Good Fine Mule £1,250 Any Takers?

[Gary D 76]

I don't recall any accounts of these Wreaths circulating. What was to be bought with a crown or why would a non-collector want one in the first place?I have collected these for nearly 20 years, and though have not purchased any for greater than 10 have seen in the main EF specimens that were likely clanking around in tellers drawers. A few gVF specimens with precious few at the F level, and a few "pocket pieces" every now and then.

My own opinion is that they rarely circulated, were legal tender obviously, much as Nick says...

With the average weekly wage in 1930 being about £4 or 16 Crowns you could buy quite a lot for 5/-. I would suggest that up until the early twenteith century crowns were widely circulated. Even into the 30s they must have being in common use.

[Peckris 579]

It's a strange one alright, but I can see both sides of the argument. There are many wreath crowns that look circulated and therefore it is reasonable to assume that some of those did circulate. On the other hand, the total coinage of all of the wreath crown years (excluding 1927 proofs) was only ~35,000 and you would probably find it difficult persuading a shopkeeper to accept the largest face value coin, the like of which he/she had never seen before. Similar to trying to spend a £5 coin today.

Precisely my point.

I don't recall any accounts of these Wreaths circulating. What was to be bought with a crown or why would a non-collector want one in the first place?I have collected these for nearly 20 years, and though have not purchased any for greater than 10 have seen in the main EF specimens that were likely clanking around in tellers drawers. A few gVF specimens with precious few at the F level, and a few "pocket pieces" every now and then.

My own opinion is that they rarely circulated, were legal tender obviously, much as Nick says...

Yes, I agree. I've hardly ever seen a worn (below GVF) specimen, and the 'pocket piece' theory of the few that did wear is as good an explanation as any.

I don't recall any accounts of these Wreaths circulating. What was to be bought with a crown or why would a non-collector want one in the first place?I have collected these for nearly 20 years, and though have not purchased any for greater than 10 have seen in the main EF specimens that were likely clanking around in tellers drawers. A few gVF specimens with precious few at the F level, and a few "pocket pieces" every now and then.

My own opinion is that they rarely circulated, were legal tender obviously, much as Nick says...

With the average weekly wage in 1930 being about £4 or 16 Crowns you could buy quite a lot for 5/-. I would suggest that up until the early twenteith century crowns were widely circulated. Even into the 30s they must have being in common use.

The Royal Mint would vehemently disagree. They stopped producing them for currency after 1900 precisely because public demand for them had fallen away. Why that is, I don't really know, but having grown up in the 1960s with ten bob notes, halfcrowns, etc, I never felt that there was a lack of an intermediate denomination. I imagine that one possible cause of their unpopularity was their sheer size, which of course did for the Cartwheel twopence, though that was bigger still.

There's no evidence that they circulated widely in the 1930s. The opposite in fact - Wikipedia says "The British crown was always a large coin, and from the 19th century it did not circulate well."

[Peter 615]

I have had a few circulated 1937 crowns but the ones I have now need a bit of Acetone and cotton bud.

[Gary1000 41]

It's a strange one alright, but I can see both sides of the argument. There are many wreath crowns that look circulated and therefore it is reasonable to assume that some of those did circulate. On the other hand, the total coinage of all of the wreath crown years (excluding 1927 proofs) was only ~35,000 and you would probably find it difficult persuading a shopkeeper to accept the largest face value coin, the like of which he/she had never seen before. Similar to trying to spend a £5 coin today.

Precisely my point.

I don't recall any accounts of these Wreaths circulating. What was to be bought with a crown or why would a non-collector want one in the first place?I have collected these for nearly 20 years, and though have not purchased any for greater than 10 have seen in the main EF specimens that were likely clanking around in tellers drawers. A few gVF specimens with precious few at the F level, and a few "pocket pieces" every now and then.

My own opinion is that they rarely circulated, were legal tender obviously, much as Nick says...

Yes, I agree. I've hardly ever seen a worn (below GVF) specimen, and the 'pocket piece' theory of the few that did wear is as good an explanation as any.

I don't recall any accounts of these Wreaths circulating. What was to be bought with a crown or why would a non-collector want one in the first place?I have collected these for nearly 20 years, and though have not purchased any for greater than 10 have seen in the main EF specimens that were likely clanking around in tellers drawers. A few gVF specimens with precious few at the F level, and a few "pocket pieces" every now and then.

My own opinion is that they rarely circulated, were legal tender obviously, much as Nick says...

With the average weekly wage in 1930 being about £4 or 16 Crowns you could buy quite a lot for 5/-. I would suggest that up until the early twenteith century crowns were widely circulated. Even into the 30s they must have being in common use.

