Some Scottish Ceremonial Coins

Home , Demy (coin), Lion (coin), Plack (coin), Royal Maundy, Scottish coinage, Touch piece

SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS . STEWARTH N bIA y , F.S.A.SCOT.

INTRODUCTION IN later medieval times special coins were only rarely struc ceremoniar kfo l purposes. When pieces were require presentationdfor offeringor , almsor , currenthe , t coin of the day was generally used. Pictorial and commemorative medals were a creation of the Renaissance, from which time pieces with non-monetary functions became gradually dissociated fro typee mformth d s an coinagef o s . Unti e appearancth l f medale sixteento e th n si h century, ther e verw ar e yfe examples in the Scottish series of coins or coin-like pieces which can make any claim to have been struck for other than normal monetary purposes. In the following pages, four items which may come into this category are discussed. One, the James groat V f thaI o s ti , species whic fabrin hi desigd can n conforms wit ordinare hth y associatee b n currencca t i dday s t it wit f bu ,y o particulah a r occasio almsgivinf no g by documentary evidence secondA . sovereige th , n medallio Jamef no s a IIIs i , heavy presentation piece, unlik existiny ean g Scottish perioe cointh t witf so dbu h coin-like types and inscriptions.1 Another gold piedfort, the James IV angel, is probably not a pattern for coinage and must be presumed to have been struck for some purpose unrelate e ordinarth o t d y currency e lasTh t . piece e angeth ,f o l Charleexampln a survivas e i th , sI archaif n ea o f lo c typ speciacoif a eo r nfo l royal ceremony. I have not included piedfort strikings of ordinary coins, such as the ecu of James V.2 Thes e probablar e y pieces plaisir,e d specimen striking kine th r somgr o sfo e senior mint official, like the piedforts of the Paris and other mints in the later middle ages. The piedfort groat of James V in gold has provoked some discussion3 (PI. XXXVI, 5). Dakers thougho wh ,piec e tth e 'probabl ycast'a , pointe t tha monograe dou tth f mo lettere th stampeK sG d behin mare th hea Gilbere f s ko dth dwa t Kirkwood, deacon in 1623- 5Kire a Dairyth f t ko , Ayrshire same th ; e mark occur Daire s th als n yoo Communion Cup. Under Burns's sequence of the groats of James V, the existence of the piece was hard to explain, but now that this order has been reversed* the piedfort can be seen as a special gold striking5 from one of the very earliest pairs of inscriptioe 1Th thin no s piece, Moneta Novashow, . . . s tha Latie tth relatt n no ter ed msoleldi currenyo t t coin. The distinction of meaning in English between coins and medals is a modern one. As late as 1808, Pinkerton's book on coins (principally) was entitled An Essay on Medals. . BurnsE 8 Coinagee Th , of Scotland vols.3 ( , Edinburgh, 1887), fig. 737. Other works cited frequently hereafter by their author's name alone are R. W. Cochran-Patrick, Records of the Coinage of Scotland (2 vols., Edinburgh . StewartH ,. I Scottish1876e d Th ,an ) Coinage (London, 1955). figd an . 3Dakers 725BurnsH 9 . 23 C ; , ii ,, P.S.A.S., LXXII (1938-9), 128. 4 Stewart r Stevenso ff M 6 t seem.i 7 , d suggestes san nha probable, me o dt , tha groat e . typth S tI f eII so (S. fig. 150) and the accompanying one-third groats (S. fig. 153) have no connection with Hochstetter; their natural positio seriese th lass ni whicn n i i t,shoul V I h transposedd e casd b typean y em I sII . 5 In Mr Stevenson's opinion there is no doubt that this, like the piedfort ecu, is a struck piece, in spite of some roughness of the surface. Mr Stevenson remarks that while the reversal of Burns's order for the groats and crowns makes good sense of the gold groat it rather takes away the point of the piedfort crown.

254 SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIA5 25 L COINS die Jamef o s s firssV' t silver coinage. Presumabl t lateyi r came into Kirkwood's possession, and he impressed it with his monogram as an owner's mark. Renaissance collectors sometimes stamped their coins in this way. Coins from the Este collection, for example stil n identifiee b lca , smala y db l countermarked armoriaeagle th e- l devicfamile th f ye- o whic h was, like Kirkwood's mark, stampe unobtrusivels da y as possible, often, in fact, behind the portrait, as on the gold groat. Also omitted are the French jettons of Mary1; purely medallic pieces2; and patterns for ordinary coinage, such as the ducat of I539- None of these are properly

within the scope of the title of this paper. 3 In the course of research into the background of the four pieces here considered detailn bees i ha n t i ,necessar investigato yt e certain topic t strictlsno y germano et the points of identification or circumstance at issue. Nevertheless, in a broader sense these matters generarelate th o et l contex piecee th f so t under discussion I hav d ean , therefore included without apology digressions on such subjects as the nature and fate of the Amiens Cathedral Treasure, early Renaissance coin portraiture, the representation of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century ships on coins, Maundy alms- royae givinth d l practicgan touchinf eo King'e th r gsfo Evil. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It is a pleasure to acknowledge the generous assistance of Mr Philip Grierson, Mrs Joan Murray, Mr J. D. A. Thompson, Mr Robert B. K. Stevenson and Mr Herbert Schneider. Mr Grierson has given me many references to comparative material. Mrs Murray has advised me on several points of detail with regard to coinage th e Thompsor o JamefM d Jame . an I sIV sII n first prompte enquire dth y into the Amiens medallion, and has also provided a fund of information on the portraya shipf o l coinsn so r Stevenso M r Schneide. M d nan r have particularn i , , checke e discussioth d f Briot'no gratefuf them o a sl m I r readangelal fo lo yT . permissio incorporato nt e idea informatiod san n from private correspondence. On PI. XXXVI are illustrated the following coins: 1. James IV Maundy groat, National Museu Antiquitiesf mo , Edinburgh. 2. James IV Maundy groat, British Museum. . Jame3 , piedfortsIV angel, British Museum. 4. James VI, obverse of devotional medallion, British Museum. 5. James V, gold piedfort striking from groat dies, N.M.A. . Charle6 , angesI Brioty b l , British Museum. 7. Charle , piercesI d Briot angel, Hunterian Museum, Universit Glasgowf yo . 8. Charles I, hammered angel, British Museum. 9. Charle , ScottissI h Coronation meda goldn i l , 1633. British Museum. 10. Edge of 9. I am indebted to the authorities of the Museums concerned for the provision of plaster casts and permission to illustrate the coins here. 1 Burns, ii, 344 ff.

. WR . e Cochran-PatrickSe , Catalogue Medalse th f f Scotlando o (Edinburgh, 1884), cited hereaftes a r Cochran-Patrick2 , Medals. 3 Burns, fig. 750. 6 25 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1964-66 Plate XXXV compare portraie sth tTrinite oth f Jamen o y I AltarpiecsII e with alloyee th tha n o td panea groa. 1470 c d f o ltan , paintin same th f ego king with his last type of groat. The former painting is in the possession of Her Majesty the Queen, and is reproduced here with the authority of the Lord Chamberlain; Scottise latteth e n th i s hri National Portrait Galler reproduces i d yan permissioy db n Trusteese ofth . I. THE AMIENS MEDALLION OF JAMES III The earliest Scottish ceremonial coin of which we have record unfortunately no longe rapparentls existswa t I . y e 1470struc th presentatior Jamer n 3fo i k fo I sII n shrin e Joht th S Baptise f o nth et o t Amiens.a t generalls i t I y know modero nt n

numismatist1 s through Cochran-Patrick's reference to it in his study of Scottish

medals. This referenc derives ei d fro oldee mth r wor f Pinkerton,ko turn i o n wh 3

borrowe2 d his description from that of the great seventeenth-century French antiquary, Charles du Fresne, Seigneur Du Cange.4 Since this description appears to be the ultimate source of all later references to the piece and is contained in a rare and not easily accessible work it seems worth citing the original passage from Du Cange in full: 'Ie me persuade aussi que cette grande Medaille d'or, de deux pouces & un tiers de diametre t attachees i qu couverclu , ea Reliquaireu d e marque a un l t e es ed , devotion, sino lacquee nd s troisiem nou d'Escossey ed mRo moinsu d , quelque d e particulier, qui en auroit fait present. Elle a d'un coste a demy-relief un Roy sans barbe avec de longs cheveux, assis en un throsne Royal, tenant d'une main une epee niie, & de 1'autre un Escu des Armes d'Escosse: au rond du pavilion qui couvre le throne est ecrit en lettres Gottiques IN MI DEFFEN, & au dessus du Pavilion VILLA BERWICI. A 1'entour de la Medaille est cette inscription aussi en lettres Gottiques, MONETA NOVA IACOBI TERTI I GRATIDE I A REGIS SCOTLE e 1'autrD . e COStC CSt 1'image e Saind t Andre Patro Royaumu nd e d'Escosse, debout ave a Croixcs 1'entoua , r sont ces mots SALWM FAC POPVLVM TVVM DOMINE. Cette piece pese environ six ou sept pistoles peu& , t avoir seru monnoye.e yd ' The context of this passage is a discussion of the reverence paid to the shrine

of Joh e Baptisnth s famou it t Amiens a to t sd relic an ,e supposedlth , y authentic 5 head of the Saint. The Scottish medallion is one of several presentations of the kind. 'Les presens que les Rois et les Princes ont fait a divers temps a la Chapelle ou repose cette Sainte Relique, & au reliquaire dans lequel elle est enfermee, sont aussi des arguments infallible leue d s r devotion.' CharleFrancef example o th I n sVI o , f eo Theodosiu Greate sth , invoke afflictionss saine hi 1'Eglisda th n i t n 'fid do e tan ed , plusieurs ornemens de veloux parsemez de fleurs de lys d'or . . . pour action de graces de la delivrance de la Normandie'. Louis XI showed Testime qu'il faisoit sacrees se e d s Reliques presene l r Ruby-balan pa ,so t e qu'ild t fi y enchass, or n e

