We currently have three issuers, Russian Empire (ends 1917), Soviet Union (1922-1991) and Russia (1991-). This leaves a gap between 1917 and 1922 which needs filling with the Provisional Government (1917) and the Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic (RSFSR) (1917-1922). This could be achieved in the database in a variety of ways, including having a single issuer Russia, with a gap where the USSR existed, or renaming Russian Empire in such a way that it can continue to 1922.
There are a large number of notes (and a few coins) issued by Russia in this period that are currently incorrectly listed under the Soviet Union (see here for many of them). Many also need assigning to the correct currencies but that will be easier once the issuer has been set up.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
I would go with the first method, creating the Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic (RSFSR) (1917-1922). It makes more sense than extending and renaming the Russian Empire, since the RSFSR is on banknotes that would fall under it, this series coming to mind: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/series.php?id=8533. I also think the creation of a provisional government issuer would make sense, titled Provisional Government (1917). Some notes from the Russian Empire would be moved here, but none from the Soviet Union. Both of these are common ways to divide up collections and catalogues, based on my understanding and experience.
RSFSR continued to issue money under its name in 1923.
1923 coins got RSFSR name. Notes issued in 1923 talk about state bank without naming the country, but they have RSFSR coat of arms and not USSR coat of arms.
RSFSR continued to issue money under its name in 1923.
1923 coins got RSFSR name. Notes issued in 1923 talk about state bank without naming the country, but they have RSFSR coat of arms and not USSR coat of arms.
Yes, there's a grey area here as the RSFSR didn't disappear, it simply became part of a larger entity. I'd definitely prefer to see those coins and notes listed under RSFSR. Once we have the issuers in place, we can move everything so that the issuer matches what's on the pieces and see how things look.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Imo Russian Empire, RSFSR and Russian Federation should be different ruling authorities of the Same “Russia” Numista issuer, like French monarchy, Empire and Republic are gathered.
USSR issues topic is more tricky due to borders change. I would be inclined to include it as Russian sub issuer (notably because Russia officially continued the Financial existence if USSR) but would also understand it to be an issuer apart
Imo Russian Empire, RSFSR and Russian Federation should be different ruling authorities of the Same “Russia” Numista issuer, like French monarchy, Empire and Republic are gathered.
USSR issues topic is more tricky due to borders change. I would be inclined to include it as Russian sub issuer (notably because Russia officially continued the Financial existence if USSR) but would also understand it to be an issuer apart
As long as we're happy with an issuer that has a large gap in the middle of it, this will work and will create a much clearer list of issuers.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
A few weeks ago, I noticed exactly this problem when adjusting some records from that period.
It would be extremely useful and important to have this gap defined. I agree with the Compendium of maintaining a sub-emitter within Russia; I don't see the need to create a separate issuer.
Hello @Jarcek. Is there agreement then with what was said above by other colleagues? =)
We have the RSFSR inside the "Issuer" Soviet Union for now. Is there a possibility that the RSFSR is within "Issuer" Russia, since the Soviet Union (theoretically) began in 1922?
Vladimir
Catalogue Administrator and Banknote Master Referee.
This doesn't (quite) work since Russia was a republic between March 1917 and January 1918 (when the name RSFSR was actually introduced). Rather than split pre-USSR Russia into three sections, can we find an agreeable title for Russia before 1922 or simply have one Russia that has a gap in it between the last issues of the RSFSR in 1923 and the first issues of the Federation in 1992?
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Should difficulties with a map be the determining factor? If we have to keep the Russian Empire separate, we really only need two sections for Russia itself:
Russian Empire
Russia (1917-)
The second section would include the issues of the Republic, RSFSR and Federation, each listed as a ruling authority. There was no temporal gap between the RSFSR and the Federation, it's just that the RSFSR stopped issuing money in 1923. We obviously keep the USSR and regions (although I'd like to see the civil war section divided into the actual localities).
