Singaporean merchant tokens fix [Risolto]

Pubblicazioni di 11 • visto 106 volte

Questo messaggio ha lo scopo di: richiedere la creazione o la modifica di un Paese/Nazione nel catalogo

Stato Fatto
Voti positivi: 5
Voti negativi: 0

» Accesso rapido all'ultima pubblicazione

Hello @Jarcek! Following up on our previous discussion on Perak and where the merchant tokens should go, I have come up with a solution.

 

Currently, these tokens are scattered around Numista in various issuers, such as Thailand (N#174242), Malaysia (N#135443), and assorted issuers under the British East Indies (N#24412, N#40074, N#48334, etc). The issue here is that ALL of these tokens were issued for primary circulation in British Singapore, NOT the locations claimed on the tokens themselves. From the descriptions of these types: “These coins were not official currency of any state. They were first issued in the early 1800s by British merchants at Singapore, to alleviate base coin shortage, before spreading to various parts of the Malay Archipelago. To circumvent confiscation attempts by colonial authorities (particularly the Dutch), British merchants used inscriptions that refer to locations that are vague, fictitious, or unaffiliated to Europeans. In this manner, legally it could not be argued that the tokens were intended for circulation in colonial territories.”

 

Within Southeast Asian colonial numismatics, they are all referred to as “Singaporean Merchant Tokens”, most notably by Zeno, Saran Singh (1986) The encyclopaedia of the coins of Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei, 1400-1986., and Fred Pridmore (1965) Coins of the British Commonwealth of Nations to the End of the Reign of George VI 1952. The locations cited on them were not where they were actually issued, and therefore should not be where they are cataloged on Numista.

 

Here is my working plan:

 

1. Create issuer “Singapore” ("Colony of Singapore"?, "British Singapore"?) for all of these tokens to be properly listed under:

Format:

British East Indies

----- “British Singapore”(?)

Name: “British Singapore” or “Colony of Singapore” (To differentiate it from the modern country of Singapore)

Map Location: Singapore

Predecessors:Sultanate of Johor

Successors: Straits Settlements”, “Singapore

Introduction: The British Colony of Singapore was founded by Sir Stamford Raffles in 1819 as a port of free trade in the Straits of Malacca, helping the British to challenge Dutch hegemony in the region. In the early days of the colony, wealthy merchants commissioned tokens to be created for circulation on the island and trade with other nearby colonies. These tokens were not official currency of any state. To circumvent confiscation attempts by colonial authorities (particularly the Dutch), British merchants use inscriptions that refer to locations that are vague, fictitious, or unaffiliated to Europeans.

Flag: Same as “British East Indies

 

2. Delete the fantasy issuers these tokens are currently listed under:

As I mentioned above, the tokens are currently spread out across Numista under various issuers. The vast majority of these issuers should not exist, as these tokens were ALL made for Singapore, despite what they might say on them. The following issuers should be deleted from the catalog once the proper Singaporean issuer is created:

- Deli (British East Indies)

- Sulawesi (British East Indies)

- Malay Peninsula (British East Indies)

- Perak (Malaysia)

 

Deli, Sulawesi, and the Malay Peninsula issuers only hold Singaporean merchant tokens, which were not issued to circulate in those places and the issuers should be removed. Perak is particularly bad currently, as it combines a Singaporean merchant token (Which should be moved to the new Singapore issuer) as well as a number of modern fantasy bullion (Which should NOT have their own issuer and just be listed under Malaysia, as they are fantasy issues made within the country of Malaysia in modern times). After these types are moved to their correct locations, the issuer “Perak (Malaysia)” should be deleted as well. 

 

The British East India issuers “Penang” and “Sumatra”, despite having many Singaporean merchant tokens under them which must be moved, should remain as issuers in the catalog, as they have actual circulation coinage that actually belongs under them other than the tokens. 

 

Many apologies for such a long write up! Thank you for taking the time to help me correct this issue in the catalog and find a proper place for these tokens!

 

- Reslumi

how about an issuing entity under straits settlements as there are no ruling authorities to deal with, regards

Arnav

'Colony of Singapore' would be correct.

 

Definitely add in King William IV as a reigning authority.

 

Aidan.

Coinwalla

how about an issuing entity under straits settlements as there are no ruling authorities to deal with, regards

While that could maybe work in theory, the coinage of the Straits Settlements began decades later than these tokens were issued, as well as on a different standard (Tokens on the kupang, Straits Settlements on the cent). They also weren’t official coinage of the colony, and were tokens used by merchants in Singapore. Additionally, these are listed separately from Straits Settlements coinage in references like Zeno and Singh. 

 

I think it best that they remain as a separate issuer, alongside issuers such as Sumatra (British East Indies). 

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic170648.html 

something like this can be done

Arnav

here are more of these tokens I believe:

Arnav

Coinwalla

here are more of these tokens I believe:

These Dutch imitations are interesting, but not related to the series of Singaporean tokens recognized by Singh, Pridmore, or Zeno that this post is about  

Reslumi

Coinwalla

here are more of these tokens I believe:

These Dutch imitations are interesting, but not related to the series of Singaporean tokens recognized by Singh, Pridmore, or Zeno that this post is about  

"These imitations were circulating in Singapore and the Dutch East Indies.

Traiectum was the name of the fortress that gave its name to the city, later renamed Utrecht."

Arnav

Coinwalla

Reslumi

Coinwalla

here are more of these tokens I believe:

These Dutch imitations are interesting, but not related to the series of Singaporean tokens recognized by Singh, Pridmore, or Zeno that this post is about  

"These imitations were circulating in Singapore and the Dutch East Indies.

Traiectum was the name of the fortress that gave its name to the city, later renamed Utrecht."

This post refers SPECIFICALLY to a series of tokens issued by merchants in Singapore, cataloged by Singh and Pridmore during the early days of British Singapore. These coins you are referring to are unrelated imitations of Dutch coins. Their circulation in Singapore isn’t relevant to the Singaporean merchant tokens, as they have entirely different origins.

Stato cambiato a Fatto (Jarcek, 12 Mar 2026, 18:55)

All done now. British Singapore might take some time to appear, and will probably need some polishing, but on the issuer side, everything is done.

Catalogue administrator

@Jarcek , please change ‘British Singapore’ to ‘Colony of Singapore’.

 

Aidan.

» Politica del Forum

Il fuso orario utilizzato è UTC+2:00.
L'ora attuale è 05:15.