especiall11m a y indebte Thompsonr M o dt firso t wh ,arouse interes y Amiene dm th n ti s medalliond an , moss ha t generousl noteye referenced alloweus san o t e dm s assembledd whicha e hh . 2 Cochran-Patrick, Medals,. 2 3 Pinkerton Essayn MedalsA n o , ,J. (3rd edn., London, 1808), vol , 14ii . . 2f Traite Historique du Chef de St. Jean Baptists (Paris, 1665), 127 f. 51 op. cit., 126 ff. SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 257 qui estoit alors de grand prix, & qui est attache au couvercle du Reliquaire [isth January 1464]. ... II donna outre cela douze cens ecus d'or, pour estre employez servicu a e divin.' Other presentations included 'une imag Saine ed t Jean Baptiste d'argent dore' give 'Seigneua y nb Coucye rd anothed an 'Duches a y rb Orleansf so . histors it relie alsd d yTh ocha an been referrelocaa y b l antiquary,o dt 1 whose account covers muc same hth e groun Cange'u lesn D i s st da detailbu s . Another write describo rt reliquare ricee th th h d giftyan s associate dFathes witwa t hi r Louis- Francois Daire a century later. 'Cette Relique est enchassee dans un cristal 2 magnifique taille en forme de tete, & accompagnee de deux medailles d'or donnees, 1'une par Jacques III, Roi d'Ecosse, Fautre per le Cardinal de Crequy.' Daire mentions als figure e saine oth th f t s Seigneuo e give th y n b Duches e Coucf rth o d yan s oengravinn f a Orleans s crystae ha th e f gH o . l reliquary, very simila illustran a o rt - tion in Du Cange's work. Unfortunately neither shows the lid of the reliquary, or 3 the medallions. Modern descriptions seem to look back principally to Du Cange. Baron's great histor Cathedrae th f yo l include followine sth g passage,4 after what appeara e b o st recapitulation of the history of the relic based on Du Cange's Traite: 'Le Chef de Saint Jean etait dans un plat d'or massif, d'un pied de diametre, donne par Isabelle de Baviere, femme du roi Charles VI . . . couvert d'une disque d'or massif. . . ce couvercle precieux avait etc donn avri9 e l l 139 Jeanr 2pa , du Lencestree ed , file sd Richard,5 roi d'Angleterre . . . [here Baron mentions the balas ruby]. . . . Le reli- quair t enrichfu e e beaucoud i p d'autres s bijouxdonde st e immenses, , tann e t orfevrerie qu'en ornements d'eglise, furent faits en 1'honneur de cette sainte relique.' Durand collates ha 6 referencee dth reliquare th o t s earln yi y inventoriee th f so Cathedral's treasure describee H . gifte sth s from 'us Louia n I rubisX s balai d'une tres grande valeur, et d'une custode a couvercle en or, enfermee dans une autre en argent dore, pour renferme reliquaire'e l r . Inventorie f 153o sd 155 5an 1 include entriereliquare th f o s accorn yi d wit Cange'u hD Daire'd an s s illustrationst Bu . Durand then writes, 'celui de 1667 ne parle pas du chef de Saint Jean, mais dans celui de 1687, ce n'est plus qu'une custode a couvercle de cuivre dore, de meme dans celu e 1700d i . t probablIes I custoda l e equ e d'o t sacrifefu r besoinx eau s pressants chapitru d e pendan perioda l t XVIu ed troublen efi siecle.a l e ed ' t exactlno s i yt I clear wha means varioue i t th n i t s account worde th y ssb reliquaire, custode and couvercle, or into which the medallions were set. Du Cange says the Jame I piec attachesII s ewa d 'au couvercl Reliquaire'u ed ; Daire say relie sth c is in a magnificent crystal, 'accompagnee' by the two medallions. Baron says it was contained in a massive gold dish (presumably representing Salome's charger), a foot in diameter, covered with a massive gold 'disque' — apparently the 'couvercle

1 de la Morliere, A., Les Antiquitez, histoires, et chases plus remarquables de la mile d'Amiens (Amiens, 1642), 84 ff. 2 Daire, L.-F., Histoire de la Ville d'Amiens (Paris, 1757), vol. 2, 118 f. Cangeu 3D . cit.op , , 132. 4 Baron , Description,J. I'eglisee d cathedrals Notre-Dame d'Amiens (1900), 17. 5f 5 Presumably John of Gaunt, son of Edward III, and uncle of Richard II, who was created Duke of Lancaster in 1362 and died in 1399. 6 Durand , MonographicG. , I'eglisee d Cathedrals Notre-Dame d?Amiens (Mem. Soc. Antiq. Picardie, 2 vols. , 1901-3) ii, 619 f. 258 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1964-66 precieux' given by John of Lancaster; the 'reliquaire' (is this the 'plat d'or' or the 'couvercle' or both?) was enriched with many jewels. It was a normal custom in the middle ages to solder coins, medalets, jewels and ornament shrineo t n so thif so s kind. Ther fourteenth-centura s ei y shrine th n ei Cathedral Treasury at Aachen which is in fact adorned with chaises d'or and other gold coin attachedo s documentarA . y referenc practice foune b th o o n t t edi s ei e Inventorth y e . shrine(1295Laurencth SS f f o )o s d Ethelber an e t Paul'S n i ts Cathedral, London, which refer o Teretrut s . LaurentiimS quatuom cu . . . r 1 annulis aureis affixis, et uno mabodino,2 et duobus obolis de Marchia aureis,3 similiter affixis cum coestis. . . . Item feretrum S. Athelberti. . . et affiguntur in una parte x oboli de marchia, et duo annuli auri.' Perhaps the medallions pre- 3 sented by James III and the Cardinal de Crequy were similarly soldered on to the shrin Joht S Baptise f nth eo t Amiensa t t botbu ; h sides must have been visiblo et allo Cange'u wD s description weighe Th .Jamef o t s Ill's medallio onls ni y given approximately t necessarilno s wa t i y o detachables , . Durand refer gola o t ds custode (pyx-cover), enclose anothen di silvef o r r gilto t , contai reliquarye nth ; between 155 d 168 gole 1an silved 7th dan r gilt custodes seem to have been replaced by one of bronze-gilt. Perhaps the medallions and jewels balae sucth s sha rub disque,e plate th th y n i n d'orweri r bott o ese whicf ho h might have been parts of what was elsewhere described as the reliquaire as opposed to its rat y custode.medallione an eth t A jeweld san s were apparentl ysevene th see y n-b teenth-century writers who describe them. Pinkerton writes of the medallion in his 1808 edition* that 'it was lost during the revolution, as I found on enquiry at Amiens'. There is little reason to doubt e trutth f thiho s information obtained first hand soon afte e eventth r moderA . n guidCathedrale th o et 5 contain principae th lis sa f o t l iteme Tre'sor,th f so including 'Le Reliquaire du chef de saint Jean-Baptiste en argent dore, orne de pierres fines, execut. Poussielgue-RusandM r epa , orfevr Parisa e , d'apres les dessin 1'anciee sd n reliquaire detruit a la Revolution'. On a recent visit to Amiens, I was unable to see the designsd . 1'Abb reliquarr Duhameol M . Lenne t Mg th eEd bu ,d r yo ean l were kind enough to search the treasure for me and their report is as follows: 'There is no medal to be found. The Reliquary consists of the gold dish and a cover in the middle of which is inset an enamelled portrait of the head of S.J. the Baptist.'

Whatever the designs of the ancient reliquary showed, they presumably did not6 sho medallioe wth Jamef no s IIIenamellee th ; d portrait probably represente th s former crystal illustrated by Du Cange and Daire. The exact setting of the medallion remains a mystery. It must have survived to be seen in the seventeenth century, but was apparently melted down at the end of the eighteenth century drawingo N . r replico s t survivei f o a tha o have s , w to et rely solely on Du Cange's verbal description.

1 Dugdale, W., Monasticon (1673), iii, 312. golA 2 d copie or coi nof, d from althos"the Morabieof, d dynast Spainyin .

3 More generally, Moorish gold coins. 4 op, cit., 1430. Boinet6 , A., La Cathedrale d'Amiens (1931 edn.)> 122 f. 6 Letter from M. 1'Abbe, Amiens, 4th October 1962. SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 259 The accompanying sketch (fig. i) indicates what the general appearance of the medallion may have been. For the purpose of this sketch the enthroned figure is generae baseth n do l desig Frencf no h gold fourteente cointh f so h centuryf o d an , Burgundian and English sovereigns of the 14803 and 14903; the sword and shield Englise th kine muce n th hel go ar h y s d b ha noble pavilioe Th . adaptes ni d from that on the pavilion d'or of Philip de Valois. 'Au dessus du Pavilion' I have taken to mean beneath the throne and the pavilion, and inscribed the mint-name on a scroll below the King's feet, where 'LONDON' appears on the sovereign groat of Henry VII1; this seems a more probable place than beneath the top of the pavilion, where the motto (in a different language) is inscribed. The Gothic lettering is rendered in the style which occur Scottisn o s h e 14705cointh f o s, wit e saltirhth e stops between words normal at this period.

