Barwani - Posthumous Impressions

I came across this specialist material from Barwani a few years back when I had just started showing interest in the stamps of the Princely States of India. They were offered to me as Barwani Proofs, a few of which were supposedly taken on cards for official records before the dies were defaced in the year 1948. I was offered the below three 'Proofs in Black on Cards' for a price of $150. I picked them up promptly, and when I happily shared my new acquisitions, I was in for a surprise!

A Mentor and a few other experienced philatelists brought to my awareness that these were the last states of the the original plates, Printing IX, but were taken much later, probably in the 1960s or even 1970s, and are certainly not 'official' proofs! I was told that the Barwani printing plates were in fact not defaced in the late 1940s but might have fell into the hands of a dealer at a later point in time who decided to run impressions of these, and that these started appearing in the market only in the 1970s. Also, there was a suggestion that that these plate impressions might have been taken with official permission of the concerned authorities of that time, although this doesn't seem that much of a possibility.

I found that there were too many of these out there on offer, and they were confidently described as Barwani Proofs, and they did sell for good prices, just like the offer price I got them for. It seems to me that not only the collectors and buyers but the dealers themselves, at least most of them, do believe that these are official proofs going by the way they confidently describe it and back it up with the prices for these. perhaps, due to the lack of in-depth knowledge and research which only a select few possess as I've observed, most of the philatelic circle does not find any reasons to doubt their origin. I came to know that genuine official proofs of Barwani Devi Singh types are very rare items, seldom seen offered in the international market.



The person who sold these to me sincerely believed they were the official proofs and as he was a very good friend of mine, he promptly took back the material when I expressed concern. And he did sell them eventually on eBay for the same prices, making me think often if I should have retained them anyway. But if not for this opportunity of having come across and bought this material, I wouldn't have known so much about the background about these as well as about Barwani stamps in general. There were a couple of suggestions as to what to call these if one should be accurate. One experienced collector lent the term "Posthumous proofs" and another renowned philatelist came out with his own description, as is typical of him: "Modern posthumous impressions, taken from original un-defaced plate of last state IX from late 1940s"

The 1904 Perkins Bacon Business Samples!

When I acquired these stamps many years back, I had just got my Stanley Gibbons Commonwealth & British Empire Catalogue, and eagerly, I dived in to identify these stamps from Kishangarh depicting Maharaja Madan Singh. I quickly spotted a similar illustrated image in the Kishangarh section of the catalogue, easily standing out from the rest of the stamps from Kishangarh.

However, to my utter dismay, I realized that the only 'one anna' value of this stamp design issued was in blue color, in years 1904 and 1906 perforated 12½ and 13½ respectively. My first reaction was to assume that these stamps that I have newly acquired - all of them were of 1 anna denomination but in various other colors unlisted in the catalogue - might be bogus issues, just like the many unauthorized labels from Faridkot printed and sold in various colors.

On a quick second look into the catalogue section, I spotted a footnote that went - Stamps in other colors, all perforated 13½, were produced by Perkins Bacon as business samples!

Upon further studying of all the stamps issued by Kishangarh, I realized that SG 42/50 Set of 9 values issued and used in the period 1904-10 (along with the same stamps handstamped towards official postage in the same period SG O17/O24) were the only instance when the services of Perkins Bacon were employed for producing Kishangarh stamps. Also, these were the only Kishangarh stamps that were printed by Recess and were issued with gum. All the other Kishangarh stamps were issued without gum, printed Typo locally.

Upon consulting another Princely States expert, I came to know that the brown and the purple shade of these Perkins Bacon Specimen stamps were more common as compared to the other color trials.

Perkins Bacon continued to produce stamps for a few Princely States of India up until circa 1930s, producing some classic and elegant beauties that stood in stark contrast to the otherwise common referral in the philatelic circles to the stamps of the Indian Princely States - "the Uglies".

To fulfil the curiosity of the Princely States enthusiasts who might be wondering how much such business samples would cost - each of these stamps might cost around $20, and at times, this group of 5 color trials is also offered together for around £50 or so...

