» Γρήγορη πρόσβαση στην τελευταία ανάρτηση
Please add the following issuing entity.
Addition of notes has been requested
Those are not standard circulation notes. I think they are classified as promissory notes. “bank cheque” is in their name. Exonumia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darlehnskasse_Ost
“it was replaced … in 1922 by the Bank of Lithuania in Lithuania."
If you need reference book about Ukio bankas, period central bank manager released book about banks in 1940 with at least one page dedicated to this bank. He also had book about money history released in 1938 with some details about that period. Both books are in public domain and available on archive.org
"Based in Vilnius" is not correct as Lithuanian finance ministry confirmed this bank at the time when Vilnius was not under Lithuanian control. It might have been founded in Vilnius, but its central office was moved to Kaunas soon after. in 1940 bank had 27 regional offices and one central office in Kaunas.
It's clear these notes have been overlooked. What's also clear is that the notes from the Darlehnskasse Ost continued to circulate in Lithuania and, if this article is correct, continued to be produced for circulation until 1922. That doesn't exclude the possibility that other banks issued notes in this period. Looking at the text on the notes, they are exchangable for “German or Ost Mark”. That doesn't mean they weren't standard banknotes. Unfortunately, the term “promissory note” is being used on Numista as a proxy for exonumia when, in fact, many circulating notes are promissory, such as the Bank of England's.
The notes carry the names of both Vilnius and Kaunas, hence my reference to both. However, that's not exactly the most important thing here. If you have links to English translations of the books you mentioned, I'd be most interested.
Books are in 80 year old Lithuanian
https://archive.org/details/jurgutis-pinigai-1938
page 237-240 is about period currency.
“Since February 16, 1918 (declaration of independence) we had four types of money: 1. Russian rubles, 2 German marks, 3. Ost money (marks) and 4. our litas. USA dollars were commonly used too”.
https://archive.org/details/jurgutis-bankai-1940 page 295-296 is about Ukio bankas
tokul
Books are in 80 year old Lithuanian
That's a shame. Can you tell us what they say about these notes? I tried using Google translate on the text from these notes and it struggled, so I'm doubtful I could get a reliable translation of the books myself.
ceh2019
Can you tell us what they say about these notes?
Lithuanian bank of economy/industry and any its departments will pay this cheque provider specified amount of German or Ost marks.
Signatures of director (J.Vailokaitis) and treasurer.
economy/industry - “ūkis” has several meanings. Approximate translation of what it says as they do not use future tense. “100 year old Lithuanian”. In UK terms you would be listening to that orange hedge in the North.
Books do not talk about those notes.
Quote from other book (V.Terleckas - "Pinigai Lietuvoje 1915-1944", Vilnius 1992). “On February 26, 1919 temporary Lithuanian government issued decree which set that ost money to be called auksinas and their 1/100 part - skatikas.” Auksinas and skatikas is just local name for N#209570 these.
Thanks, I did wonder if “Economy” was the best translation but it will do for now. I see nothing so far to suggest these notes didn't circulate (they could easily have been included in the list under ost mark) and, from the condition of the notes in the images here, I'd say they probably did. Can I suggest we put them in the banknote catalogue and see if anyone else can find proof one way or the other?
your choice. But I would vote against creating new currency for it.
Dude who was running central bank for its seven first years is better source than wikipedia.
tokul
your choice. But I would vote against creating new currency for it.
Dude who was running central bank for its seven first years is better source than wikipedia.
Are we creating a new currency? Really, we're simply extending the ost mark from the German occupied territories to Lithuania. After all, ost mark is in the list from your source. I suppose we could call it the Auksinas but, since that name doesn't appear on the notes, it might be a bit confusing.
“Since February 16, 1918 (declaration of independence) we had four types of money: 1. Russian rubles, 2 German marks, 3. Ost money (marks) and 4. our litas.”
Your other post asks to create new currency.
tokul
“Since February 16, 1918 (declaration of independence) we had four types of money: 1. Russian rubles, 2 German marks, 3. Ost money (marks) and 4. our litas.”
Your other post asks to create new currency.
Yes, because the existing ost mark is only available in the database for the German occupied territories. I don't think there's any way of linking the two within the system.
The Ost Mark should be under ‘German Occupation of Russia’ as Lithuania did not become independent until 1918.
Aidan.
BCNumismatics
The Ost Mark should be under ‘German Occupation of Russia’ as Lithuania did not become independent until 1918.