FIG. i. Reconstruction sketcAmiene th f ho s medallion of JameI sII e figurt Andre S reverse Th f th o e n wo e presents greater problem interpref o s - tation. It could be in the form which had been used on Scottish crowns of Robert III, James II and James III, with St Andrew stretched on his saltire cross2; but this would surely be described as 'sur sa croix'. More probably St Andrew 'avec sa croix' means a standing figure holding his cross in front. Such a representation saine of th foun s Scottisi ta n do h crown of Jame paintine th sn i IV, d g o3an f James III and his son on the Trinity altarpiece which perhaps inspired that coin-type.4 St Andre ws als i e Burgundia oth shown o y n thini wa sn andriesgulden,e th f o e on best known gold coin northerf so n Europ timee th I havt .ea e accordingly chosen fora m incorporating characteristic gole th f tha do sn coino t f Philio s e Goodpth , and of the pendant figure of the saint on the gold chain shown in the picture of James III (PI. XXXV, 4), which is related to the portrait on the last type of groat issued by this king (PI. XXXV, 3). little Therb authenticite en th doubeca o t piecee s a th t f yo . Hill5 thought i t 'surprisingly large ,n exceptiona a eve r nfo l coinag f thoseo e days d wonderean ' d seriee th f so producee on t goldsmita whetheno y db s wa Pragut n hri i earle th yn ei 1 Brit. Num. J., xxx (1960-1), PI. XX, 7. 2 e.g. Stewart, figs. 70-71, 89, 90. 3 Stewart, fig. 135. 4 Infra, . 263p . 5 Hill, G. F., Medals of the Renaissance (Oxford 1920), 168. 0 26 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1964-66 seventeenth century, whose concoctions do include a number of pseudo-medallions e coibaseth n n o ddesign f variouo s s countrie e fourteentth n i s d fifteentan h h centuries.1 There is nothing, however, in the type or inscriptions which does not suit an authentic reige piecth f neo of James IIIenthronen A . d kin figure lond th gha f g eo appeare obverse Scottise th th n do f eo h roya enthroneln a seal, d an 2 d king beneath a canopy comprised the obverse type of many French gold coins from the mid- fourteenth century e swor d shielTh .an d de king' th hel n si d hands woule b d familiar fro e Englismth h gold noble e standar t Andre th S s cros.s hi wa sn dw o revers eScottise typth f eo h crow strucs na Robery kb t III, Jame , JameII s I II s himself early in his reign, and subsequently James IV. The Salvum Fac motto had appeared on the reverse of the gold demies of James I and II, and on the crowns useoe reig e f silveb n III Jamed th dbilloo d o t n n an ;i s an r o I nfsI wa Jame t i V sI coin wells sa . In Mi Deffen is an early Scots-French form of the Scottish royal motto, 'In my defence God me defend'.3 Villa Berwici is one of the forms used on silver coins4 of e reigth n fro e Berwicmth k mint, whic onls Scottishn wa yi h hands from 146o 1t 1482e obversTh . e inscription suggest e wora continenta th sf ko l designere Th . formula Moneta Nova followed by the name and titles5 of the ruler, or by the name of the mint or area, was frequently used on coins of the Low Countries and the Rhineland from the later fourteenth century onwards. The word nova eventually became stereotyped and lost its meaning. The formula never occurs on English coins case onld on die e halfpencan w r , n y—i sfe fo thaa f farthingd o t ean Davif so d I whicI h read Moneta Regis David Scottorum — s anythini g closely comparable found on Scottish coins. Gothic letterin appropriats gi periode replaces th o wa et t i ; n do

Scottish coin reige s latth nn ei 6 oRomaa f Jamey b nV sI fount. In spite of the term Moneta, it is probably wrong to look upon the piece as any- f ordinaro y wa ye thincurrencyth n gi e functionTh . f curreno s d ceremoniaan t l coins did not effectively become separated until the latter were largely taken over medaly b s durin Renaissance gth sixteente th d ean h century fifteenth-centurn I . y Scotland, a medallion with coin-like types and inscriptions could presumably have been described as moneta as easily as a crown, a groat or a plack. The Berwick mint struck no current gold coins for James III, and its use for the medallion, in preference to Edinburgh, suggests both the presence of the king in the town at the time when he ordered the piece to be made, and that it was required for a special purpose. Incidentally, the Berwick mint signature is a feature which

Bernhart, Max, 'Judenmedaillen', Archivfiir Medaillen and Plaketten-Kunde, Jhr. Ill, hef , 11I t 5 ff. 21 B.M. Cat. of Seals, iv, i ff. An elaborate Gothic throne type was used from James I onwards; a seated figur alsd eha o bee nprevioue useth r dfo s century. 3 In the form In my Defens it occurs above the royal arms on an altar-cloth of c. 1500 (Twining, A History Crowne oth f Jewels of Europe, PI. 2O5c). * e.g. Burns fig. 5613. 5 One obverse die of David I reads Rex Scocie; some very rare sterlings of Alexander Ill's 1280 recoinage have Escossie Rex; otherwise all Scottish monarchs until the seventeenth century are described on their coins Scotomm,x a ofScotiae se Re medallio e us th land e e n peopleth e o kinf Th th .o f thut gns i o no ,s another indica- tion of a foreign engraver. Davir fo . fig 6S 3 I farthingd I 4 . . alscf ;o Moneta Pauperum fifteenth-centurn o y copper farthing . figs(S s . 100-1). SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 26l virtuall authentie yth establishen contemporard ow can s it n so y natur piecee th f eo ; no later fabricator is likely to have thought of putting on it a name other than Edinburgh. That thi sfac n i piec speciaa s t ewa l produc ceremoniaa r fo t l purpos s furtheei r suggeste circumstancee th y b d sizes a larg d botit historys s it an ,y e hf wa b o s t I . medallion, 2! in. in diameter, weighing some 2 oz. Very large pieces were occasion- ally strucfifteentthe kin h century: multiple doblthe Spain,ain sof 1 French gold and silver medallions celebrating the expulsion of the English during the I45OS,

an devotionada l medallion use Edwary db England.f o V dI 3 2 Ther traditioa s ei n that Jame I causesII piecstruce e b d th presentatior o et k fo n to the shrine at Amiens, but whether James ever took it in person is not certain. Pinkerton says that he sent it in 1478, when unable to visit the shrine himself. This is apparently correct.4 'In 1475 James receive safe-conducda t from Edwaro t V dI go to Amiens to perform a pilgrimage. In 1478 another safe-conduct was granted. pilgrimagee Th , however t made no thid s san , medawa , probabls wa l ye th sen y b t king himsel testifo ft veneratios yhi Johheat e S Baptist e th f dnr o th nfo , traditionally preserved at Amiens.'5 cannoe W t tell whethe piece strucks th r ewa , cas engravedr o t s descriptionIt . , d especiallan e Monetayth Nova inscriptions, suggest something close a coi o n t i nr appearance than to the work of a medallist or an engraver. It may well, therefore, have been a struck piece; in that case there might have been other strikings made, of which therrecord.o n s ei 6 II. THE MAUNDY GROAT OF 1512 There is an unusual and extremely rare type of late groat of James IV, which clearly stands outsid regulae eth r coinag reigne th obvers s f It eo . e typ beardeda s ei , facing portrait of the king, in armour, wearing an open crown,7 and surrounded by tressura ninf eo e arcs, pointed with small trefoils firsfourtd e th an t n hi ; heraldic quarters of the reverse cross, which has pierced ends,8 is a five-pointed mullet, and 1 Engel and Serrure, Traite de Numismatique du Moyen Age (Paris 1891-1905), vol. iii, 1341; a cavalier d'or

. (=2o fdiametea JohCastil f s mm o 0 3 ha I dobla)n I 9 d ef ro weigh an . .g 0 s9 2 Mazerolle, F., Les Medailleurs Francois du XVe Siecle au Mileu du XVIIe, I, vi-viii and II, I ff.; J. Babelon, La Medaille en France (1948) 9. The largest medallion measures 8a mm., the others from 52 mm. to 69 mm. 3 Unum talentum auri ponderis quinque nobilium: this piece, which no longer exists, is described in Liber Regie . Capelle,UllmannW . ed , Henry Bradshaw Society, xcn e TmagoHole (1961)th th side s f yo on ewa , n 61O . Trinity, on the other the Salutation. The inscription which is illustrated by the types is continuous from one e otherth fac o t e : Suscipe, Sancta Trinitas, hanc oblacionem, quam offerohonorsn i tuo/Ac beate Marie t omniume Sanctorum tuorum. An extant devotional medallion (PI. XXXVI, 4) is that of James VI of Scotland (1603), of which an impression of the obverse die survives (Hawkins, E., Medallic Illustrations of the History of Great Britain and Ireland, ed. Grueber and Franks, (London, 1885), 17 and PI. XIV, no. 2). 4 Tytler, History of Scotland, 1831, vol. iv, 247, says it was presented by James III to the shrine in 1477. 5 Hawkins, op. cit., 17. 6 e.gLore .th d High Treasurer's Accounts, ist January 1503/4, mention 'ane chenz goldf eo , weyand thre unce, with Sanct AndrKine , giffith it Maistre o ge t t o a b n s Margret, Inglis Murrawoman's Mr s d yha an , suggeste possibilite dth t AndreyS tha e th t w might have been portraye medaa n do l coine — th regularl e sar y called Scottish crowns. 7 Of the (Scottish) type with the central ornament a fleur-de-lys, which after the Union of the Crowns was used on all Scottish coins and is the readiest criterion for differentiating them from the otherwise similar English coins of James VI and Charles I (central ornament a cross). A feature probably copied from groats of Henry VII, on which in the English series it first appears; it is introduce8 d in Scotland on the light groats (S. type III) of James IV. 2 26 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1964-66 e secon th third n i an d dgroua f threpo e pellets e inscriptionTh . s are: obverse, crown IACOBVS : DEI4 : : GRA: REX: SCOTORV: reverse, trefoil EXVRG SzDISATV :DE I innee PENT:!th rn o circle d ;an , VILL A:ED INBV RG:Iz:. 1 Two specimens are known, both from the same pair of dies. One is in the British Museum, fro Martie mth n collection (PI .figures XXXVIwa Lindsay't n dI i . 2) , s View of the Coinage of Scotland and in The Scottish Coinage2; Burns, although claiming illustrato t e this coi s figna Coinagee . 6g8Th f Scotland,n o ai actually picturee th s other specimen Wingate'n whici s hwa s collection e timd lateth an et ra 3 passed through the cabinets of Addington, Richardson and Murdoch, from whose sale* it was acquired by the National Museum of Antiquities of Scotland (PI. XXXVI, r). The type is remarkable for the neat execution of the dies; and especially for the front-facing portrait - it is apparently at least an attempt at such - at a time when coin portraitur relativa s ewa e novelty outside Italy mosd an , t example t weri f so e three-quarter fac r fuleo l profile. The beard is certainly a realistic feature. According to Hume Brown,5 James IV 'never cut his hair or his beard'. It is difficult to say to what extent the coin-portrait is representative of the king in other respects, since the scope for engraving a full- face likeness was limited by the low relief of the coin-die. Beards were often omitted from the symbolic coin-portraits of bearded medieval rulers, but were generally realistic when present. 6t necessaril Theno e yar y accompanie very an y y serioudb s or effective attempt at a true portrayal of other facial features. The earliest coins youne ofth g Alexander III, aged eight, whe succeedee nh fathes dhi r AlexandeI I r n 1249i those ar , e wit short-crose hth s typ reversf eo e (replace lona y gdb crosn si I25O whicn )o , unbearden ha d face appear deliberata s sa e change frome thath n to norma7 l Alexander (II) short-cross sterlings, which usually show a beard prominently indicate strokey db largr so jowl.e neithet dotth n Bu 8so runbeardee theseth r no , d heads of young Alexander III, really aspire to any very close sort of likeness.9 Scottise th n I h National Portrait Galler paintina s yi g that shows JameV I s beardless,10 which is possible since he was only fifteen years old at his accession. The picture is one of a series of the first five Jameses, done on panel by an unidentified sixteente artisth n i t h century probabld an ,earliee th n yi r cases base contemn do - porary work lostw no s. There are factn ,i , strong ground r believinfo s g thae th t portrai seriese th Jamef n same i o base1ts 1 i th I en sII do contemporar y originas a l coie th n portrai lase th t typn to e of James Ill's groats which were first issued about 12 I48513 (cf. PI. XXXV, 3 and 4).

