ENGLISH TOKENS, C. 1425 to 1672
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ENGLISH TOKENS, c. 1425 TO 1672 MICHAEL MITCHINER AND ANNE SKINNER THE tokens published in the present paper follow on chronologically from the earlier series published in BNJ vol. 53. The presentation conforms to the same format and, although the present paper can be read on its own, much of the background discussion of documentary information, of Thames-side stratigraphy and of analytical technique is not repeated. During the two and a half centuries embraced by this paper, tokens of the lead-pewter- tin series were in continuous use, but their form evolved through several quite well marked stages. Fifteenth-century tokens are quite different from early-sixteenth-century tokens in their designs, size, fabric and metal composition. These, again, are very different from late-sixteenth-century tokens and from those of the seventeenth century. These four chronological contexts each have their own characteristics, and for them we have adopted the following terminology: Late Plantagenet tokens (c. 1425-1490), Early Tudor tokens (c. 1490-1545), Elizabethan tokens (c. 1550-1600/1615) and Seventeenth-century tokens (c. 1600/1615-1672). Altogether 735 distinct issues of tokens have been catalogued comprising published issues plus those in the collection of one of the co-authors (MBM). Further issues are known to exist in other collections, but the present paper is long enough without attempting to extend its scope any further and no major classes of token are known to have been omitted. Metrological analyses have been performed on 756 tokens (MBM) and the chemical compositions of 242 of these tokens have been determined by the X-ray fluorescence technique (AS). Abbreviations and Analytical Comments (see also BNJ vol. 53) Metals cited: Pb (lead), Sn (tin), Cu (copper), Fe (iron), Bi (bismuth), Ni (nickel), Zn (zinc). As (arsenic), Ag (silver), Sb (antimony). Copper: Among the tokens analysed here copper occurs in two distinct contexts, as a constituent of chalcopyrite and as a component of the tin-copper form of pewter. Chalcopyrite is a complex iron-copper sulphide that occurs as a corrosion product, particularly (in the present context) on tokens of the sixteenth century. The XRF finding is approximately equal amounts of copper and iron. The presence of sulphide has been confirmed by chemical testing (lead acetate). Tin-copper pewter is a medieval recipe first documented in England in the Pewterers' Ordinances of 1348. We have observed tin-copper pewter more often in the case of contemporary forgeries of medieval English silver coins,1 but it does occur in the case of a few tokens published here. Some further tokens with a high tin content are made of tin-lead pewter hardened by the addition of a small amount of copper. Bismuth: Bismuth has been used as an alternative hardener for tin, mainly from the Elizabethan period onwards.2 A number of contemporary forgeries of Elizabethan and later silver coins were made of tin-bismuth pewter and we looked for bismuth in the case of all tokens, particularly those with a high tin content. Only trace amounts were occasionally observed. XRF results: When tabulating XRF results the concentrations of 'Tin + Lead' have normally been totalled to equal 100%, thus excluding chalcopyrite corrosion from the result; this being the most commonly encountered cause of deviation from a purely tin-lead composition. Condition: G (good), D (damaged, but otherwise little worn), H (hole: either a nail piercing or a significant casting flaw), W (worn). Statistical analyses of token weights and diameters have normally been restricted to tokens cited as being in Good (G) condition. Illustrations: The tokens illustrated on the accompanying plates are indicated in the catalogue by an asterisk after their number. 1 M. B. Mitchiner and A. Skinner, 'Contemporary for- 2 For instance, R. F. Tylecote, A history of metallurgy geries of English silver coins and their chemical com- (London, 1976). positions: Henry III to William III', NC (1985), pp. 209-36. ENGLISH TOKENS, c. 1425 TO 1672 Acknowledge- We are grateful for the continued help provided by the several persons cited in our previous ments: paper. Abbreviations: CY J. B. Caldecott and G. C. Yates, 'Leaden tokens', BNJ 4 (1908), 1-10. A. Forgeais, Collection de plombs histories trouves dans la Seine: 3° serie: Varietes numismatiques (Paris, 1864) and 5° serie: Numismatique populaire (Paris, 1866). L B. Lillywhite, London Signs (London, 1972). M Dr. M. B. Mitchiner collection. MA P. J. Huggins, 'Excavations at Waltham Abbey', Medieval Archaeology 20 (1976), 126-27. R S. E. Rigold, 'The St. Nicholas or 'Boy Bishop' tokens', Proc. Suffolk Inst, of Archaeology 34, (1978), 87-101. RS C. Roach Smith, Catalogue of the Museum of London Antiquities (London, 1854). TR (Trig Lane excavations) S. E. Rigold, '4. Jettons and tokens', pp. 97-104 in Medieval Waterfront development at Trig