Heretical thoughts

[Geoff T 3]

I find it interesting that some of the most immediate and negative criticism of the decision to remove Britainnia from the 50p coin is coming from the tabloids, notably those like the Daily Mail which will clutch at any straw which corroborates its obsessive Little Englander mentality. I see from its website that it already has a petition asking its readers to save this icon of Britishness from disappearing. They're already blaming Gordon Brown; anyday now I expect to read that the whole thing is a conspiracy masterminded by the EU to rob us further of our national identity.

Apart from the fact that I could never bring myself to sign anything endorsed by the preferred tabloid of the narrow-minded, I have to confess that I'm not actually losing sleep over the thought that Britannia has been given the chop. Like any other design - indeed, like any other coin - Britannia is a phase in an evolutionary process. Value your past, celebrate it even, but accept that society always moves forwards, never backwards. I don't know what the new designs will look like, but my mind remains open. They might prove disappointing, particularly if they attempt to be simultaneously modern and heritagy in a 2005 sovereign sort of way, but they might also be excellent and worth getting excited about. I hope so.

I retire to my corner and await your accusations of heresy

Geoff

[Red Riley 2]

Yes and no.

I agree with you over the appalling Daily Mail, but I just happen to like Britannia. In fact, it's the only one of the current designs I would like to keep. Mind you if Scotland secedes from the union (as it surely will one day not that far away), the thing will probably die a natural death anyway. I don't see much point in hastening its end.

[Colin G. 147]

Geoff,

My concern is that if I see Britannia, I instinctively think British. This is one of the features that identifies our coinage, as does the Monarch's portrait. We already have coins that carry commemorative/artistic designs, so why do we need more.

If other modern coinage produced gave the same impression my views may be different, but I think we are one of a handful of countries that have coinage that immediately gives you an impression of the country and its identity. I look at much of the euro coinage, and the modern bi-metallic coinage, and it all looks the same, cheap, dull and repetitive.

I am all for change if it is a step forward, and I know the new design may be stunning, but I would confidently bet a few farthings that it will be lacking....

[scottishmoney 34]

Really what you have to fear, is not the demise of Britannia on the coinage, but rather whence you shall be spending Marianne(€) for your crumpets at Tesco. Then the French will have totally annihilated all British identity.

[Geordie582 18]

As a Daily Mail reader (I find all other tabloids frivolous and the broadsheets pompous - and I find the puzzles entertaining), and a fervent believer in protecting what little we have left of 'Britishness', I would just like to say - it would be nice if our lords & masters thought to do what the populace want - just for a change!

Edited January 29, 2008 by Geordie582

[scottishmoney 34]

Unfortunately politicos everywhere are way out of touch with reality, or what the people want. Your people are close in touch with the fools in the US mint that keep foisting garbage like Presidential dollars and Statehood quarters off, only really creating a seignorage profit for the mint. I am right sick of asking for old silver dollars, ie before 1978 and being proffered that presidential BS. They are the fools that took Miss Liberty off of US coinage and replaced her with images of presidential god corpses to worship as an ideal instead of Liberty.

Pretty soon QEII will have her image dumbed down to what the Dutch did to Queen Beatrix, then she will look like a cartoon figure, close to her image on the postal stamps of the UK.

[Geordie582 18]

Pretty soon QEII will have her image dumbed down to what the Dutch did to Queen Beatrix, then she will look like a cartoon figure, close to her image on the postal stamps of the UK.

You mean something like this?

[scottishmoney 34]

You mean something like this?

Precisely.

[Geoff T 3]

Really what you have to fear, is not the demise of Britannia on the coinage, but rather whence you shall be spending Marianne(€) for your crumpets at Tesco. Then the French will have totally annihilated all British identity.

That depends on whether you shop at Tesco. As one totally opposed to the way Tesco is destroying our shopping streets and exploiting our growers and farmers I don't see myself buying crumpets or anything else there even if we go back to cowrie shells. I live almost next door to one of the largest in the country and avoid it like the plague.

