^

CATALOGUE OF ENGLISH COINS
.

IN THE BRITISH

MUSEUM

A CATALOGUE
OF

IN

THE

BRITISH MUSEUM

THE NORMAN KINGS
BY

GEOKGE CYEIL BROOKE,
IN

B.A.

TWO VOLUMES
G2

WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND

PLATES

VOLUME
(INTRODUCTION, TABLES

I

AND

PLATES)

PRINTED BY ORDER OF THE TRUSTEES SOLD AT THE BRITISH MUSEUM, AND BY
LONGMANS & 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.G.

And ROLLIN & FEUARDENT,

69 Great Russell Street, W.C., and 4

Rue de Louvois, Paris

1916
[All rights reserved']

PRINTED IN ENGLAND AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS .

Special attention has been paid to the epigraphical details of the inscriptions. explain the delay of twenty-three years between that publication and the appearance of the present two volumes. They cover the period of the Norman Kings. to the an arrangement which is justified by the great advance which has been made of recent years in fixing the chronology of the types. Special founts have been prepared for the illustrations Descriptions and of important coins which are not represented in the National Collection have been included from other collections. Comparison with earlier volumes will show that considerable modifications have been made in the methods of arranging and describing the coins. making the purposes a fairly complete work of reference on Anglo-Norman coins. and the collotype plates executed by the London Stereoscopic Company. Assistant in the Department. George Cyril Brooke. has been relegated to foot-notes.. was pubThe retirement of Mr. the importance of will be manifest which which upon a glance at the Epigraphical Table accompanies the work. relating to provenance volume for practical and similar matters. have read the proofs of the whole. B. completing the Anglo-Saxon Series. I . inscriptions. and the employment of Mr.PREFACE THE British lished second volume of the Catalogue of English Coins in the Museum. public or private. Grueber on other parts the Trustees.A. Keary from the service of in 1893. The work has been printed by the Clarendon Press. Most important of all is the subordination of the mints types in the classification . In order to add to the clearness of the descriptions all extraneous information. and compared the descriptions with the coins. These are entirely the work of Mr. of the Collection.

Rashleigh (1900). and purchases were made from time those of the (1848). The present volumes will. acquired in 1825. Keeper of Coins and Medals. which formed the nucleus of the British little Museum at its foundation in 1753. The collection of King George III. The magnificent series of English coins belonging to this collector was purchased in 1810 for 4. W. At in Sir the last moment it has fortunately been possible to include an Appendix fifty-six coins from the cabinet of the late John Evans. Hoards acquired in part or in their entirety under the law of Treasure Trove have also contributed to the Collection. W. it suffices to mention here the hoard of many thousand coins found at Beaworth in 1833. . HILL. G. For half a century The coins from the Tyssen collection purchased in 1802 did not include Norman pieces. No other acquisition approaching this in importance as regards the English series was made for more than a century. E. As these are fully discussed in the Introduction. and P. although the Norman series was not strongly represented in that collection. Carlyon-Britton (1913). addition seems to have been made to the collection. r F. it is hoped.000 guineas. Hyman Montagu P. to time at the sales of collections such as Duke of Devonshire (1844). nearly seven hundred of these appear in this Catalogue. be followed in a few years by a Catalogue of the early Plantagenet series.VI PREFACE English coins were represented in the collections of Sir Robert Cotton and Sir Hans Sloane. contained a few Norman coins. James Dodsley Cuff (1854). but many Museum through the hands his of these found their of Barre* way into the Charles Roberts. the Earl of Pembroke (1896-7).

... . . . attribution IV... title : cxi Robert de Stuteville Henry.. .. Coins struck from erased obverse dies .. : xcv xcvi xcviii cvi ...... cxvii cxviii Empress Matilda Henry of Anjou .. cxxi .. xxxii xxxvi xlii Epigraphy Order of types Irregular issues : ... . York and District V. ? Ixxii I.. Eastern Counties Ixxxix C. son of Cadwgan Of the reign of Stephen : ..... . . . Bishop of Winchester . Issues bearing the king's name.... lxvi Ixvii Table showing evidence for arrangement of types Llewellyn. .. .. xi xii xvi Mules ... . Coins not bearing the king's Eustace FitzJohn .. ..... Scottish or Border Counties D. Midland Counties B. cxvi ... of uncertain II. . . Varieties grouped geographically A.. Ixxvi Ixxxii Coins with inscription PERERIC III.. : PAGE v ix ERRATA x INTRODUCTION The coinage at the time of the Conquest Types of coins and their periodical change Finds of coins Overstruck coins .. .CONTENTS VOLUME PREFACE LIST OF PLATES I .

. . . ...Vlll CONTENTS PAGE Irregular issues of the reign of Stephen (continued) Robert (of Gloucester ?) .... penalties.. . liberties. Moneyers... ccliv facing p. . . . . Coins struck from erased obverse dies II... : .... 379 ... cxxix cxxix William (of Gloucester ?) Brian FitzCount? Organization and Control of the Mint Officers of the . cclvi CATALOGUE OF COINS: William William I II 1 214 266 334 : Henry I Stephen Irregular issues I...... cxxxi cxxxii Uncertain Baronial coins : Engraving of dies at London Dies transferred from one mint to another Moneyers. their status... ... VOLUME II ...... 377 378 Coins with inscription PEBEEIC III.. clxxxix cxciii Table of Finds Table of Mints.. cxxxiii cxxxv cxxxix cxli &c... .. Forgery by moneyers Weight of coins Table showing comparative weights different types Moneyers' names Moneys of Account Mints . .. ..... . cxlix cli of coins of cliii civ clix clx Abbreviations used. .. . Issues bearing the king's name. collections quoted. . and Mionnet's scale Table of Relative Weights of Grains and Grammes Epigraphical Table Plates... ccliii . . Table of Inches and Millimetres.. and Types cxcvi ... Mint . . attribution ..... ... .. ... .. &c. of uncertain ... .....

. 392 395 395 396 397 398 400 INDEXES I. Henry of Anjou Robert (of Gloucester ?). Henry of Anjou... Coins from Erased Dies. LIX. . William William I. I XXVII. York and District 385 386 389 V.CONTENTS IX PAGE IV. . . Midland Counties B. Irregular Issues bearing Stephen's name.. Moneyers General ... Eastern Counties C. . XXXVIII XLVIII. . : .. XLIX LVI. . Robert (of Gloucester ?) . Baronial coins. LVIII... . ... William (of Gloucester ? ?) . : . Earl of Northumberland Uncertain Baronial coins Appendix of coins recently acquired . Scottish or ... .. Varieties grouped geographically A. . XXVIII XXXVII.. LVII.. Robert de Henry. LX. title .. . LIST OF PLATES 413 429 453 III. . Stephen... LXII. Border Counties . . Coins not bearing the king's Eustace FitzJohn . Brian FitzCount Henry. Bishop of Winchester. Henry. : Mints II. coins with inscription PEKEEIC. . . Brian Fitzcount? and uncertain . LXI. Bishop of Winchester Empress Matilda 391 391 Henry of Anjou . Robert de Stuteville 390 . Eustace FitzJohn . Double-figure type Stuteville. William (of Gloucester?). II.. . Empress Matilda. 383 384 . Henry I. D.

232. for Swerlinc read Sperlinc p. for p. no. son of Stephen '. Allen sale. i^K in reverse inscription read and for ' ^Elfhen' read p. insert in p. 1753'. 221. no. 307. no. 868. 385. no. for *9lI)IllE read ' 'HdlDRII' (cf. ' p. . p. 230. 65.Elf hen' read '^Ifheh'. ' p. for Druman' read Dirman'. no. ' Saawine or Sewi read Sewi (Sewine ' ' ' p. 130. 200. (cf. 38. 52. jfi '. 68.ERRATA p. 71.) . lot 327'. coll. Ciwincc read Cipincc '. '. no. 96. p. 693. no. 187 . no. 274. '. no. no. for ' ' read '. p. no. 36. insert in provenance W. insert as moneyer's name Saewi (Ssewine ?) '. 237. 22. p. no. ' no. 138. ' ' p. no. 67. Ill. and dele l Eustace. 114 . moneyer's 237. 96 A). 403. insert as moneyer's name Godwi '. Bliss p. insert as no. 256. p. 72. p. for Queen Matilda and Eustace (?) . no. 279. no. 64. no. ' read '(jElfhOh]?)'. no. 162. 86. 219 ' . Allen sale. ' ' read 'Saewi ^Saewine?)'. 59. ' p. for 'jElfen' p. for p. coll. ' 235. no. 41. 340-2. 1S98. for 'Edwine' read 'Edwi'. 246. coin from same obv. no. 40. for <(jElfh[en?)' p. p. die in T. 104. 912. ' p. 349. 359 (not Sir Hans Sloane insert as provenance 'Cotton Collection. no. 170. for moneyer's name read Eadwi ' p.Elfeh'. no. no. 104. insert as moneyer's name Godwi '. p. 'Swirlinc' read 'Spirlinc'. 79. 228. p. remove to WINCHCOMBE on which mint reads 1*1 EL). no. 227. p. for . provenance W. 125. nos. no. 351. for ?) '. 384. 1898. Plate LX. lot 321 \ 233. for 'Saewi[ne]' p. 253. read ' Stephen and Queen Matilda '. for moneyer's name read 'JE[l]fsi'. no. p. 41. . for < ' fc DB ' read ' f^VDB ' '. 362. 464 ' pp. 190. no. 66. for 'Swerlig?' read 'Sperlig'. name 'Sewi (Sewine?)'.

weight. Chron. For this double result from the same coin 1915. and even officials who held office in the mints of the Confessor continued to be responsible for the coinage of the Conqueror. Num. variously rendered on different methpd : is The coinage of the first two. 2 1 For other monetary denominations in use as moneys of account see below. 22 grs. pp. 815 below) has produced the results (1) 10 oz.IJSTKODUCTION THE coinage of the Norman kings of England l follows in unbroken sequence that of the Anglo-Saxon kings. or form. . of fine this silver to of silver of the standard of 3 18 dwt. included. of alloy. In Normandy William had been alive to the distress caused by the continual debasement of the feudal coinages. informs me that a double assay of a penny of William I (from same dies as no. as it seems that Stephen's name continued in use on the coins until the reforms of the year 1156 (or 8 ?). no change is introduced in denomination. or sometimes the figure. H. for currency was the penny weighing 22^ grains Troy 11 oz. cli ff. or four. standard. if any was struck. Finding England a currency of high standard. clix. 19 dwt. years of Henry II. as he did most 2 Anglo-Saxon institutions. a loss so it serious that quickly led to the closing of his mints. There is p. long established and well he had good reason to adopt this. pp. and (2) 10 oz. 18 dwt. The type remained as in Anglo-Saxon times on the obverse was the bust. see below. cf. of the king. 18grs. 201-2. 2 dwt. 3 some doubt about the standard weight and fineness of the penny Mr.. but his attempts remedy the which accrued to evil to by substituting a triennial tax for the revenue him from lowering the standard of the coinage loss were a failure owing to the heavy natural outflow of his consequent upon the own better coinage and inflow into his dukedom in of the baser deniers of neighbouring lords.. The only denomination still struck accepted. Symonds kindly of this and earlier periods . and fractions of were still obtained by the elementary of cutting the coin into halves and quarters.

which seem monetarius or 'moneyer'. These obverse and reverse technically of obverse ' designs that is form together what is known is as a ' ' type . I. but on a theory of legal tender. quando moneta renovatur or moneta vertente. 172. pp. p. 1893. See. These types used to be considered by some authorities as contemporaneous issues. 131. Num. p.. one particular form always found. to say. * Domesday. we must expect closely similar designs to be separate in point of time. the word ON (i.. ff. usually with some form of cross as their main to have been used without any particular and to have been selected at random from the regular meaning trade stock of the engraver round the design were the name of feature. pp.. but also 2 from the passages in Domesday 4 relating that payments were made by moneyers on receipt of their dies quando moneta vertebatur. with one particular reverse design. cxli ff. . on the reverse was one of the many designs. See below. From the passages in Domesday mentioned above we know to to was made the occasion of a payment the king by his moneyers and to bishops by their moneyers. that the types were The object of this change of types is not successively issued. A statement made ibid. pp. 179. 252. . except on irregular coins ' known ' as mules '. xxxvi ff. for example. 3 but it is clear. and the name of the mint at which he worked. 35. Packe there eays. cxxxv. known. Chron. but to intentional 1 3 ' changes for some specific purpose. 129 ff.Xll INTRODUCTION types. at) coupling the two the official called names. with his name and title round it . Chron. it is quite evident that the contrary is the case the intention being to distinguish one type from another. not only from the evidence of finds of the coins. As changes of type are quite clearly due not. but suppose that a scheme of taxation was the origin of the changes that the change of type is 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 of type to confound cause and effect. The argument for a successive issue of each type requires that those similar to each other should be near together in point of time '. 1 who was responsible for the good weight and purity of the coin. to mere development or degradation of design. See below. as in Continental coinages. 1901. This error is pointed out in Num. 2 See below. . p. e. is worth mentioning as it involves a very common and very misleading form of error.

3 See below. vol. 2 a similar being of the fifth year of Edward I trial. ix). p. in a paper to be published shortly in the British Numismatic Journal. of James I (Brit. which if not a complete change of type. . 1911. 262. The issue of dies from London to the moneyers guarded against the cutting of false inscriptions on the dies though it did not prevent some moneyers from changing or erasing inscriptions on their 3 dies. pp.. similar the Trial of the Pyx. while it was still the practice to Some such trial seems to put the moneyers' names on the coins. p. Lawrence has shown. . Journ.collecting. coinage of Edward III (see Num. Symonds. that in the change of is to say. is described of the thirty-second year of Henry III. then the purchase of the new dies was a natural and convenient opportunity at which to collect the moneyers' possible to explain these successive types as fees..COIN-TYPES Xlll tax. to find a parallel mint-marks of a to later date. Annals. assume a periodical Mint Assay. A 2 See H. evidently with some deliberate purpose on the part of the mint authorities. pp. have been necessary to complete the control of the mint. the earliest issue already tested. it is possible that small privy marks were used. 1 Cf. Chron. the indenture of Edward IV showing the object of the mint-marks.. ii.. 209. Num. cxlix ff. 1 The date of the institution of the Trial of the Pyx is not known. given a periodical change of types necessary for some other purpose. for the purpose of certifying to the Assayers that the coins they assayed were those of the latest issue and not of an would necessitate some mark on the coinage. which shows that an assay recorded trial . It seems of marking periods and to control of the output of the mint. the reigns of Henry II to Henry VI Thus on the gold inclusive. in Ruding. a barred or unbarred 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. that the letter S was reversed on all coins of a certain period (Mr. nor could there be type in order to mark a period of taxation any necessity for changing the on the other hand. $c. 313-9) annulet or saltire and similar small differences were evidently stops. vol. This was the purpose of the mint-marks which were changed at the Trials of the Pyx. . though not actually called a Trial of the Pyx. of this sort was in existence. In the period intervening between the regular change of type and the issue of mint-marks. Lawrence's classes IV and Va). Mint-marks.

Andrew's showing types. pp. 1901. more than one. this was clearly not the case. the Shillington find would prove that the tender. pp. issued. but this organization of the mint at this It is not possible to see in the mere supposition. the owner of the hoard while collecting his 164 current pennies was impoverishing himself by keeping tender. that is. Legislation . The fact that no two profile types occur in finds of Norman coins may be explained by the rarity of profile types in periods of which finds are common (e. For example. town l probably served the double purpose of defence against an enemy and control over the coinage. Brit. g. which had already been withdrawn and had therefore. vol.g. the public would be assumed to have the almost impossible knowledge of the order in which the types had been vol. having been limited by the first type of William II and again by the second of Henry I. is with legal tender. ceased to exist were restored to circulation. VII and VIII of his reign were legal tender. coins were found of three conof coins of secutive types to the number of 30. The supposition of a periodical Mint Assay would explain a against striking coins outside a periodical change of types. . and 164 respectively. pp. and the early period must remain obscure. 97. On Mr. 35-6. and Num. viii. presumably. the 1 Greatley Synod. 113-4. Liebermann. and the rarity of finds of periods in which profile types are common (e. assume that at the end of the reign of William I types V. for there is nothing on the coin to show it. 2 It mark But legal tender if change of types any connexion would only be possible for the types to one type only were allowed in currency. and types as far back as the last of William I Chron.. 2 Num. if one type only were legal tender. was later thrown open.XIV INTRODUCTION and the engraving of the reverse die with the moneyer's name must have led to the conviction of the moneyer on the discovery of a coin of impure standard or low weight but that would be no safeguard without some method of finding untrue coins.. Gesetze. Journ. i. receiving a penny of type IV would have to know by instinct that it was struck before the last four types of the reign. that is to say. 3 Similarly. for example. 158-9 (14). were in his possession allowed in currency and previous types declared false tender. 127 coins which were no longer legal If a definite number of types. then the man in the street VI. for in hoards large numbers : more than one type are very frequently found in the Tamworth find. William I). Henry 3 I).

for example. Mary Hill Church example. Epigraphical data.) and by descriptive names Profile Cross fleury ' type. but these would probably find their way automatically to the meltingif pot even get measures were not taken. find. ' Overstruck ' ' coins. we also find that the frequent changes of type were abandoned thus. Nor could there be any reason for limiting the legal tender at a period when the purity and good weight of the coinage was maintained. At periods when we know ' the legal tender to ' have been limited. A profile type. 233. (' &c. Finds of coins this period. yet man receiving a coin of type I could not be expected to it know whether was issued before or after type II. if any. contained no fewer than eleven types. a very long one . is nothing and man's memory . type I would be no longer legal tender. were put out of currency.). as they may have been. The approximate arrangement of the types in the order in which they were struck is possible by means of the combined evidence to be obtained from Finds of coins. &c. and In the following pages the types are described by the numbers in the plates of Hawkins's Silver Coins (Hks. is the second (or possibly third) of the reign of profile issue is his sixth Henry a I. for seem to show that there was no limit of tender at or. there its issue. . on the issue of the short-cross coinage . Mules '. and the Shillington find covered an even longer period (see pp.can hardly cover a period of ten years or more in a subject of the technicalities of which he is quite ignorant. to them returned. the St. therefore. to say nothing on the coin to show the period of of the difficulty arising such as the second and on the issue of a type in three-quarter face fifth types of Stephen.COIN-TYPES XV suggestion that the issue of a type with the bust in profile marked a limit of legal tender is untenable for the same reason. and until it was in its turn put continued type out of currency at the introduction of the 'long-cross' type by by Henry this ' II all previous issues ' short-cross Henry III. lii-liii). unless it were to stop the circulation of worn and clipped coins. on the issue of type VI. and the next type .

hoard. described. (See Table of Finds. with about 11. of the the abandon evidence one cannot therefore. which is fortunately rare. of which is we have the most meagre information. if a hoard contains a large number it is of coins. recover his hoard on his return. or a portion . twelve of which belong to one type and one to another similar is the Shillington .) The importance of occur in the same find primary value it is finds lies in the . grouping of types which but for the evidence thus obtained to be of necessary for the hoard to contain a considerable number of coins and for the whole hoard to have been adequately its described at the time of discovery. grouping lightly of types which they afford. is a hoard which has lain dormant for a time and been increased at a later period. in which is there no doubt that the vast majority. A glance at the Table of Finds will show that the Malmesbury find of 1828 is an example of a thoroughly unsatisfactory find we do not know of how many . The more dangerous form of hoard. but such stray coins are not usually very apt to mislead. probably the types described . but thirteen only are described. coins it consisted. as was the case in the Colchester find of 1902. not absolutely . examples. add to it any and bury again on leaving home a second time . which contained two pennies of Henry I and one of Stephen. though very strong. conclusive that the types of the hoard form a group or two of an earlier period than the rest is a stray coin quite likely to be present. Tarn worth. and every coin discovered in known is to have been the evidence.000 of the 'short-cross' issue (Henry II to Henry III). all. discovered belong to in these Again. A contrast of the coins seen in the Beaworth. and Watford finds. 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. There are obvious reasons why such a hoard may be made : a man may bury his it or on savings before going away for military service other business.XVI INTRODUCTION FINDS OP COINS.

City of London. 223 the 159 of Harold as Hks. Though from them many as two dozen finds have been recorded which contain coins of the Norman period. . have been very few coins found and no satisfactory hoards recorded. The Soberton (Hampsfure) Find 1 (1851) consisted of 259 coins and two gold rings. 100. viii (1851). 1851 . though mostly obtained. small. coin of the intervening types seventh type and at the most one it is unlikely that the portion not seen by the recorder as of the hoard included all the missing types. which contained coins of William II and four or five coins of Henry I's . Proceedings. date uncertain St.. p. number : York. 1852. Mary Hill Church. is 1 and all wrong in describing all the 78 coins of the Confessor as Hks.FINDS OF COINS of a XV11 dowry may be kept and additions made to it after a lapse of years. Soberton. An instance of some such find as this is doubtless seen in the Shillington find of 1871. 1882 . when the financial position of the owner has improved. which were found in a vessel of dingy red ware in a field near Wickham Lodge. 17. the evidence to be obtained This is hardly so satisfactory as might be expected. b . 231. Journ. . to the that the finds are due fact very unevenly chiefly distributed of the types between the third of William II and the is . Chron. The coins were : Num. 1774 . 1872. and similarly of the types between the second and last of Stephen's reign on the other hand. an account of the find in Arch. of the early types of William I and of the last two types of Henry and the first two of Stephen have been comparatively numerous. The recorded finds which contained coins of Edward Confessor or Harold II with coins of William are six in Soberton. 1845 York. Several of the coins from this find are in the British Museum.. London. and in many and their description cases hoards have been quickly dispersed consequently incomplete. finds fourteenth of Henry I there . Whitchurch (Oxfordshire ?). Some finds and good corroborative evidence is thus have contained but few coins. p.

.77 . and coins of 1 W 7 illiam ' I. ii. vol. 219. No description of this find was made at its discovery. Brit. Profile Major Carlyon-Britton's classification in Num. C. Bonnet type. B. B. Hks. and 234. p. pp. pp. . 233. of which Hawkins saw 167 these were Edward William Confessor. ' the types of Profile ' Cross Fleury type. C. the ' Profile Cross Fleury' type. 1 Hks.. 223. Discovered in digging out the foundation of a house near Jubbergate.165 1 Total 167 He says that there was one penny of William with a profile head. .XV111 INTRODUCTION Edward 1 Confessor. Chron. 'Bonnet' type ' with profile head . it but he did not see and was not able to say what was its type . 179 2 3 * Num. p. and the mule of these two The bulk of the hoard seems to have been of types. Confessor and William were found in Bishophill William represented in the hoard were Hks. 115. ii.. . Hks. 233. 231 William I. X and XI). About 600 .152 7 . possibly Cross Fleury if. 233. Hks. Hks.. . 235. 1905. Coins of uncertain number of Edward . Hks.. York Find the time of 3 (1882). Hks. 225 and 223 (P. C. pp. 1846. ' Profile Cross Fleury ' type 22 Total 259 The complete hoard seems York Find (1845).... Chron. P. 2 to have been described. Not described at time of discovery. . 230 . type not described I. vol. B. Num. 115-6. ' Whitchurch (Oxfordshire?) Find 4 (date unknown). 219. from a comparison with all the other finds in which coins of William were discovered with coins of the Confessor we may fairly conclude that this coin was of Hks. ' . VI . and Brit. coins were said to have been found. Chron. : 1 Hks. ' ' the ' Bonnet type. Num. 234. P.. 123-5. 1902. Journ. Joum.. XI Harold. '. . It is said to have contained many coins of Edward Confessor. Num. some of Harold.

FINDS OF COINS

xix

'Bonnet', and 'Canopy' types (Hks. 233, 234, 236); Hks. 234 and 236 predominating.
St.

Mary HiU Church Find

l

(1774).

Near the church

of St.
feet

Mary
below

Hill, London, was found at about fourteen or fifteen the level of the street an earthen vessel containing

coins,

and

within the

vessel

was another smaller one

of

crucible

shape

which

also contained coins
is

coins that were found

and a gold brooch. The number of the not known between 300 and 400 were
;

examined, and of these the majority were of Edward Confessor of Harold II (P. C. B. VI to XI inclusive and a mule of VII x VIII) thirty-one moneyers and twenty-two mints were represented, some
;

coins having the sceptre

and others not
' '

;

of William I the
'

'

Profile
'

types (Hks. 233, 234, 236, 237) were present, and also a curious mule with obverse of an unusual variety of the Canopy type and
',
',

Cross

'

Fleury

Bonnet

Canopy

and

Two
'

Sceptres
'

reverse of the

'

Two

'

Sceptres

type

2
;

there were

many

cut half-

pennies and farthings.
City of

London Find 3
in

(1872).

Said to have contained about

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

H. Willett

Num.

Chron., 1876, and nearly 500 were described

later in

Num.

Chron., 1885,

a few coins of ^Ethelred

by Sir John Evans. The hoard contained II, Cnut, Harold I, and Harthacnut; a

very large majority of the coins described (2,798 out of 2,829 in Willett's and about 450 in Evans's list) were of Edward Confessor,
including
'

all
'

the types of his reign except the rare so-called
4
;

the few remaining English coins of the find type were of Harold II and William I two foreign coins, both figured
;

Harthacnut

in of

Num.

Chron., 1876,

PI.

X.

8, 9,

are described, one as a coin

Magnus, which should be attributed to Svend Estridsen (10475 1075), the other as an uncertain eleventh-century German coin,
1 2

Archaeologia, vol.

iv,

pp. 356

ff.

Now in the Hunterian Collection.
Num. Num.
Cf.

See below, pp. xxxix,43, and PI. VIII. 11.
op.
cit.,

3
4

Chron., 1876, pp. 323 Chron., 1905, PI. VII.

ff.,

and

1885, pp. 254

ff.

1.
i

5

Hauberg, Myntforhold og Udmyntninger

Danmark,

PI. VIII. 6.

b2

XX

INTRODUCTION

which may probably be identified as a coin of Celle of Heinrich III 1 Profile The coins of William I represent three types (1039-56). Bonnet ', and Two Sceptres (Hks. 233, 234, Cross Fleury
'
:

'

'

'

',

and

237).

Two
in

other finds which

may

be mentioned here are those of

1704 and Dyns Marsh in 1739. The former 2 contained York 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 Fleury

type (Hks. 233), and thirteen of the 'Bonnet' type (Hks. 234). The find in 1739 at Dyns Marsh, 3 between Dungeness and Lydd,
receives a passing mention in Archaeologia as having contained

above 200 pennies of Edward Confessor. Harold II, and William. To summarize, the Soberton find, of which all the coins were
examined, shows the
be the
first
'

Profile

Cross Fleury
I,

'

type of William

and

this

is

type (Hks. 233) to confirmed by the

4 appearance of this type in all the other finds which contain coins The York finds show that the of the Confessor and Harold.
'

Bonnet

'

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

From
'

the St.

Mary
'

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
finds is conflicting as regards the question

London

which

is

the

earlier of these

two

types,

and our knowledge of these

finds is very

scanty.

5 Malmesbury Find (1828) contained some coins, the number of which is uncertain. They were found under the foundations

1

Cf.

Dannenberg, Deutsche Miinzen,
iv, p.

PI. VIII. 185.

2

Thoresby, Ducatus Leodiensis,
Archaeologia, vol.
ii,

p. 349.

3

358.

Described as

'

'

Dymchurch

in Brit.

Num.

Journ., vol.

p. 97.

4 Except the York find, 1845, in which, however, a have been seen but not described. 6

profile coin is said to

Akerman, Num. Journ.,

vol.

ii,

1837, p. 106; Sainthill, Oil a Podrida, vol.

i,

p. 189.

FINDS OF COINS
of the chapel built at

XXI

Malmesbury by William the Conqueror.
Sceptres
'

A

few coins of the
'

'

Two

and one of the
present.

Bonnet

type (Hks. 237) are described type (Hks. 234) is said to have been
'

'

The incomplete

account, which states that

many

pennies

were found' and describes only about a dozen, makes the find useless
as evidence of the order of the types.

York Minster Find.

In the York

Museum
'

are eleven coins

which are there described as having been found together in York Two Stars type Minster of these coins six belong to the
' ;

1 (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* (1833). More than 6,500 coins were found in a leaden box, 3 under the surface of a wagon track, in pasture
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

the statement.

examined and described, but later withdraws 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) Mules of preceding and following types (Hks. 240)

34
11

'Paxs' type (Hks. 241, 242)

....
Total
'

6

6,439
6,521
'

There were also eighteen cut halfpennies of the Paxs type. Hawkins gives the definite number of coins which he examined
1

The coins are described

in Brit.

Num.

Journ., vol.

ii,

p. 115.

The informavol.
i,

tion of the find
2

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

pp. 151-61.
3

The box

is

illustrated in Brit.

Num.

Journ., vol.

ii,

p. 102.

XX11

INTRODUCTION
'

type only of the other types he gives the varieties of readings on the coins, from which it appears that he only saw one coin of each variety the numbers given above are based
of the
;
;

Paxs

'

on this supposition, which
total

confirmed by his statement that the Mr. Andrew, 1 following 6,500. Major Carlyon-Britton's local information that the box contained from 8,000 to 9,000 pennies, conjectures from this and other
is

number

of coins

was about

arguments that the hoard was originally one of the donations of
six

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle tells us, William II in 1087 distributed to monasteries for his father's

marks

of gold, 2 which, the

soul.

The condition

of the coins

and the unusually high proportion
seem to show that the

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

hoard came straight from a mint or treasury. But Hawkins, in his Silver Coins, p. 168, says that some thousands more coins from
this

hoard found their
his friends later,

way

to

and

and he there estimates the

London and were examined by him total number

at scarcely less than 12,000.
tells

us of the donations to

Though the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle monasteries we do not anywhere hear
is

of the loss of

necting this

any reason for conhoard with these donations even were the amount of
there

any one

of them, nor

the find equivalent.

There

is

no reason

to suppose the
it

sum

so

exceptional that a cause must be found for

being amassed.

Discovered during work in connexion with the Board Schools at Tamworth. In a leaden box of triangular
(1877).

Tamworth Find 3

shape were found about 300 coins. Four or five only are said to have been dispersed, the remainder are described as
:

'Paxs' type (Hks. 241)
'

30 coins
97
3

Profile

'

type (Hks. 244)

Mules of preceding and following types (Hks. 245)
'Cross in Quatrefoil' type (Hks. 246)
. .

164

Total

294

1

Brit.

Num.

2

A mark
Num.

Journ., vol. i, pp. 26 ff. of gold .6 ; six marks would therefore contain 8,640 pennies.

=

8

Chron., 1877, pp. 340

ff.

FINDS OF COINS

XX111

The two following

finds contain coins of

William with coins of

Henry

:

Shillington

Find 1

(1871).

Discovered

by workmen

in

the

neighbourhood of Shillington (Bedfordshire).

Probably upwards
the

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

bone ornament.

About one-third of them were examined
' :

;

types represented were, of William
(

Paxs

'

(Hks. 241) one coin
'

only,

Profile' (Hks. 244),
'

voided

(Hks. 250), and
' :

<

Cross in Quatrefoil' (Hks. 246), 'Cross Crosses Pattee and Fleury (Hks. 247) 2
;
'

'

and of Henry

Quatrefoil and

Piles

(Hks. 252) and one other

type undescribed.
3 Bermondsey Find

men

Thirteen pennies found by worksinking for the foundation of a house
(c.

1820).

:

William,
,,

'

Cross in Quatrefoil

'

type (Hks. 246)

.

.

.3 coins
.

'

Cross Voided

'

type (Hks. 250 and 249)

.

.

5
5

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 Bea worth and Tamworth. 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, lii. 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,
2

1

Num.

Cambridge.
3

See Brit. Num. Journ.,

vol.

ii,

pp. 108-9.

Num.

Chron., 1846, p. 170.

XXIV
therefore precede the
'

INTRODUCTION

York Minster

find

Paxs type, and from the evidence of the these two types should probably be placed
no evidence to show whether the
'

'

together, but there
'

is

Profile

Cross and Trefoils type 1 (Hks. 239), the remaining type found at Beaworth, should precede or follow them. The remaining two types of the Tamworth Find, Profile type (Hks. 244) and Cross
'

'

'

'

in Quatrefoil

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

the 'Paxs' type

this conclusion is confirmed

Bermondsey

finds,

by the Shillington and where one or both of these types are found with
to these

coins of Henry.

With regard

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
2

Henry

I 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,
of

it

may

be noted that the Bersaid
to

mondsey find, examined and

which

all

the coins are

have been

described, omits the last two types of William II, and therefore shows with what caution so small a find must be
treated.

In a large hoard of continental (c. 1891). coins mostly of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, which are not
(Italy)

Bari

Find

3

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

.

.

3 coins

.

.

24 27

Total

1

From

the numbers, one would suppose that Hks. 239 was the earliest type

of the find, but it must be remembered that the total find numbers over 6,500 coins, and that therefore thirty coins must, equally with ten, be treated as stray specimens. Hawkins, in his account of the find, shows reason for sup-

posing 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. 2 See pp. lii, liii.
3

Num.

Chron., 1892, pp. 83

ff.

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.
1 Canterbury Find

(c.

1901?).

No

record of this find has been

published

;

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 distribution. Many of the coins were seen by Major Carlyon-Britton and notes were made by him, but it is
impossible to say

have been of
'

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

to

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

Full face

Cross Fleury

'

3 coins
1 1
,,

Mule
'

of preceding

and following types
'

.

.

Pellets in Quatrefoil

type (Hks. 262)

.

.

353 358

Total

Twelve pennies of Henry I are described as having been found together on the beach at Lowestoft, probably carried down by a fall of the cliff. Whether these constituted the
Lowestoft
(1905).

Find 2

whole hoard
'

is

not known.
'

They are

of

two types
.

:

Pellets in Quatrefoil

type (Hks. 262)

.

6 coins
6

'

Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury' type (Hks. 255)

Total

12

(1860 ?). Twelve coins of Henry near Battle, were of the following types
Battle (Sussex)
:

Find

3

I,

found

'Full face
'

Cross Fleury' type (Hks. iv)
'

.

.

1
1

coin

type (Hks. 258) 'Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury' type (Hks. 255)
.

Double Inscription

.

10
12

,,

Total

I am indebted to Major Carlyon-Britton for the loan of his private notes on this find also to Mr. Baldwin for further information of the provenance.
1
;

2

Num.

3

Chron., 1905, p. 112. Ibid., 1873, p. 175.

9-15) Empress Matilda (MATILDI EOI) Uncertain coins (Baronial . Variety II. 539 ff. containing a large hoard of coins.. . xxi. together with a fragment of an earthen 1 Num. In the Appendix to Archaeologia. original number of coins was 1. 3 1. 398 .. The following thinks this coins are described : . LVII.. Rashleigh. . is an account in laid before the Society of Antiquaries by Taylor Combe. Chron. 255) Stephen. 'Watford' type (Hks. a few probably been having picked up and sold by the workmen. in his account of the hoard in Num.. Pellets in Quatrefoil type (Hks. 238) ' .. who wrote a full account of them. pp. the ancient manor-house of Oxhey Place. in labourers hoeing in number above a hundred. a rude clay jar was discovered. He says that he number is nearly all that were found. Total vol. T William. 138 ff. January 1822. in the parish of Watford the coins were lying scattered upon the surface of the ground... and. with obverse inscription .XXVI INTRODUCTION coins of The following hoards contained together : Henry I and Stephen 1 Watford Finds (1818).. Chron. Pennies pennies 1 Henry I. 1850. ?). states that the total pennies. 1850. 270) ..094 33 I's This long survival of a halfpenny of the middle of William reign (about 60 years) is remarkable. Some labourers digging in a field near Watford found a few silver coins... 'Two ' ' Stars' type (Hks.. about ten or twelve inches below the surface of the ground. on further search being made. . pp. 262) ' 58 Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury type (Hks.. broken.094 pennies and 33 halves of owner These coins were kept together in the possession of the until at his death they passed into the hands of Rashleigh.632 2 1 PER ERIE (PI. of a find in April 1818 of a quantity of silver coins. 21 11 . They were found by a field of beans near the site of .

uncertain number 1 Num. Nottingham Find Jan. two separate hoards being buried at the same time for the same cause might well ' induce two neighbours to take similar action. that both finds were field. on the surface of the ground points rather to this being a residue not found in the search coins. 1881. The types represented by the coins are the same three as were found in the Watford hoard above described. pp. . described were quickly dispersed. . 5. than the larger one. 'Annulets' type (Hks. with the addition of the coin described below as variety III 6. xci. but on further digging found thirty more coins. I Chron. LVIII. 255) ' at least 7 Stephen.. Hks. Whether this small find should be considered as part The discovery of these of the larger hoard it is impossible to say. 270) I. This hoard was discovered on 1880. 255. Nottingham. Andrew for this information. 6 (Hks. could only procure nine specimens. on the other hand. iv) 'Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury' type (Hks. were Clutterbuck could hardly have failed to obtain information of it when he made inquiries in the neighbourhood nor do we know this find later . . though both occurred in or near Watford and both in the year 1818. at the back of old property in Bridlesmith Gate. on inquiry in the neighbourhood. with a fragment of an earthen vessel. which resulted in the discovery of the large hoard and broken vessel. 273). p.. Ixxviff. the original number being more than three hundred 2 comparatively few are coins ..). and 270... (see below. These two finds are distinguished in the Catalogue as Watford Find and Smaller Watford Find ' ' '. There would be nothing in the same surprising in and in the same neighbourhood. But. Clutterbuck. ff.FINDS OF COINS vessel in XXV11 which they had probably been deposited. 251) . . . PI... The they consist of : Henry I. 1 1 coin 'Full face Cross Fleury' type (Hks. ' upwards of 150 Variety with erased obverse die pp. 36 2 am indebted to Mr. Watford type (Hks. 1 (1880). 262.

of Carl isle (?) .. xcv) ff. pp. David I (?). coin fire Mr. said to have contained about 65 pennies...) . Journ. 6 These are the coins in Mr. no.. . 44. One of these is described as an Oxford coin of Stephen. pp. p.. Ixxxii coin described coin described at least 1 Variety IV A (a) (see below. 269.. (see below. 99. cxviii . contemporary forgeries? nos... Empress Matilda (see below. 4 coins Stephen. pp 186 if.. 97... 'Watford' type (Hks.. p. vii. of which the following are described : Henry ' I.. Num. nos. xcvi) ff. 1141... . cxviii Scottish. Ixxvi ff.. the coin Reynolds's collection.) 1 Empress Matilda (see below. . and later in Mr. 6 3 73 Journ.. . pp. 78.. vol. 8. Chron. Brit. 255) Stephen. Num. (ibid. in Num. 'Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury 5 type (Hks. 270) Mule.. 1 Dartford Find* (1825).XXV111 INTRODUCTION II. 77 (from same G dies as coin described below. vol.. 188. 270x269 (Brit. . 27 ff. 85. 1851. very rough work and light weight incline forgeries of Hks. 269.. i. 1 1 Hks. 270) Variety I.) PERERIE 1 . was in Rashleigh vii.. Num. Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury ' type (Hks. Found at Dartford in Kent. Journ. H.) . . . There seems to me insufficient reason for the attribution of the coins to . 255) . 102) . with erased obverse die (see below. Andrew connects the burial of this hoard with the at Nottingham on Sept. 73. 356. 4 sale. 101. M... 1 .. pp. vol. 1851. 96. 101 are extremely doubtful. p. 69-70) . p. Hks. A hoard of 95 pennies and 7 halfpennies found at Sheldon in Derbyshire.. 3 Num. 2 1 2 Brit. 5 1 s Sheldon Find'1 (1867). . Andrew's list numbered 4-68. Matilda even the letters IMP on no. p. 79-83. 44 .. The following are the types described: Pennies ' Half_ pennies 3 Henry I. 3 . lot 630. Their me to consider them contemporary . 137). 'Watford' type (Hks. pp. Variety with inscription ff. p. (see below. Stephen. 30 if. Chron... Variety IV B () . pp.

but has also two stray coins of Henry (Hks. 53. no. 6 Num.. 71. 1883. 60 ff.. 255) 1 Stephen. See below. pp. ff. xciff. 255 and 270. with inscription ff. 46. Variety III 8(b} (ibid. Quadrilateral on Cross Fleury ' type 6 .1 . 76. 84-95. 74) . about fifteen inches below the surface of the ground nearly a hundred of the coins are described : . Ixxxii See below. 75) David I (ibid. xcv. The 1 3 See below. p. Chron. p. pp. no. p. 55. 2 Variety III 7 (see below. ff. 2 * ff.. one true type of each reign 255 and 270. nos. p. HalfPennies pennies Farthings Henry ' I. which may therefore be placed as the and Sheldon hoards contained only in each case these two types are Hks. 4 Variety IV B (a) (ibid. p... p.FINDS OF COItfS XXIX Half- Pennies Stephen.. no. . 'p. (Hks. 270) 'Cross Voided and Mullets' .. 262 and 255.11 1 Variety II. 251 and iv) in addition. nos.) PERERIE . 108 . The Watford finds have coins of Hks. and therefore confirm the slight evidence of the Lowestof t find in placing the two types. with erased obverse die 1 (ibid. together. 32 4 4 type (Hks. pp. they were found in an earthen jar.) Total described 4 2 68 I are 21 5 Of these finds. no. 269) 24 14 1 Variety II. in which coins of Henry found mixed with coins of Stephen. Ixxxii . pp. xcvi. pennies 3 Variety I. the Dart ford . The Nottingham find confirms this. with inscription 100) s PERERIE (ibid. (see below. pp. 72) .1 .2 95 7 Linton (Maidstone) Find 5 (1883). Scottish. The total number of coins in this find is said to have been about 180. pp. Hks. 81. 262 with coins of Hks. 98) - . 'Watford' type (Hks.. 51. Ixxvi See below. last of Henry and the first of Stephen.

