Yes, they’re revising the British banknotes again, so hang onto your tenners. You might even get a crisp one at the bank and frame it. For the £10 note, which has carried the portrait of the World’s Best Biologist since 2000, is being given the boot. I always smiled when I pulled out a tenner in England. No longer.
The old note:
Instead, as of next year, we’re going to have. . . Jane Austen. Now don’t get me wrong: I like her work (though I much prefer “George Eliot’s Middlemarch), but couldn’t they put her on the fiver and leave Darwin alone?
The twenty, which now carries Adam Smith, will be replaced in 2020 by one of my favorite painters, J. M. W. Turner. That’s okay by me.
Finally, the fiver, which now carries Elizabeth Fry, is going to be replaced by The Bulldog this September:
They do tend to change the pictures every ten years or so (except for the Queen, who remains on the other side), but with the no-platforming of Darwin no biologists will remain on the currency. What about putting on the trio of Francis Crick, Rosalind Franklin, and Maurice Wilkins, along with a spiffy representation of the double helix?
Prepare for outrage 10 years from now if Jane Austin is replaced by a male.
Id might even rather Thatcher than Jane Austen
Theres plenty of other famous female novelists Brontes, Mary Shelley,
not to mention 20th C and since Virginia Woolf, Agatha Christie etc.
scientists … Rosalind Franklin whose X Ray crystallography identified the structure of DNA, Anne McLaren Elisabeth Garett Anderson, Beatrix Potter, Ada Lovelace, Susan Greenfield, etc.
or famous founding feminists Jessie Boucherette, Barbara Bodichon, Helen Blackburn, Marie Stopes, the Pankhursts, …. or even Florence Nightingale.
Clearly there are plenty of other notable women who would be worthy of depiction on one or other of the notes but I dont see any reason why Jane Austen is not an excellent choice – much better in my view than Mary Shelley, Agatha Christie (a mediocre writer I’d suggest) or Virginia Woolf if we are considering writers.
Margaret Thatcher is perhaps too recent a figure and also still very divisive. As Ant points out Florence Nightingale has already been honoured in this way.
I wasn’t really suggesting thatcher – perhaps I didn’t express it clearly enough I was suggesting the other people or indeed Hertha Ayrton and expressing my dismay at the choice of Jane Austen – a great novelist but a bit of a prescriptive type for women that I know many do like but I certainly don’t.
Are you kidding? You seem to be suggesting that have Austen on the money is the result of some sort of “feminism gone crazy”. Perhaps you’re not aware that the woman who proposed Austen for the banknote (and, frankly, pretty much no women other than the Queen have ever be honoured on the banknotes) was then subjected to a massive onslaught of misogynistic insults and threats on her twitter account, including at least one horrible rape threat that (for once) resulted in a prosecution. This is something that would *never* happen to a man who advocates for, well, anything. So the future man who suggests a male replacement for the fiver has nothing to fear. It really gets me cross when any progress in getting representation of women in honours and awards is met with not just misogyny but cries of “oh the poor menz” from individuals of the formerly privileged gender.
The banknote honours are not about identifying who are the 5 most influential Britons *ever* – they are changed every decade or so that should include a diversity of individuals who have made a mark on society from all domains of life. I think Austen is a pretty good choice since her stories are still told and enjoyed, and made into movies today. Those who have not read her (i.e. most men) are not really in a position to comment.
I few typos in there, sorry.
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/roiphe/2013/08/the_anger_over_jane_austen_on_a_10_pound_note_proves_people_can_rage_over.html
« pretty much no women … have ever be honoured on the banknotes »
Florence Nightingale was on the ten pound note issued between 1975 and 1994.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/a5/3a/bb/a53abb2cd9b0d90f853ef8c7bc22be4f.jpg
/@
PS. And Jerry already noted Elizabeth Fry!
http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/297990/10766308/1297813300713/Elizabeth+Fry+five+pound+note.jpg
Ah, Jerry’s read Middlemarch! I was smitten with it in 2012. But when I told people, the response was (disappointingly) invariably along these lines: “The most boring piece of literature on the planet.” There you have it. It takes a lot to persuade me to read fiction, and when I do, it is rare (I’ve been moved to read Anna Karenina, and yes Austen).
