Order of Malta as separated issuer request

I was reluctant to make this request, but some users motivated me a try. If someone dislike those kind of requests, please just jump to the next topic.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, for the happiness of coin collectors, we request the creation of the issuer “Order of Malta”

NUMISTA RULES:

According to the site rules when creating an issuer:

Some items […] are issued by an entity different from the government of the state.

Source: (https://en.numista.com/help/add-or-modify-an-issuing-entity-in-the-catalogue-193.html)

OFFICIAL NUMISTA GUIDELINES :

Following the guidelines:

 - Post a request on the forum ✔️

 - Name of the Entity in English, French and Spanish.✔️

     English: “Order of Malta”

     French:  “Ordre de Malte”

     Spanish: “Orden de Malta”

- Range of operations ✔️

    1521 - 1798 (The Knights names are already in the Numista database)

- Wikidata code Q190353  ✔️

- link to reference catalogue ✔️

https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/world/malta-order-of-grano-km-296.1-1776-cuid-1149658-duid-1446199

- Records on Numista to be part of the issuer ✔️

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/index.php?e=malte&r=&ct=coin&im1=&im2=&tb=y&tc=y&tn=y&tp=y&tt=y&cat=y&ru=&ca=3&no=&v=&i=&b=&d=&u=&a=&dg=1736-1797&m=&f=&t=&w=&mt=&g=&se=&c=&wi=&sw=&ie=&p=2

HISTORY

On March 1530, Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, gave the islands to the Knights Hospitaller under the leadership of Frenchman Philippe Villiers de L'Isle-Adam, in perpetual lease for which they had to pay an annual tribute of a single Maltese Falcon. These knights, a military religious order also known as the Order of St John and later as the Knights of Malta, had been driven out of Rhodes by the Ottoman Empire in 1522. The Knights Hospitaller ruled island of Malta and Gozo between 1530 and 1798.
 

REASONS:

It is part of coin collecting, but not mandatory, to understand the historical context of our collections, the community of collectors agreeds that it best visaulizes the period of the Knights Hospitaller rule as an important but well divided historical period of Malta.

We understand the coins of the above period are issued by a  different entity of a sovereign state.

1 - According to one of official sites of Order of Mata,  in bold letters: "The Order of Malta  began minting its own coins immediately after the conquest of the island of Rhodes "
Source: https://www.ordinedimaltaitalia.org/article/numismatica

2 - Krause lists as Order of Malta, as most of the coin collectors are familiar with:

3 - Wikipedia and its several sources, as already discussed here on the forum exhaustively:

About Order of Malta:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta

About Knights Hospitaller:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Hospitaller

were even have a picutre of a coin issued by the knights

and more important:

About The Maltese Scudo, where it says: “The scudo (plural scudi) is the official currency of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta”  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltese_scudo

4 - The Flag of current issuer of Malta is from 1964, a period very far from the historical coins of the Order of Malta, to preserve the historical status, a separated issuer would be more fair.

Flag: https://www.fotw.info/flags/smom.html

5 - The issuer was separated in the past with no argues from anyone that we could find. But the merging created frustration.

6 - Chiefacoins has detailed information about the issuer, treated as a separated entity:

Source: http://www.chiefacoins.com/Database/Countries/Order_of_Malta.htm

7 - The Order of Malta still exists as United Nations Observer, and also is treated as an order and not as a country.

Source: https://orderofmaltaamerican.org/about-the-order/permanent-observer-to-un/

8 - Coins Weekly have a great article about the coins of the Order of Malta, the modern Malta is not even mentioned.

Source: https://coinsweekly.com/coin-rarities-of-the-military-order-of-malta/

9 - According to  page 24-25 of the book “Coins of the grand masters of the Order of Malta : or Knights Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem”

The knights minted coins even before settling on Malta, this complements Malta as a country disassociated with the Order of Malta in a numismatic aspect.

Source: https://archive.org/details/cu31924029793092/page/n25/mode/2up

10 - The Bank of Malta says the first issued coins are from 1972. A modern world far from the historical coins of the Order of Malta.

Source: https://www.centralbankmalta.org/currency

CONCLUSION

There is no reason to not give the Order of Malta coins the status they had before, there are various different type of collectors like the historical enthusiast, the accumulator, those who love any shining round money and so on, the separated issuer will make every type of Numista member satisfied, se we propose the following:

We already know the voting system of the requests are useless, so we will just ignore that.

Also, this request is about the issued coins in the years range proposed, the modern (now moved to exonumia) coins of the Order are not the scope of this thread.  That is matter for another topic.

Thank you for reading.

Geison

Hi, thanks for all those elements!

A few additional ones:

- order of Malta is already searchable in the search engine :

It is made to help collectors who use Krause naming, even if as you explained above Order of Malta was not the real name at the time, but Knights Hospitallers.

This organisation name appears by the way in each entry:

Thank you for the answer and the palliative solution.

But we want separated issuer as many of the examples below, we just think there is no explanation why would be treated differently.

I can see your excellent job creating everyday lot of new issuers especially in Islamic dynasties, this one is just one more 😉

As I said in other threads “why”, because we want to sync our collections with Numista.  And because as explained in the first post, it is as should be by the site guidelines.

