Additional USA territorial issuers

Additional sub-sections should be added under United States (pre-federal and private/territorial) for each of the pre-union entities. This would allow a number of existing banknote pages to be catalogued under their respective issuers, including:

• Michigan, (British rule) (1763-1796)
• Michigan, Territory of 
• Minnesota, Territory of 
• Kansas, Territory of 
• Nebraska, Territory of 

"Colony of" should also be added (in italics) to follow the names of the former British colonies (e.g. Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts Bay etc.) Do I correctly observe that years in brackets are only to be used for entities under rulers that are currently considered to have been foreign?

Hi Titus! I've included the issuers you requested (please check if they're all correct).

Regarding your other request to include the term "colony of," please specify which ones you would like to include.

Regards,

Vladimir

Thanks for the additions @vladthiengo 

Here is the list of the names to be modified:

California Republic

Colorado Territory

Florida, Territory of

Georgia, Province of

Kentucky (British Settlement)

Kansas Territory

Nebraska Territory

New Hampshire, Province of

New Jersey, Province of

New York, Province of

North Carolina, Province of

Oregon Territory

Pennsylvania, Province of

Rhode Island and Providence Plantations

Utah Territory

Virginia, Province of

I'd like to see Massachusetts renamed as “Massachusetts Bay Colony” and “Massachusetts Bay, Province of” added as a separate issuer, as the former was self-governing. I also prefer using “Province of” for the former British colonies, as they were officially known as such. This naming convention would differentiate the individually-established/company “colonies” from their British-governed successors. 

Could you also rename Alaska as “Alaska (Russian)”, and create “Alaska, District of” and “Alaska, Territory of” as additional issuers? This would help to differentiate between the Russian and American items.

“Territory of” need not precede Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Oregon and Utah territories, as their respective areas didn't exactly correspond to their current namesake states like Alaska's and Florida's did. By the way, Kansas Territory is currently missing from the list of issuers and should be included as well.

Thank you!

Titus

p.s. Currently one cannot add notes under “United States (pre-federal and private/territorial)”, only under its subsections. A separate section for “United Colonies” should be created for notes such as this: 4 Dollars ("Continental Currency")

titus17

Thanks for the additions @vladthiengo 

 

Here is the list of the names to be modified:

 

California Republic

Colorado Territory

Florida, Territory of

Georgia, Province of

Kentucky (British Settlement)

Kansas Territory

Nebraska Territory

New Hampshire, Province of

New Jersey, Province of

New York, Province of

North Carolina, Province of

Oregon Territory

Pennsylvania, Province of

Rhode Island and Providence Plantations

Utah Territory

Virginia, Province of

 

I'd like to see Massachusetts renamed as “Massachusetts Bay Colony” and “Massachusetts Bay, Province of” added as a separate issuer, as the former was self-governing. I also prefer using “Province of” for the former British colonies, as they were officially known as such. This naming convention would differentiate the individually-established/company “colonies” from their British-governed successors. 

Hi Titus! I believe I've already made the adjustments you requested. Please check if everything is correct!

titus17

Could you also rename Alaska as “Alaska (Russian)”, and create “Alaska, District of” and “Alaska, Territory of” as additional issuers? This would help to differentiate between the Russian and American items.

 

Regarding Alaska, what we have in the current registry are only "Russian" emissions, right? Would we still keep it within the American administration, or should we rethink this?

For "district" and "territory," would both be under American administration?

vladthiengo

Regarding Alaska, what we have in the current registry are only "Russian" emissions, right? Would we still keep it within the American administration, or should we rethink this?

 

For "district" and "territory," would both be under American administration?

“Alaska (Russian)”, “Alaska, District of” and “Alaska, Territory of” can be shown as sub-sections under United States (pre-federal and private/territorial) in like manner as the Danish West Indies (1730-1917) and the United States Virgin Islands (1917-date) are currently listed under United States Virgin Islands.

The Imperial Russian flag should be used for Russian Alaska, while the U.S. flag (with 48-stars?) should be used for both the Territory and District of Alaska.

vladthiengo

Hi Titus! I believe I've already made the adjustments you requested. Please check if everything is correct!

Thanks again for the additions and modifications.

