Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
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!
5 Patacas Stamp PAGAVEIS EM TIMOR over '5 Patacas', Macau
| Issuer | Banco Nacional Ultramarino |
|---|---|
| Year | 1933 |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Size | 182 × 115 mm |
| 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 | A Macau-issued 5 Patacas note of 1924 counterstamped in 1933 for circulation in Portuguese Timor. A black bar overprint cancels the original 'MACAU' inscription, accompanied by two rectangular ink stamps: on the left, 'Decreto Nº 17154', and on the right, 'Pagáveis em TIMOR', both applied in violet or blue letterpress. The underlying note retains its original intaglio-printed design on green-tinted paper. |
|---|---|
| Obverse lettering | DECRETO Nº 17154 / PAGÁVEIS EM TIMOR |
| 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 | Log in to see details |
| Variants | Log in to see details |
| Comments |
Pick 6 is a Macau 5 Patacas base note — almost certainly from the 1920s series — overstamped for use in Portuguese Timor, with "PAGAVEIS EM TIMOR" applied to redirect an existing stock rather than commission a new printing. Banco Nacional Ultramarino routinely managed currency across multiple Portuguese territories this way, adapting metropolitan or Macau-printed supplies to serve Timor when dedicated issues were either unavailable or impractical to procure.
The overstamp practice makes accurate dating complicated. The 1933 date reflects the stamping year, not necessarily when the underlying note was produced by De La Rue in London.