Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Sandbox/Succession

A page devoted to discussion currency succession and succession boxes.

Previous discussions:

/Archive 1 (Rhodesia, East African shilling, Taiwan)
/Archive 2 (Eastern Africa, Southern Africa)

Useful sources[edit]

We need to put sources on our articles, and update the articles themselves when we do extra research for succession boxes. Here are sources we use a lot:

[1]^{[dead link]} (and other countries, of course)
Global Financial Data currency histories table^{[dead link]}
Tables of modern monetary history: Africa^{[dead link]}
Tables of modern monetary history: Asia^{[dead link]}
Tables of modern monetary history: Australia and Pacific^{[dead link]}
http://www.islamicbanknotes.com
Banknote World^{[dead link]} (Its regular url http://www.banknoteworld.com/ is currently not working)
http://www.collectornetwork.com/articles There are some interesting articles here. It's not complete, but it has some more detail about the political situation than some of the other sites.
The Marteau Early 18th-Century Currency Converter
http://www.germannotes.com
Foreign Currency Units per 1 British Pound, 1948-2005, PACIFIC Exchange Rate Service
Foreign Currency Units per 1 U.S. Dollar, 1948-2005, PACIFIC Exchange Rate Service
Information on Exchange Rates of The Americas^{[dead link]}
A Chronology of Monetary Integration in Britain and Europe
[2]
£ = $2.8 from 1950-1966
Standard Catalog of World Coins (cut and paste the following for a reference -- I was never any good at citations, but with the ISBN it doesn't matter as much. I got these titles off of booksellers' websites):
- Chester L. Krause, Cliffor Mischler, Colin R. Bruce II, et al. (editors), ed. (2001). 2002 Standard Catalog of World Coins (29th ed.). Krause Publications. ISBN 0873492439. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
- Chester L. Krause, Cliffor Mischler, Colin R. Bruce II, et al. (editors), ed. (1996). Standard Catalog of World Coins 1997 (24th ed.). Krause Publications. ISBN 0873414268. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
- Chester L. Krause, Cliffor Mischler, Colin R. Bruce II, et al. (editors), ed. (2003). 2004 Standard Catalog of World Coins: 1901-present (31st ed.). Krause Publications. ISBN 0-87349-593-4. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
- Chester L. Krause, Cliffor Mischler, Colin R. Bruce II, et al. (editors), ed. (2004). Standard Catalog of World Coins: 19th Century 1801-1900 (4th ed.). KP Books. ISBN 0-87349-798-8. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)

Standard Catalog of World Paper Money
- George S. Cuhaj, (S. editor), ed. (2005). Standard Catalog of World Paper Money, Vol. 3: Modern Issues, 1961-Date (11th ed.). KP Books. ISBN 0896891607. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)
- Albert Pick (1996). Neil Shafer, George S. Cuhaj, Colin R. Bruce II (editors) (ed.). Standard Catalog of World Paper Money: General Issues to 1960 (8th ed.). Krause Publications. ISBN 0-87341-469-1. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
- George S. Cuhaj, ed. (2006). Standard Catalog of World Paper Money, Modern Issues, 1961-present (12th ed.). KP Books. ISBN 0-89689-356-1.

Global Financial Data[edit]

I think that GFD may change the name of the currency every time the country name/colonization changes. So, for example, they list East Africa rupee in 1916 until 1920, and the introduction of the EA florin. Yet SCWC does not show that currency. I don't have SCWPM though. I'm wondering if this is the situation with the Yugoslav krone as well. Do you know if the information at Austro-Hungarian krone is correct as far as overstamping? And if that means that the ones that are not mentioned didn't overstamp? Ingrid 03:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The 3 countries listed in Austro-Hungarian krone ("Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes", Czechoslovakia, Austria) did overstamp. Hungary aldo overstamp in 1920. Romanian leu and Italian lira were not applicable, of course, since they existed long before. Since you don't have SCWPM, I'll try to put some catalog stuff here to help. --Chochopk 11:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Apparently, I misunderstood, since there is a EA rupee, and apparently a Yugoslav krone which was only used briefly. Thanks for the details. I took a day off, and you've gone and finished all the work! I'm going to try to catch up, but don't know how much time I'll get for it today. Ingrid 21:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions[edit]

I thought it would be helpful to have a section for general questions, so they don't get lost as easily. Hopefully it won't just get too full.

Ethiopia[edit]

I'm confused about the whole talari/birr/dollar issue for the Ethiopian currency. Generally, I like to use whatever the coins/notes say, but with a different alphabet, that get's more challenging. I've tried to look at various sources, and can't find anything definitive. The early notes do say "thaler" <[3]^{[dead link]}> in what looks like French of all languages. I don't know enough of the Ethiopian text to even transliterate. I think I'll post to Talk:Ethiopian birr. Do you have any insight? Ingrid 02:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was already a comment on Talk:Ethiopian birr, so I asked the author (who can read Amharic). He said that the "deux thaler" note at banknoteworld.com clearly says "two birr" in Amharic. So, it looks like the currency has always been birr, and talari is probably just the Italian for thaler. Although, during occupation, Italian was probably the official language. Still, it seems to me like it's appropriate to call it birr the whole time. What do you think? Ingrid 04:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This poses an very interesting question. What if there is an official translation, often printed on the note, that is different from its local name. We know for a fact:

Ethiopian talari printed as thaler(s) in french in the early days, birr in Amharic (looks like "∩C")
Translated as dollar in English, still "birr" in Amharic after WW2, until 1976
Translated as birr in English afterward

In the case of Taiwan and China

When China was ruled by the Nationalist (and war lords) from 1911-1949 (the Republic era), 1/2 banknotes were printed with "dollar", 1/2 with "yuan", if there was English at all. Those notes in Chinese were all yuan (圓). Example of dollar, front^{[dead link]} Example of dollar, back^{[dead link]} Example of yuan, front^{[dead link]} Example of yuan, back^{[dead link]}. The catalog uses "yuan" consistently.
The Nationalist retreated to Taiwan after the Communist took over Mainland China. The unit is still yuan (圓). Early notes are printed with "yuan" in English (Example^{[dead link]}). The government, however, has kept using "dollar" in its translated official documents. The catalog uses "yuan" consistently.
The name of the article on wikipedia are New Taiwan dollar. I can't find the article on pre-1949 yuan/dollar

Switzerland

German is clearly the language of majority. But people still call the currency Swiss franc, not franken.

Ethiopia is just a subset of this problem. So what do we use? local form all the way? or official translation if available (even if different from local form), otherwise local form?? --Chochopk 06:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I was hoping you would have the answers, not more questions.

Switzerland is an interesting example, because they go out of their way not to have one form be more official than the other. On the coins, it's Confoederatio (sp?) Helvetica, and franc is always "Fr." which is the same abbreviation for all 4 official languages. Notes have all four.

Belgium is another interesting example. The coins are made in two varieties, German (or Flemish, really), and French although the denomination is often abbreviated, but not always. Notes seem to be the same way.

I think whenever known, we can use "common usage". That would handle Belgium and Switzerland, since they're clearly usually referred to as "francs". Taiwan also, is clearly known as "dollar" for the new one anyway. But that still leaves Ethiopia, and I'm not sure what the right thing to do is. And I still don't understand where "talari" comes from (that is, why GFD uses it). The Ethiopian birr page mentions that "birr" means silver, and was used as the local name for the MTT as well as the new Ethiopian coins. My inclination is to use "birr", since that's what locals called it, and there's no other local name -- that is, they called MTTs birr also, but MTTs aren't local to Ethiopia. The Ethiopian whatever is local to Ethiopia and called birr there, so there you go. Of course, I could make an argument for thaler for the early ones and dollar for 45-76 if you want to hear it. I'd say let's take it to the whole project, but I'm not sure I want to go there. Ingrid 16:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any strong preference toward either, as long as the detail is documented. If we are to merge talari with birr, then we better note that its French translation was thaler. --Chochopk 17:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done (merged into birr which already had all the relevant info) Ingrid 21:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: the Belgian case : the last Belgian notes had the currency in three languages, the three official languages of the country : Dutch, French and German. Coins were Dutch and/or French. --LucVerhelst 08:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Principle (non country specific) discussion[edit]

How to handle "roots" currencies[edit]

Template style[edit]

Is it better to put spaces around the dash (like 1960 - 1965)?

Spaces would be fine with me -- I'm not sure if there's a standard way to do it. Ingrid 01:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Chochopk 13:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If we have more than 1 box in an article, what kind of font should be used as the title of those boxes? (like "old won" in South Korean won?)

I'm not sure about box titles and such. I've been thinking we might want to add a <hr> to the n-start template, but that would mess up multiple boxes. One thing we could do is put a new template for a box title (for when it's not the same as the article title). The Template:s-start system has that for the house. Ingrid 01:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, see South Korean won as an example --Chochopk 13:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like how you've done the title. One thing I think is important is that we come up with currency names that are distinct (whether it's with parentheses or otherwise). I think it's easiest to use the descriptive words at GFD, but am open to other ideas. An example using GFD names (not exactly, since they use "Loas", but using their descriptive words), "Lao old kip", "Lao liberation kip", "Lao new kip". Often, GFD doesn't use "old", and I think that's fine. It can sometimes lead to a situation like the "French new franc" (nouveau in GFD) coming before the "French franc". But it also tends to give a "common use" name, and come close to matching ISO 4217 in most cases (I think).

