Regnal Years

[Guest silvercoin]

I have noticed that the regnal years on the edges of crowns and halfcrowns of certain monarchs appear out of sync with the date given on the reverse of the coin. For example, the two Decimo Tertio (13th Regnal Year) halfcrowns of William III are dated 1700 and 1701 when his actual 13th regnal year was 13 February 1701 to 12 February 1702. Why were the coins not dated 1701 and 1702? Does this mean that the 1700 Decimo Tertio coins were minted in 1700 but issued in the 1701 during the actual 13th year of reign?

On the other hand, George III crowns appear to be in sync. The 1819 crowns have regnal years LIX (59th, 1818-1819) and LX (60th, 1819-1820) - matching the actual regnal years for that monarch.

Can anyone explain?

[Rob 3,152]

I have noticed that the regnal years on the edges of crowns and halfcrowns of certain monarchs appear out of sync with the date given on the reverse of the coin. For example, the two Decimo Tertio (13th Regnal Year) halfcrowns of William III are dated 1700 and 1701 when his actual 13th regnal year was 13 February 1701 to 12 February 1702. Why were the coins not dated 1701 and 1702? Does this mean that the 1700 Decimo Tertio coins were minted in 1700 but issued in the 1701 during the actual 13th year of reign?

On the other hand, George III crowns appear to be in sync. The 1819 crowns have regnal years LIX (59th, 1818-1819) and LX (60th, 1819-1820) - matching the actual regnal years for that monarch.

Can anyone explain?

Because dates up to 1752 were old style when New Year's Day was on the 25th March. William III died on the 8th March 1702 new style, which was still 1701 old style. The 13th regnal year was from 13th Feb 1701 (1700 os), so coins dated 1700 would have been produced between 13th Feb and 24th March, though it is possible there might have been a few days delay in actually changing the dies over to ones dated 1701 for operational reasons or lack of new dies. Following the change to the new calendar, all dates subsequently correlate.

[Red Riley 2]

The mint produced 'maundy' fourpences dated 1702, which is interesting because technically he had died in 1701.

[Guest silvercoin]

Many thanks for the explanation!

[Rob 3,152]

The mint produced 'maundy' fourpences dated 1702, which is interesting because technically he had died in 1701.

If they are Maundy money, and that is a definite if, because they might have formed part of the monies but were not made specifically for the ceremony as they were not struck every year - then it is possible that the 1702 issue was struck for the ceremony. According to wiki, Maundy Thursday can fall on any date between 19th March and 22nd April, so it would also be possible to have two or no Maundy Thursdays in the same calendar year. I can't find a date for Maundy Thursday 1701/2, but if it was immediately around New Year - say between New Year and the end of March, then it would be reasonable to produce pennies if there were none available for distribution just prior to the event, but dated correctly and so could reasonably be called Maundy money. As W3 died in March, this is very close to both the New Year and a potential Maundy Thursday and it would not have been possible to foresee that he was going to fall off his horse and die in advance. I don't know if this can be verified, but sounds plausible to me.

Edited January 12, 2011 by Rob

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

and it would not have been possible to foresee that he was going to fall off his horse and die in advance.

His horse put it's leg down a molehill(hole) and threw old Bill, who then died of pneumonia and complications arising from his injuries I believe. This led to the after dinner toast in catholic circles, 'to the little gentleman in the velvet jacket'. Bill having been invited across from Holland to depose the catholic James II by the protestant estate. He landed at Brixham in Devon, there is a statue of him there and I once ate fish and chips sitting on his foot - from this I claim aquaintance.

He also introduced the concept of goverment debt, i.e. bonds/gilts and generally speaking is one of my favourite kings.

Massive hooter though...

[declanwmagee 122]

He also introduced the concept of goverment debt,

of course, his relationship with the Oranje-Nassau Dutch banking family is pure coincidence...remind me again when the bank of England was established?

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

27th July 1694.

Important point about all this being, is that he (and his mates) put in place the mechanism to beat Napoleon 100 years later. Whereas Le General had to personally appeal for funds to continue his fight, the British merely issued a bond.

Pissed him off no end it did - his "nation of shopkeepers" rant was wholly about that.

But that's what you want from a king right ?

A positive contribution, a steely gaze looking ahead and a strong hand on the tiller.

[Peckris 579]

"die in advance"

Wow, how does that happen?

[Peter 615]

Weird Royal family....definite bit of the mongrol in there.