1 Exurgat Deus dissipenturt e inimici eius (Ps , i) a mott68 ,. o much use Scottisn do h coins fro gole mth d unicorns of James III onwards. 2 Lindsay, PI. xxm, 14; Stewart, PI. ix, 126. 3 Illustrations of the Coinage of Scotland (Wingate' collection)n sow , PI. XXIII . 6 , t 151Lo 4 . 5 History of Scotland (1899), 306, I ; Jame somewhas swa t ahea fashionf do beardr fo , t generalls werye t eno y wor Europeay nb n princes. 6 Except with an imitated or immobilised portrait — e.g. Henry III of England, who acceded at the age f nineo . " Stewart, 16. Stevenson, R. B. K., in P.S.A.S., xcin (1959-60), 245. Pace Burns (i, p. 119). 108 Reg . 685Royale No .Th ; House of Stewart (pub. Scottish National Portrai t Gallery, 1958), PI. 4 . 9 11 ibid., PI; Reg 3 684. No . . la Stewart grou I (PIpV . viii, 107).

lan Stewart, 'The Heavy Silver Coinage of James III and IV, Brit. Num. J., xxvn (1954), 182 ff.

3 1 SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 263 Three-quarter facing portrait n coinso s s founa , n Germanyi d , derive from paintings, wherea e Italiath s n portraits, whic e alwayhar profilen i s , derive from medallic artJamee Th .I groaII se earlies th s certainli tf o t e Renaissancon y e portrait coins with the three-quarter facing bust. earliemadn e a b r y efo r ma typ l sam e groaf firsal e e o th f th f o etclai o te A b mo t

king, first struck about I47O, whicn o portraite hth , though rather smal precisr lfo e 2

definition1 realisticertainls w i , ne a cn yi idio r removemfa d fro e stylisemth d dan impersonal front-facing middlheade th f so e ages t (PIunlikno . s XXXVi e t I . 2) , the head of Jamedepictes a I contemporara sII n di y painting (PI. XXXVe , i)Th . panee foldinpictura on f o n l o gs ei altarpiec loan o nw fro eroyano e mth l collection t Holyrooa Nationae th o dt l Galler Scotland.f yo originalls wa t I 3 y paintee th s da altarpiece for the Collegiate Church of the Holy Trinity, Edinburgh, described in King'e 148th s 5a s Chapel left e showI .tth panen so l JameScotlanf o I sII d kneeling, being crowned by St Andrew, with his son, later King James IV, behind; on the right panel is his Queen, Margaret of Denmark, also kneeling and attended by a Saint (Canut Denmark?)f eo . earliese Thesth e ear t extant historical portraits relating to Scotland.4 In Pinkerton's words, 'Hardly can any kingdom in Europe boas mora f o t e noble family pictur thif eo s earl itseln i y s epochi convincinf a t i d ;an g specimen of the attention of James III to the Arts.'5 Before he had worked out the chronology of James Ill's groats in detail, Burns wrote that the thistle-head and mullet groat, 'hitherto given to James V, in whose coinage it is entirely out of place, can only belong to James III, and must have been strucreigs hi nf k o sometimtowardd en e th se aftethoughe paintine H th r . .' . t g. the coin-portrait 'a wonderful reproduction of that on the picture - the set of the head, three-quarters to right — the style of crown — the royal mantle, although not executed wit same hth e precisio paintinge th detaif n o o s a l, whic coia n nho could same th f e o genera l expectede al b e t ar lno t character'.ye , 6 Furthermore thistlee th , - reverse head groae th th n f so et o sam e werth f eeo for thoss ma e which decorate eth tapestry behind the portrait of Queen Margaret. It would be easy to imagine that the portrai groae inspires th n wa t to thiy db s painting indees a , dI thin Scottise kon h coin-type may quite possibly have been, namely the side-face figure of St Andrew holdin unique cross th ghi n so e gold crown of James IV.7 However presence th , f eo Prince James is a powerful argument against a direct connection between the portraits. He was born on iyth March 1472/3, so that unless his figure has been subsequently added the painting must be dated several years after the introduction

1 Stewart grou I (figpI . 103). 2 lan Stewart, 'The Attribution of the Thistle-Head and Mullet Groats', Brit. Num. jf.,nxvii (1953), 65 ff. 3 Catalogue . 106-7pp , . 4 The principal literary references are: Laing, D., 'Historical Description of the Altar-piece, painted in the Reig Kinf no g Jame Thire sth Scotlanf do , P.S.A.S..' . d. m (1862) alsd ff.8 ,oan , Lain P.S.A.S.,n gi x (1875), 310 ff.; Destree Goesr , de HugoJ. , n (Brusselva d Parisan s , 1914) ff.9 8 ,; Friedlander e . J.Di M ,, Altniederlandische Malerei, iv (1926), 43 ff., and Panofsky, E., Early Netherlandish Painting (1953), I, 335 f. The portrait of Jame reproduces i I sII Twiningy db . cit.op , , PI. 2O5a, tha Margaretf o t , PI. 2050. 5 History of Scotland, , 423i . 6 Catalogue Seriesa f o f Coinso Medalsd an Illustrative of Scottish Numismatics Historyd an (British Association, Glasgow, 1876), 23. 7 S. fig. 135. A comparable coin-type was that of the Burgundian andriesgulden. 4 26 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1964-66 of the groats. Burns must have seen this difficulty when he came to date the groats as early as c. 1470, for though in The Coinage of Scotland he again mentions the likeness of the thistle-heads on the reverse of the groats to those in the painting he does not use the similarity of the portraits to reinforce his attribution of the coins to James III.1 There are perceptible differences in the portrayal of the king on the coins and on the altarpiece. Most obviously, the head in the painting is more nearly profile, with the nose breaking the contour of the king's left cheek, and the mantle as por- trayed on the coins has generally - it varies from die to die - a distinct collar. Nevertheless, there are many points of correspondence, and it is. possible that the portrait indirectle sar y relate derivatioy db n fro mcommoa n source. It can hardly be doubted that the groats of c. 1470 are meant to portray the king realistia n i c wayheae thesn Th d.o e coin completn i s si e contras anythino t g which had been produced before in Scotland (or England). It is difficult to imagine a decisio placo nt king'e eth s portrai coinags hi n o t e unless some larger version, such as a painting, already existed to give rise to the idea. And even if not, it cannot have been conceived, designed and interpreted directly in the medium of a punch-made coin die: some kin cartoof do r sketcno h would hav havo et e been prepared dan approved before it could be translated into a suitable form for execution in miniature on metal punches.2 Renaissance coin-portraits were often, if not always, based upon larger representations d demonstrablan , emeano n instance y b s confinee ar s o dt Scotland; there is also evidence that they often derive from the personal interest rulere ofth . Ercole d'Este, Duk Ferrarf eo a (1471-1505) keenls wa , y interesten di ancient coins, and his coin-portraits are, even more closely than those of his contemporary neighbours, executed in the classical idiom; on the reverse of one of his testoon , apparentlysis greae th f portrayaa ,to lose ton (anf o l d never completed) works of art of the time, Leonardo da Vinci's equestrian statue of Francesco Sforza of Milan, the clay model for which Ercole endeavoured in 1501 to obtain after the French invasion. morA e famous coin royae th , l thale Maximiliaf o r nI struc n ki