I can see the renamed Massachusetts Bay Colony issuer but am not yet seeing “Massachusetts Bay, Province of” on the list of issuers. The tree flag could be used for the former, while the latter can incorporate a red ensign.

Considering items such as this: 4 Reales - Charles III (Ascension of Charles III to the throne), I realize that Florida, Territory of should be renamed as “Florida (Spanish)” instead.

titus17

vladthiengo

Hi Titus! I believe I've already made the adjustments you requested. Please check if everything is correct!

Thanks again for the additions and modifications.

 

I can see the renamed Massachusetts Bay Colony issuer but am not yet seeing “Massachusetts Bay, Province of” on the list of issuers. The tree flag could be used for the former, while the latter can incorporate a red ensign.

 

Considering items such as this: 4 Reales - Charles III (Ascension of Charles III to the throne), I realize that Florida, Territory of should be renamed as “Florida (Spanish)” instead.

 

Hello!

"Massachusetts Bay, Province of" is already in the catalog. 

It might not appear for you yet because there are no items registered for this issuer. If you need help with this, let me know.

Regarding the flags, I can't include the images here... I'll check with the other administrators.

I changed the name of the Florida you requested here. This change should appear tomorrow. =)

titus17

vladthiengo

Regarding Alaska, what we have in the current registry are only "Russian" emissions, right? Would we still keep it within the American administration, or should we rethink this?

 

For "district" and "territory," would both be under American administration?

“Alaska (Russian)”, “Alaska, District of” and “Alaska, Territory of” can be shown as sub-sections under United States (pre-federal and private/territorial) in like manner as the Danish West Indies (1730-1917) and the United States Virgin Islands (1917-date) are currently listed under United States Virgin Islands.

 

The Imperial Russian flag should be used for Russian Alaska, while the U.S. flag (with 48-stars?) should be used for both the Territory and District of Alaska.

Regarding Alaska, I understand what you mentioned. I only have this concern: when I rename the current issuer "Alaska" to "Alaska (Russian)", all existing (mainly coins) registries will have a registered issuer that does not correspond to reality.

Perhaps it would be interesting for you to coordinate this with the coin referee regarding adjustments to the registries so that there is no inaccurate issuer information.

Best,

Vladimir

@vladthiengo I've given a bit more thought about Alaska and I think it'd be better to maintain the current issuer for the U.S. administration of Alaska, seeing that Territory of Alaska (1912-1959) is already set up as a ruling authority. An additional ruling authority should be created for the District of Alaska (1867 to 1912) (seeing that there are no items for the Department of Alaska). The Russian kopek pages can be moved to Alaska (Russian) as a new issuer.

Speaking of ruling authorities, could you add the kings for Spanish Florida (Charles III & Charles IV)?

Thanks,

Titus

p.s. I'm currently unable to specify United States (pre-federal and private/territorial) as an issuer, only its subsections. Do you think a separate issuer should be created for the United Colonies (pre-1783 Treaty of Paris)?

titus17

@vladthiengo I've given a bit more thought about Alaska and I think it'd be better to maintain the current issuer for the U.S. administration of Alaska, seeing that Territory of Alaska (1912-1959) is already set up as a ruling authority. An additional ruling authority should be created for the District of Alaska (1867 to 1912) (seeing that there are no items for the Department of Alaska). The Russian kopek pages can be moved to Alaska (Russian) as a new issuer.

Hello Titus!

I created a new ruling authority for "District of Alaska (1867-1912)", as you mentioned.

For Russian Alaska, I noticed that "Russian Territory (1799-1867)" already exists, and the registered issues are already within this period. Would it actually be necessary to create a new issuer "Alaska (Russian)"?

vladthiengo

For Russian Alaska, I noticed that "Russian Territory (1799-1867)" already exists, and the registered issues are already within this period. Would it actually be necessary to create a new issuer "Alaska (Russian)"?

I'd thought to have a separate issuer in like manner as the Danish West Indies (1730-1917). Territories under foreign rule had boundaries that don't correspond with present-day states. Considering that the Russian-American Company also had settlements in present-day California, I'm now thinking it'd make more sense to have the newly-created issuer named Alyaska & Fort Ross (Russian).

Titus