In the field of 'Feudal France' a lot of the identifications that still stand today, mostly between collectors rather than numismatists, come from the 19th to early 20th century self-made researchers (Poey d'Avant) or antiquarians and collectors (Boudeau) rather than modern numismatists. And this is not just happening with the immobilized types from Chartres to Chateaudun or Blois, but to specific named and widespread issues as late as the 13th century. One such example is this: AR18mm 0.99 g billon denier + . M . COMITISSA; large Roman I bar separating a fleur de lys and two stars. + NIVERNIS CIVIT; cross. Poey d'Avant #2141, Boudeau 347 This type is usually assigned by dealers and collectors alike to Mahaut II -- a scion of the Maison de Bourbon -- (it was sold as Mahaut II by CGB almost 4 years ago), and it appears often whenever individualized by this identification: Mahaut II (1257-1262). In his work under the supervision of M. Bompaire, G. Peigney (Le monnayage nivernais des comtes de Nevers 954 -1355 Essai de synthèse historique, économique et numismatique, Nov. 2016) assigns it convincingly to the rule of Mahaut de Courtenai (1241-1257) -- a longer reign and more likely to have produced such a large output of coinage with such varying billon quality and module/weight. The hoards presented by Peigney (pp. 183-4) point to a circulation period between around 1245 to around 1270 (so possibly the coinage was issued until the death of Mahaut in 1257). The coinage had probably a few phases with varied billon quality -- an earlier phase keeping close to the title of the coinage of Guy II of 230/1000 (or even higher according to metallurgical research) and advancing towards a later phase, when the silver drops to 196/1000 (p. 187). By the looks of it, this specimen is a lower billon quality coinage, probably one of the later emissions, post 1250, although the stable patina (meaning possibly a better that 200/1000 billon) and style would point to an earlier phase. A conservative assessment would likely place it around 1250 with the obvious caveats. There is a possibility, considering the later billon composition and drop in weight to around 0.7g, that in the later 1250s the denier of Nevers was tariffed at half the royal tournois (p. 188), although heavier pieces, like this one, had more silver than a regular obole tournois. If actually imposed, a punishing exchange rate as such would be in line with the Royal administration's policy of limiting as much as possible the circulation of the feudal coinage in favor of the Royal denier tournois, a policy started by Philippe II (in the 1190s the proposed coinage was the denier parisis but by 1205 the preference moved towards the tournois following the annexations of John Lackland's 'Angevin Empire') and was accelerated by Louis IX, Philippe IV and the diplomatic maneuvering of 1315-1320s by his heirs, marking the beginning of the end for many feudal coinages with the Ordonnances of November 1315 to spring 1316.
Fascinating, @seth77, not to mention a cogent, resonantly contextualized argument. ...But Wait! Duplessy (Tome I, 2004) had already reassigned this issue to Mahaut I (762) --albeit, typically, without commentary of any kind (762). More reason to see Duplessy as only a discrete improvement on Boudeau. Here's my example. (Edit: ) To your point about increasing Capetian regulation of feudal issues from Philippe II into the rest of the 13th century, I've noticed that it's from the 13th century that you start seeing fleurs de lis on feudal issues. If you have any interpretive light to shed on that, it would be highly welcome.
I was thinking exactly that while reading Peigney's argument, and he does mention Duplessy's extensive knowledge of the hoard material, which is very likely his source of attribution. As usual, and as you note, Duplessy does not dwell on anything, he is a cataloger extraordinaire and that's about it.
