CATALOGUE OF ENGLISH COINS

IN THE BRITISH

MUSEUM

A CATALOGUE
OF

ENGLISH COINS
IX

THE

BRITISH MUSEUM

THE NORMAN KINGS

BY

GEORGE CYEIL BROOKE,

IN

B.A.

TWO VOLUMES
62

WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND

PLATES

VOLUME
(INTRODUCTION, TABLES

AND

PLATES)

LONDON FEINTED BY ORDER OF THE TRUSTEES SOLD AT THE BRITISH MUSEUM, AND BY
LoNGMAKS & Co., 39 Paternoster Row Bernard Quaritch, 11 Grafton Street, New Bond Street, W. AsHER & Co., 13 Bedford Street, Covent Garden

Humphrey Milford, Oxford University

Press,

Amen

Corner, E.C.

And RoLLiN & Feuardent,

69 Great Russell Street, W.C, and 4

Rue de

Louvois, Paris

1916
[_All

rights reservedl

PRINTED IN ENGLAND
AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

6J'

PREFACE
The
British

V.

second volume of the Catalogue of English Coins in the

Museum, completing the Anglo-Saxon

The retirement
of Mr,

Series,

was pubservice of

lished in 1893.

Keary from the

the Trustees,

and the employment

of Mr. Grueber on other parts

of the Collection, explain the delay of twenty-three years between that publication and the appearance of the present two volumes.

These are entirely the work of Mr. George Cyril Brooke, B.A.,
Assistant in the

Department.

They cover

the

period of the

Norman

Kings.
earlier

Comparison with

volumes will show that considerable

iu the

modifications have been

made

methods of arranging and

to the

describing the

coins.

Special

attention has been paid

epigraphical details of the inscriptions, the importance of which

will be manifest

upon a glance

at the Epigraphical Table

which

accompanies the woj'k.

inscriptions.

Special founts have been prepared for the

illustrations

Descriptions and

of important

coins

which are not represented

included

in the National Collection

have been

from other

collections,

public or private,

making the

volume

for practical

purposes a fairly complete work of reference

on Anglo-Norman
descriptions
all

coins.

In order to add to the clearness of the

extraneous information, relating to provenance

to foot-notes.

and similar matters, has been relegated

Most important of
all is
;

the subordination of the mints to the

types in the classification

an arrangement which

is

justified

by

the great advance which has been

the chronology of the types.

made

of recent years in fixing

The woik has been printed by the Clarendon

collotype plates executed
I

Press,

and the

by the London Stereoscopic Company.

have read the proofs of the whole, and compared the descriptions

with the coins.

PREFACE

English coins were represented in the collections of Sir Robert

Cotton and Sir Hans Sloane, which formed the nucleus of the
British
little

Museum

at its foundation in 1753.

For half a century

addition seems to have been

made

to the collection.

The

coins from the Tyssen collection purchased in 1802 did not include
his

Norman pieces, but many Museum through the hands

of these found their of

way

into the

Earrd Charles

Roberts.

The

magnificent series of English coins belonging to this collector

was purchased in 1810

for 4,000 guineas.

No

other acquisition

approaching this in importance as regards the English series was

made

for

more than a century.

The

collection of

King George

III,

acquired in 1825, contained a few

Norman

coins,

and purchases

were made from time

those of the
(1848),

to

time at the sales of collections such as

Duke

of Devonshire (1844), the Earl of

(1854),

Pembroke
(1896-7),

James Dodsley Cuff

Rashleigh
last

Hyman Montagu
P.

E.

W.

(1900),
it

and P. W.

Carlyon-Britton (1913).

At the
in
Sir

moment

has fortunately been possible to include

coins

an Appendix

fifty-six

from the cabinet

series

of

the

late

John Evans, although the Norman

was not strongly

represented in that collection.

Hoards acquired in part or in their entirety under the law of

Treasure Trove have also contributed to the Collection.
are fully discussed in the Introduction,
it suffices

As

these

to

mention here

the hoard of

many thousand

coins found at Beaworth in 1833

nearly seven hundred of these appear in this Catalogue.

The present volumes

will, it is

hoped, be followed in a few ye&vs

series.

by a Catalogue of the early Plantagenet

G.

F.

HILL,

Kee'per of Coins

and Medals.

COIN TENTS

VOLUME
Peeface
.

PAGE
V
IX

List of Plates

Eeeata

X
:-

INTRODUCTION

The coinage at the time of the Conquest Types of coins and their periodical change
Finds of coins
Overstruck coins

XI
xii

Mules Epigraphy

Order of types

..... ..... ....... .....

:

XTi

xxxii

xxxvi
xlii

IxTi
Ixvii

Table showing evidence for arrangement of types

Irregular issues

Llewellyn, sou of

Cadwgan
:

Ixxii

Of the reign of Stephen

I.

Coins struck from erased obyerse dies

Coins with inscription Peeeeic
Issues bearing the king's name, of uncertain

Ixxvi
Ixxxii

II.

III.

attribution

Ixxxix
:

lY. Varieties grouped geographically

A. Midland Counties
B. Eastern Counties
C. Scottish or

XCY
xcvi
xcviii
cvi
title

Border Counties
.

D. York and District

v. Coins not bearing the king's

:
cxi

Eustace FitzJohn

Robert de Stuteville
Henry, Bishop of \\"inchester

cxvi
cxvii
cxviii

Empress Matilda Henry of Anjou

cxxi


VUl
CONTENTS

Irregular issues of the reign of Stephen {continued)

PAGE
exxix cxxix cxxxi
cxxxii

Robert (of Gloucester ?) William (of Gloucester?) Brian FitzCount?

.

Uncertain Baronial coins

Organization and
Control of the

Officers of the ]Mint

Engraving of dies

at

...... ....
Mint
:

cxxxiii

London

ex XXV

Dies transferred from one mint to another

cxxxix
&c.
cxli

Moneyers, their status,

Forgery by moneyers

Weight
Table

Moneyers' names

Moneys of Account
Mints

..... ...... ...... ....... ...... .........

liberties, penalties,

cxlix
cli

of coins

showing

comparative weights of

coins

of
cliii

different types

clv
clix

clx

Abbreviations used, collections

Table of Finds

.........
.

cj^uoted,

&c.

clxxxix

Table of Mints, Moneyers, and Types

cxcvi
.

Table of Inches and Millimetres, and Mionnet's scale

ccliii

Table of Relative Weights of Grains and Grammes

Epigraphical Table
Plates.

ccliv

facing p. cclvi

VOLUME
CATALOGUE OF COINS:
William I William II

II

Henry
.

Stephen

.........
:

214 266 334

377 378

Irregular issues
I.

Coins struck from erased obverse dies

II.

Coins with inscription Pekeeic

III. Issues

bearing the king's name, of uncertain

. .

attribution

379

CONTENTS

PAGE
IV. Varieties grouiDed geographically
:-

A. Midland Counties
B. Eastern Counties
C. Scottish or

383

384
385

Border Counties
.

D. York and District

386
title
:-

V. Coins not bearing the king's

Eustace Fitz John

389

Kobert de Stuteville

390
391

Henry, Bishop of "Winchester

Empress Matilda Henry of Anjou

William

391

392
y)
?)

Robert (of Gloucester

395 395
39(5

(of Gloucester
?

Brian FitzCount

Henry, Earl of Northumberland

397
398

Uncertain Baronial coins

Appendix

of coins recently acquired

400

INDEXES :
I.

Mints

413
429 453

II.

Moneyers
General

III.

LIST OF PLATES
I_XXVIL
XXVIII XXXVII. XXXVIII XLVIII.
William
I.

William

II.

Henry

I.

XLIX LVI.
LVII.
LVIII, LIX.
,

Stephen.

Coins from Erased Dies;

coins with inscription

Perekic.
Irregular Issues bearing Stephen's name.

LX.
LXI.
LXII.

Double-figure type; Eustace Fitz John

Stuteville;

Robert de

Henry, Bishop of Winchester.

Empress Matilda; Henry of Anjou. Henry of Anjou Robert (of Gloucester?) William (of Gloucester?); Brian Fitzcount? and uncertain
; ;

Baronial coins.

ERRATA
p. 22, no.
coll.)
;

114

p. 36, no.
;

1S7

p. 41, no.

219
*

p. 67, no.

359

{not Sir

Hans Sloane

p. 86,

no. 464

insert as provenance 'Cotton

Collection,

1758'.

moneyer's name Godvvi '. moneyer's name Saewi (Sfewine p. 59, no. 307, for Druman read Dirman'. pp. 64, 65, nos. 340-2, for moneyer's name read Eadwi p. 66, no. 349, insert as moneyer's name Godwi'.
p. 38, no. 200, insert as
p. 52, no. 274, insert as
'

'

?)

'.

'

'

'.

'

p. 68, no. 362, for p. 71, no. 384,

coll.

'(^lfh[en?)' read

'

(^lfh[eli]
(cf.

?)'.

on

vp-hich

remove to WIJ^fCHCOMBE mint reads I'lEI.,).

'

coin from
?)

same

obv. die in T. Bliss

p. 72, no. 385, for

p. 130, no. 693, for

p.

read Ssewi (Ssewine Ciwincc read Cipincc '. 162, no. 868, for '^Ifhen' read '^Ifheh'.
S8ewi[ne]
' '

'.

'

'

'

p. 170, no. 912, for 'iElfen p. 221, no. 41, for

'

'

read '^Ifeh'.
'

l""^

'

in reverse inscription read

MTk

',

and

for

'

.^Ifhen' read

'^Ifheh'.
p. 228,

no. 79, for moneyer's

name

read
'

'Ji;[l]fsi'.
'

p. 230, no. 96, for

'XDRII:!

read
'

IDKII

'

(cf. p.

403, no. 96 a).

p. 232, no. 104, insert in

p. p.

p.

provenance W. Allen sale, 1S98, lot 821 \ 233, no. Ill, for 'Edwine' read 'Edwi'. 235, no. 125, insert in ^jrovenance W. Allen sale, 1898, lot 327'. 237, no. 138, insert as moneyer's name Sewi (Sewine ?) '.
' '

p. 246, no. 190, for

'Swirlinc' read 'Spirlinc'.

'

p. 253, no. 227, for

p. 256, no. 237, for p. 279, no. 40, for

p. 351, no. 104, for
'

'

Saewine or Sewi read Sewi (Sewine Swerlinc read Sperlinc '.

' ' ' * '

?)

'.

Swerlig?' read
'

Sperlig'.
'

t^

DB

'

read

t^\/'DB
'

'.

Plate LX, for

'

Queen Matilda and Eustace

;

read

'

Stephen and Queen Matilda

',

and

dele

'

Eustace, son of Stephen

(?)

'.

INTEODUCTION
The
is

coinage of the

Norman kings

of

England

follows

in

unbroken sequence that of the Anglo-Saxon kings

introduced
officials

no change

in

denomination, standard, weight, or form, and

held
office

even

who

in

the

mints

of

the

Confessor

continued to be responsible for the coinage of the Conqueror.

In

Normandy William had been

alive to the distress caused

by

the continual debasement of the feudal coinages, but his attempts

to

remedy the evil by substituting a

to
failure

triennial tax for the revenue

which accrued
were a

him from lowering the standard

owing
to

of the coinage

the heavy loss consequent upon the

better coinage

natural outflow of his

own

and inflow into

his

dukedom
in

of the baser deniers of neighbouring lords, a loss so

it

serious that

quickly led to the closing of his mints.

Finding

England

a currency of high standard, long established

and well

accepted,

he had

good reason to adopt

this,

as

he did most
-

Anglo-Saxon
for currency

institutions.

The only denomination

22-|

still

struck

was the penny weighing

oz.

grains Troy of silver

silver to

of

the

standard of 11

2 dw^t. of fine

18 dwt. of

alloy,"

and fractions

of this

were

still

obtained by the elementary

method

of cutting the coin into halves

:

and quarters.

The type

remained as in Anglo-Saxon times

on the obverse was the bust,

or sometimes the figure, of the king, variously rendered on different

^

The coinage of the

it

first

two, or four, years of

Henry

II, if

any was struck,

is

seems that Stephen's name continued in use on the coins until the reforms of the year 1156 (or 8 ?). ^ For other monetary denominations in use as moneys of account see below,
included, as
^

p. clix.

some doubt about the standard weight and fineness of the penny Mr. H. Symonds kindly see belovr, pp. cli informs me that a double assay of a penny of William I (from same dies as no. 815 below) has produced the results (1) 10 oz. 19 dwt. 18grs., and (2) 10 oz. 18 dwt. 22 grs. For this double result from the same coin cf. Num. Chron.,
There
is

of this and earlier periods

fi".

1915, pp. 201-2.

XH
types, with his

INTRODUCTION

name and
to

title

round

it

on the reverse was one of

the

many

designs, usually with

some form of cross as their main

feature,

which seem
to

have been used without any particular

round the design were the name of

meaning and
the

have been selected at random from the regular

;

trade stock of the engraver

official called

ononetarius or 'moneyer',^
coin,
{i. e.

for the

good weight and purity of the

who was responsible and the name of the

at) eoujDling

mint at which he worked, the word on

names.

the two

These obverse and reverse

technically
of obverse
'

designs
that
is

form

together

what

is

known
is

as a

'

type

;
'

to say, one particular

form

always found, except on irregular coins known as

These types used to
' '

mules ',^ with one particular reverse design.

be considered by some authorities as contemporaneous issues," but

it is clear,

not only from the evidence of finds of the coins, but also

from the passages in Domesday^ relating that payments were made

by moneyers on

receipt of their dies qiiando onoaeta vertebatur,

vertente, that the

quando
known.

r}iOiieta

reaovcdur or moneta

types were
is

successively issued.

The

object of this change of types

not

From

the passages in

know
to the

that the change of type

was made the occasion

Domesday mentioned above we of a payment

king by his moneyers and to bishops by their moneyers, but

to suppose that a

scheme of taxation was the origin of the changes

of type

is

to confound cause

and

effect.

To change the types

in

order to

make moneyers pay

the purchase-money of

new

dies

and

a tax at the same time would be an extremely expensive form of

^

'

See below, pp. cxli ff. See, for example, Num.

Cliron., 1893, pp.

129

tf.

See below, pp. xxxvi fF. A statement made ih'ul.,

p. 131, is

form of

worth mentioning as it involves a very common and very misleading error. Packe there says, The argument for a successive issue of
'

each type requires that those similar to each other should be near together in point of time '. As changes of type are quite clearly due not, as in Continental coinages, to mere development or degradation of design, but to intentional changes for some specific purpose, it is quite evident that the contrary is the
case

the intention being to distinguish one type from another, we must expect closely similar designs to be separate in point of time. This error is pointed out in yum. Chron., 1901, p. 35, but on a theory of legal tender.
;

Domesday,

I, ff.

172, 179, 252.

See below, p. cxxxv.

COIN-TYPES
tax-collecting, nor could there be

XUl
for

any necessity
;

changing the

type in order to

mark a

period of taxation

on the other hand,

given a periodical change of types necessary for some other purpose,

then the purchase of the

new

dies

was a natural and convenient

fees.

opportunity at which to collect the moneyers'

possible to explain these successive types as

It

seems
of

marking periods
and

control of the output of the mint, that

in the change of

is

to

sa^y,

to find a parallel
to

mint-marks of a
to

later date,

assume a

periodical

Mint Assay, similar

the Trial of the Pyx, which

if

would necessitate some mark on the coinage,

change of

not a complete

tj'pe, for the purpose of certifying to the Assayers that

the coins they assayed were those of the latest issue and not of an
issue already tested.

This was the purpose of the mint-marks

at the Trials of the Pyx.^

which were changed

The date
-

of the

institution of the Trial of the

Pyx

is

not known, the earliest

;

recorded
trial,

trial

being of the

fifth

year of Edward I

a similar
described

though not actually called a Trial of the Pyx,

is

of the thirty-second year of of this sort

Henry

III,

which shows that an assay

was

in existence, while

it

was

still

the practice to
trial

put the moneyers' names on the coins.

Some such

seems to

have been necessary

of dies

to complete the control of the mint.

The

issue

from London to the moneyers guarded against the cutting

on the dies though
it

of false inscriptions

did not prevent some

dies,^

moneyers from changing or erasing inscriptions on their

^

Cf.,

in Ruding, Annals, vol.

ii,

p.

262, the indenture of

Edward IV showing'

the object of the mint-marks.

In the period intervening between the regular

change of type and the

inclusive, it
is

issue of mint-marks, the reigns of

possible that small privy

Henry II to Henry VI marks were used. Thus on the gold

stops, a barred or

coinage of Edward III (see Kuin. Cliron., 1911, pp. 313-9) annulet or saltire unbarred A and similar small differences were evidently

used as definite marks to distinguish issues of different periods, and may perhaps have had the same significance as the types of the Norman period and the mint-marks of the fifteenth to the seventeenth centuries similarly in the short-cross coinage of King John Mr. Lawrence has shown, in a paper to be
;

j)ublished shortly in the British

Numismatic Joiinud, that the

letter

reversed on all coins of a certain period (Mr. Lawrence's classes

^

S was IV and Va),

evidently with some deliberate j)urpose on the part of the mint authorities.

See H. Symonds, Mint-muyls,

SjC,

p. 209.

of James I (Brit. Num. Journ., vol. ix), ^ See below, pp. cxlix ff.

XIV

INTRODUCTION
of the reverse die

and the engraving

with the moneyer's name

of

must have

led to the conviction of the

moneyer on the discovery

;

a coin of impure standard or low weight

but that would be no safecoins.

guard without some method of finding untrue

against striking coins outside a

Legislation

town

probably served the double

purpose of defence against an enemy and control over the coinage.

The supposition

of

a periodical Mint Assay would explain a

;

periodical change of types

but this

is

mere supposition, and the

organization of the mint at this early period must remain obscure.

It is not possible to

see in the

change of types any connexion

possible for the types to

with legal tender.^

It

would only be

mark
But

legal tender if

one type only were allowed in currency.

this

was

clearly not the case, for in hoards large

numbers
:

of coins of

more than one type are very frequently found

find, for

in

the

Tamworth

example, coins were found of three conof 30, 97,

secutive types to the

number

and 164

respectively, that

is

to say, if one type only

were legal tender, the owner of the hoard

while collecting his 164 current pennies was impoverishing himself

by keeping
tender.
If

in his possession

127 coins which were no longer legal

of

a definite

number

types,

more than

one,

were

allowed in currency and previous types declared false tender, the

public would be assumed to have the almost impossible knowledge
of the order in

which the types had been

i,

issued.^

Similarly, the

Greatley Synod, Liebermann, Gesefze, vol.

Num.

Chron., 1901, pp. 35-6,

and

Bn't.

Num.

pp. 158-9 (14). Journ., vol.

viii,

pp. 113-4.

Mr. Andrew's showing the Shillington find would prove that the tender, having been limited by the first type of William II and again by the second of Henry I, was later thrown open, and types as far back as the last of William I types, that is, which had already been withdrawn and had therefore, presumably, ceased to exist- were restored to circulation. The fact that no

On

two

profile types occur in finds of

rarity of profile types in periods of

and the rarity of Henry I).

^

finds

Norman coins may be explained by the which finds are common (e. g. William I), of periods in which profile types are common (e. g.
I

For example, assume that at the end of the reign of William

types V,

VI, VII and VIII of his reign were legal tender, then the
receiving a penny of type
to

man

in the street

IV would have

to

know by
is

instinct that it

was

struck before the last four types of the reign, for there

nothing on the coin

show

it.

COIN-TYPES

XV

suggestion that the issue of a type with the bust in profile

marked
profile

a limit of legal tender

type, for example,
is

is

untenable for

the same reason.

the second (or possibly third) of the reign of

profile issue is his sixth

Henry
a

I,

and the next

type

on the issue

of type VI, therefore, type I

would be no longer

legal tender, yeb

man

receiving a coin of type I could not be expected to

it

know

whether

was issued before or

after type II
its issue,

there

is

nothing

on the coin to show the period of

and man's memory

can hardly cover a period of ten years or more in a subject of

the technicalities of which he
is

quite ignorant, to say nothing

of the difficulty arising on the issue of a type in three-quarter face

such as the second and

fifth

types of Stephen.

Finds of coins

seem
or, if

to

show that there was no

;

limit of tender at this period,

any, a very long one

the St.

Mary

Hill

Church

find, for

example, contained no fewer than eleven types, and the Shillington

find covered

an even longer period

(see pp. lii-liii).

Nor could

there be any reason for limiting the legal tender at a period

when
but

the purity and good weight of the coinage was maintained, unless
it

were to stop the circulation of worn and clipped coins

these

would probably
if

find their

way

automatically to the melting-

pot even
get

measures were not taken, as they

may have

been, to

them returned.

At

periods

when we know
'

the legal tender to

have been limited, we

also find that the frequent changes of type

were abandoned

thus,

on the issue of the

short-cross

'

coinage

by Henry
this
'

II all previous issues

'

were put out of currency, and

it

short- cross

type continued until

was
'

in its turn
'

put

out of currency at the introduction of the

long-cross

type by

Henry

III.

The approximate arrangement

they were struck
is

of the types in the order in

which

possible

by means
'

of the

combined evidence to
'

be obtained from Finds of coins,

Epigraphical data.

Overstruck

coins,

'

Mules

',

and

In the following pages the types are described by the numbers

in the plates of

Hawkins's Silver Coins (Hks. 233,

('

&c.)

and by

descriptive

names

Profile

Cross fleury

'

type, &c.).

XVI

INTRODUCTION

Finds of Coins.
(See Table of Finds.)

The importance
primary value

of finds lies in the grouping of types

;

which

occur in the same find

it is

but for the evidence thus obtained to be of

necessary for the hoard to contain a considerable

for the
its

number

of coins

and

whole hoard to have been adequately

described at the time of

discovery.

glance at the Table of

Finds will show that the Malmesbury

of a thoroughly unsatisfactory find
;

find of

1828

is

an example

we do

not

know
is

of

how many
which

coins

it

consisted, but thirteen only are described, twelve of

;

belong to one type and one to another

hoard, of which
is

similar

the Shillington

we have

the most meagre information.

contrast

seen in
is

the Beaworth, Tamworth, and Watford

finds, in
all,

which

there

no doubt that the vast majority, probably

described
;

of the coins

discovered belong to the types

in

these

examples,

therefore, one cannot lightly abandon the evidence of the grouping

of types

which they

afford,

whereas in the former examples the

evidence of the finds can only be accepted in confirmation of

evidence from other sources or at least in the absence of any

conflicting evidence.

Again,

if

a hoard contains a large number

it

of coins,

and

every coin discovered in

is

known
is

to

have been

described,

the evidence,

though very strong,

not absolutely
;

conclusive that the types of the hoard form a group

a stray coin

or two of an earlier period than the rest

present, as

is

quite likely to be

was the case

in the Colchester find of 1902,

which

contained two pennies of

Henry

and one of Stephen, with about

11,000 of the 'short-cross' issue (Henry II to

Henry

III); but

such stray coins are not usually very apt to mislead.

The more
is

dangerous form of hoard, which

is

fortunately rare,

a hoard
later
:

which has
period.

lain

dormant

for a time

and been increased at a

such a hoard

There are obvious reasons

why

may

be made

man may bury

any other
it

his savings before going

away

for military service

or on

business, recover his hoard on his return,

add to

it

and bury

again on leaving

home

a second time

or a portion

FINDS OF COINS
of a

XVII

dowry may be kept and

additions

years,

when

the financial position of

made to it after a lapse of the owner has improved.

is

An

instance of some such find as this

doubtless seen in the

Shillington find of 1871, which contained coins of William II and

four or five coins of

coin of
tJie

Henry

I's
;

seventh tj^pe and at the most one

it is

intervening tj'pes

unlikely that the portion not

all

seen by the recorder of the hoard included

the missing types.

Though
from them
is

as

many

as

two dozen

finds

have been recorded which

contain coins of the

is

Norman

period, the evidence to be obtained

hardly so satisfactory as might be expected.

finds

This

chiefly

due to the fact that the

:

are

very unevenly

distributed

of the types

between the third of William II and the

fourteenth of Henrj- I there have been very few coins found and

no satisfactory hoards recorded, and similarly of the types between

the second and last of Stephen's reign
of the early types of William I
;

on the other hand, finds

last

and of the

two types

of

Henry
thus

and the

first

two

of Stephen

have been comparatively numerous,

is

though mostly small, and good corroborative evidence

obtained.

Some

finds

have contained but few

coins,

and

in

many

cases hoards have been quickly dispersed

and their description

consequently incomplete.

The recorded

finds

which contained coins of Edward Confessor

or Harold II with coins of William are six in number:

Soberton, 1851
;

York, 1845; York, 1882;

Whitchurch (Oxfordshire
St.

?),

date uncertain
;

Mary

Hill Church,

London, 1774

City of London, 1872.

The Soberton [Hampsliire)

and two gold
in a field near
rings,

Fiiid'^ (1851) consisted of

259 coins

which were found

in a vessel of

dingy red ware

Wickham

Lodge, Soberton.

The

coins were

Xum.

Chron., 1852, Proceedings, p. 17.

Several of the coins from this find

find in Arch. Joiirn., viii (1851),

are in the British

p. 100, is

Museum

an account of the

wrong

in describing all the 78 coins of the Confessor as Hks. 223

and

all

the 159 of Harold as Hks. 231.

INTRODUCTION

Edward

Confessor, Hks. 219, P. C. B.^

VI

Hks. 223, P.
Harold, Hks. 230

C. B.

XI

77

152

Hks. 231
I,

William

Hks. 233,

'

Profile Cross Fleury

'

type

22

Total

259

The complete hoard seems

York Find
(1845).^

to

have been described.

Discovered in digging out the foundation

of a house near Jubbergate.

About 600
;

coins were said to have

been found, of which Hawkins saw 167

these were

Edward
William

Confessor, type not described

I,
'

...
.
.

Hks. 234,

'

Bonnet
'

'

type

with profile head

....
.

1G5
1

Total

167

He

says that there was one penny of William with a profile head,
it

but he did not see

and was not able to say what was

all

its

type

from a comparison with

the other finds in which

coins of

William were discovered with coins of the Confessor we

fairly conclude that this coin

may

was

of Hks. 233, the

'

Profile

Cross
at

Fleury' type.

York Find
the time of

(1882).^

No

description of this find

was made

its

discovery.

Coins of uncertain number of

;

Edward

Confessor and William were found in Bishophill

the types of
Profile

William represented in the hoard were Hks. 233,

'

Cross

Fleury' type, and 234, 'Bonnet' type, and the mule of these two
types, Hks. 235.

The bulk

of the hoard seems to have been of

the

'

Bonnet type.
'

Whitchurch {Oxfordshire?) Find^ (date unknown). Not described

at time of discovery.
It is said to

have contained many coins of

Edward
some
^

Confessor, Hks. 225 and 223 (P. C. B.

and XI), possibly

of Harold,

and coins of William

classification in

I,

'

Profile

Cross Fleury
ft'.

',

Major Carlyon-Britton's

Num.

Chron., 1905, pp. 179

2 ^

Num. Num.

Chron., 1846, pp. 123-5. Brit. Num. Journ., vol. ii, p. 115.
Chron., 1902, p. 219,

and

Brit.

Num.

Journ., vol,

ii,

pp. 115-6.


FINDS OF COINS
'

XIX
:

Bonnet', and

'

Canopy types (Hks.

'

233, 234, 236)

Hks. 234 and

236 predominating.
>S'^.

Mary

Hill Church

Find

(1774).

Near the church

of St.

Mary
below

Hill,

London, was found at about fourteen or

fifteen feet

the level of the street an earthen vessel containing coins, and

within the vessel was another

smaller one of

crucible

shape
of the

which

also contained coins

is

and a gold brooch.

The number

coins that were found

not

known

between 300 and 400 were

examined, and of these the majority were of Edward Confessor

(P. C. B.

VI

to

XI

inclusive

and a mule

of

VII x VIII)

of

Harold II

thirty-one moneyers and twenty-two mints were represented, some

coins having the sceptre and others not
;

of William I the
'

'

Profile
'

Cross

Fleury

',

'

Bonnet

'

',

Canopy

'

and

Two
'

Sceptres

t^^pes

(Hks. 233, 234, 236, 237) were present, and also a curious mule

with obverse of an unusual variety of the

reverse of the
'

Canopy

'

type and
cut half-

Two

Sceptres

'

type

there were

many

pennies and farthings.

City of

London Find'^
in

(1872).

Said to have contained about

7,000 coins, of which over 2,800 were examined and described by

E.

H. Willett

Num.

Cliron., 1876,

and nearly 500 were described

later in

Num.

Gliron., 1885,

by Sir John Evans. The hoard contained

Cnut, Harold
I,

a few coins of u^thelred

\Q>Yy large

II,

and Harthacnut; a

majority of the coins described (2,788 out of 2,829 in

in Evans's
list)

Willett's

and about 450

all
'

were

of

Edward

Confessor,
so-called

including
'

the types of his

reign except the rare

Harthacnut

type

the few remaining English coins of the find

I
;

were of Harold II and William

in

two foreign

coins,

both figured

Num.

Chron., 1876, PI. X.

8,

9,

are described, one as a coin

of

Magnus, which should be attributed to Svend Estridsen (1047an uncertain eleventh-century German
coin,

1075),^ the other as

^
"^

Archaeologia, vol.

iv,

Now in the Hunterian

Num. Num.
Cf.

pp. 356 ff. Collection.

^ *

Citron., 1876, pp.

323

ff.,

and

See below, pp. xxxix, 43, and op. cit., 1885, pp. 254 ff.

PL

VIII. 11.

Chron., 1905, PI. VII.

1.
i

Hauberg, MyniforhoM og Udmyntninger

Danmarl-,

PI. VIII. 6.

'

XX

INTRODUCTION
identified as a coin of Celle of Heinrich III
:

which maj^ probably be

(1039-56).^

The

coins of William I represent three types

'

'

Profile

Cross
and

rieury', 'Bonnet', and

Two

Sceptres'

(Hks. 233, 234,

237).

Two

other finds which

may

be mentioned here are those of

York in 1704 and Dyns Marsh in 1739. The former- contained 250 coins, of which Thoresby saw fifty or sixty, and describes
them
as

mostly,

if

not

all,
:

of

William
of the
'

fifteen

of

these,

in

Thoresby's collection, were

two

Profile

Cross

Fleur}^^

type (Hks. 233), and thirteen of the 'Bonnet' type (Hks. 234).

The

find in 1739 at

Dyns Marsh," between Dungeness and Lydd.

II,
all

receives a passing mention in Archaeologia as having contained

above 200 pennies of Edward Confessor, Harold

and William.
the coins were

To summarize, the Soberton

examined, shows the
be the
first
'

find, of

which
'

Profile

Cross
I,

Fleury
this

type (Hks. 233) to

confirmed by the

type of William
all

and

is
*

appearance of this type in

of
*

the other finds

which contain coins

the Confessor and Harold.

'

The York

finds

show that the

Bonnet

type (Hks. 234) follows this as the second type.

Hill

From
'

the St.

Maiy

Church

find

it

is

clear that the

'

Canopy

and

'Two
the
of
'

Sceptres' types (Hks. 236, 237) must immediately follow

Bonnet

'

type, but the evidence of the

Whitchurch and City which

is

London

finds is conflicting as regards the question

the

earlier of these

two

types,

and our knowledge of these

finds is very

scanty.

MalTYiesbury
of which
is

Find^

(1828)

contained some coins, the number

the foundations

uncertain.

They were found under

Cf.

Dannenberg, Deutsche Munsen,

PI. VIII. 185.

Thoresby,

Dumtus

Leodiensis, p. 349.
iv.

'

ArchoeoJogia, vol.

p. 358.

Described as

'

Dymchurch

'

in Brit.

Num.

Joum., vol. ii, p. 97. * Except the York find, 1845, in which, however, a have been seen but not described.
^

profile coin is said to

Akerman, Num. Joum..

vol.

ii,

1837, p. 106; Sainthill, Olhi Podrkla, vol.

i,

p. 189.

FINDS OF COINS
of the chapel built at Malinesbury

XXI

by William the Couqueror.

type (Hks. 237) are described
is

few coins of the

'

'

Two
'

Sceptres

'

and one of the

present.

Bonnet

type (Hks. 234)

said to have been

'

The incomplete account, which

states that

many

pennies

were found' and describes only about a dozen, makes the

as evidence of the order of the types.

find useless

York Minder Find.

In the York

Museum
'

are

eleven coins
in
'

which are there described as having been found together

Minster
;

York
type

of

these

coins

six

belong to the

Two

Stars

(Hks. 238), and five to the 'Sword' type (Hks. 243).^

Though

the coins are too few to supply any definite conclusion, this find
creates a probability of these

two types being

consecutive.

Beaworth Find ^ {1S33).

More than 6,500

coins were found in

track, in pasture

a leaden box,^ under the surface of a

wagon

land

attached

to

the

Manor House,

Beaworth

(Hampshire).
all,

Hawkins,

in his account of the find, says that most, if not

of the coins were

examined and described, but

later

withdraws

the statement.

There was a general scramble for the coins at the

time of the discovery and, though at the request of the owner

of the land very

many were
:

returned, a large

number seem

to

have escaped description.

represented in the hoard

Four types only, and one mule, were

'Two
'

Stars' type (Hks. 238)

....
'

31 pennies

'Sword' type (Hks. 243)

Profile Cross and Trefoils
type (Hks. 239)
.

34
11

Mules of preceding and following types (Hks. 240)

'Paxs' type (Hks. 241, 242)

....
Total
'

6,439
6,521
'

There were also eighteen cut halfpennies of the Paxs type.

Hawkins
^

gives the definite

number
Num.

of coins

which he examined
p. 115.

The coins are described

in Brit.

Jourii., vol.

ii,

The informavol.
i,

tion of the find

^

was given me at the York Museum. Archaeologia, vol. xxvi, pp. 1-25, Reprinted in Ruding, Annals,
is

pp. 151-61.
^

The box

illustrated in Brit.

Num.

Journ., vol.

ii,

p. 102.

Xxii

INTRODUCTION
'

of the

Paxs

'

type only

of the other types he gives the varieties

of readings on the coins, from

which

it

appears that he only saware based

tlie

one coin of each variety

the

numbers given above

on this supposition, which

total

is

confirmed by his statement that

6,500.

number

of coins

was about

Mr. Andrew,^ following

Major Carlyon-Britton's

local information that the

box contained
this

from 8,000

to

9,000 pennies, conjectures

from

and other

arguments that the hoard was originally one of the donations of

six

marks

of gold,^ which, the

in

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle

tells

us,

William II
soul.

1087 distributed to monasteries for his father's

of the coins

The condition

and the unusually high proportion

presumably in issue
to

of coins of the latest of the types (the type at the date of the burial of the hoard)

seem

show that the

in

hoard came

straight from a mint or treasury.

But Hawkins,

his Silver Coins, p. 168, says that

this

some thousands more coins from

hoard found their

his friends later,

way

and

London and were examined by him and he there estimates the total number
to

at scarcely less than 12,000.

tells

Thougli the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle

us of the donations to monasteries

we do not anywhere hear

any reason
for con-

of the loss of

any one

of them, nor is there

necting this

hoard with these donations even were the amount There

is

of

the find equivalent.

no reason

to suppose the
it

sum

so

exceptional that a cause must be found for

being amassed.

Tamivorth Flncl^ (1877).

Discovered during work in connexion

with the Board Schools at Tamworth.

shape were found about 300 coins.

In a leaden box of triangular

Four or

five

only are said to

have been dispersed, the remainder are described as

'Paxs' type
'

(Ilks.

241)

30 coins
97
3

Profile

'

type (Hks. 244)

,,

Mules of preceding and following types (Hks. 245)

'Cross In Quatrefoir type (Hks. 246)
.

164

Total

294

^ ^

Brit.

Num.

Joitni., vol.

i,

pp. 26

ft'.

A mark
Num.

of gold

.6

six

marks would therefore contain 8,640 pennies.

ft;

Chron., 1877, pp. 340

FINDS OF COINS

XXIU

The two following

finds contain coins of

William with coins of

Henry
Shillington

FiiuP

(ISri).

Discovered

by workmen

in

the

neighbourhood of Shilling-ton (Bedfordshire).

of

Probably upwards

250 coins were found, contained in a small jar with herring-

bone ornament.

About one-third of them were examined

:
'

the

types represented were, of William

only,
'

Paxs

'

(Hks. 241) one coin

Profile' (Hks. 244),

'

Cross in Quatrefoil' (Hks. 246), 'Cross

;2

voided' (Hks. 250), and 'Crosses Patt^e and Fleury' (Hks. 247)

and of Henry

'

Quatrefoil and Piles

'

(Hks. 252) and one other

type undescribed.

Bennondsey Fiud^

(c.

1820).

Thirteen pennies found by work:

men

sinking for the foundation of a house

'

William,

Cross in Quatrefoil

'

type (Hks. 246)

3 coins 5
5

'Cross Voided' type (Hks. 250

and 249).

Henry

I,

'Annulets' type (Hks. 251, one omitting the annulets)

Total

13

This set of

finds,

which comprises discoveries of coins of William

alone and of coins of William with coins of Henry, contains

two

hoards of considerable importance found at Beaworth and Taraworth.

These two hoards overlap each other in the

'

Paxs

'

type,

which

represents a very large proportion of the Beaworth and a small

proportion of the Tamworth,

it

As

this is the only overlapping type,

must be considered as the

latest

type represented in one hoard

and the

earliest in the other;

from the proportionate number of

should probably be placed as
first
'

coins of the type in the

two

finds, it

the last type of the Beaworth and as the

find.

of the

Tamworth

The Two Stars

'

'

(Hks. 238) and

'

Sword (Hks. 243) types

Chron., 1871, pp. 227-8. See above, p. xvii, and below, pp. xxiv, Hi. Not described in Num. Chron., 1871, but this type is represented among the coins of this find -which were presented to the Library of Trinity College,
^
"^

Num.

Cambridge.
^

See Brit. Num.

Joiirii., vol. ii,

pp. 108-9.

Xiou. Chrou., 1846, p. 170.

INTRODUCTION
'

XXiv
tlierefore precede the

Paxs type, and from the evidence of the

'

York

Minster find these

is
'

two types should probably be placed

'

together, but there

no evidence to show whether the

^

Profile

Cross and Trefoils

type

(Hks. 239), the remaining type found at

Beaworth, should precede or follow them.

types of the
in Quatrefoil

The remaining two

'

Tamworth
'

Find,

'

Profile

'

type (Hks. 244) and

Cross

(Hks. 246), are therefore concluded to be later than

;

the 'Paxs' type

this conclusion

is

confirmed by the Shillington and

of these types are found with

Bermondsey

finds,

where one or both

coins of Henry.

With regard

to these

two

finds

it is

necessary to

anticipate evidence

from other sources

so far as to say that the

evidence of the Shillington find concerning coins of

Henry

is

untrustworthy

as

mentioned above, this find

is

of a complicated

nature and evidently represents an owner's savings of two distinct

periods.

In further anticipation,
find,

it

may
last

be noted that the Bersaid

to

mondsey

of

which

all

the coins are

have been
II,

examined and described, omits the

two types of William

so small a find

and therefore shows with what caution

treated.

must be

Bari
coins

(Italy)

Find

(c.

1891).

In a large hoard of continental

mostly of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, which are not

further described, were found upwards of twenty-five pennies of

Henry

I.

These coins are of two types only

twenty-seven coins

are described
'Annulets and Piles' type (Hks. 257)
.

3 coins

'Voided Cross and Fleurs' type (Hks. 267)

24
27

Total

From the numbers, one would suppose

it

that Hks. 239 was the earliest type

total find numbers over 6,500 and that therefore thirty coins must, equally with ten, be treated as stray specimens. Hawkins, in his account of the find, shows reason for supposing that it came straight from the mint, owing to the fact that in so large a hoard almost all the coins are of one type only.

of the find, but

must be remembered that the

coins,

See pp.

lii, liii.
if.

Num.

Chron., 1892, pp. 83

FINDS OF COINS

XXV

This seems to show that these two types were issued consecutively,

but the evidence of so small a number of coins, as mentioned above,

is

by no means

conclusive^ especially in a large hoard of continental

coins.

Canterbury Find ^
published
;

(c.

1901

?).

No

record of this find has been

the coins were said to have come from Bournemouth,

but there

is

reason to suppose that they were discovered at Canter-

bury during work at the Archbishop's Palace, and conveyed to

Bournemouth before
impossible to say

distribution.

Many

of the coins

were seen by
it

Major Carlyon-Britton and notes

were made by him, but

;

is

have been of
'

how many coins were in the hoard all seem Henry I, and the following have been noted
'

to

Full

face Cross Fleury type (Hks.

of preceding

iv)

3 coins
1
,,

'Lozenge Fleury enclosing Star' type (Hks. 265)

Mule
'

and following types

Pellets in Quatrefoir type (Hks. 262)

353 358

Total

Lmuestoft

Find ^
a

(1905).

Twelve pennies of Henry I are described

as having been found together on the beach at Lowestoft, probably

carried

down by
is

fall of

the

clilF.

Whether these constituted the

are of

whole hoard

not known.

They

two types
. .

'Pellets in Quatrefoir type (Hks. 262)

'

6 coins
6

Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury

'

type (Hks. 255)

Total

12

Battle (Sussex)

Find ^ (1860

1).

Twelve coins of Henry

I,

found

near Battle, were of the following types

'Full face
'

Cross Fleury' type (Hks.

'

iv)

.1
.

coin

Double Inscription

type (Hks. 258)

'

,,

'

Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury

type (Hks. 255)

10
12

Total

am

on this find
3

indebted to Major Carlyon-Britton for the loan of his private notes also to Mr. Baldwin for further information of the provenance.
;

Num.

Chron., 1905, p. 112.

Ibid, 1878, p. 175.

XXVI

INTRODUCTION
coins
of*

The following hoards contained

together

Henry

and Stephen

Watford Finds'^ (1818).

Some

labourers digging in a field near

Watford found a few

a rude clay jar

silver coins, and,

on further search being made,

was

discovered, broken, about ten or twelve inches

coins.

below the surface of the ground, containing a large hoard of

Rashleigh, in his account of the hoard in

Num.

Chron., 1850, states

that the total

pennies.
original

number

of coins

was 1,094 pennies and 33 halves of

hands of

These coins were kept together in the possession of the

owner

until at his death they passed into the

Rashleigh,

who wrote
number
is

a full account of them.

He

says that he

thinks this

nearly

all

that were found, a few probably

having been picked up and sold by the workmen.

coins are described:

The

following,,

Ilalf-

Pennies William,

'Two
'

Stars' type (Hks. 238)

'

Henry

I,
'

Pellets in Quatrefoil

type (Hks. 2G2)

'

Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury

type

(Hks. 255)
Steplien,
.,
'

Watford
II,

'

type (Hks. 270)

Variety
(PI.

with obverse inscription

LVII. 9-15) Empress Matilda (MATILDI EOI)

Uncertain coins (Baronial

....
.

PER ERIE

?)....
Total

1,094

33
I's

This long survival of a halfpenny of the middle of William

reign (about 60 years)
is

remarkable.
vol. xxi, pp.

In the Appendix to Archaeologia,

539 ff.,

is

an account
in

laid before the Society of Antiquaries

by Taylor Combe,

January

1822, of a find in April 1818 of a quantity of silver coins, in

number above a hundred. They were found by

a
field of

labourers hoeing in

beans near the

site of
;

the ancient manor-house of

Oxhey

Place, in the parish of

Watford

the coins were lying scattered upon

the surface of the ground, together with a fragment of an earthen

Xt(m. Chron., 1850, pp. 138

ff.

FINDS OF COINS
vessel in

which

the}'

had probably been deposited.

Clutterbuck,

on inquiry in the neighbourhood, could only procure nine specimens,

but on further digging found thirty more coins.

The types repre-

sented by the coins are the same three as were found in the Watford

hoard above described, Hks. 262, 255, and 270, with the addition
of the coin described below as variety III 6, p. xci,

PL LVIII.

(Hks. 273),

Whether

this small find should be considered as part

of the largei" hoard

coins,

it is

impossible to say.
vessel,

The discovery

of these

with a fragment of an earthen

on the surface of the

found in the search

ground points rather to

this Ijeing a residue not

which

resulted in the discovery of the large hoard and broken vessel.

But, on the other hand, were this find later than the larger one,

Clutterbuck could hardly have failed to obtain information of

it

when he made

inquiries in the neighbourhood

nor do w^e

know

that both finds w^ere in the

same

field,

though both occurred in or

There would be nothing

near Watford and both

in the year 1818,

surprising in two separate hoards being buried at the same time

and

in the

same neighbourhood,

for the

same cause might well

induce two neighbours to take similar action.

These two finds are distinguished in the Catalogue as Watford

'

Find

'

and

'

Smaller Watford Find

Flnd'^
(1880),

'.

Nottimjhain
Jan.
5,

This

hoard

was discovered on

1880, at the back of old property in Bridlesmith Gate,

Nottingham,

The

coins

were

quickly dispersed, the original

'^

number being more than

described
;

three hundred
:

comparatively few are

they consist of
'Annulets
'

Henry

I,

type (liks. 251)

'Full face

Cross Fleury' type (Hks.

.

....
iv)
,
, .

1 1

coin

'Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury' type (Hks. 255)

at least 7

Stephen, 'Watford' type (Hks, 270)

upwards

of 150

Variety

I,

with erased obverse die (see below,

ff,)

pp. Ixxvi

....
ff.

uncertain

number

Num.
I

Chron., 1881, pp, 36

am

indebted to Mr.

Andrew

for this information.

FINDS OF COINS

XXIX
Half-

Pennies
Steplien,

i^ennies

Variety

I,

with erased obverse

die^

{ibid.,

p. 55, no. 76, pp.

,,

GO

ff.,

nos.

84-95, 98)
{ibid.,

.11
1

Variety

II, witli inscription

PERERIE-

p. 81, no. 100)

,,

Variety III 8(&)

Variety IV B()*

{ibid., p.

51, no. 74)

(?6k7., p. 53, no.

75)
.

Scottish,

David

I {ibid., p. 46, nos. 71,

72)

.2
number

of coins in

Linton {Maiddone) Find

this find is said to

''

(1883).

The
;

total

have been about 180

they were found in an

earthen jar, about fifteen inches below the surface of the ground;
nearly a hundred of the coins are described
Halfpennies pennies Farthings

Henry

I,

'

Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury

'

type
6
1

(Hks. 255)

4
1

Stephen, 'Watford' type (Hks. 270)

,,

32

'Cross

Voided

and

Mullets'

type

(Hks. 269)

Vai'iety II,

24

14

with inscription
ff.)

PERERIE
.

(see below, pp. Ixxxii

2 4

Variety III 7 (see below, pp. xci

ff.)

Total described

68
I are

21

Of these

finds, in

which coins of Henry

found mixed with

coins of Stephen, the Dartford and Sheldon hoards contained only

one true type of each reign 255 and 270, which

in each case these

two types are Hks.

may

therefore be placed as the last of

Henry

and the

first

of Stephen.

