Working Backwards - Postal History Sunday

Welcome to this week's entry of Postal History Sunday.  PHS is hosted every week on the Genuine Faux Farm blog and the GFF Postal History blog.  Everyone is welcome here, regardless of the level of knowledge and expertise you might have in postal history.  Each week is a little bit different - so if this one doesn't speak to you, come back for the next one or check out prior entries!

Last Sunday's post was more of what some people might call a social history post. The focus was on the writer and the recipient of the letter and the postal aspect was background information to fill out the story.  This week I thought I'd tip the scales and lean into the postal history side a bit more.

We're going to work backwards this week by looking first at a few covers that I added to my collection some time ago.  None of them cost me much, so I was willing to pick them up as learning pieces - things that would encourage me to expand my knowledge and understanding of some area of postal history I was less comfortable with.

The folded letter shown above was mailed from Triest, which was then located in the Austrian Empire.  The postage was paid using 16 kreuzer in Austrian postage stamps.  The destination was Bologna, which was in the Kingdom of Italy in 1867, when this letter was mailed.  And, in case you were hoping for a little social history, Leon Vita Levi was part of the Jewish community in Bologna and makes an appearance in this 1865 publication ( Monthly Newspaper for the History and Spirit of Judaism).

I picked up this folded letter at the same time as the first.  This letter traveled from Triest (again in Austria) to Molfetta, which is further south in the Kingdom of Italy.  This time there is 21 kreuzer in postage instead of the 16 kreuzer that was found on the first letter.  The letter was mailed in 1865, so the two letters are not that far apart as far as mailing date is concerned. 

This, of course, had me asking some questions.  If both letters started in Triest and both went to a destination in the Kingdom of Italy, why are there two different postage amounts?  Both seem to have indicators that the postage was paid to destination (P.D.).  

Then there was this one, mailed in 1870.  Once again it was mailed from Triest to a location in the Kingdom of Italy.  Firenze (Florence) would be in the Tuscan region of Italy, so it would be further away from Triest than Bologna and closer than Molfetta.  This one appears to also be paid to destination (P.D.), but the postage paid was only 15 kreuzer.

• 16 kreuzer to Bologna in 1867
• 21 kreuzer to Molfetta in 1865
• 15 kreuzer to Florence in 1870

What in the world is going on here?  I wasn't seeing a pattern, so I went through the possibilities that came to me as I considered these three items.

1. Perhaps the postage rate changes between 1865 and 1870 - maybe more than once?
2. Perhaps one or more of these letters weighs more than a simple letter?
3. Perhaps distance changes the postage rate?
4. Perhaps one of these letters was overpaid?
5. Perhaps someone has altered one or more of these pieces of postal history?  Maybe stamps are missing or added?

Well, I had some options.  I could locate pictures and scans of other related items and begin to deduce patterns.  Or, I could try to find resources that would tell me what the postal rates between Austria and the Kingdom of Italy were during this time period. 

I chose to start with what I knew already and then look for resources that would contain the rates for the time.

What I already understood

I was aware that, prior to 1860, Italy was broken into many Italian States.  After the War of 1859, Sardinia (northwest Italy) led the way to unification.  The Kingdom of Italy, by the time we get to 1865, consisted of all of Italy except Venetia and the Patrimony of St Peter (around Rome).  

I was also aware that Austria, Tuscany, Modena, Parma and the Papal State participated in the Austrian-Italian Postal League.  The postage rates in that arrangement included both a weight and a distance component to determine the cost of sending a letter.

Example 1 - Austria to Tuscany during Austrian-Italian Postal League 

Tuscany did not share a border with Austria, relying on transit via Parma, Modena or the Papal States.  There was the possibility for mail via steamship as well.  Regardless, the distance was never going to fall below 10 meilen (1 meilen = 7.5 km), so the postal rate for the shortest distance from Austria would never be effective if the destination was in Tuscany.

Prepaid Letter Rates - Austria to Modena/Parma

Effective Date	Rate	Unit	Distance
Apr 1, 1851	6 kreuzer	1 loth	10-20 meilen (c)
""	9 kreuzer	1 loth	20+ meilen
Nov 1, 1858	10 kreuzer	1 loth	10-20 meilen
""	15 kreuzer	1 loth	20+ meilen
Apr 28, 1859 (a)
March, 1860 (b)

(a) - prepay only to the border possible - mails via Switzerland

(b) - Kingdom of Italy rates at this time
(c) - 1 meilen is approx 7.5 km, so distances are 75-150 km and 150+ km

So, I could figure out postage amounts for items between the Austrian Empire and some of the Italian States.  But, once I get to March of 1860, I wasn't so sure.  Still, it doesn't hurt to look at examples that come from a prior postal rate period to help me to get more comfortable with mail processes in the region.

9 kreuzer per loth 150+ km distance:  Apr 1, 1851 - Oct 31, 1858

Note: you can see larger versions by clicking on images

Wien (Vienna) Mar 26, 1858     Firenze (Florence) Mar 2 , 1858

The folded letter shown above traveled about 860 km to go from Wien (Vienna) to Firenze (Florence) in 1858.  It's interesting to note that there is no "P.D." on this letter.  But, there is a slash in black ink on the front that tells us the Florentine postal clerk recognized it as paid.

Example 2 - Austria to Modena/Parma during Austrian-Italian Postal League 

In the 1850s, both Lombardy and Venetia were part of the Austrian Empire.  That means it was possible for destinations in Modena, Parma and the Papal States to fall within the shortest distance for calculating postage.  Otherwise, this table looks similar to the last one.  We just add a row for the shortest distance.  This was part of the appeal of the postal league.  Postal patrons in the Austrian Empire did not have to figure out different postage rates for each Italian State.

