Sterling, Arnold V of Looz (1279-1323), Hasselt

[Sheep]

Got it for free from a friendly guy in the UK who knows I collect these sterlings. Cannot thank him enough!!!

Reign/Issue authority: Arnold V of Looz
Denomination: Sterling (E(a)sterling), Pollard type
Mint: Hasselt (?)
Date: 1279-1323
Literature reference: Mayhew 61 variant, not mentioned in Mayhew
Weight: 1,04 gr
Diameter: 21x19 mm

Obverse: Bare-headed facing bust. Legend: +COMES:ARnOLDVS (: are in fact two x on eachother)
Reverse: Long cross pattée with three pellets in each angle. Legend: MON ETA COM ITIS

Mayhew describes this type under #59 with Є instead of E and lombardic 'n' instead of N: (+COMЄS:ARnOLDVS / MOn ЄTA COM ITIS). Variant 59b only reads E in COMES.
Under #61 he describes the legends all with E instead of Є, but the legend on the reverse is abbreviated different: +COMES:ARnOLDVS / MON ETA COMI TIS. This should be an unpublished variant I'll try to contact NJ Mayhew in the future.

Too bad it is cracked...


Looz (in Dutch: Loon) became a county in the early 11th century, but in 1366 it was annexed by its powerful overlord and southern neighbour Liège. Prince-Bishop Engelbert van der Marck of Liège broke his promise, made after the death of the last male Looz in 1345, that the county would go to the Heinsberg family who were also descended from the Counts of Looz.

Arnold V / VIII, Count of Looz and Chiny (and Agimont)
* 1260? x Margaretha of Vianden + 1323 (Agimont)
Arnold took part in the battle of Woeringen, 1288

[Figleaf]

What a superb collection. This sterling connects some of the others. Let me explain.

One of the worst things one could do as a medieval lord was to die without a male successor. So it was when Walram of Limburg died in 1282. His duchy was situated around the Meuse and therefore of vital strategic and economic importance to the neighbouring dukes of Guelders and Brabant. Both had a claim of succession to Limburg

Both collected allies. On the Guelders side, the counts of Nassau, Ligny and Luxembourg joined, as well as the archbishop of Cologne and the knights of Limburg, following recognition of the Guelders claim by the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. The count of Luxembourg was Henry VI, son of Henry the blond, who we have met before. In addition, duke Reynold of Guelders was married to Margaret of Flanders, a half-sister of Robrecht de Béthune. Brabant found friends in the counts of Loon, Tecklenburg, Waldeck as well as the city of Cologne and John I, duke of Brabant was married to Margaret de Béthune, a sister of Robrecht de Béthune. The two sides in this family quarrel met at Worringen (now part of Cologne) on 5th June 1288.

Guelders should have won the battle. It fielded some 2200 knights, against only 1500 on the Brabant side. However, the Brabant troops were under the sole command of duke John, while the Guelders troops battled under three commanders: Guelders, Luxembourg and the archbishop. The latter attacked separately, without supporting each other or even waiting for each other. The results were disastrous for Guelders. The duke and the archbishop were captured, Luxembourg was killed, along with 1100 knights.

As a consequence of this battle, Limburg eventually became part of the Habsburg inheritance, of which half ended up in Belgium, the other half in the Netherlands. The city of Cologne became independent of the archbishop of Cologne and each issued its own coins. Ironically, Loon eventually got absorbed into Liège for its trouble.

Peter

[Rangnath]

Marvelous coin with an incredible history.  Thanks so much for posting it Sheep. (is that really you in the icon? If so, might I say that you have about the skinniest legs of any numismatist that I have ever seen!)

Is this where the expression "as crazy as a loon" came from? I mean the place Lootz, not the icon. 

On the more or less serious side.. is this coin really just a bit over one gram or perhaps I don't know how to read the comma.  If it is, and considering its size, I'll bet the crack in the coin is standard fare. 
richie

[translateltd]

On the more or less serious side.. is this coin really just a bit over one gram or perhaps I don't know how to read the comma.  If it is, and considering its size, I'll bet the crack in the coin is standard fare. 
richie

Thin flans would have been normal at the time, as moneyers tried to squeeze more and more sterlings from their pound of silver, so cracking wouldn't be unusual, especially if there were any flaws in the metal to start with.  Bear in mind, too, that one purpose* of the cross on the reverse of English sterlings, at least, was to serve as a marker to apply the shears to cut the coin to make change.  So it couldn't be too thick and chunky or it would defeat the object!

*Whether the original intent of the cross or one that was discovered to be convenient later, I don't know - I'll leave that to other researchers!

[Figleaf]

As Sheep's avatar indicates, he is a detectorist. My guess is that his British friend is a detectorist also and that this coin spent a couple of centuries in the ground. If so, at least some of the copper has seeped out as it reacted with fertilizer, leaving the coin brittle. The crack could have been caused just by capillary action. It is not uncommon for detectorists to find coin fragments.

As the picture indicates, if the coin is special enough, even a crack cannot distract from its historic interest.

Peter

[Sheep]

I can confirm your thoughts, Figleaf. My English friend is a detectorist too and it's found in English soil.
Bought an other Arnold of Looz sterling this week. As soon as it's here I'll post it.

[Figleaf]

Thanks Sheep. That would be grand.

Peter

[Figleaf]

For the record, Vanhoudt G615, Van der Chijs volume 8 pl.XX-11.

Numista 328751

[Tirant]

I'm still stunned with the amazing coins Sheep posted. Sadly, many pics are lost, and since it's almost ten years since he came here for the last time, i guess they'll never be recovered. This one is still here, so we're lucky we can admire it.