Banknote Iconography and the Construction of a British Identity

(1)

Banknote Iconography and the Construction of a British Identity

Julia Glen

Master’s Thesis Dr Noa Roei

Comparative Cultural Analysis Graduate School of Humanities University of Amsterdam 13 June 2018

(2)

Abstract

The following research provides an in-depth analysis into the iconography of pound sterling banknotes, in light of the contemporary geopolitical situation of the state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Since 2016 eight banknotes have been issued within the United Kingdom. The Bank of England – the UK’s central bank – and the three Scottish commercial banks entitled to design and print banknotes have each issued a £5 and a £10 banknote respectively. Through the close reading of select iconographic elements of these eight banknotes, this project will address how banknote iconography alerts users to their nationhood and will consider the multiplicity of banknote iconography within the UK to offer a previously unexplored perspective on national identity construction and negotiation in the post-Brexit era of the United Kingdom.

(3)

Acknowledgements

Dedicated to Grumps

I would like to thank my supervisor, Noa, for her ongoing support, patience, advice and kindness since day one of my Master’s degree.

(4)

Abbreviations

BoE Bank of England

BoS Bank of Scotland

EU The European Union

RBS Royal Bank of Scotland

SNP The Scottish National Party

SPCB Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body

UK, United Kingdom The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

£ The Pound Sterling Currency

(6)

Introduction

The following research provides an in-depth analysis into the iconography of pound sterling banknotes, in light of the contemporary geopolitical situation of the state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Since 2016 eight banknotes have been issued within the United Kingdom. The Bank of England – the UK’s central bank – and the three Scottish commercial banks entitled to design and print banknotes,1 have each issued a £5 and a £10 banknote respectively. Through the close reading of select iconographic elements of these eight banknotes, this project considers this iconographic multiplicity in relation to the contemporary composition of British national identity. In account of the issuing banks concerned, this project shall primarily focus on the negotiation of the ‘British’ and ‘Scottish’ national identities in the iconography of Scottish-issued banknotes, and complications concerning the conflation of the ‘British’ and ‘English’ identities upon the Bank of England’s banknotes.

This paper will approach banknotes as a medium of ‘banal nationalism’, building upon Michael Billig’s concept, wherein a nation’s “ideological habits […] enable the established nations of the West to be reproduced” (6). Developing upon Billig’s conceptualisation of ‘flagging’ and the significance of seemingly unremarkable objects in the construction of a national ‘us’, this research explores how banknotes can be seen to perpetuate consciousness of nationhood. The iconography of banknotes is frequently revised and updated – a security measure against counterfeit money – meaning that regular analysis of iconography in relation to the evolving geopolitical climate enables the attaining of relevant and accurate information with regard to national identity construction.2 Close reading of the banknotes’ iconography shall be complemented with discussion of

1_{These three banks are Edinburgh based commercial bank, the Bank of Scotland, Glasgow based commercial} bank, Clydesdale Bank, and Edinburgh based retail bank, the Royal Bank of Scotland.

2_{Whilst new coinage has been issued following the Brexit vote, and the use of the pound sterling is not} exclusive to the United Kingdom, the scope of this research has encouraged me to focus exclusively on banknotes that circulate in the countries of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

(7)

corresponding iconographies on older pound sterling banknotes, as well as euro banknotes, to offer wider comparison.

Investigation of the eight banknotes and the national identities in question stands primarily within the political context of two landmark referendums. Firstly, in 2014 the Scottish Independence Referendum was held, in which the population of the country of Scotland voted upon Scotland’s position within the United Kingdom: to remain a member of the United Kingdom, or to leave and establish an independent, sovereign state. The result of the referendum demonstrated a majority preference for remaining within the United Kingdom.3_{However, the question of Scottish independence lingers in the UK’s internal} politics (“Scotland Decides”).

Secondly, the UK’s European Union Referendum in 2016 saw the decision to withdraw the state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union (“EU Referendum: Results”).4 The controversial decision for the UK to leave the EU – commonly referred to as ‘Brexit’ – looms over the UK’s international politics, as negotiations between the state and the EU regarding the terms of withdrawal remain ongoing. With this geopolitical context in mind, this research will address the multiplicity of banknote iconography within the UK, to offer a previously unexplored perspective on national identity construction in the post-Brexit era of the United Kingdom.

Chapter Summary

This exploration into currency as a medium of communication, identity construction and banal nationalism reflects an interdisciplinary study, situated at a crossroads between nationalism studies, numismatics, communication studies and iconology. In addition, the disciplines of political geography, sociology and international relations are also touched upon. In this way, this paper has been able to utilise and incorporate a wide range of thought.

3_{To the question “Should Scotland be an independent country?”, 55.3% voted no.}

4_{To the question “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European} Union?”, 51.9% voted to leave.

(8)

The opening chapter of this paper addresses the central concepts of this research and provides a wider overview of the geopolitical context of this analysis. Firstly, consideration will be given to the complex political situation of the state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, touching upon the historical, geographical and political complexities in the defining of a collective identity of the United Kingdom. The terminology utilised within this research will be defined, before exploring and establishing the relationship between language, currency and the shaping of identity. With references to the writing of Benedict Anderson, Eric Helleiner, and Michael Billig, I will consider how banknote iconography alerts users to their nationhood, and how the multiplicity of banknotes that circulate within the United Kingdom is indicative of a complicated process of shaping a national consciousness within this context.

Chapter Two conducts a close reading of the most prominent iconographic element shared by the eight banknotes: portraiture, in relation to the themes of monarchy, contemporary politics, and social movements. It will provide a nuanced stance on ‘banal nationalism’ (Billig) to establish the ability of iconography to take on a metonymic capacity and to ‘flag’ nationhood. Close reading, and historical consideration, of the portrait of the reigning monarch on Bank of England banknotes will demonstrate the metonymic significance of portraits,5 and will shed light upon the complication of the conflation of the British and English national identities. Subsequently, historical and formal contextualisation of two literary, historical figures depicted on UK banknotes will explore the changing political attitudes and tensions within the United Kingdom. Finally, portraits of two female historical figures will be looked at in conjunction with the selection process involved to highlight the evolving social factors that influence banknote iconography.