Prepaid Letter Rates - Austria to Modena/Parma

Effective Date	Rate	Unit	Distance
Jun 1, 1852	3 kreuzer	1 loth	up to 10 meilen
""	6 kreuzer	1 loth	10-20 meilen
""	9 kreuzer	1 loth	20+ meilen
Nov 1, 1858	5 kreuzer	1 loth	up to 10 meilen
""	10 kreuzer	1 loth	10-20 meilen
""	15 kreuzer	1 loth	20+ meilen
June 11(?), 1859(a)
May 15, 1862 (b)

(a) - prepay only to the border possible - mails via Switzerland

(b) - Kingdom of Italy rates at this time
(c) - 1 meilen is approx 7.5 km, so distances are up to 75km, 75-150 km and 150+ km 

15 kreuzer per loth 150+ km distance:  Nov 1, 1858 - June 11, 1859

Postal rates in Austria changed in 1858 when the empire implemented currency reform.  Technically, it was not the rates that changed - it was the value of the kreuzer that changed.  But, from a postal historian's perspective the rate amounts are different and the postage stamps also changed.  

The distance from Triest to Modena was approximately 340 km, which was roughly equivalent to 45 meilen, well over the 20 meilen mark.

Triest Mar 31, 1859      via Modena Apr 2, 1859

Routing options may include a northern route via Verona or a Southern via Bologna.  However the route didn't make a difference in postage because the distance component was not determined by the actual route a letter took to get from place to place.  Instead, distances between places were determined by agreement.  It was just understood that Triest to Modena fell in the longest distance calculation.

And what I needed to learn

With my knowledge of the Austrian-Italian Postal League, I had some groundwork already in place.  I was also aware that the borders in the region were changing.  There was a history of using distance as part of the postal rate calculation.  And, of course, it was pretty clear that postal agreements were going to be adjusted after the War of 1859.

It turns out that, as the Kingdom of Italy was being formed, the Austro-Sardinian rate structure was put into place.  So, my next step was to figure out how mail between Austria and Sardinia worked.

Example 3 - Austria to Sardinia/Kingdom of Italy Prepaid Letter Rates  

The Sardinians and the Austrians used rayons (or postal zones) to determine the distance component for their postage rates.  Rayons could be loosely defined by distance from the border.  But, postal clerks referred to lists of post offices to determine which rayon the origin and destination for a letter were in.  In many ways, a rayon based system was not so different from a distance based system - especially since actual traveling distance was not considered.

So, a letter might originate in the first, second or third rayon of Austria and travel to the first or second rayon in Sardinia.  Please note that there was a third rayon in Sardinia during the 1840s, but Sardinia was reorganized into two rayons starting in 1854.  

It certainly results in a fairly complicated table!

Prepaid Letter Rates - Austria to Sardinia/Kingdom of Italy

June 1, 1844	Jan 1, 1854	Nov 1, 1858(a)	Distance
N/A	3 kreuzer	5 kreuzer	< 30 km distance
6 kreuzer	6 kreuzer	10 kreuzer	1st Aus/1st Sard
9 kreuzer	9 kreuzer	16 kreuzer	2nd Aus/1st Sard
15 kreuzer	12 kreuzer	21 kreuzer	3rd Aus/1st Sard
8 kreuzer	9 kreuzer	16 kreuzer	1st Aus/2nd Sard
12 kreuzer	12 kreuzer	21 kreuzer	2nd Aus/2nd Sard
18 kreuzer	15 kreuzer	26 kreuzer	3rd Aus/2nd Sard
10 kreuzer	N/A	N/A	1st Aus/3rd Sard
13 kreuzer	N/A	N/A	2nd Aus/3rd Sard
19 kreuzer	N/A	N/A	3rd Aus/3rd Sard
per 1/2 wienerlot	per 1 loth	per 1 loth
Year	Rate	Weight Unit
Apr 20, 1859	35 new Kr	loth	via Switzerland
Sep 15, 1859 (b)
May 15, 1862 (c)
Oct 1, 1867	15 kr	15 grams	N/A

(a) -currency conversion to 100 kreuzer per gulden, same postal convention.

(b) - could pay the domestic rate to the border with remainder due

(c) - restore the 1854 convention, with 1858 new currency rate levels

16 kreuzer per loth Austria rayon II to Italy rayon I :  May 15, 1862 - Sep 30, 1867

And now we can make sense of our first two covers that I did not initially understand.  What I needed to learn is that the old agreement with Sardinia was simply restarted in 1862 and applied to the entire Kingdom of Italy.  The shaded area in the table can help you focus on the possible postage rates for mail from Austria to Italy at the time two of our letters were mailed.

Our first letter traveled about 300 km from Triest (in Austria rayon II) to Bologna (Italy rayon I).  By 1867, the rail lines were well established and Venetia was now a part of the Kingdom of Italy.  The railway crossed from Austria to Italy at Cormons in Austria and followed a route from Udine to Venice to Padova (and on to Bologna). 

Treist Feb 3, 1867 Bologna

 

That means we can take a good guess that our second letter cost more because it had to travel further!

21 kreuzer per loth Austria rayon II to Italy rayon II :  May 15, 1862 - Sep 30, 1867

via Ferrara, Bologna, Ancona and Foggia by Adriatic Coastal railway (~940km)

Triest Nov 1 or 4 ? Ferrara Nov 5, 1865 Ancona ??? Molfetta Nov 7, 1865

Sure enough, Molfetta was in Italy's second rayon, so the postage was 5 kreuzer more.

