Why are newer sovereign's 'browner' ?

[Pottedbeef]

10 hours ago, DarkChameleon said:

Because the country is in the sticky stuff without a paddle and the gold reflects that.

Haha. The country is fine

[AuAgCU]

I emailed the Royal Mint Museum again and brought up the topic of pickling once more. Here's what they replied:

»I have been in contact with the relevant department and I have been informed that although the pickling process has changed over time, this change wouldn’t massively alter the colour of the coin.  Therefore the colour change will be predominantly from the improved metal refining techniques which has reduced the amount of silver present in the coin.  

The colour of the sovereign can also depend on whether it is a bullion or a proof coin.  About 10 years ago we stopped making the blanks for gold sovereigns internally in the Mint, and instead began sourcing them from a company in Madrid.  For bullion coins we would strike them straight out the pack as it were, with no alterations being made to the metal.  For proof coins however, we would burn the surface of the coin to give it a more shiny appearance. 

All of these factors could contribute to the changing colour of the sovereign over time, but as you can imagine the process for making the coins is very extensive and technical and it often depends on each individual coin.  It can be concluded though that the metal refining techniques would be the key reason for the main change in colour of the gold sovereign.«

[Murph]

For proof coins they burn the surface of the coin blank? 

You think they meant burnish the surface? 

[sovereignsteve]

10 minutes ago, Murph said:

For proof coins they burn the surface of the coin blank? 

You think they meant burnish the surface? 

yes it's a very tricky procedure. If they use the blowtorch too much, they end up igniting the gold and it just burns away😂

[AuAgCU]

I copy-pasted the email  I received. It actually says "burn" there. I can't tell if that makes sense or if it should really be burnish.

[Guest]

I have three sov's from the 1950's that I bought from a German dealer. They are suspiciously copperish in colour, so I thought they could have been  a fake. I showed them to an employee of Atkinson's in Sutton. She said they were ok. She said sov's randomly vary in colour, so there's nothing to worry about. What matters is when you're about to sell them, if the buyer freaks out or not.

[sovereignsteve]

1 hour ago, savoyard said:

I have three sov's from the 1950's that I bought from a German dealer. They are suspiciously copperish in colour, so I thought they could have been  a fake. I showed them to an employee of Atkinson's in Sutton. She said they were ok. She said sov's randomly vary in colour, so there's nothing to worry about. What matters is when you're about to sell them, if the buyer freaks out or not.

I've never seen a copperish sov from the 50's

[Guest]

10 hours ago, sovereignsteve said:

I've never seen a copperish sov from the 50's

These are the ones I received from a German dealer:

Although they don't look copperish in the picture, they do look copperish to me.

 

[Guest]

To quote @SovTracker "Coin colours can vary a lot due to toning (or not). Some coins are cleaned by dealers to blind you into buying!!"

[LawrenceChard]

On 31/05/2016 at 15:47, HawkHybrid said:

 

chards claims that a small amount of silver in old sovereigns

are responsible for it's yellow gold colour.

 

This is a late contribution, but...

We not only claim it, but have tested a large number of coins, including sovereigns, using our Niton XRDif machine.

I am also on record as criticising the Royal Mint for its frequent and persistent misinformation, including that sovereigns are traditionally made of red gold. The 1816 Coinage Act (or similar) may state that, but in practice, most modern (from 1816) gold sovereigns have contained silver.

I have mainly published this on Flickr, and here is one example:

1997 Gold £2 Two Pound Bimetallic Proof Certificate Royal Mint Misinformation

 

[LawrenceChard]

On 12/04/2019 at 18:02, AuAgCU said:

I copy-pasted the email  I received. It actually says "burn" there. I can't tell if that makes sense or if it should really be burnish.

I also think the RM employee got it wrong, probably misunderstood what he or she had been told. Burnish would make sense, burn would not. Burning it would leave a dark brown, almost black coating, probably copper oxide.

Perhaps the internal RM conversation was in Welsh, and lost something in translation!