Lane, London: an account of excavations at Trig Lane, London 1974—76 and related researches, edited by G. and C. Milne, Special Paper no. 5, London and Middlesex Archaeological Society (1982). V D. G. Vorley, 'Early leaden tokens', SCMB 1981, 282-84. W G. C. Williamson, Trade Tokens issued in the seventeenth-century in England, Wales and Ireland (1889-91), reprint in 3 vols, (London, 1967). L) LATE PLANTAGENET TOKENS, c. 1425-1490 (Plates 1-3) Provenance: London (only known provenance); contemporary tokens from East Anglia are different (see p. 102 cf. pp. Ill ff.). Chronology: Tokens of the various Late Plantagenet series have a dominant numismatic association with the coins of Henry VI, as is demonstrated by the finds at several sites on both the north bank (Queenhithe, Bull Wharf, Three Cranes Wharf, Billingsgate) and the south bank (Bankside and other Southwark sites) of the river Thames in the Central London reaches. From the Annulet issues of Henry VI (1422-27) until the early coin issues of Henry VII3, coins of Henry VI are the most commonly recovered currency items. Relatively few coins of Edward IV have been recovered and these are not stratigraphically distinct from those of Henry VI.4 The tokens considered in the present section show a consistent evolutionary picture, following on naturally from the Geometric tokens of the earlier period. A few Geometric tokens have been found alongside coins of Henry VI5 and also alongside tokens of the present Late Plantagenet series, but the overlap does not appear to have been extensive. Excavations at Trig Lane' have led to conclusions consistent with this chronology: a Late Plantagenet token was recovered from a stratum dated prior to the mid fifteenth century (TR 107) alongside two contemporary 'cross and pellets'7 tokens (TR 97, 98) and three more 'cross and pellets' tokens (TR 99-101) came from a context dated c. 1440. At the other end of the time scale the Late Plantagenet tokens were to be replaced by the several series of Early Tudor tokens, a transition which affects both the form and the metal of tokens. Late Plantagenet tokens, like their Geometric predecessors, are all made of lead.8 At the very end of this Plantagenet phase a few tokens in most of the parallel series show a significant tin content. Thereafter the presence of a substantial tin content becomes commonplace in all series of Early Tudor tokens. Finds of tokens show some chronological overlap around the time of the transition: thus a small number of Late Plantagenet lead tokens have been found alongside coins of Henry VII and a few Early Tudor tin tokens 3 For descriptions of the measures taken by Henry VII to of appropriate deposits, see J. Schofield and T. Dyson, improve the poor state of the currency that he encountered Archaeology of the City of London (Museum of London, upon his accession sec R. Ruding, Annals of the coinage of 1980): Waterfront archaeology in Britain and Northern Great Britain and its Dependancies, 3rd edition, 3 vols Europe, edited by G. Milne and B. Hobley. Council for (London, 1840). British Archaeology research report no. 41 (London, 1981). 4 Stratigraphy of Thames foreshore deposits in London 5 See BNJ 53. has been further discussed in connection with medieval 6 Rigold, in Milne and Milne, 'Medieval Waterfront forged coins by Mitchiner and Skinner, 'Contemporary development at Trig Lane'. forgeries'. For Thames-side excavations at Trig Lane see 7 Catalogued below. Milne and Milne, 'Medieval Waterfront development at Trig 8 Tokens had been made of pewter until the early Lane', and regarding the building of Thames-side revett- fourteenth century. After that time they were made of lead ments, which have an important influence on the occurrence until the period when tin was rc-introduced about the 1480s. 88 ENGLISH TOKENS, c. 1425 TO 1672 L) LATE PLANTAGENET TOKENS (CONT.) (inscribed series particularly) have been found with coins of Henry VI. This period of transition appears to have been short and can best be dated 'c. 1490'. Metal: Lead. The latest issues in each series contain some Tin (30 to 70%). Form: Several parallel series of tokens were issued, in contrast to the much more closely standardised manufacture of earlier Geometric tokens. Four distinct series of Late Plantagenet tokens have been identified. It is likely that only the two major series (a and b) were issued throughout the period (c. 1425-90), the others (c and d) being more ephemeral. a) Small neat tokens A series of neatly designed and neatly manufactured tokens with small compact flans. Early issues retain the geometric designs used on preceding tokens (Geometric series: Edward Ill-Henry VI9), but the majority of tokens have pictorial designs among which several varieties of shield are the most popular. The late tokens demonstrate introduction of mercantile designs (mainly merchant marks'") and it is principally these issues that also show re-introduction of tin to the alloy of which tokens are made.