in 1876, do not show this peculiarity, and the plates for them were undoubtedly made in the ordinary way.

Mr. Beckton says: “The numerals of value were inserted separately on each of the 150 electros for each plate.” There can be no reasonable doubt that this statement is correct, but how it was done is a mystery, for, as I have already explained, it is only with the greatest labor and difficulty that any considerable alterations can be effected on the extremely delicate copper surface of an electrotype. It is true that the figures which appear uncolored in the prints, must therefore be in recess on the electros, and that it is not a question of adding to, but of cutting into the copper surface. This would be possible if the layer of copper was of sufficient thickness to bear the pressure of the engraver’s tool.

However this may be, the figures are there and, though they vary, they were reproduced with remarkable accuracy. But for the undoubted differences in the position of the numerals, both longitudinally and latitudinally, it might be possible to believe that the variations in there shapes could have been caused by the spreading of the ink used for the printing, the wearing of the plates, the clogging of the interstices with dirt, or by faulty impressions of the original casts from the mother die. In short I should be prepared to believe that there was a die, cut in relief, for each value which was transferred to each cliché, either before or after the application of the copper bath; but as I am unable to say whether such as operation is possible, I do no more than suggest it and will leave the solution to those more competent to speak on the subject.

A peculiarity in the stamps printed from the plates of 1861, and one which also points to a different method of making the plates, as compared with the French stamps and the 30 and 60 lepta of 1876, has been pointed out to me by Mr. R. W. Wilkinson. This is the varying width of the uncolored space between the outer surrounding line of the stamp and the other part of the frame. Sometimes this variation is very marked and is found in different stamps on the same sheet. I think this was probably caused by different degrees of shrinking of the casts in the process of making the electros. This peculiarity is not found on the 30 and 60 lepta.

METHOD OF PRINTING

I will now crave the attention of my readers to a somewhat lengthy account of the manner in which the stamps of the Paris and some of the succeeding issues were printed. It is a most important point, and proves that practically everything in the appearance of some of the poor printings of Athens, which we have hitherto believed due to wearing of the plates, was caused by careless printing.

The first clue came from M. Maury in his Histoire des Timbres-Post Francais published in 1907. In that work he described the extraordinary preparations made by M. Hulot for getting the best possible results from his plates in printing the early stamps of France. There can be no doubt that the Paris prints of Greece were produced in the same manner. The printing press was an ordinary hand press, something on the principle of the familiar office copying-press, in which the plate descended vertically on to the sheet which was to receive the impression, though the movement of the forme containing the plate was regulated by levers instead of a screw. The sheet to he printed was laid upon what is technically called a “blanket”, which was generally a cloth made of swan-skin; this made a more even backing for the sheet when the press descended than a hard surface would have done. We owe the numerous curiosities of printing with which Greek specialists are so familiar, almost entirely to the varying character of the “blanket”.

It is easy to understand that if the “blanket” is of the same thickness throughout it will yield an equal pressure to every portion of the printing plate, but that if it could be so cunningly prepared that there was more resistance to the plate in those portions of the design which are to appear solid or heavy in the printing, and less in those places where the lines of the engraving are fine and delicate, the result would be more effective than would otherwise be possible.

In order to produce this result several sheets of stamps were printed. From some of these sheets the whole of the face and neck, the petasus or cap, and the spandrels were cut away with scissors, from every stamp. These are the portions of the design which are not required to be heavily printed. On other sheets only portions of the spandrels and parts of the face were removed, while on others, again, nothing was cut away, but some of the lines which were to appear very fine in the printing were scraped with a knife to produce a slight thinning. These several sheets thus prepared were then pasted firmly one on the top of the other, and formed the blanket, or bed on which the sheets were placed to receive the impression from the plate. Great care had to be taken in placing this specially prepared backing, so that it exactly fitted the printing plate when it descended. By this means the pressure was so regulated that there was very little resistance in the more delicate portions of the design, and the lines of shading on the cheek and neck, and in the spandrels, presented that appearance which is characteristic of the Paris prints, while the background, the frame, and the outlines of the petasus appeared dense and solid. This process is called by M. Maury the mise en train and I shall refer to it frequently later on by this convenient name. The cutting of the sheets in the mise en train is termed découpage, another convenient term which does not appear to have its exact counterpart in English.

M. Brunel, in his recently-published book, also gives an account of this process, as applied to Greek stamps. This differs in no essential detail from Maury's, except that he describes the printing-press as being of a more modern type, in which the plate lies face upwards while the découpage, with the unprinted sheet over it, is fixed on a cylinder or roller, which is rolled over the plate to receive the impression—the effect being the same as with the other form of press.

When the découpage was not exactly in position the effect on the printing is a cloudy appearance in the background following the outline of the head, neck and petasus, on one side or the other, as the case may be. This can occasionally, though rarely, be traced in Paris prints, while in early Athens impressions, when the découpage was neither so carefully made nor so skillfully applied, this cloudy appearance is sometimes so pronounced as to look like a second outline of the face, if the découpage was shifted to the right, or of the back of the head and neck if shifted to the left.

It is well known that Parisian workmen were sent to Athens with the plates, printing accessories, etc., after a supply of all values had been printed in Paris. During their stay in the Greek capital they instructed the Greek printers in the niceties of workmanship required to get good results, and there is no doubt that the découpage was employed, but it is evident that, once left to themselves, the Greeks neglected many of the hints given to them. An examination of the stamps shows that the découpage gradually fell into disuse until 1870, when it was revived with startling results.

In order to demonstrate more clearly how the découpage, which I described above, was done, I have prepared three stamps, showing how portions of the design were cut away, and illustrate them herewith.

Every stamp in one sheet would be cut in a manner similar to that shown in the first illustration. All the stamps on another sheet would be treated as in the second, which, it will be observed, is not quite so much cut up. On a third sheet all the stamp would merely be scraped where shading occurs, and in the spandrels. These three sheets, probably with the addition of two or three others treated in a similar way, were pasted exactly on the top of one another, thus forming the completed découpage, or "overlay” as I am told it is termed by English printers.

THE PARIS PRINTS

I can find no justification for Mr. Beckton's theory that the stamps were printed by M. Hulot, though the plates were made by M. E. Meyer. The evidence points rather to the printing having been carried out by M. Barre. M. Maury in his Histoire des Timbre-Poste Francais says that M. Barre was charged, in 1858, with the engraving of the Greek stamps, and also with the organization of all the machinery necessary for printing them. At about the same time M. Barre offered to print the French stamps at a lower price than that charged by M. Hulot. It is therefore evident that he was in a position to turn out the first issue of Greece. Besides this, we know that M. Hulot kept a tight hand on all his proofs and trial sheets, and that very little of this nature came on the Market until after his decease in 1892. Now M. Pierre Mahé has told us, in his delightful reminiscences published in the Monthly Journal, 1907, that he purchased proof sheets of all values of the Paris prints of Greece from a waste paper merchant in 1868, at a time when they could have been legitimately used in Greece. He further tells us that, at another time, he bought a large parcel of printer’s trial and waste sheets from another rubbish dealer. It is hardly credible that these were thrown away by Hulot.

The actual issue first took place in Athens, on October 1st, 1861. With reference to dates, it must be borne in mind that the Greek calendar is 12 days behind the Augustine, and that according to our reckoning this date should be October 13th; the same rule must be applied to all other dates which I give in the course of these articles.

The principal feature of the Paris prints, and the one which distinguishes these stamps from all subsequent issues, is the very fine printing. The lines of shading on the cheek are dotted at the ends, the lines at the back of the neck are fine but distinct, and do not run into one another. All the details of the hair, the cap and the ear appear delicately, but firmly, outlined. The wavy lines and minute dots with which the spandrels are ornamented are lightly printed. The background behind the head is quite solid, and does not show the white specks which can generally be seen in later printings. This artistic result was due entirely to the great care exercised in the mise en train and in the printing. We have evidence, in the many and various proofs which still exist, of the successive trials which were made with different forms of découpage. In some of the proofs, or trial printings, the shading on the cheek is as heavy as in many Athens prints – in others it is much too indistinct. In some cases, again, the spandrels appear almost white, due to too much cutting away in the découpage. We can well imagine, with this evidence before us, with what infinite care and skill the various sheets forming the découpage were altered and replaced until, after many trials, satisfactory impressions were obtained. I cannot help thinking that, in the original die, the artist made the lines of shading on the cheek too much the same thickness throughout their length, otherwise so much ingenuity would not have been necessary to obtain good results.

The stamps were printed on well-finished paper which in the case of the 2, 5 and 20 lepta is strongly tinted in the color of the impressions. The 1 and 80 lepta are also tinted in the color of the impressions but much more slightly, The 40 lepta is printed in violet on blue paper with a rather greenish tinge. The 10 lepta is in vermilion on blue paper which has a more distinctly greenish tint.

This last mentioned stamp differs from the other values of the set in having numerals of value printed on the back, in the color of the stamp. These numerals are double lined and are 8 mm. in height. Normally the heavily shaded sides of the numerals are to the right, but there is a variety in which the figure 1 is inverted and another in which the 0 is inverted. One of each of these errors must occur on each sheet, but in my experience the one with the inverted 0 is more frequently met with than the other, and it is possible that there more than one of these to a sheet.

The idea of printing figures on the backs of the stamps originated with M. Albert Barre who, in 1861, submitted to the French Government an essay of a stamp of the 1849 type of France, with the numerals “10” on the back as they appear on the Greek 10 lepta Paris print. The idea was not acted upon in France, and no doubt the 10 lepta value of the first issue of Greece was so treated by way of a trial. The utility of the figures was probably intended to be two-fold. In the first place a set of stamps in which the indication of value in the design was so minute might possibly lead to mistakes, although there were distinctive colors for all values. The numerals appearing boldly at the back of each stamp would be of assistance. In the second place the numerals were thought to be an additional safeguard, slight though it might be, against forgery.

As everybody knows, in the printings made at Athens, up to the year 1879, the numerals at back were employed on all values except the 1 and 2 lepta.

According to Mr. Beckton there were two printings of all values of the Paris issue, except the 10 lepta, the second printing differing from the first in the shades, the gum and the heaviness of the printing. I cannot understand why a second printing would be necessary, or when it could have been made, considering that the plates were delivered in Athens together with the stamps, but be this as it may there are certainly marked shades, in some of the values, which go to support the theory. The most prominent of these is the 2 lepta, in which the two shades amount almost to different colors. These two shades are generally called olive-bistre and ochre-bistre respectively, the second being deeper and warmer in tone than the first. These two stamps must, of course, be from different printings and in their appearance typify the differences found, much less markedly, in the other values. The olive-bistre, which is generally accepted to be the first printing, is on yellowish paper, very highly surfaced, and the printing is clear and distinct. The gum is fairly thick and colorless, but it cannot always be described as smooth, though Mr. Beckton ascribes this characteristic to all the stamps of the first printing. The ochre-bistre is on a deeper-toned paper, almost buff, and not so highly surfaced as the last. The impression, probably owing to the unsuitable nature of the color, is not so clear. The gum is brownish and thickly applied, and is always very much cracked.

Other values which show pronounced differences of shade and gum are the 1 lepton, 20 lepta and 80 lepta. There are, however, so many graduations of shade in all these values, which may be found in all shades from light to dark, that it is impossible to divide them into two printings as in the case of the 2 lepta. Nor can I find any peculiarity of printing which is constant in any one shade of the 80 lepta, which generally have very light shading on the cheek. On the other hand the thick crackly gum, which is another of Mr. Beckton’s guides to the second printings, may be found on some specimens of all these three values. The 80 lepta, with thick, crackly gum, is fairly common; in this case the gum appears yellowish. On the 20 lepta, the thick gum is very rarely found, and on this value it is only slightly yellowish. The 1 lepton with thick gum is very rare indeed, when found the gum is quite brown. I know a block of four of this variety which is printed in deep brown, whereas Mr. Beckton says that the second printing of the 1 lepton is “reddish chocolate, varying in shade to very light.”

In the case of the 5 lepta, I have not seen any specimen with gum as thick as that I have just described. There is, however, a scarce shade of this value, with more yellow in its composition than the ordinary one, on which the gum is fairly thick.

How far the thick yellowish gum might affect the shade of the stamp it would be hard to say, but I certainly think its presence always makes the color appear darker. When the gum is so brown (which sometimes happens) as to stain the paper, it is very difficult to imagine what the color of the stamp would appear like if the paper were white.

While I agree with Mr. Beckton that two different kinds of gum were used for most values of the Paris prints, I am not convinced that there were two printings, in the ordinary meaning of the word, of any value save the 2 lepta. Differences of color might easily occur in the same printing if sufficient ink is not prepared beforehand, and another mixing is required, while the gumming might be done at different times.

In any case, even if there were two printings, they were almost certainly delivered in Athens at the same time and issued indiscriminately. The important point for the collector is to know what varieties may be found. Below I append a synopsis of this issue, in which I have described the shades to the best of my ability.

The paper which was used in Paris is of very good texture. It varies from medium to rather thin, but is always hard, with a highly finished surface. I have lately discovered a very remarkable variety of the 20 lepta. This is on extremely thin paper, through which every slight detail of the impression shows through the back. It is as thin as, and even more transparent than, any of the same value issued after 1870. I found it on the entire original letter sheet, to which it still partly adheres. It was used at Levadia on April 24^th, 1862. There is no doubt that the stamp is a Paris print, though the hues of shading on the cheek are heavier and the color rather deeper than is usual in this issue. The paper is so unlike that of any other Paris print that I feel certain it must come from one of the trial sheets which must have been included, probably by accident, among the sheet sent to Athens.

I must now briefly refer to the 10 lepta, Paris print without figures on the back. This stamp is always more heavily printed than those with the figures, and the color is a deeper vermilion, without any orange tint. From the fact that no genuinely used copy has ever been found, there can be no doubt it was never issued. On the other hand, it is always well printed and gummed, and bears no resemblance to the printer’s remainders, which were never gummed. We may safely assume, therefore, that it was intended for use and was probably sent to Athens. Why it was never used is a mystery which probably will never be known, and concerning which it is idle to speculate.

PROOFS AND TRIAL PRINTINGS OF THE PARIS ISSUE

As I have already mentioned, M. Pièrre Mahé, the well-known French dealer, bought, in 1868, an entire sheet of each of the seven values of the Paris prints from a waste paper dealer. He describes this transaction in a very entertaining manner in the Monthly Journal, vol. 17, page 100. The sheets were not gummed, but were in the most perfect condition except that some of the stamps were creased where they had been folded. On tabs attached to the corners of the sheets were particulars of the numbers printed; they were evidently sheets which had been kept by the printers for reference. Unfortunately, M. Mahé did not keep these valuable records. It was a good stroke of business for the dealer as he paid 180 francs for the lot and afterwards retailed them at 30 francs per set! These stamps were, we are told, exactly like the issued ones except for the absence of gum.

In a later chapter of his souvenirs (M. J. xvii, p. 194) M. Mahé describes how he bought in a similar way, a bundle of trial and waste sheets. I give the following account of this lot in his own words:

“One portion consisted of printer’s trial impressions, printed on one side or on both sides, sometimes with the same value and in the same color, sometimes with the impression in one color on one side and in another color on the other; the other portion, the larger, was composed of real trials of color; there was a great collection of these, some in the color in which the stamp was issued, some in the color of some other value, and on many varieties of paper. I recollect, among them, the 5 lepta printed in black upon thin green paper, and 20 lepta in black on white, and there were numerous other varieties, the details of which I have forgotten.”

