Ofec 1980

I appreciate all the inputs thus far, and it's going better than I had hoped, so I'm just going to post all the rest of the pages. I know I need some older coins in several places, and I'm working on that.

I struggled with that question, and for the Baltics I can see it going either way. I opted for the 1990's coins because of the next point you raised.




Using Azores as an example, Krause shows two coins in 1901 listed under "Portuguese Administration". The issues of 1980 were listed under "Republic", so the country in 1980 was different than the country in 1901, so the 1901 coins would not be valid for my purposes. If the Azores does mint their own circulating coins in the future, I will include one as long as there isn't a fundamental shift in what the Azores is. For example, if the Azores are taken over by a Marxist regime and then issues a currency, I would not consider that a country that existed in 1980. If a Marxist regime takes over and Portuguese forces promptly defeat them and restore the government, then it's still the same country that existed in 1980. I recognize there are any number of dicey situations that can arise, but the list of non-issuing countries is there for me to keep an eye on and include if they ever issue circulating coins and are still essentially the same country that existed in 1980.

I already have some countries I have to use coins after 1980, such as Comoros, although I am tempted to include an "Institut d'Emission" coin for that one. Turks & Caicos didn't issue circulation coinage (it appears) until 1981. Namibia didn't issue coins until 1993, but you could well argue that the publishers of the 1980 Atlas I'm using jumped the gun on that one. Independence was SUPPOSED to be declared December 31, 1978, but that was rejected by the UN and a decade of war followed (with SWAPO and South Africa and Angola and Cuba involved) until independence was finally achieved in March 1990. I like keeping that coin just as a reminder of how messy the birth of a nation can be!

Some countries make things "tight". Iran fundamentally changed in 1979, so I need a coin from 1979 or 1980. To a lesser extent the Vatican changed when John Paul II's reign began, so I felt compelled to get a coin from 1979 to recognize the global geo-political significance of that change. Mozambique presents a different kind of challenge. They gained independence in 1975, but reform coinage was issued in 1980. The 1974 coin I currently have is clearly not acceptable, but do I have to get a 1980 coin, or would a 1975 coin be OK since it would likely still be circulating for some period of time in 1980? I was leaning toward 1980 when I checked the prices on 1975 and that one is now a simple decision!

I really appreciate all of the critiques and food for thought, and I will change a few things based on what you have all said so far and any inputs based on the additional pages I posted today. (I bought the Palau coin, but I haven't received it yet, so sorry that is a blank spot for now).

Thanks again everyone!

Absolutely, my 1980 Atlas of Asia shows Turkmen S.S.R., Uzbek S.S.R., Kazakh S.S.R., Kirgiz S.S.R., and Tadzhik S.S.R all in Asia, along with the bulk of the landmass of Russian S.F.S.R. However, the Western tradition of 1980 was to place the USSR in Europe, list all of the satellite countries (Union Republics) with Russia, and I suppose it was placed in Europe partly because Moscow is in Europe, but also partly because the area of chief concern to Western nations at the time was the European frontier. I didn't split them up to maintain consistency with the traditions of the day. Do you think I should have split them up?




Perhaps my text is misleading. I'm not concerned that the FIRST Pitcairn Islands NCLT is after 1980, but that ONLY NCLT has been issued thus far (unless something changed recently). If Pitcairn Islands issues circulation coinage tomorrow, I will need to include a coin. In 1980 the Pitcairn Islands were listed as a separate country. The Marshall Islands were considered part of US Territory, like Puerto Rico. If the Marshall Islands or Puerto Rico gained independence and issued their own currency, they would be excluded (like Aruba) because they did not exist as a separate country in 1980. I realize there are several entities that one could argue aren't really countries at all - Guernsey, Jersey and Isle of Man come to mind. Instead of making those judgment calls myself, I depended on the 1980 Atlas and if a compelling argument is made to exclude something or include something I'm happy to consider it.

The status of the Azores with respect to Portugal has not changed much between 1901 and 1980; what has changed is the government of Portugal itself. When the monarchy was overthrown and the Republic established, one of the changes implemented was that the Azores would no longer have its own separate currency.


It's a "country that did not exist prior to 1980". In 1980, the United States still owned a large territory containing myriad small island groups, all captured from the Japanese during and after WWII. This Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands was broken into four pieces in 1986. Three of the pieces became independent republics: Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau. The fourth piece, Northern Mariana Islands, is still a US territory.

In a similar category is the case of East Timor, which existed (as a Portuguese colony) up to 1975, and again (as a republic) from 2002, but was annexed by Indonesia during the timeframe in question. Alongside this can be considered Eritrea (former Italian colony, later independent, annexed by Ethiopia in between) and Somaliland (former British colony, now de-facto independent, annexed by Somalia in between). In such cases, neither the coins before nor the coins after reflect the status of those countries in 1980; they should therefore be treated as "countries which did not exist in 1980".


Kaliningrad Oblast was formerly a piece of East Prussia, and part of Germany. East Prussia was split into two pieces by the Soviets when they occupied it; the southern half was given to newly re-independent Poland, the northern half the Soviets kept for themselves. Administratively, they attached it directly to Russia rather than Lithuania; perhaps they feared losing Kaliningrad if they attached it to Lithuania and were later then obliged to let Lithuania go again. As it was a piece of Nazi Germany before the war, the West basically did not care what happened to it - especially since the vast majority of the German population had already fled westwards by the time Soviet forces arrived there. They won it fair and square, it was weregild, they could do what they liked with it.

As has been said the difference between a hoard and a collection is in the organization and presentation. You have done a very good job.

As you have learned a starting simple question can lead to varied answers, some clear, some with murky shades of gray. Even simple questions like 'what is a country' have complex answers! I might quibble with some of the decisions you've made but that's part of what makes collecting a fun individual activity.

I bought a few old world almanacs from a thrift store for cheap. You might find them interesting. They have descriptions of the countries and usually a few color pages with maps and flags. At the time I found it a neat way to collect obsolete countries' flags but I think nowadays you can cut and paste them from wikipedia.

Maybe I missed the previous discussion as to why you picked 1980 in particular?

-wheatiefan

Regarding St. Pierre and Miquelon coin of 1948, Medieval wrote:




What about Reunion? Their coins, which have the same obverse as St. Pierre & Miquelon, span 1948 to 1973 without any note of revaluation. What is the difference between these two?

Thanks for the clarification, Sap. Enlightening as always! One question though. When you say:




How unusual? Can you compare it to what I would likely find in US change?

pre-1982 penny unusual?
wheatie unusual?
pre-1965 dime unusual?

I am going to have to make a call on this one. If it's wheatie unusual, I would be inclined to include it. If it's silver dime unusual, probably not.

In that case it seems obvious that I should remove the Reunion coin. Thanks for the clarification!