Finally, a Carolingian coin unambiguously attributable to Charles the Simple ...I hope

Here’s one I landed recently.

Charles III, the Simple, King of the West Franks 898-923. Denier of Melle. Visibly of fine silver (typical of Carolingian issues); 22mm., 1.53 g.
Obv. CARLVS REX.
Rev. In two lines: MET [/] ALO.
Depeyrot (3rd ed., 2008) No. 630. Citing exactly one example with this variant of the obverse legend, weighing 1.52 g.
Cf. Nouchy p. 264, nos. 33A -33G. Listing several variants of the obverse legend, most of which he identifies as later immobilizations; none with the “CARLVS REX” legend, vs. “REX F” and “REX R.” (Cf. Depeyrot 629, also noting later immobilizations ending “REX FR” …with the caveat that the issue, especially as immobilized, has several further minor variations, which he doesn’t bother to enumerate.)
See also Duplessy, Feodales v. 1, 906, 906A, and 907: early immobilizations, dated c. 930- 1100, all with minor graphic variants of the ‘CARLVS REX R’ legend.

‘Immobilization’ is exactly what it sounds like; the continuation of a given type over successive governing authorities, often with gradual alteration and degradation of the legends, motifs, and composition. This is especially endemic to early French feudal coins, mainly from the mid-10th century through the 11th-13th; sometimes even later. As Dunbabin observes, from the 10th century, mints “were as likely to be in the control of the bishops or great magnates as of the king” (France in the Making, p. 33 –a notably early instance (1985) of numismatic evidence being cited by academic historians of the middle ages). Dunbabin goes on to note the relatively few fully-realized ‘feudal’ issues, minted in the magnates’ own names, during these initial phases of the series (51-2).

Where Carolingian coins are concerned, I’ve always gravitated toward the later reigns, ending with Hugh Capet’s accession in 987. Right, as far forward into the 10th century as possible. You could blame that on a morbid fascination with the decline of the regime, especially in France. Along with ongoing fireworks from the Vikings, this is when you start to see Carolingian feudalism evolve into the more familiar ‘Classic’ form, better known from the 11th, 12th and earlier 13th centuries. …Peeling off from the existing Carolingian administrative infrastructure (truly imperial …to some extent), and morphing into the level of local autonomy that many of us grew up associating with it. The tenth century begins to see the transition of Carolingian territorial ‘feudal’ offices, which were primarily by imperial or royal appointment, into specifically hereditary duchies, counties, and seigneuries.
In the coins, this process is symptomized by the plethora of early issues which continue the original, Carolingian and Robertian legends and motifs. …Even as their composition drops from silver to billon, with attendant decreases in weight.

…Which, for a collector, can make the later, scarcer Carolingian reigns a real minefield. Immobilizations of issues in the name of the commonest reign, Charles the Bald (843-877), could be contemporaneous to later ones. …Or even later, whether by as little as a decade, or into the 11th century. This can be true even of examples which are evidently as early as that interval, on the basis of style. Often enough, the collector is effectively stuck with guesswork …with, right, weight, module and visually evident composition (billon vs. fine silver) as the other main, aggregately less than conclusive clues.

Given this level of drama, the two reigns that have caused me the most trouble are Louis IV (936-954; effectively out of my range), and our friend Charles the Simple (898-923). Regarding the issues of Melle, both Nouchy and Depeyrot include listings of early immobilizations, along with the initial, official Carolingian issues.

Of the two, only Depeyrot includes weights for the examples he cites, both official and immobilized. The difference tends to be dramatic: most of the latter are around 1.20 grams. …This is when the weight of this latest example of Melle, along with the composition and module, become as relevant as the (very) unusual obverse legend. I’m around 95 -98% ready to believe that this really is a contemporaneous issue of Charles III, the Simple.

…A last detail on this point: both Depeyrot and Nouchy confirm that the original coinage was indeed initiated by Charles III, the Simple, vs. his grandfather, Charles II, the Bald. (Carolingian chroniclers were an inventive lot, where nicknames were concerned –other good ones are ‘the Fat’ and ‘the Stammerer’ –but as translated, ‘the Simple’ could connote forthrightness and candor, along with less complimentary qualities.) Here’s an example of Charles the (merely) Bald, from the same mint. Resembling, but predating the commonest 'GDR' type, datable to the Edict of Pitres, from 865. Please note the Viking ‘peck marks,’ evincing the vast Danegelds Charles paid, beginning well over a century before AEthelred II’s better known ones. (From French ebay. The only Carolingian coins with peck marks that I previously knew of were from the Cuerdale Hoard, deposited in Yorkshire early in the 10th century.)


Charles the Bald, denier of Melle, of the preceding type. (Possibly a conspicuously early immobilization …but my money’s on it being a lifetime issue.)

Obv. +CARLVS REX R (or perhaps a ligature of ‘FR’).
Rev. ‘KAROLVS’ monogram. +MET X VLLO.

