CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME 
 OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT 
 FUND GIVEN IN 189I BY 
 
 HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE 
 
Cornell University Library 
 CJ2490 .P37 
 + 
 Series of dissertations on some ... Angl 
 
 3 1924 029 825 308 
 olin Overs 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029825308 
 
SERIES of DISSERTATIONS 
 
 % 
 
 ON SOME 
 
 Elegant and very Valuable $ *\ < ' 
 
 ANGLO-SAXON REMAINS. 
 
 I. A Gold Coin in the Pembrochian 
 Cabinet, in a Letter to Martin 
 Folkes, Efq. late Prefident of 
 the Royal Society and of the 
 Society of Antiquaries. 
 
 II. A Silver Coin of Mr. John 
 White's, in a Letter to Mr. 
 White. 
 
 III. A Gold Coin of Mr. Simp- 
 son's of Lincoln, in a Letter to 
 Mr. Vertue. 
 
 IV. A Jewel in the Bodleyan Li- 
 brary. 
 
 V. T Second Thoughts on Ld. Pem- 
 broke's Coin, in a Letter to 
 Mr. Ames, Secretary to the So- 
 ciety of Antiquaries. 
 
 Alfo the COINS engraved on a Copper-Plate. 
 
 with 
 
 A PREFACE, 
 
 Wherein the Queftion, Whether the Saxons coined any- 
 Gold or not, is candidly debated with Mr. North. 
 
 By SAMUEL PEGGE, A.M. 
 
 'Ferimur per opaca locorum. 
 
 Virg. .ZEn. ii. 725. 
 
 LONDON, 
 
 Printed for J. Whiston and B. White in Fleetftreet. 
 
 MDCCLVI. 
 ( Price 2 s. 6d.) 
 
knp$± 
 
 (7Aar/e'J,A(???/.yft/a ?//?#?</ 
 
PREFACE 
 
 TO THE 
 
 READER. 
 
 TH E following Diflertations being in themfelves 
 entirely independent of every otherDefignl may 
 have formed in my own Breaft, and at the fame 
 time having a mutual and not inobfervable Connexion 
 one with another, it has been thought proper to bring 
 them together, and to offer them to the Publick. And 
 this I was the rather induced to do, by reafon that, thro' 
 the humane Difpofition of the Gentlemen concerned, 
 they have been already perufed by fome of our Antiqua- 
 ries; and that, . at the Requeft of others, I have been 
 every now and then called upon to give Copies ; a Tafk 
 which, though I have hitherto never declined, yet I 
 fhould now be glad to be difcharged from. And 
 whereas the Purport o£ the Jirft and third Piece evidently 
 tends to eftablifh a Fact of great Importance to the 
 curious Collectors of our Englijh Antiquities, to wit, 
 that our Saxon Ancejlors had amongfi them fame coined 
 Gold ; and this Point, it feems, is not fo thoroughly 
 relifned by the Literati, as to be thought every way clear 
 and indubitable, but on the contrary to be liable to fome 
 Objections, I was willing to appeal to the World upon 
 that Head, and to fubmit my Obfervations on this 
 Subject to a more general Examination. 
 
 B The 
 
ii PREFACE. 
 
 The Occafion of writing the feveral Pieces is mfE- 
 ciently opened in the refpective Papers, and there will 
 be no Need for me to repete any thing concerning that 
 matter here ; but then, fince the Fact above-mentioned 
 of the Saxons coining Gold, as aflerted in the firjl and 
 third Letter, has been publicly oppofed by a Perfon of 
 fome Note in the College of Antiquaries, it will be 
 neceflary to take fome Notice of what that Gentleman 
 has been pleafed to alledge. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. George North, at the End of his Re- 
 marks on Mr. Clarke s Conjectures concerning a fuppafed 
 Coin of Richard I. has printed an epiflolary Dijfertation, 
 read to the Society of Antiquaries, on fome fuppofed 
 Saxon Gold Coins. What Reception his Difiertation met 
 with from the Gentlemen of the Society I cannot tell, 
 but I am perfuaded that upon a mature DifcufTion of the 
 Reafons there offered, others will incline to believe that 
 the Gold Pennies in Queftion may poffibly be Saxon ftill. 
 
 'Tis prefumed that by the Words, The Notion of a latz 
 happy Difcovery of Gold Saxon Coins, has Jo much engaged 
 the Attention of the Curious, and fo much Pains have been 
 taken in attempting a fathfaSlory Explication of the Le- 
 gends on them, &c. Mr. North had an Eye to the firfi 
 and third of the enfuing Papers, as well as to a Gold 
 Coin of Dr. DucareTs which he mentions in his laft 
 Page : And therefore as I am fo directly interefted in 
 the Event of this Difpute, wherein he is pleafed to 
 diffent from me fo totally, his Candor, I hope, will 
 indulge me a few Words in my own Defence. 
 
 In the firft place, then, Mr. North offers a general 
 Argument, againft thefe two Pieces being Saxon, from 
 
 the 
 
PREFACE. iii 
 
 the Singularity of their Types, for, fays he, The Coins of 
 all Nations in Gold and Silver bear a Refemblance to each 
 other ', and, however the Gold and Silver Coins may differ i?i 
 Size, Weighty or Value, yet there is a conjiant Samenefs of 
 Manner in denoting and exprejfmg to whom they belong. 
 But this Argument proves a great deal too much ; for 
 there is not this Analogy between the Coins either of the 
 Saxons or the Englijh. Our firft Englijh Gold Coins 
 differed vaftly in their Type from the Silver ones of the 
 Time ; and amongft the Saxons, the Copper Siicas varied 
 as much from the Silver Pennies, of thofe Days ; even of 
 the fame Kingdom. Were the Gold Coins therefore not 
 Englijh f were the Sticas therefore not Saxon f The 
 intelligent Reader will eafily difcover how inconclufive 
 this fort of Reafoning is. Now as the Coins varied in 
 one refpect, they might vary alfo in another, and fo as 
 to that Particular here mentioned, of exprejfmg the Name 
 of the Perfon to whom they belonged, 'tis poflible that an 
 Omiflion of that fort might be peculiar to the golden 
 Specie ; this, I fay, is poflible ; but there is no occaflon 
 to have Recourfe to a poflible Suppofition, becaufe if the 
 Perfon to whom a Piece belonged was denoted by any 
 other Method equally certain, the Omiflion of the Name 
 in that Cafe might be eafily difpenfed with. Now I 
 apprehend, that the Appropriation of the Piece was 
 fufficiently provided for by the Mintmajler s putting his 
 Name ; for as thefe Mafters were then publickly known, 
 and were withal Perfons of good Account, it was always 
 notorious by whofe Authority the Coin was ftruck, and 
 confequently to what Prince or Prelate it belonged. Thus 
 for Example, in Sir Andrew Fountaines ix th Tab. you 
 
 B 2 have 
 
iv PREFACE. 
 
 have a Coin infcribed on theObverfe, ^ ^ VVEFNERD 
 MONETA, and on the_Reverfe, -.SYYEFNERD 
 MONEGH, in the Area DRVR EiTs ; from whence it 
 is very clear that the Coin, though the Name of the 
 Proprietor be not mentioned, either belonged to the 
 then fitting Archbifhop of Canterbury or the Abbot of 
 St. Augufrine, the former of whom had two Mints, and 
 the latter one, at 'Dorovernia or Canterbury. The Head 
 upon the Obverfe muft neceffarily reprefent one of thefe 
 Prelates ; and this, I think, is as certain as if the Name 
 of either of thefe great EcclefiafHcs had been expreffed 
 in alphabetical Letters. I may add, that it was then 
 very affu redly known, whether it was a Coin of the 
 Archbifhop or of the Abbot, becaufe every one knew, 
 or might know if they pleafed, whofe Servant Swefnerd 
 was, to wit, whether he belonged to the Archbifhop or 
 to the Abbot. 
 
