Catalog
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
| Issuer | Isles de France et de Bourbon |
|---|---|
| Year | 1795-1796 |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Paper |
| Size | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Printer | Log in to see details |
| Designer(s) | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Plain typeset bon with serial number at upper left and date 1796 at upper right, beneath the header ISLES DE FRANCE ET DE BOURBON. The body carries letterpress text authorising payment to the bearer per the Règlement of 28 July 1790, with three manuscript signatures of colonial officials at the lower portion. |
|---|---|
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Signature(s) | Log in to see details |
| Protection type | Log in to see details |
| Protection description | Ink or wax administrative seal applied to the note by colonial authorities |
| Variants | Log in to see details |
| Comments |
The Isles de France et de Bourbon — Mauritius and Réunion under French colonial administration — issued this note during one of the most administratively chaotic periods in their history. The French Revolutionary government's grip on its Indian Ocean colonies was tenuous by the mid-1790s; communication with Paris took months, local finances were perpetually strained, and the colonial authorities were effectively printing money on their own authority to keep the islands functioning.
Three separate signatories were required — the Marine Governor, the Governor-General, and the Intendant-General — a bureaucratic redundancy that reflected Revolutionary-era suspicion of concentrated authority rather than any practical security logic.