Prior to Austria’s loss of Venetia to the Kingdom of Italy in 1866 during the Seven Weeks War, Ferrara served as an exchange office on the Padova-Bologna rail line.  The Adriatic rail line that ran along the coast was available to the public (and mail carriage) by April 25, 1864.  So, it should be safe to say that this letter was carried on a train via this route.

The blurred backstamps are difficult to read, but the Ancona-Foggia docket on the front tells us to look for those two locations as possibly having reason to provide a postal marking.  It looks like there is an Ancona marking with the "A" being visible.  A second marking in the same location looks like it might be Foggia with "GGIA" being mostly visible. 

What about this one?

Well, here's the good news.  My guesses as to why these letters all required different amounts of postage were all on my list of possibilities. 

Let me remind you of them:

1. Perhaps the postage rate changes between 1865 and 1870 - maybe more than once?
2. Perhaps one or more of these letters weighs more than a simple letter?
3. Perhaps distance changes the postage rate?
4. Perhaps one of these letters was overpaid?
5. Perhaps someone has altered one or more of these pieces of postal history?  Maybe stamps are missing or added?

The first two letters were different rates because they traveled different distances, but they were mailed during the same rate period.  This item has a different rate because the postage rates were changed.  On October 1, 1867, the Austrian Empire agreed to remove the distance component and stick with a flat 15 kreuzer rate for mail to the Kingdom of Italy. 

 

That makes this additional 1870 letter fairly easy to figure out then!

For those of you that have read this far - well done!  For those of you who skipped to the end - I understand.  Postage rates are not something that interest everyone.  But, before you go, I want to point out all of the surrounding history that was hinted at as we looked at changes in the postage rates:

• The process of Italian reunification impacted postage rates (and routes).  It is a complex period of history for Italy with many interesting stories.
• The currency reform in Austria was a big deal that changes some of the patterns we see in Austrian mail of the time.
• If you are a person who likes military history, we've got the War of 1859 and the Seven Weeks War in 1866 - both are reflected by the available rates and routes.
  
• We can look at the changing influence of Austria in Italy - from spearheading a postal league to actually NOT having any postal agreement for a period of time after the War of 1859.
• Not obvious, but certainly a factor is the development of railways in Italy and increased access to Italy by land (remember the Alps are in the north!).
• And finally, the increased volume of mail and improved transportation between European nations is reflected by simpler, and less expensive, rate structures.

If this still doesn't make you reconsider whether postal rates could be interesting, I'll give you an excuse.  I like difficult Sodoku puzzles and I enjoy problem solving and looking for patterns.  It's not you.  It's me.  Sometimes it takes a different personality to enjoy something like this.

Still - I am glad you joined me today for Postal History Sunday.  Next week will be something completely different - and even I don't know what it will be at this point.  What I am certain of is that I am pleased to share something I enjoy and I hope we all had an opportunity to learn something new.

Have a fine remainder of your day and an excellent week to come.

The Foolish Desire - Postal History Sunday

Seven days can fly by before you know it and there are weeks where I am certain I had just completed Postal History Sunday - until I realize that was LAST week's entry.  This time around, I was certain that it would be one of those weeks, so I walked into Monday with a plan.  Now we're approaching Sunday and that plan didn't work out, so we'll do this instead! 

So, what is "this" you ask?  This is called a throwback post where I visit an earlier effort and try to breathe some new life into it.  So, if it has a familiar feel, that's the reason.  I hope you enjoy this (re-) effort.

Before we get too far into it, let me remind you that everyone is welcome here.  If you are idly curious about postal history this is for you.  If you find yourself spending hours enjoying postal history as a hobby, then this blog is for you too.  If you had scrambled eggs and toast for breakfast, you, too, are welcomed.  Though some of us might have liked it if you had brought some to share.

Postal History Sunday is hosted every week on the Genuine Faux Farm blog and the GFF Postal History blog.  Since we just ended the week that contains the 14th of February, I offer up the following item:

This small, tattered envelope was mailed from New Haven, Connecticut on December 15, 1863, to London England (arriving Dec 26).  The letter was written by Harriet Silliman Shepard DeForest to her cousin Erastus Lyman DeForest - and most of the letter came along with the envelope when I acquired it several years ago. 

Like many of the items I enjoy sharing, this envelope has a 24-cent stamp paying the 24 cent rate to England for a simple letter that weighed no more than 1/2 ounce.  The letter started in New Haven and then traveled to the foreign exchange office in New York City.  The clerk there marked the letter for a December 16th departure on the Cunard Line's Scotia, which arrived at Queenstown (Cobh, Ireland) on December 24.  It was taken out of the mailbag in London on December 26 and probably delivered to Number 8 Bishopsgate Street later that same day.

medallion showing Baring's building, from article by Clara Harrow

The letter was sent to Baring Brothers & Company, a financial institution that provided travelers with lines of credit and mail holding (or forwarding) services.  There are no markings on this envelope that tell us that Baring Brothers sent this to Mr. Erastus DeForest, so it is likely that it sat in their offices until he picked it up along with the rest of his mail from whichever side-trip he was on.  The alternative is that several letters were bundled together and forwarded to his current location.  There is really no way to tell how Mr. DeForest finally acquired it.  We can only recognize the possible options and then deal with not being certain which way it got to him.

The other interesting postal history aspect is the artistic design used for the device that canceled the stamp.  I discussed the New Haven postmark in the second half of this January offering titled On Your Marks - in case you are interested.

