" A Happy Blessed and Prosperous 2013"
and that all your hopes and aspirations come true for 2013!
What a Blessed and Prosperous 2012 has been for me.......................................it is really GOOD ................despite all the "crabby Euro screw-ups, US fiscal cliff rubbish, end of the world Mayan nonsense, etc................" I've made Good enough in the equity market to buy notes that I wanted, go on GOOD holidays to neighbouring Malaysia thrice, Hong Kong once and had just returned from the United States after fifteen GOOD and enjoyable days, made some contributions into the GOOD and world renowned Owen Linzmayer's documented chapters of The Banknote Book.
Ahhhh.............wonder if you have been sharp enough to notice the number of "GOOD" that I have deliberately inserted. Why..........your GOODself may enquire?
Well, the word GOOD in Dictionary.com defines:
Adjective: of high quality
Noun: excellence or merit
The following 17th March 1911 Straits Settlement $1.00 is defined as a GOOD note!
International Bank Note Society defination of a GOOD banknote:
A well worn and heavily used note. Normal damage from prolonged circulation will include strong multiple folds and creases, stains, pinholes, and/or staple holes, dirt, discoloration, edge tears, center hole, rounded corners and an overall unattractive appearance. No large pieces of the note may be missing. Graffiti is commonly seen on notes in Good condition.
Has any renowned numismatic society or establishment ever thought of correcting the grading term of "GOOD" to reflect a more accurate term, or has the numismatic world adopted a "first blind leading the rest of the blind" ;-)
Why am I so harsh to say something like "blind leading the blind".....................................
well, did you notice the currency commissioners' signatories of my 1911 $1.00 banknote.
Apparently, the currency commissioners' names mentioned by two respected Malaysian numismatic experts in their publication of their Malaysia, Singapore & Brunei articles during the mid 1970's and lately another 2010 publication by a premier authority in Petaling Jaya mentioned the same commissioners' names; Arthur Young, J.O. Anthonioz, D.Bratty.(the spelling of these names are according to the publishers' articles and are not necessary their correct names)
Now take a much more closer look............... does any of the signatures bear any resemblance to their names, be it alphabetically or otherwise?
Either my banknote which carries the undocumented signatures of E.L. Brockman, W.C. Mitchell, P.A.F.David a rarity :-) or some so called premier experts made a BIG BOO BOO!!
Hi Clement,
ReplyDeleteExcellent website!
It may be that your combination of signatures is indeed unique. I have photos of a note A/55 03412 dated 8th June 1909 where the signatories are unmistakably: Arthur Young, J.O. Anthonioz or Anthonios, and D. Bratty. Anthonios is a very un-English name, more probably it should be Anthonies, and while Bratty is unusual it is not impossible (it could be Beatty, but that first 'r' really looks unlike an 'e').
Hello Sigismundo, Thank you for your compliments!
DeleteFirstly, credits should be given to my two friends Mike Prizov and Owen Linzmayer who incidentally has books written on these, you may want to buy them from his website. They are the ones who help me too in discovering these gross errors!
These are the two correct names: James Oliver Anthonisz and David Beatty, their names are constantly mentioned in colonial newspaper of that era.