1509 copies wa , detain di l fro paintine mth 3 Bernhary gb d Strige f 1508.o l * The James III groats indicate that there was a reasonably competent artist working in Scotland as early as 1470, who was capable of producing realistic por- probabld traitsha e H .y don paintinea g of Jame t thialssy a so ma timesom d an ,e years later have bee paintee n heade o nth th n Jamesf f so so o r s s Queehi hi , d nan Trinite th y altarpiece, whic stylistin ho c ground t earlie thoughs no si e b r thao t t n about I478.e threTh e royal head rathee sar r woode lifelesd nan appearancn i s e

comparisoy b n wit5 h standine thosth f eo g saints: the hardle n wore th yca th f ke o y b Flemish maste painteo panels.e rwh resth e f dth o t 6 1 Burns , 118ii , . 2 The case is not comparable to the engraved dies (cut like gems) of distinguished Italian artists in the sixteenth century, such as Benvenuto Cellini and Leone Leoni (see Porteous, J., Coins (London, 1964), 90 f. and fig. 124). 3 Grierson , 'ErcolP. , e d'Est Leonardd ean Vinci'a od s Equestrian Statu f Francesco e o Sforza' Italian Studies, xiv (1959), 40 ff. Porteous, op cit., also has a good illustration of the testoon (fig. 112). 4 Paintin thaled gan illustratee rar d togethe Tinierr De n r i Taler (Innsbruck, 1963), . PI34 . figure 5Th Princf eo e James also preclude earlien sa r date. 6 The painting is now generally attributed to Hugo van der Goes, who was active in Ghent in 1467—75, and died in Brussels in 1482. SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 265 With one possible exception, the groats of James III may be claimed to be the earliest portrait issues on this side of the Alps. Their rival, which could not have been struck more tha nyeaa r earlier gole th ds i ,duca Dukf o t e JohAuvergnef o I nI s a , Lord of Dombes (1459—88); it is in the Italian style, with a profile portrait, imitated closely from the ducat of Francesco Sforza, which was struck for the first time in 1463. Duke John's ducat, however certainls i , y later shows i e :h n wearin collae gth r ordee t MichaeloS th f f o r , founde firs e n 1469di th t s whicnominationo t , wa e hh . three-quarteo Thern e ear r facr profile(o e ) portrait coinss hi Jamef n ;so o V sI the bearded-face groanearese th s ti t thin trua o get portrai treigns coihi f no , earlier silver bearing at first a continuation of the late three-quarter bust of James III, followe retura stylisee y th db o nt d medieval facing head t musI . t have been struck durin s Romae lasha gth t t reige i year nr th f nletterinfo o s g which replacee th d Gothic foun latn o te varietie golf billod so dan ndies coinsit sd apparentlan , y share punchee somth f eo s use late thosr th defo f unicorneo placks.d san 1 Hitherto the bearded portrait groat has often been regarded as a pattern; at least there have been general doubts as to when and why such a coin was suddenly struck, with no other groats issued for many years before or afterwards. It is however, possibl explaio et n this isolate ddato t issu t withied i ean nweea r twoko y b , comparing two entries in the Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland.2 The first3 a loos n io se leaf (1511/12) amongst some entries which a sor'appeaf e o tb o t r account of plate': Item e samyth , n kingi e tymeth r sfo 4distributioni Cenn i s a Domini, deliveri saio t t d Maister David and cunzeit in twelf penny grotis, ane of the gret silvir stopis contenand xj pundis ij unce, quhilk is put in the chearge afoir writin. Secondly coinage th n i , e return followine sth g paragraph occurheae th f dt o sa

the account rendered on i4th August 1512:5 Item idem onerat se dejc xxvij li x s prouenientibus de conetacione unius amphore argenti ponder- antis undecim libras vnam vncia dimedim mcu a conetat n grossii i s duodecim denariorue md propriis domini regis per tempus compoti. t transpireI s therefore that, lat Marcn ei h 1512 (new style), Jamef o gav V e sI eon his great silver wine jug Davio t s d Scott, Mastecoines minte th wa f t di o ;r into shillingroatse value on th f f e o o totae g,o m fth each £12su ld an ,7 los. repreod . - sents 2,550 groats. If the weight of the vessel was exactly u Ib. ij oz. as recorded in both accounts, the rate of minting must have been a little over 14^ groats to the ounce of silver, not allowing for any alloy or remedy; this gives an average weight e weighto fsurvivine Th 32-th . f 8so gr g specimens, 31- . (Britis5gr h Museumd an ) 35'7 §r- (Edinburgh) accord well with this. 1 Placks of class IV very closely correspond with the type IV groat, particularly in the initial marks crown/ trefoil and the pellet stops. Because of the greater life of unicorn dies, the type Illb unicorns, which are the earliest to have Roman letters both sides, may not have been made until a little later than this (they have star stops, cf. class V placks). 2 A preliminary account of this identification, 'The Maundy of King James IV, is published in The Slewarts, , 133 8. xi ffNo ,. 3 Vol. iv, Appendi , 532xv . * The previous entry is dated 'the xxiij day of Marche'. 5 Cochran-Patrick i, p. 51, No. xn. 266 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1964-66 tole ar d e tha vessee W th t l came fro king'e mth s private possessions thad e an h t 1 t coinei d r distributioha dfo t Easterna . Distributio sovereige f almth n o y b s n i n perso Maundn no y Thursday a ceremon t a , e poof washinyo th e fee f rth o t f go which took place in the Early Church in commemoration of the Last Supper, has been the custom throughout Christendom since remote times.2 In Scotland, James IV's royal predecessors had given alms since St Margaret,3 wife of Malcolm III (1058-93). James III had given Scottish pence4; James IV's wife, Margaret Tudor, whose dowry in 1503 included £10,000 in English money, distributed 'Ingls penneis' in 1504; but James himself provided 32 bedesmen with 32 Scottish twelvepenny groats liberaa , l gift indeestandarde th time.y s db hi f so 5 But by 1512, when groats had not been struck for many years, James's stock of silver coin must hav outn s ordeeru r Hi coinag. fo r n 151ei 2 thus constitutee th s earliest known evidence for Maundy Money in the technical sense of coins struck specifically for distribution as Royal alms at Easter. The term has frequently been applied to the long series of silver fourpences, threepences, twopences and pennies from Charles II's reign; but certainly until the late eighteenth century,6 and on occasions until much later,7 these coins were also struck for normal currency. Claims have been advanced for certain pennies of Charles I having been struck as Maundy during the Civil War, but there is no positive evidence for this. 8 III. THE PIEDFORT ANGEL (1513?) Identificatio e Maundth f o n y groa f Jameo t raiseV I se questioth e s th f o n functio piedforte th f o n ange XXXVIL (P l , whic3) , s sometimehha s been linked with the groat as a supposed pattern for a projected new coinage.9 The types of the piece, on the obverse the Archangel Michael killing the Devil in the symbolic form of a dragon, and on the reverse a three-masted ship, are reproduced from those of the English angel,10 introduced by Edward IV. The inscriptions

mucd di gole mosr o hth o d S f o fot r James IV's unicorn coinage, whic strucs hwa k from melted down greae linkth f tso 1royal chain, ibid. 51 ff., Nos. xn, xm, xvn, xvni). Farquhar , 'RoyaH. , l Charities e Maundy'Th : , Brit. Num. J., xvi (1921-2), 19 5Royale ff.Th ; Maundy (Roya2 l Almonry Office, 1952). 3 Turgot's Life ofMargaretSt of Scotland, trans Forbes-LeitW. . h (1886), 61.

Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. i, 71. 54 Farquhar, loc. f cit. 0 20 , Only pennies were distributed wit Maunde hth lona r gyfo while e firsTh t. recorinclusioe th f do f no largee th Gentleman'se r th coin 6 n i s si Magazine, isth April 1731, which states that Georg I gaveI e 'leather bags with one-penny, two-penny, three-penny four-pennd an , y piece silvef so shillingd an r eacho st , about £n 4i value'. Mr H. A. Seaby thinks the larger pieces ceased to be struck except for Maundy purposes 'sometime reige th Georgf n o i e III' (The English Silver Coinage, 1649-1349, 129). 7 e.g. 1838 twopence Coloniese th n i s e strucordinary.threepencee us ;th r kfo Victoriaf so threepenced ;an s of William IV Wese structh r t kfo Indies . Also, many more Maundy coins were apparently struck, before eth reig Georgf no , thaeVI n were needeceremone th r dfo y alone. 8 Farquhar, H. Brit.n i , Num. J., xix (1927-8), 12. 1ff 9 e.g. Burns , 19ii , 4 f.; Grueber . A.H , , Handbook Coinse Medalsd th f an o f Greato Britain Irelandd e th an n i British Museum (1899), 179; Lindsay . cit.op , , 141; Wingate, . cit., deemeop 78 , t d'rathei medaa r l thana coin'. Jame havy sma e been familiar wit Englise hth h angel anyway t especiallbu , mucf i o yMargaref s h o t Tudor'10 s £10,000 dowry in 1503 came in coin (Hume Brown, History of Scotland, i, 315). Whereas James III and his Queen had distributed Maundy alms in Scottish pence, the 'Ingls penneis' given by Margaret in 1504 (Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, i, 71, and ii, 259) may have formed part of the first instalment dowrye oth f , whicprevioue pais th n hdwa i s September (Farquhar, H., Brit. Num. J., xvi (1921-2), 200). SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 267 SCOTORVX RE A d e IACOBUSALVATOGR Mar an SIGNI C DE HO O S4 N VICISTIRI n boli , d Roman letters, interspersed with ornamental star stops and with a thistle at the reversee th e appearancn o Th .d piecee en th whicf f eo o , onle hth y specimen i s ni e Britisth h Museum r lonfo gs littlwa , e known, largely because Burns, thoug- hre ferring to it in his text as fig. 6gga, has no representation of it on his plates. Lindsay figure meany b lina t i df e o s engraving, s onlha y t i recentl t 1bu y been illustrated photographically.2 It can probably be dated with some precision. A significant epigraphical detail which characterise lase e sth t letteTh e plackfore th . th f G mr Jamef o s so i V sI normal type of G in the Roman fount, which replaced the Gothic late in the reign, is rounded and curly. But on the billon placks of James V, a large square-fronted3 foroccursG f mthio d san , styl founs ei dvere onlth yn ylateso t sub-variety of James IV's placks. e appearancTh 4piedfort e th n o thif eo angelsG , therefore, arguer sfo its having been produced at a very late date in the reign of James IV, who perished t Floddea Septembeh gt n no r 1513. Jamey Wh s should piec a hav d thif eo eha s kind struc t thaka t stag difficuls ei t to understand. The Scottish angel does not seem to be a pattern for a new coinage, therd evidenco n an s ei e that Jame plannins swa replaco gt practicale eth , handsome and established unicorn, even though it was lighter and rather less fine than the English angel. The unicorn, a coin of typically Scottish design, weighed 58-89 gr. and was 21 carats fine; the angel was 23! carats fine and weighed 80 gr. Three Acts of Parliament dating from late in James Ill's reign and the beginning of 5 James IV's contain repeated authorisations for a new gold coinage on the English pattern — 'a fyne penny of gold be strikin to be of wecht and finace to the Rose noble'. It was to be current at 42od. (30 of the new fourteenpenny groats struck at oz.e th ) 1 o 0against Englise t th IDS f o . h coin, givin gratia o betwee face nth e values of Scottis Englisd han h coi 3^:1f weighne o ros e Th e th . e f Th o noblt s 12. 0gr ewa Scottish noble never materialised beeit n had ;struck woulit , d have give na gold : silver rati jusf oo t under 11-8:1 fractions It . s wer \,d ei.ean 0 orderef 8 . e b o dt and 40 gr. and the equivalents of 20 and 10 of the new i4d. groats, whereas the English fractions were \ and \, 60 and 30 gr. The f Scottish piece would have been equivalen Englise th o t h angel Burnd an , s wondered whethe Jamee rth piedfortV sI was not a pattern for a coinage in fulfilment of the terms of the three earlier Acts.