Why not?

Sorry I should have been clearer. By our new “period issuers” feature, we currently cut only when there was a change of name of the country. And we do not consider “Order of Malta” as an actual country name. The expression was not used before 1825.

Malta was an archipel ruled at this time by an order of Knights Hospitallers.

But the idea to extend the usage of period issuers beyond the changes of name, is under discussion here: https://en.numista.com/forum/topic138112.html

I actually launched this suggestion ;-)

You didn't even read the request.

What about the coins minted before the Order settled in Malta? (Not in the catalogue but is written in the excellent book mentioned in reason 9).

The Order minted coins for the Order, not for Malta. So it is not just a name changed, but a separated entity.

Geison

You didn't even read the request.

 

What about the coins minted before the Order settled in Malta? (Not in the catalogue but is written in the excellent book mentioned in reason 9).

 

The Order minted coins for the Order, not for Malta. So it is not just a name changed, but a separated entity.

Sorry I should have been clearer. By our guidelines what constitutes an issuer on Numista is a territory on which circulated currencies.

So, if the order minted coins before settling in Malta, we would reference them in this previous territory. 

The only reason why we would in our guidelines divide coins minted by the order from following coins which circulated in malta would be that those coins were intended to circulate in a larger area than Malta. 

For instance, if at this time Hospitallers were also ruling Sicily (I say that randomly) and were issuing same coins for both Malta and Sicily, we would create a new specific issuer for this territory “Sicily and Malta”.

I hope I helped understanding our guidelines :-)

Ok, already knew you wouldn't change anything.

At least we tried.

Thanks for all the support of the fellow collectors and Numista members, but is not this time.

Geison

Ok, already knew you wouldn't change anything.

 

At least we tried.

Thanks for all the support of the fellow collectors and Numista members, but is not this time.

I feel I took all the time needed to explain our current Guidelines. I did not accepted or rejected the request, as we need time for members to read it and maybe other elements to the discussion. I even pointed you to another thread I personally launched suggesting to do exactly what you request, not for Malta alone but for the entire catalogue. Because I sincerely believe we need rules which work everywhere, not case by case approach based on who is louder on each topic…

Also an important precision about what you wrote  in the first post:

 

NUMISTA RULES:

 

According to the site rules when creating an issuer:

 

Some items […] are issued by an entity different from the government of the state.

Source: (https://en.numista.com/help/add-or-modify-an-issuing-entity-in-the-catalogue-193.html)

This page you linked is about “issuing entities”, not at all the same thing as “issuing authorities” (also called “issuers”); I agree naming can create confusion though ^^
Here the correct page for guidelines about them: https://en.numista.com/help/add-or-modify-an-issuing-authority-in-the-catalogue-191.html

To explain what are issuing entities, here an example: 

More proofs the Order of Malta had their own coins and deserve a separated status, maybe unique in the catalog.

https://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2018-10-04/business-news/The-700-year-minting-history-of-the-Order-of-Malta-6736197261

Actually the entire numismatic world treat as Order of Malta the old coins (and the new ones, moved to exonumia).

Unfortunelly Numista guidelines will hidden the flag of the order inside the modern Malta.

Geison

More proofs the Order of Malta had their own coins and deserve a separated status, maybe unique in the catalog.

 

https://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2018-10-04/business-news/The-700-year-minting-history-of-the-Order-of-Malta-6736197261

 

Actually the entire numismatic world treat as Order of Malta the old coins (and the new ones, moved to exonumia).

 

Unfortunelly Numista guidelines will hidden the flag of the order inside the modern Malta.

But then you would also move all the coins attached to Rhodes? They never were attached to “Order of Malta” on Numista (without anyone complaining, by the way), whereas in the article you linked they are fully part of Knights hopistallers history of minting; which is, on the contrary, an excellent proof that the name “Order of Malta” is not relevant for a catalogue built on issuers (as it wouldn't make sense to put pre-Malta coins under “Order of Malta”).

Interesting, then we should have the Order of Knights of Rhodes and Order of Malta.

Interesting you treat our requests as “people complaining”.

But I will not argue, thank you for your excellent job creating, separating and merging issuers.

Hello,

Thank you Geison for raising this topic and to all for sharing your opinions.
 

I believe we should be consistent in our approach when dealing with issuers, rulers and groups of rulers on the Numista catalogue, while still making sure we don't deviate too much from the literature and collector habits.

The Order of Malta (for simplification purpose, I use this approximate name here and in the rest of my message) is an organization that ruled over Rhodes from 1310 to 1522, over Malta from 1530 to 1798. Today, it is considered as a “sovereign entity”, headquartered in Rome, with diplomatic relationships but no territory. The Order issued coins during their rule over Rhodes, during their rule over Malta and collector coins since 1961.

Here are the definitions in our catalogue guidelines:

An issuer is any:

• organised community (for example, Australia, Commune of Nice, Abbey of Saint Gall, Rauraci tribe),
• association of such communities (for example, Eurozone, West African States, joint notgeld issuers), 

with a claimed right to issue currency.

