Working backwards from the known Types of 1898*, one is able for the most part to reconstruct the plating of 1896. I say "for the most part" because there is no one to one correlation. Defects can be traced from one year to the other, but there are instances of notes being transferred to another position and two distinct defects from different 1896 cards ended up on the same 1898 card. The extra large spacing of 17mm between the first and second address lines appears only in 1898, Type 9. Two of the notes in both years are considerably shorter than the others. The 1894 and 1892 closely resemble the 1896 cards, but as you go back in time there are fewer defects that make each type unique.

Can one say with absolute certainty that the 1896 plate types were that as described above? Of course not without resurrection of an 1896 plate. One also has to consider that when one divides up certain attributes of a plate and places them elsewhere for the next printing, then what do you consider the original plate: the note; the address lines; the TARJETA POSTAL? Even in the word "POSTAL" we found a division to two plates. What you can say is that there is a high degree of correlation and the typesetters likely set the type as described above. Further, it is highly useful to have ten distinct plate positions for identifying specimens.

Click on a Type Number below to see the 1898 and 1896 cards in that position

Type 1      Type 2      Type 3      Type 4      Type 5

Type 6      Type 7      Type 8      Type 9      Type 10

* Laiz Castro, Ángel. Reconstrucción de las Planchas de los Enteros Postales Tipo Infante - Cuba 1898 - Filipinas 1898 - Puerto Rico 1898 - Fernando Po 1898. Madrid-Barcelona, 1998, in Spanish.

This page was last modified on 1 March 2011.