Postal administrations used canceling devices to acknowledge the stamps that paid for the service by marking or defacing them.  The primary motive was to avoid the loss of revenue that would come from people trying to re-use postage stamps without buying new ones. 

The letter drives the interest this time around

This particular item has some short-comings.  The envelope has fallen into two pieces (a front and a back) and the letter itself is incomplete, with a closing page apparently missing.  If I wanted an item that showed off the postal history aspects (other than the neat star cancel), I would probably select something in better condition.  But, that's not the biggest reason why this particular letter from 1863 is interesting to me.

In this case - it is primarily about the letter - and the people referenced in the letter.  I'll start by sharing my best effort at transcribing the contents. 

A cousin (Harriet Silliman Shephard De Forest) writes to Erastus Lyman DeForest while he travels in Europe:

New Haven Dec 11th
Dear Erastus,
I have so much I will tell you.  I shall write very closely & as small a hand as I am capable of.  You know how I can fill up a letter with my sprawly writing & tell precious little news.  Well, mon ami, as things have turned out I wish I had remained in Paris. That is if you are going to be there this Winter. New Haven is of course very dull & now you and Charlie are away I am more solitary than ever -

As to my husband obtaining a furlough it is all nonsense to talk of the thing. 

Gen Banks has positively forbidden the application even for leave of absence unless in the case of disability leave.  Mr. De Forest continues perfectly well & has no excuse except the foolish desire. 

I see his wife & soldiers are supposed to have no feelings for such subjects.  The government ignores such weak mindedness - but seriously, it is  ???, the prospect of not seeing my lord & master until his time is up next October. 

Sometimes I am rebellious & mentally ??  & declare I will not put up with it.  But what is the use?  I am helpless these. ????  are to be pitied and the war drags on at snail's pace.  I do not think it nears the end in spite of the predictions of those who pretend to be wise.  Mr. Curtis (I should say Curtis, he is too distinguished to have a handle to his name) called last evening after his lecture ? Lee ? and we talked war, abolition & politics for two hours.  For comfort he promises me the war nice and over before eighteen months!  I presume he knows about as much as you and I do about the prospects of peace.  We have had another  trip? to Richmond and are safely back again.  Charleston we begin to believe we do not want - a la ? & the grapes??? - I am getting fearful unpatriotic & impatient . 

Maybe when Mr. De Forest gets home I shall be for a vigorous prosecution of the war.

Here I am in ?? pretty much as of old.  I can hardly realize I have been over the waters & with you in Paris so recently.  I wish you were here. I mean for my own sake, for your good & pleasure.  I wish it as it is?  My parlor is very pleasant this winter. I have Julie Heusted's (?) piano and plenty of music in the evenings.  Now I am curious how I have more ? & on Mary ??  I find it much more agreeable. Mary was getting too great an influence over the boy.

(*presumably her son Louis and presumably Mary left, but I can't figure the exact words above*)

I flatter? myself he has improved since I have taken over control. Mrs. Beers  says so and of course it must be so. 

By the way, aprapos of Mrs Beers, a tap at my door enters Mrs B " Oh,  Mrs. De Forest - have you heard the news?  Your cousin Erastus went to a bull fight in Spain on Sunday." 

"Who says so, I asked without showing any signs of surprise." 

"Mr Thomeson wrote to some one here in town that he & Erastus had just returned form a bull fight on Sunday.  Do you believe it Mrs De Forest?" 

"You say it is so, why do you ask me anything about it?"

"Oh I suppose you know more than I do about it.  Erastus has written and told you all about it!" 

She was mistaken this time.  Mrs B left, disappointed as she shut the door remarking "You d'not seem to be surprised, I suppose you d'not think it is very dreadful"  No reply from me. 

So you see that your sins have gone before you to judgement. No doubt you are tried & condemned by Mrs. B & some of her ?? friends & put down as a hopeless sinner, past praying for.  But d'not let Mr Thomason write such items home about you, it is best to keep in with the witches.

One of my old friends, Mr. Stine <*or Stone or ?*> the artist (you may remember him) has been here for the past six weeks.  He has a studio on this floor, he has been painting Geo Baldwin, Judge Ingersoll & seven or eight other portraits he ??? return to New York this coming week.  I hope his work will hold out longer.  Julia & I will miss him very much.  He is very agreeable company. 

It is likely that Judge Ingersoll is Charles R Ingersoll, who would be governor of Connecticut starting in 1873. The following biography is from page 352 of The Judicial and Civil History of Connecticut, edited by Dwight Lewis and J. Gilbert Calhoun (published 1895).

George Baldwin, on the other hand, was apparently a farmer of "middling means," but who was related to family that had wealth and power.  The George Baldwin House is actually on the historic register and may have been part of the Underground Railroad. This, of course, assumes that I have correctly identified the individual.

Be sure you write and tell me all about your trip to Spain.  I envy you the prospect of being in Italy this Winter.  I shall depend on long and many letters.  D'not disappoint me.  If you knew how glad I always am to hear from you, you would write often. 

Your aunt was here looking at rooms(?) the other day.  She is still undecided what to do.  I meet her in the entry with Mrs. B and was introduced.  She told me she received a letter from you on Thanksgiving day.  I was glad to hear of you.  I am in the middle of a dress-making campaign.  I have another love of an alpaca (black). I thought I must tell you as you are such an admirer of alpaca.  If is even prettier than the one I got in Paris. 

