I have been reading the book The Plantagenets by Dan Jones. In one of the chapters about King John, who ruled from 1199 to 1216, he wrote about how John paid the mercenary knights, who fought his battles for him in Europe, with pennies that had his name and portrait on them. I had to think for a minute because all of John’s English pennies were issued in the name of his father, Henry III. Then it dawned on me. Jones was referring to the Irish pennies which did have John’s name and portrait on them. Dealers say that these pieces are “common,” but it took me a while find one that pleased me. Most of pieces I saw had been damaged or cleaned. Finally I caught up this one. Now I know why there are more of them available to us today. These pieces were issued from 1207 to 1211. Still it begs the question, why didn't he have these pieces made in England? Here an English piece, issued during the time of John, with Henry III's name on it.
I’m not sure I would trust much of what Dan Jones has to say. Did he cite a source that said the coins had John’s name? If I remember correctly, most of John’s “mercenaries” came from the Low Countries, and John raised a massive scutage in England of the English knights and high taxes on the various towns, and even the moneyers of England to pay for the wars. It would make no sense for that money to be coined in Ireland. And I am sure John kept Henry II’s name and image on the coins because they were stable, and widely used (Richard’s ransom was paid in those coins, which became widely imitated in the Holy Roman Empire, and the Emperor aided John in his was against Phillip Augustus).
By the way - I do like your Irish penny. I have been looking for one that I like at a price I am willing to pay...
Those are great coins @johnmilton especially your Irish penny. The reason these Irish pennies of John are considered common is that vast quantities were minted during his reign. Unlike later Anglo-Irish coinage of Edward IV, these pennies were minted to the English standard and circulated in England and Northern Europe. Large numbers of them have turned up in hoards from England and the continent. If they had been intended to stay for Irish only usage, you would have seen the continuation of the small Dominus coinage from the late 12th century. I have read the Dan Jones claim before, but never seen a citation for it. As far as why the coins were minted in Ireland, the simple answer is that the silver was located there. Large amounts of silver had come to Ireland in trade going back the arrival of the Norse. Also, silver was mined in Ireland, though it became much more extensive under Edward I. Ireland was a source of silver ripe for exploitation.
Might it have something to do with the fact that John was a lord in Ireland? Before he became king, he had halfpennies stuck in Dublin with his name on them.
Here is the text from The Plantagenets, page 154: "The national coinage was recommissioned. New silver pennies, stamped with John's image, flooded the country. Everyone handling one in receipt of payment for a service renderedto the war effort would have looked upon his king's face: his hair curling about his ears, his beard cropped short, and his eyes even in the simple minted likeness, bulging out at the holder, daring that person to defy him. Many of these coins were used to recruit mercenary soldiers: sailors and men-at-arms ..." Jones is probably off on the context because he begins by talking about an assault circa 1205. The Irish pennies were minted from 1207 – 11, but the concept is valid. John did mount another assault on the French coast in 1213. Even the description of John’s portrait makes sense. From my perspective, the portrait on these Irish pennies looks like a human being and probably was a decent likeness of John. It certainly is a better portrait that the cartoonish figures that appear on other British coins of the period. For example, check out this Henry III penny.
Here is an Irish half penny of John, issued before he became the King of England. It is interesting to note that I paid a fairly strong price for this "moon face" piece bcause it has a generous amount of mint luster on it. I don't know if I totally goofed up or not, but mint luster on coins from this era grabs my attention. These pieces are fairly common too. I think the dealer from whom I purchased it had about a dozen of them. Some dealers don't give them much respect because of hoards like that, but the one was the best of the litter litter in my opinion.
So no citation for a source From Jones? I just wonder how he can say people looked on John’s image on the coin when these things are so stylized that they are unlikely to be real portraits. Particularly since the image had not really changed since Henry’s time (even the Irish penny is not all that different for the Portrait). It’s that kind of laziness/poetic license that frustrates me about popular historians. (Please don’t view this as a criticism of you @johnmilton - if you are enjoying the book, then power to you).
There has to be reason why some coins are common, and others are scarce or rare. It's been reported from multiple sources that John had over half the coinage in England at one point, and that what he had was stored in barrels, by the barrel. The John era English penny is common, but not super common. It would seem logical that the Irish coin, which still around in fair numbers today, although not always in the conditions that we would like, was made in quantity and that he used them for wartime purposes. Like most British kings, John seems to have always been in a war or preparing for one. The trouble is most of the histories I read don’t cover much about money or coinage. The numismatic writers seem to spend most of their time on die varieties and the like. Some far as my British numismatic in endeavors, I’m more interested in the history of the monarch and how his or her coinage was used than die varieties. Changes in weight because of inflation, the need to introduce the gold angel to replace the gold noble, (Edward IV’s time) those things are all interesting. Die varieties? Not much interest at all. I been through the die variety game with U.S. coins (half cents to be exact) and that got old and frustrating. The rare ones were in “strong hands” that were not about to sell until the end of their lives, even if they had multiple examples of the same variety, and only at inflated auction prices. So I pulled the plug on the collection and have not regretted it.
This all makes sense after seeing the quote from the book. Jones is talking about the mint reorganization of 1204/1205 that John undertook which resulted in the class V pennies being introduced. They were of significantly better quality and style than the class IV pennies that had been produced during the previous 10 years or so. Here is my example of a class V penny of John from Canterbury.