“All having been properly sorted out, I found that it was possible to make up a certain number of sets containing thirty-four distinct varieties, the price of which I fixed at 80 francs the set. This was not an extravagant price, for some of these essays, of which I had only a few copies, were well worth 10 francs apiece. After these came sets of a smaller number of varieties, which I priced at 30 to 40 francs, and the remainder, the commoner varieties, which existed in considerable quantities, went off at 1, 2 and 3 francs each.”

In Mr. Jonas’ collection, which I have purchased since I started writing these articles, there is a fine series of these trial impressions and color trials. They are interesting, for they include all gradations of printing, from rough and indistinct, to the finest possible results. In some, especially noticeable in the color trials of the 1 lepton, the spandrels are much too pale, a defect which was corrected in later trials by an alteration to the découpage. In the 20 lepta printed in the medium blue shade, the lines on the cheek are very short, producing an effect very similar to that presented by the Athens-printed 1 lepton of 1870 (Gibbons No. 49). Others of the 1 lepton and 20 lepta show in an exaggerated form the hazy double impression of the head or profile which was so obviously caused by a displacement of the découpage.

As in my opinion some of these trials or essays should be included in every specialized collection of Greek stamps, I think a list of the varieties which I have before me as I write will prove of interest. It is possible that other varieties exist, but it will be seen that, by the inclusion of shades they might represent the full set of thirty five varieties which M. Mahé mentions.

It will be noticed that I do not include the variety mentioned by M. Mahé namely, 5 lepta black on green. This is a variety which I have not seen, and I think it likely that M. Mahé’s recollection was at fault and that it was the 1 lepton black on green to which he intended to refer.

Some of the varieties which I mention above I have not seen printed on one side of the paper only – but probably some of these exist. In all, my list includes 27 varieties, and these, together with the ordinary printers’ trial impressions, more or less in the exact colors of the issued stamps, would just about complete a set of thirty-five. It is a curious fact that no essays, except in the correct colors, are known of the 2, 10 and 80 lepta value.

THE FIRST ATHENS PRINT

The Parisian printers are said to have sent the plates to Athens in charge of one or two experienced workmen, together with supplies of paper and ink, also formes for printing figures on the backs of all but the two lowest values. We should therefore expect the first Athens prints to have been very good impressions. This expectation was only partially fulfilled. So far as the 1, 40 and 80 lepta were concerned the printing left little to be desired, though it was not so good as that done in Paris. On the other hand the 2 lepta, 10 lepta and 20 lepta were very rough indeed when compared with the Paris prints, and nothing like so fine as some of the Athens prints which followed them. The printing of the first Athens 5 lepta varies very much indeed, sometimes it is quite rough and at others very fine, between these two classes, being neither poor nor very good.

These variations are, doubtless, due to experiments in the mise en train. Owing to the extreme care required for printing by the aid of a well prepared découpage, the Greeks were probably first instructed in the use of a “blanket” (which I have already described above, either with or without the addition of some modified form of découpage. By this means the printing is easier than when a paper backing is used alone, but the result is never so good. The use of a “blanket” can sometimes be detected by an indefinite quadrillé appearance in the background of the circle containing the head, which, in well printed specimens, should appear quite solid. The first Athens 20 lepta, both with and without figures of value at the back sometimes shows this quadrillé background, while the whole appearance of the impression is consistent with this method of printing. The 2 lepta and 10 lepta first Athens also appear to have been printed with the aid of a “blanket” though I have not seen any copies of either of these values which show the so-called quadrillé background. The 1, 40 and 80 lepta were undoubtedly printed with the hard backing or paper découpage, as they have the same characteristics as the Paris prints, though without the finish of the latter. With regard to the early printings of the 5 lepta, I believe that some were produced by one process and some by the other.

The figures at the back of the 5, 10, 20, 40 and 80 lepta were much smaller than those on the 10 lepta Paris print, measuring 6¼ to 6½ mm. They were apparently set up from type and it is evident that in later issues there were frequent new settings for all values. The same form of type, however, was used for all printings until the final abolition of the system in 1879, with the single exception of the 5 for which a differently shaped figure was used after the first Athens print.

Before proceeding to describe each value of the first Athens prints, I will now refer to certain characteristics which are common to all, and which should be of great assistance to any readers in identifying their stamps. In the first place there is that peculiarity to which I have already referred more than once, namely, the mottled appearance of the background immediately adjoining the entire outline of the back of the head and neck or the outline of the profile and front of the neck. This hazy appearance is never found on both sides of the head. If a stamp shows it at the back of the head, the profile will be found to be quite sharply defined, and vice versa. Fully 50% of the first Athens prints do not show this peculiarity at all, and some only show it slightly, but when found it is a sure indication of an early print. It is found most often on the 5, 10 and 20 lepta, and it presence on the two latter values proves that the découpage was sometimes, if not always, used together with the “blanket.” On the 80 lepta first Athens the hazy outline occurs but rarely, thus evidencing the extreme care employed in printing this value.

The paper used for these early Athens printings was good but not so highly finished as that used in Paris. Most of the 10 and 20 lepta of this period were printed on paper which is yellowish on the face and greenish-blue and bluish, respectively, at back. Sometimes one finds the 5 lepta showing the same peculiarity though never to such a marked degree.

The 20 lepta first Athens is known used in Dec., 1860, and all the other values appeared, presumably, early in 1862, though I have never seen either the 1 or 2 lepta used on entire with dated postmark, so the date of issue can only be presumed to have been the same as for the other values.

With one exception, none of the Athens prints seem to have been actually required at such an early date, as the Paris prints are constantly found used in 1862-63 and even as late as 1866. The exception is the 20 lepta, the Paris prints of which appear to have been used up, in all the principal towns at least, during the first three months of the issue.

The 5, 10 and 80 lepta of the Paris prints seem to have lasted the longest.

The following is a descriptive list of the first Athens prints.

1 lepton, deep chocolate-brown on cream

This stamp is the exact shade of the Paris prints, from which it can only be distinguished by the shading on the cheek, which is long and continuous instead of being broken up into dots and dashes. This stamp is scarce, especially used.

2 lepta, brown on straw.

The printing of this stamp is similar to that of the 20 lepta described lower down. The spandrels are rather pale, and the shading on the face is light and slightly broken into dashes, but the general appearance of the stamp is rather blotchy and indistinct as compared with the printings which followed. The spandrels are very pale and often show small blots of color. The color is the best guide to this printing as it is quite unlike that of any other value, and can be recognized at once when seen, though it is very difficult to describe in words. It is rather dark and is browner in tone than that of the deep shades which were issued in the middle sixties, from which it also differs in not having so much yellow in its composition, In my experience this is one of the rarest of the normal printings of Greece; probably only two or three sheets were printed. I have seen several unused copies, but none used.

5 lepta, green to yellow-green on greenish

This stamp can be identified at once by the figure at the back which is a different shape from that of all later printings. The color is deep and varies considerably in shade, the most difficult to find being those which have a slightly yellowish appearance on the face. The printing also varies very much, some copies being rather rough and indistinct while others are very clear. The lines of shading on the face are generally long, distinct and unbroken. Signs of a misplaced découpage are very common.

There is a prominent variety of this and all succeeding printings of the 5 lepta value, viz.: one in which the lines of shading on the cheek are broken up into dots as in the Paris issue. In clearly printed copies this can be seen with the greatest ease. It is not an accident of printing but occurred on the second stamp in the 5th row on every sheet. The explanation of this is a question at which I cannot attempt to guess.

What is known as the broken circle variety also occurs in this printing (as well as in the Paris) but I regard this merely as a flaw and shall leave it to be treated of in a chapter which I shall devote to such curiosities.

10 lepta, yellow-ochre on greenish-blue.

Unlike the three values which I have just described, the first Athens print of the 10 lepta can only be diagnosed when it exhibits the general characteristics of the early Athens prints in a marked degree, as I have some which I know to be very early, but which are indistinguishable from the later printings of 1862 and 1863.

Unless, therefore, you have a specimen with an unmistakably yellowish-green glow on the face of the stamp, you cannot be sure that you have the real thing. The more pronounced this characteristic is the more estimable is the specimen, especially if the other signs are visible, namely, —blotchy outline at the back or front of the head, light and somewhat indefinite shading on the cheek, spandrels rather indistinct, and clear but lightly printed figures on the back. I have seen an unused copy of this on which the gum is thin and colorless, but very much cracked.

A few copies of this stamp are known without figures at the back. Mr. Beckton mentions this as a separate printing, and that the very first, but owing to its extreme rarity I am inclined to think it as an error.

20 lepta, deep blue on grayish-blue, without figures at the back.

This stamp, like the first Athens 2 and 10 lepta, is a rough looking print, and the general aspect of the impression is also similar to that of those two values. The color is dark, dull Prussian blue and varies considerably in shade. Many collectors mistake the deep shades of the Paris print for this rarity, but the color is much duller and deeper, and the lines on the cheek much coarser, than in the most heavily printed of the Paris prints. This printing was undoubtedly the first of any value at Athens, and was no doubt made before the figures of value for printing on the backs of the sheets were set up. In this connection, I have recently come across a very remarkable curiosity which, in my opinion, points to the possibility to there having been some intention on the part of the printers of using figures of the same size as those employed on the Paris-printed 10 lepta. This curiosity is a 20 lepta of this printing, showing on the back a very distinct set off of the figures “20”, measuring nearly 9mm in height. These figures are very clear, and appear on the right lower corner of the back of the stamp, so low down that the lower portions of them are cut away; in the right upper corner there is the faintest possible indication of the lower portions of other numerals, exactly in the position where one would expect to find them.

I think it extremely unlikely that anybody has faked this stamp willfully, and so risked spoiling a very rare stamp for no apparent reason; it is quite feasible to suppose that the printers were experimenting, at about that time, with figures of a large size for printing at the backs of the sheets and that, a proof having just been struck from this type, a sheet of the 20 lepta was put over it before it was dry, thus accounting for the set off. This, of course, is only supposition, and the set off may be due to some purely unphilatelic accident.

The paper on which the 20 lepta, without figures at back, is printed, varies somewhat in thickness, but is normally rather thin, showing the impression through on the back.

Properly speaking, of course, there can only be one first Athens printing, but the three printings which I am about to describe must have followed the one without figures at the back so closely, that I will stretch the meaning of the word “first” and deal with the stamps here, especially as they are so treated in most catalogues.

20 lepta, deep to very deep Prussian blue, on grayish-blue paper, with figures at back.

The stamps of this printing are sometimes exactly like those of the last, but with the addition of the figures at the back; more often, however, the color is very much deeper and brighter. Though great care was apparently taken in the printing, as is evidenced by the découpage, which is often strongly marked in this printing, the impression is not good. The lines of shading on the cheek are light but blotchy and the spandrels are very pale, giving that appearance which has generally termed “worn spandrels.” The background sometimes shows a faint quadrillé appearance due to the material used in the backing during printing. Stamps of this printing, especially those specimens printed in very deep blue, are decidedly scarce. This printing was probably made in November, 1861. This and all succeeding printings have figures of value at the back.

20 lepta, deep Prussian-blue, on gray-blue paper, with a yellowish surface.

This stamp is almost identical with the last, but the paper is stouter and is yellowish on the face. I have already referred to this peculiarity of the paper, for the cause of which I have never heard a satisfactory explanation. Sometimes the yellowish is very faint. The color is deep but never quite so intense as in the last printing.

20 lepta, steel-blue, on gray-blue paper with a yellowish surface.

The color of this printing is not nearly so deep as the last. I adhere to the color name by which it is generally known – steel-blue, as it is a good descriptive term, though I think it is really a Prussian-blue. Being a lighter shade than in the last printing, the yellowish surface of the paper gives it a different appearance.

It is evident that the method of printing was altered for this issue. The spandrels are not so pale and the lines of shading on the cheek and neck are clear and distinct. Altogether the impression is more satisfactory in most specimens, though signs of the découpage are generally discernible. This printing is much commoner than any others of this value which I have yet described; specimens with a very decidedly yellowish surface are the ones to look for – in the majority of cases the yellow is not very distinct.

This printing was made in Dec., 1861, but dated copies are found up to the end of 1862.

40 lepta, clear violet on pale blue.

The first Athens print of this value, like those of the 1 and 80 lepta, is the best printed of all the Athens prints, differing in this respect from the first Athens prints of all the other values. In color it is a little brighter than the brightest shades of the Paris issue, from which, indeed, it only differs in having figures of value at the back and continuous, instead of dotted, lines of shading on the cheek. In some very rare specimens some of the upper lines are slightly broken, but this is very unusual. The best test for identifying this stamp is – if at the first glance you think it is a Paris print, and a closer inspection proves you are mistaken, you may be pretty sure that you have the real first Athens (and should be well satisfied, as it is decidedly rare in its best form). It is probable that some Paris paper was used for this printing, as it has a distinctly polished surface.

80 lepta, rose-carmine. Pale to deep, on cream tinted paper. Vermilion figures at back.

Well printed, with clear lines of shading on the cheek, this stamp is not quite so fine as the first Athens 1 and 40 lepta, but is a little better than the best printed of the 5 leptas. Fortunately, there is no difficulty in identifying it, as the figures of value at the back are printed in vermilion, whereas all subsequent printings of this value have the figures in carmine. The color varies very much. Normally, it is a rich rose-carmine, but it runs from a pale tint of the same to an intense deep shade. There is also another shade which is different in tint. It is a fairly deep rose with a slight tinge of claret in it, and is altogether duller than the rose-carmine.

ATHENS PRINTS, 1862-68

Having finished with the actual first printings from the plates, which took place late in 1861 for some values, and early in 1862 for others, I will now describe the printings which immediately followed, grouping these with those which succeeded them up to the year 1868. This I find to be a convenient way of grouping the stamps as there is evidence that about the end of the year 1867 or the beginning of 1868 the plates were cleaned and a more careful method of printing resumed, after some very indifferent work in the years 1865 to 1867. The stamps of these six years therefore fall naturally into one group. Their general characteristics are as follows:—

Printing. Very good and clear in the early years, moderate in very bad form from 1865-67. The lines of shading on the cheek are clearer and thinner even in the badly printed copies, than in the worst prints of the 70’s. The plates were not badly worn, as is proved by the good printings that followed, consequently the bad printings of this period were due entirely to dirty plates and careless printing. After 1870 the plates undoubtedly wore a little, the whole impression having a “flatter” appearance, which can perhaps only be recognized after much experience. One peculiarity which is often to be found in the stamps of this group is that the design is more or less bespattered with small blots of color, which can be seen in the spandrels, on the cap, in the margins between the outer and inner frame, and on the circle of pearls. These blots are not found in the printings of 1862-63 but are fairly frequent in those of 1866-67. The 1 lepton and 20 lepta show them the most frequently.

Paper. Speaking generally the paper used for the stamps of this period is fairly thick and of good substance.

Color. The shade of color is often the best, and in some cases the only, sure guide in classifying. I shall endeavor to describe the shades in my detailed descriptions of the printings.

Figures on the back. All values, except the 1 and 2 lepta, have figures of value at the back; in the early printings these figures are lightly printed and the type is rarely broken or blurred, but from 1865 onwards a large percentage of the figures at the back are badly printed, and often the type is more or less defective or with indefinite outlines. It will often be found that the figures at back are not in the same shade of color as the stamp itself. This is accounted for by the fact that the two printings were not always done at the same time. I have given a good deal of attention to this matter in the hope that it might lead to some additional assistance in classifying the printings, but so far I have been unable to get any help from it whatever. The 20 lepta value shows most variations in this respect. There are several well-known errors and many minor varieties of the figures at the back of the stamps of this period, which will be described in their place.

