World of Coins

Modern European coins except the euro => UK and Ireland => Pre-decimal coins and trade tokens => Topic started by: Galapagos on October 03, 2009, 12:30:56 PM

Title: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: Galapagos on October 03, 2009, 12:30:56 PM
Parent topic: Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth (http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,4364.0.html)


You'll notice on the predecimal coins of the British Commonwealth that each monarch has two standard effigies. One is crowned, the other is uncrowned, and they are often designed by different artists. I understand that this is some kind of hierarchical thing. Does anybody have any precise information on this aspect? When did the crowned/uncrowned tradition start, and what was the reasoning behind it? And does anybody have a list of the split, i.e. which countries used only the crowned effigy, and which used both (at various times)?
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: BC Numismatics on October 03, 2009, 04:09:48 PM
Phil,
  The Union of South Africa was most definitely a Dominion.

Both Rhodesia & The Gambia were the only countries that used Arnold Machin's portrait design on pre-decimal coins.

Belize still uses the same portrait that was on the coins of British Honduras.Since 1981,Belize has been a Dominion.

Aidan.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: Figleaf on October 03, 2009, 04:11:30 PM
Many and good questions for British Commonwealth collectors. I only have some answers. At the time of the Saxon conquest, both Saxons and Celts had a whole collection of kings, some controlling just a town and its immediate surroundings. In theory, these were loyal to a high king. In practice, even ealdormen (earls) were often autonomous, sometimes fighting the high king. So it was in Wales. Clans fought each other and Wales was united for only seven years under Gruffydd ap Llywelyn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruffydd_ap_Llywelyn) (1039-1063), the first king of the Britons (Welshmen were known as Britons until the high middle ages). It was only through a complicated political compromise among the barons drawing up the Magna Charta that the title "Prince of Wales" came about. If Wales had not been conquered (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llywelyn_the_Last#Last_campaign_and_death) by Edward I Longshanks shortly after, it is likely that the princely title would have been changed to king.

Meanwhile, Longshanks famously failed to subdue Scotland, giving rise to a Scottish kingdom under Robert the Bruce. Such fine distinctions were probably lost on Victorian historians and romanticists, who just knew that prince was a lower title than king.

Province is another historical misunderstanding. The word was invented by the Romans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_province) and denoted an administrative unit of conquered territory. The conquest aspect was slowly lost, making a province no different from an English county.

Parliament is another word whose meaning has changed. Even the English version of Wikipedia treats it as a legislative assembly (the French version does better), but in the middle ages and renaissance, a parliament was simply an administrative council, implementing the orders of the ruler and a court of justice. Thus, the parliament of Burgundy was the address the French king used for raising taxes and the French king was the address the parliament of Burgundy would use to get a budget for their wishes (cahier de doléances, another term badly explained in the English version of Wikipedia). The role of the parliament in the Magna Charta was not to introduce democracy, but to introduce local government.

Traditional parliaments' only legislative role was to check the laws of the king against the local rights, prerogatives and customs. This right was exploited at the time of Charles I, effectively giving the English parliament the power of the purse. Further developments, such as the Hanoverian succession, secured the power of the English parliament and further eroded the power of the king to the point where it caught up and overtook the Dutch Estates General as an instrument of "democracy". The French revolution laid down a new parliamentary standard of power, not shared by the UK parliament, whose role is still determined by evolution from the parliaments of the middle ages, e.g. when it functions as a court in the highest instance.

While the role of parliaments in legislation was traditionally marginal, the role of assemblies in Roman times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_assemblies) was purely legislative. Assemblies may have been the most democratic institutions of Rome. Here also, the original meaning of words has been turned around, as in UK usage, assembly is most probably meant as a lower ranking body than parliament.

Peter
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: translateltd on October 03, 2009, 07:41:00 PM
I've commented on this before somewhere hereabouts.  The crowned effigy was essentially used in "colonies" while the uncrowned was used in self-governing dominions.  The change must have occurred after the 1931 Statute of Westminster, because Australia and Canada used the crowned effigy of George V (as did NZ from 1933 to 36, for some odd reason), but a distinction started being made from 1937 with the coins of George VI.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think only the UK used the bare-head effigy of Geo V and *all* the colonies/dominions got the crowned version.

The few coins that used royal effigies in Jersey pre-1971 also used the "colonial" effigy of the Queen, if I remember correctly, which is rather interesting in this context.

Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: africancoins on October 04, 2009, 12:09:02 AM
I had been viewing as a guest earlier.....

Anyway - Gibraltar 50p 2008 - made by Tower Mint. Portrait by Raphael Maklouf - his not so famous portrait of the Queen - only use by Tower Mint.

The TDC pieces are not by Tower Mint, so they use a different portrait of the Queen.