 

[LawrenceChard]

On 01/06/2016 at 12:23, sovereignsteve said:

Not seen that before, although I have seen some data from Chards on an informal basis.

A few interesting points;

The small (5 -8 ppt) silver content of the late younghead sovs have a huge influence of the colour, compared to modern ones.

The first modern day sov, 1957, has nothing in but gold and copper and isn't the red colour of current issues which have an identical composition.

The very large amount of silver in the Sydney mint aussie style coins certainly shows in the colour, and to a lesser extent in the early London ones.

One thing that does appear to be true though; you don't need that much silver to have a huge influence on the colour, tempering that awful copper tone.

The early 20th century coins from Edward and George are similar to the late Victorian ones (1887 onwards) in that a lot of them are quite reddish but you also see a lot of very yellow ones. Would be interesting to see data from these.

I thought I had tested some 1957 sovereigns, but failed to find them on a very quick, lazy search, however here is a result from a 1958 sovereign:

 

I would expect 1957 to produce a similar result.

[LawrenceChard]

On 01/06/2016 at 12:23, sovereignsteve said:

Not seen that before, although I have seen some data from Chards on an informal basis.

A few interesting points;

The small (5 -8 ppt) silver content of the late younghead sovs have a huge influence of the colour, compared to modern ones.

The first modern day sov, 1957, has nothing in but gold and copper and isn't the red colour of current issues which have an identical composition.

The very large amount of silver in the Sydney mint aussie style coins certainly shows in the colour, and to a lesser extent in the early London ones.

One thing that does appear to be true though; you don't need that much silver to have a huge influence on the colour, tempering that awful copper tone.

The early 20th century coins from Edward and George are similar to the late Victorian ones (1887 onwards) in that a lot of them are quite reddish but you also see a lot of very yellow ones. Would be interesting to see data from these.

Speaking subjectively, the proportion of silver in "old" (pre QEII) sovereigns, is about 3 ppt.

You are absolutely right that it only needs a tiny silver content (1ppt+) to improve the colour.

You want data:

For some reason, this link was not working:

(Tried 3 times to get it to display)

Gold Sovereigns Niton Tested

Part of a project to analyse the metal alloy content of British gold sovereigns from 1817 to date.

I can't persuade it to work, but have found a single test result for a 1957 sovereign:

 

If anyone wishes to see more, click on the image to take you to the image on Flickr, then under the "Album" section, click on Gold Sovereigns Niton Tested, although you may need to click on "View more albums"

 

Edited November 6, 2020 by LawrenceChard
link problem(s)

[LawrenceChard]

On 13/04/2019 at 09:27, savoyard said:

I have three sov's from the 1950's that I bought from a German dealer. They are suspiciously copperish in colour, so I thought they could have been  a fake. I showed them to an employee of Atkinson's in Sutton. She said they were ok. She said sov's randomly vary in colour, so there's nothing to worry about. What matters is when you're about to sell them, if the buyer freaks out or not.

You should check with an expert!🙂

[Hunter87]

Modern sovs are not pure gold they are rose gold which means it’s made from 22ct pure gold but with added copper. 

24ct gold is pure. 

[LawrenceChard]

On 06/11/2020 at 20:31, Hunter87 said:

Modern sovs are not pure gold they are rose gold which means it’s made from 22ct pure gold but with added copper. 

24ct gold is pure. 

No sovereigns, so far, are pure gold, even the early 1489 Henry VII to 1561 Elizabeth I issues.

All modern sovereigns, 1817 to date, are 22 carat gold (sorry but "22ct pure gold" is an oxymoron).

As I have stated, the Royal Mint are incorrect when they claim that modern sovereigns are made of red gold (22 parts gold, 2 parts copper), as most sovereigns from 1817 until Elizabeth II have included about 3 parts per thousand silver. Even some QEII sovereigns contain some silver.