I am a perpetual wonder to myself.  I am in such splendid health and weight(?). I am ashamed to ? 145 pounds.  I have not had a sick day.  I can't remember when!  I walk for hours and sometimes more every day.  This is when it is pleasant.  Dr ? came to make a friendly visit last week.  "I never saw you looking so well, what does it mean?  You must have found out the secret in Paris of ???" <*probably a reference to living well*> So you see, I have no........

And then, I find I have no more of the letter!  Well, sometimes you just have to appreciate what you have.

Who was Erastus?

Cousin Erastus sure does sound like he is an interesting fellow, doesn't he?  Trotting off to Spain to see bull-fighting - much to the chagrin of Mrs. Beers and those in society who saw this as a scandalous activity!  

Erastus Lyman De Forest was, it turns out, quite the scholar in mathematics, he completed the Bachelor's degree in engineering at Yale by the age of 20 and completed an advanced degree by the time he was 22. 

After completing the advanced degree, Erastus was scheduled to travel with his aunt, but disappeared, leaving his luggage behind.  The family searched for some time, even putting notices in the New York Times looking for him.  Eventually, they assumed he had been murdered.

After a couple of years, it was discovered that he had gone to California and Australia and was teaching there.  He returned in 1861, only to travel again for a few years in Europe (1863-1865).  If you want more of a biography, this link provides an excellent overview.  The photo is from that site and is also found on wiki commons.

Upon his return, he dedicated his study to mathematics and is credited with making improvements to the mortality tables used by the Knickerbocker Life Insurance Company owned by an uncle.  His work was not initially recognized by mathematical scholars, but have since been given more attention.  He is even given credit for the initial discovery of the chi-square distribution (for those who know some statistics).  Four of his papers (published from 1866 to 1871) are listed in this Catalog of Scientific Papers compiled by the Royal Society of London 1877 (vol VII). 

One wonders if some of those mortality tables referenced the likelihood of a bull-fighter living past of the age of 25?

Who were Mrs. De Forest and the referenced Mr. De Forest?

This is where the detective work really began.  It was not hard to figure out Erastus, because his name is on the envelope and he happens to be well enough known for me to find information about him.  But, there are many, MANY noteworthy De Forests in Connecticut and New York and actually MORE than one who was an officer under the referenced General Banks.  And, on top of it all, the part of the letter that would have included a signature of some sort is missing.

The keys for locating the proper Mr. De Forest were to recognize that he had to be an officer under General Banks in December of 1863 and that it is likely he had strong ties to New Haven, Connecticut.  After a number of dead ends, I have concluded that our Mr. De Forest from the letter is none other than John William De Forest, a realistic fiction writer, who was a captain in the Union army, forming Company I from New Haven, the 12th Connecticut Volunteers.  

Another clue in the letter that lines up is the mention of Charleston (South Carolina), where the DeForests lived prior to the barrage on Fort Sumter.  They were on the last boat to leave Charleston, returning to New Haven.

At the time of this letter, John William De Forest had just been assigned to be the inspector general of the first division, 19th Corps.  He was finally mustered out of service and could return home on Dec 2, 1864, when his health could no longer allow him to continue his work in the Louisiana campaign.

Mrs. De Forest (nee Harriet Silliman Shepard) was apparently known to be quite intelligent and an 'exceptional classical scholar' according to this Master's thesis by Elizabeth Maxwell Bright focused on John William's writing.  She was the daughter of Charles Upham Shepard who was a professor of chemistry and somewhat prolific author of papers on mineralogy.  He taught at the medical school in Charleston during the colder months and returned to New Haven in the Spring.  This further confirms the connections to New Haven and makes it fairly certain I have found the correct people!

It is a bit of a shame that Harriet, and most women of her time, are not featured prominently in histories as she seems like she could have been a most interesting person.  At least, with this letter, she has a voice - and we have the opportunity to hear it.

Apparently, many of the De Forest family papers are held in the archives at Yale and could be accessed for further research if someone desired to dig through them.

An extra note about the family

A few months after my first effort at this particular story was published a couple of years ago, I received an anonymous comment to the blog.  I thought I would include it here:

Dear Mr. Faux,
Thank you for transcribing this letter. It is from my great great grandmother, Harriet Silliman Shepard, and refers to, among others, her husband, John William De Forest, author, as you correctly deduced. She was the daughter of Charles Upham Shepard (https://www.scencyclopedia.org/sce/entries/shepard-charles-upham/) and Harriet Taylor, the adoptive daughter of Benjamin Silliman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Silliman). Their son, Louis Shepard De Forest, was my mother's grandfather.

 It's always good to get confirmation that your research was on target!

But wait, there's more!

This week, you hit the jackpot, because we're going to take this just a little bit further by bringing us back around to another connection that a postal historian enjoys.  The General Banks, in question is Nathaniel Prentice Banks, an individual who might fit the prototypical "American story" of a person who started with modest means and went on to "greater things."  He worked as a 'bobbin boy' at a textile mill his father managed and went on to publish newspapers, serve in the state legislature (Massachusetts) and then as a congressman in the House of Representatives (first as a Democrat and then as a Republican).  He was then elected governor of Massachusetts in 1858 and ran to be the presidential nominee for the Republicans, losing to Lincoln.  Lincoln appointed him to the position of Major General (as a political appointee) in May of 1861.

In December of 1862 he was transferred to New Orleans, which is where he and John William De Forest were at the time this letter was sent.

While General Banks is not a household name, nor does he feature prominently in most history books for his roles in the Civil War, he is fairly well known to postal historians that study this period in the United States.  In 1861, Banks decided that his division would have superior mail services and apparently used his connections to do just that.  Banks secured a special agent of the Post Office Department to work out of Banks' headquarters. 

