News:

Sign up for the monthly zoom events by sending a PM with your email address to Hitesh

Main Menu

A 1967 coin from the Netherlands

Started by ghipszky, October 27, 2012, 02:35:56 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ghipszky

I would just like to know more about this little coin. It is 16mm in diameter.
Thanks for any of the help.
ghipszky

translateltd

I like deceptively simple designs - only a small number of elements, but not handled boringly.  The shape of the "1", the serifs and curls on the letters, all make it much more interesting than it might appear at first glance.

The Caduceus (Mercury staff) marks the Utrecht mint, and the fish is the Mintmaster's symbol, if I understand it correctly - someone else may be able to put me right on that.

Queen Juliana was the mother of the present Queen of the Netherlands; she abdicated in favour of her daughter in 1980 and went back to being plain ol' Princess Juliana again for the rest of her life.  She died in 2004, aged in her mid-90s.  I always thought the "hairnet" (is that what it really is?) looked quite unusual on this portrait.

This design for the 1-cent coin was introduced in 1948 for the last issue of Queen Wilhelmina, just prior to her own abdication that year, which made the 1948 coins a one-year type.  Those showing Queen Juliana were introduced in 1950, and were issued throughout her reign.  The denomination was phased out when the new coins showing Queen Beatrix were introduced in the 1980s, after which the smallest coin was 5 cents.


Figleaf

Martin got it right, I can just add some detail. The fish is the mark of Dr. Van Hengel, mintmaster in Utrecht, whose name means "angling rod", so it's a speaking symbol. The diamond hair net has disappeared from view after the portrait was made. I suspect that the diamonds were used in another item. The net was a compromise between wearing (Wilhelmina) and not wearing (Juliana) a crown. While the first coins with this reverse were dated 1948, there are patterns dated 1947. Coins dated 1948 were struck for several years with a frozen date until the portrait on your coin (designed by Prof. Oswald Wenkebach) was ready.

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

ghipszky

Thank you Martin and Peter for the information on my little coin. Martin I didn't even notice the flourishes on the numbers. What is worse is that I didn't look closely at the fish and Caduceus. I was wondering what the significance of the diamond hairnet Peter. Probably the hairnet was much more comfortable versus the crown.
Is it a common thing for a queen to abdicate, so her daughter can take over?
There was a Royal from the Netherlands at the Olympics this summer.  Would it have been Queen Beatrix? I think she was also at the Royal Wedding last year and I saw her at an event during the Queen's Diamond Jubilee.
Thanks guys.
Ginger

Figleaf

The hairnet wasn't a question of comfort, but of royal policy. Wilhelmina insisted on pomp and circumstance. Juliana wanted to be as "normal" as she could get. Wilhelmina liked the idea of crowns, Juliana would have preferred not to wear a crown. The hairnet was a mother-daughter compromise.

Both Wilhelmina and Juliana abdicated. Beatrix is expected to abdicate too at some point. She is now 74. I am afraid I am not well informed about where the Dutch royals go. A quick search on Google told me the crown prince and his family were in London for Olympic hockey games. Beatrix was indeed one of the guests for the British queen's diamond jubilee.

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

translateltd

Quote from: Figleaf on November 01, 2012, 01:16:36 AM

Both Wilhelmina and Juliana abdicated. Beatrix is expected to abdicate too at some point. She is now 74.


By the year (ignoring month of birth), Wilhelmina was 68 when she abdicated, Juliana 71, so by mathematical progression, Beatrix's time is now :-)


FosseWay

Quote from: Figleaf on November 01, 2012, 01:16:36 AM
The hairnet wasn't a question of comfort, but of royal policy. Wilhelmina insisted on pomp and circumstance. Juliana wanted to be as "normal" as she could get. Wilhelmina liked the idea of crowns, Juliana would have preferred not to wear a crown. The hairnet was a mother-daughter compromise.

Does it also have anything to do with the constitutional position of the monarch in the country? The king of Sweden stopped wearing a crown, and has in fact not been crowned at a full coronation at all, when the current constitution was brought in (around the time Carl Gustav became king, IIRC). The monarch of Sweden now officially has no constitutional power, unlike Elizabeth II who theoretically has quite a lot, though in practice she could and would never wield it. At the same time that Sweden did away with some of the constitutional trappings of kingship, they also did away with some of the visible ones that had direct links to those obsolete powers. The crowns and other regalia still exist, of course (you can see them in the Crown Jewels museum in Stockholm), but they are symbols in their own right, not through the head they happen to be placed on. I don't know, though, whether this change was decided by parliament or is a personal decision of the king's.

This may or may not be relevant in the Dutch case, but I had the feeling that the Dutch monarchy was more similar constitutionally to the Swedish than the British.

Figleaf

Interesting theory, but no, it doesn't work. Here's some background.

During the second world war, the Dutch royal family (including Juliana and Beatrix) stayed in Canada. However, the queen (Wilhelmina) and the crown princess's consort remained in Britain. During that time, the Dutch government frazzled, which left Wilhelmina to represent the country. It is no coincidence that Roosevelt called her "the only man in the Dutch government". Ministers had fled, but the Prime Minister went back and most parliamentarians had not had a chance to flee. Many politicians were locked up together as hostages. They started to speculate on a "new political order" after the occupation.

Wilhelmina did the same thing, but in her speculation, her position became more powerful after the occupation, in line with her position during the occupation. She thought of herself as ultimate decider when mere politicians couldn't decide or come up with a solution. She behaved the part, acting regal and surrounding herself with pomp.

When the nazi occupation ended, both politicians and queen found that they had lost touch with the population. The politicians could still come up with a "breakthrough" party, but it didn't live long. The constitution was not changed in favour of the House of Orange. Wilhelmina was deeply disappointed by the return of the status quo and abdicated.

Juliana, who had been in a totally different environment during the second world war, did not understand her mother's ambition and did not share it. She did see impatience with the pomp grow and she had enjoyed her carefree life in Canada (Juliana was the first to study at a university, rather than have private tutors. She loved student life.) To her, the first priority was to act "normally". Later in life, she was seen cycling and celebrating Christmas with palace staff. Wilhelmina would have highly disapproved of both.

Beatrix has taken things to a position closer to that of Wilhelmina, but without the explicit political ambition. Her first priority is to maintain the position (not necessarily the power) of the royal house in the face of republicanism and cackling politicians, especially those of the extreme right.

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.