Besides the business samples exhibited here on this blog, the issued stamps themselves, a long set of values ranging from ¼ anna to 5 rupees, were ordered in large quantities, and these supplies were still lying in the state treasury even in 1948 when Kishangarh merged with the rest of the Rajputana to form the State of Rajasthan!

Great to be back at blogging the stamps of the Princely States!

The confounding Rajasthan handstamp!

When Rajasthan was formed in 1948-49 merging the states of Bundi, Jaipur and Kishangarh among other states from Rajputana, the local posts in these states continued to function more or less separately until ordered by the Indian Government to close down in April, 1950.

Among the postage stamps used locally in this intermittent period, besides the Bundi and Jaipur postage stamps handstamped and overprinted for use as postage stamps of Rajasthan, many of the very early Kishangarh postage stamps stocks from as early as the reign of Maharaja Sardul Singh (1879-1900), as well as the postage stamps from the reign of Maharaja Madan Singh (1900-1926) were handstamped in 'red' as per the Stanley Gibbons and other catalogues' classification (although I must have to admit here that seldom have I seen a handstamp on these Rajasthan stamps in the actual 'red' color!

Lastly, the postage stamps of Kishangarh issued and used under the reign of Maharaja Yagyanarayan Singh (1926-1939) were handstamped similarly to be used as postage in Rajasthan, as you can see from the picture of the fine sheetlet above.

I acquired this material two years back with the item description saying "Rajasthan SG 61/CW 79 4a brown". I looked into both the Stanley Gibbons and the KGVI Commonwealth Catalogues for further study and confirmation, but to my utter surprise, found this 4a brown only listed as 'handstamped in red'! Now this sheetlet has a violet handstamp, not red!

The only values from this entire issue/set that had a 'violet handstamp' listing in either of these catalogues was the 1/2 anna and the 1 anna values.

I sought help from fellow collectors and Philatelists, and the examples they had from this issue that could be used to compare, as reference, showed pink handstamps for what's formally classified as 'red' in the catalogues. I'm yet to find an example where the handstamp is actually 'red' in color!

These were a few possible conclusions I arrived at after much thought, research and consulting:

[1] Since all the stamps I've come across from this issue/group have a pink handstamp for 'red' and since I have seldom come across any of these stamps with an actually red handstamp, it could either be so that the handstamps on this issue have all faded/discolored over the years or the catalogues have been a bit casual in listing these handstamps as 'red'

Or

[2] Since the 'violet' as well as 'blue' handstamp varieties have been listed for certain other values in the catalogues, and since this value in particular - 4a brown - was the most heavily overprinted value in this entire issue of 9 values, this 4a brown 'violet handstamp' could well be an 'unlisted variety'!

Or

[3] Another theory put forth by a fellow philatelist was that since there were other values listed as violet handstamp variety in the catalogues, the Kishangarh Authorities might have overprinted everything remaining in the State Treasury at some point with this violet handstamp.

What could have been... but turned out to not be so...

[4] Also I found that the expertising bodies were reluctant to issue certificates for such handstamped overprints for many years as they were too easy to be forged. However I doubt this as I acquired this material from one of the most reputed firms well-known for their focus and expertise on Indian States! Besides, this postage stamp without the handstamp, Kishangarh SG 88 (1944), is currently catalogued at £28 each as compared to £2.75 when handstamped! So this rules out the possibility of forgery decisively...

I'd highly appreciate if someone has something more to add or contribute here, or share their further insights about the inconclusive findings that I've come to, as yet... Also, if someone does have a stamp from this issue, any value, with an actually 'red handstamp' that also looks red, I'd really appreciate if you could share a high-resolution image of the same with me, or here at the blog itself, for the benefit of all who might be keenly following this trail as well.

To wind up with some trivia, a senior philatelist tells me that Stanley Gibbons refused to list any overprinted handstamp issues from Rajasthan till the late 1950s because they didn't believe these stamps did actual postal duty. It was somewhere between the 1960s and the 1980s that they changed their mind, recognized these Indian State issues and started listing them in their catalogues.

Well, I bid adieu now, with this sheetlet still remaining confounding! The search continues...

Safi.