 So again, as to the next Coin in that Plate, the Ob- 
 verfe is infcribed, *%< LVNINE MONETA, and the 
 Reverfe has in the Area DOROBERNI A EIVITAS ; 
 upon which I argue in like manner, that here the Pre- 
 late's Name, by whofe Authority the Piece was coined, 
 is not expreffed in Letters, but yet every one could know 
 at the Time whofe Coin it was, from the Mafter's Name 
 and the Place of Coinage. 
 
 I mall give a third Inftance, and let that fuffice, from 
 the Santli Petri Moneta in the fame Plate, none of 
 which exhibit to us the Names of the Archbifhops of 
 York, and yet fince the Name of the City of York appears 
 upon fome of them, and the Name of the Maflers upon 
 others, they are groundedly efteemed to be Coins of 
 
 the 
 
PREFACE. r 
 
 the Archbifhops of that Province, and no doubt but at 
 the Time it was fufficiently known to what Prelate each 
 Penny appertained (i). 
 
 The Cafe is abundantly clear as to the Earl of Pembroke s 
 Coin, and I think not lefs foin relation to Mr. Simpfons ; 
 for admitting LETO to have been a Workman of King 
 Sihtrifcs in the Northumbrian Kingdom, the Subjects of 
 that State, on the Sight of any Pennies with his Name, 
 would immediately receive them as the legitimate Coin, 
 of their King. 
 
 But what becomes of our Author's Obfervation all 
 this while, that there is a conjlant Samenefs of Manner 
 in denoting and exprejjing to whom they belong f 'Tis faid 
 without Grounds, that the Coins of all Nations in Gold 
 and Silver bear a Refemblance to each other y as I have 
 fhewn; and then, as to the Samenefs of Manner in 
 denoting and exprejftng to whom they belong, there is no 
 foundation for an Objection againft Saxon Gold Coins 
 from this Topic, becaule, as we fee, the Silver Coins 
 do not always exprefs the Perfon to whom they belong,, 
 that is, they do not always exprefs him in Letters, which 
 is what Mr. Norttis Words muft be interpreted to mean. 
 
 As to this Argument then from Analogy, which is 
 thought to lie fo flrong againft me, I would obferve, 
 that fo far from oppreffing me, it really militates very 
 
 fignally on my Side of the Queftion ', for whereas I 
 
 * ■■ 
 
 (i) See alfo S. Martin's Penny in Lord Pembroke's Cabinet, Part iv. 
 Tab.%. and St. Edmunds Money in Sir Andr. Fount aine, Tab. vi. and 
 above all, the Coin marked Eotberehtus in Sir Andrew's viii th 'Table, for 
 the Coin belongs to Egbert ofWeJJex* and the Name on the Reverfe is the 
 Mintmajler's, and not the King's. 
 
 contend 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 contend that the Coin infcribed VIGMVND appertains 
 to Wulftanl. Archbifhop of York (i), the three prela- 
 tical Coins of the Pembrochian Cabinet, Part iv. "fab. 2. 
 do all of them very remarkably referable it, as does alfo 
 the Penny of Ceolnoth Archbifhop of Canterbury in Sir 
 Andrew Fountaines third Table ; and certainly if a prelaw „ 
 tical Coin be like the reft of the fame -Series, it will 
 amount to a ftrong Prefumption, that it is truly appro- 
 priated ; wherefore I muft infill, that this Gold Coin of 
 my Lord Pembroke s is formed altogether after the Manner 
 and Tafte of the Saxon prelatical Specie. And this 
 Obfervation I defire may extend to Mr. Simpfons Coin, 
 which not only anfwers to Weight, but the Buft upon it 
 is alfo fufficiently like King Sihtric, and no one, me- 
 thinks, that knows any thing of the Anglo-Saxon Coins, 
 will object to the Appearance of a Monogram on the 
 Reverfe. 
 
 It feems to me, that Gentlemen, in judging of thefe 
 Matters, do not allow enough to the State and Condition 
 of the Mintmafters ; the Nature of whofe Office and 
 Employment likewife in thefe early Times ought to be 
 taken into Confideration. The Majiers were not Earls, 
 nor perhaps of that high Rank, as Mr. Thwaites, and 
 others, are ready at every Turn to fuppofe them ; but 
 neverthelefs they were People of fome Confequence ; and 
 the very Nature of their Office, confidering that there 
 were various Mints then going on in one Kingdom, and 
 even many in one Town, as there were no lefsthan feven 
 in the City of Canterbury, made it nec^ffary for theif 
 Names to appear in' one Part or other of the Coin ; 
 
 (1 ) See the firft Difiertation. 
 
 becaufe 
 
PREFACE. vii 
 
 becaufe in cafe of any Irregularity, either as to Weight or 
 the Purity of the Metal, a Complaint could not be made 
 againft the proper Perfon, unlefs it were known who the 
 Minter was. And for this Reafon, as I apprehend, the 
 Moneyers were obliged to put their Names fomewhere, 
 and, as far as I remember, there are very few Saxon Coins, 
 if you except the Santli Petri Moneta and the reft of 
 that Clafs, that want the Name of the Mafter, I dare 
 fay there are not above one or "two (i). This now may 
 be thought another valid Reafon, along with that 
 above given (to wit, that the Mafter once known, the 
 King or Prelate would alfo be known) why it might 
 happen that the Mafter s Name fhould occur in a Coin,, 
 even without the King's or the Prelate's. 
 
 But I come now to what Mr. North calls a clofe and 
 decijive Argument. It runs thus ; "The only Piece of Gold 
 we meet with in the Saxon Hiflorians 'is the Mancus or 
 ODancurej if therefore, it fhall be proved, that thefe new 
 discovered Pieces cannot be the Coinfo called, the ^ueflion is 
 decided. But the Confequence is here denied ; and upon 
 this Foundation ; to wit, that moft Nations had Dejio- 
 minations in their Accounts different from any Pieces 
 current among them, and that the Mancus or Mark, it 
 is prefumed, was of that Kind. The Saxons reckoned 
 by thePound, the Shilling, and the Mancus (2); but it does 
 not appear they had any current Pieces of the Value of a 
 
 (1) N. B. The Name EOTBEREHTVS in the Coin marked Eotber- 
 ebius in Sir Andr. Fountaine's viii th Table, is the Name of the Mintinafter, 
 and not of the King, as was faid above. 
 
 (2) Nicholfon's Hift. Libr. p. 44. Edit. 1714. where fee the reft, both 
 of the coined Money and their Denominations. Note, They had both 
 Silver, and Cold Marks, the firft being four Pennies and the latter thirty. 
 
 Shilling^, 
 
viii PREFACE. 
 
 Shilling, or of a Pound; and therefore one may reafonably 
 fuppofe, until we have proved to the contrary, they had 
 no coined Piece of the Value of the Mancus, but that it 
 was only a Name in Accompts, juft as the Englijh Mark 
 was; the Cafe, I prefume, was the fame in refpedt 
 to the Thrimfa. Allowing, therefore, that Mr. North 
 fhould have eftablifhed this Point never fo clearly, viz. 
 that the Coins, under Confederation, are not Mancuss^ it 
 will not ferve his Purpofe, iince the Saxons might have 
 Gold Coin amongft them, though not of the Weight or 
 Value of the Mancus. Whereupon I infer, that all that 
 follows in Mr. North's Diflertation, only proves that Mr. 
 Simpfons, and Dr. DucareT s Pennies are not Mancus s, 
 which nobody ever fuppofed they were ; but neverthelefs 
 they may be Saxon Gold Pennies, and if, upon this Gen- 
 tleman's Principles, Gold in the Saxon Times was in 
 Proportion to Silver, as Nine to One, the Value of each 
 would be Nine-pence. I know not whether it be worth 
 while to mention it, but I have myfelf a" Gold Penny, 
 which by the AfpecT: mould be Saxon, and weighs twenty 
 Grains, which tallies very well with the Weight both of 
 the Dotlors, and Mr. Simpforis Piece> whereof the former 
 raifes Nineteen Grains and a Half, and the other Nine- 
 teen ; whereupon I cannot avoid remarking, as to Lord 
 Pembroke s Coin, that whether it anfwers to Weight, or 
 not, and whether I have adjudged it in the Diflertation 
 that follows to the right Owner or no, that is, though it 
 mould ftill remain the Property of Wigmund ofMerda, 
 it will neverthelefs be a Saxon, and continue to be a Proof 
 that our Anceftors of that Nation coined fome Gold. 
 