e noteH d however curious , thawa t i ts thae Englisth t h angel types should have 6 been adopted, indeesincs module wa noblee th t a dthai patters th f f I eo wa t. n 1 op. cit., PI. 13, No. 35. 2 Stewart, PI. X, fig. 136; and Thompson, J. D. A., 'Two Ships from Sixteenth-Century Coins', Mariner's Minor, vol. 39, No. i (Feb. 1953), PI. 4 (enlarged x i-j). 3 In 1512, or perhaps 1511, since the Maundy groat corresponds in points of detail with very early, if noearlieste th t , billon placks which have Roman letters. 4 Stewart class Vc; Burns, fig. 703; see Burns, ii, 261. Mrs Murray (letter dated Cheltenham, 27th December 1965 remarkes ha ) d tha evidence th t unicorne th f eo less si s decisiv indicaton a s precise a th f ro e large th f eo square-frontee us perioe th f do , sincdG t occurei unicorn so lase f th no t e dieb t s whicno y hma firse th tJame r oo f JameV sI . HoweversV , unicorn dies were used spasmodicall t forno m cona o d - d yan tinuous series like those for the billon placks. 6 Cochran-Patrick, i, 39, No. xv - 24th February 1483; p. 40, No. xvi - a6th May 1485; p. 46, No. I, 17th October 1488. 6 Burns, ii, 194. 8 26 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1964-66 fo currena r t coin t seemi , s more likely tha woult ti d have bee vehicle nth puttinr efo g converted fine English gold coins into circulation, alongsid e leseth s fine unicorns, than that it should have replaced them.1 James IV's piedfort weigh likd piedforte san eth 49 . 1gr ange f Edwaro lf o I dV England, which weighs 472! gr. and was surely meant to weigh an ounce, has been called a six-angel piece. But probably neither piece was designed to be an accurate multipl normae th f eo l current coin; rather, likRomae eth n medallion latee th f rso Empire whic e oftear h n referre s multiplea e soliduso t dth t f areo sbu ,, strictly speaking, fractions of the Roman pound, they were looked upon as related to the standard uni weightf o t , twelfte e.gpoune on th . f ho d troy. t seemI s more likely thae ange ceremoniaa th t Jamef s i o l V I s l coin thana patter currencyr nfo . Afte reige th rHenrf no y VIII Englise th , h ange prims wa l - aril royaye useth r l dfo practic touchinf eo King'e th r gfo s Evil; even fro reige mth n of Henry VII the number of surviving angels, punch-holed to take a ribbon for sus- pension, is sufficient to suggest that this function was already an important one. Miss Farquhar eveno suggestetw f o e e angeldus th e tha f Henrn th o so t I yVI mottoe originalls swa y designe differentiato dt functione th e - sJesus autem transiens per medium illorum ibat, as on the old nobles, for ordinary currency, and Per Crucem tuam salva nos, Christe Redemptor on angels for touching.2 She had only seen holed angels of Henry VII with the latter motto. The motto on James IV's angel, Salvator, signoc inho vicisti, obliqun a e referenc Visioe th o f Constantint eno e Greateth , also invokes salvation through the cross. James IV's ange havy abortivs ma el hi bee f o ne e produce ev invasio e th n dno of England in 1513. Though the evidence is against any supposition that he might have planned an issue of angels for touching, a digression on the position of Scottish king n relatioi s thio t n s ceremon justifiee b y e discussio vien th i yma d f wo f o n Charles I's touching in Scotland in 1633 which appears below. precise Th e origin royaf so l touchin littla e egar obscure earliese th t bu t, record Roberf iso Piouse th t , King Francf o knows i t i e1031o t d fron6 an tha,m 99 s hi t successors, Philip I and Louis VI, touched for scrofula.3 It appears that Edward the Confessor imported the custom into England from Normandy,4 but no definite evidenc forthcomins ei g before Edwar , amongsdI t whose Household Accounte sar repeated references to large numbers of persons sick and cured of the King's Evil who receive penne don y each. succeedinn I g reigns, thos Edwarf eo , EdwardII I dII d othersan , ther e sufficienar e t recorded instance suggeso t s a continuitt e th f yo practice of touching in England from the time of Edward I and probably earlier.5 At this time penne th , r otheyo r coigives nwa sustaio nt patiene nth t untis hi l or her recovery, but by the reign of Henry VII, when the gift had greatly increased in value, the King presented a gold angel, pierced and hung by a ribbon round the 1 It seems possible that the gold crown of James IV may have been introduced for a special purpose, such perhaps a recoinage sth Frencf eo h ecus, whicf o h 3,696 were converte Edinburge th y db h min 1504—n i t d 6an 5>°57i m J 506-7 (Cochran-Patrick, i, 52, Nos. xiv and xv). Against this, however, Mrs Murray has kindly pointed out to me that the profit accruing from the conversion of French crowns is very large and more easily explicabl thef ei y were turned into unicorns which were overvalued against other contemporary gold coins. 3 Farquhar, H., Brit. Num. J., xn (1916), 70 f. 3 Crawford, R., The King's Evil, 12 ff.

Farquahr, H., Brit. Num. J.,(1916)n x . 43 , ibid.. 56 ,

4 5 SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 269 neck: this was to be kept by the sick person as a talisman until recovery, and there- after usually treasured and often still worn as a charm. Henry VII, who first drew formaa p u l healing service, probabls wa y alsoriginatoe oth givinf ro ggola d piece

e scrofulouth o t s suppliants familiarle th r fo , y1 pierce evidencn i d t angelno e e ar s from earlier reigns, although Edwar instituteV dI denominatioe dth 1465n ni . However, therevidenco n s ei suggeso et t thasovereigny an t , excep Englanf o t d or of France, claimed the power of healing the King's Evil by touch. Indeed James , wheVI became nh e kin Englandf go , desired 'no touco t scrofular hfo t wishinno , g arrogato t e vainl himselo yt f such virtu abldivinite d b cureo an et o t es y a disease s by touch alone'. 'However he will have the full ceremony, so as not to lose this

prerogative, whic2 h belong Kinge th Englanf o st so Kings da France.'f so cons Hi 3 - temporary biographer Andrew Wilson wrote: 'He was King in understanding and was content to have his subjects ignorant in many things: as in curing the King's Evil whic knee hh wdevica ingrandizo et Vertue eth Kingf eo s when miracles were in fashion, though he smiled at it in his own Reason, finding the strength of the Imaginatio nmora e powerful AgenCure th en i ttha Plaistere nth Chirurgions shi s prescribed for the sore.'4 Touching was one of the few prerogatives of sovereignty available to royal exiles. Charles II gained much sympathy, both in exile and on return, by his energy in touching. His father is known to have ordered his mint master to strike angels in Edinburg touchinr hfo Scotlann gi possible 1633n di b whicy f o , identifo ma et t hi y surviving examples. The Stuart princes, James III, Charles III and Henry IX,

continued the practic5 e abroad, but through the authority they claimed not as Kings of Scotland but as Kings of England and thus of France.6 James IV never claimed the throne of England, and he can, therefore, be presumed never to have had the intention of striking an angel as a touch-piece. piedforte th n ca anger reasonable No b l y considere commemorativa s da e medal. It does not allude directly to any event or achievement; and commemorative medals belong mostl latea earlien a o t ro y t r age ro mose .Th t significant time eventh ef o t wa battle sth Floddenf eo como t provemorta a d t , e whicean ye b s o dlt hdisastewa r kinge foth r . The scriptural motto is not of any greater significance than the inscriptions of that kind which adorn most of the larger gold and silver coins of western Christendom in the later middle ages. The types are not such as would be appropriate to a devotional medallio e samth f eno kin s thosda f Edwar eo f Englan o V JameI f d o dan I sV Scotlan accessios hi Englise n dth o o nt h throne (PI. XXXVI, 4).7 s mosi t I t probable, therefore, thapiedforte th t ange s intendedwa l , like th e Amiens medallion of James III, as a presentation or offering piece, perhaps in connection wit king'e hth se Englis planth r fo sh campaign. Jame intendins swa g to invade England in face of the treaty of 1502, to which the Pope was a party, and