The Royal Mint would vehemently disagree. They stopped producing them for currency after 1900 precisely because public demand for them had fallen away. Why that is, I don't really know, but having grown up in the 1960s with ten bob notes, halfcrowns, etc, I never felt that there was a lack of an intermediate denomination. I imagine that one possible cause of their unpopularity was their sheer size, which of course did for the Cartwheel twopence, though that was bigger still.

There's no evidence that they circulated widely in the 1930s. The opposite in fact - Wikipedia says "The British crown was always a large coin, and from the 19th century it did not circulate well."

What I was trying to say is that the people in the 30s were probably not strangers to the crown compared to now.

[TomGoodheart 373]

Interesting. I know nothing about circulation or not, but I know that 'when I were a lad' a crown was a lot of money. If my Grandpa gave me half a crown as a gift and it would be very welcome! I remember getting one as a prize for my handwriting at school.

I could buy a lot of sweets, several ice lollies or a paperback book with 2/6. And that was in the 1960s.

So a crown in 1930 would I suspect be a decent amount of money to a youngster and to an adult like getting a tenner. And, as with now, if you saw a design you'd not spotted before, well, I suspect you'd put it aside.

Which is not to say a few mightn't have been spent, after all, I'm not sure how aware people were of the scarcity of such pieces. Certainly not like in the 1970s when newspapers were full of lists of which coins were valuable and change hunting was popular.

But I'd imagine most were saved as souvenirs, legal tender or not.

[DaveG38 385]

Perhaps the answer to this lies in the question of how the Royal Mint actually distributed these crowns. Were they simply put out to banks for people to buy as souvenirs or were they actually put into circulation. Or were people invited to buy them direct, rather like the RE Proof of 1935. Anybody know as it might give a clue to the issue of wear?

[Peckris 579]

Interesting. I know nothing about circulation or not, but I know that 'when I were a lad' a crown was a lot of money. If my Grandpa gave me half a crown as a gift and it would be very welcome! I remember getting one as a prize for my handwriting at school.

I could buy a lot of sweets, several ice lollies or a paperback book with 2/6. And that was in the 1960s.

So a crown in 1930 would I suspect be a decent amount of money to a youngster and to an adult like getting a tenner. And, as with now, if you saw a design you'd not spotted before, well, I suspect you'd put it aside.

Which is not to say a few mightn't have been spent, after all, I'm not sure how aware people were of the scarcity of such pieces. Certainly not like in the 1970s when newspapers were full of lists of which coins were valuable and change hunting was popular.

But I'd imagine most were saved as souvenirs, legal tender or not.

Indeed. That's why "the few" were minted in the first place. And such a beautiful coin too, rarely seen except by collectors.

[Peckris 579]

Perhaps the answer to this lies in the question of how the Royal Mint actually distributed these crowns. Were they simply put out to banks for people to buy as souvenirs or were they actually put into circulation. Or were people invited to buy them direct, rather like the RE Proof of 1935. Anybody know as it might give a clue to the issue of wear?

I think the ultra low mintage provides the answer to that - they wouldn't have gone to all that trouble and expense (paying designers, plus the cost of production) to mint so few for circulation. I did read somewhere (can't remember where exactly, now) that they were produced as 'Christmas gifts'. That being the case, I imagine they could well have been sold for higher than face value? One assumes that proof sets were always sold at a premium, so there was ample precedent for a profit from coins.

I also read that the 1787 silver was issued to 'customers of the Bank', which is why so many survive in high grade, just like wreath crowns.

[argentumandcoins 70]

There are dozens of post 1860 that are worth that money and more (if Scott allows the 1860 1d varieties in of course or the 1860 1/2 mule). Well, worth being taken as the price it would cost you to buy them of course!

[argentumandcoins 70]

Perhaps the answer to this lies in the question of how the Royal Mint actually distributed these crowns. Were they simply put out to banks for people to buy as souvenirs or were they actually put into circulation. Or were people invited to buy them direct, rather like the RE Proof of 1935. Anybody know as it might give a clue to the issue of wear?

The only real clue lies in the 1935 specimen crown issue I suppose. The proof quota having been reached the Royal Mint boxed "specimen strike" crown s to satisfy the demand. Taking that to it's logical conclusion coupled with the fact that all of the wreath crowns had strange mintage figures it is reasonable to assume that they were struck to order?

[scott 129]

some of the 1860 variaties are rare, and should be worth lots, but most people don't list each type.

[Peckris 579]

Perhaps the answer to this lies in the question of how the Royal Mint actually distributed these crowns. Were they simply put out to banks for people to buy as souvenirs or were they actually put into circulation. Or were people invited to buy them direct, rather like the RE Proof of 1935. Anybody know as it might give a clue to the issue of wear?

