June 2006

Next club meeting Monday 3rd July 2006.

Meetings are held at the Abbey Baptist Church. Entrance off Abbey Square.

Meeting commences at 7.00pm.

June Meeting.

The June meeting was devoted to the AGM and the annual display competition for the Michael Broome memorial trophy. Twenty-three members attended.

A brief summary of the AGM is as follows:

  1. Apologies -David, Anthony, Graham
  2. Minutes of 2005 AGM read out and approved by Michael, seconded by Doug
  3. Treasurer's report delivered (and included with last months newsletter). The club finances remain in good order and therefore annual subscriptions remain at current rates, namely £14 + optional £2 for coffee. In following the membership directive to reduce the club funds on deposit several activities throughout the year attracted small subsidies. However, with the increased income from a higher membership of 43, who all paid for a full year, this nearly balanced the club subsidies. Consequently the net loss for the year was a mere £19. The report was approved by Michael and seconded by Tony. Thanks to Neil for auditing the accounts.
  4. Chairman's report delivered - a good year for the club with membership rising to 43. Average attendance at club meetings was well over 20. With many members travelling quite long distances this bodes well for the future. All seven scheduled speakers attended, providing talks on the Roman coins of Aurelian, European Thalers, US Civil war tokens and Vauxhall Pleasure gardens to name but a few. The social events included a visit to the Museum of London, the Christmas dinner and the Skittles evening, which were enjoyed by all those who attended. The December club bourse with buffet and auction also went down well with the membership. The member's short talks were of a notably high standard, prompting a suggestion for longer talks by members. The chairman thanked the committee for all their work and noted the departure of the Secretary. On that note a plea was made for others to come forward and serve on the committee next year.
  5. Next years meeting programme is not yet finalised, since speakers for the March and April meetings are still being sought. Suggestions for speakers from the membership would be welcome. We try to cover most topics of interest but struggle to find speakers on bank notes. The programme for the rest of 2006 was presented. Michael again agreed to print the programme.
  6. Committee - Persons elected unopposed were David( per rule 6c), Henry, John, Frank
  7. Auditor - Neil agreed to continue as the club auditor
  8. Officers - The following were elected: President = Michael, Vice President = Maurice and Graham
  9. Questionnaire - Gavin presented a short summary of the recent survey. Minimal comment from membership; except to note that personal commitments preclude some from attending social events, which may explain the lower interest score.
  10. AOB - the logistics for the newsletter to be worked out by John and Michael.

Given that last years survey voiced an opinion to use some of our cash reserves we the committee wish to hear your views as to what is worthy of expenditure. By way of example we will be purchasing a current Kraus 1800- 1900.

  • Next years meeting programme was formally issued.

    Annual Display Competition.

    The annual display competition attracted four entries. Once again the standard of entries was very commendable.

    This year Neil was the deserved winner.

    Summer Social

    As previously advised the plan is to visit the museum of Wales on the 9th August. In order to finalise the arrangements members wishing to join the trip must signify their intentions no later than the next club meeting. Currently we have too few to warrant hiring a coach, so it looks like pooling personal transport - more on this later.

    Subscriptions

    Be reminded that subscriptions axe now due. It would be most appreciated if members yet to renew their subscription would please do so at the next meeting. Please see David or John. Membership cards will be sent shortly to paid-up members.

    Future Events.

    Past Events.

    The month of June is traditionally the time of the AGM.


    MINT MARKS AND PRIVY MARKS

    from a talk by Dr. J.P.C. Kent of the British Museum

    Money is believed to have originated in two ways; as weights, usually in the form of precious metals, or objects such as a cow or an ax. This naturally caused a problem of exchange, as people's ideas of the value of an ox were not always the same. They could not be regarded as acceptable money, but more as measures of value. The more sophisticated countries of the ancient world, such as Mesopotamia and Egypt, preferred to work in terms of graded weights of silver, gold or copper, and these were really the first true coins. A coin in itself does not need any form of mark or stamp unless it is to fulfil certain conditions. One of these is if the coin was a government monopoly; coinage from comparatively early times has been made by governments for their own purposes whether they were cities, royal governments, or Emperors of Rome. This way be called a form of revenue or taxation. All coinage had to be accepted at a certain rate, and the government would take it back at a certain rate and compel its use for certain purposes. For this the ,government would offer as an inducement, the authentication of the weight and fineness of the metal, Within the area of a particular country, a stamp or mark on the coin authenticated its weight and quality. These stamps were jealously guarded by each particular country because this was the only way in which revenue from the issue of coinage could be maintained.

    Coinage was generally made as a result of a contract between the State, usually the king in person, and bodies who agreed to carry out the work on a profit sharing basis. In order to exercise the State monopoly, control was essential. An equitable share of the profit between the king and the contractors had to be maintained. Severe penalties were imposed on any attempts to obtain a larger profit by the debasement or forgery of coins. Furthermore, it was essential to have a type on the face of the coin which would be recognisable; otherwise there was no need for a type even to have been created, The State would recognise its own coin and this in turn could be recognised by other people. In a way, the mere existence of a type is in itself a privy mark.

    As the amount of coinage which was issued grew greater, as the unit of government got bigger, the necessity for greater control became more imperative. Some communities took the step of not only having more than one main official responsible for their coinage, but also of having each moneyer responsible for his own type. This is, in its way, a form of control - albeit a cumbersome one. It was not until the time of the Roman Empire that more sophisticated methods of control emerged, and down to the 3rd. century it seems to have been the normal practice that control was partly maintained by variety - the more types there were, the better was the control.

