British Sumatra in the catalogue

Coins of the Sumatra Dollar, a currency issued between 1783 and 1824 by the East India Company in the settlement of Bencoolan (aka British Sumatra), are listed with Netherlands East Indies and with Malay Peninsula.

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/netherland_east_indies-1.html#devise1198

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/peninsule_malaise-1.html#devise1198

We can do 4 things here:

1. All with Malay Peninsula. Even though Sumatra is not on the Malay Peninsula it fits nicely with the other EIC territories listed here

2. All with Netherlands East Indies. Sumatra became fully part of this Dutch colony in 1824.

3. All with Straits Settlements. This might be a better term for British/EIC territories in the region.

4. Separate listing for British Sumatra.

British Sumatra should be listed separately.

Aidan.

1. New colony rulers (as British before Dutch), new location (Sumatra is an island, not part of the Malay peninsula)... New listing is logical
   
2. There is 2 duplicates thanks to this topic to be spotted as the 2 Sumatra coins in Malay peninsula are also listed in Netherlands East Indies.
   

I'd like to revisit this topic. Looking at the Dutch East Indies and Malay peninsula (just short of a mess), there should be British East Indies (much like the listing "British West Indies") to include all EIC coinage and token coinage, and Malay sultanates for all tin pitis issues.

This should be the best solution for this issue, and bring organization to these coins.

Citação: "KennyG"​I'd like to revisit this topic. Looking at the Dutch East Indies and Malay peninsula (just short of a mess), there should be British East Indies (much like the listing "British West Indies") to include all EIC coinage and token coinage, and Malay sultanates for all tin pitis issues.
​
​This should be the best solution for this issue, and bring organization to these coins.

​Sounds like a very sensible solution indeed! Perhaps it's good to honour Krause's reference by mentioning in the comments where the coins can be found in SCWC.

I believe that this is where we should be heading - better than Krause, while keep refering to it.

All of the EIC coins issued for the East Indies are all alike... why are they all split up? Geographically they are in the NEI but they are not Dutch.

If everyone agrees I'll create the new country

Lets ask 300 countries club. They wont mind I think.

From me it is humble +1.

Its like a table of contents. The more specific the better. Make a new country. Please make 50 or 200 more.

So what to do with remaining Sumatra/Sultana coins made under EIC? Move them all to BEI?

Yes because before they were listed in both. I already made the request to move them.

Good to know. Last step will be to ask Xavier to translate the country name (and if necessary, the currency/territory names)

It seems strange to me to see "Malacca" and "Penang" listed under "British east indies" when wiki lists them under "Straits Settlements"


and Malacca is a state of Malaysia on the west coast.
It was settled from Sumatra in the 1300's, occupied by the Portuguese in 1511. Captured by the Dutch in 1641. Held by the British from 1795 to 1802 and 1811 to 1818 and finally ceded to Britain in 1824.

The attribution of the following coins to Malacca is uncertain. All were struck in England, on behalf of merchants in Singapore. All have an Arabic legend Tanah Melayu Land of the Malays, above a rooster.

So, we might considerate the possibility of referencing this coin under "Strait Settlements"
Malacca - 1 Keping (1832->1836)



What is the necessity to create "British east indies" ?

Now , what about "Malay Peninsula" or Malay Sultanates" ?

This is including presently Palembang that is located south of Sumatra

Palembang sultanate - Keping (1675-1823)
First of all, we can exclude VOC and Dutch East Indies: they annexed this territory on 1823 (and so we might correct the classification in the Numista directory )
Then Malay sultans during the 16th century never controlled this territory.

Well, I didn't find any mention of Palembang coinage in the SCWC 1701-1800 ...
So when I see this file, I ask from where is this KM#3 ?

and when I compare to my coin:

I wonder if the Numista coin is really from 1113 or 1163 or 1193 ...
there are still some details to deepen


In conclusion, I'd rather name these caliphates which were independent from England and Netherlands in the Malay peninsula and Sumatra (the former "Land of Gold") as:
East Indies Caliphates

Listing all EIC coinage of the region with Straits Settlements makes a lot of sense too and reduces fragmentation of the catalogue. After all, Straits Settlements could be interpretated a bit more broadly including Sumatra as that island lies at the Malaccan Straits too.