 But 
 i 
 
PREFACE. ix 
 
 But as to my Sentiments concerning the State of the 
 <jold Specie in thefe remote 'Times, thefe I have declared 
 in the following Differtations, where it is faid, " Tho' 
 " the Saxons here in England probably had not much 
 il coined Gold current amongft them, their Payments 
 Ai in that Metal, when large, being otherwife regulated, 
 *" yet this hinders not, but a fingle Gold Piece ftruck 
 11 by way of Medal \ may have come down to us." And 
 again, " It begins now to appear to me .... that the 
 *" Saxons actually ftruck fome Gold, though perhaps not 
 " much. Time, I am greatly in hopes, will clear this 
 " Point more fully." This Opinion I fee no Caufe at 
 prefent to relinquish ; for though the Pieces in Queftion 
 *do not prove to be the Mancus, they may neverthelefs, 
 -as I have already aflerted, be Saxon Coins. Here then 
 I might difmifs Mr. North's Appendix, being directly 
 concerned with it no further than this ; however, I fhall 
 ■go fo far out of my Way, as to fay, that his Portions 
 cannot be admitted. ^ The'firft is, that the Weight of 
 •the Saxon Penny was Twenty-two Grains and an half; 
 this now is generally fpoken, but cannot be true, for 
 the Saxon Coins varied, and many that I have weighed 
 actually are a full Penny-weight and more ; feveral of 
 them Twenty-five Grains. Upon which I make no 
 other Reflection at this Time, though it is a Subject 
 that leads to fome very important Conclusions, but that 
 the Tower Weighty as it is called, could not prevail when 
 the Coins were fo heavy ; and confequently that this 
 Author exprefTes himfelf too generally, when he fays, 
 The Weight of the Saxon Penny . . . appears to be the fame 
 £ts of our mofi ancient Engli/h Money, and that it cannot 
 
 C be 
 
SERIES of DISSERTATIONS 
 
 ON SOME 
 
 Elegant and very Va l u a'b l e 
 
 ANGLO-SAXON REMAINS. 
 
 r. 
 
 A brief Dijfertation on a moft rare Gold Piece in the 
 Pembrochian Cabinet ', Part iv. Tab. 23. wherein it is; 
 proved to be a real Anglo-Saxon, and probably a Medal 
 ©/"Wulftan, ArchbijhopofXoxk. 
 
 In a Letter to Martin Folees, Efq, 
 
 S I R, 
 
 AF T E R I had thePleafure of infpecting along with 
 you that curious Gold Coin in the late Earl of 
 Pembroke s Collection, fuppofed to belong Wigmund 
 King of Mercia y and fome Doubts were raifed concern- 
 ing it, I held it advifeable at better Leifure to take it 
 into more mature Confideration : And . having now 
 formed what I think a true, at leaft a fettled Judgment 
 upon it, I beg Leave to fubmit my Sentiments to your 
 candid Difquifition, and by your means to communicate 
 them, if you think proper, to the learned Society of 
 Antiquaries, over which you fo worthily prefide. 
 
 The Coin is undoubtedly exquifite both as to the 
 Type and Size* the Metal and Owner of it j. in moft of 
 
 whichi 
 
14 DISSERTATION I. 
 
 which Particulars it is indeed an Unic, greatly enriching 
 that noble Collection of which it is a Part. 
 
 Concerning the Owner there is neverthelefs fomeCaufe 
 of Doubt. In my Lord's own Plate it is faid to be the 
 Coin of Vigmund King of Mercia along with Wiglaf 
 A. D. 830. but this Opinion I propofe, in the Sequel, to 
 call into Queftion, and after that to difcover the true 
 and rightful Proprietor of it. 
 
 Now in the firft place I find nothing that leads to 
 the Opinion of its appertaining to that Mercian^ but on 
 the contrary every thing againft it. 
 
 I make the firft Objection to the Form of the Letters, 
 particularly the G, which in the Mercian Specie is 
 always either E, 6, or £• . See Sir Andrew Fountaines 
 Tables in Wiglaf^ Cynethrith, and Coenulf. 
 
 The fecond lies againft the Head, which is a full Face, 
 with a peculiar Ornament upon it, both which are 
 entirely repugnant to the Representations given us of 
 the Mercian Princes, either in Sir Andrew Fountaines 
 Tables or in this Collection. 
 
 My next Objection is to the Style, VIGMVND 
 VREP which they interpret Vigmund Merciorum Rex t 
 for I muft think the Ligature VR to be Part of fome one 
 Word ; and confequently that the M, fo tied to the R, 
 cannot be feparated from it, fo as to ftand for Mercio- 
 rum^ as Gentlemen fuppofe, which would be highly 
 unnatural. Neither can I difcern in this Legend the 
 Word REX, it being evidently REP. 
 
 The laft and greateft Exception is, that upon the 
 
 ■ftricteft Enquiry I cannot find there ever was any fuch 
 
 JCing of Mercia as Wigmund. For though both Bromp- 
 
 4 ; , ton 
 
DISSERTATION I. 15 
 
 ton and Higden inform us ( 1 ), that Wiglaf had a Son of 
 that Name, yet he never was King, either in Conjunc- 
 tion with his Father or iingly by himfelf ; all the Authors 
 that mention him agreeing, that Berthulf immediately 
 fucceeded Wiglaf. 
 
 And for thefe Reafons I efteem it abfolutely neceflary 
 to feek out for fome other Proprietor of this Coin, whole 
 Claim may better conflft with Appearances. This Pro- 
 prietor, as I mall now fhew, was probably no other 
 than Wulftan the Firft, the fixteenth. Archbifhop of 
 York. 
 
 Firft, I conclude it to be a prelatical Coin, becaufe 
 I obferve it in every refpeCt to refemble thofe Pieces of 
 this Clafs engraved in this Collection, Partiv. 'Tab. 2. 
 which are all full faced, with a like Ornament or Mitre 
 on the Head. See alfo the Heads of the Prelates in Sir 
 Andrew Fountaine, Tab. iii. and ix. 
 
 Vigmund or Wigmund I judge to be the Name of the 
 Mintmafter, nothing being more common than to fee the 
 Majiers Name placed on the Obverfe of the Coins, Sir 
 Andrew Fountaine, Tab. i. JElfred, N° 1 1 . and Tab. ix. 
 Numifmata incerta, N° 5, 6. Le Blanc, Traite des Mon- 
 noyes de France, p. 57. and the Saxon Gold Penny found 
 at Hull (2), efpecially where there is no Room for his 
 Name on the Reverfe, as happens to be the Cafe here, 
 and on the Coin Iaft cited (3). VR is therefore the 
 
 (1) Bromptpn, inter X Scriptores, col. 778. Higden, p. 254. Edit. 
 Gale. See alio the Polychronicon, Fol. ccxxiv. b. 
 
 (2) Gentleman'^ Magazine 1747, p. 526 and 55J. 
 
 (3) See alio the Pembrochian Collection, Part iv. Tab. 2. the third 
 Penny there. 
 