Whatever we use though, I think it's important to use the same thing in succession box titles and before/after succession sections, to make it clear which currency is being referred to. Ingrid 19:14, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the template instructions. Mostly just grammar ... Ingrid 22:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You changed the text to "The life of the currency is less than 2 years (if the start and end year are the same or one year apart)." It actually changed what I meant. I meant to say, if the end year minus the start year = 2, then it is possible that the life is longer than 2 years, or shorter. But if the end year minus the start year = 1, then we know for sure that its life is less than 2 years. Do you think it's better to keep it this way (life < 2 years), or change it to (end year - start year <= 2)? --Chochopk 01:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to change what you'd said. As I said before, I don't care for including the day/month, but don't mind doing whatever you want. Ingrid 01:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What happens when there is no predecessor[edit]

I think we say Primitive currency or "no modern predecessor" or something like that. Ingrid 01:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Chochopk 04:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

x new = y old or y old = x new[edit]

See discussion in South African rand

Was there an open issue on this? I think it was just my repeating my question of using separate variables, and your reminding me that that would not work. If there's something that still needs to be resolved, remind me here please. Ingrid 23:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this discussion has a conclusion. I just put a reference here so that someone can read them, if they want. --Chochopk 01:23, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date of independence[edit]

I updated the template instructions. Mostly just grammar, but I also took out your mention of how to handle if recognized independence is differnet from declared independence. Since we're dealing with currency, I don't think it matters what date independence happened -- usually, currency is introduced well after independence. Ingrid 22:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is important when we use the 4 column format. The date of independence will go to the start date of the third column. --Chochopk 01:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'd forgotten that. I'm not sure what's best. it might be hard to have a standard that makes sense for all situations (for example, some currencies exist for unrecognized countries -- Somaliland shilling) Ingrid 01:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is better to use the date of declaration. Most people would say 1776 is the year for the U.S.A.. No one would say 1783. Also the CIA factbook lists only the date of declaration too. Moreover, if the independence is eventually recognized, the new country will probably celebrate their national day on the date of declaration too. I'll add this to the guide line. --Chochopk 13:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably right in general. I was also thinking of Namibia, although I didn't mention it. 1990 is a case of recognized independence which is the only useful date to use. Maybe that's an isolated case -- I don't really know. Ingrid 19:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming convention[edit]

As far as naming conventions for currencies, the project has chosen ISO 4217, and no one seems to care that that doesn't help us. So, I think it's reasonable for us to use the old style of <adjectival form of country name> <currency name>. When we need disambiguation, I think we should use (detail), for example, Cambodian riel (1955) and Cambodian riel (1980). It's not clear to me when it's appropriate to use new/old. I prefer to use whatever is on the currency itself, but that leads to problems because currencies often have "new" for a little while then drop it even though the currency hasn't changed. I do think it's important to use the same name in the succession box that we use in the article/label (see below). Ingrid 22:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't know what they want to do with ISO there. They just talk and little is implemented. I don't think anyone will carry out the renaming of all currencies to their ISO codes. That is just ridiculous. I agree that we should use <adjectival form of country name> <currency name> (except for "Common name" like Taiwan dollar or Singapore dollar). I also agree that we should use disambiguation, either "Cambodian riel (1955)" or "1955 Cambodian riel" is fine for me. Perhaps the first one is the style of wikipedia. About new/old, I'm not so sure either. I'm thinking we can use new/old on the title of the currency when it cannot be mistaken in the context (e.g. there've been only 2 kinds of Taiwan dollar), or in the ratio attribute even when there were many (like Yugoslavian dinar). If this is the case, then we would probably have to say 1 euro = 13 Austrian "new" schilling.

This is also related to the question to split or not to split. I don't think we have to stubburnly split whenver there is a redenomination. That could result in many, but unsubstantial articles. We can follow the current style of South Korean won. In this case, we could apply it to Cambodian riel, Vietnamese đồng. In a nutshell, have more than one box in an article. --Chochopk 01:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I switched new/old below (on all but Vietnamese dong) based on GFD table. Ingrid 01:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the[edit]

If we are forced to write out the long form of a country, like "Federal Socialist Islamic Democratic People's Republic of xxx", should the box read "Currency of the Federal Socialist Islamic Democratic People's Republic of xxx"? --Chochopk 10:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. We should be using correct grammar. —Nightstallion (?) 10:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mother of all currencies[edit]

This is the section where we can keep track of the "roots" currencies, so that we won't miss a former colony when doing the ultimate currencies.

I've been thinking about how these should be handled. I think it would be great if we could include everything, but it will be huge (I'm thinking especially of British pound, but the others too). But maybe if we made a separate page like British pound succession and linked to it, it wouldn't upset the people who care about the currency but not the succession -- to be fair, this is probably most people who are reading the main page. This might also be a good idea for the euro, even though it's not nearly as complex, it's just got so many predecessors (and more to come). Ingrid 03:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I must be crazy to start doing this --Chochopk 14:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me about it. There are some things I want to get to, but trying to keep up with you keeps me too busy. But I think we're doing great work. Ingrid 01:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch guilder[edit]

Belgian franc (1832, Belgium)
Netherlands Antillean gulden (1940, Netherlands Antilles)
Surinamese gulden (1962, Surinam)
Euro

British pound[edit]

~~British Central Africa group~~
British South Africa group

Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of United Kingdom 1560/61 –	Succeeded by: Current
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Nyasaland ca. 1894 – 1940	Succeeded by: Southern Rhodesian pound Reason: creation of local currency Ratio: at par
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Southern Rhodesia ca. 1892 – 1940
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Northern Rhodesia ca. 1906 – 1940

French franc[edit]

CFA franc
Pacific franc
Swiss franc???
Lebanon-Syria???

French franc was in use in :

Southern Netherlands (present Belgium) 1795-1815
Saarland 1918-1935 and 1954-1957 --LucVerhelst 08:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indian rupee[edit]

~~British East Africa group~~
~~Gulf rupee~~
South Asia group (India, Burma, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan)

Preceded by: ???	Currency of German East Africa (Tanganyika, Burundi, Rwanda) ??? – 1905		Succeeded by: German East African rupie Ratio: at par
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of East Africa (Kenya, Uganda) ? – 1906		Succeeded by: East African rupee Ratio: at par
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Zanzibar ? – ca. 1908 Concurrent with: Zanzibari riyal		Succeeded by: Zanzibari rupee Ratio: at par
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of British Somaliland brefore 1887 – 1940		Succeeded by: Italian East African lira Reason: captured by Italy
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Italian Somaliland 1889 – 1910 Concurrent with: Maria Theresa thaler and Eritrean tallero		Succeeded by: Italian Somaliland rupia Reason: creation of a local currency Ratio: at par, and 1 Italian Somaliland rupia = 1.68 Italian lira
Preceded by: ???	Currency of Aden ca. 1894 – 1951		Succeeded by: East African shilling Ratio: 1 shilling = 1 British shilling
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Bahrain 1880 – 1959		Succeeded by: Gulf rupee Ratio: at par
	Currency of Kuwait 1899 – 1959
	Currency of Muscat 1891 – 1959
	Currency of Qatar 1892 – 1959
	Currency of Trucial States 1892 – 1959
Preceded by: Some Ottoman currency	Currency of Iraq ca. 1920 – 1931 Note: some source says it ended in 1932		Succeeded by: Iraqi dinar Ratio: 1 dinar = 13 1/3 rupees = 1 British pound
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Najd ? – 1918 Concurrent with: Ottoman kuruş, Egyptian qirsh, Maria Theresa thaler		Succeeded by: Najd coins Ratio: see article
Preceded by: currencies of the Indian states	Currency of British India 1835 – 1947	Succeeded by: Pakistani rupee Reason: Partition of India Ratio: at par
		Currency of India 1947 – Note: some states and union territories joined later, between 1961 and 1954	Succeeded by: Current
Preceded by: currencies of Danish India Reason: sold/ceded to the U.K. Note: from 1839 to 1869
Preceded by: French Indian rupee Location: French India Reason: integrating with India from 1947 to 1954
Preceded by: Portuguese Indian escudo Location: Portuguese India Reason: integrating with India in 1961

French Indian rupia

Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of French India ? – 1954	Succeeded by: Indian rupee Reason: integrating with India

Portuguese Indian rupia

Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Portuguese India ? – 1958	Succeeded by: Portuguese Indian escudo Reason: unifiying the currencies of the Portuguese colonies Ratio: at par with Portuguese escudo, or 1 escudo = 1/6 rupia

Portuguese Indian escudo

Preceded by: Portuguese Indian rupia Reason: unifiying the currencies of the Portuguese colonies Ratio: at par with Portuguese escudo, or 1 escudo = 1/6 rupia	Currency of Portuguese India 1958 – 1961	Succeeded by: Indian rupee Reason: integrating with India

Spanish and Mexican silver dollars[edit]

Malaysia/Singapore group
French Indochina
North America
Hong Kong??

Mexican peso

First peso
Preceded by: Spanish gold escudo and Spanish real de plata fuerte Ratio: 1 peso = 8 reales = 0.5 escudo	Currency of New Spain 1732 – 1821	Currency of Mexico 1821 – December 31, 1992	Succeeded by: Second peso Reason: inflation Ratio: 1 new peso = 1000 old pesos
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Circulates in Thirteen Colonies ? – 1785 Note: declared independence in 1776	Currency of United States 1785 – 1792 Note: officially recognized and used until 1857	Succeeded by: United States dollar Reason: independence Ratio: at par

Second peso
Preceded by: first peso Reason: inflation Ratio: 1 new peso = 1000 old pesos	Currency of Mexico January 1, 1993 –	Succeeded by: Current

Maria Theresa thaler[edit]

Somalia
~~Ethiopia~~
North Yemen
Middle East??

Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Ethiopia ca. 1800 – 1906? 1894?	Succeeded by: Abyssinian talari Ratio: at par Note: Maria Theresa thaler still circulates until probably 1931
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Italian Somaliland 1889 – 1909 Concurrent with: Indian rupee	Succeeded by: Italian Somaliland rupia Ratio: at par with Indian rupee Note: Maria Theresa thaler still circulates until the late 1910s
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Hejaz ? – 1916 Concurrent with: Ottoman kuruş, Egyptian qirsh	Succeeded by: Hejazi riyal Ratio: at par
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Najd ? – 1918 Concurrent with: Ottoman kuruş, Egyptian qirsh, Indian rupee	Succeeded by: Najd coins Ratio: see article

Japanese occupied money[edit]

Malaysia/Singapore group
Burma
Philippines
Indonesia
British Oceania

Japanese yen[edit]

Korea
Taiwan

German reichsmark[edit]

~~Austria~~
~~Czechoslovakia~~
Denmark
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Poland
~~Danzig~~
Saar
~~Slovakia~~
~~Slovenia~~

Italian lira[edit]

See Italian Empire (unification 17 March 1861)
SCWPM starts at Law 1874
Eritrean Tallero 1891^{[dead link]}

