Circulation sets with poorly unified design

[Figleaf]

Good analysis! It's good to make these lists. It's better to bridge the gap from list to design with analysis, in order to provide new insights into what messages the designs carry.

Petre

[<k>]

If we look at the forint denominations of the Hungarian coinage, they go:

Shield of arms; plant; bird; shield of arms; plant; bird; shield of arms.

These correspond respectively to the ascending denominations:

1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 forint.

Notice that the shield of arms appears on the 1, 10 and 100 forint coins, so there is a pattern there.

However, is it not lazy to repeat the shield design across three denominations?

Usually such heraldic designs appear on the highest denominations of a thematic set - not the lowest and middle denominations.

[chrisild]

If we look at the forint denominations of the Hungarian coinage, they go:

Since we talk about circulation coins here, the 1 and 2 forint pieces are gone, and a 200 forint coin was added to the range. So you see the CoA on the 10 and 100 HUF coins. Sorry for the somewhat blurry image but you get an idea.

[<k>]

Since we talk about circulation coins here, the 1 and 2 forint pieces are gone, and a 200 forint coin was added to the range. So you see the CoA on the 10 and 100 HUF coins. Sorry for the somewhat blurry image but you get an idea.

Yes. Each example that I give is a snapshot of a certain period in time. It may refer to the past, to the recent past, or to the present. And coinages do indeed develop and change over time, though often at very different rates. I simply use these snapshots to illustrate certain principles, as I see them, and as they were applied (or not) at the time.

[Pabitra]

Decimal system.
The CoA will appear next on 1000 Forint coin, as and when issued.
Before that, a 500 Forint coin will need to be issued.

[<k>]

Cape Verde: reverse designs of the 1977 to 1980 / 1982 set.   The common obverse featured the national emblem.

In 1977 Cape Verde issued its first coinage as an independent country. There was an evident plan to the structure of the coinage.

It had three tiers:

1] Aluminium: 20 and 50 centavos.

2] Nickel-brass: 1 escudo and 2½ escudos. 

3] Copper-nickel: 10, 20 and 50 escudos.

Each tier had a different theme. The aluminium 20 and 50 centavos coins each featured a small tuna fish on the reverse in the exergue. Maybe it was the same fish but reversed - I am not sure. Curiously, these reverses also showed the denomination. The remaining coins of the set showed it on their obverse.

The nickel-brass 1 escudo and 2½ escudos coins were FAO-themed, with appropriate slogans. FAO = Food and Agricultural Organization (a United Nations body). Numista lists them as circulating commemorative coins.

The top tier of copper-nickel coins featured three different national heroes.

The FAO-themed coins were circulating commemoratives, but the other coins were standard circulation coins.

The 20 and 50 centavos and 50 escudos were issued from 1977 to 1980. The 2½, 10 and 20 escudos were issued from 1977 to 1982. The set was not long-lasting. Perhaps this suggests that it was not considered completely satisfactory.

Despite its coherent overall plan, the mixture of themes seems odd. The aluminium coins have a diameter of 21 mm and 24.5 mm, so the fish could have comfortably been made larger or occupied the centre of the coin. Perhaps the aluminium coins were not considered worthy of a better design. The generic FAO-themed figures do not sit easily together with the portraits of the national heroes. Furthermore, it means that we have five human figures outnumbering the two rudimentary fish. The middle tier should perhaps have had a different theme to add more balance to the set - maybe all plants, or all buildings.

Another option would have been to feature national heroes on every denomination, thereby giving the set a uniform feel. It was not a good idea to include two FAO-themed designs in the middle of the national set. Some countries, such as Tonga and Sao Tome, issued sets where every coin was FAO-themed, and this worked well. This piecemeal approach for Cape Verde's coinage did not result in a well-unified set, in my view, and perhaps for that reason that particular design series was not retained for very long.

[<k>]

Comoros. Obverse designs of the coinage in the 1990s.




Comoros. Reverse designs of the coinage in the 1990s.

The Comoros coin design series of the 1990s.

It includes a few anomalies.


The obverse designs show the denominations.

They are all rather plain, except for the 5 francs.


The 5 francs coin carries an elaborate pictorial design from 1964.

Comoros was still a French possession in those days.

It is therefore surprising that Comoros wanted to retain that design.

It is a superb design, though, by world class numismatic artist Lucien Bazor.

Of the reverse designs, the 10 francs stands out.

The other designs are highly pictorial.

However, the crescent and star come from the Comoran flag.


Usually the national symbols appear on the highest denominations.

Just occasionally they appear on the lowest denomination.

