Thoughts on portraits used on UK, etc., coins

[<k>]

So that's massively in QEII's favour. What we don't know, of course, are the world figures, but given today's massive wealth, even the dropping out of India and its billions of coins possibly hasn't even affected QEII's lead.

Looking to the future, i.e. CIII, or whatever he will choose to call himself, I imagine some countries will have ditched the monarch, e.g. Australia at least. Also, IMO, wealth will be more constrained as the world's resources become more expensive to extract and obtain - but if it isn't, and computers reign, then even more money will become electronic.

[Pabitra]

As regards the Indian coins - didn't some states issue their own prior to independence?

Out of about 600 Indian Princely States, only about 50 were authorised to issue their own currency.
Only about 10 of them issued regular coinage.
Out of that, few such as Bikaner etc. issued smaller coins with effigy of the British monarch.
In all  of them, British India coins were more regularly used than any of their own coins.

The silver coins of British India were routinely accepted in all countries located on the periphery of Indian Ocean.

[Figleaf]

In all  of them, British India coins were more regularly used than any of their own coins.

I general, there can be no doubt about that. The coins of Kutch and Hyderabad look pretty good in most cases. However, such halfpennies as issued by e.g. Sailana and Dewas are almost always as worn as Victorian halfpennies that stayed into circulation for decades.

Peter

[Pabitra]

The coins of Kutch and Hyderabad look pretty good in most cases.

Apart from those states, only Jaipur, Travancore, Mewar & Bahawalpur issued full set of coins. Others issued mostly copper coins of 1 or 1/2 paisa and few silver 1 Rupee coins. For rest of coins and other princely states, British India coins were accepted currency.

[Figleaf]

And this one? And this one? And this one?

Peter