the ethiopian birr model you suggested to use this model in some cases in my opinion it is okay to include a territory in the current part succession box that has some autonomous rights especially the right to have its own currency like pre montenegro or present day kosovo therefore in the case of ethiopian birr it makes sense to speak about currency of eritrea between and between between only ethiopian administration existed eritrea had neither sovereignty nor any sort of autonomous rights saying in that the currency of eritrea is the birr is like saying in that the currency of east germany is the euro the same case of austria between even ukraine and belarus represents the same situation during their soviet union membership however both countries had more or less autonomy and were members of the un since i have the fear that the innumerable border modifications in europe during the xxth century will make huge and complicated succession boxes for example after wwii slovakia got back not only its southern territories which the st vienna award awarded to hungary in but three villages near to pozsony bratislava horv tj rfalu jarovce oroszv r rusovce dunacs ny cunovo were awarded to slovakia treaty of paris due to strategic considerations one could say that who cares with three villages but this territory was part of hungary between the two world wars and it is not much smaller than murak z medimurje so i don't think each territorial change must be mentioned in the succession box only mention if the currency of a new country state autonomous province etc so a state like subject that has the right to circulate its own currency appears without precedessor like eritrean nakfa after split from ethiopia in but unlike ethiopian birr after split of eritrea or disappears without successor like east german mark after the reunificaton of germany in but unlike west german mark after the reunification for example german mark or deutschmark was the currency of the federal republic of germany between it would express that east germany was simply integrated into west germany contrary to the widely used reunification term at least from the point of view of the circulating currency it would also express that germany is not the successor state of west germany but the same country with an enlarged territory in the case of the peng i would simply say that it was the currency of hungary between jan and jul northern transylvania southern slovakia and b cska was totally incorporated into the hungarian administration subcarpathia enjoyed some autonomy but it was very little and cannot be compared to the rights of then yugoslav federal states present day us states or german federal states naturally this is only my opinion i would like to know your thoughts