5_{Metonym is conventionally understood as a word that is substituted by an associated word, e.g. ‘Westminster’} is metonymically used for ‘the Parliament of the United Kingdom’. In this research I will be expanding the traditional meaning of the word to encompass iconography, to explore how an image has the capacity to take on associations in relation to nationhood.

(9)

In the final chapter of this research three secondary iconographic elements will be considered in relation to portraiture, and with direct comparison to the iconography of the €50 banknote, released in 2017. The first section will address how the use of allegory can establish a narrative of commonality, and what this may suggest about the UK’s internal politics. The second section will consider the significance of geographically locating banknote iconography in the ‘flagging’ of nationhood through specific landscapes and landmarks. The chapter will come to a close by addressing the limited use of maps on UK banknotes, and consider why this aspect of iconography is especially significant in exposing controversy within contemporary geopolitics.

This thesis will conclude by considering how the assemblage of iconography on each banknote negotiates the differing nationhoods that comprise the United Kingdom. Ultimately, I hope to draw a conclusion to my central hypothesis, that the differing iconography of banknotes within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland reflects distinct communities, and can be seen to ‘flag’ different imaginings of the national ‘us’ in this contemporary moment.

(10)

Chapter 1: Imagining the United Kingdom

Multiplicity: The Competing Identities of Britain

To consider the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in relation to national identity is not without its complications. At the heart of this complexity lies the question: ‘what defines a nation?’. Whilst the aim of this research is by no means to provide a definitive answer to this question, it is necessary to unpack some of the complexities of the United Kingdom with regard to its status as a nation in order to understand whether it is possible to speak of a UK national identity.

Nations, though intangible, are no doubt perceived to be real. To quote Hugh Seton-Watson, “no ‘scientific definition’ of a nation can be devised; yet the phenomena [sic.] has existed and does exist” (4).6 For Seton-Watson a clear emphasis lies on the distinction between a nation and a state. He observes:

States can exist without a nation, or with several nations, among their subject; and a nation can be coterminous with the population of one state, or be included together with other nations within one state, or be divided between several states. There were states long before there were nations, and there are some nations that are much older than most states which exist today (Seton-Watson 1).

This differentiation is useful in observing the fact that nations and their associated identities are not necessarily geographically bound to state territories. Krishan Kumar, however, proposes that, in practice, it is too ambiguous to separate the two intertwined ideas (12).7 Benedict Anderson’s conceptualisation of imagined communities is regarded as one of the most influential theories within the field of nationalism studies, offering the definition of a nation as “an imagined political community” (5-6).8 Anderson’s definition is functional, as he provides four identifiable characteristics of a nation, as; imagined, limited, sovereign, and a community (6). However, rooted within a political understanding of the term, Anderson does

6_{British historian whose studies specialised in Russian history and nationalism.}

7_{Professor of sociology, whose research includes empire, nationalism and national identity.} 8_{Political scientist whose research focussed on nationalism and empire.}

(11)

not observe the distinction of state and nation, and the continued significance of historical nations, as laid out by Seton-Watson. Similarly to Kumar, for Anderson nations and the political are intertwined, meaning that a state will always be regarded as a nation.

Michael Billig convincingly argues that, in addition to Anderson’s criteria for an imagined political community, a nation must have a “homeland” and a connection to a particular place (74).9 What this suggests is that within a nation there is a hierarchy of territory, with some places being considered integral to the nation – and other areas holding less significance. This idea of hierarchy reflects Seton-Watson’s assertion that the boundaries of nations are indistinct, and opens up the complication of perception – that the interpretation of what territories fall within a nation may be not cohesive amongst all members, or each of the regions, that comprise an imagined community. However, if a nation is indivisible from a state, borders are critical in the governance and administration of contemporary states. These somewhat contradictory stances are complicated in their application to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, particularly in light of political devolution.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is a sovereign state, which – in its contemporary composition – is comprised of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The centralised UK government, metonymically known as Westminster, is responsible for conducting legislation on ‘reserved matters’ on behalf of the United Kingdom, including foreign policy, trade and immigration. In this way, the four countries of the United Kingdom are observed as a cohesive unit internationally, a primary example of this being the United Kingdom’s membership of intergovernmental organisations, such as the European Union.10 In light of Anderson’s theory, the United Kingdom can be observed as an “imagined political community” (5-6).

9_{Billig is a professor of social sciences whose research includes ideology and rhetoric.} 10_{This idea shall be elaborate upon subsequently.}

(12)

Discontent in the late 1990s regarding the centrality of England within UK politics led to increasing devolution of the centralised government. In this way ‘devolved matters’ such as health, education and emergency services are at the jurisdiction of regional, country-based authorities, which are the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly (Holyrood and Westminster… 2-3). As Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland practise regional politics independently of the state, these countries also fit within Anderson’s definition of a nation.

The abstract nature of national identity makes it challenging to pin down specifically what constitutes such a feeling. Justin Gibbins explains that “National identity – be it defined as a commonality of laws, national myths, culture, memories and/or psychological ‘we’ feeling – is what, in essence, holds a nation together” (4).11 Michael Billig argues that an identity is “the embodied habits of social life. Such habits include those of thinking and using language [… and] involves being situated physically, legally, socially, as well as emotionally […] within a homeland” (8). Both of these definitions point towards the abstract nature of identity, and the inability to pin down comprehensive criteria. However, each highlights the way in which identity is ingrained and shared through social behaviour. What can be deduced from the difficulty of defining national identity is that such a feeling is not necessarily tied to political structure.

Notably, England does not have a devolved authority, meaning legislation that concerns only England is conducted at a state level, so England is politically indivisible from the United Kingdom. This somewhat explains the conflation of the English and the British national identities as “two sides of the same coin” (Kumar 4). However, in understanding that national identity need not be limited by politics, each of the four countries that comprise the United Kingdom, as well as the state itself, can be recognised as having associated national

(13)

identities. Within this study, I will address the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as a nation, with clear acknowledgment of the multiplicity of country-based nations therein, and the complication of England’s position.

