Kwangtung Province - Other versions are not listed under kwangtung

I understand that this coin is arguably a distinct regional issue intended for use only in kwangtung (though I frankly have not seen evidence that these were part of a distinct system of coinage different from the rest of the dynasty). However, even though this specific large type coin is categorised as a kwangtung regional issue, other variants like N#17768 (N#17768) or N#22475 (N#22475) are not. These are also all categorised the exact same in Hartill's Cast Chinese Coins and zeno.ru. I'm not sure what makes this one special compared to the rest to deem it a regional issue.

Furthermore, it is not like other provinces did not have similar treatments for guangxu tongbao and xuantong tongbao. Tianjin, Fujian, Jilin, Jiangsu and Wuchang all minted very similar distinct examples for the Guangxu tongbao. Why not categorise these as regional issues too? The same logic can be applied to Xuantong tongbaos; none of them are categorised as regional issues. Where is the line drawn?

Thanks all.

If nobody has any protest, I'll change the other 2 to match but I'd like an opinion first.

electricity

If nobody has any protest, I'll change the other 2 to match but I'd like an opinion first.

Shouldn't it be the other way, with this one changed to Empire of China to match the others? As far as I'm aware these cash coins were still issued under the authority of the central government, not the provincial government.

Caljathiel

electricity

If nobody has any protest, I'll change the other 2 to match but I'd like an opinion first.

Shouldn't it be the other way, with this one changed to Empire of China to match the others? As far as I'm aware these cash coins were still issued under the authority of the central government, not the provincial government.

I agree with you here. But this item was set this way for a reason, and I also had a similar conversation about xinjiang pieces under qing that essentially said, since they were not intended to circulate outside the region and were produced for the region, they were designated separately under “South Xinjiang” in Numista (https://en.numista.com/forum/topic170770.html). The fact this coin was set that way makes me think that the person who catalogued it believed it falls under the same category.

However, in my personal opinion while I can see the argument for xinjiang pieces this one makes no sense. Sure, it was minted in kwangtung and intended for use within kwangtung but it would still be considered legal tender across the empire and you can make the exact same argument for all provincial coin mints; yet we don't have 50 issuers for the 50 local mints in operation. While xinjiang is obviously distinct and separate to a reasonable extent I don't see this being true in Kwangtung. The only reason I'm considering to change the others is because of the previous thread and the fact this one was clearly intentionally set to Kwangtung province.

Furthermore, I believe that south xinjiang hongqian did not circulate concurrently with normal qing cash, especially outside the region of xinjiang, and struck vs cast guangxu tongbaos and similar did circulate across provinces concurrently, but I do not have a reliable source for this; I might have picked it up from a book somewhere and forgot where. This is another reason why the guangxus shouldn't be categorised at the provincial level.

On the other hand, seeing that you and I are the only ones in this thread and nobody else has given input, I might just go ahead and change it to generally be under Empire of China based on the arguments I presented here, I'll give it a day or so to let other people voice their opinions if anyone else wants to.

Caljathiel

electricity

If nobody has any protest, I'll change the other 2 to match but I'd like an opinion first.

Shouldn't it be the other way, with this one changed to Empire of China to match the others? As far as I'm aware these cash coins were still issued under the authority of the central government, not the provincial government.

Okay, I did some further research. Unlike many other Chinese cash coins, this one was tagged with its Yeoman number. I looked it up in the Krause catalog and under there, Chinese provinces are listed separately. Probably the user that tagged it under Kwangtung did so using Krause. 

We cannot take the Krause approach for Chinese coins. It groups all cast patterns and Beijing minted coins under “China, Empire”, but all coins minted outside of Beijing are listed as under each individual province. This approach contradicts the entirety of cash coins listed on the Numista catalog so the correct choice is to change this one example to comply with the rest. I will do it immediately.

I came across this issue independently while going through some of my Chinese coins, and then realized that a discussion about this particular topic had already been started. I will state up-front that I am by no means an expert in Chinese coins.

I sort Chinese Empire issues in my collection as follows:

1: Classic, “cash” style coins, bronze or brass, with a center hole, and the mint name in Manchu script on the reverse

Example: N#6817

2. Bronze or brass cash coins without a center hole and with the mintmark of the issuing mint incuse on a large “dot” on the reverse

Example: N#243814 (the Y10x series, where “X” is typically a letter, but could also be a letter-dot-number

I classify coins that fall under categories 1 and 2 above as general issues of the Empire of China.

3 Coins that have the issuing province name written out on the obverse

Example: N#27137 (a Fukien province example)

I classify coins that fall under category 3 as provincial issues under the Empire of China.

Numista appears to follow this same general organization of Chinese Empire coins as well (with a few exceptions as discussed in this email chain).

The N-6817 coin is an outlier/exception as it is binned by Numista under Kwangtung Province, while it would seem to fit better under the general issues for the Empire of China. Similar looking coins (albeit smaller and with round center holes); https://en.numisat.com/22475

are binned by Numista under the general issues of the Empire of China, not provincial issues of Kwangtung Province.

I support moving the N-6817 coins from Kwangtung Province to the Empire of China.

thoram2

I came across this issue independently while going through some of my Chinese coins, and then realized that a discussion about this particular topic had already been started. I will state up-front that I am by no means an expert in Chinese coins.

 

I sort Chinese Empire issues in my collection as follows:

 

1: Classic, “cash” style coins, bronze or brass, with a center hole, and the mint name in Manchu script on the reverse

Example: N#6817

 

2. Bronze or brass cash coins without a center hole and with the mintmark of the issuing mint incuse on a large “dot” on the reverse

Example: N#243814 (the Y10x series, where “X” is typically a letter, but could also be a letter-dot-number

 

I classify coins that fall under categories 1 and 2 above as general issues of the Empire of China.

 

3 Coins that have the issuing province name written out on the obverse

Example: N#27137 (a Fukien province example)

 

I classify coins that fall under category 3 as provincial issues under the Empire of China.

 

Numista appears to follow this same general organization of Chinese Empire coins as well (with a few exceptions as discussed in this email chain).

 

The N-6817 coin is an outlier/exception as it is binned by Numista under Kwangtung Province, while it would seem to fit better under the general issues for the Empire of China. Similar looking coins (albeit smaller and with round center holes); https://en.numisat.com/22475

are binned by Numista under the general issues of the Empire of China, not provincial issues of Kwangtung Province.

 

I support moving the N-6817 coins from Kwangtung Province to the Empire of China.

 

 

 

Yes. Though I have submitted the edit weeks and weeks ago, no change has come. I have asked a master referee to take a look, yet no change has come from that either. Hopefully something will change