3 coins . such as coins of Matilda. In his Introduction to Domesday Book.. ' Catalogue of T. 270) . p. . with several of Stephen. this improbable statement may be partly explained by the attribution at that time of coins of Henry of Anjou to Henry I. about 300 yards from the ancient Chapel of Saint Blane. Sir Henry Ellis mentions this find us containing 'a large assemblage of pennies from the Saxon times to the . 15. Earl Henry (see below. vol. . In Gentleman's Magazine. 1804).. is (c.. found. p.. coins with obverse type erased. 216 ibid. of this type. 1824.. 269) treated separately below (pp. coins with obverse inscription PER ERIE.XXX Linton find is INTRODUCTION the latest of this group of finds. Ixxi ft*. 9 Total 27 Winterdow Find 2 (1804). 2 reign of Stephen . which is confirmed in the Sheldon hoard by the mules of 270 x 269 and also by the two contemporary forgeries. in the vicinity of Salisbury In the MS. all of which are thus shown to have been issued before the . near Salisbury. three The following coins are gold bands. Dimsdale sale. 'Watford' type (Hks. p. Catalogue of the B. . p. Roberts collection some coins are noted AS having been found in a chalk pit at Winterslow. 1863. xcviii) Uncertain (type as Hks. and other varieties . and of coins of William (of Gloucester?) to William I and William II. The coins so noted in the Roberts Catalogue and elsewhere 1 3 are : Chron. and gives us as the second type of Stephen's reign Hks. 1865. and one silver bar. These finds are of further importance as containing various irregular issues. ' Ixxiv lately a notice of a coin (the Dirnsdale specimen) '. 14 1 . 269. Hawkins (Silver Coins. 57 ff. many halfpennies are there said to have been found. were found 27 silver coins (some in fragments) with two gold rings. . or whatever they may be. Num. issue of the second regular type of the reign (Hks. lot 228.). David I . pp. 270) Scottish. At the south end of the island. described : Stephen. 3 . C. 185) also mentions the find without giving any additional information.. these coins are Bute Find* (1863).

p. p. 351 1855. one coin of Hks. 3 1 f. 1 near Wetherby. type I (b) (see below. . 354 ff... p. 3 (see below. 216.typeII(6)(seebelow. : The following are described Stephen. p. Ducatus Leodiensis. any types between the second and the last of find. .) . pp. p. 1 (see below. one of Robert de Stuteville (see below. one of Eustace FitzJohn. of Yorkshire Philosophical JSoc. cxvi). p. 'Awbridge' type (Hks. p. Total 14 3 At 1 Catal. all close together at about 2f feet below the surface of the ground. Variety III 4 (see below. type B (see below. 31 coins 3 . 110 144 Total This find shows Hks. 269) 'Cross . Hampshire. type I (c) (see below. were found a few silver coins in 684.. Henry ' II. 1 1 no. Tealby type (Hks.. type 11(6) (see below. 'Watford' type (Hks.FINDS OF COINS XXXI Half- Stephen. Pennies 1 pennies 2 2 1 and Fleurs' type (Hks. xci . . including one of Stephen. 285) . . Proc. pp. p. cxxi) . The finds give no evidence of the order. cxxii . Chron. of this reign .p.) . and another coin of Stephen (type not described). Variety III 7 (see below... 276 occurred in the Winterslow 1 Thoresby. cxxiii) . 2 Awbridge Find (c. 1 1 1 D (b) (see below. near Romsey. cxxxii) . xc) Variety IV . pp. 268 to have been the last type issued by Stephen. 350.. cxxxiii) . Henry of Anjou. . . 1902). 1 1 Williara(of Gloucester?). 276) . or even existence as definite types. . 2 Num. cxxii) type II (a) (see below. no. p. p. ff.. 268) ' . 270) 'Cross Voided and Mullets 'type (Hks.cxxx) Uncertain baronial. pp. . cvi). 1905. . p. . variety IV D (d) (see below. About 180 coins of Stephen and Henry II were found at Awbridge. cvi) . cxiv).

XXXii INTRODUCTION first with a few coins of the coins of irregular issues. type) ]257 67 262 255 (last type). be from dies of the same type or from dies of different types in the latter case it follows that. the earlier. passed into circulation. impression on the coin is that of the earlier of the two types. underlying impression of a different pair of dies coins having been struck._241-|*"}-|i2 ^^ oori Zov \ ** I * TI i J HENRY 251 or 252 (first I. two. OVERSTRUCK COINS. temporarily. as in almost every series. perhaps. and. as the types were not struck con. unimportant. and are. cannot easily be distinguished from double-struck coins. that is to say. coins of the former class. STEPHEN. return to the mint and are re-struck without the previous impresThe two impressions on a coin may sion having been removed. in any case. or obliterated. types of the reign and several To summarize the evidence obtained from finds. type) 234 (second type) | 937 900 2. are The coins re-struck with dies of a different type commonly known as ' Overstrikes ' and are very important . where the two impressions belong to the same type. Coins are commonly found in this. 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 ' I and II. is on which the impression of the dies superimposed upon an . 270 268 (first type) 269 (second type) (last type).

iii. 282 ff. for we have seen above 3 that one type cannot have gone out of currency on the issue of another. p. that the later .. Journ. pp. it 2 3 1 1 Num. that officials of the exchange were prohibited from circulating coins of any type but that actually in issue at the mint. a considerable period intervenes before the the coin. Num. this effect can only be produced by a blow which has hammered the high relief flat and sunk part of the flat surface into incuse. re-striking might As overstriking might be supposed to guarantee the genuineness of a coin. type immediately follows the earlier no. again. is The reason It cannot for re-striking coins in this way quite uncertain. Brit. on p. e.). 1905. though it frequently happens. should perhaps be mentioned that some ingenious modern forgeries are struck on genuine mediaeval coins (see Brit. 4 in which case. ' re-striking It has been suggested that the coins known as Overstrikes represent not re-struck coins. pp. p.OVERSTRUCK COINS XXX1H as giving quite definite evidence that one type precedes another. g. viii. 'of xxxiv. clipped coins would have to be returned to the melting-pot.. xiv. but coins struck from re-engraved dies from which the original design was not completely erased. Such a prohibition would presumably c . 110-1. 10 in fact. vol. its owing to protection by the original high relief beside it. can it have been due to the coins being clipped or effaced circulation by . Chron. though there is no documentary support for the assumption. 123. It is possible. in some cases. and still in some of the cases here quoted the original impression stands out so clearly through the overstruck type that it is impossible to suppose the coins to have been much worn. Num. have been done with the object of restoring to currency coins that were no longer current. as their weight would be untrue. Journ. and are marked out by an incuse outline which represents the part of the field of the in original coin that has failed to rise into the later dies. Nor. 1 It cannot be concluded. 2 but it ' is clear from an examination of such coins that this is not the case.. vol. relief On the these coins it will be found that the parts in high original have been flattened down by the second striking to the level of the field.

'Two Stars' type (Hks. Coin of London (Carlyon-Britton sale. (see below. and Trefoils' type (Hks. no. . Mule (Hks. (7) William. {2) William. 234) over type of Harold II (Hks. The following are the overstrikes that have been noted coinage of this period (1) : in the William. 243) over 'Two Sceptres' type Coin of London (Carlyon-Britton sale. (Hks. W. lot 706) and another of Winchester in P. A coin of Huntingdon in P. 227. lot 712). 233). 'Bonnet' type (Hks. 308 one of same (Hks. 56). or came into. Carlyon-Britton collection {4) William. lot 717). below. Britton collection. (3) Malmesbury (H. P. Sharp Ogden collection). 403. 1913. P. 236). 246) over 'Canopy' type (Hks. Perhaps such an evasion is meant by the foHsfacturse veteris monetae charged to Gilpatric in the Pipe Roll (see below. be intended to prevent the moneyers from evading the cost of new dies by continuing to use dies of an old type. 239) over 'Sword' Coin of uncertain mint (Carlyon-Britton sale. W. p. Carlyon-Britton collection. cxlvi) . Mule (Hks. no. 244). 238) over 'Two Sceptres' type Coin of Cricklade. p. 'Cross in QuatrefoiP type (Hks. Carlyon-Britton collection. 237). 230. ' 1913. 'Cross in Quatrefoil' type (Hks. 237). 60. 241). (5) William. 29. p. 'Sword' type (Hks. 244). Coin of A). p. 241) over Profile Cross and Trefoils' type (Hks. (see Coin of Hereford in P. Coins of Hereford. Profile Cross type (Hks. Carlyon- William. (8) W. P.XXXIV INTRODUCTION be due to the necessity of circulating coins which remained in. lot 747). Coin of Southampton in P. 245) over Leicester in Evans collection 'Profile' type (Hks. 76. 'Paxs' type (Hks. 230). 246) over 'Profile' type (Hks. 'Profile' type (Hks. 237). and Worcester. p. William. W. (9) William. ' (6) William. no. ' W. 239). 'Bonnet' type (Hks. 237 x 238) over Two Sceptres' type (Hks. 93. 234) over 'Profile Cross Fleury' also type (Hks. P. 154. 243). 1913. no. p. the mint or exchange after the issue of a new type. p. Morrieson collection) and Hereford (W. Coin of Chichester. (11) William. 244) over 'Paxs' type (Hks. 1913. mint (Carlyon-Britton sale. no. 67 (10) William. Coin of Wallingford.

Carlyon-Britton collection. no.OVERSTRUCK COINS p. 2 confirms the placing of the the Nos. 6 places 239 later than 243. Rarity of coins at the present day is not a safe reason for assuming few to have been in currency it is usually clue to scarcity of finds of certain periods the Paxs type of William. the rarest of his types. example. vol. which was certainly in some cases (e. which perhaps accounts for the rarity of overstrikes of the Paxs type (type VIII) of William in spite of the Beaworth hoard having made this issue so common in the present day. 244. pp. Crosses Pattee and Fleury type (Hks. ' ' QuatrefoiP type ' (Hks. 'Crosses Pattee in and Fleury' type (Hks. 1 any former impression is more thoroughly As regards the evidence afforded by the overstrikes towards placing the coin-types. 250). 234. too. Beaworth and Tamworth ' ' : c 2 . no. owing to the finds. 1 In Brit. also of Oxford in P. 4 ' ' Profile Cross Fleury ' type before Bonnet ' type. Mules. too much stress of both overstrikes and mules of these two later reigns. XXXV 242. and 246 but it must also be remembered that overstruck coins have an unpleasing appearance. evidence thus given to the groups of the types that were formed after examining the finds of the coins. 258. combined with the evidence York Minster find. is and 5 show that the group 238. p. 247. makes 239 immediately precede the Paxs ' type (241). 240 and 245. and thus. .g. is perhaps due partly to more careful striking of the coins. Joum. ' ' frequently been thrown out among the refuse of a find. before the Beaworth find. "was. and therefore used not to be preserved by collectors. 247) over 'Cross Coin of Rochester. 243. partly to the greater rarity of coins of these reigns. in which 238 and 243 were found ' together. the Watford find) consigned to the melting-pot. 125-6. and partly to the obverse and reverse designs tilling more completely the surface of the field. 258. No this overstrikes are known of the reigns of Henry I or Stephen . Coin of Thetford. and 239 later than the group 236 and 237. W. 252. 171 . of the correctly placed No. P. is laid on the rarity Overstrikes are of common in periods of which the coins are most frequent for Hks. (13) William. no. viii. and some additional. are naturally most common of the types of Hks. much confirmatory. p. Num. 246). so that obliterated. (12) William. They have probably course most . for example. 247) over Cross Voided' type (Hks.. is No.

-Sax. I and II on page xxxii may by adding the evidence of overstrikes. of course. strictly speaking. nos. 247 later than Hks. Chron. 248 is still left The groups of the two later reigns remain in complete uncertainty. which are therefore 241 244 246. die. no. 11 places the 'Cross in Quatrefoil' (Hks. when all an obverse die made. No. . to denote only those coins commonly used which are combined an obverse of one type and a reverse of another. 246) as the last of the three types. MULES. p. in which case five of these coins are mules '. 352. is quoted in support of this theory on the ground that the obverse die must have been made specially for the mule issue. VIII.XXXVI INTRODUCTION Nos. 1 although of the same type. must be. vol. it was the practice so early as this to issue two reverse dies with one obverse. it was not originally vice versa for example. though one of these ' may be made with a true combination of dies. and B. Catalogue. 250. on pp. as before. That these mules were authorized issues of the Crown introducing a new type seems hardly possible. PI. connecting the last two types of his reign. The groups of types of William therefore be extended. 1107-13 are struck from the same obverse and therefore. No. mules'. that to say. 24. 157.. j^j -|^j_239 - 241 244 But the position of Hks. ii. or is used with a reverse for which . Series. But as ' mules ' of this sort are very common and of minor importance. ' 1 8 Num. 7 and 8 support the evidence of the Beaworth in and Tamworth and finds making the ' Paxs ' type the latest of the Beaworth earliest of the Tamworth Tamworth types. Ang. But the Unless. to the following: 233 (first type) 234 (second type) 246250247. and PL XXIII. The term ' Mule ' is strictly applicable to all coins is which are struck from an incorrect combination of dies. the remaining six. The so-called artificial mule 2 ' ' of the Confessor. 13 makes Hks.M. 1905. on the term it is ' mule ' is here limited to the technical sense in which in this coinage. 205-6. 8.

money of dies. p. . of which the object must have is been the saving of expense in the purchase of new dies. I. and presumptive evidence to the contrary is Of the Norman period in the rarity of mules of the London mint. Allan sale. to risk new the penalties for the fraudulent retention of dies and the issue of an unauthorized coinage. mules were regularly issued for a short new type. 1908. at the change of type. Chron. left.. a sceptre is added. for the saving of the purchase. .. like the ordinary issues. is ' ' the obverse originally designed for the last type of the reign. they. pp. in possession of dies so little worn as to tempt them. sale. lot 590. substantiated by the two mules which are described below as nos. lot 36. and that its superficial resemblance to that of the preceding type led to its withdrawal and the substitution of the more common ' ' profile obverse the comparative frequency of this mule (see Num. would probably be most frequently found of the London mint. Each of these mules has had the obverse 1 Except the coin described in catalogue of H. 196-7) seems to point to the same conclusion. H. 1913. incorrect .MULES treatment of this coin as a mule is. of the Confessor's reign know three only: Num. This aspect of the ' mule as an irregular ' issue. but the obverse differs very widely from that of the earlier type (the ends of the diadem hang straight down on either side of the head. the bust continued to the edge of the coin and the inner circle mule bears It seems more likely that this so-called omitted). 1905. lot 601). the draping of the bust is quite different. The improbability a coinage of mules is of the Crown confusing its issues by such a serious obstacle to the theory that they are found regular issues. Carlyon-Britton sale. 1905. where the supply of bullion and the output of coins reasonably be assumed to have been most regular that they more frequently bear the names of lesser mints may perhaps be due to moneyers at the smaller mints being more frequently may . 189 (= Carlyon-Britton Montagu sale. If Chron. the reverse is indeed identical with the reverse of the later type. no London mules are at present known I l . XXXV11 I think. and part period prior to the introduction of the lot 850. 3 and 4 (p. 1913. xxxix).

no. a mule may be considered. is not easily detected. iv is and this supposition is confirmed muled with both the preceding and subsequent obverses. two mules occur. iv). struck from the same Major Carlyon-Britton's is. I think. therefore. Mules are usually. to connect two consecutive types. iv) in collection. and on the Canopy . the obverse of a mule will represent the earlier of the two 2 types. Also. die naturally outlives the reverse. or trussel. 10 and 11 below. in the die absence of conflicting evidence. to suppose that the reverse of Hks. either of which is with its proper fellow true currency. cutting through the bust. or standard. made from dies of two consecutive types. for example. for the roughness in the in the third quarter of the cross (see PI. 1 ' ' the reverse 5) is not corrosion. It is natural. The issue of mules l must therefore have been fraudulent. have been turned into the sceptres botonne' and patte which are found beside the bust on the Two Sceptres The object of these alterations must surely have been to issue. ' ' ' ' ' obverse an inner circle has been drawn. and the pillars ' ' circulate the coins with less likelihood of detection. 11. XLII. As a which has survived a longer period. but occasional examples occur (see no. But this is not an absolute rule . below) mule made from a general rule. having different obverses. as a general rule. 2 Because the obverse. and is therefore the more likely to be left in good condition at the change of type. the reverse of which die as a coin of the true type (Hks. by an examination of the later of is these two mules. nos. but at the same time the risk of the fraud being exposed would in any case be slight. of a 1. as one would expect. as the two sides of a coin cannot be seen at the same time and the inconsistency of obverse and reverse. That the mule is the later of the two strikings field of almost certain. therefore. with the reverse of Henry I's 'Full faceCross Fleury' type (Hks.XXXV111 INTRODUCTION in die worked over ' such a way as to make it approximately similar to that of the true obverse corresponding to the reverse type on the Bonnet obverse pillars have been placed beside the head to resemble those of the Canopy type. . Using mule here and throughout in the strictly limited sense of a coin combining two types.

33. 15. Rev. 'Canopy' type (Hks. M. 236). This coin came from the xxxviii. Another of London (II. 14. nos. Salisbury (Fitzwilliam Reynolds Museum). the sceptre botoane being placed to left instead of right. Stars' type (Hks. (2) Obv. William. Coin of Shaftesbury (?). York Museum. 237). 11. The obverse die from which this coin has been struck is altered evidently with a view to making it resemble the ' ' Canopy obverse . Wells collection). others (P. 'Canopy' type (Hks. William. Profile Cross Fleury' type (Hks. the inner circle has ' been continued through the bust. 238). Rev. Carlyon-Britton and H. is also intentional. 73. lot 36). 234). by rust on the die r and this is not visible on the true coin the true coin was therefore . . altered in order approximately ' to resemble the Two ' Sceptres obverse . 'Two 'Two Sceptres' type (Hks. the pillars of the Canopy ' have been turned into the sceptres of the later type. another of uncertain mint in Edward Confessor. H. 180. xxxvii-xxxviii. though an ignorance of die-engraving has caused them to be reversed. 72. Chron. Rev. 13. p.MULES XXXIX but a roughness of the metal caused. PI. 12. 1905). William. 71 . 237). Lockett collection). VIII. (3) Obv. (4) Obv. Stamford (W. PI. 233). p. pp. pp. 13-15. type XI (Num. ' PL ' III. that the obverse mule belongs to a type later The following are the mules period : at present known of the Norman (1) Obv. C. William. and Taunton (R. Mary Hill Church find. no doubt. C. Rev. possibly the double-striking See above. iv. ' Bonnet' type (Hks. Allan sale. Rev. 236). and of the we may conclude than Hks. (5) St. Coin of Ipswich. p. Coin of Exeter in Hunterian collection. William. VI. III. xxxvii- PI. 11. The obverse die of this similarly to the preceding. ' type (Hks. 1908. no. Coins of Huntingdon and Stamford. Obv. P. 'Bonnet' type (Hks. collections). coin is.. struck earlier than the mule. 234). 234). See above. Bonnet of Lincoln W. 'Two Sceptres' type (Hks. no. a pillar has been cut on the die on each side of the bust.

251. .) and is of very rough work. 225. 267). 1901. W. XVII.X INTRODUCTION Coin of Hereford in P. nos. XLI. 66. 67 A). ' Double Inscription Full face ' type (Hks. 67 . Coin of Thetford in Hunterian collection. ' Voided Cross and Fleurs Pointing Bust and Stars ' type (Hks. 248). collection. as described in described a coin bearing and reverse of Hks. 'Profile' type (Hks. type (Hks. 1. obverse with bust to be. 258). Reynolds collection). but is perhaps an error of the A coin it is described in is Hks. Coin of Warwick in P. Rev. also of Chester and Leicester (Evans collection . Nottingham. Oxford (Royal Mint Museum) and Winchester (H. See pp. 239). vol. 246). Coin of Gloucester in Hunterian collection. I Num. Coin of Canterbury (?) in L. PI.. Profile ' and Trefoils' type (Hks. William. ' Rev. In Whitbourn sale. H on p. Paxs type (Hks. Carlyon-Britton collection also been . Cross Fleury and Piles type (Hks.. 11-16. see below. Cross Fleury 1 2 Brit. Thetford. ' (6) Obv. (8) Obv.. ' Rev. 13-15. 2 Fig. am indebted to Sheriff Mackenzie for kindly sending me the coin. Henry ' I. 'Cross in Quatrefoil' type (Hks. 5. ' Full face Cross Fleury ' type (Hks. pp. 241). is Num. P. I. E. 65 A. nos. 9. 247). Num. Henry Rev. cit. p.. Taunton. Rev. Malmesbury. very base. 267. Coins of Dover and Gloucester. Chron. weighs only 10-7 (op. p. grs. XL. two 1 and one of Ipswich have Cross published. of Dorchester W. This may possibly 1869. William. XXX. 263). type (Hks. Chron. Carlyon-Britton (10) Obv. 151. of the coin. Bruun collection. PI. 257 and 267. M. 59-60. 403. 1. iv). 'Crosses Pattee ' and Fleury' type (Hks. PI. 91-3. iv). as a mule of a contemporary forgery of a coin of Hks. PI. XI. and 251. ' Winchester. 'Cross in QuatrefoiP type (Hks. 48. 244). 60 does not reproduce the very bad condition and rough work (9) Obv. 1901. 5. William. XXXVI. lot 148. XLII. p. PI. ii. p. a mule of Hks. ' Rev. Coins of Maldon.. PI. 15. 254 sale catalogue. (1 1) Obv. PI. Journ. (7) Obv. ' Henry I. 266). P.

262). (12) Obv. nos. forms a convincing proof that these five types. types of the William coins the sequence 239 also confirmed by the mules 239 x 241 and 244 x . another halfpenny (same PI. therefore. but also complete the series of types of the reigns two Williams. field of the mule show it to be later than the true coin. P. Carlyon-Britton collection. mule 9. 'Lozenge Fleury enclosing Star' type (Hks. iv) is X from the same reverse die as a coin of the true type Rust-marks in the in the Carlyon-Britton collection. Journ. form in that of the order the first five 241244246 is 246 (nos. and mule 12 shows that 265 the type immediately preceding 262. Penny and Halfpenny of Canterbury (Brit. dies as Sheldon penny) in B. the regular chain of mules. 234. forms a series 257267266 mules 10 and II is form another series 258. Of Henry 263 iv I. 236 x 237. Romney XLIII. 44). and further groups of Henry I : WILLIAM I and II. Roth collection. 237 x 238. vol. The mule of Stephen only confirms the position of his first two types. results in a very probable sequence of the types of the two Williams. Hks. These mules not only confirm the evidence obtained from finds and overstrikes. LIII. 270). of the Bari find. Pellets in Quatrefoil ' type (Hks. Coin PI. 237. . ' in P. ' Rev. 2. \V. 1.. Rev. 238. 233 x 234. 2-5. Henry of I. combined with the evidence . 'Watford' type (Hks. of this list brings Hks. 6 and for the first The eighth mule time into the scheme and 7). 236. p. (?) from the Sheldon find Num. 233234236237238243239241244246250247 248. ' Cross Voided and Mullets type (Hks. Hks. (13) Obv. The additional evidence of mules. 233.MULES This coin (Hks. Stephen. 15. 269). 258 may therefore be assumed to be the later of the two types. 265). 248 places it at the end of the William series. vii. 234 x 236.

. 17. Andrew's description of the types of that reign in Num. Exception must be made of the irregular issues (see below.. Series I. 62. 'Anglo-Saxon Coins'. and crescent. it is said that the letters are not cut with a graving tool. a punch like a small blunt chisel forming the vertical strokes of such letters as B. the strange character of some of them (notably A and C ). continued in use throughout the Norman period on the obverse was the king's name . Ixxiff. nos. 1 on the reverse the names of the 2 nor is there inoneyer and the mint connected by the word ON . 75. no. 3 See Epigraphical Table. any reason to believe that any change took place in the means by which the inscriptions were cut on the dies. OF is used 1 The probably in error. the tail of R. In B. (See Epigraphical Table.INTRODUCTION HENKY 251 or 252 (first I. pp. B. Chron. ii. M. O. omit the moneyer's name. vol. pp. pp. vol. &c. (first type) 269 (second type) (last type). E.). type II. 265262255 270 268 STEPHEN. F. no. but punched into the die with tools of different shapes.. 130 ff. which was in use on Anglo-Saxon coins of the eleventh century. p. 81). &c. 325-6.) The form of the obverse and reverse inscriptions. described on p. a small wedge- shaped punch forming the horizontal bars of E. and those of the reign of Henry I in Mr. with or without the royal title. EPIGRAPHY. on p. xcix. &c. L. Catalogue. and ONN (on Oxford and Thetford coins of William I.. The disjointed forms of the 3 letters. and P. M. Num.shaped punches of larger and smaller size forming the curves of D. (regularly on Norwich coins). in York Museum) occur for ON. 2 The Launceston coins of the fifth type of William I. 1901. ii. N (p.. Journ. . varieties of obverse inscription used on the different types of the reigns of William I may be seen in Major Carlyon-Britton's description of the types in Brit. type) 257267266 263 iv 258 (last type). 38 ff. 402.

were in most cases and do not correspond exactly with the that is to say. I. Series (5). A recent paper read by Mr. the later 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 subject. incision thus made and finished tool .EPIGRAPHY the close resemblance of the upright ] xliii strokes and the strange result mistakes that commonly occur of punch-work of this nature this explanation has therefore been seem only explicable as the . accepted without question and without serious investigation as regards. it off by means of a tool. F (2). . A close examination of the lettering on the coins described in this catalogue results in the conclusion that (1) the inscriptions . L (2). p. These conclusions are based on the following points 1 See Epigraphical Table.. 1913. and of the great variety of shape. were cut on the dies by means of punches (2) the punches. 10. notably in breadth and in the finish of the fishtail ends. and TH 2 Num. Anglo-Saxon and Norman periods. Proceedings. Hocking before the Koyal Numismatic 2 Society has made it necessary to inquire more critically into the at' least. of the coins shows that the dies were not . . S (6). after the engraver had lettering seen on the coins hammered the punch into the die. pre- sumably a graver's cutting thickness exhibited finishing touches by the irregularity of shape and the lettering is explained partly by the (3) added with the graver's tool after punching. but partly also by unsuccessful striking of the coins themselves. the fill metal in many cases having failed to sufficiently the hollows : of the die. larger in diameter than the coins they struck but this does not prove that the dies were not made of larger size and filed down after they were engraved. 3 The turning up of the edge Chron. that is usually exhibited in the upright strokes on the same coin and the same side of it facts incongruous with the previously accepted theory. he usually broadened the narrower and less blunt. letters C (2). so close to the edge of a die without splitting 3 it. though similar in shape to those above described.

Instances of this are fairly numerous and in many cases easily visible. is XXXIII. no. a small semicircular piece being broken off the corner of the punch from which these strokes were made the same flaw may be seen. of the other letters on the obverse of this coin. 14). 170 (PL LIV. no. 81 (c) strokes of the obverse of William (PL XXXI. on the letters no. less clearly. 160 (PI. A small hole in the left-hand corner of the bottom edge of the vertical strokes of L. 8). small hole in the centre of the top edge. on most. XXXIII. 157 (PL LIII. (d) MRK of the obverse of William and JG on the II. but rather smaller and less round in shape. A similar flaw. 104 (PL XXXI. of the (/) On second vertical stroke of the N ON and of of the N of the mint-name. .EUW 7). no. position on the vertical no. 69. if not all. the reverse of Stephen. (6) A similar. (g) serif. of William II. In the vertical strokes of the letters the following flaws have been noted (a) : On the obverse of William II. just above the serif. 155 (PI. slightly smaller. in similar position. the letter M has a small flaw at the bottom of the left-hand corner of each vertical stroke. flaw appears in the same II. 7).Xliv INTRODUCTION (1) A certain flaw repeating itself in precisely the letters of on different same position a coin shows that these letters must have been made by punching the die with an instrument which itself contained this flaw. . notably on the three letters immediately preceding the M. /\ in the 9) mint-name on the reverse . a crack across the lower left-hand corner. no. 16). the V-shaped form of this flaw noticeable in both strokes of the letter. obverse of William (e) II. A small flaw in the lower left-hand fish-tail of the two strokes of no. just below the on the obverse of of both vertical strokes of the letter A N Stephen.

&c. of a coin of William II. and shown therefore to be made from the same punch.. no. as has been suggested. of Salisbury (P. at the end of the mint-name. M. Hks. not only as showing that the vertical strokes were made with one punch and not. (k) On the reverse of William II. In the horizontal wedge-shaped strokes forming the bars of E. the wedge-shaped bars forming the tail of XV the lower bar of F in the mint-name. examination of the strokes containing the flaws above mentioned. W. 250. cxxxv ff'. and the reverse of same type of Wilton one of the same type of across the centre of the Worcester (P.). 16 (PI. C. show two holes. (2) An reveals considerable variety of shape and breadth in the strokes . and of one of the (H. to side. B. 7) the . but also as evidence of the dies having been pp.). which were themselves the work of the same punch for example.EPIGRAPHY (h) The obverse and reverse coll. made at London (see below. and F in the mint-name no. on the coin mentioned above as flaw d (PI. there is a similar flaw on the bars of E 94 (PL XXXI. and slopes slightly downwards from is left to right on the reverse of the Wilton coin the punch HE is for example. 11). F.). one and the three bars of E near each end of the bar E is be noted that the top bar of punched closer in to the vertical stroke than the other two . XXVIII.). forming the lower half of the stroke). . near the broad end of the bars. it may bars. show a break vertical strokes it stretches right through the verticals from side . and another. from piece- punches (one punch forming the upper half. on This group important. the following flaws have been noted : (i) On the reverse of William II. coll. The close resemblance of the shape of the break in these strokes in all three coins leaves the dies for the three coins were all little room for doubt that made with the same punch. 12). showing clearly that these two flaws were in the punch from which all these bars were made. or the same punch again. coll. sometimes inverted. B. C. XXXIII. and on this bar the two holes are closer to the vertical.

though thinner and smaller. no. As these show the same flaw and are therefore made with the same punch. but also is probably in part due to the broadening of the true impression after form of the projecting piece is punching. it cannot therefore be due to the slipping of a graver's tool. 137 . 292 (PI. York Museum. the and more waisted than the other two narrower strokes DEL first L . no. in shape but fish-tail much smaller in size also. a similar projection may be seen vertical of P on the obverse. (I) On iype above the IV. after hammering the punch into the engraver broadened the incision and finished off the tool. fish-tail 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 the narrower . we must conclude that. (PI. above the vertical of the initial cross of the reverse cases the protrusion is in these and similar invariably shaped similarly to the true strike of the vertical stroke. below the R. V. the letter I in the moneyer's name shows a shaped it piece protruding beyond lower end. no doubt partly due to the punch not being hammered so deeply as in the true impression. . 4). in the a coin of London (moneyer Wulfword) of William II. 167. the die. and on William I.INTRODUCTION on the obverse vary in breadth. on the obverse of William I. no. An example of similar double-punching of a horizontal bar may be seen on the obverse of William II. -where the bar of the third L has a wedge-shaped protrusion . being letters they vary also in the shape letters and length of their fish-tail ends. X. 12). Many instances may be found of a similar protrusion -above or below a letter for example. corresponding to . 262 (PL XXXVII. near the top of the letter a protrudes on either side corresponding to the fish-tails at the top of the letter. no. and a similar near the bottom of the letter. 16). ends with a But the point is better shown by letter instances which have been noted of a portion of a being double- punched (a) : On its the reverse of William I.

xlviii. crescent-shaped punch-marks of the punch-marks.EPIGRAPHY Xlvii beyond second its broad end.. 5). the H of the obverse inscription has the horizontal bar five times. 83 (Pi. it may be clue to . showing in strokes of these dotted lines their point of contact with the It is possible that the field. on which the horizontal bar . instead of the usual ---. the shape of the vertical strokes. probably the engraver. has been so punched as to leave the top of the vertical visible 1 Cf.faulty striking. cut the metal of the die in a sharp slope down to the deepest point of the punched impression. no. XXXI. 84 (PI. where. seems to imply that the usual practice was to broaden the letters after they were punched. 8). There are also cases where more than three bars are visible on an E. to a slip of the graver's tool. however. on William II. again. is thus: punches themselves sloped off in this way. . 186 (PI. forming a steep slope instead of the usual 1 perpendicular setting of the letters to the field of the coin. and that these letters Frequent varieties show the untouched punch-work. That a cutting tool was used for finishing off the after punching first is fish-tail ends also shown by William I. William I. vertical In section. no. 1029. as compared with corresponding strokes of other letters. the narrowness no. the I) of the money er's name has . IV. stroke of ^V in the mint-name has the lower fish-tail left running right out to the vertical of the preceding letter )p this must have been due original I. after punching the strokes of the letters. on which the on the . instead of cutting down perpendicularly and so broadening the impression. the sides of the letters are of the shape -^-. no fewer than punched on the reverse William of Similarly. VII. no. . of the letter T. 202. The William no. see below. also the lettering of the obverse of the coin of 6). form of the punches may probably be gathered from on the reverse of which the letters LI off' of the moneyer's name present a The upper surface of these letters somewhat unusual appearance. four instead of two in these cases. II. is narrow and is sloped sharply to the field of the die.

inscription without the horizontal strokes to complete the letters on the former between P and M? the inscription consists of nothing but vertical strokes. the remainder of the inscription being both these coins the uprights seem to be carefully spaced out in such a way as to leave room for the and they seem to show that. have upright strokes in the obverse . two coins struck from of the mint-name has on no. 58 (PI. . William I. it is later period the serifs are added with 3 separate punches and are sometimes omitted. 1. 2 Compare. in this and breadth of the punches. 5) and William II. William . no. . We may 1 therefore conclude that the punches were all narrower coins. when serifs are added and the verticals are convex instead of concave. 1114. 184 (PL XXXIV. engraver. XLI. 1113 this very thin appearance and on the other the normal thickness.Xlviii INTRODUCTION it. on the other coin the initial cross and P alone are complete. Series T (2). but probably of the same and that the after length. 3 See Henry I. for example. 1113. conclude with certainty that the thin lettering gives us the untouched work of the punch. coin. the same reverse die the ^| I. therefore. broadened with a tool the incision thus made and finished off the corners. above show similarly the shape of one end of the stroke. on the obverse of which some of the letters are without serifs. 2 It is not. I. possible to. hammering the punch into the die. but duplicates show that some- times due to faulty striking of the coins. nos. (3) is The very thin lettering which is seen occasionally on coins probably due in some cases to the omission of the engraver to it is broaden the punch-marks. coins. 329 (PI. See Epigraphical Table. 4). the flan failing to take the full impression of the die. the engravers punched first 1 p. XII. resembles the shape impossible to say . increasing the slope of the fish-tail than the lettering seen on the ends of the uprights. no. horizontal strokes to be inserted vertical strokes only. 11). On in making See below. these two dies at least. Two no. How nearly the lettering of the later coins.

too. Series I-IV comprising the earlier class. The remainder of Henry's coins Stephen belong to quite a new epigraphical class. connects the various series of epigraphical groups which serve to allocate most of the types at present unplaced. a considerable number of the types of these four reigns have already been placed in chronological sequence.. and Mules. &c. serifs being also sometimes present and those of at the ends of the horizontal strokes of (i. and class. C. 399 ff. rather than to keep changing tools in order to finish off one letter before beginning another. notably . the uprights of the letters less fish-tailed have concave . improved rudimentary) forms of lettering. 1913. sides on Anglo-Saxon and more or coins. and thereby which may to obtain further evidence of the chronological sequence of the 1 coin-types of this period. pp./V. E. and also on coins of one type 2 less only of the old as the last of the types a type which may therefore safely be regarded which bear the old form of lettering. ' type of Henry I (Hks. it is possible to find varieties be traced to a change in height or shape of the punches used at different times by engravers. on four of the types of Henry I. With the evidence that has been drawn from Finds. this It was the regular practice. having uprights with convex sides and serifs added by means of separate punches at both ends. . 257). Annulets and Piles Chron. Having arrived at the conclusion that punches were used in making the of lettering inscriptions on the dies. . as it seems natural to suppose that would be quicker in working with a punch to hammer into the die the strokes that one punch would make. and this order.EPIGRAPHY the uprights and finished them off with the graving tool before punching the horizontal strokes. which is shown on pp. ends without serifs so. The Epigraphical Table shows clearly the distinction between these two classes. e. are found on coins of this new class. 1^ \T. 1 2 See ' Num. xli-xlii. Overstrikes. on the coins of the two Williams. The most important epigraphical change place in the reign of as of this period takes Henry I .

Hks. after the main division of new classes of lettering.e. The nine the old and series are differentiated. 262. Series IV . The new class of lettering forms five series. Henry I. Of first Henry and the two of Stephen. this middle series groups together. reflect the use forms of in the cutting of all the dies. the two series of Stephen types. kept within the upper and lower limits of the punch-mark. 1% \T. The nine series into which the epigraphical of different groups are there divided punches forms of figured.1 INTRODUCTION Series V-IX the later. 250) ' ' -and all of the ' Crosses Patte'e and Fleury ' ' type (Hks. the last type of the reign. which were found on other evidence to be the last two types of Immediately preceding this series (no. the type that has been found to precede Hks. 270. 255. as would be expected. forms of A. chiefly by the height of the uprights measurement shows so minute a variation in the height of lettering on coins of the same series that it is safe to assume . and may therefore be placed between the two series of Henry of Henry I. which have lettering of a larger type. in finishing off the letters with the tool. . Series III will therefore is be the other series of the old class which found on coins of Henry I. in each series the normal the letters and the most important varieties are to the scale of 2 to 1. . must be the later. VII) must be placed the series containing Hks. The measurement . and the coins of the * Cross Fleury and Piles (Hks. types and the two series of Stephen types. The drawings are the later of Of the four series of the old class. 262 this is therefore Series VI. and the other series of Henry types is Series V. 248). the one containing Hks. and 269. 247). of which two contain types and two contain types of Stephen the remaining one contains types of both Henry I and Stephen. 265. Series I covers all the types of the two Williams with the exception of some coins of the Voided Cross type (Hks. Series II. that the engraver. which have lettering of Series III. and these series can therefore be numbered IX and VIII respectively. two are found on types of which must be that in which occur the new i. 268. broadening the strokes without increasing their height.

first The second group with thicker up- on the fourth ('Two Sceptres') type and rights appears continues to the eighth (' Paxs ') type. so that the finish of the letter effort original the individual close it workman based on the traditions of the mint. 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 2 : Series I is I.EPIGRAPHY is li There taken to the centre of the top and bottom of the uprights. it is usually narrower and slightly smaller (2-2 mm. but is comprised of three groups which differ slightly in finish but hardly enough to necessitate series. and sixth (' Sword ') types. 1913. 404. p. cxxxvi. This block d 2 . Cross Voided' type). otherwise account for the very close resemblance of the coins presumably the workmen were usually unable to read . 244 the third 1 2 -of For intelligent attempts to copy a blundered model see below. a strictly homogeneous series.). p. 1 The variety of form and height of these uprights may be seen on the following diagram. groups is seen on coins of the four types of William and occasionally on coins of his fifth (' Two Stars '). It is not. On Hks. includes also some of the coins of the eleventh ' William type (Hks. 250.) than that which follows it (2-4 mm. and is of the form represented in the table. is reproduced from Num. set is Probably the engravers copied a model of them by the not the chief engraver. of William the lettering in use at the beginning of the reign and continues through ten types bearing the name it of William. but a engraver's original design . by kind permission the Council of the Royal Numismatic Society. however. is also marked difference in finish and breadth of lettering in the different series. copy of the chief would be impossible to the finished lettering on or write. first the creation of three separate The earliest of the three I. Chron. and ignorantly copied the model set them..

p. 250). and carefully worked. 250 forms a transitional type containing lettering of both Series I and II confirms the previous evidence of its position between Hks. has The few exceptions mentioned Num. pp. Series III (2-5 form . its characteristic a lettering of the same height as the preceding. II represents a much larger lettering (2-8 mm. are very doubtful. 246 and some coins of Hks. 248 as the last type of William II. It is used on the coins of the Cross Fleury and Piles type (Hks.lii INTRODUCTION group appears but having as uprights . . 1913. 251) with the name of Henry. 252. and on those of the 'Annulets' An epigraphical type (Hks. xxiii-xxiv). connexion is thus formed between the William and Henry confirming the placing of Hks. 251. the uprights broaden at the top more than at the lower end. 247. the type of the Shillington find. 247 ). The evidence of the Bermondsey find is therefore correct. 252. in the Bermondsey Shillington find. the lettering mm. but after the Paxs type there is a very marked decline both in the striking ' of the coins and in the finish of the dies. The fact that Hks.) is of a narrower and shows better finish and greater ' ' less clumsy neatness.. more marked fish-tail ends to the this continues on Hks. The evidence of Finds left a doubt whether Hks. especially in types III to VIII. which occurs in the coins. which occurs find (see above. 1 in fact. or Hks. Chron. with the exception of these slight varieties within the series (it must be remembered that the drawings of Series I represent rather the earlier than the later style of this series). 248) with the name of William. Thus. and defining the first type of Henry I. It is used on some Series coins of the 'Cross Voided' type (Hks. Series I continues throughout the first ten types bearing the ' name of William and on some coins of the Cross Voided ' type (Hks. 250) and all l the coins of the ' Crosses Patte"e and Fleury ' type (Hks. in Hks. was the first type of the reign of Henry I. 250. 246 and Hks.) with coarser finish and more careless striking. 404. The ' finish of the lettering of the first eight types is very good.