Obliterations. From 1861 to 1883 only two types of postmarks are commonly found on the stamps, The first, which was used for obliterating stamps on prepaid letters, consisted of a lozenge-shaped pattern of dots with a number in the center, this being the postal number of the town. Athens was numbered 1, Piraeus 2, Corinth 5, and so on. The other type of postmark, which is not so frequently found on the stamps of this period, consisted of two circles enclosing the name of the town, above, and its number, in brackets, below. The date is in the center. This postmark was only used, in the early years at any rate, on stamps which were affixed to letters to denote postage unpaid. The prepayment of postage was by no means general in Greece at that date and as Postage Due stamps were not introduced until 1875 the ordinary postage stamps were used for the purpose, and these were invariably obliterated with the date stamp of the receiving office. One or two other types of obliteration are known but are extremely scarce. I shall treat of these in a special chapter on postmarks when I have finished with the stamps.

After these general observations I will now proceed to describe the various printings in detail.

1 Lepton

A. 1862. 1 lepton, chocolate-brown on cream.

In color this is very similar to that of the first Athens print, but it is neither so deep nor so rich in tone. The impression is very fine indeed, very nearly as good as the last, from which it differs not only in shade but in the shading on the cheek, the lines of which are finer (though not so distinct) and shorter. The paper is good and well finished.

B. 1862. 1 lepton, chocolate-brown on cream.

This is similar in shade to the last but the lines of shading on the cheek are more like the first Athens. The impression is very clear and good. Paper as last.

C. 1862. 1 lepton, brown on cream.

Impression not quite so good as in B, but still very fine. Color a full brown, varying in shade from medium to fairly deep, but always with less red in it than A and B. Paper as last. Specimens from the vertical margins of the sheets occasionally show vertical ribbing in the paper.

D. Yellowish-brown on cream.

This is the olive-brown of Beckton, who dates it April, 1862. I have been unable to find any used on entire or with dated postmark, but there can be no doubt, from the printing, that it is quite early. The impression is very fine and the spandrels generally appear rather pale. This and all earlier printings of this value sometimes show signs of the découpage out of register. The color is much paler than any so far described and really has very little yellow in it, but in comparison with the others the term yellow-brown will be found fairly descriptive. Paper as last. This printing is decidedly scarce.

E. 1863. 1 lepton, brown on cream.

The stamps of this printing are the same color as C, but the impression is very smudgy. Evidently the plates were not properly wiped. The whole of the design is blurred with smudges and little blots of color, clouding the spandrels and shading on the face. Sometimes this is so to such a degree as to make the stamp look like a very late impression, but the quality of the paper and the shade of color clearly indicate that it belongs to this printing.

F. 1864. 1 lepton, reddish-brown on cream.

The impression is now rather coarser than in the last printing but while the smudges are absent the little spots of color are generally to be seen in different parts of the design. The color varies slightly in shade from medium to rather full, but is never so deep as in some later printings. The paper is still good, but is not so well finished as in earlier printings.

G. 1 lepton, pale purple-brown on cream.

Impression similar to the last, but still coarser. The parts of the design which should be solid color are now flecked with white specks. The little blots of color are not so much in evidence as in the last printing, though many specimens show them. Paper as last.

H. 1 lepton, deep purple-brown on cream.

As last, except that the color is very much deeper.

2 Lepta

A. 2 lepta, pale yellow-brown on yellowish.

Impression very fine, but the color being unsuitable the effect is not so good as in early prints of other values. It is, however, far superior to the first Athens printing of the same value. The paper is good, with a smooth surface.

B. 1862. 2 lepta, bistre-brown on deep cream.

Impression heavier than the last, but still good. The lines of shading on the cheek are frequently somewhat broken, showing dots and dashes, but not to the same extent as in the Paris print. These stamps often show very marked indications of the découpage. The color is something like the lighter shades of the second printing of the Paris issue but is not so reddish. Paper good, with a strong yellowish-cream tint, but not so well finished as the last.

C. 2 lepta, pale bistre-brown on cream.

Impression clear and good, but lines on cheek continuous, except in the best printed specimens. Color lighter than B. Paper as last.

D. 1863. 2 lepta, brownish-bistre on cream.

The characteristic of this printing is that the paper is appreciably thinner than those which preceded it. The impression, though not so good as the last, has a smoother look, probably due to the glossy surface of the paper. The color is a trifle warmer than the last, with not quite such a yellowish tone.

E. 1863. 2 lepta, dull bistre on cream.

The color of this printing is very distinctive. It is duller and grayer than any others of this period, and resembles some of the 2 lepta issued in the 70’s. The impression is good, but has a flatter and slightly more mottled appearance than the earlier prints. The paper is good and rather stouter than in D, but is not so well finished.

F. 1865. 2 lepta, deep bistre-brown on cream.

Impression heavy, lines of shading less clear, spandrels rough and rather blotchy. The color, which is very deep, is the best guide to this printing. Paper thin, as in D, but not so well finished.

5 Lepta

A. 1862. 5 lepta, bright yellow-green on greenish.

This stamp and all succeeding printings of this value have the figure of value at back, as Type II. of illustration No. 4; this differs from Type I., which occurred on the first Athens prints, in being more open and having a rounder body.

      

This printing, which is very rare, resembles the yellow-green shades of the first Athens print in color, though it is a trifle brighter. At first glance it might be mistaken for the first Athens print, but reference to the figure at back reveals its identity. The paper is good and not very strongly tinted.

B. 1862. 5 lepta, blue-green on greenish.

This is similar to A, but different in color, which is deeper than in any other 5 lepta of this group. The lines of shading on the cheek are distinct and separate. Paper as last, but more strongly tinted. This printing is also scarce.

C. 1862. 5 lepta, yellow-green on greenish.

The color of this is paler and softer than A. The impression varies from fine to indifferent. The paper is similar to B. The earliest dated copy I have is June, 1862, but most of them are dated 1864.

D. 1862 (?) 5 lepta, pale yellow-green on paper very slightly tinted green.

I have not seen any dated copies of this printing but from the clearness and general appearance of the impression it is evidently quite early. It is the most distinctive of all the printings of this value, on account of its color and paper, which is hardly tinted green at all and is very stout. It is decidedly scarce.

E. 1864. 5 lepta, dull yellow-green on greenish.

The color has a slight tinge of sage in it. The impression varies, as in C, from fair to indifferent. Paper as in C, though not so strongly tinted. Most of the specimens dated 1865-66 are of this printing.

F. 1865. 5 lepta, bluish green on greenish.

The color of this printing varies considerably from pale to medium bluish-green. Though some specimens are well printed, the majority are rather indistinct. Paper as in C. My earliest dated copy is 5th May, 1865. This printing remained in general use until 1867.

G. 1866. 5 lepta, deep yellow-green on greenish.

In this printing the impression is very bad indeed, the details of the design being very indistinct. It is the worst printed of all the 5 lepta on greenish paper. The paper is of good texture and ordinary thickness, which serves to distinguish it from some printings after 1870. I have a specimen used on entire together with a 10 lepta Paris print and three 20 lepta, used in February, 1866.

10 Lepta

A. 1862. 10 lepta, orange on greenish.

This printing is like the first Athens, but the paper is without the yellowish surface. The printing is very fair, the lines of shading on the cheek are thin and separate, and occasionally somewhat broken. The spandrels are often rather pale, and the outline of the head at back sometimes shows signs of the découpage. In heavily printed specimens the shading on the cheek and the spandrels appear as though printed in red, giving a very curious effect.

B. 1863. 10 lepta pale yellow-orange on bluish.

This is the palest of all the 10 lepta stamps, though it might be confounded with the printing of 1869, which, however, is more reddish in color.

The impression is very clear, and the lines of shading on the cheek and neck are generally so deeply impressed as to make the cheek look embossed. In spite of this, the lines are very clear and distinct. The whole appearance gives the impression of being an early print. I have seen several used on entires, all dated in the early months of 1863. It is decidedly scarce.

C. 1863. 10 lepta, reddish-orange on bluish.

This is the commonest printing of this value. The impression is good to medium. The finest copies resemble printing A, but the color is slightly different in tint, and the lines of shading on the cheek are heavier.

D. 1864. 10 lepta, deep orange on blue paper.

This impression is still good, but shows up badly on the deep-colored paper. The shade varies greatly, and is sometimes almost a yellowish-orange. The earliest dated copy I have seen is dated 15th Oct., 1864, but the printing does not appear to have been in general use until 1865.

E. 1865. 10 lepta, vermilion on blue.

This printing is precisely similar to the last except that the color always has a pronounced tinge of red in it.

F. 1867. 10 lepta, vermilion on bluish.

Impression similar to the last; the color is also the same, but appears brighter on the pale-tinted paper. The paper is hard and highly surfaced. The earliest date I have is one used at Constantinople on Sept. 23rd, 1867.

20 Lepta

A. 1862. 20 lepta, pale blue on slightly bluish.

Printing similar to the 20 lepta steel blue of the first Athens set, but color much lighter an the paper, which is fairly stout, is not tinted yellowish on the face. The outlines of the head or face often show signs of the découpage. The gum, which is rather thick and yellowish, frequently discolors the paper a little.

B. 1862. 20 lepta, bright blue on bluish.

Very clear impression, better than in any other Athens print of this value. The lines of shading on the cheek are long, distinct and separate. Every detail in the spandrels stands out clear and sharp, and if examined under a glass it will be found that the small dots do not run into the wavy lines between which they are placed. There are no small spots or smudges of color in any part of the design, as is generally the case with later printings which, in other respects, might be mistaken for it. These excellent results were evidently due to the use of a carefully prepared découpage, but as this was often out of register, many specimens show a faint duplicate outline of the front of the face or (more rarely, in this printing) of the back of the head. The color is a full bright blue, varying considerably in shade, the deepest approaching a violet-blue. The figures on the back are always in dark blue with thin outlines, never blurred or smudgy.

C. 1862. 20 lepta, pale bright blue on bluish.

The impression is similar to that of the last printing but is not so clear, though in some cases it is very little inferior. In the majority of specimens many of the dots between the wavy lines in the spandrels are not quite separate from the lines, and the shading on the cheek is not so clear. As in the last printing, there are no small blots or smudges on any of the uncolored portions of the design, not even in the spandrels nor in the space between the outer and inner frame lines. The color is bright but, as a rule, much paler than in B, though the shade is, at times, almost as dark. The spandrels sometimes look as though they are turning black; this, I think, is caused by a slight thickening of the ink in the parts affected. It also occurs in most subsequent printings.

The figures at back are useful as a guide; they are always in pale blue and are clearly printed with thin outlines.

The gum is colorless and never stains the paper at back.

These stamps are generally found with dates from 1862-66.

D. 1864. 20 lepta, dull blue on bluish.

The impression has still further deteriorated in detail, though the general effect is still good. In some lightly printed copies, however, it is very difficult to distinguish from C. The uncolored portions of the design, or the spandrels, nearly always show, in some part or another, one or two small colored spots, while the small space between the inner and outer frame lines may show in places very minute smudges. These indications, though exceedingly slight (often requiring a glass to detect) are important, as their occurrence in B and C is very exceptional. The absence of the spots or smudges proves nothing, but their presence, in however small a degree, proves that they are neither B nor C printings. (In later printings the spots become more pronounced).

The color is much duller than in C, compared with which it has a slightly greenish tinge. There are, however, many shades, the palest of which approach very nearly to the pale shades of C.

The figures at the back also vary considerably in color, but are never very dark. The gum is thick brownish-gray and frequently stains the paper a little.

This printing was in pretty general use from 1864 to 1868.

E. 1865. 20 lepta, cobalt-blue on bluish.

The impression is still coarse, and has a harder look. The small blots and smudges are more frequent.

The color is distinctly different from anything that preceded it; it is darker than any in B, C, or D. The spandrels show a still more decided tendency to appear blackish.

The figures on the back are generally dark in color, though not always, while as a rule they are still fairly well printed.

A printing almost identical with this cropped up again in 1873, and except in dated copies I do not know how they are to be discriminated with certainty. The figures on the back, however, in the 1873 issue are generally more heavily printed and often smudgy. Printing E was in fairly general use in the years 1865 to 1868, but is not so common as D.

F. 1865. 20 lepta, bright cobalt-blue on bluish.

With the exception of the color, which is the same tone but brighter, this is exactly like printing E.

G. 1866. 20 lepta, blue on greenish.

Impression similar to the last, but easily distinguishable by the paper which is greenish instead of bluish. This shade varies considerably from pale to deep. The gum is rather thick and yellowish. Though Beckton dates this printing to 1865, the earliest dated copy I have noted is July 6th, 1866. It was in use in many places until 1869.

H. 1867. 20 lepta, deep bright blue on bluish.

Impression very heavy, generally having an over-inked appearance. The color is very deep and bright, quite as deep as the deep Prussian blue of the first Athens prints, but a truer blue and brighter. The spandrels are heavily printed and are frequently splashed with spots of color, caused by the interstices between the wavy lines becoming clogged with ink. Some of the lighter prints are very like printing F, but the lines of shading on the cheek are generally rather shorter.

The figures at the back are sometimes very deep in color, but not always so deep as the stamp itself.

I. 1867. 20 lepta, very pale blue on bluish.

Impression light, but coarse. As the last printing is the deepest blue so this is the palest. The lines of shading on the cheek are fairly clear and separate but the general appearance is rather mottled. The figures on the back are in a much deeper color than the stamp.

40 Lepta

A. 1862. 40 lepta, violet on blue.

Impression very good as a rule, sometimes very nearly as clear as the first Athens. The spandrels are fairly light and sharply printed, while the lines of shading on the cheek are long, unbroken, and separate. The paper is a very clear blue, and is well finished. The gum is nearly always thin and colorless, though specimens with a late date (’65 and’66) often have traces of a thicker and more yellowish gum. The color is the same delicate violet as in the first Athens, though there is perhaps a “thought” more red in it, and it varies considerably in depth. The figures at back are in the same color as the stamp.

Specimens of this stamp are generally dated from 1863 to 1865, but may also frequently be seen with a date as late as 1868.

B. 1864. 40 lepta, deep violet on blue.

Impression heavier, often very heavy indeed. While in the majority of specimens the lines of shading on the cheek are fairly clear (though never so clear as in A) in some specimens, they form almost a solid mass of color. The spandrels are also generally thick and indistinct.

The color is deep to very deep, and the paper, which is more of a greenish blue than in the last printing, gives the whole stamp a duller appearance.

C. 1865. 40 lepta, pale dull purple on bluish.

Impression as in B, but appearing worse on account of the very poor color, which is the best guide to the printing. It is a pale faded-looking brownish purple, which must not be confounded with the thin paper issue of 1872, the paper of this printing being stout and of good texture.

D. 1866. 40 lepta, reddish-lilac on lilac.

This is a very distinctive printing, the paper being so different in color from that of any other printing. The color of the impression is, in its pristine condition, a distinct reddish-lilac, but it is generally found more or less discolored, appearing more like a lilac-brown. The impression is very coarse and mottled.

E. 1866 (?) 40 lepta, deep purple on greenish-blue.

Impression not so rough as the last but not good, the spandrels being dark and thick. The color is deep but much duller than B. It is almost a claret. The paper is good and greener in tint than any of the earlier printings.