ibid., 77- Roman Transcripts, General Series, vol. 88, p. 9 (letter 8). 31 Calendar o f Venetian State Papers, p. 44, June 16032 , letter 69. 4 Quote Farquhay db Brit.n ri Num. J.,(1919-20)v x , 141. belowe 5Se , sectio. nIV 6 Brit. (1919-20)v Num.x , J. , 161 Frence claie ff.th th ; mo t h crow abandones nwa Georgy db n i I eII 1801. abovee 'Se , sectio . 261p , n.I n-3. 270 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1964-66 ' James's ally kine th f France, go called ha , councida opposition i l e Popeth o nt . James was thus in need of religious backing. The allusion to Christ's victory in the reverse inscription woodee th , n cros hon (i sc signo) centrae placn i th f eo l e masth f o t victore Archangee th ship th d f obversee yo an ,th havn y o l ma e, been combineo dt invoke moral suppor Scote theid th r san rfo t king. An alternative interpretatio bees t forwar nha r Thompson, npu M y s db ha o wh suggested that there may be a play in the type1 s on St Michael and the Great Michael, the largest ship then existing, and the pride of the Scottish Navy. Ordnance apart, cose sh t £30,000; afte disastee th r Frence Floddef solth s o r 40,00o r dt wa hfo e nsh 0 francs. r ThompsoM 2 n writeshie depicteth s pa f reversso e th n do e of James's angel: 'Although this vesse s unrealistici l a clos, e examination reveals some interesting features. She is obviously a carvel-built carrack of late fifteenth-century type with high bow and sterncastles. The castles each have a row of typically sixteenth-century "horseshoe" gun-ports and on the forecastle there is a row of shields (or possibly guns) below these. All three masts have fighting tops, that at the main being full of javelins. The rudder is indicated, while a slight projection from the bow suggests a figurehead. ... It would be wrong to assume that the vessel on the angel is intended to represent the Great Michael, but there are undoubtedly points of resemblance between it and the modern model of that ship made from contemporary evidence. . . . The Great Michael would of course be appropriate to a coin which bears the Arch3 - angel' sobverse.e effigth n yo ' Eithe thesf ro e interpretation possible s sThompson'r i M d an , s more satisfactorily account otherwise th r sfo e somewhat surprisin Jamestandary e b th e f so gus d type of the contemporary English gold coinage. Nevertheless, there may have been no such particular motive thir sfo s particular piec type-copyingf eo : medieval coinage is full of examples of indiscriminate and often inappropriate imitation of types by allie enemied san s alike. t remainI s probable, however, simplgrounde datth e natur d n th yeo an f so f eo the piece, that it was struck in the context of James IV's preparations for the invasion of England though if it could be as early as 1512 it could relate to negotiations with France early in that year. Its exact function, and the occasion for which it was made, must remai nproblea t possesmno evidencwhice o d sth e hw solveo et . With some certainty, however, we can say that it was not a pattern for ordinary coinage. IV. A SCOTTISH TOUCH-PIECE OF 1633 Charles I's Scottish Coronation took plac i8tn eo h June 1633 dayw , anfe s da later he performed a Touching ceremony at Holyrood. The latter is described by the contemporary historian, Lord Lyon Sir James Balfour of Denmylne and Kin-

naird (1600-1657) followine th n i , g words4:

2 Mariner's1 Mirror,. 57 vol , 39 . Hume. f Brown 4 34 , i , 3 Illustrate . BowenC . F y ,d b From Carrack Clipper,o t PI. 5 . 4 Historical Works (London, 1825) ('published fro originae mth l manuscripts preserve Librare th n di f yo the Faculty of Advocates'), vol. n, 201. The passage is reproduced almost word for word, with acknowledg- men Balfour to t GuthrieW. by , GeneralA , History of Scotland (London, 1767-8), vol. ix discussiona , 213For . , see Farquhar, H., 'Royal Charities, Part I', Brit. Num. J., xn (1916), 113. SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 271 . Jhon Junijf St 'Tho e 4 eb e2 , Baptists day s Maiest,hi y s chapel wenhi o t t l royal staitn i lthed an ,r mad esolema e oflfertorey therafted an , r tuoched aboute 100 persons that wer troubled with the Kings eivell, putting about eurey one of ther neckes a pice of gold, (coyned for the purpois) hung at a whyte silk riband.' recentls ha t I y been suggeste r StevensonM y db 1 thae actuath t l typ golf eo d coin struck for Charles I's visit to Edinburgh can be identified as the machine- struck angel (PI. XXXVI bearin) 7 d initiae Nicholaan r g th 6 ,fo lB s s Briotwa o ,wh much concerned with the affairs of the Scottish mint at the time (i63i-3). This 2 identificatio subsequentls nha y been challenge r SchneideM y db e studa th n i rf yo gold coinag f Charleeo I sstrucTowee th t London.f ka o r 3 Sinc r Stevenson'eM s original suggestion did not amount to an argument of his case, a rather fuller discussion of the problem may be appropriate. Briot worked at the Tower mint on his special private coinages for two periods of some twelve months each, from November 1631 and July 1638. His coins of the earlier perio markee dar d latee witth f rhflowe a o wit d anchorn ha an r , whics hwa the current mintmark on the hammered coinage at that time. Briot's flower has been thought to be his version of the mintmark rose used on Tower hammered coins, but it does not coincide exactly in date with these, and is more probably a private mark.4 f Briot'O s private Tower coinag f 1631-eo goldn 2i , there exist unites wite hth initial B and an anemone or daisy, and half unites (double crowns) with the same marks; the gold crown has just the B, with no flower, and some half unites also (die-linked to the flower-marked coins) have only the initial. At this period concernet , no Brio s wa t d wit Scottise hth h silve gold ran d coinage, occupies wa extenden t a n bu di d dispute wit official e Scottise hth th f o s h mint over his proposal executiod an currene r th sfo f no t copper coinag Edinburgh.n ei n O 5 Aprih 6t l 1633 the king instructe temporarils d wa Briot o wh , Londonn yi mako t , e medalScottiss hi r sfo h coronatio preparo t d nan transporo et tools pressed hi t san s to Edinburgh. On 3ist May the Privy Council authorised Briot to strike 100 medals in gold and 2,00 silven 0i r (PI. XXXVI r StevensoM . 9) ,writtes nha n tha 'wile h t l have acted royae onth l instruction given earl havy April;'n yi ma e e prepareh 6 desige dth n and cut some dies in advance, but it is unlikely that he would have anticipated the authority to strike the medals. There is certainly no question of the medals having been struck before Briot went to Scotland, for some very rare piedfort gold medals7 Stevenson, R. B. K., 'The "Stirling" Turners of Charles I', Brit. Num. J., xxix (1959), 128 ff. (cited as Stevenson)1 ; much of what follows is summarised from this paper (esp. pp. 132—3) which contains a full and well documented accoun Briot'f o t s activitie Scotlandn si . 2 Brooke , EnglishC. . G , Coins (3rd (Whitton) edn., 1950), 204, overlooked Briot's activitie Scotlann si d at this period. My own reference is inadequate (Stewart, no). Schneider , 'ThH. , e Tower Gol Charlef d o Angels'e Th : ParsI , IV ,t Brit. Mum. (1962)x J.,xx , 31. 6ff 43 Brooke, op. cit., 203 f.; corrected by Schneider, B.N.J., xxviii, 334. 5 Stevenson, 131 f. 6 Stevenson, 133. 7 Hawkins, E., Medallic Illustrations of the History of Gnat Britain and Ireland, to the death of George II (2 vols. ed. A. W. Franks and H. A. Grueber, London, 1885 and 3 vols. of plates 1904—11), 259, no. 59; the British Museum gold piedfort illustrates i PIn do . XXII . i. no , Silver piedfort specimens also exist, somf eo which hav edge eth e inscribed incongruousl gold e alse th oSe n . o Cochran-Patrick s ya , Medals, . 18ff 2 27 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1964-66 have an inscription on the edge to say that they were struck in Edinburgh from Scottish gold - EX. AVRO. VT. IN. SCOTIA. REPERITVR. BRIOT. FECIT. EDINBVRGI. 1633 (PI. XXXVI, 10). There were a number of dies cut for the medals, some being used for sinkings in both gold and silver. Judging from the considerable number of surviving specimens, 1 at least the full number of 2,000 silver medals ordered seem to have been struck and distributed. Balfour say Coronatiose thath t a t n procession 'the pice golf d so dan silver coyne Bishope wente th h thar s y a b d,f fo e o ty purpoiwa e flungs th swe l al e Murray, almoner for the tyme, among the people'.2 On loth May Briot had further been instructed by the king to strike a number of angels 'for those whome we ar to toutch who have the King's evill, with the lyk Impression and fyness as they ar which we vse for that purpois in our kingdome of England' preparo t s whicr wa fo , ee hengineh irons.d san 3 Of Briot's angel, which Mr Stevenson proposes to associate with this occasion, two specimen knowne sar (PIe .On .XXXVI Britise th n i h ) Museum,6 , 4 unpierced, weighs 64-9 gr., which is very close to the theoretical weight of Charles I's angel.5 The other, little known until published by Mr Schneider, is in the Hunterian

Museum, Glasgow (PI. XXXVI hola s e, ha 7)rathe t i ; r smaller than that norma6 l in Charle I sange l touch-pieces. Both specimens froe same ar m th e pai f dieso r .

generan I l type, Briot's angel7 follow traditionae th s l design, thoug t differhi s a s much in treatment as do his current coins from their counterparts in the normal hammered series (PI. XXXVI, 8). Artistically, its composition is more satisfactory; detailn i t e reversth bu , s opeei criticismo nt a happ s i t yI . tric relievo kt e th e cramped treatmen shie extendin y th pcoin e b f edgconfinin e d to th th f an ,e o o t gt i g the legend to three-quarters of the circumference. But it is not nearly so accurate as the ship on the hammer-struck Tower angels.8 The hull is a mere sketch, without a proper quarter-deck or forecastle; the rigging is a hopeless muddle, lifts, braces, rnartnets, fore-backstay and forestay all being led in the wrong directions. 'Con- sidering Briot's talent and his eye for detail,' writes Mr Thompson, 'this is a poor effort.' Briot was obviously a better artist than nautical draughtsman. At first sigh t wouli t naturae db associato lt onle eth y known typ Briot'f eo s angel with the king's visit to Scotland in 1633. Mr Schneider's objections, however, carry with the authorite mth intimats hi f yo e knowledg gole th df eo coinag Charlef eo , sI s experhi f o t judgmentd an expresses A .publicatio s hi n di angee th f nlo coinage, privatn i d an e correspondence, summarisee b the n yca d unde followine rth g heads: 9 Design. This is 'totally different' from the English. The type of Charles I's

