How do you guys who collect world coins classify the coins' country in case of occupation/colony/protectorate. E.g., Morocco while it was French protectorate. Do you include such coins in your French collection? In Morocco? Or as a separate country? I tended to make it a separate country, but nowadays I have doubts. Isn't a franc minted in Paris a French coin? Isn't a franc used in Morocco a Moroccan coin? Which is it?
I ussually keep it with the country it was minted for, and I make a notation at the bottom, beside the denomination, 'occupation currency'
I generally follow Krause. In the case of Morocco, it is divided into sections for Kingdom, French Protectorate, and Kingdom Resumed; with sub-sections for each ruler. My own incomplete "One per Monetary Regime" collection will have eight coins when it is complete (if it ever is ). I have a friend whose "One per Country" collection has one Morrocon coin, and will never have any more. Bottom line - one of the great things about coin collecting is that there is no right or wrong way to collect - each of us can set our own standards for what to collect.
Thanks for the chuckle Mike. It's entirely up to you, but Mercs (unlike the famous "Continental Dollars) were minted after September 3, 1783, so speaking for myself, I would not classify them as "in revolt" UKs. (If you're interested, you can read the full text of the treaty here.)
I have a note from the Republic of Biafra (an province of Nigeria that revolted unsuccessfully). I don't put it in Nigeria. I just have it in my AFRICA folder. I'll let my heirs sort it out. Does that mean you would classify the Continental Dollars as "in revolt" UK's?
My point exactly - We are all free to set our own parameters for what we collect, and how we arrange/display it. No, since I don't personally use that classification. What I am saying is that someone who does use it, could rationally place the Continentals there, and could rationally classify your Biarfran note as "Nigeria In Revolt"; but putting Mercs there would be as irrational as putting modern Panama in a "Colombia In Revolt", or a "Spain In Revolt" category. It just seems to me that once the "mother country" formally recognizes the independence of the former colony/territory/geographic subdivision, it is no longer a revolting part of the mother; and its coinage attains full legitimacy under any classification scheme.
I think colonial coin is always a colonian and can be added to collection separate from the domain countries. It can be similar denomination of these coins, but they are made special for colonies, with different design and so on.
My System: Countries Names Upto Their Present Situation Foreign rule , historical name , provincial coin , occupation , protectorate , are attributed to specific coins. An example: a part of the cabo verde section CAPE VERDE - CABO VERDE 20 CENTAVOS 1930 3 PORTUGUESE RULE 20 CENTAVOS 1977 15 ... the coin of 1977 has no remark. It is attributed to the current mame of the independent country. Another example: SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO 1 PARA 1994 161 YUGOSLAVIA 5 PARA 1965 42 YUGOSLAVIA 5 PARA 1994 164 YUGOSLAVIA ... 5 DINARA 2003 SERBIA , "NARODNA BANKA SRBIJE"
British Commonwealth collectors regard the coins of the British colonies (such as Bermuda & British Honduras) as being part of the British Commonwealth.As Biafra is now part of Nigeria,it is classified as being an extinct British Commonwealth country like Rhodesia. Aidan.
Definitions This thread makes one think, not just about where to assign them but how to classify them. Now there was mention of Colonial coins??? Are we talking baout American Colonials or the coins from the Australian penal colonies, also refered to as colonial coins. This is a great hobby, as the old commercial said,"STOP, you're both right"
Either, both, or neither. Remember, there were myriad British, French, German, Spanish, and other country's colonies in Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Oceana which had their own coinage, some dating from the late 15th/early 16th Centuries.