Preceded by: various state currencies Reason: unification Ratio: some state lira were already very close to the unified lira	Currency of Italy 1861 – December 31, 2001 Note: euro existed as an accounting currency since 1 January 1999	Succeeded by: euro Reason: deployment of euro cash Ratio: 1 euro = 1936.27 lira
Preceded by: Austro-Hungarian krone Location: South Tyrol and Trieste Reason: became part of Italy in 1918
Preceded by: Ethiopian talari Reason: annaxed by Italy into Italian East Africa Ratio: 1 lira = 5 talari	Currency of Ethiopia 1936 – ca. 1938	Succeeded by: Italian East African lira Reason: creation of a local currency Ratio: at par
Preceded by: Italian Somaliland rupia Ratio: 1 lira = 8 rupees	Currency of Italian Somaliland 1925 – ca. 1938 Concurrent with: Italian Somaliland lira
Preceded by: Maria Theresa thaler Ratio: 5 lira = 1 thaler	Currency of Eritrea 1922 – ca. 1938
Preceded by: Eritrean tallero Ratio: 5 lira = 1 tallero	Currency of Eritrea 1922 – ca. 1938		Currency of Libya 1912 – 1941	Succeeded by: This is a stub Note: This list of stubs may not be complete
Preceded by: Yugoslav 1920 dinar Reason: Italian occupation	Currency of Montenegro, Italy occupied portion of Slovenia 1941 – 1945	Succeeded by: Yugoslav 1945 dinar Reason: reunification of Yugoslavia as a result of World War II and end of Italian occupation

New boxes[edit]

Zanzibar revisited[edit]

Zanzibar riyal[edit]

moved to article. --Chochopk 12:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Persian gulf[edit]

Gulf rupee[edit]

Note: GFD table actually says this was used in Muscat only (not Muscat and Oman), but it doesn't say what was used in Oman before the Omani rial. I need to do more research -- check www.islamicbanknotes.com, and elsewhere. Ingrid 00:54, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
added more detail from http://www.islamicbanknotes.com/gulfrupees%20(article).htm. I'm going to added concurrent with to the template, and will update this after that. Ingrid 03:39, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should we split Omani rial into Omani rial and Saidi rial (1970-1973)? --Chochopk 14:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about those. User:Dove1950 said that he thought they were the same currency... Where was it? At Talk:Yemeni rial. That was about the Ahmadi rial and Imadi rial, but he mentioned the Oman situation. I didn't know whether those should be considered separate currencies, and he thought they shouldn't. So, I suggest you check with him. I just don't know enough about it to have a valuable opinion. Ingrid 02:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self (--Chochopk 14:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)) (Finally)[reply]

Abu Dhabi
- largest of the seven emirates that comprise the United Arab Emirates
- was also the largest of the former Trucial States
- also a city of the same name within the Emirate that is the capital of the country, in north central UAE.
Dubai
- one of the seven emirates that make up the United Arab Emirates on the Arabian Peninsula, or
- that emirate's main city, sometimes called "Dubai City" to distinguish it from the emirate.
Trucial States (redirects to United Arab Emirates)
- In March 1892 the Trucial States (or Trucial Oman) were created.
- comprising 7 emirates
- Before 1971, they were known as the Trucial States or Trucial Oman
- In 1971, 6 of these states — Abu Dhabi, Ajman, Fujairah, Sharjah, Dubai, and Umm Al Quwain — merged to form the United Arab Emirates. They were joined in 1972 by Ras Al Khaimah.
Muscat and Oman
- Muscat and Oman was a country that encompassed the present day Sultanate of Oman(=Oman) and parts of the United Arab Emirates(UAE)
- existed from about 1856 until about 1970. The country is not to be confused with either the Trucial States or Trucial Oman
- Historical differences always existed between the more secular, rich, seafaring coastal Sultanate of Muscat and the interior Imamate of Oman, whose rulers were of the more conservative Wahhabi persuasion.
- In 1891, Oman became a British protectorate, which lasted until 1971.

I would like to finish this region. All we need is to clear up Oman, the what came before Saudi Arabia (Hejaz, and Najd). I don't have strong preference toward either to split or not to split Omani rial. --Chochopk 09:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm doing some work with recategorizing, and trying to spend less time on the computer, so I may not check in here as often for a little while. I don't care about splitting or not. Dove seemed to think they shouldn't be split, so let's go with that. Feel free to move whatever you want. I trust you, and if you want me to check something, you can leave a note here, and I'll check it on the main page when I get time. Which reminds me, I used "Ethiopian thaler birr" and "Ethiopian birr" for the pre-1936 birr and post-1945 birr. I couldn't think of anything better. Ingrid 21:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sources:

Move. --Chochopk 06:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hejazi riyal[edit]

Hejaz independent in 1916, then started CM on Turkish, Egyptian, and MMT until AH1338 (year starting 9/26/1919), when it started minting its own coins. Hejaz riyal = MMT = EGP = 1.1 TUK.
I wish to consider CM coins as a new currency, like over stamped banknotes
also issued banknotes in pound. Very very very rare.

Preceded by: Ottoman kuruş, Egyptian qirsh, Maria Theresa thaler Ratio: 1 riyal = 1 thaler = 1 qirsh = 1.1 kuruş	Currency of Hejaz 1916 – 1928 Note: countermarked coins before 1920	Succeeded by: Hejazi and Najdi riyal Reason: merging with Najd Ratio: at par

Najdi coins[edit]

CM only

Preceded by: Ottoman kuruş, Egyptian qirsh, Maria Theresa thaler, Indian rupee Ratio: 1 riyal = 1 thaler = 20 qirsh = 22 kuruş = about 2 rupees	Currency of Hejaz 1918 – 1928	Succeeded by: Hejazi and Najdi riyal Reason: merging with Najd Ratio: at par

Hejazi and Najdi riyal[edit]

Coin started AH1346 (year starting 1927/7/1) Najdi occupation of Hejaz in 1925

Preceded by: Najdi riyal Location: Najd Reason: merging with Hejaz Ratio: at par	Currency of Kingdom of Hijaz and Nejd 1928 – 1932	Currency of Saudi Arabia 1932 – 1936	Succeeded by: Saudi riyal Reason: creation of Saudi Arabia Ratio: 1 sovereign riyal = 0.5 Hejazi and Najdi riyal = 0.05 British Pound
Preceded by: Hejazi riyal Location: Hejaz Reason: merging with Najd Ratio: at par

Saudi riyal[edit]

Raw data:

Political
- The Saudi state began in central Arabia in 1744. A local ruler, Muhammad bin Saud, joined forces with an Islamic reformer, Muhammad Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab, to create a new political entity.
- Najd was conquered by the Wahhabi forces of Abdul Aziz ibn Abdul Rahman ibn Saud, from the Ottoman Empire, during the period of 1899–1912
- TMMH: By 1904 Ibn Sa'ud ('Abd al-'Aziz II) had recovered all of the original Sa'udi territory in central Arabia (the Najd)
- In 1916 Hejaz's independence was proclaimed by Husain ibn Ali, the Sherif of Makkah.
- In 1924, however, ibn Ali's authority was usurped by ibn Saud of the neighboring nation of Nejd
- In 1925 the Sa'ūds captured the holy city of Mecca
- On January 8, 1926 Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud became the King of Hijaz.
- By the Treaty of Jedda, signed on May 20, 1927, the United Kingdom recognized the independence of Abdul Aziz's realm (then known as the Kingdom of Hijaz and Nejd).
- Unification 23 September 1932
Monetary
- TMMH: 1517-1916?: fixed (as part of currency union); officially used Ottoman currency, in practice used silver Maria Theresa thalers and other foreign currencies
- TMMH: 1912-9 July 1915: The Ottoman Bank opened a branch in Jiddah. It issued its first notes on 16 November 1863. The Ottoman government issued notes from 28 August 1876-12 March 1880, but they seem to have circulated little outside Constantinople (now Istanbul).
- TMMH: 1916?-22 January? 1928: Apparently, Saudi Arabia adopted the Turkish silver medjidie as its standard coin after independence. It is unclear whether adoption was formal or informal. The silver medjidie was equal to 20 silver piastres, or one-fifth of a prewar Ottoman pound (lira).
- TMMH: 23 January? 1928-1936: The Saudi riyal, equal in size and silver content to the old Turkish silver medjidie, existed only as a silver coin; it was the official unit of account. British gold sovereigns were widely used. 10 Saudi riyals = UK£1
- GFD: 1800-01/01/1936: Arabic kingdoms: Maria Theresa Thaler
- GFD: 1800-10/22/1952: Arabic kingdoms: British Gold Sovereign (Pound Sterling)
- GFD: 06/10/1916-09/22/1932: Hejaz: Saudi Arabian Riyal = 1 MMT = 0.2 GBP
- GFD: 08/22/1921-09/22/1932: Nejd: Saudi Arabian Riyal
- GFD: 01/22/1928-01/01/1936: Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabian Riyal
- coin catalog:Hejaz countermarked coinage: on AH1327//2-//9 (=AH1328-AH1335). 1 dinar = 5 riyal, 1 riyal = 20 piastres, 1 piastre = 40 para. Para coins CM on Turkish para. Piastre coins CM on Turkish kurish & Egyptian qirsh. 20 piastres also on 1 MMT. By logical deduction, dinar = pound = livre, riyal = dollar.
- coin catalog: regular coinage of Hejaz earliest in AH1334//5 = AH1338 (starting 11/9 1915). 1 riyal = 24.1g * 0.917 Ag
- coin catalog: Mecca (occupied by bin Sa'ud): AH1343-1344 (1343 starts 8/2 1924, 1344 starts 7/22 1925)
- coin catalog: Hejaz & Nejd: AH1346-1348 (AH 1/1/1346 = 7/1 1927, AH 1/1/1348 = 6/9 1929). riyal = 24.1 g * 0.917 Ag
- coin catalog: Nejd: 1918. Piaster CM on Egyptian piaster or Turkish kurush, rupee CM on Indian rupee, 20 piastres also CM on MMT.
- banknote catalog: Hejaz pound in 1924. 1 pound (riyal) = 20 ghirsh (piastres). No Najd or Nejd listed.