F. 1866. 40 lepta, reddish-purple.

Impression fair to good, resembling A but flatter looking. The color is distinctive, being distinctly redder than A and B, and deeper than C. The impression is good but does not appear to be so smooth as C. The figures at the back are in the same color as the stamp, and are generally more heavily printed than in earlier printings.

80 Lepta

A. 1862. 80 lepta, deep bright rose on cream.

This printing resembles that of the first Athens, but the figures of value at the back are printed in the same color as the stamp instead of in vermilion. The lines of shading on the cheek and the spandrels are clear and distinct; there are no specks or blotches of color anywhere, except occasionally on the cheek under the eye which is caused by a defect on the plate. The color varies considerably in depth but is frequently a most brilliant deep rose. The paper is very slightly creamy.

B. 1863. 80 lepta, rose on cream.

Impression not so fine as A but still good, and the color neither so bright nor so deep. Paper as before.

C. 1864. 80 lepta, pale rose on cream.

Impression again slightly inferior to the last in the majority of specimens and sometimes very much inferior. The color, which is paler than the last, is still a pure rose. It is difficult to discriminate between this printing and that of 1870, but the color is not quite so pale as a rule, and the spandrels are not so light. The paper is slightly creamy as before but the surface is generally more tinged with rose than in A and B.

D. 1865. 80 lepta, rose to deep rose, on deep cream.

This printing has a pronounced characteristic which distinguishes it from C. I refer to the gum which is thick and yellow, and which can generally be found still adhering to the backs of used stamps in sufficient quantity to characterize it. In D the color of the impression is really the same as B, but the yellow gum having stained the paper to a deep cream, gives it a duller appearance. The printing is still good and smooth, a fact which differentiates it from the next printing to be described.

E. 1866. 80 lepta, carmine-rose on cream.

In this printing the impression is bad to very bad. In some extreme examples the inscriptions are practically indecipherable. The color is still rose but not always such a pure rose as before, generally having a more carmine tinge. The gum is yellowish as a rule but never so thick as in D. The paper varies in thickness, sometimes being rather transparent. As in the last two printings the surface of the paper is slightly suffused with rose.

F. 1867. 80 lepta, rose-carmine on cream.

An effort was made to improve the impression in this printing, an effort which met with some success. The spandrels however are still somewhat mottled and the whole appearance is flat-looking and rather coarse. This paper is slightly thinner and whiter than the last; the gum is almost colorless.

This ends my list of the printings from the plates before they were thoroughly cleaned. I have separated them as well as I could into groups or printings. Many of these might be still further subdivided by the careful collector, but it would be impossible to supply descriptions for all the slight nuances of color, impression and paper which have to be taken into account in such a subdivision.

THE PRINTINGS FROM THE CLEANED PLATES, 1867-1885.

Hitherto it has been generally accepted that the plates were thoroughly cleaned in 1870, but the fact that they were also cleaned at earlier, as well as at later dates appears to have been overlooked. An examination of the stamps will show that from 1867 onwards many efforts were made to improve the prints, by means of (a) cleaning the plates, (b) careful printing (wiping the ink and exact pressure, and (c) by means of new découpages. It is rarely that there is any marked evidence of the use of the last mentioned in the appearance of the stamps in this period, though there can be no doubt that it was used fairly consistently from 1867 onwards. Two well-known printings, however, immediately come to mind, viz.: the 1 lepton pale brown (short shading on the cheek) and 20 lepta, blue, (dotted cheek and “worn” spandrel), both of 1870. These both show very marked signs of the découpage, which appears to have been cut too deeply under the shading on the cheek of the 1 lepton and in the spandrels of the 20 lepta. Specimens of the latter are frequently found which have been printed with the découpage much out of register; I have one specimen in which the light portions of the design which were intended to fall on the neck and in the spandrels are all too low down, so that the tablet at foot containing the value, the part immediately below the bust, and other portions of the design which should have appeared as solid color, are only partially inked. In this it reproduces in a more marked degree, the peculiarity which I have already described as being so frequently present in the first Athens printings, where it generally produces a mottled appearance at the back or front of the head. Naturally the 1 and 20 lepta of 1870 also frequently show this misplacement in the same position, but generally the stamps were printed with the découpage exactly in register.

Mr. Beckton says that a German workman went over to Athens in 1870 with a new printing press, and that he cleaned and renovated the plates. It seems more than probable that these remarkable printings of the 1 lepton and 20 lepta were his work and that after he left, the découpages which he constructed gradually wore out and were never efficiently replaced. They were boldly cut and could only have been used by a very skilled printer, but it is fairly certain that in 1867 and 1868 the Greeks themselves had made use of some less pronounced form of découpage, though I think that with one exception attention was confined in these early days, to its effect on the shading on the cheek, the result being that the lines were shorter. There is, however, one very rare stamp, (which I presume was printed in 1869, as I have a copy dated Athens, 1st Jan., 1870), which shows very short shading on the cheek and very pale spandrels, evidently due to an ambitious form of découpage. It is printed in a deep rich chocolate-brown, and its appearance is quite unlike that of any other 1 lepton. (I describe it in detail later as printing K). This looks as though it might have been a trial printing by the German workman (which would anti date his visit by some months). It was by no means a satisfactory looking printing and judging by its rarity only a very few sheets could have been printed.

From 1872 onwards the plates of all values appear to have been kept in good condition by constant cleaning, and many of the impressions of all values between that date and 1876 would have been very good but for the fact that the plates were becoming worn after so many years constant use.

I must here mention the two well-known flaws on the 1 lepton which, until lately, were believed to have been caused by a damage to the plate in the year 1870. Of late years several copies bearing postmarks of an earlier date than that have been found.

Mr. Fearnley has shown me one, of the printing of 1868, postmarked Oct., 1869, and I have seen several other undated copies which evidently belong to the same printing.

      

These flaws consist of (1) an uncolored blotch immediately below the fore part of the base of the neck, hiding four of the pearls in the circle and impinging on the spandrel (4th stamp in 5th row), and (2) an oblong uncolored blotch (smaller than the last) in the lower part of the back of the neck, immediately behind the ear (5th stamp in 6th row).

These two flaws were evidently the result of an accident to the plate, and as they are so near together there can be no reasonable doubt that they were both due to the same accident; probably the dropping or slipping of a heavy load. If they occurred during the cleaning of the plate, as has been generally supposed, I shall expect to find them dated 1867.

The printings of the stamps issues during these years fall naturally into four divisions. As follows:

I. 1867-72. Generally good impressions from the cleaned plates; all values.
II. 1872-76. Impressions very fair, on thin to very thin paper with a very open mesh (coarse grained). All values.
III. 1876-79. Varied impressions on cream or on buff papers; all values except 80 lepta.
IV. 1879-80. As last but without figures of value at back. All values except 80 lepta.

I will consider these subdivisions in order, and leave the description of the two values 30 and 60 lepta, which were introduced in 1876, till afterwards.

THE STAMPS OF 1867-72 FROM THE CLEANED PLATES.

1 Lepton

I. 1867 1 lepton, deep red-brown on cream.

The color of this printing is distinctive; it is a deep rich red-brown. Signs of the plate being cleaned are not very evident, but the lines of shading on the cheek being somewhat shorter than in the previous two or three printings points to the use of a new découpage. The impression is heavy and not very clear.

J. 1868. 1 lepton, red-brown on cream.

The color of this printing is similar to the last, but not so deep. It is a true red-brown. The plate was evidently cleaned very thoroughly for this as in the majority of specimens the impression is very clear. The paper used appears to be smoother and better finished than in the other printings of this period. This corresponds to the printing which Beckton calls H, variety h, concerning which he says: “A few sheets of the glazed paper, being on hand, was [sic] used up in this printing. In consequence of the better finished paper the impression is much clearer, and at first sight would appear to belong to an earlier printing (B); but the color, and the lines of shading on the neck not being so clearly defined, at once locates the stamp.”

The earliest date I have is Jan. 12, 1868. It is a scarce stamp.

K. 1869. 1 lepton, chocolate-brown on cream.

This is the printing which I referred to in my introductory remarks on the stamps of this period. The color is as deep as printing I and warmer in tone, but its distinctive feature is the very short shading on the cheek and the pale spandrels. These effects were evidently due to the use of an exaggerated form of découpage, which was by no means suitable. In appearance the impression is something like that of the well-known “cleaned-plate” printing of 1870, (Gibbons 49), but the color is of course much deeper, and the shading on the cheek though short is heavier. Besides, this printing is not so smooth. It is extremely rare; I have two specimens, both with dated postmarks, one having been used at Athens on 1st January, 1890 and the other at Chalkis in 1871, (name of month illegible). I should imagine that this printing was made in the early part of 1869, as the color resembles I and J, whereas the next printing to be described is identical in color with that of 1870.

L. 1869. 1 lepton, pale reddish-brown on cream.

The various efforts at producing better impressions from the plates resulted quite satisfactorily in this printing. The stamps have the look of much earlier impressions; indeed until I discovered several dated copies I always regarded it as one of the fairly early Athens prints. The spandrels are clear and the lines of shading on the cheek are distinct, separate and fairly long. The color is exactly like the paler shades of the printing next to be described, but the stamps cannot be mistaken for these as the shading on the cheek is totally different. The earliest postmark I have seen is 5th April, 1869 (Athens).

M. 1870. 1 lepton, pale to full reddish-brown on cream.

Of all the 1 lepton printings this is the most distinctive – the one about which there need never be any doubt. All authorities agree (a very rare circumstance in matters Greek) in putting the date at 1870. Dated copies are scarce and I have not seen a great number, but of these the earliest is May, 1870.

The impression is characterized by the extremely short shading on the cheek, and the frequent absence, or partial absence, of the lines of shading jutting up from the center of the base of the bust. Early writers on Greek stamps averred that these peculiarities were inconsistent with any other possibility than the use of a new plate, but this statement has long been disproved. The presence of the flaws which are the same in this printing as before and after, is quite sufficient to prove that the same plate was used. The difference is entirely accounted for by the use of a new découpage which was evidently designed with the hope of reproducing dots and dashes in the shading which are characteristic of the Paris impressions; in this it failed. (In the case of the 20 lepta of the same date this result was actually achieved). In other respects the impression is almost identical with printing L.

The color varies considerably from pale to fairly deep, the latter shades being the scarcer. This stamp is quite common unused without gum but is not easy to find mint, while a pair or a block in any condition is extremely rare.

N. 1871. 1 lepton, pale dull brown on cream.

Judging by the color alone one would at first assign these stamps to the 1863-64 period. Some specimens are very like printing C, though as a rule they are paler. This false impression is corrected by an examination of the printing, which though carefully done reveals the lack of sharpness which characterizes the early prints. The general appearance is flat and featureless. These stamps were in general use from 1871-74 after which date they disappear (according to the evidence of dated copies) until 1883 (!). It is possible that those of the latter date, of which I have seen a good many copies from various sources, are from a new printing of that date, but I think this unlikely because both impression and color are most unlike any other printings of that late period. My opinion is that they belong in the printing under notice, a part of which had been overlooked during the intervening period and then used up.

O. 1872 (?). 1 lepton, dull brown on deep cream paper.

This printing is very like the last, but may be distinguishable by the paper, which is very strongly toned, appearing yellowish when compared with the stamps of the last printing. The shade of the stamp itself also has a redder appearance, and it is slightly darker than the last. This printing is not common; I have no used dated copies, but from the appearance I think it must have been issued in the early 70’s.

2 Lepta

G. 1869. 2 lepta, bistre-brown on cream.

Owing to the ineffective color in which this value was printed, the small variations in printing, which are often so noticeable in the other values are very difficult to trace. Consequently, it is possible to separate those printings which have the most marked peculiarities. To add to this difficulty which I have found with this value, there is the fact that copies with dated postmarks are very scarce, especially during the years 1866-71.

No serious effort appears to have been made to clean the plate of this value until 1871. The first printing of this period (G) is a fair impression rather like D in color and appearance, but not quite so smooth-looking. This is accounted for, no doubt, by the paper being thicker and not so highly surfaced.

H. 1871. 2 lepta, pale yellow-bistre on deep cream paper.

This is a distinctive printing and corresponds with No. 54 of Gibbons’ list. The shade is rather like that of printing A, but the impression is not so distinct. The paper is rather thick and strongly toned cream. Unused specimens (which are much commoner than used ones) show a very thick yellowish gum.

I. 1873 (?). 2 lepta, pale flesh on cream.

This evidently belongs to this period, but I have not seen a used copy. It is extremely rare. The color is very difficult to name. It is hardly flesh, but the word is more or less descriptive and I think should help collectors to recognize it if they are fortunate enough to find it. It is really a very washy looking bistre with a suggestion of pink in it. The impression is fairly good but owing to the very unsuitable color it is most ineffective. The paper is much thinner than in H, and is more highly surfaced.

J. 1873. 2 lepta, pale dull bistre on cream.

This stamp is on thin paper like the last, but the color being deeper, the impression shows up much more clearly though it is still unsatisfactory. A close examination, however, shows that the printing is clear, and the lines of shading on the cheek separate and distinct. The stamps of this printing are fairly plentiful used, but are rather scarce unused.

K. 1874. 2 lepta, bistre-brown on cream.

The stamps of this printing are much like F in color, but are never so deep. The ink used has a tendency to become oxidized, and the stamps are occasionally found in an unnaturally deep color from this cause. All oxidized 2 leptas may safely be assigned, so far as my experience goes, to this printing. The impression is not very fine, though the lines of shading on the cheek are fairly clear and frequently broken, forming dashes. The paper is thin, as in the last two printings.

5 Lepta

H. 1867. 5 lepta, pale bluish-green on greenish.

The impression is very fair, but the color is very pale, and consequently it does not show up well. The spandrels and the shading are quite clear. The paper is almost a bluish-green, and on the face it looks quite bluish but this, I think, is an appearance which is partly due to the color of the impression. This is a very scarce printing.

I. 1867. 5 lepta, bluish-green on greenish.

The stamps of this printing are much finer impressions than the last. The plate was evidently thoroughly cleaned for this; the fine lines in the spandrels and the shading are very clear. It is difficult to separate this printing from F, but as a rule the color is deeper and the printing finer. The figures on the back, on the other hand, are often thicker, and sometimes smudgy.

J. 1870. 5 lepta, pale yellow-green on greenish.

Very light impression, as though as little ink as possible was used. A curious effect is often observable owing to this light inking, the background having a mottled appearance but leaving a solid outline to the front of the profile, which is darker than the background itself. Figures at back heavily printed. This printing is scarce.

K. 1870. 5 lepta, sage-green on greenish.

The stamps of this printing, which are fairly common, somewhat resemble E in color but are paler. The impression is good, but not so fine as in E, from which it can best be distinguished by the spandrels, which are decidedly paler. The color has a slight sage tint in it, which, however, is not so marked as in the thin paper printing of 1872.

L. 1873 (?). 5 lepta, deep bright bluish-green on greenish.

I am venturing to make this printing on the strength of a single specimen which I possess; it bears a dated postmark—25 Febr. ’73. If this stamp were not so markedly different from any others, I should have hesitated before calling it a separate printing without having seen others to corroborate it. In the circumstances I have no hesitation in doing so. The color is similar to some of the deep shades of the thin paper period, but in this case the paper is of the ordinary thickness and texture. The tint also has its counterpart in some of the bluish-green first Athens 5 lepta. The impression is heavy, and the lines of shading on the cheek slightly shorter than usual, a characteristic of this period which is often very noticeable in the other values, but rarely so in the 5 lepta.