The Nottingham

find confirms this, but

iv) in addition.

has also two stray coins of Henry (Hlvs. 251 and

The Watford

finds

have coins of Hks. 262 with coins of Hks. 255

slight evidence of the Lowestoft

and 270, and therefore confirm the

find in placing the

two

types, Hks. 262

and 255, together.

The

^ ^

See below, pp. Ixxvi See below, p. xcv.

ff.

*
ff.

See below, pp. Ixxxii See below, p. xcvi.

fF.

Num.

Chron., 1883, pp. 108

XXX
Linton find
is

INTRODUCTION
the latest of this group of finds, and gives us as the
is

second type of Stephen's reign Hks. 269, which

confirmed in

the Sheldon hoard by the mules of 270 x 269 and also

by the two
various

contemporary
These
finds

forgeries, or

whatever they
importance

may
as

be, of this type.

are

of

further

containing

irregular issues, such as coins of Matilda, coins with obverse inscription

PERERIE,

coins with obverse type erased,

to

and other

varieties

all of

which are thus shown

have been issued before the issue

;

of the second regular type of the reign (Hks. 269)

these coins are

treated separately below (pp. Ixxi

fi").

Bute

Fiiid'^

(1863).

At the south end

of

the

island,

about

300 yards from the ancient Chapel

and
one

of Saint Blane,

were found

27 silver coins (some in fragments) with two gold rings, three

gold
bands,
silver

bar.

The

following

coins

are

described
Stephen, 'Watford' type (Hks. 270)
Scottish,
.

David

Earl Henry (see below, p. xcviii)

Uncertain (type as Hks. 270)

....
In Gentleman's Magazine, vol.lxxiv
'

Winterslovj
{1804), p. 15,

FinrP
is

(c.

1804).

a notice of a coin (the Dimsdale specimen)

'.

lately

found, with several of Stephen, in the vicinity of Salisbury

In the

MS. Catalogue

of the B. C. Roberts collection

some coins are noted

as having been found in a chalk pit at Winterslow, near Salisbury;

many

halfpennies are there said to have been found.

^

The

coins so

noted in the Roberts Catalogue and elsewhere

are

'

Xiini. ChroH., 1863, p.

216

ibid.,

1865, pp. 57
Sir

ff.

In his Introduction to

Domesday Book,

Henry

Ellis

mentions this iind

as containing 'a large assemblage of pennies from the Saxon times to the

may be partly explained by the Henry of Anjou to Henry I, and of coins of William (of Gloucester?) to William I and William II. ^ Catalogue of T. Dimsdale sale, 1824, lot 228. Hawkins {SiJrer Coins, p. 185) also mentions the find without giving any additional information.
reign of Stephen
'

this

improbable statement

attribution at that time of coins of

FINDS OF COINS
Ilalf-

Pennies
Stephen, 'Watford' type (Hks. 270)
'

jiennies

Cross Voided

and Mullets type (Hks. 269)

' '
.

2
1 1

'

Cross

and Fleurs type (Hks. 276)

p. xc)
.

,,

Variety III 4 (see below,

Variety

IV

D (6)

(see below, p. cvi)

Henry

,,

of Anjou, type I {b) (see below, p. cxxi)

type

I (c) (see

below,

p. cxxii)
f.)

.3

,,

type II () (see below, pp. cxxii

type 11(6) (see below, p. cxxiii)

1

William (of Gloucester?), type II(i)(see below, p. cxxx)

Uncertain baronial, no.
,,

(see below, p.

cxxxii)

1
1

no. 3 {see below, p. cxxxiii)

Total

1-1

At

Catal,^

near Wetherby, were found a few silver coins in

1684, including one of Stephen, variety

IV

D {d)
below,

(see below, p. cvi),

p.

one of Eustace FitzJohn, type

Robert de Stuteville
(see

(see

cxiv),

one of
of

below, p. cxvi), and another coin

Stephen (type not described).

Aiubridge Find-

{c.

1902).

About 180

coins of Stephen

and
all

Henry
The

II

were found at Awbridge, near Romsey, Hampshire,

close together at

about 2| feet below the surface of the ground.

:

followino- are described

'

Stephen,

Awbridge
Tealby

'

type (Hks. 268)

ft'.)

31 coins
3

Variety III 7 (see below, pp. xci

II,
'

Henry

'

type (Hks. 285)

Total

110

H4

This find shows Hks. 2C8 to have been the last type issued by
Stephen. The finds give no evidence of the order, or even existence
as definite types, of
this reign
;

any types between the second and the

last of
find,

one coin of Hks. 276 occurred in the Winterslow

Thoresby, Ducatus Leodiensis, pp. 350, 351

Proc. of Yorkshire riiilosophical

Soc, 1855, p. 216.

^

Num.

Chron., 1905, pp. 354

if.

XXXii

INTRODUCTION
first

with a few coins of the

coins of irregular issues.

two types

of the reign

and several

To summarize the evidence obtained from finds, the following groups may be made with some probability (the numbers of
Hawkins's figures are here used alone to denote the types)

William
233
(first

and

II.

type)

234 (second

type)

I'^^j

Heney
251 or 252
(first

I.

type)

(257 1267

262

255
(first

(last type).

Stephen.

270 268

type)

269 (second type)

(last type).

OVEESTRUCK COINS.
Coins are commonly found in
this,

as in almost every series,

is

on which the impression of the dies

superimposed upon an
;

underlying impression of a different pair of dies

that

is

to say,

coins having been struck, and, perhaps, passed into circulation,

return to the mint and are re-struck without the previous impression having been removed.

The two impressions on a

coin

may
;

be from dies of the same type or from dies of different types

the latter case
it

in

follows that, as the types were not struck conis

temporarily, the earlier, or obliterated, impression on the coin

that of the earlier of the two types

coins of the former class,

where the two impressions belong

to the

same type, cannot

easily

be distinguished from double-struck coins, and are, in any case, unimportant.

are

The coins commonly known as

re-struck with dies of a different type

'

Overstrikes

'

and are very important

'

OVERSTRUCK COINS

XXXlll

as giving quite definite evidence that one type precedes another.^

It

cannot be concluded, though

it

frequently happens, that the later

;

type immediately follows the earlier

no.

in fact, in

some

cases,

e.

g.

10 on

p.

xxxiv, a considerable period intervenes before the

re-striking of the coin.

It has

been suggested that the coins known as

'

Overstrikes

represent not re-struck coins, but coins struck from re-engraved

dies

from which the original design was not completely erased

it

^
;

but

is

clear

from an examination of such coins that

this is

not the case.

On
the

these coins
original

it

will be found that the parts in

high

relief

in

have been flattened down by the

field,

second striking to the level of the

and are marked out by

field

an incuse outline which represents the part of the

of the

original coin that has failed to rise into the later dies,
its

owing to
effect

protection

by the

original high relief beside

it

this

can only he produced by a blow which has hammered the high

relief flat

and sunk part of

tiie flat

surface into incuse.

is

The reason
It

for re-striking coins in this

way

quite uncertain.

cannot

have been done with the object of restoring to currency coins that

were no longer current, for we have seen above

that one type

cannot have gone out of currency on the issue of another.

again, can
it

Nor,
eflfaced

have been due to the coins being clipped or

;

by

circulation

clipped coins would have to be returned to the

melting-pot, as their weight

would be untrue, and

still

in

some

of the

cases here quoted the original impression

stands out so clearly

through the overstruck type that

coins to have been

it is

impossible to suppose the

much worn.

It is possible,

though there
officials

is

no
the

documentary support for the assumption, that

of

exchange were prohibited from circulating coins of any type but

that actually in issue at the mint;^ in which case, re-striking might

As overstriking might be supposed

to guarantee the genuineness of a coin,

it

should perhaps be mentioned that some ingenious modern forgeries are

struck on genuine mediaeval coins (see Brif.

-

Num.

Jouni., vol.

iii,

pp. 282

ff.).

Xum.
p. siv.

Chron., 1905, pp. 110-1.

^
^

Brit. Kit)!). Jouni., vol. viii, p. 123.

Such a prohibition would presumably

c

'

XXXIV

INTRODUCTION
in,

be due to the necessity of circulating coins which remained

or

came into, the mint or exchange after the issue of a new type. The following are the overstrikes that have been noted in
coinage of this period
(1)
:

the

William, 'Bonnet' type (Hks. 234) over type of Harold II (Hks,

230).

A
'

coin

of

Huntingdon

in

P.

W.
'

P,

Carlyon-Britton

collection.

(2) William,

J3onnet

'

type (Hks. 234) over

Profile Cross Fleury

also

type (Hks. 233).

Coin of Wallingford, p. 29, no. 154;

collection)

Malmesbury (H. W. Morrieson

Sharp Ogden
(3) William,
collection).

and Hereford (W.

Mule (Hks. 237 X 238) over Two Sceptres' type (Hks. 237).
'

Coin of Hereford in
below, p. 56).
(4) William,

P.

W.

P. Carlyon-Britton collection

(see

'Two

Stars' type (Hks. 238) over

'Two

Sceptres' type

(Hks. 237).

Coin of Cricklade, p. 60, no. 308;

sale,

one of same
another
of

mint (Carlyon-Britton
Winchester in P.
(5) William,

1913,

lot

706)

and

W.

P. Carlyon-Britton collection.

'Sword' type
237).

(Hks.
of

243)

over

'Two

Sceptres'
sale,

type
1913,

(Hks.
lot

Coin

London

(Carlyon-Britton

712).
'

(6) William,

Profile Cross and Trefoils' type (Hks. 239) over 'Sword'

Coin of uncertain mint (Carlyon-Britton
sale,

type (Hks. 243).

1913,
(7) William,

lot 717).

'Paxs' type (Hks. 241) over

'

Profile Cross and Trefoils'

type (Hks. 239).

Britton collection.

Coin of Southampton in P.

W.

P. Carlyon-

(8) William, 'Profile' type (Hks.

244) over 'Paxs' type (Hks. 241).

sale,

Coin of London (Carlyon-Britton

(9) William,

1913, lot 747).

Mule (Hks. 245) over

'Profile' type (Hks. 244).

Coin of

Leicester in Evans collection (see below, p. 403, no. 67 a).

(10) William, 'Cross in Quatrefoil

'

type (Hks. 24G) over 'Canopy'

type (Hks. 236).

(11) William,

Coin of Chichester, p. 227, no. 76.

Quatrefoil'

'Cross

in

type (Hks. 246) over 'Profile'

p.

type (Hks. 244).

Coins of Hereford,

230, no. 93, and Worcester,

be intended to prevent the moneyers from evading the cost of new dies by continuing to use dies of an old type. Perhaps such an evasion is meant by the Jorisfactuvde, reterifi monetae charged to Gilpatric in the Pipe Roll (see below,
p. cxlvi)

OVERSTRUCK COINS
p.

XXXV

242, no. 171

also of

Oxford

in P.

W.

P.

Carlyon-Britton

collection.

(12) William, 'Crosses Patt^e and Fleury' type (FTks. 247) over 'Cross
in
(^uatrefoil
'

type

(Ilks.

246).

Coin of Rocliester, p. 258,

no. 247.

(13) William,

'

Crosses Pattee

and Fleury

'

type (Hks. 247) over 'Cross

p.

Voided

'

type (Hks. 250).

Coin of Tlietford,

258, no. 252.

No

overstrikes are

known

of the reigns of Henrj^ I or Stephen

coins,

this is perhaps

due partly to more careful striking of the

partly to the greater rarity of coins of these reigns, and partly to

the obverse and reverse designs tilling more completely the surface
of the
field,

so that

any former impression

is

more thoroughly

obliterated.^

As regards the evidence

placing the coin-types,

afforded

by the

overstrikes towards

much

confirmatory, and some additional,

evidence
after

is

thus given to the groups of the types that were formed

finds of the coins.
'

examining the

No. 2 confirms the placing of the

the
'

Profile

Cross

Fleury

'

type before

Bonnet

'

tyjDe.
is

Nos. 4 and 5
later

show that the group 238, 243, and 239

correctly placed

than the group 236 and 237.

No. 6 places 239 later than 243, and thus, combined with the evidence
of the

York

INIinster

find,

in

which 238 and 243 were found

'

together,

makes 239 immediately precede the

Paxs

'

type (241).

vol. viii, pp. 125-6, too much stress is laid on the rarity and mules of these two later reigns. Overstrikes are of course most common in periods of which the coins are most frequent for example, Hks. 284, 244, and 246 but it must also be remembered that overstruck coins have an unpleasing appearance, and therefore used not to be preserved by collectors, which perhaps accounts for the rarity of overstrikes of the Paxs type (type Vlll) of William in spite of the Beaworth hoard having made this issue so common in the present day. They have probably frequently been thrown out among the refuse of a find, which was certainly in some cases (e.g. the Watford find) consigned to the melting-pot. Mules, too, are naturallj' most common of the types of Hks. 240 and 245, owing to the Beaworth and Tamworth finds. Rarity of coins at the present day is not a safe reason for assuming few to have been in currency it is usually due to scarcity of finds of certain periods the Paxs type of William, for example, was, before the Beaworth find, the rarest of his types.
'

In Brit. Xiim. Jouni.,

of both overstrikes

'

'

'

'

c 2

XXXVl
Nos. 7
in

INTRODUCTION

and 8 support the evidence

of the Bea-svorth

and Tamworth and

finds

making the Paxs type

'

'

the latest of the Beaworth

earliest

of the

Tamworth
Tamworth

types.
last of

No. 11 places the 'Cross in Quatrefoil' (Hks. 24G) as the

three
types, -which are therefore

the

241

246.
244

Ko. 13 makes Hks. 247 later than Ilks. 250.

The groups
the following

of types of William I

and

II on page xxxii

may

therefore be extended, bj- adding the evidence of overstrikes, to

;3

243[ 239 241 244

complete uncertainty.

246 250247.
But the position of Hks. 248
is still left in

The groups

of the

two

later reigns

remain as before.

Mules.

The term

'

Mule

'

is

strictly applicable to all coins

is

which are

struck from an incorrect combination of dies, that

to say,

when
all

an obverse die
made, or

is

used with a reverse for which

;

it

was not

originally

vice versa

for example, on pp. 205-6, nos.

die,

1107-13 are

struck from the same obverse

and therefore, though one of these

six,

may
as
'

be made with a true combination of dies, the remaining

be, strictly speaking, 'mules'.^

although of the same type, must

But

mules

'

of this sort are very

common and

of

minor importance,

the term
it is

'

mule

'

is

here limited to the technical sense in which

in this coinage, to denote only those coins of one type

commonly used

on

which are combined an obverse

and a reverse

of another.

That these mules were authorized

a

issues of the

Crown introducing
'

new type seems hardly

possible.

The

so-called
tyj)es

artificial

mule

'

of the Confessor, connecting the last

two

of his reign, is

quoted in support of this theory on the ground that the obverse

die

must have been made

Unless, of course,

specially for the

mule

issue.

But the

dies with one obverse, in

was the practice so early as this to issue two reverse which case five of these coins are mules 2 Num. Chron., 1905, PI. VIII. 24; and B.M. Catalogue, Ang.-Sax. Series, vol. ii, p. 352, no. 157, and PL XXIII. 8.
^

it

'

'.

treatment of this coin as a mule

is

is, I

think, incorrect

the reverse

indeed identical with the reverse of the later type, but the

obverse differs very widely from that of the earlier type (the ends
of the

diadem hang straight down on either

is

side of
is

the head,

the draping of the bust

quite different, a sceptre

added, the

bust

is

continued to the edge of the coin and the inner circle

It

omitted).

seems more likely that this so-called

'

mule

'

bears

the obverse originally designed for the last type of the reign, and

that
to its

its superficial

resemblance to that of the preceding type led

profile

withdrawal and the substitution of the more common

;

obverse

the comparative

frequency of this

'

mule

'

(see

2imn.

Chroii., 1905, pp.

196-7) seems to point to the same conclusion.

of the

The improbability
a coinage of mules
is

Crown confusing

its

issues

by such
found

a serious obstacle to the theory that they are

is

regular issues, and presumptive evidence to the contrary

in the rarity of

mules of the London mint.

;

Of the Norman period

of the Confessor's reign

no London mules are at present known

I

know

three only: jShivi. Chroa., 1905, p. 189

sale,

sale, sale,

1913, lot 601), Carlyon-Britton

1913,

(= Carlyon-Britton lot 590, and Montagu

part

I,

lot 850.

If

mules were regularly issued for a short

period prior to the introduction of the new" type^ they, like the

ordinary issues, would probably be most frequently found of the

London mint, where the supply

coins

of

bullion

and the output of

;

may

reasonably be assumed to have been most regular

that

they more frequently bear the names of lesser mints

may

perhaps

be due to money ers at the smaller mints being more frequently

left,

at the change of type, in possession of dies so little

worn

as to tempt them, for the saving of the purchase-money of

dies, to risk the penalties for the

new

fraudulent retention of dies and

the issue of an unauthorized coinage.

This aspect of the

'

mule as an irregular
'

issue, of

which the object

must have been the saving

is

of expense in the purchase of

new

dies,

substantiated

by the two mules which are described below

xxxix).

as

nos. 3

and 4

(p.

Each of these mules has had the obverse

sale, 1908, lot 36.

'

Except the coin described in catalogue of H. H. Allan


'

XXXviii

INTRODUCTION
in

die

worked over
on the

such a

way

as to

make

it

approximately-

similar to that of the true obverse corresponding to the reverse

type

'

Bonnet obverse
'
'

pillars

have been placed beside the

'

head to resemble those of the Canopy

type,

and on the Canopy

'

'

obverse an inner circle has been drawn, cutting through the bust,

and the

pillars

have been turned into the sceptres botonne and

bust on the
'

patte which are found beside the

issue.

Two

Sceptres

The

object of these alterations

must surely have been to

circulate the coins

with

less likelihood of detection.

The

issue of

mules

must therefore have been fraudulent, but at the same time

the risk of the fraud being exposed would in any case be slight, as
the two sides of a coin cannot be seen at the same time and the
inconsistency of obverse and reverse, either of which
is

with

its

proper fellow true currency,

is

not easily detected.

Mules are usually, as one would expect, made from dies of two
consecutive types, but occasional examples occur (see no.
of a
1,

below)
period.
in the

mule made from a die which has survived a longer

a mule may be considered,

As

a general rule, therefore,

absence of conflicting evidence, to connect two consecutive types.

Also, as a general rule, the obverse of a
earlier of the

mule

will represent the

:

two

types.-

But

this is not

an absolute rule
I's

two

mules occur, for example, with the reverse of Henry

Cross Fleury' type (Hks.
obverses.
iv), nos.

'Full face

10 and 11 below, having different

It is natural, therefore, to

suppose that the reverse of

Hks. iv

is

muled with both the preceding and subsequent obverses,

and

this supposition is confirmed

by an examination
is

of the later of

these two mules, no. 11, the reverse of which

die as a coin of the true type (Hks. iv) in
collection.

struck from the same

Major Carlyon-Britton's
is,

Tliat the

mule

is

the later of the two strikings

I think, almost certain, for the roughness in the field of the reverse

in the third quarter of the cross (see PI.

XLII.

5) is

not corrosion,

^ Using mule here and throughout in the strictly limited sense of a coin combining two types. - Because the obverse, or standard, die naturally outlives the reverse, or trussel, and is therefore the more likely to be left in good condition at the change of type.
' '

'

MULES

XXXIX

but a roughness of the metal caused, no doubt, by rust on the die,

and

this is not visible

on the true coin

the true coin

was therefore

struck earlier than the mule, and

of the

we may conclude
than Hks.
iv.

that the obverse

mule belongs

to a type later

The following are the mules

period

at present

known

of the

Norman

(1)

Ohv.
Jiev.

Edward

Confessor, type

XI [Num.

Chron., 1905).

William, 'Bonnet' type (Hks. 234).

(?),

Coin of Sliaftesbury
in

p. 13, no. 71

another of uncertain mint

York Museum.
'

PI. III. 11, 12.

'

(2) Ohv. William,

liev,

Profile Cross Fleury

type (Hks. 233).

'Bonnet' type (Hks. 234).

Carlyon-Eritton and H.

Coins of Huntingdon and Stamford, p. 14, nos. 72, 73; others

of

Lincoln

(P.

'W.

P.

M. Reynolds
collection).

collections), Salisbury (Fitzwilliam

Museum), Stamford (W. C.

(R.
C.

Wells

collection),

and

Taunton

Lockett

PI. III. 13-15.

(3) Ohv.

William,

'

Bonnet' type (Hks. 234).

Hev.

'Canopy' type (Hks. 236).

p. 33, no. 180.
is

Coin of Ipswich,
this coin has

The obverse

die from

which

been struck
'

altered evidently with a

'

view to

making

it

resemble the

Canopy

obverse
;

a pillar has been cut

on the die on each side of the bust

is

possibly the double-striking

PI. VI. 15.

also intentional.

See above, pp. xxxvii-xxxviii.

sale,

Another of London (H. H. Allan

(4) Ohv. William,

1908, lot 3G).

'Canopy' type (Hks. 236).

Eev.

'Two

Sceptres' type (Hks. 237).

Coin of Exeter in Hunterian collection.

coin
to
is,

The obverse

die of this

similarly to the preceding, altered in order approximately

'

resemble the

Two

Sceptres

'

obverse

the inner circle has

'

been continued through the bust, the pillars of the

Canopy

have been turned into the sceptres of the

later type,

though an

ignorance of die-engraving has caused them to be reversed, the

sceptre botonne being placed to left instead of right.

This coin

came from
xxxviii.
(5)

the St. PI.

Mary

Hill

Church

find.

See above, pp. xxxvii

VIII.

11.

Obv. William, Eev.

'Two
'

Sceptres' type (Hks. 237).

Stars
'

Two

type (Hks. 238).

Xl

IKTRODUCTION
Coin of Hereford in P.

W.

P. Carlyon-Britton collection
also been

two

of Dorchester and one of Ij^swich have

published.^

PI. XI.
(6) Ohv.
liev.

1.
'

William,

Profile Cross and Trefoils' type (Hks. 239).

'

Paxs type (Hks. 241).

'

Coins of Maldon, Malmesbury, Nottingham, Taunton, Thetford,

Winchester.

See pp. 91-3.

PI.

XVII.

11-16.

(7) Ohv. William, 'Profile' type (Hks. 244).

]iev.

'

Cross in Quatrefoil

'

type (Hks. 246).

p.

Coins of Dover and Gloucester,

225, uos. 66, 67

;

also of

Chester and Leicester (Evans collection

see below, p. 403, nos.

65 a, 67

a),

Oxford (Royal Mint Museum) and Winchester (H. M.

Reynolds

collection).

PL XXX.

13-15.
247).

(8) Obv. William, 'Crosses Pattee

and Fleury' type (Hks.

'

Eev.

'

Cross Fleury and Piles

(?) in L.

type (Hks. 248).

Coin of Canterbury

E.

Bruun

collection.

PL XXXVI. 15.

In Whitbourn

sale,
1.,

1869, lot 148,

is

described a coin bearing

obverse with bust to

be, as described in

and reverse of Hks. 251. This

may

possibly

Num.

Chron., 1901, p. 48, a mule of Hks. 254

and 251, but

is

perhaps an error of the sale catalogue.

A coin
it is

described in
is

Num.

Citron., 1901, pp.

59-60, as a mule of

Hks. 257 and 267,

a contemporary forgery of a coin of Hks. 267;

grs.,

very base, weighs only 10-7

and

is

of very rough work.^

Fig.
a,nd

on

p.

60

(o2). cit.)

does not reproduce the very bad condition

rough work of the

Henry

I,
'

coin.

(9) Ohv.

Voided Cross and Fleurs

'

type (Hks. 267).

Rev.

'

Pointing Bust and Stars' type (Hks. 266).

collection.

Coin of Warwick in P. W. P. Carlyon-Britton

(10) Ohv. Henry Hev.
I,

PL XL. 5.

'Cross in Quatrefoil' type (Hks. 263).

'

Full face

Cross Fleury

'

type (Hks.

iv).

Coin of Gloucester in Hunterian collection.

(11) Ohv.
Eev.

PL XLI.
iv).

9.

Henry

I,

'Double Inscription' type (Hks. 258).

'

Full face

Cross Fleury

'

type (Hks.

Coin of Thetford in Hunterian collection.

PL XLII.

5.

Brit.
I

Num.

Journ., vol.

ii,

p. 151.

am

indebted to Sheriff Mackenzie for kindly sending

me

the coin.

MULES
Xli

This coin
(Hks.
iv)

is

from the same reverse die as a coin of the true type

the Carlyon-Britton collection.
it

in

Rust-marks

in the
.258

field of

the

mule show

to be later than the true coin.

Hks.

may

therefore be assumed to be the later of the

two

types.

(12) Ohv.

Henry
of

I,

'Lozenge Fleuvy enclosing Star' type (Hks. 2G5).

'

Rev.

Pellets in Quatrefoil
in
P.

'

type (Hks. 2G2).

Carlyon-T3ritton
collection.

Coin
PI.

Romney XLIII. 15.

'

W.

P.

(13) Obv. Stephen, 'Watford' type (Hks. 270).

Eev.

Cross Voided and ^lullets

of Canterbury
vii,
\).

'

type (Hks. 269).

Penny and Halfpenny

{Brit.

(?)

from the Sheldon find

Num.

Journ., vol.

44); another halfpenny (same

PI.

dies as Sheldon penny) in B. Roth collection.

LIII.

1, 2.

These mules not only confirm the evidence obtained from finds

and overstrikes, but

of

also complete the series of types of the reigns

;

the

two Williams

the

regular chain of mules, nos.

2-5,

Hks. 233 X 234, 234 x 236, 236 x 237, 237 x 238, forms a convincing
proof that these five types, 233, 234, 236, 237, 238, form in that
the sequence 239

order the

first five
is

types of the William coins

also confirmed

241244246
246
(nos.

by the mules 239 x 241 and 244 x

list
it

6 and

7).

The eighth mule of this

scheme and places
I,

brings Hks. 248

for the first time into the

at the end of the

William

series.

Of Henry
263

mule

9,

combined with the evidence

;

of the Bari find, forms a series 257

267 266

mules 10 and 11
is

form another

series

iv 258, and
first

mule 12 shows that 265

the type immediately preceding 262.

The mule

of

Stephen only

confirms the position of his

two types.

The additional evidence

groups of Henry

of mules, therefore, results in a very

probable sequence of the types of the two Williams, and further

I

William

and

IT.

233234-230237238-243239241244-24625024 7
248.

xlii

INTRODUCTION

Heney
251 01-252
(first

I.

type)

257267266 263 iv 258 265262255

(last type).

Stephen.

270
268

(first

type) 269 (second

type)

(last type).

Epigraphy.
(See Epigraphical Table.)

The form

of the obverse

and reverse

inscriptions,

which was

in

use on Anglo-Saxon coins of the eleventh century, continued in use

throughout the

Norman

period

on the obverse was the king's name

with or without the royal

title,^ on the reverse the names of the moneyer and the mint connected by the word ON ^ nor is there any reason to believe that any change took place in the means by which the inscriptions were cut on the dies. In B. M. Catalogue,
; '

Anglo-Saxon Coins

',

vol.

ii,

p. xcix, it is

said that the letters

are not cut with a graving tool, but punclied into the die with
tools of different shapes, a

punch

like a small blunt chisel

forming

the vertical strokes of such letters as B, E, M, &c., a small wedge-

shaped punch forming the horizontal bars of E, F, L, the

&c.,

tail of

R,

and crescent- shaped punches of larger and smaller

size

forming

the curves of D, 0, and P, B, &c.

letters,

The

disjointed forms of the

the strange character of some of

them (notably

and C

^),

^ Exception must be made of the irregular issues (see below, pp. IxxifF.). The varieties of obverse inscription used on the diiferent types of the reigns of William I may be seen in Major Carlyon-Britton's description of the types in B)-it. Num. Journ., vol. ii, pp. 130 and those of the reign of Henry I in Mr. Andrew's description of the types of that reign in Num. Chron., 1901,
ft'.,

pp. 38
^

ff.

coins of the fifth type of William I, described on p. 62, (regularly on Norwich coins), omit the moneyer's name. N (p. 17, no. 81), and ONN (on Oxford and Thetford coins of William 1, type II, in York Museum) occur for ON; on p. 75, no. 402, OF is used probably in error. ^ See Epigraphical Table, Series I.
nos.

The Launceston
325-6,

EPIGRAPHY
the close resemblance
of

xliih

the uprij^ht
^

strokes

and the strange

been

mistakes that connnonly occur

of

seem

onl}^ explicable as the result

punch-work

of this nature

this explanation has therefore

accepted without question and without serious

regards, at
least,

investigation as

the

later

Anglo-Saxon and Norman periods.

recent paper read

^

Society
subject.

has

by Mr. Hocking before the Royal Numismatic made it necessar}^ to inquire more critically into the This explanation of the engraving of dies by means of

punches during the

Norman

period was there condemned on the

grounds of the impossibility of hammering such broad blunt punches

so close to the edge of a die without splitting
it,^

and

of the great

variety of shape, notably in breadth and in the finish of the fishtail

ends, that

is

usually exhibited in the upright strokes on the

side of
it

same coin and the same

facts

incongruous with the

previously accepted theory.

close

examination of the lettering on the coins described in

this catalogue results in the conclusion that (1) the inscriptions

were

cut on the dies by

means

of punches

(2)

the punches, though

in

similar in shape to those above

described, were

most cases

narrower and

less blunt,

and do not correspond exactly with the

;

lettering seen on the coins

that
the

is

to say, after the engraver

had

hammered

the punch

into

die,
it

he usually broadened the

incision thus

made and

finished
tool
;

off

by means

of a tool, pre-

sumably a graver's cutting

thickness exhibited
finishing touches

(3)

the irregularity of shape and

is

by the

lettering

explained partly by the

tool after punching,

added with the graver's

but

partly also

by unsuccessful striking

of the coins themselves, the

fill

metal in

many

cases having failed to

sufiiciently the hollows

:

of the die.

These conclusions are based on the following points

See Epigraphical Table, Series

(5).

I,

letters

(2),

(2),

(2),

(6),

and

TH
^ "

Num.

Chrou., 1913, Proceedings, p. 10.

of the coins shows that the dies were not
;

The turning up of the edge

were not made of larger
size

larger in diameter than the coins they struck

dies

and

filed

down

but this does not prove that the after they were engraved.

Xliv
(1)

INTBODUCTION

certain flaw repeating itself in precisely the

same position

on difterent letters of a coin shows that these letters must have

been made by punching the die with an instrument which
contained
tliis

itself

flaw.

Instances of this are fairly numerous and in

many

cases easily visible.

In the vertical strokes of the

:

letters the

following flaws have been noted

((/)

On tlie obverse of William II,

no. 69, the letter

M has
may

a small

flaw at the bottom of the left-hand corner of each vertical stroke,

a small semicircular piece being broken off the corner of the punch

from which these strokes were made

less clearly,

the same flaw

be seen,

on most,

if

not

all,

of the other letters on the obverse

of this coin, notably on the three letters immediately preceding

the

n
(b)

similar,

slightly

smaller,

flaw appears

in

the same
II,

position on the vertical

no. 81
(c)

strokes of the

obverse of William

(PL XXXI.

7).

A similar flaw, in similar position, but rather smaller and less

letters

round in shape, on the

no.

MRE

of the obverse of William II,

104
(d)

(PI.

XXXI.

16).

small hole in the left-hand cornei" of the bottom edge

of the vertical strokes of

L-EX-M and
7).

on the

obverse of

William
(e)

II, no.

155

(PI.

XXXIII.

small flaw in the lower left-hand fish-tail of the two

strokes of
no. 160 (PI.

/\

in the
9);

mint-name on the reverse

the V-shaped form of
tliis

of William II,
is

XXXIII.

flaw

noticeable

in both strokes of the letter.

(/')

On

the reverse of Stephen, no. 157 (PI. LIII. 14), a crack

corner, just

across the lower left-hand

above the

serif,

of the
of the

second vertical stroke of the

of

ON

and

of the

mint-name.
((j)

small hole in the centre of the top edge, just below the

serif, of

both vertical strokes of the letter

8).

on the obverse of

Stephen, no. 170 (PI. LIV.

EPIGRAPHY
[li)

xlv

The obverse and reverse

coll.),

of a coin of

William

II,

Hks. 250,

of Salisbury (P. C. B.

and

of one of the

same type of Wilton

(H.

W. M.

coll.),

and the reverse of one of the same type of

coll.),

Worcester

(P. C. B.
:

show

a break across the centre of the

\ertical strokes

it

stretches rio-ht through the verticals from side

slightly

to side,

and slopes

downwards from
is

left to right

on the

reverse of the Wilton coin the punch

sometimes inverted, on
This grouj)

NE,
is

for example, at

the end

of

the mint-name.

important, not only as showing that the vertical strokes were

not, as

made with one punch and

same punch

has been suggested, from piecehalf,

punches (one punch forming the upper

and another, or the

again, forming the lower half of the stroke), but also

as evidence of the dies having been -made at pp.

London

(see

below,

cxxxv ff.).

The

close resemblance of the

little

shape of the break in

these strokes in all three coins leaves

room

for doubt that

the dies for the three coins were

all

made with

the same punch.

In the horizontal wedge-shaped strokes forming the bars of

E, F, &c., the following flaws have been noted
[i)

On

the reverse of William

II,

no. 16 (PI.

XXVIII.

12),

the

wedge-shaped bars forming the

tail

of \K, the lower bar of

F
one

and the three bars of

in the mint-name,
:

show two

holes,

near each end of the bar

it

may

be noted that the top bar of

is

punched and on

closer in to the vertical stroke

this

than the other two

bars,

bar the two holes are closer to the vertical,

in

showing clearly that these two flaws were

the

punch from

which
(/t)

all

these bars were made.

On

the reverse of William

II,

no.

94

(PI.

XXXI.

11),

there

is

a similar flaw on the bars of

and

in the

mint-name

near the broad end of the bars.

(2)

An

examination of the strokes containing the flaws above

mentioned, and shown therefore to be made from the same punch,

reveals considerable variety of shape

and breadth

in the strokes
;

which were themselves the work of the same punch

on the coin mentioned above as flaw d
(PI.

for example,
7)

XXXIII.

the

Xlvi

INTRODUCTION
first I,

strokes X-EL. on the obverse vary in breadth, the

being

narrower and more waisted than the other two

letters

they
these

vary also in the shape and length of their fish-tail ends.

letters

As

3)unch,

show the same flaw and are therefore made with the same we must conclude that, after hammering the punch into
the engraver broadened the incision and finished
tool.
off"

the

die,

the

ends

with a

But the point

is

better

shown by
letter

instances

which have been noted of a portion of a

punched
(a)
:

being double-

On
its

the reverse of William

I,

no.

292

(PI.

X.

16),

the

letter

| in the moneyer's

name shows

a shaped piece protruding

it

beyond

lower end, corresponding to

;

in

shape but
fish-tail

much

smaller in size

also,

near the top of the letter a

fish-tails

protrudes

on either side corresponding to the

letter.

at the top of the

(h)

On

a coin of London (moneyer Wulfword) of William

II,

type IV, in the York Museum, a similar projection

may
letter.

be seen
fish-tail

above

the vertical of \}

on the obverse, and a similar

near the bottom of the

protruding from the

left side

These show clearly that the punch has been struck twice into the
die

and the marks

of the mis-strike not obliterated

is

the narrower

form of the projecting piece

no doubt partly due to the punch not

is

being hammered so deeply as in the true impression, but also

pro-

bably in part due to the broadening of the true impression after

punching.

Many

instances
;

may

be found of a similar protrusion

I,

.above or below a letter

no. 167,

for example, on the obverse of William

I,

below the

R, and on William
is

no. 137 (PI. V. 12),

;

above

the vertical of the initial cross of the reverse

cases the protrusion

in these

and similar

invariably shaped similarly to the true

strike of the vertical stroke,

though thinner and smaller;

it

cannot

therefore be due to the slipping of a graver's tool.

An

example of similar double-punching of a horizontal bar

II, no.

be seen on the obverse of William

where the bar of the third

262

(PI.

may XXXVII. 4),

X^ has a wedge-shaped protrusion

EPIGRAPHY
fceyoucl its

Xlvii

broad end.

I'liere

are also cases wliere

II, no.

more than

tliree

bars are visible on an

JE,

on William

83

(PI.

XXXI.

8),

the

second

of the obverse inscription has the horizontal bar

five times.

punched

no fewer than

Similarly, on the reverse of William II,

no. 202, the I) of the moneyer's

name has

four instead of two

crescent-shaped punch-marks

in these cases, again, the narrowness

of the punch-marks^ as compared with corresponding strokes of

other letters, seems to imply that the usual practice was to broaden
the letters after they were punched.

That a

cuttino- tool
is

was used

for finishino^ off the fish-tail ends

I,

after punching
first

also

shown by William

no. 1029,

on which the
on the

stroke of

^\

in the

mint-name has the lower

fish-tail

left

running right out to the vertical of the preceding

letter

this

must have been due

original
I,

to a slip of the graver's tool.

The

form of the punches may probably be gathered from

on the reverse of which the
letters

William

no. 186 (PI. VII. 5),

1,1 of the moneyer's

name

present a

somewhat unusual appearance.

narrow and
is

The upper
ofi"

surface of these letters is

sloped sharply

to the field of the die,

forming a steep slope instead of the usual

field of

perpendicular setting of the letters to the

the coin;^ probably

the engraver, after punching the strokes of the letters, cut the

metal of the die in a sharp slope

down

to the deepest point of

the punched impression, instead of cutting

down

perpendicularly

and

so broadening the impression.

In section, the sides of the

are of the shape

vertical
of the

strokes

of

these

letters

*-, instead

usual --; the shape of the vertical strokes, showing in

field,
is

dotted lines their point of contact with the

It is possible that the

thus:
in this

punches themselves sloped

ofi'

way,

and that these

letters show^ the

untouched punch-work.
on which the horizontal bar

Frequent varieties of the

letter T,

has been so punched as to leave the top of the vertical visible

Cf.

also the lettering of the obverse of the coin of

6),

William

I,

no. 84

(PI.

IV.

where, however,

it

may be

clue

to faulty striking;

see below,

p. xlviii.

Xlviii

INTRODUCTION
it,

above

show

similarly the shape of one end of the stroke.

I,

See

Epigraphical Table, Series

(2).

"We

may

therefore conclude that the punches were all narrower

than the lettering seen on the coins, but probably of the same
length,^

and that the engraver, after hammering the punch into

the die, broadened with a tool the incision thus

off the corners, increasing the

made and

finished

slope of the fish-tail ends of the

uprights.
(3)
is

The very thin

lettering

which

is

seen occasionally on coins

probably due in some cases to the omission of the engraver to

;

broaden the punch-marks

but duplicates show that

it

is

some-

times due to faulty striking of the coins, the flan failing to take
the full impression of the die.^
It is not, therefore^ possible to

conclude with certainty that the thin lettering gives us the un-

touched work of the punch.

coins,

How

nearly the lettering of the later

when

serifs are

added and the verticals are convex instead

of concave, resembles the shape

and breadth of the punches,

it is

impossible to say

in this later period the serifs are

added with

separate punches and are sometimes omitted.*^

Two
no.

coins,
(PI.

William

I,

no. 329

(PI.

XII. 5) and

WiUiam

II,

184

XXXIV.
coin,

4),

have upright strokes in the obverse

inscription without the horizontal strokes to complete the letters

on the former

between

and JM, the inscription

consists of

nothing but vertical strokes, on the other coin the

initial cross

and

alone are complete, the remainder of the

inscription

being

vertical strokes only.

On

both these coins the uprights seem

to be carefully spaced out in such a

way

as to leave

room

for the
that,
first

horizontal strokes to be inserted

in

and they seem

to

show

making

these

two

dies at least, the engravers

punched

^ ^

See below, p. 1. Compare, for example, William

;

I,

nos. 1113, 1114,

two coins struck from

the same reverse die

the

J^

of the mint-name has on no. 1113 this very thin

appearance and on the other the normal thickness.

^

See Henry

I,

no. 58

(PL XLI.

11),

on the obverse of which some of the

letters are without serifs.

EPIGRAPHY

xlix

the uprights and finished them off with the graving tool before

punching the horizontal strokes.

this

It
it

seems natural to suppose that

was the regular

practice, as

would be quicker

in

working

with a punch to hammer

into the die the strokes that one

to

punch

would make, rather than

oft'

keep changing tools in order to finish

one letter before beginning another.

at the conclusion that punches
it is

Having arrived

were used in

making the
of lettering

inscriptions on the dies,

possible to find varieties

which

may

be traced to a change in height or shape of

the punches used at different times by engravers, and thereby

to obtain further evidence of the chronological sequence of the

coin-types of this period.^

With the evidence that has been drawn

from Finds, Overstrikcs, and Mules, a considerable number of the

types of these four reigns have already been placed in chronological
sequence, and this order, which
is

shown on

pp. xli-xlii, connects

the various series of epigraphical groups which serve to allocate

most of the types at present unplaced.

The most important epigraphical change

place in the reign of
as on Anglo-Saxon
sides

of this period takes

Henry

on the coins of the two Williams,

coins, the uprights of the letters

less fish-tailed

have concave
;

and more or

ends without serifs

so, too,

on

four of the types of

Henry

I.

The remainder of Henry's coins

class,

and those

of

Stephen belong to quite a new epigraphical

serifs

having uprights with convex sides and

added by means of

separate punches at both ends, serifs being also sometimes present

at the ends of the horizontal strokes of
(l. e.

C, E,

&c.

improved

less

rudimentary) forms of lettering, notably /V, I^, \^, are

class,

found on coins of this new

only of the old
as the last
class,

and

also

on coins of one type^

safely be regarded

a type which

may therefore

of the types which bear the old form of lettering.

clearly the distinction

The Epigraphical Table shows

these

between

two

classes,

Series

I-IV comprising the

earlier class,

and

See
'

Num.

Chron., 1913, pp. 399

'

ft'.

Annulets and Piles

type of Henry

(Hks. 257).

INTRODUCTION

Series

V-IX

the

later.

The nine

series into

which the epigraphical

of
different
series

groups are there divided

reflect

the use

forms of

punches in the cutting of the dies; in each

forms of
figured.
all

the normal

the letters and the most important varieties are

to the scale of 2 to
class,
1.

The drawings are

Of the four series of the old

two are found on types

of

Henry

I,

the later of which must be that in which occur the

i- e.

new

forms of /V, l^, \r,

Series

IV

Series III will therefore

is

be the other series of the old class which

found on coins of

Henry
and
have
*

I.

Series I covers

all

the types of the two Williams with

'

the exception of some coins of the

all

Voided Cross type (Hks. 250)

'

of the

'

Crosses Pattde and Fleury

'

type (Hks. 247), which

lettering of a larger type, Series II,

'

and the coins of the

Cross Fleury and Piles

(Hks. 248), which have lettering of

Series III.

The new
of

class of lettering

forms five

series, of

which

two contain types and may

Henry

I,

and two contain types of Stephen

the remaining one contains types of both

therefore be placed between the

Henry
two
;

and Stephen,

series of

Henry
series

types and the two series of Stephen types

this

middle

groups together, as would be expected, Hks. 262, 255, 270, and 269,

which were found on other evidence

to be the last

two types

of

Henry and
series (no.

the

first

two

of Stephen.

Immediately preceding

this

VII) must be placed the series containing Hks. 265, the

;

type that has been found to precede Hks. 262

Series VI, and the other series of

this is therefore
is

Henry types
later,

Series V.

Of
can

the two series of Stephen types, the one containing Hks. 268, the
last

type of the reign, must be the

and these

series

therefore be

numbered IX and VIII

respectively.

The nine
the old and

series are differentiated, after the

main

division

of

new

classes of lettering, chiefly

by the height

of the

uprights

measurement shows

so

minute a variation in the height

series that it is safe to

of lettering on coins of the

same

assume

that the engraver, in finishing off the letters with the tool, kept

within the upper and lower limits of the punch -mark, broadening
the strokes without increasing their height.

The measurement

EPIGRAPHY
is

taken to the centre of the top and bottom of the uprights.

is

There

also

marked

difference in finish

and breadth of

lettering

in the different series.

set
is

Probably the engravers copied a model

them by the
not
the

chief engraver, so that the finish of the letter

effort

original

of

the

individual

workman based
to

on the traditions of the mint, but a close copy of the chief

engraver's original design
;

otherwise

it

would be impossible

account for the very close resemblance of the finished lettering on

the coins
or write,
of
;

presumably the workmen were usually unable to read

set them.^

and ignorantly copied the model

The variety

form and height of these uprights

may

be seen on the following

diagram, on which the uprights are drawn to scale (three times

the original size) upon a ground ruled with horizontal lines which

mark

halves of millimetres in the original

SERIES
I

^
:

lii

INTRODUCTION

group appears a lettering of the same height as the preceding,

but having as
uprights
;

its

characteristic

more marked

fish-tail

ends to the

this continues

on Hks. 246 and some coins of Hks. 250.

Thus, with the exception of these slight varieties within the series
(it

must be remembered that the drawings

of Series I represent
series),

rather the earlier than the later style of this

Series I

continues throughout the

first

ten types bearing the

'

name

of

William and on some coins of the

Cross Voided

'

type (Hks. 250).

The
the

finish of the lettering of the first eight types is

very good,
after

and carefully worked, especially in types III to VIII, but

'

Paxs type there

'

is

a very marked decline both in the striking

of the coins
Series

and in the

finish of the dies.

II represents a much larger

more
Cross Voided

lettering (2'8
It is

mm.) with

coarser finish and

coins of the
of the
' '

careless striking.
'

used on some
all
^).

type (Hks. 250) and

'

the coins

Crosses Patte'e and Fleury

type (Hks. 247

The

fact

that Hks. 250 forms a transitional type containing lettering of

both Series I and II confirms the previous evidence of

its

position

between Hks. 246 and Hks. 247.

Series

III

(2'5

mm.)

is

of

narrower

and

less

clumsy

form

the lettering shows better finish and greater neatness, the

It is

uprights broaden at the top more than at the lower end.

used on the coins of the

'

Cross Fleury and Piles

those
of

'

type (Hks. 248)

the

with

the

name
is

of

William, and on

'Annulets'
epigraphical

type (Hks. 251) with the

name

of

Henry.
the

An

connexion
coins,

thus

formed

between

William and

Henry

confirming the placing of Hks. 248 as the last type of

II,

William
of

and defining the

first

type of Henry

I.

The evidence
in

Finds

left

a doubt whether Hks. 252, which occurs

the

Shillington find, or Hks. 251, which occurs in the

find (see above, pp. xxiii-xxiv),

Bermondsey

was the

first

type of the reign of

is

Henry
correct
;

I.

The evidence

of

the Bermondsey find

therefore

in fact, the type of the Shillington find,

Hks. 252, has

The few exceptions mentioned

in

I\um. Chron., 1913, p. 404, are very

doubtful.

liii

EPIGRAPHY
lettering of the

new

class

with

serifs

and convex uprights, and

than the four Henry

must therefore

at the earliest

come

later

types with lettering of the old

Series

class.

IV

(1-8

mm.)

is

the last of the old concave style.

The

uprights are usually disproportionately broad, giving an ugly squat

appearance to the
the
'
'

letters.