Cf. Depeyrot 619, 624 and 626 –all with variants of the ‘...REX R’ legend. He goes on to note immobilizations with the ‘CARLVS REX FR’ legend (627). –But these have to be early, in light of the weights of the examples he cites, and the substantively different type initiated by Charles the Simple.
Nouchy, while noting that this type was immobilized, cites only the ‘REX FR’ legend (p. 133, no. 41).
Now we can proceed to the better documented immobilizations of the type with the two-line ‘MET ALO’ legend. Duplessy (Monnaies Feodales), while no less, um, selectively exhaustive than Depeyrot or Nouchy, is of real help in dating them. This one is of the first phase of the imobilization; dated to ‘vers 930 - vers 1100’ (Duplessy
906).




And this one corresponds more nearly to Duplessy’s next phase, ‘XIIeme siecle’ (909). I’d really like this to correspond to the ducal reign of Guillaume IX (1086-1126), an early proponent of the troubadour genre, of whom a surprising number of lyrics are extant. ...Right now, I’m having trouble accessing them online, but I promise you, they’re refreshingly candid, and correspondingly graphic, in their content.



If you made it this far, Please, post some Carolingians and early feudal stuff!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Courtesy of a recent sale here - (John Anthony's description and picture) Frederick III ruled Denmark and Norway from 1648 until his death in 1670. He fought two wars against Sweden and instituted absolute monarchy in 1660. Here is a silver 2 Skilling coin of 1649. I am quite amazed to have it in my possession.

 

@MIGuy, just watch out! Medievals can be habit-forming.

 

Cool coins! Sounds like a very challenging series to collect. Has anyone done any metallurgical analysis of the coins to try to associate composition with ruler?

 

Thanks, @savitale! A lot has been done on that front; this stuff has attracted some of the top academic numismatists. Grierson, Blackburn, and Bompaire are three that come to mind. --What am I saying? You can add Spufford.
Sadly, in print, I'm limited mostly to general references, which tend to get into the methodological details only peripherally. As @seth77 can tell you, the cutting-edge work invariably shows up in journals first. But the triangulation of composition, weight and dating from hoard evidence is well underway.

 

Well, as a matter of fact the later immobilizations are also from the famous Crusader 'nostra moneta' coinages -- coins taken by the crusaders towards the Holy Land in the First Crusade. So if one does not have access to research on the coinage of Poitou, there is another shot to be taken towards the research done on Crusader material, especially hoards. So in this case we have roughly speaking -- Fecamp (Francoise Dumas-Dubourg - Le tresor de Fecamp...) and the later Outremer hoards - Near East 2000 (I & W Schulze, Bompaire, et al - A coin hoard from the First Crusade...) and the ones noted by Metcalf (Some hoards and stray finds...) etc. as material. Teboulbi, Bompaire et al (Les monnayages d'Alphonse de Poitiers...) gives the bottom tail-end of the series at 400-430/1000 for the coinage of Richard for instance, but for the period of ca. 1000 to 1100 (so after Fecamp but before the 'nostra moneta' of the crusaders) I don't really know if there is research marking the evolution of billon quality.

 

Many, Many thanks for weighing in, @seth77! --Yes, Of Course, Dumas! Dope-slapping time.

 

France, Carolinginian. Charles the Simple, as Charles IV, King of West Francia, AD 898-922. AR Denier (22mm, 1.64 g, 3h). Metalo (Melle) mint. Obv: +CΛRLV(retrograde S) REX R, cross pattée. Rev: MET/ΛLO in two lines. Ref: Depeyrot 629 var. (obv. legend); M&G –; MEC –; Fécamp 8381-7. Extra Fine, lightly toned, traces of underlying luster, light ghosting on reverse. Ex CNG eAuction 426, Lot 599.

 

Very, Very impressive example, @Edessa. This exact variant ('+CARLVS REX R,' with nothing in the reverse fields) corresponds to Nouchy p. 264: 33B.
Surprisingly, given Depeyrot's reputation, Nouchy is sometimes better, especially for the variant legends. Your example deserves a full citation:
Patrick Nouchy. Le Rois Carolingiens de Francie Occidentale de Pepin le Bref a Louis V (751-987). Dreux: Editions du Grenier Durocasse, 1994.
Unlike Depeyrot, which is arranged by mint --similarly to references on feudal coins, back to Poey d'Avant-- Nouchy is set up by reign, with each mint arranged alphabetically (right,over and over...). Maybe just a tad more user-friendly. He also has indices for mints, and even legends --for the times when it comes down to that. (Trust me, I've been there!)

 

Thanks very much, DVCKS! I will keep an eye out for a copy of Nouchy. I don't see any for sale in the haunts that I usually check.

 

You're very cordially welcome, @Edessa. Sorry to report this, but all I did was to check US Amazon --in case you don't slum (verb) to the extent that I do-- and there was Nada, aka Kwa-Zero. If you were brave enough, French Amazon (Hopefully with better labor policies, if only by default), might be another option.

 

That's a great denier from the mint at Melle, congrats on landing the coin @+VGO.DVCKS I've always wanted to acquire a denier with the METALO reverse. The closest I have are deniers of Richard I minted at Melle. The example below was struck on a very large flan.

 

Wow, I've never seen that kind of flan for anything from the neighborhood, @TheRed. Wonder how the weight compares to more typical ones.