Furthermore, the other crescent and star occurrences appear on the obverse.

So that is another anomaly.


I note that two of the reverses are FAO-themed.

However, both carry excellent designs.


But overall, the anomalies do stand out.

[<k>]

The stars on the Comoran 50 and 100 francs coins were later rearranged.




The Comoran 10 francs coin was minted in stainless steel from 2001.

It therefore changed colour.





The Comoran 5 francs coin was reduced in size in 2017.

Its reverse design was also amended considerably.


Apparently the coin has now disappeared from circulation.

Its value is too low now to be of any use.


See:  Coinage of Comoros since 1964.

[<k>]

Here you see Ghana's first national coinage, dated 1967.

The approach to its design has some typical elements.


The bronze coins share a common obverse design and a common reverse design.

The copper-nickel coins also share a common obverse design and a common reverse design.

The copper-nickel designs are different from the bronze coin designs, though.

This helps to distinguish the lower denominations from the higher denominations.


The designs themselves are competent, though nothing out of the ordinary.

Strangely, though, the national symbols appear on the reverse.

The national symbols are the national shield of arms and also the star from Ghana's flag

Such symbols usually appear on the obverse.


The figurative or representational (thematic) subjects usually appear on the reverse.

Here they appear on the obverse.


These coins do not carry a human portrait.

We therefore identify the obverse as the side that carries the country name.

That name here is found on the side that shows the thematic subjects.

Thematic subjects are usually shown on the reverse.


For a long time there was something about this set that didn't click with me.

I had never thought much about it, but today it occurred to me.

The obverse designs should be the reverse designs, and vice versa.

It's a simple as that.

[<k>]

Here I have photoshopped two of the 1967 Ghana coins.

I have amended two separate obverse and reverse designs.


I do regard it as an improvement.

Now the obverse really looks like an obverse.

Ditto the reverse.




Another edited experiment.

[chrisild]

The obverse designs should be the reverse designs, and vice versa.

This obverse/reverse thing I have always found difficult. For me, the side that shows the face value has always been more relevant so I consider(ed) that to be the obverse. Now that works well when it comes to coins from one country – as in, all these pieces I used to come across in circulation were DEM coins anyway, so the face value was decisive. Well, with euro and cent circulation coins that does not really work, hehe. The face value is still the decisive factor, but a circulating coin may come from a variety of countries.

Plus, in many cases some law "dictates" which side is what. European legislation for example says that the common side is the reverse while the country specific side is the obverse. German law avoids those terms entirely and merely states that a coin has a "Wertseite" (value side) and a "Bildseite" (image side). And if the law in XYZland says that the side with the XYZish CoA is the obverse, or the reverse, then that's it.

[<k>]

The old German mark and pfennig coin series, directly pre-euro, was in any case not consistent about which side it showed the country name. The 50 pfennig and 5 DM included it on the denomination side, but the other coins did not - with the exception of the 2 DM coin, which showed the country name on both sides. The 1 DM coin was alone in showing the year on the same side as the denomination.

It was the American George Cuhaj of the Standard World Coin Catalog who told me of the general country name rule for the obverse, but he pointed out that some coins do show the country name on both sides. And if you look at Numista, it shows the portrait side as the obverse for US coins - not the country name side!

See also:  Obverse and reverse.

[chrisild]

It was the American George Cuhaj of the Standard World Coin Catalog who told me of the general country name rule for the obverse, but he pointed out that some coins do show the country name on both sides.

Hmm, Americans also tend to use silly terms ("coin", "medal") when it comes to the orientation of coins only because they use the inverted alignment instead of the parallel alignment. My primary point was that is there is no universal rule regarding obverse and reverse. As I wrote in that topic that you posted the link to, the good old German terms "the one side and the other side" are best, hehe.

[<k>]

As I wrote in that topic, the good old German terms "the one side and the other side" are best, hehe.

People do tend to categorise the sides into more important, less important. In the UK we have the saying, "Heads or tails?" when tossing a coin, because of course in the UK the monarch's portrait always appears on the obverse.

Then there is the fact that, worldwide, many series have one side with a common design and the other side with varied designs. Often enough the side with a common design is regarded as the obverse. However, in the Coin characteristics board I show the various ways in which these supposed rules are broken and the resulting varieties that are found.

See: Coin characteristics index: Sets.

[<k>]

Rhodesia set of 1964.

Here the heraldic emblem is dropped into the middle of this little set.

It does look somewhat out of place, but not badly so.

Probably it should have gone onto the 25 cents coin.

However, Tommy Sasseen's sable antelope occupies that coin.

It would not have looked so splendid on a smaller coin.