Historically significant English gold coin

[Figleaf]

First Gold Coin Struck in the Name of an English King to be Sold by Spink
By Spink on Monday, June 14, 2010

The UK auction firm of Spink has announced the upcoming sale of an Anglo-Saxon gold Shilling of King Eadbald of Kent dating from c.620-635. This is the first gold coin struck in the name of an English King and a rare and important piece of English history. Found near Deal Kent in 2010, this coin will be sold at auction on June 24th and is expected to fetch upwards of £8,000. (Editor: Seems very Inexpensive)

This type was long known to be amongst the earliest of Anglo-Saxon gold coins with a single example present in the important Crondall hoard found in Hampshire in 1828 and dating from c.670. The conclusive attribution of these coins to king Eadbald of Kent, reigned 616-640, though was only made in 1998. This followed the emergence of new finds which enabled the obverse inscription to be confirmed as avdvarld reges, and translated as ‘of King Audvarld’.

The name ‘auduarldus’ appears in Bede’s Historia Ecclesiastica completed in 731 in which he wrote about king Eadbald of Kent. Given this and the presence of one of these coins in the Crondall hoard, the attribution to Eadbald is now accepted

While the Kentish Shilling or Thrymsa seems to have sought to match the Merovingian Tremissis, the design of this coin is peculiarly Anglo-Saxon using neither motifs found on Merovingian coins nor seeking to copy Roman types. In common with some other coins (e.g. the so called ‘Witmen’ and ‘Londiniv/Londeniv’ types), this coin has an inscription on the reverse. This can be clearly read on a example in the Ashmolean Museum as containing the word londenv indicating London as the mint or die source for these coins all of which share the same obverse die.

The real significance of these coins though is in the obverse inscription naming the historical figure of king Eadbald. This is exceptional for a coin of this period and is only certainly found again at the end of the seventh century with the Sceattas of Aldfrith of Northumbria (685-705). As such the Eadbald Thrymsa is the earliest coin issued in the name of an English king.

Eadbald succeded Aethelberht as king of Kent in 616. Aethelberht is principally remembered for having accepted St. Augustine into his kingdom and his subsequent conversion to Roman Christianity. It seems, according to Bede, that after his accession Eadbald fell foul of the young Church, rejecting Christianity, ejecting its Bishops and incurring the wrath of the Church committing ’such fornication as the Apostle Paul mentioned as being unheard of even among the heathen, in that he took his father’s (second) wife as his own.’

Whatever Eadbald did, this situation did not last for he repented and was duly baptized, rejecting his wife and thereafter favouring the Church within his kingdom.

These events reflect the conflict and confusion amongst the Anglo-Saxon elite at this time as Christianity sought to assert itself over the Pagan religion. This struggle is best known from the mix of Pagan and Christian artefacts in the Sutton Hoo ship burial, which is contemporaneous to Eadbald and this coin.

As to the date of these named Thrymsas or Shillings of Eadbald, the presence of Christain iconography dates them to after his conversion and a date to between 620 and 635 is thought appropriate.

Six coins other than this example are recorded with five of the six in insitutional collections. Only one example other than this specimen is therefore in private hands.

1. Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 1.26g, AV 69%, Crondall Hoard, 1828. Dies A/a

2. American Numismatic Society, New York, 1.29g, AV 64%, formerly Norweb, SCBI 16/42, ex Lockett I lot 206, Grantley 595a, Ponton D’Amecourt 658, Robert = Belfort 6527. Found Pas de Calais. Dies A/b

3. Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, 1.27g, AV 72%, BNJ Coin Register 1998, 37. Found Tangmere, West Sussex, 1997. Dies A/c

4. The British Museum, London, 1.28g, AV 74%, BNJ Coin Register 1998, 38. Found Shorne, Kent, 1998. Dies A/d

5. Stewartby, 1.28g, AV 67%, Bonhams 1610, 2007 lot 3255. Dies A/d

6. Hunterian Museum, Glasgow, 1.30g. See Bateson and Campbell, 1998, p171, and plates 28-29, no. 1. Ex. Hunter, possibly an eighteenth century find. Dies A/e

A further similar Thrymsa in the name of Eadbald, 1.29g, found at Goodnestone, Kent, from a different obverse die and with a reverse mint signature thought to be for Canterbury rather than London, is now in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

Source: Coinlink

[akona20]

The estimate of 8000 pound seems astundingly low for such a coin. Hmmm

[Figleaf]

While the coin is rare, 6 known copies is not excessively rare. Also, demand for 7th century coins is very low. This may be the reason why Spink is trying to hype the coin: they think it should bring in more money. That's also our luck, because now we get access to a nice picture and some research. I hope Tony Clayton will add this piece to his site.

