In message , Aidan Stanger
writes

Was a pound ever worth a pound of gold?

No. The word originally referred to a pound of silver - from 1158 this
was defined as sterling silver, hence the term "pound sterling".

Also, the pound weight referred to was the Troy Pound, as still used in
the precious metals business, which is a bit lighter than the modern
pound. One Troy pound is 0.8229 of a modern (Avoirdupois) pound.

--
Paul Terry

Is it not the case that banknotes (whomsoever they are issued by) are
simply that: a note from the bank stating that the bank concerned will pay
the bearer on demand the amount stated, i.e. in gold?

Was a pound ever worth a pound of gold?

I was not suggesting that one would get a Pound of gold in weight, merely a
Pound's WORTH of gold, i.e. presumably a fraction of an Ounce!

That being so, the Royal Bank of Scotland (in Edinburgh) would be obliged
to honour only one of its notes in the same way that the Bank of England
in London would only be obliged to honour one of its notes.

UIVMM they're not *simply* that - the Bank Of England control how many
Scottish pounds are issued...

That I did not know.

I am reminded of the apocryphal tale of the man who went to the Bank of
England and stated that he was "The Bearer", and when asked what he meant,
simply stated he wanted the equivalent of the note he was presenting in
gold.

What did he get?


Stunned silence, no doubt!

Marc.

"Mait001" wrote in message
...

Was a pound ever worth a pound of gold?

I was not suggesting that one would get a Pound of gold in weight, merely
a
Pound's WORTH of gold, i.e. presumably a fraction of an Ounce!

When golden sovereigns were normal coins of the realm, they were worth one
pound.
--
Terry Harper
http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

Mait001 wrote:
Is it not the case that banknotes (whomsoever they are issued by) are
simply that: a note from the bank stating that the bank concerned
will pay the bearer on demand the amount stated, i.e. in gold?

That being so, the Royal Bank of Scotland (in Edinburgh) would be
obliged to honour only one of its notes in the same way that the Bank
of England in London would only be obliged to honour one of its notes.

I am reminded of the apocryphal tale of the man who went to the Bank
of England and stated that he was "The Bearer", and when asked what
he meant, simply stated he wanted the equivalent of the note he was
presenting in gold.


Since we came off the Gold Standard, notes are no longer backed by gold and,
hence, cannot be exchanged for their value in gold. i.e. a five pound note
is now intrinsically worth a fiver rather than being a representation of
five pounds worth of gold

Mait001 wrote:
Is it not the case that banknotes (whomsoever they are issued by) are
simply that: a note from the bank stating that the bank concerned
will pay the bearer on demand the amount stated, i.e. in gold?

That being so, the Royal Bank of Scotland (in Edinburgh) would be
obliged to honour only one of its notes in the same way that the Bank
of England in London would only be obliged to honour one of its notes.

I am reminded of the apocryphal tale of the man who went to the Bank
of England and stated that he was "The Bearer", and when asked what
he meant, simply stated he wanted the equivalent of the note he was
presenting in gold.


Since we came off the Gold Standard, notes are no longer backed by gold and,
hence, cannot be exchanged for their value in gold. i.e. a five pound note
is now intrinsically worth a fiver rather than being a representation of
five pounds worth of gold


I am sure that this is correct.

However, the Bank of England still holds a large amount of gold and what, I
wonder, is that actually worth?

To bring this subject back to the original digression onto which I launched it,
i.e. the European Union, I seem to recall that a condition of the U.K. joining
the Euro was to have that gold transferred to the European Central Bank.
Thankfully, I am quite sure that this will never happen, since the likelihood
of us joining E.M.U. diminishes daily.

Marc.

On 29 Feb 2004 17:03:53 GMT, (Mait001) wrote:

Mait001 wrote:
Is it not the case that banknotes (whomsoever they are issued by) are
simply that: a note from the bank stating that the bank concerned
will pay the bearer on demand the amount stated, i.e. in gold?

That being so, the Royal Bank of Scotland (in Edinburgh) would be
obliged to honour only one of its notes in the same way that the Bank
of England in London would only be obliged to honour one of its notes.

I am reminded of the apocryphal tale of the man who went to the Bank
of England and stated that he was "The Bearer", and when asked what
he meant, simply stated he wanted the equivalent of the note he was
presenting in gold.


Since we came off the Gold Standard, notes are no longer backed by gold and,
hence, cannot be exchanged for their value in gold. i.e. a five pound note
is now intrinsically worth a fiver rather than being a representation of
five pounds worth of gold


I am sure that this is correct.

However, the Bank of England still holds a large amount of gold and what, I
wonder, is that actually worth?

To bring this subject back to the original digression onto which I launched it,
i.e. the European Union, I seem to recall that a condition of the U.K. joining
the Euro was to have that gold transferred to the European Central Bank.
Thankfully, I am quite sure that this will never happen, since the likelihood
of us joining E.M.U. diminishes daily.

Marc.

I think you will find that 'our' Gold went to Germany several years
ago when it was thought a foregone conclusion that we would join the
Euro and that curency needed propping up.

AIUI there is only a small reserve now kept in Wales, none in London

Keith J Chesworth
www.unseenlondon.co.uk
www.blackpooltram.co.uk
www.happysnapper.com
www.boilerbill.com - main site
www.amerseyferry.co.uk