HistoricCoinage

Not sure I'm entirely smitten, but here are the new designs for the coming year.

As I said earlier, such a thing might have been paid for in terms of raw silver - either as ingots, hacksilver or coin - alternatively there are other commodities to be used for payment/trade. If the sale of a farm did not involve any coin then I'm doubtful that a longboat would have been much different.

I admire their audacity! Nearly as much as that of the early medieval counterfeiters, where I'm sure punishments were somewhat more severe.

What about this groat? I couldn't resist when I saw it - a 'rose' crudely engraved on it, for a coinage where there wasn't even a sixpence let alone a 'rosed' one.

It's most likely an Edward III Fourth Coinage Post-Treaty penny of York, ecclesiastical mint. Cross before CIVI, often found with a lis on breast, e.g. Spink reference 1649.

Indeed. That's what I was getting at as a part of a more complex economy - moving slightly further away from barter to a centralised control that, let's not forget, could be more easily taxed and controlled by the monarch and his government.

I've always favoured a slightly more religious meaning. I've got a few gilded 'Pilgrim pence' of Elizabeth and here's one of my Philip & Mary pieces with a cross engraved on it.

The halfgroat pellets, though?

Right before my eyes!!

I also note that the obverse legend doesn't line up. The E and L at the start of Elizabeth. Something I've seen fairly often.

Is there the red wax often associated with impressions on this example, or is the single red patch on each side associated with an old repair?

A very warm welcome to you, Geoff! We look forward to seeing some of your coins.

Indeed. Very large projects would have been paid for by weights of silver, often in coin. Other transactions, like the sale of farms, are noted down as having been paid in commodities: "On 4 January 1346, in Våle, Vestfold, four witnesses testified that Kolbein Simonsson had sold Torleiv Eiriksson a share in the farm Olumstad worth 32 kyrlag. The following payment was made (the document’s value assessments in brackets): 1 red horse (4 kyrlag), 2 bulls (5 kyrlag), 7 cows, 1 bullock (1 kyrlag), various types of cloth (9 kfrlag), 8 laupa butter (4 kfrlag), 2 pounds grain and 2 laupa butter (2 kyrlag)". Gift giving and commodity trading still made up a large part of transactions, at least in the late Viking Age. Money often acts as a unit of account or storage.

Very much so. It probably also explains why the halfpenny issues of the Late Saxon and Norman periods never really took off, whereas the 13th and 14th centuries represents a much more politically-organised and complex society & economy. With regard to barter, yes. The later medieval period would still very much have relied upon barter and exchange for day-to-day workings.

Potentially, but also for more official uses. If one looks at the extreme rise of money in the late 10th and 11th centuries it can be attributed to the Danegeld payments, much of which was in coin. I would also imagine that the coins represented a way of storing wealth. Probably longer-lasting than a chicken and easier to maintain, provided you safely stashed it.

Don't forget that the economy was not purely coinage-based, though. The hacksilver and associated ingots formed a large part of the silver economy but there were also other things traded by the Scandinavians, from furs to butter. Commodities formed a major portion of any large purchase during the Viking period and much of the subsequent centuries.

Especially recently, Peter.

Very interesting proposition.

I notice that your question also relates to other Anglo-Saxon coinage, too. I suppose the size would be limited by the weight standard adopted by the Kings. There's probably only so large you could get a 1.6g bit of silver with the technology provided.

It is to do with the weight standard. Alfred the Great had set the weight standard for pennies at 1.6g with many continental deniers being heavier at about 1.75g but the Viking coinage of York (at least the Regal/Royal coinage) was about 1.3g with the earlier Danelaw issues being about 1.35g. These low weights, which probably correspond to their lesser diameter, are completely in line with the East Anglian and Northumbrian issues prior to the Viking invasion. My take is that the weight, and therefore size to some degree, is noticeably different in order to separate the Viking coinage as independent from the other 'English' issues. These issues were also different in terms of value and design, showing that there were different priorities and levels of organisation between the Scandinavian settlers and the so called Saxons.

It says the video's been removed by the user, Dave. But I thought I'd post this:

Good to see I'm not going to be the only one chatting to myself. Family are milling about but I suspect they're still half asleep. Seems like some can handle the Christmas Eve alcohol better than others... Have a good day, chaps!

Not a shame that eBay listened, though. Listing is gone.

That is depressing. As a note to others it's a fake Edward I groat.

Plenty of us members on here will purchase whole collections or sell on commission. Good photographs and a detailed list or a visit are helpful.