Major related coins of the time

Coin	weight (g)	purity	metal	real content (g)	note
Turkish 20 kurus	24.055	0.83	Ag	19.96565
Egyptian 20 piastres	28	0.833	Ag	23.324	it's been like this at least before 1910
MMT	28.0668	.833	Ag	23.3796444	data from wiki
Indian rupee	11.66?	0.917	Ag	10.6922
Hejaz riyal	24.1	0.917	Ag	22.0997

- TMMH: 1936-July 1948: Saudi Arabia minted a new, greatly debased silver coin equal in size and silver content to the Indian silver rupee. 20 new Saudi riyals = 7.32238g gold (1 gold UK sovereign)
- TMMH: July 1948-third quarter 1951: revalue excnahge rate
- GFD: 01/01/1936-10/22/1952: Saudi Arabia: Saudi Sovereign (new) Riyal = 2 Saudi Arabian (old) Riyal = 0.1 GBP (contradiction with TMMH and catalog. Should be 1 new = 0.5 old = 0.05 GBP.)
- coin catalog: 1935 is the first year of Saudi Arabian riyal coin, 11.6 g * 0.917 Ag. 1 riyal = 20-22 ghirsh

- TMMH: third quarter 1951: This rate was chosen such that 40 riyals = 1 British gold sovereign. 3-15/22 Saudi riyals = US$1. became formal on 22 October 1952
- GFD: 10/22/1952-: Saudi Riyal. 1 USD = 3.75 SAR
- coin catalog: the earliest "reform coinage" started in 1963. no precious metal. new subunit halala. 1 riyal = 100 halala, 1 ghirsh = 5 halala
- banknote catalog: the earliest in 1953. The pilgrim receipt. It was recalled in 1963 and demonetized on 3/20/1964
- banknote catalog: regular issue in 1961

What happened around 1952? Was the riyal revalued? Neither TMMH nor GFD gives an affirmative answer, only that it it pegged to a new anchor currency - USD. So I must look up the exchange rate between USD and GBP around that time.

~~http://www.mises.org/money/4s5.asp says $2.4.~~
Using price index to reverse engineer the approximate the exchange rate: index in UK in 10/1952: 10.1, 12/2005: 194.1. Inflation calculator: $1 in 1952 = $7.37 in 2005. exchange rate on 12/15/2005 £ = $1.77270. In this sense, £ in 1952 = $4.62 in 1952.
Just before peg to USD, 40 riyals = 1 British gold sovereign = 7.32238g gold = 0.2354 Troy ounces. And 1 ounce of gold was like $20 or $33, I'm not sure, if $33, then 1 USD = 4.85 riyal, if $20, then 1 USD = 8.5 riyal?!?!?!? This is confusing.
£ = $2.8 from 1950-1966. So TMMH somewhat contradicts itself. IT says third quarter 1951-21 October 1952, 3-15/22 Saudi riyals = US$1, and also 40 riyals = 1 British gold sovereign = 7.32238g. And GB£ ~= 2.491 g of gold (calculated from the section of India). So $1 = £1/2.8 = 2.491/2.8 g of gold = 2.491/2.8/(7.32238/40) riyal = 4.86 riyals, which is 32% more than 3 15/22 riyals.

Preceded by: Hejaz and Najd riyal Reason: creation of Saudi Arabia Ratio: 1 sovereign riyal = 0.5 Hejazi and Najdi riyal = 0.05 British Pound	Currency of Saudi Arabia 1936 –	Succeeded by: Current
Preceded by: Gulf rupee Reason: devaluation of the Gulf rupee before delivery of replacement	Circulates in Qatar and Trucial States except for Abu Dhabi June, 1966 – September, 1966	Succeeded by: Qatari and Dubai riyal Reason: local currency delivered Ratio: 1.065 Qatari and Dubai riyals = 1 Saudi riyal, or 1 Qatari and Dubai riyal = 1 pre-devalued Gulf rupee

Qatari and Dubai riyal (it currently redirects to Qatari riyal)[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 06:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Qatari riyal[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 06:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United Arab Emirates dirham[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 06:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kuwaiti dinar[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 06:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bahraini dinar[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 06:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Omani rial[edit]

~~result different depending on split or not split~~
Another step toward completion
Moved. --Chochopk 06:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iraqi dinar[edit]

Preceded by: Indian rupee Ratio: 1 dinar = 13 1/3 rupees = 1 British pound	Currency of Iraq 1931 – 1991 Note: some source says it was delayed until 1932	Succeeded by: Current Location: Iraq except Iraqi Kurdistan
		Succeeded by: Swiss dinar Location: Iraqi Kurdistan Note: The "currency" was in fact the old notes that evaded the currency confiscation
Preceded by: Kuwaiti dinar	Currency of Kuwait August 2, 1990 – early 1991 Note: Iraqi occupation	Succeeded by: Kuwaiti dinar Ratio: = pre-war Kuwaiti dinar

Swiss dinar[edit]

Preceded by: Iraqi dinar Ratio: at par Note: The "currency" was in fact the old notes that evaded the currency confiscation	Currency of Iraqi Kurdistan 1991 – 2003	Succeeded by: Iraqi dinar Reason: fall of Saddam Hussein's regime

Ottoman Empire[edit]

1798-1801: French occupation of Egypt
1805: Muhammad Ali established a semi-independent dynasty of Egypt
1817: Serbia gained autonomy
1821: Beginning of the Greek War of Independence.
1830: Algeria's gradual cession to French rule.
1832: Greek sovereignty formalized.
1856: Establishment of a united Romanian autonomous state.
1876: Occupation of Cyprus by Britain.
1877: Romanian War of Independence began
1878: Treaty of San Stefano - recognition of Romanian and Serbian independence, as well as the establishment of an autonomous Bulgarian principality under nominal Ottoman protection. Austria-Hungary occupies Bosnia by default.
1881: As the Empire celebrates its 600th anniversary, Tunisia becomes a French colony.
1882: Egypt under British protection.
1885: Province of Eastern Rumelia transferred to Bulgarian jurisdiction.
1908: Austria-Hungary annexes Bosnia by mere declaration; Bulgaria obtains full independence.
1911: Ottomans easily defeated by Italy in a short war, with the Italians gaining Libya; thus the 340-year Ottoman presence in North Africa is brought to an end.
1912: First Balkan War; Albania declares independence; Ottoman Empire nearly wiped out from Europe, save for Istanbul and just enough land around to defend it.
1914: Cyprus annexed outright by Britain. Entry of the Empire into World War I on the side of the Central Powers.
1920: Treaty of Sèvres. Hejaz (now part of Saudi Arabia), Armenia and Assyria were to become independent. Kurdistan was to be given autonomy. In accordance with the wartime Sykes-Picot Agreement, Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Palestine were assigned under mandate to the tutelage of the United Kingdom, Lebanon and an enlarged Syria to that of France. The Dodecanese and Rhodes (already under Italian occupation since 1911), with portions of southern Anatolia, were to pass to Italy, while Thrace and Western Anatolia, including the key port of Smyrna (now Izmir), would become part of Greece.
1920: Formation of Turkish Parliament
1923: Declaration of the Republic of Turkey

Finally, I got this part. But what's the earliest coins denominated as lira? --Chochopk 15:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman kuruş[edit]

Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Ottoman Empire Unknown – 1844	Succeeded by: Ottoman gold lira Reason: creation of a new unit for the new bimetallic standard. Kuruş became a subunit Ratio: 1 lira = 100 kuruş Note: But Kuruş remained a popular unit even for amount larger than 1 lira

Ottoman gold lira[edit]

Preceded by: Ottoman kuruş Reason: creation of a new unit for the new bimetallic standard. Kuruş became a subunit Ratio: 1 lira = 100 kuruş Note: But Kuruş remained a popular unit even for amount larger than 1 lira	Currency of Ottoman Empire 1844 – 1921 Concurrent with: Ottoman paper lira	Succeeded by: Turkish lira Reason: founding of a new republic (officially in 1923) Ratio: at par

Ottoman paper lira[edit]

Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Ottoman Empire ca. 1840 – 1921 Concurrent with: Ottoman gold lira	Succeeded by: Turkish lira Reason: founding of a new republic (officially in 1923) Ratio: 1 Turkish lira = 3~9 paper lira

Turkish lira[edit]

Preceded by: Ottoman gold lira Reason: founding of a new republic (officially in 1923) Ratio: at par	Currency of Turkey 1921 – January 1, 2005	Succeeded by: Turkish new lira Reason: inflation Ratio: 1 new lira = 1,000,000 old lira
Preceded by: Ottoman paper lira Reason: founding of a new republic (officially in 1923) Ratio: 1 Turkish lira = 3~9 paper lira
Preceded by: Cypriot pound	Currency of Northern Cyprus 1975 – January 1, 2005

Turkish new lira[edit]

Preceded by: Turkish lira Reason: inflation Ratio: 1 new lira = 1,000,000 old lira	Currency of Turkey, Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus January 1, 2005 – Note: Northern Cyprus is not widely recognized	Succeeded by: Current

Egyptian pound[edit]

£ = 100 piastres

Preceded by: Egyptian coins very similar to Ottoman coins Reason: currency reform Ratio: 1 pound = 7.4375g gold	Currency of Egypt 1834 –	Succeeded by: Current
	Currency of Sudan 1834 – 1957 Concurrent with: British pound	Succeeded by: Sudanese pound Reason: independence (in 1956) Ratio: at par

Sudanese pound[edit]

Preceded by: Egyptian pound Reason: independence (in 1956) Ratio: at par	Currency of Sudan 1957 – 1992	Currency of Northern Sudan 1992 –	Succeeded by: Sudanese dinar Reason: inflation Ratio: 1 dinar = 10 pounds
		Currency of Southern Sudan 1992 – Note: see Second Sudanese Civil War	Succeeded by: Current

Sudanese dinar[edit]

Preceded by: Sudanese pound Reason: inflation Ratio: 1 dinar = 10 pounds	Currency of Northern Sudan 1992 –	Succeeded by: Current

Latin Monetary Union[edit]

The more I do, the more I realize the importance of the previous metal content in coins. I believe understanding Latin Monetary Union is crucial to do these european currencies (of course), and Ottoman too. I will first construct the table of the start and end date for the coins that are compatible with the LMU's standard, and some other important ones. Unfortunately, I don't have a coin catalog for the 19th century. So I would need some help for the start date. --Chochopk 11:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, you've impressed me. I started trying to write a Latin Monetary Union page, and found it frustrating. The information on Wikipedia does not match the several dates I found when searching the internet. My only real (non-internet) source is SCWC, and I didn't think to check the metal content. I'm thinking I might try the real-life library at some point. I believe the LMU was gone around the time of WWI, even though some currencies maintained their previous metal content. Ingrid 16:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Before I started doing this project, I never consider the importance of metal content. I thought they were just boring numbers. But I was wrong. They actually tell a story. The funny thing about 5 LMUU is that you can actually tell that the Balkans are closer to A-H (either politically or monetarily) at that time. But I must go back to Malaysia and French Indochina. They've been here forever. I would need to do some stubs, splitting, and trace it all the way back to Mexican peso/Spanish dollar. --Chochopk 03:00, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Table moved to User:Chochopk/Latin Monetary Union unit. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swiss franc[edit]

Probably the easiest yet

Preceded by: Currencies of the cantons Reason: formation of the confederation (in 1948) Ratio: 1 new franc = 1 French franc, and = 2/3 cantonal franc of many cantons	Currency of Switzerland 1850 –	Succeeded by: Current
Preceded by: Austrian krone and Liechtenstein krone Reason: Austrian krone was unstable Ratio: at par with Swiss franc	Currency of Liechtenstein 1921 – Concurrent with: Liechtenstein frank	Succeeded by: Current

Spanish real de plata fuerte[edit]

This is the real where $1 = 8 real

Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Spain ? – 1808 Concurrent with: Spanish gold escudo	Succeeded by: Spanish real de vellón Ratio: 1 real de vellón = 0.4 real de plata fuerte

Spanish gold escudo[edit]

Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Spain ? – 1850s Concurrent with: Spanish real de plata fuerte before 1808, Spanish real de vellón after	Succeeded by: Spanish real de vellón Ratio: 1 real de vellón = 1/40 gold escudo

Spanish real de vellón[edit]

need to split Spanish real
It takes 20 of this reales to make $1. And yes they were available in 20R from 1809~1863.