If we just assign Republic and RSFSR as additional ruling authorities for the existing Russia and rename it appropriately, we can get started moving the coins and notes to the correct places.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Do we still need to come to a clear conclusion here or are matters in hand to allow coins and notes to be assigned to Russia in this period? I'd hate to see this kicked into the long grass again.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
There were issues during that era, but they are typically labelled as “Provisional Government” (Mar 1917-Nov 1917)—which falls under both the Empire, if going based off of Republic formation (until Sep 1917), and Republic (Sep 1917-Jan 1918)—and "RSFSR" (Nov 1917-Dec 1922)—including the Republic (Sep 1917-Jan 1918).
I think it would make sense to include it, but it would be impossible to differentiate between the notes that would go under the Empire versus Republic if it is decided to go by the Republic formation for the start, rather than the formation of the Provisional Government.
I'm working on making a spreadsheet of which notes go to the Empire vs Provisional Government vs RSFSR vs USSR between 1900 and 1930, so that we will know which banknotes go where.
Yes, the tradition has been to use the term Provisional Government for the period between the two revolutions in 1917, then RSFSR after the second. However, this isn't quite accurate, because the RSFSR name only came into use (along with others) in January 1918, with the earliest communist proclamations given in the name of the Republic. There are issues from the Republic and others from the Empire that continued to be issued, so it would be best not to have a break in Russia at 1917.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
I still dislike how it is done, but I see no really good options here. Banknotes are not my favourite area, so feel free requesting what needs to be added to those sections - Rulling authorities, currencies, denominations.
Question on Russian civil war. I seen other threads where it is separated by georgraphical areas - is that common ground? Or would it be possible to group by “sides” of the warring parties?
let's try to respect this timeline. I created new issuers as subsection of Russia Civil War. It is also time to start splitting the civil war section.
That simply doesn't work. Why do we split Russia when it stopped being an empire but not France or Germany? Arguing that the borders changed applies equally to those two countries. The civil war section could be used for sub-national issuers (like Spain, if we want to) but it can't be used for the republic or RSFSR. Those belong in Russia. We need either
Russia (-1923)
USSR (1923-1991)
Russia (1992-)
or
Russia
USSR
with a gap in the middle of Russia when the USSR took over production of coins and notes. Hiding the Republic and RSFSR issues in “Civil War” doesn't make this part of the catalogue very accessible to those unfamiliar with Russian history.
Note that, whilst the USSR was created in December 1922, it didn't issue any money until well into 1923.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
I think that banknote issues in several countries in Europe became somewhat complicated in the early 20th century. A common fit may not be the best way to treat them as circumstances were different in various countries.
In the case of Russian banknote issues having a ‘Russia Civil War (1917-1922)’ as an overall heading with more specific sub listings is, I think, a practical approach which will allow for flexibility. Similar to Polish Notgeld, for example, which has sub listings by Issuer.
I think that banknote issues in several countries in Europe became somewhat complicated in the early 20th century. A common fit may not be the best way to treat them as circumstances were different in various countries.
In the case of Russian banknote issues having a ‘Russia Civil War (1917-1922)’ as an overall heading with more specific sub listings is, I think, a practical approach which will allow for flexibility. Similar to Polish Notgeld, for example, which has sub listings by Issuer.
Except that we don't put the national Polish issues in the so-called notgeld section, just the sub-national ones. We can achieve a common approach if we stop trying to interpret the issues and simply catalogue them according to the entity that issued them.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
The problem is that we are applying names to sections and creating groupings within issuers rather than simply recording what exists under the names of the actual issuers. If there were notes issued in what is now Poland that used the term Notgeld, that must be recorded on those notes but not applied more generally to all locally issued notes in Poland. Don't forget that most of the pieces currently listed under German Notgeld aren't actually Notgeld.
