King George VI

Started by ghipszky, December 04, 2008, 10:14:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ghipszky

This coin is from 1948 and has Britannia on the reverse. Hope I haven't posted
it before.
Ginger

BC Numismatics

Ginger,
  That is a very nice British 1 Penny that you've got there.It is a very common date.The 2 scarce dates for King George VI 1d. coins are 1950 & 1951.

Yes,I have got both of those in my collection.

Aidan.

ghipszky

Thanks Aidan it is one of my favorites.
Ginger

translateltd

Even though the reverse design tends to be overlooked because bronze pennies are so common, there's a wealth of history there, going back to classical models several centuries BC that long pre-date the notion of Britannia itself.   I think it would make a fun collecting theme to pull together classical Greek models through to the Roman examples copied from them, and then the various incarnations of Britannia on English coins from 1672 through to the 2000s.  Sounds like it might be my 208th retirement project ...


Figleaf

Quite true, but the obverse is also to be reckoned with. First, the portrait. It's looking left because Edward VIII's portrait would have looked right (there's a story here, but that's for another time). The convention followed here is that portraits should be from the side and should alternate left and right. The first tradition was introduced by Pisanello (1395-1455). The second has been followed since the Stuarts.

Pisanello also put name and titles around the portrait and by following this convention also, this coin looks dull and devoid of any form of innovation compared to Pisanello's most famous medal, that of John Paleologos, struck 6 centuries earlier. As I will argue below. That's exactly the intended effect.



The legend connects wonderfully with the portrait in ultra-arch-paleo conservatism. Consider that not only it is in latin, but also the U is written as V, both traditions that came about in the early middle ages that had been discontinued (sometimes for several centuries, like in France) in other countries. The result is a coin full of gibberish, absolutely useless for users who happen not to have studied numismatics. The pinnacle is of course that the denomination is not indicated. Users are assumed (just as in the middle ages) to be unable to read or write. They must recognize the coin by its reverse design. The only other country in the world that still does not put a denomination in numerals on its coins is of course the US.

GEORGIVS VI (Georgius sextus) - George VI. Name and reign number.
D:G: (Dei Gratia) by the grace of god. This is not, as many claim, an invocation of god, but a reminder of the ancient dogma that the ruler is chosen by god, so that to resist the ruler is heresy. Britain was the last country on earth to use this entry to a series of noble titles.
BR:OMN: (Britaniae Ominium) - of all the Britains. This part of the title is least explained. It is mostly taken to refer to the constituent parts of the country (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland), though I have seen other explanations, linking it to Brittany and the British colonies. Earlier coins use Brit:Mag (Great Britain), which is clearer. However, on those coins, the Irish title was mentioned separately. This twisted expression may be some administrative compromise to include Northern Ireland without mentioning it.
REX: King.
F:D: (Fidei Defensor) - defender of the faith. This title applies to the Church of England, of which the English king is head since Henry VIII invented it.
IND:IMP. (Indianum imperator) - emperor of India. This is the most ridiculous part of the legend. After the Indian mutiny, the Mogul was deposed and the title went to the king of Great Britain. While you can defend the translation of Mogul by imperator, there is no way you can claim that rex is a higher title than imperator, which is implied by mentioning the title imperator last, even after the religious title.

So were the British so exceptionally deep stuck in the mud as this coin suggests? Fortunately not. They were (and are) certainly more conservative than the rest of the continent, with the possible exception of Poland and at the time, more people were wearing elaborate white whigs professionally than in any other country, but by and large, the population was pretty "normal".

Rather, Britain was a very powerful country in rapid decline. It was exhausted by the second world war, it would lose practically its whole colonial empire in the next 20 years, its heavy industry and coal mines would fast become irrelevant, its economy would be overtaken by Germany, Italy and France and its currency would go on a sinking course against other currencies. If you are in that sort of situation, you cling to national symbols, traditions and conservatism, hoping that by embracing history, you can enjoy the advantages of being a superpower for a little while longer. That's the image this coin projects for me: a country, powerless to stop its decline.

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

translateltd

Nice analysis, but a few minor comments and nit-picks interspersed below:

Quote from: Figleaf on December 05, 2008, 05:54:09 PM
Quite true, but the obverse is also to be reckoned with. First, the portrait. It's looking left because Edward VIII's portrait would have looked right (there's a story here, but that's for another time).

As you say, really for another time, but why not note anyway that Ed VIII was vain and thought his left side the better one and his portrait also faced that way on his (unissued) coins?  His brother Geo VI also faced left to get the alternation back into sequence again.

Quote from: Figleaf on December 05, 2008, 05:54:09 PM
Consider that not only it is in latin, but also the U is written as V, both traditions that came about in the early middle ages that had been discontinued (sometimes for several centuries, like in France) in other countries.

U and V were originally not distinguished - not until about the 16th century, anyway.  V tended to be the capital form and u (sometimes) the lower case form.  It was only after that time that the forms became separate letters.  Likewise I and J (J tended to be used at the end of a sequence, e.g. viij for 8, as you'll still see on apothecaries' weights, for instance).

Quote from: Figleaf on December 05, 2008, 05:54:09 PM
The result is a coin full of gibberish, absolutely useless for users who happen not to have studied numismatics.

One benefit (to me at least) was that this "gibberish" was a challenge to me as a child, and my efforts to decipher it gave me a career ...

Quote from: Figleaf on December 05, 2008, 05:54:09 PM
The pinnacle is of course that the denomination is not indicated.

Umm, look at the reverse a bit more closely ...

Quote from: Figleaf on December 05, 2008, 05:54:09 PM

BR:OMN: (Britaniae Ominium) - of all the Britains. This part of the title is least explained. It is mostly taken to refer to the constituent parts of the country (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland), though I have seen other explanations, linking it to Brittany and the British colonies. Earlier coins use Brit:Mag (Great Britain), which is clearer. However, on those coins, the Irish title was mentioned separately. This twisted expression may be some administrative compromise to include Northern Ireland without mentioning it.

The OMN: was added only in 1902 - you'll see that Victoria's titles were just BRITT: REG:
The story I am familiar with is that it was added at King Edward VII's request to honour the colonies that had supported Britain in the South African War by elevating them to "other Britains" beyond the seas.  The Latin words are plural, btw - BRITANNIARUM OMNIUM (translation as you state above).

Quote from: Figleaf on December 05, 2008, 05:54:09 PM
IND:IMP. (Indianum imperator) - emperor of India.

Yes, though INDIAE IMPERATOR.

England's decline was also helped along by the massive sums it had to repay the U.S. under the wartime lend-lease arrangement, which I believe it finally managed to pay off a couple of years ago, 60 years after having to discontinue its circulating silver currency to help pay its debts.