Changes of UK Coin Dates and Monarchs at Accession Precedents - But What is Different This Time?

[LawrenceChard]

Changes of UK Coin Dates and Monarchs at Accession Precedents - But What is Different This Time

I have answered numerous questions on TSF in the past week, and also about when the monarch's names and portraits change.

I have mainly borne in mind the effect on precious metal bullion coins, but these matters will also affect base metals, and commemorative coins.

Year Dates

Before 1970, the year date of coins in producing and being released would usually be the same as the current calendar year, although the exisiting dies would remain in use for the early part of the next year, for reasons of economy. It would be very inefficient to destroy perfectly usable dies, and also inefficient to halt production while coining presses were stopped to install the new dies.

It was not usual to start minting coins with the next year's date.

Some time after the Royal Mint started actively marketing collector coins, things changed, but not immediately. Without doing some checking back, I cannot remember when this change arrived.

I do know that other mints started to produce and release the next years coin during the last few months of the current year, mainly to get a jump start on other mints for sales of collector coins and sets.

Eventually, the British Royal Mint succumbed to this commercial pressure.

Monarchs Names and Portraits

If we look at all reigns from George III through to George VI, when the reigning monarch died or abdicated, it was normal for their portrait to continue being used for the current years coins. Again, this made good sense from the point of view of efficiency, and the avoidance of waste. It wowuld be wasteful to scrap all the good working dies, and halt production until new designs were approved, then dies made for the incoming monarch. 

It also seems to be tradition that two different monarchs names and portraits did not appear on coins of the same year date. It hardly mattered which part of the year a monarch died, his or her name and portrait contunued to be used, at least until the end of the calendar year. The the new monarch's name and portrait would be released for the next year.

Some of this might be due to practicality, because it would always require planning, production of designs, preparation and approval of dies. This necessarily takes time. It is likely that this pratical aspect then turned into tradition.

So there are two factors which used to be traditional, but one of these factors has already changed. Is there any reason the second factor should change? The obvious answer is no, the new monarchs name and portrait does not need to wait until the next year to be changed.

But this ignores the fact that some coins now get released with next year's date on them. This might not have mattered if Elizabeth had died earlier in 2022, well before any 2023 dated coins were issued. Now it is too late, as a number of UK collector coins have already been issued using Elizabeth's name and portrait.

If the tradition is followed that no two monarch's name and portraits are used with the same year date, then we would need to wait until 2024 before Charles III's name and portraits would be used. Slight correction: coins of Charles III might be issued late in 2023, but bearing the date 2024.

This would be a long time to wait, and would seem to be a rather silly solution.

For this reason, I now believe we will see a break in tradition, and that we will start to see 2023 dated coins with Charles' name and portrait. Exactly when is the next question, and will surely be one of the matters being debated, or soon to be debated between the powers that be. These include the Royal Mint, The Treasury, The Privy Council, the Accession Committee, and the King himself. These discussions will take time. I do not think the new King Charles would wish to see his own portrait appearing on 2023 dated coins while those of his mother continue to be produced, more or less in parallel. It would appear disrespectful.

While nothing much is certain at this stage, it is my guess is that Charles III coins will be issued starting in January, and dated 2023.

Of course, it is not quite so simple, and the changeover might be made denomination by denomination.

The coins which have already been released, or are "awaiting stock" are:

2023 Lunar Calendar Year of the Rabbit, in various metals, weights and denominations, including base metal, silver, and gold.

2023 The Royal Tudor Beasts The Yale of Beaufort, in various metals, weights and denominations, including base metal, silver, and gold.

I believe 2023 dated silver bullion Britannias of Elizabeth were probably scheduled fro release in October, and possibly also gold Britannias. Whether these two issues will now still be released very soon is in doubt. These two must surely be the first two decisions. Gold bullion sovereigns of Elizabeth would probably be the next 2023 dated possibilities.

There are probably other new commemorative issues in the pipeline which could appear before the year end, with either 2022 or 2023 dates.

Because we are now in September, it seems likely that January 2023 would be a convenient monarch changeover date for most denominations, circulation issues in particular. Coins in mint and proof year sets may be an exception.

All that sounds slightly complicated, any of it could be wrong, or subject to change.