Preceded by: Spanish real de plata fuerte and Spanish gold escudo Ratio: 1 real de vellón = 0.4 real de plata fuerte = 1/40 gold escudo	Currency of Spain 1808 – 1864 Concurrent with: gold escudo slowly withdrew until 1850s	Succeeded by: Spanish silver escudo Ratio: 1 silver escudo = 10 reales de vellón

Spanish silver escudo[edit]

Preceded by: Spanish real de vellón Ratio: 1 silver escudo = 10 reales de vellón	Currency of Spain 1864 – 1868	Succeeded by: Spanish peseta Reason: joining the Latin Monetary Union Ratio: 1 peseta = 1 French franc = 0.4 silver escudo

Spanish peseta[edit]

Preceded by: Spanish silver escudo Reason: joining the Latin Monetary Union Ratio: 1 peseta = 1 French franc = 0.4 silver escudo	Currency of Spain 1868 – January 1, 2002 Note: a virtual currency unit, European Currency Unit, was created in 1999	Succeeded by: euro Reason: creation of a monetary union Ratio: 1 euro = 166.386 pesetas

Central Europe[edit]

Austro-Hungarian gulden[edit]

earliest note 1759
last (biligual) banknote in gulden: 1880
this is more confusing because Austria-Hungary didn't exist until 1867. From 1804-1867 it was the Austrian Empire. Before that, it was the Holy Roman Empire. But Dove1950 told me that the Holy Roman Empire didn't use the A-H gulden, just the South German gulden, and some other currencies. He's working on filling out the German currency situation. Ingrid 15:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Preceded by: ??	Currency of Austria-Hungary, Liechtenstein ??? – ???	Succeeded by: Austro-Hungarian krone Ratio: 2 kronen = 1 gulden

Austro-Hungarian krone[edit]

Still having some trouble with this one. I've gotten this info out of GFD, and the details of the breakup of A-H from Wikipedia. There's a fair amount of information in the A-H krone article, but it doesn't exactly match this. I'm not sure if overstamping would constitute a new currency (I think GFD thinks it does, and that's what the Austrian krone, Hungarian koruna, and Czechoslovakian koruna are, but I don't really know). I'm getting really frustrated with this process because I don't know what to call the currencies. In this table, I've used basically the names from GFD (although they aren't consistent about adjectival forms). Ack. Any help is appreciated. Ingrid 04:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "Table of Monetary History" does not have one for Europe. So it's harder for us, I guess. And starting this is very dangerous, as it opens a doorway to the Balkans, which in turn leads to Ottoman Emmpire, which leads to its successors in the Middle East. Yet, this is a job we must do. And I have confidence that we will do a great job.

It is worth looking at Liechtenstein^{[dead link]}. The 1920 notes were 10, 20, and 50 Heller.

The article of Austro-Hungarian krone is wrong. Austro-Hungarian krone is not succeeded by Austrian schilling--Chochopk 13:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think over stamp counts as a new currency, as it is the norm in the Standard Catalog. --Chochopk 15:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the template instructions. Mostly just grammar, but I also took out your mention of how to handle if recognized independence is differnet from declared independence. Since we're dealing with currency, I don't think it matters what date independence happened -- usually, currency is introduced well after independence. Ingrid 22:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as naming conventions for currencies, the project has chosen ISO 4217, and no one seems to care that that doesn't help us. So, I think it's reasonable for us to use the old style of <adjectival form of country name> <currency name>. When we need disambiguation, I think we should use (detail), for example, Cambodian riel (1955) and Cambodian riel (1980). It's not clear to me when it's appropriate to use new/old. I prefer to use whatever is on the currency itself, but that leads to problems because currencies often have "new" for a little while then drop it even though the currency hasn't changed. I do think it's important to use the same name in the succession box that we use in the article/label (see below).

Do you know what happened in Galicia when it became part of Poland? At the time, Poland used the Polish marka. GFD says that Poland (maybe just Galicia?) used the Austrian krone 1918-1919, but it doesn't include enough detail. I'm going to guess that it was just Galicia, unless you can figure out something better. Ingrid 22:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See principle discussion above. --Chochopk 01:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about handling the Latin Monetary Union? GFD uses one code, and refers to Union Latine lira, Union Latine franc, etc. It makes sense to me that it's just one currency, but I'd rather have one name for it. The best I can think of is "Latin Union currency"

Unless the idea sounds bad to you, I'm thinking of creating a page for Latin Union currency which links to Latin Union and mentions how the currencies had different names and patterns, but were interchangeable and thus really one currency. Then, I'll link to the page from "Latin Union lira", "Latin Union franc", etc. with a reference on the "Italian lira", "French franc", etc. pages. Then, we can use "Latin Union lira" or LU whatever in our boxes. Sound reasonable? Ingrid 15:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue: I just looked in SCWC (Standard Catalog of World Coins) and saw that the A-H krone was called "corona" on the Austrian coins. It was "koruna" on the Hungarian coins. I see (on the web) that the banknotes said "krone", I just found that odd, and will mention it in the updated article, whenever I update it. Ingrid 15:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I started looking into Latin Union currency. It's fascinating. The only regret I have is not to have a coin catalog for 1800-1900. I'm for the new articles. --Chochopk 11:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it would be better if we drop Latin Union lira and Romanian leu here. Territories are ceded from one country to another (existing one) all the time through out history. And it would be insane to include all those into the currency succession box. So IMHO, I think we only want to include the case where an entire country is occupied (e.g. Kuwait by Iraq), or a formation of a union with a newly acquired territory (e.g. Yugo), a split (N. and S. Korea), etc (did I include all appropriate changes?) --Chochopk 01:42, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, and agree that we could never reasonably expect to include all territory changes. But I think this is a different case, since Austria-Hungary ceased to exist. I think it deserves a mention where all the pieces went. A similar case (and one that I'm not exactly looking forward to, but at the same time, am interested in learning more about) would be Poland which has come and gone throughout history. A case that I wouldn't worry about is Alsace-Lorraine which has gone back and forth between Germany and France too many times to worry about. If you don't want to mess with it (I know, I started A-H when you wanted to leave Europe alone), just leave it for now, and I'll get back to it at some point. Ingrid 02:38, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear editors. The question of the succession boxes for Austria-Hungary is very interesting. As far as I know, after the dissolution of the Monarchy, 4 countries (Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Lichtenstein) were created on its territory without independent de jure precedessor; two countries (SHS kingdom, from 1929 Yugoslavia) were created on Kuk and other territories without de jure precedessor, while Romania and Italy were existing independent states awarded with Kuk territories.

All of these (be it newly created or independent before) used stamps to mark the banknotes on their territory - according to the treaties after the WWI, which forced the states to overstamp and then replace the banknotes circulating in their territory.

Some of the banknotes emitted by the still existing Austro-Hungarian Bank after the WWI were not accepted in some of the successor states. This was the first step which led to different inflations. The second step was the overstamping: if a country quickly overstemped the notes, it could deny in a short time the acception of non-overstamped money (and naturally the money of different states). If a country was late, the notes without stamp cumulated there, aggravating inflation (case of Hungary). As a third step, the new banknotes were introduced - the amount money depended only on the new states.

Austria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia (so the states fully created on the former Kuk territory) kept the earlier currency name (Krone, korona and koruna, respectively). However, the Krone and the korona was soon replaced with a new currency (Schilling and pengő), while the currency in Czechia and Slovakia is still the koruna...

Poland was created on the territory of Germany, Russia and A-H. The new money was named marka, but at least Kuk money was overstamped before replacing.

Hungary is a special case: the inner politics were extremely turbulent that time. The main aim of the first government (Károlyi) was to 'destruct' the army (which made it impossible to resist the Treaty decisions, which in the case of Turkey worked). The communists replaced this government in a short time, who reached some military success in the first time, but after 133 days' ruling, they were defied. - Due to the political uncertainty (vacuum), the currency system became very incalculable. Many local banks, towns, compounds and even newly created and unrecognised "republics" issued or overstamped money.

The Károlyi government asked the then-existing AH Bank to bring banknote press and clishé to print money in Budapest. Vienna sent the clishés of the 25 and 200 Kr bills, which were designed after the war and had a poor quality. However, the banknotes printed in Budapest were later declared forgeries by Vienna. This forced Hungary to stop the efflux of the old currency from the country and to replace the 25 and 200 kr. with new notes. These banknotes were emitted by the Post savings bank, and had the Kuk krone in deposit as their cover. In 1921 the korona state notes were printed, and the first 'real' banknotes were the pengő bills - emitted by the just-set-up Hungarian National Bank from 1927.

It is not easy to relate a currency to a time period. It is fact, that a 'korona' which was only legal tender only in Hungary, existed. But it is a good question, what should be the birthday of this currency.