 Abbreviation; 
 
16 DISSERTATION I. 
 
 Abbreviation of Monet 'anus, and the whole of the Legend 
 I interpret, VIGMVND MonetaRius EPtfcopL 
 
 Quaere then, who this Vigmund was, and when he 
 lived ? For if that Point can be made -out, we fhall be 
 enabled to conjecture with a tolerable Degree of Proba- 
 bility, whofe Effigies it is that the Coin bears. Now 
 there is a Mafter of this Name on two Coins of Anlaf 
 the Danijh King of Northumberland, Sir Andrew Foun^ 
 taine, Tab. x. which I believe to be the fame Perfon ; 
 jconfequently this Pieee muft have been /truck in the 
 Northumbrian Kingdom and atTork, and exhibits to us 
 jJie Image of fome Archbifhop of that Province cotem- 
 porary with that royal Dane ; and, as there is good 
 Grounds for believing, .of Archbifhop Wuljlan, the 
 Sixteenth Prelate, who fat in that See from A. D. 94 r.. 
 to A. D. 955. and is known to have taken part with 
 the Danes in that Country againft his Liege Sovereigns 
 King Edmund and King Edred (1), and with Anlaf 
 confequently, whofe Reign coincides with that Interval 
 of Time. Whereupon it may be proper to remark, that 
 the Workmen of the royal Mints were often employed 
 by the Prelates of thofe Times ; thus JEthelulf, who 
 wrought for Plegmund Archbifhop of, Canterbury, was 
 a Mafter of King Alfred's, and of Burgred King of 
 Mercia £ and Diala, who ferved Archbifhop Ceolnoth, 
 was likiwife the Workman, perhaps in a different Part 
 : of his Life, of Coenulf King of Mercia. 
 
 I efteem it no Objection to our Conjecture that 
 Archbifhop Wuljlan is here only ftyled Epifcopus, fori 
 find that very commonly done. See Mr. Drakes Eboracum^ 
 
 (i).Mr. Drake's Efaracum, p. 409. 
 
 p. 400. 
 
DISSERTATION I. 17 
 
 p. 400. The Laws of King JEthelftan, Cap. xiv. Dr> 
 Hickes 's famous Epijlolary Dijfertation, p. 73. Eddius, 
 Vita Wilfridi, Edit. Gale. Archbifhop UJhers Antiq. 
 Brit. Eccl. p. 52, &c(i). 
 
 Nor is it any Objection that the Piece is Gold ; for 
 though the Saxons here in England probably had not 
 much coined Gold current amongft them, their Pay- 
 ments in that Metal, when large, being otherwife regu- 
 lated, yet this hinders not, but a fingle Gold Piece, 
 {truck by way of Medal, may have come down, to us (2). 
 And if we can be allowed, Sir, to confider this Piece as 
 a Medal, it might poflibly be coined on Occafion of the 
 Peace {truck up between King Edmund and King Anlaf, 
 A. D. 942. by the Mediation of our Prelate and of Odo 
 Archbifhop of Canterbury ; but this is offered as a mere 
 Conjeaure. However, the Reverfe, MVNVS DIVI- 
 NVM, round a Wreath, or Crown, may properly enough 
 denote the Reftoration of Peace, the Gift of Heaven, in 
 Allufion to Luke ii. 1 4. Glory to God in the highejl, and 
 on Earth Peace, Good-will towards Men. 
 
 I mail only add for a Conclufion, that the above 
 Appropriation of this Coin to the Anglo-Saxon Series, 
 receives great Confirmation and Support from the cele- 
 brated Sol d'Or of Ludovicus Pius, of which Monf. Le 
 Blanc, p, 99, has given us both the Hiftory and the 
 
 (1) Cavendifh, Life of Card. Wolfey, p. 48 and 155. Godwyn's Hift. 
 ■of Hen. VIII, p. 71. Brooke's Cat. of Honour, p. 159. So Speed of the 
 Pope, p. 1008. and the Proteftants generally call the Pope only Bijhop of 
 Rome ; to the Popes often ftyle themfelves. See alfo Sparrow's Collection, 
 p. 1 and 4. And the Oath of Allegiance. 
 
 v (2) This Point, whether the Saxons coined fome Gold, is fecure, whether 
 this Piece be of Mercia or of Northumberland. 
 
 D Type. 
 
18 DISSERTATION I. 
 
 Type. The Reverfe has a like Crofs within a Wreath, 
 or Crown, with the fame Infcription, Munus Dk)inum y 
 which I think never appears on any Silver Coin. Lewis 
 died A. D. 840, and his Sol weighed 132 Grains, which, 
 if one may judge by the Size of our Type, might pro- 
 bably prove to be the Weight of this Piece, were it tried ; 
 but the Superintendant of Lord Pembroke s Tables has 
 unfprtunately omitted the Weight of this admirable and 
 truly valuable Anglo-Saxon Remain. 
 
 * I am, Sir, 
 
 Your moft obedient Servant, 
 
 Godmerfham, June 
 20, 1751. 
 
 ■Samuel Pegge. 
 
 To 
 
DISSERTATION It. 19 
 
 II. 
 
 To Mr. John White. 
 S I R, 
 
 TH E Day after I fent away my laft, I found a littk 
 Leifure to confider your curious Angk-Saxon 
 Penny, of which you was pleafed to fend me a Type^ 
 and I here fend you, with my Compliments, the Remit 
 of a clofe and very careful Infpe&ion. [See Plate, N° 2.] 
 
 Whereupon I have to remark, firft, that the Name 
 ipulfton, or VFulJlon, on the Obverfe, cannot be the Mint- 
 mailer, as was the Cafe in the Gold Coin of Archbifhop 
 Wuljlan, on which I formerly diflertated, becaufe the 
 Matter's Name occurs on the ReVerfe. 
 
 It muft, therefore, fecondly, be the Name of the 
 Prelate for whom, or by whofe Authority, the Piece 
 was coined ; for Wulfton or Wuljian not being the 
 Chriftian Name of any King of England, and the Device, 
 moreover, not agreeing with thofe of any of our regal 
 Coins, it ought to be referred, unqueftionably, at leaffc 
 in my Judgment, to that very imperfect Series, which 
 I would call the Prelatical Series. 
 
 And then, thirdly, considering the Form of the Re- 
 verfe, and the Manner of exprefllng the Legend there, 
 we ought, I think, by all means, to refer it to the Clofe 
 of the Reign of Ethelred II, the Father of Edmond Iron- 
 Jide, who tied. Ann. 10 16, and whofe Coins prefent us 
 with the like Legends, and the fame Stamp exactly, on 
 that Side. We muft, confequently, try what Prelate of 
 that Time it will beft fuit. 
 
 D 2 Now 
 
20 DISSERTATION II. 
 
 Now we have no lefs than three Wulflons on Record, 
 who may put in their refpective Claims. The firft is 
 Wuljian I, the fixteenth Archbifhop of York, who died 
 A. D. 9555 according to Mr. Drake s Eboracum. This is 
 he whofe Gold Coin I before endeavoured to illuftrate, 
 but cannot be the Prelate to whom this Piece belongs, 
 becaufe he went off the Stage too early, Ethelred not 
 acceding to the Throne till A. D. 978, and it being in 
 his Reign that this Type and Legends of this Form firft 
 came into Ufe. 
 
 The fecond is Wuljian III, Bifhop of Worcejler, who 
 wasconfecrated A. D. 1062, towards the End of the 
 Confejfors Reign, and died A..D. 1095, in the Time 
 of William Rufus. But this cannot be the Perfbn, becaufe 
 he is as much too late as the other was too early. 
 
 The third is Wuljian II, the Twenty-firft Archbifhop 
 of York, who fucceeded to both the Sees of York and Wor~ 
 cejler, A. D. 1002, and died A. D. 1023. Thefe Dates 
 beft agree with the Form and Fafhion of this Coin ; and 
 as Ethelred 'II. acceded A. D. 978, and died 1016, his 
 Death happened but feven Years before that Prelate's ; 
 and moreover, we mall find that the Type of the Obverfe, 
 at leaft as I interpret it, accords perfectly well with the 
 Promotions of this great Ecclefiaftic ; but of that by 
 and by. 
 
 And thus' having found the Perfon to whom this Coin 
 belongs, and he being both Archbifhop of York and 
 Bifhop of Worcejler, there will naturally arife a fourth 
 Queftion, to wit, whether the Piece was ftruck for him 
 as Archbifhop of York, and confequently was minted in 
 the Diocefe of York, or as Bifhop of Worcejler, and 
 
 therefor- 
 
DISSERTATION II. 21 
 
 therefore in fome Town of that Jurifdi&ion. I incline 
 to believe the former, having found no Proof as yet, 
 that the Bifhops of Worcefler, as fuch, ever coined any 
 Money, whereas we are fure the Archbifhops of York did. 
 