In addition to commonality, the construction of a national identity is dependent on a process of ‘othering’ and identifying what the nation is not (Gibbins 14). ‘Othering’ is a “set of dynamics, processes, and structures that engender marginality and persistent inequality across any of the full range of human differences based on group identities” (powell and Menendian). One such way, therefore, that the group identity of a nation is defined is through the continual evolution in the balance of ‘Self/Other’. This process of comparing similarities and differences with territories that fall outside of the perceived boundaries of the nation reflects how a multiplicity of identities can coincide, for example the country-based and state-based national identities of the United Kingdom. Additionally, it demonstrates how layers of identity can form in relation to international political unions: the identity of the United Kingdom in relation to the other member states of the European Union being a contemporary example of this.12

With regard to the United Kingdom the state-based identity is complicated in its conflation with other identities of the same name. Whilst the terms ‘UK’ and ‘British’ are commonly used interchangeably in describing the United Kingdom and its inhabitants, British identity is not always synonymous with the state of the United Kingdom. Consideration of the term British geographically reflects an identity that is not coterminous with the contemporary state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Great Britain is the largest island of the British Isles, made up of England, Scotland and Wales. The British Isles are comprised of the countries of the United Kingdom, as well as the independent sovereign state of the Republic of Ireland, and the Crown dependencies of the

(14)

Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, none of which are members of the United Kingdom. Additionally, the legacy of the British Empire extends British identity beyond the British Isles to fourteen British Overseas Territories. In this way, it is possible to perceive an attachment to a British identity in any of these places. Gibbins’ convincing rationale is the rejection of a geographical restriction in the definition of British, favouring instead a discourse-based approach, which acknowledges the multiplicity of stances and an awareness of the political complications of the term (4-5).

A historical glance reveals the roots of a British identity that precedes the establishing of the contemporary political union of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 1922. Foremost, under the rule of the Roman Empire, between 43 and 410AD, the province of ‘Britannia’ – modern day England, Wales and Southern Scotland – was imagined as a single political community. Following hundreds of years of conflict between the Kingdom of England – which included Wales – and the Kingdom of Scotland, the two monarchies were united in 1603 under King James I (of England, VI of Scotland) to become the Kingdom of Great Britain. Additionally, in 1606 the Union Jack flag was created, a design that collaborates Scotland’s Saint Andrew’s Saltire and England’s Saint George’s Cross.13 In 1707 the monarchical union was followed by political union, with the issuing of the Act of Union between the governments of Scotland and England to create the state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain. The Act also created a currency union, wherein the Scottish abandoned the Scots pound currency, to adopt the pound sterling currency used in England (Lowther). This political unification is considered the point at which the British, or UK state, identity began to develop (“Act of Union 1707”).

It is necessary to observe that significant constitutional changes have been made in the imagining of the state of the United Kingdom, since the initial development of the British

13_{Saint George’s Cross originates from the Kingdom of England, which incorporated the country of Wales,} which is why the Welsh flag does not make up the composition of the Union Jack.

(15)

identity. Most importantly concerning the membership of Ireland. In 1800 the United Kingdom of Great Britain unified with the Kingdom of Ireland to create the state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. As a symbol of this union, the following year Saint Patrick’s Saltire, the flag of united Ireland, was integrated into the Union Jack flag (Suchenia 7).14 However, whilst the northern counties of Ireland and the Kingdom of Great Britain found commonality in the practising of Protestantism, the southern counties of Ireland are predominantly Roman Catholic. In 1922 these religious tensions culminated in the division of Ireland into two separate countries. The southern counties abandoned the United Kingdom to establish the independent sovereign state of the Republic of Ireland, whilst the now-country of Northern Ireland remained a part of the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland’s decision to remain in the UK reflects a clear process of ‘othering’ from the southern counties, circulating around religion. Notably, tensions between the two countries remain, with citizens divided in support of the United Kingdom and for the reunification of Ireland. Furthermore, at present, individuals born in Northern Ireland have the right to apply for dual citizenship of the UK and the Republic of Ireland. The establishing of the Republic of Ireland and ongoing complications with Northern Ireland’s position within the UK reflects the evolving and entangled nature of the national British identity.

As a result of the UK’s 2016 European Union Referendum, the Irish land border has become a critical point in the negotiations concerning the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU. Whilst both the UK and the Republic of Ireland remain EU members, and abide by the principle of the freedom of movement across the European Union, enforcing a border between the two countries has not been necessary. Brexit, however, had introduced a need to take decisive action on the Irish border, as the possibility of an end to free movement between the UK and the remaining EU member states will demand the enforcement of a clear

14_{It is this version of the Union Jack that is used contemporarily to represent the United Kingdom of Great} Britain and Northern Ireland.

(16)

state boundary. In light of the complexities of the geographical and historical definitions of the British identity, and keeping in mind the complication of Northern Ireland’s position within the UK, this project will understand British as the national identity of the state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Consideration of the UK’s contemporary geopolitical context brings to light the additional complication of the ongoing debate surrounding Scottish independence, and the prominence of the country-based national identities that sit alongside British. Anderson observes that “many ‘old nations,’ once thought fully consolidated, find themselves challenged by ‘sub’-nationalisms within their borders – nationalisms which, naturally, dream of shedding this subness one happy day” (3). In the Scottish Independence Referendum held on 18 September 2014, 55% percent of Scotland’s voting population voted ‘no’ to becoming an independent country. Subsequently, the balance of power within the UK was renegotiated and increased devolution of the UK Parliament was agreed upon, granting additional powers to the country-based, regional authorities (“A guide to devolution in the UK”). Whilst the 2014 decision that Scotland should remain a part of the United Kingdom may be seen to reflect the horizontal comradeship felt across the four countries, it also demonstrates the strength of a distinct Scottish political identity. The Scottish independence question reflects that in each region within the United Kingdom citizens are faced with a negotiation of competing country and state national identities.