...I have to equally admire and envy your access to the journal literature, both linguistically and logistically. ...There are glimmers of hoard evidence even in Boudeau (for issues of the comte de Provence, for instance), but on what amounts to a random, anecdotal basis. One fun thing about the expansion of royal control over the currency in its earlier phases, into the reign of Louis IX, is that it's far from a monolithic process. Through that period, the inroads the Capetians were making against their more prominent vassals took place largely through very canny exploitation of existing feudal law. --That's far from the whole picture, of course, since royal administration was expanding from the reign of Philippe II. But the dramatic expansion at the expense of Jean Sans-terre (also using feudal law as pretext) was effectively the exception that proved the rule. Relative to what was happening numismatically, here are my two favorite examples of the lingering limitations of royal control, into the reign of Louis IX. Somewhat ironically, it was only from the royal acquisition of the viscounty of Chateaudun in the earlier 13th century (from Chateaudun's traditional suzerains, the comtes de Blois) that the viscomtes, as tenants-in-chief, began issuing coins in their own names. Here's the example it's easiest to find pictures of. Geoffroi V (1233-1253), denier. Obv. (From 7 o'clock: ) GAVF [...] RID' CATRVMDVNI (Duplessy --Our Hero-- 504.) Then there's the seigneurie of Deols. This is a fun progression. Deols. Philippe II as 'baillistre' (during the minority of the female heir), 1206-1207. Obv. +REX FILIPVS. Rev. Magen David, annulet in center (identical to the motif in the most recent seigneurial issue, c. 160-1176). +DE DOLIS. (Duplessy 682.) With the marriage of the heiress, the seigneurie was returned to the husband --whose son nonetheless replaced the annulet with a fleur-de-lis, in the following issue. (For people tuning in late, the fleur de lis was the quintessential Capetian insignia; the royal coat of arms was a field full of them.) Guillaume I de Chauvigny, 1207-1234. Rev. Magen David, fleur de lis in center. +DE DOLIS Obv. Cross, fleurs de lis in two angles. +GVILERMVS. The other example of an earlier 13th-c. feudal issue with fleurs de lis that leaps out at me is of Henri, Comte de Bar-le-duc. (Not in Duplessy --so far; posted not long ago.) It's also fun for the selective "Lombardic" lettering --which becomes de rigueur over the 14th and 15th centuries. Comte de Bar-le-duc. Henri II, 1214-1240. Obv. Cross with fleurs de lis in two angles. xhENRICVS COmES Rev. Comital coat of arms (including two 'bars' --a kind of fish). [+B]ARRI DVCIS (Boudeau 1425.) ...Nope, it's like, Welcome to Formatting Hell. Except, that was an hour of my Friday that no one can give back to me.
One other obvious feature of the later Chateaudun denier is the interesting variation of the 'chatel' motif. @seth77, you know most of what I don't about the scope of the migration of this (now royal) motif, into feudal and international coinage over the 14th and 15th centuries. But in the French feudal series, it does show up elsewhere, obviously enough for me to get it, notably in issues of the duchy of Burgundy from the early 14th century, where a still-early representation (in this medium) of the ducal coat of arms is replaced by a less creative rendering of the chatel. ...I have no examples as late as this, and no better references than the usual suspects, but the contrast is marked.
The problem was not to be resolved by adopting the type by feudal polities -- Louis IX actually went as far as to interdict his brother Alphonse (and to lesser extent Charles) from minting their own denier tournois in 1263. And this had wide repercussions for the western monetization in the Mediterranean as these coinages seem to have migrated east after 1263 (and more so after Viterbo in 1267) but it also showed that the Royal administration was interested in the main goal of centralization: the increase of revenue from seigneuriage and the direct control of the metrics of the coinage. With feudal mintage there was no way to actually control this and the variations in billon title could become means by the lucrative robber baron to impoverish the Royal administration in two ways -- 1. by exchanging lesser coin for the better Royal coin and 2. by driving the better Royal coin underground as per Gresham's Law. After Philippe IV though, as Louis X's admin went through the motions with the Ordonnances of 1315-1316 imposing thus heavy penalty for feudals who did not abide by the rules imposed on them by the king in terms of design and metrics, the barons found themselves with no practical monetary freedom and many would sell their minting rights to the Royal admin by the middle of the 14th century. Certainly there were temporary exceptions and periods of intercession, notably right at this time 1315-6 to 1322 when princes du sang Philippe de France and Charles de France on one side and powerful enough barons like Eudes IV de Bourgogne had their own feudal deniers tournois minted in Poitou and La Marche and Auxonne. But all three were short-lived -- in the cases of the princes the local types stopped once the princes stepped up to become kings of France and in the case of Eudes, the tournois stops also in 1322. Eudes IV tournois of Auxonne:
Brilliant commentary, @seth77. ...And @PlanoSteve! This is why we love this stuff. It's a moment when there starts to be enough reliable primary documentation that you can begin to get a handle on what was happening, synergetically, in several spheres at once. (Economic and administrative, as @seth77 pointed out, in conjunction with ...at risk of redundancy... underlying, more unambiguously political ones.)