It covers three types of

'

Henry
253),

Profile

and Cross Fleury

'

(Hks. 254),
;

'

Pax (Hks.
'

and

Annulets and Piles

(Hks. 257) types

at present

of the first

two

of these

three types

we have

found no evidence of position,

but the third (Hks. 257) has already been shown, from the forms
/V,
I'*,

and \f,^
In the word

to be the last type

with lettering of the old

Hks. 253 occurs the form

class.

PAX

in the field of

of

/V found
form
^

in the inscriptions of

Hks. 257, sometimes with and

This
first

sometimes without the upper bar.

appearance of a true
'

may

perhaps be taken as evidence that the

this conclusion is

Pax type
'

immediately precedes Hks. 257, but

by no means

a certain one, for the use of the letter in the word

be conventional, as
coins of Hks. 241

we

find a similar true

also

form

PAX may in PAXS on

The
'

and
'

on the coins of Harold.

'

Profile

and Cross Fleury

(Hks. 254) and

Pax

'

(Hks. 253) types

may

therefore be placed provisionally as second and third types, with

the 'Annulets and Piles'

of the reign.

(Hks. 257)

type as the fourth type

On
is

the last of these three types there appears a

slight tendency to

make
ill

the lettering narrower and more legible,

but the height

only very slightly increased, and the execution

finished.

remains careless and

Series

(2-5

mm.).

This

is

the

first

series of the

new

class

with

serifs

and convex uprights.

It includes all the coins of

'Voided Cross and Fleurs' type (Hks. 267),

'

Pointing Bust and Stars

'

type (Hks. 266),

'

Quatrefoil and Piles' type (Hks. 252),

Larger Profile and Cross and Annulets type (Hks. 256)

'

^
^

See also notes on letter

A.

below, p.

Iviii.
;

Witti the exception of occasional forms on William coins

I,

see Epigraphical

Table, Series

4, 5, 6.

' '

liv

INTRODUCTION
:

and some coins of

'

Cross in Quatrefoil

'

type (Hks. 263),

iv),

'

Full Face and Cross Fleury' type (Hks.

'

Double Inscription

'

type (Hks. 258).

is

Of these
Hks. 266
types,

types, Hks. 267

connected by the Bari find with

reign,

Hks. 257, which has been placed as the fourth of the

is

and

connected by a mule with Hks. 267.

The other two

no
of

Hks. 252 and 256, which have

as the seventh

this series of lettering only,

is

must be placed

and eighth types, but there

is

evidence to show which of the two

the earlier.

The order

the three remaining types, which form transitional types from

Series

V to Series VI, is already fixed by

earliest

the mules in the Hunterian

collection (see above, pp. xl-xli).

The

form of lettering of

this series, at the introduction

of the serifs slightly

and convex uprights with type

it

V
in

(Hks. 267), differs

(2-7

from the later forms;

less

is

somewhat higher
finer

mm.),

rather

convex, and very

much

execution,^

The
neat

lettering assumes its

more usual form on some coins of type VI

series
;

and so continues throughout the

in appearance

this

form

is

less

and the

finish less careful.

The introduction

of pellets to divide the

words of the legends

begins in this series,^

on

the

fifth,

sixth,

and seventh types of

Henry they

are used occasionally, and on the eighth and later

types almost invariably.

Series

VI (2 mm.)

is

a smaller and more neatly finished lettering.

It covers the

remaining coins of types IX, X,

'

XI

(Hks. 263,

iv, 258),

and

all

the coins of the

'

Smaller Profile and Cross and Annulets

'

(Hks. 264) and Star in Lozenge Fleury (Hks. 265) types, the latter
of

which

is

connected by a mule with the

'

Pellets in Quatrefoil

It was pointed out above, p.xxv, that the evidence of the Bari find was not by any means conclusive but I am content to accept it in placing Hks. 267 as the first type of the new class of lettering, as I think that this different and much more finely executed form of lettering is likely to be the earliest work
' ;

after the change.

^

There are a few isolated instances on earlier

coins.

EPIGRAPHY
type (Hks. 262)
series.
;

hr

some coins
is

also of

Hks. 262 have lettering of this

Hks. 264

thus fixed as the twelfth type of the reign.

last

Series

VII

(2-3

mm.) includes coins of the

first

two types of
curved

Henry
269). sides
;

and of the

two types

of Stephen (Hks. 262, 255, 270,

less

It is a larger lettering

and has uprights with

the dies appear for the most part to have been carefully

finished.

still

larger style of lettering seems to have

;

come into
this larger

occasional use for obverse inscriptions during this series

lettering
(2'7
first

mm.)

is

found on the obverse of some coins of

Stephen's

type (Hks. 270) which read

his second type (Hks. 269);
11,

STIEFNE, and
examples of
it

also

on a few coins of
be seen on PI. L.
Series

may

LI.
is

11,

LIII.

4.

VIII

(2

mm.)

a small lettering with straighter sides to

the uprights, their convexity being

now
'

scarcely visible.

Some

coins of Stephen's second type (Hks. 269) fall into this series,^

which includes

also the coins of the

Cross and Fleurs

'

(Hks. 276)

and

'

Lozenge Fleury and Annulets

'

(Hks. xix) types, and some

coins apparently of the type figured on PI.

LV.

1.

Of

this last

type

only two specimens are

no. 179, PI.

known

to
is

me on
;

one

(see below, p. 367,

LV.

1)

the lettering

of Series IX,

on the other

'^

the

obverse

is illegible

and the reverse has

lettering of Series

VIII

this therefore

seems to be the transitional type of Series VIII

and IX, and Hks. 276 and xix may be placed immediately after
Hks. 269 as the third and fourth types of the
is

reign,

though there

no evidence to show which

Series

is

the earlier of the two.

to a

IX

(2-6

mm.) returns

much

larger lettering.

The

types falling into this series are, besides the transitional type just

mentioned as the

fifth

of

the reign, the remaining

of

two types
is

of Stephen, Hks. xviiib

and 268,

which Hks. 268

already

placed as the last type by the Awbridge find.

there seems to be some irregularity of height,

On

this series

some

of the uprights

Also perhaps a few, but very few, of Stephen's

Chron., 1913, p. 409. B.

first

type (Hks. 270).

See
1913,

Num.
-

Roth collection
7 b).

(the

reverse

is

illustrated

in

Num.

Chron.,

n. XIX.

Ivi

INTEODUCTION
;

measuring as much as 2-8 and others only 2-4 mm.

it

may

be that

here again a larger lettering was sometimes used for obverse

inscriptions, as

on some coins of Stephen's

first type.^

The

coins

have for the most part a coarse and unpleasing appearance, due
partly to the clumsiness of the lettering and partly to the roughness
in execution of the dies.

This large lettering

is

also seen
'

on some
type).

coins of the first issue of

Henry

II (the so-called

Tealby

'

The

results thus obtained

from epigraphical evidence, and the

association of this evidence with that of Finds

and Mules, may be

seen below, pp. Ixvi-lxvii.

In the Epigraphical Table the ordinary forms of

in each series are figured,

letters in use
;

and

also the chief varieties

from these

are omitted the forms on coins of very coarse and irregular

work

which are mentioned below.^

A. The
first

two forms

in the table are those in regular use^ the

former being the earlier and more common on the early types of

William

the inclination of the two strokes tends quickly to

is

diminish, and the form of the letter

strokes
of

reduced to the two parallel

the second form, which remains in use throughout

the reigns of

William I and

II,

and the

first

three types of

Henry

I.

The third form, similar

occurs rarely:
no.
p. 7, no.

to
;

form
p.
1).

but with a cross-bar added,

p. 22, no.

31
;

10, no. 55;

114;

p. 46,

234

(PI. III.

V. 3

IX.

Similarly, with parallel uprights,

p. 22, no. 117.

the letter

H
:

is

substituted for

/\ on
8)

Form 4 Form 5

p. 3, no.

9 (PI.

I, 8).

p. 75, no.

402

(PI.

XIV.

p. 82, no.

445
;

a Stamford
in the

coin of the second type of William I (York

Museum)
I.

word

PW^S
Form
Henry
formed
I,

on
6
:

all

coins of the eighth type of William

p. 37, no.

196

(PI.

VII.

11).

Series III, form 2, occurs on the obverse of a Winchester coin of

type

I,

in Mr. Lockett's collection

this is a roughly-

letter

engraved somewhat carelessly

the finish at the

See above, p.

Iv.

p. cxxxviii.

EPIGRAPHY

Ivii
is

upper end

is

uncertain, nor

is

it

quite clear whether there

16).

central cross-bar (see PI.

XXXVIII.

In Series IV, forms 2 and 3 are found in the word

PJtK

on type III of Henry

the old form being

I,^

and are both

in regular use

on type IV,

now abandoned. new class of lettering, Series V-IX, call for no comment a large top bar with serifs is introduced in In Series IX Series VII and continues to the end of the period.
The forms
of this letter in the
;

both barred and unbarred forms are found on types

of Stephen.

VI and VII

shows no

varieties of

importance.
is

An

interesting ease of

double-punching of this letter

p. 249, no. 202,

seen on the coin of William II,

and has already been mentioned.^

less

In Series II the crescents tend to be thinner and

in Series III the second form,
(PI.

curved

which occurs on

p. 264, no.

273

XXXVII.

15), is

due to the limited space in which the engraver

had

to cut the letter.

is
;

regularly of the square form throughout the whole of this

period

the second figure of Series I shows a very natural puncherror

worker's
(Series
I,

which occurs
3,

occasionally.

The round forms

2)

form
I,

Series V, form 3,

and Series VII, form

8),

occur

on William

p. 75, no.

402

(PI.

XIV.

Henry

I,

p. 288, no. 70,

and
D.

pp. 323-4, nos. 231-4

(PI.

XLVII.

16).
is

The very
1,

straight form of loop

which

figured in Series V,

form

occurs on

the earlier coins of the series

which have the

finer lettering.^

Cf. p. 276, no. 33 (PI.

I,

XL.

1).

E. The round form of Series

p. 25, no.

form

2, is

found on William
3, is

I,

132

(PI.

V. 10); the similar form, Series V, form

I,

on

a London (Sigar) coin of Henry

lection.

type VI, in the Hunterian col-

In Series

and VI

the horizontal bars of

E,

as also of
serifs
;

SLud

F, are sometimes with, sometimes without,

serifs,

in
still

Series

VII they are more common without

^
''

but are

See above, See above,

p. liii.

p. xlvii.

p. liv.

Iviii

INTRODUCTION
;

sometimes found with them

are usually present.
F. Series
to
I,

in Series

VIII and IX the

serifs

form
;

2,

shows a not uncommon error and one natural

I,

punch-work

cf.

William
I,

p. 28, no.

148 (PL VI.

3).
11),

Similar

errors are fc,

for

cf.

William

p.

117, no. 624 (PI.

XIX.

and

F, and

for

E.
Series I are both in regular use
;

G.

The

first

two forms of

form 3

shows a

different shape of the top stroke, probably this is

worked

with a tool and not due to a punch of different shape.

In Series II

both forms are again commonly used, and in Series III and IV
the form with the complete circle

O with a wedge-shaped
letter

bar at

the top

is

alone used, except on a Hunterian coin (Winchester) of

type IV, where the

already introduced.

new form

of this letter, Series IV, form

2, is

Probably the

was not made

in

the
die

ordinary

way with

a punch, but, like 0,^

marked out on the

with a turning instrument like a pair of compasses, in some cases

the ch'cle not being completed and in others a complete circle

being formed, and at the top of this circle or semicircle an incision

was made with a wedge-shaped punch such

of E, &c.

as

is

used for the bars

In the centre of the letter

cf.

may
239

sometimes be seen
IX. 4)
;

a raised pellet,
pellet
is

William
in

I,

p. 47, no.

(Pl,

a similar

commonly seen
This pellet

the centre of the letter 0, also freI's

quently in the centre of the reverse of coins, notably in William

first

type.

is

probably due to the fixed foot of the

die.

compasses cutting a small hole in the

outline

The unevenness
oft'

of the

would be due

to the
it
is

engraver finishing

the letter free2,

hand
which

after

marking
;

out in this way.

Series IV, form

is

mentioned above
is

it

the earliest appearance of the form of

in use

on the serifed classes (Series V-VIII) and supplies

additional evidence of this type being the fourth of the reign.

H. As already mentioned, the

invariable

Roman form
Henry
I's

of
;

this letter is

down

to the third type of

reign

on his fourth

See below,

p. Ix.

See above, p.

liii.

;;

EPIGRAPHY
t}-pe the

lix

English form appears and

is

ahvaj'S used to the end of

letter

the

period.

The importance

of this
I

in

determining the

position
noticed.
I.

of

type IV of Henry

(Hks. 257) has already been

The only point with regard

is

to

this

letter

that need be
&c.. at

mentioned
of

its

frequent use instead of

is

^\, N,
of

the end
letter

an inscription where there

not room

for the

whole

thus

PILLEM X\E^ I similarly LVI for LVM.

K. This letter
is

(for

/\)

is

frequent occurrence,

found on two coins in the York Museum of

William

I's

first

type (var. inscription beginning above head)

Also
I,

which read

VLFHEEEL on EOFOK (same dies?).

I,
;

on Winchester coins of Henry

type XV, and Stephen, type

with the raoneyer's name Kippig or Chippig

297,
L.

see p. 332, nos. 296,

and pp. 353-4,

nos. 120-3.

The second form

William

in Series I is figured as one of the

many

examples of errors that

punches.
I, p.

are

essentially

due to working with

58, no. 297.

M. The

intersecting lines of the letter

this,

seem to have been usually

case,

engraved with a tool;

however, was not always the

as some coins show clearly that wedge-shaped punches were used

for this purpose,
p.
e.

g. W'

illiam

I,

p.

159, no. 856 (reverse), W^illiam II,

264, no. 271 (obverse).

for

The

varieties in Series I need

I, p.

no special
;

comment;
form
4,

form 3 see William

I,

30, no. 162 (PI. VI. 11)

for

William

p. 12, no.

69

(PI. III. 9).

In Series V, form 2

occurs on

Henry

I, p.
I,

280, no. 42 (PL

XL.

12),

and a similar spread

Series VI, form
2,

form on Henry
is

p. 291, no. 78 (PI.

I,

XLII.

9).

found on Henry

p.

286, no. 62.

interest.

N. There are no varieties of particular

reversely barred form, form
3,
;

In Series I the
I,

occurs on W^illiam
11)
;

p. 12, no. 67,

and

p.

117, no. 624 (PI. III. 7

XIX.
5).

for

form 4 see

W' illiam II,

p. 219, nos.

29-31

(PI.

XXIX.

In Series IV the regular form,

form

1, is

alone in use on coins at present

is

known

of types II

and III
letter.

on type IV

introduced a fashion of the reversely barred

Ix

INTRODUCTION
;

form 2

all

the
2, or,

known
rarely,

coins of type IV, with one exception/

having form
have the

form

3.

On some
it

coins of type

which
1

earlier style of Series V, the reversely barred

is
still

form (form

of Series V)

retained in use, but

disappears before the

introduction of type VI.

O.

Form

1
it

of Series I

is

that in regular use in the reign of

die,

William I;
to

seems not to have been punched into the

but
like

have been marked out with compasses, and afterwards,

letters,

punched
letter G,

thickened and finished with a tool

is

as in the

a pellet

frequently visible in the centre.

I,

The
2)

size

varies considerably, a very small form (Series

form

being

sometimes seen.^

The

letter is not

uncommonly found

in the

form

of a large pellet, that is to say, the centre of the letter has been

accidentally cut
(Series
I,

away on
^),

the

die."*

A double
wrong

form sometimes occurs

to double-punching

form 3

which might be due either

circle in the

or to
it,

marking out the

position and re-marking

or

by marking
foot.

it

doubly by swinging the compasses round

on the wrong

During the reign

the letter (Series
I,

of William I

is

introduced a different form of

form

4),

which

is

made by two crescent-shaped

IV,*^

punches

it

occurs as early as type

;

but

is

very rarely found

before type VIII

on type VIII the two forms are equally common

type the form made by two crescent punches

on William
is

II's first

the one in regular use, the other form being not frequent on

this type

and rare on type

form

II;

on the introduction of Series II

is

the round form returns into regular use, and

not

uncommonly

of

small size (Series

II,

2)

Series II, form

3,

occurs occasionally

on type III and rarely on type IV.

type
is

In Series III a small round

II, p.

regular,

form 2 occurring on William

264, no. 271,

coin in the Hunterian collection reading

iCrOI)PXNIOM*X)NC

e:
^

^
<>

See on G above, p. Iviii. William I, p. 97, no. 511 William I, p. 55, no. 289 See p. 54, no. 281 (PI. X.

(PI.
(PI.
8).

XVIII.
X. 14)
;

6).

"

William

I,

p. 16, no. 78.

William

II,

pp. 229-30, nos. 89, 90.

EPIGRAPHY

Ixi

and

p.

265, no.
in

280

(PI.

XXXVII.

11, 16).

The round type alone

is

found

Series IV, but with the introduction of the

new

style

in Series

the form

made with

crescent punches

is

re-introduced,

and the round form does not appear again.

Some
e.g.

strange forms of this letter have occasionally been noted,

Chron., 1901, p. 288 (British
this

Xum.

Museum

coin,

p. 273,

no. 27),

due in

and some other cases to a flaw

in the die, or,

more

frequentl}', to the letter Ijeing

engraved over the impression

of a vertical

punch

(see Pi.

XVI.

XIX.

14).

P.

There are no varieties of this

letter,

except such slight

;

varieties as are

due to the careless punching of the loop

in Series
I,

an

instance

is

shown

form 2

(cf.

on William

I,

p.

137,

no. 728, the last letter of the reverse inscription).^

R. This letter, similarly, has only varieties due to careless punch-

work

a strange instance

is

shown

in the Table (Series

I,

form

2),

on which the loop has been punched

at the to

away from

the vertical stroke

end of the

tail,

which

is itself

placed nearly at right angles

246, no. 187, the

the vertical: see William

(PI.

II,
7).

p.

in the

moneyer's name

XXXIV.
I,

coin of

Henry

p. 329, no. 276 (PL

XLVIII.

6),

has in the

mint-name an instance of

this letter with a true-formed tail with

;

doulile curve (R), instead of the usual small crescent

traces of

double-punching within the

letter incline

one to think that this

must be made with a new

this
S.

tail-punch, but I have not

met with

form elsewhere in

this period.

How much
it

of this letter

was made by punches

is

not always

quite clear;

shows considerable variety in form, due partly to

difference in the finish of the central part of the letter, the usual

practice being to

form the
For
II.

letter of

two small crescent and two

William
I,

small wedge punches.

15, 45,

lesser varieties see

nos. 11,

70 (PL

I.

10, 13;

16;

III. lO), also the

in

PK^S
p. 246,

throughout type YIII, where the crescent punch-marks overlap

The fourth form

and Errata.

of

should also be classed as P; see below,

no. 190,

Ixii

INTRODUCTION
is

considerably owing to the small space within which the letter

enclosed.
Series
I,

The following are the

form 2
:

varieties figured in the Table

e.g.

not uncommon,

\Mlliam

I,

p.

16, no.

77,

and

p. 32, no. 175 (PI.

IV. 3; VI. 14).

722
(a

form 3

William

I,

p. 136, no.

contemporary forgery).
11).

form 4
form 5
form 6

William
William

I, p. 18,
I, p.

no.

90 (PI. IV.

20, nos. 100, 101.

William

II, p.

246, no. 190, a variety showing extreme

carelessness of
Series V,

punch-work.
coll.).
coll.),

form 2
form
3

Henry
Henry
PI.

I,
I,

type VII, London, Spirling (P. C. B. type IX, Sandwich, Wulf wart (W. C.
8.

W.

XLI.

Series VI,

form 2

Henry

I, p.

285, no. 58 (PI.

XLI.

11).

T.

The upright
is

of this letter appears as either a thin vertical

punch, such as

used also for making

initial crosses (Series I,

I,

forms

1,

2),

or an ordinary thick vertical (Series

I,

form

3),

or

wedge-shaped (Series

form

4)

the cross-bar

is

commonly made
off'

by an ordinary
usual

vertical

punch thickened and finished

a form which
I,

in the
I,

way
;

sometimes by two wedge-shaped punches (Series

form 4

Series II,

form

2),

is

in

regular use in

and

after Series III.

Series
is

form

2,

shows the way in which

cf.

the top of the vertical

nos. 540, 559,
no. 11 (PI.
p. 222, no.
1.

frequently left visible,^

15)
;

William

I,

852
;

(Pl.

XVIII.

form 4

may

be seen on

p. 4,
II,

10)

form

5 on p. 49, no. 251 (PI. IX. 8),

2).

and William

46

(PI.

XXX.

The
of
or

varieties of later series are

due mostly to presence or absence

serifs to the

upper

Ijar,

and the use of wedge punches for the bar

In Series V, form 3 shows again the
I, p.

the engraving of a

line.

top of the vertical punch,

Henry

277, no. 36 (PI.

I

XL.

4).

V. At the beginning of the reign of William

the two strokes

forming

this letter are usually sloped

towards each other at the

lower end, but this

letter soon becomes, like A,

two

parallel strokes,

and therefore not distinguishable from A.

(Series
I,

The true

form

form

3)

made
^

w^ith

two long wedge-shaped punches

xlvii.

See above, p.

EPIGRAPHY
occurs on William
I,

Ixiii

p. 11, no.

62;

p. 162, no.

869

(PI.

XXIII.

8),

and a few other

form

coins.
1 is

In Series IV form
2,

used throughout types II and

is

III,

and
first

we have

seen above,^

the true form which appears

on type IV, and continues

the end of the period.

(in

variety with or witliout serifs) to

W. The Anglo-Saxon
VII the
of

form, Wen,
:

is

used to express this letter

throughout the whole period

later English form,
I

for a short period in Series

is

VI and

W,

introduced on the last two types

Henry

and the

first
it

type of Stephen, but the Anglo-Saxon

it
;

form continues with

and survives

the form

occurs only
all

rarely on Stephen's first type, and apparently not at

on the

remaining types of his reign.-

The form used

for

Wen

is

not different from that of

P except
on which
I,

on a few coins of the

first

two types

of William

I,

a wedge punch
form
rare,
2).

is

used instead of the crescent punch (Series

See

p. 9, nos. 45,

46 (PL

II. 16)

examples of this are

intentional.

and are probably accidental rather than

William

Form
273

shows the large crescent punch used by mistake

crescent, see
I, p. 2,

for the small

;

no. 3 (PI.

I. 3),

and

p. 52, no.

in

form 4 the loop has been punched too

close to the vertical,

and

^ives the appearance of a swelling on the side of the vertical, see

William

II, p.

246, no. 190.^

is

X. The regular form of this letter

made with wedge-shaped

as on p. 10, no. 53
this
is

punches

occasionally a cross

is

used in
I,

its place,
;

(PI. III. 3),

a form figured in Series

form 2

form made with

an ordinary upright and two wedge punches

three types of Series IV.
varies considerably
;

always used on the

form

In the

new

class of lettering the

the limbs are usually straight, sometimes

thick, sometimes thin, either

with or without

serifs.

p. xlix.

Except in irregular issues (see below, pp. xcii ff.). This letter should have been read as P, and not

the

name

is

evidently

:Sperling.

Ixiv

INTRODUCTIOK

DH, TH.
on the Bath

The Anglo-Saxon form, D, remains

in use on coins

nearly to the end of the reign of

coin of

Henry

its last

appearance

is

Henry I, type XIII,

p. 295, no. 87 (PL XLIII. 2).

is

The

earliest

appearance of
I,

TH

as separate letters
(PI.

on the Bristol
In the name

coin of

Henry

type X, p. 285, no. 57

XLI.

10).

of the mint, Thetford, the

letter
fifth
^

form

is

earlier

abandoned for the

is

T on Henry
;

I's

third type the

form

used, but on the

and

later types the

name

of the
is

mint appears as TETFO, &e.

1,

The regular form

of the letter

form

Series I

it is

made

as

with the addition of a wedge-shaped stroke on either side of the

each pointed towards the vertical
;

vertical,

form 2 shows a variety

vertical,

with the wedges punched with broad ends towards the

p. 25, no.

133

in

form 3 a longer wedge has been punched through

I,

the loop instead of two small wedges through the vertical, William
nos. 80, 96-8, 150, 166, 167, 170, 171, 173, 177, 178

(PL IV. 14;

VI.

13).

Form 4

is

made with
3).

a small instead of a large crescent

punch,
error
;

p. 28, no.

148 (PL VI.

Form

5 is a tj'pical punch-worker's

the engraver has used the straight punch instead of the

it

large crescent punch:

occurs on
10).
is

p. 27, nos.

144-6" (PL VI.

2),

and

p.

220, no. 37 (PL

XXIX.

In Series II the regular form

no. 245
dies)

as that of Series I

on

p.

257,

(shown more clearly on a Hunterian coin from the same

this series is used; instead of
is

form 2 of

two wedge-shaped
letter,

impressions one only

made, that within the

the outer

one being omitted.

This becomes the regular form of Series III

class of

and IV

on the introduction of the new

is

lettering in

Series V, the cross-bar

JE.

carried right through the vertical.

On

the

first
I,

three types of William I the diphthong form

figured in Series

form

1,

is

frequently used, e.g.

p. 42, no.

224

(PL VIII. 10)

this is

made by attaching a long wedge-shaped

;

stroke to the letter

a similar diphthong form, but

is

made with
I,

a short, instead of a long, wedge punch,

e.

also used, Series

form

2,

g. p. 16, no. 78.^

Series

I,

form

3,

which occurs on some coins of

Of

'

* See below, his fourth type I know no Thetford coins. p. cxxxvi. These two forms are not distinguished in the text of the Catalogue.

EPIGRAPHY
the earliest types of William
the end of the reign
;

IXV

I,

becomes the only form in use at

it

consists of the bars of

an

attached to
little

the second vertical of an A, the verticals of

being

or
in

not at

all

inclined towards each other at their upper end;

it

appearance, therefore,
tinues to the

does not differ from IE.

This form con-

end of the old

type,

class of lettering; it is

found on

Henry

I's

third

and on a coin
collection,^ if the

of

his

fourth type in

Major Carlyon-Britton's
coin reads, as I think,

moneyer's

name on

this

SIEPINE.
I

In Series VII the diphthong

appears in the natural form, the bars of an

the second stroke of an A.
the diphthong during Series
occurs, except the first

being attached to

have found no instance of the use of

and VI,^ but as in every form that

of Series I

two forms

and that

of

Henry

I,

type IV (when a
of an

new

form had just been introduced), the bars

are added to the form of

at the time in use, it is reason-

able to suppose that in Series

to that of Series

and VI the form would be similar

is

VII

the change of form (which

in reality

dependent on the form of A) comes most probably with the change

from the old to the new

i".

class of lettering.

The custom

of placing a cross
is

at the beginning of both

obverse and reverse legends

continued throughout this period

with few exceptions.^

This

initial cross is

formed of a
letters,

vertical,

usually thinner than that of the ordinary

with a wedgeis

shaped stroke on either side of

it.

Sometimes the cross-bar

I,

formed by a single stroke similar

to the vertical, Series

form

2.

Form

3 shows a
;

common
form
is

variety with broad vertical like that of

other letters

this

always used in Series IV instead of that

letterino;

with a thin

vertical.

In the new class of

the forms

on type VII IE represents can find no instance of the diphthong occurring on this type in this or any other form except the one quoted {ibid., p. 288) from a sale catalogue. 3 "William I, William II, p. 150, no. 805 (obverse) p. 27, nos. 144-6 (reverse)
^

Xum. Chron., 1901, PL In Num. Chi-071., 1901,

;

III. 10.

p. 53, it is stated that

I

(Hks. 252

W. J.

A. IV), but

p. 222, no.

46 (obverse)

Henry

I,

obverse of all coins of type

XI

also p. 313,

no. 177 (obverse),

and

p. 314, no. 181 (obverse).

Ixvi

INTRODUCTION
serifs,

vary with or without

limbs.

and with straight or wedge-shaped

seems to begin in the

The use
fifth

of

compound, or ligatured,
;

letters

type of William I

the only earlier instance that I have met in

this reign is

N^

in type I (p. 8, no. 38,

and

p. 11, no.

59); in

types

to

VII they are not common, but

in

in type

VIII they are

frequent,

and continue

common

use in the later reigns.

They

have no

significance,

and are evidently used merely for the saving

as three letters are run together, e.g.

of space or, sometimes, are due to an error of the die engraver.

Occasionally as

many

KR

on

p. 223, no. 52, &c.,

HI,

on

p. 153, no. 823.

Order of Types.
for the arrangement of the left, the types are bracketed by the Epigraphical Series, and on the right by Mules (with references to numbers on The numbers of Hawkins's plates are inserted pp. xxxix ff.) and Finds. between the brackets of Mules and Finds in order to render the table more clear. The Nottingham, Bute, Winterslow, and Colchester finds are omitted from this table (see pp. xxvii ff. and Table of Finds). The brackets of Finds are dotted to show types absent from the finds.

The following Table summarizes the evidence

types.

the

On

For the following notes see refei-ences on p. Ixvii. ^ Classification of types of William I and II in Num.
Brit.

Chron., 1902, pp.

211

&.,

and
I in

Num.

Joitrn., vol.

ii,

pp. 130

ff.

and

classification

of types of

Henry

Num.
^
^ *

^ 6 ^
^

CJiron., 1901, pp. 42 ff., and of Steplien in Brit. Num. Journ., vol. viii, p. 386. Overstruck on type I and on coin of Harold II (p. xxxiv, nos. 1, 2). Overstruck on type IV (p. xxxiv, no. 4). 0%'erstruck on type IV (p. xxxiv, no. 5). Overstruck on type VI (p. xxxiv, no. 6). Overstruck on tj'pe VII p. xxxiv, no. 7). Overstruck on William I, type VIII (p. xxxiv, no. S). Overstruck on "William I, type III, and on William II, type I (p. xxxiv, nos.
i

10, 11).
^

10
11

Overstruck on William II. types II and III (p. xxxv, nos. Order of types II and III doubtful, see p. liii.

12, 13),

Evidence of

11^

letters (^^^ J/^^ '\^ &c.), see p. xlix. Order of types VII and VIII doubtful, see p. liv. Order of types III and IV doubtful, see p. Iv.

ORDER OF TYPES

Ixvii

P.C.B.

OR

Type
Confessor

W.J.A.i

Mules Hks.
S--8
/

Finds

1 1

"1.

William

233
'^'

IP
III

II
III

^2)
.

(234

Si's
'

3
ID
:

^^^
.

1236
1238

J"

IV

IV

(4)
.

V^
Series
I
]

V
VI VII

(5)
.

t|237 I
243
(239

r-i

.11

VP
VIP
vin
William
II

Yin
1

(6)
.

(241

p
IP
III

(244
(7)

2
,

1246"

Series II

4
3
5
I

'

250 5
(247
(8)

1
J

IV
"
I

Series III
Series

V
I

1248
251 J"

(Henry

II

10

II

254
253 257"
(9)

IIPO

III

IV

IV"

VI
VII
VIII

V
VI

J267_ (266

VIP2
Series

IV

252

VIIP2 IX

V X
,

256
.

(263
(10)
t

X
Series

XI
(11)

ivi

VI

XI XII
XIII

XII

258 ib

IX
.

264
(12)

i|

XIII

XIV
Series
.

XIV

j265 I (262j"
73

O
11

XV
I

XV
1

255
(270
(13)

VII

Stephen

II

2
3,

1269.

Series

Ill"

or 4

276
xix

VIII

IV

^3

V
Series
.

VI
VII
('

4,

or 3
5

...

xviiib

-J

to

IX
Henry
II

...

268~||

...First

Tealby

')

Issue

285JI

For notes see preceding page.

Ixviii

INTRODUCTION
this attribution of eight types to

For

William

and

five to
is

William II there seems considerable probability, though there

no

definite evidence.

It rests

mainly on the proportion of types

of other

to the years of the reign

reigns.^

and a comparison with that

but they are
first

Many

other arguments have been and might be produced

all

in favour of this division,

conjectural and open to

serious objection.

That the

type issued after the accession

^

of a

Norman king would

necessarily be in profile

cannot be main-

tained in the face of the strong evidence in favour of placing the

full-face

type (Hks. 251) at the beginning of the reign of Henry

to

I.

It

might be considered satisfactory

divide
case

the types at a

point where no mule exists, in

to the present attribution are to

Avhich

the only variants

before or after

draw the

line

Hks. 243, or before or after Hks. 250, and none of these divisions gives so satisfactory a proportion
;

but,

on the other hand,

Confessor

mules

exist

not only with

11,^

an obverse of Edward

and reverse of Harold

but even with an obverse of Edward

I's

Confessor and the reverse of William

p. 13).

second type (see below,

The

'

Paxs

'

type has been assigned to a date within the period

1082-7 on the evidence of the Durham coinage (Num. Ghron.,

1901, p. 183), but the charter

by which the Durham

i,

coins

were

dated

is

spurious

(see

Davis, Regesta, vol.

in

no.

148).

If the

use of the

word Fax

the design

of

the coinage could be

supposed to have any reference to the condition of the country,

the only period in which the issue of the
'

Pass

'

type by either
last

William could reasonably be placed would be during the

years of the reign of William
I,

two But

that

is

to say, after the

Danes

abandoned their scheme of invasion

in the

autumn

of 1085.

no such meaning can be attached to the use of

the coinage

Pax

as a design for

when

that design was the only one issued by the

See Num. Chron., 1912, pp. 103-4, where it is shown that there seems to be an average duration of between two and three years for each type.
'

^ 3

Biit.

Num.

Joiirn., vol.

ii,

p. 137.

Nu7n. Chron., 1905, PI. VII i. 81.

ORDER OF TYPES
unfortunate Harold
11,^

Ixix

whose succession was

so

hazardous as

to require indecent haste in the burial of the late

king and in his

with an inva-

own

coronation ceremony

who came

to the throne

sion already preparing in

Norway, and in

face of the certainty of

risings

armed opposition from Normandy and the probability of

in

Northumbria,

if

not in other parts of the country

who was no

sooner crowned than he

made ready

for war,

and defeated one

enemy only
another.

to

meet

his death

immediately after at the hands of

The dating

of the types is also conjectural

and can only be based

on the proportion of types to the number of years of the reign.

It is certainly

noteworthy that these and other reigns seem to

of

show an average duration

to run

two

to three years for each type,^

and perhaps two or three years was the usual period for a type
;

but

it is difficult

to

put so short a limit to the

first

type of

Stephen, which there

is

good reason to suppose was in issue at

the time of his captivity in 1141."

theory of the triennial issue of types has been based on the

evidence of a tax called

Monetagium
in

or

Monedagium, which

is

mentioned

in

Domesday* and

the Charter of

Liberties of

Henry I^
the

(1100); a parallel has been found between this tax and

of Normandy,*^ a triennial hearth-tax granted to
in or shortly before 1080,

Monetagium

the people

by Duke William, probably

as a concession in exchange for the ducal privilege of debasing

^ See Ramsay, Foundations of England, vol. ii, pp. 2-3. But this type was not originated by the Confessor, for the coins with his obverse which bear this

reverse type are clearly

'

mules

'

struck in the reign of Harold.

The

tj'pe

must

have been issued by Harold.

2 ^

See

Num.

Chron., 1912, pp. 103-4.

'

See below, p. Ixxv. Aluredus nepos Turoldi habet 3 toftes de terra Sybi,

quam

rex sibi dedit,

in quibus habet

omnes consuetudines

pi-aeter

geldum

regis de

Monedagio

'

{Domesday,
""

fol.

336 b (Lincoln)).
'

Monetagium commune quod capiebatur per ciuitates et comitatus, quod non fuit tempore regis Eadwardi, hoc ne amodo sit, omnino defendo {ChaHer of Liberties of Henry I, 1100).
'

"

Num.

Chron., 1893, p. 131;

ii,

1901,
vol.

p.
i,

14;

1902, pp. 209

ff.

Brit.

Num.

Journ., vol.

p. 92

(from Ruding,

p. 163,

note

2j

vol. viii,

pp. 114-9.

IXX

INTRODUCTION
;

the coinage

and from

this it is concluded that the English coin-

types were issued triennially.

But no
of

parallel exists;^ the

Norman

tax was viewed as a concession from Duke William to the people,

the English tax
as its removal

was evidently one

by Henry
I

King William's

impositions,

was one

of this king's concessions to

the people

the

Norman
the

tax was levied in exchange for the

debasement of the coinage, a baronial privilege not exercised by

the English kings
;

Norman

tax was triennial and

;

we have no
if it

reason to assume the same of the English tax

the tax could not

possibly be referred to the change of types of the coins, nor,

could,

would

it

make

the change triennial, but,

it

if

a parallel with
of

the

Norman

tax existed,

would stop the change

^

types

altogether.

The tax was,

as Sir H. Ellis

says,

probably identical

with the payments de Moneta which are mentioned in Domesday

at several mint-towns.

Coincidences of types with current events are also misleading, as

has been shown above with reference to the 'Paxs' type

the
'

similar!}^,

Cross voided

'

type of William

II,

which usually has two stars

on the obverse, has been connected with the appearance of a comet

in the year 1097,^ a date at
in issue, but this
'

which the fourth type was probably

'

Two

Stars

type has

now been shown

to be the

third type of the reign,'*

and was therefore certainly out of issue

before the comet appeared.

of

The

coinage, or absence of coinage,

any mints
;

is

quite untrustworthy as a

means

of dating the

coins

at Bath, for example,

no coins are known of the reign

of William II,

and

it

might naturally be supposed that the defire in

struction of the city

of its

by

1088 put an end to the working

II,

mint

but a notification of William

which

is

assigned to

the period 1089 to January 1091, grants to St. Peter of Bath,

Bishop John and his successors, in alms for the augmentation of

the see, the whole city of Bath,
1
'

with

all

customs and a mint and

See Nxim. Chron., 1912, pp. 98

Introduction to
Brit.

ff.

Domesday

Boole, p. Iv (folio ed.), note 9.

^
*

Num.

Journ., vol.

ii,

p. 179.

See Num. Chron., 1913, pp. 402 and 411. An arrangement since adopted by Major Carlyon-Britton in Brit. Num. Journ. (see vol. viii, p. 62).

'

ORDER OF TYPES
toll
' ;

Ixxi

clearly the

mint was
of

still

in

existence, probably too in

operation.

The dating

the types must therefore be left in

uncertainty, admitting that an approximate period of two to three

years

is

the probable duration of eaeli type.

inquiries of 1108

The monetary
pp. cliv

and 1125 and the

possibility

of assigning certain types to these periods are discussed below,

f.
;

there seems to be some support in these dates for the

attribution of a period of about

two and a half years

to each type.

Some

additional evidence of the order of the types ma}' be found

in the statement of William of

Malmesbury with regard

to the

incising of coins (see below, p. cxlviii).

Irregular
The

Issues.

coins above described represent the regular issues of currency

;

from 1066 to 1156 or 8

such coins as can be shown to be forgeries

of these regular issues, struck

light

by the moneyers

in base metal or of

weight for their

own

profit,

are reserved for consideration

(see

in connexion

with the control and organization of the mint

ff.).

below, pp. cxlix

The

coins here described as

'

Irregular Issues
differ, for

comprise special issues of particular mints which

some
;

known or unknown they may belong to

reason,

from the regular types of the reign

the ordinary currency of the period or they

may have
lawfully.^

been issued by some authority other than the king,

whether privileged by royal grant or usurping the privilege un-

They

differ

from the regular

issues in

having the usual

or,

obverse or reverse design altered or vitiated in some way,

while

conforming to a regular type, bear an obverse inscription other

than the name and
title

of the king.

With one exception

these

all

belong to the reign of Stephen.*

^
'^

Davis, Regesta, vol.

i,

no. 326.
1.

See above,

p. xi,

note

The privileged

ecclesiastical issues of Canterbury, York,

&c., are not differentiated

from royal

issues,

Bury St. Kdmunds, and have therefore not been

reserved for separate treatment.

^

The type used

for

inscriptions of irregular coinages does not always

accurately represent the original.

Ixxii

INTKODITCTION

One
is

coin of the reign of William II needs special mention.

Bi^it.
it

It
ff.

published and illustrated in

Num.

Journ., vol.

viii,

pp. 83

In obverse and reverse design

conforms to the second type of

'

William II
inscriptions

('

Cross in Quatrefoil

type) but bears the following

obv.

iiEPirrEnK-i-

K
is

as in op. cit,

^LEPirrEnu

Eev.

i.HnVEOVOMKV*)i:o
apparently of good
silver.

It

weighs 18 grains and

Major

Carlyon-Britton shows reason for attributing this coin to Llewellyn

son of

Cadwgan
is

the obverse inscription, though the

first letter is

not clearly legible, seems to be intended for Lewillen, or Lewelin, as

the

name

written in the Annales Camhriae, and there

is

likelihood

in the reading of the mint-name

R"VHE)KO

as

Rhyd y

Gors, or

Ryt

Cors, as

it

appears in Brut y Tywysogion.

From

the Chroniclers

we

learn that in the reign of Stephen the

barons had mints in their castles and issued their

own money

^
;

and that forgery produced a coinage

in ten or

so light

and debased that

more
:^

shillings the value of twelve pence could scarcely

be found

also,

that in 1149

Henry

England, struck a

new

coin

when he invaded which obtained the name of the

of Anjou,
all

Duke's money, and that not only he but

bishops,
earls,

the magnates,

and barons, made their own money, but when

^ Castella quippe per singulas provincias studio partium crebra surrexerant, erantque in Anglia quodammodo tot reges, vel potius tyianni, quot domini
'

castellorum, habentes singuli percussurara proprii numismatis, et potestatem

subditis, regio more, dicendi juris
vol.
i,
'

(William of Newburgli, Rolls Series, no, 82,

is:

p.

69

sub anno 1149).

in

"The
crescebat

statement
;

W. Malm,

'Jamque

caritas

annonae

paulatim

pro falsitate difficultas monetee tanta erat ut interdum ex decem Ferebatur ipse rex et eo amplius solidis vix duodecim denarii reciperentur.
et

pondus denariorum, quod fuerat tempore Henrici

quia, exhausto prsedecessoris sui

regis,

alleviari jussisse

immenso

illo tliesauro, tot

militum expensis

nequiret sufficere

'

(a.

1140

Stubbs (Rolls Series, no. 90),

vol. ii, p. 562).

IRREGULAR ISSUES
the

Ixxiii

Duke came (on which occasion it is not quite clear), he put down the coins of the greater part of them.^ There are many coins which vary in legend or design from the
regular issues of the reign, and which from their occurrence in
finds of the

normal coinage or for other reasons must be assigned

It is therefore natural to suppose that
to,

to this period.

some of
is

these represent the baronial issues above referred

but there

great difficulty in so assigning them, owing

partly to the indefinite

information that

is

given us by the Chroniclers of the nature of

In the
first

this irregular coinage.

place

it

is

evident from the

that

passage in William of

Newburgh quoted above

in this case

some barons
profit

usur2)ed the privilege of coining and presumably

issuing light

made

by

and base coins

and

we

should expect their

coins to imitate the types

of the realm,
to differ

and inscriptions of the current coinage

from
it
;

only in quality and weight and

for

perhaps in roughness of execution

by

altering the design they

issues into currency.

would defeat their object of passing their base

It
is

therefore natural to look for baronial

coins

of this class

among

the coarse and light coins described under the regular issues

of the reign,
nos. 142, 143,

and perhaps they may be

illustrated

by such
(e.g.

coins as

144 of the Catalogue, pp. 356-7, and others

the coin

attributed to Watchet, p. 352, no. 113) which combine with lightness

of

weight a coarseness of fabric and an irregularity of lettering

to

which seem
of the

show that the die-engravers were not

officials of

in possession

punches which were used by the

it is

the royal mint.

But from the coins themselves

evident that not only did

strike coins,

Henry and
should
barons,
&c.

his mother, the

Empress Matilda,

Duke as we

expect,

bearing
a

their

own names, but

;

others

bishops,
names
of
it

issued

named coinage
and
others.

such,

for

example, are

Bishop Henry
Ilobert(?),

(presumably of
(1),

Winchester),

Eustace FitzJohn,

William

As

these coins bear the

their issuers
is

and usually

differ in

type from the regular currency,

possible that the privilege of coining

was actually bestowed by

;

tlie

King or the Empress on some

^

of their followers

for a usurp-

Roger of Hoveden

(Rolls Series, no. 51), vol.

i,

p. 211.

Ixxiv

INTRODUCTION

ing authority would be likely to imitate the currency of the realm

in order to

command

a wide currency for the imitations

it

issued.

Further, the circumstances of the Civil

War, and especially the

events of the year 1141,

make

it

probable that the authority of

the royal mint was to some extent impaired, and that the control
of

some

of the

more distant provincial mints,

especially in the

North and West, lapsed during part of

this reign.

The

identification of the coins is very uncertain,

and

it

seems

therefore desirable, having determined, so far as possible, which

coins belong to the regular currency

and

in

what order they may

be placed, to deal separately with

these types, and arrange

all

the coins that differ from

them

so far as possible in groups, for the

purpose of deciding the locality and authority that issued them.

The order
venience
;

in
it is

which the

varieties

are described

is

one of con-

impossible to

make any

scientific classification in

our present lack of knowledge of the time and place of issue

of the majority of them.
classes
I.

They are grouped

in the following

Coins struck from erased obverse Coins with inscription

dies.

II.

PERERIE.

III.

Issues bearing the king's name, of uncertain attribution.

Issues bearing the king's name, of certain, or probable,
localities
:

IV.

A. Midland Counties
;

B. Eastern Counties
district.

C. Scottish or Border Counties

D. York and

V. Coins not issued under the king's name.

It has

been assumed above that the currency of Stephen's reign

may

be divided into seven types, the order of which has been

(see

determined on the evidence of Finds, Mules, and Epigraphy

p. Ixvii),

but some of these types, notably

III,

IV, V, are

known

to

us

by

so

few specimens that

it is

not possible to be certain that each

one represents a distinct type rather than a variety of another.

Of the

first

two types there can scarcely be any doubt, the evidence

sufficiently strong to define

of finds
first

and mules being

them
is

as the

two types

of the reign,

and similarly the

last

type

assured

IRREGULAR ISSUES

IxXV

by

its

occurrence with

Henry

II's coins in

the

Awbridge

find

tlie

intervening types are very uncertain.

There

is

reason to suppose that the duration of the

first

type

of this reign
it

was longer than

usual.

It

was shown above that

of

was not unlikely that the types were changed on the occasion
this took place at
fF.),

some assay or examination corresponding to the Trial of the Pyx,

and that

more or

less

regular intervals of two or

first

three j^ears (see pp. xii

of Stephen

but,

though the imitation of the

in her

type

by the Empress Matilda

show that the

own

coinage does not

till

necessarily

issue of this type continued

1139,^

the fact that the majority of the irregular coinages of the reign

copy the obverse or reverse design of the

probable that this type was
still

first

type makes

it

in issue, or at least prevalent in

currency, as late as 1141, the time of the king's imprisonment and

the greatest confusion in the country.civil

Nor

is it

unlikely that the

wars threw the mint organization out of gear, and that an

first

examination of the coinage was thus impossible, and the

therefore issued for a longer period than usual.
reg-ular coinage of
fineness,

type

Nevertheless, the

the reign retained

its

standard weight and

in this

and

light or base coins are not

;

more frequent

than

in the preceding reigns

such as there are

officials,

may

be explained as the

fraudulent

work

of

the mint

or in

some cases

as the

imitations of baronial mints.