Political sovereignty remains central to the vision of Scotland’s leading political party, the Scottish National Party, who assert that:

the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will (SNP Manifesto 2016 24).

(17)

After 62% of Scotland’s voting population voted for the UK to ‘remain’ within the EU, the SNP continue to campaign for a second Scottish independence referendum following Brexit, though such a prospect is undetermined (“EU Referendum: Results”). If, as Gibbins argues, “National identity […] holds a nation together” (4), ongoing support for Scottish independence certainly alludes to significant changes in the negotiation of Scottish and British identities within the contemporary imagining of Scotland.15

Subsequently, the question is raised as to how Scotland’s departure from the state could impact upon the UK’s national identity. On the day before the Scottish independence vote the then-UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, delivered the following:

I speak for millions of people across England, Wales and Northern Ireland – and many in Scotland, too who would be utterly heart-broken by the break-up of the United Kingdom. […] The United Kingdom would be no more. No UK pensions, no UK passports, no UK pound (qtd. in Dearden).

This rhetoric suggests that Scotland’s withdrawal would signal the “break-up” of the UK, and is therefore, an integral territory for the British identity.16 Whilst the membership of Ireland has complicated the evolution of a British identity, Scotland’s political union with England and Wales laid the foundation to the construction of the British identity. It is interesting, too, to note the explicit reference to the “UK pound” in relation to Scotland’s membership of the United Kingdom.

Although this analysis may have raised more complications than clarifications, it has succeeded in highlighting the multiplicity of nationhoods that sit alongside, and even compete against, each other within the United Kingdom. The primary focuses within the thesis will be the balance of the Scottish and British national identities, as well as the issue of the conflation of English and British, in relation to the UK’s banknote iconography. The complexity and contradictory notions explored here concerning nationhood will constantly be

15_{Contemporary attitudes towards national identity within Scotland can be found in “Ten things we learned} about Scottishness”.

16_{Contrastingly, when the Republic of Ireland was established, the decision was left to Northern Ireland whether} or not they wanted to remain within the UK, suggesting that they were not perceived as an integral territory.

(18)

addressed to understand how the multiplicity of banknote designs within the United Kingdom complicate the construction of the British national identity.

(19)

Shaping Commonality: Languages of the UK

Michael Billig considers national identity to be shaped by “the embodied habits of social life. Such habits include those of thinking and using language” (8). Benedict Anderson, too, identifies language, specifically print-capitalism, as the most significant factor in the shaping of an imagined national community (37-46). The establishment of a shared vernacular print-language had a homogenising effect within the communities that would become the nations that now comprise the European continent. Anderson argues, it was ultimately this commonality that gave rise to national consciousness and the modern ‘nation state’.

In the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, English is established as the vernacular language of state administration. As the official – de facto – language of the state, English carries political and legal legitimacy, and is the language used by mainstream media. The Welsh language is acknowledged as the de jure language of the United Kingdom, with Westminster recognising a “statutory obligation” to ensure information is available to Welsh speakers, a nod to the a horizontal kinship between speakers of both languages (“Welsh language on GOV.UK”). Under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, additional language variants are observed by the state:

The regional or minority languages covered under the Charter in the UK are Welsh, Scottish Gaelic, Irish, Scots, Ulster Scots and Cornish. Manx Gaelic in the Isle of Man is also covered under the Charter. Welsh, Scottish Gaelic and Irish have been granted protection under Part III of the Charter, as stated in the instrument of ratification” (European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages 4).

Whilst these languages are not granted official status by the centralised government of the United Kingdom, the devolved authorities of each country have granted alternative legitimacies.

The country of Wales, for example, is official bilingual, meaning that legally Welsh must be treated equally to English. In Scotland, English is the language in which legislation is

(20)

conducted within the Scottish Parliament. However, the Scottish Parliament’s “The Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005, seeks to give effect to the principle that the Gaelic and English languages should be accorded equal respect. The SPCB, for historical and cultural reasons, also recognises the use of Scots” (SPCB Language Policy 1). Such policy reflects the esteem of minority languages in Scottish culture, representing the historic roots of the nation and demonstrating a perceived commonality between speakers of each of the languages as being ‘Scottish’. The differing legitimacies of languages within each country demonstrates the imagining of distinct communities and identities within UK. In light of Anderson’s notion that a common language gives rise to a national consciousness it becomes easy to see how, despite the political unification of the United Kingdom, the underlying national identities of the four countries within the state persist.

The capacity of shared language to shape national identity is not simply limited to print-language or the language of administration, but can also be recognised in the less traditional medium of currency. Eric Helleiner, for example, draws a parallel between shared language and currency as a “monetary” (8), or “economic language” (8), explaining that:

analysts of money in the nineteenth century likened it to language in that both act as a basic medium of social communication (e.g. Shell, 1982). Little wonder then that the creation of a national currency was seen alongside the creation of standardized national language as a crucial task by nation-builders in that era (8-9).17

This historical association between currency and language brings to light a comparable effect in the way in which each medium can facilitate commonality and consolidate the imagining of political communities. Whilst print-capitalism enabled communication amongst vernacular dialects across a nation, money enables communication and trade on equal terms between members of a currency zone. This relationship is particularly prominent in Helleiner’s analysis of the euro currency, a “supranational currency” (13), which has been adopted by

(21)

nineteen of the twenty-eight states that currently comprise the European Union. Quoting an unspecified 1995 publication by the European Commission, Helleiner considers adjusting to the Euro to be “somewhat like learning a language—it takes time and practice before it is possible to ‘think’ in the new currency” (13). Furthermore, Helleiner regard the euro as having the potential to “influence identities by creating new ‘price languages’, thus altering the mental universe of monetary calculations that an individual makes every day” (13). Indeed, it is argued that the euro has the ability to enable users to “foster a pan-European identity” alongside state-based identities (26).