Preceded by: Austro-Hungarian gulden Ratio: 2 kronen = 1 gulden Note: This was called the florin in Austria and forint in Hungary	Currency of Austria-Hungary, Liechtenstein 1892 – 1918 Concurrent with: Liechtenstein krone in Liechtenstein since 1898	Succeeded by: Austrian krone Location: Austria and Galicia as part of Poland, Liechtenstein Reason: dissolution of the Empire after World War I Ratio: at par
		Succeeded by: Hungarian korona Location: Hungary Reason: dissolution of the Empire after World War I Ratio: at par
		Succeeded by: Czechoslovak koruna Location: Czechoslovakia Reason: dissolution of the Empire after World War I Ratio: at par Note: on 10 April, 1919
		Succeeded by: Italian lira Location: South Tyrol and Trieste Reason: became part of Italy
		Succeeded by: Romanian leu Location: Transylvania Reason: became part of Romania
		Succeeded by: Yugoslav krone Location: Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes Reason: dissolution of the Empire after World War I Note: overstamping of Austro-Hungarian krone on 12 November, 1918

Yugoslav krone[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 07:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yugoslav dinar[edit]

What's listed on SCWPM:

Serbia
- 1876 dinar (the last one before WW2 German occupation was dated 1918)
- 1941 German occupation dinar (by Serbian National Bank) (1 note was overstamped Yugo note) (The last one was 1943)

Yugoslavia
- Kingdom of the S, C, & S (as a subsection)
  - 1919 overstamped krone (on A-H krone)
  - 1919 dinar (by the Ministry of Finance of the Kingdom of the S, C, & S printed)
  - 1919 overstamped krone (on KSCS dinar)
    The ordering of these 1919 notes is unclear
  - 1920 dinar (by the National Bank of the KSCS)
- Kingdom of Yugoslavia
  - 1929 dinar (the last one before German occupation was dated 1939)
  - 1943 kingdom in exile dinar
- Hungarian occupation of Backa (WW2) (in today's northern Vojvodina, Serbia)
  - 1941 dinar (overstamp on Yugoslavian dinar)
- Italian occupation of Montenegro (WW2)
  - 1941 dinar (overstamp on Yugoslavian dinar)
- Democratic Federation of Yugoslavia
  - 1944 dinar
- Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia
  - 1946 dinar
Croatia
- (Revolution of) 1848 forint (extremely rare)
- 1941 "Independent State of Croatia" kuna (Axis influence) (last one 1943)
Montenegro ("1 perper = 100 para = 1 Austrian crown")
- Kingdom
  - 1912 perper (last 1914)
- Austrian occupation (WW1)
  - 1916 perper (all overprint on older perper)
  - 1917 "convertible" perper, 2 perper = 1 munzperper = 1 krone

To Do:

details of occupation
add Serbian dinar and Montenegrin perper to Yugoslav krone

Can I say Yugoslavia group is done for the part after 1990? --Chochopk 08:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. --Chochopk 11:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note:

GFD calls this both the convertible and new dinar
Republika Srpska = part of Bosnia
Republic of Serbian Krajina = part of Croatia
THE WORLD'S WORST INFLATION?
Probably no/few coins in this hyperinflation period. I will aid whatever I can with SCWPM. --Chochopk 17:17, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if there's a distinction between "Slovenian tolar bons" and "Slovenian tolar". I don't see bons anywhere other than GFD. --Chochopk 17:17, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

took out bons. Also, put back to three columns. Were you trying to split out the 91 and 92 dates? Since they were different dates within the year, it seems like it's better to just use "various dates" as we've done somewhere else. If you were trying to do something else, let me know. Ingrid 02:04, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. --Chochopk 11:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian dinar[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 11:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnia and Herzegovina dinar[edit]

Moved --Chochopk 06:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnia and Herzegovina convertible mark[edit]

make a redirect?
Moved --Chochopk 06:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Republika Srpska dinar[edit]

Moved --Chochopk 06:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonian denar[edit]

Moved --Chochopk 05:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slovenian tolar[edit]

Moved --Chochopk 05:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian dinar[edit]

Use dinara for plural (local name principle)?
Moved --Chochopk 20:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian kuna[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 08:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Krajina dinar[edit]

There is an article Krajina reformed dinar (as of June 19, 2006, it redirects to Krajina dinar). This section simply copy-edited from Yugoslavia
Moved --Chochopk 20:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Austrian krone[edit]

Note for text on page:

This was originally the Austro-Hungarian krone overstamped with "DEUTSCHÖSTERREICH"
The Austrian National Bank began operations in 1923 (ref bank website)
Original schilling was overstamped on 10000 kronen note (at least there is one at banknoteworld). Late 1923 to late 1924 was a transitional period when krone and schilling existed together (not sure exactly when first schilling was produced, but it was authorized late 1923 -- see below).

changing date below from 1923 to 1924.

Preceded by: Austro-Hungarian krone Reason: Dissolution of the Empire after World War I Ratio: at par	Currency of Austria 1918 – 1924	Succeeded by: Austrian schilling Reason: inflation Ratio: 1 schilling = 10,000 kronen
	Currency of Liechtenstein 1918 – 1921 Concurrent with: Liechtenstein krone (even before 1918)	Succeeded by: Swiss franc and Liechtenstein frank Reason: Austrian krone was unstable

Austrian schilling[edit]

Global Financial Data currency histories table^{[dead link]}: 1.5 DER = 1 ATS
Austrian schilling: 1 Reichsmark to 1.5 Schillings
German Money in Austria 1938-1945, Germannotes: The Schilling was exchanged at a rate of 1 Reichsmark to 1.5 Schillings.
From the Schilling to the Euro, Oesterreichische Nationalbank^{[dead link]}:Schillings were exchanged for reichsmarks at a rate of 1.5 schillings to the reichsmark, a populistic step representing a revaluation of the schilling.
Also, check this out [7]
Should I use schillings or schilling for plural? It look like schilling in German, but why does everyone say "schillings"?

Americans tend to adopt local names and then use -s for plural. I prefer using the local version of the plural, when known, especially since we don't translate the singular. Ingrid 03:58, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More details about the switch from krone to schilling, from the national bank

Austrian national bank formed by law November 14, 1922, began operations January 2, 1923.
December 1923, authorized to issue kronen/schilling coins. (not sure exactly if these were krone or schilling or both as far as what was written on them -- I don't have my SCWC with me right now).
Schilling became official currency December 1924
First notes in 1925

It's interesting... SCWS says the last krone coin was in 1924, and the first groschen/schilling coins was in 1925. The 20 and 100 kronen coins in 1923 and 1924 had spec similar to the pre-inflation predecessors (gold), but the 100, 200, and 1000 kronen coins in 1923 and 1924 are similar to the 1, 2, 10 groschen coins later (1925).

There was a 10,000 kronen note dated Jan 2 1924 by Oesterreichische Nationalbank, it was available in its original form and overstamped form (as 1 schilling). It was the only overstamped schilling. Either version are inexpensive. There is another kronen by the same bank - 1 million kronen dated July 1 1924. It was probably not issued. First regular schilling note dated Jan 2 1925. --Chochopk 09:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I took out the part about European Currency Unit which was created long before 1999. I replaced it with an explanation of why we use 2002 instead of 1999. It's too long, but I can't think of a shorter way to say it. Feel free to take it out. Ingrid 03:58, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved. --Chochopk 13:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian korona[edit]

This succession box could be moved - only the proper dates are missing. I would choose 31 December 1926, since 1 January 1927 was the official date of obligatory switching to pengő in accounting marked by law. I know, it is not easy to mark one date: korona notes were overstamped from 25 August 1926, first pengő notes were first released into circulation on 27 December 1926 (somewhat like the euro coin beginner sets). Korona notes were withdrawn from circulation on 30 June 1927 (1 to 100 000 K) and on 30 June 1928 (500 000 and 1 million K). However, banknotes could be changed to pengő in the central bank until 30 June 1930 (30 June 1931 for 500 000 and 1 million K).

It is even more difficult to answer the question of the beginning date. After the first world war, the dissolution of the empire caused a chaotic monetary situation. In November, new states appeared and other territories were annexed into neighbouring countries. After November 1918, Austria-Hungary no longer existed (However, the borders and other statehood-related affairs were sanctified later by the Treaty of Saint-Germain and the Treaty of Trianon). It is more important that from 1 January 1919, the successor states were allowed to overstamp the Austro-Hungarian banknotes to limit their circulation only to their territory. However, the Austro-Hungarian Bank still functionated (until its final liquidation in 1922), and issued Austro-Hungarian Krone/korona notes - later issues (especially the 25 and 200 K bills) were not accepted in all successor states. Overstamped KuK banknotes circulated until 1924. Anyway, I would choose 1 Jan 1919 as beginning date.Timur lenk 23:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: the official reason of the introduction of the Hungarian korona was an obligation by the treaties after WWI. There was an attempt to preserve the common money after the dissolution of the Monarchy. This attempt faild: first, the neighbouring countries started to exchange the Krone/korona notes on the annexed territories for their own; second, the Treaty of Saint-Germain obligated all successor states to overstamp and then to replace the KuK currency.Timur lenk 00:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Preceded by: Austro-Hungarian krone Reason: breakup of Austro-Hungarian Empire Ratio: at par	Currency of Hungary 1918 – 1927 Note: korona notes overstamped to pengő in 1926 were not legally considered pengő	Succeeded by: Hungarian pengő Reason: inflation Ratio: 1 pengő = 12,500 korona

Hungarian pengő[edit]

These names come from GFD. Not sure if they should be changed.

I am not convinced that the adópengő (tax pengő) should be considered as a separate currency. Additionally, tax bills were not withdrawn as the forint was introduced on 1 August, 1946. The 10 000 000 adópengő bill was used as 5 fillér (0.05 forint) and the 100 000 000 adópengő bill as 50 fillér (0.50 forint) until 30 September in the forint circulation (1 forint was equal with 200 million adópengő). Pengő and adópengő were both used in 1946, but saying adópengő succeded pengő would not be correct: the value of adópengő was related to pengő daily. The reson for introducing the adópengő ("to stop people deferring tax") is incorrect. (See: Pengő#Tax bills)

Milpengő and B.-pengő are simply higher denominations of pengő. Mil- stands for millió (million or 1 000 000) and B.- for billió (1 000 000 000 000). It is like the 10 000 Portuguese escudos: on the banknotes it is designated as 10 mil escudos (where mil stands for thousand).

Bačka (Bácska) and Međimurje (Muraköz) should not be separated, since these territories were part of Hungary then (along with northern Transylvania and southern Slovakia).

