Should symbols for the four nations be mandatory on every UK circulation series?

[<k>]

Should symbols for the four nations be mandatory on any UK circulation series?

Every UK circulation series in living memory has referenced all the four nations of the Union in its designs:

England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland.


England: lion / rose; Wales: dragon / leek / daffodil; Northern Ireland: shamrock / harp / flax plant.

Scotland typically has a unicorn or thistle or sometimes a Scottish lion.


The four floral symbols are shown on the reverse of the UK 2023 2 pound coin.

I mentioned to our forum member eurocoin that every UK circulation series has to reference all the four nations. "According to who?" he quickly responded, which got me thinking.

Do you agree with him that they are not necessary? Or do you regard the idea of a UK circulation series without any of those symbols as unthinkable?

[<k>]

If you think of sporting events, the four nations of the UK often compete individually.

Which other country has component parts with their own "national" team?


And what about the crown dependencies and the British overseas territories? Could they in theory compete in the football World Cup, or whatever it's called these days? Could Alderney one day, in theory, win the World Cup?

[Alan71]

No. Deeman's post from the other topic is helpful here:

Dormice are not native to Ireland and are not found in Scotland.
Red squirrels are found in all four nations.
Oak trees are found in all four nations. ('Derry', meaning oak, being a prefix to many NI place names.)
Capercaillies are exclusively Scottish.
Puffins are found in all four nations.
Atlantic salmon are found in all four nations.

I would argue that Capercaillies is a Scottish design.  It wouldn't appear in this set if Scotland wasn't part of the UK.

Therefore the dormouse is an English and Northern Irish design.

Are there more Red Squirrels in Scotland than anywhere else in the UK?  I read that somewhere.

The Oak tree is not an English design in this context and, like Atlantic Salmon and Puffins, can be seen as representing the UK as a whole.

Wales isn't represented as such across the seven designs, but it wasn't really on Matthew Dent's design either.  Are there any wildlife that are only found in Wales?  And it is on the £2 of course.

[<k>]

I would argue that Capercaillies is a Scottish design.  It wouldn't appear in this set if Scotland wasn't part of the UK.

In the UK, wildcats, pine martens, and the Loch Ness monster are also exclusive to Scotland.


> Are there more Red Squirrels in Scotland than anywhere else in the UK?  I read that somewhere.

I wouldn't know about that. I have seen some at a protected site in Newcastle upon Tyne, my birth city.

[<k>]

No.

So that's your "No" to whether such symbols should be mandatory.

What are your views on the UK? I know that you are a Brexiter and also something of an English nationalist, though left-leaning and definitely not of the far right or fascist variety. Would you be in favour of an independent England? I would guess that you would favour a UK republic.

I describe myself as English rather than British, though I am of course both. I am neutral on the Union, but so long as we have one, then I think that the individual nations should be catered for on the coinage.

[Alan71]

Correction.  A Brexiter that was divided roughly down the middle.  I could see pros and cons of either argument.  I could have voted either way, but for me it was more because the UK public had never had a say on the subject in my voting lifetime, and that this might be the only time we ever got one.  Other countries had referenda on specific European issues, we never had.    The UK state paid the price for that, I believe.

I'm only "English" because the Scottish and Welsh seem to be very nationalist, but it seems to be perfectly acceptable for them.  For England, it seems to have negative connotations.  Double standards.  The SNP threat seems to have subsided so I hope the UK can get over its nationalistic tendencies.

I'm not left-wing, but definitely to the left of centre-left.  I've never voted Tory in my life and never will.

When the Queen was alive I was OK with a monarchy but not so much now.  We won't see it gone in mine or any living person's lifetime though.

[<k>]

I'm only "English" because the Scottish and Welsh seem to be very nationalist

I've yet to meet a Welsh nationalist. Even the two native Welsh speakers that I knew would wince and cut me off if I tried to talk to them about Plaid Cymru.

> I'm not left-wing, but definitely to the left of centre-left.

I think you need to rephrase that. Surely left-wing means anything to the left of the Liberal Democrats, here in the UK. Therefore social democrats, socialists, Trotskyists, communists and anarchists are all left-wing.