The main points are that for previous reigns, date changes occurred at their natural point in time.

Mass coin collecting and marketing of collector and investor coins only arose during the reign of Elizabeth, so things have changed since any other precedents and traditions arose.

Possibly the only certain thing is that there will be change.

As usual, I welcome all comments, suggestions, corrections, and opinions. I guess there will also be questions!

 

[Shinus73]

For this very reason, I ordered an extra Yale or two and even ordered a silver rabbit. I might be wrong, but I can’t find any historical precedent for a monarch appearing on a coin dated with the year after they died.

Although not an error, as they were proclaimed by the Queen, they are an unarguable novelty and will always tell a story.

I’m guessing the Harry Potter coins may also fall into this category.

[Darr3nG]

11 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

As usual, I welcome all comments, suggestions, corrections, and opinions

Do corrections (opinions) garner a free pint in Blackpool Demense?

[LawrenceChard]

9 minutes ago, Shinus73 said:

For this very reason, I ordered an extra Yale or two and even ordered a silver rabbit. I might be wrong, but I can’t find any historical precedent for a monarch appearing on a coin dated with the year after they died.

Although not an error, as they were proclaimed by the Queen, they are an unarguable novelty and will always tell a story.

I’m guessing the Harry Potter coins may also fall into this category.

By magic!

😎

[LawrenceChard]

6 minutes ago, Darr3nG said:

Do corrections (opinions) garner a free pint in Blackpool Demense?

No, I think it might cost too much. I did not proof-read it, it's been a long day, I'm tired, and a heap of other excuses!

😎

[HerefordBullyun]

TLDR. Can you summarize in one sentence - so I get the gist?

Is it?

a) @LawrenceChard will get whole lot richer

b) @LawrenceChard will got a whole lot poorer

c) HerefordBullyun will have to sell more of his dung to buy some sovs, and make people have world record rhubarb. 

[LawrenceChard]

11 hours ago, HerefordBullyun said:

TLDR. Can you summarize in one sentence - so I get the gist?

Is it?

a) @LawrenceChard will get whole lot richer

b) @LawrenceChard will got a whole lot poorer

c) HerefordBullyun will have to sell more of his dung to buy some sovs, and make people have world record rhubarb. 

a) NFI, but the last few days I have had to work a whole lot harder.

b) NFI, but the last few days I have had to work a whole lot harder.

c) NFI, but I suggest you concentrate on quality, not quantity.

😎

[SidS]

14 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

Changes of UK Coin Dates and Monarchs at Accession Precedents - But What is Different This Time

I have answered numerous questions on TSF in the past week, and also about when the monarch's names and portraits change.

I have mainly borne in mind the effect on precious metal bullion coins, but these matters will also affect base metals, and commemorative coins.

Year Dates

Before 1970, the year date of coins in producing and being released would usually be the same as the current calendar year, although the exisiting dies would remain in use for the early part of the next year, for reasons of economy. It would be very inefficient to destroy perfectly usable dies, and also inefficient to halt production while coining presses were stopped to install the new dies.

It was not usual to start minting coins with the next year's date.

Some time after the Royal Mint started actively marketing collector coins, things changed, but not immediately. Without doing some checking back, I cannot remember when this change arrived.

I do know that other mints started to produce and release the next years coin during the last few months of the current year, mainly to get a jump start on other mints for sales of collector coins and sets.

Eventually, the British Royal Mint succumbed to this commercial pressure.

Monarchs Names and Portraits

If we look at all reigns from George III through to George VI, when the reigning monarch died or abdicated, it was normal for their portrait to continue being used for the current years coins. Again, this made good sense from the point of view of efficiency, and the avoidance of waste. It wowuld be wasteful to scrap all the good working dies, and halt production until new designs were approved, then dies made for the incoming monarch. 

It also seems to be tradition that two different monarchs names and portraits did not appear on coins of the same year date. It hardly mattered which part of the year a monarch died, his or her name and portrait contunued to be used, at least until the end of the calendar year. The the new monarch's name and portrait would be released for the next year.

Some of this might be due to practicality, because it would always require planning, production of designs, preparation and approval of dies. This necessarily takes time. It is likely that this pratical aspect then turned into tradition.