Peter

[UK Decimal +]

Makes my little silver halfpenny of c.1300 seem very insignificant.

Bill.

[Figleaf]

They are both medieval coins, but that doesn't make them comparable, Bill. Your coin is a workhorse of day-to-day trading. Real people used it to buy a ferry ride, pay a blacksmith, drink themselves into a stupor or get supplies for the winter.

The gold coin was a rarity in a silver-based system. It was a plaything for chieftains, a reward among warriors, a treasure coin that could safely be buried. If it was spent, it would be an instrument of power or war: land, a ship, a toll. It was testimony to the power and glory of a "king" in a world with many kings and high kings without power.

Peter

[tonyclayton]

After a little delay as I considered how best to add this coin, it and a gold York type thrysma or shilling, are now on my website, along with a host of new coins, with many more to come.

Details of new coins are at http://www.ukcoinpics.co.uk/misc/new.html

The two gold coins are at http://www.ukcoinpics.co.uk/hamm/early/index.html

[Figleaf]

Good for you, Tony. This also brings my last post in perspective.

You have put this coin of Eadbald of Cent under Eadward the elder. This is legally incorrect, as Eadward was king of Wessex, not of Cent. However, it is factually correct in the sense that if Eadward called for spearmen and swordsmen, Eadbald would have sent them. I hesitate to call Eadbald a client or an ally, he was something in between. But one thing is certain: Eadward the elder was neither high king, nor king of England. English popular legend has it that the house of Wessex was the first ruling house of England and Aelfred, Eadwards father did call himself king of the English, but the reality was that Wessex did not control all of England at the time of Eadward.

Peter

[tonyclayton]

I can see that my page is not clear.  The reference to Edward the Elder is actually the link to the next page.  I shall need to add the 'backward' link to the last monarch, Elizabeth II as I have done before, and make it clear that Edward the Elder is a link and not a title!

[tonyclayton]

Now changed.

When trying to add early Angl-Saxon coins to my site I fully realise that the history of the time is complex, and what might be England then (if it existed) is not England as it is now, thus the title: Early Anglo-Saxon Period.

[Figleaf]

Don't worry, Tony. Very few people will have an interest in the period between the Romans and 1066. Only fogeys like me will make such comments

Peter

[UK Decimal +]

When would you say that coinage for 'England complete' was first issued?   It is my understanding (from CY2010) that new coinage for the whole of the country was introduced by the Anglo-Saxon King Eadgar in 973 AD.

Bill.

[Figleaf]

Wikipedia says there is no agreed date for the creation of England, but nevertheless uses 927 (fall of Northumbria to Wessex). I think this is nationalistic propaganda. Only a few years later, Mercia was independent again and in 1015, Wessex surrendered to invading Norsemen. My current own favourite is 30th November 1016, when Eadmund Ironside, king of Mercia died mysteriously, leaving Cnut the great in possession of all of what is now England, in accordance with the treaty of Deerhurst, concluded only weeks before.

Cnut therefore had three things going for him never before seen together:

• He was in factual control of the land now called England (even a bit more)
• He was crowned as king of England
• He called himself king of England

The third point may be illustrated with this coin with the legend CNUT REX ANGLORV


This does not sit well with nationalists, because it makes England a Norse kingdom and its first king was a Dane. However, the truth is even worse for them. After 1066, a whole new order of nobility violently replaced the old Saxon ealdorman (think of Sir Ivanhoe, of Walter Scott fame). They came from Normandy, and Normandy was of course nothing but another Norse fief, hence its name. William the Norman slew Harold Godwinson the Norman in 1066. What's Saxon about that?

Peter