But still, bummer re the Darwin –> Austen tenner.
While many know George Eliot as the author of “Middlemarch”, “Silas Marner”, and “The Mill on the Floss”, few know her has an important figure in the criticism of religion.
She translated into English both Ludwig Feuerbach’s “The Essence of Christianity”- one of the earliest books to criticize Christianity on psychological rather than scientific or moral grounds- and David Friedrich Strauss’ “The Life of Jesus Critically Examined” the first book to do any kind of critical analysis of the mutual contradictions in the New Testament and ask in that light what elements of the Gospels are reliable.
Eliot’s translation of both of these remains the standard English edition to this day.
=-=-=
I really like both the novels Marner and Mill/Floss. I sadly have only seen the Masterpiece Theatre rendition of Middlemarch which many think subtly distorts the work.
I vividly remember the New York Review’s assessment of the television version. “[In the TV series] the implied horror is that Dorothea does not sleep with Casaubon; in the novel the implied horror is that she does”
They may SAY that’s JMW Turner (and he’s worthy of the honour). But we KNOW that’s Brian Cox. Are they related? I think we should be told.
And Brian Cox looks just like Davy Jones of the Monkees so I say it’s Davy Jones!
Maybe the treasury will develop a sense of humour, make a Nine Pound note and have Ken Ham on the backside?
😉
Would that be the modern version of the old nine-bob note,as which crooks might have been as bent? 😉
Ah… a clever person. Nod’s as good as wink .
😉
The really bent crook could take your nine-bob note and change it for three three bob notes and make a profit on the deal.
True story : in the late 1970s I was acquainted with a pub in Darkest Snowdonia where the landlord (1) didn’t bother too much about underage drinkers, and (2) hated decimalisation. So he would relay all his prices, and change as pounds, shillings and pence. Nice enough guy, but a nutter.
The way to really piss him off was to pass him a pound note (this was before pound coins, or “squidlets” as they’re sometimes referred to), and ask for change of two ten-bob notes.
At the time a ten-bob note in reasonable condition would fetch about a pound (decimal) from the scripophilists.
I don’t think many people in the UK know who Ken Ham is. I’d nominate Donald Trump.
Or just his toupee?
Darwin for Austen does not compute in any way except they both had books published.
They were both British people of significant achievement. That’s the only requirement as far as I know so it computes in those terms. They change them every ten years or so and have included various politicians, artists, scientists, philosophers, social reformers, soldiers and so on.
Yeah I get that, just seems a work of fiction isn’t on the level of importance as evolution.
Are they allowed to have non-British people on the notes? Maurice Wilkins was a New Zealander but he may have lived in the UK which might be allowed.
Whatever the answer, I too was disappointed that Darwin had to be removed.
Professor Richard Dawkins, in his most commented TED talk, was comparing US dollar and England pound to show difference between two cultures. Alas, I can’t see that note if I ever visit England. England should reconsider this issue.
They must offer for sail in some form (e.g. as postcards) all notes that have ever been in circulation.
sale, of course
There won’t bee any problem about getting good quality note for the scripophily market for years to come.
I made sure to get some specimens of the tenner when I heard Darwin was on it. Got a puzzled look from the International Exchange attendant at MSP when I got some (“just ten-pound notes, please; how much will that be in US currency?”) as I passed through the international area heading to a different country (not the UK).
Now I’m going to have to load Middlemarch to my Kindle … 🙂
I’m not sure we can complain about the replacement of Darwin, who has been on a note about as long as anyone ever is, but if it’s going to be Austen, Turner and Churchill (note the citation for *literature*), then we have three artists/writers and no scientists.