When the Queen was alive I was OK with a monarchy but not so much now.  We won't see it gone in mine or any living person's lifetime though.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I've noticed history speeding up markedly since 2014. Recently I've been reminded of Lenin's little quip, "There are decades in which nothing happens, and then there are months in which decades happen."   

[Offa]

I am 25% Scot's but I still regard myself as a very proud Englishman. But yes all four nations should be represented

[Deeman]

The Laws in Wales Acts, passed in 1536 and 1543 during the reign of Henry VIII from the Welsh Tudor dynasty, created a single state and legal jurisdiction, effectively annexing Wales to England. Hence, Wales is not represented on the Royal Shield because it is a Principality.

I think you need to rephrase that. Surely left-wing means anything to the left of the Liberal Democrats, here in the UK. Therefore social democrats, socialists, Trotskyists, communists and anarchists are all left-wing.

You missed out the far left Green Party.

[Alan71]

> I'm not left-wing, but definitely to the left of centre-left.

I think you need to rephrase that. Surely left-wing means anything to the left of the Liberal Democrats, here in the UK. Therefore social democrats, socialists, Trotskyists, communists and anarchists are all left-wing.

If centre-left is roughly about 1/6th of the political scale, then I'm to the left of that 1/6th but definitely still in it.  The next sixth up would be the Labour "norm" with the far-left up from that.  And the same with the corresponding right side.

Anyway, back to topic.  Now that the designs are revealed, I hope they remain for the full 25 years maximum of the King's reign.  They don't need to be changed again, regardless of whether you regard the  four nations to be properly represented on these.

[<k>]

The Laws in Wales Acts, passed in 1536 and 1543 during the reign of Henry VIII from the Welsh Tudor dynasty, created a single state and legal jurisdiction, effectively annexing Wales to England. Hence, Wales is not represented on the Royal Shield because it is a Principality.

You missed out the far left Green Party.

Yes, the "green-behind-the-ears" party, that thinks we can do without fossil fuels. 

Somebody once told me that Wales is NOT a principality. In that case, why is there a Prince of Wales?

Constitutionally, though, Wales is certainly a constituent country of the UK.

[<k>]

I do hope and expect that the Royal Mint will have a glossy in-depth book ready for Christmas, that will tell all about the preparation of the new coinage. Presumably the questions raised in this topic will already have been considered and explained.

[FosseWay]

I voted No, in the sense that I don't think any of the countries *need* to be specifically represented on the coinage. I can kind of understand the idea that if you represent one explicitly, you need to represent them all, but I feel that the new series doesn't represent countries at all (apart from the £2, which represents all four). The capercaillie is only found in Scotland, sure, but is it a "symbol" of Scotland in the way the heraldic thistle is? I don't think so. It's an animal native to the British Isles, just as all the other animals in the series are. If any of the designs is an odd one out, I'd say it's the oak, just because it's the only plant, leaving aside the heraldic ones on the £2. I don't think this matters a great deal, either, but I'd probably have chosen another animal for the 5p, just for consistency.

[<k>]

If any of the designs is an odd one out, I'd say it's the oak, just because it's the only plant, leaving aside the heraldic ones on the £2. I don't think this matters a great deal, either, but I'd probably have chosen another animal for the 5p, just for consistency.

My thought was that the oak 5 pence was added so that the 2 pound coin was not the only design that represented flora.

I think that the prime reason for including the 2 pound design was to symbolise the four nations on the flora. It quite cleverly fits in unobtrusively with the nature theme. Yet the 5 pence does still stand out as in some way the odd one out.

[Alan71]

The 1990 reduction in size clearly demoted the 5p's future use for interesting designs.  For the Dent shield, we merely got the centre of it (though it was still arguably more interesting than the parts that appeared on the 1p or 20p). It's not that far off from the similar-sized decimal half penny where just a crown was shown.

The £2 design is little more than an amended version of the old (2016-22) £1 reverse (which itself seemed to recall previous coin designs).  The leek is replaced by the daffodil, and there is no crown, but it's otherwise related.  The 5p and £2 designs are the weakest links in this series but, for me, are more than made up for by the others.