Featured Medieval - Some Thoughts on the Normans and their Coins

Ooops, brain-o there. I meant Richard.

Who knew that the physicist had such a great coin collection, eh?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This guy came in the mail a couple days ago:

Norman Italy - Capua
Anfusus, r. 1136-1144
AE Follaro, 10.86 mm x 0.69 grams
Obv.: O/A/N in left field, standing figure holding sword
Rev.: Pseudo-Cufic legend, cross above and below
Ref.: [MEC 14.188]

It's a tiny one! Smaller than the stand I put the coins on to photograph... also, the 'standing figure' clearly has a halo around it, so now I have a mystery as to who the saint is...

 

An interesting story. I once bought a jar of black sand from Hawaii for $1.00 at a garage sale in San Diego when I was ten years old. Inside were two coins I could never identify. Years later, I learned that one was an Alexandrian tetradrachm of Nero and the other a silver denier of Bohemund II of Antioch. Somehow the owner of the jar of black sand had squirreled away the coins in the black sand and when he passed away, his wife sold them at the garage sale. It turned out that the denier of Bohemund was a cast, and therefore, a forgery, whilst the tetradrachm turned out to be authentic.

 

Cool story ACH - while I haven't delved into crusader Coins much, I think a Bohemond II is hard to come by.

And my sickness continues - just ordered another Roger II coin...

 

I recently picked up a few coins from the 'Crusades' period (1090-1300), and amongst them was this Bohemond V
CRUSADERS, County of Tripoli. Bohémond V. 1233-1251. Æ Pougeoise (16mm, 0.92 g, 11h). Tripolis (Tripoli) mint. Struck 1235 and later. + CIVITAS, cross with central annulet and annulet at end of each arm; pellet in each quarter / + TRIPOLIS, crenelated tower with arched entry. Sabine 308-31; Metcalf, Crusades 555-9; CCS 21

 

Very neat @Topcat7! I like the cross on that. I’ve been lusting after a Roger of Salerno coin from Antioch lately. Not sure if I’ll pull the trigger. A big coin show is coming up, so I kind of want to save my money...

 

I really enjoyed your write-up on the Normans (not knowing much beforehand) and I enjoyed seeing your coins. Thanks.
Good luck with 'Roger of Salerno'.

 

I read all this only now. What an excellent exposé about the Normans! Thanks for the insights. I’m collecting Sicilian Normans, very interesting with the Arabic influences.

 

I still need to get in touch with you about ordering that book Pellinore! My work schedule is starting to clear up, so maybe in the next week or so

 

Excellent. I am looking for pictures of coins by william 1 before 1066 - does anyone know, where to find information and pictures?

 

Welcome @muskathund! There is no firm chronology of the Norman coins during William’s time. There are some general reckonings based on archaeological evidence, and the occasional coin we can attribute to someone based on inscription, but the Norman coins of the 11th century are generally ugly and garbled. They will look like the Henry I coin in the OP, but with other various designs

 

There is an idea kicking about that the the jury system, as applied under common law in the UK and the USA, came into being due to Islamic influence on Norman affairs. I take the key part from memory, but as I recall it concerns a guy from Selby, Yorkshire, who was initially a kind of political minister in South Italy, and then came back to work for Henry II. It's not a theory I either believe or disbelieve - I would just like to see it better studied. I have consulted a historian in the British legal system, but felt he dismissed idea out of prejudice alone.

The "sterling" weight system however definately does seem to me to derive from "Easterling" and mean Islamic in origin, and apparently has a continuous use from 1083 onwards in Norman England. It seems first adopted by Offa, c. 792, later submerged during complicated fiscal and other influences, before it stabilised again from 1083 onwards.

There are of course contrary views on this metrological matter - but I have come to the conclusion that the support for them is not very strong. Am open to debate of course.

Rob T

 

I suspect the person in question might be Thomas Brown? He was an Englishman who worked for the Normans in Southern Italy and returned to England, but I do not know for certain where he originated (or under which king he served - HII or RI). I hadn’t heard of the Islamic influence theory, but sounds a little silly to me. The Germans, (and I believe also the Anglo-Saxons, but not sure off the top of my head) already had a jury system which was necessary in an early illiterate society.