G

[Red Riley 2]

I am far from this country's biggest flag waver, but somehow I have retained the notion that a coinage works best when it reflects a country's history, heritage, legends etc. in a simple and easy to understand form. I suppose it is difficult to argue that the heraldic symbols on most of our coinage are well understood, but Britannia is recognised as a symbol of these islands throughout the world. Since the cartwheel coinage of 1797, a new version of Britannia has appeared roughly every 25 years, so we are overdue a redesign, but to lose this nigh on 2,000 year old image altogether strikes me as a shame. By comparison, the French Marianne, as close to an equivalent as one can get, has even survived the switch to a single European currency.

Now it wouldn't be like me to post something on here without a hint of controversy now would it, but I just happen to believe that our coinage is blighted by having to have a portrait of the reigning monarch on the obverse. On a personal level, I really don't wish Elizabeth Windsor or her family any ill will, but can't we have something/someone else for a change? And no, I do not want a portrait of Gordon Brown instead!

[Geoff T 3]

Now it wouldn't be like me to post something on here without a hint of controversy now would it, but I just happen to believe that our coinage is blighted by having to have a portrait of the reigning monarch on the obverse. On a personal level, I really don't wish Elizabeth Windsor or her family any ill will, but can't we have something/someone else for a change? And no, I do not want a portrait of Gordon Brown instead!

[Red Riley 2]

Monarchist as I am, I think this is a very fair comment. Just because you have a monarch, there's no hard and fast rule which says that their image should appear on all coins and banknotes. As far as I can remember, none of Denmark's currency bears a portrait of the queen and in Sweden and more particularly Norway the king's portrait appears on only a few of the larger denomination coins and none of the notes. I don't think that this implies any less loyalty to the crown. I've long felt that the presence of a none too flattering image of the queen on our banknotes hinders a more creative approach to design. Our coins too might offer more to the imaginative designer if the royal presence were restricted to a discreet crown or royal cypher as is often the case in the Scandinavian monarchies.

G

It's probably because somebody in government would have to tell her ('er... excuse me your majesty, do you mind if we replace your head on the 10p piece with a hippopotamus...?'), and politicians being the chickens they are, nobody wants to volunteer for the job. Reminds me of the piece of legislation in the 19th century which outlawed male homosexuality. It was easy enough mentioning this to Queen Victoria because the subject was covered in the bible. However, lesbianism never became illegal apparently because nobody wanted to explain it to her!

[scottishmoney 34]

Reminds me of the piece of legislation in the 19th century which outlawed male homosexuality. It was easy enough mentioning this to Queen Victoria because the subject was covered in the bible. However, lesbianism never became illegal apparently because nobody wanted to explain it to her!

They surely did not wish to tell her about her distant kin, Queen Mary(1689-1694) or Queen Anne(1702-1714), allegations of lesbianism which are still discussed some 300+ years later.

The portrait of a monarch on a coin is not a bad thing when the monarch is popular or attractive, but what happens when Charles becomes monarch? He is neither really. That might be time to revive the cypher, or his initials. Say CIII?

[scottishmoney 34]

I've long felt that the presence of a none too flattering image of the queen on our banknotes hinders a more creative approach to design. Our coins too might offer more to the imaginative designer if the royal presence were restricted to a discreet crown or royal cypher as is often the case in the Scandinavian monarchies.

G

When the Queen was younger, and they came out with the first portraits of her in the 1960's on the banknotes, they were attractive, but not really an improvement over the "Helmeted Britannia" on the £5 note from 1956-early 1960's. Face it, unless one were demented, there is not much of an attraction for an 81 year old woman on banknotes. If they must have a monarchist, or perhaps a future one, perhaps Kate Middleton could stand in?

[Geordie582 18]

It's not the loss of the queens head I'd be bothered with - it's what this mob would replace it with!

Edited January 31, 2008 by Geordie582

[scottishmoney 34]

It's not the loss of the queens head I'd be bothered with - it's what this mob would replace it with!

Here is my entry:

[Red Riley 2]

It's not the loss of the queens head I'd be bothered with - it's what this mob would replace it with!

I would go with a series of great Britons e.g. Darwin, Brunel, Robbie Burns (to keep the Scots happy until they take their ball away).

[scottishmoney 34]

It's not the loss of the queens head I'd be bothered with - it's what this mob would replace it with!

I would go with a series of great Britons e.g. Darwin, Brunel, Robbie Burns (to keep the Scots happy until they take their ball away).