The
2),

tradition quoted

by William

of

Malmesbury

(see p. Ixxii,
is

note

that Stephen reduced the standard

of the coinage,
coins.

therefore not supported

by the evidence

of the

If the issue of the second type

first

had commenced
still

in the i^receding year,

be the prevailing currency, and would therefore be more likely to be imitated by Matilda than the type which was actually being issued at the time of her landing. The use of this type again by Henry of Anjou might be due to his continuing the type adopted by
coins of the

type would probably

his mother.
^

Cf. Brit.

Num.

Jouni., vol.

vii, p.

42.

'

Ixxvi

INTRODUCTION

I.

Coins of Type
are

struck with Erased Obverse Dies.

:

The following coins

known

Form
Mint.

Reverse Inscription.

of Erasure on Obverse.

Wt.

Provenance,

&c.,

and

Notes.

Bristol

Series of cuts, yertical

tal.

23-2

B.

Roth
lot

and horizon-

sale,

(Rashleigh 602, from

1.

Dartford find, 1825).

PI.

LVII.

20-2

W.

C.

Wells
reverse,

(from

same

and

perhaps obverse, die

as preceding).

Norwich

d:om:nor

Plain cross from edge to edge.

B.

Roth and P. W. P.

Carlyon-Britton (formerly Capt. Douglas).

These two coins are

from the same

dies.

d:on[

Plain cross from edge to edge, and additional small cross in second and
fourth angles.

Nottingham Museum Nottingham (from

find, 1880).

*OTiA:0

From same obverse

die (with erasure)
as preceding.

frag-

ment

*EDS[

n:mok
n:nori
^

Plain cross from edge to edge.

17-5

H. M. Reynolds (from

Nottingham
1880).

find,

*OTiBl:i:0

P.

W.

P.

Carlyon-

(formerly Britton Hilton-Price).

This and subsequent

lists

omit coins of which the readings are quite uncertain.

IRREGULAR ISSUES
Form
of Erasure

Ixxvii

Mint.

Reverse Insci'iption.

on

Obverse.

Wt.

Provenance, &e., and

Notes.

Norwich

R:ofi:fio

Plain cross from edge to edge.

21.1

British

Museum,
2.

no.

229.

PL LVII.
Another from
dies

same

P. Carlyon-Britton collection. Others (from different dies) in NotP.

in

W.

tingham
(from
find,

Museum

Nottingham 1880) and B.

collection.

Roth

Norwich?

e:on:iioi

Plain cross from edge to edge, and additional small cross in second (?)

15-0

H. M. Reynolds (from Nottingham find,

1880).

and fourth

angles.

Notting-

ham

*spein:o m:snot:

Small
cross

cross

on

14-17

Several

specimens.

king's face.

The
in

varies

Some from Nottingham and Sheldon

finds. British

form and position, but usually has limbs more or less sometimes patte a pellet is added
;

Museum

fragment, no. 229 A,

and coin from Evans coll., p. 410, no. 229b.

PI.

LVII.

3, 4.

in one angle.

Stamford
j

*L,EFSI*0
Pellet

on each limb

on cross king's shoulder and stroke through Small

shaft of sceptre.

14-8

B.

Roth
PI.

(Rashleigh
5.

sale, lot 605).

LVII.
(a

of reverse cross.

Another from same

dies

fragment,
in

13-8 grs.)

W.

C.

Wells collection. Mr. ^Y. C. Wells has also a

coin (17-7 grs.) struck from the same dies before the erasure of the obverse die and

another obverse

from same and a re-

verse of ordin ary type

(15-2 grs.).

Ixxviii

INTRODUCTION

IRREGULAR ISSUES

Ixxix

In jSfum. Chron., 1881, pp. 42

a large
in
his

ff.,

the same writer

comments on
and,

number

of these coins whicli were

pubHshed by Toplis
pp. 37
fF.)

account of the Nottingham find

(ibid.,

abandoning his former attribution to the Empress, he finds in

them the
struck by

'

Duke's Money

'

of

the

Chroniclers,

that

is,

money

Henry
is

of

Anjou during one

of his visits to England.

This theory

open to the same objection as the previous one,

namely, that they were issued from mints over which the
never had control.
In Hawkins's Silver Coins
probabl}^ struck
(p.

Duke
were

178)
of

it

is

said that 'they

by a partisan

Matilda,

who wished
title
'

to use
this is

Stephen's dies, but not to acknowledge Stephen's

the view that has since been generally held, and in his account
of

the Sheldon

find

(Brit.

Num. Jour a.,

vol.

vii,

pp.

59

fi".)

Mr. Andrew adopts this view and attributes them to various

barons, those of
to

Nottingham

to William Peverel, those of Thetford

Hugh
It is

Bigod, &c.
is

noteworthy, and

elsewhere observed, that the obliterat^

;

ing cross or lines are cut or punched on the die

several duplicates exist,

in pioof of

which

and of the Stamford mint coins are known

not therefore a method of stamping coins

struck from the same obverse die both before and after the erasure

was made upon

of light
reject

it.

It

is

weight or base metal in order to pass them for currency or

it.

them from
is

That the object was

to erase the king's figure

from the die

not so clear; on the Nottingham and Stamford

coins the erasing cross falls not

on the king's
is

face,

but on his

shoulder,

and on the York coin the die

cut on either side of

of the

the king's bust.

One may reasonably doubt whether any

by

barons

who usurped

the privilege of coining would have hazarded

deliberately

the possibility of passing his coins into currency

obliterating the obverse die for the sake of
^

marking his independence

See above,

p. Ixxii.

of the cross on some coins, notably those of Nottingham and Thetford and some of Norwich, I am inclined to believe that a punch was used on others the erasure has evidently been made with
^
;

From the regular form

a cutting instrument.

Ixxx
of the king
;

INTRODUCTION
^

if

he succeeded in capturing coining dies he would

profit

be glad to

make

by issuing

coins

which could be

easily-

passed into currency.

There seems more reason to suppose that

the object of obliterating the dies was to prevent their use in case
of their falling into unscrupulous hands, in just the
dies at the present day,
if

same way as

kept, are obliterated

by some mark upon

I

their surface

in order to
it

prevent their use for forgery.^

dies

am

inclined to believe that

obliterated
;

was by royal authority that the

were

the erasure of the obverse or standard dies would be

sufficient to

put both obverse and reverse dies out of action, and

this

may have

been done at times when the mints were in danger

of falling into the enemy's hands.

Nottingham, for example, was

in 1138 held

by Peverel

for the Empress, but he seems to

have

come over

to

Stephen in 1139, at the time that Stephen

of

ratified

Queen Matilda's treaty with Henry

Empress

Northumberland at Notfound on

tingham, for from this time until he surrendered his castle to the
in 1141 as the price of his personal freedom, he is

the King's side.^

in

The sacking

of the

town by Robert

of Gloucester

1140 or 1141 miofht have caused the authorities of the mint to

obliterate their standard dies in fear of their falling into the Earl's

hands.

Assuming the

dies to

have been obliterated for

this purpose,

the question remains,

obliteration
?

by whom were they put The majority of the coins are

into use after the

of

low weight,

14-17 grains, and

of base silver
;

many

certainly have the appearance of being

:

but some are undoubtedly of good weight

Bristol coin, if the Rashleigh Sale Catalogue is correct, weighs

23-2 grs., the

Norwich coin

in the British

Museum weighs

21-1

grs.,.

and the British Museum coin of uncertain mint weighs 20 -6 grs.; some,
too, are certainly of excellent silver, as, for
^

example, the Norwich

;

Mr. Andrew sees in the Nottingham crosses a personal badge I think is not too early a date for such a use of heraldic devices, a baron would not impose his badge upon a die in such a way as to deface the coins which he hoped to pass into currency. ^ See Num. Chron., 1915, pp. 105 fF. ^ Ramsay, Foundations of England, vol. ii, p. 394. But Peverel's position is
that, even if this

very

difficult to

follow (see Brit.

is

Num.

Journ., vol.
;

of the sacking of Nottingham

also uncertain

The date vii, pp. 61 ff.). 1141 seems the more probable.

IRREGULAR ISSUES
coin mentioned above,

Ixxxi
grs.

which weighs 21'1

fell

While one would

naturally suppose that the dies

into the hands of the king's

enemies, and were turned to good account

by the

issue of light
dies,

and base

coins, in spite of the erasure of the

standard

one can
piece

hardly believe that so good a coin as the British

of

Museum

Norwich was issued by a usurping authority.

It is not

im-

possible that, the king's enemies

having succeeded in passing into

circulation the light coins in spite of their defaced obverses, the

king's

own moneyers

at other mints

which had not been captured,

or on the recapture of their implements, saved themselves expense

by following the example

of their enemies

and bringing back into

use dies which they had themselves erased.^

The uneven quality

of the coins of this series increases the difficulty of its solution,

which

is

at present merely conjectural.

Xiirii.

In Brit.
of

Journ., vol.

vii, p.

66, Mr.

Andrew

describes coins

Nottingham which have the obverse

out.

inscription

curiously

stamped

As he
same

points out, the

die
;

marks are not uniform on

coins from the

the obliteration

was

therefore not on

the die

itself.

It occurs occasionally on the reverse instead of

the obverse, and

may

perhaps be attributed to uneven flans or

faulty striking rather than a deliberate obliteration of the king's

name on
I
(PI.

the coins.
collection

have inserted here a coin of York in Mr. Roth's

LVII.

7)

this differs from the other coins in being struck

is

from dies of extremely rough workmanship, and perhaps

the
lines

work

of a forger's dies,

which had been obliterated by the two

for striking false coins.

cut on the obverse,

and again used

Or the contrary may have been the

case, i.e. the

king having ordered his

own
this

obliterated dies to be used in spite of the obliteration, barons were able,

dies, to issue coins struck

on getting possession of obliterated

is

from them.

But

obviously less likely.

Ixxxii

INTRODUCTION

11.

Coins of Type

with Obverse Inscription

:

PEI^EKIE

etc.

The following coins are known

Mint.

IKREGULAR ISSUES

Ixxxiii

Mint.

IxXXiv

INTRODUCTION

Earl of Derby than to the Earl of

Warwick
pp. 81

coins struck at so

many
*

mints, including

London and Canterbury.

vii,
fF.,

In Brit.

Hum.

Journ., vol.

Mr. Andrew says

could have been

Obviously the only person in whose

name money

issued at mints spread nearly all over the country

and

the

list

would probably be extended

tion on the

if

we had
is

not to rely for our informa-

mere accident

of discovery

was either Stephen himself

and
reads
front

or the Empress Matilda.

Stephen

ruled out as impossible, for his

name and
remains.'

title

have no break in their sequence, and so Matilda

In the inscriptions

a lopped form of the

PERERIEM^ he word IMPERATRIEIS, commencing in

PERERIE

of the king's face with a cross inserted

by the shoulder

in imitation

of the current coins of Stephen.

in the evolution, ingenious

Apart from the

it is,

difficulty that I find

though

of this puzzling inscription

from the title 'Imperatricis', I

am unable to agree with

Mr. Andrew's

original proposition that coins struck at all these mints can be attri-

buted to the Empress.

Her career in England was,

in brief, this

she

landed at Arundel in 1139 (Sept. 30) and was given by Stephen

a safe-conduct to

Bristol.

On

Oct. 15 she

moved

to Gloucester.

Her movement from

(Feb. 2, 1141)
;

the west dates from the battle of Lincoln

Robert of Gloucester brought Stephen a prisoner to

;

her at Gloucester, she sent him on to Bristol

she then advanced to

Cirencester (Feb. 13), where she negotiated with Henry, Bishop of

Winchester, the Legate (Feb.

16).

On March

2 she

met the Legate

again at Wherwell, near Andover, and made terms for securing the
throne
;

the following day she arrived at Winchester and

was there

blessed, the
'

crown was handed

'

to her,

and she had

lierself jDro-

claimed Lady and Queen

of England.

For Easter (March 30) she

castle to
'

went
her.

to Oxford,

where Robert d'Oilly surrendered the

On

April 7-8 a Synod at Winchester declared her

Lady

of

England and Normandy'.

On

April

9-10 the deputation of

Londoners arrived at Winchester and demanded the release of their

He

also gives the reading

PERERIEI.

It

appears to be a misreading of
is

a Lincoln coin, on Avhich the final letter of the obverse inscrij^tion

to be

shown

by another specimen from the same

dies.

IRREGULAR ISSUES

IXXXV
of*

king without actually opposing the decision in favour were made to win the Londoners

Matilda

Matilda proceeded to Reading and St. Albans, and in the meantime

efforts
;

in

May
last

she was joined

by

King David

of Scotland (presumably to assist at her coronation).

24, the

few days before June

;

Londoners at

gave in and were

induced to receive her

they conducted her to Westminster.

She

demanded a subsidy from the Londoners, refused a request

the good laws of the Confessor, and

to grant

by her general demeanour

roused hostility

in the meantime,

Queen Matilda and William of

hostile to the Empress,

Ypres had been raising an army in Kent, and on their approach

to the city the Londoners,

now thoroughly

opened the gates to them on June 24.

The Empress escaped

to

Oxford, having already alienated the Legate by refusing to secure

Stephen's
sons
in

their

father's

continental possessions.

Earl

Robert failed to reconcile the Legate, and the Empress entered

Winchester with an armed force (July 31) and besieging the

Bishop was herself besieged in turn by Queen Matilda and William
of

Ypres

the Empress escaped (Sept. 14) through Ludgershall and

Devizes to Gloucester; Earl Robert w^as taken prisoner and ex-

changed for Stephen.

Stephen, set free at Bristol on Nov.

1,

went

to Winchester

and London (Dec), and held the Christmas

;

crown-wearing at Canterbury
a royal progress to

in

March-April,

1 142,

he

made

York

via Ipswich and Stamford.

The Empress

spent the winter, 1141-2, at Oxford, going at the end of March,

1142, to

Devizes,

whence she sent an embassy

;

to her husband,

urging him to come over

he sent over the young Duke Henry,

who landed

at Bristol in the late

autumn.

From September

to

December, 1142, the Empress was besieged by Stephen at Oxford,

and at Christmas escaped by night to Abingdon and thence to

Wallingford.

After this she returned to her old quarters at Bristol

and Gloucester, and ceased to play a prominent part in the war, which dragged on for the next five years it was carried on by
;

Robert of Gloucester on behalf of Henry of Anjou.^

1148, she left

In February,

England

for ever.

See below, pp. cxxvi

f.

IxXXVi

INTRODUCTION
is

This bald statement of the movements of the Empress

to

sufficient

show the
It is

difficulty of attributing this series to her.

all to

noteworthy that these coins seem

differing

be of good weight
issues

and of good metal, thus

of the period

from most of the irregular

and notably from the coins bearing the

title of

the

Empress
regular

also,

they are struck from dies evidently made in the

the
official

way with

coining-irons.

These points, together

that, if

with the issue

issued

of the coins from the London mint, show

by the Empress, they were issued

'

after

March

3,
'

1141,

when

she proclaimed herself

the

crown

at Winchester.

Lady and Queen of England and received Though she was only admitted to
it is

London

for a very

few days,

not beyond the bounds of possi-

bility that in that time the mint

officials

had come over

to her
;

and

accepted her orders for her

title to

be placed on the coins

is

Bristol

was her own stronghold, and though there

were struck there for Stephen (Catalogue,
is

evidence that coins

2),

p. 335, no.

the mint
too, coins

likely to

have

fallen into her hands.

At Winchester,

might conceivably have been struck in her

as
'

name

after her acceptance

Lady
is

of

England

'.

At Canterbury,

Lincoln, and Stamford the

case

otherwise.

Though

the castle at Canterbury

was

in 1135 in

the hands of Robert of Gloucester's

to Stephen

men and they refused admittance

on his arrival in England, the mint of Canterbury was

evidently in his hands at this period (Catalogue, pp. 336-7, nos. 9-16),

and there
of the

is

no reason to suppose that

;

it

ever
it

fell

into the hands

this part of the

Empress

she never went there, and

loj^al to

was

country that was most

Stephen's Queen and raised the

24, 1141.

troops which she led into

London on June

Lincoln Castle

was apparently
to

seized

by Ealph

of Chester in 1140; the

town was
Stephen

sacked and burnt after the battle of Lincoln, but the castle seems

have remained intact and was surrendered by Ralph

is

to

in 1146; Matilda never held Lincoln, and there

no reason to
Finally, so

suppose that she could ever have struck coins there.

far as

we

know, Stamford was always in the King's hands, and

only surrendered to Henry in 1153.

The quality and the extent

of the issue of

PERERIE

coins seem

IBKEGULAR ISSUES
to sliow that

Ixxxvii

they must for a period have constituted the true

it is

coinage of the realm, though

giV)le title

difficult to

explain the unintelli-

on coins which are of good quality and no worse executed

than any other of the reign.

During Stephen's captivity there was

the

much

confusion and

uncertainty throughout the country;

barons secured their position by supporting the side which fortune

seemed to favour or which offered them the highest price

support, and some at least of the ecclesiastics,
if

for their

we can

accept

William of Malmesbury's statement, attached themselves to the

Empress after obtaining Stephen's permission

position of a
selves

to temporize.
;

The

moneyer was

as difficult as anyone's

the coins themof the side

which he issued constituted a public declaration

;

wliich he supported

and as soon

as the King's imprisonment

it

and

the Empress's recognition

by the clergy made

clear that, for

a time at least, she would be on the throne, the issue of coins with

Stephen's
reverse
If,

name on the obverse and the moneyer 's name on

the

was

irrefutable evidence of his disloyalty to the Empress.

on the other hand, Stephen should later obtain his freedom

to

and regain the throne,

have struck coins in the name of the

of disloyalty to the

Empress would equally convict a moneyer

King.
I

am

therefore inclined to believe

that

the

moneyers

temporized as the clergy did, and that the inscription

PERERIE

was deliberately substituted

to be unintelligible then as of

for the King's

it is

name and was intended

to us.

'The coins are well struck,

good weight and of good metal, their circulation among an

public would therefore not be deterred by the change

illiterate

of the obverse inscription, whereas,

on examination of the
were not struck
still

coins,

either party could be satisfied that they

in the

name

of the other.

Loudon would probably

impose the form

;

of die adopted in some, at least, of the provinces

and that

fact

would account for the uniformity of

very
difficult to

this meaningless title, a thing

it is

explain on the theory that

It
is

merely a blundered

form of Tmperatrlcis.
with the inscription
struggle between

curious that in the Danish coins

issued apparently during the
for the throne of

lOANSTREX,

Magnus and Swein

Denmark

IxXXViii

INTRODUCTION

in 1044-7,

we have

a possible parallel to this use of a meaningless

inscription^ (see Hauberg, Myntforliold og

Udmyntninger

Dan-

marl;

p. 49,

and PL VIII, 1-7)

.^

Sir

Arthur Evans, in his presidential address to the Royal Numismatic

inscriptions.
ff.

Society (Nhdi. Chroii., 1915, Proceed in/js, p. 37), threw some light on the origins
of the
^

PERERIE and lOANSTREX

Num.
Chruii.,

have recently had an opportunity He argues that the Archbishop of Canterbury, after declaring himself on the side of the Empress, would have issued his coins under her name, and that Lincoln under Ralph of Chester, then her partisan, was also likely to issue her coins further,
See also
1915, pp. 109
I

of obtaining a clearer view of Mr. Andrew's opinion and argument.

moneyer of this date was time-serving than in assigning a coinage of the Empress to such mints as Cantei'bury, Lincoln, and Stamford. He does not, however, attach much importance to the mints and thinks that the issue may prove more extensive than is at present known. It seems that we are agreed as to the date of the issue and in considering it the regular coinage of the realm for a few months in 1141. Mr. Andrew holds that Matilda's i^osition was at this
that no less difficulty lies in assuming, for example, that a Bristol

time considered so strong and her attainment of the throne so certain that she was generally accepted throughout the country and her coinage therefore he sees in the obverse legend a corissued by most of the principal mints ruption due to a misunderstanding by the die-engraver of an original order in which the title was written in abbreviated script. Though perhaps I should modify the conclusion that I have drawn above from the mints of this issue, I have left unaltered what I had written before I fully understood Mr. Andrew's argument or appreciated how nearly we were for I feel that the attribution to Stephen or to in agreement in some respects the Empress must at present be left an open question, and that the decision depends mainly on the historical evidence. From the numismatic point of view I cannot i^ersuade mj'self to accej)t Mr. Andrew's interpretation of the inscription, but my own suggestion is not free from difficulty. On the historical side I doubt whether Matilda was even at this time so universally accepted or her power so extensive as this coinage would imply if assigned to her authority.
;

That all hope of the King's release was never abandoned is shown most clearly by the obstinacy of the Londoners and by the attitude of the men of Kent who, even when the Londoners accepted the Empress, were enrolling themselves under Stephen's Queen. I do not agree with Mr. Andrew that the 'temporizing' of the clergy was merely a question of obtaining release from their oath for conscience sake. I think that they and many of the barons were safeguarding
themselves for the future in view of a possible return of the King to power.

IRREGULAR ISSUES

Ixxxix

III.

Issues beaeixg the King's Name, of uncertain

ATTEIBUTION.
1.

Similar to type

I,

but very large bead eitber to

1.

or

r.,

and

of very

coarse work.

Obverse.

XC

INTRODUCTION

swords, or truncheon-shaped clubs.

that
it

Mr. Andrew has suggested

represents the Host, radiate, elevated on a monstrance, and

this is perhaps a
I

more probable
is

interpretation.

The

coin,

which

believe
;

is is

unique,

of

good weight, and apparently of good

metal

one

at a loss to account for so strange a variety in place

of the usual sceptre.

As regards the

lettering

and

style there is

nothing unusual about the coin except the rounded form of the
letter
3.

C on

the reverse.
I,

As type

but

witli

a large rosette of pellets at the end of the

obverse inscription.
Obv.

II'T'IEFN
grs.

AV..

*BRIHTPII1[
no. 236.

Wt. 16-6

British

Museum,

PI.

LVIII.

3.

The

style

and lettering of

this coin are similar to those of the

ordinary

issues,

but the weight rather points to the coin being a

forgery, perhaps
foi"

made by a mint

official.

One can

give no reason
;

the stamping of the rosette of pellets on the die

p.

cf.

following
I (h).

coin and
4.

xcv, no. Ill 8

r.,

(b),

also p. cxxi,

Henry of Anjou, type

Obv. Bust to

rosette of pellets in front of forehead; inscription,

:

beginning above crown

Jiev.

Q^TEPf
;

Cross pattee, three pellets at end of each liinb, in each angle a mullet
inscription

of six points; beaded inner circle

lA/'BEKTIONr
no. 237.

Wt. 16-3

grs.

(good metal?).

British

Museum,

PL LVIII.
its

4.

This coin seems to be a contemporary imitation, with

obverse

type copied from the type of the reign.

It

first

type and the reverse from the second

is

The

lettering

somewhat coarsely worked.

was found

in

a chalk pit at Winterslow, near Salisbury, with

(1),

a few coins of Stephen, types I

II (2 pennies, 2 halves), III

(1),

and some baronial and irregular

It therefore

issues (see above, pp. xxx-xxxi).

probably belongs to a later period than most of the

irregular coins here described.

5.

As type

I,

but with an annulet enclosing a pellet in place of each

ileur-de-lys
cross.

on the reverse, and an annulet at the end of each limb of the

shoulder.

The obverse has an annulet on the

blundered
PI.

1'Q|5TIE[
grs.

Reverse inscription

and uncertain.
5.

Wt. 15-9

British

Museum,

no. 238.

LVIII.

IRREGULAR ISSUES
This coin
is

XCl

of veiy coarse

work (more

especially the reverse),

sort,

and

is

no doubt a contemporary forgery of some

perhaps one

of the

many

that are said to have been struck by the barons at

their castles.

G.

Ohv. As type

I,

but

Avitli

plain

domed

oroAvu without lleurs

au

annulet on the shoulder.

Rev.

*i<t^TlE[
and
Beaded outer and plain inner

On

a sliort cross voided a quadrilateral ^vith incurved sides

a pellet at each angle

circle.

and

in the centre.

itOt^BER[

]X:
British

AVt. 17-G grs. (clipped?).

Museum,

no. 239.

PI.

LVIII.

6.

This coin came from

xxvii),

tlie

smaller Watford find (see above, pp. xxvi,

first

and must therefore be contemporary with the

Apart from the
lettering,

type of

the reign.
liar,
is

peculiarities noted, the style is not pecu-

and the

though small (corresponding to Series VIII),

It

apparently worked on the die with the ordinary punches.

impossible
;

is

to
it

account for this

deviation

from the regular

reverse type

cannot be treated as a separate type of the reign,

first

or as a mule of the the

and an unknown second type, because and

this coin, occurring

Watford, Dartford, and Linton finds prove unquestionably

first

which are the

in the

two types

of the reign,

smaller Watford find, must have been in currency confirst

temporarily with the

type,

and previous to the

issue of the

second type.

It is certainly

an irregular issue of some kind, but

it is

by whom

it

was
I,

issued,

and where,

impossible to say.

7.

As type

but on the obverse the collar

;

is

represented by annulets
is

instead of pellets

on the reverse the cross moliue

voided and has an

annulet in the centre and at the end of each limb.

Obverse.

Reverse.

wt.
16-7 17-4

Provenance, &c.

*BTErNER *t^ANSOH: ON ANT Ex

British

Museum,
7.

nos. 240, 241.

PL LVIII.

XCll

INTRODUCTION

Obverse.

'

IRREGULAR ISSUES

XCIU

or on other coins of this reign, and I see no reason to imagine so

harsh a combination of letters and so unparalleled an obscuring

of the mint-name.

The natural attribution

is

of

the coins
'

is

to

Southampton, which
(cf.

variously spelt

'

Hamtune

or

'

Amtune

William

I,

nos. 138, 369),

first

but the occurrence of so many- dies

of

on which

the

three

letters

the mint read invariably

/VNT
as
'

causes considerable doubt

'

whether so unusual a form

Anton

for

Southampton can

really be intended.^
is

curious feature of these coins

that the finds in which they

first

occur show that, though they obviously use Stephen's

for their model,

type

they were not only in issue with the early currency

of

Henry

II but

were

first

put into circulation

after, or

very shortly

before, the

first

type of Stephen was superseded at the royal

finds in

mints.

The only

which they have been recorded are the

;

Linton and Awbridge finds

at

Linton four pennies and two

halfpennies were found with seven coins of

forty of Stephen's
coins with the
first,

Henry

I's last

type,

and thirty-nine of
inscription
;

his second type,

and two

PERERIE

in the

Awbridge

find three

specimens are noted, with thirty-one of Stephen's last issue and

110 of Henry
so late a
l)ut

II's first ('Tealby')

coinage.

Their occurrence in

hoard

may

possibly be due to the locality of the find,

finds.

none are recorded in the Watford, Dartford, or Sheldon

first

It

seems therefore that they

of

made
II,

their appearance during

the issue

Stephen's second type, and that their circulation

continued into the reign of

Henry

when no

other coins of

Stephen's reign except those of his last issue found their

a hoard.

way

into

One can only

of the
captivity,

conjecture that these coins are the

work

of one

magnates who was

powerful at the period of Stephen's

to the

and held

his

power down

end of the reign

but in

face of the difficulty of determining the

mint at which they were

struck,

it is

impossible to hazard even a guess at the issuer of this

castles

money. There were several barons who strengthened their

in the time of the civil war,

and held them

'

until the peace of

On

the other hand,

'

Northantona occurs in the Pipe

Rolls.


INTRODUCTION

Wallingford in 1153, and even

in 1155
;

later, till

Henry

II

put them down

such were Henry, Bishop of Winchester, William Peverel,

Roger of Hereford,
or demolished

Hugh

of Mortimer,

whose

castles

were

all

taken

by King Heniy

in 1155,

Ralph

of Chester,

who

died in 1153, and

distinct
class,

many

others.

These

coins,

more than any other

expect in a
of the confusion
first

fulfil

the conditions which

we should

coinage issued

by a baron who took advantage

;

of the country to usurp this j)rivilege

they were probably

issued

by him when the

first

type of Stephen was the most

frequent in circulation, and that type was adopted as a model,

or,

possibly, the similar

(b))

issue

of

Henry

(cf.

Henry

of

Anjou,

type I

:^

they were issued of base metal and light weight, the

skilful

dies being

worked by an engraver who was not a very

officials of

workman, and evidently was not

used by the

in possession of the instruments

the royal mint.

it

Having originated
by

his type,

he continued to employ

even after the original ceased to be

later types.

issued and was superseded

is

in currency

The method

simply one of organized forgery, and cannot be distinguished

forger, except that perhaps the

from the work of an ordinary

baron's
control
of

the

neighbouring

country put

him

in

an

advantageous position for the circulation of his

military power secured him from punishment

coins,

and his

in case of discover}^.

From

this point of

view

it

is

apparent that, as the obverse type

as a model, so too on the reverse

and legend use a genuine coin

the legend as well as the type
the actual place of issue.
8 ().

may be

copied and

may not

represent

As type

I,

but with long cross fleury superimposed on the cross

inoline of the reverse, dividing the legend.

obv.
F^ev.

1S[

]EFNER^
\ril

SIM
B. Pioth,

ONE

11 E
dies.

two coins from the same

PI.

LVIII.

9.

Perhaps of Exeter.
punches of the period.

These coins are of good work made with the usual

But in

this case there

seems no reason to change the obverse

title to

that

of Stephen.

IRREGULAR ISSUES
(h) Similar,

XCV

but a small quadrilateral lleury takes the place of the

original cross moline of the reverse type.

Obv.

Rev.

ODV
^^'t.

INEK^V (retrograde). INAZ-B OOliiX[

Xum. Journ. ,\ol.
p. cxxi,
vii, p.

16 grs. Sheldon find {Brit.

51, no. 74).

Of very coarse work, not made with ordinary punches.

pellets of. p. xc, nos. Ill 3

For the rosette of

{b).

and III

4,

and

Henry

of Anjoii, type I

IV.

Varieties grouped geogra.phically.

A.

Midland

Counties.

(a)

As type

I,

but having long cross fleury superimposed on the cross

Similar in type to variety

moline of the reverse, dividing the legend.

III 8 (a) above, but quite different in style,

Obv. Rev.

RE AHG c ICD Ell^XA ERC

*.taT
M't. 17-3 grs.

Aand
B.

British

Museum,

no. 244,

Roth (same

dies).

PI.

See Brit.

LVIII. 10. Xum. Journ.,

vol. v, p. 440,

and

vol.

vii,

pp. 54
;

and

82,

where these coins are assigned to Alexander, Bishop of Lincoln

be
little

there can

doubt that they Avere struck at Newark.

(b)

Obv.

Rude head

r.,

sceptre in front.

Iiei\

Short cross voided, in

each angle a bird.

Obverse.

XCVl
(c)

INTRODUCTION
Obv.

Rude head
J^ev.

r.,

sceptre

in

front (very similar to preceding

it

variety).

Short cross voided, over

a saltire fleury.

Obv.
Rev.

^tSTEPHANVSRex
*.R/VINALD-ONBTOWt. 14-9
PI.
grs.

British
13.
is

Museum,

no. 246.

LVIII.

The reading of the mint

uncertain

it

may

be either

t^TO

(Nottingham) or tST"\/' (Stutesbery or Tutbury?),

vol. V, p. 440.

see Brit.

Num. Journ.,

Of the three
III 8

varieties

above described and attributed to the

bears the

Midland Counties, the

(rt),

first

same type
it

as a

variety,
it

of the indeterminate issues, but

difiers

from

in the

very coarse fabric and poor weight of

is

tlie

coins.

The

lettering
varieties.

very similar in style to that of the other two Midland

These other two varieties are even more closely connected, for
they are identical in style of design and lettering on obverse and
reverse, the only difference being the placing of a bird in each

angle of the cross in the Derby coins, and a fleured saltire over
the cross on the Nottingham or Tutbury coin
this coin to
;

the attribution of

Nottingham or Tutbury must be

left uncertain.

B.
[a)

Eastern Counties.
coai'se

As type

I,

but of very

work, and having on the reverse

a broad cross with a pellet at the end of each limb and in each angle,

superimposed on the cross moline.

Obverse.

IRREGULAR ISSUES

XCVII

Obverse.

XCVlll

INTRODUCTION

C.

Scottish or

Border Counties

(?).

{a) Obi\

As obyerse

of type I of Stephen, bearing title of Earl Henry.

Rev. Cross crosslet, in each angle a cross pattee suspended from

a crescent resting on the inner

circle.

See Catalogue, p. 397.

Obverse.

Reverse.

Wt.
22-8

Provenance, &c.

*H-EMCi:CO
01111:1
Same
die as preceding.

British jMuseum,
no. 287.

*:^w^ilel:m:

20-5

11.

M. Reynolds.

ohci:b (or f) ?):

PI.

LIX.

1.

]EHCi:SOM *:>^ilel:m:
oici:i

23-0
17-6

British

Museum,
289,

pierced' nos.

288,

from same rev. clipped (and obv. ?) die.

*MEMCi:CO!
*h:K[
]h

*[

]El:m:o
(01

15'6

British

Museum,

iici:B

broken

no. 290.

*^W^ILEL:f[l

f
A

(or?):

14-8 British Museum, clipped no. 291.

coin of the type of Stephen's first issue of distinct Scottish

style (thus differing from similar coins of

Henry

of Anjou)

may

also be attributed to the Earl

it is

illustrated in Burns,

Coinage

of Scotland, PI. III. 24 a.

The

inscriptions seem to be

"iiHEN

FICVS
The
coin

and

*EREB[
in the

]:

It

should probably be

attributed to Carlisle, and was presumably struck by Earl Henrj'in virtue of his possession of the

town between 1136 and

1139.

was found

Bute hoard.

IRREGULAR ISSUES
(b)

XCIX

Same type

as () above.

jiev.

*:^vyAixELM:oH:oD(orBoci
AVt. 21-0
lot

and 19-3

grs.

IT.

^I.

Reynolds and Rashleigh

2.

sale,

G13 (same

dies).

PL LIX.

Atti-ibuted by Mr.
Belford),

Lawrence

to Outchester (2| miles south-east of

where the find of the Earl Henry coins occurred.

(c)

As type

I of

Stephen, but on the reverse a long cross voided

is

superimposed on the cross moline.

Obverse.

INTRODUCTION

A coin of the ordinary type of

these in style, reads
ohv.

Stephen's

first issue,

but resembling

^BTetHeii:
*FOBlIlD:OIl.D\/'NI.Dm
AVt. 15-2 grs.
S.

Rev.

M. Spink (Rashleigh

sale, lot 608).

:

Another, similar, in Nottingham Museum, reads

Eev.

]nd:oh:d\/'H[
d),

(e)

Similar to preceding (var.

but the annulets on reverse take the

at the base of each

place of the spikes of the fleurs,

and an annulet occurs

cross.

fleur as well as at the end of each limb of

No

star

on obverse.

Ohv. Illegible.
Rev.

>iilIHDIHEDON:El
\7i.

18-6

grs.

British

Museum,

no.

253,

and Nottingham

Museum

(same rev. (and obv.

PI.

?) die).

LIX.
coins

6.

The bulk
Outchester.

of Earl Henry's

(variety a)

were found in
all

There

is

an obvious temptation to see in

three varieties (CI:TH,

these

mint-readings of the

first

OTHCI, OCCAIT,
them
to

CAST)

different

forms of the name of this same place, Outchester,

near Belford.

At

least

one

may

confidently attribute

this neighbourhood.

There seems no reason

to

doubt the attribution of variety

(a) to

Henry, the son of King David of Scotland, who was created Earl
of Northumberland

by Stephen

in 1139.

The obverse resembles

in

style the Scottish coinage,

and the irregular broad

;

flans correspond

more

to the Scottish than the English fabric

but their probable

issue in the north of

England brings them within the scope of the

English coinage, and they are here described

bearing Stephen's
the other varieties.

among

varieties

name

in order
(6)

to

show

their connexion with

Variety

has the appearance of a mule

from a reverse die of Henry of Northumberland and an obverse

die

with name of Stephen which belongs to the coinage of either

(c)

variety

or variety

{d).

Apart from the more general resem-

IRREGULAR ISSUES

CI

blance of the inscription and type of this obverse to that of the

two
letter

later

varieties,

the
I

peculiarity of the

form used

for

the

(!>>>),

which

have not found on any but these

coins,

shows an intimate connexion between them.

Varieties
(c)

and

(d)

are closely connected

by the

style

and

lettering of the obverse and, as above mentioned,

more especially

by the peculiar form

variety
(c)

of

the letter R.
all

The mint-readings of
the coins of variety
(d),

are suggestive of Outchester;

including the coin described above which differs only in style from

Stephen's

first

type, bear a
;

mint-name
(e)

DVNI

which seems
;

likely to be

Durham

var.

is

closely similar to var. (d)

the

mint reads EI, which

is

quite uncertain.
coins
is

The curious feature about these

coins of the varieties
(c), (d), (e),

the connexion of the

which bear the name of Stephen,

of

with those of variety

(a)

which bear the name

Henry, son of
{b).

David, by means of the intermediate issue described as variety

In January, 1136, King David crossed the border and took

Carlisle,

Wark, Norham, Alnwick, and Newcastle, but

Stephen, arriving at

failed to

capture Bamborough.

Durham on

Feb.

5,

saved this city from falling into David's hands^ and by large
concessions

made

peace,

conferring

on

Henry
to
;

the earldom
of

of

Huntingdon with Doncaster and

conquests being restored.

Carlisle,

the rest

David's

Henry

did

homage

Stephen at York,
he then followed

presumably on behalf of his English estates

Stephen to London to
assist at

Queen Matilda's coronation, where

the precedence which was assigned to

him caused great

it

indignation,

and the Earl

of Chester

was

so offensive that

was some time

In

before David allowed his son to return to the English court.

1138 Henry was with his father's army, which invaded England

and was defeated at the Battle of the Standard, when Henry was

make his way independently to Carlisle. In 1139 a peace was arranged at Durham by Queen Matilda and ratified at Nottingham by Stephen,
cut off after a successful advance on the wing and had to

and Henry received from Stephen the earldom of Northumberland,

with the exception of Bamborough and Newcastle, he withdrawing

Cll

INTKODUCTION

his authority

from the lands of

St.

Cuthbert and of

St.

Andrew's,

Hexham. Henry remained

him
In the following year
attempt on his
life

for Easter with Stephen

and accompanied
life.

in an expedition against Ludlow,

when

the King saved his

we hear on

his return to Scotland of

an

by the Earl of Chester, which was frustrated by

In 1147

the escort given him by Stephen.

we

are told that the

only district of England in the enjoyment of peace was that beyond

the Tees, which was under the
his father at Carlisle, at

sway

of Earl Henry.

He was with

Whitsun, 1149,^ at the knighting of Henry

of Anjou.

He

died in 1153.
issue (var. 6)

The intermediate

must have been struck

If
it

either

by
his

Stephen or by the Earl Henry.

was struck by Stephen,

adoption of the type of the Earl's coinage must imply the capture

by Stephen

of

some place

in

which the

Earl's coinage
difficulties
:

was previously

issued or current.(1)

This presents two

What

object would Stephen have in using the type of the

?

Earl's coinage

In the event of one of the King's mints falling

into the hands of one of the barons, one

would naturally suppose

that the baron would

turn it to his profit

by striking base coin

with the King's die

the King, on the other hand, could not have

any reason
the people

for using the Earl's die or copying his type, unless

of that

district

were more familiar with the Earl's

it

coinage and would more readily accept

than the current coin of

Stephen.
(2)

Did Stephen

at

any time capture a town

his

in

which Henry of
?

Northumberland had
invasion, that
of

mint or issued his currency

The

first

1136, was met by the

fall of

arrival of Stephen at

Durham, which saved the

the city

peace was immediately

beginning of 1138, was

concluded without any advance of Stephen into the country held

by the

Scottish.

The

second,

at

the

a plundering raid which advanced as far as the Tyne, but withSee below,
cxxv.

p.

The opposite case (that the coinage was originally Stephen's, and that Henry captured a reverse die and made an obverse of his own to pair with it) does not seem possible, because the coinage is more akin to the Scottish than the English, and is therefore supposed to have been originated by the Earl.
'^

IRREGULAR ISSUES

CUl
;

drew

to

Wark on
hostilities

Stephen's

approach

Stephen,

instead

of

attacking the invading army,

shire,

made a

counter-raid into Berwick-

and

were abandoned at Lent.

The

third invasion,
into Yorkshire
;

in July of the

same year, pushed through Durham

and ended
retreated,

in the defeat of the Scots at Northallerton

off

the Scotsserious-

some being cut

on the way, but there was no

pursuit.

Thus

it is

clear that

Stephen did not on any of these occasions,

his-

push a serious attack into the territory of the Scottish king or

son
;

his raid into

Berwickshire in reply to the second Scottisli

invasion seems to have been a mere raid and not to have involved
the capture of any towns.
for Stephen's concessions^

At the truce

of 1136 David, in retura

in-

gave up the country conquered by him

is

the North of England

but the coinage of Earl Henry

almost

certain to have been struck

of

by him after the grant of the earldom

Northumberland
I

in 1139.

am

inclined

to

believe

that

Earl

Henry

in the first place

issued a coinage in the

name

of Stephen.

We know

that after he

received his earldom of Huntingdon

in 1136 he paid

homage

to

Stephen at York, and again in 1139, as Earl of Northumberland,

he was attached to Stephen's court and fought for him at Ludlow.
It is impossible to

say by what right he issued coins

;

perhaps in
title

view of his earldom of Northumberland

but the occurrence of his

reverse type with an obverse bearing Stephen's

name and

seems to me, for the reasons given above, to indicate that he began
his issue in the his

name

of

Stephen and

later replaced that

name by

own.
consideration
of

In

the

very close

connexion which exists

between the
all

five varieties of Class C, I

am

inclined to attribute

the coins of this class to the Earl of Northumberland, though

is

such an attribution
nature.

of course

of a conjectural

and tentative
be

In this case the

first issue
{e),

of the Earl will probably

the coins of varieties {d) and

which imitate the coinage of

;

Stephen both
variety
{c),

in type

and inscriptions

the second issue will be

style of lettering

which shows a variety of the type and

CIV

INTRODUCTION
his

which approximates more nearly to that of

third issue will be the variety
is first
(b),

named

coins

the

where an original reverse type

still

used and his dependency on the English king

;

acknow-

ledged

and the fourth and

last the variety (),

on which the Earl's

difficulty
;

name
lies

is

substituted for that of Stephen.

The greatest
all

in the obscurity of the mint-names

upon

these coins

even

the attribution to

Durham

of the coins

which

have suggested
anj'^

may
the

be the earliest struck by

the Earl

is

not by

means certain

though he

may

possibly have struck coins at

is

Durham about

year 1141, when his presence there

proved by his charter to the

Scottish Charters, cxxxiii)

monks
and

of

Coldingham (Lawrie, Early

his influence

attempt to seize the bishopric

by the part he played during William Cumyn's But too (cf. o^;. cit.^ pp. 366-70).
placed on the inscriptions of the two

much importance must not be

varieties {d)

and

(e).

The
;

coins are all of light weight and appa-

rently of base metal

issued,

this coinage therefore,

by whomsoever

it

was

seems to have been a usurped privilege akin to forgery,

(p. xciv),

and, as I showed above

a baron

who was

issuing a base

coinage would have no reason to put the names of his mint and

moneyer upon the

would be as

coins,

and the reverse

inscription of his

model
In the

likely to be copied as that of the obverse.

present instance, some coins of variety {d) have what seem to

be either ornaments or meaningless letters at the end of the

reverse
inscription,
fill

and

this

may

perhaps be explained as an

attempt to

up a space where the coin that served as a model

could not be read.

With the other

and

issues the case is different

the

coins of the second, third,

(c), (b), (a),

fourth issues of the Earl, varieties

are of good weight and apparently of good metal; the

issuer
basis,
all

had therefore established a mint or mints upon a proper

presumably by grant of the king.
is

Whether these
;

coins

may
all

be assigned to one mint

not certain

but they must

presumably have been struck

in Northumberland.

in

the same neighbourhood, probably

This theory then assumes that Earl Henry

[d)

usurped the privilege of coining and thus issued varieties

and

(e),

that he later received recognition of the

privilege

and

IRREGULAR ISSUES

CV
his

acknowledged the suzerainty of Stephen by placing

his next issues
(c)

name on
coins of

and

(h),

and that

finally he
title.

issued

variety

(a),

bearing his

own name and

The coin
which
I I

figured in Burns, Coinage of Scotland,

PI. III.

24

A,

mentioned above

(p. xcviii), is not included in this series

which

have tentatively assigned to the Earl.

to

I regard

it

as

belonging

the

earlier

period,

1136-9, and assume that he

copied the type not directly from Stephen but from the issues of

David, which are identical with this in style

(cf. op.cit., pi.

III. 24).

The
I

series of Earl

Henry coins and the cognate issues with which

The

am

here concerned were presumably struck after 1139.

possibility of the attribvition of so

many of

the series to Outchester,

coins took place,
is

the place where the find of the

of

named Henry

some importance.
(, 6,

It

seems to

me

that the coins of the three

issues

and

c)

are all liable to this interpretation.

It is necessary to

emphasize the fact that the attribution of these

is

coinages to the Earl

conjectural,

and based upon the

close con-

nexion of varieties bearing the name of Stephen with the issue which
bears the Earl's

own name {VK/iCl CON = HENRICYS COMES

:

?).

Failing this attribution,

it

seems necessary to assume that a central

authority in the North of England controlled or supplied the dies

for

the

coinages issued in Scottish border counties

by Stephen

and the Earl of Northumberland,

of style

in order to account for the unity

and of peculiarity in
;

detail

which appears in the coinages of

the accepted attribution

the

King and Earl

or

we must abandon
Henry
if.,

of the t<[EMCI

CON

coins to

of Northumberland.

In

Num.
attri-

Chron., 1895, pp. 110

Mr. Lawrence^ gave reasons for

buting them to Henry of Anjou, but one can hardly assign a

series

which seems
in

to be of northern origin
fit
;

to

the Duke, nor

little

does

it

any way

into the series

which can with

doubt

be attributed to

him

nor,

even

so,

would there be

less difiiculty in

the close connexion of an issue of the

Duke with

issues bearing

the

name

of Stephen.

He

has since abandoned this theory.

CVl

INTRODUCTION

D.
(a)

York and

District.

As type

I of

Stephen, but of curious workmanship similar to that of

;

the

following varieties

the

beaded inner

circle

of

the

obverse runs

through the king's bust.

obv.
A'ev.

*HSEPEFETl5i *>^IM|S0-GHET0dA
wt. 20
grs.
II.

M. Reynolds.

PL LIX.

7.

Obv.