For commemorative/collector coins....  both Turks & Caicos and New Zealand have one or two other slightly different portraits of the Queen.

Thanks Mr Paul Baker
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: Galapagos on October 04, 2009, 12:46:56 AM
I am surprised that at various times, according to your posts, Ceylon and India were allowed to use uncrowned effigies of QEII and EVII. I thought that an unspoken apartheid would have been maintained between First World and Third World. In other words, it just ain't pukka.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: andyg on October 04, 2009, 12:50:46 AM
I am surprised that at various times, according to your posts, Ceylon and India were allowed to use uncrowned effigies of QEII and EVII. I thought that an unspoken apartheid would have been maintained between First World and Third World. In other words, it just ain't pukka.

Sailana is an Indian State - Ceylon used the crowned portrait.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: BC Numismatics on October 04, 2009, 03:25:48 AM
Sailana is an Indian State - Ceylon used the crowned portrait.

Andy,
  A few of the Indian Princely States were allowed to use portraits of the British monarch on their coins.

These states included the following;
Alwar.
Bindraban.
Dewas Junior Branch.
Dewas Senior Branch.
Sailana.

Ceylon used the Mary Gillick portrait design,albeit,modified to include the shoulder strap,for the 1955 & 1957 2 Cents.

Aidan.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: BC Numismatics on October 04, 2009, 11:39:22 AM
King William IV - India (1835),Demerary & Essequibo (1831-35),& British Guiana (1836).

Queen Victoria - British Guiana,& British Guiana & West Indies (1891-1900).

King Edward VII - British Guiana & West Indies.

King George V - British Guiana & West Indies,& British Guiana.

Queen Elizabeth II - Gough Island,Nightingale Island,Alderney,Ascension,St. Helena,Stoltenhoff Island,Tristan da Cunha.

Queen Elizabeth II's portrait has appeared on Ghanaian & Zambian medal-coins.

Aidan.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: andyg on October 04, 2009, 01:00:46 PM
Yes I forgot Alwar,
I'd add it in but I don't seem to be able to edit my posts.
The Bindraban portrait is excessively crude, one wonders if they actually had permission for this 'home made' job.

Hong Kong makes an interesting study,
They used the Victoria 'Gothic' type portrait on the 1 and 10 Cents (first struck in 1863), yet the standard colonial 'Crowned'; portrait on the 5, 20, 50 Cents and 1 Dollar (first struck in 1866).
One would imagine that this portrait is therefore slightly later in age.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: BC Numismatics on October 08, 2009, 11:46:31 PM
So that was  a faux pas, then, because the Gillick effigy is uncrowned. Ceylon was a colony, not a dominion, so should have used the Cecil Thomas crowned effigy.

 Sri Lanka became independent in 1948 as the Dominion of Ceylon.

Rhodesia & Nyasaland also used Mary Gillick's obverse design as well.Rhodesia & Nyasaland was effectively a Dominion,due to the viceregal representative being a Governor-General,but legally,Rhodesia & Nyasaland was a federal colony,albeit,one with its own High Commission in London.

Aidan.

 
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: translateltd on October 11, 2009, 08:15:07 PM
Note that Geo II effigies are technically divided into "young" and "old" head varieties - I think I can dig up a YH halfpenny if an image is needed.

Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: translateltd on October 12, 2009, 01:48:20 AM
Re George II: here's a YH halfpenny of 1735 alongside an OH farthing of 1754.  Sorry I couldn't get matching denominations!  There are enough distinctions in the effigies once you start looking.

If this isn't the appropriate location for the images I'm happy for them to be moved.

Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: BC Numismatics on October 19, 2009, 07:28:55 AM
Both New Brunswick & Nova Scotia also issued coins inscribed 'TOKEN' as well.

These are commonly known as 'semi-regal' issues,as they were approved by the colonies' governments,but not the Imperial Government at Westminster.

Aidan.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: tonyclayton on November 24, 2009, 12:04:01 AM
Re George II: here's a YH halfpenny of 1735 alongside an OH farthing of 1754.  Sorry I couldn't get matching denominations!  There are enough distinctions in the effigies once you start looking.

If this isn't the appropriate location for the images I'm happy for them to be moved.



As always, you can find images of both heads on my website at http://www.ukcoinpics.co.uk
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: UK Decimal + on February 14, 2010, 10:39:46 PM
I happened to notice this in Encyclopaedia Britannica:-

In the 20th century, coins of the colonies continued in general to show a crowned bust of the monarch; those of the self-governing Commonwealth powers exchanged a crowned for an uncrowned bust. New Zealand issues, with Maori designs prominent, began only in 1933. Indian and Pakistani coinages, each bilingual with English, grew out of the imperial Indian coinage, the British sovereign's head being replaced in India by pictorial designs and in Muslim Pakistan by calligraphic and symbolic devices.