The only real clue lies in the 1935 specimen crown issue I suppose. The proof quota having been reached the Royal Mint boxed "specimen strike" crown s to satisfy the demand. Taking that to it's logical conclusion coupled with the fact that all of the wreath crowns had strange mintage figures it is reasonable to assume that they were struck to order?

A very reasonable assumption, especially when you look at how the mintage tailed off for the final 2 years of their production.

[DaveG38 385]

I've just been looking through the London Coins catalogue and was struck by the collection of wreath crowns being sold, almost all of which are well worn. It's almost as if the seller set out to buy the lowest grade he/she could find.

[Peckris 579]

I've just been looking through the London Coins catalogue and was struck by the collection of wreath crowns being sold, almost all of which are well worn. It's almost as if the seller set out to buy the lowest grade he/she could find.

Eh? I just browsed the September catalogue online and there isn't a single wreath crown in there, that I can see?

[DaveG38 385]

I've just been looking through the London Coins catalogue and was struck by the collection of wreath crowns being sold, almost all of which are well worn. It's almost as if the seller set out to buy the lowest grade he/she could find.

Eh? I just browsed the September catalogue online and there isn't a single wreath crown in there, that I can see?

Lots 2061 to 2081?

[Paulus 1,942]

Always makes me chuckle when you see the suggestion that a coin might be MORE collectible because it is in a LOWER grade!

Maybe the Americans will introduce AW (Artificial Wear)!

Edited August 23, 2013 by Paulus

[Peckris 579]

I've just been looking through the London Coins catalogue and was struck by the collection of wreath crowns being sold, almost all of which are well worn. It's almost as if the seller set out to buy the lowest grade he/she could find.

Eh? I just browsed the September catalogue online and there isn't a single wreath crown in there, that I can see?

Lots 2061 to 2081?

Strange - I had to browse by lot number to see those. They aren't in the overall Catalogue.

Anyway - I'm disregarding the 1927's. Something very odd must have happened for someone to buy a proof set then spend the centrepiece for face value only. Having said that, the 1927's are numerically by far the biggest mintage. Even so, how many shopkeepers would have known what they were?

Items 2065 and 2069 do not have what I would class as 'regular circulation wear'. They look as though they have been rubbed many many times, and they have that kind of artificial overall wear that you don't see from general circulation. Mind you, it's no more than a feeling, but they just don't look right as circulated coins.

There were more high grade crowns than low grade in the first 10 lots.

[Peter 615]

A 1927 crown would be a big temptation for a sticky fingered child.

[copper123 1,352]

Or even a broke adult - remember this country has always gone boom - bust forget what gordon brown said about abolishing it - it still happens

[Peckris 579]

Or even a broke adult - remember this country has always gone boom - bust forget what gordon brown said about abolishing it - it still happens

These are sound points, but the question remains : what shop would even have recognised them, let alone taken them? And if they did, what customer would have taken them as change?

[copper123 1,352]

But surely a sixty year old sweet shop owner in say 1930 would remember well that a crown was the size of a wreath crown and also be well versed in recognising a coin that is made of 50% silver and not made for use overseas.

I have seen many many 1935 and 1937 crowns with lots of circulation wear

[Peckris 579]

But surely a sixty year old sweet shop owner in say 1930 would remember well that a crown was the size of a wreath crown and also be well versed in recognising a coin that is made of 50% silver and not made for use overseas.

I have seen many many 1935 and 1937 crowns with lots of circulation wear

There are some, it's true, though only a minority compared to those in high grade. But the point is, the mintage of those 2 crowns was out of all proportion to wreath crowns - 3/4 and 1/2 a million respectively. And there would have been a fair amount of publicity too - in 1935 for the Jubilee, and in 1937 for the new reign. They wouldn't have cost more than face probably, whereas you would have had to pay a premium for a wreath, and you weren't going to make a loss by spending it.

I still stand by the claim that few people would ever have seen a wreath crown. And that those worn specimens in the CGS sale didn't look as if they'd suffered circulation wear, but more by constant rubbing or buffing up. We can't know for certain of course, but that was my gut feeling.

[copper123 1,352]

you are of course very, very right many many more wreath crowns got wear from being pocket pieces than through circulation.

Have you though that they maybe were kept for a time and then passed on (spent) and the next person that got hold of it maybe used it as a pocket piece as well after being showed it as a curio by a shopkeeper

[Peckris 579]

you are of course very, very right many many more wreath crowns got wear from being pocket pieces than through circulation.

Have you though that they maybe were kept for a time and then passed on (spent) and the next person that got hold of it maybe used it as a pocket piece as well after being showed it as a curio by a shopkeeper

It's entirely possible, I guess. Though in my opinion, it would only apply to a small number of pieces.

[VickySilver 775]

I wouldn't say I have seen LOTS of circulated '35s and '37s, but a few...