Debbie Posted July 29, 2012 Posted July 29, 2012 I was always under the impression that each time a new king or queen took over the direction they faced on the coinage changed. I noticed that George V, Edward VIII and George VI all face the same way. ? Quote
azda Posted July 29, 2012 Posted July 29, 2012 (edited) I was always under the impression that each time a new king or queen took over the direction they faced on the coinage changed. I noticed that George V, Edward VIII and George VI all face the same way. ? Edward the VIII did'nt like to conform to tradition, if you look at George VI, he also faces the same way Edited July 29, 2012 by azda Quote
Coinery Posted July 29, 2012 Posted July 29, 2012 And Charles II faced both directions in gold and silver! As did James II on his tin coinage! Quote
Nick Posted July 29, 2012 Posted July 29, 2012 I was always under the impression that each time a new king or queen took over the direction they faced on the coinage changed. I noticed that George V, Edward VIII and George VI all face the same way. ? Edward VIII's face was not particularly symmetrical and he didn't like the side that should have shown on the coins - so he faced the other way. Quote
Peckris Posted July 29, 2012 Posted July 29, 2012 I was always under the impression that each time a new king or queen took over the direction they faced on the coinage changed. I noticed that George V, Edward VIII and George VI all face the same way. ? Edward VIII's face was not particularly symmetrical and he didn't like the side that should have shown on the coins - so he faced the other way.Yes, Edward VIII was extremely vain. This even superseded his political leanings, which would have made the correct right-facing portrait far more appropriate. George VI simply restored the natural sequence as if his brother had faced the proper way. Interestingly, the Abdication was so late in the year that the issue of 1937 George VI coins must have been a very rushed job. This can be seen in an almost unchanged portrait, and reverse designs that were more often identical than not. Quote
SEnumis Posted July 30, 2012 Posted July 30, 2012 I wonder if Charles will have his portrait head on? It would be interesting if he did although have no evidence to suppose he would. Now that would be a much older tradition... Quote
Debbie Posted July 30, 2012 Author Posted July 30, 2012 Thanks for that interesting info chaps, that's something else I didn't know.I don't think I would be able to tell the difference between the two portraits of EdVIII and George V1 - apart from that Edwards nose looks slightly more dipped.I'm sure Charles will keep to the tradition and definately in profile! Quote
Generic Lad Posted July 30, 2012 Posted July 30, 2012 What I wonder is if Charles will keep his name and be Charles III or whether he will change it to something with better history. So will we see George VII? Or perhaps Edward IX? Or William V? Quote
Peckris Posted July 30, 2012 Posted July 30, 2012 What I wonder is if Charles will keep his name and be Charles III or whether he will change it to something with better history. So will we see George VII? Or perhaps Edward IX? Or William V?I think he will be Neddy Seagoon the First Quote
Red Riley Posted July 30, 2012 Posted July 30, 2012 I wonder if Charles will have his portrait head on? It would be interesting if he did although have no evidence to suppose he would. Now that would be a much older tradition...They'd have to increase the size of the coins to accommodate his ears. Quote
Red Riley Posted July 30, 2012 Posted July 30, 2012 What I wonder is if Charles will keep his name and be Charles III or whether he will change it to something with better history. So will we see George VII? Or perhaps Edward IX? Or William V?He is on record as saying he wants to be George VII. Quote
Peckris Posted July 30, 2012 Posted July 30, 2012 What I wonder is if Charles will keep his name and be Charles III or whether he will change it to something with better history. So will we see George VII? Or perhaps Edward IX? Or William V?He is on record as saying he wants to be George VII....with Camilla as Min, William as Griptype-Thynne, and Harry as Eccles Quote
scottishmoney Posted August 2, 2012 Posted August 2, 2012 Inasmuch as the monarchy is a phenomenal tradition, I do believe amends must be made to skip a generation or otherwise just insure that the interregnum will be duly brief betwixt the reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King William V. Quote