So in my opinion, the correct succession box would be Hungarian korona -> Hungarian pengő -> Hungarian forint. And the only country where these three currencies were used is Hungary.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timur lenk (talk • contribs) 16:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that adópengő still circulated some time after forint was introduced. I will correct the dates. But I think adópengő should be have its own succession box because it had "exchange rate" against pengő and other currencies. I will also correct the reason for the creation of adópengő.

As a rule to the succession box, "significant" occupation should be documented. And for every succeed relationship, there is a corresponding precede relationship. Yugoslavia did not exchange small chunk territory during WWII. Instead, it was partitioned completely. See Yugoslav dinar. So that why I put Bačka and Međimurje there. In fact I have plans to put southern Slovakia and Transylvania in the pengő box.

I will think of some way to represent the pengő-adópengő relationship later. I'm at work now.

--Chochopk 19:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't consider the pengo-adopengo issue (I'm trying not to jump back in -- too much real-life stuff to do), but I think this version of the box improves the occupation issue. Ingrid 18:26, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, some specialists also consider "pengő and adópengő as simultaneously existing currencies, which cross-rate was estabilished by the government on a daily basis" (Rádóczi-Tasnádi: Hungarian Paper Money 1848-1992; Budapest, 1992). Howerver, I would not say that adópengő succeeded pengő, since both currencies existed at the same time (moreover, the value of the adópengő was determined in pengő!), and both were succeeded by the forint.

Like ECU existed together with the pre-Euro Western-European currencies as an account-money (and calculation basis), but it did not succeed any of them. And the Euro succeded all of these currencies.

I don't know how could this be incorporated into the succession box, though... --Timur lenk 23:40, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How's this now? --Chochopk 00:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Almost excellent!

Preceded by: Czechoslovak koruna, Location: southern Slovakia and Subcarpathia, Reason: First Vienna Award in 1938

Preceded by: Romanian leu, Location: Northern Transylvania, Reason: Second Vienna Award (1940)

Currency of Hungary: 1 January 1927 – 31 July 1946 (The Law No. XXXV of 1925 introduced pengő. From 25 August 1926, korona notes were overstamped to pengő denominations to facilitate the currency switch. The first pengő banknotes (5, 10, 20, 50, 100 P) were introduced on 27 December 1926. The obligatory accounting in pengő value came into power on 1 January 1927) German Reichsmark never acted as a currency in Hungary. The nazi-related issues are the Pengő series under the Szálasi government. Neither this, nor the Red Army issues should be separated from the "regular" pengő.

Succeeded by: Czechoslovak koruna, Location: southern Slovakia, Reason: Treaty of Paris

Succeeded by: Soviet ruble, Location: Subcarpathia, Reason: Treaty of Paris

Succeeded by: Romanian leu, Location: Northern Transylvania, Reason: Treaty of Paris

Adópengő was pegged to the pengő. It was withdrawn since the pengő was succeded by the forint, so a numerical basis for pengő calculations was no longer needed. However, the two highest denominations remained in circulation to facilitate the switch to the forint. No accounting was done in adópengő after the introduction of the forint. 1 January 1946 – 31 July 1946 (30 September 1946) would be the best date, but it is okay in its current form as well.--Timur lenk 16:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trying the "Ethiopian birr model". How's this now? (I would really like to make use of the start and end attributes of the middle column). Adópengő also improved. So if overstamped pengő existed since 25 August 1926, then that should be the start date. We (well, just the two editors here) generally use the date of physical currency, and add extra explanation if necessary. Examples include Somali shilling and pre-euro currencies under construction here. --Chochopk 06:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Did you mean Hungarian korona overstamped to pengő? However, this doesn't mean that the banknotes became pengő bills. Unlike the case of the successor states of Austria-Hungary (or Czechoslovakia), the overstamping of the banknotes had been executed only to show their denomination in pengő to make calculations (and thus the currency switch) easier, but "pengő" was not used as an accounting subject (while after the split of Czechoslovakia in 1993, the banknotes overstamped by the successor states became new currencies: Czech koruna and Slovak koruna, respectively). So the firstday of pengő in circulation was 27 Dec, and the official introduction day was 1 Jan. I prefer the latter, but you know. It should be consistent with the other succession boxes, so you decide it. And the above details can be written in the pengő article.

Not only the southern part but the whole Subcarpathia (today's Zakarpatskaya oblast') became part of Hungary.--Timur lenk 08:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Checking in a little late, but I like this version! I wonder if there's some way we can visually indicate that all of these boxes relate to one nation.... Perhaps a different line style, like a dashed line between them. I think that's pretty tricky to implement though. I'll give it some more thought. If either of you have an idea, I'll try to update the templates to make it happen. Ingrid 21:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So we have two styles here (crap!) So I revisited those and thought about why they were done in the way they were done

1 long cell (rowspan>1) German Mark It was the currency of a unified Germany from 1990-2001 It was also the currency of West Germany before Somali shilling It was the currency of the then unified Somalia 1962-1991 It was the currency of a smaller Somalia after 1991 and "independent" Somaliland from 1991-1994 (a reversal situation of German Mark?)	many individual cells (rowspan=1) Ethiopian birr Even though today's Eritrea was part of Ethiopia before 1993, the start date of Ethiopian birr wasn't really in sync with the rest of Ethiopia. Pengő here Start and end date for these different parts during WWII are all different, and different from Hungary proper of course German Reichmark here Same reason as pengő

So by reverse engineering, using Germak mark-Somali shilling model requires at either start date or end date to be the same for the different locations. And birr, pengő, and Reichmark all fail that requirement. But I think dotted line is the way to do. I will take up that responsibility. --Chochopk 10:40, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dotted line implemented. What about putting "(As part of xyz)" as a template parameter, and make it non-bolded? --Chochopk 07:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't jump out as much as I'd like. What do you think about taking the line out completely? Perhaps it would be enough then to say "Currency of <region>" but maybe it should still say as "(as part of <country>". I agree it should be a template parameter. Non-bold sounds fine, if it looks good to you. Can you tell I'm not feeling decisive tonight? Ingrid 02:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the best would be if the lines were be removed. The box should show that the money was used only in one country (Hungary) and the changes in the territories where it was accepted is alway in correspondence with the territorial changes of Hungary.Timur lenk 00:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't mind, I move this succession box to Hungarian pengő. I don't think it can be professionalized any more and, indeed, there was no change in it for several months. I set the date of introduction 1 January 1927, since this is written in the law. Anyways, further changes are still possible on the pengő article. Timur lenk 19:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian milpengő[edit]

redirect to pengő Ingrid 02:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC) merged with pengő --Chochopk 13:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian bilpengő[edit]

redirect to pengő. GFD says 400,000,000, but Hungarian pengő says 4 x 10 ²⁹ pengő (4 x 10¹⁷ bilpengő). I'm having trouble finding another source. Ingrid 02:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merged with pengő --Chochopk 13:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian forint[edit]

I think this succession box can be moved to the forint article.--Timur lenk 21:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved with Timur lenk's blessing. --Chochopk 22:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Czechoslovak koruna[edit]

Pre-WWII
Preceded by: Czechoslovak koruna Reason: dissolution of the Empire after World War I Ratio: at par	Currency of Czechoslovakia 1919 – 1938 or 1939	Succeeded by: Bohemian and Moravian koruna Location: Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia Reason: fill in Note: in 1939
		Succeeded by: German reichsmark Location: Sudetenland Reason: German annexation Note: in 1938
		Succeeded by: Slovak koruna Location: Slovak Republic (WWII) Reason: fill in Note: in 1939
		Succeeded by: Hungarian pengő Location: southern Slovakia and Subcarpathia Reason: First Vienna Award Note: in 1938

Post-WWII
Preceded by: Bohemian and Moravian koruna Location: Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia Reason: reunification of Czechoslovakia as a result of World War II and end of German occupation Ratio: at par	Currency of Czechoslovakia 1 November 1945 – 31 December 1992	Currency of Czech Republic 1 January 1993 – 7 February 1993	Succeeded by: Czech koruna Reason: breakup of Czechoslovakia
Preceded by: German reichsmark Location: Sudetenland Reason: reunification of Czechoslovakia as a result of World War II and end of German occupation
Preceded by: Slovak koruna Location: Slovak Republic (WWII) Reason: reunification of Czechoslovakia as a result of World War II and end of German occupation Ratio: at par		Currency of Slovakia 1 January 1993 – 7 February 1993	Succeeded by: Slovak koruna Reason: breakup of Czechoslovakia
Preceded by: Hungarian pengő Location: southern Slovakia Reason: reunification of Czechoslovakia as a result of World War II and end of Hungarian occupation

Slovak koruna[edit]

I just realized that there's no succession box on the Slovak koruna page. I think the present and the WWII Slovak koruna should be separated into different articles. Only the name is similar. The disambiguation site (koruna) would help.

There's info on the printer of the banknotes on the National Bank hompage:

Printers:

BA Banknote (Canada)
Thomas De La Rue (Great Britain)
Giesecke & Devrient (Germany)
Oesterreichische Banknoten und Sicherheitsdruck GmbH (Austria)
François-Charles Oberthur Fiduciaire (France)
Polska Wytwórnia Papierow Wartosciowych (Poland)

The corresponding websites:

www.babanknote.com
www.delarue.com
www.gi-de.com
www.oebs.at
www.oberthur.com
www.pwpw.pl

I don't know how to add multiply printers and the related websites.Timur lenk 19:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know Slovak koruna is tricky. I received some opposition when I merged them. Anyway, do you mean you don't know how to add multiple printers in infobox? --Chochopk 22:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it would be great if you helped. I understand that you merged the two articles, both were short and it is still very short - and later, if it is expanded, it can be divided into two articles again. In my opinion, the best would be the "one monetary system - one article", so there should be an article on Romanian Leu and Romanian New Leu (2005), Polish złoty (1950) and Polish złoty (1995), and Soviet ruble, Russian ruble (1993) and Russian ruble (1997) and so on. I think, this is logic: in 1 Jan 1927 Hungary changed Hungarian korona to Hungarian pengő at 1:12 500; in 1 Jan 1995 Poland changed from Polish złoty (1950) to Polish złoty (1995) at 1:10 000; in 1997 Russia changed from Russian ruble (1993) to Russian ruble (1997) at 1:1000. The only difference: Hungary changed the money name while the latter two countries did not.