Islamic influence on money is without a doubt - the gold penny of Offa’s with Islamic inscription (which I think is currently in display at the BL exhibit on Anglo-Saxon England) is evidence of this, but this is nothing to do with the Normans. They adopted the system they found in England then adapted it to suite their needs.

 

Yes I checked the article I wrote a few years back on this. Robert of Selby was chancellor in Sicily. Thomas Brown was a member of his staff who subsequently worked in the court of Henry II in London. The argument for Islamic influence hangs on the specific number of jurors (12), and comparisons with contemporary Islamic North African practice. As I said, as it stands the argument seems a bit thin, and indecisive. However, I see no reason at all to call the idea silly.

I believe trial by combat was a practice of ancient German early illiterate society? And introduced into England by William I? I am inclined to say that that practice would correctly be called silly

Correct, but oddly, Offa’s dinar at root had no real connection to the sterling system either. The Islamic gold dinar weight seems to be a form of Attic, surviving at Damascus. The sterling system seems to be a much older, from Egypt, and was instead applied to Islamic silver dirhems. And, apparently, thence to Offa’s silver penny.

Its very probably more complicated than that. Cologne seems clearly to be using the sterling standard already by the 10th century. Meanwhile, the Vikings certainly introduced their own weight system to England, which seems to have been, in complicated ways, a derivative of Attic via Roman practice. So, at the very least, in 1083, William I chose sterling out of a number of alternatives, and he quite possibly chose it in contradiction to Paris and Rome, but in line with Cologne.

That’s my best guess, would be pleased to hear of evidence, for or against

Rob T

 

I’ll admit ignorance to where the exact number of jurors comes from. I could say specifically that Brown worked in the Exchequer and thus probably had more of an influence in taxation and the treasury, but with the special powers he apparently had (according to Richard Fitz Nigel) then who knows what other type of influence he may have had.

 

Thank you very much for your answer

 

Very very interesting article.

You wrote: "The Normandy coins degenerated in time. Whereas there was once a clear picture of a temple on the reverse, over the course of a few generations this would become a series of various geometric shapes. There was even a time when the legends degenerated into geometric designs, only to later be reestablished. The chaotic nature of the later Norman coins means it is often a mystery determining exactly who was duke when certain types were minted, and we are thus reliant on Archaeological finds and context."

When you keep that in mind, and look at a coin a found in 2017 in the Netherlands. There must be a connection in what you wrote.
There is on one side an (israelic) Cross or a Cross with crosslets. On the other side there are geomatric designs and degenerated legends. I hope you reply on my suggestion.



https://www.cointalk.com/threads/unknown-unpubliced-tremissis.312988/#post-3029180

 

Hello Kadan - I recall seeing your coin when you first posted it. Unfortunatly I know little of Tremisses, and while I could see the same process behind the degeneration of design, the similarities would end there (as there is a good 300-500 year difference between when our coins were minted). And chaos during the time of the Merovingian Kings isn’t unheard of

 

Thanks for your answer. But i doubt that my coin is a Tremissis. The Cross on both sides unusual for a Tremissis. Also the lack of a head.
I think the date should be around 1000AD - 1200AD rather than in the merovingian's time. Also the weight actually does not really correspond to a tremissis, or at least it is on the low side. 1.1 grams. Also 84% gold is a littlebit high.

 

I think the problem of dating your coin to 1000-1200AD is that we don’t have evidence of gold being in use as coins in Western Europe (none that I am aware of anyway - aside from areas of Islamic influence such as Spain and Southern Italy). there is certainly the concept, as I recall an entry in one of the Pipe rolls of Henry II (although it may have been Richard I or John - this is an old memory) mentioning paying with a gold shilling. Shillings were just an accounting term at that time, so supposedly the fee was paid with some type of gold, but no evidence that it was coin.

You said you brought your coin to Pol who said it was a Tremissis - why would you doubt him? Again, I have no experience with these coins, but they are generally a mystery. So why do you think 1000-1200?
While the design looks like geometric shapes, it doesn’t share the same characteristics as the Norman types (the arrows are strange - the pellet in the square could work, but the Norman coins have pellets inside triangles), and the Norman coins were so terribly debased that I doubt they would bother minting something in gold.