As if 13 sceatta's weren't enough ... When I visited a private seller in the south of the Netherlands to buy an Ambiani AV stater (which I will post later), he must have remembered my weak spot for sceatta's. This is a somewhat light specimen (0.86 gram; they usually weigh around 1.0 - 1.2 gram), but it's not uncommon. It's completely black and shiny, and hence difficult to photograph. Interestingly, the obverse shows a die break at two places: inside the beak (near the sharp end of the triangle), and near the three pellets between the spine, the standard and the sharp end of the beak. None of my 13 other sceatta's have die breaks. This, in combination with the lower weight, may point towards an (even less) unofficial mint, or later date. ANGLO-SAXON, Anonymous. AR Sceatta (series E, variety G), minted: Frisia; 690-720 Obverse: Porcupine' with triangular beak. Spikes ending in dots, not attached to spine. Between beak and spine three pellets; below part of a standard Reverse: Square standard of line with dots, inside pellet within annulet, horizontal line above and below ending in dots on each side. Weight: 0.86g; Ø:12mm. Catalogue: Metcalf & Op ten Velde (2010) die chain 336-338 (plate 11, The Monetary Economy of the Netherlands, c. 690 - c. 760 and the Trade with England: A Study of the 'Porcupine' Sceattas of Series E). Provenance: Ex. Jan van Bergen; acq.: 07-2020 I was able to link it to diechain 336-338: I really have a weak spot for sceatta's ... I already own a Series E variety G. But well, this one did not have a die match and ehm ... it's not so darkly toned, and ehm... the reverse is partly off-center, ... well here it is: ANGLO-SAXON, Anonymous. AR Sceatta (series E, variety G), minted: Frisia; 690-720 Obverse: Porcupine' figure to the right, pellets above but not connected to spikes, triangle at right end of arc, with three pellets between triangle and arc. Below, upper end of standard Reverse: Standard with square around consisting of dotted border, around pellets. Annulet in center, with pellet inside, around four horizontal lines with pellet at one end. Between, two pellets. Weight: 1.02g; Ø:12mm. Catalogue: No die match in Metcalf & Op ten Velde (2010) (The Monetary Economy of the Netherlands, c. 690 - c. 760 and the Trade with England: A Study of the 'Porcupine' Sceattas of Series E). Provenance: Possibly found near Slappeterp, Friesland. Numis nr: 1150657; acq.: 05-2020
Such a cool coin! I am always amazed by the Anglo-Saxon Sceatta's general resemblance to coins minted CENTURIES earlier by the Celts. PORCUPINE MAN in Britain! Celtic Britain Iceni Boudicca 61 CE 1.03g Celt Hd r Celtic horse galloping Seaby 434 Scarce
Roerbakmix, from here, your erudition with this stuff is effecively as impressive as the coins. Maybe a good time to ask about something I've never understood. How do Frisian sceattas, this much later than the initial migrations, end up being called 'Anglo-Saxon'? Were the examples in England the prototypes? (I couldn't even tell you why, but that seems a little counterintuitive.) ...Or is it maybe as simple as the same ethnic groupings having been involved on both sides of the Channel?
Brilliant! And it's That Cool that this one is of Boudicca! You can draw the same parallels with the early French feudal 'Bleso-Chartrain' /'Chinonais' coins. These did for one late Carolingian profile portrait what the Celts did to Alexandrian and Hellenistic prototypes. Below is, not my best example, just, sadly my best pictures of one. County of Blois, anon. c. 980-1030. Duplessy 575. (I'm embarrassed to even give the reverse legend, since you'd have to take my word for it!) There's at least one French dealer who sometimes refers to both Celtic and Bleso-chartrain coins as 'cubiste.'
Great coin. I have not done it yet, but I am promising myself to start focusing on Celt issues. Would be cool to pair them up with later Sceatta and Carolingian style coins. Just for funzies.
I love these. I'm not sure whether I like that Sceattas are generally not attributed, but it makes them more intriguing. The leadership at the time seems to have been very confused anyway. Somehow they feel wilder even that Celtic coins. I don't have a porcupine yet, but this one seems to have a vaguely similar reverse style: Series C1 Primary Sceatta, 690-710, mint in Kent. 11.5mm, 1.27g. Radiate bust right on pyramidal neck; Λ behind; runic APA before. Standard with central annulet, Ts and Is in opposing angles; spray above, cross below.
I don't even have a porcupine any more, but portrait ones were always kind of the collective /-ing holy grail. ...The nose on that one is looking very Bleso-Chartrain from here.
I'm no expert but I believe it was simply that they were essentially the same people. They did a lot of trade with each other so these coins are found on both sides, but the style originated in Europe.
Very cool, they are such interesting little coins. I happen to have one in my collection, but to tell you the truth it hasn’t gotten the attention it most likely deserves. Could you please recommend some literature that would be useful in identifying the date, mint, and dare I say ruler of the coin?
Thanks @+VGO.DVCKS for the compliment. You are absolutely correct: Anglo-Saxon is as wrong (or right) as describing them as "Tang dynasty": it's meant to give a rough timeframe and location. (nb. the Tang dynasty joke is by @AnYangMan. Only real numismatists get it.) Some sceatta's were probably minted in England, some in France, some in Frisia, some in West-Germany, some in Danmark, etc. Anglo-Saxon is a compromis, though it would be more correct to write "FRISIANS". There are two sceatta's that are attributed to the Frisians: the series E (which I posted two examples from), which consists of many varieties and countless sub-varieties, and the series D (with only three varieties and some sub-varieties). Series D variety 8 Series D variety 10 Series D variety 2c Regarding the literature (on series D and E): There are two extensive studies on these two series by Metcalf and Opdenvelde which are freely available from the Dutch "Jaarboek voor Munten en Penningenkunde" (which goes back into the 1800's, and includes many English, German and French studies): All previous publications: https://jaarboekvoormuntenpenningkunde.nl/jaarboek-op-artikel/ The Serie D https://jaarboekvoormuntenpenningkunde.nl/jaarboek/2003/2003a.pdf The Serie E https://jaarboekvoormuntenpenningkunde.nl/jaarboek/2009/2009a.pdf https://jaarboekvoormuntenpenningkunde.nl/jaarboek/2010/2010a.pdf It's a bit dry, but very comprehensive (I have not found a similar book on the other Sceatta's)
Thanks for that, John. Kind of thing that makes immediate, intuitive sense .....now that you mention it!
Many thanks, Roerbakmix, both for the clarification and the links. ...So it's a typical 'term of art.' Now I can relax!