*STIEFHEP1
B. Roth.
I of

(b)

As type

Stephen, but having a representation of the Standard or

(?) in

a horseman's lance
in field to
r.

place of the sceptre in the king's hand.

star

Obv.
nev.

*STIEFI1ER^VliDMESlOMEA/':
^Yt. 19-5 grs.

H.

:\I.

Reynolds.

PI.

LIX.

8.
grs.

^'arious inscriptions

and ornaments.
PI.

Wt. 14-5-19

See Catalogue,

pp. 386-7, nos. 254-9.

(c)

LIX.

9-14.

Obv.

As type

I of

Stephen, but voided lozenge containing pellet in

place of spike of lys on sceptre.

liev.

t^TlEM
PI.

^^itl

ornaments.

Saltire fleury

on cross pattee.

Ornaments

in place of inscription.

Wt. 17-2 and lo-5

P.

grs. (chipped).

British

Museum,

no. 260,

and

W.

P. Carlyon-Britton.

LIX.

15, 16.
other, supporting

(d) Obv.

Two

figures,

male and female, facing each

fleury.

between them a long sceptre

liev.

Cross fleury over thin saltire

pommee; annulets

in field.

Obverse.

IRREGULAR ISSUES
Variety
(a)

seems to form a step from the ordinary

(/>),

first
'

type

of Stephen to variet}t3'pe'.
(b)

which

is

commonly known

as the

Flag

The

object

held in the king's hand on coins of variety

has been supposed to represent the Standard which was borne

into the battle at Northallerton.

The Standard was

heavy mast
of Beverley

bearing- the three flags of St. Peter of York, St.

John

and

St. Wilfrith of

Ripon, crowned by a silver p3-x containing

Possibly this

the Host, and

was borne on a four-wheeled waggon.

standard
(cf.

represents the

in

miniature, or

it

maj' be merely a
iVa.prh
let<

horseman's lance
Sceaux,
p. 158.

Deniay, Le Costume

au Moyen Age

fig.

179).
'

The reverse
or
less

inscriptions on these of

Flag coins appear to be more

'

degraded copies

some common
it

original,

and,

from

Mr. Reynolds's coin above described,

the mint-name of
its

appears that the original bore

York
is

the attribution of these coins to

bj' their

York

or

neighbourhood

confirmed

resemblance in

style,

and in

the ornaments employed, to

named

coins of Eustace

and of Robei't

de Stuteville, which seem certainly to have been struck in or

near York.

Ingenious attempts have been

made

(b}-

Packe in

Xuni.

Chroii., 1896, pp.

59

ft'.,

and others)

to decipher these reverse

likelj' to

inscriptions, but such attempts

cessful.

do not seem

prove sucperiod

During the

civil

wars,

and especially in the

immediately preceding and during the

captivit}- of Stephen,

com-

munication between London and the North must have been

difficult,

and probably the central control from London of the northern

mint organizations was temporarily suspended.
This would lead

not only to variation of the usual type but to laxity in local mint
administration, affording easy opportunity for the
or base coins without risk of detection
;

i.ssue

of light

the dies must have been

engraved

locally,

and the reverse inscription seems to have been not

accidentally but intentionally blundered and rendered illegible, so

that

the

moneyer responsible could not be convicted by the

presence of his

name on

the coins.

If the object in the king's

hand

is

the Standard, the coins were presumably issued in 1138,

it

or shortly after, but

is

not possible to be certain of this or to

; ;

CVlll

INTRODUCTION

explain the appearance of the strange ornaments in the reverse

inscription
;

but

am

inclined to think that the latter

was a device

of the issuer for satisfying

an

illiterate public

with the appearance

of the coin without incriminating his

moneyer by engraving the

Clrc, 1914, pp. 627-8)

usual legend on the die.

Mr.

Andrew {Num.

attributes this coinage to the Archiepiscopal mint,

and interprets

the legend

MANuJ
Variety
(c)

(ON EVerwic
local

is

probably a similar

production which

is

more

curious in that the reverse type, instead of following the usual

type of Stephen's

first issue, is

that which appears on the coins

of Robert de Stuteville (see below, p. cxvi),

and the ornaments in

the obverse and reverse legends are also similar.

Variety

(cZ)

is

one of the most curious issues of this reign

is

to the left of a tall sceptre

represented a male figure in chain;

armour, wearing a peaked helmet and long trousers

is

to the right

a female figure, her hair long and tied with ribbons, wearing
stift*

a bodice of mail and a

long manches
a
tall
;

triangular skirt

both figures have

between them they support, each with one hand,

sceptre.

fleured

The reason

for

the

attribution

of this

issue to the

York

district is the style of lettering

and ornaments.

The design appears

the sceptre of the

to be the original

work

of a northern engraver,

fancifully representing

Queen Matilda

assisting the king to support

kingdom during the period

a knight in

of his captivity.
till

The
1147

male figure can hardly be Eustace, who was not knighted

or 1149.^

The

figure

is

full

armour and may reasonably

name forms the obverse legend. Various suggestions have been made for the interpretation of these two figures
represent the king, whose

The coins of this York series are all placed about the year 1141, or slightly owing to their close connexion with each other and, through the 'Flag type' coins, with the first issue of Stephen, which presumably did not continue after 1141. An interpretation of the 'Flag type coins as commemorative of
^

earlier,

'

the Battle of the Standard would place that issue in, or shortly after, 1138; the
'

Double-figure

'

type, if attributed to the period of Stephen's captivity,

would

be issued in the year 1141. On PI. the coins are assigned to 'Queen Matilda and Eustace this should be corrected to Stephen and Queen Matilda'.
' ; '

LX

IRREGULAR ISSUES

CIX
is

some have even held that both

figures are male, but this

clearly

wrong
figure

the

different

representation of the trousers of the male

and the triangular skirt of the female figure can easily be

of various specimens,^

seen

by an examination

and the figure

to

the left wears a peaked helmet, while the female figure has the

head bare, showing the long hair bound with ribbons or ornaments
after the feminine fashion of the time.

Packe's theory
are

(Num.

Chron., 1896, pp. 69-70-) that the figures

Queen Matilda and Prince Henry, and the occasion the con-

vention of

Durham

in 1139, is

most unconvincing; that a peace

should be an occasion for putting one's former

side with the queen in place of the king's head
is

enemy

side

by
the

upon the coins

of

liardly possible.

The probable Yorkshire provenance

does
the

issue renders the interpretation of the type as

his

Duke Henry and

inscrip-

mother the Empress improbable, as

also

tion, the

name
the

of Stephen.

The

issue belongs clearly, as

ft'.),

Packe
series
if

pointed out {Num.

of

Chron.,

1896, pp. 65

to

large

coins

provenance of which must be Yorkshire,

itself.

not

the city of

York

As well

as the varieties above described,

the series includes coins with the

name

of Eustace

which

re-

present a full figure in armour on the obverse, others bearing

the same

name with an animal

horseman type.

as obverse design, and also coins

of Robert with
is

The connexion
in

of all these issues

not merely a superficial similarity

style,

but a detailed

identity both of lettering and of ornaments.

best be seen
coins,

This identity

may

by a comparison

of the catalogue descriptions of the

where the ornamental borders and some inscriptions have

the form of lettering

been reproduced from drawings made as accurately as possible

to scale
;

is

not only connnon to

it

all

these

issues but peculiar to this series

is

punched work of a neat

serifs

though disjointed and rather meagre form, the length of

and horizontal strokes dwarfing the uprights

^

the ornaments are

But

it is

curious that Eustace, on the full-figure coins which bear his name,

is

is wearing on these coins. Mr. Andrew {Num. Circ, 1914, p. 628) also takes this view, and supposes the coins to have been struck at York in honour of this peace.

clad in just such a skirt as the female figure

ex

INTRODUCTION
unintelligible,

most curious and

but

it is

important to notice
all

how

the same ornaments reproduce themselves on

series
It is

the issues of this

'

with the exception of some of the

'

Lion type

Eustace coins.
all

therefore impossible to believe that the coins do not

or, at least,

come

from the same mint,

the dies from the same local centre.

is

That

this
'

mint

is

York, or some place in the neighbourhood,

'

shown

by the Flag type

coin in Mr. Reynolds's collection

(VIDNESI

ON

EV), by the reverse inscriptions of the Eustace coins, and by the

obverse legend of the Robert coins, which seems certainly to denote

Robert de Stuteville, the Yorkshire magnate.

The

issues

seem

to

me

to represent the efforts of the

mint of York
its

in the

hands of

local administration

thrown upon

own

resources,

and upon the

ingenuity of local engravers, owing to the severing of control from

the central authority at Loudon.
It

appears that the control of the

in the

mint or mints of Yorkshire was taken over at some period

reign (presumably about 1141, or perhaps slightly earlier)

by the

Constable of York and other magnates, either on the king's behalf

or for their

own

profit

and most probably those who were friends

of the king, or the

moneyers who acted for them, were not above

making some
as

profit for themselves

by issuing coins
be.

of

low weight,

most of these

issues

seem

to

To attempt any further

explanation of these strange types and inexplicable inscriptions than

as the original

work

of

local

genius must bring one into the

It

region of fanciful speculation.

has already been suggested that

the

'

Flag type

'

perhaps represents the Standard that was taken

into battle at Northallerton,

and the confused reverse inscriptions

;

perhaps show attempts to obscure the moneyer's identity

'

the

Double-figure

'

type probably represents the Queen assisting the

King

to support the royal

power

in his captivity

but whether

the coins were

Vtarons
is

made by

officers of

the

King

or

by independent

mere conjecture.

IRREGULAR ISSUES

CXI

y. CofNS NOT BEARINTt THE KiNG's TiTLE.

Eustace FitzJohn
(?)

Type A.
'Ohv. 'Full figure in

'

Full-figure

'

type.

armour, liolding sword.

Rev. Cross pattee in quatrefoil.

OUverse.

Reverse.

Wt.

EV2T AEI *EBORACIoE

DT2
Fi. liX. 5, 6.

2.

Same die
.coin

as preceding

in Br,itish

Mu-

seum.
jPI.

*EBORACIoT DEFr
7.

LX.

:3.

Similar to preceding;
|

^TjOMHt^FI
,HXt^\/'LF
8.

but no annulets in

field.

l^-O ^^'^

PL LX.

Cxii

INTRODUCTION

residence at York as governor

this title

he gives no authority for conferring

on Eustace.

Packe's reference to Stubbs's Constitutional

;

History (see

Num.

C'Arou., 1896, p.67) is unintelligible

it

Stubbs has no
of

such statement.

I gather that

arises

somehow from the account

Eustace's arrival at

York and order

for Divine Service to be held

I can find in the Chronicles

in spite of the Papal Interdict, in 1149.

no reason for the conclusion that Eustace was Governor of

at the time;
'

York

William of Newburgh (under the year 1147) says,

filius

adveniens Eustachius regis

of

sacra officia celebrari prseeepit

'

John

Hexham (Symeon, H.R.,

Cont.) says, 'post regis abscessum

venit filius ejus Eustachius Eboracum, divinaque ofRcia in eo cessare

reperiens, clericos de divinis ministeriis nil omittere coegit
' ;

these
in

expressions rather give the impression that Eustace

ofiicial

was not

any

position at York, but coming there on his father's departure

took very strong action on finding that the Papal Interdict was
being observed.

Nor do
'

know any

reason to believe that such

an

ofiice

as

'

Governor of York existed in the twelfth century.

of Eustace, Stephen's son, with the city of

The connexion
seems to
rather to

York

have been exaggerated.

The passages quoted above tend

1149 was not in the capacity of
be, there is

show that

his arrival in
but,

an
his

official of

York

however that may

no trace of

having had any connexion with the city at an

earlier period.

On

the contrary, his age, which, though not definitely known, can be

approximately deduced,

is

sufficient

guarantee that he held no

independent authority at the time that this coinage must have

been issued.

The

coins bear

a close resemblance in

style

and

lettering to the irregular issues of

is

York above
and
this

described,

which

strongly suggestive of

work contemporaneous,
;

or approximately
is

contemporaneous, with those issues

connexion

greatly

strengthened by a comparison of the ornaments of the Eustace

coin, no. 268,
'

on

p.

390, with those of 'Flag type' coins on pp. 386-7

'

and of the Double-figure coins on

p.

388

some

of these

ornaments

may
^

even have been made with the same punches.

similar statement occurs in
it

The probabiHty
;

Withy and Ryall

(1756)

have not suc-

ceeded in tracing

further.

IRREGULAR ISSUES
of the
issue

CXIU at

of all

these coinages of

York

an early date,
'

hardly later than 1141, and in particular those of the 'Flag

'

and
1).
l)e

Doulile-figure

'

types, has
'

been shown above

Full-figure
'

(p. cviii,

note

The Eustace

coins of the

type must therefore

earlier,

assigned to a date hardly

Eustace, son of Stephen,

later,

perhaps even

than 1141.
hence

was knighted

in 1147 or 1149;^

he

may

be assumed to have been born about 1130 and to have

the

been, at

most, very

little

more than ten years old when

of a knight in full of Stephen before 1147 or 1149,

these coins were struck.

The representation

armour cannot depict the son

The

coins

'^

should, I think, be assigned to Eustace FitzJohn, to

'

whom
by him
As

the

Lion

'

issues,

described below, are attributed on the

evidence of the fragment in Mr. Lawrence's collection published

in

Num.

Chron., 1890, pp. 42

all

ff".,

where Mr. Lawrence

also

advocated the attribution of

the Eustace coins to FitzJohn.

Packe pointed out, the full-figure types are clearly struck at

city, for

York

some bear an inscription which

is

identifies the

town

name, though part of the inscription

bear the

unintelligible, and others

name

of

Thomas

FitzUlf,

whom
I, ed.

he identified as Thomas
'

FitzUlviet' of Pqje Roll,

of York. of

Henry

Hunter,

p. 34,

an alderman

FitzJohn was certainly a Yorkshire magnate, and lord

Malton and Knaresborough, but we cannot at present trace

his connexion with the city of York.

He was

fighting for

David

at the Battle of the Standard in 1138,

to a charter to

and seems from

his signature

have been, at

least temporarily, reconciled to

Stephen
in

by

1141-2,"

That he issued coins

in his

own name somewhere

the neighbourhood of

York

is

made

certain

by Mr. Lawrence's

fragment described below.

In our present scanty knowledge of

1 Ramsay (Foundations, vol. ii, p. 437, note 4) follows Hewlett's argument the signature of charters of 1147-8 by Eustace with title Conies ior accepting 1147 of the Gesta against 1149 of Huntingdon and Hexham. Round (Feudal EiKjland,'^. 495) denies that knighthood need precede the use of the title Conies,

and places
2

it

in 1149.

they are described as coins of Eustace, son of Stephen (?)' but since the plate was printed I have felt more strongly the necessity of

On

Plate

LX

'

abandoning
^

this attribution.

See below, p. cxv.

CXIV

INTRODUCTION

this period it is impossible to

itself.

say

how he came

to do so in

York

It is
'

important to note that the fragment which identifies

the

'

Lion issues as a coinage of FitzJohn, though resembling the

'

other
'

Lion

'

coins in type,
coins
;

is

in style

more

closely allied to the

Full-figure

'

this is
it

most noticeable
also

in the

form of lettering

and punctuation, but

its

is

noteworthy that what remains of

reverse inscription bears at least a superficial resemblance to the

unintelligible part of the reverse inscription of the British

Museum

coin of Full-figure type, no. 265.

Eustace FitzJohn.

Type
Ohv.

B.

'

Lion

'

type.
tielcl.

lion(?) passant to

r.,

ornaments

in

Rev. Cross fleury over salth-e, each limb of which ends in small crosses
pattees
;

annulets in

field.

Obverse.

Keverse.

Wt.

Provenance, &c.

*[

]CIIoEIIo
PI.

T@riD^BE[Ur
10.
in place of

L. A. LaAvrence.

LX.

Ornaments

18-8

British

Museum,

legend (each limb of 16-6 nos. 269, 270, saltire ends in two chipped and other specicrescents from which 18-0 mens from the a chain issiies to the 18-9 same pair of dies. edge of the coin(. 21-3
I

PI.

LX.

11.

Very
Stephen
led

little is
;

known

of Eustace

FitzJohn during the reign of

I naturally

his close intimacy

with the court of Henry

him

to favour the cause of the Empress, of Stephen depriving

and

in February, 1138,

we hear
Castle,

him

of the custody of

Bamborough
;

on the ground that he was plotting with Matilda

in

July of

the same year he joined David of Scotland, surrendering to

his castle of Alnwick, and, as

him

we have

seen, fought

on his side at

the Battle of the Standard.

Between Christmas, 1141, and Easter,

'

IRREGULAR ISSUES
1142,^
lie

CXV

witnessed at Stamford a charter of Stephen to William,

Earl of Lincoln.
liini

In the later part of the reign

we only hear

of

founding- and

endowing

religious

houses.

His signature to

the charter at Stamford seems to point to a reconciliation with

Stephen between 1138 and 1142

but the witnesses of this charter

are mostly local magnates or relations of the grantee,

as Randulf of Chester

some (such

and Roger of Warwick) certainly in revolt

both before and after this date, and perhaps the signatures only
denote a temporary truce and not a definite transfer of allegiance.

He

witnessed Scottish charters at Scone in 1124, at

York

(?)

in

1128, at place

unknown

circa 1136,

at Carlisle circa 1139, at

earlier),
liv,

Durham
at

circa 1141, at

Huntingdon circa 1145 (perhaps

Early
Scottish

Corbridge in 1150-2 (Lawrie,

Charters,

Ixxv and Ixxvi, cxv,

cxxiii, cxxxiii, clxxvii, ccxlvii).

The fragment

in

Mr. Lawrence's collection must clearly be

it.

attributed to this Eustace, and the other coins naturally follow

Mr. Andrew,^ however, prefers to separate the ordinary Lion-type

issue

from that bearing the

full

name

of

FitzJohn, attributing

the

former to the son of Stephen, and assuming FitzJohn to

this

have issued in his own name an imitation of

Eustace, son of Stephen.

issue

of

But finding an

issue in currency

which

would even

in

name
nor
is

serve as his

own, he would surely not

expose his abuse by adding to the

'

name Eustace

the additional

Filius lohannis

'

is

there

any reason

to suppose that the

FitzJohn fragment
like

lighter or baser, or in

any other way more

issue.

an imitation, than the ordinary Lion-type

The reason

for the divorce of these

two

closely related issues seems to be the

connexion with the issues of York, and the lack of any authority
for

assigning to FitzJohn power in

is

the
this

city

of

York.
for

This
of

difficulty

not,

however, solved

by

means,
'

the

two Lion-type
is

issues the one bearing the

name

Filius lohannis

most certainly the nearer

in style to the other Eustace coins

of York, the style of lettering

and of ornaments and design being

Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 157-9.

Num.

Circ, 1914, pp. 629-30.

INTRODUCTION
of the good

workmanship

of the

York

coins,
'

whereas the more

Eistaohius
',

common
still

Lion-type coins,

which bear the name

though

similar in style, especially of lettering, differ from

any other

of the York issues in the form of the ornaments in the reverse If either, therefore, is to be regarded as an imitation inscription.
of the other, it should surely be the
'

Eistaohius

'

issue.

Robert de Stuteville.
Ohv.

Armed

figure on

horseback to

r.

jRODBeRTLHSDe
coll.;

Rev. Cross pattee over saltire fleury.

British
P.

Ornaments.
H.

Museum,
P.

no.

271;
;

Hunterian
B.

M. Reynolds;

W.

Carlyon-Britton

Roth.

The

British

Museum,
dies.

Hunterian, and Reynolds specimens are from the same

PI.

LX.

12, 13.

All the specimens at present

in the

known

of this coinage, except that

Hunterian

collection,

are in a more or less fragmentary

condition which renders the last part of the obverse inscription

illegible
;

this

has

made
in

possible the

traditional attribution

to

Robert of Gloucester, an attribution which was, however, questioned

style

by Packe

Num.
IV

Citron.^

1896,

p.

70,

on grounds of

and identity of reverse type with the coin of Stephen de-

scribed above as variety

(c).

Packe's suggestion of Robert de

is

Stuteville as the issuer of this coinage

made almost

certain Ijy
is

the Hunterian coin, on which the whole obverse inscription

clearly legible with the exception of the letters

D;
Of

these are

read by comparison with the Reynolds specimen.

this Roliert

de Stuteville we

know nothing

except that he was one of the

Yorkshire magnates who met at York in 1138 to consider measures

of defence against

David of Scotland

he

is

supposed to have been

the father of the sheriff of Yorkshire of 1170-5.

The

similarity of the style of his coins to that of the other

irregular issues of

York

points to an early date of issue, apparently

within the period 1138-41.

IRREGULAR ISSUES

Henry, Bishop or Winchester.

Ohv. Bust
liev.
r.,

crowned, holding crozier

star in field to

r.

Cross pattee over cross fleury.

Obverse.

CXVlll

INTRODUCTION

expiry of his legatine commission with the death of Innocent in

September, 1143

from

this period

may

be deducted nearly

tlie

whole of the year 1141 (February to December), the period of

Stephen's captivity, which leaves the alternative of the two periods

March, 1139
1143.

February,

1141, and

December, 1141
is

September,
first

The

later of these

two periods

not a likely date for

a coinage which adopts for the portrait that of the King's

issue.

We may

therefore take as a conjectural date of the issue

the period March, 1139

February, 1141.
York

This date
issues,

is

confirmed

by the resemblance

in style to the

a resemblance so

close as to suggest that the dies

were made at York or even the

coins struck there (Major Carlyon-Britton's specimen

was found

at

York), but I cannot accept Mr. Andrew's theory^ that they were
issued
of

by William Fitzherbert

shortly after June, 1141, in honour

till

his uncle, the Legate.

Fitzherbert was not consecrated

is

1143,
to

and an unconsecrated Archbishop of York

not likely

have issued a coinage bearing the names of the Bishop of

Winchester and the Kins.

Empress Matilda.
Type
as first issue of Stephen.

Obverse.

IRREGULAR ISSUES

Obverse.

Reverse.

AVt.

Provenance, &c.

flATILDi:i

IIID/VH-DE"
]Er:ea[

17-0

Raslileigh
lot

sale,

632.

:matillis:i
Pl.

B.

Roth

(two

coins from
dies).

same

LXI. 4
17-2 16-5
British
no.

lATILDi:iMi*S\/'Ellli:0
i:
PI.

Museum,

|h:ox:
LXI.
5.

and 273, H. M. Reynolds.

IILDMMP
PI.

*I^A111DELXI.
6.

B.

Roth

(two

coins).

IlleKible.

B.

Roth

(very

similar to
ceding).

pre-

li\TILDi:iM
]e:imp[
A

s^

EMVHl

s.-iwrs.?s$ =s$

.^ =^

B. Roth.

]\/'We:in[
movements
in

brief description of the Empress's

England

is

given above in the account of the coins inscribed

pp. Ixxxiv
f.).

PERERIE

(see

Her

coins are all

of the type of Stephen's

lirst issue

and bear as obverse inscriptions forms, more or

Iniperatrix, Mat'ddis Comitissa,

less abbreviated, of

and Matildls Imperatrix. The lies were of rough work and were hand-engraved with the exception of the reverse of the Oxford coin, which is made with
the usual punching-irons
of good metal.
^
;

they

all

seem

to be of

low weight but

The only mints that can be ascertained with any

is

The coin

in Rashleigh sale, lot 631,

perhaps also from a punch-worked

die, but has rather the appearance of being engraved in imitation of

punched

lettering.

CXX

INTRODUCTION

certainty are Bristol, Oxford, and

Wareham
,

^
;

I^/\.

is

presumably

not Canterbury (see above, p. Ixxxvi) possibly Calne.^ The coins were

most probably

all

struck between 1139 and 1142

base, ma,y

those of Bristol,
l)een issued at

which was probably always her chief

have

any

time between these dates

perhaps the coins with the inscription

Iin2Jeratrix preceded those that

to the title.

have the name MatilcUs

at,

in addition

The Oxford

coins were perhaps struck

or shortly

after, Easter, 1141,

when
it

the castle

was surrendered
fell

to the

Empress

by Robert

d'Oilly

seems likely that dies then

into her hands,

for the reverses of these coins are struck

from dies made apparently

all

from the regular punching-irons, and have

coinage of Stephen.^
after the flight

the appearance of the

in June, 1141,

They might have been struck

in

from London, or

September-December, 1142,
;

when

she was besieged at Oxford

by Stephen

but the occasion of

her entry to Oxford in the course of her triumphal progress to

London

in March, 1141,

seems the more probable date.

Wareham,

one of Robert of Gloucester's strongholds, seems to have surrendered

to Stephen in 1138, but

was certainly

in rebellion in the following

;

year when Baldwin de Redvers landed there

it

was not recovered

from William of
;

by Stephen
Gloucester,

till

June, 1142,

when he took

it

who was put

attempt
to

in charge in his father's absence

it

was
was

retaken by Robert, after a siege of three weeks, in November.

Stephen's
recover
it

in

the

following

year

unsuccessful.

Other coins that have been attributed to Matilda are the variety
of Stephen's first issue
(see above, pp. Ixxxii

which bears the inscription PERERIE, &c.

fF.),

and two coins

of Stephen's second type

{British

Numismatic Journal,

vol. vii, p. 85,

and

PI. II, 35, 36),

but these are ill-struck and

attribution.

illegible,

and

I see

no reason for the

The former attribution of these and other coins (see below, Warwick was, as Mr. Andrew has pointed out, most improbable.
^
'^

p.

cxxxi) to

See below, pp. clxivf., and Nh}. Chron., 1915, See Num. Chron., 1915, p. 114.

p. 115.

irregular issues

IIexry of Anjou.

Type
(a)

I.

As

first issue of

Stephen.

Obverse.

CXXil
(c)

INTRODUCTION
Ohv.

As
As

first issue of

Stephen.

Rev.

last issue (type

XV)

of

Henry

I.

Obverse.

Reverse.

Wt.
12-4

Provenance, &c.

British
no.

Museum,

|[

]:

the

(from WintersloAV

277

PI.

LXI.

12.

find).

Two

coins similar to preceding, illegible, in P.

W.

P. Carlyon-

Britton and H. M. Reynolds collections.

*[
Square crown without ornaments inscription
;

]LEMO

B. Roth.

begins to r. of sceptre and is not divided by

bust.

PI.

LXI.

11.

]N[
Ornament between and sceptre.
face

MLFRE[
/\.*

16-5

British
no.

Museum,

(from AVinterslow
find).

278

PL LXI.

13.

Illegible.

REX
Broad double diadem in
place of crown.

16-4 British Museum, clipped no. 279 (Winfind), terslow

and W.
(same
14.

T.

Ready

dies).

PL LXI.
Another

similar, illegible, in P.

W.

P. Carlyou-Britton collection.

Type
()

11.

Ohv. Bust facing, crowned,

between two

stars.

Rev. Cross botonnce over quadrilateral with pellet at each angle.

^EHRIEA/'[

*arefim:o MBRI
15.

16-6

British

Museum,

no. 280.

PL LXI.

IKREGULAK ISSUES

cxxni

Obverse.

Reverse.

Wt.

Provenance, &c.

From same
ceding.

die as pre-

Copenhagen

Museum.

PI.

LXI.

16.

]mEV[

From same
cedinft-.

die as pre-

lO'O

H. M. Reynolds.

*om:si[
PI.

]\r

16.1

British
no.

Museum,
(Win-

281

LXII.

tersLow find).
1

*DIIlIHaA/'[ |*ADi\ lOIl^W^

160

British

Museum,

]N
PI.

JIVELOE
LXII.
3.

no. 282.

*PNOA/'0EM HIA/'OVNIN OI OHIHPI.

14-4

British

Museum,

no. 283.

LXII.

4.

The
coins

last

two coins

are perliaps contemporary imitations of

tlie

Duke's

(b)

As preceding

issue,

but the cross hotonne


CXXIV

INTRODUCTION

Mr. Andrew^ reads the obverse of this coin

not

retroo-rade

+ :bVWFREI- DE BVhuN.
coin of

It

seems to

me

to be a blundered

Henry
gratins

or possibly William.

'

Anno

MCXLIX,
in
et

qui est XIIII i-egni regis Stephani, Henricus

dux Normannorum venit

ei

Angliam cum magno

non tantum

exercitu, et reddita sunt

castella

multa

munitiones cjuamplures;
;

et fecit

monetam novam,
omnes potentes,
Sed

tarn episcopi

quam vocabant monetam ducis quam comites et

ille

et

ipse, sed

barones, suani faciebant monetam.

cassavit.'
^

ex quo dux

venit,

phu-imorum monetam
in

The above passage occurs

and

Roger of Hoveden's Chronicle under

the year 1149, and seems to be an original statement of his own,

not, like the great part of his history of this period (1148-69),

taken from the Chronicle of Melrose.

of Hoveden's Chronicle, Stubbs says:

In his introduction to Roger

'The notices of the years

directl}^

1148 to 1169 which are neither taken

from the Chronicle

of Melrose, nor connected closely with the Becket contest, are very

few, and some of them, I think, of very questionable authenticity.

...

Of the striking

of

duke's mone}'", and of

money by Henry in 1149 the appointment of Henry as

that

called " the

justiciar to

Stephen in 1153,
equally

it

is

impossible to say that they are false, but

impossible

to

say

they

are

in

the

least

degree

probable.'

There were four

(or three

1)

occasions on which
:

Heniy came

to

England during Stephen's reign

(1)

In late autumn, 1142, then nine years

old,

he was sent over

to Bristol

and lived there four

3'ears,

returning to

Normandy towards

the end of 1146.

[(2)

In the spring of 1147, in order to create a diversion on

behalf of Gilbert of Clare,

who was

attacked in Pevensey by

Stephen, he brought a small band of adventurers and was joined

on landing by Robert of Leicester

he made an attack on Cricklade

;

and on Bourton (Gloucestershire

?)

Ijoth attacks failed, his

men

Num.

Circ, 1914, p. 632.

Series, no. 51), vol.
i,

Roger of Hoveden (Rolls

p.

211.

IRREGULAR ISSUES

CXXV
to

began to

desert,

and at the end of 3Iay he returned

Perhaps
<i.ii

Normandy

from Wareliam.
(3)

invent ion of the Gesta.^]

Early in 1149 he returned, apparently for the purpose of

being knighted

by David

of

Scotland

landing

probably at

Wareham, he was
Of the
rest of his

at Devizes on April 13, and thence

went

to
22.

the court of David at Carlisle, where he was knighted on

May

movements we know nothing

till

liis

return to

Normandy
(4)

in January, 1150.

In January, 1153, at the request of the beleaguered garrison

of Wallingford, he arrived

with a force said to consist of 150 men-

at-arms and 3,000 foot-soldiers.

He reduced the keep of Malmesbury,

made an armed
(?)

raised the siege of Wallingford, and, after a short time, visited his

head-quarters at Bristol, after which he

progress

through the midlands, from Winchcombe

Stamford, and Nottingham
;

to

Evesham, Warwick,

Stamford Castle surrendere<l to him,

but the garrison at Nottingham, by firing the town, caused his

retreat.

On Aug.

10,

1153,

the

death

of

Eustace
in

gave

the

opportunity for a compromise which culminated

ratified in

the peace

Council at Winchester on Nov.

6,

1153.

The passage above quoted from Roger

confused in chronology

of

Hoveden

is

at least

the

visit of

Henry when he was accom-

panied by a large force, and received the surrender of several

castles,

was that

of 1153, not of 1149; in the sentence referring to

',

the
is

'

duke's

money

if

we may believe
tale.

the statement, the chronicler

evidently similarly inaccurate, and probably relates under the

If the statement that

mention of Henry a traditional

he

made a new
is

coinage,

and that the bishops and barons did

likewise,

correctly placed to his visit of the year 1149, his suppression

of this baronial coinage can hardly

have occurred during his same

stay in England, which lasted not longer than nine months. Apart

from

its

chronological inaccuracy, the statement, which does not

in itself sound like a groundless fabrication, finds support in the

coins

which

may

with nuich probability be attributed to the Duke,

in England.

or rather, the

Angevin party
^

See Round, Feudal England, pp. 491

ff.

INTRODUCTION

These coins were at one time supposed to belong to the reign of

Henry

I,

but their presence in the Winterslow

find,^

and their

absence in the finds of coins of

issued in the reign of Stephen.

Henry

I,

show them

to have been

It is still

sometimes suggested that

Earl Henry, son of David,

it;

may have

issued this coinage or part of

hut a comparison of the inscription

>l/VREFIMIOM BRI

with

*iVRFElli:iiBRIlT

on a coin of Empress Matilda,

and
nos.

*PIC0RIC:ON her:

with coins of Stephen, pp. 340-1,

38 and 39, leaves no doubt that, whoever this Henry was,

he coined at Bristol and Hereford.

The

Scottish prince cannot

his coins the

have coined in the West, nor would he have put on

title

REX, which

is

likely to be adopted only

by a claimant

to the

throne.-

Further, in connexion

with these coins must be considered

the coins similar to the later issue (described as type II aliove),

but bearing other obverse

titles,

which seem only explicable as

a baronial coinage imitating the coinage of Henry, such as Hoveden

tells

us was suppressed by the

is

Duke on

his arrival.

There

much

difficulty in
;

determining when this coinage can

the earliest type, presumably,
is

have been issued by Henry

the

direct imitation of the first issue

of Stephen, which can hardly

late

have been the type in issue at the royal mints in the of 1142, when Henry first landed in England.
Matilda had on, or shortly
after,
first issue of
still
"

autumn

her arrival issued a coinage

which imitated the

(1139) presumably

Stephen, the coinage at that time

or at least

in

issue,

the most frequent

type

in

currency

this

type she continued to issue without

flight

change until perhaps her

from Oxford in December, 1142,

practically altandoned,

from which date her claim

was

and her

1
"^

See above,
Stephen's

p. xxx.
it

must be remembered that a coin is known of the type having on the obverse the name Henricits (without must be attributed to Earl Henry, owing to its Scottish style title), which and very close resemblance to coins of David of the same type, and also on account of its Scottish provenance (Bute find) and its probable attribution to

At the same time

first

of

issue

Carlisle
'

and the moneyer Erebald

p. Ixxv.

(see above, p. xcviii).

See

IRREGULAR ISSUES
part}'

CXXVll

were held together by Robert of Gloucester

in the

name

of

Henry.

Henry's confirmation of his mother's charter to Aubrey de

Vere, attributed to July-November, 114.2,^ and indeed the guarantee

given
in the

l:)y

the Empress in her original charter (not later than June

year), that she

same

would obtain her

son's ratification,

show

that in this year (1142) she

was

fighting for the cause of her son as

rightful heir to the throne,

It is to this period,
c.

and had abandoned her own claim.

on the coinage

1142-3, that I should attribute the substitu-

tion of the
of the

name

of

Henry

for that of Matilda

Angevin party

in England, the original type being con-

tinued for a timer

In October, 1147, Robert of Gloucester died,

to exist, the
;

and the Angevin cause in England practically ceased

Empress herself leaving the country

in the following Februar^^

it

revived with the third (second?) visit of

Henry

in 1149.

The

profile

types I have above assigned to the period immediately following

the change in the Empress's position from claimant in her
right to claimant in the right of her son, that
I
(c)

own
1142,
later,

is

to say,
(h).

c.

being presumably somewhat later than I

()

and

The

or full-face, types, the obverse of

which

is

presumably based on that

have commenced

of type III of Stephen, must, I think, at least

their

currency before Robert's death

in 1147.

Of

this I

find

confirmation in the finds of coins of this reign.

find the absence of coins of

In the Awbridp-e

Henry struck

before his accession

his coins

might possibly be explained by assuming that he recalled

though that seems hardly possible

from circulation at the same time as he put down the baronial

issues,
if

the later type of

1153.

his coinage

was not brought

into circulation before

The

Winterslow find seems more

definite.

No account

exists of this find,

but B. C. Roberts seems to have had a representative selection

from
^

it,

and to judge from

his coins the hoard contained specimens

Round, Geoffrey de MandeinUe, pp. 184 ff.

See Num. Chron., 1915, p. 118. I was tliei-e mistaken in saying that Mr. Andrew assigned all the profile types of Henry to 1149 Hks. 259 he places in 1142, and with it I understand him to include all those with the
^
;

reverse of Stephen's

first

type (except the coin of Scottish style from the

Joto'n., \ol. ix, p. 414), the re)iiaiiu'ii.g profile coins

Bute find; see

Brit.

Num.

(described above as type

I (c)) in

1149 and the full-face issues in 1153.

eXXVlll

INTKODUCTION

of all the varieties of

Henry
of

of

Anjou excepting type

I, II,

I (a);

and of

the true coinage of Stephen, types

and III were represented.

The
that

later issue of

Henry

Anjou was therefore most probably

introduced during the issue of the third or fourth type of Stephen,

is

to say, probably not

many

years after 1145.

likelihood
I
(b)

The mints that can be identified with type I (a) Hereford and Malmesbury, of type
type I
(c)
'

are

of

Gloucester, of

Crst'

(Cirencester in Gloucestershire

1),

the others being

uncertain; of type II (a) Bristol (the same moneyer, Arefin, seems to

have struck coins

Wiveliscombe
?
;

of the Empress, see above, p. cxviii),

(b)

Sherborne

?,

of type II

none are

certain.
it is

Even
as

if

the mints could be interpreted with certainty,

not

likely that a consideration of

them

in

connexion with such evidence

assist

we have
;

of

Henry's movements would

towards dating the

coinage

for these issues of

Henry

represent, I think, rather the

coinage of his party than his

own

private issues.

At

this time,

after 1142, the West of England was Angevin, and at the Angevin

strongholds, such as Bristol, Gloucester,

Wareham,

&c., there

was

probably a more or
first

less

continuous output of coins in the

name

of Matilda,

and

later of

Henry, and these coinages are likely

to

have been the main currency of the West.^

Type

I [b) is of

some

interest as

it

varies from the regular type

of Stephen,

and

is

identical in type

with a variety described above,

;

variety III 7 (see above, pp. xci

ft'.)

that variety was

shown

to

have occurred in finds of

containing coins of the

late coins of the reign,

and not

in finds

first

issue (except

one specimen in the

at the end of
in

Linton find), and therefore

the period

was apparently first issued

when type

was being minted, and continued

circulation to the beginning of

Henry

II's reign.
;

Why there should

one cannot suppose
;

be this curious connexion

that

it is

impossible to say

Henry

issued coins bearing Stephen's

name

it

may

be that

they were issued in the

^

same

locality,

and perhaps the

dies

made

doubtful.

The usual interpretation of CRST as Chvistchurch seems to me very The town was called Twynham. Christchurch was the name of
I

the monastery only.

^

suggest Cirencester conjeetu rally.

ix, p.

See Brit. Xiim. Joio-n., vol.

414.

IRREGULAR ISSUES

CXXIX
of style
is
is

by the same engravers, though the difference

this
;

against

perhaps the variety of uncertain attribution

in the

the

work
on an

of

some baron

West

of England, where Henry's coins were

if

mostly in circulation, but

imitation of Henry's coin
is

so,

the use of Stephen's

title

not easily explained.

Robert (of Gloucester

Type of Stephen's second
Obverse inscriptions:
issue.

?).

^ilUETA/"
LXII.

(penny.

B. Roth). B. Roth).

]ROBETA/'[ (halfpenny.
PI.
5.
6.

Reverse

inscriptions
:

quite

uncertain

the

penny

reads

VND ON
:

the

mint-name has some appearance

LIISC.

of being
is

hERE

or
;

LERE,

or possibly

The attribution

quite
of

uncertain
necessity.

the coins

may

represent a baronial issue, or

money

coins

One would not expect Robert of Gloucester except in the name of the Empress or Henrj^

to issue

Another Robert

may

be the issuer.

If
is

LERE

is

the reading of

the mint-name on the penny (but this

very doubtful), Robert

to

de Beaumont, the favourite of Stephen,

who went over

(see Brit.

Henry

on his arrival in 1147

vol. vi, p.

(?), is

more probable

Num.

Journ.,

366, and

vol. vii, p. 88).

William

(of Gloucester?).
T'>/pe

I.

As type

of

Henry of Anjou,

I (c).

See p. cxxii.

Obverse,

cxxx

INTRODUCTION

Tyije II.
(a)

As type of Henry

of Anjou, II (a).

See p. cxxii.

Obverse.

Reverse.

wt.
15-0

Provenance, &c.

H. M. Reynolds.

:cRwT
Two rows of pellets take
the place of the crown.
PI.
(b)

LXII. 10
Henry of Anjou,
II
(b).

As type

of

See p. cxxiii.

*[
PI.

MDOB
8.

]ANDO
15-0 14-5

P.W.P.CarlyonBritton.

LXII.

*^W^ILLELCT) *ro0iero:d
PI.

P.W.P.CarlyonBritton

and

LXII.

11,

12.

H. M. Reynolds (same dies).

15-4
British

Museum,

broken
PI.

no. 285.

LXII.

7.

From same
ceding.

die as pre-

]AV3.om:[

16-0

British

Museum,

no. 286.

These coins are evidently struck in direct imitation of the issues

of

Henry, not only of the

(a),

later

but also of the

earlier, or profile, class.^

In one case, type II

there seems to be an attempt to express

some
tion

title as

well as the

name on

the obverse

this difficult inscrip-

may

perhaps be read

WILLEM DVO

(for

DVX

?)

or

WILLem
and

EoMes DVO(?). Mr. Andrew^ reads WILLelmus EoMes DVrOtrigum

and attributes the coin
Somerset
^
;

to William de

Mohun, Earl

of Dorset

but the letter of Brian FitzCount to the Legate, published

I,

am

very doubtful whether this coin, described as type

should be

classed with the other

2

William

coins.

Num.

Circ, 1914, p. 631.

;: ;

IRREGULAR ISSUES

CXXXl

by Mr. Round

Eng. Hist. Rev., 1910, pp. 297 fF., shows that William de Moyon deserted the Empress before the end of 1143, and there
in
side.

seems no reason to suppose that he returned to her

certainly belongs to the latter half of the reign.
It is

The

coin

noteworthy that not only the types but also the mint-names
they can be interpreted) are identical with those on coins
or the Empress.
see

(so far as

of

Henry

The name CRST occurs again

p.

(possibly

Cirencester?

above,

cxxviii),

also

at

WAR
?)

(doubtless

Wareham)

the same moneyer, Roger, coined under the Empress

(Dorchester?) and

DOB

or

DOR

WIS
is if

(Wiveliscombe
low.

are quite

uncertain.

The weight
extent of

of the coinage

These considerations
be
attributed
to

and the
one

this
is

coinage,
doubtful),

it

may

person
issued
;

(which
it

suggest

that

the

magnate

who

was at some time leader of the Angevin party in

England

this position

may have

fallen to

William of Gloucester

between his father's death in 1147 and the arrival of Henry in 1149, a period of which historical records are very meagre; but

any

attribution of

the coins must be a matter of considerable

(6),

doubt.

The

coin of type II

with mint-reading WIS, came from

the Winterslow find.

Brian FitzCount?

Type

of

Henry

of Anjou, II (),

and William

(of Gloucester ?), II (a).

Ohv. Rev.

*B-R-C-IT-[

*BRIITililI-TO:
Wt. 15-9
grs.

r. AV. P. Carlyon-Britton.
p.

PI.

LXII.

13.

Mr. Andrew {Num. Circ, 1914,

B- R-

632) reads these inscriptions

ComlTIS DEVonlse and BRILTDPI TO

follows

(a

blundered copy

of an Exeter reverse of the last issue of the reign of

Henry
I

I)

he

thus

Montagu
satisfied

{Num.
the

Chron.,

1890,

Proceedings,

p. 5) in attributing the coin to

Baldwin de Redvers.
latter

am
I

not

by any means
inscription
to

that

part

of

the
it.

obverse
prefer

can be read as Mr. Andrew has read

remain content with the proposal of Packe {Nuon. Chron., i 2

CXXXU
1896,
pp. 63
f.),

INTRODUCTION

reading

the

inscription

as

Brianus Comitis

Filius; the reverse inscription seems to

me

likely to be a copy

of that on the obverse,

Brian FitzCount declared for Matilda

in 1139 and concerted with Robert of Gloucester in plans of he was blockaded in Wallingford by Stephen, but campaign
;

relieved
at

by Milo

in the

same year.

He was

with the Empress

London

in June,

and at Oxford

in July, 1141,

and

after the

siege of Winchester fled with her to Devizes;

at Bristol^ at the close of 1141,

he was with her

and at Oxford in the spring of

1142; to his castle at Wallingford Matilda fled at Christmas, 1142.

He was
in 1153,

besieged by Stephen at Wallingford in 1146, and again

when Henry

relieved

him on

his fourth (third?) arrival

in England.

Perhaps this coin might be attributed to the siege

of Wallingford in 1146.

Baldwin de Red vers was created Earl of Devon by the Empress

before June, 1141.^

He revolted from Stephen in

of Wight,

1136,

was besieged,

capitulated and fled to the Isle

and surrendered on
;

hearing of Stephen's approach from Southampton

he was banished

and took refuge with Geoffrey of Anjou.

In 1139 he landed at

Wareham and took

little

Corfe Castle

he joined the Empress and was

After that

present at the siege of Winchester in 1141.

of

him except

as a benefactor of religious houses.

we He

hear
died

in 1155.

Unceetain Baeonial Coins.

(1) Obv.

II^OCD

Bust in armour

r.,

holding sword.
fleured
at

Rev. >l50[

]ONI^./\.

Quadrilateral,

angles,

over cross fleury.

Wt.

5-8 grs. (clipped). British

Museum,

no. 292.

PI.

LXII.14.

From
Mr. Andrew
^

the Winterslow find.

attributes this coin to Patrick, Earl of Salisbury.

Dugdale, Monasticon,

vol. vi, p. 137.

^ 3

Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 271-2.

Num.

Circ, 1914, p. 632.

IRREGULAR ISSUES
(2) Obv.

CXXXlll

>JTOD(oi'
star to
r.

Tj^OEFN

Bust facing, crowned, holding sceptre,

Rev.

l/VL,PI^DONTOMI
pellet in each angle,

Cross pattee, annulet enclosing

Wt. 15-2

grs.

British

Museum,

no. 293.

PI.

LXII.

15.

Perhaps the obverse inscription represents a blundered form of

STIEFNE.

The resemblance
is

of the reverse type to that of the

following piece
(3) Ohv.

noteworthy.
Bust to
r.,

iNEPrH*
Stephen).

holding sceptre (as on

first issue of

Rev.

HB^^^t^l^liEHLONr
in each angle.

Cross pattee, annulet enclosing pellet

Wt. 16

grs.

British

Museum,

no. 294.

PI.

LXII.

16.

Organization and Conthol of the Mint.

The only

officials of

the mints of whose existence

we have any
aurifaher,

Norman money ers, whose names appear on

literary evidence during the

period are the Tnoiietarii, or

the coins.^

An

or goldsmith,

was probably employed

for the designs of the coinage

dies
;

and perhaps controlled the engraving of

Otto from the
time

a function which

seems to have been hereditary in the family of the goldsmith

of

Domesday, and apparently developed

post of Cuneator or Engraver of the
definite tenure of the king.
-

at a later date into the

Dies,

which was held

in

Otto the

Goldsmith appears in Domesday

in possession of lands in Essex

I

and Suffolk
of London,

a charter of

Henry

directed to Maurice, Bishop

who

died in 1107, confirmed to William FitzOtto

(presumably son of Otto of Domesday) lands held by his father and

^

See below, pp. cxli ff. II. 97 b, 106 b, 286 b.

