The die has been cast

So as I mentioned in the other thread, I escaped CNG 102 with only one piece of loot. I am not a very productive raider.

I found this to be intriguing from the start.



ANGLO-SAXON, Anglo-Viking (Danish East Anglia)(?). Late 9th century. PB 1½ Eyrir (1.5 Ounce?) Weight (21mm, 35.85 g). Circular lead weight, obverse inset with Series K, type 32a sceat. Cf. G. Williams, “Anglo-Saxon and Viking Coin Weights,” in BNJ 69 (1999), no. 5 (for a similar lead weight with inset Porcupine-type sceat). For inset: Abramson 38.40.10; SCBI 63 (BM), 490; SCBC 803C-D. Much as made. Very rare and interesting.

Williams' analysis of the known weights of this type clearly places them in the Danelaw during the later ninth century, when the Viking economy was still bullion-based, and weights were used for weighing both coinage and bullion.

The purpose of the coins set into these weights remains uncertain, but Williams suggests that they served both a decorative and a practical function as a symbol of authority. Although the Viking economy was still pre-monetary, Williams notes that the Vikings were familiar with coinage and likely recognized that coin designs represented state authority. He also suggests that the Vikings were probably familiar with Anglo-Saxon coin weights, which were validated by the virtue of being stamped with official dies, and argues that the lack of coin dies for use on their own weights was remedied by applying a coin within each. Williams points out that the fact that some of the coins used were issued by Anglo-Saxon kings would have been irrelevant, as the vast majority of the Vikings were illiterate. The present example supports this idea, as the coin inset, a Series K, type 32a sceat struck in east Kent, should have mostly fallen out of circulation in England by this time. Accordingly, the weight could not have been used to validate only a particular series.

http://www.britnumsoc.org/publications/Digital BNJ/pdfs/1999_BNJ_69_4.pdf


Is it a weight as Williams suggests? Some sort of gaming token as some others suggest?

I don't know for sure, but I was willing to gamble because I just happen to be here this week.




While others are throwing money around at tables and machines all around me, I spent my midday gambling in my room......

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That is an interesting piece of history. You spent your time wisely Grasshopper.

 

Awesome. I love it.

 

oh wow, that's very cool...haven't seen anything quite like that!

 

Whatever it is, it's a fantastic acquisition. Congrats!

 

That is very cool. Congrats on a great acquisition.

 

That IS cool!

 

It's a weight, Williams has a pretty strong argument. Besides, what game would you play with it?

 

Bang the teeth out of Christian? It's Viking, right?

 

Very lucky and cool, congrats!

 

I agree. I've seen them listed as game pieces, which I have no interest in.

This is intended to replace my stolen Cnut and surpasses it in a thousand ways for me. No provenance was listed, which for me was the gamble. Since it most likely came out of Britain, I thought those finds had to be registered and would thus provide a provenance. But it obviously did not stop me. I'm glad only a couple others took took notice during all that time.

 

Wow, 42BC => that OP-example is amazingly awesome (neat piece)

Man, that would make an outstanding Monopoly game piece!!





I am very jealous of your cool new addition (congrats)

 

There is no law requiring a finder to record their finds in the UK unless they think it is potential treasure. This would be classed as an artefact and to fit the description of potential treasure its content would have to be a minimum 10% Gold or Silver which clearly (at @1.0g) the Sceat would not be.

Very nice purchase.

 

Just Awesome. Congrats!

 

Wow! I'm not easily impressed, especially by born-yesterday stuff that include AD in their description, but that is seriously cool! Nicely done.

 

You won! Great, intriguing piece, and many thanks for the background info.

 

Nice buy, very interesting piece of history!

 

Maybe it's an ancient salesman-sized curling stone? (the Vikings were Nordic)

... I'm just sayin'

 

So now that I own this fancy curling stone, and I am home from my trip, I thought I would add some extra background.

For those who are interested, this is an image of a coin that is of the same type as that embedded in the lead weight. The lead weight has the wolf-head showing. Once I get the weight I will get better photos. The sides of the weight (somewhat visible in the auction photo) have piqued my interest as they seem to have an odd pattern. I need to see if that is an optical illusion or not.

Anyway. the sceat




Photo & attrib CNG ANGLO-SAXON, Secondary Sceattas. Circa 720-740. AR Sceat (1.13 g, 6h). Series K, type 32a. Mint in east Kent. Diademed and draped bust right, wreath knot behind head, holding cross / Wolf-headed, coiled serpent right. Beowulf 61 (this coin); Abramson K400; Metcalf 307; North 89; SCBC 796

https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=104328

Coiled, serpent-like creatures were a common protective motif in pre-Christian artwork. This symbol was assimilated into Christianity as a representation of Christ’s Resurrection (Gannon, pp. 137-8)




The coin, as mentioned in the CNG auction description would have long been out of circulation when this type of weight was created and used. Therefore it probably would not have been used to measure against against this specific type of coin, but would have been used to measure against bullion or some contemporary coin at some established count.

Having said that, there is a good 100 years between when this coin was minted and when it was incorporated into the lead. It seemed to have been kept in very good condition over those hundred years because the visible side shows little wear. Either that or it was discovered contemporary to the creation of the weight.

Because the coin is recessed into the surface, the reverse side (wolf) was fairly well protected from wear after the weights creation. The fact that this is a weight and not a circulating coin also saved it from surface wear once created.

It is quite possible that if this was punched into warm lead, the obv (which is hidden) might still be in real nice condition........................

But we will never know.

Anyway, that is all I have for now.

 

I think it's a very interesting piece as well

I've seen a few of these and the coin is usually in poor shape. This is an extremely nice example of the coin, with an iconic design.

As mentioned, this coin is a sceat, series K thought to originate from Kent. Other weights known have sceattas, stycas, and even Mercian pennies inserted

While I am in no point to argue as I am not any sort of researcher, I have a hard time believing that this sceatta coin, which is from the early 8th century, could have been manipulated at such a later time (late 9th century). It's hard to believe that coins that were well over 100 years old be just sitting around for all that time, and in nice condition. You don't find sceats in 9th century penny hoards, so the idea of this being a later Viking Danelaw item is, to me, implausible.

Rather, I think it has to be a contemporary piece of the 8th century, probably made by the Anglo-Saxons themselves, to whom the image of the wolf would have held some meaning. If it must be Viking, though I see no great reason why it must, then it probably would be very early, late 8th or early 9th century. After that period, the idea of sceattas being in circulation is much harder to accept. Offa's coinage (in Mercia) got going in the mid 8th century, and except for Northumbria (where stycas circulated until the mid 9th century) the sceatta was phased out in all of southern England in favor of the broad penny.