This arrangement resulted in the use of multiple hand stamps, such as the one on the envelope shown above, that indicated the origin of the letter as being from the Banks Division.  This letter was postmarked on August 1, 1862 when I believe the division headquarters were located at Harpers Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia).  An excellent article by Richard Graham can be found here outlining more details about the Banks Division postal services.   

Bull fighting to end of war predictions

Harriet mentions a prediction that the war would end in 18 months and greeted it with some skepticism.  After all, she was worried about her husband.  As she said, "Maybe when Mr. De Forest gets home I shall be for a vigorous prosecution of the war."  It's a normal sentiment, of course.  I'm all for our troops taking the victory, but I would rather they do it without my husband in harms way.  

Amazingly, the war did end in approximately 18 months, but Mr. De Forest would depart the forces prior to its end, having only received a small wound - but still suffering from other maladies that ended his service time.  Apparently in December of 1864 he had more than the foolish desire as an excuse to go home again.

Each of these stories are far more complex than what I have written here.  If you desire to read more details about any of these individuals, feel free to take the links I provide in the text and read to your heart's content.  Or, you can decide you have had enough of this silliness.  The good news is - you have a choice!

Have a great remainder of the weekend and a good week to follow.

Do you want to learn more?

A couple of references to some of the printed materials that are now also on the web:

Richard B. Graham, G.B.D. and Banks' Division Markings, US Philatelic Classics Society, Volume: 20 Number: 3, 1968 - the Chronicle is one of the best US journals for early postal history and much of the earlier publications are searchable online.

Elizabeth Maxwell Bright, An analysis of the methods used by John William De Forest in An analysis of the methods used by John William De Forest in translating his personal war experiences into realistic fiction as translating his personal war experiences into realistic fiction as shown in Miss Ravenel's conversion. shown in Miss Ravenel's conversion.  University of Louisville, 1949.  - this is the Master's thesis referenced in the text.  There are many interesting tidbits in the biography section.  

But, if you want to appreciate the rest of the thesis you should consider reading:

J.W. De Forest, Mrs Ravenel's conversion from secession to loyalty, New York, Harper & Bros, 1867.

Another Thing Leads to Another - Postal History Sunday

Welcome to this week's entry of Postal History Sunday.  PHS is hosted every week on the Genuine Faux Farm blog and the GFF Postal History blog.  Everyone is welcome here, regardless of the level of knowledge and expertise you might have in postal history. 

This week's post builds off of last week's post.  Both of these posts are on items that were featured in a virtual presentation I was honored to give to the Collectors Club of New York on February 1.  The video of this presentation will be available for the next few days - until the next installment of their Virtual Collectors Club Philatelic Program Series is completed on February 15. After that point in time, the presentation will be available to members only.

This slightly worn item is the focus of today's exploration.  The ink has eaten into the paper in places and there is a little staining and fading.  But, the story that surrounds this piece of postal history is a good one.  I'm going to focus first on explaining how it got from here to there.  If I still have the energy at the end, we might get into some of the social history.

But, let's start first with some of the ground work to help us understand what is going on here.

Baseline #1: US to the UK

Last week's Postal History Sunday actually covers this example and I'll refer you to that post for the details.  Some basic information we want to take away that will help us understand our focus cover are as follows:

1. the postage rate was 24 cents for a simple letter from the US to UK weighing no more than 1/2 ounce.
2. a properly paid simple letter typically had a US exchange marking in red.
   
3. these letters usually had an exchange marking, in red, for the United Kingdom.
4. the exchange markings usually had the word "paid" somewhere in the design. 
   

Baseline information becomes valuable for a postal historian because it helps us to find patterns even when a cover gets more complex.  These are building blocks for mail in the 1860s, and I find it useful to study these "typical" items so I have the tools to work with "atypical" covers.

Baseline #2: UK to Italy

Our next example is a letter mailed from Manchester, England to Naples (Napoli), Italy in 1865.  This particular folded letter is not quite a perfect baseline item because it is actually an example of a letter that weighed MORE than a simple letter.  The postage stamp provided 1 shilling of postage (12 pence), so this letter qualified as a double weight letter, weighing more than 1/4 ounce and no more than 1/2 ounce.

For the duration of this postal agreement (1857 to 1870) mail from the United Kingdom to Italy via France went by closed mail.  When we say something went by closed mail we are referring to instances where letters were put into mailbags in one country, but traveled through one or more intermediary countries (or mail services) to get to the destination. In this case, the French agreed to carry mailbags between the UK and the Kingdom of Italy, but the French did not process any of the individual letters.  Instead, France received compensation for their services based on bulk amounts (total weight of letters carried).

The take-away here is that we will see markings on this folded letter from the United Kingdom (Manchester and London) and markings for Italy (Napoli).  But, we will not see any French markings because this letter was not handled individually by French mail clerks.

So, how do we know this letter even went through France?  After all, once it leaves the UK, the next marking is Napoli, which is in southern Italy!  The first clue is the docket at the top left that reads "via France and Sardinia."  This directional marking gives us a clue that the letter was intended to go overland.  But, a good question to ask now is whether these directional dockets were always followed - and the answer to that is "usually, but not always."

In this case, we are supported with the knowledge of the options for mail from the UK to Italy.  The default route was overland via France and Sardinia in 1865.  The other alternative with the same postage cost was via France and then by steamship from Marseilles to Naples.  A third option, via German mails was available, but the rate was 11 pence per 1/2 ounce.  So, it is safe for us to conclude that the default route - the same as the one directed by the docket - was taken through France.