10 Lepta

G. 1870. 10 lepta, pale orange on bluish.

This printing is nearly as pale in color as B, but is not so yellow. The shade is very distinctive, being almost flesh. Some specimens are almost identical with certain faded shades of the solferino 40 lepta. The impression is light and fairly clear; the lines of shading on the cheek are fine and the spandrels are generally rather pale and clear. The figures of value at the back are nearly always much deeper in color than the stamp itself. The gum is grayish and rather thick.

This printing is very rare unused but is not uncommon used. This is the only printing I have assigned to this period for this value, though it is a moot point whether printing F ought not to be included as many specimens look as though they were from cleaned plates.

20 Lepta

J. 1868. 20 lepta.

The majority of specimens of this printing very much resemble C. The color is sometimes identical, but is generally paler. The impression, though from the cleaned plate, is not so clear and smooth as in C; close examination reveals small blotches in the spandrels in the majority of specimens and occasionally in the shading on the cheek. The figures of value at back are dark and not so sharply printed as in the earlier prints. The “0” of “20” is frequently inverted.

K. 1870. 20 lepta, blue to pale blue on bluish.

The main characteristics of this well-known and much discussed printing are the spandrels which are very pale, often showing hardly any of the pattern at all, and the shading on the cheek which is very delicate, the lines appearing broken up into dots and dashes in the majority of specimens, as in the original printing in Paris. These effects were due to the use of a very well made découpage which, during the course of the printing, gradually became so worn that in the latest impressions its effect was almost imperceptible. It is therefore possible to get together a long series of these stamps, showing the gradual change from the first to the last state.

The shade varies very much from a delicate pale blue (which I think was the first) to a full moderately deep bright blue. I have several specimens in duller blue on paper which is gray rather than bluish, but I think this effect is due to the influence of the gum, which in this printing is always grayish and rather thick; specimens on which the gum was applied more thickly than usual might easily have been affected in this way.

This is the first printing in which the error “02” at back occurs; there are several other curious facts in connection with the figures at back on this printing which I shall explain in a later chapter on this subject.

This printing appears to have come into use about 1870.

L. 1872. 20 lepta, grayish blue on bluish.

The impression has now reverted to a worse state than that which immediately preceded printing K; it is flat and characterless, without being indistinct. The color is the best guide, being slightly duller than any of the earlier printings; it is, however, identical with that of the first printing on thin paper which has yet to be described. The figures on the back are thick and generally in pale blue.

M. 1872. 20 lepta, bright cobalt-blue on bluish.

In color, execution and impression these stamps are very similar to printing F, but the figures on the back are always deep blue, and are, moreover, heavily and coarsely printed; by this time the type used for printing the figures had evidently become worn. In printing F the figures at the back have more the character of the early prints, and are generally printed in a rather pale blue.

The color of the impression is deep and very bright, some specimens might almost be described as violet-blue.

December, 1872 is the earliest date I have seen. This is the last printing before the thin paper period.

40 Lepta

G. 1869. 40 lepta, pale reddish-purple on blue.

This is similar to F (the last printing of the 1862-68 period), but the color is neither so deep nor so red, though it is still distinctly reddish-purple. The shades vary very considerably in depth, some being a full rich color and others very pale and dull. The printing is generally much better than in F, the spandrels especially being paler. This appears to have been issued about the end of 1869.

H. 1870. 40 lepta, deep violet on blue.

This printing, which is decidedly scarce, is evidently one of the very careful printings of 1870 which are to be found in all values. The color reverts to the rich violet shade of printing B, the pronounced reddish tint of the last two printings having disappeared. These stamps can be distinguished from B by the impression, the spandrels being rather pale, while the lines of shading on the cheek are finer than in any others of this value. The paper appears to be more highly surfaced than in the previous printings, which would partly account for the excellent results.

I. 1871. 40 lepta, solferino on greenish paper.

Transcriber's note: In Pemberton's day, the term Solferino referred to all of the 40 lepta stamps of 1871, including those of flesh and rose-flesh. Today only those 40 lepta of this period with a purple or magenta shade of both face and control numbers on greenish paper are considered to be Solferinos.)

A totally different color makes this printing very easy to identify. Most authorities agree that, as originally printed, the color was identical with that of the figures on the back, which, it will be found, are always in a deep claret shade. I have, indeed, seen one used specimen which was very nearly the same color as the figures. The majority of specimens that are met with have faded to a dirty yellowish flesh; the best condition in which the collector can hope to find it is in a moderately deep rosy-buff – much paler than the figures on the back, and without any tinge of magenta. In short, the stamp as it exists today is no longer solferino, except as to the figures on the back. Why the color on the face of the stamp should have faded, is probably due in some way to the gum having some preservative qualities. This sounds a plausible theory, but I cannot say whether it is right.

The impression is good, though not so fine as in the last printing. The paper is fairly stout, but is not so highly surfaced as in H.

Mr. Beckton gives April, 1872 as the date of this stamp, but I have seen several copies dated Dec., 1871, the earliest being the 19th of that month.

The printing must have been a very small one, and was apparently pretty well exhausted in 1872, though, as in the case of many other printings, copies bearing much later dates frequently turn up. I have seen one clearly postmarked 1892. The stamp is decidedly rare, unused. Collectors must beware of fakes made by dyeing the paper of the common buff, 40 lepta, of 1876, which are sometimes offered as pale shades of the solferino.

80 Lepta

G. 1870. 80 lepta, pale rose on cream.

In this, the first printing of this value in the cleaned plate period, although the impression is clearer than in E, F and G, the change is not so marked as in any of the other values, except the 10 lepta. The main characteristic is the color, which in the majority of specimens is paler than any other printing not excepting C, which most nearly resembles it in shade. Some specimens are extremely pale, almost pink. The shading on the cheek is rather shorter than in earlier prints, and the lines are always separate and fine; the spandrels are rather pale and not blotchy. The paper is good and not very strongly tinted cream.

H. 1873. 80 lepta, rose to bright rose on cream.

The characteristic of this printing is that the spandrels are pale and the shading on the cheek light and often indistinct. It is evident that a new découpage was used and considerable care taken in printing. In some specimens too little ink was used in printing, giving the impressions a washed-out appearance. There was, doubtless, more than one printing at this period, judging from the variation in shade, but I think it would be hopeless to attempt to divide them. The paper is as in the last printing. The figures on the back are nearly always thick and heavily printed.

THE PRINTINGS OF 1871-1876 ON THIN PAPER

In 1871 paper of a texture quite different from that which had been used for all values up to that time, began to be employed for some values, and was gradually extended to all values as the old stock became exhausted. The 80 lepta was the only value on which it was not extensively used, only a very few specimens of this value on unmistakably thin paper being known.

The characteristics of the new paper are two, viz.: thinness and coarseness, but it varies so much in both particulars that frequently only one of these characteristics is noticeable. The coarseness may best be recognized by holding up one of the thin paper 5 lepta (pale green or emerald-green for choice) against a good light; and looking through the paper. It will then be seen that the paper appears to have a grain in it which is absent from the close-textured paper of the earlier issues. The wide mesh is very easy to see in certain printings, but in others it is apparently absent; in such cases the stamp can only be recognized by the thinness or transparency of the paper. The extreme transparency which is often noticeable in the stamps of this issue is undoubtedly due to the gum having soaked into the loosely woven paper. In such cases the grain of the mesh is filled in with gum and it cannot be seen at all clearly when looked through in a strong light. On the other hand if such a specimen be soaked long enough for the gum to be all dispelled the mesh of the paper shows up clearly.

Apart from this, however, there is no doubt that the texture of the paper does vary very much indeed, the wide mesh always being very conspicuous in some printings of the 5 lepta, (more so than in any other values) and being indistinguishable in others. Printings H and I of the 10 lepta have the wide mesh almost as clearly as the 5 lepta but in this case the paper is very much thicker; in fact in most cases these stamps could not have been recognized as belonging to this period but for the coarseness of the paper which is frequently quite as thick as, and less transparent than, some specimens of printing F. The paper of the 1 lepta never shows the mesh in any marked degree, but in the 20 lepta and 40 lepta it can always be detected though rarely so distinctly as in the 5 and 10 lepta.

The new paper was not employed at once for all values. From an examination of my own and several other collections of dated copies it would seem that it was first used for the 5 lepta the earliest date I have being 12 Dec., 1871, on that value. The 10 lepta and 40 lepta were the next to follow, after which the 20, 1, and 2 lepta came in the order named. I have not seen a single dated copy of the 80 lepta. I may here remark that great care must be taken in accepting the date “71” on a Greek postmark; a great many stamps which appear to bear that date really belong to 1874; the figure “4” being generally such a peculiar shape that if at all indistinct it looks exactly like a thick “1”. Cases frequently occur in which the figure might just as easily pass for one as for the other and it is not safe to accept a “1” unless it is quite clearly formed. In spite of many alarms I am satisfied that the only clear ‘71 that I have seen on the thin paper series is that on the above-mentioned 5 lepta. This I have found since the September installment of my article was printed; I have consequently altered the date of this series from 1872, as then stated, to 1871.

The printing of the stamps on the thin paper is generally very fair. It is evident that the Greek workmen understood their work better than they did in the middle '60's, and that they took some pains to keep the plates clean, but after ten years constant use it was not possible to reproduce the effect of the early Athens prints, especially as the paper was not very suitable.

From the evidence of dated copies it would seem that several printings of each value were in use at the same time, the dates being so intermingled that it is extremely difficult to assign any order to them. The dates I give are the earliest I have seen of the respective printings, but I have no doubt that much earlier dates of most of them will turn up is in course of time.

The following is the list of printings:

1 Lepton

P. 23rd Oct., 1874. 1 lepton, gray-brown on buff.

Impression fair, but not so good as in N and O. The paper is generally extremely thin and transparent, much more so than in S, the only other printing to which it bears any resemblance. The color varies from medium to very deep.

Q. Jan., 1875. 1 lepton, coffee-brown on buff.

Impression and paper as last, but color deeper than the average shades of P and with much more red in its composition. This printing is scarce, especially unused, yet there is a very great disparity in the earliest and latest dates I have seen, namely, from Jan., 1875 to Sept., 1888!

R. 21st Sept., 1875. 1 lepton, reddish-brown on buff.

Impression and paper as last. The color alone distinguishes this printing from the last. It is much paler and of quite a different tone. It must not be confounded with the thin paper printing of 1882, which is a true red-brown and always much deeper.

S. 11th Dec., 1876. 1 lepton, grey-brown on straw.

Impression as before; color as in P but deeper. The paper is a sure guide to this printing as it is a true pale yellow, quite different from the buff papers of the last three printings. It is, moreover, rarely so thin, in fact in most cases it is of ordinary thickness and only slightly transparent. There is a very pale shade of it, which might perhaps be classed as another printing, but as the paper is identical, and the color of the same tone. I think it advisable not to separate it.

2 Lepta

L. (? Date). 2 lepta, pale bistre on cream.

Impression fine and clear, but owing to the color being so pale the effect is not very good. The paper is very thin, but not noticeably coarse-grained, and the impression often shows through clearly at the back.

M. (? Date). 2 lepta, straw on cream.

As this is a well-known stamp, I have adopted the color-name by which it is always known. It is Gibbons No. 65, and Mr. Beckton's printing H. I see the latter gives the date as 1872, but I have not seen any copies used before 1882! As the paper is unmistakably the thin paper of this period, and shows the coarse grain very clearly, it was possibly printed in the seventies, though there can be no doubt that the larger part of the printing was not used up until much later.

5 Lepta

M. 12th Dec., 1871. 5 lepta, sage-green on greenish.

Impression blotchy and indistinct. Color deep to dull sage-green. Paper thin and semi-transparent but not noticeably coarse-grained.

N. 1873. 5 lepta, sage-green on greenish.

Impression as last. Color still sage but with rather more blue in it. Paper very thin and decidedly coarse-grained.

O. June, 1873. 5 lepta, green on greenish.

Impression better than the last two, occasionally very good. Color medium to pale green, varying very much in shade, generally yellowish-green, but occasionally blue-green. Paper very thin, decidedly coarse-grained.

P. —March, 1874, 5 lepta deep green on greenish.

Impression as last. Color much darker than last, but similar in tone and varying in the same way. Paper as last.

Q. 1875. 5 lepta, emerald-green on greenish.

Impression finer than in any other printing of this value and period. In some specimens the ink is very lightly applied and the impressions resemble those of printing J. The color is generally a fairly bright emerald green, but not at all deep in tone. The color is so marked that it ought certainly to be included in a general catalogue, yet Bright's is the only one of the well-known catalogues which gives it. The paper is thin and coarse-grained as before.

10 Lepta

H. 27th February, 1872. 10 lepta, vermillion on bluish.

Impression fair to poor. Color very like that of printing F but generally rather duller, though not invariably so. The paper is thin, but neither so thin nor so transparent as for the 5 lepta, but it is distinctly coarse-grained, by which characteristic alone it can always be separated.

I. 25th February, 1873. 10 lepta, orange-vermilion on dull greenish paper.

Impression fair to very bad. The color is not so red as the last; the paper is very distinctive, being a dull greenish tint, sometimes appearing almost colorless; in other respects it is exactly like the last. This and the last printing are included in Gibbous as 69a, yet they are very different printings, I being much rarer than H.

J. July, 1873. 10 lepta, bright red-orange on lavender.

Impression poor. Color deeper and much redder than any other printing. The paper is much thinner than in the last two printings and it can never be mistaken on account of its color. I think it possible that the paper was intended for the 20 lepta as it is almost identical with some used for that value at the same period.

20 Lepta

N. 1873. 20 lepta, pale blue on bluish.

Impression good. Color pale and soft, resembling some shades of D. Paper thin, not always transparent, but always showing the wide mesh. This is a rather scarce printing.

O. 1873. 20 lepta, grey-blue on bluish.

Impression hardly so good as the last. Color dull and rather dark. Paper as last, but more transparent.

P. 1874. 20 lepta, indigo-blue on bluish.

This printing might be subdivided into two varieties of impression. The majority are coarse prints but occasionally one finds very fair impressions which have evidently been produced with a new découpage. These have very pale spandrels and the lines of shading on the cheek clear and distinct. Nevertheless they appear to have been printed from a dirty plate. The color varies from a medium to very deep indigo-blue. The paper is very thin and transparent.

Q. 1874. 20 lepta, violet-blue on bluish.

As in the last printing there are two marked varieties of impression, for which the description I have given above will suffice. The color is dark to very dark, but is always brighter than in O. Paper as in O. This is the commonest of the printings on thin paper.

R. 1874. 20 lepta, bright-blue on bluish.

Impression very fair. Color much brighter than the last. In other respects exactly like Q.

S. Dec., 1875. 20 lepta, dark blue on blue.

Impression fair to poor and blotchy. The paper, which is much darker in color than any other, is a sure guide to this printing.

40 Lepta

J. 1872. 40 lepta, dull purple on blue.

The color is something like that of printing C but is duller and with less red in its composition. In most specimens the color is faded so that the stamps have a distinctly brownish appearance, but in all cases the purple predominates; in this latter respect this printing differs from M, N and O, in which bistre or brown is always the prevailing tint.

