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

Main Menu

France: 20 Francs Mont-Saint-Michel

Started by eurocoin, October 27, 2018, 07:28:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Recently French numismatists also started to get interested in unrealised designs.

A few nice ones were shared on Facebook of the 20 Francs Mont-Saint-Michel (pictured above).

There are more unrealised designs of other denominations to follow.





The artist was trying to fit too much onto the coin. I prefer the scene in Reply #1, though the building should have been moved upward slightly. Even Reply #3 is preferable to the issued design. There is too much sea on the issued design and it is too stylised. It's clear that the artist wanted to indicate the maritime location of the scene by including more sea, which is why Reply #1 was rejected.

Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.


And I for one prefer the issued design over the one that shows the dam in such a prominent way. :)  Don't really see much difference between the first two designs. These two look good to me, but I wonder whether all those details would have made it onto the issued coin ...



I agree, the issued one is by far the best. I like the symmetry and most of all, it looks awe inspiring the way it normally does when does see it in person


A lovely design.  I particularly like the addition of the center "plug" on the bimetallic planchet.  It gives the effect of a trimetallic coin.


Quote from: onecenter on October 27, 2018, 10:55:49 PM
A lovely design.  I particularly like the addition of the center "plug" on the bimetallic planchet.  It gives the effect of a trimetallic coin.

This is a Trimetallic coin


Question is whether the central part has the same composition as the outer ring, or not. As far as I know (could be wrong though), the two are the same, and then it could well be considered bimetallic. ;)  This piece for example, a medal made by the Mexican mint, is definitely trimetallic ...




You may have difference of opinion about it being bimetallic or trimetallic but let me submit the authoritative evidence.
SCWC 1901-2000 2019 edition calls it trimetallic even though it does not make any difference in two yellow metal constituents.

See enclosure



Mauritania coins have been minted by same mint ( namely Paris) and one coin has same specific configuration.
Our forum authority on Bimetallics ( namely Jostein) calls that coin as trimetallic.
Case rests.


Bi-metallic (and tri-metallic) are term used quite loosely and not in any logical or scientific sense. It apparently does't mean either "made of two different alloys" or "containing two different metals". Fourés and clad coins are not considered bi-metallic and neither are copper-nickel coins. It comes closest to meaning "assembled from two parts" (though I would argue that this definition would include plugged coins, usually not considered bi-metallic).

In that sense, this coin is tri-metallic. It is assembled from three parts. Moreover, while, even before striking, the outer part has the shape of a flat ring, the central part is a little ball, rolling around in what will become its nest until it gets deformed and banged in place. That makes the little centre a wonder of technology in the World of Coins.

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