Pointing Bust and Stars type (Hks. 4. but the third (Hks. from the forms 1 to be the last type with lettering of the old \.EPIGRAPHY lettering of the liii new class with serifs and convex uprights. Series V with < serifs mm. 267). 257) type as the fourth type the last of these three types there appears a the lettering narrower and more legible. sometimes with and ' ' sometimes without the upper bar. and than the four Henry must therefore at the earliest come later types with lettering of the old Series class. 257) types of the first two of these ' ' Profile ' ' ' . 241 we find a similar true also A form in PAX may PAXS on ' and on the coins of Harold. ' ' ' Larger Profile and Cross and Annulets type (Hks. 256) ' . 1 See also notes on letter 8 With the exception I. 252). .). ' slight tendency to make but the height is only very slightly increased. Iviii. 257. with the ' Annulets and Piles of the reign. It includes all the coins of (2-5 : < ' Voided Cross and Fleurs' type (Hks. Quatrefoil and Piles type (Hks. 5. 253). 257. and the execution remains careless and ill finished. giving an ugly squat It covers three types of Henry I appearance to the letters. Series A. 254). of occasional forms on William coins .) is the last of the old concave style. 253) types may therefore be placed provisionally as second and third types. 6. 257) has already been shown. 266). 254) and 'Pax' (Hks. The Profile and Cross Fleury' (Hks. G below. 253 occurs the form of /V found in the inscriptions of Hks. found no evidence of position. On (Hks. This first appearance of a true A form 2 may perhaps be taken as evidence that the Pax type immediately precedes Hks. Pax (Hks. but this conclusion is by no means a certain one. This is the first series of the new class and convex uprights. as coins of Hks. we have In the word PAX in the field of Hks. the ' and Cross Fleury (Hks. IV (1-8 mm. three types at present class. The uprights are usually disproportionately broad. } !>. and Annulets and Piles (Hks. see Epigraphical Table. p. for the use of the letter in the word be conventional. and "V.

265) types. type of the new class of lettering. which have this series of lettering only. 267 1 . Hks. 263. rather lettering 1 The convex. p. which has been placed as the fourth of the reign.with the Pellets in Quatrefoil ' ' ' It was pointed out above. X. that the evidence of the Bari find was not by any means conclusive but I am content to accept it in placing Hks. differs later forms. in appearance and the finish less careful. 267). assumes its more usual form on some coins of type VI and so continues throughout the series. 267 connected by the Bari find with Hks. The of the serifs slightly form of lettering of this series. 258). 252 and 256. as the first 1 There are a few isolated instances on earlier coins. pp. xl-xli). sixth. and very much finer in execution. . it is from the less somewhat higher (2-7 mm. and Hks. ' ' It covers the and all remaining coins of types IX. but there earlier. is Of these types. ' ' Full Face and Cross Fleury type (Hks. fifth. 266 is connected by a mule with Hks.liv INTRODUCTION : and some coins of ' t Cross in Quatrefoil ' type (Hks. is no of The order the three remaining types. 257. is already fixed by earliest the mules in the Hunterian collection (see above. as I think that this different and much more finely executed form of lettering is likely to be the earliest work after the change.) is a smaller and more neatly finished lettering. and seventh types of Henry they are used occasionally. iv). iv. XI (Hks. must be placed as the seventh and eighth evidence to show which of the two is the Series types. xxv. the latter of which is connected by a mule .). which form transitional types from V to Series VI. this form is less neat The introduction of pellets to divide the words of the legends 2 begins in this series. The other two types. ' Double Inscription ' type (Hks. 263). at the introduction and convex uprights with type V (Hks. 267. 258). the coins of the Smaller Profile and Cross and Annulets ' (Hks. 264) and Star in Lozenge Fleury (Hks. and on the eighth and later on the types almost invariably. Series VI (2 mm. Hks.

) a small lettering with straighter sides to the uprights. of which Hks. 276) Lozenge Fleury and Annulets (Hks. LI. Series VII Henry 269). LIII. 270) which read on a few coins of his second type (Hks. xviiib and 268. 4. 276 and xix may be placed immediately after Hks. come into this larger occasional use for obverse inscriptions during this series lettering (2-7 first mm. and . a larger lettering and has uprights with less curved (2-3 still the dies appear for the most part to have been carefully finished. 255. 269) fall into this Some series. coins of Stephen's second type (Hks. type (Hks. 1. and IX. See Num. some first of the uprights 1 Also perhaps a few. xix) types. 179. their convexity being now scarcely visible. 1) the lettering is of Series IX. 1 which includes also the coins of the ' Cross and Fleurs ' (Hks. 264 thus fixed as the twelfth type of the reign. obverse this and the reverse has lettering of Series VIII therefore seems to be the transitional type of Series VIII is illegible . of Stephen's Chron. A larger style of lettering seems to have . 367. Hks. and Hks. but very few.. 270.EPIGRAPHY type (Hks. sides . PL LV. 2 no. v some coins is also of Hks. 270). Of this last type and ' ' only two specimens are known to me on one (see below. is 11. and some coins apparently of the type figured on PI. Series 11. on the other the . the remaining two types of Stephen. 262 have lettering of this Hks. Roth collection (the 7 b). Chron. 268 is already placed as the last type there seems to be by the Awbridge find. besides the transitional type just mentioned as the fifth of the reign. I and of the It is mm. L. 409.) returns to a much larger lettering. also examples of it may be seen on PI. . 269) Stephen's STIEFNE.) is found on the obverse of some coins of type (Hks. p. PL XIX. The types falling into this series are. . 2 reverse is illustrated in Num. On this series some irregularity of height.. p. 1913. 1913. though there is no evidence to show which is the earlier of the two. VIII (2 mm.) includes coins of the last two types of first two types of Stephen (Hks. B. 262. Series IX (2-6 mm. LV. 269 as the third and fourth types of the reign. 262) series.

p. 117. the former being the earlier and more common on the early types of William I the inclination of the two strokes tends quickly to . occurs on the obverse of a Winchester coin of I. 55. p. 1 The coins have for the most part a coarse and unpleasing appearance. 75. Series III. no. and also the chief varieties from these are omitted the forms on coins of very coarse and irregular which are mentioned below. Lockett's collection . . cxxxviii. with parallel uprights. no. 46. . 22. 3 IX. no. type I. 445 . form 1 but with a cross-bar added. 37. as on some coins of Stephen's first type. VII. no. . 8) . The first two forms in the table are those in regular use. (Pi. which remains in use throughout O William I and II. Similarly. inscriptions. 402 XIV. the letter H : : is 1). letters in use . In the Epigraphical Table the ordinary forms of in each series are figured. I. This large lettering is also seen on some coins of the first issue of Henry II (the so-called ' ' Tealby type). 2 work A. 9 (PI. a Stamford in the coin of the second type of William I (York Museum) I. p. to . and the form of the strokes of the second letter is reduced to the two parallel the reigns of form. 10. Form 4 Form 5 p. 234 (PI. it may be that here again a larger lettering was sometimes used for obverse . form 2. The results thus obtained association of this from epigraphical evidence. word PWXS on Form 6 Henry formed : all coins of the eighth type of William p. 31 . no. may be seen below. . 11). this is a roughly- letter engraved somewhat carelessly p. pp. p. p. 4 7. similar occurs rarely: p. diminish.INTRODUCTION measuring as much as 2-8 and others only 2-4 mm. no. Ixvi-lxvii. and the evidence with that of Finds and Mules. no. and the first three types of Henry I. due partly to the clumsiness of the lettering and partly to the roughness in execution of the dies. The third form. no. substituted for /"V on p. Iv. 22. 114. 2 p. 3. 82. III. no. 196 (PI. 8). V. in Mr. the finish at the 1 See above.

no. . nor is it quite clear whether there 16). is found on William 3. both barred and unbarred forms are found on types of Stephen. and F. 3 XL. p. no. Series V-IX. 264.EPIGRAPHY Ivii upper end is uncertain. type VI. 33 (PL finer lettering. p. on William I. occasionally. is . straight form of loop which is figured in Series V. 75. in Series III the second form. form 3. form I. no. 2 p. form Series V. are sometimes with. which occurs 3. xlvii. The round form of Series . 8). 1 In Series IV. liii. The round forms 2) occur p. I. is due to the limited space in which the engraver had to cut the letter. and Series VII. no. (Sigar) coin of Henry I. 15). liv. C period whole of this regularly of the square form throughout the the second figure of Series I shows a very natural puncherror worker's (Series I. VI and VII B shows no varieties of importance. form occurs on the earlier coins of the series which have the Of. and pp. 132 (PL V. a large top bar with serifs is introduced in call for no comment In Series IX Series VII and continues to the end of the period. p. 70. 1). E. Henry 231-4 (PL XLVII. An interesting case of II. The very 1. 10) the similar form. and has already In Series II the crescents tend to be thinner and less curved . is I. of William double-punching of this letter is seen on the coin 2 been mentioned. form on a London lection. 25. new class of lettering. 402 (PL XIV. 323-4. no. forms 2 and 3 are found in the word PffX on type III of Henry I. and are both in regular use on type IV. serifs Series VII they are more common without serifs. XXXVII. 288. 202. form 2. See above. nos. is a central cross-bar (see PL XXXVIII. but are 1 U in still 3 See above. p. 249. Series V. 16). in the Hunterian col- In Series V and VI the horizontal bars of E 5 as also of . sometimes without. 273 (PI. 276. p. the old form being now abandoned. The forms of this letter in the . no. which occurs on p. p. D.

Series type IV. VI. . p. a raised pellet is pellet. in some cases the circle not being completed and in others a complete circle being formed. this letter is down to the third type of reign on his fourth 1 See below. and in Series III and IV the form with the complete circle O with a wedge-shaped bar at the top is alone used. 47. 3). cf. Series I. is would be due to the engraver finishing it hand after marking mentioned above . and at the top of this circle or semicircle an incision was made with a wedge-shaped punch such as is used for the bars of E. notably in first William I's type. 4) . IV. 117. Similar errors are fc. to punch. form . form it is the earliest appearance of the form of serifed classes (Series G which is in use on the V-VIII) and supplies additional evidence of this type being the fourth of the reign. William in I. also fre- quently in the centre of the reverse of coins. shows a not uncommon error and one natural I. 11). no. F. where the new form of this already introduced. form in 2. In the centre of the letter may 239 sometimes be seen IX. Ir. but.work cf. in Series VIII and IX the are usually present. The first two forms form 3 shows a with a different shape of the top stroke. (PI. liii. 2 See above. Series IV. out in this way. 2 H. 28. no. p. the invariable Roman form Henry I's of . a similar commonly seen This pellet is the centre of the letter 0. for cf. 148 (PI. p. and F for Eof Series I are both in regular use . p. 2. 624 (PL XIX. except on a Hunterian coin (Winchester) of letter. compasses cutting a small hole in the die. O. As already mentioned. William p. William I. like O. is Probably the letter was not made the 1 ordinary way with a punch. probably this is worked tool and not due to a punch of different shape.Iviii INTRODUCTION serifs sometimes found with them. &c. no. and E F. outline probably due to the fixed foot of the The unevenness of the off the letter free2. In Series II both forms are again commonly used. marked out on the die with a turning instrument like a pair of compasses.

type XV. 69 (PI. form 2. no. form 2 occurs on Henry I. p. N. I. 297. found on two coins in the York Museum of I's K. 62. is found on Henry p. no. 291. 5). no special 11) . XXIX. p. 9). William II. 11) . no. 257) has already been of this in noticed. no. is alone in use on coins at present is IV the regular form. no. for William 12.EPIGRAPHY type the English form appears and the period. type (var. 117. This letter William first which read V/LFKEEEL OH EOFOR . the end letter. The varieties in Series I need I. XIX. 12. engraved with a tool. 12). no. 42 (PI. XL. as some coins show clearly that wedge-shaped punches were used for this purpose. 159. g. The intersecting lines of the letter this. In Series I the reversely barred form. In Series form 1. 58. is lix always used to the end of letter determining the position of type IV of Henry I (Hks. III. type I. no. III. nos. 353-4. at mentioned of frequent use instead of f\. Also on Winchester coins of Henry I. There are no varieties of particular interest. 332. for form 4 see William II. 296. The importance The only point with regard is its is to this letter that need be &c. and a similar spread XLII. p. in Series I is figured as one of the The second form errors many examples of punches. and Stephen. 219. that are essentially due to working with William I. no. with the money er's name Kippig or Ckippig see p. form on Henry I. and p. 286. p. p. no. occurs on William I. I. 624 (PI. 67. 78 (PI. 264. Series VI. e. 120-3. p. 29-31 (PI. 9). nos. form 3. 7 . nos. and pp. comment form 4. no. . 297. 162 (PI. . M. 280. known of types II and III letter. VI. p. 856 (reverse).. seem to have been usually however. N. an inscription where there not room for the whole thus PILLEJM REX is I (for /\) is of frequent occurrence. for form 3 see William I. similarly LVI for LVM. on type IV introduced a fashion of the reversely barred . 271 (obverse). p. William I. 30. In Series V. was not always the case. inscription beginning above head) (same dies'?). p. L.

a very small form (Series sometimes seen. no. In Series III a small round type is regular. before type VIII on William is II's is very rarely found on type VIII the two forms are equally common first type the form made by two crescent punches . p. G but . p. and afterwards. 1 having form 2. like William I. form 3. William I. (PI. 54. 271. it occurs as early as type IV. the reversely barred form (form 1 of Series V) is still retained in use. that is to say. the centre of the letter has been 4 A double form sometimes occurs accidentally cut away on the die. is 2 as in the a pellet frequently visible in the centre. II. no. no. 55. punched letter G. but it disappears before the introduction of type VI. 4 William I. no. form 4). with one exception. form 3 5 ). On some coins of type V which have the earlier style of Series V. but to have been marked out with compasses. thickened and finished with a tool. O. the other form being not frequent on this type and rare on type II on the introduction of Series II . form 2) . wrong position and re-marking or by marking foot. the known coins of type IV. Series II. 3 The letter is not (Series I. 8). 90. occurs occasionally on type III and rarely on type IV. no. Form 1 of Series I is that in regular use in the reign of it seems not to have been punched into the die. or. the one in regular use. 78. varies considerably. 14) William . it doubly by swinging the compasses round on the wrong During the reign of William I is introduced a different form of the letter (Series I. form 3. 229-30. 6). letters. XVIII. X. and is not uncommonly of small size (Series II. 511 William I.x INTRODUCTION all form 2 . p. The size I. which is made by two crescent-shaped punches . 1 A coin in the Hunterian collection reading JO'OI)PINION) I1 C S E: 2 3 6 6 See on G above. (PI. 281 (PL X. pp. Iviii. rarely. p. 97. the round form returns into regular use. 16. form 2 occurring on William II. which might be due either to double-punching or to marking out the circle in the it. nos. 264. . p. 89. form 2) being in the form found uncommonly of a large pellet. 289 See p.

shows considerable variety in form. 137. There are no varieties of this instance is shown in Series I. 276 (PL this letter XL VIII. III. P. no. p. due in this and some other cases to a flaw in the die. 14). form 2). 16). p. How much it of this letter was made by punches is not always to quite clear. where the crescent punch-marks overlap 1 The fourth form of and Errata. see (PI. throughout type VIII. wedge punches. no. on William I. Some strange forms of this letter have occasionally been noted. W should also be classed as P. 6). This letter. p. . 7). with double curve (R). XIX. the R in the money er's name XXXIV. on which the loop has been punched away from the vertical stroke at the end of the tail. but with the introduction of the new style in Series V the form made with crescent punches is re-introduced. no. small 15. engraved over the impression punch XVI. no. but I have not met with this S. 16.. the last letter of the reverse inscription). 187. form elsewhere in this period. Num. 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 tail-punch. 70 (PL 10. 1 B. 1901. William II. 728. e. 190. 13. 246. except such slight varieties as are due to the careless punching of the loop an letter. form 2 (cf. more frequently. A coin of Henry 329. similarly. 5 . 11. I. For II. due partly form the letter of difference in the finish of the central part of the letter. see below. I. lesser varieties see nos. no. which is itself placed nearly at right angles to the vertical . or. has only varieties due to careless punchwork a strange instance is shown in the Table (Series I. of a vertical to the letter being (see PI. 10). also the S in PWXS p. 265.EPIGRAPHY Ixi and p. . no.g. 280 (PI. the usual practice being to two small crescent and two William I. 11. XXXVII. p. 273. p. 246. has in the tail mint-name an instance of with a true-formed . Chron. . The round type alone is found in Series IV. 288 (British Museum coin. and the round form does not appear again. 27). 45.

no. V. 11). form 2. XXX. type VII. : not uncommon. and therefore not distinguishable from A. Henry XL. 559. left visible. 46 (PI. 32. form 6 : William II.Ixii INTRODUCTION is considerably owing to the small space within which the letter enclosed. forms 1. VI. 100. 10) . coll. 90 (PI. p.g. 16. p. 14). p. : William I. B. 4). no. p. by an ordinary vertical punch thickened and finished off in the usual way. 49. 11). a variety showing extreme carelessness of punch. Series VI. 58 (PI. The upright of this letter appears as either a thin vertical punch. : type IX. like A. 36 (PL or the engraving of a line. . 4. William William I. coll. be seen on p. and William II. no. form 2 : Henry I. 136. but this letter soon becomes. Series I. top of the vertical punch. form 3). or wedge-shaped (Series I. W. form 4 Series II. no. sometimes by two wedge-shaped punches (Series I. Wulfwart (W. 77. 8). form 4) the cross-bar is commonly made . such as is used also for making initial crosses (Series I. or an ordinary thick vertical (Series I. 101. : I. form 2). the top of the vertical nos. IV.). I. XVIII. 285. London. IV. form 3 shows again the I.work. Sandwich. XLI. XLI. William I. form 3) made with two long wedge-shaped punches 1 See above. no. may IX. form 5 on p. and the use of due mostly to presence or absence wedge punches for the bar 277. 2). and form 4 form 5 : 175 (PI. 11 (PI. nos. no. no. 1. shows the way in which 1 cf. p. no. form 2 form 3 : Henry Henry PI. I. a form which is in regular use in . The varieties of later series are of serifs to the upper bar. 190. and after Series III.). 3. no. 18. 222. 852 (PL frequently 15) . The following form 2 form 3 : are the varieties figured in the Table e. p. 8. In Series V. two parallel strokes. 2). The true V form (Series I. no. C. 540. C. At the beginning of the reign of William I the two strokes forming this letter are usually sloped towards each other at the lower end. Series V. xlvii. form 4 251 (PI. p. p. William I. p. 20. 246. 722 (a contemporary forgery). p. T. Series is I. Spirling (P.

3). no. 46 (PI. 62.. no. 273 . 869 (PI. 3 X. see William II. 1 2 p. probably accidental rather than intentional. p. (PI. 190. form See p. introduced on the last two types Henry and the first it type of Stephen. as on p. The Anglo-Saxon VII the of form. we have seen above. I for a short period in Series is VI and W. Form 3 shows the large crescent punch used by mistake for the small in crescent. sometimes . 16) examples of this are 2). II. xciiff. no. and a few other In Series coins. Wen. 9. I. the name is evidently Sperling. and apparently not at on the remaining types of his reign.and continues the end of the period. see William I. XXIII. 3 (PI. 45. 53 . . and not W . varies considerably thick. nos. p. 10. xlix. (in serifs) to W.). and first form 2. 8). this is form made with &n ordinary upright and two wedge punches three types of Series IV. . The regular form of this letter is made with wedge-shaped punches occasionally a cross is used in its place. and are rare. 162. The form used for Wen is not different from that of P except on a few coins of the first two types of William I. pp. and gives the appearance of a swelling on the side of the vertical. 11. 1 is IV form used throughout types II and 1 III. and p. p. 3). In the new class of lettering the always used on the form the limbs are usually straight. no. 52. is the true form which appears variety with or without on type IV. no. either with or without serifs. This letter should have been read as P. form 4 the loop has been punched too close to the vertical. Ixiii p. 246.EPIGRAPHY occurs on William I. form continues with rarely on Stephen's and survives 2 the form W occurs only all first type. no. on which a wedge punch is used instead of the crescent punch (Series . 2. sometimes thin. but the Anglo-Saxon it . a form figured in Series I. 8 Except in irregular issues (see below. I. form 2 . is used to express this letter throughout the whole period later English form. III.

These two forms are not distinguished in the text of the Catalogue. instead of a long. no. 78. Of . vertical. 57 (PL XLI. is also used. 16. it is made as D with the addition of a wedge-shaped stroke on either side of the . Thetford. 178 (PL IV. 28. but on the and later types the name of the mint appears as The regular form of the letter is form 1. no. and p. 171. the cross-bar JE. 245 (shown more clearly on a Hunterian coin from the same . no. the engraver has used the straight punch instead of the large crescent punch. no. Form 5 is a typical punch-worker's error. nos. cxxxvi. p. is frequently used. 14. p. the outer one being omitted. it occurs on p. no. 80. &c. On the first I. 10). the form letter fifth l D is earlier abandoned for the is T on Henry . 144-6 10). Form 4 is made with 3). 167. p. which occurs on some coins of 1 8 2 his fourth type I know no Thetford coins. 27. but made with . on the introduction of the new is class of lettering in Series V. See below. 2). 285. 1O) . This becomes the regular form of Series III and IV . I's third type the D form used. 166. p. e. nos. 177. p. 3 g. this is stroke to the letter made by attaching a long wedge-shaped E a similar diphthong form. remains in use on coins I . form 3. e. In Series II the regular form is as that of Series I on p. 96-8. no. three types of William I the diphthong form figured in Series form 1. in VI. 37 (PL XXIX. 2). wedge punch. 42. TH. no. carried right through the vertical. a short. 295.g. no. form 3 a longer wedge has been punched through the loop instead of two small wedges through the vertical. Series I. 173. each pointed towards the vertical form 2 shows a variety with the wedges punched with broad ends towards the vertical. The earliest appearance of TH as separate letters is on the Bristol coin of Henry I. Series I. 170. D. TETFO. 150. 2 (PL VI. dies) form 2 of this series is used. 87 (PL XLIII. a small instead of a large crescent punch.INTRODUCTION DH. William I. p. type XIII. 224 (PL VIII. 148 (PL VI. 13). Series I . nearly to the end of the reign of Henry its last appearance is on the Bath coin of Henry I. 25. instead of two wedge-shaped impressions one only is made. In the name of the mint. type X. 133 . 220. that within the letter. 257. form 2. p. The Anglo-Saxon form.

805 (obverse) William II. Num. if the moneyer's name on this SIEPINE. The custom of placing a cross at the beginning of both obverse and reverse legends is continued throughout this period with few exceptions. 1901.. with a wedgeSometimes the cross-bar is I. A tinues to the end of the old type. it is stated that I . the verticals of being little or not at all inclined towards each other at their upper end. to the vertical.. except the first and VI. the bars the form of A at the time in use. 181 (obverse). IV). 3 William I. In Num. 2 but as in every form that two forms of Series I and that of Henry I. 252 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. -therefore. usually thinner than that of the ordinary shaped stroke on either side of formed by a single stroke similar it. . 46 (obverse) . 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 class of lettering. no. p. also p. Form 3 shows a . X. common form is variety with broad vertical like that of other letters this with a thin vertical. no. 222. no. p. 288) from a sale catalogue. e . 144-6 (reverse) p. in appearance. 10. the bars of an E being attached to the second stroke of an A. it is found on Henry I's third and on a coin 1 of his fourth type in Major Carlyon-Britton's coin reads. Series form 2. p. 1901. it does not differ from IE. Chron. V type IV (when a of an new E are added to form had just been introduced). A. 53. In Series VII the diphthong appears in the natural form. PI. I have found no instance of the use of the diphthong during Series occurs. class of lettering . collection. This form con- becomes the only form in use at consists of the bars of an E attached to I. and p. 3 This initial cross is formed of a vertical. Chron. nos. 150. 314. 27. as I think. letters.EPIGRAPHY the earliest types of William .. M W. p. 177 (obverse). obverse of all coins of type XI . no. always used in Series IV instead of that In the new class of lettering the forms 1 2 (Hks. J. Henry I. 313. it is reason- A able to suppose that in Series to that of Series V and VI the form would be similar is VII . 1XV the end of the reign it the second vertical of an A. but . III.

nos. 52. xxxix ff. Occasionally as many as three letters are run together. 12. viii. type III. no. Journ. For the following notes see references on p. vol. 38. . types II and III (p. type IV (p. pp. type VI (p. see p. William I. 8). 153. Iv. VII they are not common. and Colchester finds are omitted from this table (see pp. 6).INTRODUCTION vary with or without limbs. no.. no. and of Stephen in Brit. pp.. 11. &c. xxxv. xxxiv. no. 223. They frequent. NM. 211 ff. nos. xxxiv. and pp. xxxiv. for the arrangement of the left. between the brackets of Mules and Finds in order to render the table more clear. type VIII (p. Order of types III and IV doubtful. no. 8. 3 4 8 6 7 8 Overstruck Overstruck Overstruck Overstruck Overstruck Overstruck on on on on on on type IV (p. William I. no.. Brit. Evidence of letters (i f^ } |/. are due to an error of the die engraver. p. sometimes. and are evidently used merely for the saving to V of space or. xxxiv. 1902.xlix - 12 13 Order of types VII and VIII doubtful. and p. \f.. and with straight or wedge-shaped compound. 10. have no significance. xxxiv. The brackets of Finds are dotted to show types absent from the finds.. The Nottingham. The following Table summarizes the evidence types. and on the right by Mules (with references to numbers on The numbers of Hawkins's plates are inserted pp. Chron. 5). Num. but in type VIII they are types and continue in common use in the later reigns. Order of types II and III doubtful. the On Chron. 386. see p.g. xxxiv. 11). WR on p. . Ixvii. the types are bracketed by the Epigraphical Series. &c -)> 8ee P. 59) in of . 18). 1 Classification of types of William I and II in Num. Bute. uos. 1901. 7). no. no. xxvii ff.. vol. 42 ff. or ligatured. e. on ORDER OF TYPES.) and Finds. 823. 130 ff. liii. see p. ii. letters seems to begin in the fifth type of William I the only earlier instance that I have met in this reign is l^M in type I (p. 9 10 11 Overstruck on William II. no. xxxiv. and on William II. type I (p. 2). 8 Overstruck on type I and on coin of Harold II (p. liv. Journ. and Table of Finds). 1. type VII (p. p. and classification of types of Henry I in Num. Winterslow. serifs.. Num. The use . 4).

C.ORDER OP TYPES Ixvii P. Confessor William I SERIES I William II SERIES j ^ * 5J SERIES III j " 1 f Henry " I SERIES J IV SERIES V SERIES VI SERIES VII Stephen SERIES VIII SERIES IX Henry II . B.

Chron. pp. in no. after the Danes abandoned their scheme of invasion in the autumn of of 1085. the only period in which the issue of the ' the word Pax Paxs ' type by either William could reasonably be placed would be during the last two years of the reign of William I. and none of these sions gives so satisfactory a proportion . Chron. 137. PI. coins were dated of is spurious (see Davis. but they are all conjectural and open to serious objection.. 13).INTRODUCTION For this attribution of eight types to William I and five to no William II there seems considerable probability. type issued after the accession of a Norman king would necessarily be in profile 2 cannot be maintained in the face of the strong evidence in favour of placing the first That the full-face It type (Hks. 251) at the beginning of the reign of Henry I. though there is definite evidence. 103-4. 183).. Many other arguments have been and might be produced in favour of this division. might be considered satisfactory to divide the types at a point where no mule exists. Num. 1 2 Brit. It rests mainly on the proportion of types 1 to the years of the reign and a comparison with that of other reigns. 81. Journ. p. If the the design of the coinage could be use supposed to have any reference to the condition of the country. 148). 3 Num. that is to say. in which case the only variants to the present attribution are to draw the line before or after divi- Hks. 1901. but. 243. where it is shown that there seems to be an average duration of between two and three years for each type. ii. or before or after Hks. . VIll. on the other hand. Chron. vol. But no such meaning can be attached to the use the coinage Pax as a design for when that design was the only one issued by the See Num. second type (see below. Regesta. 1912.. 250. vol. type has been assigned to a date within the period 1082-7 on the evidence of the Durham coinage (Num. but the charter The ' Paxs ' by which the Durham i. 1905. I's Confessor and the reverse of William p. p. mules exist and reverse of Harold not only with an obverse of Edward Confessor 3 but even with an obverse of Edward II..

92 (from Ruding. . whose succession was so hazardous as to require indecent haste in the burial of the late own coronation ceremony who came . pp. if not in other parts of the country who was no . hoc ne amodo sit. 209 ff. but it is difficult is to put so short a limit to the first type of Stephen. quod tempore regis Eadwardi. Chron. Brit. 2 See Num. probably as a concession in exchange for the ducal privilege of debasing See Ramsay. pp. 14. quam rex sibi dedit. 4 Aluredus nepos Turoldi habet 3 toftes de terra Sybi. ' ' 5 ' non 6 fuit Monetagium commune quod capiebatur per ciuitates et comitatus. Ixxv. 1902. vol. 163. vol. vol. But this type was not originated by the Confessor. p. 2 and perhaps two or three years was the usual period for a type to run . 2-3. and in face of the certainty of armed opposition from Normandy and the probability of risings in Northumbria. 103-4. ii. 181. a triennial hearth-tax granted to in or shortly before 1080. . a parallel has been found between this tax of and Monetagium Normandy G . for the coins with his obverse which bear this reverse type are clearly mules struck in the reign of Harold. 3 See below. p. It is certainly noteworthy that these and other reigns seem to show an average duration of two to three years for each type. which is mentioned in Domesday 4 and in the Charter of Liberties of A Henry the I 5 (1100). Journ. Num. fol. p. to meet his death immediately after at the hands of is The dating of the types also conjectural and can only be based on the proportion of types to the number of years of the reign. pp. sooner crowned than he made ready for war. and defeated one enemy only another. i. theory of the triennial issue of types has been based on the evidence of a tax called Monetagium or Monedagium. vol. Foundations of England. 1912. viii. 1893.. Chron.ORDER OF TYPES unfortunate Harold 1 lxi*X II. 336 b (Lincoln)). The type must 1 ' ' have been issued by Harold. Num. pp. 1100). 114-9.. in quibus habet omnes consuetudines praeter geldurn regis de Monedagio (Domesday. ii. which there good reason to suppose was in issue at 3 the time of his captivity in 1141. p.. note 2) . p. 1901. the people by Duke William. omnino defendo (Charter ' of Liberties of Henry I. to the throne with king and in his an inva- sion already preparing in Norway.

. 62). which is assigned to the period 1089 to January 1091. Chron. type of William II. and struction of the city of its mint . Introduction to Domesday Book. 1913. Iv (folio ed. but. 402 and 411. is quite untrustworthy as a means of dating the coins at Bath. p. or absence of coinage. The coinage. Ellis 2 says. An arrangement since adopted by Major Carlyon-Britton in Brit. Peter of Bath. But no parallel exists. which usually has two stars on the obverse. 4 5 See . Bishop John and his successors.1XX INTRODUCTION . William's impositions.. of any mints . Brit. as Sir H. note 9. 98 ff. (see vol. 1912. p. Chron. Num. has been connected with the appearance of a comet the ' Cross voided ' in the year 1097. ii. 1 the Norman tax was viewed as a concession from the English tax was evidently one of as its removal Duke William King to the people. 4 and was therefore certainly out of issue before the comet appeared. grants to St. the whole city of Bath. viii. Journ. in alms for the augmentation of the see. p. 179. for example. vol. could. would stop the change of types The tax was. 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. Joiim. the Norman the the English kings . Num. pp. at several mint-towns. would it make the change triennial.. Coincidences of types with current events are also misleading. a baronial privilege not exercised by the people . 3 a date at which the fourth type was probably ' in issue. as has been shown above with reference to the 'Paxs' type similarly. Norman tax was triennial and . no coins are it known of the reign of William II. it if a parallel with the Norman tax existed. the coinage and from this it is concluded that the English coin- types were issued triennially. might naturally be supposed that the deby fire in 1088 put an end to the working but a notification of William II. pp. by Henry I was one of this king's concessions to tax was levied in exchange for the debasement of the coinage. nor.). Num. 1 ' with all customs and a mint and 2 See Num.. probably identical with the payments de Moneta which are mentioned in Domesday altogether. but this ' Two Stars type has now been shown to be the third type of the reign.

i. pp. IRREGULAR ISSUES. from 1066 to 1156 or 8 The coins above described represent the regular issues of currency 2 such coins as can be shown to be forgeries . Edmunds. . 2 See above. p. Some additional evidence of the order of the types may be found to the in the statement of William of Malmesbury with regard incising of coins (see below. struck light by the moneyers in base metal or of weight for their own profit. are not differentiated 4 from royal issues. The dating of the types must therefore be two left in uncertainty. probably too in operation.. York. The coins here described as Irregular Issues differ. or. 1 Davis. note 3 The privileged ecclesiastical issues of Canterbury. no. cliv f. . of these regular issues. for comprise special issues of particular mints which some . and have therefore not been reserved for separate treatment. known they or unknown reason. inquiries of 1108 The monetary pp. from the regular types of the reign may may have been belong to the ordinary currency of the period or they issued by some authority other than the king. and 1125 and the possibility of assigning certain types to these periods are discussed below. admitting that an approximate period of to three years is the probable duration of each type. &c.). while conforming to a regular type. are reserved for consideration (see ' in connexion with the control and organization of the mint ' below. 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. 1. The type used for inscriptions of irregular coinages does not always accurately represent the original. 326. cxlix ff.OUDER OF TYPES ' toll l . vol. xi. p. bear an obverse inscription other than the name and title of the king. 4 With one exception these all belong to the reign of Stephen. Begesta. clearly the mint was still in existence. Bury St. obverse or reverse design altered or vitiated in some way. cxlviii). whether privileged by royal grant or usurping the privilege un3 They differ from the regular issues in having the usual lawfully.

In obverse and reverse design it conforms to the second type of William II ('Cross in Quatrefoil' type) but bears the following inscriptions Obv. Rev. 2 also. ' nequiret sufficere (a. is Jamque caritas annonse paulatim . or Lewelin. that in 1149 Henry of Anjou. and barons. exbausto praedecessoris sui immenso illo thesauro. and issued their own money l and that forgery produced a coinage so light and debased that in ten or more shillings the value of twelve pence could scarcely barons had mints in their castles be found. 1140 . 2 i. Journ. Rolls Series. as the name is written in the A nnales Cambriae. Stubbs (Rolls Series. dicendi juris vol. et potestatem subditis.INTRODUCTION One is coin of the reign of William II needs special mention. no. ' statement in W. Malm. erantque in Anglia quodammodo tot reges. Ferebatur ipse rex pondus denariorum. struck a new coin which obtained the when he invaded name of the Duke's money. regio more. sub anno 1149). tot militum expensis et pro falsitate difficultas monetae tanta erat ut . as in op. pp. earls. Num. the obverse inscription. 82. : HEPlrrENtt* (or. 562). 90). quot domini castellorum. or Ryt Cors. p. : . bishops. but when Castella quippe per singulas provincias studio partium crebra surrexerant. vol. vol. England. no. and that not only he but all the magnates. 1 ' p. quod fuerat tempore Henrici regis.. Major Carlyon-Britton shows reason son of for attributing this coin to Llewellyn first letter is Cadwgan . ii. made their own money. From the Chroniclers we learn that in the reign of Stephen the . alleviari jussisse quia. viii. eft. 83 ff. vel potius tyranni. as it appears in Brut y Tywysogion. ' crescebat et eo interdum ex decem amplius solidis vix duodecim denarii reciperentur. though the not clearly legible. seems to be intended for Lewillen. . It published and illustrated in Brit. It weighs 18 grains and is apparently of good silver.. and there is likelihood in the reading of the mint-name RVHBKO as Rhyd y Gors. habentes singuli percussurara proprii numismatis. 69 The (William of Newburgh.

but coinage. Eustace FitzJohn. As these coins bear the names of and usually differ in type from the regular currency. are Bishop Henry (presumably of Winchester). no. . he put There are many regular issues finds of the which vary in legend or design from the of the reign. 51). In the first place it is evident from the passage in William of Newburgh quoted above that some barons information that is usurped the privilege of coining and presumably made profit by in this case we should expect their issuing light and base coins . such. as others Duke we expect. his mother. coins to imitate the types of the realm. Robert (?). 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. bishops. and which from their occurrence in coins to this period. 142. 143. But rom the coins themselves it is evident that not only did Henry and should barons. and others (e. these represent the baronial issues above referred but there is great difficulty in so assigning them.IRREGULAR ISSUES Ixxiii Duke came (on which occasion it is not down the coins of the greater part of them. p. 1 the quite clear). pp. i. and to differ and inscriptions of the current coinage from it only in quality and weight and . vol. strike coins. normal coinage or for other reasons must be assigned It is therefore natural to suppose that some of to. 356-7. 113) which combine with lightness of weight a coarseness of fabric and an irregularity of lettering which seem to show that the die-engravers were not in possession of the punches which were used by the officials of the royal mint. the Empress Matilda. g. ] Roger of Hoveden (Rolls Series. issued named for example. William (?). owing partly to the indefinite of given us by the Chroniclers of the nature this irregular coinage. the coin attributed to Watchet. p. no. perhaps in roughness of execution for by altering the design they issues into currency. bearing a their own names. it that the privilege of coining was actually bestowed by possible the King or the Empress on some of their followers for a usurptheir issuers is . and others. &c. and perhaps they may be illustrated by such coins as nos. 211. 144 of the Catalogue. 352.

D. and Epigraphy p. make it probable that the authority of the royal mint was to some extent impaired. lapsed during part of this reign. III. C. localities A. and similarly the last type assured . of certain. notably III. the evidence us by so few specimens that of finds first and mules being sufficiently strong to define them is as the two types of the reign. IV. . but some of these types. in which the varieties are described is one of conit is impossible to make any scientific classification in our present lack of knowledge of the time and place of issue of the majority of them. and that the control some of the more distant provincial mints. It has may been assumed above that the currency of Stephen's reign be divided into seven types. of in the The identification of the coins is very uncertain.1XX1V 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. PERERIK. so far as possible. Issues bearing the king's name. Of the first two types there can scarcely be any doubt. They are grouped in the following classes : I. the order of which has been (see determined on the evidence of Finds. and especially the events of the year 1141. the circumstances of the Civil War. purpose of deciding the locality and authority that issued them. and arrange all the coins that differ from them so far as possible in groups. to deal separately with these types. for the The order venience . York and district. V. which coins belong to the regular currency and in what order they may be placed. II. Coins not issued under the king's name. Scottish or Border Counties . Further. Ixvii). V. Mules. Issues bearing the king's name. especially North and West. or probable. of uncertain attribution. Coins struck from erased obverse Coins with inscription dies. having determined. and it seems therefore desirable. Eastern Counties : . Midland Counties B. IV. are it is known to not possible to be certain that each one represents a distinct type rather than a variety of another.

or at least prevalent in currency.IKKEGULAR ISSUES IxXV by its occurrence with Henry II's coins in the Awbridge find . fraudulent work of the mint officials. . and the first type Nevertheless. and that an examination of the coinage was thus impossible. though the imitation of the by the Empress Matilda in her show that the own type not does coinage till first necessarily issue of this type continued 1139. the therefore issued for a longer period than usual. or in some cases as the imitations of baronial mints. and light or base coins are not more frequent in this than in the preceding reigns such as there are may be explained as the regular coinage of the reign retained its . that Stephen reduced the standard of the coinage. The tradition quoted by William of Malmesbury (see p. The use of this type 1 If the issue of the second type first coins of the again by Henry of Anjou might be due to his continuing the type adopted by his mother.). p. Brit.. note 2). and that this took place at more or ff. 42. civil 2 Nor is it unlikely that the wars threw the mint organization out of gear. Ixxii. the time of the king's imprisonment and the greatest confusion in the country. had commenced in the preceding year. standard weight and fineness. Joiirn. the 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. 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. vii. Num. It was shown above that was not unlikely that the types were changed on the occasion of some assay or examination corresponding to the Trial of the Pyx. as late as 1141. is therefore not supported by the evidence of the coins. 1 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. vol. 2 Of. xii of Stephen but. would type probably still be the prevailing currency. less regular intervals of two or three years (see pp.