This association of language and currency is particularly interesting with regard to the pound sterling, which circulates within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.18 As the official currency of the UK, since the establishment of the state of the United Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707, the adoption of this shared monetary language enabled the consolidation of a British identity. In this manner the pound sterling can be regarded as a significant aspect in forging commonality amongst the citizens of the state, and in shaping of a British national consciousness. The continued significance attached to the currency can be witness in both the internal and international politics of the UK. In a poll conducted at the time of the Scottish Independence Referendum, 53% of English people opposed an independent Scotland sharing the pound sterling currency (Settle). This is to suggest that in Scotland’s withdrawal of the state, and thus relinquishing of the British identity, Scotland should no longer share in this aspect of British nationhood. Furthermore, in 2015, following his re-election as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron entered a renegotiation of the terms of the UK’s membership of the European Union. In his official letter addressed to Donald Tusk, President of the European Union, Cameron insisted

18_{Much like the English language, Britain’s imperial history means that the use of the pound sterling is not} limited to the United Kingdom. The pound sterling is also used in the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, and some of the British Oversees Territories. For the purpose of this research, I will only be concerned with the use of pound sterling and its application within the United Kingdom

(22)

upon an “end [to] Britain’s obligation to work towards an ‘ever closer union’” (3), emphasising the United Kingdom’s “permanent opt-out from the Eurozone” (2). This letter exhibits a clear commitment to the UK’s pound sterling currency, as opposed to adopting the pan-European euro currency, a different monetary language and a symbol of European integration. Whilst the rejection of the euro is based, no doubt, on an entanglement of economic and political reasons, the theoretical links between currency and identity suggest there may be more at stake.

The links between language and currency in relation to national identity, established by an understanding of currency as an “economic language” (Helleiner 8), are strengthened by the iconography of a currency’s money and its communicative potential. The communicative potential of such iconography was identified early on in the development of money. Indeed, in the Roman era coins were considered to be “the most deliberate of all symbols of public communal identities in the Roman provinces” (Howgego et al. Preface). Eric Helleiner observes that in the nineteenth century:

The potential importance of imagery on money was, however, not neglected by policymakers engaged in nation-building […] most independent governments across the world began a systematic and organized campaign to place nationalist imagery on their money. Aided by advances in the technology of printing, they began to cover banknotes with detailed images of national landscapes and landmarks, personalities, key national historical events, and scenes of the everyday life of national citizens (4).

For Anderson “the novel and the newspaper […] provided the technical means for 're-presenting’ the kind of imagined community that is the nation” (25, original emphasis). In a similar fashion, money carries the same ability to “re-present” nationhood. In this way, the iconography of money and national identity are two long-associated ideas.

Whilst there is a single currency in circulation within the United Kingdom, there is multiplicity concerning the money itself. Pound sterling coinage for the whole of the UK is designed and minted at the Royal Mint. This means that there is a commonality between the

(23)

countries of the United Kingdom in the consistent design of coins. Banknotes, however, are not all produced centrally, and the iconography of a banknote differs depending on its country of issuing. Whilst all banknotes can circulate freely within the United Kingdom, in understanding the significance of currency in shaping national identity, consideration of the multiplicity of banknote iconography and the country-based distinctions therein, may be seen to shed light on the dynamic of competing national identities within the United Kingdom.

(24)

Flagging a National ‘us’: Iconography and Nationhood

To elaborate upon the way in which money and iconography are related to national identity, it is necessary to delve deeper into Michael Billig’s conceptualisation of ‘banal nationalism’. That is the way in which seemingly insignificant details can insight the feeling of a national ‘we’, and can produce a ‘flagging’ effect, which subconsciously alerts a citizen to their nationhood. Whilst Benedict Anderson describes novels and newspapers as mediums through which a nation can be “re-presented” (25), Billig develops an understanding of other means through which a nation can be “reproduced” (6). He explains:

the term banal nationalism is introduced to cover the ideological habits which enable the established nations of the West to be reproduced. It is argued that these habits are not removed from everyday life, as some observers have supposed. Daily, the nation is indicated, or 'flagged', in the lives of its citizenry. Nationalism, far from being an intermittent mood in established nations, is the endemic condition (Billig 6, original emphasis).

For Billig, national consciousness, and an awareness of a national ‘we’, is reproduced and instilled within the citizen of a nation as they are subconsciously reminded of their own nationhood through the presence of certain objects and the practice of seemingly unremarkable habits. These objects and habits are said to have a ‘flagging’ effect.

Central to Billig’s concept of banal nationalism is ‘discursive flagging’, particularly within political discourse and mass media (93-127). Evidencing a variety of speeches delivered by political leaders from across the democratic ‘West’, Billig explores the language used, specifically how the nation and those outside of the nation are addressed. Of particular interest is the use of words like ‘we’, ‘us’, ‘our’, ‘them’, and ‘their’, which take for granted nationhood (Billig 92). ‘We’, for example, has a ‘flagging’ effect by invoking “the people, the country, the nation. A common, national identity” (Billig 97). By using ‘we’ the speaker becomes, in the eyes of both those who belong to, and those outside of, the nation, the voice of the whole nation, standing as a metonymic figure (Billig 112). A second example of

(25)

‘discursive flagging’ is the use of ‘the people’. Billig argues that the use of the definite article ‘the’ is “continually playing its quiet part in a routine ‘deixis’, which banally points out ‘the’ homeland” (94).

