Armenia 3rd Definitive

Blog New Update Mar 16/21 - several new forgeries added

First Issue
In October 1922, the third issue was produced, the ASSR. The stamps were produced in the printing shop of the
Gosnak Department of the People’s Finance Commission in Yerevan.
There were 2 Types
Because of inflation the first stamps were not circulated
Most of them were destroyed and genuine copies are very scarce

Second Issue
The issue consisted of 10 stamps with individual motifs on different papers.
Since the manufacturing process for the issue was about one year, the issue became obsolete due to inflation
Quantities issued
50 r. – 427500,  2000 r. – 427500
300 r. – 427500,  3000 r. – 427500
400 r. – 427500,  4000 r. – 427500
500 r. – 882000,  5000 r. – 427500
1000 r. – 810000,  10,000 r. – 427500
The stamps were printed on two types of paper using lithograph technology.
The 50, 400, 500, 1000, 2000, 3000 and 10,000 r. stamps were printed on white
paper. The 4000 and 5000 r. on lower quality yellow paper. The 300r was on both papers.
Two types of glue: white and yellow. The 11.5 perforations tend to be poorly done
All the stamps bear the following slogan, "Proletarians of All Nations Unite" and the initials, "ASSR" (Armenian
Soviet Socialist Republic), both written in Armenian.

The originals are shown below

NOTE - Many color varieties, paper and gum types exist of these.

This issue was extensively forged with several sources involved, some of which produced some very good forgeries.
A few forgery samples follow. There are several types

In the Type I forgery;

1. The letters are clearer

2. The mountain shading lines are erratic and a white space is generally present

3. The top of the 5 is flat

4. The hammer head has fewer lines

5. The double frame lines are thinner

6. The star is more uniform and larger

In the type II forgery

1. The areas around the sickle and hammer have more shading

2. As with many other Type II (see other in the blog) there are artifacts (small dashes) around the outer frame

3. The perfs are neater and larger than the Type I

 

In the forgery 

1. Round frame is thinner with less spikes.

2. The background is completely filled in

3. The ground shading lines are much clearer

In the forgery 

1. The inner ring is closer to the outer 

2. The comma is longer

3. & 4. The inner lines are not broken

In the forgery Type I

1. The hammer and handle are slightly larger

2. The rays are broken

3. The shadow behind the tablet is heavily shaded

4, The background lines are broken

Type II Forgery

1. The rays are not broken like the Type I

2. The area behind the tablet is not filled in

3. The design in the tablet is almost completely filled in

4. The lines are not missing as with the Type I and are identical to the original

5. There is a lot more shading than the original particularly on the right side.

In the forgery

1. The water lines are more complete and less troubled

2. There is a dot in the top right of frame (see close-up below)- this is typical of a Type II forgery along with numerous breaks in the sky lines

3. The lines under the columns are thinner

4. The mountain top is not filled in

5. There is generally a break in the sky line

6. The letters are thinner and neater, the comma is not well represented

This is a Type I forgery

1. There is no break in the skyline and no dot at the top right of the frame

2. The perfs are cleaner and larger than the forgery above

3. The shading lines are much finer than in the original

In the forgery;
This is probably a Type I forgery distinguished by the last bottom background having a break on the left
1. The background lines are more complete dense and with few breaks
2. The star rays have no breaks
3. The bottom bell shaped ornaments are smaller and well defined

This is a Type II forgery

1. The perf holes are larger and well neater

2. The bottom row of ornaments are slightly large and not as well defined

In this Type I forgery

1. Part of the shading is missing

2. The lines in the leg are uneven compared to the genuine stamp

3. The letters are thinner and well defined

4. The background lines are mostly complete

This appears to be a Type II forgery

1. The zipper on the seed pocket is well defined

2. The letters are clear and thin

3. The background lines are broken but not as much as the original

4. The perforations are very neat and the perf holes are larger than the first forgery

In the forgery;

1. The rays are better defined

2. The background coloring is less blotchy

3. The hair and eyebrows show little or no individual hairs

4. The O shape is not a constant

5. The letters are thinner and clearer

This forgery is very similar to the above

The area to the left of the head and below have many shading differences

It is possibly a variety of the above

In the forgery;

1 Facial details lacking.

2. Shading lines are coarser and irregular.

3. Sickle on anvil has a center line added.

In the forgery;

1. Bottom line extends to tip of horn

2. Ground lines are more defined.

3. Handle does not extend to the plow

This is probably a Type II

It has the plow handle and the line touching the horn of the previous forgery

In addition the background lines have many breaks and all the shading lines are finer.

As with the other type II the perfs are neat and  larger

The overprint is fake as with any overprint on a forged stamp

New Arrivals

Listed as a lilac color proof

Although the design is more dense than the original, it has the general traits of an original

This was described as a rare color proof

However the traits of the forgery are predominant

This stamp was described as being genuine with a rare missing background.

What is there matches the forgery

This was described as a rare orange colored background

The forgery features are all present