Ixxvi INTRODUCTION I. . COINS OF TYPE I STRUCK WITH ERASED OBVERSE DIES. * : The following coins are known Mint.

.IKREaULAR ISSUES Ixxvii Mint.

.Ixxviii INTRODUCTION Mint.

1881... he finds in them the 'Duke's Money' 1 of the Chroniclers. the same writer comments on a large number of these coins which were published by Toplis in his account of the Nottingham find (ibid.. pp. Andrew adopts this view and attributes them to various barons. It is not therefore a method of stamping coins for currency or of light weight or base metal in order to pass reject them That the object was to erase the king's figure from the die is not so clear. pp. but on his them from it. Chron. Ixxii.IllREGULAR ISSUES Ixxix In Num. vii. This theory is open to the same objection as the previous one. and of the Stamford mint coins are known struck from the same obverse die both before and after the erasure was made upon it. namely. In Hawkins's Silver Coins (p. is noteworthy. &c. 2 in proof of which ing cross or lines are cut or punched on the die several duplicates exist.) Mr. 42 ff. 59 ff. 178) it is said that 'they were probably struck by a partisan of Matilda. and in his account of the Sheldon find (Brit. 37 ff. that the obliterat. that they were issued from mints over which the Duke struck by Henry of never had control. on the Nottingham and Stamford coins the erasing cross falls not on the king's face. those of Thetford to Hugh It is Bigod. pp. One may reasonably doubt whether any of the barons who usurped the privilege of coining would have hazarded the possibility of passing his coins into currency by deliberately obliterating the obverse die for the sake of marking his independence 1 See above. abandoning his former attribution to the Empress. this is the view that has since been generally held. money Anjou during one of his visits to England. who wished to use Stephen's dies. that is. Num. .) and. Nottingham that a punch was used on others the erasure has evidently been made with 2 From the . a cutting instrument. those of Nottingham to William Peverel. shoulder. but not to acknowledge Stephen's title'. and on the York coin the die is cut on either side of the king's bust. notably those I am inclined to believe of and Thetford and some Norwich. Journ. vol. and elsewhere observed.. p. of regular form of the cross on some coins.

INTRODUCTION if he succeeded in capturing coining dies he would make profit by issuing coins which could be easily passed into currency. Foundations of England..1XXX of the king 1 . 61 ff. at the time that Stephen ratified Queen Matilda's treaty with Henry tingham. Num.). are obliterated by some mark upon I their surface in order to prevent their use for forgery. was by royal authority that the dies were the erasure of the obverse or standard dies would be sufficient to this may put both obverse and reverse dies out of action. vol. for example. the Norwich coin in the British Museum weighs 21-1 grs. even if this is not too early a date for such a use of heraldic devices. 2 it am inclined to believe that obliterated . but he seems to have of come over to Stephen in 1139. pp. Bristol coin... Nottingham. Journ. he is the King's side. Andrew sees in the Nottingham crosses a personal badge I think that. obliteration? by whom were they put of into use after the of The majority the coins are low weight. for Northumberland at Notfound on from 3 this time until he surrendered his castle to the Empress in 1141 as the price of his personal freedom. coins which he hoped to pass into currency. The of the sacking of Nottingham is also uncertain . if kept. 14-17 grains. 8 . pp. Chron.. weighs 23-2 grs. Assuming the dies to have been obliterated for this purpose. 105 ff. was in 1138 held by Peverel for the Empress. for example. and have been done at times when the mints were in danger of falling into the enemy's hands. But Peverel's position is date very difficult to follow (see Brit. and the British Museum coin of uncertain mint weighs 20 -6 grs. The sacking of the town by Robert of Gloucester in 1140 or 1141 might have caused the authorities of the mint to obliterate their standard dies in fear of their falling into the Earl's hands. are certainly of excellent silver. 2 See Num. as. There seems more reason to suppose that be glad to the object of obliterating the dies was to prevent their use in case of their falling into unscrupulous hands. if the Rashleigh Sale Catalogue is correct. vii. p. ii. and many certainly have the appearance of being a of base silver but some are undoubtedly of good weight : . some. 1141 seems the more probable. 394. too. a baron would not impose his badge upon a die in such a way as to deface the 1 . the question remains.. Kamsay. in just the same way as dies at the present day. the Norwich Mr. vol. 1915.

barons were able. 7) . the king's enemies Museum It is piece not im- having succeeded in passing into circulation the light coins in spite of their defaced obverses. the coins. of Num. Mr. In Brit. and perhaps is the work of a forger's dies. or on the recapture of their implements. 66. in spite of the erasure of the standard dies. Roth's collection LVII. and may perhaps be attributed to uneven flans or faulty striking rather than a deliberate obliteration of the king's name on I (PI. 1 Or the contrary may have been the case. and again used for striking false coins. As he points out. this differs from the other coins in being struck from dies of extremely rough workmanship. While one would naturally suppose that the dies fell into the hands of the king's enemies. the marks are not uniform on . It occurs occasionally on the reverse instead of the obverse. on getting possession of obliterated dies..IRREGULAR ISSUES coin mentioned above. which had been obliterated by the two lines cut on the obverse. possible that. the king's own moneyers at other mints which had not been captured. and were turned to good account by the issue of light and base coins. 1 The uneven quality of the coins of this series increases the difficulty of its solution. But is obviously less likely. Journ. the king having ordered his own this obliterated dies to be used in spite of the obliteration. which is at present merely conjectural. vol. Andrew describes coins Nottingham which have the obverse inscription curiously stamped out. coins from the same die the obliteration was therefore not on the die itself. have inserted here a coin of York in Mr. . saved themselves expense by following the example of their enemies and bringing back into use dies which they had themselves erased. e. one can hardly believe that so good a coin as the British of Norwich was issued by a usurping authority. to issue coins struck from them. which weighs 21-1 grs. i. p. vii.

COINS OF TYPE I WITH OBVERSE INSCRIPTION : PERERIC ETC.Ixxxii INTRODUCTION II. . The following coins are known Mint.

.IRREGULAR ISSUES Ixxxiii Mint.

and made terms for securing the the following day she arrived at Winchester and was there the crown was handed to her. 30) and was given by Stephen On Oct. this she landed at Arundel in 1139 (Sept. ingenious the shoulder in imitation difficulty that I find though it is. including London and Canterbury. the Legate (Feb. Bishop of Winchester. 2. M . where Robert d'Oilly surrendered the castle to her. On March 2 she met the Legate again at Wherwell.. Joum. commencing by Apart from the of the king's face with a cross inserted of the current coins of Stephen. blessed. pp.' Stephen is ruled out as impossible. 15 she moved to Gloucester. and so Matilda In the inscriptions PERERIE and PERERIEM l he reads in front a lopped form of the word IMPERATRIEIS.. in the evolution. For Easter (March 30) she went to Oxford. Her career in England was. a safe-conduct to Bristol. Mr. 1141) . of this puzzling inscription from the title 'Imperatricis'. the west dates from the battle of Lincoln her at Gloucester. vii. on which the final letter of the obverse inscription is shown to be by another specimen from the same dies. throne . In Brit. On April 7-8 a Synod at Winchester declared her ' Lady of On April 9-10 the deputation of England and Normandy'. name and remains. 13). vol. : Her movement from (Feb. Andrew's original proposition that coins struck at all these mints can be attributed to the Empress. Andrew says Obviously the only person in whose name money could have been : ' issued at mints spread nearly all over the country and the list tion would probably be extended if we had not to rely for our informaon the mere accident of discovery was either Stephen himself title or the Empress Matilda. she sent him on to Bristol Robert of Gloucester brought Stephen a prisoner to she then advanced to . near Andover. Num. I am unable to agree with Mr. and she had herself pro' claimed 'Lady and Queen of England. for his have no break in their sequence. 16). Londoners arrived at Winchester and demanded the release of their 1 He also gives the reading PERERIE I. It appears to be a misreading of a Lincoln coin. where she negotiated with Henry. Cirencester (Feb. in brief.INTRODUCTION Earl of Derby than to the Earl of Warwick coins struck at so many mints. 81 ff.

From September to December.IRREGULAR ISSUES 1XXXV . 1142. changed for Stephen. 24. and held the Christmas March-April. 14) through Ludgershall and Devizes to Gloucester. opened the gates to them on June 24. Queen Matilda and William of . in 1142. set free at Bristol on Nov. She demanded a subsidy from the Londoners. and by her general demeanour roused hostility in the meantime. 1. Stephen. king without actually opposing the decision in favour of Matilda Matilda proceeded to Reading and St. he made Canterbury crown-wearing a royal progress to York via Ipswich and Stamford.). and on their approach to the city the Londoners. now thoroughly hostile to the Empress. to Devizes. After this she returned to her old quarters at Bristol and Gloucester. England for ever. going at the end of March. 1 See below. and ceased to play a prominent part in the war. and at Christmas escaped by night to Abingdon and thence to Wallingford. 1 142. whence she sent an embassy to her husband. . five years . which dragged on for the next 1148. refused a request to grant few days before June . urging him to who landed at Bristol in the late autumn. come over he sent over the young Duke Henry. Earl Robert was taken prisoner and ex- Ypres . she left it was 1 carried on by Robert of Gloucester on behalf of Henry of Anjou. 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 the Empress escaped (Sept. at Oxford. went to Winchester and London at . Albans. Londoners at the good laws of the Confessor. The Empress spent the winter. Earl Robert failed to reconcile the Legate. pp. In February. the Empress was besieged by Stephen at Oxford. and in the meantime efforts were made to win the Londoners . the A gave in and were induced to receive her they conducted her to Westminster. . in May last she was joined by King David of Scotland (presumably to assist at her coronation). 1141-2. Ypres had been raising an army in Kent. (Dec. having already alienated the Legate Stephen's father's refusing to secure continental possessions. cxxvi f. sons in their The Empress escaped by to Oxford.

country that was most loyal to Stephen's Queen and raised the London on June 24. The quality and the extent of the issue of PERER1E coins seem . 9-16). Though she was only admitted it is to London for a very few days. coins is likely to have fallen into her hands. Matilda never held Lincoln. and though there be placed on the coins Bristol is evidence that coins . Lincoln Castle was apparently seized by Ealph of Chester in 1140. and Stamford the Though the castle at Canterbury was in 1135 in '. Finally. 335. together with the issue of the coins from the London mint. the town was sacked and burnt after the battle of Lincoln. 1141. they were issued after March 3. issued ' if by the Empress. also. show that. These points. and only surrendered to Henry in 1153. the mint At Winchester. and it was this part of the is .INTRODUCTION This bald statement of the movements of the Empress to show the difficulty of attributing this series to her. no. Lincoln. p. nos. thus differing from most of the irregular issues of the period and notably from the coins bearing the title of the Empress. bility that in that time the mint officials not beyond the bounds of possihad come over to her and accepted her orders for her title to was her own stronghold. too. so far as we know. the mint of Canterbury was evidently in his this period (Catalogue. At Canterbury. and there is no reason to to suppose that she could ever have struck coins there. the hands of Robert of Gloucester's to Stephen men and they refused admittance on his arrival hands at in England. It is is sufficient noteworthy that these coins seem all to be of good weight and of good metal. but the castle seems troops which she led into have remained intact and was surrendered by Ralph to Stephen in 1146. pp. were struck there for Stephen (Catalogue. Stamford was always in the King's hands. 336-7. and there no reason to suppose that it ever fell into the hands of the Empress she never went there. might conceivably have been struck as ' in her name after her acceptance Lady is of England case otherwise. they are struck from dies evidently made in the regular way with the official coining-irons. 1141. when she proclaimed herself Lady and Queen of England and received ' the crown at Winchester. 2).

she would be on the throne. to be unintelligible then as to us. During Stephen's captivity there was the much confusion and uncertainty throughout the country. for a time at least. and that the inscription PERERIE was deliberately substituted for the King's it is name and was intended coins are well struck. at least. I am therefore inclined to believe that the moneyers temporized as the clergy did. of the provinces and that fact would account for the uniformity of this meaningless title. a thing very difficult to explain on the theory that it is merely a blundered It is curious that in the Danish coins form of I'mperatricis. The position of a moneyer was as difficult as anyone's the coins them. London would probably still impose the form . name on the obverse and the moneyer 's name on the was irrefutable evidence of his disloyalty to the Empress. to have struck coins in the name of the Empress would equally convict a moneyer of disloyalty to the King. either party could be satisfied that they were not struck in the name of the other. with the inscription IOANSTREX. on the other hand. their circulation among an illiterate public would therefore not be deterred by the change of the obverse inscription. if we can accept William of Malmesbury's statement. the issue of coins with Stephen's reverse If. of die adopted in some. and some at least of the ecclesiastics. on examination of the coins. The of good weight and of good metal. barons secured their position by supporting the side which fortune seemed to favour or which offered them the highest price for their support. issued apparently during the struggle between Magnus and Swein for the throne of Denmark . which he issued constituted a public declaration of the side which he supported and as soon as the King's imprisonment and selves . attached themselves to the Empress after obtaining Stephen's permission to temporize. Stephen should later obtain his freedom and regain the throne. whereas. though it is difficult to explain the unintelliare of good quality and no worse executed gible title on coins which than any other of the reign. the Empress's recognition by the clergy made it clear that.IRREGULAR ISSUES to show that they must for a period have constituted the true coinage of the realm.

date of the issue and in considering and thinks that the issue may prove more It seems that we are agreed as to the it the regular coinage of the realm for Mr. would have issued his coins under her name. See also Num. Dan- mark. however. Lincoln. 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. and that Lincoln under Ralph of Chester. threw some light on the origins of the PERERIE and IOANSTREX inscriptions. . Chron. that no less difficulty lies in assuming. Andrew's argument or appreciated how nearly we were for I feel that the attribution to Stephen or to in agreement in some respects . was also likely to issue her coins further. p. 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. Myntforhold og Udmyntninger PI. 1915. for example. Andrew holds that Matilda's position was at this 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 a few months in 1141. Andrew that the 'temporizing' of the clergy was merely a question of obtaining release from their oath for conscience sake. much importance extensive than is to the mints at present known. after declaring himself on the side of the 2 Empress. 1915. then her partisan. Chron. He argues that the Archbishop of Canterbury. in his presidential address to the Royal Numismatic Society (Num. attach . Andrew's opinion and argument. I have recently had an opportunity of obtaining a clearer view of Mr. and Stamford. and that the decision depends mainly on the historical evidence.. 2 Sir Arthur Evans. From the numismatic point of view I cannot persuade myself to accept Mr. Proceedings.. 49. 1 p. I have left unaltered what I had written before understood Mr. even when the Londoners accepted the Empress. He does not. inscription we have 1 a possible parallel to this use of a meaningless i (see Hauberg. were enrolling themselves under Stephen's Queen.IxXXViii INTRODUCTION in 1044-7. 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. 37). that a Bristol moneyer of this date was time-serving than in assigning a coinage of the Empress to such mints as Canterbury. and VIII. I do not agree with Mr. 109 ff. the Empress must at present be left an open question. pp. Though perhaps I should modify the conclusion that I have drawn above from the mints of 1 fully this issue. . 1-7). but my own suggestion is not free from difficulty. Andrew's interpretation of the inscription. ruption due to a misunderstanding by the die-engraver of an original order in which the title was written in abbreviated script.

Obverse. ISSUES BEAKING THE KlNG'S NAME. Similar to type I.IRREGULAR ISSUES Ixxxix III. OF UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTION. .. 1. and of very coarse work. but very large head either to 1. or r.

pellets on the die . l il05TlE[ British Reverse inscription Wt. which I believe is unique. II (2 pennies. that it this is Mr. or truncheon-shaped clubs. types I (1). : beginning above crown "1 flJTEFf" inscription Rev. inscription. probably belongs to a later period than most of the irregular coins here described. and perhaps a more probable interpretation. Wt. three pellets at end of each limb. with a few coins of Stephen. one is at a loss to account for so strange a variety in place of the usual sceptre. 5. with its obverse type copied from the first type and the reverse from the second The lettering is somewhat coarsely worked. and some baronial and irregular It therefore issues (see above. elevated on a monstrance. near Salisbury. PI. (6). Wt. 3. ]A/nBEI^Y*ON[ no. for the stamping of the rosette of p. Cross pattee.. xcv. *m<I!VTPIN no. Museum. is of good weight. 3. 238. in each angle a mullet of six points. British Museum. perhaps made by a mint official. radiate. The style and lettering of this coin are similar to those of the ordinary issues. Henry of Anjou. It was found in a chalk pit at Winterslow. and apparently of good metal . As type cross. (good metal?). no. PL LVIII. 236. 16-3 grs. beaded inner circle . . coin and 4. pp. xxx-xxxi). LVIII. III (1). blundered and uncertain.XC INTRODUCTION swords. As type I. Ill 8 r. Bust to rosette of pellets in front of forehead. 15-9 grs. type I Obv. As regards the lettering and style there is nothing unusual about the coin except the rounded form of the letter C on the reverse. The obverse has an annulet on the shoulder. but with an annulet enclosing a pellet in place of each fleur-de-lys on the reverse. 4. but with a large rosette of pellets at the end of the obverse inscription. type of the reign. The coin. I. following (6). LVIII. Obv. cxxi. H'j-'lEFN grs. no. cf. 237. and an annulet at the end of each limb of the 5. Rev. 2 halves). Andrew has suggested represents the Host. This coin seems to be a contemporary imitation. 16-6 British Museum. also p. but the weight rather points to the coin being a One can give no reason forgery. PI.

On a short cross voided a quadrilateral with incurved sides and a pellet at each angle and in the centre. and must therefore be contemporary with the first type of the reign. occurring in the smaller Watford find. This coin came from the smaller Watford find (see above. and where. As type I. pp. but with plain domed crown without ileurs. PI. Obv. peculiarities noted. no doubt a contemporary forgery of some sort. the style is not pecu- is is though small (corresponding to Series VIII). Dartford. and Linton finds prove unquestionably which are the first two types of the reign. 7. on the reverse the cross moline voided and has an annulet in the centre and at the end of each limb. first and an unknown second type. no. perhaps one of the many that are said to have been struck by the barons at and is their castles. It impossible to account for this deviation from the regular . 17-6 Museum. and this coin. &c. 240. but by whom it was issued. and the reverse type it or as a mule of the cannot be treated as a separate type of the reign. xxvii). PL . Beaded outer and plain inner *0&BEP[ grs. must have been in currency con- temporarily with the and previous to the issue of the second type. It is certainly an irregular issue of some kind. LVIII. liar. an annulet on the shoulder.IRREGULAR ISSUES This coin is XCI of very coarse work (more especially the reverse). LVIII. because the Watford. Rev. 6. 6. 16-7 17-4 Provenance. ]XI British Wt. apparently worked on the die with the ordinary punches. circle. 7. Reverse. Apart from the lettering. Wt. it is impossible to say. xxvi. 241. British Ex ONANT Museum. first type. As type I. nos. (clipped?). but on the obverse the collar is represented by annulets is instead of pellets. 239. Obverse.

without expressing his opinion. larger upper bar than the letter has elsewhere on 1 I am indebted to Mr. I do not find that the A. EX CAN tt&AH&OHI 16-0 H. having a large upper bar. Num. 243. the moneyer. 242. 16-2 British Museum. documentary evidence of the Bishop of was a tenant Winchester. Mr. who. might represent a combined and the coins be attributed to Taunton in a review of this . one penny only was described in the publication of the . In describing the Awbridge find (Num. Andrew. 1905. Reverse. appear to be of very base metal. iii. of was closely connected w ith the town r Taunton '. 345. Grueber put forward a proposal of Mr. Roth. Bliss. 1W. Walters that the A. M. p. &c. Citron.. Andrew for this information find. 0[ no. 14-0 OANTOI N&ONI: OM[ cut halfB. of course. 8. Journ. Wt. 1 T. no. adds that 'there is to prove that Sansun. Four pennies and two halfpennies were found and three at Awbridge. Mr. . PI.. penny &TEFNEH These coins all MT at Linton. vol. article in Brit. LVIII. British EX *S Museum. in the mint name has a these coins.XC11 INTRODUCTION Obverse. 17-3 Provenance. p. Reynolds. 361).

138. I. .IRREGULAR ISSUES XC111 or on other coins of this reign. There were several barons who strengthened their castles and held them until the peace of On the other hand. but none are recorded in the Watford. and two PERERIE in the Awbridge find three specimens are noted. and I see no reason to imagine so harsh a combination of letters and so unparalleled an obscuring The natural attribution of the coins is to of the mint-name. 369)./VNY as ' causes considerable doubt whether so unusual a form ' Anton for Southampton can 1 really be intended. it is impossible to hazard even a guess at the issuer of this in the time of the civil war. his second type. but the occurrence of so many dies on which the first three letters of the mint read invariably . A curious feature of these coins is that the finds in which they occur show that. conjecture that these coins are the work of one who was powerful and held his power down to at the period of Stephen's the end of the reign . 1 money. but in face of the difficulty of determining the mint at which they were struck. for their model. or Sheldon It seems therefore that they first made their appearance during the issue of Stephen's second type. nos. finds. which (cf. Dartford. or halfpennies were found with seven coins of forty of Stephen's coins with the first. and that their circulation continued into the reign of Henry II. they though they obviously use Stephen's first type were not only in issue with the early currency first very shortly type of Stephen was superseded at the royal mints. One can only of the magnates captivity. Southampton. the first of Henry II but were put into circulation after. and thirty-nine of inscription . The only finds in which they have been recorded are the Linton and Awbridge finds. ' Northantona occurs in the Pipe ' Rolls. is ' variously spelt Hamtune ' or ' Amtune ' William. when no other coins of Stephen's reign except those of his last issue found their way into a hoard. with thirty-one of Stephen's last issue and 110 of Henry II's first ('Tealby') coinage. at Linton four pennies and two before. Their occurrence in so late a hoard may possibly be due to the locality of the find. Henry I's last type.

Rer. LVIII. who coins. fulfil the conditions which coinage issued by a baron we should expect in a who took advantage of the confusion they were probably first of the country to usurp this privilege. by him when the first type of Stephen was the most frequent in circulation. the type dies being worked by an engraver who was not a very skilful workman. and evidently was not in possession of the instruments used by the officials of the royal mint. From this point of view it is apparent that. Having originated his type. and distinct many others. till Henry II put them down such were Henry. 9. Perhaps of Exeter. William Peverel. possibly. more than any other class. but with long cross fleury superimposed on the cross moline of the reverse. and even later. issue of Henry (cf. . died in 1153. Hugh of Mortimer. 8 (a). he continued to employ it even after the original ceased to be by later types. two coins from the PI. . the similar I (6)) l .XC1V INTRODUCTION in 1155 Wallingford in 1153. and cannot be distinguished from the work of an ordinary forger. whose or demolished castles were all taken by King Henry in 1155. As type I. These Ralph of Chester. so too on the reverse the legend as well as the type may be copied and may not represent the actual place of issue. These coins are of good work made with the usual 1 But in this case there seems no reason to change the obverse title to that of Stephen. as the obverse type and legend use a genuine coin as a model. Oh. The method is simply one of organized forgery. Roth. dividing the legend. Bishop of Winchester. issued or. 11 E same dies. Henry of Anjou. punches of the period. LPHEBX SIM VH ONE m&[ B. and that type was adopted as a model. they were issued of base metal and light weight. except that perhaps the in currency issued and was superseded baron's control of the neighbouring country put him in an advantageous position for the circulation of his coins. and his military power secured him from punishment in case of discovery. Roger of Hereford.

Journ. IODV IHVB Wt.IRREGULAR ISSUES (b) Similar. Sheldon find (Brit. Obv. no. but quite different in style. Obv. Num. ]NER# (retrograde). Roth (same dies). Henry of Anjou. *. Ill 3 and III 4.. III 8 (a) above. (a) As type I. p. and B.. there can .74). . dividing the legend. 440. Obverse. *>. p. where these coins are assigned to Alexander. Rev. A. no. nos. Obv. and vol. (6) 54 and 82. but having long cross fleury superimposed on the cross Similar in type to variety moline of the reverse. See Brit. pp. LVIII. Bishop of Lincoln be little doubt that they were struck at Newark. VARIETIES GROUPED GEOGRAPHICALLY. Short cross voided. Journ. Rude head r. Rev. For the rosette of I (b). in each angle a bird. vol. xc. 244. xcv but a small quadrilateral fleury takes the place of the original cross motine of the reverse type. vol. 10. p. 51. not made with ordinary punches. ^w?w. pellets cf.&T RE AMG c ICD ENW ERC AWt. 16 grs.. British Museum. Of very coarse work. grs. sceptre in front. cxxi. v. type IV. vii. GGE*[ vii. and p. 17-3 PI. Midland Counties.

the attribution of this coin to Nottingham or Tutbury must be left uncertain. and a fleured saltire over the cross on the Nottingham or Tutbury coin. PI. the (a). 246. a broad I. for they are identical in style of design and lettering on obverse and reverse. it may be either t^T\^ (Stutesbery or Tutbury?). see Brit. The reading of the mint (Nottingham) or vol. p. superimposed on the cross moline. .. Rev. *-R/UNALD-ONSTO\Vt. Rev. is The lettering varieties. but it differs from it in the very coarse fabric and poor weight of the coins. same type as a variety. 14-9 grs. B. Rude head r. and having on the reverse with a pellet at the end of each limb and in each angle. 440. first of the indeterminate issues. Short cross voided. (a) Eastern Counties. As type cross Obverse. no. over a saltire fleury.XCV1 (c) INTRODUCTION Obv.Journ. sceptre in front (very similar to preceding it variety). v. uncertain . very similar in style to that of the other two Midland These other two varieties are even more closely connected. but of very coarse work. is Museum. the only difference being the placing of a bird in each ungle of the cross in the Derby coins. Num. British 13.. LVIII. Of the three III 8 varieties above described and attributed to the bears the Midland Counties.

IRREGULAB ISSUES XCV11 Obverse. .

a) Obv. and in virtue of his possession of the coin was presumably struck by Earl Henry town between 1136 and 1139. 24 A. 0111:1 die as preceding. 1. bearing title of Earl Henry. PL LIX. Reverse. As obverse of type I of Stephen. Obverse. 397. 287. Cross crosslet. of Scotland. 291. ]EMCi:iOH 0101:1 23-0 pierced 17-6 British nos. was found Bute hoard. p. Scottish or Border Counties (?). Museum. ?) die. &c. A coin of the type of Stephen's first issue of distinct Scottish style (thus differing from similar coins of Henry of Anjou) . 290. Provenance. M. *H-EHCI:CO M 22-8 British Museum. may also be attributed to the Earl it is illustrated in Burns. . 289. PL III. Reynolds. 14-8 British Museum. See Catalogue. in each angle a cross pattee suspended from a crescent resting on the inner circle. The inscriptions Coinage seem to be ^I-^Erl should probably be KIEV'S The and *ERB[ in the ]DI It attributed to Carlisle. from same rev. Wt. 288.xcvm INTRODUCTION C. clipped (and obv. *HEHCI:COI *[ ]EL:M:O 15-6 British Museum. no. Same 20-5 H. clipped no. broken no. Rev.

LIX.IRREGULAR ISSUES (b) XC1X Same type obv. LIX. no. Rev. Attributed by Mr. As type As type I of Stephen. 4. Lawrence to Outchester (2^ miles south-east of Belford). sale. British E: *vi: :oa Museum. H. *&TIFEI*EI'VE Wt. Reynolds. H. 19-9 Provenance. Wt. &c. PI. 250. PI. 3. M. I. 613 (same dies). 21-0 and 19-3 lot grs. (c) As type I of Stephen. Reynolds and Raslileigh PI. 2. ]NEH-oo. Obverse. LIX. . but on the reverse a long cross voided is superimposed on the cross moline. Rev. (d) Obv. Reverse. as (a) above. of sceptre. M. E: :on 21-5 no. where the find of the Earl Henry coins occurred. with annulet at point of each fleur and at end of each limb of cross. 251. 21-5 British Museum. with star in field to r. Obverse.

15-2 grs. OTHCI. (and obv. * IMDIMEDOM: [ Wt.INTRODUCTION A coin of the ordinary type of these in style. The bulk of Earl Henry's Outchester. the son of style the Scottish coinage. Outchester. and an annulet occurs at the base of each (e) fleur as well as at the end of each limb of cross. At least one may confidently attribute them to (a) to this neighbourhood. LIX. (variety a) were found in all There is an obvious temptation to see in these mint-readings of the first three varieties (CLTH. reads : Stephen's first issue. 253. variety or variety which belongs to the coinage of either Apart from the more general resem- .Dm Wt. who was created Earl of Northumberland by Stephen in 1139. and the irregular broad . S. Variety (b) has the appearance of a mule from a reverse die of Henry of Northumberland and an obverse die with name (c) of Stephen (d). but the annulets on reverse take the place of the spikes of the fleurs.DVNI. PI. There seems no reason to doubt the attribution of variety King David of Scotland. and Nottingham Museum (same rev. WOBtlNDION. CAST) different near Belford. i British Museum. M. in Nottingham Museum. reads ]ND:ON:DVN[ Similar to preceding (var. d). Obv. no. forms of the name of this same place. flans correspond more to the Scottish than the English fabric but their probable issue in the north of English coinage. England brings them within the scope of the and they are here described among varieties bearing Stephen's name in order to show their connexion with the other varieties. K. lot 608). 18-6 grs. ?) die). OCCAIT. but resembling Eev. : Another. Illegible. The obverse resembles in Henry. Spink (Rashleigh sale. similar. No star on obverse. coins 6.

(d) the mint reads El. he withdrawing . which seems . Varieties. In 1139 a peace was arranged at Durham by Queen Matilda and ratified at Nottingham by Stephen. and Henry received from Stephen the earldom of Northumberland. mint-name (e) DVNI . In January. 1138 Henry was with his father's army. (c) and (d) lettering of the obverse and. the rest of David's Henry homage to Stephen at York. (e). including the coin described above which differs only in style from Stephen's first type. son of David. by means of the intermediate issue described as variety (b). the I peculiarity of the form used for the coins. where the precedence which did and the Earl of was assigned to him caused great indignation. the connexion of the which bear the name of Stephen. as by the above mentioned. arriving at Durham on Feb. Stephen. (d). conferring on Henry the earldom of Huntingdon with Doncaster and conquests being restored. King David crossed the border and took Carlisle.IRREGULAR ISSUES Cl blance of the inscription and type of this obverse to that of the two later varieties. Wark. when Henry was cut off after a successful advance on the wing and had to make his way independently to Carlisle. letter R (I>V). (c) The mint-readings the coins of variety of (d). saved this city from falling into David's hands. Alnwick. of with those of variety (a) which bear the name Henry. which coins of the varieties is quite uncertain. 1136. and Newcastle. Norham. he then followed Stephen to London to assist at Queen Matilda's coronation. coins is The curious feature about these (c). variety are suggestive of Outchester. is closely similar to var. but failed to capture Bamborough. which have not found on any but these are closely connected shows an intimate connexion between them. which invaded England and was defeated at the Battle of the Standard. bear a . likely to be Durham var. with the exception of Bamborough and Newcastle. and by large concessions made peace. Carlisle. more all style and especially by the peculiar form of the letter R. on behalf of his presumably English estates. 5. Chester was so offensive that it was some time In before David allowed his son to return to the English court.

his coinage must imply the capture Earl's coinage difficulties : by Stephen some place in which the was previously issued or current. could not have any reason for using the Earl's die or copying his type. 8 . was a plundering raid which advanced as far as the Tyne. but with1 See below. in the In 1147 we are told that the only district of England enjoyment of peace the Tees. cxxv. when the King saved his life. that by the Scottish. was met by the arrival of Stephen at saved the fall of the city peace was immediately which Durham. Cuthbert and of St. unless the people of that district were more familiar with the Earl's coinage and would more readily accept it than the current coin of Stephen. at the knighting of Henry of Anjou. The second. of adoption of the type of the Earl's either by was struck by Stephen. concluded without any advance of Stephen into the country held invasion. issue (var. Hexham. one would naturally suppose object What that the baron would turn it to his profit by striking base coin with the King's die .Cll INTRODUCTION his authority from the lands of St. In the following year we hear on his return to Scotland of an attempt on his life by the Earl of Chester. and is therefore supposed to have been originated by the Earl. on the other hand. the King. at the beginning of 1138. The opposite case (that the coinage was originally Stephen's. which was frustrated by the escort given him by Stephen. He died in 1153. 1149. Did Stephen at any time capture a town in which Henry of Northumberland had his mint or issued his currency ? The first (2) of 1136. Andrew's. Henry remained for Easter with Stephen and accompanied him in an expedition against Ludlow. which was under the his father at Carlisle. p. 6) The intermediate Stephen or must have been struck If it by the Earl Henry. 2 (1) This presents two would Stephen have in using the type of the In the event of one of the King's mints falling Earl's coinage ? into the hands of one of the barons. because the coinage is more akin to the Scottish than the English. and that Henry captured a reverse die and made an obverse of his own to pair with it) does not seem possible. at sway of Earl Henry. was that beyond He was with 1 Whitsun.

though is such an attribution nature. and again in 1139. his raid into Berwickshire in reply to the second Scottish invasion seems to have been a mere raid and not to have involved the capture of any towns. the Earl will probably be which imitate the coinage of Stephen both in type and inscriptions the second issue will be variety (c). which shows a variety of the type and style of lettering the coins of varieties (d) and . The third invasion. of course of a conjectural and tentative In this case the first issue of (e). reverse type with an obverse bearing Stephen's name and title seems to me. at Northallerton the Scots serious- some being on the way. in return gave up the country conquered by him in the North of England. and hostilities were abandoned at Lent. Henry in the first place issued a coinage in the name We know that after he received his earldom of Huntingdon in 1136 he paid homage to Stephen at York. but the coinage of Earl Henry is almost certain to have been struck by him after the grant of the earldom of Northumberland I in 1139. . in July of the same year. he was attached to Stephen's court and fought for him at Ludlow. for Stephen's concessions. but there was no pursuit. to indicate that he began his issue in the his name of Stephen and later replaced that name by own. instead of attacking the invading army. to drew Wark on Stephen's . It is impossible to say view of his earldom of by what right he issued coins perhaps in Northumberland but the occurrence of his . consideration of In the very close connexion which exists between the all five varieties of Class C. as Earl of Northumberland. made a counter-raid into Berwickshire.IRREGULAR ISSUES C1H approach Stephen. At the truce of 1136 David. I am inclined to attribute the coins of this class to the Earl of Northumberland. for the reasons given above. Thus it is clear that Stephen did not on any of these occasions push a serious attack into the territory of the Scottish king or his son . pushed through Durham cut off into Yorkshire . and ended in the defeat of the Scots retreated. am inclined to believe that Earl of Stephen.

Early his influence attempt to seize the bishopric by the part he played during William Cumyn's But too (cf. pp. and the fourth and last the variety (a). xciv). on which the Earl's difficulty . varieties . This theory then assumes that Earl Henry usurped the privilege of coining and thus issued varieties (d) and (e). The coins are all of light weight and appa- rently of base metal issued. and fourth issues of the Earl. Whether these coins may but they must all be assigned to one mint is not certain . (a). where an original reverse type is first used and his dependency on the English king still acknowledged . 366-70). cit.<51V INTRODUCTION . a baron who was issuing a base inscription of his coinage would have no reason to put the names of his mint and moneyer upon the coins. third. and this may perhaps be explained as an attempt to fill up a space where the coin that served as a model could not be read. and the reverse would be as likely to be copied as that model In the of the obverse. op. some coins of variety (d) have what seem to be either ornaments or meaningless letters at the end of the reverse inscription. year 1141. (c). that he later received recognition of the privilege and . cxxxiii) monks and of Coldingham (Lawrie. With the other issues the case is different : the coins of the second. when his presence there is proved by his charter to the Scottish Charters. . showed above (p. present instance. by whomsoever it was and. all presumably by grant of the king. name lies in is substituted for that of Stephen. are of good weight and apparently of good metal the issuer had therefore established a mint or mints upon a proper basis. probably in Northumberland. this coinage therefore. which approximates more nearly to that of his named coins the third issue will be the variety (6). placed on the inscriptions of the two much importance must not be varieties (d) and (e). The greatest all the obscurity of the mint-names upon these coins even Durham of the coins which I have suggested may be the earliest struck by the Earl is not by any means certain though he may possibly have struck coins at Durham about the the attribution to . (&). presumably have been struck in the same neighbourhood. as I seems to have been a usurped privilege akin to forgery..

110 Mr. and based upon the close con- nexion of varieties bearing the name of Stephen with the issue which bears the Earl's own name (TCEMCI CON = HENRICVS COMES ?). III. which I mentioned above I not included in this series have tentatively assigned to the Earl. pi. 1 He has since abandoned this theory. which can with little doubt . bearing his own name and title.. The which coin figured in Burns. Coinage of Scotland. op. would there be less difficulty in the close connexion of an issue of the the Duke with issues bearing name of Stephen. and c) are coinages to the Earl It seems to me that the coins of the three interpretation.. pp. gave reasons for attributing them to Henry of Anjou. in order to account for the unity of style and of peculiarity in detail . and that finally he issued coins of variety (a). Lawrence does any way fit into the be attributed to him nor.IRREGULAR ISSUES CV acknowledged the suzerainty of Stephen by placing his name on his next issues (c) and (6). : Failing this attribution. but one can hardly assign a series which seems to be of northern origin to the Duke. III. 24 A. which are identical with this in style (cf. am the place where the find of the of named Henry coins took place. The I series of Earl Henry coins and the cognate issues with which here concerned were presumably struck after 1139. I regard it as belonging to the earlier period. issues (a.cit. The possibility of the attribution of so many of the series to Outchester. is some importance. 24). . even it in series so. xcviii). 1136-9. nor Chron. 1 In Num. (p. the King and Earl which appears in the coinages of or we must abandon the accepted attribution coins to ff.. and assume that he issues of copied the type not directly from Stephen but from the David. all liable to this It is necessary to emphasize the fact that the attribution of these is conjectural. 1895. is PI. it seems necessary to assume that a central authority in the for North of England controlled or supplied the dies the coinages issued in Scottish border counties by Stephen and the Earl of Northumberland. of the WEMCI CON Henry of Northumberland. b.