    The unit of administration in the mint of Rome was the officina, of which there were for a long time six; they were characterised by the possession of at least one distinctive type each, so that a typical issue might consist of six reverse varieties in any one metal. It was only in the late 3rd. century that the logical step was taken of not bothering so strictly to distinguish one officina, or even one mint, from another by type, but by adopting a system of numbers on the coins. From this time, the number of reverse types used by the Roman Government declined rapidly. The mint marks which first of all expressed simply the officina number, then a combination of the name of the mint, number of workshop and symbol of issue, did away with the necessity for varying the reverse types. This system went on into the late Roman Empire and came to its culmination at the start of the 6th, century with the Byzantine copper coinage, which from the time of Justinian, proceeded to base itself year by year on the imperial regnal year. This meant that the Byzantines had, in a way, a system very like that which we have today, because since 1662 the privy mark has been the year on the coin. This does not necessarily have to coincide with the actual year of mintage and there is no practical reason why it should.

    In this country, control of the coinage by putting the name of the moneyer and the mint on the coin - a system whose origins went back to the very beginning of AngloSaxon coinage - continued until the 13th, century, by the end of which there were very few moneyers and mints. People who ran the King's coinage by this time were such as Nicholas of St. Albans-, who was a contractor on a grand scale and operated from more than one mint. When contracts were issued on this scale it became irrelevant to put the name of the moneyer on the coin at all, because responsibility for the coinage was wholly vested in one contractor at a time. This system operated throughout the later middle ages in England; the name of the mint still being shown for many years to come.

    The beginnings of privy marking as we know it in the early modern period, can really be seen to date from the use of initial marks to replace the hitherto invariable cross at the junction of the beginning and end of the inscription on each side of the coin. This is a character-istic of the reign of Edward IV. The marks - such as a rose, sun, fleur-de-lys and forms of cross - were used for a certain period only, and defined a group of coins to be tested at Trials of the Pyx. This was the outward sign of control which was basic to the coinage of Edward IV and his successors, down to Charles II.

    The use of true mint marks continued through the reign of Edward IV, e.g. H for Bristol. This reminds one that when new mints came into existence at times of emergency or of re-coinage then true mint marks continued to be applied in addition to the privy or control marks. Something of an approach to rationalisation was made at the end of the reign of Ellizabeth I, when the symbols O, l and 2 were used as privy marks to signify the dates of issue 1600, 1601 & 1602.

    Most of the marks of the 17th and 18th. centuries are of a different kind. They are more of a complimentary nature, such as the Guinea Company, the commemoration type such as the "Vigo" and "Lima" marks of Anne and George II and the South Sea Company on the coins of George I. These, however, had nothing to do with mint control. From early in the reign of Charles II, the privy mark on the coin was the date and all other forms of privy marks almost dis-appeared Mint marks, however, persist. For example, we have "Soho" on the 1797 penny and two-pence, and "H" and "KN" on the pennies of George V, and must not forget the letters denoting the place of mintage of many modern soverei gns. The last use of a privy mark as a form of control appeared on some coins of Victoria in the form of a die number which was put on to test the life of the dies.

    (I wish to record my grateful thanks to Dr. Kent for the considerable amount of work he put into virtually rewriting this article, which was a precis of a talk previously given to the club about five years ago (Feb 1969).... Editor)


    A GLIMPSE OF READING IN THE MIDDLE AGES

    At the November meeting of Reading Coin Club, held at Reading Museum last Wednesday the Chairman, William Smith, spoke on "Mediaeval Reading as revealed in the Borough Acoounts". His talk was based on the account rolls for 1364/5 and 1373/4 edited by Dr C. F. Slade and those for 1420/21 edited by the speaker himself, all published in the Berkshire Archaeological Journal some twenty years ago. These are accounts of the gild merchant of Reading, which became the governing body of the town and eventually evolved into the corporation. They show a remarkable development during the period of less than sixty years which elapsed between the first and the last of these rolls. In the 1360's and 1370's the guild's only income came from the admission fees paid by now members of the gild. But by 1420/21 the guild was receiving, in addition, rents from property and for the hire of numerous stalls in the town market as well as a small income from the town wharf. It was also making rules for the good government of the town and collecting fines from those who infringed them. In the earlier period the only officers of the gild were the mayor and the clerk. By 1420/1 there were the mayor, the clerk, two cofferers (or treasurers}, the mayor's servant, and a 'common piper' and his servant. The mayor and the cofferers were clearly members of the gild and received no pay, but all the rest did.

    The accounts were kept in shillings and pence, but the shilling was a notional unit only - there was not, and never had been at this time any shilling coin. There was a silver coinage consisting of groats (a groat was fourpence), half-groats, pennies, halfpennies, and farthings. A common amount in the accounts was 6s.8d. (it was the annual salary of the clerk and also of the mayor's servant) which was a noble or half a mark. There were gold nobles, half-noblas, and quarter-nobles. Since Reading regularly had rich and powerful visitors - the king himself made frequent visits to Reading - the town was probably not unfamiliar with these gold coins.

    It is clear that Reading was an expanding town. Many of the inhabitants had surnames based upon the places from which they or their recent forebears had come. These included not only villages round about, like Caversham, Beenham and Baughurst, but places as far away as Northamptonshire Norfolk, and West Wales. For example, in 1364/5 William Wymondham (who must have come from Norfolk or Leicestershire where there are places of that name) was paid fourpence for cleaning out the communal privy. The privy was not the only public amenity. The accounts for 1420/21 show that there was a town clock; someone was paid for looking after it, and the gild paid a rent of a shilling a year for the site on which it stood.