1 Easily observed variant details are: RexfR; with or without diamond below date; large or small letters on reverse; position of cross on crown in relation to inscription; form of thistle; no initial after date; etc. 2 Historical Works, iv, 403. 3 Stevenson, 133, where full references are given. 4 Brooke . cit.op , , PI. xlv ; Brit.6 , Num. , xJ. n (1916), 135. 5 64ft gr. — 89 being struck from the pound troy. 6 Brit. Num. (1961)x J.,xx , PI. XVII. 7 Schneider, 304 f. 8 For comment on nautical design I am much indebted to Mr Thompson (letter dated Oxford, 7th May 1962). Letters from Luxembourg, 27th April 1962, Antwerp, 196224ty Zurichd hMa an , , 196526ty hMa . 9 SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIAL COINS 273 normal angels is a natural development from that introduced for the later issues of Henry VII. Briot' interpretation a s si earliee style tastd th th ef an en o i r seventeenth century; it is in the French idiom, and, though less forceful than the original, 'as i n t i excellent artistic achievement' this I . hurriedlsa y prepared design 'likf o , e impression' to the English? The model of the ship is a complete change, and 'the elaborate riggin reaa s gi l tour deforce'. lio e firs e Scotlanf th no th t s i n quarte i y t royae Details,dno th Wh f lr) o arm(i s? letterine (iiTh ) indistinguishabls gi e from that use Briot'r dfo s private mill coinage at the Tower in 1631-2. (iii) Negatively (to counter Dr Kent's point ), the mark B 1 without flowe disqualificatioo n s i r Englisr nfo h origin indicates a , existencee th y db , noted above f crowno , doubld an s e crown undoubtef o s d Tower production with the initial only. Function. There is no reason to dispute Miss Farquhar's belief that the Briot angel wa pattern.sa Brooke inexplicably treate currena s a t d i 'clearl s ti coin,t i t ya bu 2 3 pattern' struck in preparation for the private mill coinage of 1631-2.* That one of specimene th hole s sspeciai o n s di l obstacl thio et s view. After 1642 anything available was used as a makeshift touch-piece. There is even a pattern double-crown whic pierces hi d apparentl thir yfo s purpose. Time. Though Briot almost certainl5 y made punches for Tower hammered angels, he would not have anticipated the need for this coin in Scotland and so presumably would not have taken them with him. He was busy with routine work on the Scottish copper coronatiocoinage th d ean n medals probable h d an ; y left before eth touching ceremony. Woul therefore dh e hav timd einnovatha o et e'strikingla y different' ange diee th sl t witdesigncu hd sucan , h 'painstaking care lasdowe th t o nt detail'? Striking. coie 'suspiciouslns Th i y well struck'. Briot' scoppee worth n ko r coinage had been criticised on technical grounds; and Briot's earliest main issue for Scotland, in 1636, was not very well produced. Balfour. speciao N l significance nee assignee db Balfour'o dt s remark aboua t piec golf eo d purposecoinee th r dfo doee angen t refee :h a sth no goldf o t ro ld an , remark was not made in a numismatic context. We have no reason to assume that he kne Charlef wo s I's orde Brioo t r striko t t e angel t Edinburghsa havy ma e e H . known that coins use touchinr dfo g were normally 'coinepurpose'e th y r dfo ma e ;h also have known that a white silk ribbon was normally used. (This particular detail, in fact, does not happily accord with the small piercing in the Hunterian angel, which would have been better suited to a thin thread: however, this is a trivial point.) Assumptions. substantiato T identificatione eth necessars i t i , assumo yt tha) e(a t

1 Quote Stevensony db , 133. 2 Brit. Mum. J., xn (1916), 135. . cit.3op , 212. 4 Without pressin pointe g th r Schneide M , r mentions tha occasioe t Brioon n o t n exhibite 'tew nne s dhi shilling piece' at a banquet at the Tower and remarks that 'in contemporary literature the angel was sometimes referre "ths a shillinn eo dte t g piece" wherea portraie sth tsame coith f eno valu usualls ewa y calleda

double crown'. 6 Illustrated by Farquhar, Brit. Num J., xni (1917), 99; see also Schneider in Brit. Man J., xxrx (1958), 105. 274 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1964-66 the order to coin angels was carried out; (b) that such a tiny issue has left survivors; and (c) that the coins under discussion are such survivors.

Mr Schneider's arguments may be answered point by point. As regard e designa matte th ss i f subjectivt i o ,r e judgment whether Briot's design conforms with the king's request for an angel of 'lyk Impression' to the English certainln ca t I .argue e yb d tha phrase tth e merely means sam e 'ofth e type'. No one would have expected Briot to copy the hammered angel in every detail. To modere th n numismatist ther obvioue ear s differences t thes bu differencee , ear f o s treatment only e maith ; n element e desigth preservede f o nar se genera th d an l, appearanc mucs ei samee hth . The lion of Scotland might certainly have been in the first and fourth quarters arme oth f s earliesdisplayee th saile t th bu ;t n Scottisdo h coin Jamef so I aftesV r Unioe e Crownth th f n o 160n si 3 displaye Englise dth h versio royae th f lno arms (though this was soon corrected). Inconsistency also occurs, throughout the coinages of Charles I and Charles II for Scotland, in the usage of the formulae Scotiae, Angliae Magnaed an Britanniae royae th n li titles.1 However, since Charles touched as King of England, the retention of the English arms could have been deliberate. Tha e letterinth t Briot'n go s ange s apparentli l y from punches s hi use r dfo English coins, could be explained as a result of Briot having included these in his equipment to be taken to Scotland, as ordered by the king; it does not necessarily mean tha angee strucTowers e th t th wa l t factkn a I . , lettee somth f reo punches used for the dies of Briot's Scottish Coronation medals are not perceptibly different from thos e angele th use r .dfo Furthermore e letterin t th e medal,a th f o n gs o i s least three sizes, mediu obverse th r mfo e inscription, usuall ycircume largth r efo - scription on the reverse, and very small for the date of the event in the exergue, so that Briot must have taken several sets of letter punches with him. The Coronation medals serve to dispel doubts on two other points: namely that the angel, if a Scottish piece, is technically better produced than Briot's other early product Scotlanr sfo d woul expecto t e d tha d havnovelte on ;an td th equalitle d yan y of the design do not suggest hurried work at a busy period. The medals are beauti- fully produced oved thousano an ,rtw thesf do e were ordere strucke b o dt ; thee yar of entirely novel design, neatly executed, and interpreted in slightly different ways in points of detail on separate dies. Though Balfour's testimon s incidentali y e issuth ed musan , e decidedb t n o other grounds accoundetaie s Touchinth hi e , f th o l f o t g ceremon authentin a s yha c tone; and somehow the effect of putting the words 'coyned for the purpois' in parentheses gives the emphasin ma s inappropriat a casua o t e l embroidere th f yo narrative. Perhaps Balfour was not a numismatist,2 but the frontispiece to the 1825 editio works hi f nso show portraisa witm hhi book a f to seala , , coin compassesd san , as evidence presumabl literarys hi f yo , antiquarian, numismati mathematicad can l

1 Stewart, 109, for Briot's practice. authorits Hi a exacn a n yto numismatic point (that bawbees were introduce Jamey quoteds b i ) sV y db Burns , 262ii , . SOME SCOTTISH CEREMONIA5 27 L COINS certainls wa interests e h yd righAn . Coronatiote thath t ta n 'piece golf silved so dan r coyned for that purpois' were distributed to the crowd. As Lord Lyon King of Arms, he was responsible for the details of ceremonial administration of Charles I's visit Scotlando t woule H . d certainly have knowinstructione th f no Brioo st t botr hfo Coronatioe th n touchpiecesr medalfo d san narrativs Hi .Coronatioe th f eo f o d nan the Touching ceremony sounds like the account of an eye-witness, which he was. No doubt Briot's angel could be considered as a pattern or trial-piece in the absenc othef eo r evidence, though this also involve numbesa assumptionf ro s- tha t Briot would have essaye typa r coif strikine o ddesignfo a th n, it whicd f go an , h was never to be a part of his private Tower coinage; that two specimens of it survived, thoug issue hth e would probably have been tinier tha nScottise thath f o t h touchpieces; and that one of these patterns ended up (accidentally) with a hole in it, presumably for a Touching ceremony. Further, it implies negative assumptions with regarScottise th o dt h Touching ceremony: either that this issu lefs o n etha survivors, whereas a striking of patterns by Briot has left two, or that the issue never took place, in which case Charles I must unexpectedly have come by other angels in Scotland which were not to hand previously. It seems to me more satisfactory to accep r Stevenson'M t s identification. Postscript At Abbotsford there is a portrait of James IV, young and beardless, wearing a chain round his neck with, as a pendant, a saint spearing a dragon. Some personal interes. Michae kine St th n accoungy i f o t adoptioma le th r t botfo thir nd hfo san of the type of the piedfort angel. n ProfessoI r Gordon Donaldson's Scottish Kings, London 1967 e figureth , f o s Quees Trinite hi th d n Jameno yan altarpiecI sII illustratee ear figss da . 14d 13;an James IV's personal interes coinage th n i t illustrate s ei somy db e verse Dunbarf so , quote . 125p n ,d o where "cunyouris" figur lisa f artist o t n i ecraftsmed san n with whom the king liked to surround himself; and a woodcut of 1580 (fig. 34), showing half-lengta h figure of Jame I witsV h swor laured dan l branch, bear closa s - ere semblence to the portrait on the gold twenty pound pieces of 1575-6 (Stewart, fig. 186), another example of the affinity between numismatic and graphic art.