British Numismatic Society

Why did the Northumbrians retain the sceat, then the styca, instead of following the south in adopting the broad penny? Offa’s light coinage may have appeared experimental to the authorities in the north, whose numismatic habits were rather conservative. Besides, the contrast between the light penny and the sceat was not that great. The earliest date to emulate the broad penny would have been after Eadberht’s retirement but Archbishop Ecgberht may well have influenced continuation of the familiar as the Archbishop of York was more powerful than the new monarch at this time. In any event, both the northern and southern coinages seem to be in retreat in the third quarter of the eighth century, whether the problem was disruption to North Sea trade or further afield. Perhaps Offa’s move to the heavy penny (a clearer contrast to the sceat) was a gesture of Mercian confidence or defiance in the face of Viking incursions - it must have been around the time of the attack on Lindisfarne. After this, there seems to have been a collapse of confidence in the north evinced by the paucity of coins of Eardwulf’s and the illusive Ælfwald II. There was no incentive to issue any coin, let alone risk adopting the penny.

Presumably it is the same monetarius, Cuthheard, who had been employed in the mint since, at the very latest, the introduction of the inscriptional reverse by Ælfwald I, who became one of Eanred’s moneyers of the early silver-alloy coins. The chronology is uncertain; it could be argued that these came near the start of Eanred’s reign otherwise Cuthheard is endowed with remarkable tenure for those precarious times (unless it was a succession, say, of father and son?) Moreover, one would expect an economic recovery to have occurred by two decades after the 793-794 attacks. It is plausible that Eanred was attempting to resume the earlypenny coinage and it is considerably later in his reign that he issued further, base coins. Only one of the ‘Group A’ moneyers, Æthelweard, convincingly has the longevity (or acuity) to be re-engaged in minting the brass coinage, indicating another lengthy cessation of production.

Eanred replaced silver with zinc, perhaps realising that this was a constructive step economically - or facing supply difficulties after Dore. Hence, the currency of the Northumbrian sceat is here extended to include these silver-alloy emissions and the styca is regarded as starting only when the copper alloy included zinc not silver. Indeed, any distinction seems increasingly contrived, as what we are seeing here is precisely the gradual, albeit fragmented, process of monetization. Belief that it would simplify matters to abandon both the terms ‘sceat’ and ‘styca’ and merely refer to early (or proto-) pennies on the plausible grounds that this is historically more accurate, is misguided. Conflating these two distinct denominations as pennies and then differentiating the early- from the broad-penny does not add clarity. Moreover, common parlance, general comprehension and routine use in numismatic and historic literature render this unfeasible.

Northumbrian stycas are amongst the most unpretentious of currencies. They state the name of the issuer, monarch or archbishop, on the obverse and the moneyer’s name on the reverse. Out of the entire corpus, only a tiny number of coins, struck by the moneyer Leofthegn, portray an animal - a revival of the Fantastic Beast.

The initial silver-alloy emissions of Eanred are chronologically skewed towards earlier sceattas by the presence of the moneyer Cuthheard and are distanced from the later base issues by the absence of 10 of the 11 earlier ‘Group A’ moneyers of Eanred. From around 830 to 866/7, stycas were issued, usually in base metal, for four monarchs (one restored) and three archbishops by a total of 26 moneyers. The only elaboration is the repertoire of around 50 different central motifs.

Towards the end of Eanred’s reign there is a substantial increase in the number of moneyers presumably in an effort to augment the volume of silver-free coins produced, in response to several factors: economic growth, increased penetration of coinage into lower levels of society occasioned by the fall in intrinsic value and the attraction of the fiscal pull of the ‘widow’s mite’. Increased production is accompanied by a decline in mint discipline. Dies are matched promiscuously, and combinations proliferate (Booth, 1997b, 26). The die-linking is extensive, but illusory as regards sequencing though it may demonstrate the likelihood of a single mint. The output seems to be random - the product of a system which sets no store by the matching of moneyer with a particular device. Central motifs are used in various combinations adding further permutations to the typology. Standards of literacy vary and both legends and individual characters appear in various scripts, languages and aspects. In the first edition of the BNJ, Creeke lists hundreds of variations in issuers’ and moneyers’ names.

Thoresby blamed the decline on ‘the intolerable Bunglers of the Age’ and this sentiment prevailed until the end of the twentieth century. However, it is now recognised that this small denomination was empowering - the first English coinage to meet quotidian needs, the first to be commensurate with the daily wants of the common people. Not only did it suffice for low value, routine transactions but it could be used to pay one’s church dues to earn spiritual redemption without excessive sacrifice. This chronology used here is not intended to ignore the continuing problems of uncertainty of metallurgy, coinage or regnal chronology. In the latter regard, the silver penny found in the Trewhiddle, Cornwall, hoard in 1774, could be crucial. It is now thought to belonging to Eanred of Northumbria, but in the style of mid-ninth century pence.

Should this cause regnal dates to be deferred a decade, it reduces Osberht’s reign to a more convincing duration and increases his annual productivity nearer to expectations.