16. 7. H. British Museum. Obv. PI. and W. but having a representation of the Standard a horseman's lance (?) in place of the sceptre in the king's hand. *VI1DHE&IOHEV: Wt. Wt. (c) See Catalogue. LIX. B. Ornaments Wt. Various inscriptions and ornaments. between them a long sceptre Rev. 386-7. M. 17-2 and 15-5 P. . the following varieties but of curious workmanship similar to that of the beaded inner circle of the obverse runs- through the king's bust. Two male and female. Cross fleury over thin saltire pommee . 9-14. *it^TlEM LIX. grs. Carlyon-Britton. figures. (chipped). A star in field to r. Rev. As type I of Stephen. but voided lozenge containing pellet in place of spike of lys on sceptre. 19-5 grs. 20 grs. M. 8. Roth. PI. 254-9. As type I of Stephen. 15. supporting (d) Obv. Obverse. . Reynolds. Rev. in place of inscription. PI. Rev. LIX. nos. no. 14-5-19 grs. (a) York and District.CV1 INTRODUCTION D. an d ornaments. Reynolds. H. PI. other. annulets in field. 260. Obv. P. or (t) As type I of Stephen. LIX. Rev. Saltire fleury on cross pattee. facing each fleury. *\yAI&S0 GHETOD/V Wt. pp.

and the reverse inscription seems to have been not accidentally but intentionally blundered and rendered illegible.. crowned by a silver pyx containing the Host. 158. and probably the central control from London of the northern mint organizations was temporarily suspended. to cle confirmed by their resemblance in style. and was borne on a four-wheeled waggon. Reynolds's coin above described.IRREGULAR ISSUES Variety (a) CV11 first ' seems to form a step from the ordinary (b). If the object in the king's hand is the Standard. the attribution of these coins to York or neighbourhood the ornaments employed.. Demay. Le Costume au Moyen Age d'apres ' ' p. (cf. of Stephen to variety which is bearing the three flags of St. John of Beverley and St. the dies must have been engraved locally. from it appears that the original bore the mint-name of its York is . Peter of York. Wilfrith of Ripon. inscriptions. type commonly known as the Flag in the held The object king's hand on coins of variety type'. Flag coins appear to be more some common original. affording easy opportunity for the issue of light or base coins without risk of detection . but such attempts cessful. it or shortly after. This would lead not only to variation of the usual type but to laxity in local mint administration. Ingenious attempts have been made (by Packe in Num. 1896. and. The reverse or less inscriptions on these degraded copies of Mr. or it may be merely a les horseman's lance Sceaux. fig. pp. and others) to decipher these reverse Stuteville. the coins were presumably issued in 1138. to represent the Standard which was borne (6) has been supposed The Standard was a heavy mast into the battle at Northallerton. Chron. St. 179). but not possible to be certain of this or to . communication between London and the North must have been difficult. and in named coins of Eustace and of Robert which seem certainly to have been struck in or near York. do not seem likely to prove sucespecially in During the civil wars. Possibly this represents the standard in miniature. 59 ff. so that the moneyer responsible could not be convicted by the presence of his name on is the coins. and the period immediately preceding and during the captivity of Stephen.

the ' Double-figure type.. this should be corrected to ' Stephen and Queen Matilda'. cxvi).T ) MANuj jEBoRaci fPeTrl ECcleSise- DomiNI (ON EVerwic Variety (c) is probably a similar local production which is more curious in that the reverse type. or slightly to their close connexion with each other and. her hair long and tied with ribbons. each with one hand. Various .r. 1914. who was not knighted till 1147 or 1149. or shortly after. The reason for the attribution of this issue to the York district is the style of lettering and ornaments. 627-8) attributes this coinage to the Archiepiscopal mint. Mr. Andrew (Num.^. through the 'Flag type' coins. whose a knight in full armour and may reasonably name forms the obverse legend. An interpretation of the 'Flag type coins as commemorative of earlier. suggestions have been 1 made for the interpretation of these two figures this York series are all placed about the year 1141. The male figure can hardly be Eustace. 1138. would be issued in the year 1141. 1 The figure is represent the king. wearing a bodice of mail and a stiff triangular skirt both figures have . . is armour. and the ornaments in the obverse and reverse legends are also similar. The coins of owing 1 the Battle of the Standard would place that issue in. Circ. with the first issue of Stephen. The design appears to be the original work of a northern engraver. is that which appears on the coins of Robert de Stuteville (see below. p. if attributed to the period of Stephen's captivity. of the issuer for satisfying an illiterate public with the appearance of the coin without incriminating his moneyer by engraving the usual legend on the die. Variety (d) is to the left of a tall sceptre one of the most curious issues of this reign. and interprets the legend : VI . which presumably did not continue after 1141. is represented a male figure in chain. a tall fleured sceptre.CV111 INTRODUCTION explain the appearance of the strange ornaments in the reverse inscription but I am inclined to think that the latter was a device . On PI. wearing a peaked helmet and long trousers to the right a female figure. between them they support. the coins are assigned to 'Queen ' LX Matilda and Eustace ' . pp. assisting the king to support fancifully representing Queen Matilda the sceptre of the kingdom during the period of his captivity. long manches. instead of following the usual type of Stephen's first issue.

1 and the figure to the left wears a peaked helmet. the name of Stephen. others bearing name with an animal as obverse design. that a peace should be an occasion for putting one's former enemy side by side with the queen in place of the king's head upon the coins The probable Yorkshire provenance of the is hardly possible. 2 Mr. showing the long hair bound with ribbons or ornaments after the feminine fashion of the time. 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 seen by an examination of various specimens. . Circ. is most unconvincing. and also coins horseman type. Packe pointed out of coins the (Num. 628) also takes this view.). which must be Yorkshire. This identity may best be seen coins. issue renders the interpretation of the type as his Duke Henry and inscrip- mother the Empress improbable.. but a detailed identity both of lettering and of ornaments. 65 to provenance itself. p. the length of serifs and horizontal strokes dwarfing the uprights. of Robert with is The connexion of all these issues not merely a superficial similarity in style. by a comparison of the catalogue descriptions of the where the ornamental borders and some inscriptions have been reproduced from drawings made as accurately as possible to scale. of 1896. while the female figure has the head bare. The issue belongs clearly. Packe's theory are (Num.IRREGULAR ISSUES C1X is some have even held that both figures are male. and the occasion the conDurham in 1139. Chron. a large series if not the city of York As well in as the varieties above described. 1914. the series includes coins with the present a the same full figure name of Eustace which re- armour on the obverse. Andrew (Num. pp. the form of lettering is not only it is common to all these issues but peculiar to this series punched work of a neat though disjointed and rather meagre form. and supposes the coins to have been struck at York in honour of this peace. the ornaments are 1 is But it is curious that Eustace. clad in just such a skirt as the female figure is wearing on these coins. 69-70 2 ) that the figures vention of Queen Matilda and Prince Henry. Chron.. as ff'. 1896. on the full-figure coins which bear his name. as also does the tion. pp..

CX INTRODUCTION unintelligible. either on the king's behalf and upon the the severing of control from resources. That this mint is York. 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 been suggested that the Flag type perhaps represents the Standard that was taken into battle at Northallerton. ' ' It has already (perhaps 4 show attempts ' to obscure the moneyer's identity . at least. or perhaps slightly earlier) by Constable of York and other magnates. by the reverse inscriptions of the Eustace coins. assisting the King to support the royal power in his captivity but whether the coins were barons is made by mere conjecture. and the confused reverse inscriptions region of fanciful speculation. as most of these issues seem to be. the dies from the same local centre. were not above making some profit for themselves by issuing coins of low weight. the Double-figure type probably represents the Queen . owing to the central authority at London. or. which seems certainly to denote Robert de Stuteville. Reynolds' collection VIDNESI EV). The issues seem to me to represent the efforts of the mint of York its in the hands of local administration thrown upon own ingenuity of local engravers. the Yorkshire magnate. or some place in the neighbourhood. and most probably those who were friends of the king. or for their own profit . It appears that the control of the mint or mints of Yorkshire was taken over at some period in the the reign (presumably about 1141. and by ' ' ( ON the obverse legend of the Robert coins. or the moneyers who acted for them. is shown by the Flag type coin in Mr. officers of the King or by independent . therefore impossible to believe that the coins do not all come ' with the exception of some of the from the same mint. most curious and but it is important to notice all ' how the same ornaments reproduce themselves on series It is the issues of this Lion type Eustace coins.

LX. Annals of the Coinage. no. British nos. PI. 'Full figure in ' Full-figure type. 190 Museum. 265. COINS NOT BEARING THE KlNO's TlTLE. &c. Cross pattee in quatrefoil. Wt. but no annulets in 19-0 18-9 8.coin in British Mu- *EBORaCIoT DEFr 7. terian coll.M. i 267 Roth (all from same dies). 264andHunH. PI. PI. 18-5 Provenance. All from same reverse die. 266. Museum. 4. *EBOHACIoE LX.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXI V. such as the Double-figure type and others. EUSTACE FrrzJoHN (?) ' Type A. 5. Ornaments. 169. Same die as preceding . LX. LX. 9. Obverse.that Eustace probably struck these coins 'during his . nolds Roth (same dies). Reverse. They have usually been attributed to Eustace. field. 16-1 British Museum. which have been found at Catal and elsewhere in company with coins of Stephen. Rev.p. armour. . i EVBT PI. Olv.Reyand B. 6. 268. states . and B. vol. Similar to preceding. Ruding. seum. holding sword. i. vs Type EVSTA CI as preceding. .3. Coins of the full-figure type of Eustace are not recorded in any published finds but their approximate date of issue is shown by . son of Stephen. 18-3 British Museum. 2. their close association in style with issues. (same dies). British no. no.

Stubbs has no of such statement. ' on p. I gather that it 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. though not definitely known. I have not suc- . ' adveniens Eustachius regis of filius sacra officia celebrari prsecepit ' . 1 . Cont. with those issues and this connexion is greatly strengthened by a comparison of the ornaments of the Eustace coin. H. The probabilitjr A similar statement occurs in Withy and Ryall (1756) ceeded in tracing it further. which. divinaque officia in eo cessare these reperiens. 1 he gives no authority for conferring this title on Eustace. William of Newburgh (under the year 1147) says. 67) is unintelligible . and of the Double-figure coins on p.. with those of 'Flag type' coins on pp. been issued. his age. official position at York. with the city of York office as ' ' seems to have been exaggerated. 386-7 ' . rather to show that his arrival in but.CX11 INTRODUCTION residence at York as governor'. no. p. can be approximately deduced. The passages quoted above tend 1149 was not in the capacity of however that may be. in 1149. no reason for the conclusion that Eustace was Governor of York at the time. Stephen's son. or approximately contemporaneous. 388 some of these ornaments may even have been made with the same punches. 'post regis abscessum Eustachius Eboracum. there is no trace of having had any connexion with the city at an earlier period. is guarantee that he held no independent authority at the time that this coinage must have style The coins bear a close resemblance in and lettering to the irregular issues of is York above described. 268. which strongly suggestive of work contemporaneous. but coming there on his father's departure took very strong action on finding that the Papal Interdict was being observed. an his official of York . sufficient On the contrary. 390. John venit Hexham (Symeon.) says. R. Nor do I know any reason to believe that such an Governor of York existed in the twelfth century. clericos de divinis ministeriis nil omittere coegit rather the expressions give impression that Eustace was not in any filius ejus ' . . The connexion of Eustace. Chron..1896. Packe's reference to Stubbs's Constitutional History (see Num.

at least temporarily. He was fighting for David at the Battle of the Standard in 1138. but we cannot at present trace his connexion with the city of York.. Lawrence also advocated the attribution of all the Eustace coins to FitzJohn. cxv. . ' ' hardly later ' than 1141. ed. and in particular those of the Flag and Double-figure types. I think. than 1141. and places it 495) denies that knighthood need precede the use of the in 1149. Henry I. title Comes. be assigned to Eustace FitzJohn. whom he identified as Thomas FitzUlviet of York. abandoning 3 this attribution. 42 ff. p. 1 assigned to a date 'hardly later. and lord of Malton and Knaresborough. and others ' name ' of Thomas FitzUlf. In our present scanty knowledge of 1 Ramsay (Foundations. note 1). has been shown above (p. where Mr. an alderman FitzJohn was certainly a Yorkshire magnate. perhaps even earlier. p. As Packe pointed out. Hunter. son of Stephen (?) but since the plate was printed I have felt more strongly the necessity of On Plate LX . 3 That he issued coins in his own name somewhere the neighbourhood of York is made certain by Mr. to a charter to and seems from his signature have been. very been. ii. pp. cviii. 437. note 4) follows Hewlett's argument the signature of charters of 1147-8 by Eustace with title Comes for accepting 1147 of the Gesta against 1149 of Huntingdon and Hexham. Eustace. described below. for some bear an inscription which identifies the town name. to whom the ' Lion ' issues.. 34. Chron. The representation armour cannot depict the son of Stephen before 1147 or 1149. reconciled to Stephen in by 1141-2. h . are attributed on the evidence of the fragment in Mr. though part of the inscription bear the is unintelligible. See below. was knighted little hence he may be assumed to have been born about 1130 and to have the most. at more than ten years old when of a knight in full these coins were struck. of Pipe Roll. son of Stephen. 1890. ' The Eustace coins of the ' ' Full-figure type must therefore be in 1147 or 1149. ' ' they are described as coins of Eustace. an early date. vol. Round (Feudal England. Lawrence's collection published by him in Num. 2 p.IRREGULAR ISSUES of the issue of all CX111 these coinages of York at. p. Lawrence's fragment described below. The coins 2 should. the full-figure types are clearly struck at York city.

Obverse. ornaments in Rev. . field.CX1V INTKODUCTION this period it is impossible to say itself. but its 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. Type Obv. EUSTACE FITZJOHN. thi it is is most noticeable in the form of lettering also and punctuation. Cross fleury over saltire. no. B. 'Lion' type. annulets in field. is in style more closely allied to the ' ' ' ' Full-figure coins . 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 Fitz John. 265.. though resembling the other Lion coins in type. A lion(?) passant to r. each limb of which ends in small crosses pattees .

the style of lettering and of ornaments and design being 1 Round. Andrew. 629-30. Lawrence's collection must clearly be it. 1914. Corbridge Ixxv and Ixxvi. clxxvii. issue of But finding an as his issue in currency which would even ' own. however. at place York (?) in 1128. cxxiii. or in any other way more like an imitation. This difficulty is not. son of Stephen. The reason for the divorce of these two closely related issues seems to be the connexion with the issues of York. he witnessed at Stamford a charter of Stephen to William. at Carlisle circa 1139. h 2 . we only hear of His signature to religious the charter at Stamford seems to point to a reconciliation with Stephen between 1138 and 1142 but the witnesses of this charter . liv. Geoffrey de Mandeville. Durham at circa 1141. and the other coins naturally follow Mr. pp. and perhaps the signatures only denote a temporary truce and not a definite transfer of allegiance. cxxxiii. prefers to separate the ordinary Lion-type issue from that bearing the full name of FitzJohn. and assuming FitzJohn to this have issued in his own name an imitation of Eustace. The fragment 2 in Mr. at unknown in 1150-2 circa 1136. ccxlvii). Earl of Lincoln. ' for of the ' two Lion-type issues the one bearing the name Filius lohannis is most certainly the nearer in style to the other Eustace coins of York. he would surely not expose his abuse by adding to the name Eustace the additional nor is there any reason to suppose that the Filius lohannis in name serve ' . Circ. as Randulf of Chester some (such and Roger of Warwick) certainly in revolt both before and after this date. In the later part of the reign houses.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXV 1 1142. pp. him founding and endowing are mostly local magnates or relations of the grantee. solved by this means. attributing the former to the son of Stephen. than the ordinary Lion-type issue. at Huntingdon circa 1145 (perhaps (Lawrie. at earlier). He witnessed Scottish charters at Scone in 1124. however. and the lack of any authority for assigning to FitzJohn power in the city of York. 2 Num. Early Scottish Charters. cxv. 157-9. attributed to this Eustace. FitzJohn fragment is lighter or baser..

Armed figure on horseback to r. . 12. British B. an attribution which was. Reynolds. &RODB6RTU/&D6 coll. p. 70. ROBERT DE STUTEVILLE. he is supposed to have been the father of the sheriff of Yorkshire of 1170-5. LX. and Reynolds specimens are from the same PI. is to be regarded as ' of the other. Hunterian Roth. therefore. dies. Packe's suggestion of Robert de Stuteville as the issuer of this coinage is made almost certain by is the Hunterian coin. If either. DC.CXV1 INTRODUCTION workmanship of the York coins. on grounds of style and identity of reverse type with the coin of Stephen described above as variety IV D (c). still similar in style. . it should surely be the Eistaohius issue. M. Of these are this Robert de Stuteville we Yorkshire magnates of defence against know nothing except that he was one of the who met at York in 1138 to consider measures David of Scotland . are in a more or less fragmentary condition which renders the last part of the obverse inscription illegible . differ from any other of the York issues in the form of the ornaments in the reverse an imitation ' inscription. especially of lettering. 13. this has made possible the traditional attribution to tioned Robert of Gloucester. Obv. apparently within the period 1138-41. Ckron. The similarity of the style of his coins to that of the other irregular issues of York points to an early date of issue. Hunterian.. Cross pattee over saltire fleury. no. whereas the more common Lion-type coins.. All the specimens at present in the known of this coinage. British Ornaments. Rev. P. 271. however. Carlyon-Britton The Museum. W. H. except that Hunterian collection. P. 1896. on which the whole obverse inscription clearly legible with the exception of the letters read by comparison with the Reynolds specimen. Museum. quesby Packe in Num. which bear the name Eistaohius though of the good ' '.

the the reverse with the episcopal King. 15-9 frag- Provenance.P. Archbishop of York (1147-53). crowned. hardly a possible candidate for this coinage.. 15. 1143 he consecrated William as Archbishop of York. Reverse. Rev. who was not recognized by Stephen till their reconciliation is in 1150.W. Bust r. British ^[ PI. holding crozier . and according to Ralph de Diceto the pall was actually sent him by . raise his legatine commission in . BISHOP OF WINCHESTER. I Museum. LX. is. and would a very curious one and a remarkable illustration doubtless have used the title archiepiscopus instead of episcopus. gave him a position superior to the Primate in 1142 he even urged the Pope to the Pope in Winchester to metropolitan rank. Theobald of Canterbury dissenting. showing probably that the coinage was issued by grant of. Cross pattee over cross floury. 14. Whether the story is true or false that Bishop Henry was 1139 actually elected to the archbishopric of Canterbury in 1136 but refused translation by the Pope. Murdac. star in field to r. Obv. &c. There seem to have been only two bishops of the name of Henry in English sees during the reign of Stephen the Bishop of Win- chester and Henry Murdac. Obverse. and not in defiance of. wt. 272. between his appointment as Legate in March. The coinage is is of the extraordinary power of Henry title of Blois. that One is naturally inclined to place his coinage in the period of his greatest ecclesiastical power. ment LX. B11PPAHV B-R6X PI.CarlyonBritton. no. 18-0 P.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXV11 HENRY. and the . Like the late eighth- century coins of Canterbury. 1139. these coins couple the royal title on on the obverse.

1141 September. Obverse. 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 the period March. 1141. whole of the year 1141 (February to December). . December. EMPRESS MATILDA. Andrew's theory 1 and an unconsecrated Archbishop of York is not likely to have issued a coinage bearing the names of the Bishop of 1143. but I cannot accept Mr. the Legate. in honour by shortly of his uncle. This date is confirmed by the resemblance in style to the York issues. The later of these two periods is not a likely date for February. 1141. which leaves the alternative of the two periods March. Winchester and the Kinjr. and a coinage which adopts for the portrait that of the King's first issue. Type as first issue of Stephen. 1143 . 1139 was found at issued that they were William after Fitzherbert June. We may therefore take as a conjectural date of the issue February. Fitzherbert was not consecrated till York).CXV111 INTRODUCTION expiry of his legatine commission with the death of Innocent in from this period may be deducted nearly the September. 1139 1143. 1141. the period of Stephen's captivity.

is perhaps also from a punch-worked but has rather the appearance of being engraved in imitation of punched lettering. The coin in Rashleigh die. wt. 17-2 16-5 British no. LXI. and 273. 6. Illegible. &c. B. 5. Roth MF PI. Her coins are all of the type of Stephen's first issue and bear as obverse inscriptions forms. 4. 632. EllVNll A brief description of the Empress's movements in England is given above in the account of the coins inscribed PERERIE (see pp. B. lot 631. MATILDinil 111DAN-DEBR[ Rashleigh lot sale. Reverse. of Imperatrix. Ixxxiv f. Museum.IRREGULAR ISSUES Obverse. Roth (very similar to preB. H. Roth (two coins). M. 1 they all seem to be of low weight but The only mints that can be ascertained with any l . Roth. more or less abbreviated. Matildis Comitissa. ceding). >. and Matildis Imperatrix. LXI. PI. which is made with the usual punching-irons of good metal. Reynolds. sale. H:OX: PI. (two coins from same LXI. B. The dies were of rough work and were hand-engraved with the exception of the reverse of the Oxford coin. .). 17-0 Provenance. dies).

and Wareham . 114. Ixxxvi) possibly Calne. or in September-December. who was put in charge in his father's absence it was retaken by Robert. p. Stephen's attempt to recover it in the following year was unsuccessful. one of Robert of Gloucester's strongholds. when it the castle was surrendered to the Empress by Robert d'Oilly . Andrew has pointed out. 36). Ixxxii Other coins that have been attributed to Matilda are the variety which bears the inscription PERERIE. Chron. Oxford. when he took . &c. pp. . which was probably always her chief base. from dies made apparently from the regular punching-irons. or shortty . pp. The coins were most probably all struck between 1139 and 1142 those of Bristol. Warwick was. 1 p. The Oxford coins were perhaps struck at.. 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. Wareham.. 3 See Num. but was certainly in rebellion in the following year when Baldwin de Redvers landed there by Stephen till June. Gloucester. l . 2 See below. 1141. and have all the appearance of the 3 They might have been struck in June. and Num. cxxxi) to . p. but these are ill-struck and illegible. it it was not recovered from William of . vii.. after. and PI. p. 2 is presumably not Canterbury (see above. 1141. seems the more probable date. J^ ^\. 1141. 35. II. Easter. may have been issued at any time between these dates perhaps the coins with the inscription Imperatrix preceded those that have the name Matildis in addition to the title. 115. clxivf. 1142. coinage of Stephen. seems to have surrendered to Stephen in 1138. as Mr. p. 85. ff. of Stephen's first issue (see above. for the reverses of these coins are struck seems likely that dies then fell into her hands. vol. . The former attribution of these and other coins (see below. after the flight from London. after a siege of three weeks. 1142. 1915.CXX INTRODUCTION certainty are Bristol. and two coins of Stephen's second type (British Numismatic Journal. 1915. in November. Chron.). and I see no reason for the attribution. most improbable.

). The mint on these two coins might possibly read coins are clipped through the mint name. which must be attributed to Earl Henry. 275. Type (a) I. 274. son of David. A (6) As variety III 7 of Stephen (see above. 8. 7. 276 (from the Winterslow no. Provenance. but of Scottish style. Reverse. fabric this coin seems to belong to this series. PL LXI. Obverse. no. p. B. Roth. no. PI. 9. xci ff. 10. As first issue of Stephen. coin of this type. die as pre- 17 -Q pierced British Museum. LXI. :R ExFrom AN: its style ]RI:D and B. British LXI. was found at Bute (see above. Roth.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXX1 HENRY or ANJOU. Wt. pp. PI. INN:HIOI From same ceding. BEDEFORD . xcviii). find). 16-7 Museum. &c. *I*ENRIi:::*: PI. both :*KEHRICV *PICIRIC:ON 15-9 British $ Museum. LXI. .

Rev. As last issue (type XV) of Henry I. .CXX11 Obv. Obverse. INTRODUCTION (c) As first issue of Stephen.

PI. no. IVEL.CarlyonBritton. 9. From same cedin. 10HIN4. LXII.P. 3. 282. NIVOVNIN OI PI. PI. Museum. (Win- PI. die as pre- Copenhagen Museum. (Win- BHI 1. ]M PI.W. Museum. 281 LXII. &c. 16-0 P. penny *[ ]L. 15-5 H. NIIO: (retrograde) pellet Annulet enclosing above each star. Provenance.OC LXII. 284 half- terslow find). cut 2. 16. Reverse. sale. 14-4 British Museum. Reynolds. 16-0 British Museum. terslow find). 16-1 British no. LXI. no. . British no. The coins last two coins are perhaps contemporary imitations of the Duke's (6) As preceding issue. M. **EHHII:V& PI. die as pre- From same ceding.DEV 15-4 Bashleigh lot 627. LXII.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXX111 Obverse. 283. wt. LXII. but the cross botonnee on the reverse 7-6 is voided.

' barones. and some of them. . Sed quam vocabant monetam ducis tarn episcopi quam comites et ex quo dux ille et non tantum ipse. equally it is impossible to say that they are but impossible to say they are in the least degree probable. and not. in order to create a diversion on behalf of Gilbert of Clare. 51). Stubbs says: In his introduction to Roger 'The notices of the years 1148 to 1169 which are neither taken directly from the Chronicle of Melrose. In the spring of 1147. taken from the Chronicle of Melrose. 2 plurimorum monetam cassavit. venit. "?) . Henricus dux Normannorum venit in Angliam cum magno exercitu. of Hoveden's Chronicle. he was sent over to Bristol and lived there four years. suam faciebant monetam. coin of seems to me Henry or possibly William. ' Num. his men . then nine years old. 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 both attacks failed. et reddita sunt ' ei castella multa et munitiones quamplures. sed omnes potentes. .' There were four (or three "?) occasions on which : Henry came to England during Stephen's reign (1) In late autumn. vol.. 1914. nor connected closely with the Becket contest. 1142. like the great part of his history of this period (1148-69).CXX1V INTRODUCTION 1 Mr. and of the appointment of money by Henry in 1149 Henry as that called "the justiciar to false. i. are very few. Of the striking of duke's money". p. and seems to be an original statement of his own. et fecit monetam novam. . qui est XIIII regni regis Stephani. Stephen in 1153. 2 Roger of Hoveden (Rolls Series. Circ. of very questionable authenticity. returning to Normandy towards the end of 1146. . Anno gratiae MCXLIX. who was attacked in Pevensey by [(2) Stephen. The above passage occurs in Roger of Hoveden's Chronicle under the year 1149. Andrew reads the obverse of this coin It not retrograde o to be a blundered + :KVMFREL DE BVhuN. p. 632. 211. I think. . no.

Warwick. 6. from its which lasted not longer than nine months. caused his retreat. In January. Stamford. but the garrison at Nottingham. which does not in itself sound like a groundless fabrication. he arrived with a force said to consist of 150 menat-arms and 3. the chronicler evidently similarly inaccurate. in the peace The passage above quoted from Roger of Hoveden is at least confused in chronology the visit of Henry when he was accompanied by a large force. 1150. after a short time. 491 ff. the statement. not of 1149. He reduced the keep of Malmesbury. and.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXXV began to desert. 10. and probably relates under the mention of Henry a traditional tale. 1 See Round. Of the rest of his movements we know nothing till his return to Normandy (4) in January. Feudal England. Perhaps an invention of the Gesta. the death of Eustace gave the opportunity for a compromise which culminated ratified in Council at Winchester on Nov. visited his head-quarters at Bristol. If the statement that he made a new coinage. is correctly placed to his visit of the year 1149. and at the end of May he returned to Normandy from Wareham. in the sentence referring to '. made an armed (?) raised the siege of Wallingford. and that the bishops and barons did likewise. apparently landing probably at being knighted by David of Scotland Wareham. . finds support in the coins which may with much probability be attributed to the Duke. and received the surrender of several castles. and thence went to the court of David at Carlisle. was that of 1153. 1153. and Nottingham Stamford Castle surrendered to him. from . at the request of the beleaguered garrison of Wallingford. where he was knighted on May 22. his suppression of this baronial coinage can hardly have occurred during his same stay in England. Apart chronological inaccuracy. or rather. Winchcombe to Evesham. the Angevin party in England. by firing the town.000 foot-soldiers. 1153. 1 ] for the purpose of (3) Early in 1149 he returned. after which he progress through the midlands. 1153. he was at Devizes on April 13. pp. On Aug. the is ' duke's money if we may believe the statement. .

or shortly after. The Scottish prince cannot have coined in the West. *PIG1RIC:ON *EH: with coins of Stephen. the direct imitation of the first issue of Stephen. son of David. and also on account of its Scottish provenance (Bute find) and its probable attribution to Carlisle and the moneyer Erebald (see above. 340-1. There is much difficulty in . may have issued this coinage or part of but a comparison of the inscription ^/VREFIMZOM BHI of with *ARFEN i:iIBRIlT on a coin 38 and 39. her claim was date which from practically abandoned. whoever this Henry was. the coinage at that time in issue. 1142. such as Hoveden tells us was suppressed by the Duke on his arrival. determining when this coinage can is have been issued by Henry the earliest type. and nos. 3 See p. nor would he have put on his coins the title REX. issue must be remembered that a coin is known of the type having on the obverse the name Henticus (without which must be attributed to Earl Henry. 2 Further. no doubt that. pp. presumably. he coined at Bristol and Hereford. it. 1 and their absence in the finds of coins of issued in the reign of Stephen. owing to its Scottish style and very close resemblance to coins of David of the same type. leaves Empress Matilda. and her 1 2 See above.CXXV1 INTRODUCTION These coins were at one time supposed to belong to the reign of Henry I. but bearing other obverse titles. Henry I. or at least type in currency. which is likely to be adopted only by a claimant to the throne. Matilda had on. ." this the most frequent she continued to issue without type change until perhaps her flight from Oxford in December. which can hardly late have been the type in issue at the royal mints in the of 1142. in connexion with these coins must be considered the coins similar to the later issue (described as type II above). p. her arrival issued a coinage first issue still which imitated the (1139) presumably of Stephen. At the same time first it of Stephen's title). which seem only explicable as a baronial coinage imitating the coinage of Henry. Ixxv. show them to have been It is still sometimes suggested that Earl Henry. xcviii). autumn when Henry first landed in England. xxx. p. but their presence in the Winterslow find.

The profile have above assigned to the period immediately following types the change in the Empress's position from claimant in her own right to claimant in the right of her son. It is to this period. I their presumably based on that think. though that seems hardly possible if the later type of his coinage assuming that he recalled his coins was not brought into circulation before 1153. or full-face. In the Awbridge confirmation in the finds of coins of this reign. Geoffrey de Mandeville. No account exists of this find. exist. Roberts seems to have had a representative selection from it. .. on the coinage 1142-3. 1147. In October. p. find the absence of coins of Henry struck before his accession might possibly be explained by from circulation at the same time as he put down the baronial issues. places reverse of Stephen's first type (except the coin of Scottish style from the 2 . and had abandoned her own claim. that is to say. Andrew assigned all the profile types of Henry to 1149 with the him all those to include I understand in and it with 1142. attributed to July-November. types. vol.face issues in 1153. 1142. 259 he Mr. pp. 118. see Brit. the obverse of which of type III of Stephen. The later. the remaining profile coins1149 and the full. c. show that in this year (1142) she was fighting for the cause of her son as rightful heir to the throne. 184 ff. must. Robert of Gloucester died. 1142. Chron. Henry's confirmation of his mother's charter 1 Vere. 414). Hks. 1915.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXXV11 of Gloucester in the name of party were held together by Robert to Aubrey de Henry. I was there mistaken in saying that See Num. Num. the original type being con- 2 tinued for a time. p.. at least have commenced is Of this I find currency before Robert's death in 1147. but B. that she would obtain her son's ratification. Empress I herself leaving the country in the following 1 February it revived with the third (second ?) visit of Henry in 1149. ix. and to judge from his coins the hoard contained specimens Round. c. 1 Bute find . that I should attribute the substitu- tion of the of the name of Henry for that of Matilda Angevin party in England. Described above as type I (c)) in Journ. I (c) being presumably somewhat later than I (a) and (6). and indeed the guarantee charter (not later than June given by the Empress in her original in the same year). and the Angevin cause in England practically ceased to the . C. The Winterslow find seems more definite.

is to say. Gloucester. after 1142. be this curious connexion one cannot suppose that Henry issued coins bearing Stephen's name it may be that they were issued in the same locality. p.) that variety was shown to have occurred in finds of containing coins of the late coins of the reign. p. of type I 1 (c) (Cirencester in Gloucestershire ?). Num. Wiveliscombe 1 of type II (6) none are certain. I think. &c. . the West of England was Angevin. vol. Arefin. cxviii). 414. At this time. and of the true coinage of Stephen.CXXV111 INTRODUCTION Anjou excepting type I (a).. and perhaps the dies made it is impossible to say 1 doubtful. for these issues of Henry represent. The usual interpretation of CRST as Christchurch seems to me very The town was called Twynham. The mints that can be type I (a) ' identified with likelihood (6) are: of Hereford and Malmesbury. and continued in Linton circulation to the beginning of Henry II's reign. and later of Henry. xci ff. I suggest Cirencester conjecturally. of type II (a) Bristol (the same moneyer. . 2 See Brit. such as Bristol. and therefore was apparently first issued at the end of the period when type I was being minted. and identical in type with a variety described above. types I. of type I Crst ' Gloucester. see above. Wareham. seems to have struck coins of the Empress. The later issue of Henry of Anjou was therefore most probably of all the varieties of Henry of that introduced during the issue of the third or fourth type of Stephen. Sherborne ?. II. ix. the others being uncertain. Why there should . probably not many years after 1145. Journ. Even as if the mints could be interpreted with certainty. and at the Angevin strongholds. rather the coinage of his party than his own private issues. pp. Christchurch was the name of the monastery only. 2 of some interest as it varies from the regular type is of Stephen. . and these coinages are likely to have been the Type I (6) is main currency of the West. and III were represented. .. it is not likely that a consideration of them in connexion with such evidence assist we have of Henry's movements would towards dating the coinage. and not in finds first issue (except one specimen in the find). variety III 7 (see above. there was probably a more or first less continuous output of coins in the name of Matilda.

the coins Another Robert may be the issuer. Roth). If is LERE is the reading of the mint-name on the penny (but this very doubtful). See p. inscriptions . vii. B. is more probable (see Brit. Robert de Beaumont. and vol. Type of Stephen's second Obverse inscriptions : issue. the favourite of Stephen. . p. I (c). but imitation of Henry's coin is where Henry's coins were the use of Stephen's title on an not easily explained. vi. or possibly LI1SE. WILLIAM (OF GLOUCESTER?). 366. PI. Obverse. . though the this . Type I. mostly in circulation.. 88). HUBE YV (penny. 6.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXX1X is by the same engravers. cxxii. if so. vol. Num. Journ. who went over to Henry on his arrival in 1147(1). B. ROBERT (OF GLOUCESTER?). As type of Henry of Anjou. : may represent a baronial issue. ]ROBETV[ (halfpenny. difference of style is against perhaps the variety of uncertain attribution the work of some baron in the West of England. Eeverse VND : hERE the uncertain penny reads quite has mint-name some ON the appearance of being The attribution is quite or LERE. 5. or money of not expect Robert of Gloucester to issue would One necessity. uncertain . Roth). LXII. coins except in the name of the Empress or Henry. p.

. As type Obverse. cxxii. II (a). See p.cxxx INTRODUCTION Type (a) II. of Henry of Anjou.

also at WAR (doubtless . this is coinage. II (a). p. Rev. it may be attributed to (which it who suggest that the magnate was at some time leader of the Angevin party in England between this position may have fallen to William of Gloucester 1147 and the arrival of Henry in 1149. (possibly Cirencester see above.. Roger. These considerations are quite and the extent one person issued . came from the Winterslow BRIAN FITZCOUNT? Type of Henry of Anjou. (b). Chron. LXII. but any attribution of the coins must be a matter of considerable his father's death in doubt. Rev. The coin by Mr. : Mr. 5) in attributing the coin to Baldwin de Redvers.IRREGULAR ISSUES CXXX1 in Eng. obverse I prefer can be read as Mr. II (a). 1914. 632) reads these inscriptions (a ComlTIS DEVonlse and BRILTDPI TO last issue blundered copy an Exeter reverse of the thus follows of the reign of Henry I I) . the Chron. Carlyon-Britton.. R'of Circ. 297 ff. 15-9 grs. ? of Henry The name CRST occurs again p. iB*H*C'lT*[ *BmiT!!!!I-TO: Wt. P. The weight of of the coinage (Wiveliscombe ?) low. with mint-reading WIS. B. shows that William de Moyon deserted the Empress before the end of 1143. cxxviii). he Montagu satisfied (Num. i 2 . Proceedings. am not by any means inscription to that latter part of the it. doubtful). 1890. Round certainly belongs to the latter half of the reign. p. and William (of Gloucester ?). a period of which historical records are very meagre. 1910.. and there seems no reason to suppose that he returned to her side. W. Andrew has read remain content with the proposal of Packe (Num.. Andrew (Num. Obv.. pp. Wareham) the same moneyer. It is (so noteworthy that not only the types but also the mint-names far as they can be interpreted) are identical with those on coins or the Empress. PI. coined under the Empress DOB or DOR 1 (Dorchester ?) and WIS is if uncertain. Hist. The coin of type II find. P. 13.

1 Dugdale. ]ON!0/\. 63 f. Mr. with the Empress and after the he was with her siege of Winchester fled with her to Devizes.CXXX11 INTRODUCTION pp. (1) Obv. present at the siege of Winchester in 1141. before June. . Andrew 3 attributes this coin to Patrick. Perhaps this coin might be attributed to the siege of Wallingford in 1146. was besieged. 15-8grs. 1914. no. hearing of Stephen's approach from Southampton he was banished and took refuge with Geoffrey of Anjou. From the Winterslow find. besieged by Stephen at Wallingford in 1146. relieved at by Milo in the same year. LXII. fleured at Her. 632. Quadrilateral. Earl of Salisbury.. and surrendered . in 1139 and concerted with Robert of Gloucester in plans of he was blockaded in Wallingford by Stephen. but campaign . holding sword. 1142. In 1139 he landed at Wareham and took Corfe Castle he joined the Empress and was . Monasticon. reading the inscription as Brianus Comitis the reverse F'ilius. British Museum. vol. 271-2. inscription seems to me likely to be a copy of that on the obverse. ]EOfD $}[ Wt. 137. 2 Baldwin de Redvers was created Earl of Devon by the Empress He revolted from Stephen in 1136. and again when Henry relieved him on his fourth (third ?) arrival 1 in England. He was in 1153.).. PI. pp. p. to his castle at Wallingford Matilda fled at Christmas. vi. 292. 8 Num. Circ. and at Oxford in the spring of 1142. little After that* we hear of him except as a benefactor of religious houses. p. 1141. He died in 1155. Bust in armour r. on capitulated and fled to the Isle of Wight. Geoffrey de Mandeville. over cross fleury.(clipped).14. 2 Round. UNCERTAIN BARONIAL COINS. at Bristol at the close of 1141. London in June. Brian FitzCount declared for Matilda 1896. 1141. and at Oxford 1 He was in July. angles.

pp. Cross pattee. irWX. Bishop of London. Grimbaldus 74). Leawinus (I. A pedigree of the Otho family. 36 b. 15-2 grs. 286 b. and apparently developed date into the post of Cuneator or Engraver of the time of in definite tenure of the king. STIEFNE. (I. is published in Num. a function which seems to have been hereditary in the family of the goldsmith Otto from the at a later Dies. crowned. 293. Nicholaus (aurifaber comitis Hugonis. 106 b. 1893. designs of the coinage probably employed and perhaps controlled the engraving of dies. with citations from records.. ^AL. 97 b. 16 grs. whose names appear on the coins. LXII. 63. . which was held Otto the Goldsmith appears in Domesday 2 in possession of lands in Essex and Suffolk. Bust to r -> ]NEPri>i* Stephen). 160 b). CXXXiii >iT(T)(or star to r. annulet enclosing pellet Wt. for the was or goldsmith.EMON[ in each angle. who died in 1107.L. II. 15. Rev. or 1 An aurifaber. PI. Other goldsmiths mentioned in Domesday are: Alwardus (I. g5?)EFN Bust facing. 145. ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OF THE MINT.FRDOHTOflI pellet in each angle. annulet enclosing Wt. 279). The only officials of the mints of whose existence we have any literary evidence during the Norman period are the monetarii. moneyers. p. 63 b).273). British Museum. 16. Domesday. 58 b).IRREGULAR ISSUES (2) Obv. noteworthy. Teodricus (I. Chron. cxli ff. holding sceptre (as on first issue of Rev. confirmed to William FitzOtto (presumably son of Otto of Domesday) lands held by his father and 1 2 See below. Cross pattee. holding sceptre. British Museum. no. a charter of Henry I directed to Maurice. Perhaps the obverse inscription represents a blundered form of The resemblance of the reverse type to that of the is following piece (3) Obv. II. Rainbaldus (11. 294. PL LXII. no.

p. 1 payments in Domesday are sometimes and assayed compensated. Of any other officers of the Mint we find no evidence at all. and in the forty-first year of the following reign an inquiry was held into the conditions of tenure under which Otto Fitz William. The administration was not at this early period divided into separate Government departments the first sign of breaking away from the old centralization . and I think may assume of the that the same executive officers controlled the moneyers at the royal mints throughout the country as audited the accounts of the king's sheriffs. or before. assaying was certainly known and employed ' at this time. then dead. of financial. p. and it has been suggested above 2 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. * and references in foot-note). had held the custody of the king's die in office of England. xiii. this would seem inadequate without some periodical trial of the money. the reign of John into an office definitely attached to the Mint. 1205. the appears in the reign of Henry II. .e. introduction. Under the Mint was no doubt treated as an 1 inseparable part of the king's treasury or exchequer. May 16. and administrative authority in a single executive board first Norman one kings. judicial. blanched '. Aurifaber of the time of William I developed nor can any conclusion be drawn from an inquiry into the organization of the Mint in later times. That a financial department existed at this time and earlier. a writ him to to William FitzOtho ordered make dies for the Royal and Episcopal mints of Chichester. Crump and Johnson. From this it appears that the hereditary in. the craft of the dies m the sixth year of John. for i. at least. work 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 nioneyer's name and of his mint on his reverse dies. Dialogus de Scaccario. there seems no doubt (see Hughes. 13. at the same time the moneyers were probably more independent than at a later period.CXXX1V INTRODUCTION .