The impression is generally very fair and would appear better if a more suitable color had been used. Some specimens may be found which have been very carefully printed with a strong découpage; in these the shading on the cheek is very light, occasionally even dotted, and the spandrels are very pale.

The printing may be subdivided according to the color of the figures at the back. In the majority of cases these are purple—more or less in the color of the stamp, but in rarer instances they are in a very pale greenish-bistre.

The paper is thin, often very transparent and always with a very coarse mesh.

This printing is very scarce unused.

K. 1872. 40 lepta, purple on blue.

This is very similar to the last in all respects save the color which, in this printing, is much deeper and shows no tendency to fade. As before there are two distinct varieties of the figures at the back, but in this case one appears to be no rarer than the other.

L. 1872. 40 lepta, deep bright purple on blue.

This printing can only be distinguished from the last by the color which is brighter and with more red in it. The shade varies considerably from a moderately deep purple to a particularly deep rich shade.

So far as my experience goes the figures on the back are always in the same color as the stamp. I have not yet been able to find one with bistre figures.

M. 1872. 40 lepta, pale bistre on blue.

The stamps of this printing have a most peculiar appearance; the color is a very unattractive, muddy-looking bistre. There can he no doubt that, as originally printed, the color was nothing like what it now appears to be. It was doubtless some shade of dull purple or violet, which was so badly mixed that it could not withstand the normal action of the atmosphere. I have seen specimens which were parti-colored, i.e., portions of the design appearing in dull purple, thus proving beyond doubt that the present color is not the original. There are several other instances which will occur to philatelists, in which stamps printed in shades of purple are now only known by the names of the colors to which they have faded. Of these the New South Wales 6d. of 1854 with diademed head, greenish-grey shades, and the 5 neu-groschen Saxony of 1863, provide the best known examples.

The impression is generally very indistinct. The paper is thin and coarse-grained and is rendered very brittle and transparent by the gum.

The figures on the back are in the same color as the stamp, but are sometimes so pale as to be almost indistinguishable. I have frequently seen specimens offered for sale as varieties without figures, but I have never yet been unable to find indications of the numerals. Sometimes they appear to be printed in dull white which can only be seen by holding the stamp so that the light falls on the figures, causing what little remains of the color to shine.

N. 1873. 40 lepta, bistre-brown on blue.

The remarks made about the deterioration of the color of the last printing apply equally to this. But the original shade was evidently deeper for this, as the present color is not so pale nor so washy as in M. The shade varies from bistre-brown (with a distinct shade of purple in it) to bronze, according to the degree of decomposition to which it has been subjected.

The impression varies from fair to quite good. The paper, gum and figures at back are as in the last printing.

O.—? dark: 40 lepta, duff greenish-bistre on blue.

This printing resembles N in everything save the color which has a distinct tinge of green in it.

This brings us to the end of the printings on colored papers, and closes what, to most collectors, is the most interesting period of Greek postal history. Nevertheless, the issues that follow also include numerous varieties of printing which are almost as intricate as in the earlier stamps, and while some of these are decidedly scarce, even used, there are, among the unused, some first class rarities.

ISSUES OF 1876-79 ON CREAM OR ON BUFF PAPER

The stamps of this set comprise all values save the 80 lepta, the use of which was not now so great owing to the alterations in the postal rates and the issue of the 30 and 60 lepta stamps in 1876. The 80 lepta was finally withdrawn from circulation by Royal Decree dated 31st Dec., 1881 and demonetized on April 29th, 1882. Of the other values of the set those of 5 lepta and upwards continue to have figures on the back, but cream paper, with an occasional special printing on buff, replaced the blue paper of the previous issues. This change did not affect the 1 and 2 lepta, the printings of which for this period can only be distinguished by other means. During the three years of the issue the variations of printing were very great. Constant efforts were made at improving the impression and on the whole the printing is very good. This is especially noticeable in the first printings of the 5, 10 and 20 lepta, but towards 1879 the plates fell into a bad state again.

The following is a list of the printings:

1 Lepton

T. 1877. 1 lepton, black-brown on cream.

This is a very distinctive printing: the color is deeper than that of any others of this value. All authorities are agreed in calling it black-brown and I adhere to the description. It is really a very deep grey-brown, with sometimes, in the deepest shades, a distinct purplish tone. I have been tempted to separate the latter into another printing—which it probably was—but so many specimens partake of the characteristics of both that it is more practical to lump them together under one heading. Mr. Beckton separated them (his printings F and P) bat he was certainly in error in assigning one of them to the period before 1870—a mistake which has been perpetuated in Gibbons' catalogue ever since. I have seen many dated copies, the earliest being one in my own collection, Dec. 1877. The very deep shades with the purplish tint (which I take to be Beckton's P) are generally dated before 1880; the others very rarely before that date.

There is only one other printing with which this might be confused, namely, the grey brown, of 1886, the deepest shades of which are even darker than the shades of T. There is, however, an infallible test, for in the later printing the shading on the cheek is shorter and the outer frame line of the stamp is always more or less broken — often missing altogether on one or more sides.

The impression is heavy and coarse, especially in the deepest shades. The lines of shading on the cheek are long and thick, generally running into one another. The paper is deep cream and varies very much in texture from thick and spongy to thin and transparent.

U. 1879. 1 lepton, deep red-brown on cream.

Impression similar to the last but coarser still. The color is rather like I and J but duller. It varies considerably from medium to very dark. As in the last printing the paper varies from thick and spongy to very thin and transparent, the very deep shades generally being on the latter.

2 Lepta

N. ? date. 2 lepta, pale yellowish-bistre on straw.

This is the only distinctive printing of this value which I have been able to assign to this period. The impression is very good, and at first sight might be thought to belong to a much earlier date, but this is only due to the care which has been exercised in the printing and the sparing manner in which the coloring matter has been applied. The lines of shading on the cheek are thin and the spandrels are clear, but there is a certain flatness about the impression which distinguishes it from the early Athens.

5 Lepta

R. 1876. 5 lepta, pale yellow-green on cream.

Impression very good. Lines of shading clear and separate. Spandrels often extremely pale. Paper of good texture and well finished, which has evidently assisted in producing such good impressions. The gum occasionally renders the paper semi-transparent.

S. 1878. 5 lepta, yellow-green on deep cream.

Impression poor to very bad, providing one of the most abrupt transitions which even Greece can show. Some impressions are so coarse that the inscriptions are indecipherable. The color is always deeper than in R, and is often very deep indeed. The paper is deep cream to buff, is very coarse-textured and often more or less transparent.

T. 1879. 5 lepta, bluish green on deep cream.

Impression and paper as last. The color is brighter and fairly deep bluish-green. This is a much rarer printing than the last two.

U. 1879, 5 lepta, bluish-green on cream.

Impression excellent, even better than in R. The color is very similar to the last but scarcely so bright. The paper is not so deeply toned as in the last two printings and appears to have a smoother surface, but it is still coarse grained — in which respect it differs from that of R.

10 Lepta

K. 1876. 10 lepta, orange on cream.

This corresponds with printing R of the 5 lepta. The impression is generally good, spandrels often pale; the paper is good and well finished. The color, as a general rule, is paler than in N. This is the rarest printing of the period, especially unused.

L. 1877. 10 lepta, orange on yellow.

Impression not quite so good, but very fair, the paper is yellow instead of cream, and this is a sufficient guide. The color varies considerably from very pale to moderately deep.

M.—1877. 10 lepta, red-orange on cream.

Impression fair to very bad. The color is deeper and has more red in it than the last two, though there are some pale shades which might be confused with K, but for the difference in the paper, which in this printing is thinner and with a coarse open mesh. This is the common printing.

(Note.—Two or three used copies are known distinctly double printed).

20 Lepta

T. 1876. 20 lepta Prussian blue on cream.

This corresponds with the 5 and 10 lepta of the same date in that it is well printed on surfaced paper of good texture. The shade varies from medium to full Prussian blue. The figures at back are always in the same shade as the stamp. The paper is not so deeply tinted cream as in later printings of this group.

U. 1876. 20 lepta, deep blue on cream.

This and the next three printings all vary in shade to a considerable extent. I am sure they might be sub-divided still further, but such a course would only add to the difficulties of classification. An important point to remember is that no stamp which has the figures at back in ultramarine can possibly belong to any of these four printings, indeed the figures on the back are of considerable help in identifying some of these stamps.

The impression of printing U is normally quite good but rarely so clear as in the Prussian blue. The paper is more deeply toned cream, is not so well finished and of coarse texture. The figures on the back are always Prussian blue, generally rather pale. Curiously enough the deepest shades generally have the palest figures. The color is deep blue, not by any means a dull shade but with out the brightness of W, the only one with which it might be confused.

Za. 1877. 20 lepta, indigo-blue on cream, with ultramarine figures at back.

Impression coarse. Color resembles the dullest shades of X from which, however, the color of the figures serves to distinguish it.

Zb. 1878. 20 lepta, ultramarine on cream.

The color is quite distinct from any other of this group. It varies very much in depth, some being very dark. As a rule the paper of the deep shades is much more toned than in the paler ones. The impression is rather better than in the last two or three printings and some specimens may be found which are extremely well printed. The paper is coarse-textured as before. The figures at back are ultramarine, much brighter than in the last three printings.

40 Lepta

P. 1876. 40 lepta, salmon-buff on cream.

A radical change in the color was made for this printing; the new shade is very difficult to name and I hope my readers will appreciate the description given above. It is called variously, by different writers, —flesh, salmon, rosy-buff, etc. I prefer to combine two of these names and call it salmon-buff. The printing is indistinct, no doubt owing to the unsuitable color. There is, however, a variety in which the printing is much finer and the spandrels pale; this, as far as my experience goes, is only found unused. The paper is of good texture but thin, and is rendered transparent by the gum. The figures at back are in the same color as the stamp. This stamp is much scarcer used than unused, as there was a fairly large remainder of them. The earliest date I know of was noted by Mr. O. Fearnley, viz.—Oct., 1876.

Q. ? date. 40 lepta, pale flesh on cream.

This printing is identical with the last, except that the color is paler and the salmon tint is missing.

Note. All values of this period may occasionally be found on vertically ribbed paper.

THE ERRORS OF THE NUMERALS AT BACK

Transcriber’s Note: The photos shown of these control number errors are from stamps in the transcriber’s collection and those in the collections of other philatelists. For a more complete listing of the control number errors please see the excellent work of John Coundouros, The Control Numbers and the Classification of the Stamps of the Large Hermes Heads.

Having finished the description of the printings of the stamps with figures at the back. I will now give an account of the various errors and varieties which may be found in the numerals. The main errors (emphasis added) are due to one or other of the following causes:

The varieties (emphasis added) are due to shifted and defective type, and other minor accidents which are not of sufficient importance to be termed errors.

I have already described under the Paris prints two of the errors which occur on the 10 lepta of that issue. Since writing that chapter I have found an error which has hitherto been unchronicled, namely, the 10 lepta with figures at back inverted. This error was almost certainly due to an entire sheet being printed upside down, in which case, as there must have been 150 stamps, it is somewhat remarkable that it has not been discovered before.

The errors occurred very seldom in the early printings, but became gradually more frequent as time wore on, the printings from 1870 to 1880 accounting for the large majority. Taking all the facts into consideration it is certainly a matter for surprise that the list is such a short one; the opportunities were very great. In those days, fortunately, stamp collectors were not catered for by the printers, and instead of errors “creeping in” by design, as is now so frequently the case in many countries, those of Greece were undoubtedly accidental.

In the following list I take each value separately through all its printings.

5 Lepta

5 double. On printings K and O.

No other errors, so far as I know, exist on this value. That on K is very mach rarer than the other. There are several varieties of spacing of the double numerals on O (the thin paper printing, commonest shade) which proves that several sheets (or part sheets) must have been so printed. In one of these the figures occur one above the other, but not quite clear of each other.

Kohl catalogues a variety of the green on cream of 1876 bearing the first type of 5 which is peculiar to the first Athens print. I do not believe in this variety. I have seen one which was greatly prized by its owner, but which was certainly a later printing (without figures) to which this type of numeral had been fraudulently applied.

10 Lepta

Remarks.

a. This error occurred once on the sheet at the left hand margin of the printings named, and is not due to whole sheets being printed upside down as is the case with h. It was evidently corrected early in 1867. (See illustration No. 8).

b. Apparently the numerals were re-set early in 1873. From the examination of pairs and strips showing this variety it would seem that there were two on each sheet with the numeral 1 missing. One is the ninth stamp in a horizontal row, as I have seen marginal pairs in which the “0” error occurs on the left hand stamp, and the minor variety “1 0” spaced on the right hand (marginal) stamp. Other pairs prove that there must have been another of this error somewhere nearer the center of the sheet. I have only observed this with regard to the last printings L and M, and it may be that in I, J and K there was only one error on the sheet. The fact that I have not found the “1 0” spaced variety earlier than L seems to support this theory. (See illustration No. 9).

c. There were also two of these on the sheet of the last printing. One occurred on the first stamp of the bottom row but there is no evidence to show the position of the other. (See illustration No. 10).

d. This is a curious error. The numeral 1 is shorter than in the normal. (See illustration No. 11). It no doubt occurred only once on some sheets of the last printing, for it was corrected in e. below.

(Transcriber's note: The author might have intended this photograph to be one showing a print of the metal spacer alone and not a true figure “1”.)

e. It sometimes reads 110 but more often shows the second 1 covering the first and smaller numeral. Why the printers should have taken the trouble to correct this and leave the other errors on the sheet is a mystery.

(Transcriber’s note: This illustration did not appear in the author’s article. The text seems to indicate there was a double printing of the numeral “1”, but this is not known to exist today. The example shown appears to have had the metal spacer printed.)

f. This error on printing A has always been regarded as a separate printing, namely, the first Athens. It is Gibbons’ No. 12. I have only seem one specimen, which is that in the collection of Mr. Beckton, and with all due respect to that authority I cannot agree with him that it is a separate printing, still less that it is the first Athens. It has not the distinctive ap­pearance of the earliest Athens prints and to my opinion is an error of printing A due to an entire sheet or part of a sheet having missed the printing.

This error on printing I is well-known. Mr. Hausburg has a block of four (which came originally from the Jonas collection) in which the top two stamps have “10” inverted and the lower ones are without numerals. There are also vertical pairs, the lower stamp in each case being without numerals, in the collections of Mr. Beckton and Mr. Hall. Apparently these errors occurred in the bottom row of the sheet (Illustration No. 13 not available).

I have seen two specimens of printing L without figures at back. Though they came to me from totally different sources at an interval of many years, they were both used at Smyrna and dated Sept., 1877, so that it is fairly safe to assume that one entire sheet was issued without control and was sent to this Levantine post-office. As it happens to be the printing on yellowish paper, there need be no confusion between this error and any stamps of later printings which were normally issued without figures at the back.

g. This is due to entire sheets having the numerals twice printed. No specimens should be accepted as the error unless both numerals are clearly twice printed, as many smudgy numerals, which are due to the paper shifting at the moment of printing, may be found.

h. The inverted “10” variety is the commonest of all the errors. It is due to entire sheets being printed upside down. Curiously enough, it did not occur (in my experience) until 1872; it is quite common on printings H and I. This error on M is sometimes in a different category, as there is a variety which is not due to an entire sheet being printed upside down. It occurs twice, I believe, on the sheet. The 0 and the 1 are spaced rather far apart, the 0, which is inverted, slanting slightly to the left; the 1 is normal. The ordinary inverted “10” also occurs on M.

i. The very rare variety with “10” inverted on the face occurs only on D. I have seen three or four specimens of it, all of which look as though they might be off the same sheet.