 But Quaere, fifthly, where then this curious Penny was 
 coined? the Reverfe is ►£< EANA ON LVD. from 
 whence it is very obvious to imagine it was ftruck at 
 Ludlow in Shropjhire ; but that cannot well be, fince 
 Ludlow is neither in the Diocefe of York nor Worcefler, 
 but in Hereford^ where you will find no Bifhop of this 
 Appellation. Whereupon I would obferve, that there 
 is no Place of this Orthography in the Diocefe of Wor- 
 cejler ; which amounts to a further Proof, that Wulflan 
 coined it not as Bifhop of Worcefter. But then, was 
 there any Place fo fpelt in the Diocefe of York f I anfwer, 
 I think there was, and I pitch upon the Town oiLeedes 
 in York/hire, anciently written Loid or Luyt. [See Mr. 
 Tborejbys Pref. to his Ducatus Leod. p. viii.] For the 
 Vowels are fo eafily changed, that Loidis, as Leedes is 
 called in venerable Bede, might by others as readily be 
 written Lydis or Ludis. And I myfelf have a Coin of 
 EthelredW, with' a Reverfe minutely in the fame Form, 
 and coined at the fame Place, as I conje&ure, for the 
 •Infcription runs, ►£ JELFRIL ITO LVD. And this, 
 methinks, adds a mighty Confirmation to the Obferva- 
 tion above, as to the Age of this Piece/ fince it fhews fo 
 clearly, that Money of this Type was actually coined for 
 the Crown, at Leedes, in the Reign of King Ethelred II. 
 
 Whereupon I would obferve, that whereas that worthy 
 good Man and diligent Antiquary, the late Mr. Ralph 
 'Thorejby, who being a Native of Leedes, was very 
 
 folicitous 
 
22 DISSERTATION II. 
 
 folicitous to eftablifh a Mint at that Place, comments 
 upon one of his own Sticas thus : 
 
 " EDELRED. REX. Rev. LEOFDES. Moneta. fup- 
 " pofing the F redundant, or designed for E, wanting 
 " only the Lineola at the Bottom (an eafy Error in the 
 " bungling Minters of thofeAges) and it makes LEODES. 
 " Leedes was, without Controverfy, a Place much more 
 " eminent during the Heptarchy than many Places that 
 " occur upon their Monies, witnefs Bede, the venerable 
 " Hiftorian, who lived in this very Century, and writes 
 " it likewife with an O." \Thorefbys Mufoum, p. 341.] 
 Whereas, I fay, Mr. Thorejby was fo de&ous of finding 
 a Mint at Leedes,. we can now furnifh him with one 
 upon very good Grounds, which I doubt were wanting 
 before ; for as to the Stica in Queftion and his Conjec- 
 ture upon it, he in the firft Place mifreads the Name, 
 which on the Coin is TEOFDEI}. [See the Type in Cam- 
 den,Tab.v. N°i3. of the Copper Sticas,"] or LEOFDEG, 
 which probably was intended for Leofreg (1) or Leofrig, 
 a Name not uncommon amongft the Saxons. [See the 
 Saxon Chronicle pajjim, and in particular the Name of 
 a Minter of Ethelred II. See Sir Andrew Fountaines firft 
 Table ; you have the L in this Form r, on the two Sticas 
 of Ethelhelm.] And then, what is worfe, he takes the 
 Name of the Mint-mafter for the Name of the Place, 
 interpreting M. Moneta, whereas it rather iignifies Mo- 
 netarius. 
 
 One Word now upon the Device on the Obverfe, and 
 then I have done. One of the Figures is apparently a 
 
 (1) Dr. Wctton (that is, Mr. Tbwaites, for Mr. Thorejby miftakes the 
 Perfon) read it EEOFREG. See the Notes on that Table in Camden. 
 
 Woman, 
 
DISSERTATION II. 23 
 
 Woman, as is clear from her Breafts, and I take it for 
 granted, it was intended to reprefent the Virgin Mary. 
 The other Figure, which is a Man, is in no Pofture of 
 Adoration, as one would expedr. from the received No- 
 tions of thofe Times, and moreover is placed on the 
 Right Hand, confequently muft be at leaft equal, or 
 perhaps fuperior to her in the prefent Cafe. From 
 whence I conceive, that Wulftan being both Archbifhop 
 of York and Bifhop of Worcejler, and the former of thefe 
 Cathedrals -being dedicated to St. Peter ', and the other to 
 St. Mary ; thefe two Figures mean to reprefent St. Peter 
 and St. Mary \ and in this Cafe York, being the principal 
 See, St. Peter wouljl neceffarily have the Right Hand. 
 The Device, thus interpreted, affords us this Senfe, Wul- 
 ftan Bifhop of St. Peter s and- St. Marys, and at the fame 
 Time appropriates the Coin, irrefragably, to Wulftan II, 
 the Twenty-flrft Archbifhop of York, as was afferted 
 above, fince there was no other Wulftan but him that 
 enjoyed both the Sees. 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 
 ; Your moft obedient, 
 
 Whittingtan, Sept. 
 8,i755- 
 
 Samue l Pe GGE. 
 
 To 
 
24 DISSERTATION III. 
 
 III. 
 
 To Mr. George Vertue. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 TH E Gold Coin, of which you was pleafed to fend 
 me a Drawing (i), is very curious in Regard both 
 of the Metal and the Type. It is undoubtedly an Anglo- 
 Saxon^ of the Northumbrian Kingdom, being {truck at 
 York, in the Beginning of the tenth Century ; and per- 
 haps is a Coin, but this I fpeak with Diffidence, of the 
 Danijh King Sihtric. Thefe Points I fhall endeavour to 
 eftablifh and illuftrate, as follows : 
 
 The Infcription on the Head Side is LETO MON. 
 that is Leto Monetarius ; for it is very cuftomary to have 
 the Mint-Majiers Name on an Obverfe. Of this you 
 will find many Examples in Monf. Le Blanc s Traite des 
 Monnoyes de France, p. 57,y%. But this Point I have 
 fully clearly in a Diflertation on the famous Gold Piece 
 of my Lord Pembroke 's, Part iv. Tab. 2 3 . and therefore 
 need fay no more here than only to obferve, that fome- 
 times the King's or the Prelate's Name is exprefled in 
 the Reverfe, and fometimes not, as in this Cafe. And 
 ►that, where it is riot, it mull needs be, generally fpeaking, 
 exceeding difficult, and fometimes abfolutely impracti- 
 cable, to fay, whofe the Piece is. 
 
 (1) See Plate, Numb. 3. N. B. This curious Gold Penny is the Pro- 
 perty, or lately was fo, of Mr. Thomas Simp/on of Lincoln. See Gent. Magaz. 
 1747, p. 526 and 557. 
 
 1 The 
 
DISSER T A T I O N v III. 25= 
 
 The Letters in the Cypher on the Reverfe fyp, are 
 only EiE, for the Twift in the Middle is nothing out an 
 Ornament or Ligature to tye the E and I together. Thefe 
 Letters, Sir, I interpret, Glvitas Eboraci ; for I have feen 
 the Place of Coinage very often exprefled in fuch Mono- 
 grams ; witnefs that incomparable Coin of King Alfred 
 with his Head, in Sir Andrew Fountaines firfl Table, and 
 Monf. Le Blanc, p. 88, et alibi. And indeed where the 
 Majlers Name is on the Obverfe, as here, the Place of 
 Coinage generally occupies the Reverie in fome Shape or 
 other. Sir Andrew Fountaine, Tab. ix. Numifmata incerta, 
 N° 6. Le Blanc, p. 57. 
 
 This Cypher, together with ' the Place where the 
 Piece was found, to wit, at Hull in the County of York, 
 induces me to refer it to the Northumbrian Kingdom, 
 where only, fo far as yet appears, the Anglo-Saxons 
 coined Gold. 
 