Its strikes me that a good British scientist who would be highly relevant to current civil rights fights would be Alan Turing.
I can’t work up much upset about Darwin. The government seems to have a process, and be following it normally, with no particular favoritism or antipathy aimed at biology, evolution, science, etc.
Frankly, I’d be if the US did something similar and had a 10-year or 15-year cycle rate for their bill design. Our “cycle” has been (from what I’ve read) a whopping four changed pictures since 1914.
+1
Which is, of course, precisely WHY, Turing won’t be on a note in the near future. Civil servents are notoriously shy of controversies, and even the hint of taking a side in them.
Note Churchill’s citation for literature. Steering well clear of questions about Dresden, for example.
Turing would be a good choice, though several anniversaries were missed.
(Still, it is the 80th anniversary of the paper that made his reputation this year, so …)
It’s an idea I’d support (I’ve actually read the paper, I think. It’s the one about the ending problem, isn’t it?)
But I don’t see it happening until after Britain’s first openly bisexuality monarch.
“Halting problem” is how it is put now. (If I recall, the term is due to Kleene.)
“On Computable Numbers With an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem” is the title.
Oh, that reminds me that I need to do my German practice today.
Don’t forget there’s also the £50 note which isn’t due to change for some time. This features matthew Boulton, James Watt and the steam engine.
May be not rocket science, but in the right area.
Except that you never see a £50 note these days because no shop ever accepts them, because only forgers use £50 notes, everyone else uses credit cards.
Don’t know what shops you go to but I never have trouble tendering a bullseye in Waitrose
Got loads on them in summer 2015 from the ATMs in London and elsewhere. Never had trouble spending them (hoo-boy, no trouble spending a LOT).
That would be Stephenson.
/@
Not sure of your Stephenson reference?
Thomas Newcomen invented the stationary steam engine, which worked by condensing the steam in the cylinder with a water spray (so really a ‘vacuum’ engine). James Watt developed it into a low-pressure stationary engine with a separate condenser. He never allowed any significant working pressure for safety reasons. This was never going to be a mobile engine.
Francis Trevithick built the first (high-pressure) steam locomotive. A number of other pioneers built early steam locomotives, but it was George Stephenson who adopted it, developed it, promoted it and turned it and railways into a practical and world-changing form of transport.
Not sure if he’s ever been on a banknote but he ought to be.
cr
“rocket” science.
Looks like Ant picked up the pun.
So unlike me!
George Stephenson was featured on the five pound note issued between 1990 and 2003. It features the “Rocket”, largely designed by his son Robert, albeit with input from George.
http://drps.synthasite.com/resources/GREAT%20BRITAIN-382bR.jpg
/@
Whereas I *completely* missed the pun. And it was a good one.
My only excuse is that, living in New Zealand, I ‘never’ see British notes.
(Not quite ‘never’, since I’ve been in UK for a total of about a month, but then I was too preoccupied to ever look at what was on them. That was in 2014, by which time I assume all the Stephensons would have disappeared).
cr
Fascinating to read these discussions. Learning more every day! Thanks!
Why would they put Brian Cox on the 20 Pound note, he is not dead yet? Or did I miss something… nope just checked, he is still kicking. Perhaps he will be dead before 2020… better let him know.
😉
Jane Austen instead of Darwin ,,,, I know a lot of people love her work but sounds like Rule of the Domestocrats
Ive read Austen – good literature but not my thing. Officers of the British army used to be given a copy of Pride and Prejudice or other Austen works to take on campaign as reminder of true womanhood back at home. Yes the characters are plucky and care for their families. But given all the maids who supported the lovely house and the closeted, but suppressed, difficult and endlessly fussy (upper) middle class lives of the early 19th Century protagonists in modern context just represents to me mindless consumerism plus turbo charged domesticity.
That said I suppose Darwin has had his cycle on the bank notes …. Rosalind Franklin or Alan Turing as possible replacement?