Using the baseline examples

Since I am today's tour guide, let me give you a preview of where we are going.  This envelope was mailed in Boston during the year 1865.  It was initially sent to London, was then forwarded to Florence (Firenze) in the Kingdom of Italy.  After that, it was forwarded again to Venezia (Venice), which was within the borders of the Kingdom of Venetia.  Venetia, in turn, was under the control of the Austrian Empire at the time.

Sometimes, and in some places, the description you just got in the prior paragraph would be enough - maybe more than enough.  But, around here, we like to explore HOW to see these things when we look at a cover.  We also like to be able to explain WHY everything fits together.  If something still seems out of place once the description is complete, it might be an indicator that there are more opportunities to learn.

The first step is to recognize the indicators that this letter traveled from the United States to the United Kingdom.  There is a 24-cent stamp, which pays the proper postage for a letter that weighed no more than 1/2 ounce.  The Boston (US) exchange marking is obscured by a British postage stamp that has been adhered over that mark.  Because it is applied with red ink, we know Boston considered the item to be properly paid for.  We can also guess the Boston exchange marking looks a lot like the one in our first baseline example.

There is also a London exchange marking that indicates the letter was considered to be paid when it was taken out of the mailbag.  This letter was then delivered to the Baring Brothers, a financial firm that provided services to Americans abroad.  These services included holding mail until the traveler came to pick it up or forwarding mail to the traveler's next known location.

The Baring Brothers paid the 6 pence in postage required to mail a simple letter from London to the Kingdom of Italy.  The purple stamp represents payment of that amount and the post office at Lombard Street used a black oval obliterator with the number "19" to deface that stamp so it could not be re-used.

The red Lombard Street postmark includes the word "paid" and it also includes the letters "F.O." which stood for Foreign Office.  Like our second baseline example, you will see the "PD" in an oval and a London exchange marking on the back of the envelope.  Also, like our second baseline item, there are no French markings on this envelope, even though it was carried through France.

So, how do we know this one went through France?

This time, we have no directional docket, but we do still know that the default route was overland through France and Sardinia.  Also, the first Italian mail marking we see is the Susa-Torino (or this could be Susa - Modane) marking on the back of the envelope.  This would be the traveling post office on the first railway in Italy that is just east of the Alps crossing between France and Italy.

The major passes through the Alps where mail to Italy was regularly carried can be seen below.  Three passes would have required the letter to travel through Switzerland.  The other two were in France and Austria. If you would like to learn a bit more about the Modane Tunnel and the Mount Cenis Railway, this contemporary article from Harper's New Monthly Magazine might be of interest (No. CCLIV.—JULY, 1871.—VOL. XLIII).

That's enough information to be conclusive, this letter went via France.

There is another circular marking that is not a postal marking - it was applied at the U.S. Consulate General's office in Florence.  The Consulate General was (and still is) "responsible for the welfare and whereabouts of US citizens traveling and residing abroad."  The existence of this marking gives us another clue that the letter was probably to a traveling US citizen who was in Italy in May of 1865.

 

Unlike the Baring Brothers, the US Consulate General did not have a financial account with the traveler.  The Baring Brothers could deduct any costs for forwarding postage from the line of credit established for the traveler.  The US Consulate, on the other hand, would forward the mail, but they were not likely to pay the postage - though I admit it could be possible.

There are two more markings on the back of this envelope that chronicle this last segment of travel.  The first reads Pontelagoscuro, Ferrara.  If you will take a quick look at the map shown below, Ferrara would be located near the border of Romagne and Venetia.  What we need to know about the status of Italy in 1865 was that Romagne was part of the Kingdom of Italy.  Venetia, on the other hand, was not.  Venetia was under the control of Austria and the Austrian postal system.

Once again, there is a protocol to exchange mail between two different postal services.  The Ferrara marking served as Italy's exchange marking, while the Venezia (Venice) marking was the exchange for Venetia. 

The bold, oval postmark on the back that reads "distribuzione I" tells us that this letter was sent out with a mail carrier with the first distribution of mail on that day.  Yes, you heard that right.  Many cities in Europe sent mail out to be delivered to their customers multiple times each day.  But, we must consider that mail was the most common and accessible means of communication at the time.  There were no phones - postal mail was a vital service that was taken very seriously in the 1860s.

Italy and Austria were not playing well together

But wait!  There's more...

There was another reason the US Consulate in Florence did not prepay the postage to send the letter to Venezia.  It just so happened that a person couldn't prepay that mail.  Austria and Italy had not yet come up with a new postal agreement after the War of 1859.  As a result, a person in Italy could only pay for a letter to get to the border.  After that, the letter would travel through Austrian territory with the internal postage unpaid.  The recipient would have to pay that amount to receive the letter.

Postage rates for mail in Venetia and Austria was based on both weight and distance.  A simple letter could weigh as much as one loth (15.625 grams), but that simple letter would then be given a postage rate based on how far it had to travel.  The first letter shown above did not have to travel more than 75 kilometers from the border with the Kingdom of Italy.  The second had to travel over 150 km from the border to get to Vienna.

Each of these letters shown here have a 20 centesimi Italian stamp that paid the postage within Italy to its border with Venetia.  The numerical markings told the mail carrier to collect five and fifteen kreuzer, respectively, from the recipient for the internal Austrian mail services.*

* note: the first cover is probably rated in soldi, rather than kreuzer, but using kreuzer serves for the discussion.