 And I refer it to the beginning of the tenth Centuryj 
 becaufe I think it might be about that Time, if one 
 may judge from the Gold Coin of Archbifhop Wulftan, 
 that the Saxons began to ftamp Gold. The Weight, 
 me'thinks, which is nineteen Grains, agrees perfectly 
 _ with this Period, for the Silver Money of King Edmund 
 and King Edred, in Mr. T%oreJbys Mufaeum, and the 
 Cotton Library ( 1 ), run thereabouts ; and I muft believe 
 
 that the Gold Money was adjufted exactly to the Silver, 
 
 * *«, 
 
 ( 1 ) I was favoured with the Weights of Mr. 'tborejby's Coins by his Son j 
 and thofe in the Cotton Library I weighed myfelf, with the Permillion of 
 the late Mr. Cajley. 
 
 E as 
 
±6 DISSERTATION III. 
 
 as to Weight, whatever Difference there was, as to the 
 Value of the two Metals (i). 
 
 I mould imagine, laftly, that about this Time, the 
 Mint-ma/iers began in England to defifl from putting 
 their own Names only, without the King's, on the 
 Specie ; for I do not recollect any Example of it later 
 than the Middle of this Century. If this be fo, then I 
 think this may poflibly be a Coin of Sihtric, King of 
 Northumberland^ who began his Reign, according to 
 Mr. Drake, A. D. 914, and the Drawing certainly 
 agrees fufficiently with the Head of Sihtr'ic in Sir Andrew 
 Fount aine s 'Tab. ix. 
 
 I have been the more exact in the Confederation of 
 this Piece, becaufe it begins now to appear to me, from 
 this Penny, and my Lord Pembroke s Piece above-men- 
 tioned, that the Saxons actually ftruck fome Gold, tho' 
 perhaps not much. Time, I am greatly in hopes, will 
 .clear this Point more fully. In the mean while, 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 
 Your moft obedient, 
 
 Godmerjham, July 
 3*> 1751. 
 
 Samuel Pegge. 
 
 (1) Dr. Ducarel's Gold Penny weighs Nineteen Grains and a Half, 
 mine Twenty Grains. 
 
 IV. A Differ- 
 
DISSERTATION IV. 27 
 
 IV. 
 
 A Differ tation on an ancient Jewel of "■ the Anglo Saxons *, 
 now in the Bodleyan Library. 
 
 THERE is a well known and curious Piece of Gold 
 now in the Bodleyan Library, of which I propofe 
 here to take fome Notice, though it be not properly a 
 Coin. It has been no lefs than four Times engraved, 
 firft by Dr. Plot, in his Natural Hijlory of Oxfordshire \ 
 then in Camden s Britannia ; after that by Sir Andrew 
 Fountame, in the Epiflolary Differtation prefixed to his 
 Tables ; and laftly by Mr. Wife, in the xvii th Table of his 
 Catalogue ; and all the Gentlemen concerned ; to whom 
 1 may add Mr. Thwaites in his Notes on the Anglo-Saxon 
 Coins, have refpedtively given their Opinion of it, but 
 are fo difcordant amongft themfelves, that there is indeed 
 great Room and great Occafion for a Moderator to com- 
 pofe Differences between them, and, if one may be fo 
 happy, to give the true Explication of it. The Method 
 I fhall take will be in the firft Place to give you the feve- 
 ral Authors Words ; then to add fome Remarks upon 
 them ; and laftly, but with all due Deference to the 
 great Names herein to be produced, to fubjoin my own 
 Opinion. 
 
 Dr. Plot, in his Nat. Hijl. of Oxford/hire, p. 3 5 2. 
 " Before they [the Kings of England~\ touch for this 
 Diftemper [the Kings Evit\ they have always Prayers 
 read fuitable to the Occafion, both which, when per- 
 formed, the King forthwith beftows on every Patient a 
 
 * See Plate, N°4- 
 
 E 2 Piece 
 
28 DISSERTATION IV. 
 
 Piece of Angel-Gold purpofely coined, and put upon a 
 White Ribbon to be hung about the Neck; which a& 
 
 long as worn preferves the Virtue of the "Touch 
 
 However it be, that this was the Cuftom ab initio I 
 take to be plain from that Piece of Gold of King Edward 
 the Confejfor, Tab. xvi. Fig. 5. found in St. Giles's Field 
 in the Suburbs of Oxon, having the initial Letters of his 
 Name over the hinder Part of his Head, • and two fmall 
 Holes through it, as if defigned to be hung on a Ribbon 
 for the Purpofe above-mentioned, the Holes being 
 ftrengthened with Gold Wire fattened round them, and 
 to the Piece itfelf, much after the Fafhion of the Eye of 
 a Man's Doublet, as exactly defcribed in the Figure, ut 
 fupra ; which Piece was lent me by that courteous Gen- 
 tleman Sir John Holeman, Bart, in whole Poffeffion it 
 now remains at his Houfe near Northampton" 
 
 Mr. ObAdiah Walker, in Camden s Britannia i 
 Tab. iv. N°40. " 
 
 <£ The fortieth is taken out of Dr. Phis Hiftory of 
 Oxfordjhire ; it was found in digging the Works (1) at 
 Oxford, and is, or not long fince was, in the Pofleffion 
 of Sir John Holman* It is fuppofed to be the Gold given 
 by St. Edward the Confejfor at his curing the Scrophulce, 
 or the Kings Ewil. It is worth noting, that it hath upon 
 it the Figure of a Woman veiled (not unlike a Nun) whe- 
 ther of the blefTed Virgin, or fome other holy Woman, 
 I cannot determine. But it feems much more proper for 
 that Function, than that now ufed of an Angel ; which 
 was taken from the French." 
 
 (1) In St. Giles's Field. Dr. Plot. 
 
 Mr. 
 
DISSERT AT ION IV; 29 
 
 Mr. Thoresby mCamden, ibidem. 
 <c That Edward the ConfeJJbr was the firfl of our Kings 
 who cured the Struma, is acknowledged by all, and 
 that it was called the Kings Evil upon that Account is 
 probable enough : But that he and the fucceeding Kings 
 gave Pieces of Gold in this Form, may, I think, be 
 juftly fcrupled, and can never be proved from E C, the 
 fuppofed Initials of his Name, who is never ftyled Con- 
 fejfor upon any Moneys or Medals of undoubted Anti- 
 quity. And if Gold had been coined and diflributed 
 upon this, or any other Occalion, in thofeAges, a greater 
 Number of them, no doubt, would have been found in 
 the Cabinets of the Curious, as well as their current 
 Moneys; whereas, nothing of that Metal appears till 
 Edward the Third's Time ; and that, perhaps, no other, 
 than the current Silver Money of each Prince, except 
 gilded for Diitindtion. Such an one, with a Hole for 
 the Ribbon to be hung about the Neck, was amongft the 
 Curiofities in the old Lord Fairfax's Mufaeum, and is 
 yet preferved in this. It has the full Face (as he is 
 reprefented upon his Great Seal in Speed's Hiftory) with 
 the arched Crown, and may poflibly be one of the fame 
 numerical Pieces given upon that Occafion. As for the 
 Curiofity defcribed by the ingenious Dr. Plot, in his 
 Hiftory of Oxfordjhire, and from him tranfmitted to 
 Number Forty in this Table, I look upon it as a Sort of 
 Amulet (for which thofe darker fuperftitious Ages had 
 an extraordinary Veneration) like that noble one of King 
 Alfred, defcribed by the learned Dr. Hickes (1) ; and do 
 
 (i)In his Tbefaurus Ling. vet. Septentr. p. 142. 
 
 conclude.. 
 
3 o D I S S E RTAT.I O NT IV. 
 conclude, with Dr. Wotton, that thofe Pieces infcribed 
 St. Edmond y were of the like Nature." 
 
 Sir Andrew Fountaine, DifTert. Epift. adComit. Pem- 
 h'ochice praefix. Tab. Nummorum Anglo-Sax. &c. 
 