(I.

Grimbaldus

74),

Other goldsmiths mentioned in Domesday are Alwardus (I. 63 b), Leawinus (I. 58 b), Nicholaus (aurifaber
:

comitis Hugonis,

II.

279j, Rainbaldus (11.273), Teodricus

(I.

36 b, 63, 160 b).

is

pedigree of the Otho family, with citations from records,

Chron., 1893, p. 145.

published in

Num.

CXXXIV

INTRODUCTION
;

the craft of the dies

to

m the sixth year of John, May 16, 1205, a writ

to

Wilham FitzOtho ordered him

make

dies for the

Royal and

Episcopal mints of Chichester, and in the forty-first year of the

following reign an inquiry was held into the conditions of tenure

under which Otto FitzWilliam, then dead, had held the custody
of the

king's

die

in

England.

From

this

it

appears that the

hereditary office of Aurifaber of the time of William I developed

in,

or before, the reign of John into an

office definitely

attached

to the Mint.

Of any other
Mint

officers of

the Mint

we

find

no evidence

at

all,

nor can any conclusion be drawn from an inquiry into the

in later times.

ore:anization of the

The administration was

the old centralization
single

not at this early period divided into separate Government depart-

ments

the

first

sign of breaking

away from

of financial, judicial,

and administrative authority in a

II.

executive board

first

appears in the reign of Henry

Under the

Norman
one

kings, at least, the

Mint was no doubt treated as an

inseparable part of the king's treasury or exchequer,^ and I think

may assume
of the

that the same executive officers controlled the

work

moneyers at the royal mints throughout the country

;

as audited the accounts of the king's sheriffs

at the

same time

the moneyers were probably more independent than at a later

period.

Some

reference has already been

made

to the

means at the

disposal of the king or his officers for controlling the moneyers.

The most obvious method was the engraving of the moneyer's name and of his mint on his reverse dies; this would seem inadequate
without some periodical
trial of

the money, and

it

has been suggested

above

that the periodical change of the coin-types was

made with

the object of marking a periodical assay which might be the origin

of the

Trial

of

the

Pyx; assaying was

certainly

known and

employed at
'blanched',

this time, for

payments in Domesday are sometimes

i.e.

assayed and compensated.

* That a financial department existed at this time and earlier, there seems no doubt (see Hughes, Crump and Johnson, Dialogus de Scaccario, introduction,

p. 13,
''

and references

in foot-note).

p. xiii.

ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OF THE MINT

CXXXV
in

Whether the

dies for provincial mints

;

were

all

made

London

has long been under dispute

but the evidence of Domesday on the

it

question seems so strong that I think

slight reservation.

may

be accepted with

The Domesday passages

Mdiich bear on the

subject are the following statements of fees paid

receipt of dies after the introduction of a

by moneyers on
^
:

new type

In civitate AVirecestre habebat Rex Echvardus banc consuetudinem. Quando moneta yertebatur quisque monetarius dabat xx solidos ad Londoniam pro cuneis monette accipiendis (I. 172).

Septem monetarii erant

tarius episcopi.

ibi

(in Hereford).

Unus ex

his

erat

monexviii

Quando moneta renovatur dabat quisque eorum

:

solidos pro cuneis recipiendis

et

ex eo die quo redibant usque ad

solidos.
1

unum

mensem dabat quisque eorum regi xx episcopus de suo monetario xx solidos (I.
Tres monetarios habebat
ibi

Et similiter babebat

79).

(in

Sciropesberie)

rex.

Qui,

postquam

coemissent cuneos monetae ut

alii

monetarii patrifp, xv die dabant regi

XX

solidos unusquisque.

Et hoc

fiebat

moneta vertente
tliis

(I.

252).

certain

amount

of evidence on

subject

may

be adduced

from the coins themselves, but not

conclusion.

sufficient to afford

any

definite

In favour of the engraving of

all

dies at London, emphasis has

always been
mints in
all

laid

on the very

close similarity of coins struck at

;

parts of the country

it is

the similarity of style

is

indeed striking, and

coins

impossible, with the exception of a

to attribute a coin to its

few
mint

which are mentioned below,

by examining the
into account the

style of the obverse.

But

this does not take

method

of engraving dies,

which was apparently

The payment

of fees

is

also mentioned, but without notice of the receipt of

:

dies, in the

following passages

In burgo de Lewes,
(I,

cum moneta

renovatur dat

burgo Dore Cestre) erant ii monetarii, quisque eorum reddens regi unam markam ai'genti, et xx solidos quando moneta vertebatur (I. 75). Ibi (in Brideport) erat unus monetarius, reddens regi unam markam argenti et xx solidos quando moneta vertebatur

XX

solidos unusquisque monetarius

26).

Ibi (in

(I. 75).

Ibi (in

Warham)

ii

monetarii, quisque reddens

(1. 75).

unam markam

argenti

regi, et

xx solidos quando moneta vertebatur

monetarii, quisque reddebat
(I. 75).
i

erant

iii

burgo Sceptesberie) markam argenti, et xx solidos quando

Ibi (in

moneta vertebatur

CXXXVl

INTRODUCTION

a system of reproducing a set model with mathematical precision

and with the assistance of punching

scope for individuality.

tools

and did not leave much

die, or

The use

of a

model or pattern

rather, the copying of one die

from another, seems

to be the only

possible explanation of a curious reproduction of errors

on Thetford

coins of the second type of William

I.^
;

These are the three coins

they are
all

described
different

below,

p.

27,

nos,

144-6

struck

from

reverse dies, on each of which appears the very rare

;

omission of the initial cross

to the right of the

on each the inscription begins a

little

limb of the voided cross of the design instead

of beginning in the usual place exactly above the limb,

and the

readings are

riMUlrOM^IEO^MF
KIMUlrOMD-i-IEOlPMF

rmuiroMD'i'XEo^MF
The
first

reading contains a very natural punch- worker's error,

>^X for HE>j the use of a straight instead of a crescent-shaped punch the other two both reproduce this error, but, apparently
;

with the intention of correcting

it

and on the supposition that the

letter

misgraven
This
is

letter represented

H, the

is

inserted before

it.

a very curious and, I think, quite certain proof of the

die, for

copying of die from

there

is

no doubt whatever that the

coins nos. 145 and 146 are struck from

two

different reverse dies,

though each reproduces the extraordinary mistaken attempt to

correct the error of no. 144.

The engraving
to the

of dies

was therefore

a matter of copying, the original being presumably

chief engraver

made by

the

and supplied

workmen

to copj^

This does

not decide the question whether the copying of the original die

and the recopying of

it

die

from die were done at London or locally

if

does

show,

however, that,

the

dies

were

all

made

at

London, either a model was kept by the cuneator at London, or

a
^

number
Num.

of dies,

and not a single

I

pair,

were delivered to the

Chron., 1911, pp. 283-4.

locally,

there held the view that this proved that

dies

were engraved

but

it

may
set

equally be explained as the work of

engravers at

London working from a

model.

ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OF THE MINT

CXXXVll

moneyer

at the introduction of the

new

issue

^
;

for

we know from

specimens of dies of hammered coinage, though later in date, which

still

survive, that the dies

when returned

after use were not in

a condition to be copied by the engraver.

A
it

coin which affords some, though rather conjectural, evidence

that the dies were

is

made

in London, is described

on

p. 11 4, no.

608

a Chichester coin on the reverse of which the outline of

H
the
as

is visible

below the second and third

letters
is

(IK) of the mint

coin

is

in very good condition and there

no trace of overstriking.
die
;

The

letter

was evidently wrongly engraved on the

must have been made

if,

seems

likely, the

engraver began to engrave the mint as Exeter

at

instead of Chichester, the die

London

and not

at Chichester for such confusion to arise.^

literal
is

Perhaps the strongest support for a

the passage above quoted from
consideration of the
occasional
efforts

interpretation of

Domesday

to be

found in the

meaning of the reverse

the moneyers to
dies.

inscriptions,

and of

of

make them

illegible

by

tampering with their

moneyer's name and
of
this

There can

be no doubt that the

that of his mint were placed on the coins

period for the purpose of identification of the person

responsible for

any

coin that might be found of low weight or

base standard.

Certain coins have been found, and are described

below

(pp. cxlixff.),

which were struck, usually of low weight, from

reverse dies on which some ingenuity has been spent in changing

the names in the legend or in making them illegible

these
profit

are clearly attempts on the part of the moneyers to make

by the usual fraudulent

practice of coining at low weight, while

minimizing the risk of conviction by tampering with the mark

To Bury

St.

Edmunds one

set of dies only

that only on return of the old

set.

was supplied at a time, and But Stei^hen granted the Abbot as many as

three sets (see below, p. clxiv). ^ Note also, on p. xlv, the possible evidence of the use of identical punches
in
^

making the dies of different mints. See Num. Chron., 1911, pp. 285 ff.

am

not

now

of opinion, as

then was,

that these coins are evidence of the moneyers being in possession of official

graving punches.

CXXXVlll

INTRODUCTION

of identification
dies

which the coins

locally, it
of,

bear.

If the

engraving of the

had been done

would presumably have been done

by, or under direction

the moneyers,

who seem

to have been

important

officials

responsible for the operations of the mints at

;

which they worked

in this case, the altering of the inscription

it

on reverse dies would be an unnecessary labour, as

in the moneyer's

would be

power

to

have his dies originally engraved with

a false inscription.

The

chief

argument

to be opposed to the theory that the dies

is

were made at London,

that certain coins of a certain locality,

while differing from the coins of the other mints, bear a very close

resemblance in style to each other.

Most noteworthy of these

are the coins of William I which are attributed to the mints of

St.

Davids and Cardiff

I

(see PI.

XIX.

1-3,

and
even

PI.
if

XXIII. 13-16)
the evidence of

and

think
is

it

must be conceded

that,

Domesday

right, exception

must be made

of the

Welsh

mints,^

for they, unlike other so-called coarse or barbarous issues, were

evidently not

made with the

usual punches that were used for the

^

rest of the coinage.

Other coins of the reign of William I

have

a peculiarity of style (see

Nwm.

Chron., 1911, p. 283)

the most

important instance

is

the coins of type

all

IV

of Lincoln, Stamford,

and York, which are

similar in style.

of very rough

work and

all

closely

Similar also are some of the Lincoln coins of

13, 14).

type II (see PI. IV.

to be

The coarseness

of these coins seems

to the
dies.

due not to the use of punches of irregular form, but

careless handling of the punches

and clumsy engraving of the

This might well be explained by the assumption that the dies were
cut locally or at a separate centre for the Yorkshire and Lincolnshire mints
;

but this explanation

is

not a necessary one

it

may

equally be explained

by the assumption that the work was

at

distributed to the engravers

London by
at
this

localities,

and that
the
(see

inexperienced
^

workmen were

period

given

dies
PI.

Coins

of

Rhuddlan, however, are not of

'barbarous'

work

XXIII.
^

8).

purposely avoid making mention here of coins of Stephen, as peculiarities

of that reign might be attributed to baronial work.

ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OF THE MINT

to

CXXXIX

engrave

for

the

northern

and

north-eastern

part

of

the

country.

We

may, therefore,

conelucle that one of the

methods by which

the authorities controlled the

work

of

the moneyers

was the

engraving of their dies at London;

but this statement requires

some modification.
the engraving

Not only does

of

it

seem necessary to attribute

to
local

of dies
tools,
it

the

Welsh mints

workmen

using locally
in

made

but

it is

also necessary to concede that

some circumstances

was allowed, or

at least possible, for an

obverse die to be borrowed by a moneyer of one mint from

a moneyer of another.^

The following

instances, all of the

'

Paxs

'

type of William

I,

occur of a die being sent from one mint to another (traces on the
coins of rust-marks or cracks on the dies usually furnish evidence

at which mint the die

was

first

used)

-^

From From From From

897-8).

Barnstaple (Seword, nos. 498, 499) to Exeter (Seniser, no. 668).

Canterbury (Godric, no. 554) to Hythe (Edred, no. 712).

Guildford (Seric, nos. 690-2) to Chichester (Bruman, nos. 600-2).

Marlborough

(Cild, no.

827) to Salisbury (Esbern or Osbern, nos.

From

Salisbury (Esbern, nos. 899, 900) to Marlborough (Cild, no. 828).

die, no.

(These two Marlborough coins are from the same reverse

the later.)

828 being

From

Salisbury (Esbern or Osbern. nos. 895-6) to ^yilto^ (Sewine,

no. 1062).

From Wilton

(Sefaroi

and Sewine,

nos.

1058-9, 1063) to Salisbury

(Osbern, nos. 901-2).

From Cricklade (^Ifwine, no. 625) to Wilton (^Ifwine, no. 1057). From Shrewsbury (Godesbrand, no. 938) to St. Davids (Turri, no. 883).^ From London (Alfred, nos. 763-4) to Southwark (Osmund, nos. 976-7).
^

The

use of an obverse die

by two or more moneyers

at the

same mint

is

very frequent.
^

on

See Num. Chron., 1911, pp. 274 ff. The London and Ipswich die mentioned 278 {op. cit.) is omitted, as the coin that purports to be of Ipswich is certainly a forgery (see below, p. 186, no. 722).
p.
^

The

close resemblance of both obverse

and reverse of the Shrewsbury coin

its

to the coarse

work of
correct
;

St.

Davids causes some doubt whether

attribution to

Shrewsbury

is

see below, p. clxxx.

Cxl

INTRODUCTION
I,

In type II of William
evidence at which mint
it

the same die was used (there

first

is

no

was

used) at

London (Godwine?,
die of the

no.

128) and Thetford (Cinric, no. 145); the reverse

see below, p.
cl.

London

coia

had heen tampered with,

Thetford (Cinric, no. 146) and

MAINT

(Brihtwi, no. 130).

In type III of William

no. 201) to
It will

I,

a die was sent from London (Sibode,

Exeter (.Elfwine, no. 184).

be noticed that, disregarding the Shrewsbury

St. Davids
accessible, if

die (and indeed

Shrewsbury was probably the most

not the nearest, mint to St. Davids), the two mints using the

same

die are

almost invariably in close

proximity.
;

The only
whether

exceptions are London

the
is

Thetford, and
die

London Exeter
is

London

Thetford
We

was used

first at

London or Thetford
certainty,

uncertain, but the

Loudon

Exeter die
distinct

shown with

from rust-marks
to Exeter.

in the crown, to

have been sent from London

have, then,

two

phenomena

in the first

place that of a die being sent from one mint to another in the
vicinity,

and secondly, a

die being sent

from London

all

the

way

to Exeter,

and another either from London to Thetford or from

Thetford to London (presumably, by analogy, from London to

Thetford).

The former

case

is

no doubt simply the borrowing or

;

purchase of a die from a neighbour as an emergency measure

whether

it

was an authorized measure

case
is

or illegal, one cannot say.

illus-

The second

very different

it

seems to be a definite

tration of the theory that dies

were delivered from London to

the provincial mints, as I think one can only explain the transfer
of

a die from London to a mint so far distant as Exeter as

a stop-gap measure, an old die being sent when the need at

Exeter was urgent, in order to save the time of engraving the

new

die.

The

large

number

of irregular issues in the north of

England

during the reign of Stephen

may

perhaps be attributed to a tem-

porary collapse of the direct control from the London mint.

cxli

MONEYERS.

The

position of the

moneyer

in

Anglo-Saxon times

is

obscure

in the reign of -cEthelred II, he

had workmen under him for

^

whom

he was personally responsible

in the

laws of Cnut the moneyers

of the reeve, for

seem themselves
if

to

have been under the authority

false coin

they affirmed that they made

with his permission the

if

reeve was to undergo the triple ordeal, and,

guilty, to suffer the

same penalty
iEthelred
II,

as a guilty moneyer.^

In the laws of ^thelstan,

and Cnut the same penalty

amputation of the hand,

The
II
*
:

and

its

exposure over the mint

of mone3^ers

was fixed for false coining.^

(to

number
town

was reduced by ^thelred

for every chief

three,

for every other

town one

judge by the names

appearing on consecutive issues of the coins of this reign, this

law was repealed or modified).

In the Winton Domesday
'

(fol. 2)
'

Godwine Socche

is

described as

having been master moneyer in the time of the Confessor.

In Domesday, more information
is

given on this subject

we
dies

have already

(p.

cxxxv) quoted passages which

show that the

moneyers, when the type was changed, purchased their

at

new

London and then paid

their fees

the

king's moneyers to the

king, the bishop's to the bishop.

At Oxford,
three shillings

the

moneyer Suetman has a

free

house (domus)

rated at forty pence.

(I.

Suetman has two mansioiies muri and pays

free^ so long as

154).

At Wallingford, a monej^er has a house (haga)

he works at the mint
(I.

56).

At York, Nigellus de Monneville has one onansio

(I.

of a

moneyer

298).

Liebermann,
Op. Op.
cit., p.
cit.,

Gesetze, p.
(II.

236 (IV. jEthelred,

8, 2). (II.

9, 1).

314

Cnut,

pp. 158, 234, 314

^thelstan, 14,

IV. yEtheh-ed,

5,

II.

Cnut,

8,1).
*
^

Op.

cit.,

p.

236 (IV. .Ethelred,

9).
it,
'

Not

necessarily, as

Ruding

translates

rent-free

'

the word liber may-

carry further privileges or immunities

(cf.

Maitland, Domesday Book and

Beyond,

p. 89, &c.)

Cxlii

INTRODUCTION
in the time of the Confessor,

At Hereford,

when

the king came

to the city, the

moneyers made for him as many pennies as he

{i.e.,

required from the king's silver

the bishop's)
;

presumably, as opposed to
;

the seven moneyers had sac and soc

if

one of
relief,

the king's moneyers died, the king had twenty shillings in

and,
if

he died intestate, his whole property;

(the

if

the reeve went

to Wales with an army, they

moneyers) went with him under

penalty of forty shillings

(I.

179).

Under
moneyer

the

Confessor,
(I.

Walter, Bishop

of

Hereford, had one

in Hereford

181

b).

At

Leicester, the

moneyers paid twenty pounds

;

(at

the rate of

twenty pennies

to the ounce) yearly

(I.

of this,

Hugh

de Grantmesnil

received the tertius denarius

230).

At Huntingdon there were,

in the time of the Confessor,

but not

at the time of the Survey, three

moneyers paying forty

(I.

shillings

between the king and the earl

203).

At

Colchester, both in the time of the Confessor

and at the time

of the Survey, the

moneyers paid four pounds

if

(II. 107).

At Norwich, the bishop,

moneyer
(11.

he wished, had the privilege of one

117

b).

The following payments monetae, de moaeta,

Pevensey, twenty shillings
(I.
(I.

&c.,

are noted:
shillings

20 b)

Malmesbury, 100
(I.

64

b)

Gloucester,

twenty pounds

162)

Colchester and

Maldon, twenty pounds, apparently reduced by William to ten

pounds

(11.

107 b);^ Thetford, forty pounds

(II.

119);

HuntingLincoln

don

Rex W.

geldum monete posuit

^

in

burgo

(I.

203);

Geldum regis de monedagio

In the reign of Henry I there

(I.

336 1)).

is

some

legislation

with regard to
In his

the coinage, and some reference to moneyers, forgers, &c.

Coronation Charter (Aug.

5,

1100)

i^

Monetagium commune quod capiebatur per

non
fuit

ciuitates et comitatus,
sit,

quod

tempore regis Eadwardi, hoc ne amodo

;

omniuo defendo
J.

( 5).

^ The passage seems coirupt County History of Essex.

see translation

by

H. Round in Victoria
vol.

See above, pp. Ixix-lxx.

Liebermaun,

i,

p. 522.

MONEYERS
Si quis cai")tus fuerit, sine monetarius siue alius,
iusticia recta inde fiat ( 5, 1).

Cxlui

cum

falsa moneta,

The following charter de moneta falsa

attributed to the date 1100-1 or 1103:^
Henricus rex Anglorum Sanisoni episcopo
et

et

camhiatoribus

is

Ursoni de Abetotet omnibus

baronibus, Francis et Anglis, de Wirecestrescira sahitem.

Sciatis

quod uolo

et precipio,

ut omnes burgenses et omnes

illi

qui in

burgis morantur, tarn Franci

quam

Angli, iurent tenere et seruare

monetam

meam
Et

in Anglia. ut

non consentiant falsitatem nionete mee.

si

quis

cum
;

falso denario inuentus fuerit, si

et si ilium inde

warant inde reuocauerit,

fiat iusticia

ad eum ducatur
ipso warant.
iusticia

conprobare poterit,

mea de

Si uero
scilicet

non

poterit ilium probare, de ipso falsonario fiat

Si

mea,

de dextro pugno et testiculis.

autem nullum

Avarant inde reuocauerit, portet inde indicium, se nescire nominare uel

cognoscere aliquem a quo acceperit.

Praeterea defendo, ne aliquis monetarius denarios mutet nisi in comitatu

suo, et hoc
alio

coram duobus

legittimis testibus de ipso comitatu.

fuerit, nisi

Et

si

in

comitatu mutando denarios captus

sit

captus

sit

ut falsonarius.

Et nuUus

ausus cambire denarios

monetarius.

Teste Willelmo cancellario et Roberto comite de Mellent et R[odberto]

filio

Hamonis

et R[icardo]

de Retuers.

Apud

^\^estmonasterium in natale

Domini.

In the Chronicles of Roger of Hoveden, Eadmer, Florence of

Worcester, and

Symeon

of

Durham,

the following

is

recorded under

the year llOS:^

Monetam quoque corruptam

corrigi statuit, ut

et

falsam

sub

tanta

animadversione

quicunque

falsos denarios

facere depreliensus fuisset,

et

oculos et inferiores corporis partes sine ulla redemptione amitteret;*

quoniam

ssepissime

dum

denarii eligebantur, flectebantur, rumpebantur,

^ ^

Liebevmann,

p. 523.
is

Cf. Kiim. Chron., 1901, p. 475.

The text followed

that of Hoveden (Rolls Series, no. 51, vol.

falsa muJtis modi's midtos affligehat.

i,

p. 165);

variants of the other chroniclers are given in the notes.

^

Item moneta comtpta

Ut nulliis qui
et

et

Quam

rex

Eadmer.
*

i^osset

deprehendl falsos denarios facere aliqaa redemptione qtiin

iuvari valeret.

oculos

inferiores corporis partes perderet

Eadmer, Florence

of Worcester,

Symeon

of

Durham.

Cxliv

INTRODUCTION

respuebantur, statuit, ut nullus denarius vel obelus, quos et rotundos esse

iussit,

aut etiam quadrans,^

toti

[si]

integer esset, respueretur.^

est,

Ex quo

facto

magnum bonum'

regno provisum*

quia ipse rex hsec in ssecu-

laribus ad relevandas terrse jerumnas^ agebat.

William of Malmesbuiy, in his

brief:

epitome of the reign of

Henry

I,

states after a
7

mention of Henry's return from Normandy

(Spring, 1107):

Contra trapezetas, quos vulgo monetarios vocant, prrecipuam sui

dili-

gentiam exhibuit

nullum falsarium, quin puguum perderet, impune

fuisset

abire permittens, qui

irrisisse.

intellectus falsitatis sure

commercio fatuos

In the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle under the years 1124-5 occur the

following passages
^
:

1124. That (the high price of food, &c.) Avas because there was
corn,

little

and the penny was so bad, that the man who had

at a

market a pound

could by no means buy there\Yith twelve pennyworths.

1125. In this year, before Christmas, King Henry sent from
to

Normandy
and

England, and commanded that

all the
;

moneyers that were in England

should be deprived of their members

their testicles beneath.

that was the right

hand

of each,

That was because the

{sic).

man
all

that had a pound could

not buy for a penny at a market

sent over all England,

And

the Bishop Roger of Salisbury

and commanded them

that they should come to

Winchester at Christmas.
one,
this

When

they came thither they were taken one by

and each deprived of the right hand and the testicles beneath. All and that was all with great was done Avithin the twelve nights
;

quos

quadrans omitted by Eadmer.

resjmeretur Eadmer, Florence,

insUtuit for

iussit

Florence,

Symeon. ^ For [si] which is not

^ *

and Symeon read

integer

esset,

intelligible.

Eadmer

inserts

ad tempus.

creatum Eadmer, Florence, Symeon. quia ipse rex omitted by Eadmer.

Eadmer
The

inserts interim rex.

399 (Rolls Series, no. 90, vol. ii, p. 476). that of Thorpe in the Rolls Series (no. 23). Ruding says that the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle mentions the punishment of six" forgers in 1124, but there is no reason to suppose that the six men there mentioned were
'

W. Malm.,

G. R.

v.

translation

is

forgers.

MONEYERS
justice,
false

Cxlv

because they had fordone

all

all

the land with their great quantity of

money which they

bought.

The same event

is

related
it

by most

of the Chroniclers

the

Margam Annals
in 1126.

place

in the year 1124,

and Symeon

of

Durham
given as

In the Margaui Annals the number of moneyers

ninety-four
;

is

according to the Winton Annals

all

the moneyers of

England were mutilated except three of Winchester.

of food prices in 1125 is attributed in the

The height
to rain-

Margam Annals

storms in the summer, by Florence of Worcester to the reform of

the coinage which followed this punishment of moneyers.

Wykes

adds to the penalty of mutilation that of banishment.

In the Pipe Roll of Henry

I (1130)

two men

at

London owe a

fine

for forfeitures for false coining

Algarus

et

Sprachelingus debent x marcas ai'genti

pro forisfacturis

falsorum denariorum.

But there

is

no reason to suppose that these are moneyers

coins of

the

name Algar occurs on

on the coins

London

of this period but not that

of Spracheling, unless, as Mr.

is identical.

Andrew

suggests, the

Similarly, in the

name Sperling following entry, we

have no reason to suppose the debtor to be a moneyer,^ nor can

we

conjecture

what the

offence

was
iiii

Godwinus Quachehand debet

placito Monetae.

marcas auri ut haberet pacem de

Definite references to

moneyers occur

under Hampshire (Hamtona)

Saietus

monetarius

debet

cclxxviii

marcas

argenti

pro

placito

ii

cuneorum.
"W. Malm., Roger of Hovedeii, Margam Annals, H. Hunt., Waverley Ann., Winton Ann., Cont. Floi*. Wore, Sym. Dur., Matt. Paris, Wykes. 2 A coin of Henry I, type XV (T. Bliss collection) reads "^^^ identification of this reading with Godwine GA^I OI^
^

GODPINE
is

Quachehand of the Pipe Roll {Num.

doubtful.

Chron.,

1901,

p. 283)

possible, but

Cxlvi

INTRODUCTION

under Honor de Arundel

Brand Monetarius reddit compotum de xx
aliis

libris

ne esset disfactus

cum

monetariis.
i

Et idem Vicecomes reddit compotum de

marca argenti de hominibus

monetariorum

Cicestrise.

under Norfolk
Eadstanus debet
c solidos

de pecunia Ulcbetelli monetarii.

under Pembroke
Gillopatric monetarius reddit
veteris Monetae.^

compotum de

iiii

libris

pro forisfacturis

In

his

summary

of

the

character of
ii,

Henry
487) says

I,
:

William of

Malmesbury
Fures
et
:

(Rolls Series, no. 90, vol.

latentes

p.

falsarios

maxima

diligentia

perscrutans,

inventos

puniens

parvarum quoque rerum non

fractos,
licet

negligens.

Cum nummos
audisset,

boni argenti, a

venditoribus

non

recipi

omnes

vel frangi vel incidi pra^cepit.

In the reign of Stephen

we have no
(p. Ixxii).

reference to the coinage and

mint

officials,

except the brief allusions to baronial issues which

have been quoted above

The information
moneyers
if

to be obtained

with regard to the status of the

of the

is

very scanty.

At the time
were
'

Domesday Survey,
is

we

maj''

argue from particular cases to the general (which

very

doubtful),

we

find that they

i.e.

free tenants of the king,

having
op.
cit.,

sake and soke,

p.

presumably the lower justice' (Maitland,

over
their

81),

or limited jurisdiction

own men and

least)

their

property;
service
;

they were subject

(in

Hereford at

to military

in

some

cases they held

office,

an

official residence,

mansio or

haga, during their term of

and the king did not have the

consuetudo of the moneyer's haga at Wallingford.

of

The property

moneyers

(at

Hereford) was not free from the king's relief at

their death, nor from reversion to the king in case of intestacy.

The Pipe Roll

of

Henry

(Honor de Arundel) shows that the

moneyers had workmen under them, and we have already seen

^

See above,

p. xx.xiii,

note

4.

See below, pp. cxlviii

f.

MONEYERS

Cxlvii

that in the reig-n of ^Etheh-ed II the moneyers were personally

responsible for their

workmen.
and that they were men

They were,
of

therefore, of burgess rank,

some property may perhaps be concluded from the amounts of

in the Pipe Roll
;

payments made or owed by them

Brand

of

Chichester, for instance, has the penalty of mutilation

to

commuted
still

payment

of

twenty pounds (probably the

fine

is

owing

from the Christmas of 1125, when so

penalty).

many moneyers
the large

suffered the

Saiet of

Southampton owes

sum

of

278 marks
paid, but

of silver.
it is

It is true that these

sums are owed and not

unlikely that Brand could have had his sentence

commuted
show
;

to

a fine unless he could give some security or at least

himself likely to clear the debt within a reasonable time

is it

nor
office

probable that Brand or Saiet would be continued in their

if

of

moneyer

they were unlikely ever to clear themselves of their

;

fines.

The sums they owe are large

6s.
8f/.,

Saiet owes as

much

as

185

which at

least gives

an impression that moneyers

were in Norman times men of no small means.

in the time of

We know

that

Henry

III moneyers were burgesses of good position

tlie office

who

not infrequently held

of sheriff or reeve,^

and that

they were sometimes

Stephen,
if

men

of wealth.^
little

So early as the reign of

(as

there

seems

doubt)

Thomas FitzUlf
that he
is,

is

correctly identified with the alderman of

York mentioned
;

in the

Pipe Roll,^ an alderman

is

acting as moneyer

is

coining

under a baron and not directly under the king

purpose, unimportant.
to prove that the

for the present

There

is

certainly nothing in
I

Domesday

moneyers of William

were men of equal status

tell

to their successors,

but Domesday Book does

it

us that they were

burgesses with certain privileges, and

hardly justifies us in

assuming that their position underwent any material change during

the eleventh century.
1

Num.

Chron., 1885,

pj?.

209 ff.

In 1242 Nicholas de Sancto Albano farmed the cambium of London and Canterbury (Calendar of Close Rolls). Thomas de Weseham was the king's Burgeon {Brit. Num. Journ., vol. is, p. 159).
*

See above,

p. cxiii.

k2


CXlviii

INTRODUCTION
(p.

The passage quoted above

character of

cxlvi)

from William of Malmesbury's

Henry I (Rolls

Series, no. 90, vol. ii, p. 487

Cum iiumTnos
omnes

frados,

licet

honi argenti, a venditoribus

non

recipi audisset,

velfrangivelincidi prxcepityiB of considerable interest, as Mr. Andrew

has shown in
passage
is

Num.

Ghron., 1901, pp. 55, 492

the meaning of the

coins,
all

undoubtedly that the king, finding that cracked

silver,

although of good

were not accepted by traders, ordered

;

coins to be cracked or incised

to be issued

that

is

to say,

by ordering

all

coins

from the mint with a crack or incision in their edge

the king compelled the acceptance of cracked coins.

This clearly refers, as Mr.

Andrew

pointed out, to a sharp cut

;

which appears on coins of

seen on PI. XLI.
4,

this reign

the most clear instance

is

but on this coin the cut has penetrated much

;

further into the coin than usual

nos.

14 and 15 on the same plate,

and

7, 9,

13 on PI. XLII, are perhaps better examples.

all

This incision occurs on

the coins that I have seen of types

VII

to

XII

inclusive,^

and

also

on a very few coins of types XIII,

XIV, and

XV

(PL XLIII.

3,=^

15

XL VI.
is

XL VII. 13),

but not on

any coins

of types I to VI.

This

an interesting confirmation of the

;

order in which the types of this reign have been placed

to

types I

VI XV, of which

clearly precede the introduction of this measure, and XIII to

incised, or snicked, coins are unusual,

must have

been issued after the withdrawal of the measure.

Unfortunately,

we

are given no date of either

it

its

introduction or withdrawal

Mr. Andrew supposes that

was given up when the coinage was

;

reformed after the punishment of moneyers at Christmas, 1125

if

he

is right,

type XII

is

earlier

than 1125 and does not, as

I conclude

^ See also Brit. Num. Journ., vol. viii, pp. 132-3, where Mr. the passage with the issue of cut halfpennies and farthings.
'^

Andrew connects

cannot be quite certain of all the coins of type XII

the incision cannot be

seen on the coin of Lincoln (no. 82), perhaps because the coin is clipped. ' The coin has cracked towards the centre from the end of the incision after
the incision was

made

the incision can be distinguished from an accidental

crack by
*

its

regular shape.
this,

Mr. Andrew comments on

but

fails to

observe that the incisions

are not found on coins of types IV, V, and VI, which in his grouping of the

types fall between the types which

have numbered VII and XII.

MONEYERS AND FORGERY

CxHx
quite possible that the

below

(p. cliv),

follow the reform

for

but

it is

practice continued

a time after 1125, and was later found

unnecessary.
Legislation against debasing the currency
reiterated,
is

severe and continually

all

and also against secret coining and

kinds of forgery.

Yet at

this period, as

throughout the mediaeval English coinage,

forgery and the frauduleuce of moneyers were, or were reputed to

be,

the cause of

much

distress in the country.

In 1108, and again

in 1125, this feature is noted

by

the Chroniclers, and on the latter

occasion

it

led to the mutilation, and, according to

Wykes, the

banishment, of an enormous number of moneyers.

The

coins give evidence of continual debasement

;

and forgery of

this sort

not only are there several coins evidently struck in the

regular mints of light weight and base metal, but also some pieces

which show attempts

reverse dies.^

to evade the penalties

by

falsification of the

series of these coins

seems to have been issued by the moneyer

first

iElfsi,

or iEolfsi, of London, during the

I.

three issues of the

reign of William
collection
is

coin of type I in Major Carlyon-Britton's

struck from a reverse die on which the orisrinal

to

inscription

I'EI-FSIOMLIINDE has been changed X"ELPPlOnE^EESI)E. The following drawing shows

by

shaded lines the alterations made in the original inscription

J-ELPSIONEi^ErDE
the weight of this coin
is

16-3 grains (PI. II. 6).

Some
scription

coins of type II,

which are not uncommon, bear an

I think,

in-

which has been changed,

to

from

i'lEI-FSON
thus:

UinDEMI'

IDEFIOMC/MHEMI
WBCFSONCnHDENI
18-1,
17,

Three of these coins, weighing

^

and 15-9

grains,

are

uiission of the Council of the

^

See Num. Chron., 1911, pp. 285 ff. The blocks are reproduced by kind perRoyal Numismatic Society. For this reading of the moneyer's name cf. Carlyon-Britton sale, 1913,

lot 645.

Cl

INTRODUCTION
2),

described in this Catalogue, nos. 109-11 (PI. V.

two

of

which

are struck from the same obverse die as a coin reading

iIEOl.F

SIOnUIMDEN
A
coin of type III in Major Carlyon-Britton's collection has the
inscription,

reverse

*i<IELFSIONUINI>EnEN,
*PifiH&IOHGrniBENEN

partly

defaced by cuts:

the coin weighs 17-5 grains.

These coins are evidently forgeries of the same money er,

or .^olfsi, of

^^Elfsi

whom we know
I.

at present no coins later than the coins are all of appreciably low
is

third type of William

The

weight, and the most noteworthy feature

alteration on the die
is

that in each case the

evidently done with the object of obscuring

that of his mint, the unimportant parts of

the

moneyer's name and

the inscription

the

word

ON

and the

last letters of

the

mint

being untouched.
Similarly, a coin of William
is
I,

type

II, in

the

York Museum,

struck from a reverse die which was altered from JIEI,PI

to

NEOnUINDHE
IV.
16).

i-IDLPIMEOnUl^NCOME

(pi

coin

of

Godwine

of

London, also of the second type of

William

I (Catalogue, p. 24, no. 128), is similarly altered

it

weighs 16-4 grains.

The reverse

inscription

is

more

clearly seen

on a duplicate coin in Mr. L. E. Bruun's

collection (PI.

V.

6).

The obverse

die

was

(previously, I think) used at Thetford

by the

moneyer

Cinric.
this

Another die of

same moneyer and

of the

same type was used to

strike a coin in the

York Museum with

to

the inscription changed from

-i-CTODPIMEOnLVDI
The
p.

-X-IELFPIME

OMKVFI

coin of type

VII

of this reign described in this Catalogue,

86, no. 462, is another instance of this, but the original in-

scription of the reverse die cannot be deciphered with certainty


MONEYERS AND FORGERY
perhaps
it cli

was

X-inLFPINEONLlI,

the altered inscription

beginning half-way through the moneyer's name of the original.

Another attempt to obscure the reverse inscription

p. 38, no. 199.^

may be found on
;

That these coins are

is

all of

the London mint and

I

of the reign of William I

perhaps a coincidence

have seen

similar

coins

of

Anglo-Saxon

and

'

Short-cross

'

(Henry II

Henry IH)

times.

Perhaps the same God wine of London, who struck the coins

mentioned above with altered reverse

reading

dies,

forged the reverse die

Catalogue,
p.

X^IIUPIMEOnCPlWH
from
is

(see

136,

no. 722), as the coin struck

this forged die is struck

from

an obverse die which

used with a genuine reverse, reading

(p.

i-coDPinEOMUino
With regard
from good
dies, it is of

isi, no. sn).

to coins that are struck of

low weight or base metal

course not possible to draw any fixed line,

and say that coins below a certain weight were necessarily struck
light
;

the decision must depend on the allowance

made

for loss

of weight,

and

this is again

dependent on the length of time for

which a coin was

suffered, the

in currency, the extent of corrosion of cleaning

which

it

has

amount

which

it

has undergone, and other

unascertainable data.

Further, though

we assume

the standard

weight of the penny during this period to have been 22^ grains,
this is

not a matter of certain knowledge, nor even that the

standard remained the same throughout the period with which

are dealing.

we

In his account of the Bea worth

find,

Mr. Hawkins gave

the average weight of coins of the various types, both of coins in the
find

and of coins in the British Museum before the discovery

is

the
to
is
it

contrast of these figures

sufficient to

condemn any attempt

of existing coins
;

discover a standard weight

by an average

nor

the average weight of coins in a find of any practical value, for

will obviously include coins that were fraudulently struck light, and

coins that have suffered severely

from clipping or wear

and even

^ It need hardly be said that the alteration of a die need not always have been the work of a forger (cf. pp. 19.3-4, nos. 1043-5, which are quite good coins and of good weight).

clii

INTBODUCTION

in the

Beaworth

find,

which was remarkable

for the fine condition

of the coins, there were

some

forgeries (e.g. p. 136, no. 722),

of the

and

some coins
which

in

worn condition (some

best be based

Lewes

coins of type VIII

left to conjecture,

are instances).

The standard weight must be

may perhaps

upon a table showing the number

In the following table the

of coins of different weights of each type.

highest

number of coins of each type is printed in heavy fount, in order

weight of the most numerous
less

to emphasize the extent of variation of

set of coins of each type.

Types represented by
:

than twenty

coins in all should be disregarded

for the sake of completeness.

they are only inserted here

These numbers omit pierced and

for

clipped coins, and

coins

which

any

definite

reason can be

declared false, such, for example, as the forgeries mentioned above.

The

figures in this table are not incompatible with the standard

weight of
first five

common

tradition,

viz.

22-5 grains,

if

we

except the
is

types of William I (those types where no figure

shown
five

in italics are of course also excepted, because through their scarcity

their evidence

is

valueless)

on the other hand, these

first

types, or at least the first three, render figures

which certainly

give an impression that the coins were in the early part of the
reign struck on a lower standard.
instructive
is
;

But the

figures of type II are

it

is

obvious that, however low the standard weight

tail of

conjectured to be at this period, there must be a long

it.

coins struck very considerably below

Place the standard as

low as 20 grains, then at least the twenty-three coins which weigh

less

than 17 grains must be considered as having been struck

significance of these figures
is,

light.

The

I think,

that the lower weight

of the early types of William I denotes not a lower standard of

the coinage, but a laxity in the control of the moneyers

perhaps

a slight drop or slight

rise in the general

weight of coins may,

the

as a rule, be taken to signify a relaxing or tightening of

king's authority.

Throughout the whole Norman period there are evidently many

coins

which were struck below the standard weight, and

I,

this

is

most prominent in the second type of William

and the fourteenth

WEIGHT OF COINS

cliii

'-'-'

l-^.S?t^'^'>"-'

1'-^'*

^_

^-,

'-

"ti

"*

O S "* CO

Tj(

rH

r-l

Tt<

CO

*
,-(

CO "5 n'

? |c3^N^^Sl22j?2oor^ca^
(M

|^^o.c.oco^og5S2^'
I I

1^-

^ N oa c- oo(M ^ N rH
T-<
,-1 ,-H


cliv

INTRODUCTION
I.

of

Henry

This latter case

is

noteworthy

on the assumption

that the types were regularly changed at intervals of two or three

years, this type

would come into

after

issue after 1130

about 1132
that
it

some seven years

Christmas, 1125
;

the great punishment of moneyers at

case,

in

any

we can hardly suppose

There

was

in

issue at that time, as

we should then

leave one type only for the

are, in fact, other indica-

remaining ten years of the reign.

tions that the type then current,
of
issue,

and presumably then put out

'

was the

'

double-inscription

type, the eleventh of the

reign.

One may reasonably suppose

scale

that a punishment of the

is

moneyers on so large a

was followed by what

is

commonly

known
those

as a reform of the coinage, that

to say, not a change

in standard

but a general inquiry and reorganization similar to

of in 1180, 1205,

we hear

and 1247, and we should expect

in w^orkmanship.^

this to be

marked by a general improvement

from the
'

I think

we may
I

find a gradual decadence in style of the coins

fifth type,

of

Henry

continuing to and culminating

'

in the eleventh, or

double-inscription

type,

and
'

this is followed

by a marked improvement
cross-and-annulets
'

in the twelfth, or

smaller profile and

type,

which shows a much neater and more

compact
there
is

style,

with a more definite attempt at portraiture.

Thus

probability in placing the end of the issue of the eleventh

type at Christmas, 1125.^

That so many coins

in

an issue of some

six or seven years after the inquiry of 1125

were struck light

and
how

many,

to judge

by

their appearance, of base metal

shows

soon a warning of this sort was forgotten, and

how

willing the

moneyers were

to risk the

most severe penalties for the sake of

the profit available from debasement of the coinage.

The only other occasion during the Norman period when we

Mr. Lawrence gives a diagrammatic explanation of the effect of these

'reforms' on the coinage, in an article shortly' to be published in the British

Numismatic Journal, where he deals with the coinage of 1205. Mr. Andrew also places this type here, though he calls it the twelfth of the reign, but I cannot agree that the coins at present known are of base metal (see Nui. Chtvu., 1901, pp. 78-9). See also above, p. cxlviii, on the incision
of coins of type XII.

MONEYERS NAMES

clv

have

definite

evidence of any inquiry into the coinage which

'

would be

likely to produce a

reform

'

of this sort

is

that of 1108,

which has been quoted above.

Applying the above principle of

is

degradation to this occasion, the obvious conclusion

that the

fourth type was then in issue and at this period superseded by

the

fifth

this conclusion allows a period of seventeen years for

seven types, nos.

to XI,

which

is

consistent with the average

p. Ixix).

duration of two and a half years for each type (see above,
It allows

eight years for the first four types, which

if

is

also con-

sistent

with that figure

its

completed

natural period

we suppose that type IV had when the inquiry was held.

not

Similarly,

by

this reckoning, the last four types of the reign

would cover a period of almost exactly ten years, assuming that

Stephen's
accession.

name was

placed on the coins immediately after his

is

This assumption

most probable, as Stephen's claim was

of publishing his accession were
to

doubtful, and all possible

desirable,
last issue

means
II,

whereas Henry
to

who seems

have allowed Stephen's

rival

continue

till

1156 or 1158, was without any

claimant to the throne.

The names
form^
reigns of
of

of the

moneyers of

this period occur in the English

until the Latin termination is occasionally

adopted in the
type

Henry

I
is

and Stephen

this appears first in the sixth

Henry I, and

afterwards occasional in use, being more frequent

last

than previously in the

of Stephen.

two types

of his reign

and in the

first

In the Table of Mints, Moneyers, and Types the forms are mostly
retained which
far

occur on the
;

coins,

varieties being inserted so

as space will allow

an attempt to restore the true form

cases be arbitrary,

of the

names would

in

many

and

is

best left

to specialists.

The names which appear on the coins are frequently

ways, partly owing to late forms being used after

varied in

many

the Conquest (yEgel- for ^thel-, -wi for -wig, &c.), partly owing
to the clipping of terminations

and omission of

letters

in order

foreign termination sometimes appears, such as Bundi, Sendi.

clvi

INTEODUCTION

to abbreviate the inscriptions (Wixie for Wihtsige, Goldhfc for

Goklhafuc), and partly owing to carelessness of engraving (Lesis

for Lesig or Leising,
p. 99, no.

Gowi

for

Godwi, Brwode for Brihtword

?)
;

see

518

W?egelwine for ^gelwine

letters

sometimes the identity

in

form of the

P and W, and
The
original

the similarity of

and V,
difficult

S and

G, cause difficulty.
;

name

is

consequently

to trace

^Imser, for example,

may
-\vi

represent ^Ifmser or iEgel-

(-^thel-)m8er.

The termination

appears to represent not only

;

-wig, but also in some cases

-wine

at

London, for example,

Godwine occurs on types

VII
William

II to

VI
;

(inclusive)

and VIII of William

III,

I,

and on II and III of William II

of
I,

Godwi occurs on types

V, and

and

is

therefore likely to be the

same moneyer.
of William
I
;

At Ilamtun, Ssewine occurs on types II-V and VIII

types
I,

I,

II,

V
II,

of William II,
I,

and type II of Henry

I

Ssewi on

type IV of William
Ssewine on

and types
VII, VIII

and II of William
of

II.

At Wilton,
I

IV,

William
I,

I,

and

and II of
II.

William II

Sajwi on

of

William

and III
I,

of

William

At
II,

London, Eadwine on I-V of William

type II of William
all

and types IX and XI of Henry

fifth of

Eadwi on

types from the

William

I to

the third of William II inclusive.

At Malmes;

bury, Brihtwi on II and IV, Brihtwine on V, of William I

at

Oxford,

-<:Egelwi

on type III of William

In which of these,
it is

I,

and iEgelwine on

II

and

III of William

IL

if

any, the termination -wi

may

represent -wine,

impossible to say, but this certainly

seems likely with Godwi at London, and with Ssewi at both

Hamtun and
Inhuhe

Wilton.