It will be noted that six out of the nine errors on the 10 lepta are found on M, the last printing, before the system of printing the numerals at the back was abolished. As some of them occurred more than once on each sheet, it is likely that in each entire sheet of M there were nine or ten errors out of 150 stamps.

20 Lepta

Remarks.

a. This occurred as an error on the sheet for a very short time only. See illustration No. 15.

b. Of this I have only seen one satisfactory specimen, which is in Mr. Dorning Beckton’s collection. There is no trace of the 0. It must have been corrected very soon after it occurred. (Illustration No.16 not available.)

c. This first occurred on the 1870 printing K and was soon corrected. It was the first stamp in a horizontal row. It turned up again in M, the numeral “0” being totally different in shape from that in the earlier error. This also was soon corrected, but the same mistake occurred once more in the very last printing, the ultramarine, this again having a different shaped “0”.

d. This is a curious error, occurring only on the last printing. It is not due to an entire sheet containing c printed upside down, but is certainly an error of setting which occurred once on the sheet. The upper part of the "2" is always defective in this variety.

e. As in the case of b I have only seen one really satisfactory specimen without numerals, in the collection of Mr. Beckton.

f. Although the double 20 is found on seven different printings, it is by no means common, probably only one sheet of each being so printed. In most cases the two pairs of numerals are from 1/2 to 2 mm. apart, but in one variety they are so far apart that portions of the superfluous figures appear on either edge of the stamp.

      

g. Mr. Beckton has a copy of this, which has every appearance of being genuine. It is on printing M and bears a postmark dated 29 June, 1873.

h. This, which is due to whole sheets being printed upside down, I have only found on printings K (in an exceptionally deep shade) and Za. Those I have seen on K are all used at Patras.

40 Lepta

Remarks.

a. This curious error was apparently noticed and corrected by hand, possibly after a certain number of sheets had been printed. It has been chronicled as existing without the correction, but as I have never seen this I do not include it. (See illustration No. 20.)

(Transcriber’s note: See Coundouros’ The Control Numbers and the Classification of the Stamps of the Large Hermes Heads, pp. 97-98 for a detailed discussion of the error “20” corrected to “40” and fraudulent examples thereof.)

b. The double 40 on printing B shows the figures almost on the top of one another, but clear enough to prove that it is really a double print and not a slip. On printing J the extra numerals are lower down and a long way from the others, part of the 0 showing at the left, and the 4 and part of 0 on the right. (See illustration No. 20.)

80 Lepta

Remarks.

a. This occurred once on the sheet in printing D. It was certainly in the bottom row, and was possibly the right corner stamp. (Illustration No. 22).

b. In printings A and B this was on stamp No. 9 in the top row. In C and D it occurred somewhere in the first vertical row. (Illustration No. 23).

c. This is only known in printing D and is extremely rare.

d. I have seen three or four specimens of this and have heard of others. They are all in the same shade (rather deep) and on rather thin paper. Two were used in Alexandria, Egypt in 1874 and the others in Athens (undated). (Illustration No. 24 is unavailable).

In addition to the errors above described, all of which are quite unmistakable at a glance, there are minor errors due to the 0 in the 10, 20 and 40 lepta, and the 1 in the 10 lepta being inverted. Strictly speaking such errors should be as important as any of the others, but as there is very little difference in the appearance of these numerals, whether they are in the right position or inverted, they are not generally considered of much importance. The difficulty in detecting these inverted figures is heightened, especially in the case of the numeral 1, by poor or smudgy printing.

Though I agree that the varieties of which I am speaking are relatively of small importance they should certainly be taken into account by a specialist. I have made a particular study of the inverted 0 on the 20 lepta and have found that prior to 1870 the variety was very common; there must have been several on the sheet. Thus the first and the last stamps in the top row had, in the printings I and J at least, the 0 inverted. With the printing of 1870 (K) the inverted 0 disappears until the issue of the stamps on cream paper. I have examined hundreds of specimens of printings I and J, which have yielded between 5 and 10 per cent. of inverted 0’s; I have probably seen an equal number of printings K to S, but have not found among them a single example of this error. This proves conclusively either that the inverted 0’s were corrected for the 1870 printing, or that the type was entirely distributed and re-set. It seems difficult to believe that they should have taken the trouble to correct the inverted 0’s, as their appearance is most unobtrusive in print, but it must not be forgotten that the compositor would probably be able to detect the inverted type in his forme more easily than on a proof. As a matter of fact, 1 believe that the type was not entirely re-set, as I have examples of broken type occurring in the same position on the sheet in printings J and K, which would be an extraordinary coincidence if the type had been re-set. On the other hand I have a specimen of printing I with inverted 0, showing a small break at top and bottom of the numeral. This stamp also has three small but distinctive flaws on the face of the stamp. I have two specimens of printing K, showing the same three flaws, but with the 0 at back, with the same break at top and bottom, turned the right way up. This, I think, is distinct evidence that the type was not re-set but that all that was done was to put the 0's the right way up. It was probably in making these minor corrections that the more serious error “02”, which occurred for the first time in 1870, crept in. The inverted 0 turns up again in 1876, on the cream paper issue, but is very uncommon.

With regard to the other values with this minor error, I am unable to give much information further than to say that the inverted “0” is common on the 10 lepta (I have seen a block of four of which three show the variety) and very scarce on the 40 lepta. The inverted 1 on the 10 lepta is also fairly plentiful. A curious fact with regard to these values is that the errors seem to occur on them more frequently after than before 1870.

MINOR VARIETIES OF THE FIGURES

These consist of broken or battered type, of misplaced numerals, or any other minor accident. It would be impossible to give a list of all the noticeable variations in the numerals, the number of which gradually increased as the type became more worn, until the majority of the type (at any rate on the 20 lepta) was in some way defective by the time the system of printing the numerals at the back was finally abolished. So much is this the case that I believe ft would be possible to plate printings L and M of the 20 lepta by means of these broken figures and the small flaws and scratches which by that time had become common on the face of the stamps. The task would be very difficult and of little utility, but 1 think it could be done.

It is obvious that the numerals were either reset at different times or that some fell out and had to be replaced, because most of the errors, as we have seen, occurred only in certain printings, and I have evidence that some of the broken types occurred in different positions on different printings, which shows the difficulties in the way of making a complete study of the numerals. Such a study would hardly be worth the trouble if it were not that it assists in the arrangement of the printings, for the defects began at various dates and continued until the end.

In the following list I only give those varieties which are most pronounced:

5 Lepta

• 5 with a perpendicular line before it, making it appear as “15.” The stroke is very thin and is caused by a printer’s bit becoming loose. I have seen this on printings K and M.
• 5 with only the flag and lower half of the body showing. I have seen this on I and O and some intervening printings.

10 lepta

• 10 with a perpendicular line before the 1, making it appear as 110. Caused by a printer's bit becoming loose. Printings H, K and M.
• 0 of 10 with center shaped like a keyhole. Printings H and M.
• 1 of 10 considerably above the level of the 0. Printing M.
• 0 of 10 noticeably above the level of the 1. Printing M.

20 Lepta

• 2 with tail and part of head missing. All printings from L to Zb.
• 2 with part of head broken off. This variety is curious, as it is evidently the identical piece of type which is found inverted on Zb in the "" error. It is found on printings P to Za inclusive.
• 0 of 20 very much above the level of the 2; this I have only found on printing U.
• 0 with its center shaped like a keyhole. Printings O, P, Q and Za. I have seen the same variety but with the keyhole inverted on printings T and Zb.
• 2 and 0 spaced nearly 3 mm. apart, instead of the normal 1 to 1½ mm. Printings T to Za.

40 Lepta

• 0 of 40 raised above the level of the 4. I have only found this on printing L. but it will probably be found on all subsequent printings.
• 0 with its center shaped like a keyhole, inverted. Printings P and Q only.

80 Lepta

• 0 with its center shaped like a keyhole. Printing H. (Thinnish paper).

ISSUE OF 1879-1886 ON CREAM OR ON BUFF PAPER,
WITHOUT FIGURES AT BACK

Though the year 1879 is given by Mr. Beckton as the date of the abolition of the figures at the back of the 5 and 10 lepta values, the precise month, October, being specified, the earliest dated copy which I have so far been able to find is December, 1880, on the 20 lepta! The first record of the change in the philatelic press appears to be a note in the Timbre-Poste for May 1881, where it is stated that the 5 lepta stamps are now appearing without the numeral at the back. The Philatelic Record of August, 1881, says,—under the heading “Greece”, “These stamps are being carelessly printed just now. We have seen pairs of the 10 lepta, one stamp having the usual 10 at the back, and the next one marked 00. The same values without any figures at the back are now common, as are also the 5, and 10 lepta. Perhaps this carelessness betokens the coining of a new issue, which is sorely wanted.” The italics are mine for the word “carelessness” seems to imply that the stamps without figures at the back were then regarded as varieties of the normal, an impression which would hardly have prevailed if the stamps had been in regular use for nearly two years. Further, The Philatelic Record for Feb., 1882, in its list of the new issues of the previous year, includes the four values, 5, 10, 20 and 40 lepta (rose-lilac) without figures. It is possible that the philatelic press of those days overlooked the issue for eighteen months or so, but all the evidence seems to point to the 20 lepta without figures having been first issued in the latter part of 1880 and the other three values early in 1881. The Oct., 1881 issue of the Philatelic Record had the following note, which is of considerable interest: “The Timbre-Poste says that the 20 lepta adhesive has, owing to its being extensively forged, been withdrawn from circulation. The Post Office authorities at Athens in a circular which points out the differences between the forged stamp and the genuine one, say that the forgery still has the numeral of value on the back, which in the genuine stamp has been suppressed for a year.” This stamp, therefore, was in use for a bare twelve months, which accounts for its being so scarce. It is curious that the forgeries referred to are unknown today; is it possible that they were not forgeries but some poor impressions of genuine stamps which the authorities were unable to recognize? The list of the stamps of this period includes the last printings of the 1 and 2 lepta, which can only be distinguished from earlier ones by peculiarities of shade, printing and paper.

1 Lepton

V. 1881. 1 lepton, deep red-brown on thin buff paper.

This printing, but for the evidence of dated copies, would appear to belong to the 1871-76 set, as the paper is very thin, coarse-grained and transparent. It is almost identical with that of printing R, to which also it bears a strong resemblance in color. The impression, however, of this later stamp is heavier and coarser. The lines of shading on the cheek generally run into one another very much, which is not the case in the earlier stamp, while the spandrels are very rough. I have seen many copies dated 1882 and later, the earliest being 30 June, 1882. It is identical with Gibbons No. 62.

W. 1883. 1 lepton, reddish-fawn on cream.

Impression poor. Even in the best printed specimens, there is a hardness and coarseness of outline which distinguishes them from any earlier printings. The color also is distinctive, having a more yellowish tinge than that of printings L and N. The paper is of medium texture.

X. 1883. 1 lepton, pale fawn on cream.

In every respect save the shade this printing is similar to the last. The color is paler and has a still more yellowish tinge than the last. Some specimens are carefully printed, but it is obvious that by now the plate had been too much used to reproduce clearly all the finer lines of the design. The lines of shading on the cheek are generally thick and rather short.

Y. 1885. 1 lepton, dark red-brown on cream.

Some specimens of this might easily be mistaken for U. but the points which differentiate it are as follows: The color, which is not quite so deep is rather more reddish; the shading on the cheek which is generally shorter, and the fact that in many specimens the outer frame-line of the stamp is indistinct—in some cases failing to print altogether. The paper is of moderate thickness.

Z. 1886. 1 lepton, gray-brown on cream.

This, which I believe was the last, is at the same time one of the most distinctive of all the printings of the 1 lepton. This solely by reason of the color. The only one to which it bears any resemblance is the pale shade of T. The shade varies very much from pale to very deep gray-brown; it also varies slightly in tone, some specimens being rather more yellowish than the majority.

The printing is distinctly better than in the last three, but in the deepest shades the peculiarity which I noted under Y, namely the weakness of the outer frame-line is again in evidence; this fact, and the shortness of the shading on the cheek, serving to distinguish them from pale shades of T, to which they hear a strong resemblance in color.

2 Lepta

O. (? 1881). 2 lepta, yellow-bistre on straw.

Execution very good; looks much earlier at first glance on account of the color which is almost identical with D. Like that printing also the paper is thin, but closer inspection shows that the impression is nothing like as early.

P. (? date). 2 lepta, yellow-bistre on straw.

Impression produced with the aid of a new découpage, giving an appearance generally described as from a "cleaned plate." Though the lines of shading on the cheek are fine, (sometimes dotted) and the spandrels are rather pale, the execution is indistinct. The color is a full yellow-brown and the paper is rather thin, but not so thin as in O.

Q. 1883. 2 lepta, deep dull bistre-brown on straw.

Impression distinctly coarse. All details cloudy; in some specimens the inscriptions and the ornamentation at the sides are indecipherable. The color is deep as in F, but is much duller. The paper is of average thickness. This is a common printing, especially unused.

R. (? date). 2 lepta, dull bistre-brown on straw.

Impression very coarse, but not usually so bad as in Q, probably because the ink was not so thickly applied. In all respects save that the color is not so deep, this printing corresponds with the last.

S. (? date). 2 lepta, pale brown on straw.

In all respects save color this resembles Q and R. The color is remarkable as it is brown, not yellow. It is more like a very pale 1 lepton than a 2 lepta, and was probably printed in error. The nearest shade to it among the 2 lepta is printing I, but it is an even warmer tint than that and has no tinge of yellow in it. In my experience it is extremely scarce. I have no precise reason for putting it as the last printing of this value, but it is obviously a very late one.

5 Lepta

V. (? April, 1881). 5 lepta, dark green on cream.

Impression good. Lines of shading clear and separate. Color medium to deep green; paper fairly stout and well finished, which no doubt accounts in great measure for the good printing. The paper varies in tone from cream to almost buff, but never so markedly deep in tone as that used in printing X.

W. (? date). 5 lepta, deep green on thin cream paper.

Color deeper than in the last and printing not so good. The paper is the best guide, being very thin with a transparency which is not due to the gum.

X. 1883. 5 lepta, deep yellow-green on buff.

This is another very distinctive printing, by reason of the paper, which is a very pro­nounced buff. The texture is coarse but the paper is fairly thick, and not transparent except in specimens which have the gum, when it is slightly so. The impression is generally coarse.

Y (? date). 5 lepta, deep yellow-green on cream.

Execution good to very good. Color more yellow-green than in any of the last three printings and hardly so deep, but still a full color. Paper of medium thickness (but not so thick as in X) and toned rather a deep cream.

Z. (? date). 5 lepta deep yellow-green on transparent cream paper.

Impression not quite so good as before in most specimens, but much better than in W to which printing it bears some resemblance on account of the paper being thin and transparent. But whereas W is a really thin paper the transparency in this printing is probably due to the gum. The color is as in Y and is more yellowish than and not so deep as in W.

Za. 1881. 5 lepta, pale green on cream.

Impression fair. Color pale green, generally with pronounced yellowish tinge. Paper varies from medium to rather thin.

Zb. 1885. 5 lepta, green on cream.

Similar to the last, but not so pale. Color varies from green to yellowish-green.

Zc. (? date). 5 lepta, pale sage-green on cream.

Similar to Za, except for the color.