So there are two factors which used to be traditional, but one of these factors has already changed. Is there any reason the second factor should change? The obvious answer is no, the new monarchs name and portrait does not need to wait until the next year to be changed.

But this ignores the fact that some coins now get released with next year's date on them. This might not have mattered if Elizabeth had died earlier in 2022, well before any 2023 dated coins were issued. Now it is too late, as a number of UK collector coins have already been issued using Elizabeth's name and portrait.

If the tradition is followed that no two monarch's name and portraits are used with the same year date, then we would need to wait until 2024 before Charles III's name and portraits would be used. Slight correction: coins of Charles III might be issued late in 2023, but bearing the date 2024.

This would be a long time to wait, and would seem to be a rather silly solution.

For this reason, I now believe we will see a break in tradition, and that we will start to see 2023 dated coins with Charles' name and portrait. Exactly when is the next question, and will surely be one of the matters being debated, or soon to be debated between the powers that be. These include the Royal Mint, The Treasury, The Privy Council, the Accession Committee, and the King himself. These discussions will take time. I do not think the new King Charles would wish to see his own portrait appearing on 2023 dated coins while those of his mother continue to be produced, more or less in parallel. It would appear disrespectful.

While nothing much is certain at this stage, it is my guess is that Charles III coins will be issued starting in January, and dated 2023.

Of course, it is not quite so simple, and the changeover might be made denomination by denomination.

The coins which have already been released, or are "awaiting stock" are:

2023 Lunar Calendar Year of the Rabbit, in various metals, weights and denominations, including base metal, silver, and gold.

2023 The Royal Tudor Beasts The Yale of Beaufort, in various metals, weights and denominations, including base metal, silver, and gold.

I believe 2023 dated silver bullion Britannias of Elizabeth were probably scheduled fro release in October, and possibly also gold Britannias. Whether these two issues will now still be released very soon is in doubt. These two must surely be the first two decisions. Gold bullion sovereigns of Elizabeth would probably be the next 2023 dated possibilities.

There are probably other new commemorative issues in the pipeline which could appear before the year end, with either 2022 or 2023 dates.

Because we are now in September, it seems likely that January 2023 would be a convenient monarch changeover date for most denominations, circulation issues in particular. Coins in mint and proof year sets may be an exception.

All that sounds slightly complicated, any of it could be wrong, or subject to change.

The main points are that for previous reigns, date changes occurred at their natural point in time.

Mass coin collecting and marketing of collector and investor coins only arose during the reign of Elizabeth, so things have changed since any other precedents and traditions arose.

Possibly the only certain thing is that there will be change.

As usual, I welcome all comments, suggestions, corrections, and opinions. I guess there will also be questions!

 

1820 half crowns must have been a blip then? 😁

14 hours ago, Shinus73 said:

For this very reason, I ordered an extra Yale or two and even ordered a silver rabbit. I might be wrong, but I can’t find any historical precedent for a monarch appearing on a coin dated with the year after they died.

Although not an error, as they were proclaimed by the Queen, they are an unarguable novelty and will always tell a story.

I’m guessing the Harry Potter coins may also fall into this category.

Henry VIII had posthumous issues.

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, SidS said:

1820 half crowns must have been a blip then? 😁

Henry VIII had posthumous issues.

a) Yes, as were: 1830 British Gold Sovereigns of William IV

https://goldsovereigns.co.uk/1830sovereignwilliamiv.html

b) Yes, there were rumours that a few of his children were born posthumously! 😎 Posthumous coin issues were common from ancient Greek and roman times, through to the days of hammered silver pennies.

 

[SidS]

2 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

a) Yes, as were: 1830 British Gold Sovereigns of William IV

https://goldsovereigns.co.uk/1830sovereignwilliamiv.html

b) Yes, there were rumours that a few of his children were born posthumously! 😎 Posthumous coin issues were common from ancient Greek and roman times, through to the days of hammered silver pennies.

 

1837 groats ring a bell as well. However, I'm not sure if these Victoria 1837s were patterns or not.

[LawrenceChard]

13 minutes ago, SidS said:

1837 groats ring a bell as well. However, I'm not sure if these Victoria 1837s were patterns or not.