Given the behavior of their student unions, maybe an Orwell bill is in order.
On that note (heh), how about a Jonathan Swift bill? Just the thing you want when buying irish babies.
A £19.84 note …
/@
Wonderful! 🙂
Or McCartney on a £19.85 note
Alan Turing FFS.
+1
The Darwin £10 notes will continue in circulation alongside the Jane Austen notes, although they will eventually be withdrawn and destroyed as they wear out. I’m not sure what the lifetime of a Bank of England note is these days, but I expect to see Darwin in my wallet for a few years to come.
The current Bank of England £50 note features James Watt, the Scottish scientist and engineer whose name is used as the SI unit of power.
As an astronomer, I always loved to see Isaac Newton on the old £1 notes, but those were taken out of use thirty years ago when the pound coin was introduced. I have a framed crisp uncirculated Newton £1 note.
The £5 note used to show George Stephenson, the pioneer of steam locomotives, whilst the £10 depicted Michael Faraday, who made major contributions to the study of electricity and magnetism, earning him the distinction of having the SI unit of capacitance named after him.
Meanwhile, the Royal Bank of Scotland recently announced that the 19th century astronomer Mary Somerville will appear on its £10 notes from next year, which is a win for both women and science.
So scientists have been, and continue to be, pretty well represented on banknotes in circulation in Great Britain.
If I had been an astronomer, my pedantry would have sent me into an apoplectic rage every time I looked at the picture on the £1 note with the Sun clearly in the wrong place.
It looked like an egregious error, indeed, but it turns out that there is actually a diagram in Newton’s Principia which shows the Sun at the centre of the ellipse rather than at the focus. Presumably, Newton included that diagram to illustrate the incorrect placement of the Sun.
Too many great Brits, too few banknotes.
Yes, that’s the problem. It’s unrealistic to expect the few banknotes in circulation at any one time to cover both genders and all areas of human endeavour. You’ve got to take the long view.
I think each denomination should have several series. For example, the 5 pound note could have a royalty series (the queen), a statesperson series (Churchill), a scientist (I vote for James Clark Maxwell), philosopher (I vote for David Hume), the arts(Elgar), etc.
I’m sorry to say, but it’s really not very attractive paper currency, unlike these:
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/10/norways-new-banknotes-are-works-of-art/381240/
Or these:
http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2015/02/hungarian-banknote-concept-designed-by-barbara-bernat/
Or this collection of 59, of which I don’t agree with a lot of them, including my own countries, (#9). The queen is not amused:
http://www.instantshift.com/2014/12/01/beautiful-country-currency/
Or these, art of birds on a different kind of bill (if your not already sick of them:
http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2013/11/birds-on-bills-by-paula-swisher/
Compared to the dreary U.S. currency the British notes are heavenly beautiful, and doubly so that they feature people other than horrid long dead and better forgotten politicians. I can not even dream of a day when the benighted U.S. would deign to recognize a scientist on the currency.
Ben Franklin?
His presence on the $100 bill confuses many British people, who think it means he was a president. (It’s a common wrong answer on a quiz show that we regularly watch.)
/@
Not sure if it’s the $100 bill (which few British will have seen) or his presence on the rather small mental list-of-well-known-Americans which probably runs something like ‘George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Ben Franklin, Mark Twain, Arnold Palmer, ummm…’
cr
I guess growing up in Canada (and paying some attention) I learned a lot more about the US than sometimes I care to think about! (And more than people from Europe would be exposed to.)
When I was small, I did watch a lot of PBS, for example. In particular, for a while I saw both the US *and* the Canadian Sesame Streets and also saw a lot of Square One TV and 3-2-1 Contact.
Some nice looking notes in those 59. The Pacific island nations (or their contracted designers) seem to have managed particularly well, with gorgeous colours well matched to the design – I’m thinking of the Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, Fiji.
I also like the Euro (very clean), Russia (very modern – snowboards) and the Hong Kong Dollar which gets away with its daring choice of colours by cunning design.
