The main reasons as to why I do not allow the Australian Traders’ tokens to be in the main Australian catalog is because they are unofficial and unrecognised by the government. Once the government caught on to what was happening these Traders’ tokens were made illegal. These tokens in Australia were never legal tender and not officially recognised by banks and the government therefor classifying them as tokens. I do not allow tokens into the main Australian catalog because they are tokens and not legal tender coins. They have also been given their own place on the numista sight called *Tokens*. Until such a time where the Numista guidelines explicitly say that these types of tokens should be in the main country catalog all Australian Traders’ tokens will stay in the *Tokens* section of Numista.
Cita: "Australian Coin Info"Once the government caught on to what was happening these Traders’ tokens were made illegal.
That is incorrect. Here is a quote from Renniks:
The colony of Victoria supressed the private issues in 1863, and would have liked to do so earlier but did not have sufficient coins with which to take over"
So the government knew full well about the coins and didn't ban them as soon as they "caught on to what was happening" but they instead tolerated them to circulate until they had sufficient coins with which to replace them. You can tell that these coins were readily accepted as currency by the fact that there are so few good examples of them around. Most of them are worn almost smooth from use, and they only circulated for a couple of decades.
They are the same as the Conder tokens, New Zealand trade tokens, Canadian tokens and the "emergency money" you find in several countries. They were made to fill a need, they are part of Australia's monetary history and should be included in the catalogue.
Canadian trade tokens are listed with coins, and rightly so in my opinion. If you were to move them to the "token" section, you would belittle their unquestionable contribution to economic life in the 19th century. This was the coinage that the more modest of our ancestors would see and use most often. Meanwhile, the coin section of the catalogue includes Canadian and Australian pseudo-coins that are not even meant to circulate. It would be quite sad if us, coin collectors, weren't able to recognize the greater numismatic value of a 19th century halfpenny trade token over an encapsulated Bugs Bunny or gold 10¢ coin.
Cita: "Camerinvs"It would be quite sad if us, coin collectors, weren't able to recognize the greater numismatic value of a 19th century halfpenny trade token over an encapsulated Bugs Bunny or gold 10¢ coin.
I'd say that a Nuremberg counter token (from the 16th or 17th century) also has greater numismatic value than either of those other two examples - yet I doubt that anyone catalogues Nuremberg counters as money.
Cita: "Camerinvs"It would be quite sad if us, coin collectors, weren't able to recognize the greater numismatic value of a 19th century halfpenny trade token over an encapsulated Bugs Bunny or gold 10¢ coin.
I'd say that a Nuremberg counter token (from the 16th or 17th century) also has greater numismatic value than either of those other two examples
I beg to differ, the Canadian tokens, British conder tokens, Australian and New Zealand merchant tokens were all used as currency, they were accepted as currency by both consumers and merchants due to a shortage of small denomination official coins. To me that has more numismatic value than a token that was just used to tote up accounts.
This is why they should be included in with the regular issued coins, and ARE included in all the countries main catalogues, except for Australia, because their referee has dug his heels in.
Cita: "Camerinvs"It would be quite sad if us, coin collectors, weren't able to recognize the greater numismatic value of a 19th century halfpenny trade token over an encapsulated Bugs Bunny or gold 10¢ coin.
I'd say that a Nuremberg counter token (from the 16th or 17th century) also has greater numismatic value than either of those other two examples
I beg to differ, the Canadian tokens, British conder tokens, Australian and New Zealand merchant tokens were all used as currency, they were accepted as currency by both consumers and merchants due to a shortage of small denomination official coins. To me that has more numismatic value than a token that was just used to tote up accounts.
This is why they should be included in with the regular issued coins, and ARE included in all the countries main catalogues, except for Australia, because their referee has dug his heels in.
But a Nuremberg counter still has greater numismatic value than "an encapsulated Bugs Bunny or gold 10¢ coin", right?
Yes, I agree that counter tokens have a greater ─much greater─ numismatic value than Bugs Bunny and other pseudo-coins. I also agree with neilithic that they should not be listed with coins but, IMHO, nor should any non-circulating coins.
Listing trade tokens together with all the other tokens ─arcade, car wash, etc.─ makes as much sense as listing root beer with beers rather than pops/sodas. If the Numista guidelines for each category need to be updated, hopefully this will be done at some point in the not-too-distant future, though I don't mean to put any pressure on the administrators.
The American Hard Times tokens & Civil War tokens should also be listed in the coin catalogues as well - as they also circulated as coins,as did Notgeld & Chamber of Commerce tokens.
Just wanted to mention that when I entered this Austrian 5-euro trial coin from '96 (one of those X# ones) it popped up under the normal Austria banner for regular currency. Strange, I thought.
The same happened with my Artikugol' tokens. They ended up under the Spitzbergen-dot on the map. Well, at least three of them. The fourth one eded up in the section "tokens".
I thought it might be cool if (in the future) each member could "modify/tweek" his or her account to his or her own preference.
For instance, I always wondered what it would look like if I had all my thematic coins grouped together. I lack extra albums to try it out. But if that could be done by the click of a button on here, that would be awesome.
Concerning the token-issue:
What I do here at home on my personal registry of my coin (& token) collection:
I include tokens when the denomination doesn't vary from the common currency and there is a mention from a bank, a town, a company, (so most (if not all) emergency and commerce coins from Germany and France, certain transport tokens, pre-Canada bank tokens, etc.)... or, I also include tokens if they had intermingled with the common currency (because of equal size and weight, like on the British isles between 1500 and 1800 or so, and of European colonial companies in America, Africa and Asia).
Yet, every token after 1946 ends up elsewhere. Not with the good moneys.
And then I place them in their own section, under the title of its issuer (issuee?) or, if there's none, under its city name, or under its region. Simply because I like making new chapters (entries) in my collection. Makes it colourful (I give 'em different colours...).
(I hope I'm making sense here... )
Other tokens (for which the stuff here above doesn't apply) end up in my "real full-on" token section, at the end.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What bothers me slightly is the rotating flags jointed to the coins.
Some flags are giving the wrong impression to earlier or later periods.
Me-thinks. (But that beside the point of tokens "floating around").
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the recent creation of a new 'Australia - Colonial' catalog, all Australian Trade Tokens have been moved out of the Tokens catalog and into the new catalog.
Cita: "Mark240590"Pre federation Australia should be the country name like pre federal USA Canadian provinces too.
There was several colonies in Australia that had currency tokens - the most common ones are from New South Wales (especially Sydney) & Victoria (especially Melbourne).
Tasmania was called Van Diemen's Land until around 1855 or 1856.
If the Numista guidelines for each category need to be updated, hopefully this will be done at some point in the not-too-distant future, though I don't mean to put any pressure on the administrators.