 " Atvero mihi hand diffitendum eft, ne unum quidem 
 [nummum aureum] aut a me unquam fuifte vifum, aut 
 inter legendum mihi occurrifle, nifi in Differtatione ilia 
 Walkeriana et Hiftoria Naturali comitatus Oxonienjis a 
 Doctore Plot confcripta. Hie quidem fcriptor, eumque 
 fecutus Walkerus, nummum 40 um in tabula octava 
 (quam videre eft in prasdicta editione Britannia? Camde- 
 niancz) autumat efle Saxonicum, et qualem ad curandam 
 Scrophulam Edvardus cognomento Confejfor hominibus 
 morbo illo laborantibus elargiri folitus eft. Sed ratio- 
 ciniis adeo infirmis innixa eft haec opinio, ut in 
 tabulis noftris monetae Saxonicce nummus ifte nullum 
 obtinuerit locum. Veruntamen iconem ejus infra appo- 
 nere vifum eft, ut inde judices, Hon. Comes, quam valido 
 argumento contendat Walkerus nummum hominibus 
 fcrophulae afTedris elargiendum, monachal quam Angeli 
 (uti nunc dierum in more pofitum eft) imagine rectius efle 
 flgnandumr" 
 
 Mr. Thwait e s. 
 
 " In the 1 6i ft Page of Sir Andrew Fountaine 'sEpijlolary 
 DiJfertation> a Coin (or Piece of Money) reprefents, if I am 
 not miftaken, the Head oijefus Chrijl, with thefe Letters, 
 C. A. &. O.. that is, Chrijlus Alpha et Omega; Chrt/l, 
 Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and Ending, orfirft and 
 kft. This Head is adorned with a triple Crown. The little 
 Character ^ (&, and) is to be feen now in ancient Coins, 
 i ftruck 
 
DISSERTATION IV. 3 t 
 
 ftruck in the. fame Manner. It is taken from the 
 Anglo-Saxon ^ or "j (&, or and.)" 
 
 Mr. Wise, Numifm. Bodl. Catalog, p. 232. 
 ** Superefl dicendus nummus aureus^ fi nummum vo~ 
 care fas fit, olim prope Oxoniam repertus, et a celeber- 
 rimo Joanne Radcliffe, M. D. fcriniis Bodleianis dona- 
 tus. Sane non diflimilis eft iftis, quos Bracteatos et Cavos. 
 vocant Antiquarii Septentrionales, fcilicet tam incufus 
 quam excufus. Hunc primus vulgavit CI. Rob. Plot, 
 M. D. in Hift. Naturali Comitatus Oxonienfs, illumque 
 autumavit ex iis effe, quos infirmis Scrophula laborantibus 
 dedit Edwardus Confeflbr. Quam etiam opinionem cal- 
 culis fuis probarunt alii eruditi : immo CI. Edw. Thwaites 
 literas A et O in epigraphe, fi qua lit,, videre voluit. 
 Vid. Not. in Num. Saxon. Sseculum proculdubio olet, 
 quin et opus forte, Saxonicum -, at an unquam monetae 
 infervierit, merito dubitatur. Quandoquidem Saxonibus 
 in nummis propriis rarus aut nullus, uti diximus, auri 
 fuit ufus ; a quo vero, in cimeliis diverfi generis fabri- 
 candis, eos neutiquam alienos fuifie abunde conftat. 
 Quare ipfe in alium ufum iftud elaborari cenfeo, ad 
 codicis, puta, aliufve fupelle£tilis, ornamentum ; cujus 
 etiam exteriori tegumento affixum fuifie,, me maxime 
 perfiiafum habeo." 
 
 So far the Gentlemen Commentators : Now as to Dr. 
 Plot's and Mr. Walker s Notion, of this being one of 
 thofe Pieces diftributed by Edward the Confejfor amongft 
 the Patients; touched by him for the Kings Evil, the 
 later Antiquaries, Sir Andrew Fountain?, Mr. Thorejby, 
 and Mr. Wife, all agree to reject it, and, I think, very 
 
 juftljv 
 
32 DISSERTATION IV, 
 
 juftly. In the firft Place, Dr. I 3 lot builds his Opinion 
 upon the C, which he thought he difcerned upon it, 
 and which he imagined might denote Confeffor ; but that 
 Letter is not a C but a G. Secondly,, I efteein this 
 Piece of Gold to be older than that Prince. Thirdly, 
 I do not take it to be a Coin. Fourthly, The Head 
 does not reprefent a Woman veiled, confequently neither 
 the blefled Virgin, nor any other holy Woman, as Walker 
 thought, but a Perfon of a higher Order, as will- be feen 
 below. ' To all which you may add, fifthly, the plaufible 
 Objections raifed by Mr. Thorejby. 
 
 Mr. 'Thorejby very rightly judges it to be an Amulet, 
 but he has contributed little to the Explanation of it, 
 fince he adds nothing either concerning the Effigies or 
 the Letters upon it, but leaves us frill entirely in the 
 Dark as to them. 
 
 Sir Andrew, in Effect, fays little upon it, contenting 
 himfelf with alledging it to be no Coin, and expofing 
 Mr. Walker 's, and Dr. Plot's Notion, of its being a 
 Touch Piece. 
 
 Mr. Thwaites, who follows next, has come neareft the 
 Truth ; but as on one hand he takes it for a Coin, which 
 it is not, fo on the other, he frill perfifts in the old 
 Track of taking the G for a C, and likewife has over- 
 looked two other Letters. Moreover, his Interpretation 
 has been fo coldly received, fo flighted by Mr. Wife, who 
 feems entirely to diflent from him, and even to doubt 
 whether there be any Infcription or not, that it may be 
 thought neceflary, to do Juftice to Mr. Thwaites in cer- 
 tain Particulars. 
 
 : £ Ms. 
 
DISSERTATION IV. 33 
 
 Mr. Wife very rightly holds it to be a Jewel, and not 
 a Coin ; but then, I think, he miftakes its Ufe, and 
 even doubts, as I faid, whether there be any Legend 
 upon it ; which I cannot but admire, fince that is fo 
 evident in his own Type. 
 
 What I propofe, therefore, to do in the laft Place, in 
 regard to this DifTonance of Opinions, is, firft, to difco- 
 ver and explain the Letters. Secondly, to fhew whole; 
 the Head is. Thirdly, to add a Word of the Age of 
 the Jewel. And fourthly, of the Ufe for which it was 
 originally defigned. 
 
 Firft then, this Jewel is chafed and repaired ; for that 
 Side which is placed for the Reverfe in Mr. JVifes Type 
 (which I make Ufe of here, as efteeming it to be the 
 moft accurate) is the Intaglia, or concave Side, and the 
 Obverfe is the Convex. But the Workman very 
 thoughtlefly (a Fault too frequent in thofe rude and 
 early Times) wrought the Letters of his Draught or Pat- 
 tern the right End upwards on the Concave Side, by 
 which Means all of them but one, namely, the G, are 
 inverted on the other. The Margin, which confifts only 
 of Ornaments, feems to be entirely emboffed, or the 
 Work of the Chiffel, there being no Appearance of it 
 on the other Side. The Letters, then, on the Convex 
 Side, where they are the faireft, are EGOVSU, all 
 which, except^ the G, being, as I faid, inverted, when 
 they are made to (land upright, are EGOA?>Q, which 
 I interpret Ego Alpha et Omega; the A wanting the crofs 
 Stroke, as is very common on the Coins, and the reverfed 
 S.(?) being an ufiial Abbreviation of et. Mr. Thwaites 
 calls this the little CharaEler f£, but I do not know why, 
 
 F iince 
 
34 DISSERTATION IV. 
 
 fince it is of the Size of the Letters. This Chara&er he 
 deduces from the Anglo-Saxon q or 1, which is certainly 
 very unnatural, if it is to ftand that Way he gives it ; but 
 if it be reverfed, as is alledged above, then it may poflibly 
 be that Anglo-Saxon Character rounded at the Corners, 
 or rather that other Mark E, which he gives us, Page 
 182, fo rounded ; and it is certain, that upon the En- 
 glish Coins, both Gold and Silver, from Edward III. to 
 Edward VI. inclurlve, the ^ or et generally ftands that 
 Way. Mr. Tfawaites alfo overlooks two of the Letters, . 
 the firft and third, and takes the G for a C ; but it is 
 evidently a G in Mr. Wife's Plate, and the other Letters, 
 E, G, O, are very conspicuous upon the Jewel on the 
 Obverfe or convex Side ; and I cannot but wonder he 
 mould mifs them ; and much more that Mr. Wife mould 
 difpute the Existence both of them and the reft of the 
 Letters, which I think muft be undoubted to every body 
 elfe. Thefe, now, are all the Letters and Characters I can 
 perceive, the Strokes or right Lines, that precede the E, 
 being intended for another Purpofe, as wilL appear, 
 hereafter. 
 
