Pemba is a small island off the coast of Tanzania (Tanganyika), and north-east of Zanzibar. It has an area of 380 square miles. Pemba is the world's leading producer of cloves.
The Pemba counterstamp is the Arabic inscription "Pemba" in a clove design. It is listed in the Hafner catalog as Hafner 107.
Literature references
Literature references regarding the Pemba counterstamps are scarce.- Brunk, World Countermarks on Medieval and Modern Coins, page 361.
- Bruce, Unusual World Coins, lists two Maria Theresa talers (#X17 and #X18) with Pemba counterstamp. #X17 is on a host coin dated 1765, #X18 is on a host coin dated 1780.
-
Davenport, in The Dollars of Africa, Asia, and Oceania, lists the counterstamp as #488. Davenport writes
Zanzibar used both the Maria Theresa taler and the India Rupee as currency. In 1872 the clove plantations in Zanzibar were destroyed by a hurricane, and the governors of the island of Pemba (untouched by the storm) counterstamped talers and rupees with a clove shaped counterstamp bearing the island's name to validate them as local currency.
Sales
Specimen with Hafner 107 counterstamp have been offered in several coin auctions and sales starting with late 1968. All known early offers were from the Browder collection.
| Auction | Comments |
| Kreisberg - Cohen, Mail bid sale, November 18, 1968; Lot #665. | Text reads Old style Taler. |
| Schulman, Frederico Diaz Lascano Collection et al, May 1969; Lot #730. | From Browder collection. Text reads Description per consignor. Host coin is a post-1945 strike. |
| Schulman, Frederico Diaz Lascano Collection et al, May 1969; Lot #823. | From Browder collection. Two Pemba counterstamps and one Quaiti counterstamp (Hafner 110). Host coin is a post-1945 strike. |
| Schulman, Mabbot Part III, Rosenbach Part II et al, March 1970; Lot #1701. | From Browder collection. Text reads Description by T. Browder. |
| Kreisberg - Cohen, Mail bid sale, June 29, 1970; Lot #718. | |
| Kreisberg - Cohen, Mail bid sale, September 13, 1971; Lot #2091. | Two counterstamps. |
| Kreisberg - Cohen, Mail bid sale, September 13, 1971; Lot #2092. | One counterstamp. |
| Kreisberg - Cohen, Mail bid sale, November 27, 1972; Lot #2405. | Two counterstamps. |
| Kuenker, Auction 110, March 2006; Lot #3725. | One counterstamp. Host coin is Hafner 27a. This specimen is notable for the host coin, its price estimate of 1,000 Euro, and its selling price of 1,400 Euro. Possibly specimen from November 1968 Kreisberg-Cohen sale. |
| CNG Mailbid Sale #81, May 2009; Lot #1316. | Two counterstamps. Specimen from Album Fixed Price List Album 222, March 2007, #52772. |
Other Specimen
- Unusual World Coins (2 specimen). The host coin of X#17 is a 1765 Taler, the host coin of X#18 is a 1780 Taler. The latter has two counterstamps.
- The specimen in Brunk, World Countermarks on Medieval and Modern Coins has two counterstamps.
- The host coins of both specimen shown in the Hafner catalog are post-1945 strikes and therefore not genuine.
- The host coins of two of the three specimen in my collection have been struck after 1945. The host coin of the third specimen is Hafner 63, struck in London 1936 or later. All are therefore not genuine.
Conclusion
It is possible, though unlikely, that genuine specimen of Maria Theresa Talers with Pemba counterstamp (Hafner 107) exist.- Coins with the Pemba counterstamp were only offered for sale starting in late 1968. All early offers can be tracked to the Browder collection.
- There are no known historic records about counterstamping of coins in Pemba (The reference in the Davenport catalog can not be considered to be a historic reference).
- The host coins of most known specimen have been struck after 1935/1945.
- If struck on Indian Rupees, the host coin is often dated after 1872 (Bruce lists 1877-1902 as possible host dates).
- There is a large number host coins with multiple Pemba counterstamps. While it makes sense from an astethic point of view to have more than one counterstamp of the same type on a given coin, it does not make sense from an official point of view. It is thus very likely that such counterstamps were produced purely for astethic reasons, i.e., to raise the value of a counterstamped coin to be sold to collectors.