I have interpreted the runes on the R8 Sceatta featured in this article as HHL. The runes HH appear to be ligate or bind. The rune graphs are discussed. Many different combination of runes were used on the obverse flans of the R series, EPA, GEPA, EA, EP, ER, RHY and SPI were the most common, ES is quite unusual. I have only observed EAP on one coin, presumably an error by a die cutter. The later Wigraed (R10) and Tilberht (R11) coins had their names in runes. I have only seen the combination of runes HHL on two coins I own and one more registered on the Early Medieval Corpus database at the Fitzwilliam. The symbols outside of the standard on the reverse of the “Angry Face” coins are also discussed.
This Blog article discusses the unusual Iconography of what I have classified as a variant of the R8 Series (R8 Type 16) Sceat. I comment upon the epigraphic content of both the obverse and reverse of the three coins featured. The shape of the head/face and other symbols on the obverse are compared to other R8 types, also the positioning of the runes is observed and compared to other R8 types. The very unusual content of symbols within the standard on the reverse is reviewed. The rarity of these three coins is commented upon.
The late Anglo-Saxon coinage minted between the early 970s and the Norman Conquest of 1066 is one of the most extensively studied portions of medieval English currency. Even so, new surprises continue to emerge. One such is a Harold I penny from a recent auction which presents, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the first known instance of a street-name on Anglo-Saxon coinage. The occurrence of one street name opens up the possibility that certain other puzzling mint-signatures could reflect streets or districts within larger centres rather than separate locations.
In 1795 a large hoard of over 1000 coins of Edward the Confessor and William I was unearthed in the orchard of Mr Shelley at Oulton, Staffordshire. Very little is known about the hoard other than there are no known Harold II coins and the William I coins are limited to BMC i and ii. P.H. Robinson contributed two articles to the Journal, the first in British Numismatic Journal Volume XXXVIII (1969), pp 24-30, The Stafford (1800) and Oulton (1795) Hoards and the second to the Miscellania section of Volume XLIX (1979). A small parcel of coins from the Oulton hoard which have been in the hands of the Shelley family since the 18th century has recently come to auction in Australia where members of the family have lived since the 1860’s. This parcel doubles the number of proven coins from the hoard.
A moneyer by the name of Eotberht was proposed in Sylloge of Coins of the British Isles, volume 68, as a new moneyer for the Northumbrian king Æethelred I. Another coin has now come to light on the Portable Antiquities Scheme which helps to shed some light on the identification of this “new” moneyer. From examination of the images and review of the die characteristics, it appears that Eotberht is not a new moneyer at all, but rather seems likely to be a new spelling for a known moneyer, Ceolbald. This article reviews some the coinage of Ceolbald and tries to draw some conclusions based on the available data. The coins of Ceolbald are discussed, along with some commentary on the rare “double obverse” coin of Æethelred I, which fits into this grouping and is also presumably a Ceolbald issue.
As readers of this blog will be aware, I am currently looking into the Expanding Cross type of Edward the Confessor, with a view to determining the relative chronological order of its Heavy and Light phases. Having already reviewed for the blog the evidence for the Expanding Cross type supplied by single finds reported to the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) database, it seems to me that it would also be helpful to provide the numismatic community with a list of the single finds of coins of Expanding Cross type reported to the Early Medieval Coinage (EMC) site, with updated attributions and other relevant comment.
As indicated in previous notes for this blog, I have been looking into the evidence for the Expanding Cross type of Edward the Confessor, with a view to trying to determine the relative chronological order of its Light and Heavy phases, and it seems sensible to put on record such corrections to the descriptions of items in volumes published in the SCBI series as I have so far noticed.
As readers of a previous note by me on this blog will be aware, I am currently looking into the Expanding Cross type of Edward the Confessor, with a view to determining the relative chronological order of its Heavy and Light phases. In the process I have reviewed the evidence for the type supplied by coins reported to the Portable Antiquities Scheme, and it seems to me that it would be helpful to provide the numismatic community with a list of the coins concerned, with updated attributions and other relevant comment. If other readers of this blog with specialist knowledge of the issues of particular mints can assist with attributions for coins which I have so far failed to identify either in whole or in part, I would be most grateful. Click here to read the article
This article explains how a printers’ error mistakenly led to a belief amongst some numismatists that Edward the Confessor’s Expanding Cross type included coins from the moneyer Wulfwine at Wallingford. This was based on an erroneous auction catalogue entry dating back to 1955 that referred to PVLFPINE ON PALI (Wallingford). Wulfwine was in consequence listed as a moneyer for the Wallingford mint in this type both by Dr Anthony Freeman, writing in 1985, and by Kenneth Jonsson and the late Gay Van der Meer in their authoritative listing in 1990 of mints and moneyers for the period between c.973 and 1066. Click here to read the article.
This brief note describes an Aethelred II penny from the Norwich mint with the anomolous moneyer name of FORANTINC. Click here to read the article.