(p. 157),

Api or
list,

Some names are quite obscure, such Awi (p. 317), Bat (pp. 232, 249).
in

as

In the following

which notes

of interrogation refer not

to the existence, but to the classification, of the

name, the names

of

moneyers of William

I are

roughly

classified

Anglo-Saxon.
iEgel-, -briht, -ma?r, -ric, -wi, -wine; ^If-, -g?et, -geard, -heali,

-noth, -red,
'

-ric, -si,

-wi, -wine,

-word

-^stan

Alhsige (Alcsi)

York Powell {Eng.

Hist. Rev., 1896, p. 766) classifies

Eastan as Scandinavian,

; ; ;

MONEYEBS' NAMES

clvii
-\vi,

Blacsun

Briht-,

-ma3r,

-noth,

-red,

-ric,

-wine,

-wold,

-word;
Cen-,

Brun-, -gar,^
ric,

-inc,
;

-man,

-stan,^
;

-wine;
:

Ceorl;

CikH;
;

-stan

Cnihtwine

Cuthbert
;

Deorman

Duninc
;

Ead-,
?

-red, -ric, -ward, -wi, -wine,

-wold
-a,

Eald-, -gar, -red, -ulf

Earnwi

Folcheard
-wi, -wine

Forna'?

God-,

-esbrand?, -inc,
;

-leof, -noth, -red, -ric,

;

Gold-, -man, -stan, -wine

?
;

Heathewi

Heregod

Howord
-stan,
-ric,

(Howorth)

Hwateman

Leisinc
;

Leof-, -inc, -red,

-a, -inc,

-ric,
;

-sun, -wi, -wine, -wold,

-word

Mann-,

-wine

Ord-,

-wi; Os-, -mo?r, -wold;

-wi, -wine
Side-, -loc,
;

R^efwinel;

See-, -fara?, -grim, ^ -mser, -ric,

Si-,
;

-bode, -brand, -ferth, -lac, -mjer, -ward, -wulf

-man

Sunulf
;

Swet-,

-inc,
-ric,

-man

Theodred

Wig-,

-inc,

-mund

Wiht-, -red,
-meer,

-sige (Wixsi,
-si,

Wideman &c.) Wine ^

;
;

W^ulf-, -bold, -gset,

-noth, -red, -ric,

-stan, -wi, -wine,

-word;

Wyn-

(Win-), -da3g, -red.

Scandinavian.
Aleif
;

Arncetel; Arthulf; Atseror Acer; Autholf

-blac, -grim, -inc,^

Beorn; Brand;
;

Col-, -bein,

-man," -swein
;

Guthred

Horn?'*;

Osbern

or

Esbern

Osmund
Ulf

Oter

0th-, -bern, -grim, -ulf

-col,

Roscetel; Swein; Spraceling; Swart-, -brand,

-line

"^

Thor

Thor-, -bern, -cetel, -stan

Ulfcetel

Uspac or Ospac (Unspac).

Other Foreign Names.

Agemund, Anderbode,
Baldric, Garvin, Gifel
?,

0wi[ne]

Uncertain.
Inhuhe, Turri, Unnulf (possibly Scandinavian, or variant of
Sunulf, see p. 113).

but ^thelstan, iEstan, and Eastan, which

Confessor, are probably the
stan,
'

all

occur on Winchester coins of the

same name

similarly in

Domesday

(I.

185) ^thel-

Bishop of Hereford,

is

called ^Estan.

Scandinavian ?
If Silac-wine at Gloucester is to

^ ^
'

be treated as two names.

Anglo-Saxon

Lifwine Horn at Rochester.


Clviii

INTRODUCTION
of William II adds

The reign

Anglo-Saxon.
^gelword, JEUgav,
Goklhafue,
Goldinc,
iElfstan, Algod, Barcwit
?,

Ealdwine, Gold,
Leofsi,

Herman (= Hereman)?,

Leofnoth,
?,

Ordgar, Sewold, Siwate, Smewine, Sperhafuc, Sprot

Theodric,

Wibern (= Wigbeorn), Wulfgar.

Scandinavian.
Ascetel (Ascil), Colbern, Hal[]dene.

Other Foreign Names.

Baldwine, Bat ?, Bimdi?, Coc ?, Hathebrand, Sindi (Sendi) ?, Walcin.

The reign

of

Henry

adds

Anglo-Saxon.
Ail-, -noth,

-wald

Blacman, Derlinc, Ealla, Edmund, Essuwi

Folcred,

(=

iEscwig'?),

Estmund,

Godhesel,
Sfegsef?),

Herdigl,

Leftein

(=

Leofthegen?), Osulf, Saiet

(=

Sawulf, Sigar, Sper-

ling?, Suneman, Wibert.

Scandinavian.
Chitel,

Odde, Oslac or

Aslae,

Othen (Owthin),

Ravenswart,

Sihtric, Stanchil, Thored,

Toe I Winterlede.

Other Foreign Names.

Acel, Adalbot, Andreu,

Api or Awi ?, Boniface, Burchart, Chippig

Dort
?,

(=Hilping1),
Ev^erard,

Cristref?,
Geffrei,

Durant,

Engelram,

Erembald,

Gahan,

Gosfrei,

Germane, Gillebert?, Gillemor,

Ricard,

Gilpatric, Gregori,

Hlud, Mor?, Norman, Paien, Raulf,

^

Rodbert, Roger, Rolland, Stefne, Stigant, Sultan, Tovi

% Walter,

Warmund, Willem.
The reign
of Stephen adds

Anglo-Saxon.
Edgar, Gladwine, Godmer, Hermer (=Heremoer
beorn?), Wynstan.
^

?),

Siber

(=

Sig-

Scandinavian (=Tofa)?

MONEYERS' NAMES.

MONEYS OF ACCOUNT

cHx

Foreign Names.

Adam,
Tierri,

Adelarcl,

Alisander,

Etrei?,

Falclie,

Farman,
lun,

Fobund,
Martin,

Godard, Gurdan, Hamjiind,

Henri, Hue,

Hunfrei,

Tomas.

The English and Scandinavian names

found on Anglo-Saxon coins
;

of this period are nearly

all

of the foreign

names the doubtful

Owi

is

the only one of the reign of William I which has not already
;

appeared in Anglo-Saxon times

to this are

added

in the reign of

William
Coc.

II,

Hathebrand, Sindi, Walcin, and the doubtful Bat and

It is in the reign of

Henry

I,

and

chiefly

toward the end

in

of the

reign, that

new

foreign

names appear

any number
;

these are mostly Frankish, a few

Romance and

Biblical

more are

added in the reign of Stephen, and these again are mostly Frankish
in origin.

Moneys of Account.
The Moneys
of

Account of Domesday Book, and of the Laws, are

thus related to each other and to the penny

2 Ferdingi, Quadrantes, &c. 2 Oholi, &c.

=
=

Obolus, Maille, &c.

Denarius.

12 Denarii

20 Solidi
6 Librae

= =
also

1 Solidus.

12 Orae or Unciae 9 Marcae Argenti

Auri=l

Libra.

=1
Minuta
Sir

Marca Auri.

occurs once in Domesday, and was supposed by

Henry
is

Ellis to represent the

Northumbrian Styca.

Perhaps

farthing

a more likely interpretation.

In the Laws, the Mercian and West-Saxon shillings of 5 and

4 pence respectively are

also occurs.

still

found.

The Thrymsa (= | Oral)

are

The Domesday methods

of

payment

hy

tale,

by

tale of

pennies of standard weight (20 to the ounce), by weight, by weight

Hughes, Crump and Johnson, Didlogus de Scaccario, pp. 34 ff.

clx

INTRODUCTION

of silver of approved fineness or (occasionally) blanched, of pennies of standard weight

(1130), in addition to

by

tale

and

fineness.
tale

In the

first

Pipe Roll

payments by

and by weight, blanch

of payment,
I,

payments are
which seems

in regular use.

method

ad scalam,

to occur in the reign of

is

Henry

but to have fallen

into disuse before 1130,

assay.^

the addition of 5 per cent, in lieu of

Mints.
(See Table of Mints,
If

Money ers, and

Types.)

we assume

as correct our attribution of the coins,

we know
I,

of

sixty-seven mints in operation in the reign of William

as against
of the

seventy-three in the reign of the Confessor.

Confessor, or Harold
II, of

The mints

which no coins of the Conqueror's reign

are

now known,

are Axbridge,^ Aylesbury, Berkeley, Bridgnorth,

St.

Buckingham, Bury
ford,

Edmunds,^ Horndon,

Islip,

Langport, Lyd-

Lymne, Newport, Pershore, Petherton, Reading, Richborough

added Bridport,
Cardiff,

in the Conqueror's reign are

Christchurch

or

Twynham, Durham, Launceston, Marlborough, Northampton, St. Davids. The mints of William II number fifty-seven, no coins of this king being known of Barnstaple,*
Pevensey, Rhuddlan,
Bath,* Bedwin, Bridport, Cardiff, Christchurch,* Durham,* NorthSt.

ampton,* Rhuddlan,

Davids, Winchcombe, and only one

new

mint, Totnes, being added.

of Carlisle

In the reign of Henry I the mints

appear, and of

and Pembroke

first

Bury

St.

Edmunds

the

first

coins since the reign of the Confessor,

of

and no coins are

Hertford, Hythe,
Pevensey,^
fifty or

known

Cambridge,
Maldon,

Cricklade,

Guildford,

Launceston,^
Stafford,^

Malmesbury,

Marlborough,

Steyning, Watchet.^

Stephen's mints

number

R. L. Poole, The Exchequer in the Ttvelfth Century, p. 32.

ft'.

For many of these attributions see Brit. Num. Jonrn., vol. vi, pp. 13 But see below, p. clxiv, for coins attributed to this mint, and for confirmation of the grant of a moneyer by William I.
'
'

Coins of Henry
doubtful.

are

Coins of Stephen are

is

known known

of these mints.

of these mints, but the attribution to Launces-

ton

MINTS
fifty-one,^

Clxi

two, or perhaps three,

new mints
.
.

appearing, namely

Castle Rising, the uncertain Bran

coins being

.,

and perhaps Rye, and no

known

of Christchurch, Dorchester, Ilchester, Rochester,

Romney, Southampton, Totnes, Wallingford, Wareham.

To determine the number

at this period
is

of

moneyers employed

in each

mint

impossible.

The largest number

of names occurring

in

any one type

all

will frequently be too high, as the

moneyers

may

not

have been working contemporaneously, some having taken

over the dies of others during the issue of that particular type.

An

estimate of the number of names which overlap in more than one

type will probably in most cases be too low, owing to the comparative rarity of the coins at the present day, and the consequent

omission of names in types where they ought to appear.

But
and

a comparison of the two estimates will provide a standpoint from

which the mints may be viewed

in relation to their

in relation to each other,

own
I

position in the reign of the Confessor.

In the reigns of Henry

of the types prevents
possible

and Stephen, the great rarity of most

of

any estimate being made

the lowest

number

of moneyers.

In the following notes on the mints, these conjectural estimates

of the

numbers

of

moneyers working immediately before and after

the Conquest are considered.

is

The estimate

of the Confessor's reign

collection

based

mainly upon the British

Museum

and the

principal public and private cabinets.

References to numbers of

moneyers

in

Domesday Book
;

are noted, and also those in the

Greatley and subsequent laws

but

it

must not be concluded that

from the time of the Greatley Edict of -^thelstan there was

a steady increase of moneyers until the reign of the Confessor, for
the enormous output of the reign of ^^^thelred
necessitated at
all

seems to have

the mints a great increase in their number,

which

is

reduced again by the time of the Confessor.

:

Barnstajde (Domesday

Barnestaple).

The

attribution to this
is

mint of coins previously attributed to Bardney

satisfactorily

This does not include coins of irregular issues

'

'.

clxii

INTRODUCTION

established.^

The

coins of Leofwine
no. 74),

(William
C. Wells)
p.

I,
;

type II) read

apparently
Britton

Bur

(p. 15,

Burl (W.
vol.
ix,

Major Carlyon-

{Brit.

Num.

Journ.,

143)

assigns
I,

them

to

Bury

St.

Edmunds.

The Godesbrand

coins (William

type VIII),

here attributed to Bath, are

by Major Carlyon-Britton described

under Barnstaple.

Of the Confessor's

reign, only one

money er,.-^lfric,

is

at present

known
At
is

the post-Conquest coins also justify an assumption that

Barnstaple was one of the boroughs which had one moneyer only.
this

mint the increase of moneyers in the reign of ^Ethelred II

;

noteworthy

no fewer than three

at

(^Elfsige, Birhsige

and Huniga)

seem to have been

work

at the

same time.

Bath (Domesday: Bade).

the
cit}''

In the grant by William Rufus of

is

and

its

customs to Bishop John, which

the mint
is

assigned to the

period 1089

January 1091,^

specially mentioned,
I
;

and

also in the confirmation of this charter of the mint, therefore,

by Henry

the properties
of 1088, or

presumably escaped the

fire

were quickly restored^ though at present we know no Bath coins

of William II.

In Domesday

(I.

87) the

mint pays 100

shillings.

The

attribution of coins of Godesbrand to Barnstaple or

Bath

is

quite uncertain.

As
types

the
I,

name Osmser

occurs on coins of the Confessor and of

V, and VIII of the Conqueror, and Brungar on type III

of the Conqueror,

we may assume

that these two moneyers were

contemporaneous
together,

in the Confessor's reign also,

two

at least

worked

namely ^glmser and Wsedell (followed by ^thelmser),

and, later, Godric (followed

by Willewine) and Osmasr.

In the reigns of W^illiam I and

Bedford (Domesday

Bedeford).

William

II,

two moneyers

at least were

working

at the

same time.

In the early part of the reign of the Confessor there seem to have
been at least three, perhaps four; in the latter part of his reign
also not fewer

than three.
ff.
;

1 ^

mim.
Davis,

Chron., 1897, pp. 302

lierjesta, vol.
i,

1898, pp. 274

ft'.

1911, p. 274.

no. 326.
vol.
ii,

Dugdale, Monasticon,

p. 268.


MINTS
clxii

Bedivin

or

Great

Bedwiii

(Domesday

Bedvinde).

For

an

account of this mint see

Num.

Chron., 1902, pp. 20-5.

Coins are
first

preserved onlj- of the reign of the Confessor and of the

of the Conqueror.

type

Only one moneyer,

Cild, is

known.

Bran

occurs on coins of the last type of Stephen's reign.

is

Their attribution

quite uncertain.

Mr.

Andrew (Num.
as

Circ,

1914, p. 632) suggests Braines,

now

Bradninch, in Devonshire, citing

specimen in the Carlyon-Britton collection

;

ORGAR ON

BRAES

but the
to

last

two

letters of this inscription are uncertain,

and seem

me

to be better interpreted as
dies, in

ME

or

NE

another

specimen from the same

Copenhagen Museum, misses the

same two

letters.

Brid'poH (Domesday

Brideport).

Domesday

(I.

75) says that

here.

in the time of the Confessor there

was one moneyer

Of the

last

type of William I

we have

coins of

two moneyers,
;

who were presumably

coins of his or

not working at the same time

no other

any other reign are yet known

:

of this mint.

Bnstol (Domesday

Bristou).

In the reigns of the two Williams

of

two

is

the lowest possible

number

moneyers working together,

but so few as two are unlikely, and would necessitate a succession

of

Ceorl

Hwateman BrihtwordBarcwit,
A
'Paxs' type, five names

and of Leofwine

Swein^
bable.

Brunstan ^ Colblac Sendi.^

In the

larger

number

is

pro-

appear.
is

In the early part of the Confessor's reign three

possible number,

the lowest

and

five

names occur
is

in type (Hildebrand)

in

the latter part of the reign two

in type G.

possible,

and three names occur

Either a reduction of moneyers took place at this

reign, or, as

mint during the Confessor's

seems more probable, the

^ A common obverse die of these two moneyers is more rusted when used by Brunstan, and therefore shows that, unless they were contemporaneous, Brunstan was later than Swein. The name of this moneyer has been variously read as Sinot, Senwi, &c. A comparison of the coins shows that they are all of the same moneyer and his

name seems

to be Sendi or Sindi (see Table).

1

Clxiv

INTRODUCTION

Bristol coinage of the last

after,

few years before, and of the period

the Conquest
'

is

poorly represented at the present day.

'

Coins of

Irregular Issues
;

of the reign of Stephen struck at this

I
'

mint are described above

(p.

they are of variety

Pereric
'

Erased Obverse

'

Ixxvi),

variety

II,

'

(p.

Ixxxii),
f.).

Empress

Matilda

(p. cxviii),

Henry

of

Anjou

(pp. cxxii
:

Bury

St.

Edmunds (Domesday
The grant
Mus.,
(Brit.

Villa uhi quiescit

of one

humatus
Abbot

Sanctus Eadmundus).

money er

to the
fol.

by the Confessor
and Henry

MS. Addit. 14847,

(Ibid., fol.

31)

was
38),

confirmed by William I
I {ibid. fol.

and William II
33
b).

36 b and

One

die only

was allowed

to the

Abbot, for Stephen's

second
die,

confirmation charter

{ibid., fol.

36) adds a
die,

and

is

followed by another charter granting a third

implying possibly the addition of a second and a third monej^er.

Apart from Major Carlyon-Britton's attribution of the coins

Conqueror's second type which read

of the
&c.,

LEOFPINE ON BVRI,

no coins of either of the two Williams are assigned to this monastic

mint.

In the reigns of Henry I and Stephen the name of the

is

mint

represented by an abbreviated form of Sancti Edraundi,

or occasionally of

Edmundi

{Sancti being omitted), and as far as

we know
on coins

at present the earliest instance of the

is

form Bury {Beri)

of the latter part of the reign of

Henry

III.^

In

charters of

the

Norman

period, as

in

Domesday, Villa Sancti

mint
&c.,

Edmundi
of

seems to be usual, thougli in the Confessor's charter

is

the form Seint Edmundeshiri

used.

Confusion with

tlie

Sandwich

is

inevitable,

and with coins reading SA, SAN,

this Catalogue has

mainly followed the principle of assigning

to

Bury

coins of

moneyers who can be shown by

other coins to have

;

struck at this mint, and the remainder to Sandwich

tions are not likely to be correct in every case.

the attribu-

Calue (Domesday: Cauna, Calne).

Some

coins of the

Empress

Matilda are tentatively attributed to this borough (see above,

^

the moneyer's

Unless a coin of Stephen's last type in Mr. B. Roth's collection, on which name is illegible and the mint is represented by the letters
to Bury.

BVR, should be assigned

MINTS
p.

clxv

cxx).

Calnc

is

situated
in

west of Marlborough and midway

it

between Malraesbury

the north and Devizes in the south;

therefore lay in a district essentially Angevin,

in

and was presumably

Angevin possession throughout the Civil War. Empress travelled by way

On

her

way

to

Bristol in 1139, the

of Calne,

and at

this

point Waleran of Meulan left her in charge of the Legate.^

Gamhridge

(Domesday

Grantehrige).
is

The employment
just
it

of

only one moneyer after the Conquest

possible

on the

evidence of the coins at present known, but

seems unlikely.

As many
later

as three, or even

four,

moneyers seem to have been

employed in the reign of the Confessor.

than the
reig-n of

No

coins are yet

known

William

II.

Canterbury

(Domesday:

Cantuaria).

In

the

Greatley laws

seven moneyers of Canterbury are mentioned, four of the King,

two
and

of the Archbishop,

and one of the Abbot.

In the reign of

the Confessor seven moneyers must have been working together,

after the Conquest six or seven overlap

from the end of the

Conqueror's into Eufus's reign, though from the coins at present

known
'

as

few as three moneyers may have been employed at the

reio'n of

beffinninp; of the

William
of

I.

Eight names occur in the

Paxs

'

type.
is

The low number

moneyers immediately after

the Conquest
of

probably due to the chance circumstance of rarity

the present day
;

the

coins

at

and there appears

to be

an

establishment of seven moneyers, as in the reign of iEthelstan, both

in the reign of the Confessor

and after the Conquest.

Erased Obverse

Irregular coinages in the reign of Stephen, bearing the mint-

name
(

of Canterbury, are of varieties I

').

('

')

and II

Pereric

Coins of the Empress have been attributed to this

mint.

See above, pp. Ixxviii, Ixxxii, cxx.

Oardif.

The

attribution to Cardiff of a few coins of the last

is

type of William. I

based on their resemblance in style and fabric

to the coins of St. Davids,

Rossler, Mathilde, p. 250
ii,

and on the forms Cairdi,

Gariti,

by

William of Malmesbury

(Rolls Series, no. 90j,

vol.

p. 556.

Clxvi

IXTEODUCTION
is

which the mint

William

rendered

on

them.

It

is

supposed

that

I established the castle at Cardiff in

St.

1080 on his return

from the expedition to

coins

Davids.^

If correctly attributed, the

must have been struck a few years

after the building of

the castle.
Carlisle.

In

1092

the

city
;

was refounded under

but no coins are

English
of the
I,

sovereignty and the castle built

known

mint of
is

Carlisle earlier

than the fourteenth type of Henry

that

to say, about the time of, or shortly before, the establishment

of the bishopric under the metropolitan of

York

in 1132.

At the

beginning of 1136 Carlisle was seized by David, and in the terms

of the peace
it

was granted

to his son

Henry, with the earldom of

Huntingdon.

One

of the coins described below, p. 337, no. 17,

bears strong resemblance in style to the Scottish coinage of David,

and was perhaps struck

after Scottish occupation.

Coins seem to

have been struck here by Earl Henry (Burns, Coinage of Scotland,

PI. III.

24 a) and by King David (Burns,

first

op.

cit.,

pp. 27

ff.)

those

which copy the

type of Stephen being presumably the

earliest,

and struck

in,

or shortly after, 1136.

A
;

coin of
I
if

David which
A. Lawrence
is

bears the type of the last issue of

collection)

Henry

(L,

was struck by a moneyer Erebald

legible, is to

the mint, which

not clearly

be read as Carlisle (the name Erembald

I,

occurs also on Edinburgh coins of David

lot 1090),

cf.

Rashleigh

sale,

the coin was presumably struck rather later than the

I

issue of

Henry

from which

it

was copied

for the Scottish king-

was
the

not,
it

as far as we know,
in the year 1136.

in possession of Carlisle before he

seized

(See H.
p. 529.)

W.

C. Davis,

England under

Normans and Angevlns,

Castle Rising"^

(Domesday: Rislnga).

This seems to be the

only possible attribution for coins of the last issue of Stephen, on

which the mint-name appears

Risinges
;

as Risinge

(p.

370, no.

189) and

the moneyer's

name

is

lun or Hiun.

See Ramsay, Foundations,

vol.

ii,

p. 122.

See ^^um. Chron., 1889, pp. 335

ff.


MINTS
clxvii

Coins of types II and VI of the same reign struck by Robert

On

Rin

may

also

with probability be attributed to Castle Rising.

Those of Rawulf

On

Rie of Stephen's second type are here also

given to this mint, but

may

perhaps be assigned to Rye,^ which

is

sometimes identified with the

New

Borough

of

Domesday

(I.

17).

The
(p.

coin of Stephen's first

337, no. 20)
is

type of uncertain moneyer on Rl

also of doubtful attribution.

Cestre).

Chester
Cestre

(Domesday
is

The

first

appearance of the form

on coins

an isolated instance
;

in the last issue of

William I

(see below, p. 113, no. 598)

other coins of the same type, and from

still

the same obverse die

(p.

112, nos. 594, 595), retain

the old

name

Legecestre or Lehecestre.

The

difficulty of distinguishing the

Chester and Leicester coins, therefore, continues in this period, and,

though the main principle of distinction

is

now

clearly explained,^

the abbreviated readings on the coins are frequently ambiguous,

and must be considered

in connexion with the moneyers'

names

for example, the reachngs Legr, Legrl, Lehri

on coins of

^gelwine

necessitate the attribution to Leicester of the remaining coins of

this

moneyer, which read Leg, Legi, Leh, and might otherwise

be equally well assigned to either Lege-{Lehe-)cestre or Legra{Lehra-)cestre.

(Leiec, Lecstr),

The

old form continues in the reign of William II

late as the third

and even as
is

type of Henry

I, if

the

Carlyon-Britton coin

correctly read (Lege).

Later in Henry's

reign there are some coins with ambifjuous reading-s, and these are

here attributed to Leicester in order to avoid, where possible, the

attribution of

any but

Cestre readings to Chester at so late a period.

Not fewer than

four

three moneyers

Lifinc, Lif wine,

type
(five if

and Sunulf

appear to be working together at the end of the Conqueror's reign

names appear

in the

'

Paxs

'

Sunulf and Unnulf

are not identical), and also in the fourteenth type of

Henry

in

William

I's

second type there are

six.

The

coins of the Confessor

suggest a larger number, for in his reign eight moneyers can be

counted whose issues overlap in two or more types, namely, iElfsige,

'

Num. Num.

Circ, 1914, p. 632.

Chron., 1891, pp. 12
ff.

clxviii

IKTRODUCTION

Alcsige,

Brunninc,

Colbrand,

Huscarl,

Leofnod,

Leofwine

and

Sweartcol.
ChicJiester

(Domesday

Cicestre).

The Greatley Synod mentions

In the

Chichester as having one moneyer.

Norman

period there
certainly

were two at

least,

for

Brunman and Godwine were

of William II,
I
;

working together

in

the reign

and Brand and

type two names

Godwine

in the reign of

Henry

in the

'

Paxs

'

only appear. apparently not

In the reign of the

less

Confessor the number was

than three (^Ifwine, Godwine and Wulfric).

This mint has

Ghristchurch (Domesday: Tlniinain, Tuinani).

been identified on coins of William

Britton in Brit.

and Henry
vi,

by Major Carlyonff".

Num.

Journ., vol.
(of

pp. 161
?)

The

coins of

Henry

of

Anjou and William

Gloucester

which bear a mint-

name name

Crst have also been attributed to Christchurch (see p. cxxviii)

still

but in the reign of Stephen Christchurch was

of the

probably the

Abbey
is

only,

and

Twynham

the

name

of the town.

Cirencester

here suggested as the mint of the coins of

(of

Henry

of

Anjou and William

Gloucester?) above mentioned, which have pre-

viously been assigned to Christchurch (see above, pp. cxxviii, cxxxi).

Cirencester

was probably an important Angevin centre

it

was

the scene of the council held by the leaders of that party in 1142

(W. Malm.).
Colchester

(Domesday

Colecestra).
(in

mint in the laws of ^Ethelstan

Brit.

No Num.

mention

is

made

of this

Chron., 1901,

p. 161,

and

Num.

Journ., vol.
vol.
ii,

v, p. 116,

following B.

M.

Catal.,

Anglo-

Saxon

Coins,

p.

cix,

it

seems to have been confused

107) the

with Eochester).

In Domesday

(II.

money ers

paid,

and

had paid in the time of the Confessor, four pounds, but their

number

is

not given

also (II. 107 b) the burgesses of Colchester

I

and Maldon paid twenty pounds, reduced by William

pounds, for their mint.^

to

ten

In the reign of the Conqueror, three

moneyers at

least

were contemporaneous, probably four; four

See above,
note

p, cxlii,

1.

MINTS

Clxix

occur

ill

the

'

Paxs

'

type

in the reiyn of

Rufus

their

number

seems to have been not

correctly read
:

less

than four,

if

doubtful coins have been

is

in the reign of the Confessor live

the lowest

numbei' estimated from the coins

CricJdade (Domesday
:

now known.
In the reign of the Confessor
;

CricJielade).

two moneyers seem

the

to

have been employed at Cricklade

after

Conquest there

were probablj^ two, though one

\vill

just

suffice for the coins at present

known, assuming a succession of

;

moneyers, Leofred
in the fifth,

Wulstan ^Ifwine Edouf

known
:

two names occur

and one

in the eighth, type of the Con(|[ueror.

later

No
not

coins of this mint are

than the
the

reisrn of

William
it

II.

Derby

(Domesday

Derby).

After

Conquest

is

necessary to assume an establishment of more than two moneyers

at

Derby, and two names occur in the

'

Paxs

'

type

but in the

early part of the reign of the Confessor there appear to have been

three at the same time (Froma, Swartinc, and Wulfeh).

For irregular coinage (variety IV

see above, p. xcv.

(/>))

of the reign of

Stephen

Devizes (Domesday:
of
lot

Theodulveside).

For a coin of the reign

Rashleigh
sale,

Stephen attributed to this town see 603 (now in the Fox

collection).

1909,
627,

Also in the same

' '

sale, lot

a coin of Henry of Anjou.

contemporary^ documents.
Dorchester (Domesday:

But the form Vises

is

not used in

Dorecestre).

In the Greatley laws one

(I.

moneyer

is

allowed to Dorchester.

In Domesday Book
silver,

75)

two

moneyers are mentioned as paying each a mark of

shillings qiiando

and twenty

moneta

vertebcUiir, in the

time of the Confessor.

From

the coins

we may conclude

that the two moneyers in the Con-

fessor's reign

were Godwine, followed by Hwateman, and Blacaman.^ Coins of the Norman period justify the assumption that two
to

moneyers continued
coins are yet
^

work

at this

mint after the Conquest.

No

known

of the first three types of the Conqueror;

no. 194, I should attribute to

Joinii., vol. vi, p. 41).

The coin described in B. M. Cafal, Anglo-Saxon Coins, vol. ii, p. 355, Warminster (cf. coin of Harold I, Brit. Num.

C-lxX

INTRODUCTION

possibly none were struck at Dorchester so soon after the ravages

followino; the rising- in the South-west in 1068.

coin of William (of Gloucester

?)

may

possibly be attributed to

this mint, see above, p. cxxxi.

Dover (Domesday:

Dovre).

In the reign of the Confessor as

last

many

as four

moneyers overlap in the

two

types,

and four

also

appear to be contemporaneous in the early part of his reign.

After

the Conquest three run from the reign of William I to that of

William II

(this calculation

omits both Goldwine and

Manwine

owing

to the possibility that each of these

earlier
'

names may denote two

on which the name

moneyers striking the

appears)
:

and

later issues

in the

'

Paxs type
coins are
I
:

five

names

occur,

Durham.
' '

Xo

known
but no

of this

mint

earlier

than the

Paxs type of William

definite evidence

can be obtained

from

this concerning the

I,

date of that type, as the charter of

William

which was supposed to confer the right of coinage

is

among

other privileges upon the bishops,

i,

certainly spurious (see

Davns, Ee(jesta, vol.

no. 148).
vol. ix, pp.

Erami

See Brit. I^um. Journ.,

is

138-9, for a coin of

the fifth type of William 1 which

attributed to Great Yarmouth.

Exeter (Domesday: Execestre, Exonia).

The Greatley Synod

mentions Exeter as having two moneyers under iEthelstan.

In the reign of the Confessor there appear to be five moneyers

working

at

the

same time, and

after

the Conquest

the

same

number seems
two
and
the
of
'

to be required

by the

coins at 'present

earlier part of the Conqueror's reign, or four if

known of the we assume that

of

different

moneyers of the name

of Lifwine struck in the first

last types of the reign.

Only three names occur on coins

Possibly the ravages of

Paxs type.
'

Perhaps the number was reduced in the middle

I.

the reign of William

1068 are

reflected in the rarity of

Exeter coins of the Conqueror's second

its

type;

if so,

the mint quickly recovered

former activity.

Gloucester

(Domesday
(I.

Glotvecesire).

At

the

time

of

the

Domesday Survey

162)

the mint of Gloucester paid twenty

MINTS

Clxxi

pounds

to the King.

Under the Confessor

in

there appear to he no

fewer than six moneyers employed, but perhaps the number was
reduced by William
in successive types,
*

I,

whose reign four moneyers only overlap

and four names only occur on coins of the

Paxs

'

type.

For a coin of Henry of Anjou attributed to Gloucester see

above, p. cxxi.

Gromhes ...

coin of the second type of William I in the

York Museum reads

name (Earnwi
S
is is

-i-EUPIOMCrUOMKES.
coins.

The moneyers

?) suggests Shrewsl )ury,

and the confusion of

:

and

not

uncommon on

But Grimsby (Domesday

Grline><hl)

not impossible.

Guildford (Domesday

GUdeford, Geldeford).

From
this

the coins
to

known

at the present

day one would suppose

mint

have

employed one moneyer

only after the Conquest, and in the time

is

of the Confessor also this

possible,

assuming a succession of

moneyers, ^Ifwine Blacaman ^Ifric Godwine Leofwold,

followed after the Conquest by Seric
Hasttiujs

^Ifric.
One moneyer was allowed
of the Confessor's reign

(Domesday

BasHiiges).

by the laws

of J^thelstan.

At the end

at least three moneyers, Colswegen,

Duninc and Theodred, worked

together at Hastings, and in the reign of William II the same

number was employed, though two names only appear on

issue of

tlie last

William
...
1

I.

Hedu
The

coin

of

Stephen's last type, which

is

in

the

Hunterian

collection, reads

*GEI^A.R0:OM:i-ED\/'I:i.
mint
is

identification of the
(cf.

quite uncertain, but

Hythe

is

possible

Domesday

Hede).

Hereford (Domesday: Hereford).

Domesday

(I.

179) tells us of

seven moneyers having been employed at this mint in the reign

of the Confessor, one of

the evidence of

them being the Bishop's moneyer. From the coins at present known, not more than five
to

moneyers can be shown

have worked together in the reign of

Clxxii

INTRODUCTION

the Confessor and not more than four after the Conquest; five
is

the largest

number

of

names appearing
' '

in

any type

of

tlie

Confessor, and four occur in the

Paxs type of the Conqueror.

For coins of Henry of Anjou struck at Hereford see above,

p. cxxi.

Hertford (Domesday

Herford, Hertforde).

There appear to have

been not fewer than three moneyers employed at Hertford in the

reign of the Confessor.
in the British

As many as five names occur in

C),

his third type

Museum Catalogue (Hildebrand

certain.

but the readings

are not

all

In the reigns of

the two Williams two

moneyers seem to be at work.

of William Rufus.

No

coins are

known

after the reign

Huntingdon (Domesday: Huntedone, Huntedun).

(I.

Domesday
coins

203) says that three moneyers were here in the time of the

Confessor, but not at the time of the Survey.

The

now

the Confessor, but as

{B.

known show only two moneyers overlapping in many as four names occur
M.
Catal., xi,

successive types of
in one of his types

Hildebrand G).

After the Conquest two moneyers

are evidently contemporaneous in the early part of the reign of

William

I,

but one only occurs in the

is

'

Paxs

'

type.

In the reign

of William II one only

certain.

Hythe (Domesday

Hede).

Presumably a borough emploj^ing one

moneyer

only.

In the Confessor's reign, though as

many

as four

names

occur, there is
at one time.

no reason to suppose that more than one

is

worked
at

After the Conquest, Edred

the only moneyer the

reign
of

present
II,

known.

No
.)

coins

are

known

after

William

unless the Hunterian coin of

Stephen's last issue

(see above,

Hedu
is

may

be assigned to this mint.

The rusty

condition of the obverse dies which struck the Conqueror's coins

of this mint

noteworthy, and also the use at this mint of dies

previously used at Canterbury.

Ilchester

(Domesday:

Givelcestre).

Only a few coins

at least

of the

Confessor's reign are

known, but two moneyers

seem

to

MINTS

clxxiii

have been working together.

is

After the Conquest the same number

necessary for the coins at present known.

is

Waegelwine on

p. 46,

nos. 237, 238,

presumably an engraver's error for .^gelwine.

The bar
of William

across one of the limbs of the reverse cross on coins

I's

sixth type

is

curious and evidently serves some

is

definite purpose, as the

same feature

found on coins of this mint

of the Confessor's reign (see B.

vol.
ii,

M. CataL, Anglo-Saxon Coins,

p. 371, nos. 432-5).

Ipsivich

(Domesday

Gipesivlc, Gipeiuiz).

Domesday

(II.

290 b)

says that in the time of the Confessor the moneyers paid four

pounds a year, and at the time of the Survey twenty pounds

in the

four years previous to the Survey they paid only twenty-seven

pounds.
to

Under the Confessor not fewer than four moneyers appear

in the

have been employed, and in the reign of the Conqueror no

; '

fewer than three

Paxs

'

type as

many

as six moneyers'

names

occur.^
.

Lansa
of

Coins of the

first

type of Stephen with this reading

his

the

mint were tentatively attributed by Rashleigh in

account of the Watford find

Lancaster.

{Num. Chron.,
lots

1850, p.

157)

to

They
iii,

are
p.

now

assigned to Launceston {Brit.

Num.
of

Journ.,

vol.

113),

For Laniua, in

518 and 519

Rashleigh

sale, I

should read
:

Gamva

(Canterbury).

Launceston (Domesday
(1.

Lanscavetone).

The Domesday passage

little

120

b),

Canonici Sancti Stefani tenent Lanscavetone, leaves

doubt of the correctness of Major Carlyon-Britton's attribution of

coins to the church of St. Stephen at Launceston {Brit.
vol.
iii,

Num

Journ.,

pp. 107

fif.

vol. iv, pp.

68

ff.).

The

earliest coin of this

mint

at present

known

(William

I,

type V) has no moneyers name, but

clearly intended for Sancti Stefani;

has a reverse legend which

is

and the Hunterian coin of type VI, which reads

CTOOHXI^

ON

SIN^S^FNI
^

(see PI.

XIV.

15), connects the earlier reading

which omits the moneyers name with the

Possibly on coins of the
(i. e.
'

later

which omits the

Ulfwine
only are

Paxs type the moneyer's name should be read as Wulfwine) rather than Alfwine, in which case five moneyers
'

known

of this type.


Clxxiv
title

INTRODUCTION

Sandl.

Coins of Stephen, mentioned above, with the reading

possibly be assigned to Launceston.^
coins of

Lansa,

may

The Latua
Leicester

Henry
:

I,

type XIV, are probably of Lewes.

(Domesday

Ledecestre).

The moneyers
(I.

of Leicester paid

the

King

at the time of the

is

Survey

230) twenty pounds yearly

their

number
to

not mentioned.

Not fewer than four monej^ers

seem

have worked together in the Confessor's reign, namely

^gelric, /Egelwine, Godric and Leofric, but the attribution of the

^gelric and Leofric coins

is

doubtful.

In the Conqueror's reign

only two are apparent on the coins, perhaps even one only might

have been employed

but the amount of the moneyers' pajnnent

in DomesdajT- suggests a larger

number.

For attributions

to this

mint

see foot-notes to Table of Mints, Moneyers,

(p. clxvii).

and Types and

also

notes on Chester above

Lewes (Domesday

Lewes).

Two moneyers were

(I.

allowed to

Lewes by ^thelstan.
as paying

In Domesday

26)

moneyers are mentioned

renovatur,

twenty

shillings

cum moneta

but

their

number

is

not given.

In the reign of the Confessor there were

not fewer than four moneyers (Eadward, Eadwine, Godwine and

Oswold) overlapping in types (Hildebrand)

F and

the coins
:

known

of the

two Williams
necessitates

will allow of so

low a number as two

but as this

the

close

sequence

Oswold

iElfric

Brihtmser, and hence the supposition that no

new

tj'pes of these

moneyers remain

to be found, one

may
In the

assume that the number

was not

less

than three.

Three seem to overlap from the reign

I.
'

of William II to that of

Henry

Paxs type three occur.

'

Lincoln (Domesday: Lincolia).

Domesday

(I.

336b)

sa^ys

that

the mint at Lincoln then paid seventy-five pounds.

In the early

part of the Confessor's reign not fewer than ten, and towards the

end of the reign not fewer than eight, moneyers seem to have been
employed.

At the beginning

of the reign of William

I,

there seem

1 Perhaps also the coin of type III (Hks.276) in Cuff (lot 758), Murchison (lot 33), and Simpson Rostron (lot 40) sales, now in Captain Alan Dawnay's collection. 2 If the coin of Godric of type II is, as seems likely, a misreading.

MINTS
to be seven

clxXV
of the Confessor
;

moneyers who continue from the reign

or Harold II, and seven

in his fourth

names occur
Paxs

in his second type

similarly,

and

fifth types, five

'
'

or six appear to be working

together

but in the
tlie

type only two names occur.

This

great decrease in

number of moneyers represented on coins of

the end of the Conqueror's reign

tive scarcity of coins of the

may possiblj^ be due

names

to a

comparafind,

Northern mints in the Beaworth

of these mints
;

and a consequent

loss

of monej-ers'

but

this is not a probable explanation, for in

the

Bea worth hoard

there were 171 coins of Lincoln

representing onl}-

two moneyers,

whereas of Canterliury 285 coins represented as man}- as eight

moneyers, and of Hereford
fiftj'-nine coins

served to produce four

moneyers' names.

In the reign of William II there appear to be

coins are

two or three moneyers, but the

uncertain.
of the

few and some readings

Probably there was a decrease in the establishment

close of the Conqueror's reign,

mint at Lincoln towards the

though Domesday gives no signs of any serious decrease

prosperity of the city;
of 1,140
for,

in the
total

though 240 raansiones out of a

had disappeared
owing

since the Confessor's day, 166 of these

had been demolished

in building the castle

and

onl}-

seventy-four
fire.

had

fallen into ruin

to misfortunes, poverty,

and

On
Henry

the coins
I,

of

the twelfth and

of

the last two types of

first

and on most of the coins of Stephen's

used for the

type, the form

K'lcole is

name

of the mint.

For irregular coinages

(II
f.

and IV

((())

of the reign of Stephen

see above, pp. Ixxxii, xcvi

London (Domesday: Lundonia). In the reign of ^thelstan London had eight monej'ers. Under the Confessor we find from
the coins no fewer than twenty-five moneyers working together
in the early part of the reign,

and

in the middle of the reign

at least twent}', but at the end of the reign about twelve only

seem

to be contemporaneous,
c)

and in

his last type but one (Hildebrand

A, var.

only twelve names are

(?)

known

as opposed to thirty-two
I there

in his third

tj'pe

(Hildebrand B).

Under William

seem

to be not fcAver than nine or ten

moneyers employed

at the begin-

Clxxvi

INTRODUCTION
'

ning of the reign, and in the

Paxs

'

type eight names occur.

Probably a reduction of the

staft'

of the

London mint took place

in the Confessor's reign, perhaps concurrently with an increase in

the activity of the smaller provincial mints.

Maiat
William

The

attribution of these coins of the second type of

;

I is quite uncertain

all

that I have seen are from the

same

dies

and from an

obverse die which was also used at

of

Thetford.
(I

The low weight

the British

Museum specimen
false

have not ascertained the weight of the Hunterian and York

is

specimens) suggests forgery, but there

or even of any altering of the
die,

no trace of

work,

on the

coins.

Malclon (Domesday

Melduna).

Two moneyers

at least

were

employed in the reign of the Confessor, and

Three names occur in the
'

also after the Conquest.

Paxs type, but the alteration of the die

'

that was used to strike no. 821 (see below,

Citron., 1911, p. 285) suggests

p. 153, note,

and Xum.

some confusion between ^Ifwine

after the reign of William II.
of

and ^^Ifword.
assessed in

No

coins are

known

The payment by the burgesses

Maldon

for their

mint

is

Domesday with

that of the Colchester burgesses.

Malmeshurij (Domesday: 2Ialmesberie).

tioned in

This borough

is

menbeen
coins

Domesday

(I.

64 b) as paying 100 shillings for the mint.

From

the coins

now known one moneyer

employed at the mint.

of regular issues are

Two

occur in the

'

may have Paxs type. No

only
'

known

after the reign of

(?)

William
to

II.

For a coin of Henry of Anjou

see above, p. cxxi.

attributed

Malmesbury

Marlhoroufjli (Domesday:
pp. 23
flf..

Merleher<je).

In

Num.

Chrou., 1902,

Major Carlyon-Britton has shown that the mint and the

moneyer, Cild, were probably transferred from Bedwin to Marlborough.

Coins of Marlborough are

last six

known

of this
I,

moneyer

only,

and only of the

William
II.

types of William

and of the

first

of

Nexuarh.
as

For coins of the variety of Stephen's reign described

see above, p. xcv.

IV

A (a),

'

MINTS

clxxvii

Northamiyton (Domesday: Northantone, Hantone).

coins, earlier

The only

than the thirteenth type of Henry

to this

I,

which can with

any certainty be attributed

mint are those of the second

type of William I which bear Nothant as the name of the mint.

The moneyer
of this

is

Saewine.

Hence

it

is

possible that other coins

attri-

moneyer on which the form Hamtune occurs should be

buted to Northampton rather than Southampton,

See Brit.
of

q. v., p. clxxxii.

Henry

Num. Joivrn., I as many as

vol. ix, pp.

140

ft".

At

the end of the reign

four moneyers occur at this mint, and not

less

than two of these must liave worked together.

Noriulch

(Domesday: Norwic).

From Domesday
moneyer

(II.

117b)
mint
it

we

learn that the bishop could have one

at this

he wished.

Not fewer than

five

moneyers appear to have worked together at

;

Norwich under the Confessor after the Conquest four is the lowest number available from the coins at present known. As many as
eight

names appear

in the

'

Paxs

'

type

but of these some, such

as Godwid and Inhuhe, are uncertain and may perhaps be blundered forms of names already included. As many as twelve names, if the coins are correctly attributed, appear in the first type of Stephen.

The reading
no. 163).

NON

is

attributed to

Norwich

(see

below,

p.

362,

Coins of Stephen's reign struck from erased obverse dies are

known

of this

mint

(see above, pp. Ixxvi

fi".).

iVo^^i>i(//iam
(I.

(Domesday

Siwtiugeham,Snotingham). Domesday

280) mentions two moneyers here in the time of the Confessor.

Coins of the Confessor's reign are rare and show no satisfactory

sequences, but they confirm the

number

of

moneyers mentioned in

Domesday

as being, at

least,

the lowest

number

possible.

The
Paxs

coins of the reign of William I

at least after the Conquest,

show

that there were

two moneyers
in the
'

and two names occur

reign, I

type.

For varieties of Stephen's

?),

and IV

(c)

(Nottingham

or Tutbury

see above, pp. Ixxvii, xcvi.

Outchester,

where most of the coins

of

Henry, Earl of Northum-

Clxxviii

INTRODUCTION
is

berland, have been found,

suggested as the possible place of

(a), (6), (c).

mintage of the varieties IV

See above, pp. xcviii

fF.

Oxford (Domesday: Oxeneford).

In the reign of the Confessor

seven seems to be the lowest number of moneyers that can have

worked
in

together,

and seven is the largest number of names occurring

Immediately after the Conquest at
'

any one type.

to

least six

seem

be contemporaneous, but in the

Paxs

'

type only three

names

occur.
p. cxix.

For Oxford coins of the Empress Matilda see above,

Pembroke.
Coins of
tliis

mint of the fourteenth type of Henry

[Brit.

have been
vol.
ii,

identified

by Major Carlyon-Britton

Num.

Journ.,

pp.

54-6)
is

from an entry on the Pipe Roll of 1130^ in

which a payment
Stephen's
first

made by

Gillopatric the moneyer.

coin of

type was recently acquired by the British

Museum

(see below, p. 348, no.

88 a) on which the same mint and moneyer

are identified.

P
in

(or

W1)ene

...

coin of the ninth type of

Henry

I (Hks. 263)

Copenhagen Museum reads

is

^iVI.X^REDION^PEUE^
?

