Here's Where I Fail To Understand Scott's Logic....

Ok, I just got my 4 1923 Ukraine Famine Relief semipostal stamps in the mail.

So, I'm starting to hack some pages together for these stamps. Went to look up the stamps in Scott, and I am baffled.

The stamps are available in a number of varieties, according to Ingert Kuzych (Ingert is an authority when it comes to Ukrainian Postage Stamps. He has written several books, and Scott has used him as a consultant on the catalog.) They come:

Perforated unwatermarked
Unperformated unwatermarked
Perforated watermarked
Unperforated watermarked for one of the Shevchenko stamp
Overprinted

Scott lists the 4 Perforated unwatermarked stamps with major catalog numbers: B1 - B4
The 4 imperforate varieties are given only minor numbers B1a - B4a
The performated watermarked stamps are listed with major catalog numbers B5 - B8
The unperforated watermarked stamps get a minor number B6a
The overprinted stamps are not listed at all

So, when I look at Scott's US listing, if two stamps are the same, but have different perforation, they get different Scott major catalog numbers. Well, here we're looking at a perforated vs unperforated stamps, which is as different as you can get. And Scott only gives it a minor catalog number? I fail to see the logic here.

And the overprints, which would get major catalog numbers, if it were a US listing, don't even show up in the catalog.

Where is the logic Scott?

My 1981 copy of Stanley Gibbons list these about the same as Scott.

Some believe the imperforate watermarked stamps are printers waste.

Some believe the overprinted stamps are private in origin.

It's tough to say what's what with stamps that were only available for sale for 3 weeks...

Officially for sale for 3 weeks.

But there are far too many of these stamps out there, from a country in deep repression, to have been sold for only 3 weeks.

Obviously the remainders made it to the market by other means.

Question: Which were sold first... watermarked or unwatermarked?

My opinion... watermarked were sold first in that 3 week period and the unwatermarked continued to be printed and sold illegitimately for a much longer period of time.

Watermarked paper was more expensive back then but wouldn't be necessary for stamps sold illegitimately; even though some may have made it through the postal system at the time.

Personally, I think that both paper stocks were sold at the same time. I think the whole series was printed on leftover printer paper to save costs, which meant the printer used both his watermarked and unwatermarked scrap paper to make sure he had enough to complete the order.

I just joined the UPNS yesterday. Soon as I get my login and password for the site, I'll post a messsage on their forums and see what they say.

Michel lists the unwatermarked perforated as 67A-70A, the unwatermarked imperf as 67B-70B, the watermarked perforated as 67 X A-70 X A and the imperf watermarked one as 68 X B.
No mention at all of an overprint.

I found out the overprint stamps were UPU submitted samples. The "3PA3OK" overprint is "Sample" in Cyrillic.