Then there are of course the independent local kingdoms or sultanates that were located all over the region (including Sumatra and Java). For this we could indeed change the 'country' to East Indies Sultanates.

So... Are you suggesting Sumatra/Sultana to move again? To Straits Settlements?

No British East Indies will stay like it is, although seeing Straits, Malaya, Malaya and British Borneo all listed together seems like a good idea... although it would be less countries in the list, although they are hardly different countries.

I would prefer keeping the old Malaysian coinage (SS, Mal, Mal&BB) still separate listings. We usually list separate different colonial coinages. Moreover, you should include North Borneo to the debate, aka. British North Borneo. And this is not the first merging "aberration" I already spotted. I would consider the same error the former merge British Guiana / BG&BWI. For me even this one should be listed apart.

I'll answer this evening (CET) to later arguments, moving to Luxembourg for the day.

Citação: "jokinen"​Then there are of course the independent local kingdoms or sultanates that were located all over the region (including Sumatra and Java). For this we could indeed change the 'country' to East Indies Sultanates.

​+1 - The reference book for Malay archipelago early coinage is:



"Currencies of the natives of the Indonesian Archipelago and Malay Peninsula".
It lists:
Java,
Sumatra,
Chinese colony of Bangka island,
Malay peninsula,
Borneo (Pontianak, Mampawa),
Soulou (Soliok) archipelago and Magindanao,
Celebes and Macassar.

Although there are not all Muslim, the most well known are Tin Pitis and few golden coins.

So it would be wise to gather these coins in the current state "Malay Peninsula" (named from the SCWC) with the extension to the entire archipelago and name it either:
East Indies Caliphates, East indies Sultanates, Native East indies, Early Malay peninsula & archipelago.

And include all the Pitis coinage of Palembang before 1823 which are wrongly classed in the NEI.

Citação: "KennyG"​... although seeing Straits, Malaya, Malaya and British Borneo all listed together seems like a good idea...

​

OK for Native currencies.

I spotted wrongly classified coins which were made by Princely states under NEI administration like Deli. I'll move them back to NEI.

EDIT: only not moved Sultana/Sumatra coinage as made like older coinage.

Even though the British had quite some influence over the Malay and Aceh/Sumatran sultanates, suzerainty or protection was not in place until the 1850's, so well after those coins were issued. I therefore completely agree with chomp and frenchlover to have these coins listed under the successor of Malay Peninsula, to be named East Indies Sultanates

Sultana solved as equivalent to Singapore. However still thinking about similar period Sumatra coinage.

All of the island of tokens were struck by British Singapore merchants. Just as deceitful pieces like the genuine British east India company kepings. Given the stated reason I think its a total grey area. Hence why I was fobbed off when I suggested this very thing about 4 years ago !

Yes the keping tokens were issued by Singapore merchants and don't belong to any "currency" or state, since they were not issued by the state themselves but a semi-legitimate form of currency serving as an alternative to the copper "doits".

Whats the right place for this coins in the Numista Database?


The coin is listed in Krause: Netherlands East Indies (Singapore Merchant; Token Coinage) as KM#Tn4



The coin is listed in Krause (1801-1900): Netherlands East Indies (Singapore Merchants, Token Coinage) as KM#Tn3.



The coin is listed in Krause (1801-1900); Netherlands East Indies (Singapore Merchants; Token Coinage) as KM#Tn2.

Now its the question if I shall list the coins accordingly Krause (SCWC) in Netherlands East Indies or if I shall list the coins like this similar coin at British East Indies.....????

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces40074.html

I hope anyone can help me! :)

We agreed here it made much more sense to list these as British East Indies. The Dutch had nothing to do with these coins except for watching in envy how Singapore became a huge success.

O.k., thanks! (Y) :)
Than I will list the coins to British East Indies! :)

Coins struck for places located in what is now Indonesia under native rule should be removed from the Malay Peninsular listings.

Aidan.