Zd. 1886. 5 lepta, pale yellow-green on buff.

Impression very fair. The color of the paper is very distinctive, but it is not such a deep buff as in printing X. This printing is scarce.

10 Lepta

N. May, 1881. 10 lepta, deep orange-vermilion on cream.

The color is an infallible guide to this printing. It is normally very deep and bright and occasionally remarkably so. In the palest specimens the printing is fair but in the very bright ones the ink has been laid on so heavily that in some cases the inscriptions and other details are quite blotted out. The paper is fairly stout. This is the printing which is so rare unused, and corresponds with Gibbons No.123.

O. July, 1881. 10 lepta, deep orange on cream.

This is something like the last but the color is not so bright, the orange tint predominating, in fact the color is identical with some of the medium shades of M, which was the last printing with figures at the back. The impression is better than in N.

P. August, 1881. 10 lepta, bright orange-yellow on cream.

It is evident that a new découpage was used for this printing. The lines of shading are light, and so are the spandrels, while in many specimens the outer frame-line is very indistinct. The color is very bright and is rather more yellow than orange. The paper is good.

Q. October, 1881. 10 lepta, orange-yellow on cream.

The color is not so bright nor the printing so good, but the latter is still very fair; in other respects, very much like the last.

R. January, 1882. 10 lepta, dull orange-yellow on cream.

The color is again much duller and with less orange in it, yet it is rather a deep shade. The impression is much less clear, probably owing to the fact that the paper is thinner and generally transparent.

S. March, 1882. 10 1epta, dull orange-yellow on buff.

In color and impression this is very much like the last, but the paper, which is yellowish or buff is a sure guide. It is a scarce stamp.

T. June, 1882. 10 lepta, deep yellow-orange on buff.

In every respect like the last except that the color is much deeper and redder. This also is scarce but nothing like so rare as S.

U. December, 1882. 10 1epta, dull red-orange on cream.

The color is nearly as deep as in O but is not quite so red. The impression is poor and indistinct. The paper is generally fairly stout.

V. 1883. 10 lepta, yellow-orange on cream.

The color is rather like Q but is somewhat deeper and more orange. It need not be confused with Q as the impression is normally much coarser.

W. 1884. 101epta, pale orange-yellow on cream.

Impression light but poor, appearing as though lacking in ink and giving a very flat appearance. Color pale. Paper fairly stout and not transparent.

X. 1885. 10 lepta, pale yellow on cream.

This is the palest and yellowest of all these printings of the 10 lepta and can therefore easily be distinguished. In other respects it is very like the last printing.

20 Lepta

Zc. December, 1880. 20 lepta, deep ultramarine on cream.

This is the only printing of the blue 20 lepta without figures at the back. With the exception of the absence of figures it is precisely similar to Zb. It was withdrawn from use and demonetized in October, 1881, on account of forgeries being supposed to be in circulation.

THE 30 AND 60 LEPTA

Owing to a reduction in the postal rates for letters going abroad, two new values were required, viz., 30 lepta and 60 lepta. These stamps were ordered from Paris and were delivered in Athens in 1878. The design was the same as for the other values, and there can be no doubt that the same original die was used. There must have been some alteration in the method of constructing the plates, as the stamps differ in two important details from those of the first issue. Thus the numerals of value, 30 or 60, do not vary in position or shape, which proves that an intermediate die on which the required numerals were engraved was used for making the electros for each plate. The other point, due no doubt to an improvement in the process of electrotyping, is the fact that there are no variations in the width of the frame as in the other values.

The sheets consisted as before of 150 stamps in fifteen rows of ten. In the stamps which were afterwards printed in Athens, marginal specimens generally show .a narrow frame-line at a distance of 1 millimeter from the stamp, from which it might be inferred that a line was drawn on the plate enframing the whole block of 150 stamps. I believe this inference is wrong for I have not seen any indication of the line on Paris prints, while some lightly printed Athens prints are also without it. The explanation seems to be that the line was caused by the edge of the plate, which, in this case was unusually close to the stamps. In the carefully printed Paris prints the ink was wiped off the edges before printing, and consequently left the margins of the sheets quite blank.

The stamps were first issued in September, 1875, and were announced in a Royal Decree dated September 15th of that year, in the following terms:

* “Two more stamps have been added to the existing list, viz.:

30 lepta, gray or dust color.
60 lepta, dark green.”

* From “The Stamps of Greece” by W. Dorning Beckton.

There are two distinct shades or printings of the Paris-printed 30 lepta, as follows:

Olive-brown on straw, and
Brown on straw.

The latter is very scarce, barely five per cent. of used specimens being in this shade, although Gibbons prices both the same. Mr. Beckton mentions that this stamp exists double-printed, but does not say whether he has seen a used specimen. I have seen unused copies which I should say belong undoubtedly to the proof or mise en train impressions. A large number of the unused copies of this value which one sees are in the same category and are either without gum or have been re-gummed. These are also found in shades paler than the issued stamps.

The Paris 60 lepta is printed in dark green on thin transparent paper, deeply tinted green. There was a large remainder of this stamp which accounts for its being so plentiful unused. Used specimens are very much scarcer.

THE ATHENS-PRINTED 30 AND 60 LEPTA

The first printing of the 30 lepta made in Athens was in a shade very similar to the Paris print but the paper is more cream than straw in tint and is generally more transparent. The very earliest prints were well executed and might be mistaken for Paris prints but for the shading on the cheek which is not dotted.

I do not sub-divide this value any more than is done by Mr. Beckton, or by Gibbons’ Catalogue, though printing A shows a large range of shades and some varieties of paper.

30 Lepta

A. September, 1876. 30 lepta, olive-brown on cream.

The earliest date I have seen is 5th Sept., 1876. The impression varies from very good to poor. The paper is generally thin and transparent but of good texture, but varieties may be found on a thicker and coarser paper. The color also varies from very deep to pale, and generally speaking the deeper the color the more pronounced is the olive tint.

B. 1876. 30 lepta, olive-brown on buff.

Impression coarse, the shading on the cheek and the spandrels being very heavy and blotchy. The color seems to be hardly so olive as the last, but this I think is an illusion caused by the color of the paper which is buff and gives the whole stamp a warmer tone. The paper is always very thin and transparent.

C. 1878. 30 lepta, deep brown on cream.

The color is so different from that of either of the preceding printings that there need be no confusion here. It is practically the same as that used for the later stamps of printing T of the 1 lepton, which was in use at the same time. The two stamps are indeed, so much alike that confusion must have arisen in the post office, and yet the two stamps were in use concurrently for at least two years before the color of the 1 lepton, was changed to red-brown (printing U). The paper of this printing is thick and rather coarse.

60 Lepta

A. 1876. 60 lepta, deep green on buff.

The impression is coarse; the buff paper is alone sufficient to distinguish this from the Paris. The paper is rather thin and the color varies from very deep to medium.

ISSUE OF 1882

This issue comprises the 20, 30 and 40 lepta in changed colors. The appearance of the two lower values was announced in a Royal Decree dated Dec. 31st, 1881, in which the 80 lepta was, at the same time, cancelled and demonetized. The 40 lepta was not issued, apparently, until nearly the end of 1882. It was not referred to in the Royal Decree above mentioned and there is no record of any official notice heralding its appearance.

Owing to the fact that there was a fairly big stock of the old 30 and 40 lepta still on hand, these two values in the new colors were not in general use for a long time after their first appearance. The 20 lepta, however, was used regularly from April, 1882. The earliest date I have seen is April 6th; it was chronicled for the first time in the Philatelic Record for May of that year.

All values are without figures at back.

The following is a list of the printings:

20 Lepta

A. 1882. (April). 20 lepta, deep carmine on cream.

The execution is poor, especially in the most heavily printed specimens. The color varies from medium to very deep. In unused condition the palest shades are the scarcer, owing to the appearance during the last few yeas of a small remainder, which are all in a very deep shade and printed on paper rendered transparent by the gum. Used stamps in this shade and on transparent paper are very scarce.

B. Jan., 1883. 20 lepta, deep bright aniline rose on cream.

Execution still poor, all the finer details of the design appearing very coarse. The color is sometimes a very intense glowing shade, and this is particularly noticeable in some of the remainders, of which a small lot recently came on the market. Some of these latter are almost scarlet and execrable impressions.

C. March, 1883. 20 lepta, bright aniline rose on cream.

Impression and execution as last, the shade varies considerably. Paper rather thin but not so transparent as the last.

D. (? date). 20 lepta, very pale aniline rose on cream.

Owing to the lighter color the impression generally appears better than in the last two printings. There is one extremely pale shade of this which is quite scarce. At first I thought it was faded or washed, but I have had several specimens, both used and unused, and have no doubt that it is as issued.

30 Lepta

A. 1882. (? May). 30 lepta, deep bright ultramarine on cream.

Execution poor, especially in the deepest shades. All the bright and deep shades belong to this printing, which was the first. The earliest date I have seen is 25th May, 1882, but Mr. Fearnley notes having seen 18th May. The paper is moderately stout and deep cream in tint.

B. 1882. 30 lepta, pale ultramarine on cream.

The execution is rather better in this printing. The color is a rather pale clear ultramarine, and is sometimes described as milky-blue. This appeared towards the end of 1882.

C. 1883. 30 lepta, dull grayish-blue on cream.

Execution as in A. The color is generally rather paler than the last, and has a dull grayish tone. The paper is deep cream.

40 Lepta

A. 1882. 40 lepta, deep mauve on cream.

Execution coarse as a rule, but in some eases fair. Paper fairly stout and very deeply tinted cream, in some cases appearing almost buff. The color varies somewhat in depth.

B.1884. 40 lepta, pale mauve on buff.

Execution as before. The color is much paler than in C, and the paper is more deeply toned.

FLAWS AND VARIETIES

All. values exhibit flaws and varieties of a greater or lesser degree of prominence. Under the heading “varieties” I class those stamps which, owing to some abnormality in making the electros, show a variation from the normal type. The 5 lepta with lines of shading on the cheek dotted, and the varieties of spacing between the outer frame line and the body of the stamp, noticeable in all values of 1861, belong to this class.

The flaws are of three kinds:

The flaws of the first variety, which are not very numerous, are found in all printings, though the dotted cheek variety of the 5 lepta is generally very difficult to detect in poor or indifferent printings.

The second kind of flaw is generally constant from the moment of its appearance on the plate until the end of the issue, but in the case of a flaw which appeared at a very early date, and of which I shall speak in its place, either some effort was made to correct it or it became filled up with dirt in such a way that it never occurred again.

In the same way some of the minor flaws which were due to this cause are indecipherable in the roughest of the late printings. When we remember that in some cases the inscriptions and the Greek border are blotted out with ink this is not to he wondered at.

Flaws of the third kind had very short lives as whenever the plates were cleaned they disappeared.

In the following list of the flaws and varieties I only mention those which, can be seen with the naked eye, and I have not divided them into the various classes.

1 Lepton.

1. Uncolored blotch in front of forehead. This is the flaw which defies all tradition by appearing only on the first two or three Athens prints. It occurs on No. 116 on the sheet.
2. Large blotch under point of bust. No. 44 on the sheet.
3. Oblong flaw at back of bead. No. 55. This and No. 2 are the prominent flaws which are well known to all collectors of Greeks. The aim of the most advanced collectors is to get the two together in a block. This is possible in very late printings, Z being the commonest; the earliest printing containing the two flaws which I recollect having seen is V, though I know of a block of M containing one of the flaws.
   Until quite lately it was always believed that these flaws first appeared on printing M (Gibbons 49) but I have, during the past few years, found it on several earlier printings, of which I is the first.
4. Distinct scratch in background between top of petasus and oval, No. 62, The earliest printing I have seen is T.

2 Lepta

I have seen no prominent variety on this value, though an examination of an entire sheet reveals numerous trivial ones.

5 Lepta.

1. The prominent variety in which the cheek is dotted instead of being composed of continuous lines, occurs on the 2nd stamp in the eighth row. No. 72 on the sheet. In the first Athens prints and in the well printed stamps of 1881 onwards, the variety can be seen very clearly, but on nearly all intermediate printings it is very difficult to discern. The striking nature of the variety makes it a most interesting addition to a collection. Many theories have been advanced to account for this variety, the most popular being that it is a retouch made on this particular stamp in order more nearly to reproduce the appearance of the Paris prints. My own view is that this particular electro was not so thickly coated with copper, and as the original die had dots only on the cheek, in this particular case the dots were not exaggerated or spread into one another so much as was apparently the case on all the other electros that went to make up the plate.
2. The so-called fish-hook variety, which is caused by the circle at the right opposite the nose being broken, the upper broken end being curved round like a hook and meeting the outer line. No 129 on the plate. This occurs on all issues, including the Paris.
3. This is similar to the last, in that the circle is broken in the same place, but there is no hook. There are several of this variety on the sheet, showing different widths of the break.

10 Lepta.

1. Small uncolored loop with dot in the center, on extreme right of circle. This occurs on A and all subsequent printings and probably exists on the Paris, though I have not noticed it.
2. Small uncolored flaw breaking through top of circle. Clear printings also show on the same stamp a thin vertical scratch in the background, in front of the lower part of face.
3. Two dots, instead of one, after second word of inscription in the top label. The earliest printing on which I have seen this is F.
4. Broken circle at right. This variety also shows a blotch of color, in frame, above the dot between the two words of inscription at top. This stamp is certainly from the bottom row of the sheet. According to Mr. Fearnley it is the third stamp in that row.
5. Thin, almost vertical, stroke immediately to right of the dot between the two words of inscription at top. I have only noticed this on the late printings without figures at back.
6. Long vertical scratch in background at back of head. This also, I believe, only occurs on the last few printings.
7. Long white flaw hanging downwards in background from below the point of the chin. M is the first printing on which I have seen this.

There are various other small varieties with scratches in the background, but those mentioned are the most noticeable.

20 Lepta.

1. One of the lines of shading on the cheek a little below the level of the mouth, is too short and thus produces a pronounced angle in the shading. This is found on all Athens printings, and is most noticeable on clearly printed copies. (No. 89 on the sheet).
2. Small flaw between the point of the base of the neck at back and the pearled circle. This occurs on the Paris and all subsequent printings, but is very indistinct in late ones. On an entire sheet of the aniline rose, which I have had the opportunity of examining, it appears to be stamp No. 22, but the impression is so indistinct that it is impossible to be quite certain.
3. Broken circle at right. There are several stamps on the sheet which have the circle at right either broken or thinned. These are on Nos. 18, 22, 82, 105 and 123. One of these, viz., No. 22, is further distinguished by an uncolored scratch, extending from margin at top of key-pattern at left diagonally downwards through petasus and ending in background above the forehead. Each of the other four varieties can be differentiated by means of other very minute flaws or specks of color which they exhibit, and also by the extent of the break in the circle, but it would take too long and serve no good purpose to attempt to describe them here.
4. In the fourth horizontal row a thin scratch runs across seven stamps. Beginning at the point of the chin on the third stamp it extends, slightly downwards at first, and later with a more pronounced slope, through stamps Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, and ends in the lower part of the S.E. corner block on the 9th stamp. On this last stamp the line runs in a slanting direction through the word at foot and the second “20.”

40 Lepta.

1. The outer line at top and for a short way down the right-hand side is missing. No. 19 on sheet.

80 Lepta.

There are no prominent flaws or varieties on this value. On nearly all Athens printings stamps may be found with a blotch of color on the cheek; these become more pronounced the later the printing.