60 | Spanish Banknotes

Automatically generated translation

100 Pesetas. March 11, 1938. Unissued color proof and number 0,000,000. (Edifil 2023: NE32Ma, Pick: 90cts). Extremely rare, with very few known examples, this note is undoubtedly one of the rarest banknotes in the Spanish banknote collection and undoubtedly one of the most iconic. Fine ++. Encapsulated in PMG58 (printer's annotation).

The intense inflation within the territory controlled by the Republic, whose origins can be attributed to many factors, both productive and related to the evolution of the war itself, as well as economic decisions, created a pressing need to produce more and more money to maintain the monetary supply required for the functioning of the economy. Thus, despite requests to Bradbury, the Bank of Spain decided to involve Thomas de la Rue from the beginning of the war. In 1937, they would enter into negotiations with them to produce a new 100-peseta banknote.

The English printing process was considerably slower than that of other competitors. Since one copy is dated July 1, 1937, it is assumed that this was the contract date, as it was common practice to use it on banknotes. We know of a proof with the adopted colors and a notation from February 18, 1938. That copy still bears the mark "Madrid, July 1, 1937," and shows the signature of the auditor, Adolfo Castaño. As a response to this proof, another copy is preserved in which the Bank of Spain corrected the signature to indicate that it should be Antonio Victoriano Martín, that the place of issue should be Barcelona, and the date should be March 11, 1938. We assume this reply was sent between late February and early March of that same year. Later, there is evidence of a proof with the corrections carried out and dated by hand on April 14, 1938. A couple of months later, on June 21, 1938, the Board of the Bank of Spain approved the specimen sent to them by Thomas de la Rue.

Aside from these proofs, samples, and approval notes, we find other examples of great interest for understanding the process and the time involved. There are several color proofs of this note, all alternatives to the combination finally chosen and with several notable characteristics. First of all, they have a notation in the lower right corner with numbers ranging from D701 to D713. Furthermore, they already have corrections to the auditor's signature and the place of issue. However, they all have two other surprising aspects in common: they all have orange or brown tones on their obverse, very different from the final colors, and they all lack the issue date, presenting instead a blank space, slightly different in each sample, which seems to indicate, along with other clues, that it was erased after printing. What was the purpose of these color proofs? When were they produced, and why did they not bear an issue date?

It's difficult to date these types of proofs, since the correct signature and place of issue should indicate that they date from after the Bank of Spain's reply of March 1938. However, they don't show the date of issue, even though it was already indicated on the reply note. Why? Perhaps the reply was accompanied or followed by a letter indicating that they would need to confirm this aspect. Or perhaps the printer forgot to correct this point and preferred to send the proofs with that part erased. But, in any case, why send samples of different color combinations when they were already working with one that was the final one? To this, we could respond that perhaps the printer worked on a model to confirm the design and then proposed alternatives, which is consistent with what we know of their workflows. It's conceivable that some of the unknown models sent (we have images of six proofs of the cited issues) were the same as the final colors. The fact is that the Bank of Spain didn't like these alternatives very much and opted to continue with the original colors. Given this, all these unique tests could be dated to the end of March 1938.