One more baseline

Before we close the story on our letter from the US to Italy via the UK, we need one more baseline example.  Shown above is a letter that was mailed in the mid-1860s from France to Austria.  The postage rate was 60 centimes, which is properly paid by the postage stamps.  All of the markings for a typical, paid letter from France to Austria can be found on this letter.  But....

There is an ink scrawl that is the number "5."  I have circled that marking in red on this envelope.  This told the letter carrier to collect 5 kreuzer from the recipient on delivery.  Remember, five kreuzer would be the proper postage rate for internal Austrian mail that traveled less than 75 km.

It turns out - this letter was also forwarded.  Like our example, it was forwarded to a new location but the forwarder did NOT prepay the postage.  As a result, the postal clerk made sure the carrier would know to collect postage by putting this "5" on the front of the cover.

Dealing with unfinished business

Since the US Consulate probably would not and could not prepay the postage from Florence to Venice, we should have expected to find an amount due when the carrier delivered this letter to Mrs. Abbott Lawrence.  And, sure enough, here it is!

With all of the pen markings and the damage to this cover, it is not as obvious as one might expect.  As a matter of fact, I did not notice this for quite some time myself.  I knew this letter was forwarded to Venice, but I didn't quite understand how the postage was covered until I observed how Austrian postal clerks wrote their fives.  Once I noticed that, it became easier to see the five on this item.  So, Mrs. Abbott Lawrence had to pay 5 kreuzer (or soldi) to the carrier so she could read the news from Boston.

And that, my friends, is the long explanation for how I piece together clues in my effort to read the postal story a particular cover might have to tell. 

Not quite bonus material

Matthew H. called attention the addressee of the letter from the UK to Italy, Giuseppe Sonnino in Naples.  For those who have some knowledge of European history, the name Sonnino just might ring a bell or two.  Sidney Sonnino was the Prime Minister of Foreign Affairs for Italy during World War I and also served briefly as Prime Minister in the early 1900s (twice).  

While that is interesting, Giuseppe Sonnino of Naples cannot, with my brief bit of research, be easily connected to Sidney.  Sidney's origins start in Livorno and Pisa and he had connections to the Anglican Church.  Giuseppe, on the other hand, can be found as a rabbi for the Jewish community in Naples in the 1860s.  There are enough references in Italian resources for Giuseppe that a person might be able to put some biographical material together over time.  But, unless there is an extended family connection, I don't find a direct connection between the two.

A bit closer to bonus material?

During the presentation, someone asked if the addressee of this cover, Mrs. Abbot Lawrence was one and the same as the person depicted in this painting by John Singer Sargant. 

Unfortunately, the answer is, once again, no.  But, the relationship is a bit closer this time around.  Portrayed here is Mrs. Abbott Lawrence Rotch, who was born in 1867, after the date this letter was received.  She was married to respected meteorologist Abbott Lawrence Rotch, who is fairly closely related to the letter's recipient (a nephew, perhaps).

Another possibility suggested was that the letter recipient was Katherine Bigelow Lawrence, spouse of Abbott Lawrence. Lawrence was an accomplished businessman and gave Harvard University $50,000 to establish the Lawrence Scientific School. He built lodging houses for the poor in 1845, and pushed for education for the lower class. He was also the Vice Presidential candidate in 1848 as part of an unsuccessful ticket with Zachary Taylor.  When Taylor won in the next election, Lawrence was not on the ticket.  When offered a cabinet position, he opted for a position as minister to Great Britain.  Abbott died in 1855.

However, the information that time was spent in Europe makes it possible that Katherine Lawrence could have been traveling there in 1865.  But, there is a problem with that too.  Katherine Bigelow Lawrence died in 1860 according to this, and other, sources.

painting of Katherine Bigelow Lawrence by Chester Harding at MFA Boston website

This leads us to Abbott Bigelow Lawrence, Jr, who was married to Harriet White Paige Lawrence.  Abbott Bigelow Lawrence was the son of Abbott Lawrence and Katherine Bigelow and was born in 1828, putting him and Harriet (born 1832) at about the right age for her to be the recipient of this particular letter.

So, let's introduce another character into this play.    Timothy Bigelow Lawrence, brother of Abbott Bigelow Lawrence was a colonel in the Union army and was part of General E.D. Keyes' staff.  Unfortunately, Col. Lawrence had a "tendency to deafness that became so much increased by exposure, and especially from the heavy firing he was so long surrounded by, as to impede and limit his usefulness in the field."* Thus, he moved on to a diplomatic appointment that he had delayed filling in his effort to serve with the armed forces.

*this quote and other information on T.B. Lawrence can be found in this printed memorial that was initially in Boston Courier in 1869.  It was printed for private distribution in April, 1869 under the title T. Bigelow Lawrence 1869.

T.B. Lawrence served as the US Consulate General in Florence from 1861 to 1869.  Having a brother in Italy might be enough of a reason for Abbott and Harriet Lawrence to make a visit to Italy (or maybe it was just Harriet?).  It also made it pretty easy to avail themselves of the services of the Consulate General's office!  It can be nice to have connections.

So, yes, there are links to the family and to the women depicted in these two paintings, but neither of them was the recipient of this particular letter during travels in Europe.  But, we still got to meet some interesting people in the process.

And, if our featured piece of postal history looked familiar to you this week, it was also featured in this Postal History Sunday from October 2022.

------------------------

Thank you for taking this journey with me today!  I hope you enjoyed some or all of this entry of Postal History Sunday.  Have a great remainder of your day and a fine week to come.