“Vietnam - Empire” Reorganization

Hello Numista users and admins,

I‘d like to formally suggest a reorganization of the “Vietnam - Empire” issuer and the coins filed under it. As it is now, it can be difficult to navigate and many coins seem to be misattributed. I’ve come up with new system to be considered:

1. All separate issuers (Đàng Trong/Ngoài and Dynastic Rebels) be consolidated with the other dynasties of Vietnam as their own currency. 

Considering there are so many dynastic rebels, another solution would be to make another issuer titled “Dynastic Rebels” and make each rebel  its own currency under it. 

2. I think that the “Cash(970-1945)“ currency should be deleted and the currencies organized as such:

Vietnam - Empire:

Đinh dynasty - Tiền (960-980)

Former Lê dynasty - Tiền (980-1009)
Lý dynasty - Tiền (1009-1225)

Trần dynasty - Tiền (1225-1400)

Hồ dynasty -Tiền (1400-1407)

*Ming occupation of Vietnam - Tiền (1400-1428)
Lê dynasty - Tiền (1428-1527)

Mạc dynasty - Tiền (1527-1593)

Mạc at Cao Bằng - Tiền (1593-1677)

Revival Lê dynasty - Tiền (1533-1789)

Đàng Ngoài - Tiền (1545-1787)

Đàng Trong - Tiền (1558-1802)

Tây Sơn dynasty - Tiền (1778-1802)

Qing occupation of Vietnam - Tiền (1788-1789)

Nguyễn dynasty -  Tiền (1802-1945)

*Unknown Issues 

Dynastic Rebels*:

Trần Tuân rebellion - Tiền (1511)

Trần Cao rebellion - Tiền (1516-1521)

Ninh Xá rebellion - Tiền (1739-1741)

Lê Văn Khôi revolt - Tiền (1833-1835)

Nông Văn Vân rebellion - Tiền (1833-1835)

*I’d recommend that An Pháp and related cash be moved to unknown issues and replaced with the rebel coins cast at the time (rebellions which may be individually labeled in their titles or descriptions):

 Thiện Khánh Thông Bảo,  Vĩnh Thiên Thông Bảo (Lê Nga rebellion), Vĩnh Ninh Thông Bảo (Lộc Bình Vương rebellion)-  see: https://www.zeno.ru/showgallery.php?cat=3716)

Some of Toda’s other rebel attributions are highly contested so I’d recommend they be moved to unknown issues as well the Toda attribution can be noted in the description). 
 

I know that my reorganization idea is a major overhaul, but I’d hope it or some changes I’ve suggested in it may be accepted. I’d like to help in any way I can.

Thank you! 

Just going to bump this.

Does anyone have any comments, suggestions, or improvements on this? 
 

Sorry for the delay in response, and thank you for the proposal.

So, to me it sounds like the proposal is:

- to handle the current “sub-issuer” structure instead as Ruling Authorities.  The Dynasties and Rebel Groups would just be Ruling Authorities under the top-level issuer Vietnam, Empire.  We are doing this with other issuers, so it can make sense as long as we don't have other enduring sovereign states, which should be treated as sub-issuers.. 

- to have only one currency, the Tien covering the entire time period.  This would presume we can define other denominations (Cash, Van, etc) as a sub-division of the Tien.  Is this the case? 

Any chance there is a reference that describes the currency in these earlier periods? 

Your understanding of my proposal seems to be correct but I’ll specify a little more. 
 

“Vietnam - Empire” and “Dynastic Rebels” would be two distinct issuers with the dynasties/rebellions listed below them as individual currencies. Ruling authorities (emperors/rebellion leaders) would be listed on an individual coin basis. 
 

Ex:

N#97780

This page is good but the “Currency” would be replaced with “Đinh dynasty - Quán (960-980)” or “Đinh dynasty - Văn (960-980)” or “Đinh dynasty - Đồng (960-980)”

As far as  the “Tiền” denomination goes, a quick Wikipedia search seems to say that contrary to what I thought, “Tiền” isn’t the highest value in the Vietnamese currency system but rather a “Quán” (string of cash) is. 
 

https://art-hanoi.com/toda/06

https://art-hanoi.com/library/articlethierry.pdf

Toda and Thierry seem to support this but give insight into the fact that the values of Vietnamese currency were never constant. I would probably that for simplicity’s sake, “Văn” or “Đồng” might be the best currency name. Văn and Đồng are both traditional names for the cash coins and may avoid the trouble that comes with valuing them in terms of a string or tiền subunits. 

 

Currencies should not be divided along dynasty lines, if the currency was still the same.

I can understand that; however, I think it could be argued for considering the currency’s constant fluctuation and mandates regarding its value between dynasties. Constant changes were brought about, even if traditional units stayed the same. 

I’m mainly suggesting it as to be a better method of consolidating the issuer and making navigation easier because it stands now, everything is out of order. Dynastic line currencies might be easier on the eye and more user-friendly in finding their coin in such an expansive series. 

If there is another method that would achieve the result in my proposal without using different currencies over dynastic lines, I’m open to it. 

NoodleAioli

I can understand that; however, I think it could be argued for considering the currency’s constant fluctuation and mandates regarding its value between dynasties. Constant changes were brought about, even if traditional units stayed the same. 

 

I’m mainly suggesting it as to be a better method of consolidating the issuer and making navigation easier because it stands now, everything is out of order. Dynastic line currencies might be easier on the eye and more user-friendly in finding their coin in such an expansive series. 

 

If there is another method that would achieve the result in my proposal without using different currencies over dynastic lines, I’m open to it. 

Yes, the solution is to attach rulers to groups of rulers (here, dynasties)

I think the current structure we see was set up when we were creating different currencies for periods like dynasties.

However, we are trying to not do this any more if the main currency units stay the same over time, even if their ratios may have changed (we also see this in medieval European currencies where the equivalence of billon to silver types , or of silver to gold denominations was constantly fluctuating, but the named denominations remained the same).

So the current thinking is: to have one currency (cash) covering the medieval to early modern dynasties, and a more detailed currency system covering the 19th-20th century.

The navigation should be improved by using the Ruler Group - Ruing Authority hierarchy, as mentioned by Compendium.