Peckris Posted August 2, 2012 Posted August 2, 2012 Inasmuch as the monarchy is a phenomenal tradition, I do believe amends must be made to skip a generation or otherwise just insure that the interregnum will be duly brief betwixt the reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King William V.Good job you're in the Ukraine, or you could find yourself in the Tower for an insurrectionary remark like that! Quote
scottishmoney Posted August 2, 2012 Posted August 2, 2012 Good job you're in the Ukraine, or you could find yourself in the Tower for an insurrectionary remark like that!"The" Ukraine is an insurrectionary comment in Ukraine - only pro-Russian uses the article "the". I remember a few years ago, my mother in law got chewed out for saying that. It is okay to speak Russian, we all do in UA, but never say it like "the" Ukraine.At least I have the highest respects for Her Majesty, just not her firstborn. I will stay out like the plaque whence Charles becomes monarch. If he were a long reign, I foresee the final dismantling of a long and formidable monarchy. Quote
Peckris Posted August 2, 2012 Posted August 2, 2012 Good job you're in the Ukraine, or you could find yourself in the Tower for an insurrectionary remark like that!"The" Ukraine is an insurrectionary comment in Ukraine - only pro-Russian uses the article "the". I remember a few years ago, my mother in law got chewed out for saying that. It is okay to speak Russian, we all do in UA, but never say it like "the" Ukraine.At least I have the highest respects for Her Majesty, just not her firstborn. I will stay out like the plaque whence Charles becomes monarch. If he were a long reign, I foresee the final dismantling of a long and formidable monarchy.Hardly likely, given his current age! The words "Edward" and "VII" come to mind for some reason. Mind you, I don't share your antipathy - much as I admire Her Maj, a Goons-loving, environmentally-caring, plant-talking, Camilla-marrying gonk might be quite fun for a year or two Quote
scottishmoney Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Hardly likely, given his current age! The words "Edward" and "VII" come to mind for some reason. Mind you, I don't share your antipathy - much as I admire Her Maj, a Goons-loving, environmentally-caring, plant-talking, Camilla-marrying gonk might be quite fun for a year or two Surely will be good for the Tabloids. But then again, George VII might could get upset and shutter them. Quote
Peckris Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Hardly likely, given his current age! The words "Edward" and "VII" come to mind for some reason. Mind you, I don't share your antipathy - much as I admire Her Maj, a Goons-loving, environmentally-caring, plant-talking, Camilla-marrying gonk might be quite fun for a year or two Surely will be good for the Tabloids. But then again, George VII might could get upset and shutter them.Wow. A Battle Royal between George VII and Rupert Murdoch. Now that I'd pay good money to see! Quote
SEnumis Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 One thing there won't be is an interegnum. The Queen is dead.Long live the King. Quote
scottishmoney Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 One thing there won't be is an interegnum. The Queen is dead.Long live the King.There was that brief interregnum betwixt the reigns of GV and GVI, aka Walli's husband. Canna say they really reigned. Wasn't even coronated, in fact GVI was coronated when EVIII was supposed to have been. Quote
Peckris Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 One thing there won't be is an interegnum. The Queen is dead.Long live the King.There was that brief interregnum betwixt the reigns of GV and GVI, aka Walli's husband. Canna say they really reigned. Wasn't even coronated, in fact GVI was coronated when EVIII was supposed to have been.Hmm, if you only count a reign from the coronation, then Her Maj's Diamond Jubbly is not until NEXT year! Quote
SEnumis Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 One thing there won't be is an interegnum. The Queen is dead.Long live the King.There was that brief interregnum betwixt the reigns of GV and GVI, aka Walli's husband. Canna say they really reigned. Wasn't even coronated, in fact GVI was coronated when EVIII was supposed to have been.Hmm, if you only count a reign from the coronation, then Her Maj's Diamond Jubbly is not until NEXT year!And Edward VIII reigned - just look at the stamps Quote
scottishmoney Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 And Edward VIII reigned - just look at the stampsAnd mercifully short for the monarchists. Quote
Geordie582 Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 Off with all your heads Lets get back to real monarchy and get rid of these pesky politicians Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.