They have all appeared on British banknotes, Darwin and Brunel on the reverses of BoE notes, and Robbie Burns has been on the RBS notes since 1970, and previous to that 1961 on the British Linen Bank notes. And now Adam Smith, a Scot is on the reverse of the £20 BoE note. Actually I like those series, since they are non political, and commemorate people that made Britain great, industrially, financially etc.

[Red Riley 2]

It's not the loss of the queens head I'd be bothered with - it's what this mob would replace it with!

I would go with a series of great Britons e.g. Darwin, Brunel, Robbie Burns (to keep the Scots happy until they take their ball away).

They have all appeared on British banknotes, Darwin and Brunel on the reverses of BoE notes, and Robbie Burns has been on the RBS notes since 1970, and previous to that 1961 on the British Linen Bank notes. And now Adam Smith, a Scot is on the reverse of the £20 BoE note. Actually I like those series, since they are non political, and commemorate people that made Britain great, industrially, financially etc.

Aye, but the good thing about dead celebrities is that when you get fed up with them, you can change them without offending anybody. I don't think it really matters that they have already been honoured in some way and if they are skipped, we might just end up with a few second rate celebrities gracing our coinage. Pure speculation of course as it's got as much chance of happening as England winning the Football World Cup again in my lifetime.

Going back more to the original point of this thread, with the accession of George VI, the reverses of the two smaller bronze coins went off in a rather different direction with the Golden Hind and the wren but since then, circulation coins have just followed tired old themes. It would be nice to see the historical/wildlife series picked up again; a few suggestions - Stonehenge, St. Paul's Cathedral (or would this look too much like the Jefferson nickel?), S S Great Britain, red deer, golden eagle...

[Geoff T 3]

"Aye, but the good thing about dead celebrities is that when you get fed up with them, you can change them without offending anybody. I don't think it really matters that they have already been honoured in some way and if they are skipped, we might just end up with a few second rate celebrities gracing our coinage. Pure speculation of course as it's got as much chance of happening as England winning the Football World Cup again in my lifetime."

This is what bothers me somewhat. For all that we Brits talk of heritage and tradition, we have this Philistine streak which doesn't actually value them. The average Brit has no sense of history beyond last week and no sense of heritage and culture beyond what the media tell them is important. Retaining a monarchy at least spares us the prospect of "the people's choice" landing us with a President Beckham and Pouty Spice on our banknotes.

G

[scottishmoney 34]

This is what bothers me somewhat. For all that we Brits talk of heritage and tradition, we have this Philistine streak which doesn't actually value them. The average Brit has no sense of history beyond last week and no sense of heritage and culture beyond what the media tell them is important. Retaining a monarchy at least spares us the prospect of "the people's choice" landing us with a President Beckham and Pouty Spice on our banknotes.

G

Which is where you want to have a rule, that the person must have been pushing up daisies for at least 40 years so you can make good and sure they have historic impact. I doubt Davie and Vicky will have any such fervor in 40 years, they will be long forgotten. I love the image of Sir Winston Churchill and the Spitfires on the reverse of the Gibraltar £50:

I believe Winnie is deserving of his place on a British banknote too. Ha ha, just because I would laugh that yet another American citizen appears on a British banknote, the other being Jack Nicklaus on the reverse of the RBS fiver.

[Red Riley 2]

The problem with Winston Churchill (and I don't begrudge him his place in history) is that Britain has a morbid fascination with the Second World War, Dunkirk Spirit, D-Day, El Alamein and all that, as if it were some kind of golden age (it wasn't if you were under the bombs in the blitz). Yes, of course we should look back with a degree of pride, but the years 1939-45 seem to dominate our historical thinking almost to the exclusion of anything else. Can't we just take our foot off of this particular gas pedal for a bit and rediscover other equally interesting periods of our history?

[scottishmoney 34]

I agree with you to a point about the fascination with WWII. Problem is, it is Politically Correct aka PC, whilst the advancement of the Empire into Africa, India etc. is now not. So if you take out WWII, you are left with industrialists or social cause people etc.

I do wonder if say hopefully QEII reigns well into her 90's or beyond even, that they will show older images of her, or just keep using the younger portraits. I do hope for Britain that she does reign long - VIVAT REGINA! so the next monarch will be a mere caretaker.