Objects, too, are essential within the concept of banal nationalism, sharing the capacity to invoke an awareness of a national ‘we’. An example Billig draws upon as a clear illustration of the ‘flagging’ of a nation is an unwaved national flag, such as “the flag hanging unnoticed on the public building” (38). Its presence is largely ignored as a familiar object, however such a presence acts as a subtle reminder of the nation within which the flag hangs, making any passer by acutely aware of their own nationhood. As previously noted, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is represent by the Union Jack, however each country within the UK have independent flags which, whilst they tend not to be recognised internationally, continue to be used within each country (Smith).19

Much like the divide of the official status of languages within the United Kingdom, the policies regarding the flying of a flag from government buildings differs depending on the country. Whilst in England the Union Jack always “takes precedence over all national flags” (Suchenia 8), Scottish policy dictates that Saint Andrew’s Saltire be “flown every day from Scottish Government buildings” with the exception of certain observed occasions (Days for Hoisting Flags 8).20 As an object of banal nationalism, the displaying of a country flag, as opposed to the collective flag of the Union, reflects the ‘flagging’ of a different nationhood. Whilst within England an individual who passes by a government building is more likely to be alerted to British nationhood, in Scotland the precedence of the Saltire suggests the banal ‘flagging’ of Scottish nationhood. The differing policies regarding the flying of flags allude to a pattern of regional distinction within the United Kingdom. In recognising this divergence

19_{England: Saint George’s Cross, Scotland: Saint Andrew’s Saltire, Northern Ireland: Ulster Banner, Wales: Y} Ddraig Goch (The Red ‘Welsh’ Dragon).

20_{Remembrance day, the memorial day of the First World War observed by the Commonwealth of Nations, is} the only occasion when the Union Jack is flown in place of the Saltire.

(26)

in the nationhood ‘flagged’, it may be expected that consideration of other objects of banal nationalism will bring to light a similar regionalism.

Billig notes that “Flags are not the only symbols of modern statehood. Coins and bank notes typically bear national emblems, which remain unnoticed in daily financial transactions” (41) – what might be described as ‘iconographic flagging’. In his analysis of the iconography of the banknotes of the United States dollar, Josh Lauer explains that for banknotes to be accepted as the material realisation of a currency, social trust must be developed, allowing users to recognise in the value of a banknote (112).21 A banknote’s worth does not lay in its materiality, but in the promise of its value (Lauer 111). In this way it is necessary to iconographically inscribe a banknote with value and legitimacy. Lauer continues:

In all cases the visual imagery of money is an assertion of the issuer’s legitimacy, either directly through monarchial, [sic.] state, or institutional insignia, or indirectly through symbolic appeals to the community’s common religious or historical past (112).

A common aspect of these examples of “visual imagery” is their ability to appeal to a nation’s identity. To consider this in relation to the significance of banknotes as an object banal nationalism, I propose that Lauer’s list is not exhaustive. Rather a range of insignia has the capacity to appeal to a nation’s common past or contemporary imagining, subtly alerting users of their nationhood, and thereby associating the money as belonging to the nation. In this way the banknote is brought under the blanket of the national ‘us’, and is inscribed with legitimacy. This means that regardless of whether the issuer of a banknote is the centralised state bank or an independent commercial bank, by utilising imagery that ‘flags’ nationhood, a legitimising effect can be achieved. In light of this, a hypothesis emerges that the iconography of banknotes issued within different countries of the United Kingdom shall fall

(27)

in line with the pattern of regional distinction recognised in the differing policies concerning language and the flying of flags.

The United Kingdom is almost unique in the world in that commercial banks have the authority to design and issue their own banknotes (de Heij 145), rather than it being the sole responsibility of the state’s central bank.22 Before the establishing of the Bank of England as the UK’s central bank in 1946, multiple banks within England and Wales issued their own banknotes. Contemporarily, the Bank of England holds a monopoly on the issuing of banknotes within these two countries. The Bank is owned by the UK Government, meaning it is accountable to both the British public and the UK Parliament (“Governance and funding”). Furthermore, “The Bank is overseen by a board of directors, known as the Court of Directors, who are appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor”, meaning that the Bank of England is directly affiliated with the British monarchy (“Governance and funding”).

Three Scottish banks,23_{and four Northern Irish banks,}24_{are bestowed with the} authority, granted by the Bank of England, to issue their own banknotes. Whilst these banknotes are legal currency throughout the United Kingdom:

The majority of banknotes circulating in both Scotland and Northern Ireland are issued by Scottish and Northern Ireland banks, respectively. These notes circulate and are accepted quite freely and, for the most part, they are also readily accepted in England & Wales (“Legal Position”).

In 1970 the current arrangement of the three commercial banks in Scotland, authorised to issue banknotes, was established. Previous to this date over eighty banks in Scotland had at some point issued banknotes, however a process of consolidation in the 1950s reduced this

22_{Hong Kong also has three commercial banks that issue banknotes.}

23_{These three banks are Edinburgh based commercial bank, the Bank of Scotland, Glasgow based commercial} bank, Clydesdale Bank, and Edinburgh based retail bank, the Royal Bank of Scotland.

24_{In the period of research for this project, following the 2016 EU Referendum, no new banknotes entered} circulation within Northern Ireland. In light of this, no Northern Irish notes have been selected for close reading within this study.

(28)

number to three (Penrose and Cumming 824).25 Notably, each of the Scottish banks remain commercial and independent of the state, and although the design differs depending on the bank of issuing, each denomination of Scottish banknotes is equal in value and legality. Penrose and Cumming acknowledge that historically the differing political alignments of the Scottish banks have impacted upon the banks’ respective iconographies, particularly concerning the balance of ‘British’ and ‘Scottish’ national identities (826-834).26 In this way, even within the country of Scotland, banknote iconography has historically been seen to ‘flag’ different imaginings of nationhood.

Following the United Kingdom’s European Union Referendum in 2016, eight banknotes have been designed and entered circulation, each of which has been printed on polymer, a new security measure. These banknotes have been issued by the Bank of England and each of the three Scottish banks.27 The Clydesdale Bank was the first of the UK banks to release a polymer banknote, with the introduction of their ‘World Heritage Series’ £5 denomination banknote in 2016. This was followed by the Bank of Scotland’s ‘The Bridge Series’ £5 and the Royal Bank of Scotland’s ‘Fabric of Nature’ themed series’ £5. The Bank of England also released their first polymer banknote in 2016. Subsequently, in 2017 each of these four banks released a £10 denomination banknote. These eight banknotes share some basic design aspects, including the primary colour scheme and dimensions of each denomination of banknote.28 _{This uniformity is significant in enabling each of the polymer} banknotes to be immediately recognisable as belonging to the pound sterling currency, and for a banknote’s value to be immediately recognised by users across the UK. In a manner

25_{Jan Penrose’s research focuses on cultural and political geography, nationalism and identity politics.} 26_{Penrose and Cumming provide detailed discussion of the differing political loyalties of Scottish banks and} how this effected banknote iconography, for example whilst Unionist-supporting banks depicted primarily British iconography, Nationalist-leaning banks depicted more Scottish nationalist iconography.