I do agree that’s not a flattering portrait of the Queen on the Canadian dollar #9, and design-wise the coloured stripe clashes incongruously with the almost-monotone rest of the note.
While I’m at it, our New Zealand $5 (# 38) is adequate but not particularly inspiring, though it’s just been much updated and – so I heard on the news last night – just won some design award. Since I love irony, it gives me some trivial amusement to note that the award-winning update has been designed and printed in – Canada!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/79311384/new-5-banknote-wins-international-prize
cr
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think the English notes look better than those Norwegian ones.
Also, the new ones won’t be made out of paper.
I like the British tradition of changing their currency periodically, so the Darwin change doesn’t really bother me. I wish my country (USA) would do likewise instead of staying with the same old presidents year after year after year…I will be glad to see Harriett Tubman in a few years.
I’d like to see us honor some of our artists, authors, scientists, explorers, musicians, etc. instead of just political figures, on our currency and coinage.
I agree. Though I think Tubman is only the first of several scheduled changes, and our Treasury has plans now to do a regular cycle of currency design change like England and several other places.
Well, at least the USA has one scientist on our money, though I don’t think that’s why he’s there.
Are we referring to Franklin.
Good that they decided to change course and stay with Hamilton on the ten bill. Removing Jackson from the 20 was okay with me but Hamilton must stay.
Egads! Out, out foul demon of blandness and mediocrity!
They should get rid of the whole lot of dead presidents. Or relegate them to rotating slots on the back side. Who gives a rip about any of them anyway? Heck, Prince would be a better choice for the $10 than any of those old dead politicians. I’m sick to death of them all.
I honestly don’t comprehend the desire for such static currency. The slim merits, sure, that it’s easy to know what is a real bill and what is not by sheer lifelong exposure. But the desire? One might as well say they wanted to have needles poked into their eyes for all the sense the desire to see these dead politicians forever enshrined on currency makes to me.
I can’t agree with that headline.
Darwin will have been there for 17 years. Being dropped in the usual rotation is not ‘ignominious’ unless you want to apply that to everyone else who has featured on a banknote, including, inevitably, Jane Austen in a decade’s time.
I do like that Turner will be there, he’s one of my favourite painters. ‘The Fighting Temeraire’ is the background picture, ironically showing the old warship (with a French name!) being towed away to be broken up.
cr
Hear hear!
Thatcher on the Banknotes ? as an earlier posting suggested. I have a better place for her Potrait , Toilet Paper.
See my above comment about controversy. I doubt I’ll see the Maggon on scrip in my lifetime. May she rot in a non-existent hell of her own imagining.
I wasn’t really proposing that – i was just using that to register my dismay at Austen as a choice
The double helix was on a £2 coin in … I think it was 2003.
I remember sending you the dinosaur coin (because I happened to have one laying around) – didn’t I send a double-squidlet too? I may not have had one to hand.
Slightly late to the party is the news that Zimbabwe is withdrawings its $100 trillion notes from circulation. No, that’s not a misprint.
See here:
http://loweringthebar.net/2016/04/100-trillion-bills.html
http://i0.wp.com/loweringthebar.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Zimbabwe-100-tril.jpg
I note that the pile of rocks illustrated could potentially be worth more than the banknote (depending of course where the rocks are and whether you include the delivery charge in the value)
cr
In some places people are overzealous about anti-inflation. I think in Zimbabwe they would be right to be concerned.
Bah – if our govt plans to get rid of Darwin they could at least have replaced him with Mary Anning!
I had my Churchill rant the other day (needless to say that while I appreciate his role in WWII I’m not a fan as he was something of a nasty little white supremacist and apologist for war crimes).
How about putting Alan Turing on it instead? He had a massive role in the war, and a much more important legacy than Churchill post-war. Plus, well, I think we all know about how horribly the UK govt treated him now….
I thought the idea was to have people with lots of facial hair to make them harder to forge?!