There is a group of banknotes that were made specifically for use in North Africa during WW2, so we should put these banknotes into a new issuer called North Africa, and make that new issuer then have a period called allied occupation. North Africa would include Libya, Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia on the map. Please upvote if you agree or explain why in a forum post if you disagree. Thank you.
The US notes were US Legal Tender, and as far as I know were acceptable within the US, as it states so on the left of the note. They are still exchangeable at face value. These should be under US notes.
I would have to look up the British Military Authority notes (I have the catalogue on them somewhere). However, these notes were very likely not acceptable in the UK as currency. (Their current filing location on numista doesn’t make sense, as they were not for use in the UK, but that is for another topic - I think i will dig out that catalogue!).
To quote wikipedia, “The North Africa Series of United States Silver Certificates was issued in $1, $5, and $10 denominations, with series dates of 1934, 1934A, and 1935A. Similar to their Hawaii overprint counterparts, the North Africa series was issued during World War II, but for use in Europe and Northern Africa.”
To quote the Harford Coin Company, “The solution to this concern was a distinct series of notes made to pay the troops, the so-called "North Africa notes." All military personnel serving in the North African campaign were paid with these special silver certificates, which had a distinct and unique yellow seal. This action was taken as a precaution; in the event of German capture of the money supply, all silver certificates with a yellow seal could be repudiated; the now-worthless captured money would be useless to any enemies. ”
I believe we should put these notes under North Africa and list a comment that they could be used in USA but mainly were not.
A similar note series are the WW2 Hawaii notes and they have their own sub-issuer.
The British notes were NAAFI vouchers and should be listed in Exonumia. Unfortunately, whilst we have the appropriate section for NAAFI tokens, the vouchers section has not yet been added.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
I am familiar with the US North Africa notes, being a collector of US notes. These WW2 North Africa notes are regular US currency issued to the US military, and belong either in the same area as the regular US issues, or with US military payment certificates. As the North Africa notes are regular US currency, they would more likely than not have only circulated on US bases and not in the local community.
In terms of having ‘North Africa’ as an issuer, I point out a couple of potential issues: First, in your quote of wikipedia, the last few words “…for use in Europe and Northern Africa.“ creates an immediate issue with labeling them under ‘North Africa’ as an issuer, as your quote mentions Europe. Second, there is no such entity as ‘North Africa’ that was issuing banknotes, you would have to subdivide ‘North Africa’ into individual regions specific to each note issue, which might not correspond to the borders of the countries you suggest. And for numista listing purposes, what would be the Ruling Authority?
Ruling Authority would be Period: Allied Occupation.
I don’t see this as a valid Ruling Authority in this case.
These US notes were issued to US troops, not issued to the population at large. This differentiates them from Allied Currency issued in France or Germany for example, or from Japanese or German occupation currencies produced during the war.
You have not addressed the other points I raised, particularly the point in connection with your quotation “…for use in Europe and Northern Africa.”
The British notes were NAAFI vouchers and should be listed in Exonumia. Unfortunately, whilst we have the appropriate section for NAAFI tokens, the vouchers section has not yet been added.
They are NOT ‘Exonumia’, as the British Armed Forces notes are official issues.
The British notes were NAAFI vouchers and should be listed in Exonumia. Unfortunately, whilst we have the appropriate section for NAAFI tokens, the vouchers section has not yet been added.
These banknotes were not NAAFI vouchers.
These British Military Authority notes were occupation currency issued by the British in lands liberated from Axis forces, initially Tripolitania, and then Madagascar, French North Africa, the Balkans, Greece and Italy. The Lire issues were introduced in 1943 in Tripolitania only.
[British Military Authority, 1942-1956., Van Elmpt, T.F.A., 1st Ed., 2003] Well worth a read for anyone interested in the notes.
So we're just talking about the 1943 issue only (meaning all the later issues can definitely be moved to exonumia). Could you share with us the relevant quotes that these notes were issued for general circulation and not just used by the British military?
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
So we're just talking about the 1943 issue only (meaning all the later issues can definitely be moved to exonumia). Could you share with us the relevant quotes that these notes were issued for general circulation and not just used by the British military?
The later issues from 1946 to 1972 are NOT exonumia, as they were issued under the authority of the Army Council, which was a section within the Ministry of Defence.
We need to unpack this a little, and establish that we are discussing the same things here.
Can you give us your reference for your statement above with regard to the British Military Authority notes under discussion here, listed in the top post:
So we're just talking about the 1943 issue only (meaning all the later issues can definitely be moved to exonumia). Could you share with us the relevant quotes that these notes were issued for general circulation and not just used by the British military?
It is summarised neatly on the back cover of the book I referenced. I will upload a pic of it later when i have the opportunity.
We need to unpack this a little, and establish that we are discussing the same things here.
Can you give us your reference for your statement above with regard to the British Military Authority notes under discussion here, listed in the top post:
“Originally issued in 1943 for use by British troops in North Africa. One Pound notes w/BULGARIA, FRANCE and GREECE ovpt. were prepared but not issued.”
No mention of them being used as occupation money.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Specialised! Found it now, thanks. I was looking for them in the General Issues. The latest Ed. I have for Specialised is vol 11, and it is still says the same thing.
Here is the reverse outside cover of Van Elmpt, which summarises them neatly.
Do these details match van Elmpt? If so, they flatly contradict Pick on nearly every level. A different date and entirely different usage! It would place them on a par with the German Reichskreditkassenschein. These are currently listed within the main German section but should be in a separate sub-section titled something like “German Occupied Territories (WWII)”. If van Elmpt is right, I'd suggest putting the BMA notes (but not the later BAF notes) in a sub-section titled “British Occupied Territories (WWII)”.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
which gives details of these notes issuance in Greece. I can't find anything related to the other areas mentioned yet but the evidence is becoming clear.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