Aidan.
If you look at the notes in question, you will see that they were issued after Lithuania's independence, between 1919 and 1920.
ceh2019
I see nothing so far to suggest these notes didn't circulate (they could easily have been included in the list under ost mark) and, from the condition of the notes in the images here, I'd say they probably did.
What evidence is there to suggest that they did circulate?
The condition is not relevant imho - old paper items do not need to be currency notes to end up in such a condition, or worse.
ceh2019
Can I suggest we put them in the banknote catalogue and see if anyone else can find proof one way or the other?
I think a robust discussion first would be better. Rather have something well-evidenced than putting it into the catalogue and having to remove it again.
SCWPM (16thed, p810) refers to them as ‘circulating checks’.
This suggests that they may have circulated as currency in some fashion.
However, are they banknotes by numista definitions? Look at other countries, and what is done with similar items. Also, SCWPM has many errors and omissions. I would always look for more than a single reliable reference.
I would consider that circulating checks are not banknotes.
@ceh2019 , I was referring to notes listed here;
http://banknote.ws/COLLECTION/countries/EUR/GER/GER-OCC.htm .
Aidan.
Hibernia
ceh2019
Can I suggest we put them in the banknote catalogue and see if anyone else can find proof one way or the other?
I think a robust discussion first would be better. Rather have something well-evidenced than putting it into the catalogue and having to remove it again.
SCWPM (16thed, p810) refers to them as ‘circulating checks’.
This suggests that they may have circulated as currency in some fashion.
However, are they banknotes by numista definitions? Look at other countries, and what is done with similar items. Also, SCWPM has many errors and omissions. I would always look for more than a single reliable reference.
I would consider that circulating checks are not banknotes.
We list other circulating cheques in the banknote catalogue, such as those from Iran and Zimbabwe. We also need to be careful that we understand what was meant by čekio, given that there's uncertainty about the meaning of the bank's name. The best way to get people to notice these hitherto overlooked notes is to add them to the catalogue. The worst that could then happen is that they be moved to exonumia.
Hibernia
ceh2019
Can I suggest we put them in the banknote catalogue and see if anyone else can find proof one way or the other?
I think a robust discussion first would be better. Rather have something well-evidenced than putting it into the catalogue and having to remove it again.
SCWPM (16thed, p810) refers to them as ‘circulating checks’.
This suggests that they may have circulated as currency in some fashion.
However, are they banknotes by numista definitions? Look at other countries, and what is done with similar items. Also, SCWPM has many errors and omissions. I would always look for more than a single reliable reference.
I would consider that circulating checks are not banknotes.
@Hibernia , http://banknote.ws/COLLECTION/countries/EUR/LIT/LIT-UBA.htm lists these as banknotes.
Bearer Cheques can be listed as banknotes, as they circulated as currency.
Aidan.
These notes have now been accepted into the catalogue, so it would be nice if the issuer could be added soon.
Those are bearer checks and not standard circulation notes. As per central bank manager from the times Ukio bankas was private deposit bank and not state controlled money issuer. In what world private banks are printing standard circulation notes?
tokul
Those are bearer checks and not standard circulation notes. As per central bank manager from the times Ukio bankas was private deposit bank and not state controlled money issuer. In what world private banks are printing standard circulation notes?
Trading banks have had licences to release currency notes into circulation.
This is true with Hong Kong, Northern Ireland, & Scotland at present.
Aidan.
tokul
Those are bearer checks and not standard circulation notes. As per central bank manager from the times Ukio bankas was private deposit bank and not state controlled money issuer. In what world private banks are printing standard circulation notes?
There are literally thousands of types of private banknotes that circulated as standard currency. Here's a small selection:
As you can see, they were issued in many different countries and across many years. Except for Scotland, Northern Ireland, Hong Kong and Macau, all have stopped issuing notes but that doesn't mean their issues should be excluded from the catalogue.
ceh2019
As you can see, they were issued in many different countries and across many years. Except for Scotland, Northern Ireland, Hong Kong and Macau, all have stopped issuing notes but that doesn't mean their issues should be excluded from the catalogue.
Actually, these two are government controlled issues, as are current issues of Scotland and Northern Ireland.
This one would be a good example of an Irish private bank issue which did not have regulation on the size of its note issue: N#564577
Η ζώνη ώρας που χρησιμοποιείται είναι η UTC+2:00.
Η ώρα είναι 11:39.