Bill.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: Figleaf on February 14, 2010, 10:58:15 PM
Were the crowned and uncrowned portraits generally designed by different or the same people?

Peter
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: translateltd on February 14, 2010, 11:00:35 PM
Were the crowned and uncrowned portraits generally designed by different or the same people?

Peter

Different for Eliz II.  I'd have to hunt up some references for earlier monarchs.


Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: gerard974 on July 29, 2010, 03:26:34 PM
Andrew
If all these coins are in your collection congratulation
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: <k> on March 01, 2011, 05:42:50 PM
(http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4364.0;attach=4762;image)

I know that Percy Metcalfe (http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,9021.0.html) designed the effigy which is the third from the left. Can I also assume that the second effigy from the left and the one on the far right are also designed by him and are simply variations of his original design?

To remind you where these were used (from left to right):

1) UK

2) Australia, British Honduras, British Guyana, British West Africa, Canada, Ceylon, Cyprus, East Africa, India, Jamaica, Jersey, Mauritius, Newfoundland, Sailana, South Africa, Straits Settlements

3) Australia (1934 2/-), Fiji, Mauritius, New Zealand, Southern Rhodesia
(These all struck after 1932)

4) Australia (1927 2/-)
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: andyg on March 01, 2011, 07:20:29 PM

The coin on the left has the initails BM - I ought to know who this is for but I'll have to look it up.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: <k> on March 01, 2011, 07:23:30 PM
The coin on the left has the initails BM - I ought to know who this is for but I'll have to look it up.

Bertram Mackennal - so that's number 1, the UK one only?
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: andyg on March 01, 2011, 07:54:02 PM
Bertram Mackennal - so that's number 1, the UK one only?

That's him.  He also designed the equivalent commonwealth portrait - No.2.
No idea on No.4 (Australian 2/- 1927 only)
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: translateltd on March 01, 2011, 07:58:11 PM
2 and 4 are both Mackennal, according to Rennik's Aussie catalogue.

Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: andyg on March 01, 2011, 11:59:50 PM
here is the Octorino pattern,

(http://zjrr1g.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p2Kf6qqy9sOZsX0NWKPYuvUrkYFaqLpq_dSoanVBKNnXdauFEVnTsV_TcDksLpjoy4L7yF3XBah29IfVp0Fl7Q3x3mkhiIdG5/53.jpg?psid=1)

by Huth also.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: andyg on March 02, 2011, 12:05:18 AM
And here is the 4 shilling,

(http://zjrr1g.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pKPOOtmKNN6hKwHBQ4-TRg4ZL3JRi_QFpycIMF0Wv2snOfGyVSQespHxum0uQ3EqF_aMGt43NVT7-G3W7OT3cFasNFEqbjkqL/54.jpg?psid=1)

One I'd forgotten about! (thanks Martin)
Martin is probably right - the portrait does look four shilling size.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: Afrasi on March 02, 2011, 11:56:54 PM
I was told by a friend the mainland and the dominions, where the British came as settlers (Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc), used uncrowned coinage, while the colonies had to use crowned coins.
Another meaning I did hear, it has to do with having an own parliament. But this also correspondents in many ways to the first statement.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: tonyclayton on April 15, 2011, 04:38:56 PM
here is the Octorino pattern,

(image snipped)

by Huth also.

I saw no image on my first attempt!  It loaded when I first posted this.

Here is a better copy, courtesy of Spink, as I recall

The problem is that the denomination does not fit into my website scheme!!
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: <k> on May 20, 2011, 11:38:39 AM
(http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4354.0;attach=4752;image)

According to Numismaster, Belize has issued circulation 1c and 25c coins dated 2007 that bear this portrait: the crowned effigy by Cecil Thomas. The last example of this portrait that I can find from another country is the very scarce Hong Kong circulation 10c coin dated 1980.
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: Figleaf on July 09, 2011, 09:40:33 PM
Maybe the use of the portraits was not so much established policy as someone's idea that it would be neat. The someone in case would be powerful, not the king (I don't see Elizabeth second-guessing her father) and most probably not a politician. I wonder if a deputy master of the mint played a role in establishing the hierarchy.

Peter
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: kumarrahul on September 04, 2011, 01:56:57 PM
Dear Andy.. I was searching high and low for information on which portraits are featured on which coins.. this thread completes my search.. you have made my day.. Thanks a ton!
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: Figleaf on September 30, 2011, 12:25:11 AM
Two more thoughts. First, Edward VIII had bad political taste. Wiki says: His attitudes towards many of the Empire's subjects and various foreign peoples, both during his time as Prince of Wales and later as Duke of Windsor, were little commented upon in their time but have soured his reputation subsequently. He said of Indigenous Australians: "they are the most revolting form of living creatures I've ever seen!! They are the lowest known form of human beings & are the nearest thing to monkeys." He was also embarrassing enough to be moved to the Bahamas under pressure, as he was thought to be way too nice to Hitler. In 1936, racism did not have the highly negative connotation it has today, but the anti-slavery movement had opened at least some minds. On balance, I think he could probably have gotten away with making a racist difference as long as he didn't explain his motives in public.

