How Can An Object Shaped Like An Apple Be Considered A Coin?

This is a surprisingly difficult thing to nail down. At it's broadest, a coin is "whatever I happen to be pointing at when I say "that's a coin"". Which is, of course, a quite useless definition, and therefore unsatisfactory.

To me, a "coin" is distinguishable from the other two primary numismatic items, "token" and "medal", by the following: a coin must be both {a} issued by a government, and {b} have some sort of legal tender or publicly accepted value for use as a piece of currency. Coins are usually and traditionally made of metal, though this is by no means a hard and fast requirement. The only possible disqualifier for the apple-coin under this definition is that perhaps the government of Cameroon has not in fact assigned legal tender status to these objects, thus assigning them as unofficial coins quasi-coins and thus technically medals (since people are not attempting to use them as money, they cannot be "tokens").

We then come to the matter of distinguishing "coin" from "banknote", which again ought to be obvious but isn't quite as simple as "banknotes are made of paper", since there do exist things that are clearly definable as "coins" and "banknotes" that are made out of plastic, or leather, or numerous similar substances. Banknotes, fundamentally, are "coin substitutes" - things made by a government (or bank) out of a substance that is cheaper and more available than coinage metal, that allow financial transactions to proceed without the need for cumbersome, expensive or difficult-to-obtain coinage.

So this leaves us to ponder the numismatic apple: it's made of metal, issued by a government, and assigned a legal tender face value. The only thing stopping everyone from freely accepting it as a "coin" is the shape. And so far, "shape" has not entered into any of my definitions. Coins are customarily small, flat and round, though all three of those adjectives are optional since "small, flat and round" is the traditional shape for coins simply for the convenience of people having to use coins as money. Coins can be, and have been, made that are lacking some or all of those three adjectives. Swedish plate money is neither small, nor round, nor even particularly flat, yet they are happily accepted by everyone as "coins". I cannot really foresee any working definition of "coin" that allows us to exclude the apple-coin but include things like plate money.

Is the apple-coin gimmicky? You betcha. Is it something every collector of coins from Cameroon needs to obtain to complete their Cameroon coin set? That, dear reader, is where the collector must make up their own mind. For we must, however reluctantly, conclude that the apple-coin is, in fact, a "coin". Personally, I don't want one, but that's simply because of my own criteria for collecting, which includes "if it doesn't fit in a 2x2, I don't really want it". There are plenty of legitimate, used-as-money coins that don't fit in a 2x2, and I'm OK with that.

If I bought that 'coin', I would be too tempted to hang it on my Christmas tree and pray that the tree would not tip over from the extra weight.

If I bought that coin, it would ruin my apple press.

You will get more juice from a turnip than that apple coin..

Think of it as hipster coinage. Like, have you ever like really thought, what is a coin really, bruh? Like, is any coin really a coin-coin now? Or were they even ever? Mind: blown. Even just, like, your concept of a coin, is like, conceptual.

I do agree with your post, though. A coin that is purely art for art's sake is a medal, even if you attach a denomination to it.

I think it needs to brought up that the inscription on this 'coin' is circling the .. well bottom end of this thing - talk about being the 'butt' of a joke..

At least it has a pretty box.