Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
World Coins
>
Origins of the English Penny
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="+VGO.DVCKS, post: 4940574, member: 110504"][USER=109923]@John Conduitt[/USER], your article was impressive enough that I initially forgot to comment about your examples. Which, Doh, are consistently on a comparable level.</p><p>There is one other fun thing about Henry III's long crosses. The (notoriously opinionated --if benignly so, at least at this remove) chronicler Matthew Paris mentions this. ...I'm having trouble accessing my bookmarks for the British Library and the Parker Library at Cambridge Uni, but here's a .jpg of the operant illustration from the slightly later ms. (c. 1250) at the former one. The illustration is at the lower left.[ATTACH=full]1187584[/ATTACH]</p><p>As translated from the slightly earlier ms. at Cambridge, here's some of what he had to say about the reform.</p><p>"[Distress and Trouble Caused by the Changing of the Coinage]</p><p>"Also at this time, various precepts of the lord king, concisely promulgated by criers through the cities of England, concerning the issue of coins, so troubled the people that they would have preferred a measure of corn to have cost more than twenty shillings [then, as you noted, money of account]. For exchange was only permitted in a few cities. When they got there, they were given a certain weight of new money for a certain weight of old, but on every pound [...ditto] they had to pay thirteen pence for the silversmith's work, namely for moneyage, which is commonly called blanching. This money differed from the old in that a double [i.e., 'voided'] cross intersected the border with the inscription. Otherwise, that is in weight, impression and inscription, it was the same as before. Thus the people were constrained and suffered no small damage, for they could scarcely bring back twenty shillings from the money-changer's table, in exchange for their thirty, and had the labour and expense of several days of wasteful and tedious waiting."</p><p>(Vaughan, ed. /trans. The Illustrated [and Very abridged] Chronicles of Matthew Paris. Sutton, "in association with" Cambridge, 1993. Pp. 61-2; under the entry for 1248.)</p><p>In other words, the royal administration was profiting from the endemic practice of clipping; just on the back end. It's easy to speculate that this would have been a factor in the remarkable level of urban and middle-class support Simon de Montfort had during the 'Barons' War' (1258-1265, depending on when you want to end it), especially in contrast to the the Magna Carta era of the preceding generation.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="+VGO.DVCKS, post: 4940574, member: 110504"][USER=109923]@John Conduitt[/USER], your article was impressive enough that I initially forgot to comment about your examples. Which, Doh, are consistently on a comparable level. There is one other fun thing about Henry III's long crosses. The (notoriously opinionated --if benignly so, at least at this remove) chronicler Matthew Paris mentions this. ...I'm having trouble accessing my bookmarks for the British Library and the Parker Library at Cambridge Uni, but here's a .jpg of the operant illustration from the slightly later ms. (c. 1250) at the former one. The illustration is at the lower left.[ATTACH=full]1187584[/ATTACH] As translated from the slightly earlier ms. at Cambridge, here's some of what he had to say about the reform. "[Distress and Trouble Caused by the Changing of the Coinage] "Also at this time, various precepts of the lord king, concisely promulgated by criers through the cities of England, concerning the issue of coins, so troubled the people that they would have preferred a measure of corn to have cost more than twenty shillings [then, as you noted, money of account]. For exchange was only permitted in a few cities. When they got there, they were given a certain weight of new money for a certain weight of old, but on every pound [...ditto] they had to pay thirteen pence for the silversmith's work, namely for moneyage, which is commonly called blanching. This money differed from the old in that a double [i.e., 'voided'] cross intersected the border with the inscription. Otherwise, that is in weight, impression and inscription, it was the same as before. Thus the people were constrained and suffered no small damage, for they could scarcely bring back twenty shillings from the money-changer's table, in exchange for their thirty, and had the labour and expense of several days of wasteful and tedious waiting." (Vaughan, ed. /trans. The Illustrated [and Very abridged] Chronicles of Matthew Paris. Sutton, "in association with" Cambridge, 1993. Pp. 61-2; under the entry for 1248.) In other words, the royal administration was profiting from the endemic practice of clipping; just on the back end. It's easy to speculate that this would have been a factor in the remarkable level of urban and middle-class support Simon de Montfort had during the 'Barons' War' (1258-1265, depending on when you want to end it), especially in contrast to the the Magna Carta era of the preceding generation.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
World Coins
>
Origins of the English Penny
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...