The ruling authority is an individual head of state represented on numismatic or exonumia items (for example, Charlemagne). Heads of state are understood in a broad sense, including monarchs, regents, governors, lords, ranking nobles or clergy, leaders, officers, usurpers, etc.

From the summary I mentioned above and the definitions, I consider that:

• Rhodes and Malta are issuers, which were ruled by the grandmasters of the Order of Malta during part of their history.
• The contemporary Order of Malta is an issuer.

This is what was implemented in the Numista catalogue a few week ago, and I am convinced this is the correct approach according to our guidelines.

Coins issued by the Order of Malta in Rhodes are set with the issuer “Rhodes” and rulers that are grandmasters of the Order of Malta.

Coins issued by the Order of Malta in Malta are set with the issuer “Malta” and rulers that are grandmasters of the Order of Malta (with a specific ruler group to distinguish from the French and British rulers).

Coins issued by the Order of Malta since 1961 are set with the issuer “Order of Malta” and rulers that are grandmasters of the Order of Malta.
 

I understand that part of the issue raised in this topic is that the coins issued since 1961 are in the Exonumia category. As a result, the issuer “Order of Malta” does not appear in the list of issuers of the Coins category. They are categorized as exonumia because, even though the Order of Malta is “sovereign”, their emissions are collector pieces only: they don't circulate anywhere and they have no legal tender status. In this respect, they are equivalent to the fantasy coins issued by many micronations and fantasy nations. The only difference is the “sovereign” status of the Order of Malta: that's why they are not categorized as “Exonumia › Fantasy currency” but “Exonumia › Official collector currency”.

Now, I would also like to consider the literature and collector habits. The best way to do so is by looking at the Krause catalogues.

• The coins of the Rhodes period are not in scope of their catalogues, which start in 1600.
• The coins issued by the Order in Malta are listed on the page 1186 and following of the Standard Catalog of World Coins 1701-1800 (7th edition). They are listed for the country Malta and the “Sovereign Order” is shown as a ruler/period/sub-section.

• The coins issued by the Order of Malta are nowhere to be found in the Standard Catalog of World Coins 1901-2000 (46th edition, 2019) or the Standard Catalog of World Coins 2001-Date (13th edition, 2019). They are listed in Unusual World Coins (6th edition) for the country Order of Malta.

In both cases, Numista is now aligned with these versions of the Krause catalogues: coins of the Malta period are categorized as coins with issuer/country “Malta” and the collector coins since 1961 are categorized as unusual/exonumia with issuer/country “Order of Malta”.

Well, we understand your point of view, the word of the boss is the word of the boss!

Thank you for answering and explaining.

Geison

-----------------------------------------------------------

For the unhappy sample of the upvotes, I would suggest:

• Do not stick to the catalog, do your own separation or merging try to be happy with the collection, a hobby must be something always enjoyable.

• Optional sites with different guidelines:

1.  https://colnect.com/en/coins/series/country/325-Malta_Sovereign_Military_Order_of
2. https://en.ucoin.net/catalog/?country=order_of_malta
3. https://web.maktun.com/catalog/country/18117

For information,
- The coins of the Order of Malta (1530-1798) in Malta are in the list of coins of Malta under the title Malte-Scudo (1530-1825)

- The coins of the Order of Malta (1310-1522) in Rhodes east called Order of the Knights of Rhodes (1310-1522), placed under Eastern Latin States Frankish Greece, and Rhodes is under Greece (Ancient)

- Coins of the Order of Malta (1968-present) are in Exonumia country Malta

Malta and Rhodes are territories, while the Order of Malta is an issuer, which is confusing

Also, for information, since the Krause is no longer issued, I guess Numismaster is the best approach if used as literature.

https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/world/malta-order-of-grano-km-296.1-1776-cuid-1149658-duid-1446199

Ando also, seems all other sites of the internet are wrong about the collectors habits. But we should respect the Numista new guidelines.

I'm really confused with so much changes occuring in a short period and worried about the lack of a consistent definition for issuer.

I think it's better to discuss a full definition before small changes, because this changes are annoying the collectors.

For example, Xavier said that Order of Malta is sovereign and has no territory, but Seborga is not sovereign ‘de facto' and its territory belongs to Italy. So why is Seborga considered an issuer?!  the same applies to many others.

Another example: Palau is sovereign and has its territory, but their coins are collector coins only.

So far and so on. The point is that the absence of criteria leaves room for subjective decisions of the referees and leads to many conflicts without a clear basis for resolution.

CREPOSUC

For information,
[…]

- Coins of the Order of Malta (1968-present) are in Exonumia country Malta

[…]

As explained above, the coins of the Order of Malta since 1961 are in the exonumia section with issuer Order of Malta.
 

rodrigo.queiroz

I'm really confused with so much changes occuring in a short period and worried about the lack of a consistent definition for issuer.

 

I think it's better to discuss a full definition before small changes, because this changes are annoying the collectors.

You'll find an extract of the definition in my message above. Sovereignty is not part of the definition.
The full definition is available at: https://en.numista.com/help/add-or-modify-an-issuing-authority-in-the-catalogue-191.html