I have a 1 british Sovereign dated 1901 coin with the “M” mark, which I suppose being Melbourne Mint. However, the series of KM# 13 of Australia - Colonial ends in 1900… Am I correct?
That's clearly the thought process that led to the decision to split. However, if we look a little more deeply, we find that the sovereigns were struck in three different colonies, Victoria, Western Australia and New South Wales. We surely don't want to split them up into the different colonies, so we are already accepting Australia in some sense as existing before 1901. Since we can split Victoria's reign into “colonial” and “federal” (for all of three weeks) using the ruling authority, I think that covers the distinction much better.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Having said that, we do have pieces clearly associated with individual colonies, (e.g., the holey dollar and the Adelaide pound), so we will need some colonies for them, as well as “Australia” for the half sovereigns and sovereigns.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Yes, that's the point. They were also made in three different colonies (only the mintmark is different), so splitting them doesn't really make any sense.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
That's clearly the thought process that led to the decision to split. However, if we look a little more deeply, we find that the sovereigns were struck in three different colonies, Victoria, Western Australia and New South Wales. We surely don't want to split them up into the different colonies, so we are already accepting Australia in some sense as existing before 1901. Since we can split Victoria's reign into “colonial” and “federal” (for all of three weeks) using the ruling authority, I think that covers the distinction much better.
I agree, creating six different subsections based on current existing States for the period before 1901 might get very messy. State boundaries changed quite a bit before 1900. Queensland was part of NSW originally and South Australia included what is now the Northern Territory. Keeping it as Colonial Australia and using Ruling Authority is the way to go.
Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
Ruling authorities are not made for issuers, and as these pieces are trade tokens without ruling authorities (we should attach issuing entities though), we cannot even use groups of rulers like I did for pre 1901 sovereigns.
I just created the 6 colonial states before reading your answer (cf the other thread I linked), I really think it respects our guidelines and align with other colonial issuers in the catalogue.
I attached one item or two to each of them to make them appear tomorrow, please let me know if anything else is needed :-)
I think this is the right way to proceed. Australian-wide pieces in Australia, more local pieces in the individual colonies. However, the changing borders will have to be observed. One issue, though. We currently have the sovereigns in a separate currency “1788-1929”. Can that be merged with “1910-1966” within the database or do we need to transfer them manually and rename the latter?
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
If we remove sterling, we can merge. The Australian pound was devalued in the run-up to sterling leaving the gold standard (a process which may have started in late 1929), settling at 16 shillings sterling. However, within Australia it was a continuous currency, so a single pound is best.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
That will end the confusion that started this thread.
Can we also update the currency for the states to "1788-1900"?
We then come to the trade tokens. These currently appear to be separated by using a different currency. That might have been the best solution in the past but can't we do better now? My suggestion would be to move them to the regular currency for the individual colonies. Barring a single restrike, all pre-date the Commonwealth.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
That will end the confusion that started this thread.
Can we also update the currency for the states to "1788-1900"?
We then come to the trade tokens. These currently appear to be separated by using a different currency. That might have been the best solution in the past but can't we do better now? My suggestion would be to move them to the regular currency for the individual colonies. Barring a single restrike, all pre-date the Commonwealth.
Australia did not have states until 1 January 1901.
The currency tokens were also under the Pound Sterling currency, as there was no separate Australian Pound until 1910.
Thanks, I am now moving the respective coins/trade tokens under the appropriate sections. Once done there will need to be some minor tweaks such as flags and name changes etc.
I will contact compendium with those details soon.
Regards Mike
Master Referee - See my profile for what I collect.