Qui. 75). et xx solidos quando moneta vertebatur . Ibi (in Warham) ii monetarii. cum moneta renovatur dat xx burgo Dore Cestre) erant ii monetarii. A certain amount of evidence on this subject may be adduced from the coins themselves. 75). were all made London has long been under dispute but the evidence of Domesday on the question seems so strong that I think it may be accepted with slight reservation. The Domesday passages which bear on the subject are the following statements of fees paid receipt of dies after the introduction of a by moneyers on l : new type In civitate Wirecestre habebat Rex Edwardus hanc consuetudinem. quisque reddebat (1. in the following passages In burgo de Lewes. the similarity of style is indeed striking. quisque reddens (1. solidos pro cuneis recipiendis et coemissent cuneos monetge ut Tres monetarios habebat ibi (in Sciropesberie) rex. to attribute a coin to its mint by examining the style of the obverse. sufficient to afford any definite In favour of the engraving of all dies at London. 252). erant iii markam Ibi (in burgo Sceptesberie) argenti. tarius episcopi. Quando moneta vertebatur quisque monetarius dabat xx Londoniam pro cuneis monetse accipiendis (I. Ibi (in Brideport) erat unus monetarius. 75). reddens regi unam markam argenti et xx solidos quando moneta vertebatur 26). postquam alii monetarii patrise. et xx solidos quando moneta vertebatur (L 75). quisque eorum reddens regi unam markam argenti. et xx solidos quando moneta vertebatur monetarii. xx Et hoc fiebat moneta vertente (I. with the exception of a few coins which are mentioned below. solidos unusquisque monetarius Ibi (in (I. and it is impossible. 179). i unam markam argenti regi. solidos ad Septem monetarii erant ibi (in Hereford). but without notice of the receipt of : dies. which was apparently 1 The payment of fees is also mentioned. emphasis has always been laid on the very close similarity of coins struck at mints in all parts of the country . 172). But this does not take into account the method of engraving dies.ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OP THE MINT CXXXV in Whether the dies for provincial mints . but not conclusion. Unus ex his erat moneQuando moneta renovatur dabat quisque eorum xviii : ex eo die quo redibant usque ad unum mensem dabat quisque eorum regi xx solidos. xv die dabant regi solidos unusquisque. (I. Et similiter habebat episcopus de suo monetario xx solidos (I.

145 and 146 are struck from two different reverse dies. the use of a straight instead of a crescent-shaped punch. 1 Num. that. I there held the view that this proved that but it may equally be explained as the work of working from a set model. 144. for there is no doubt whatever that the coins nos. apparently with the intention of correcting it and on the supposition that the misgraven letter represented H. or rather. either a model was kept by the cuneator at London. The engraving of dies was therefore a matter of copying. . HB. 144-6 . the other two both reproduce this error. to the right of the limb of the voided cross of the design instead of beginning in the usual place exactly above the limb. This is a very curious and. 1911. but. or a number of dies. and not a single pair. the original being presumably made by the and supplied to the workmen to copy. quite certain proof of the copying of die from die.. The use of a model or pattern die.CXXXV1 INTRODUCTION a system of reproducing a set model with mathematical precision and with the assistance of punching tools and did not leave much scope for individuality. Cht-on. on each of which appears the very rare omission of the initial cross on each the inscription begins a little . 1 possible explanation of a curious reproduction of errors on Thetford coins of the second type of William These are the three coins they are all described different below. 283-4. were delivered to the does show. though each reproduces the extraordinary mistaken attempt to correct the error of no. p. 27. seems to be the only I. the letter D is inserted before it. however. and the readins are : The first for reading contains a very natural punch-worker's error. This does not decide the question whether the copying of the original die and the recopying of die from die were done at London or locally chief engraver it . dies were engraved locally. nos. the copying of one die from another. struck from reverse dies. I think. if the dies were all made at London. engravers at London pp.

though after use were not in still survive.ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OF THE MINT CXXXvii moneyer at the introduction of the new issue l . three sets (see below. clxiv). 2 Perhaps the strongest support for a literal interpretation of the passage above quoted from Domesday is to be found in the consideration of the meaning of the reverse inscriptions. A coin which affords some. 285 ff. which specimens of dies of hammered coinage. 1911. seems was evidently wrongly engraved on the the engraver began to engrave the mint must have been made if. . Chron. graving punches. from reverse dies on which some ingenuity has been spent in changing the names in the legend or in making them 3 illegible . The letter ^C likely. the die London and not at Chichester for such confusion to arise. though rather conjectural. 608 it is : a Chichester coin on the reverse of which the outline of $ is visible below the second and third letters is (IE) of the mint. usually of low weight. is described on p. no. There can be no moneyer's name and that of his mint were placed on the coins of doubt that the period for the purpose of identification of the person or responsible for any coin that might be found of low weight this base standard. pp. Edmunds one set of dies only that only on return of the old set. 114. xlv. on p.). that the dies when returned a condition to be copied by the engraver. for we know from later in date. the possible in I am not now of opinion. these are clearly attempts on the part of the moneyers to make profit by the usual fraudulent practice of coining at low weight. the as coin is in very good condition and there no trace of overstriking.. die . and of occasional efforts of the moneyers to make them illegible by tampering with their dies. p. cxlixff. evidence that the dies were made in London. and are described below (pp. 2 was supplied at a time. 3 See Num. that these coins are evidence of the moneyers being in possession of official making the dies of different mints. and But Stephen granted the Abbot as many as evidence of the use of identical punches Note also. as I then was. which were struck. Certain coins have been found. while minimizing the risk of conviction by tampering with the mark 1 To Bury St. as Exeter at instead of Chichester.

who seem to have been important officials responsible for the operations of the mints at . XIX. while differing from the coins of the other mints. 13-16) even if .. which they worked in this case. which are similar in style. instance is Num. dies had been done locally. is that certain coins of a certain locality. p. 283) . are not of 'barbarous' work PL XXIII. the evidence of Domesday right. it of. and that the (see inexperienced 1 workmen were period given dies Coins I of Rhuddlan. the altering of the inscription on reverse dies would be an unnecessary labour. of very rough work and all closely Similar also are some of the Lincoln coins of type II (see PI. however. exception must be made of the Welsh mints. 1 for they. and York. purposely avoid making mention here of coins of Stephen. unlike other so-called coarse or barbarous issues. 14). The coarseness of these coins seems to be due not to the use of punches of irregular form. by. or under direction would presumably have been done the moneyers. bear a very close resemblance in style to each other. distributed to the engravers at London by at this localities. Stamford. The chief argument to be opposed to the theory that the dies were made at London. Ghron. 1911. and must be conceded that. the most the coins of type all IV of Lincoln. . Davids and Cardiff I think it is (see PI. 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 may but this explanation is not a necessary one it equally be explained by the assumption that the work was . were evidently not made with rest of the coinage. . IV. the usual punches that were used for the Other coins of the reign of William 1 2 have a peculiarity of style (see important. but to the careless handling of the punches and clumsy engraving of the dies. as it would be in the moneyer's to have his dies originally engraved with power a false inscription. Most noteworthy of these 1-3. are the coins of William I which are attributed to the mints of St.CXXXvili INTRODUCTION If the engraving of the of identification which the coins bear. as peculiarities of that reign might be attributed to baronial work. 2 8). 13. and PL XXIII.

2 See Num. no. no. clxxx. 3 The close resemblance of both obverse and reverse of the Shrewsbury coin to the coarse work of St. 897-8).ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OF THE MINT to CXXX1X engrave for the northern and north-eastern part of the country. no. 499) to Exeter (Semser. nos. 900) to Marlborough (Gild. 901-2). Salisbury (Esbern. no. . (These two Marlborough coins are from the same reverse die. nos. The London and Ipswich die mentioned on p.) From From . 3 From London (Alfred. nos. We may. From Wilton (Sefaroi and Sewine. From Cricklade (JElfwine. 828 being the later. 827) to Salisbury (Esbern or Osbern.. 600-2). Salisbury (Esbern or Osbern. p. 763-4) to Southwark (Osmund. nos. 1058-9. 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 The following instances. 712). 136. 895-6) to Wilton (Sewine. Davids causes some doubt whether its attribution to Shrewsbury is correct . pp. Davids (Turri. 899. 976-7). 1911. therefore. From Marlborough (Gild. as the coin that purports to be of Ipswich is certainly a forgery (see below. conclude that one of the methods by which the authorities controlled the work of the moneyers was the engraving of their dies at London. 625) to Wilton (JElfwine. From Canterbury (Godric. no. From Guildford (Seric. no. 668). 1062). 274 ff. 1 type of William I. see below. no. p. or at least possible. nos. 1057). all of the ' Paxs ' at which mint the die was first used) 2 : From Barnstaple (Seword. nos. no. nos. but it is also necessary to concede that in some circumstances it was allowed. 278 (op. 883). but this statement requires some modification. From Shrewsbury (Godesbrand. 690-2) to Chichester (Bruman. no. nos. no. 498. nos. no. 938) to St. 1063) to Salisbury (Osbern. 828). nos. the engraving of dies of the Not only does it seem necessary to attribute Welsh mints to local workmen using locally made tools. for an obverse die to be borrowed by a moneyer of one mint from a moneyer of another. 554) to Hythe (Edred. cit. 722). 1 The use of an obverse die by two or more moneyers at the same mint is very frequent.) is omitted. no. Chron.

if not the nearest. We two and another either from London to Thetford or from Thetford to London (presumably. tration of the theory that dies were delivered from London to the provincial mints. no. The only whether exceptions are London Thetford. mint to St.cxl INTRODUCTION is In type II of William I. . seems to be a definite illusillegal. in the crown. 130). same is uncertain. no. 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. 145). from London to The former case is no doubt simply the borrowing or Thetford). (Brihtwi. 184). no. and secondly. the same die was used (there evidence at which mint it was first used) at : no die of the London (Godwine?. Davids Shrewsbury was probably the most accessible. Thetford (Cinric. . 146) and MAINT . then. see below. from rust-marks to Exeter. distinct to Exeter. in order to save the time of engraving the new die. Davids). In type III of William I. purchase of a die from a neighbour as an emergency measure . It will be noticed that. a die was sent from London (Sibode. it one cannot say. no. but the London Exeter die is shown with certainty. The large number of irregular issues in the north of England may perhaps be attributed to a temporary collapse of the direct control from the London mint. the reverse London coin had been tampered with. and London Exeter the London Thetford die was used first at London or Thetford die are . 128) and Thetford (Cinric. an old die being sent when the need at Exeter was urgent. during the reign of Stephen . no. the two mints using the die (and indeed almost invariably in close proximity. no. to have been sent from London phenomena: in the first place that of a die being sent from one mint to another in the vicinity. cl. whether it was an authorized measure or case is The second very different. p. disregarding the Shrewsbury St. by analogy. a die being sent from London all the way have. 201) to Exeter (^Elfwine.

p. 89. Cnut. IV. 4 for every chief number of moneyers was reduced by ^thelred II other town one town three. to suffer the In the laws of ^Ethelstan. for if they affirmed that they made false coin witli his if permission the reeve was to undergo the triple ordeal. 56). At Oxford. ' 5 Not necessarily. Op. 1 2 8 Liebermann. at (p. in the reign of ^thelred Anglo-Saxon times is obscure he had workmen under him for whom in .. 8. for every (to judge by the names and its : appearing on consecutive issues of the coins of this reign. The position of the money er II. II. ^thelred. as Ruding translates it. cxxxv) quoted passages which. 4 p. Cnut. cit. 3 . . &c. (I. so long as At York. . 314 (II. pp. show that the the type when was changed. the word liber may carry further privileges or immunities (cf. ^Ethelred. cit. more information is given on this subject. 2 guilty. ^Ethelred II. 234. At Wallingford. (I. moneyer Suetman has a free house (domus) Suetman has two mansiones muri and pays free 5 154). JEthelstan. 3 The exposure over the mint was fixed for false coining. f ' ' 2) Godwine Socche is described as having been master moneyer in the time of the Confessor. Maitland. rent-free ' . 314 (II. Domesday Book and Beyond. we have already moneyers.1). purchased their fees their new dies London and then paid the king's moneyers to the king. Nigellus de Monneville has one mansio of a moneyer 298).. three shillings the rated at forty pence. ^Ethelred. 14. Op. 158. p. 9. ln the Winton Domesday (fol. 236 (IV. cit. 8. 1).cxli MONEYERS. 2). and Cnut the same penalty amputation of the hand.. same penalty as a guilty moneyer. he was personally responsible l in the laws of Cnut the moneyers seem themselves to have been under the authority of the reeve. 1 Op. Gesetze. In Domesday. 236 (IV. 5. 9).) . this law was repealed or modified). a moneyer has a house (haga) he works at the mint (I. and. the bishop's to the bishop. p.

forty pounds (11. of this. the king's moneyers died. Malmesbury. County History of Essex.Cxlii INTRODUCTION in the time of the Confessor. presumably. The following payments monetae. pp. Ixix-lxx. his whole property. if he died intestate. 181 b). but not at the time of the Survey. Lincoln In the reign of Henry I there is some legislation with regard to the coinage. had one penalty of forty shillings (I. the moneyers made for him as many pennies as he required from the king's silver (i. In his Coronation Charter (Aug. the moneyers paid twenty pounds . de moneta. Hunting- don Rex W. the moneyers paid four pounds (II. 117b). twenty pounds. twenty pounds 162). At Norwich. forgers. Colchester and Maldon. Bishop moneyer in Hereford (I. and. omnino defendo ( 5). Pevensey. Round in Victoria vol. twenty shillings (I. 107). . 20 b). 107 b). had the privilege of one &c. 203) . both in the time of the Confessor and at the time of the Survey. At Hereford.119). hoc ne amodo sit. between the king and the in the time of the Confessor. 203). apparently reduced by William to ten 1 pounds (II. 179). 1 100) 3 : non 1 Monetagium commune quod capiebatur per ciuitates et comitatus.. 336 b). quod fuit tempore regis Eadwardi. 2 Liebermann. (I. the king had twenty shillings in relief. the bishop. p. Walter. (I. H. Hugh de Grantmesnil received the tertius denarius 230).. three moneyers paying forty shillings . At Colchester. shillings 64 b). see translation 3 by J. geldum monete posuit in burgo Geldum regis de monedagio 2 (I. if the reeve went to Wales with an army. are noted: moneyer (II. as opposed to the bishop's) the seven moneyers had sac and soc if one of .e. 522. &c. The passage seems corrupt See above. 5. when the king came to the city. 100 (I. (at the rate of twenty pennies to the ounce) yearly (I. i. earl (I. Under the Confessor. At Huntingdon there were. Gloucester. Thetford. . and some reference to moneyers. of At Leicester. if he wished. . they (the moneyers) went with him under Hereford.

cum falsa moneta. rumpebantur. 523. Francis et Anglis. The following charter de moneta falsa attributed to the date 1100-1 or 1103: 1 et cambiatoribus is Henricus rex Anglorum Samsoni episcopo et Ursoni de Abetotet omnibus baronibus. . the following is recorded under the year 11 08 2 : Monetam quoque corruptam et falsam 3 sub tanta animadversione corrigi statuit. and Symeon of Durham. si warant inde reuocauerit. 5. Chron. Et nullus sit ausus cambire denarios nisi monetarius. Ut nullus qui posset deprehendi falsos denarios facere aligua redemptione quin oculos et inferiores corporis partes perderet iuvari valeret. Num. p. Eadmer. that of Hoveden (Rolls Series. 1901. ut quicunque falsos denarios facere deprehensus fuisset. Florence of Worcester. de Wirecestrescira salutem. Sciatis quod uolo et precipio. Cf. fiat iusticia mea de Si uero scilicet mea. p. de ipso falsonario fiat de dextro pugno et testiculis. 2 The text followed is i. ad eum ducatur ipso warant. vol. Quam rex . cognoscere aliquem a quo acceperit. In the Chronicles of Roger of Hoveden. Eadmer.* et quoniam 1 ssepissime dum denarii eligebantur. ut omnes burgenses et omnes illi qui in burgis morantur. Liebermann. siue iusticia recta inde fiat ( Cxliii monetarius siue alius. iusticia et si ilium inde conprobare poterit. Apud Westmonasterium in natale filio Domini. falso denario inuentus fuerit. si quis cum . flectebantur. ne aliquis monetarius denarios mutet nisi in comitatu Et si in suo. Eadmer. no. tarn Franci quam Angli. 1). ut non consentiant falsitatem monete mee. Florence of Worcester. nominare uel Praeterea defendo. iurent tenere et seruare monetam meam Et in Anglia. et hoc coram duobus legittimis testibus de ipso comitatu. 8 Item moneta cornipta et falsa multis modis multos affligebat. 165). 475. 51. oculos et inferiores corporis partes sine ulla redemptione amitteret. non poterit ilium probare. . alio comitatu mutando denarios captus fuerit. variants of the other chroniclers are given in the notes. . p.MONEYERS Si quis captus fuerit. portet inde iudicium. Teste Willelmo cancellario et Roberto comite de Mellent et R[odberto] Hamonis et R[icardo] de Retuers. captus sit ut falsonarius.. 4 Symeon of Durham. Si autem nullum se nescire warant inde reuocauerit.

2 For [si] which is not 3 . and Symeon read integer esset. but there is no reason to suppose that the six men there mentioned were is The forgers. vol. this When they came thither they were taken one by and each deprived of the right hand and the testicles beneath. and commanded that all the moneyers that were in England should be deprived of their members that was the right hand of each. respueretur. no.) was because there was little corn. intelligible. Eadmer inserts interim rex.INTRODUCTION respuebantur. 7 8 W. . and . That was because the (sic). 23). translation 399 (Rolls Series. All and that was all with great was done within the twelve nights . And the Bishop Roger of Salisbury and commanded them that they should come to Winchester at Christmas. in his brief epitome of the reign of Henry I. &c. impune abire permittens. one. Symeon. p. . 90. instituit for iussit Florence. quos vulgo monetarios vocant. In this year. ii. ut nullus denarius vel obolus. G. 3 magnum bonum 8 regno provisum est. [si] integer esset. Malm. qui fuisset intellectus falsitatis suse commercio fatuos irrisisse. that of Thorpe in the Rolls Series (no. states after a mention of Henry's return from Normandy (Spring. . statuit. That (the high price of food. 476).. man all that had a pound could not buy for a penny at a market sent over all England. quin pugnum perderet. Florence. their testicles beneath. 1 quos . Eadmer inserts ad tempus. before Christmas. toti 4 William of Malmesbury. King Henry sent from to Normandy England. 1125. nullum falsarium. quia ipse rex haec in saecu6 laribus ad relevandas terrae aerumnas agebat. R. Symeon. and the penny was so bad. praecipuam sui dili- gentiam exhibuit. Ruding says that the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle mentions the punishment of six forgers in 1124. . v. 4 5 6 creatum Eadmer. quos et rotundos esse 1 2 Ex quo facto iussit. that the man who had at a market a pound could by no means buy therewith twelve pennyworths. In the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle under the years 1124-5 occur the 8 following passages : 1124. quadrans omitted by Eadmer. 1107): 7 Contra trapezetas. aut etiam quadrans. . quia ipse rex omitted by Eadraer. Florence. respueretur Eadmer.

Cont.. marcas auri ut haberet pacem de Definite references to moneyers occur : : under Hampshire (Hamtona) Saietus monetarius debet cclxxviii marcas argenti pro placito ii cuneorum. Wore.. The same event is related it by most of the Chroniclers. cxlv because they had fordone all all the land with their great quantity of false money which they bought. Bliss collection) reads The identification of this reading with Godwine @\^* 1 ON GODPINE is Quachehand of the Pipe Roll (Num.. the number of moneyers is ninety-four of according to the Winton Annals all the moneyers England were mutilated except three of Winchester. Margam Annals. place in the year 1124. Matt. Waverley Ann. but k . In the Pipe Roll of Henry I (1130) two for forfeitures for false coining : men at London owe a fine Algarus et Sprachelingus debent x marcas argenti pro forisfacturis falsorum denariorum. doubtful. Sym. as Mr. Roger of Hoveden. Paris.. and Symeon of Durham given as In the Margam Annals .. The height of food prices in 1125 is attributed in the Margam Annals to rain- storms in the summer. 1 the Margam Annals in 1126. Hunt. in name Sperling the following entry. type XV (T. Dur. Winton Ann. p. Chron. 2 nor can we conjecture what the offence was iiii : Godwinus Quachehand debet placito Monetse. 283) possible.. 2 A coin of Henry I. 1901. Malm. Wykes. the on the coins Similarly. W.. But there is name Algar occurs on coins of is identical. of Spracheling. unless.MONEYEES justice. Flor. we have no reason to suppose the debtor to be a moneyer. by Florence of Worcester to the reform of the coinage which followed this punishment of moneyers. no reason to suppose that these are moneyers the London of this period but not that . Andrew suggests. Wykes adds to the penalty of mutilation that of banishment. H.

cit. 2 See below. Ixxii). p. nor was not free from the king's relief at from reversion to the king in case of intestacy. pp. In the reign of Stephen we have no reference to the coinage and mint officials. nwnsio or haga. 90. 81). if we may argue from particular cases to the general (which is very doubtful). licet negligens. presumably the lower justice' (Maitland. latentes p. have been quoted above The information to be obtained money ers is very scanty. under Pembroke : Gillopatric monetarius reddit veteris Monetse.. service . marca argenti de hominibus under Norfolk : Eadstamis debet c solidos de pecunia Ulchetelli monetarii. i Et idem Vicecomes reddit compotum de monetariorum Cicestrise. during their term of office. Henry 487) says I. we find that they were free tenants of the king. and the king did not have the consuetude of the moneyer's haga at "Wallingford. no.e. 2 : William of Malmesbury Fures et : (Rolls Series. vol. 1 compotum de iiii libris pro forisfacturis In his summary falsarios of the character of ii. boni argenti. they were subject (in Hereford at least) to military some cases they held an official residence. ' property. inventos puniens parvarum quoque rerum non fractos. cxlviii f.CXlvi INTRODUCTION : under Honor de Arundel Brand Monetarius reddit compotum de xx aliis libris ne esset disfactus cum monetariis. p. except the brief allusions to baronial issues which (p. maxima diligentia perscrutans. Cum nummos audisset. xxxiii. a venditoribus non recipi omnes vel frangi vel incidi prsecepit. note 4. or limited jurisdiction over their own men and their i. The Pipe Roll of Henry I (Honor de Arundel) shows that the moneyers had workmen under them. . op. with regard to the status of the At the time of the Domesday Survey. The property in of moneyers (at Hereford) their death. having sake and soke. and we have already seen 1 See above.

2 little So early as the reign of is (as there seems doubt) Thomas FitzUlf correctly identified with the alderman of York mentioned in the . 3 Pipe Roll. surgeon (Brit. Journ.MONEYERS that in the reign of JEthelred II the moneyers were personally responsible for their workmen. of silver. which at least gives an impression that moneyers were in Norman times men of no small means. The sums they owe are large . therefore. of burgess rank. Num. it is It is true that these sums are owed and not paid. Brand of Chichester. k2 . In 1242 Nicholas de Sancto Albano farmed the cambium of London and Canterbury (Calendar of Close Rolls). We know that in the time of who III moneyers were burgesses of good position not infrequently held the office of sheriff" or reeve. if men of wealth. nor probable that Brand or Saiet would be continued in their office of moneyer if they were unlikely ever to clear themselves of their is it fines. Thomas de Weseham was the king's vol. when so many moneyers suffered the Saiet of Southampton owes the large sum of 278 marks penalty). p. 1 2 Num. Saiet owes as much as 185 6s. an alderman is acting as moneyer that he is coining under a baron and not directly under the king is. pp. They were. cxiii. 1885. 159).. p. for the present purpose. 8c/. and it hardly justifies us in of William I assuming that their position underwent any material change during the eleventh century. Chron. unimportant. ix. and that they were men of some property may perhaps be concluded from the amounts of payments made or owed by them in the Pipe Roll.. but to unlikely that Brand could have had his sentence commuted a fine unless he could give some security or at least show himself likely to clear the debt within a reasonable time. has the penalty of mutilation to commuted still payment of twenty pounds (probably the fine is owing from the Christmas of 1125. for instance. but Domesday Book does tell us that they were burgesses with certain privileges. to prove that the There is certainly nothing in Domesday were men of equal status moneyers to their successors. 3 See above. 1 and that Henry they were sometimes Stephen.. 209 ff.

viii. of which incised. all This incision occurs on the coins that I have seen of types VII to XII inclusive. 492 l . where Mr. vol. and any coins to XV XLIII. 55. 2 the incision cannot be I cannot be quite certain of all the coins of type XII seen on the coin of Lincoln (no. as the king compelled the acceptance of cracked coins. VI clearly precede the introduction of this measure. Num. . Andrew pointed out. on a very few coins of types XIII. and 7. Journ. which appears on coins of this reign the most clear instance is seen on PL XLI. 487 Cum nummos boni argenti. vol. by ordering coins from the mint with a crack or incision in their edge refers. a venditoribus non recipi audisset. . which in his grouping of the types fall between the types which I have numbered VII and XII. XL VI. Chron. also 3 XIV. (PI. 132-3. 4.. but not on . type XII is earlier than 1125 and does not. crack by its regular shape. and VI. as Mr. Andrew has shown in passage is Num. This clearly Mr. . 82). the meaning of the coins. 8 the incision was The coin has cracked towards the centre from the end of the incision after made the incision can be distinguished from an accidental . Andrew comments on this. perhaps because the coin is clipped. must have been issued after the withdrawal of the measure. Andrew supposes that it was given up when the coinage was reformed after the punishment of moneyers at Christmas. Unfortunately. or snicked. 13 on PI. 14 and 15 on the same plate. to a sharp cut . no. p. as I conclude 1 See also Brit. 15 . are perhaps better examples. omnes velfrangivelineidi prd&cepit}is of considerable interest. 13). This is order in which the types of this an interesting confirmation of the 4 reign have been placed types I . V. and XIII to XV. ordered all all that is to say. but on this coin the cut has penetrated much further into the coin than usual nos.. were not accepted coins to be cracked or incised to be issued . 8 XLVII. of types I to VI. Andrew connects the passage with the issue of cut halfpennies and farthings. finding that cracked although of good silver. 2 and 3. by traders. 1901.CXlviii INTRODUCTION (p. ii. XLII. pp. 9. undoubtedly that the king. he is right. . licet from William of Malmesbury's Henry I (Rolls Series. pp. * Mr. we are given no date of either its introduction or withdrawal Mr. cxlvi) The passage quoted above character of fractos. 1125 if . coins are unusual. 90. but fails to observe that the incisions are not found on coins of types IV.

are 1 See Num. Legislation against debasing the currency is severe and continually reiterated. in- which are not uncommon. Chron. to Some XIEUFSON IDEFIONE/VllENI weighing 18-1. 1913. and was later found unnecessary. according to Wykes.. Yet at this period. lot 645. follow the reform . The blocks are reproduced by kind permission of the Council of the Royal Numismatic Society. . in 1125. 6). from coins of type II. of London. during the I. 2 For this reading of the rnoneyer's name cf.MONEYERS AND FORGERY below (p. or ^Eolfsi. cliv). this feature is noted by the Chroniclers. but also some pieces which show attempts to evade the penalties by falsification of the The coins give evidence of continual debasement . and also against secret coining and all kinds of forgery. forgery and the fraudulence of moneyers were. 285 ff. and 15-9 grains. thus: Three of these coins. A series of these coins seems to have been issued by the moneyer first ^Elfsi. and on the latter occasion it led to the mutilation. and again be. 17. but it is quite possible that the practice continued for a time after 1125. 1911. as throughout the mediaeval English coinage. this sort 1 reverse dies. bear an scription which has been changed. I think. or were reputed to In 1108. The following drawing shows by : shaded lines the alterations made in the original inscription the weight of this coin is 16-3 grains (PL II. three issues of the reign of William collection is A coin of type I in Major Carlyon-Britton's struck from a reverse die on which the original inscription ^EUFSIOWLIINDE has been changed to fcELPPIOnEXEESDE. the banishment. and. pp. and forgery of not only are there several coins evidently struck in the regular mints of light weight and base metal. the cause of much distress in the country. Carlyon-Britton sale. of an enormous number of moneyers.

in the York Museum. Bruun's collection (PI. Another die of this same moneyer and of the same type was used to the inscription changed from S strike a coin in the York Museum with to fcCTODPIMEOHLVD! The p. V. struck from a reverse die which was altered from "tlEUPI (Pi. L. *IEU PINE ONEUFI but the original in. two of which are struck from the same obverse die as a coin reading *XIEOUF SIOIIUniDEII A coin of type III in Major Oarlyon-Britton's collection has the inscription. 109-11 (PI. The obverse die was (previously. coin of type VII of this reign described in this Catalogue. is another instance of this. is similarly altered weighs 16-4 grains. V. 86. Similarly. 24. nos.Cl INTRODUCTION 2). The coins are all of appreciably low weight. ^Elfsi or ^Eolfsi. I think) used at Thetford by the it moneyer Cinric. 6). reverse "X-IELFSlONLlinDEMElM partly defaced by cuts: the coin weighs 17-5 grains. scription of the reverse die cannot be deciphered with certainty . E. of whom we know at present no coins later than the third type of William I. p. I IEOI IUII IDI IE 16). 462. no. no. described in this Catalogue. and the most noteworthy feature is that in each case the alteration on the die is evidently done with the object of obscuring the moneyer's name and the that of his mint. 128). to *II)U>H lEOriUUCONE IV. type II. a coin of William is I. The reverse inscription is more clearly seen on a duplicate coin in Mr. A coin of God wine of London. also of the second type of : William I (Catalogue. These coins are evidently forgeries of the same moneyer. the unimportant parts of the inscription word ON and the last letters of the mint- being untouched.

Hawkins gave the average weight of coins of the various types. (see Catalogue. Perhaps the same God wine of London. the extent of corrosion which it has and this is again has undergone. which are quite good coins and of good weight). dependent on the length of time for which a coin was in currency. and coins that have suffered severely from clipping or wear . to is discover a standard weight by an average nor the average weight of coins in a find of any practical value. reading 151. 811). contrast of these figures is sufficient to condemn any attempt of existing coins . both of coins in the find and of coins in the British Museum before the discovery the .MONEYERS AND FORGERY perhaps it cli was J'lELFPINEOMLlI. 1 That these coins are is all of the London mint and . 722). 136. though we assume the standard weight of the penny during this period to have been 22^ grains. Further. the altered inscription beginning half-way through the moneyer's name of the original. suffered. it is of course not possible to draw any fixed line. In his account of the Bea worth find. and say that coins below a certain weight were necessarily struck light . nos. forged the reverse die reading ^HUPIMEOMCTIWH from is (P. and other unascertainable data. as the coin struck this forged die is struck from an obverse die which used with a genuine reverse. who struck the coins mentioned above with altered reverse dies. for it will obviously include coins that were fraudulently struck light. *Crom>ninOMUnn) With regard to coins that are struck of low weight or base metal from good dies. Another attempt to obscure the reverse inscription may be found on p. p. no. the decision must depend on the allowance made for loss of weight. pp. . 1043-5. and even 1 It need hardly be said that the alteration of a die need not always have been the work of a forger (cf. no. 38. 199. Mr. the amount of cleaning which it this is not a matter of certain knowledge. 193-4. of the reign of William I perhaps a coincidence I have seen similar coins of Anglo-Saxon and ' ' Short-cross (Henry II Henry III) times. no. nor even that the standard remained the same throughout the period with which we are dealing.

Clii INTRODUCTION in the Beaworth find. for example. The I think. most numerous than twenty Types represented by : less coins in all should be disregarded for the sake of completeness. 136. and this is most prominent in the second type of William I. which may perhaps best be based upon a table showing the number of coins of different weights of each type. be taken to signify a relaxing or tightening of the king's authority. give an impression that the coins were in the early part of the But the figures of type II are reign struck on a lower standard. however low the standard weight .g. In the following table the highest number of coins of each type is printed in heavy fount. Throughout the whole Norman period there are evidently many coins which were struck below the standard weight. 22-5 grains. such. that the lower weight of the early types of William I denotes not a lower standard of the coinage. as the forgeries mentioned above. instructive it is obvious that. they are only inserted here These numbers omit pierced and definite clipped coins. . or at least the first three. in order to emphasize the extent of variation of weight of the set of coins of each type. in coins of type VIII left to conjecture. there were some forgeries (e. if we except the is types of William I (those types where no figure shown in italics are of course also excepted. 722). tail of coins struck very considerably below Place the standard as less low as 20 grains. which was remarkable for the fine condition of the coins. because their evidence is valueless) . there must be a long it. through their scarcity on the other hand. p. as a rule. significance of these figures is. no. and coins which for any reason can be declared false. viz. then at least the twenty-three coins which weigh than 17 grains must be considered as having been struck light. these first five render figures which certainly types. but a laxity in the control of the moneyers a slight drop or slight rise in the general perhaps weight of coins may. The figures in this table are not incompatible with the standard weight of first five common tradition. and the fourteenth . and some coins are worn condition (some of the Lewes The standard weight must be instances). is conjectured to be at this period.

CJ 02 OS (M |T-H i I I-H sq JOOCM^ 22 -^ I> O "3 i I C<1 --H | CO CM | CM j !^^iT-HT-HTHCMCMJ t-H I J I J |CO|T-H| r-l j | | | i-H | 00 t-H t I T-H l>- OS CO Mil .::.WEIGHT OF COINS cliii T-H * CO !> T-H T-H Tj< CM 03 1* OS o t-HiocMCMocoT-Hoj'j.

2 Mr. as we should then leave one type only for the remaining ten years of the reign. issue at that time. pp. on the assumption issue after that the types were regularly changed at intervals of two or three years. and presumably then put out of issue. judge by appearance. was the ' ' double-inscription type. that is to say. where he deals with the coinage of 1205. which shows a much neater and more with a more definite attempt at portraiture. this type would come into 1130 about 1132 some seven years after the great punishment of moneyers at Christmas. 1205. Lawrence gives a diagrammatic explanation of the effect of these 'reforms' on the coinage. soon a warning of this sort was forgotten. of coins of type XII. other indications that the type then current. not a change in standard but a general inquiry and reorganization similar to those we hear of in 1180.. 1 think we may find a gradual decadence in style of the coins fifth type. p. 1125. The only other occasion during the Norman period when we Mr. type. we can hardly suppose that it was in . of Henry from the ( continuing to and culminating ' in the eleventh. in fact.INTRODUCTION of Henry I. reign. on the incision . but (see I 1 Chron. and how willing the moneyers were to risk the most severe penalties for the sake of the profit available from debasement of the coinage. or double-inscription type. and we should expect in this to be I marked by a general improvement I workmanship. 1125 in any case. Thus probability in placing the end of the issue of the eleventh That so many coins in an issue of some six or seven years after the inquiry of 1125 were struck and light to their of base metal shows how many. though he calls it the twelfth of the reign. cannot agree that the coins at present known are of base metal See also above. cxlviii. or smaller profile and compact there is style. Num. in an article shortly to be published in the British Numismatic Journal. 78-9). 1901. Andrew also places this type here. There are. This latter case is noteworthy. and 1247. 2 type at Christmas. and ' this is followed by a marked improvement cross-and-annulets ' in the twelfth. the eleventh of the One may reasonably suppose that a punishment of the moneyers on so large a scale was followed by what is commonly known as a reform of the coinage.

p.for ^Ethel-. and Types the forms are mostly retained which occur on the far as space will allow . was without any rival to who seems claimant to the throne. nos. this conclusion allows a period of seventeen years for seven types. -wi for -wig. the last four types of the reign would cover a period of almost exactly ten years. and Stephen this appears first in the sixth type of Stephen. desirable. In the Table of Mints. Moneyers. such as Bundi. as Stephen's claim was doubtful. partly owing to late forms being used after the Conquest (^Egel. Applying the above principle of is degradation to this occasion. partly owing to the clipping of terminations and omission of letters in order 1 A foreign termination sometimes appears. .). which is consistent with the average duration of two and a half years for each type (see above. not Similarly. &c. coins. which is also consistent with that figure its if completed natural period we suppose that type IV had when the inquiry was held. and is afterwards occasional in use.MONEYERS NAMES civ have definite would be evidence of any inquiry into the coinage which likely to produce a reform of this sort is that of 1108. by this reckoning. The names form 1 of the moneyers of this period occur in the English until the Latin termination is occasionally I adopted in the reigns of of Henry Henry I. being more frequent than previously in the last two types of his reign and in the first . last issue and all possible means of publishing II. and is best left to specialists. varieties being inserted so an attempt to restore the true form of the names would in many cases be arbitrary. Sendi. ' ' which has been quoted above. It allows eight years for the first four types. his accession were whereas Henry to continue till have allowed Stephen's 1156 or 1158. This assumption is most probable. Ixix). The names which appear on the coins are frequently varied in many ways.was then in issue and at this period superseded by the fifth . V to XI. the obvious conclusion that the fourth type. assuming that Stephen's name was placed on the coins immediately after his accession.

Clvi

INTRODUCTION

to abbreviate the inscriptions (Wixie for Wihtsige, Goldhfc for

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

Godwi, Brwode for Brihtword ? see Wsegelwine for ^Egelwine ?) sometimes the identity in form of the letters P and W, and the similarity of A and V,
for Lesig or Leising,
p. 99, no.

Gowi

for

518

;

;

S and G, cause
to trace
;

difficulty.

The

original

name

is

consequently difficult

^Elmaer, for example,

may

represent ^Elf maer or ^Egel-

The termination -wi appears to represent not only in some cases -wine; at London, for example, but also -wig, Godwine occurs on types II to VI (inclusive) and VIII of William I, and on II and III of William II Godwi occurs on types III, V, and
(Jthel-)mser.
;

VII

same moneyer. At Hamtun, Ssewine occurs on types II-V and VIII of William I, types I, II, V of William II, and type II of Henry I Ssewi on
I,

of William

and

is

therefore likely to be the

;

type IV

and types I and II of William II. At Wilton, Ssewine on II, IV, VII, VIII of William I, and I and II of William II; Ssewi on V of William I, and III of William II. At
of William
I,

London, Eadwine on I-V of William

I,

type II of William
all

II,

and types IX and XI of Henry
fifth of

William I

types from the At Malmesto the third of William II inclusive.
I
; ;

Eadwi on

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

at

Oxford, ^Egelwi on type III of William I, and ^Egelwine on II and III of William II. In which of these, if any, the termination -wi may represent -wine, it is impossible to say, but this certainly

seems likely with Godwi at London, and with Ssewi at both Hamtun and Wilton. Some names are quite obscure, such as

Inhuhe

(p. 157),

Api or Awi
list,

(p.

317),

Bat

(pp. 232, 249).

In the following
of

in

to the existence, but to the classification, of the

which notes of interrogation refer not name, the names
:

moneyers of William

I are roughly classified

ANGLO-SAXON.
^Egel-, -briht, -mser, -ric, -wi, -wine; ^Elf-, -gset, -geard, -heah,

-noth, -red,
1

-ric, -si,

-wi, -wine,

-word

;

^Estan

l
;

Alhsige (Alcsi)

;

York Powell (Eng.

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

Eastan as Scandinavian,

MONEYERS' NAMES

civil

Blacsun

;

Briht-,

-mser,
1

-noth,

-red,

-ric,
1

-wi,

-wine,

-wold,
1

-word;

Brun-, -gar,

-inc,

-man,

-stan,

-wine;

Ceorl;

Gild

?;

Cen-, ric, -stan; Cnihtwine; Cuthbert; Deorman: Duninc; Ead-, Eald-, -gar, -red, -ulf Earnwi ? -red, -ric, -ward, -wi, -wine, -wold
; ;

;

Folcheard
-wi, -wine

;

Forna ?

;

God-,

-a,

-esbrand
;

"?,

-inc, -leof, -noth, -red, -ric,
;

;

Gold-, -man, -stan, -wine

Heathewi

Heregod

;

Howord
-stan,
-ric, -ric,

(Howorth)?; Hwateman; Leisinc?; Leof-, -inc, -red, Mann-, -a, -inc, -wine -sun, -wi, -wine, -wold, -word
;
1

-ric,
;

Ord-,

-wi; Os-, -mser, -wold; Rsefwine
-wi, -wine;
Side-,
Si-,
;

?;

Sae-, -fara?,

-grim, -maer,

1

-bode, -brand, -ferth, -lac, -mser, -ward, -wulf;

-loc, -man -inc,

Sunulf
;

;

Swet-,

-inc,
-ric,

-man

;

Theodred

Wig-,

-mund
-geet,

Wiht-, -red,
-mser,

-sige (Wixsi,
-si,

Wideman Wine 2 &c.)
;
;

;

;

Wulf-, -bold,

-noth, -red, -ric,

-stan, -wi, -wine,

-word;

Wyn-

(Win-), -daeg, -red.