It may be pedantic of me, but I consider "rose gold" is a jeweller's romantic nomenclature for "red gold". Where I have stated "red gold" the expression is interchangeable with the expression "rose gold".

Some "modern sovereigns" also contain traces of other metals, including iron, lead, and platinum, if our Niton machine can be believed.

I think most TSF forum members will already know that 24ct gold is pure gold.

Until electrolytic gold refining became common is the last score or so of years, most gold was only refined to about 995 parts per thousand, and even now, there is little point refining beyond 999.9 ppt, although the Royal Canadian Mint use 999.99 mainly as a marketing exercise, but it could also be ueful in some scientific applications. Completely pure gold, with zero impurities, exists more in theory than in actual practice. 

Interesting but almost useless trivia fact: there are numerous isotopes of gold. Only one, ¹⁹⁷Au, is stable, the other 36 known are radio-active, most with short half-lives, and almost non-existent in nature. A friend who worked in the nuclear industry for most of his life did not know this. I would be wasting my time trying to educate him, so I did not, and will not, bother trying!

Edited November 8, 2020 by LawrenceChard
yet another typo!

[Midasfrog]

I would keep clear of those brown sovereigns they may have been concealed and smuggled through an airport at some point 💩

There was a story in the press a while back about some gold bars.

[MrFreezerrr]

@LawrenceChard Very interesting to read!

To avoid confusion with some readers, I just wanted to point out you made a little typo in this sentence:

“As I have stated, the Royal Mint are incorrect when they claim that modern sovereigns are made of red gold (22 parts copper, 2 parts copper), as most sovereigns from 1817 until Elizabeth II have included about 3 parts per thousand silver. Even some QEII sovereigns contain some silver.”

 

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, MrFreezerrr said:

@LawrenceChard Very interesting to read!

To avoid confusion with some readers, I just wanted to point out you made a little typo in this sentence:

“As I have stated, the Royal Mint are incorrect when they claim that modern sovereigns are made of red gold (22 parts copper, 2 parts copper), as most sovereigns from 1817 until Elizabeth II have included about 3 parts per thousand silver. Even some QEII sovereigns contain some silver.”

 

Thanks, I do make too many typo's, fortunately I spot many of them before someone else does, but it's always appreciated getting heads-up when I miss one.

[LawrenceChard]

6 hours ago, Midasfrog said:

I would keep clear of those brown sovereigns they may have been concealed and smuggled through an airport at some point 💩

There was a story in the press a while back about some gold bars.

Yes, someone was smuggling them out by the back passage at the Royal Canadian Mint!

[Stacktastic]

I have been wondering this as I have 3 2020 gold standard coins that are brown (like the one in the photo) where as all my other gold coins (2019, 2020 & 2021) are, well, a gold colour, same with the older sovs I have. They are definitely gold as i tested them. Just the sound of them alone was enough. 

 

Edited November 8, 2020 by Stacktastic

[Heirlooms]

1 hour ago, Stacktastic said:

I have been wondering this as I have 3 2020 gold standard coins that are brown (like the one in the photo) where as all my other gold coins (2019, 2020 & 2021) are, well, a gold colour, same with the older sovs I have. They are definitely gold as i tested them. Just the sound of them alone was enough. 

 

I've thought the same thing. Here's images of two 2020 coins, both different colours. I don't own either it has always mystified me

 

 

[Stacktastic]

I was wrong it is the 2020 sovereigns that are browner.
Maybe they are trying to make it look older somehow, or distinguish it from the britannia's etc? 
The only other coins that I have that are slightly darker are George 1st. 

[LawrenceChard]

12 hours ago, Stacktastic said:

I was wrong it is the 2020 sovereigns that are browner.
Maybe they are trying to make it look older somehow, or distinguish it from the britannia's etc? 
The only other coins that I have that are slightly darker are George 1st. 

 

 

George I sovereigns???

[StackemHigh]

I believe that some sovereigns an amalgam of silver (brighter) and some with copper. If copper then it can change colour red to dark brown that may cause a darkening.