Willim IV:

https://24carat.co.uk/frame.php?url=1837groat.html

1837 Victoria Groats were proof only.

😎

[LawrenceChard]

2 hours ago, SidS said:

1820 half crowns must have been a blip then? 😁

Henry VIII had posthumous issues.

 

1 hour ago, LawrenceChard said:

a) Yes, as were: 1830 British Gold Sovereigns of William IV

https://goldsovereigns.co.uk/1830sovereignwilliamiv.html

b) Yes, there were rumours that a few of his children were born posthumously! 😎 Posthumous coin issues were common from ancient Greek and roman times, through to the days of hammered silver pennies.

 

 

1 hour ago, SidS said:

1837 groats ring a bell as well. However, I'm not sure if these Victoria 1837s were patterns or not.

I managed to find a posthumously issued coin of Charles I:

I hope our new King Charles doesn't see that!

😎

[SidS]

32 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

 

 

I managed to find a posthumously issued coin of Charles I:

I hope our new King Charles doesn't see that!

😎

Nice to see one that isn't a severed head for once, merely a severed body. The bodies never get any respect. They held his head up for all to see but no one held his body up.

[LawrenceChard]

Just now, SidS said:

Nice to see one that isn't a severed head for once, merely a severed body. The bodies never get any respect. They held his head up for all to see but no one held his body up.

I had never thought about that!

😎

[HerefordBullyun]

4 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

 

c) NFI, but I suggest you concentrate on quality, not quantity.

😎

Quality dung always produced. you see how much verbal of it I produce here.

 

[Shinus73]

5 hours ago, SidS said:

Henry VIII had posthumous issues.

He had a lot of issues.

I’m going to work on the assumption that 2023 Lunar Rabbits will be easier to pick up than the Henry VIII coins. 

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, Shinus73 said:

He had a lot of issues.

I’m going to work on the assumption that 2023 Lunar Rabbits will be easier to pick up than the Henry VIII coins. 

The one ounce ones will be much easier to pick up than the one kilo ones!

😎

[Stuntman]

Thanks @LawrenceChard.

I came here to mention the 1820 half crowns of George III and George IV, but @SidS was already there!

Good to learn about some of the earlier 'issues' of all sorts, too.

In my own collection, I don't have (and don't want) an 1820 George IV coin and I don't want a 2022 Charles III coin and I definitely don't want a 2023-dated Elizabeth II coin.  To me it seems wrong, and in the last of those cases, disrespectful.

Just my own opinion of course.

Edited September 11, 2022 by Stuntman

[LawrenceChard]

2 hours ago, Stuntman said:

Thanks @LawrenceChard.

I came here to mention the 1820 half crowns of George III and George IV, but @SidS was already there!

Good to learn about some of the earlier 'issues' of all sorts, too.

In my own collection, I don't have (and don't want) an 1820 George IV coin and I don't want a 2022 Charles III coin and I definitely don't want a 2023-dated Elizabeth II coin.  To me it seems wrong, and in the last of those cases, disrespectful.

Just my own opinion of course.

The passage of time does make a difference to many things, so I would never normally have thought any better or worse of 1820 George III or IV halfcrowns.

I would positively like to handle an 1830 William IV gold sovereign, partly in order to obtain high quality photographs of it.

I see no good reason to shun 2023 dated coins of the late Elizabeth II, especially ones already issued, or produced. The dies had already been made, and other processes in different stages of progress, in the hope and expectation that H.M would continue living longer. Indeed, from what I have gleaned about her, I suspect Elizabeth herself would have unhappy about dies and other resources being wasted. I think this in itself an important consideration. Obviously there is always bound to be varying opinions.

I do agree that 2022 dated Charles II coins would be considered by many, if not most, as distasteful, although I would be surprised if none were produced for some other countries, and marketed by some of the Coin Marketing Companies!

😎

[fmadmarq]

Likewise to @Shinus73 I grabbed the known 2023 coins so far - the 1oz Silver Rabbit and the The (Tudor) Yale of Beaufort (Silver Proof Two-Coin Set). The reverse frosted seems to have a mintage of 500(!?).

If no further Proof 2023 Elizabeth II coins are minted, I would dare to say that the animals in Gold or weighing a lot in Silver might be of some interesting numismatic value...

Regarding the Bullion Britannias, well the Royal Mint could spice up things with a couple of 2 over 3!  🙊