Hello, I have some questions about those large copper pennies with Brittania on the back and the english ruler on the obverse. Are they all British, or were there canadians, Bahamanians, australian ones made also, if so how can one tell the difference? And are there any price guides for these coins on line? My dad had a bunch of them that I shipped to my sister who claimed them, I had no idea what they were worth but just threw them in along with his Lincoln collection. So today I stopped at the antique mall, and bought a bunch of them, mostly early 1900s to 1930s. They did not cost much and the coin seller at the antique mall is normally pretty pricey, but I am curious what to look for and what a good ballpark figure for buying them would be. I know it is sort of like shutting the gate after the cattle have got into the corn, but better late than never.
Australia has the, but with a kangaroo on the reverse. Canada has Large Cents. The Bahamas used Great Britain coins, which were legal tender until the Bahamas issued their own decimal coins in 1966.
Chip - I can't answer for Australia, Canada, Bahamas. IME for England and Ireland coppers, the King and/or Queen is on the obverse, and Britannia or Hibernia, respectively, on the reverse. Here is an online link that I use for English and Irish coppers: farthings, half pennies, pennies, and two pence: http://www.coinarchives.com/w/ Also, I use the Spink Guide which has all English and UK coins. It doesn't include Ireland: Coins of England & The United Kingdom, 43rd Edition, Standard Catalogue of British Coins, Spink, (c)2007 Hope this info helps. Good luck :thumb:
Here's a great price guide for UK pennies: http://www.coins-of-the-uk.co.uk/values/penny.html Updated pretty regularly. All UK pennies from 1797 until 1970 had Brittannia on the reverse, in varius forms. Pictures of the penny through various monarchs from George III to Elizabeth II is shown below (part of the same website as the price guide above). http://www.ukcoinpics.co.uk/pen2.html If you'd like any more info on UK pennies, I'd be only too happy to assist ...
After 1911 Australia minted large pennies and half pennies that were similiar, if not the same in size and weight as the British ones(i'm not sure exactly). The Canadian large cent of the same time period is a bit smaller than the Australian or British though. All are fun coins to collect... and places like Newfoundland, and Nova Scotia did their own versions of these large pennies. Here are some photos, an Aussie 1917-I penny, minted in India, you can see the 'I' mintmark on the reverse. The obverse of a Canadian 1899 Victorian Large Cent, and a 1908 Edward VII Canadian Large cent, as well as the reverse of an 1861 Newfoundland large cent.
There have been several complex answers here but the question was how to tell the difference. Am I not correct that the issues for 'other' places will always have that name on the coin "Australia", "Canada" etc. but the mainstream, back home UK issues take it for granted that you know where they were from and never say the country name? I know always and never are dangerous words and some issues hide the words a bit (there are Australian coins showing the national seal held by local animals where the word is on a ribbon below and could wear away in time) but the simple answer is that if it does not say where it is from, think UK.
That is absolutely correct! The UK is unique in not displaying country name on its coins (and stamps, too). All other 'large' pennies will have the country name on them. For a long time, some coins in the UK didn't display their value - halfcrowns only started that in 1893, and pennies/halfpennies/farthings in 1860. The earliest to display a value was the newly-introduced florin (2/-, two shillings) in 1849, displaying the value as "one tenth of a pound" ... the first step to decimalisation, which wouldn't occur until 1971!
I suppose they expected that people would recognize Britannia on the reverse of the bronzes.... and as with the ones that do not display denomination, most of these issues were not expected to circulate very far from the country of origin, to my knowledge, at least with the types we are talking about. So people would know the sizes of different denominations, or that was the thinking.... I assume.
Going back in time, the practice of marking the state name on coins was rarely a high prority when it could be assumed. Rather few Roman Imperial coins actually say 'ROMA' on them but many earlier Republican ones do before Rome was the major power it later became. The bigger the state became, the less they felt the need to name it on the coins. The emperor is shown with his titles but he is not limited by it being pointed out that he is just ruler of the Romans; he is presented simply as 'Augustus' and a string of other titles. When Rome is mentioned on a coin it is generally in connection with the type like 'Glory of the Romans' showing a soldier or when the city personification herself is shown matching the coins where Britannia appears on the coins. Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic kings that followed him ususally had legends with only their names but you don't see things like 'Ptolemy, king of Egypt' which would admit that he was not king of somewhere else. Conversely, the big user of the city name was Athens that almost always marked their coins with the first three letters of the twon name even though the distinctive owl type would have identified it quite nicely. Relying on distinctive city badges for types was common so the need to actually spell out the name of the state was not consistant. Kings are more likely to point out that they are in charge than to limit their power by being too specific about what is included in their rule. The exceptions to this is when they felt the need to claim being over France, Spain or India in addition to the obvious homeland. I believe we were expected to realize that the money was not 'of the country' but 'of the king' so it was not necessary to state that a coin with Victoria's portrait and inscription was from her country. Provincials in Roman times usually had the emperor's portrait on the obverse with a reverse legend reading in the genitive plural 'of the Marcianapolitans', for example which is what we see when Canada and Australia mark their coins but the UK does not. All this is the development of centuries of tradition which we might call 'the language of coins'.
Interesting thread and thanks, andyscouse, for the links! I like large coppers and pick them out of junk boxes often: Mexico 50 centavos, UK pence, 19th century France and Italy, Bank of Upper Canada, and so on. In another topic, I mentioned buying a bag of UK pence a long while back and still give them out along with real money as tips in the coffee shop, etc., I used them as "unit coins" ("challenge coins") when I worked for a couple of security firms. So far, no one mentioned intrinsic value. Putting the king's image and name (or the city's name) on coins was more to glorify the king than to guarantee the coin which circualted by its own weight and fineness, especially when a count ruled an area only 20 miles on a side, or bishop ruled only a cathedral city. Making coins money of account only began about 1540-1550 with Henry III or IV of France -- Ian corrects me on this all the time; I never get it right -- when the "franc" coin declared its legal value. There were antecedents, of course. Ancient Greek coins from Kolophon, I think, little bitty silvers had an Epsilon or Eta to show the fraction of a drachmon because the coin was too small to judge on its own conveniently (or so we think). The Roman denarius had a X to show that it was X aes ("asses" but we avoid that with "aes") ten bronze standard "as" weight coins. But those were exceptions to the long history. In fact, the first US Federal gold coins did not have denominations on them. The half dollar had 1/2 (1796-1797), but did not have a denomination until 1807. The dollar coins (patterns) had no denomination until 1840. Coins spoke for themselves. They glorified the king, but he wasn't making any promises...
actually, edward vi (1547-1553) shillings, sixpence, and threepence had value designations on them in roman numerals. no, i do not own these coins, just using the pictures as a reference. both coins were minted between 1551 and 1553.
This is true! (I don't collect hammered, so I'd forgotten about those). But in "spelt out" form, that wasn't until the C19th. Also, the first dated UK coin was in 1551, the period you describe ...
you are correct on the era, but it was before 1849. the earliest "spelt out" form is the 1799 george iii farthing, but it was only for that year. william iv (1830-1837) was the first to say "one shilling" on a shilling. he also spelled out sixpence and fourpence.