The mint

quite uncertain

possibly Winchester

Peterborough (Domesday: Burg).

in a charter to

In 1067 William I confirmed

vol.
i,

Peterborough Abbey (Davis, Regesta,

no. 8) the

privileges granted

by Edgar and other kings.

vol.
iii,

The grant

of

Edgar

(Birch,

Cartularium Saxoaicum,

pp. 543 and 582) included

is

one moneyer in Stamford, but the moneyer

charter of William
I.

not mentioned in the

III,

The
vol.
i,

bull of

Eugenius

published in
privileges

Dugdale's Jlfonasticoa,
it

p. 390, grants the

Abbey the

formerly held, and makes specific mention of the coining-die in

If

Stamford.
not
less

one of the Stamford moneyers, of

whom
I

there were

than four in the Conqueror's reign, was working for the

Abbot

of Peterborough

through the Norman period,

do not think

that he can

now

be identified.
Pevenesel).

Pevensey

(Domesday

No

coins

of

Pevensey are

known

before the Conquest.

In the reigns of the

two Williams,

MINTS

Clxxix

iElfheh was the Pevensey moneyei-, and in Stephen's reign Alwine.

Pevensey was presumably one of the boroughs that were allowed

one moneyer only.
Reading.
In the foundation charter of Henry
I (1125)

a grant

was conferred upon the

('

Abbey
. .

of a

mint and moneyer at Reading

et

donavi Radingiam
').^

cum moneta

uno monetario apud

Radingiam

This privilege seems to have been soon exchanged

for the use of a

moneyer

at London,

and Roger, Bishop of Salisbury,

London, namely Edgar.-

probably not

many

years later, at the king's order granted to the

in

Abbot and monks one moneyer

privilege of one

The

moneyer

at

London was confirmed by Stephen.^ London

coins

We may
reign,

therefore assume that some, at least, of the

bearing the

name

iEdgar, which are of the last type of Henry's

were struck for the Abbot of Reading,

We

do not at
;

present

know any
still

coins of this

moneyer

of the reign of Stephen

he

may

have been working for the Abbot or have already been

replaced

by another moneyer.
:

Rhuddlan (Domesday

Roelend, Roelent).

There can be no
I

doubt of the attribution of 'Paxs' type coins of William

Rhuddlan, where Domesday says
held
'

to

(I.

269) that Robert de Roelent

medietatem
fF.).

monetse

'

(see Brit.
is

Num.

Journ., vol.

ii,

pp. 41

Only one moneyer, Elfwine,

Gore'.

known.

Rhyd y

See

p. Ixxii.
:

Rochester (Domesday

Rovecestre).

In the laws of ^thelstan

Rochester had three moneyers, two for the king and one for the
bishop.

Whether the
and

bishop's privilege continued to

the time

of the Conquest

after,

we have no knowledge.
any

Coins of this

mint are not common at

period, but in the reign of the

Confessor the coins are sufficient to show that not fewer than three moneyers worked together. After the Conquest two moneyers only
are necessary.
1

Two names

only occur in the

fol. 16.

'

Paxs

'

type, but of

Brit. Mus.,

Harley MS. 1708,

'

Ibid., fol. 113.

Printed in full in Dugdale's Monasticon,

fol. 28.

vol. iv, p. 41,

and

in

Num.
3

Chron., 1901, pp.

Brit.

373^. Mus., Harley MS. 1708,


CIXXX
this

INTRODUCTION
'

mint only nine

Paxs

'

coins were described in the account

of the

Beaworth hoard.
time,

^thelstan's

Norman
the
first

times.

Two moneyers, or perhaps three as in may be assumed to have been employed in No coins of this period are yet known later than
I.

type of Henry
:

Romney (Domesday
employed
Leofric).

Romenel).

Two moneyers

at least

were

by the

Confessor
as three

(Wulfm?er and

Brungar

Estin
;

As many

seem to have been working after the

'

Conquest, though two only occur in the

appears in the
first

Paxs

'

type

for

Coc

issue of William II,

and both Winedi and

I

Wulfmser continue from the reign of William

type of William
Rye.
this
II.

to

the second

On

the proposed attribution of some coins of Stephen to

p. clxvi (Castle Rising).

mint see above,

Davids.

St.

For the attribution of coins reading

Dewi-town, see Brit.

'

Devitun
ii,

'

to
ff.

St. Davids, or

Num.

Journ., vol.

pp. 47

The
(p.

identity of the obverse die of a coin attributed to

Shrewsbury
;

175, no. 938) with that of a St.

Davids coin

is

curious

but the

coarse

work

of both obverse and reverse of that coin suggests

it

that possibly
St. Davids.

should

itself

also be attributed

to the

mint of

Salisbury (Domesday

Sarisberie).

Three moneyers at

least

seem to have worked here

the Conquest the same the
coins
I,

in the reign of the Confessor,

is

and after
are,

number

likely

for,

though two
in

from
of

at

present

known, not impossible

the

reign

William

three moneyers are required

by the

coins of William II.

Sandiuich

(Domesday

Sandiuic,
St.

Sanwic).

The confusion
in the

between

this

mint and Bury

Edmunds, both
is

Norman
In

period and in the reign of the Confessor,

at present hopeless.

the Confessor's reign some coins of the moneyer Leof wine, reading

Sand and

Sandu), are no doubt correctly attributed to Sandwich,

but a coin of the same moneyer of type (Hildebrand)

reads Sance (B.

which

M. CataL,

no. 1161) might, one

would think, be

MINTS

clxXXi
;

assigned with equal certainty to

Bury
to

in whicli case there

this

was
and and

more than one moneyer allowed

Morcere was coining there in this
later

Bury at

period, for

issue, as well as in earlier

types.

In

the

Conqueror's

reign,

u^Elfheh,

^Ifgset,

GodM'ine are clearly Sandwich nioneyers, and show that at least

two nioneyers were employed

^Ifgar and Godhese must be
quite uncertain.

together.

Of the

later

moneyers

of

Sandwich, but the remainder are

Shaftesbury (Domesday
this

Sceptesherie).

By the

laws of ^Ethelstan
reign
of

mint was allowed two moneyers.

In the

the

Confessor there were three moneyers paying each a

mark

of silver
I.

and twenty
This

shillings

quando moneta

vertehatur (Domesday,

75).

number agrees with

the figure deduced from the coins

if

now
of

known
type

of the Confessor's reign,

we assume

that the

^Ifward

of type (Hildebrand)

was a

different

moneyer from that

but

if

the

same /Elfward worked continuously through

there appear to have
'

the reign there would appear to be not fewer than four moneyers

employed.

In the Conqueror's reign

also,

been three moneyers, and three occur on coins of the

Paxs type.
'

There

is

some confusion between

this

mint and Shrewsbury, as

both mints seem to have had a moneyer of the name of Godesbrand

in the reign of William I (see

Xum.

Chroii., 1911, p. 273).

Sherborne.

For a coin of Henry of Aujou attributed to Sherborne

see above, p. cxxviii.

Shreiusbury (Domesday: Sciropesberie).

The

city of

Shrewsbury
paid twenty
dies,

had, in the time of the Confessor, three moneyers

who

shillings apiece within fifteen days of the receipt of their

et

hoc jiebat
his

moneta

vertente

(Domesday,

I.

252).

of

reign one would have supposed that as

From the many as

coins

four

moneyers were working under the Confessor,

for .^Ifheh, Leofstan,

and Wulfmser run from types (Hildebrand)

^

to F,

and Leofwine

coins of William Fs second type vea^ding Leofwine on

St.

This lends some colour to Major Carlyon-Britton's attribution to Bury of Bur; see above on Bury
p. clxiv.

Edmunds,

Clxxxii

INTRODUCTION

occurs in type E, which certainly precedes the coins of type

as struck
I believe,

but

it

may

be that

E and F were not struck by the same iElfheh those of type A/ as the intervening types (C, B, D) are, not known of this moneyer. In the reign of William I
names
'

three moneyers were evidently contemporaneous and three

occur in the
is

Paxs type.
'

The

attribution of coins of

Hathebrand

uncertain (see below,

p. 264).

On

the coin described on p. 175, no. 938, see St. Davids, p. clxxx,
difficulty of the identification of the

and on the

Shaftesbury and

Shrewsbury mints on coins

Soidha'niiyton

of

Godesbrand
Maiitoiie,

see Shaftesbury, p. clxxxi.

(Domesday:

Hantune, Hanitiine).

On

the confusion between

Northampton and Southampton

(

see North-

ampton,

p. clxxvii.

Under ^thelstan, 'Hamtune'

Assuming the present
seem
to

= Southampton)

had two moneyers.

attribution of coins to

Southampton

to be correct, there at this

have been not fewer than

two moneyers
the Conquest.

mint both in the Confessor's reign and after

'
'

One name only occurs on Paxs coins. It may be noted that, in the Gesta Eegum, William of Malmesbury always, with
one exception only
(in

the partition of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms,

is
:

a part of his work which

probably not original, where the

Rolls Series, no. 90, vol.
i,

form Suthamtunensis
uses the forms

is

used
or

p. 100),

Hmntona

Hamhina

for

Southampton, and

invariably uses Northantotia or Isorthantiina for Northampton.

For an issue of the reign of Stephen (variety III

possibly be attributed to this mint, see above, pp. xci

7),
fF.

which

may

Southiuark (Domesday: Sudwerca, Siidwerche).

The

similarity

of the abbreviated forms of the names Southwark and Sudbury

makes the

attribution of the coins difficult.

In the Table of Mints,

Moneyers, and Types the forms found on coins of these two mints
are inserted in foot-notes.

In the reign of the Confessor the only

to

moneyer that can be assigned with any certainty

Folcwine;
if

Sudbury

is

the doubtful moneyers are

still

all

to be attributed to

Southwark, there are

only three contemporaneous moneyers

Hildebrand, no, 645.

'

MINTS
necessitated

clxxxiii

by the

coins

now known.

After the Conquest also,

'

three must have worked together, and four names occur on

coins.

Paxs

Stafford (Domesday: Stadford, Statford).

From

the few coins

known

of the Confessor's reign, there is

no reason to assume the

existence of

more than one moueyer

at Stafford, but in the reign

of William II the coin of

^Ifward

of the second tj^pe

shows

this

moneyer

to

have been working with Godric, of

whom we

have

a sequence of coins through the whole reign.

last

In the second and

types of the Conqueror, two moneyers' names occur.

:

Stamford (Domesday

Stanford).
to

The

coins at present

known

show

as

many

as eight

moneyers

have been working at Stamford

;

in the early part of the Confessor's reign

in the latter half of the

reign there seem to be only

five.

Immediately after the Conquest

there were not fewer than three, or perhaps four, moneyers, and

three only are at present

known

in the Conqueror's last issue.

is

This great reduction in the staff of the Stamford mint

similar

to that at the neighbouring mint of Lincoln, but seems to have taken

place at an earlier period.

Coins of the

first

two

varieties of Stephen's reign occur of this

mint

(see above, pp. Ixxvii, Ixxxiii).

Stey Thing, Sussex, (Domesday

Staiiinges).

One moneyer only

^

seems to have been employed here both before

Conquest.

and after the

Two, however, appear

to

have been employed by

later

William

II.

No

coins are yet

known

than the reign of

William

II.

Sudbury (Domesday
(II.

Sutberie).
',

The

phrase

of

Domesday

286 b),

'ibi

sunt monetarii

suggests the existence of more

is

than one moneyer at Sudbury, but one only

coins both before and after the Conquest. of Westminster (Brit.

apparent from the

In the Abbey Register

fol.

Mus., Cotton MS., Faustina A. Ill,

79)

The

coin of

Godwine

of the Confessor's last type (B.

M.

Catalogue, no. 121!

should assiffu to Stafford.

Clxxxiv

INTRODUCTION
I

Henry

confirms the dedication by Wulfric. his moneyer, of the

church of St. Bartholomew at Sudbury to the use of the monks

of Westminster.

This confirms the attribution to Sudbury of the

in the reigns of

coins struck

by Wulfric

William

I,

William

II,

and Henry

I.

On

the confusion of

Sudbury and Southwark

:

see above, p. clxxxii.

Tamworth (Domesday
in the reigns of the
TaitTito it

Tameworde).

Two moneyers seem

to

have been employed at Tamworth in the Confessor's reign and

two Williams.
:

(Domesday

Tantoue).

Only one moneyer may have

been employed at this mint both in the reign of the Confessor and
after the Conquest.

Coins of variety III 7 of Stephen's reign have been attributed

to

Taunton

(see above, p. xcii).

Thetford (Domesday

Tetford, Tedfort).

At the time

of

the

Domesday Survey
perhaps
six,

(II.

119) Thetford paid 40 pounds a year to the

king for the mint.

In the Confessor's reign at least

five,

or
is

moneyers seem to have worked together, and seven

the highest

number

of

moneyers
I,

in

any one type

of the reign
possible of
'

in the reign of William

six

'

is

the lowest

number
'

contemporaneous moneyers, and six occur in the

Coins of this mint of varieties I and IV
are described above, pp. Ixxviii, xcvii.

Paxs type.

(6),

of Stephen's reign,

Totnes (Domesday

Toteiiais, I'othenels).

No coins of
issue of

Totnes are

known

of the Confessor's reign.

The second

William II

was the only post-Conquest type known

of the first type of

of this

mint until a coin

Henry, struck by the same moneyer, Dunic, was

recently found in the Old

Sarum

excavations.
reign,

Tutbury.

For a variety of Stephen's

IV

A (r),

attributed

to this mint, see above, p. xcvi.

Twynham.
^

See Christchurch,
who coined

p. clxviii.

Assuming

Folcserd,

for the Confessor, to

have been at work in

the early issues of the Conqueror.

MINTS

CIXXXV

Wallingford (Domesdaiy

Walengeford, Walingeford).
(I. 56).

Domesday
Under the
two names

mentions a money er here having a house free

Confessor as

many

as five

moneyers seem

to

have been employed,

;

and

in the early part of the Conqueror's reign three

'

only appear in the

Paxs

'

type.
I,

A
(for

coin of the sixth t^^De of William

is

struck by a moneyer

Swartbrand, on which the mint

represented by the letter

?),

has been tentatively assigned to Wallingford (see Brit.

JS^um. Journ., vol. iv, pp. 54

and

56).

Wareham (Domesday: Warham). In the laws of ^Ethelstan, Wareham had two moneyers. There were also two monej^ers in the time of the Confessor, who paid one mark of silver to the king,
and twenty
shillings

qua ado moneta vertehatur (Domesday,

I.

75).

The

coins of the Confessor confirm the existence of two, at least.

In the reign of William I there seem to be not fewer than three

employed, and four names are

known

in the

'

Paxs type.
"

There

is

sometimes
;

difficulty in distinguishing coins of

Wareham

and Warwick

the mint-readings are inserted in the notes of the

Table of Mints, Moneyers, and Types.

For Wareham coins of the Empress Matilda and of William

(of Gloucester?) see above, pp. cxix,

cxxx.

Warwick (Domesday:
seem
to

Wartuic).

Under the Confessor there

working
in the reigns

have been not fewer than three moneyers employed at

;

Warwick
of the

probably the same number

^^'ere

two Williams, though two might

at present
;

just suffice for the coins

'

known

four names occur in the

of William II.

Paxs type, and three

'

in the first

and second types

On

the possibility of

confusion with

Wareham
:

see above.

Watchet (Domesday

Wacet).

One moneyer only seems

to

have

been employed at Watchet, both in the Confessor's reign and after

the Conquest.

Wilton (Domesday:

Wiltone,
is

Wiltune).

In the Pipe Roll of

Henry I, Tomas, a moneyer,

had
liis

mentioned under Wiltshire as having

;

fine

reduced on account of poverty

perhaps this

is

the

clxXXvi

INTRODUCTION
of the first type of Stephen, but

Tomas

coins struclv

by him

in the reign of
{c.

we do not yet know any Henry I. In a grant in Wilton

William of Wilton, the
this

to the church of Salisbury

organist,
is is

1.200),

mentioned as son of William, the moneyer;^

probably the William

moneyer

who

struck coins of the last type

of Stephen

and of the

first issue

of Henr}^ II.
five

There seem to have been not fewer than

moneyers employed

at Wilton in the latter half of the reign of the Confessor,

and as
In the
(if

many

as six

names occur
William

in one type (Hildebrand H).

early part of the Conqueror's reign, as

many

as four, or five
of

^Ifwine

of

is

identical

with the -^Ifwine

;

the

Confessor), seem to be contemporaneous

at the end of the reign

not more than three are necessary from the coins

three

now known, and

names occur

in the

'

Paxs type.
'

Winchcombe (Domesday: Wlncelcumhe).

coins to the borough of
pp. 49
ff.

For the attribution of

Winchcombe
to

see Brit.

Num.

Jourii., vol. vi,

One moneyer seems

have worked here both before

and

after the Conquest.

I.

No

coins are yet

known

later

than the

reign of William

Winchester (Domesday

Wlncestre,
six

Wintonla).

In ^thelstan's
In
the

laws Winchester was

allowed

moneyers.

Winton

Domesday, Alwinus Aitardessone

ster

(fol. 1),

Godwinus Socche {magi(fol.

monetariorum,
(fol.
7),

fol.

2),
(fol.

Andrebodus

3),

Alwardus

filius

Etardii

Alestan

8 b) are mentioned as moneyers of

the reign of the Confessor, and

Odo

(fol. 8),

Sanson

(foil.

15, 16),

Siward

(foil.

16,

23 b) as moneyers at the time of the Survey

;

(between 1107 and 1128)

and the wife

(fol.

of

a house at the time of the Survey

Wimund the moneyer had b). On fol. 4 b occurs the

difFacte pre-

phrase

'

Et in mercato fuerunt v monete, que fuerunt

'

eepto regis (see Brit. Ntiin. Journ., vol.

of the Confessor not less than nine

vi, pp.

164-5).

In the reign

moneyers seem to have worked at

though six would suffice for
'

the same time

in the Conqueror's reign,

the coins at present known, eight names appear in the

^

Paxs type.
'

Charters, &c., of Salisbury (Rolls Series, no. 97), no. Ixxv.

MINTS

clxxxvii

For a coin

of

variety

II

of

Stephen's

reign,

attributed

to

Winchester, see above,

Wiveliscombe.
Gloucester'?)

p, Ixxxiii.

For coins of Henry of Anjou and William

(of

which may have been struck at Wiveliscombe see

above, pp. cxxiii, cxxxi.

Worcester (Domesday

Wirecestre).
(I.

Money ers

of Worcester are

mentioned in Domesday

172) as having paid, in the time of

the Confessor, twenty shillings each at London on receipt of dies

qua/ndo inoneta vertebatur.

This city seems to have had not fewer

than
as

five,

or perhaps six, moneyers in the reign of the Confessoias six

many

moneyers appear

to overlap

from the Confessor's to

the Conqueror's reign, but later in the reign of William I and in

that of William II not more than four are necessary
;

four occur in

the

'

Paxs type.
'

Yarmouth.

See above,
:

p. clxx,

Erami

York (Domesday
fessor's reign as

Eboracum).

In the early part of the Con-

many

as seventeen

moneyers seem to have been

employed, and in the latter half at least ten appear from the coins
to

have been contemporaneous.

I as

On

coins of the second type of

William

many

as eleven distinct

names

occur, all of

which

are found on coins of the Confessor or Harold, or of the Conqueror's

first

type

but in the second half of the reign only four moneyers

appear, from the coins at present known, to have been working at

the same time, and four names only are found on

'

Paxs

'

coins.

This great decrease in the staff of the York mint was perhaps the
result of the ravages of 1069.

We

do not

know how many moneyers were

but in a suit of

allowed to

the

Archbishops,

1279 the

Archbishop,

William,

pleaded that they had had two dies (which perhaps imply two

moneyers) from time immemorial, and

also, at

one time, a third die

which was then in the king's hands

and

his claim

was allowed.

The form
(B.

EBO

occurs on a coin of the seventh type of

Henry

Roth

collection).

For irregular coinages of Stephen's reign which were struck at

clxxxviii

INTRODUCTION
I,

York

see varieties

IV D, Eustace FitzJohn and Robert de

fF.).

Stute-

ville (pp. Ixxviii, cvi

The comparative importance

of the eleventh century

of

the mints in the second half

may

be

summarized by the following

of

classification in groups, the

number

moneyers being, as pre-

viously remarked, only an approximate estimate from the coins

now available, and probably in many cases below the actual number employed.^ The mints which occur in two groups, showing
a decrease during the Conqueror's reign, are in
asterisk
italics
;

and an
of

marks those which show a reduction during the reign

the Confessor.
6 moneyers and over

clxxxix

Abbreviations lted, Collections quoted, etc.

The numismatic publications which arc

f[Uoted in this Catalogue

have for the most part appeared in either the Numismatic Chronicle
or the British Numisruatic Journal, which are quoted as Nii^m.

Chron. and Brit.

(referred to as

Num. Journ} Spink's Numismatic Circular Num. Circ.) contains in the issue of 1902 Major
list

Carlyon-Britton's original

of coins of the reigns of William I

and William
the British
to

II

as these lists are

now

in course of revision

in

Numismatic Journal,

reference

has not been made

them except

in the Table of Mints, Moneyers, and Types.

The

ordinary handbooks have been used and are quoted under their
authors' names,

Hawkins, Grueber, &c.

is

Historical matter has been introduced only so far as

for the elucidation of the coinage.

necessary

The operations
by the
political

of the mints

seem to have been very

little

influenced

and military

history of the period except during the reign of Stephen.

irregular coinages during the period of civil

The

war have

necessitated

more

historical detail,

for

which pui-pose Sir William Ramsay's

J.

Foundations of England and Mr.

ville have been extensively used.

H. Round's Geoffrey de MandeReferences are given in

full to

such historical works as have been consulted.

In compiling the Catalogue much difficulty has been experienced

owino- to the laro-e
this period.

number

of collections
of

which contain coins of

of collections

But the kindness

many owners
to see a

and

curators of
of coins

museums has enabled me

very large number

for comparison,

and

to obtain impressions of

many

by

which means

several readings of coins in the British

Museum have

been verified or ascertained and gaps in this collection supple-

mented

in the tables of the coins

many

coins in other collections

are also figured in the Plates of

the Catalogue, and are there

of the collection to

marked with the

initials or

name

which they

is

The date which appears on each volume of the British Numistnatic Journal that of the Proceedings which are described in it, and not the date of

publication.

cxc

INTRODUCTION

belong.

The following abbreviations have been used

for

the

collections quoted:

A.H.B.

Mr. A. H. Baldwin. Mr. Alexander Mann.

A.M.

Asbm.
Bodl.
.

Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

Bodleian Library, Oxford.

B.R.
Brln.

The
.

late

Mr. Bernard Roth.

Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin.

National Museum, Copenhagen.

Cpnhn.

F.A.W.
F.Mus.
H.L.F.

Mr. F. A. Walters.
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

Miss Helen Farquhar.

H.M.R.
Hntr.
H.S.
.

Mr. H. M. Reynolds.

Hunterian

collection,

Glasgow.

Mr. Henry Symonds.

Col.

II.W.M.
J.B.M.
J.E.C.

H.

W.

Morrieson.

Mr.

J. B. S.

Mcllwaine.

Mr.
Mr. Mr.

J. E. Cree.
J. J.
J.

J.H.D.

H. Daniels.

J.W.P.
J.Y.
.

W.

Parkes.

Mr.

Young.

L.A.L.
L.E.B.

Mr. L. A. Lawrence. Mr. L. E. Bruun.

Lewis

Lewis
.

collection,

Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.

Mint
Nott.

Royal Mint, London.

Castle

Museum, Nottingham.

Old Sarum
Paris
P.C.B. R.C.L.
.

Old Sarum excavations.

Bibliotheque Natiouale, Paris.

Major
Mr. R.
.

P.

W.

P. Carlyon-Britton.

C. Lockett.

R.T.

The Hon.
Mr.

R. Talbot.

S.M.

Sheriff Mackenzie.
S.

S.M.S.

M. Spink (Messrs. Spink and Son).

Stkm.
T.B.
.

Royal Museum, Stockholm.

The

late

Mr. T.

Bliss.

T.C.C.

Trinity College, Cambridge.

Castle

T.Mus.

Museum, Taunton.
C. Wells.

W.C.W.
W.E.II.

Mr. Mr.

W. W.

Hidden.

ABBREVIATIOXS USED, COLLECTIONS QUOTED, ETC.

^y.,T.R.
.

CXCl

Mr. M'. Mr. V.

Mr.

J. E.

Ryan.

W.S.L.

W.

Lincoln (Messrs.

W.

S.

Lincoln and Son).

W.S.O.

W.T.R.

York

....

W. Sharp Ogden. The late Mr. W. T. Ready. York Museum.

of the above collections I

To the owners and curators

indebted for the
facilities

am

greatly

which they have given me

;

for seeing and

for publishing their coins

the difficulty of the subject has been

materially lessened by the large

disposal.
I

number

of coins thus put at

P.

my

have obtained much help from Major

W.

P.

Carlyon-

Britton, F.S.A., not only

coins,

by

free access to his large collection of

but

also bj^ the use of

manuscript notes which he has kindly

lent me.

To Dr. George Macdonald, F.B.A., Hon. Curator of the Hunterian collection, I owe special obligations for time and trouble
most generously given both
in

showing

me

the Hunterian coins

for

and in making
sincere

impressions of several of

them

my

use.

My

acknowledgements are due to Mr. H. A. Grueber, F.S.A.,

formerly Keeper of Coins,

who

has read proofs of the introduction

and

also

gave

me much

assistance in the early stages of the

work
F.S.A.,

also to Mr. L. A.

Lawrence, F.S.A., and Mr.

W.

J.

Andrew,

who many

have read proofs of the introduction and helped

suggestions and corrections
;

me with

and

especially to Mr. G. F. Hill,

Keeper of Coins, who has read proofs of the whole work, and whose help and encouragement have done much to lighten the
sometimes arduous work of preparing the Catalogue.
I

Nor must

forget to express

my

indebtedness to the helpful care of the

Reader of the Clarendon Press.

TABLE OF FINDS

TABLE
The numbers

implies that one or more coins of the type occurred, but the

This table

and cut halfpennies and farthings, number is not contains only the regular English issues. For the irregular issues and
in this table include both pennies

cxcv

OF FINDS
each halfpenny and farthing counting as one coin.

known.
other coins represented in the finds, see the detailed description on pp. xvi-xxxii.

HENRY
VII
VIII

STEPHEN
XI XII XIII

IX

XIV XV

VII

Sobeiton, 1851

York, 1845
York, 1882

Whitchurch
St.

Mary

Hill
1771

Church,
1872

City of London,

Malmesbury,

1828

York Minster
Beaworth,
1833
1877

Tamworth,
4 or

Shillington, 1871

Bermondsey,
Bari, 1891?

1820

MULE
1

Canterbury, 1901?
Lowestoft, 1905
Battle, I860?
643

Watford,
1818

1818

+
u)nvnids
of 150

Smaller Watfoi-d,

Xottingham,

1880

Dartford. 1825

Sheldon, 1867
40
3
1

Linton, 1883

Bute,

186:^

Wintcrslow,
c.

1804

Awbridge,

1902?
*

nr2

TABLE OF MINTS, MONEYERS,

AND TYPES
The majority of the readings which are included
been taken from the coins themselves
photographs of the coins
;

in the following table

have
or

or,

in

few

cases,

from

casts

which are inserted from published or unpublished lists or from free-hand draAvings, are in italics (the Stockholm coins in italics are from readings kindly supplied by Major P. W. P. CarlyonBritton, the remainder from casts sent to me from the Stockholm Museum). Italics are also used in the columns of moneyers' names to denote, in the left-hand column, names which occur on coins of the Confessor or Harold II and, in the right-hand column, those which occur on coins of the first issue (' Tealby type) of Henry II. The foot-notes contain readings from various publications, many of which some, which may well be correct, are Avithheld from are certainly incorrect No the table itself owing to lack of evidence for the existence of the coins. readings have been inserted on the sole evidence of the Spicer Manuscript [Kiwi. Chron., 1904), because that work has been found to reproduce or Readings were inserted in it from sale catalogues originate many errors. without discrimination the columns were sometimes confused, as in the mint of Romney where the entries under 239-40 should evidently have been jjlaced under 241-2 and the columns have themselves been misread by later writers in Brit. Num. Journ., vol. ix, p. 132, for example, the Eadweard reading, which The MS. Catalogue is of type VI (243) in Spicer, appears under type VIII. of the B. C. Roberts collection has been the source of many errors, which are Confusion of types, especially here, so far as possible, identified and corrected. of (Hawkins) 243 and 247, and of 238 and 250 (the two Two-Stars types), is not uncommon; in the A. W. Hankin sale catalogue (1900), for example, both coins described in lots 409 and 410 as of (Hawkins) 247 are of 243, being
the remainder,
'
: ; ;
'

'

now
234

in

the Co). Morrieson collection.

JNIisprints are

another obvious source

of error, as in
is

Num.

Chron., 1880, p. 72, wdiere the Widfnod coin of (Hawkins)

described as 244.

The foot-notes do not include

as

all

published readings;

such obvious mistakes

Alic

for Alif or

Aleif,

Strop for Sprot, Leslie for

attributions which
arise

Lesinc, &c., are omitted,

and the

insertion of

many

from the confusion of London and Lincoln,

similar pairs of mints
other.
is

Chestei'

obviated by a cross

and other reference from one mint to the

Leicester,

and

TABLE OF MIKTS, MONEYEKS, AND TYPES

Other collections
doubtful readings, in
are
tlie

CXCVll

only

quoted in

the

table

to

supplement gaps, or

British

Museum

collection.

The abbreviations of

sale catalogues
:

and other publications, which are used

in the table, are as follows

British
,,

Museum

Catalogue.
,,

(Appendix).

Allen
B.N.J.

W.

Allen

sale, 1898.

Ast. 'OG
.

Bscm Btmn

Circ. '02

Astronomer sale, 1906. British Numismatic Journal. G. J. Bascom sale, 1914. W. and T. Bateman sale, 1898. Numismatic Circular, 1902 {William I and
by
P.

JI.

their

Mints and

Moneijers

W.
J.

P. Carlyon-Britton).
sale, 1898.

Clark
Cufif

H. Clark

D. Cuff sale, 1854,

sale, 1862.

Ciurer

Miss R. Currer
.

Drrnr

E.

Durrner

sale, 1853.
sale, 1913, lot 61, &c.

F.A.W., lot 01, &c. H. H. Allan

F. A.

Walters

H. H. Allan
D. F.
L. A.
C. C.

sale, 1908.

Knid
Lscbe

Kennard

sale, 1892.

L.A.L. 43, &c

.

Lawrence sale, 1903, lot W. Loscombe sale, 1855.

43, &c.

M'Ewn
Mntgu Midch
N.C.
. .

McEwen

sale, 1854.

H. Montagu
J. G.

sale, 1896-7.

'69,
.

&c.
.

Murdoch sale. 1903. Numismatic Chronicle, 1869,

&c.

NIgn

P.C.B. 743, Rash.

&

Rstn
S.
i.

'57, 6,
. .

&

Rev. Dr. Neligan sale, 1851, P. W. P. Carlyon-Britton sale, 1913, lot 743, &c, E. W. Rashleigh sale, 1909. Simpson Rostron sale, 1892. Sotlieby sale, January, 1857, lot 6, &c.
R. Sainthill, Olla Podrida.
C. L. Stainer, Oxford Silver Pennies.
J.

Sntl

Stnr
Tplis

Toplis sale, 1890.

Webb
Witte

H.
J.

Webb
Witte

sale, 1895. sale, 1908.

For other abbreviations

see list of collections

on pp. cxc, cxci

CXCVlll

TABLE OF MINTS.

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

HENRY

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

HENRY
I

TABLE OP MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

CClll

HENRY

CCIV

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

CCV

HENRY

CCVl

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AMD TYPES

CCVll

HENRY

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS. AND TYPES

CCIX

HENRY

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

HENRY

CCXll

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

HENRY

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYEKS, AND TYPES

CCXV

HENRY

CCXVl

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

C'CXVn

HENRY

CCXVIU

TABLE OF MINTS,
(continued).

LEICESTER
1

ConfesHor,

LECR
^

HarohL

LElhlKI

TVilliam
^

I,

type

III,

LECT
'

IV.

LECHI;

LEcrl

LE
REE,

LEH LEICES, LEIE LEHKE, LEHUr, LEHKI

VII

confessor,

i.^nv.nr. Triuianihi^XKnr:^

leesT'k

STR

LERE
?

LEHU
LE
I

le
Stephen,

i/er,/,

LEIE?,

"

LEI

LEEE LEREE
;

IJiiE

^^

WILLIAM
LEAVES
iKlfric
i*:if\viiie

AVILLIAM
VI
VII VIII
III

II

iP.C.B. iR.C.L.

Aluiar
Brihtiiir (Brihniar, &C.I
P.C.B.

(+?
iT.B.

+?

IT.B.

Eduuiiid

Herrevi
Hiinfrei

Osebern
Usicolcl

Bodl

Willeni

AViniwd (Winered, &c.)

Hntr
II,

P.C.B.

Mntiju

070

A.H.B.

Brihtred (William Lecfvild (William

types II and III). Xinn. Chron., 1901, p. 266. Probably Brihtinffir. x Harold mule; William I, type VII; William II, type III). Various sale catalogues, &c. False, cf. Brit. Num. Journ., vol. iii, pp. 284-5.
I

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

See also Chester. ^(iclu-inc CSMlIiam

CCXIX

I, tj-pe VIII). Brit. Xum. Journ., vol. vii, p. 2.5, = Xum. Circ, 1902, p. 5573, appears to be a misreading of a British Mu.seuiu coin. Edmund (Henry I, type XII). L. A. Lawrence sale, 1903, lot 106 = P. W. P. Carl.\ on-Brittoii coll. (see Lewes). Gifrie (William I, type II). Xum. Chron., 1904, p. 26(). Probably Lieric. Godard (William II, type III). Sotheby, May 3, 1811, lot 355. False? Cf. Bril. Xum. Journ.,

whence

it

vol.

iii,

p. 283, no. 37.

II,
II,

Godric (William Lificin (William

type IV).

Xum.

Chron.,
III).

19(U, p. 266,

mule IxII and type

p. 283, nos. 33, 31.

Various sale catalogues, &c.

False,

cf. Brit.

Xum.

Journ., vol.

iii,

HENRY

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

cexxi

HENRY

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

CCXXIU

HENRY

TABLE OF MINIS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

HENRY

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

CCXXVll

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

CCXXIX

HENRY

ccxxx

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

CCXXXl

HENRY

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYEES, AND TYPES

ccxxxni

HENRY
V

CCXXXIV

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYEKS. AND TYPES

HENRY

cexxxvin

TABLE OF MINTS,
{continued).

SOUTHWARK

tSVTP
HB>EI

XI

SA/'TPVK

XII

t^VD

XIV

SVDPER, tav

'

DPE, SA/^DP^r,

svD, ^\rr^^

SV*>E SV*)I,
^^

SV*)IE SV'*)E
S*)EP, SU-BE,

SVT

SVHE>, SVI SlHG)I;i?aroW7/SV*EP; William S'l&Vm, SV*)I, SVHE>; wnuamii, SVHG>E, SV

I,

sv*>ep, sv confessor, SV^BC,

SA/'D,

SV*)EI, SVHE)EPR, SV^BEPI

MONEYEKS, AND TYPES

Sec also Sudbury. JElfric (William II, type IV). E. H. Evans sale, 18iM. lot 28. Jb:iwQra (William II, type III). W. Allen sale, 1898, lot 360. Aldwinc (William I, type VIII). Num. Chron., 1904, p. 276. Algar (William II, type II). Num. Chron., 1901, p. 277. Godric (Henry I. type XIV). Num. Chron., 1901, p. 299. Oodwinc (William II, type I). Archd. Pownall sale, 1887, lot 69. (William II, type II). Num. Chron., 1904, p. 277. G7-ot (William II, type IV). H. Clark sale, 1898, lot 57. Probably Sprot. Lcofu-ine (William I, type VII). Num. Chron., 1904, p. 277. Scu-inc (William II, type II). ,, ,, ,, Siicai'd (Stephen, type I). C. E. Simpson sale, 1903, lot 5 = Stamford. Sprot (William II, type II). Num. Chron., 19(M, p. 277.

HENRY

ccxl

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

ccxli

HENRY

ccxlii

TABLE OF MINTS,

W^ILLIAM
II

AVILLIAM
VII
VIII
Ill

II

III

IV

VI

IV

III

THETAcus
Ailnot

FORD

Alfward
Aschetil

Baldewin
(Baldwine)

Brhtoth

+
L.A.L. P.C.B.
f

Bundi
(Bundnd,
&c.)

Burchart
(B^irhrd)

'(app.)

P.C.B,

Cinric
(Cenric)

P.C.B.

Driv Esbearn
(Osbearn, &c.)

Folcxrd
(Folchred,
<tc.)
I

MULE

Mint
1

(B.X.J.

\ix.l3S

Gefrei
(Geflrei)

God
Godclcf
(Godlef, <tc.)

+
(app.)

P.C.B. P.C.B.

Godinc Godreed
(Godred)

+
(Rash
I

385

P.C.B.

P.C.B.

Godnc
Godivine
Neigel
(Negelus)

P.C.B.
r

fHntr
(P.C.B.

fRash
\ 466

P.C.B.

+?

(B.E.

Norman
Odde
(Ode)

Osbearn
(Otbearn), see Esbearn

Stan

- - -

Thurtan
type VI). Num. Chron., 1901, p. 426. See Hereford. Alfminc (Henry I, type XIII). G. Marshall sale, 1852, lot 73. Alrand (Henry I, type XIV). E. W. Rashleigh sale, 1909, lot 467. Perhaps Alfward? Baldric (William II, type I). Num. Chron., 1904, p. 279. Banvnnd (William II, typo II). H. Montagu sale, 1897, lot 87. Probably = Catalogue, p no. 154 (Bundnd). Beand (Henry I, type II). Rev. H. Christmas sale, 1864, lot 228, Probably Bundi. Blac.sunu. See London. Bunon (William II. mule IxII). Num. Chron., 1904, p. 279. Probably = Bundnd, type II Catalogue, p. 239, no. 154). Cinric (William I, type VII). Sotheby, Jan. 25, 1860, lot 109. JJiinic (William II, type II). Num. Chron., 1904, p. 279.

P.C.B.

Aberrand (Henry

I,

239,

(cf.

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

ccxliii

HENRY

ccxliv

TABLE OP MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

ccxlv

HENRY

ccxlvi

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

ccxlvii

HENRY

ccxlviii

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYEKS, AND TYPES

ccxlix

HENRY

ccl

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYEKS, AND TYPES

ccli

HENRY
VI
VII VIII

STEPHEN
X
XI
XII
XIII

IX

XIV

XV

II

III-VI

VII

W^ORCES^Klfgserd (vKlfgeet,

TER

&c.)

Api or Awi?
Baldric Eastiuaer (Estmser,
&c.)

Edwine
B.E.?

Garulf Godric

Heathewulf
Liofric

Kefwinc Sewine Wiginc

XC '01)
P.4T8S

JVulfric

Godwine (William
Leo/wine

II,

type II).

Xum.

Chron.,

1877, p. 346

= Catalogue,

p. 241, no. 169

(Winchester).

Archd. Pownall

sale, 1887, lot 65.

IV

ccli

TABLE
FOR

CONVERTING ENGLISH INCHES INTO MILLIMETRES

AND THE

MEASURES OF MIONNET'S SCALE

EnCLiSH

ccliv

TABLE
OF

THE RELATIVE WEIGHTS OF ENGLISH GRAINS AND FRENCH GRAMMES

Grains.

cclv

TABLE
OF

THE RELATIVE WEIGHTS OF ENGLISH GRAINS AND FRENCH GRAMMES

Grains.

IE

SERl

HENRY

Types XIV, XV

B
Ci

D
E F G
I

H M n

p
T
\;

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

I.

^^>--

'*^^??V

14

.i^^J

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

I.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

II

i^X^

P.C.B. sale, 1913. Lot 677.

>;7^rT5:

~r

14

i^
16

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

I.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

III.

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

I;

MULES: CONFESSOR

||,

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

IV.

--z^r^'^i

^A,x^

i-/:-"^,

r.7,:<A

rr/^J

/#^K
WILLIAM
I.

TYPE

II.

NORMAN
1^^;^

KINGS.

PLATE

V.

-^-..6^

V/5viJ^

^/kP?:>

13

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

II.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

VI.

'^^^^

1T

S-V-i-l

.'

XrC=7j

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

11;

MULE

II

III.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

VII.

I.

TYPE

III.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

VIII.

XL/r

HUN

I'tK.

W ILLIAM

I.

TYPE

111;

MULE

III

IV;

TYPE

IV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

IX.

-'i>-^-6<>

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

IV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

X.

-'^f^bs

v^-^v

16

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

IV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XI.

WILLIAM

I.

MULE

IV x

TYPE

V.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XII.

PK^'

/'^^A^c^

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

V.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XIII.

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

V.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XIV.

WILLIAM

I.

TYPES V AND

VI.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XV.

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VI.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XVI.

.r-:s:5s.

4^?^.

,^_y^-

WILLIAM

I.

TYPES

VI

AND

VII.

NORMAN
Cr.

KINGS.

PLATE

XVII.

^
X,''i-

^r^.>\

,.-^r^<:;

^i^^&^.

.^^9t

r"^_

x^/iisr

<Ut^
/"^^
;^---^'_

y
',i^.
'

ifr.

?.?^j^ i

i^.

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VII.

MULE

VII

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XVlll

fSt-

^&2^.

^C^^
d^^---'^-

^^-^^K^

f7^-.

p^Mk

fer^liS

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XIX.

^^-r.r4

>^
*^

r=7^-

/M^

3i.f

J^i

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN (''

KINGS.

PLATE XX.

r^

f-^s*^^

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIM.

NORMAN
--T^^.

KINGS.

PLATE

XXI.

-/vv'

i6

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXII,

^^/
i^^y <3;li^

t-ii ^'1

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXIII.

'"

.i^.:

s>>v

Mmi.
t>
-.

^%Q
/m^
EPi"-/j'/-',i'j

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXIV.

f-/^

\^.

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXV.

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

Vlil.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXVI.

.<->

.^m>.

0M^

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXVII.

.^:sm.:.

>a^

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXVIll.

WILLIAM

TYPE

I.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXIX

~'\o

Mt"'

-'' ---I"

'^
>=i^-

/-

///-'

WILLIAM

II.

TYPE

I.

NORMAN
r-^*^-/

KINGS.

PLATE XXX.

,<>Jji^

WILLIAM

IL

TYPE

I;

MULE

M.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXXI.

l?^^'

/^r

'r\

WILLIAM

II.

TYPE

II.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXXII.

jcm:

WILLIAM

II.

TYPE

II.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXXIII.

-^^
WILLIAM
II.

TYPE

II.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXXIV.

h.

'i'^'L

.y^'

i6

WILLIAM

II.

TYPE

III.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXXV.

>

'

X,

;-^,

r
v.i>-ii:

^^^.'/4^y .i77-

11

I- f..'-

;^^'-'X

#r,
COPENHAOrN.

WILLIAM

II.

TYPE

III.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXXVI

^,-/

'/;

.r^i
j#^- "

WILLIAM

II.

TYPE

IV;

MULE

IV

V.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXXVII.

';&-

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXXVlll.

sr'J?7^-'>

' ,

,-

'v

"^.

HENRY

I.

TYPE

I.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXXIX.

/f^J?'

:tJ^i..

-i"-.-/-

HENRY

I.

TYPES

II,

III,

IV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XL.

-*-S.

/"

j0f

-~

--v

jy.
<^'

/^^rM'\

EVANS.

HENRY

I.

TYPE V;

MULE V

VI;

TYPES

VI,

VII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XLI

HENRY

I.

TYPES

VIII,

IX;

MULE

IX

X;

TYPE

X.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XLll.

y^f-v- :^.

ss
N

'i

HENRY

I.

TYPE

X;

MULE

XI x X;

TYPES

XI,

XII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XLIIl.

Ulffex

^;^.

^^

HENRY

I.

TYPE

XIII;

MULE

Xlll

XIV,

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XLIV.

'^^^:^^>^/

HENRY

I.

TYPE

XIV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XLV.
-^-ly>'

^1U>

-vfn

--

:t

HENRY

I.

TYPE

XIV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XLVI.

0^
^-."^^y:^

A&J^k

-^f-t^.

HENRY

I.

TYPE

XIV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XLVII.

''^3^

Vi,.

.*>_!^,

HENRY

1.

TYPE

XV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XLVIII.

.'-:>.^^-.

w.c.w. i-

'-.

HENRY

I.

TYPE

XV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XLIX.

rr^

STEPHEN.

TYPE

I.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

L.

Y'

'JM.

'/^7.^

V.

STEPHEN.

TYPE

I.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LI.

'.<r~ '<?">

^ --2::::'
-

STEPHEN.

TYPE

I.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

Lll.

-.1^

^l^-^

<-

^ r*-

^
(

?^

"

-'-^J-,

^-^y^:;..

/,

<<:^i^

/^^fev

^:^f

STEPHEN.

TYPE

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

Llll.

?i'

"

-./'!?,1

ll?.\/^
y^^^^^-'i

^
i&^

^\JJ'

^u
W*!^'"
i6

STEPHEN.

MULE

||,

TYPE

II.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LIV.

.#^

:rj:-

'{is:.

. -I

'

V,*

* '"^ rue'

'P^M^-

W^^'^' I ''%5^&^ ^^y.

-^-rJ" ^'r

STEPHEN.

TYPES

II,

III,

IV.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LV.

^
(

^^S '^^
J^\^

"Z>^/

lo

^>Ci

^^^^

./^_
-i.v/^V

'J

'?:-;;.rr--''

STEPHEN.

TYPES

V,

VI,

VII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LVI.

STEPHEN.

TYPE

VII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LVII.

^^,i^
*

'0

-^

/'^v;^\
/-,>

Sotheby,

26. vii. 19

/
*
-^
'^'.

''''*i-i'-

^^fC<v

STEPHEN.

COINS FROM ERAZED DIES; COINS INSCRIBED PERERIC.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LVIll.

:^'^,

STEPHEN.

VARIETIES.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LIX.

STEPHEN.

VARIETIES.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LX.

QUEEN MATILDA AND EUSTACE ('); EUSTACE, SON OF STEPHEN <') EUSTACE FITZJOHN; ROBERT DE STUTEVILLE; HENRY. BISHOP OF WINCHESTER.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LXI

'-J

x^-f:

''-^--

-ji./'.i

..''.r"/^

^rr

^"izTs^^^

B.R.

COI'.

MCi

EMPRESS MATILDA; HENRY OF ANJOU.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

LXII,

:>^^
6 6
B.R.

'-.^^^M'

yr^^/V

^i-

^%=^!

v^i

HENRY OF ANJOU; ROBERT OF GLOUCESTER ('; WILLIAM OF GLOUCESTER BRIAN FITZCOUNT (?> AND UNCERTAIN BARONIAL.

(0;