SCANDINAVIAN.
Aleif
;

Arncetel; Arthulf; Atseror Acer; Autholf
3

;

Beorn; Brand;
;

Col-, -bein,

-blac, -grim, -inc,
;

-man,
;

3

-swein
;

;

Guthred

Horn? 4
3
;

;

Osbern or Esbern
Roscetel
;

Osmund
;

Oter

Oth-, -bern, -grim, -ulf
-brand, -col, -line
;

;

Swein

;

Spraceling
;

Swart-,

Thor

;

Thor-, -bern, -cetel, -stan

Ulf; Ulfcetel

Uspac or Ospac (Unspac).

OTHER FOREIGN NAMES.
Agemund, Anderbode,
Baldric, Garvin, Gifel
1,

Owi[ne]

?

UNCERTAIN.
Inhuhe, Turri, Unnulf (possibly Scandinavian, or variant of
Sunulf, see p. 113).

but jEthelstan, JEstan, and Eastan, which all occur on Winchester coins of the Confessor, are probably the same name similarly in Domesday (I. 185) ^Ethelstan, Bishop of Hereford, is called JSstan.
;

1

Scandinavian ?
If Silac-wine at Gloucester is to

2
3 4

be treated as two names.

Anglo-Saxon?
Lifwine Horn at Rochester.

Clviii

INTRODUCTION
of William II adds

The reign

ANGLO-SAXON.
JEgelword, ^Elfgar, ^Elfstan, Algod, Barcwit
Goldhafuc,
Goldinc,
?,

Ealdwine, Gold,
Leofai,

Herman (= Hereman)?,

Leofnoth,

Ordgar, Sewold, Siwate, Smewine, Sperhafuc, Sprot?, Theodric,

Wibern (= Wigbeorn), Wulfgar.
SCANDINAVIAN.
Ascetel (Ascil), Colbern, Hal[f]dene.

OTHER FOREIGN NAMES.
Baldwine, Bat ?, Bundi?, Coc ?, Hathebrand, Sindi (Sendi) ?, Walcin.

The reign

of

Henry
-wald

I

adds

ANGLO-SAXON.
Ail-, -noth,
1

;

Blacman, Derlinc, Ealla, Edmund, Essuwi
Folcred,

(= ^Escwig
(

?),

Estmund,
?),

Godhese?,
1

Herdig?,

Leftein

=

Leofthegen
?,

Osulf, Saiet

(=

Ssegset

?),

Sawulf, Sigar, Sper-

ling

Suneman, Wibert.
SCANDINAVIAN.

Chitel,
Sihtric,

Odde, Oslac or Aslac,

Othen (Owthin),

Ravenswart,

Stanchil, Thored, Toe ?, Winterlede.

OTHER FOREIGN NAMES.
Acel, Adalbot, Andreu,
1

(= Hilping

?),

Api or Awi ?, Boniface, Burchart, Chippig Cristret?, Dort ?, Durant, Engelram, Erembald,
Gillemor,
Ricard,

Everard, Gahan, Geffrei, Gosfrei, Germane, Gillebert?,
Gilpatric, Gregori,

Hlud, Mor?, Norman, Paien, Raulf,
l
?,

Rodberfc, Roger, Rolland, Stefne, Stigant, Sultan, Tovi

Walter,

Warmund, Willem.
The reign of Stephen adds
ANGLO-SAXON.
Edgar, Gladwine, Godmer, Hermer (=Heremser
beorn?),
?),

Siber

(=

Sig-

Wynstan.
1

Scandinavian (=Tofa)?

MONEYERS' NAMES.

MONEYS OP ACCOUNT

FOREIGN NAMES.

Adam, Adelard,
Tierri,

Alisander,

Etrei?,

Falche,

Farman,
Iim,

Fobund,
Martin,

Godard, Gurdan, Hamund, Henri, Hue, Hunfrei,

Tomas.

The English and Scandinavian names
;

of this period are nearly all

of the foreign names the doubtful found on Anglo-Saxon coins 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 II, Hathebrand, Sindi, Walcin, and the doubtful Bat and
;

Coc.

It is in the reign of

Henry

I,

and

chiefly

toward the end
in

of the

reign, that

new

foreign

names appear

these are mostly Frankish, a few

Romance and

Biblical

any number 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 Oboli, &c. 12 Denarii

20 Solidi
6 Librae

= 1 Obolus, Maille, &c. = 1 Denarius. = 1 Solidus. = 12 Orae or Unciae Auri=l Libra. = 9 Marcae Argenii
1

Marca Auri.

Minuta
Sir

also

occurs once in Domesday, and

was supposed by

Ellis to represent the Northumbrian Styca. Perhaps a more likely interpretation. farthing In the Laws, the Mercian and West-Saxon shillings of 5 and

Henry

is

4 pence respectively are
also occurs.

still

found.

The Thrymsa (= ^ Ora?)
1

The Domesday methods

of

payment

are

by

tale,

by

tale of

pennies of standard weight (20 to the ounce), by weight, by weight
1

Hughes, Crump and Johnson, Dialogue de Scaccario, pp. 34 ff.

clx

INTRODUCTION

of silver of approved fineness or (occasionally) blanched,

by

tale

of pennies of standard weight
(1130), in addition to

and

fineness.

In the

first

Pipe Roll

payments are in which seems to occur
1

and by weight, blanch payments by regular use. A method of payment, ad scalam,
tale

in the reign of
is

Henry

I,

but to have fallen

into disuse before 1130,
assay.

the addition of 5 per cent, in lieu of

MINTS.
(See Table of Mints, Moneyers, and Types.)
If

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.

The mints

Confessor, or Harold II, of which no coins of the Conqueror's reign

are

now known,

are Axbridge, 2 Aylesbury, Berkeley, Bridgnorth,
St.

Buckingham, Bury
ford,

in

Islip, Langport, LydLymne, Newport, Pershore, Petherton, Reading, Richborough the Conqueror's reign are added Bridport, Cardiff, Christchurch
;

Edmunds, Horndon,

3

or

Twynham, Durham, Launceston, Marlborough, Northampton, Pevensey, Rhuddlan, St. Davids. The mints of William II number 4 fifty-seven, no coins of this king being known of Barnstaple,
4

Bath,

Bedwin, Bridport,
4

ampton,

Rhuddlan,

St.

Durham, 4 NorthDavids, Winchcombe, and only one new
Cardiff, Christchurch,

4

mint, Totnes, being added.
of Carlisle

In the reign of Henry I the mints
appear,

and Pembroke

first

the

first

coins since the reign of the Confessor,
of

and of Bury St. Edmunds and no coins are
Hertford, Hythe,
5

known
Stafford,

Cambridge,
5

Cricklade,

Guildford,

Launceston,
5

Marlborough, Pevensey, Malmesbury, 5 Watchet. Stephen's mints number fifty or Steyning,

Maldon,

1

2
3

R. L. Poole, The Exchequer in the Twelfth Century, p. 32. For many of these attributions see Brit. Num. Journ., vol.

vi,

But

see below, p. clxiv, for coins attributed to this mint,

and

pp. 13 ff. for confirma-

tion of the grant of a
4

moneyer by William

I.

5

Coins of Henry I are Coins of Stephen are
is

known of these mints. known of these mints, but

the attribution to Launces-

ton

doubtful.

MINTS
1

fifty-one,

two, or perhaps three,

new mints
.
.

Castle Rising, the uncertain
coins being

Bran

.,

appearing, namely and perhaps Rye, and no

known

of Christchurch, Dorchester, Ilchester, Rochester,

Romney, Southampton, Totnes, Wallingford, Wareham. To determine the number of moneyers employed in each mint
at this period is impossible.
in

The largest number

of

names occurring

any one type
all

not

will frequently be too high, as the moneyers may 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 a comparison of the two estimates will provide a standpoint from

which the mints

in relation to their

may be viewed own position

in relation to each other,

and

in the reign of the Confessor.

In the reigns of Henry I and Stephen, the great rarity of most of the types prevents any estimate being made of 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
possible

the Conquest are considered.
is

The estimate

of the Confessor's reign
collection

based

mainly upon the British
in

Museum

and the

principal public and private cabinets.

References to numbers of

moneyers

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 yEthelstan there was

&

steady increase of moneyers until the reign of the Confessor, for the enormous output of the reign of ^Ethelred seems to have necessitated at all the mints a great increase in their number.

which

is

reduced again by the time of the Confessor.

Barnstaple (Domesday: Barnestaple}. The attribution to this mint of coins previously attributed to Bardney is satisfactorily
1

This does not include coins of irregular issues
'

'.

INTRODUCTION
established.
1

The

coins of Leofwine

(William

I,
;

type II) read

apparently Bur (p. 15, no. 74), Buri (W. C. Wells) Major CarlyonBritton (Brit. Num. Journ., vol. ix, p. 143) assigns them to

Bury

type VIII), here attributed to Bath, are by Major Carlyon-Britton described
I,

St.

Edmunds.

The Godesbrand

coins (William

under Barnstaple.

Of the

Confessor's reign, only one

money er, .^Elfric,

is

at present

known;

the post-Conquest coins also justify an assumption that

Barnstaple was one of the boroughs which had one moneyer only. At this mint the increase of moneyers in the reign of ^Ethelred II

noteworthy no fewer than three (^Elfsige, Birhsige andHuniga) seem to have been at work at the same time.
is
;

Bath (Domesday
the city and period 1089
its

Bade). In the grant by William Rufus of customs to Bishop John, which is assigned to the 2 January 1091, the mint is specially mentioned, and
:

also in the confirmation of this charter

by Henry

I

3
;

the properties
of 1088, or

of the mint, therefore,

presumably escaped the

fire

were quickly restored, though at present we know no Bath coins In Domesday (I. 87) the mint pays 100 shillings. of William II.

The

attribution of coins of Godesbrand to Barnstaple or Bath is

quite uncertain.

As the name Osmser
types
I,

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

;

in the Confessor's reign also,

two

at least

worked

together, namely ^Eglmser and Wsedell (followed by ^Ethelmser), and, later, Godric (followed by Willewine) and Osmaer.

Bedford (Domesday Bedeford). In the reigns of William I and 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.
1

Num.

2
3

Chron., 1897, pp. 302 ff. Davis, Regesta, vol. i, no. 326.
vol.
ii,

;

1898, pp. 274

if.

;

1911, p. 274.

Dugdale, Monasticon,

p. 268.

. citing and seem to me to be better interpreted as dies. Bradninch. 1902. Bristol (Domesday Bristou). the latter part of the reign two in type G. 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). is Their attribution quite uncertain. now a specimen in the Carlyon-Britton collection as ORGAR ON BRAES but the last two letters of this inscription are uncertain. 2 The name of this moneyer has been variously read as Sinot. Senwi. Gild. Brunstan 1 Colblac Sendi. In the reigns of the two Williams of two is the lowest possible number moneyers working together. For an Coins are first Num. as seems more probable. coins of his or any other reign are yet : known of this mint. occurs on coins of the last type of Stephen's reign. In the early part of the Confessor's reign three is the lowest in possible number. and five names occur in type (Hildebrand) D . preserved only of the reign of the Confessor of the Conqueror. p. names appear. is possible. in ME or NE .MINTS clxiii Bedwin or Great Bedwin (Domesday account of this mint see : Bedvinde). but so few as two are unlikely. 1 2 . and of Leofwine of Ceorl Swein 1 bable. 75) says that in the time of the Confessor there was one moneyer here. another specimen from the same Copenhagen Museum. and therefore shows that... Circ. : Of the who type of William I we have coins of two moneyers. 1914. Chron. Bridport (Domesday Brideporf). and would necessitate a succession Hwateman Brihtword Barcwit. or. and of the is type Only one moneyer. . unless they were contemporaneous. misses the same two letters. the 1 A common obverse die of these two moneyers is more rusted when used by Brunstan. 2 five A larger number is pro- In the 'Paxs' type. 20-5. Andrew (Num. were presumably not working at the same time no other last . and three names occur Either a reduction of moneyers took place at this mint during the Confessor's reign. Domesday (I. . &c. pp. known. Mr. Brunstan was later than Swein. Bran . in Devonshire. 632) suggests Braines.

Edmunds (Domesday: Villa ubi quiescit humatus Sanctus Eadmundus). In the reigns of Henry I and Stephen the name of the mint is represented by an abbreviated form of Sancti Edmundi. variety II. and as far as we know on coins at present the earliest instance of the form is Bury (Beri) of the latter part of the reign of Henry III. for Stephen's confirmation charter (ibid. or occasionally of Edmundi (Sancti being omitted).. 36) adds a second die. 14847. Villa Sancti seems to be usual. 1 In charters of the Norman period. and the remainder to Sandwich the attribu. (p. SAN.). Addit. One die only was allowed to the Abbot.. Mus. no coins of either of the two Williams are assigned to this monastic mint. Calne (Domesday : Cauna.. Empress Matilda Henry of Anjou (pp. Apart from Major Carlyon-Britton's attribution of the coins of the Conqueror's second type which read LEOFPINE ON BVRI. cxxii Bury St.' tions are not likely to be correct in every case. the few years ' before. Calne). this Catalogue has mainly followed the principle of assigning to coins of Bury money ers who can be shown by other coins to have struck at this mint. B.INTRODUCTION Bristol coinage of the last after. cxviii). and with coins reading SA. fol. 36 b and 38).. Ixxxii). &c. though in the Confessor's charter the form Seint Edmundesbiri is used. and is followed by another charter granting a third die. should be assigned to Bury. 31) was confirmed by William I and William II (ibid. fol. The grant of one money er to the Abbot by the Confessor (Brit. ' mint are described above (p. (p. Roth's collection. implying possibly the addition of a second and a third moneyer. Unless a coin of Stephen's last type in Mr. Some coins of the Empress Matilda are tentatively attributed to this borough (see above. Irregular Issues of the reign of Stephen struck at this is . and of the period Conquest ' Coins of poorly represented at the present day. as in Domesday. &c. MS. 1 . on which the moneyer's name is illegible and the mint is represented by the letters BVR. 33 b). they are of variety Pereric ' I ' Erased Obverse ' Ixxvi). and Henry I (ibid. fol. f.. fol. Confusion with the mint of Edmundi Sandwich is inevitable.

beginning of the reign of William Eight names occur in the of moneyers immediately after due to the chance circumstance of rarity probably of the coins at the present day. the this Cambridge (Domesday : Grantebrige). William of Malmesbury (Rolls Series. or even four. bearing the mint- name (' of Canterbury. four of the King. Rossler. 250 ii. Cardiff. moneyers seem to have been employed in the reign of the Confessor. pp. 556. it therefore lay in a district essentially Angevin. no. Ixxxii. 1 and fabric Cariti. Ixxviii. cxx. Irregular coinages in the reign of Stephen. p. only one moneyer after the Conquest is evidence of the coins at present known. 90). The attribution to Cardiff of a few coins of the last type of William I is based on their resemblance in style to the coins of St. and there appears to be an Paxs ' type. On her way to p. seven moneyers of Canterbury are mentioned. Davids. both in the reign of the Confessor and after the Conquest. Bristol in 1139. and was presumably in Angevin possession throughout the Civil War. . but employment of just possible on the it The seems unlikely. though from the coins at present as few as three moneyers may have been employed at the I. No coins are yet known In the Greatley laws Canterbury (Domesday: Cantuaria). and after the Conquest six or seven overlap from the end of the known ' Conqueror's into Eufus's reign. . The low number the Conquest is establishment of seven moneyers. Empress travelled by way of Calne. and on the forms Cairdi. (' Erased Obverse ') ? and II Pereric Coins of the Empress have been attributed to this mint. As many as three. and at 1 point Waleran of Meulan left her in charge of the Legate.MINTS Calne is situated west of Maryborough and midway cxx). p. See above. Mathilde. as in the reign of ^Ethelstan. later than the reign of William II. are of varieties I '). by vol. two of the Archbishop. between Malraesbury in the north and Devizes in the south. and one of the Abbot. In the reign of the Confessor seven moneyers must have been working together.

and was perhaps struck after Scottish occupation. . (See H. 24 A) and by King David (Burns.clxvi INTRODUCTION which the mint is rendered on them. C. 337. in possession of Carlisle before he seized the in the year 1136. Foundations. 2 Castle Rising (Domesday: Risinga). Carlisle. See Num. Coinage of Scotland. the coins must have been struck a few years after the building of the castle. vol. Chron. no. 189) and 1 2 See Ramsay. is to be read as Carlisle (the name Erembald bears the type of the last issue of occurs also on Edinburgh coins of David lot 1090).. Davids. with the earldom of Huntingdon. or shortly before. no. At the beginning of 1136 Carlisle of the peace it was seized was granted to his by David. ii. It is supposed that William I established the castle at Cardiff in 1080 on his return from the expedition to St. p. the coin was presumably struck rather later than the I issue of Henry from which it was copied . on which the mint-name appears as Risinge (p. as far as it we know. 1889. III. p. pp. 17. Rashleigh sale. the establishment of the bishopric under the metropolitan of York in 1132. A . This seems to be the only possible attribution for coins of the last issue of Stephen. PI.. first op. for the Scottish king was not. bears strong resemblance in style to the Scottish coinage of David. Lawrence if the mint. One of the coins described below.) W. those which copy the type of Stephen being presumably the earliest. coin of David which Henry I (L. 27 ff. Risinges the moneyer's name is lun or Hiun. . 335 ff. or shortly after. 122. p. about the time of. and in the terms son Henry. 529. In 1092 the city sovereignty and the castle built. cf. pp. A. 370. England under Normans and Angevins. I. cit. was refounded under English but no coins are known of the I. Coins seem to have been struck here by Earl Henry (Burns. mint of Carlisle is earlier than the fourteenth type of Henry that to say. 1 If correctly attributed.) . 1136. which is was Erebald struck a collection) by moneyer not clearly legible. Davis. and struck in.

113. working together at the end of the Conqueror's reign ' four names appear in the Paxs ' type (five if Sunulf and Unnulf are not identical). The coins of the Confessor suggest a larger number. 2 though the main principle of distinction is now clearly explained. 112. The difficulty of distinguishing the Chester and Leicester coins. 595).MINTS clxvii Coins of types II and VI of the same reign struck by Robert On Ris may also with probability be attributed to Castle Rising. 594. for example. Lehri on coins of ^Egelwine necessitate the attribution to Leicester of the remaining coins of this money er. in William I's second type there are six. but may perhaps be assigned to Rye. continues in this period. 598) other coins of the same type. which read Leg. Lecstr}> type of Henry I. Lifinc. 17). Legi. Not fewer than three moneyers appear to be and Sunulf . Num. and also in the fourteenth type of Henry I . no. and must be considered in connexion with the moneyers' names . of Stephen's first type is uncertain money er on Ri 337. 20) also of doubtful attribution. namely. Chester Cestre (Domesday: Cestre). . no. p. 12 ff. Chron. 632. if the Carlyon-Britton coin is correctly read (Legc). and these are late as the third and even as here attributed to Leicester in order to avoid. Those of Rawulf given to this sometimes identified with the Rie of Stephen's second type are here also 1 mint. p. Circ. for in his reign eight moneyers can be counted whose issues overlap in two or more types. Leh. nos. therefore. pp. Legri.. 1 2 Num. Lif wine. the attribution of any but Cestre readings to Chester at so late a period. 1914. The coin (p. Later in Henry's reign there are some coins with ambiguous readings.. The first appearance of the form on coins is an isolated instance in the last issue of William I . and. retain the old name Legecestre or Lehecestre. where possible. (Leiec. which is On New Borough of of Domesday (I. and from still the same obverse die (p. the readings Legr. ^Elfsige. and might otherwise be equally well assigned to either Lege-(Lehe-)cestre or LegraThe old form continues in the reign of William II (Lehra-)cestre. the abbreviated readings on the coins are frequently ambiguous. 1891. (see below.

cxxxi). The coins of Anjou and William (of Gloucester ?) which bear a mintHenry name Crst have also been attributed to Christchurch (see p. three moneyers at least were contemporaneous. were two at least. and had paid in the time of the Confessor. p. but their number is not given also (II. and Twynham the name of the town. cxxviii) . four 1 See above. pp. cxlii. and Num. reduced by William pounds. . p. p. M. 107) the moneyers paid. probably four. vol. cix. 161. CataL.. 116. pp. Colchester (Domesday : Golecestra). 107 b) the burgesses of Colchester with Rochester). Colbrand. Journ.INTRODUCTION Alcsige. it following B. 1 I to ten In the reign of the Conqueror. ii. vi. Brunninc. which have pre- viously been assigned to Christchurch (see above.). Tuinam). . note 1. p. for their mint. The Greatley Synod mentions Chichester as having one moneyer. v. In the reign of the Confessor the number was apparently not less than three (^Elfwine. vol. but in the reign of Stephen Christchurch was still probably the name of the Abbey only. cxxviii. 161 by Major Carlyonff. No Num. Angloseems to have been confused In Domesday (II. of I and Henry I Num. This mint has been identified on coins of William Britton in Brit. four pounds. Chichestcr (Domesday : Cicestre).. for In the Norman period there Brunman and Godwine were certainly ' ' working together in the reign of William II.. Journ. and Brand and Godwine in the reign of Henry I in the Paxs type two names . Malm. and Maldon paid twenty pounds. (in mint in the laws of ^Ethelstan Brit. Christchurch (Domesday: Thuinam. Leofwine and Sweartcol. Godwine and Wulfric). Huscarl. Cirencester is here suggested as the mint of the coins of (of Gloucester?) Henry of Anjou and William above mentioned. it was the scene of the council held by the leaders of that party in 1 142 (W. vol. 1901. only appear. Saxon Coins. Cirencester was probably an important Angevin centre. mention is made of this Chron. Leofnod.

p. The coin described in B. and one in the eighth. vol. vol.. coin of Harold I. if doubtful coins have been ' Paxs ' . moneyer is allowed to Dorchester. in the reign of the Confessor five is the lowest number estimated from the : coins now known. 194. For irregular coinage (variety IV see above. p. Coins of the Norman period justify the assumption that two the coins we may conclude that the moneyers continued to work at coins are yet 1 this mint after the Conquest. 603 (now in the Fox collection). followed by Hwateman. and twenty shillings qucmdo moneta vertebatur. and two names occur in the Paxs type Derby ' ' . Num.MINTS clxix occur in the in the reign of Rufus their number type seems to have been not less than four. In the Greatley laws one In Domesday Book (I. After the Conquest it is not necessary to assume an establishment of more than two moneyers but in the at Derby. in the time of the Confessor. CataL. 1909. Brit. But the form Vises ' ' is not used in contemporary documents. a coin of Henry of Anjou. For a coin of the reign Stephen attributed to this town see Rashleigh sale. . Swartinc. coins of this mint are known later than the reign of William II. and Wulfeh). Warminster (cf. Dorchester (Domesday : Dorecestre). no. 355. . lot 627. early part of the reign of the Confessor there appear to have been three at the same time (Froma. Anglo-Saxon Coins. type of the Conqueror. correctly read. ii. Cricklade (Domesday Crichelade). Leofred Wulstan ^Elfwine Edouf two names occur No in the fifth. A (b)) of the reign of Stephen Devizes (Domesday: of lot Theodulveside). vi. I should attribute to M. after the Conquest there were probably two. 75) two moneyers are mentioned as paying each a mark of silver. p. assuming a succession of moneyers. Also in the same sale. (Domesday: Derby). No known of the first three types of the Conqueror. xcv. In the reign of the Confessor two moneyers seem to have been employed at Cricklade. Journ. though one will just suffice for the coins at present known. 41). and Blacaman. From two moneyers in the Con1 fessor's reign were Godwine.

Erami . Only three names occur on coins of Perhaps the number was reduced in the middle I. i. . and after the Conquest the same number seems two and the ' to be required by the coins at 'present earlier part of the Conqueror's reign. and four also appear to be contemporaneous in the early part of his reign. 148). In the reign of the Confessor as last many as four moneyers overlap in the two types. Durham. if so. Paxs ' type. which was supposed to confer the right of coinage is among other privileges upon the bishops. Gloucester (Domesday: (I. known of this mint earlier than the Paxs type of William I but no definite evidence can be obtained from this concerning the date of that type. certainly spurious (see Davis. Num. vol. as the charter of William I. Dover (Domesday: Dovre). In the reign of the Confessor there appear to be five moneyers working at the same time. A coin of William (of Gloucester ?) may possibly be attributed to this mint. Gloivecestre). the mint quickly recovered Exeter coins of the Conqueror's second its former activity. see above.INTRODUCTION possibly none were struck at Dorchester so soon after the ravages following the rising in the South-west in 1068. At the time of the Domesday Survey 162) the mint of Gloucester paid twenty . p. no. The Greatley Synod mentions Exeter as having two moneyers under ^Ethelstan. 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 moneyers striking the earlier and later appears) in the Paxs type five names occur. See Brit. of the reign of William reflected in the rarity of Possibly the ravages of 1068 are type. ' names may denote two issues on which the name ' . . is ix. ' ' No coins are .. 138-9. Regesta. for a coin of the fifth type of William 1 which attributed to Great Yarmouth. cxxxi. Exeter (Domesday: Execestre. vol. Exonia). or four if known of the we assume that different moneyers of the name of Li fwine struck in the first last types of the reign. Journ. pp.

Geldeford). p. but perhaps the number was reduced by William in successive types. cxxi. : From the coins Guildford (Domesday Gildeford. A coin of the second type of William I in the York Museum reads J-ERPlONCTKOMttES The moneyer's name (Earnwi ?) suggests Shrewsbury. I. Domesday (I. 179) tells us of seven moneyers having been employed at this mint in the reign of the Confessor. issue of William I. and in the time of the Confessor also this is possible. ^Elfwine Blacaman ^Elfric Godwine Leof wold.. one of them being the Bishop's moneyer. the of the Confessor's reign by at least three moneyers. and the confusion of G and S is not uncommon on coins. Colswegen. whose reign four moneyers only overlap and four names only occur on coins of the in 'Paxs' type. . not more than five moneyers can be shown to have worked together in the reign of . Grombes . Under the Confessor there appear to be no fewer than six moneyers employed. reads fcCEHAHiiiOM^EDVI:. ? A coin of Stephen's last type. One moneyer was allowed Hastings (Domesday Hastinges). . known at the present day one would suppose this mint to have employed one moneyer only after the Conquest. But Grimsby (Domesday Grlmesbi) : is not impossible. followed after the Conquest : by Seric zElfric.MINTS pounds to the King. Duninc and Theodred. assuming a succession of moneyers.. the laws of At end yEthelstan. For a coin of Henry of Anjou attributed to Gloucester see above. From the evidence of the coins at present known. but Hythe is possible Domesday Hede). which is in the Hunterian collection. mint is identification of the (cf. quite uncertain. Hedu The . though two names only appear on the last together at Hastings. worked and in the reign of William II the same number was employed.. Hereford (Domesday: Hereford}.

successive types of M. and four occur in the Paxs type of the Conqueror. Domesday coins 203) says that three moneyers were here in the time of the Confessor. No coins are known after the reign of William Rufus. there is no reason to suppose that more than one worked at at one time.INTRODUCTION the Confessor and not more than four after the Conquest. may be assigned to this mint. and also the use at this mint of dies previously used at Canterbury. No . There appear to have been not fewer than three moneyers employed at Hertford in the : reign of the Confessor.) coins are known after the reign of William unless the Hunterian coin of Stephen's last issue (see above. but not at the time of the Survey. all Museum Catalogue certain. Hertford (Domesday Herford. Ilchester (Domesday: Glvelcestre). Presumably a borough employing one moneyer only. cxxi. Edred is the only moneyer present II. I. five is names appearing in any type of the Confessor. In the reign Hythe (Domesday : Hede). Huntingdon (Domesday: Huntedone. Gated. (I. in the British As many as five names occur in his third type are not (Hildebrand C). the largest of ' ' number p. In the Confessor's reign. . though as many as four names occur. Only a few coins of the least Confessor's reign are known.. The now known show only two moneyers overlapping in the Confessor. The rusty condition of the obverse dies which struck the Conqueror's coins of this mint noteworthy. Hildebrand G). William ' Paxs ' type. Hertforde). but as many as four names occur (B. Hedu is . known. in one of his types After the Conquest two moneyers are evidently contemporaneous in the early part of the reign of but one only occurs in the of William II one only is certain. xi. After the Conquest. Huntedun). but two moneyers at seem to . but the readings In the reigns of the two Williams two moneyers seem to be at work. For coins of Henry of Anjou struck at Hereford see above.

. Anglo-Saxon Coins. . XIV. iii. p. says that in the time of the Confessor the moneyers paid four pounds a year. The bar across one of the limbs of the reverse cross on coins I's of William.. sixth type is curious and evidently serves some is definite purpose. 1 . 120 b). 157) to They iii.. Chron. pp.. which reads known type V) has no moneyer's name. ii.. four years previous to the Survey they paid only twenty-seven pounds. Gipewiz).e. 238. Coins of the first type of Stephen with this reading the mint were tentatively attributed by Rashleigh 1850. pp. 46. Wulfwine) rather than Alfwine. names occur. I should read : Canwa (Canterbury). to Under the Confessor not fewer than four moneyers appear ' have been employed. 107 ff. Num. in his account of the Watford find (Num. 432-5). vol. Num. are p. vol. now assigned to Launceston (Brit. M. as the same feature found on coins of this mint of the Confessor's reign (see B. Stephen at Launceston (Brit. in lots 518 and 519 of Rashleigh sale. Launceston (Domesday Lanscavetone). : Domesday (II. vol. Journ. 237. 113). The Domesday passage (1. connects the earlier reading which omits the moneyer's name with the ' ' later which omits the Ulfwine Possibly on coins of the Paxs type the moneyer's name should be read as (i. Catal. CTODRIE ON SIN^S^FFNI 1 (see PI. . Canonici Sancti Stefani tenent Lanscavetone. is After the Conquest the same number necessary for the coins at present known. iv. For Lanwa. Lansa of . but clearly intended for Sancti Stefani . The earliest coin of this mint at present (William I. is presumably an engraver's error for ^Egelwine.). 290 b) Ipswich (Domesday Gi^)eswic. and in the reign of the Conqueror no fewer than three in the Paxs type as many as six moneyers' ' . has a reverse legend which is and the Hunterian coin of type VI. Wsegelwine on p. 68 ff. p. leaves little doubt of the correctness of Major Carlyon-Britton's attribution of coins to the church of St. 371. Lancaster. nos. in which case five moneyers only are known of this type. 15). Journ. nos.MINTS clxxiii have been working together. vol. and at the time of the Survey twenty pounds in the .

a misreading. and Types and notes on Chester above Leives (Domesday ^Ethelstan. but the attribution of the In the Conqueror's reign only two are apparent on the coins. 2 If the coin of Godric of type II is. with the reading 1 possibly be assigned to Launceston. as seems likely. Eadwine. moneyers seem to have been employed. (p. In the reign of the Confessor there were not fewer than four moneyers (Eadward. . ' ' Lincoln (Domesday: Lincolia).276) in Cuff(lot 758). Godwine and Oswold) overlapping in types (Hildebrand) F and H the coins known of the two Williams will allow of so low a number as two . Not fewer than four moneyers seem to have worked together in the Confessor's reign. At the beginning of the reign of William I. one may assume that the number but as this necessitates the close Three seem to overlap from the reign In the Paxs type three occur.INTRODUCTION title Sancti. and hence the supposition that no new types of these moneyers remain to be found. 230) twenty pounds yearly number is not mentioned. namely ^Egelric. was not less than three. and Simpson Rostron (lot 40) sales. allowed to Lewes by as In Domesday 26) moneyers are mentioned renovatur. may Coins of Stephen. ^Egelwine. clxvii). are probably of Lewes. . Moneyers. (Domesday Ledccestre). Two moneyers were (I. coins of The Lawa Leicester Henry : I. 336 b) says that the mint at Lincoln then paid seventy-five pounds. For attributions to this also mint see foot-notes to Table of Mints. . now in Captain Alan Dawnay's collection. the their King at the time of the Survey (I. : Lewes). perhaps even one only might have been employed 2 but the amount of the moneyers' payment ^Egelric is and Leofric coins doubtful. paying twenty is shillings cum moneta but their number not given. mentioned above. there seem 1 Perhaps also the coin of type III (Hks. Godric and Leofric. of William II to that of Henry I. sequence Oswold ^Elfric Brihtmser. Lansa. In the early part of the Confessor's reign not fewer than ten. Domesday (I. and towards the end of the reign not fewer than eight. The moneyers of Leicester paid . Murchison (lot 33). in Domesday suggests a larger number. type XIV.

and of Hereford fifty-nine coins served to produce four moneyers' names.140 had disappeared since the Confessor's day. 166 of these had been demolished in building the castle and only seventy-four had fallen into ruin owing to misfortunes. Under the Confessor we find from the coins no fewer than twenty-five moneyers working together in the early part of the reign. Probably there was a decrease in the establishment of the mint at Lincoln towards the close of the Conqueror's reign. For irregular coinages (II f. In the reign of William II there appear to be two or three moneyers. On Henry Nicole the coins of I. five ' or six appear to be working type only two names occur. c) only twelve names are known as opposed to thirty-two type (Hildebrand B). of 1. Ixxxii. find. xcvi : London (Domesday Lundonia). in his fourth and fifth types. but in the Paxs ' tive scarcity of coins of the Northern mints in the Beaworth . for in the Beaworth hoard there were 171 coins of Lincoln representing only two moneyers. and seven names occur in his second type similarly. loss of whereas of Canterbury 285 coins represented as many as eight moneyers. 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 is name of the mint. and fire. In the reign of ^Ethelstan London had eight moneyers. though 240 ruansiones out of a total . and a consequent but moneyers' names of these mints this is not a probable explanation. and IV B ()) of the reign of Stephen see above. though Domesday gives no signs of any serious decrease in the prosperity of the city for.MINTS to be seven moneyers who continue from the reign of the Confessor or Harold II. but the coins are few and some readings uncertain. poverty. This great decrease in the number of moneyers represented on coins of the end of the Conqueror's reign may possibly be due to a comparatogether . var. pp. and in his last type but one (Hildebrand A. and in the middle of the reign at least twenty. Under William I there seem to be not fewer than nine or ten moneyers employed at the beginin his third (?) . but at the end of the reign about twelve only seem to be contemporaneous. .

Ckrou.. 23 ff. 153.. or even of any altering of the die. (?) For a coin of Henry of Anjou see above. p. . I is quite uncertain all that I have seen are from the also same dies and from an obverse die which was used at The low weight of the British Museum specimen ascertained the weight of the Hunterian and York have not (I specimens) suggests forgery. Cild. p. Major Carlyon-Britton has shown that the mint and the moneyer. on the coins. and Num. Maint William . p. paying shillings for the mint. last six types of William I. tioned in This borough is men64 as 100 b) Domesday (I. pp. employed at the mint. In Num. The attribution of these coins of the second type of . as For coins of the variety of Stephen's reign described see above. Chroii. perhaps concurrently with an increase in the activity of the smaller provincial mints. Probably a reduction of the staff of the London mint took place ' ' in the Confessor's reign. 1911. were probably transferred from Bedwin to Marlborough. 285) suggests some confusion between ^Elfwine and /Elfword. attributed to Malmesbury Marlborough (Domesday: Merleberye}. p. 1902. From the coins now known one moneyer only may have been Malmesbury (Domesday: Malmesberie). and only of the William II. but the alteration of the die ' that was used to strike no. note. The payment by the burgesses assessed in of Maid on for their mint is Domesday with that of the Colchester burgesses. cxxi. No coins known after the reign of William II. but there is no trace of false work. Coins of Marlborough are known of this moneyer only.INTRODUCTION ning of the reign. . Three names occur in the Paxs type. Maldoti (Domesday: Melduna). of regular issues are Two occur in the ' Paxs ' type. and of the first of Newark. IV A (a). and in the Paxs type eight names occur. ' Two moneyers at least were employed in the reign of the Confessor. No coins are known after the reign of William II. and also after the Conquest. 821 (see below. xcv.. . Thetford.

p. The moneyer of this is Ssewine. : Coins of the Confessor's reign are rare and show no satisfactory sequences. The only coins. see above. ' or Tutbury ?). v. From Domesday we learn that the bishop could have one moneyer at he wished. and two names occur in the Paxs For varieties of Stephen's reign. but they confirm the number of moneyers mentioned in Domesday as being. At the end of the reign of Henry I as many as four moneyers occur at this mint. ix. Hantone). pp. pp. As many the coins are correctly attributed. at least. Num. As many as eight names appear in the Paxs type but of these some. I and IV A (c) (Nottingham type. Ixxvii. Not fewer than five moneyers appear to have worked together at . p. 280) mentions two moneyers here in the time of the Confessor. The reading no. and not less than two of these must have worked together. clxxxii. such ' ' . See Brit. Norwich (Domesday: Norwic). where most of the coins of Henry. xcvi.). pp. Snotingham).. 117 b) this mint if (II. Ixxvi ff. Norwich under the Confessor after the Conquest four is the lowest number available from the coins at present known. Nottingham (Domesday Snotingeham. q. Journ. The ' coins of the reign of William I show that there were two moneyers at least after the Conquest. are uncertain and may perhaps be blundered as twelve names. 163). Hence it is possible that other coins attri- moneyer on which the form Hamtune occurs should be buted to Northampton rather than Southampton.. 140 ff. Domesday (I. Earl of Northum- m . vol. 362. if forms of names already included. NON is attributed to Norwich (see below. earlier than the thirteenth type of Henry I. Outchester. appear in the first type of Stephen. Coins of Stephen's reign struck from erased obverse dies are known of this mint (see above. which can with any certainty be attributed to this mint are those of the second type of William I which bear Nothant as the name of the mint.MINTS clxxvii Northampton (Domesday: Northantone. the lowest number possible. as Godwid and Inhuhe.

grants the Abbey the privileges formerly held. 390. vol. it vol. 88 A) on which the same mint and moneyer are identified. was working for the Abbot of Peterborough through the Norman period.. A coin of the ninth type of Henry ? I (Hks. but the moneyer is not mentioned in the charter of William I. The mint quite uncertain : possibly Winchester Peterborough (Domesday Burg).. p. and makes specific mention of the coining-die in If one of the Stamford. vol. iii. Coins of this mint of the fourteenth type of Henry I have been identified by Major Carlyon-Britton (Brit. i. . Oxford (Domesday: Oxeneford). I do not think that he can now be identified. Pembroke. is suggested as the possible place of (a). mintage of the varieties IV C See above. 54-6) from an entry on the Pipe Roll of 1130. i. pp. For Oxford coins of the Empress Matilda see above. but in the Paxs type only three ' ' names occur. Pevenesel). of whom there were than four in the Conqueror's reign. (6). The grant of Edgar Cartularium Saxonicum. 543 and 582) included one moneyer in Stamford. in which a payment Stephen's first made by Gillopatric the moneyer. no. p. p. *A!. cxix. In the reign of the Confessor seven seems to be the lowest number of moneyers that can have worked together. vol.. not less Stamford moneyers. pp. Num. A coin of type was recently acquired by the British Museum is (see below. have been found. and seven is the largest number of names occurring in any one type. in a charter to Peterborough Abbey no. P in (or Wl)ene . (c). Journ. In the reigns of the two Williams. 8) the privileges granted (Birch. ii. 348. published in Dugdale's jllonasticon.INTRODUCTION berland. Immediately after the Conquest at least six seem to be contemporaneous. 263) Copenhagen Museum is reads . The bull of Eugenius III. xcviii ff. by Edgar and other kings.VHEDIOHIPENE: In 1067 William I confirmed (Davis. Regesta. pp. Pevensey (Domesday : No coins of Pevensey are known before the Conquest.

" Ibid. iv. 269) that Robert de Roelent . . is Num.. known. p. 373-4. Printed in full in Dugdale's Monasticon. Gors. probably not many years later. Pevensey was presumably one of the boroughs that were allowed one moneyer only. where Domesday says held medietatem monetse ' ' (I. pp. vol. (see Brit. Harley MS. donavi Radingiam cum moneta et uno monetario apud 1 This privilege seems to have been soon exchanged Radingiam '). In the foundation charter of Henry I (1125) a grant was conferred upon the Abbey of a mint and moneyer at Reading Reading. 16. namely Edgar.. vol. 41 ff... 1708. and in Stephen's reign Alwine. . 1 Two After the Conquest two moneyers only names only occur in the Paxs type. There can be no doubt of the attribution of 'Paxs' type coins of William I to : Rhuddlan.MINTS Clxxix ^Elfheh was the Pevensey moneyer. 28. ii. and in Num. Mus. at the king's order granted to the Abbot and monks one moneyer in London. but of ' ' Brit. 3 Chron. two for the king and one for the Whether the bishop's privilege continued to the time bishop. at least. (' . Rhyd y See p. Roelent). . for the use of a moneyer at London. Bishop of Salisbury. We do not at .. fol. We may therefore assume that some. 1708. Coins of this mint are not common at any period.). 41. 1901. Mus. which are of the last type of Henry's were struck for the Abbot of Reading. pp. Journ. fol. Brit. fol. Harley MS. we have no knowledge. he Rhuddlan (Domesday Roelend. are necessary. of the Conquest and after. In the laws of ^Ethelstan Rochester had three moneyers. and Roger. m 2 . : Rochester (Domesday Rovecestre). name ^Edgar. Only one moneyer. of the London coins bearing the reign. but in the reign of the Confessor the coins are sufficient to show that not fewer than three moneyers worked together. . Elfwine. present know any still coins of this moneyer of the reign of Stephen have been working for the Abbot or have already been may replaced by another moneyer. 2 The 3 privilege of one moneyer at London was confirmed by Stephen. Ixxii. 113.