However, the expression that came to my mind is "rump commonwealth (http://books.google.com/books?id=tvdWI1ux3J4C&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=%22rump+commonwealth%22&source=bl&ots=sw5Vm0fg2c&sig=G5He6c1Wxx0zqV74pbFzvQWN4CY&hl=en&ei=pOyETqSxM-2O4gSrjbXGDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=%22rump%20commonwealth%22&f=false)". The expression was widely used among British civil servants when I was young and innocent, but faded away, probably because it could easily be construed as racist and was in fact used as such. In principle, the term referred to the (former) British empire minus the parts in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean (negative definition), in practice, it meant something like "more loyal", "more likely to vote with us", "more conservative", "more royalist", "more like us", "more willing to support" or in hard data Canada, Australia and New Zealand (positive definition.) Maybe this concept provided the basis for the distinction?

Peter
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: paisepagal on November 21, 2011, 10:26:19 AM
Edward VII

1) UK, India, Sailana

2) Australia, British Guyana, British Honduras, Canada, Ceylon, Cyprus, East Africa, Hong Kong, Jamaica, Jersey, Newfoundland, Straits Settlements.


1)                                     2)

The crowned effigy of Edward VII was indeed used on India's 1anna coin
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: malj1 on November 21, 2011, 11:21:25 AM
Victoria ('Gothic Head')

1) UK

2) Alwar, Bikanir, Dewas, Dhar, Hong Kong, India



1)                                    2)

May I point out that this is actually the Godless florin not the Gothic; the latter design shows the complete crown and seems to fit the flan in a slightly better manner.

Here is the Gothic...
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: andyg on December 02, 2011, 07:43:16 PM
thanks both for comments -
India 1 Anna I missed completely,

The Florin I always thought was the same portrait by William Wyon?
In the revised (http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,10641.0.html) thread I dropped the name "Gothic" as I realised that it didn't apply to the Godless Florin.  There were some additional portraits I missed of Victoria too....
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: malj1 on December 03, 2011, 12:27:53 AM
A once only portrait used for the Royal visit to Australia in 2000, fifty cent coin by Royal Mint designer, Vladimir Gottwald who also designed the reverse. The Queen graciously approved the one-off use and took the dies home with her!
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: paisepagal on December 05, 2011, 07:58:30 AM
Just to point out you've mentioned Malaya...but perhaps more accurate as "Malaya & British Borneo" ?
(http://www.coins-and-banknotes.com.au/images/coins/1961%20Malaya%20&%20Brit.%20Borneo%2050%20Cents%20copy.jpg)
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: Abhay on December 05, 2011, 09:51:05 AM
Two more new Effigies of QE II have been released by Great Britain - on the new 2012 Diamond Jubilee 5 pound Coin.

Interestingly, a single coin has two different portraits - one each on Reverse and obverse.

Abhay
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: andyg on December 05, 2011, 07:20:40 PM
Malj1 - the Australian portrait was in the revised thread - but I didn't have the designer (thanks :))
Paisepegal - Have amended

Engipress- there are an ever increasing number of portraits being issued on NCLT, for some more we already have a thread http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,12029.0.html (http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,12029.0.html), of which you coin will be a nice addition. :)
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: kumarrahul on September 24, 2013, 03:45:48 PM
Hi,

Based on the information available on this forum pertaining to use of crowned and uncrowned effigies, I have prepared the attached summary presentation document using for illustration the coins I have.  I have scanned the coins in one go, to allow for comparative size and views.

Feedback appreciated.  Best seen/read at 200% zoom :-)

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0By3J02pw-YfVaU1hTGxCOFdTRUk/edit?usp=drive_web

Cheerss
Rahul
Title: Re: Comments on Use of the Crowned and Uncrowned Effigies in the Commonwealth
Post by: <k> on September 24, 2013, 03:52:16 PM
Yes, that pretty much sums it up, Rahul. I think probably the original reason for the division was simply to distinguish overseas coinages from "homeland" issues (British), for when the time came to withdraw the British coins. However, this practical reason acquired a hierarchical symbolism (in the eyes of the dominions) that was never originally intended. The other mystery is why George V was so dead against the dominions getting the uncrowned effigy. I have never read what his reasons for this might have been.

But yes, a nice succinct summary.  ;)