27_{All UK polymer banknotes can be found in Appendix: fig. 1, 2, 3 and 4 for BoE banknotes, fig. 5, 6, 7 and 8} for BoS banknotes, fig. 9, 10, 11 and 12 for Clydesdale Bank banknotes, and fig. 13, 14, 15 and 16 for RBS banknotes.

28_{£5s: 125mm x 65mm, £10s: 132mm x 69mm. Whilst the BoE £50 is conventionally red, Scottish £50 notes} are green. At present, the BoE have not announced plans to issue a polymer £50, so it is not known if the denominational colours will change.

(29)

comparable to the standardisation of language brought about by print-capitalism, such uniformity across the polymer banknotes enables the banknotes to be utilised as a tool of communication throughout the imagined community of the United Kingdom. Indeed, Hans de Heij acknowledges that “the co-circulation of Scottish variants and the British pound notes [has] led to a variety of banknotes in people’s wallets” (146).29 Whilst aspects of commonality can be found in the banknotes’ designs, the iconography of each banknote stands distinct, thereby demonstrating the complexity of the UK’s situation in relation to banknotes as a medium of banal nationalism.

Jan Penrose argues that through a banknote user’s identification with images of the nation-state depicted on a banknote, the imagined national community that is ‘flagged’ will be reified (429). In light of the differing iconographies of the banknotes within the United Kingdom, analysis of the banknotes can seek to realise if the banknotes issued in Scotland ‘flag’ the same “common, homogenous community” as those produced by the UK’s central bank (Helleiner 4). In the following chapter within this research I will analyse the iconography of the six polymer banknotes issued by the three Scottish banks and the two issued by the Bank of England, to consider if the Scottish banknotes appeal to a distinct Scottish national identity, independent of the British identity. What remains central to this project is the hypothesis that the differing iconography of banknotes within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland reflects the imagining of distinct communities, and ‘flags’ a different national ‘us’.

(30)

Chapter 2: Banknotes Portraits: Shifting Metonymies of the Nation

Banknote iconography must be understood as an assemblage of images, each aspect of which adds value to, firstly, the security of the banknote – making it complicated to forge or replicate – and secondly, and most significantly within this research, by appealing to nationhood in order to instill social trust in the legitimacy of the banknote’s claim of value (Lauer 112). Whilst each of the four issuing banks in question have designed the banknotes independently, there is a significant point of commonality shared in the iconography of each of the eight banknotes. This is the prominence of a specific iconographical element: portraiture. Upon each of the UK’s polymer banknotes the inclusion of a portrait of a historical figure is central to the design, dominating the iconography of the obverse of each Scottish banknote, and depicted on the reverse of the two Bank of England banknotes. On the Bank of England banknotes, this portrait of a historical figure falls second in prominence to the portrait which graces the obverse of each banknote of the reigning monarch of the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth realms.

As the most prominent iconographic element of the eight polymer banknotes, it may be inferred that the inclusion of a portrait of a real human figure serves a critical role in the assertion of a banknote’s legitimacy. Whilst the depiction of the reigning monarch is clearly identifiable as ‘monarchical insignia’, in line with Lauer’s limited categorisation (112),30 it is less easily recognisable what aspect of an imagined community the inclusion of historical figures appeals to. Whilst historical characters are, evidently, an aspect of a community’s past, what seems more significant is how the characters fit in with the imagining of a community in its contemporary realisation. In this way, it seems more plausible that legitimacy is established through visual imagery that appeals to a nation’s contemporary

30_{“visual imagery of money is an assertion of the issuer’s legitimacy, either directly through monarchial, [sic.]} state, or institutional insignia, or indirectly through symbolic appeals to the community’s common religious or historical past.”

(31)

culture and values. The identity of a nation is continually evolving, with factors such as the political situation of the state, international relations, social issues, developments in culture and to the monarchy all influencing a nation’s shifting identity.

To draw upon banal nationalism, ‘discursive flagging’ – such as the use of ‘us’ in a speech – enables the speaker to become, metonymically, the nation (Billig 112). In this way, I believe that the same effect can be achieved visually through ‘iconographic flagging’, wherein the depiction of a person who appeals to a nation’s culture and values can take on a metonymic function. This individual becomes a symbol of the nation and when integrated into the iconography of a banknote will ‘flag’ to a currency user their nationhood. The association of the metonymic individual with the banknote creates a bond of social trust in the value and legitimacy of the banknote. In this chapter, I aim to establish how the metonymic significance of different portraits can reflect the imagining of distinct Scottish and British nationhoods, through consideration of portraiture in relation to: the monarchy, internal and international politics, and social movements of the United Kingdom.

Foremost, a historical glance into the use of monarchical portraiture on UK banknotes reveals a contradiction in the nation that is ‘flagged’ by the Bank of England’s polymer banknotes, and how this aspect of iconography has impacted the ‘flagging’ of nationhood in contemporary iconography. Subsequently, two pairs of historical figures will be considered to shed light on the relationship between portraiture and two aspects of contemporary nationhood that contribute to the shifting nature of identity of a nation. The first pairing of Robert Burns and Sir Winston Churchill takes a look at the political implications of portraiture, as two historical figures whose writing was integrated into contemporary political discourse. Consideration of the trend of selecting portraits of literary figures in relation to the geopolitical context of the two referendums recently held within the United Kingdom – 2014’s Scottish Independence Referendum and 2016’s European Union Referendum –

(32)

reveals the conflicting national identities that are ‘iconographically flagged’ by the UK’s banknotes. The second pairing of Jane Austen and Mary Somerville identifies the societal connotations of the historical figures depicted on banknotes, as two historical figures who were selected amid controversy and through engagement with banknote users. Exploration of controversies surrounding portraiture, alongside consideration of developments in the processes of character selection, in relation to contemporary feminist ‘zeitgeist’ will problematise the banal status of banknotes. Ultimately, the question raised asked whether the different figures who appear within the iconography of the eight banknotes can be seen to ‘flag’ different nations.

