|
Date: |
|
Description: | I have examined a silver object reported found at an uncertain location. The object is a piedfort or piéfort striking of the coin-type known as the double parisis of Charles IV the Fair, King of France (1322-1328). The type was originally introduced in 1323. The reference to the coin is J. Duplessy, Les monnaies françaises royales (1988) no. 244b; an alternative reference work, J. Lafaurie, Les monnaies des rois de France (1951), no. 224, records known piedfort strikings as well as coins and in it there are listed three piedforts of this denomination.Finds of single coins are not normally considered as potential Treasure. However, non-functional coins or coin-like objects of precious metal do have the potential to be so considered. The first piedfort reported under the Treasure system was found in 2007 and was declared to be Treasure, to be followed by a second in 2008, this a piedfort of a denier parisis of Charles IV's father, Philip IV of France.Piedforts are unusual objects and their actual purpose has never been definitely established. In most cases, they are objects struck from the dies of a currency coin, but using a blank of unusual thickness and weight. However, the weights of surviving piedforts do not seem to relate to the weights of the currency coins - they are never clear multiples of these. This is the most obvious feature that sets them apart from usable currency coins. There is no record of a piedfort being found in a hoard or in a clear currency context, nor are they referenced in any monetary context in medieval documentary sources.In this case, the weight of the currency coin was something around 1.4g, but this piedfort weighs 8.03g, between five and six times the weight of the coin. The three other piedfort doubles parisis listed by Lafaurie weighed 4.88g, 6.45g and 7.93g. The fineness of the original coin was set at about 48% silver. The fineness of this piedfort has been tested in the British Museum's Department of Conservation and Scientific Research, where it was found to be about 46% silver, broadly in line with the fineness of the currency coin.The earliest piedforts are known from the mid to late 13th century from France, England and other principalities in the region. They continued to be produced into the 16th century, longer in the case of France. Although all individual piedforts are rare, they are relatively common as a phenomenon in the French coinage especially. As noted above, several piedforts of this particular denomination have long been known and recorded.A number of ideas have been put forward to explain piedforts. It is very unlikely that they are pattern (experimental) coins, since they are made with currency dies (in some cases the same die has been identified as being used both for normal coins and for a piedfort). Nor is it likely that they were created as guides for mint workers - the presence of several French piedforts as English finds makes this highly implausible. Perhaps the likeliest idea is that they were made for the use of important officials, who might utilise them as reckoning counters. This would certainly account for them turning up far from home and away from any context of currency. It is in fact possible that piedforts as a class fulfilled different purposes across time.Guidance for the Treasure Act defines a coin as 'any metal token that was, or can reasonably be assumed to have been, used or intended for use as or instead of money'.The argument for piedforts being eligible to be considered as Treasure is similar to that employed for coin jewellery, i.e. that they are not usable coins but are in fact something else. The case for piedforts is potentially stronger, in that coins turned into jewellery were undoubtedly made originally to be used as money and may indeed have served this purpose for a while. Piedforts, whatever their purpose, were not intended to be used as coins in any meaningful sense and probably could not have been (any more than, say, a silver spoon could have). In a world where coins were generally under a millimetre thick, piedforts would have stuck out very obviously as a different sort of object. If this argument is accepted, then there is a case for this item, being substantially of silver (over 40%), to be considered as Treasure under the terms of the Act.Dr Barrie J. CookCurator of Medieval and Early Modern CoinageDepartment of Coins and MedalsBritish Museum10 May 2010This case was placed before a jury at inquest who found the arguement convincing and declared the case Treasure - Aquired by British Museum.
Original Image | Publisher: | http://finds.org.uk | Source: | Portable Antiquities | Identifier: | http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/r... | Go to resource |
|
More Like this...
-
-
TOKEN
A silver object reported found…
-
TOKEN
DescriptionThe object is a piedfort…
-
TOKEN
The following record was written…
-
-
TOKEN
A silver piedfort striking of…
-
Coin
Post-Medieval silver coin: Shilling of…
-
COIN
A Medeival gilded silver farthing…
-
-
|