The first one should be rename Crimean Khanate and put under the Mongol states. This issuer existed until 1777. We can link it to the Golden Horde, the Ottoman Empire, and "Crimea" (the last coins in this section).
About the map, I had say Ukraine and Russia as the original territority of this Khanate is actually split in half by those countries.
The other coins, minted in 1787 can keep the name "Crimea" but I think they should be place under Russia as a subsection of this country. It can be linked at the Crimean Khanate, Russian Empire (and Ukraine ?).
About the map, I don't know : most countries don't recognise this area has part of Russia but it doesn't belong to Ukraine anymore.
I think it isn't correct to put Crimea under the Mongol States.
Usually it is not counted on the list of Mongol States.
It was independent country for the short periods of time, but for the longest period it was a vassal state of the Ottoman Empire. If you want to put it under some subsection it shall be an Ottoman Empire, but due to the some periods of independence and period under Russia I believe it shall stay separate.
With the same logic you shall put, e.g., Khanate of Khiva, under the Mongol States. At least it was independent for the long period of time.
My personal list of scammers from Numista: erniemix, yvain, CassTaylor
I agree with you about the vassal thing, however I don't have the impression the catalog tends to use this link to aggregade the issuers.
If we follow this logic we would have only the vassals of the French king under the France Feudal but it's not the case at all (the catalog used only the actual borders of the country instead) : the Louis XIV coins minted in Catalonia are inside the Spanish session, the Savoy county and most issuers from the eastern part of the France should be under the German states instead of the France Feudal if we followed the vassal links.
I guess it would be not practical to use those links in some situations as it's not instinctive at all when we are looking for a coin in the catalog.
For example, the Trebizond Empire (a byzantin state) was a vassal of the Georgia kings during a short period... Then Georgia become a vassal of the Ilkhanids and later a vassal of the Ottoman Empire. We would have to add some islamics states like the seljukids under the ilkhanids as well.
If we used the vassal links here, that would be way to complicated and kinda inefficient.
About the Ottoman Empire, none of the Eyalets are actually under it (in my opinion they should be group together as issuers of this empire but it's another question here) : they can be find under the Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Georgia and so on... even if those coins were minted under the name of the ottoman rulers and the Eyalets were just consider as administrative division of the Empire.
Regarding the Crimean Khanate, they minted coins under the names of their khans instead of the Ottoman ruler so the situation is a bit different. The khanate acted more like an allie than a vassal of the Ottomans : it kept its identity as they just wanted to be under the protection of the Empire.
Regarding the Khanate of Khiva I don't know much about it, but apparently it was part of the
old Chagatai Khanate that forms the actual Uzbekistan : we can consider this issuer either as an early coinage of this country or as a later coinage of the mongols. It probably has his place under both sections.
Cycnos, thank you for such detailed comment. I agree that a logic of the catalogue doesn't allow to put Crimea under the Ottoman Empire.
But I still disagree that it shall be under the Mongol states. At least in Russian historical traditions it is always separate from the Mongol states and closer to Ottoman.
I think a current separate position is the best.
My personal list of scammers from Numista: erniemix, yvain, CassTaylor
SjoelundHow come Crimea was never adhered to Ukraine, it's the same piece of land?
Crimean Khanate covered much territory outside modern Crimea, including (AFAICT) places like Taganrog that were never Ukrainian territory. I'm not sure if that's the main reason for counting it as a separate first-level country, though; maybe it's just that the admins don't want the confusion of putting it under either Russia or Ukraine.
Taurida Governorate was administered under the Russian Empire; in fact I'm not entirely convinced that their coins deserve a separate issuer at all, as opposed to just being commemorative coinage of the Russian Empire proper. Putting it on second level under Russia is indeed confusing, though.
On the other suggestions, it indeed makes no sense to put Crimean Khanate under Ottomans (in fact their last coin issues were under Russian suzerainty), and it was nominally a Mongol state but I agree that putting it there would be quite misleading.
I'm honestly tempted to suggest putting it in Central Asia and Caucasia - it wouldn't be too out of place in that particular hodgepodge!
I think now Crimeam Khanate is on the position where it shall be. There are not Mongols lived there, it was a part of former Golden Horde, but it was never a Mongol state. The main population were from Turkic peoples…
And the territiry is not at Central Asia and Caucasia
So, I see no reasons to move it somewhere. The suggestion to split them and move the last coinage under Russia and the ealier coinage under Ottoman Empire (surely not under Mongol state) may be a possible option, but it won't create any value and only add some confusion.
My personal list of scammers from Numista: erniemix, yvain, CassTaylor
Crimean Khanate covered much territory outside modern Crimea, including (AFAICT) places like Taganrog that were never Ukrainian territory.
You probably never read Chekhov and what he had to say about his hometown Taganrog. And Taganrog was part of the Ukrainian SSR in Taganrog Okrug in 1920s, until it was transferred to the russian SFSR.