(33)

‘Monarchical Insignia’ and Conflating Identities

In contemporary iconography a conspicuous division of Scottish characters for Scottish-issued banknotes, and English historical figures for Bank of England banknotes is identifiable. The Royal Bank of Scotland’s call for nominations for their ‘Fabric of Nature’ themed £10 explained that “nominees must be historical figures who are Scottish or have made a significant contribution to Scotland in the field of science and innovation” (“Royal Bank of Scotland seeks nominations…”). In fact, all three of the candidates shortlisted were born in Scotland,31 and each portrait to appear on the eight Scottish-issued banknotes depicts a historical figure born in Scotland.32 The metonymic significance of depicting exclusively Scottish historical figures reflects a process of differentiation and ‘othering’ from the other three countries of the United Kingdom, demonstrating the imagining of a community distinct of the state.

Conversely, the Bank of England categorised their historical figures as “UK characters who are widely admired and who have made an important contribution to our society and culture” (“Choosing banknote characters”).33 Indeed, as the central bank of the United Kingdom, it may be assumed that Bank of England iconography should stand to represent the unity of the four countries that comprise the British national identity. Despite this claim, however, the three characters to have been selected to feature on the polymer banknotes,34 as well as the five shortlisted candidates for the £20,35 were all born in England. This brings forth an issue regarding English centrality in the visualisation of British nationhood, which mirrors the political concerns of England’s dominant place within the

31_{Mary Somerville, James Clerk Maxwell and Thomas Telford.}

32_{RBS £5: Nan Shepherd, RBS £10: Mary Somerville, BoS £5 and £10: Walter Scott, Clydesdale Bank £5:} William Arrol, Clydesdale Bank £10: Robert Burns.

33_{Note the use of ‘discursive flagging’ - “our” signifies the nation of the United Kingdom and British society} and culture.

34_{Winston Churchill, Jane Austen and J.M.W. Turner – who will feature on the polymer £20, scheduled to enter} circulation in 2020.

(34)

United Kingdom.36 The use of exclusively English-born figures to stand metonymically for the United Kingdom reflects the conflation of English and British identities. Indeed, this becomes heightened through the exploration of the depiction of the monarch on both the Bank of England’s £5 and £10 banknotes (Appendix fig.1 and 3).

Conflated Identities and the British Monarch

The portrait of Queen Elizabeth II is positioned on the right hand side of the obverse of each banknote printed in a dark grey ink, a clear contrast to the light shades of each banknotes’ respective denominational colour. In the portrait the Queen’s head is adorned with a crown, a clear symbol of her status as monarch. This use of ‘monarchical insignia’ can also be observed on the UK’s coinage, produced by the Royal Mint, upon which each denomination has a ‘heads’ side depicting a profile portrait of the reigning monarch. Unlike pound sterling coinage, on banknotes the monarch’s portrait engages in eye contact with the banknote user. This engagement creates a relationship between the monarch and the currency user, acknowledging their shared context as citizens of the United Kingdom. The portrait’s status as ‘monarchical insignia’ is significant both within the United Kingdom, and internationally, as a globally recognised symbol of Britain. As the head of state, the Queen reflects commonality of government and monarchy across the four countries of the state, as well as “stability and continuity as [the monarchy is] a hereditary institution” (Raento et al. 939). In this way, the monarch’s portrait becomes a metonymical icon for the United Kingdom and the inclusion the Queen within the iconography stands as a ‘flag’ of British nationhood.

Since 1960, a portrait of the reigning monarch has consistently been depicted upon each denomination of Bank of England banknote issued (“Withdrawn Banknotes”). Although the portrait of the monarch has been updated as new series of banknotes are issued, it is

36_{See discussion in Chapter One.}

(35)

notable that the portrait of Queen Elizabeth II has remained the same since the issuing of ‘Series D’, which came into circulation in 1990. The consistent use of this portrait of Queen Elizabeth II within the Bank of England’s iconography is particularly noteworthy in consideration of the development in the materiality of the banknotes. As the first Bank of England banknotes to be issued on the polymer material, the materiality of banknotes – previously taken for granted and considered normative by banknote users – could no longer be relied upon in inciting legitimacy. In this manner, banknote iconography became the primary way in which social trust in the value of the new banknotes had to be developed. The continuity of the familiar portrait of the Queen from the preceding series, lends an air of security and dependability to the new banknotes. Through banknote users’ recognition of the portrait, a transferral of trust from the preceding series to the newly issued banknotes is carried out. The stable inclusion of a portrait of the monarch – the monarchy itself an established and historical institution – enables currency users to continue to identify British nationhood in the Bank of England’s iconography and remain trusting in the value of banknotes issued by the Bank.

Whilst the portrait is itself metonymic of the United Kingdom, a somewhat contradictory outcome arises from the exclusive depiction of the British monarch on Bank of England banknotes. In the process of centralisation in 1946 the Bank of England was established as the UK’s central bank and “retained its exclusively English name while claiming a new Britain-wide monopoly on the privilege of reproducing the reigning monarch’s portrait on its banknotes” (Penrose and Cumming 833). By inaccurately transposing the use of ‘England’ in place of ‘Britain’ in the naming the UK’s central bank, England’s “asymmetrical place in the United Kingdom” is highlighted (Kumar 7). Furthermore, by claiming an exclusive association between the British monarchy and the Bank of England, an imbalance in England’s association with the monarchy is reflected.

Banknote Iconography and the Construction of a British Identity