This coin looks Carolingian to me, but I could be way off. I find it interesting in that it is much larger than later Deniers at 22mm. Any idea what it might be?
While no expert, I get a strong Carolingian vide from the coin too. The obverse seems to have the Karolus monogram, though in a crude form. Maybe it is an imitation from Scandinavia?
Hi, I am away from my references and not at all confident enough but what we need to be focusing on is the monogram. The legends are degenere and at least on one side it seems to be a reversed legend so I suppose they would not be of much help. The size and weight are helpful as they indicate a 10 to early 11 century coinage. So who is this monogram for? The monogram itself looks degenere too, hence the trouble. It does bear familiarity with the VIICOC monogram of the coinage of the Viscounts of Albi from the 11th century but the flan seems larger than the usual Albigenois denier (btw what is the weight of the coin?) To me it also bears some resemblance to the LVDOVI monogram of the deniers of Louis IV d'Outremer (maybe Reims?), but these are extremely rare coins. Another similarity in both style and monogram shape are the EBIIIS and IVOS monograms of Dukes Conan II and Conan III of Bretagne (weight might also help in supporting or discarding this possibility). It even resembles an unstructured monogram of Lothaire, again extremely rare. These are the directions I'd explore first as I do not recognize the type upfront. If you could provide the weight and some more photos in different lighting/shades to make up some legends it might also help narrowing it down.
The monogram may be a COMES type. It resembles Roberts-4288 From Stacks Bowers NYINC 2016 auction https://www.sixbid.com/browse.html?auction=2463&category=51283&lot=2090462 Another possibility is Roberts 4251 https://www.sixbid.com/browse.html?auction=5509&category=178420&lot=4611139 Hope this helps
I think that Scodingue is the best bet. The flan is too large for a 12th century denier of the Viscounty of Albi (it's even big for an earlier 11th century one). For Scodingue the monogram should read COMITS and here is an example that seems like it could have come from the same celator: The legends are both in retrograde, but from this specimen one could read them as: SCYTINCORM/SCITINCOR-I; COMITS in middle field SALINIS BR-M/Y; cross These probably date around the beginning of the 1000s.
Back with some more details: There seem to be 3 different coinages for Scodingue in this early phase of comtal coinage, all of them likely in or around the reign of Otte-Guillaume de Macon, ruling as Count of Burgundy (982-1026). Of the three, yours is the only one noted by Boudeau (#1245, pp. 164-165) but unfortunately without a sketch drawing. Back then the coin was rather rare (20 francs) but now is a lot more accessible. The other two are: 1. A coin minted in the name of a King Charles, which was assigned by Caron to the mint at the Bourg of Lons-le-Saunier around 1000 (not sure based on what): Note the S - C or S - S in the quarters of the cross on the reverse, a distinctly later feature, which probably prompted Caron to assign this type to the County of Scodingue in the first place. 2. A coin which names Otte-Guillaume himself and a King Louis (probably Louis IV d'Outremer, in whose name many feudal coinages were made up to the 13th century), noted by Grut to be also of Lons Bourg for the County of Scodingue: The monogram has been interpreted as SC standing for Scodingue, dated tentatively to 986-1026. The similarities to your coin are also obvious. These two types are both very rare, which makes dating them a lot harder. Your coin on the other hand has a dating conventionally assigned to it to 1050 or "cca. 11th century" but I think we could do better. Caron only notes that they should have a terminus post quem of 996, on the strength of a hoard found in the 19th century. The rare signed type of Otte appeared in the Flace-les-Macon hoard, which might date during the wars for the succession of the Duchy of Burgundy (cca. 1004-1016) between Otte-Guillaume (who was Count of Burgundy, Macon, Scodingue et al) and King Robert II of France. Which makes sense since that would have been the period when the Count of Burgundy needed to assert his prestige the most, naming himself on his comtal coinage. But what about the anonymous coinage, like your specimen here? Well, before the conflict with the King of France, Otte had already claimed and ruled as both Count and Duke of Burgundy, after the death of his relative Otte-Henri in 1002. Considering that the two coinages share an obvious familiarity, it is fair, I think, to put them in relation with each other. And observing that in other places where the comtal coinage started around the same time (end of 10th - beginning of 11th century), like Troyes or Provins et Sens for instance, there was a period of anonymous issues before moving to issues naming the counts, we could propose a dating for your type before 1004. So now we have a terminus post quem of 996 or perhaps 1002 and a terminus ante quem of 1004. Of course, this exercise is as we stand a theoretical one, but so is the conventional "1050" or "the 11th century."