Edmunds. this to the second On the proposed attribution of some coins of Stephen to mint see above. or Num. Sanwic). clxvi (Castle Rising). no. and after the Conquest the same number is likely for. Davids. and both Winedi and I Wulfmser continue from the reign of William type of William II.. pp. 47 The (p. St. is at present hopeless. type of Henry : Romney (Domesday the Romenel). though two only occur in the Paxs type Confessor ' ' . appears in the first issue of William II. at present known. . one would think. M. Sandivich between this The confusion Sa-ndwic. reading Sand and Sandw. both in the Norman : period and in the reign of the Confessor. see Brit. 1161) might. no. be . from Salisbury (Domesday : Sarisberie). vol. Journ. should itself also be attributed to the mint of Three moneyers at least seem to have worked here in the reign of the Confessor. identity of the obverse die of a coin attributed to Shrewsbury . or perhaps three as in ^Ethelstan's time. 175. Catal.. Davids. the coins I. Davids coin is curious but the coarse work of both obverse and reverse of it that coin suggests that possibly St. In the Confessor's reign some coins of the moneyer Leof wine. St. 938) with that of a St. Norman the first times. ' Devitun ii. (Domesday mint and Bury St. Two moneyers. p. for Coc Conquest. For the attribution of coins reading Dewi-town. though two are. Two moneyers at least were (Wulfmser and Brungar Estin employed by As many as three seem to have been working after the Leofric). but a coin of the same moneyer of type (Hildebrand) G which reads Sauce (B. Rye. may be assumed to have been employed in No coins of this period are yet known later than I.C1XXX this ' INTRODUCTION ' mint only nine Paxs coins were described in the account of the Beaworth hoard. Davids. are no doubt correctly attributed to Sandwich. not impossible in the reign of William three moneyers are required by the coins of William II. ' to ff.

1911. p. three shillings apiece within fifteen et paid twenty days of the receipt of their dies. This lends some colour to Major Carlyon-Britton's attribution to Bury of I's second type reading Leofwine on Bur. Leofstan. 75). if we assume that the yElfward of type (Hildebrand) type G. This number agrees with the figure deduced from the coins now known of the Confessor's reign. The city of Shrewsbury had. for ^Elf heh. for Morcere was coining there in this issue. Sherborne.MINTS assigned with equal certainty to Bury l . Confessor there were three moneyers paying each a mark of silver and twenty shillings quando moneta vertebatur (Domesday. 273). Shrewsbury (Domesday : Sciropesberie). and show that at least two moneyers were employed together. Edmunds. 252). ^Elfheh. cxxviii. In the Conqueror's reign also. ^Elfgset. there appear to have been three moneyers. Shaftesbury (Domesday this : Sceptesberie) . . There is some confusion between this mint and Shrewsbury. but the remainder are Godwine are clearly quite uncertain. Sandwich moneyers. as well as in earlier and In the Conqueror's reign. From the coins as of his reign one would have supposed that as many four moneyers were working under and Wulfmser run from types (Hildebrand) 1 the Confessor. A to F. By the laws of ^Ethelstan In the reign of the mint was allowed two moneyers. in the time of the Confessor. but if moneyer from that of the same ^Elfward worked continuously through A was a different the reign there would appear to be not fewer than four moneyers employed. Of the later moneyers ^Elfgar and Godhese must be of Sandwich. Chron. For a coin of Henry of Anjou attributed to Sher borne see above. p. see above on Bury p. in which case there was more than one moneyer allowed to Bury at this period. and Leofwine coins of William St. moneyers who hoc fiebat moneta vertente (Domesday. I. and three occur on coins of the Paxs type. and later types. clxiv. as both mints seem to have had a moneyer of the name of Godesbrand ' ' in the reign of William I (see Num. I..

Davids. if to Sudbury is the doubtful moneyers are still all to be attributed to Southwark. which may possibly be attributed to this mint. D) are. Hanitune). The similarity of the abbreviated forms of the names Southwark and Sudbury makes the attribution of the coins difficult. 100). with one exception only (in the partition of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Sudwerche). no. i. p. On the confusion between Northampton and Southampton see North- Under ^Ethelstan. no. In the Table of Mints. but it may be that the coins of type E and F were not struck by the same ^Elfheh 1 as struck those of type A.INTRODUCTION occurs in type E. a part of his work which is probably not original. p. clxxvii. Shrewsbury and on the Southampton (Domesday: Hantone. 90. ampton. pp. 'Hamtune' ( = Southampton) had two moneyers. as the intervening types (C. It may be noted that. B. The attribution of coins of Hathebrand uncertain (see below. vol. there at this seem to have been not fewer than ' ' One name only mint both in the Confessor's reign and after occurs on Paxs coins. On the coin described on p. William of Malmesbury always. For an issue of the reign of Stephen (variety III 7). 938. 175. xci ff. p. In the reign of William I three moneyers were evidently contemporaneous and three names occur in the is ' Paxs type. no. clxxx. where the form Suthamtunensis is used Rolls Series. clxxxi. . to be correct. p. 264). : uses the forms Hamtona or Hamtuna for Southampton. difficulty of the identification of the Shaftesbury and Godesbrand on of see mints coins Shaftesbury. there are only three contemporaneous moneyers 1 Hildebrand. 645. Moneyers. I believe. see above. and invariably uses Northantona or Northantuna for Northampton. see St. Assuming the present attribution of coins to Southampton two moneyers the Conquest. and Types the forms found on coins of these two mints are inserted in foot-notes. Southwark (Domesday: tiudwerca. which certainly precedes F . not known ' of this moneyer. in the Gesta Regum. p. In the reign of the Confessor the only moneyer that can be assigned with any certainty Folcwine. Hantune.

or perhaps four. No coins are yet known later than the reign of William II. 79) 1 The coin of Godwins of the Confessor's last type (B. .MINTS necessitated clxxxiii three coins. Catalogue. moneyers. but in the reign of William II the coin of ^Elfward of the second type shows this moneyer to have been working with Godric. Sutberie). must have worked together. by the coins now known.. Mus. Statford). (Domesday : Statiinges). reign there seem to be only known in the Conqueror's last issue. but seems to have taken three only are at present place at an earlier period. This great reduction in the staff of the Stamford mint is similar to that at the neighbouring mint of Lincoln. From the few coins known of the Confessor's reign. Sussex. however. appear to have been employed by Conquest. William II. suggests the existence of more than one moneyer at Sudbury.(Domesday: Stadford. of whom we have a sequence of coins through the whole reign. Ixxvii. but one only is apparent from the In the Abbey Register coins both before and after the Conquest. Coins of the first two varieties of Stephen's reign occur of this mint (see above. One moneyer only seems to have been employed here both before l and after the Two. Steyning. After the Conquest also. The coins at present known show as many as eight moneyers to have been working at Stamford . 'ibi of Westminster (Brit. M. Stamford (Domesday : Stanford}. two moneyers' names occur. and five. Ill. in the early part of the Confessor's reign in the latter half of the Immediately after the Conquest there were not fewer than three. 286 b). fol. The phrase of Domesday sunt monetarii'. 5 Cotton MS. there is no reason to assume the existence of more than one moneyer at Stafford. pp. and four names occur on Paxs ' ' Stafford . Faustina A. no. In the second and last types of the Conqueror. Sudbury (Domesday: (II. 1218) I should assign to Stafford. Ixxxiii).

attributed to this mint. number possible of ' ' contemporaneous moneyers. p. and seven number of moneyers I. his moneyer. Tutbury. was recently found in the Old Sarum excavations. For a variety of Stephen's IV A (c). coins struck by Wulfric in the reigns of William and Henry I. No coins of issue of Totnes are known of the Confessor's reign. Two moneyers seem to have been employed at Tamworth in the Confessor's reign and in the reigns of the two Williams. On the confusion of Sudbury and South wark see above. Totheneis). who coined for the Confessor. Twynham. xcii). and six occur in the Paxs type. p.INTRODUCTION Henry I confirms the dedication St. of the Bartholomew at Sudbury to the use of the monks This confirms the attribution to Sudbury of the I. clxviii. xcvii. reign. church of by Wulfric. or is moneyers seem to have worked together. pp. . Coins of variety III 7 of Stephen's reign have been attributed to Taunton (see above. Tamworth (Domesday: Tameworde). Dunic. clxxxii. 1 See Christchurch. William II. of Stephen's reign. The second William II was the only post-Conquest type known of this mint until a coin of the first type of Henry. Assuming Folcserd. struck by the same moneyer. (II. Totnes (Domesday: Toteuais. of Westminster. p. are described above. to have been at work in the early issues of the Conqueror. in in the reign of William six 1 is the lowest any one type of the reign. At the time of the Domesday Survey perhaps six. Coins of this mint of varieties I and IV B (6). king for the mint. : Taunto n (Domesday Tantone). Tedfwt). the highest 119) Thetford paid 40 pounds a year to the In the Confessor's reign at least five. Ixxviii. p. Only one moneyer may have been employed at this mint both in the reign of the Confessor and after the Conquest. see above. xcvi. Thetford (Domesday: Tetford.

iv. on which the mint represented by the letter P W Num. ' ' There is sometimes . and twenty shillings quando moneta vertebatur (Domesday. In the Pipe Roll of the Henry I. cxxx. ' ' . a moneyer. is Wiltune).MINTS C1XXXV Wallingford (Domesday: Walengeford. Moneyers. 75). has been tentatively assigned to Wallingford (see Brit. Journ. For Wareham coins of the Empress Matilda and of William (of Gloucester?) see above. cxix. One moneyer only seems to have been employed at Watchet. I. Under the Confessor as many as five moneyers seem to have been employed. Walingeford). two names A (for coin of the sixth type of William is I. and Types. Under the Confessor there seem to have been not fewer than three moneyers employed at Warwick probably the same number were working in the reigns . had Tomas. 56). mentioned under Wiltshire as having . Wilton (Domesday: Wiltone. Watchet (Domesday Wacet). ?). In the laws of ^Ethelstan. Domesday mentions a money er here having a house free (I. On the possibility of ' ' . confusion with Wareham : see above. pp. Wareham (Domesday: Warham).. and four names are known in the Paxs type. struck by a moneyer Swartbrand. and in the early part of the Conqueror's reign three only appear in the Paxs type. both in the Confessor's reign and after the Conquest. and three the first and second types of William II. and Warwick difficulty in distinguishing coins of Wareham the mint-readings are inserted in the notes of the Table of Mints. though two might just suffice for the coins at present four names occur in the Paxs type. of the known in two Williams. Warwick (Domesday: Warwic]. The coins of the Confessor confirm the existence of two. his fine reduced on account of poverty perhaps this is . In the reign of William I there seem to be not fewer than three employed. 54 and 56). at least. There were also two moneyers in the time of the Confessor. pp. vol. Wareham had two moneyers. who paid one mark of silver to the king.

vi. que fuerunt ' diffacte pre- cepto regis (see Brit.. 2). 16). and Winchcombe (Domesday: Wincelcumbe). Wintonia). vi. early part of the Conqueror's reign. at the end of the reign not more than three are necessary from the coins three names occur in the Paxs type. moneyer is probably the William who struck coins of the last type of Stephen and of the first issue of Henry II. . 16. we do mentioned as son of William. William of Wilton. Journ. 15. in the Conqueror's reign. 1 this organist. Ixxv. seem to be contemporaneous. 4 b occurs the . . 1). the church of Salisbury is not yet know any In a grant in Wilton Henry 1200). as many as four. Godwinus Socche (magimonetariorum. ' the same time though six would suffice for the coins at present known. 3). There seem to have been not fewer than five moneyers employed at Wilton in the latter half of the reign of the Confessor. On fol. : ster Domesday. &c. 23 b) as moneyers at the time of the Survey (between 1107 and 1128) and the wife of Wimund the moneyer had a house at the time of the Survey (fol. no. pp. the moneyer. 8b) are mentioned as moneyers of the reign of the Confessor. and after the Conquest. 164-5). Sanson (foil. In ^Ethelstan's Winchester (Domesday Wincestre. 8). 97). fol. or five ^Elfwine of I is identical with the ^Elfwine of the Confessor). vol. of the Confessor not less In the reign than nine moneyers seem to have worked at vol. eight names appear in the Paxs type. no.. and Odo (fol. but coins struck by him in the reign of (c. Si ward (foil.INTRODUCTION Tomas to of the first type of Stephen. Alwinus Aitardessoiie (fol. 7). One moneyer seems to have worked here both before pp. Journ. ' ' now known. coins to the borough of For the attribution of Winchcombe see Brit. the I. Alestan (fol. No coins are yet known later than the reign of William I. In the Winton laws Winchester was allowed six moneyers. 49 ff. of Salisbury (Rolls Series. ' phrase Et in mercato fuerunt v monete. Alwardus filius Etardii (fol. ' 1 Charters. Num. Andrebodus (fol. 2 b). Num.. and as In the (if many as six names occur William in one type (Hildebrand H).

Roth collection). four occur in the ' Paxs type. p. pleaded that they had had two dies (which perhaps imply two moneyers) from time immemorial. a third die which was then in the king's hands and his claim was allowed. and four names only are found on Paxs coins. pp.MINTS clxxxvii reign. fessor's reign as many In the early part of the Conas seventeen moneyers seem to have been employed. See above. see above. cxxxi. Erami . On coins of the second type of William I as many as eleven distinct names occur. all of which are found on coins of the Confessor or Harold. William. but later in the reign of William I and in that of William II not more than four are necessary . Wiveliscombe. For coins of Henry of Anjou and William which Gloucester?) may have been struck at Wiveliscombe above. For irregular coinages of Stephen's reign which were struck at . but in a suit of 1279 the Archbishop. This city seems to have had not fewer moneyers in the reign of the Confessor . or of the Conqueror's but in the second half of the reign only four moneyers from the coins at present known. and in the latter half at least ten appear from the coins to have been contemporaneous. twenty shillings each at London on receipt of dies quando moneta than as five. or perhaps six. . We do not know how many moneyers were allowed to the Archbishops. and also. vertebatur. ' ' result of the ravages of 1069. For a coin of variety II of p. to have been working at appear. (B. clxx. Stephen's attributed to Winchester. in the time of the Confessor. (I. Money ers of Worcester are mentioned in Domesday 172) as having paid. The form EBO occurs on a coin of the seventh type of Henry I . (of see Worcester (Domesday : Wirecestre). ' Yarmouth. York (Domesday: Eboracum). many as six moneyers appear to overlap from the Confessor's to the Conqueror's reign. This great decrease in the staff' of the York mint was perhaps the first type . Ixxxiii. the same time. . cxxiii. at one time.

and probably in many cases below the actual classification in groups. ana over 5 moneyers c . the number number employed. Eustace FitzJohn and Robert de ff. York see varieties IV D. Stute- ville (pp. as previously remarked.). showing and an are in italics in the Confessor. cvi The comparative importance of of the mints in the second half the eleventh century may be summarized by the following of moneyers being. Ixxviii. asterisk marks those which show a reduction during the reign of . two groups. 6 moneyers J .clxxxviii INTRODUCTION I. only an approximate estimate from the coins now available. 1 The mints which occur a decrease during the Conqueror's reign.

and are there marked with the initials or name of the collection to which they 1 is The date which appears on each volume of the British Numismatic Journal that of the Proceedings which are described in it.clxxxix ABBKEVIATIONS USED. In compiling the Catalogue much difficulty full to has been experienced owing to the large number of collections of which contain coins of collections this period. irregular coinages during the period of civil The war have necessitated more historical detail. as these lists are now in course of revision in the British Numismatic Journal. . ETC. for which purpose Sir William Ramsay's Foundations of England and Mr. and Types. Journ. and not the date of publication. reference has not been made The to them except in the Table of Mints. Grueber. by of coins in the British Museum have been verified or ascertained and gaps in this collection supplemented in the tables of the coins many coins in other collections . H. 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. are also figured in the Plates of the Catalogue. ordinary handbooks have been used and are quoted under their authors' names. 1 Spink's Numismatic Circular Num. J. Circ.) contains in the issue of list Carlyon-Britton's original 1902 Major of coins of the reigns of William I and William II . (referred to as Numismatic Journal. &c. which are quoted as Num. Money ers. and Brit. Hawkins. Round's Geoffrey de Mandevllle have been extensively used. References are given in such historical works as have been consulted. COLLECTIONS QUOTED. Historical matter has been introduced only so far as is necessary for the elucidation of the coinage. Num. But the kindness many owners of to see a and curators of of coins museums has enabled me very large number which means several readings and to obtain impressions of many for comparison. The numismatic publications which are quoted in this Catalogue have for the most part appeared in either the Numismatic Chronicle or the British Chron.

. . . E.. Mr. Oxford.W. Mr. S. Wells. Mcllwaine. Royal Mint. . . Cambridge. Spink (Messrs. L. Bernard Roth. . Nottingham. J. . Hunterian collection. . T. Cree. The . Henry Symonds.P. H. . Fitzwilliam Museum.M. . W. Mr. A.. . .C.E. L. Bodleian Library.C. . Talbot.C. H. Parkes. Alexander Mann. . H. A.C. National Museum. J. . Mr. .S Miss Helen Farquhar. P. .M. J. Paris. Bibliotbeque Nationale.. Cambridge.R. .. Bliss. . Berlin. . A. Mr. late Mr. collection.C. B S.S.Mus. Reynolds.E. J. Museum.H. Hntr H.Y L. R. . .. Lockett.D. . . Mr. Mr. Bodl Ashmolean Museum. . .. Lawrence. Mr. London..A.H..Mus.W. J. Mr. W. H. Carlyon-Britton. . .CXC INTRODUCTION belong.B. M. Castle T. . H. M.W. Mr. E. Major P. W. A.B. Royal Museum. . W. . .M S.. . Mr. Mr. S. H.W. R. . R. H.. Bruun. Baldwin. . F. J.E. Mr. E. . Col. Young. Walters. T. . Oxford. C.R Brln The late Mr.T The Hon.B T. . .F. Mr. J. Spink and Son). L.M. . . .M Ashm. B. W. Cpnhn.M. . Kaiser Friedrich Museum. . Lewis Lewis Mint Nott . F. Cambridge. R.A.B.. Copenhagen. F. . . . Old Sarum Paris Castle Museum. The following abbreviations have been used for the collections quoted: A. W.B. J.L. Mr. Glasgow. . J.C. C. .L. Hidden. J. . Taunton.. . Morrieson. .. W. Daniels. Corpus Christi College. Stockholm.... .. . Sheriff Mackenzie. .L. Mr. . P. Trinity College.. .H.. Old Sarum excavations. Stkm.

P. Sharp Ogden. Carlyondisposal.S. Ready. F.. J. formerly Keeper of Coins. Hon.S. ETC. George Macdonald. Keeper whose help and encouragement have done much to lighten the sometimes arduous work of preparing the Catalogue.A.. W.. .S... Mr. F. and Mr. and my indebtedness to the helpful care of the Reader of the Clarendon Press.J. W. F.T. S. \V.. Ryan. G. To the owners and indebted for the curators of the above collections I am greatly facilities which they have given me for seeing and for publishing their coins. Mr. W... My sincere acknowledgements are due to Mr. . Nor must I forget to express of Coins. Lawrence. H. who has read proofs of the whole work. who also to Mr. York Museum. late E.S. . F. W.A.A. L. W. W. COLLECTIONS QUOTED. W..ABBREVIATIONS USED. not only by free access to his large collection of materially lessened by the large I lent me. A. but also by the use of manuscript notes which he has kindly To Dr. who have many read proofs of the introduction and helped me with suggestions and corrections and especially to Mr. Grueber.. F. ..B. T.S. Lincoln (Messrs.A. F. Curator of the Hunterian collection. .L.O. Hill. CXC1 W. . A. . I owe special obligations for time and trouble coins. J. Mr.A. The York . . . the difficulty of the subject has been number of coins thus put at my have obtained much help from Major P. W. Andrew. and also gave me much has read proofs of the introduction assistance in the early stages of the work .. F.R. W. . Mr. most generously given both in showing me the Hunterian coins and in making impressions of several of them for my use.R. Britton. Lincoln and Son).S.

.

TABLE OF FINDS .

For the irregular issues and -f- THE numbers in .CXC1V TABLE this table include both pennies and cut halfpennies and farthings. but the number is not This table contains only the regular English issues. implies that one or more coins of the type occurred.

known. see the detailed description on pp. HENRY I .cxcv OF FINDS each halfpenny and farthing counting as one coin. other coins represented in the finds. xvi-xxxii.

as in the mint under 241-2 the entries under 239-40 should evidently have been placed and the columns have themselves been misread by later writers in Brit..y 1904). Roberts collection has been the source of many errors. vol. W. identified and corrected. because that work has been found to reproduce or originate many errors. which are inserted from published photographs of the coins lists or from free-hand drawings. of the B. so far as possible. both coins described in lots 409 and 410 as of (Hawkins) 247 are of 243. being . the remainder from casts sent to me from the Stockholm Museum). Romney where now 234 in the Col. are in italics (the Stockholm or unpublished coins in italics are from readings kindly supplied by Major P. which may well be correct. are omitted. without discrimination of Readings were inserted in it from sale catalogues the columns were sometimes confused. No readings have been inserted on the sole evidence of the Spicer Manuscript (Num. . the table itself owing to lack of evidence for the existence of the coins. Num. for example. Catalogue is of type VI (243) in Spicer. as in is Chron. Chester and Leicester. MONEYERS. Leslie for and the insertion of many attributions which arise from the confusion of London and Lincoln. ix. and of 238 and 250 (the two 'Two-Stars' types). Sjprot. CarlyonBritton.. is not uncommon. for example. 132. Morrieson collection. P. in the A. Journ. C. in the right-hand column. the Eadweard reading. 1880. or. many of which are certainly incorrect some. Hankin sale catalogue (1900). . where the Wulfnod coin of (Hawkins) The foot-notes do not include all published readings described as 244. appears under type VIII. Num. such obvious mistakes as Alic for Alif or Aleif. which The MS. Italics are also used in the columns of moneyers' names to denote. Misprints are another obvious source of error.TABLE OF MINTS. W. Strop for Lesinc. from casts or the remainder. Chrnn. of (Hawkins) 243 and 247. (' Tealby The foot-notes contain readings from various publications. and other similar pairs of mints is obviated by a cross reference from one mint to the other. AND TYPES The majority of the readings which are included been taken from the coins themselves . in the left-hand column. &c. . especially here. p. are withheld from . p. those which occur on coins of the ' first issue type) of Henry II.. which are Confusion of types. 72. names which occur on coins of the Confessor or Harold II and. in in the following table have a few cases.

1853. . in the British Museum collection. &c. M'Ewn Mntgu Mrdch N. Olla Podrida. 1908. sale. Rash Rstn S. Neligan sale. 1862. C.L. Simpson Rostron sale. 43.. 1896-7. 1909. 1855. . P. J. Kennard sale. cxci . L. . 1906. 1854. 1914. McEwen H. Allan . . 1902 (William I and P. . Stnr Tplis . E... Durrner sale. Numismatic Circular. 1893. . Toplis sale.. C. i. and W.TABLE OF MINTS. Montagu J. Rashleigh sale. Miss R. . Bscm Btnin Circ. Oxford Silver Pennies. Carlyon-Britton). Webb Witte sale. . . A.A. sale. '06 . '02 Bascoin T. . E. &c. which are used in the table. .J Astronomer sale. B.A. W. &c. 743. . C. Lscbe Lawrence sale. . J. (app. 1892. lot 61. &c. . Dr. Rev. R. &c. lot W. Knrd L. . Allan D. 1890. sale. G. sale. &c..B. &c.N. J.W. J. II. Webb Witte H.C. MONEYEBS. '57. 1854. .. &c. '69. W. Allen sale. 1895. . Allen Ast. Clark Currer . January. 1892. by P. Sotheby Sntl sale. sale. Stainer. or doubtful readings. Numismatic Chronicle. 1869. . Drrnr F. W. L. F. The abbreviations of sale catalogues and other publications. H.) . 1903. .. . British Numismatic Journal. H. 1913. 1903. Loscombe sale. sale. . A.. 1851. Carlyon-Britton sale. &c. H. Currer sale.. 1898. W. . 1857. Murdoch sale. D.. lot 743. 1908. . 43. (Appendix). 1898. Nlgn P. For other abbreviations see list of collections on pp. H. F. Walters sale. &c. P. G.C. Sainthill. Cuff sale. are as follows : + + British ' Museum Catalogue. 6. 1918. Clark Cuff H. Bateman sale. cxc. lot 61. their Mints and Moneyers. lot 6. AND TYPES CXCvii Other collections are only quoted in the table to supplement gaps.

CXCV111 TABLE OF MINTS. .

AND TYPES CXC1X .MONEYERS.

cc TABLE OF MINTS. .

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CC1 .

.ecu TABLE OP MINTS.

AND TYPES CC111 HENRY I .MONEYERS.

CC1V TABLE OF MINTS. .

AND TYPES CCV .MONEYERS.

CCV1 TABLE OF MINTS. .

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CCV11 .

CCV111 TABLE OF MINTS. .

AND TYPES CC1X .MONEYERS.

.ccx TABLE OF MINTS.

AND TYPES CCX1 .MONEYERS.

.CCX11 TABLE OF MINTS.

AND TYPES CCX111 .MONEYERS.

.CCX1V TABLE OP MINTS.

MONEYEKS. AND TYPES CCXV .

TABLE OF MINTS. .

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CCXV11 .

(r. LEHIU wa LEES^U LEREEE LEHREE LE //w L EC E w^. ' 8 / H J 12 . typo III. /. LERE " LEI BTR? LEttEE LEIE?. v LECTI VH. I /. LE LEHRE. 1 1:E LEHH REE. IV. LEH LEIEES.ontinued). LEHUE. LEIE a**^.CCXVlii TABLE OF MIVIH. 1. 2 > 4 ' . LEICESTER 1 LEHRI WtfHam LECT LEGTU. LE Vonfr. .H*or.1:0*11 Harold.

f. I'liluni ml. Journ. p. Curb on Hritt. (William OCX IX Unit. A. type III). Probably Lloric.!. vli. Hi. I. vol. typo II). vol.i.. p. Chron. Hi. lot.. Varloun Hale catalogueH. new.MONKYKK8.on roll. Joum.. May 3. \V..:. UK. lot 355. p. Falnc. 25. (\f.. of. Brit. SKyclwinr.Xi:. 34. appcarn to be a mlHreadlriK of a Hritlxli Muneurii coin. &c. 283. < Ihrori. whence it vol. I... I'. Num. lAfwln (William II.. 1844.. type XII). 2f. 1902.. Oodard (William II. Hothcby. Oodric (Wllllarn II. Num. typo IV). FalHC? (. AND TYPK8 Hoe nlHO Ghent cr.. L.'. 1WH.n\-i I. I'. I'. IflfM. mule IxII and type III). p. (lifrii: (Wllllarn I. :i7. p. 5573. . Circ. (HOC LOWCH). Num. type VIM).vvr<:. Num. p. 2flfl. . Hrlt. no. 283. Journ. = Num..:<: -. Num.

ccxx TABLE OP MINTS. .

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CCXX1 .

.CCXXll TABLE OF MINTS.

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CCXX111 .

.CCXX1V TABLE OF MINIS.

AND TYPES CCXXV .MONEYERS.

.CCXXV1 TABLE OF MINTS.

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CCXXV11 .

CCXXV111 TABLE OF MINTS. .

AND TYPES CCXX1X HENRY I .MONEYERS.

ccxxx TABLE OF MINTS. .

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CCXXX1 .

CCXXX11 TABLE OF MINTS. .

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CCXXX111 .

.CCXXX1V TABLE OF MINTS.

AND TYPES CCXXXV .MONEYERS.

.CCXXXV1 TABLE OF MINTS.

MONEYERS. AND TYPES CCXXXV11 .

&VDPA7. SOUTHWARK SVTP xi. &VD. . xii. SV V SU-BEI. xiv.&VDPEH. &VTPVH DPE. (continued).ccxxxvi TABLE OF MINTS. SVD . S * SV-EP. 4 SVHBI. SVTW SVI .

p. E. 1903.. type IV).. type XIV). H. Oodric (Henry I.MONEYERS. Chron. 1904. 277. 1898. Evans sale. 277.. p. Chron. Chron. lot 57. Aldwine (William I. lot 69. 277. type I). 1904. type VII). 1901. Algar (William II. 1904. type II). type II). Simpson sale. type II). 299. Allen sale. 1898. AND TYPES See also Sudbury. Godwine (William II. (William II.. Siward (Stephen. Archd. H. Leofivine (William I. p. Probably Sprot. ^Elword (William II. type I). p. 277. C. lot 5 = Stamford. 1904. Num. 1904. type IV). ^Elfric (William II. lot 28. Pownall sale. Num. Chron. type II). Num. 1887. E. 1894. Num. p.. p. lot 360. Clark sale. Sprot (William II. Chron. Chron. Num. type III).. type VIII). W. CCXXX1X . Seioine (William II. Grot (William II. Num. 276.

ccxl TABLE OP MINTS. .

AND TYPES ccxli .MONEYEKS.

.ccxlii TABLE OF MINTS.

MONEYEES. AND TYPES ccxliii .

ccxliv TABLE OF MINTS. .

MONEYERS. AND TYPES ccxlv .

ccxlvi

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

ccxlvii

HENRY

I

ccxlviii

TABLE OF MINTS,

WILLIAM
WIN-

I

CHESTER
JBRfwine
(Ailwine, &c.)
(JSEgstan,
<frc.)

Ailward Aldwine
Alfric

Alwold Anderboda (Andrbod,
Brunic
Ckippig, sec
&c.\

Edwvne Engelram
(Hengelram
Gefrei

Kippig

Godnoth Oodwine
(Gowine,
<&c.)

Goldinc

Hengelram,
see

Hue

Engelram
(Ckippig)

Kippig
Lefioine

Leofwold
(Lifwold,
<frc.)

Liflnc (Livinc &c.)

Rogier (Rogir
&c.)

Saiet (Saied)

Sawulf Siword Si ward, &c
(

Sprseclinc (Spraclinc)

Stigant
[T]ovi?

Wimund

MONEYEES, AND TYPES

ccxlix

HENRY

I

ccl

TABLE OF MINTS,

MONEYERS, AND TYPES

ccli

ccliii TABLE FOR CONVERTING ENGLISH INCHES INTO MILLIMETRES AND THE MEASURES OF MIONNET'S SCALE ENGLISH INCHES 14- .

.ccliv TABLE OP THE RELATIVE WEIGHTS OF ENGLISH GRAINS AND FRENCH GRAMMES Grains.

.cclv TABLE OP THE RELATIVE WEIGHTS OF ENGLISH GRAINS AND FRENCH GRAMMES Grains.

.

1RIE SER] LLIA pes II HENRY I Types XIV. XV I .

.

16 .NORMAN KINGS. PLATE I. ^**m0zr TYPE I. 15 -^e&Ti^r WILLIAM I.

.

WILLIAM I. sale. PLATE II. Lot 677.M. TYPE I. P. 1913.NORMAN KINGS. 13 H.C.W.B. .

.

PLATE WILLIAM I. TYPE I. .NORMAN KINGS. I x ||. MULES: CONFESSOR x ||.

.

.-n=\ _ j ^^. . "iTv s> ^_ S^X far dgik . TYPE II..x--r. ^'^>^ ^- % c r .f .-'i -- * *s -Trf- 1 . /***** / J>~vj . PLATE IV.NORMAN KINGS.^ jwfam $fe *i .r=^. . f&t-r&'r't 3&&&21 WILLIAM I. * . rfffl * A~*i V *v~ -O ^ * t . vr.

.

13 WIULIAM I.NORMAN KINGS. . PLATE V. TYPE II.

.

/^f. PLATE VI.NORMAN KINGS.^ >' t E^ y-J . TYPE II.<\ OL-i| -./^W* ' -- ^ ' Wfc JW '--^. . WILLIAM I.. MULE II x III.

.

v- ^>-*^/ glp . TYPE III. PLATE VII. ? WILLIAM I.NORMAN <^jr~j -^ . & .<<ws (f f^-. KINGS. .

.

. TYPE IV. MULE III x IV. PLATE VIII. WILLIAM I. TYPE III.NORMAN KINGS.

.

5>//^T?>j /~/&3 -~ ' ffSlf '&* Vi WILLIAM I. PLATE IX.NORMAN KINGS. . TYPE IV.

.

. PLATE X. 1 6 WILLIAM I.NORMAN KINGS. TYPE \V.

.

NORMAN KINGS. WILLIAM I. PLATE XI. . TYPE V. MULE IV xV.

.

TYPE V. . .^ ^r? '^fc% A5/& 16 WILLIAM I. - ./^-->. PLATE XII.NORMAN KINGS.

.

ffl '4 1 6 WILLIAM I. . TYPE V. PLATE XIII.NORMAN KINGS.

.

TYPES V AND VI. WILLIAM I. . PLATE XIV.NORMAN KINGS.

.

. 13 a '3& ?ixz r i<?=3 15 WILLIAM I. PLATE XV. TYPE VI.NORMAN KINGS.

.

. PLATE XVI. ^^* WILLIAM I. TYPES VI AND VII.NORMAN KINGS.

.

PLATE XVII. MULE VII x VIII. . 13 WILLIAM I. TYPE VII.NORMAN KINGS.

.

TYPE VIII. f jr+ x.NORMAN KINGS. . PLATE XVIII. - -z ^r f 4K*?r~' ' ^ /_j 13 14 15 1 6 WILLIAM I.^?5iO^.

.

. PLATE XIX. m 1 6 WILLIAM I. TYPE VIII.NORMAN KINGS.

.

w WA 13 15 WILLIAM I. TYPE VIII. . PLATE XX.NORMAN KINGS.

.

*>-- ^<^/ '5^^ 'W - (5>^ . PLATE en ^_ XXI. TYPE VIII. .NORMAN *^&^~ '-' KINGS.*- m 14 16 WILLIAM I.

.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXII.

r-^-XV

U

14

m
WILLIAM
I.

jgS&tet .^/z^^zjt'

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE

XXIII.

'

$J

LI~i

-r-

-WOT

<^rl

&ff

szm>;

'T>^

^-is^-

<i^/'
tjifpzB c

13

14

15

16

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIII.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXIV.

16

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIM.

NORMAN

KINGS.

PLATE XXV.

Vi

S&Zg**
Kl -r*r --

6^K'\

., \

Hi^&'&i,

ntt

Af&~?rr-

l-jl <2t

$*&
,Ot

+.?^ f

13

WILLIAM

I.

TYPE

VIM.

.

NORMAN KINGS. IIIoU WILLIAM I. PLATE XXVI. TYPE VIII. .

.

NORMAN KINGS. . TYPE VIII. \ WILLIAM I. PLATE XXVII.

.

TYPE I. . PLATE XXVIII.NORMAN KINGS. WILLIAM II.

.

TYPE I.NORMAN KINGS. . PLATE XXIX sfSLs* -^3> yr j j^ 15 WILLIAM II.

.

.-' >-iv. . TYPE I.}&) v IZ?. dL : . . MULE I x II.* J {-%$'> . PLATE XXX.NORMAN KINGS..^ -<v WILLIAM II.

.

. TYPE II. PLATE XXX\. 1 6 WILLIAM II.NORMAN KINGS.

.

^. r '<2ft ^. . . TYPE II.- f C M?J. zj&~i ~i /.C./-//> 13 WILLIAM II. N. PLATE XXXII. .NORMAN KINGS.^ .

.

PLATE XXXIII. 5^ * /-.NORMAN KINGS. TYPE II. 13 ^ V 15 WILLIAM II. ??}'*. .

.

TYPE III. \ WILLIAM II. PLATE XXXIV.ly>x <%r". . ~.NORMAN KINGS.

.

NORMAN KINGS. . TYPE III. WILLIAM II. PLATE XXXV. 16 COPENHAGEN.

.

~ I f 7 M ^ 'Aj . . MULE IV X V. -1^67 v-' WILLIAM II. PLATE XXXVI.NORMAN KINGS. W^r4b.^*SS' . TYPE IV.

.

.NORMAN KINGS. Cv Sj^jfiX 13 H Sft WILLIAM II. PLATE XXXVII. TYPE V.

.

PLATE XXXVIII. telfc v HENRY I. .NORMAN KINGS. TYPE I.

.

TYPES II. . /* ' HENRY I. PLATE XXXIX. IV. III.NORMAN KJNGS.

.

NORMAN KINGS. TYPES VI. <2^Os^~r^->-ij\ *mm if W^ /tf-'-r^!~~?T^-T& > 1 * s^Vh. VII. i ^ r m^ 3jii HENRY I. . PLATE XL. TYPE V. MULE V x VI. 2 V-.

.

TYPE X. IX.NORMAN KINGS. MULE IX x X. TYPES VIII. . % &ffi HENRY I. PLATE XLI.

.

MULE XI x X. PLATE XLII. HENRY I. TYPES XI. TYPE X. . XII.NORMAN KINGS.

.

PLATE XLIII. HENRY I. TYPE XIII. .NORMAN KINGS. MULE XIII x XIV.

.

HENRY I. . TYPE XIV.NORMAN KINGS. PLATE XLIV.

.

. rr^ 4 HENRY I.NORMAN KINGS.V* W ^ . - &~ - " * J . PLATE XLV. TYPE XIV.

.

P. TYPE XIV.C. . PLATE XLVI.C.B.B. HENRY I.NORMAN KINGS. s 16 P.

.

TYPE XV. . SL^ff 0^5^ if ffir& ^$&>*. PLATE XLVII. ''-^x/ / 13 r .NORMAN KINGS.-r?f- s2S - -per- HENRY I.

.

. TYPE XV. 13 HENRY I. PLATE XLVIII.NORMAN KINGS.

.

. PLATE XLIX. ^^ . TYPE I. .J l\t STEPHEN.NORMAN KINGS.rvr^=?2.

.

NORMAN KINGS. TYPE I. . V? m &%?* 15 STEPHEN. PLATE L.

.

. TYPE I. v' * ">'fir) $&ii^m) STEPHEN. ..NORMAN KINGS. PLATE LI.s .

.

NORMAN KINGS. TYPE I. .- '^^: STEPHEN. . PLATE Lll.

.

STEPHEN.. ^\y. PLATE LMI. > B.W vv / *& - ' f -\^~i. MULE I * II. -. /~' ''**. . TYPE II.R.NORMAN KINGS.

.

STEPHEN. III. TYPES II. IV.NORMAN KINGS. PLATE LIV. .

.

. VI. T-~ P f ~ '^A * !~>'"~.NORMAN KINGS. PLATE I_V.*--' \ / . ^ STEPHEN. VII. TYPES V.

.

TYPE VII.NORMAN KINGS. I .^^'~l ^ \ S &1F?J? ?-KV i^vj. STEPHEN.*fci! . . PLATE LVI.

.

PLATE LVII. STEPHEN.3 B. B. COINS INSCRIBED PERERIC. . M -r-J\ .R. % .NORMAN KINGS. COINS FROM ERAZED DIES.R.

.

B. HUNTER. P. VARIETIES . STEPHEN.NORMAN KINGS.C. PLATE LVIII.

.

.NORMAN KINGS.M. 14 *<- /' m^ STEPHEN.R T^ rSi-FT* >/&&v vt\^ faMfc ' x .R.M. <^? 3$. !-~7^r.. H. PLATE LIX.?$F. VARIETIES. H.

.

EUSTACE F1TZJOHN.-^-// '^rjf v^s^ ^"" -i/ f *^J QUEEN MATILDA AND EUSTACE ( ). PLATE LX. . EUSTACE. BISHOP OF WINCHESTER. SON OF STEPHEN (?).NORMAN KINGS. ? . ROBERT DE STUTEVILLE. HENRY.

.

MU3. EMPRESS MATILDA.NORMAN KINGS. PLATE LXI.>- 16 COP. HENRY OF ANJOU. . .

.

NORMAN KINGS. WILLIAM OF GLOUCESTER BRIAN FITZCOUNT AND UNCERTAIN BARONIAL. . PLATE LXII.- * ^**zz^* ^r HENRY OF ANJOU. ROBERT OF GLOUCESTER (?>. r< '*'" 1 *<'*' 4 **&i -. ? < (?). .

.

.

.

CJ 2491 B75 British Museum.l Museum PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE FROM THIS CARDS OR SLIPS POCKET UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY . of Coins and Medals catalogue of English coins in the British A v. Dept.

< ^^^m^^/^^Mm m' I^PilMISI .