Page 258 - The Postal Agencies in Eastern Arabia

It is difficult to be certain that the relationship between the
Bahrain and Kuwait 2 Rupees Type II overprints and the print orders
is as shown; but this would appear to be the pattern, taking into
account the present recorded earliest dates of postmarks. Note the
new earliest date for Bahrain Type II (4.5.53), some sixteen months
earlier than that previously recorded (8.9.54).
All the Type I overprints have the appearance of being type-set,
and the Bahrain Type III is without doubt also type-set. On the other
hand all the Type II overprints give every appearance of being plate-
printed, in that the peculiarities of position and measurement arc
constant throughout the sheet. It should be noted that there is another
means of identifying the Bahrain Type II overprints - ‘2 RUPEES’
being lined up almost the same length as ‘BAHRAIN’ (‘2’ being Zi mm.
closer to ‘RUPEES’ than in Type I); in Types I and III a good part of
the figure ‘2’ lies well to the left of the ‘B’ in ‘BAHRAIN’.
The question arises as to why the March 1955 Bahrain over­
printing was type-set (Type III); and one can only conjecture that the
overprinting plate used for Type II had been damaged, and it was not
considered worth making another for such a short printing run of only
150 sheets. The Inverted ‘I’ variety of Type III (Row 2/1) is
certainly a rarity, with only a possible 150 in existence! There is,
of course, the possibility that a Type III of the Kuwait ‘2 Rupees’
exists (March 1955 order), but it has so far not been recorded.

The existence of a third type of overprint on the Kuwait 10
Rupees has already been recorded (10 mm. space between the two lines
of overprint); unfortunately only two copies have so far been seen,
and neither of them shows a clear enough strike of the postmark to
identify the year. This stamp looks like remaining somewhat of a
mystery, for the detail of print orders does not justify the existence
of a third type of overprint. Although its appearance is otherwise
akin to Type II rather than to Type I, it certainly did not occur as a
variety in the sheets with the Type II overprint.
Nevertheless, it exists — even on the evidence of only two copies —
and one can only guess at its origin; was the first overprinting plate
damaged during the preparation of the April 1952 order - only 200
sheets — and was the order completed by means of another hurriedly
made plate on which the wider spacing was constant?

255 &