Scottishmoney Posted September 26, 2009 Report Share Posted September 26, 2009 I received this note in a collection of mainly Romanian notes from a collector friend in Romania a couple of years ago. I immediately imaged it for my site, then I was perplexed - where do I put it? It was issued by Austria-Hungary beginning in 1912, but it was overstamped by Romanian authorities giving it status in their newly occupied part of the ex Austria-Hungary, Bukovina in 1919. This territory was subsequently disputed betwixt the Ukrainian National Republic and Romania, then after Ukraine was absorbed into the USSR, betwixt Romania and the USSR. The ladies from the Austrian and Hungarian sides of the note. And the whole note: The disputed province was subsequently split betwixt the USSR and Romania, and thence Ukrainians were deported from Romania, whilst Romanians were forced out to leave to Romania, often just moving close by through the boundary. When the USSR forced Romania to cede several territories beginning in 1940 the region of Bukovina was absorbed into the USSR and the population shifted to mainly Ukrainians and Russians. With the Axis invasion of the USSR the following year, Romania re-integratted the province into Romania, but this only lasted until 1944 when yet again the region reverted to the USSR. Now Bukovina is mostly in the Ukrainian nation, with only the small southern part being a part of Romania. The whole region, with the inclusion of Moldova and Transdnestr to the south is one of the most mixed up portions of territory in the world. To travel in some parts of Ukraine there you have to "sneak" through Moldovan territory - been there done that myself. Whilst Bukovina is largely not hotly disputed now, Moldova and Transdnestr have been in a long term frozen conflict since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Transdnestr is a small swath of territory to the east of the Dnestr river and is "protected" by Russian soldiers. Moldova is still largely a communist country, curiously though finds itself more comfortable with allying itself with the USA and the EU. So here I have this note, from a province in Europe that is still not quite a part of any country, because it is largely populated by a mixture of peoples, Romanian, Hungarian, Russians, Ukrainians and even a few Germans. When I get around to putting it on my site, I cannot quite put it in Ukraine, nor Romania, and not really Austria either. Perhaps Bukovina by itself is the wisest choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 I know what you mean. I usually place it in the nearest place it would be now. So for my Netherlands Indies notes, they are not in Netherlands, nor in something I made for Java or an entry for Netherlands Indies, but rather for Indonesia with a remark for it being also Java and the Netherlands Indies. It can be quite challenging for some of the African notes too, especially when there are issues for individual countries within a monetary union (like the modern EU) but also when there were general issues without country identifiers - then I have to make a special entry for that monetary union as well as having individual notes within that union. But it's all part of the fun of the challenge, innit? Nice note, btw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishmoney Posted September 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Netherlands Indies usually ends up in Europe on fleaBay, kind of annoying when you have to -Indies on your Netherlands searches like I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 I know what you mean by annoying. I hate having to specify which Guinea I mean - A search for Guinea alone turns up Guinea Bissau, Portuguese Guinea, Papua New Guinea all mixed together with Guinea. 'Course if your're doing a Google search, then there's the Guinea Pigs, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badin Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 because a part of bukovina is in romania and the stamp on the banknote is romanian this banknotes are romanian 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishmoney Posted September 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badger Posted October 2, 2009 Report Share Posted October 2, 2009 I received this note in a collection of mainly Romanian notes from a collector friend in Romania a couple of years ago. I immediately imaged it for my site, then I was perplexed - where do I put it? It was issued by Austria-Hungary beginning in 1912, but it was overstamped by Romanian authorities giving it status in their newly occupied part of the ex Austria-Hungary, Bukovina in 1919. This territory was subsequently disputed betwixt the Ukrainian National Republic and Romania, then after Ukraine was absorbed into the USSR, betwixt Romania and the USSR. The ladies from the Austrian and Hungarian sides of the note. And the whole note: The disputed province was subsequently split betwixt the USSR and Romania, and thence Ukrainians were deported from Romania, whilst Romanians were forced out to leave to Romania, often just moving close by through the boundary. When the USSR forced Romania to cede several territories beginning in 1940 the region of Bukovina was absorbed into the USSR and the population shifted to mainly Ukrainians and Russians. With the Axis invasion of the USSR the following year, Romania re-integratted the province into Romania, but this only lasted until 1944 when yet again the region reverted to the USSR. Now Bukovina is mostly in the Ukrainian nation, with only the small southern part being a part of Romania. The whole region, with the inclusion of Moldova and Transdnestr to the south is one of the most mixed up portions of territory in the world. To travel in some parts of Ukraine there you have to "sneak" through Moldovan territory - been there done that myself. Whilst Bukovina is largely not hotly disputed now, Moldova and Transdnestr have been in a long term frozen conflict since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Transdnestr is a small swath of territory to the east of the Dnestr river and is "protected" by Russian soldiers. Moldova is still largely a communist country, curiously though finds itself more comfortable with allying itself with the USA and the EU. So here I have this note, from a province in Europe that is still not quite a part of any country, because it is largely populated by a mixture of peoples, Romanian, Hungarian, Russians, Ukrainians and even a few Germans. When I get around to putting it on my site, I cannot quite put it in Ukraine, nor Romania, and not really Austria either. Perhaps Bukovina by itself is the wisest choice. Hello Scottishmoney, Very interesting! I think it depends on what You collect. You should really make Your own choice, and that's a good thing! I have added my similar note to Hungary without much hesitation, as 1 side is in Hungarian, and I mostly collect Hungary - in spite of the fact that it should have a Hungarian overprint to be truly Pick Hungary 27. Romanian collectors, of course, can feel free to think of it as Romanian because it is part of their history, too. And the STAMP is 100% Romanian! But let's trust Mr Alfred Pick, who cannot be accused of being prejudiced. This note is basically AUSTRIA 12, as You surely know. He also mentions it among Romanian banknotes (if it has the Romanian stamp), but only within the very clear category: "Austro-Hungarian Banknotes". (It was issued in Austria-Hungary, anyway, whatever history brought on later). So, in place of You & if I had collections from many countries, I would definitely put it in my Austria collection. I do not know of anybody collecting Bukovina... