Vichy France is nothing compared to all of the other Frances - specifically, at least five Republics, two Empires, and some number of Kingdoms that I forget. The dismemberment of France would be very messy indeed (and essentially pointless, considering the continuity between coins issued by vastly differing governments).
Me neither. There is no need to split this way. If we need to split anyway, we would have to select a bigger minting year range.
Administrateur du catalogue, référent de nombreuses nations antiques et de la Lorraine.
Catalogue administrator, numerous Antique nations and Lorraine referee.
If anything we could separate France by 'dynasties', where the different governments are separated (Mexico as an example). Otherwise there is no difference.
Why Yemen is split 5 times is beyond question.
Kenny
- Verifying your Asian and British-territorial coins everyday with the best quality photos and the best information.
Citeer: "KennyG"No, regions are alphabetical, governmental changes are chronological
Yes but they show up the same way on Numista.
For example on a coin page for a 1 peso coin from modern Mexico, it says, Mexico (Estados Unidos) and on the coin page for a pfennig from Prussia, it says, German states (Prussia)!!
Citeer: "KennyG"Dynasties are chronological, regions are timeless. I've adopted dynasties for Afghanistan and Vietnam, really does help sort out the coinage.
It was only when I split the Delhi sultanates in dynasties that I started to understand their coins. Sometimes its very useful.
The main purpose of moving coins around is to make things easier for collectors, to simplify the catalog, and to be as historically accurate as possible, separating by dynasty achieves this goal, so does combining Congo and Ruanda-Urundi
Kenny
- Verifying your Asian and British-territorial coins everyday with the best quality photos and the best information.