To help those who seek info on the monetary system of a country, there should be articles like Hungarian money or Money of Hungary etc. And who search info on ruble, there should be a disambiguation site for ruble.Timur lenk 11:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slovak koruna
Preceded by: Czechoslovak koruna Reason: breakup of Czechoslovakia Ratio: at par	Currency of Slovakia 8 February 1993 –	Succeeded by: Current

Germany[edit]

History of German Money and Economy
It's not that bad...... unlike people's impression. Plus, we have the experience of Yemen and Vietnam (and Korea to some extent). --Chochopk 09:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German papiermark[edit]

I am not sure if it's correct to separate German papiermark with German gold mark. The German gold mark became the papiermark because it lost its link to precious metal.

German rentenmark[edit]

Google translation: pension Mark
The article is wrong
Only one source has an end date for rentenmark (GFD: 1939) (last banknote dated 1937) (last coin, which I could only find rentenpfennig, 1936)
How should we handle this concurrent currency situation? (neither the start nor the end dates are the same)

Moved. --Chochopk 05:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German reichsmark[edit]

In my opinion, reichmark was not the currency of Austria between 1938 and 1945, since there was no such country then. The same situation in the case of Danzig and Germany occupied portion of Slovenia. These territories became part of Germany, so Reichmark was circulating in Germany then. This format would be only correct, if - say - Austria adopted the Reichmark while remaining an independent or at least autonomous country (like the case of the DM and Montenegro).--Timur lenk 17:22, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about using the Ethiopian birr model? I believe many would consider it "occupation" therefore not "legit". --Chochopk 06:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, we shouldn't go into the question of legitimacy... especially when it is revised later (like the statehood of WWII Slovakia). In Austria, there was German administration during the WWII, so we can't say that reichmark was the currency of Austria. But this way it is good ("Germany occupied" or "as part of Germany").

I know, it would sound better to say "Reichmark was the currency of the Republic of Austria due to temporary German occupation", but it is not correct, since no such state "Republic of Austria" existed during that time. It is a little bit similar to the case of Ukraine and Belarus: both countries enjoyed somewhat autonomy in the Soviet Union, furthermore, both countries are original members of the UN (i.e., from 1945!). However, saying that the Soviet ruble was the currency of Ukraine before 1991 would be true but somewhat misleading: it was the currency of the whole Soviet Union, since Ukraine did not exist as an independent state before the dissolution of the CCCP.

All in all, I would say: Reichmark was the currency of Germany between 1924-1948. Territorial changes should be mentioned in the article or in a corresponding history article. --86.101.173.69 22:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)--Timur lenk 22:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

imperial Mark
probably the wierdest conversion ratio with its successors

Preceded by: German rentenmark Ratio: at par, and 4.2 reichsmark = US$1	Currency of Germany 30 August 1924 – 1948 Concurrent with: German rentenmark	Succeeded by: East German mark Reason: reaction to the change over in Trizone (later West Germany) Ratio: 1 kuponmark = 7 reichsmark on the first 70 reichsmark for private individuals, otherwise 1 kuponmark = 10 reichsmark
		Succeeded by: (West) German mark Reason: intended to protect West Germany from the second wave of hyperinflation and stop the rampant barter and black market trade Ratio: 1 mark = 10 reichsmark, and each person received 40 mark
Preceded by: Danzig gulden Reason: Free City's Nazi government voted for re-unification	Currency of Danzig (as part of Germany) 1939 – 1945	Succeeded by: Polish złoty Reason: became part of Poland as a result of World War II and end of German occupation
Preceded by: Czechoslovak koruna Reason: German annexation	Currency of Sudetenland (as part of Germany) 1938 – 1945	Succeeded by: Czechoslovak koruna Reason: reunification of Czechoslovakia as a result of World War II and end of German occupation
Preceded by: Austrian (old) Schilling Reason: German annexation (anschluss) Ratio: 1 reichsmark = 1.5 Schilling	Currency of Austria (as part of Germany) 1938 – 1945	Succeeded by: Austrian allied military Schilling Reason: restoration of sovereignty, under allied occupation Ratio: at par, limited to 150 Schilling per person
Preceded by: Yugoslav 1920 dinar Reason: German occupation	Currency of Germany occupied portion of Slovenia 1941 – 1945 Note: not as a separate protectorate/colony	Succeeded by: Yugoslav 1945 dinar Reason: Reunification of Yugoslavia as a result of World War II and end of German occupation

East German mark[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 05:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German mark[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 05:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysia[edit]

Straits dollar[edit]

Sigh... I cannot sit and guess from some obscure sources. I just bought a coin catalog for the 19th century, as banknote data are less meaningful then. I can't believe I'm spending more than $40 for this project. =) --Chochopk 17:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First note 1898
First coin by East India Company 1845 (in cent). Cent was not a subunit of rupee. Catalog says the company rules from 1826-1858
First coin British India 1862 (in cent). as part of British India from 1858-1867
First coin by Straits Settlement 1871. As a British colony from 1867-1939. Weird, no dollar coins. 20 cents have spec close to LMUU.
TMMH: before 1867, used Mexican and Spanish silver piasters (pesos, dollars) and Indian silver rupee
TMMH: starting from 1867, used Straits dollar
GDF: The East Indies Company Dollar (XEID) was used in Malaysia from 1788 to 1858, and became the predecessor to the Straits Settlement Dollar (STSD), which replaced it at par in 1858.

Why is everyone telling a different story. --Chochopk 10:12, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After careful consideration, I started to think if we should just simply drop some of those boxes for the more obscure currencies. Better nothing than wrong. --Chochopk 18:20, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

East India Company dollar

Preceded by: Mexican peso, Spanish dollar Ratio: at par	Currency of Straits Settlements as part of British India 1845 – 1862	Succeeded by: British Indian Straits dollar Ratio: at par

British Indian Straits dollar

Preceded by: East India Company dollar Ratio: at par	Currency of Straits Settlements as part of British India 1862 – 1867 Concurrent with: Mexican peso, Spanish dollar	Currency of Straits Settlements 1867 – 1871 Concurrent with: Mexican peso, Spanish dollar	Succeeded by: Straits dollar Ratio: at par
Preceded by: No modern predecessor	Currency of Brunei ? – 1971 Concurrent with: Mexican peso, Spanish dollar

Preceded by: British Indian Straits dollar Ratio: at par	Currency of Straits Settlements, Brunei 1871 – 1939 Concurrent with: Mexican peso, Spanish dollar. It is unclear when these foreign currencies phased out.	Succeeded by: Malayan dollar Ratio: at par, or 60 dollars = 7 British pounds

Sarawak dollar[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 14:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

British North Bornean dollar[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 14:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Malayan dollar[edit]

Both GFD and TABLES OF MODERN MONETARY HISTORY say 1938 was the year SS$ was replaced, and 1952 was the year the common Board Commissioners were created. The date 1940 and 1953 are obtained from the Standard Catalog. I must wait for catalog of coins to do more verifications.
first malayan coin = 1939
~~Todo: add Japanese occupation money~~
What's the best way to name these Japanese occupation money? English is not my first language. Help needed!
Please note that I added "at par, or 60 dollars = 7 British pounds", how's that? --Chochopk 12:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how to name the occupation money. Was it specific to each area? That is, was there a Japanese occupation dollar specifically for Malaya? If so, I think what you have, "Japanese occupation Malayan dollar" is fine. GFD uses "Malaya gumpyo dollar" (also military yen). I don't know what gumpyo means. GFD also doesn't destinguish pre-war and post-war Malayan dollar.

By the way, I'm very impressed by anyone who can speak more than one language (it's a goal of mine, but I've never devoted enough effort to it). So, if you ever want me to proofread something, just ask. Ingrid 00:54, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These occupation money are country specific. They replaced Malayan dollar, Philippine peso, or some other local currencies at par respectively. Gumpyo means "military note". It should like like 軍票 (But I'm typing in Chinese, not sure if the Japanese form is identical. I'll look up the images when I get home.)

Moved. --Chochopk 14:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Malayan and British North Bornean dollar[edit]

What about "common name" principle on Singapore dollar?

My understanding is that common name applies to page names, and I'm not recommending we change those. I'm a big fan of consistency, and common names are not always consistent. I'd like to use <adj country> <local denom> in these boxes consistently, but I recognize that I do not own the boxes, and don't necessarily get to make that decision. I switched Tanzanian shilling to Tanzanian shilingi for that reason, even though I'm sure it's not commonly known as that. I think that once you start translating currencies, you can get into a mess (dollar comes to mind -- is a yen a dollar? Is a tolar or thaler a dollar? Is a peso a dollar? Or is a dollar a thaler?). So, that's why I'd like to do it this way, but I'm open to your (and everyone else's) opinions. Another potential problem is that when you're dealing with historical currencies, they don't necessarily have common names (that are easy to determine anyway). Pound sterling is another one that drives me crazy. I understand that that's how it's commonly known, but I wasn't aware of that (since I'm not dealing with currency traders or anything), and I think British pound is more clear. Ingrid 02:22, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sources:

First series of S$^{[dead link]}

Moved. --Chochopk 05:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysian ringgit[edit]

These are trivial, but must be done.

Moved. --Chochopk 05:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore dollar[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 05:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bruneian dollar[edit]

Moved. --Chochopk 05:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

French Indochina[edit]

I'm trying to review this section (finally), and am very confused. Maybe it's just because I'm tired. I'll come back to it some other time. For now though a couple of things:

both GFD and TMMH call the North Vietnamese currency "piastre dong viet", not just dong. SCWC just calls it "dong".
SCWC has South Vietnamese su/xu from 1953. The dong weren't until 1960 (later dates don't bother me, but why would there be 1953 when South Vietnam didn't exist yet). Ingrid 03:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the name piastre dong viet is just a mix up. I never see piastre with dong on banknotes. You probably know this already: Su/xu is a subunit. 1 dong = 10 hao = 100 xu. I don't know why there are South Vietnamese coins in 1953. Perhaps they are not released until 1955? --Chochopk 14:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

French Indochinese piastre[edit]

moved to French Indochinese piastre. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 07:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lao kip[edit]

Moved to Lao kip. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cambodian riel[edit]

moved to Cambodian riel --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

North Vietnamese đồng[edit]

moved to North Vietnamese đồng. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 04:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

South Vietnamese đồng[edit]

Moved to South Vietnamese đồng. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 03:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]