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siluska Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 Hello Scottishmoney,Very interesting! I think it depends on what You collect. You should really make Your own choice, and that's a good thing! I have added my similar note to Hungary without much hesitation, as 1 side is in Hungarian, and I mostly collect Hungary - in spite of the fact that it should have a Hungarian overprint to be truly Pick Hungary 27. Romanian collectors, of course, can feel free to think of it as Romanian because it is part of their history, too. And the STAMP is 100% Romanian! But let's trust Mr Alfred Pick, who cannot be accused of being prejudiced. This note is basically AUSTRIA 12, as You surely know. He also mentions it among Romanian banknotes (if it has the Romanian stamp), but only within the very clear category: "Austro-Hungarian Banknotes". (It was issued in Austria-Hungary, anyway, whatever history brought on later). So, in place of You & if I had collections from many countries, I would definitely put it in my Austria collection. I do not know of anybody collecting Bukovina... I think that the notes with more than one stamp will sure make think easy. For example a HUngarian stamp of the city Pecs on one side and Romanian stamp on the other. Or the Czech stamp with the value in haleru on one side and Yugoslavian stamps on the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishmoney Posted October 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I believe all the Romanians here believe that it is Romanian. Romania probably does have the best claim - since the last authority to issue it was Romania. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badin Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 this stmped banknotes becamed romanian banknotes trough law. and the law was emited because romania in 1919 cannot have enaugh resources (time and money) to redraw all the austro-hungarian valute from market. so this banknotes whit no stamp are austro-hungarian, with stamp "ROMANIA * TIMBRU SPECIAL" are romanian, with "DEUTCHEOSTERRICHE" stamp are austrian, with "MAGYONOSVAR" are hungarian banknotes, etc..... p.s. only stamped banknotes were acepted in payments in Romanian after 1919, and a lot of this bills are double stamped, for example: a banknote can be stamped in Romania and Hungary, or Romania and Serbia, Hunagry and Seribia, etc.... and here are the problems because this banknotes circulated in multiple countries and can be clasified to the respective countries. (see the pictures, the banknotes are in my collection) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badin Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 I do not know of anybody collecting Bukovina... I do. and i guess i am not the only one..... , and your afirmation that the stamped banknotes can be clasified as austrian banknotes is wrong this banknotes are clasified ONLY by their overprint (stamp). for these reason a 50 corona 1902 stamped in ro is sold with 100 - 300 euro despite 50-70 euro without stamp! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NumisMattic2200 Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 It is Romanian, for two reasons. 1.) It was amongst a collection of Romanian notes. and 2.) It was issued by the state of Romania originally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badin Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 2.) It was issued by the state of Romania originally. what do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishmoney Posted October 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Folks, can we all just settle this over some cool beer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badger Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I do. and i guess i am not the only one..... , and your afirmation that the stamped banknotes can be clasified as austrian banknotes is wrong this banknotes are clasified ONLY by their overprint (stamp). for these reason a 50 corona 1902 stamped in ro is sold with 100 - 300 euro despite 50-70 euro without stamp! What I meant, first of all, is that the banknote is originally Austro-Hungarian. And yes, there are a lot of countries which can claim it as theirs, there's no time & space here to speak about the history of Central/South-eastern Europe. I 100% agree that Romania can claim it as its own...but Austrian & Hungarian collectors can also say it belongs to us...By the way, Hungarian catalogs consider the note as (Austro)-Hungarian, with the remark it can have a number of different stamps (including Romanian) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishmoney Posted October 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Just for fun, and given my ties to Ukraine of course - I am arguing for Ukraine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badger Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 It is Romanian, for two reasons. 2.) It was issued by the state of Romania originally. I really do not know (and it seems I am not the only one) what You mean by this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badger Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Folks, can we all just settle this over some cool beer? Very good idea...hopefully we would not argue whether it should be Ukranian, Romamian or Austrian beer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
see323 Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 How about settling over some green tea ? Much better for our health. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badger Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 I do. and i guess i am not the only one..... , and your afirmation that the stamped banknotes can be clasified as austrian banknotes is wrong this banknotes are clasified ONLY by their overprint (stamp). for these reason a 50 corona 1902 stamped in ro is sold with 100 - 300 euro despite 50-70 euro without stamp! Yes, I completely believe You - and in Hungary notes with Hungarian overprint are worth a lot more than with any other stamp...that's only natural... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badin Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 How about settling over some green tea ? Much better for our health. neahhhh... beer is better. and about arguing wich beer ..... who give a thing? we wil have one fro each country ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishmoney Posted October 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Very good idea...hopefully we would not argue whether it should be Ukranian, Romamian or Austrian beer... I will settle this here and now, we will drink the all of the three and be merry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishmoney Posted October 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 How about settling over some green tea ? Much better for our health. I drink green tea all day long, iced. A bad habit I picked up in China Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.