The book rectifies some appalling historical inaccuracies in Hern's books that have been published over the last ten years despite the fact Hern KNEW that his coin catalogues were inaccurate.
Namely:
- exclusion of the Griquatown tokens as they never circulated nor ever used as money in South Africa. They have no numismatic value. - inclusion of the Strachan and Co currency tokens which circulated as currency (largely among the indigenous population) for nearly 60 years in the region around East Griqualand - correction in the number of Veld Ponds actually minted - much less than previously claimed
If you follow the links in my post above you will understand why.
We are talking about the first bona fide indigenous circulating currency in South Africa. If a token is minted but never circulated as money then technically it was never a coin - rather a trinket. If it is not a coin then it is not a numismatic item. Numismatics is about collecting coins.
tokensa1, Your argument is an interesting one but, in my opinion, fallacious.
Quote: Numismatics is about collecting coins.
Numismatics is about so much more than collecting coins. Firstly, numismatics is about studying the objects rather than just collecting or dealing in them.
Secondly, the objects aren't just coins but banknotes, cheques, patterns, trade tokens, jetons, advertising tokens, phone tokens, coin weights, medals, medallions, items used for trading like stamps, shells, sweets, ingots, beads, Chinese knife money and spade money.
I would also include the means of production like dies and punches, and the ephemera used with coins. I would also include books and articles and web pages dealing with numismatic objects.
Feel free to disagree with me about "stamps, shells, sweets, ingots, beads, Chinese knife money and spade money.", however the British Museum which has one of the foremost numismatic collections in the world has all of these in their collection.
Quote: If a token is minted but never circulated as money then technically it was never a coin - rather a trinket.
Whether tokens are coins is a question of semantics.
Trade tokens are called tokens to differentiate them from coins legally authorised by government. Most trade tokens were issued by non-government authority or privately, either by individuals or corporations. The fact that they circulate doesn't make them coins.
Many shops in Italy and Israel used to accept telephone tokens in change, and in the 60s and early 70s, Italian shops used to give sweets in change. When there was a scarcity of small change there was little alternative but that didn't make telephone tokens or sweets, coins.
I would be very happy to include the Griquatown tokens in my collection - please send me all of yours.
The Griquatown "tokens" have been re-classified as "fantasy tokens". As I pointed out in one of Scott's previous threads on the subject, the Krause catalogues have recently made this same reclassification.
This does not, however, make them any less "numismatic". As Pertinax stated, numismatics is a "broad church" and covers much more than items used as money. Medals, for example, are clearly numismatic - yet a key aspect of the definition of "medal" as distinct from "coin" or "token" is that medals were never intended to have a monetary function.
What the reclassification does mean, however, is that there is likely to be much less demand for the Griqua tokens, with a resultant reduction in value. Because most "coin collectors" are not "numismatists"; they only want things that actually circulated as money. Non-monetary fantasy pieces such as these hold much less interest, even though they are still quite rare and antiques in their own right.
As another example of coins that dropped in value after being dropped from the mainstream Krause catalogues, look at Lundy coins. Their value dropped by half once the OFEC collectors could no longer find them in Krause. They still haven't recovered.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
The point I am trying to make is quite simple - nothing to do with semantics.
For many years South African coin catalogues have suggested the first indigenous circulating coin in South Africa was the Griquatown tokens.
This claim is completely false.
I don't have any of those Griquatown tokens (fantasy coins) - but the Strachan and Co, until now looked over, are correctly recognised in this new coin book as South Africa's first indigenous circulating currency.
Look at the links in my initial post for the proof.
Trade tokens are called tokens to differentiate them from coins legally authorised by government. Most trade tokens were issued by non-government authority or privately, either by individuals or corporations. The fact that they circulate doesn't make them coins.
Today's FIAT money used by countries around the world is IN FACT a token currency - there is nothing tangible backing it (ie no physical gold or silver) that's why the Fed Reserve has printed trillions of dollars in the last few years. Because they can.
REAL money backed by gold and silver coins was slowly phased out and the US went off the gold standard in 1971 under that idiot President Nixon.
In the case of the Strachan and Co they are recognised as currency tokens - ie they were accepted by the local Griqua government as their official currency in the 1870s and accepted as such by the indigenous people of East Griqualand as their money for nearly sixty years.
The history is in the links in my initial post - read the material and then lets talk.
Here we are, a year later and Mr Balson is yet to post a link to the rave reviews he was posting about. Well, he can't because there are none. Mr Balson is promoting the Strachan sets, because he owns a pile of them. He tried the same trick with the famous Veldpond, but was quickly found out. History can be repeated, but not changed.
I believe that in spite of all the biased cheerleading, the author of this book has now decided to INCLUDE the Griquatown coinage in the next edition. Good to know that common sense still prevails.
The publisher of the new S African coin catalogue, Morgan Carroll, contracted a professional researched, Ann Stuart, to investigate the Griquatown tokens from a totally independent viewpoint.
Her findings, detailed in a 12 page PDF linked below, were of no surprise to me and confirm what I have always claimed - ie the Griquatown tokens NEVER circulated and Krause are correct in seeing them as "Fantasy coins" in their coin catalogues. Her findings ratify my earlier research on this subject - also attached in summary form below.
Let me assure you that I have heard it from the horses mouth that the Griquatown tokens will NOT be in the new South African coin catalogue, and yes common sense has prevailed at last.
Now that the issue of the Griquatown tokens has been put to bed it leaves just one question. When will the National Numismatic Society in Johannesburg revoke their misplaced award to a Cape Town coin dealer, Pierre Henri Nortje, for his clearly fraudulent "research" on the Griquatown tokens? More at: http://www.tokencoins.com/nortje.htm
Following the release of the research undertaken by a third party for Morgan Carroll you can see how Pierre Henri Nortje embraces his own fraud with a spin (note the back slapping trying to ingratiate Carroll in his post), and the fact he provides NO link to the research he refers to (linked in the post above) exposing his fraud:
QUOTE (NORTJE's POST ON the BidorBuy Forum):
Recently a well-researched paper by Ann Stuart (funded by Morgan Carroll - a 100 pats on his back from me & many others) was compiled and entitled - The Failed Community Coinage of Griqualand - A research into the Missionary-issued Community Coinage of Griqualand, South Africa in the early 1800's
Up till the new contemporary records were discovered by her (Ann Stuart), we only know of 4 previous records of the period referring to the Griqua pieces. (Rev. Campbell's report of 7 August 1813, The London Missionary Society annual meeting report of 10 May 1816, John Campbell's diary of 8 & 12 August 1820 and Missionary Helm's letter of 21 June 1821 to Dr. John Philip)
The handful of newly discovered contemporary documents reported by Ann Stuart, date from the period 15 January 1816 to 21 July 1817.
None of these newly discovered contemporary documents refers to the dispersing or circulation of the coinage, so regarding this important issue (did they circulate or not?), nothing new has been found or came to light. (I will come back to this issue again).
But other very important & interesting contemporary information regarding the Griqua coinage was indeed found
In my follow ups to this post, I will comment on these very important documents discovered & reported by Ann Stuart.
Then again we had Edward VIII and his coinage didn't circulate in the UK, does this mean that the coins aren't of interest to collectors? No, it doesn't. It just means most people won't have a coin of his from the UK.
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited. Contact Us | Advertise Here | Privacy Policy / Terms of Use
Posted 01/22/2015 5:52 pm