Regarding Russia, the key is that there is a continuity between the final issues under Nikolai II and those of the Republic. Any split in 1917, with any name, loses that continuity. We don't split up the national issues of Poland and we shouldn't do that for Russia. Yes, all issuers have their own characteristics but that doesn't justify what's being proposed for Russia.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
In the case of Russian banknote issues having a ‘Russia Civil War (1917-1922)’ as an overall heading with more specific sub listings is, I think, a practical approach which will allow for flexibility. Similar to Polish Notgeld, for example, which has sub listings by Issuer.
I agree with this take. It would define the transition period between the empire and USSR, as well as keep the issuers under one umbrella that makes common sense.
Russia
Russian Empire (-1917)
Russian Civil War (1917-1922)
Russian Provisional Government (1917)**
RSFSR (1917-1922)
Russian Notgeld*
USSR (1922-1991)
Russian Federation (1991-present)
*Could also be called Regional or Local Issues
**It would make more sense, at least in my opinion, to use the Provisional Government, since it is its own separate government (created at the abdication of Nicholas II and ended at the creation of the RSFSR), and does fit into Numista's terms for creating different issuer periods, like with British Honduras and Belize: https://en.numista.com/help/add-or-modify-an-issuer-in-the-catalogue-191.html. This also allows for the Civil War to be defined as a separate issuing period.
Question on Russian civil war. I seen other threads where it is separated by georgraphical areas - is that common ground? Or would it be possible to group by “sides” of the warring parties?
Most catalogs separate by areas. You'll see stuff like siberia and urals, far east, transcaucasia, central asia, etc… Other way would be by sides, which in broad terms would be;
I've stripped out the regional entries in the list for clarity. I'm not a fan but, if we take this as the starting point, it needs some work. First, let's get it in chronological order. Second, let's change the modern Russia to “Russian Federation” to make it clear. Third, let's get the name of the RSFSR correct. Whilst issuing money, it was called the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic. The two “S”s switched order in 1936. Alternatively, we could use RSFSR and I wonder if USSR would be better than Soviet Union? Finally, we need a “Local Issues” section (please don't give it a German name).
As it stands, we can start moving the notes and coins to the proper sections, which was the primary aim of this thread.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
I will rework this, I just created those issuers for a start. (PS: Even if you move items now, it is good, they will then move all at once.)
We discussed it a bit, and here is the thing. (You might not see it done due to cookies and catalogue delay).
Modern Russia is to get renamed to Russian Federation. We do not do this often, using a long name, but only when it is needed to make a distinction.
New section for Russia will appear, containing periods:
Russian Empire
Russian Republic
RSFSR (with changed name, thanks)
Modern Russia
All other, including Soviet Union, will stay under main “Russia” header. New change is that those big section headers will get “section” in the name to avoid more confusions.
For Civil War, I will go with geographical division. (Is there any need to make warring parties searchable together by some means?) I will start creating those issuers once we are done reorganizing the Russia section. Civil War name can stay for the time being.
Catalogue administrator
Status changed to Started(Jarcek, 4 Mart 2025, 12:33)
If there were notes issued in what is now Poland that used the term Notgeld, that must be recorded on those notes but not applied more generally to all locally issued notes in Poland.
No. As a collector of Polish Notgeld, I think you are wrong here.
ceh2019
Don't forget that most of the pieces currently listed under German Notgeld aren't actually Notgeld.
I did not mention German Notgeld. A broad statement like this needs referencing, imho.
ceh2019
Regarding Russia, the key is that there is a continuity between the final issues under Nikolai II and those of the Republic. Any split in 1917, with any name, loses that continuity.
Disagree. Have a look at the issues of Finland during its civil war (same era). No problems with cataloguing overlapping issues.
Modern Russia is to get renamed to Russian Federation. We do not do this often, using a long name, but only when it is needed to make a distinction.
New section for Russia will appear, containing periods:
Russian Empire
Russian Republic
RSFSR (with changed name, thanks)
Modern Russia
All other, including Soviet Union, will stay under main “Russia” header. New change is that those big section headers will get “section” in the name to avoid more confusions.
I think this is a good start. It can grow easily from here as it needs to with additions.
Jarcek
(Is there any need to make warring parties searchable together by some means?)