 The Head, therefore, in the fecond Place, is not an 
 Angel's, or the Blejfed Virgin j, or other holy Woman 'j, , 
 as has been fuppofed, but our bleffed Saviour's. The. 
 Legend plainly alludes to Rev. i. 8. Ego fum a et w (1) ;• 
 and you may obferve the Crofs placed before his Face, 
 and Rays of Glory (which at firft Sight fome might take, 
 
 , (1) I think it very probable* that the Word fum was wanting in that 
 Copy of the Latin Vulgate which the Defigner of this Jewel made Ufe of. 
 But at prefent I have no Opportunity of examining how the feveral Copies 
 of that Verfion ftand,. in Relation to this Text. . 
 
DISSERTATION IV. 35 
 
 for Letters) ifluing from the Drefs or Ornament of his 
 Head ; for what Mr. Thwaites above calls a triple Crown, 
 is nothing elfe but an antique Head-drefs, fomething 
 like what we have on the Coins of Burgred King of 
 Mercia, in whofe Territory the Jewel was found. See 
 Sir Andr. Fount aines Tab. iii. Burgred, N° 17- — 23. 
 
 I would willingly, therefore, thirdly, refer the Piece 
 to the Mercian Kingdom, the G being of a Form fome- 
 times ufed in that Country, [See the foregoing Diiler- 
 tation on the Coin of Archbifhop Wulflan\ and to 
 the Reign of King Burgred, who was living when 
 King JElfred came to the Crown, and flourifhed in the 
 Middle of the Ninth Century. But if any Gentleman, 
 on Account of the Infcription A?n, would chufe to 
 place it an Hundred Years later, when the Allufion to 
 that apocalyptical Defcription of our Saviour was much 
 in Vogue, namely, in the Reign of Ethelred II, as ap- 
 pears from his Money in Sir Andr. Fountaines flrft Plate, 
 I will not greatly conteft it with him. In either Cafe, 
 the Jewel will be older than Edward the ConfeJJor, and 
 can have no Relation to him, or his pretended Cures. 
 However, it mould be remembered, on the other Side, 
 that in the Franco-Gallic Series, the A and O appears 
 fooner than the Time of Kenred King of Northumber- 
 land {1). It is obfervable, that there are certain Holes in 
 it for a Silken String or fmall Ribban to pafs through ; 
 and therefore I think it highly probable, in the laft Place, 
 that it was intended to be worn about the Neck, either 
 by way of Ornament, or perhaps as an Amulet, or 
 Charm, according to the Conjecture of Mr, Thorejby^ 
 
 (1) Le Blanc, p. 14. 
 
 F 2 And 
 
36 DISSERTATION IV. 
 
 And this, I think, much more likely than the Notion* 
 of Mr. Wife (who fancies it might be intended for the 
 Bofs or Ornament of a Book, or fome other Piece of 
 houfhold Furniture) by Reafon that the laid Holes are 
 placed near together, and not oppofite to one another in 
 different Parts of the Margin or Border, which furely 
 they would have been, had the Jewel been intended to 
 have been fattened to any other Subftance. 
 
 ^ucere, Whether this be not the oldeft Piece of chafed 
 Work at this Day any where extant. 
 
 V. Second* 
 
[37l 
 
 V. 
 
 Second Thoughts on Lord Pembroke's Coin j 
 
 In a Letter to Mr. Joseph Ames. 
 
 S I R, 
 
 YOU remember that in the Year 1751 I wrote a 
 Letter to Mr. Folkes, concerning a curious Gold 
 Penny of LordPemkrokes, which I perceive has been 
 perufed by many others of my Brother Antiquaries, as well 
 as yourfelf. But fince then, and indeed fince the preceding 
 Diflertations, with the Preface prefixed, were dif- 
 patched, to London for the Prefs, I have had the Plea- 
 sure" of infpe&ing, , by the Favour of our common Friend^ 
 Mr. White, a Couple of Sticas, which have occafioned 
 me to alter my Sentiments on that Coin. This, Sir, I 
 am never afhamed to do upon valid and fufficient Rea- 
 fons ; and what the Reafons are that have induced me to 
 do it in this Cafe, I here beg Leave to declare in what 
 follows— And this Method I take of giving the World 
 my fecond Thoughts, rather than to fupprefs or interpolate 
 the Letter ; becaufe, as I obferved, it has been feen by 
 fb many ; and that though I mall now appropriate the 
 Coin to a different Prelate, the Letter, in the moft ma- 
 terial Parts, will not be affected,, and wherever it is,. I 
 propofe to fpecify below. 
 
 Now, Sir, one of Mr. White s Sticas is in moft exqui- 
 site Prefervation ; and this ftill remains in the Cuflody 
 of that Gentleman, who has permitted- it to be en- 
 graved *. 
 
 * See the Plate, N 6 £. 
 
 The: 
 
2$ SECOND THOUGHTS ON 
 
 The other, which now by his Bounty enobles my {len- 
 der Cabinet, is in good Order in every other Refpeci 
 but the Prelate's Title., which unhappily is but too much 
 .defaced. 
 
 The Infcription of the firft, which fingly is fufficient 
 for our prefent Purpofe, is, $4 VIGMVND AF E-P ; 
 Reverfe, ►£ EoENRED. The Legend on the other Coin 
 is the fame on both Sides, only, as I faid, the E-P are 
 fomewhat obliterated ; for that the third Letter in the 
 Style is a E, and not an E, will appear evidently to any 
 one that compares it with the two E's on the Reverfe. 
 
 You will be fenfible, Sir, that ARC-P can ftand for 
 nothing but Archiepifcopus, of which Word thofe Letters 
 are a natural Abbreviation ; efpeciallyif it be confidered, 
 that the third Letter with the fhort Line or Dot after it, 
 and placed jufl in the Middle of it, was intended both 
 for a E and for an E, as was common in thefe Times. 
 And whereas we now, according to the Truth of the 
 Etymology, do infert an H and an I in this Latin Name, 
 that was not the Cuftom anciently ; for you have upon 
 ;the Coins AREEPI^ for Archiepifcopus. See Sir Andr. 
 Fount aines Tab. iii. Ceolnoth, N° 2. As in the Saxon 
 Chronicle, ajicek for the Englim Word, Archbijhop. 
 
 Thefe Sticas, then, muft belong to Wigmund, the 
 .twelfth Archbifhop of York, who fat in that See from the 
 Year 831 to A. D. 854. For though both Matthew of 
 Weftminjler (1), and William of Malmjbury (2), agree 
 in calling him Wimund, yet I prefume it is by Accom- 
 
 (i)Matth. Wejlmon. Ann. S3 1. 854. 
 (2) Gul. Malntjb. p. 2.6$. 
 
 modation 
 
LORD PEMBROKE'S COIN. 39 
 
 modation to the Pronunciation of their own Times, and 
 that otherwife the true and ancient Orthography was 
 Wigmund) or Vigmund^ a Name not infrequent among , 
 the Saxons (3). Whereupon I would obferve, that Malmf- 
 bury, in another Place, to wit, p. 291. writes the Name 
 Guimund-, ftill more conformably to the Norman Man- 
 ner, for that Guimundy and Wimund, and Vigmund^ are 
 the fame Name, there remains no Doubt with me. How- 
 ever;, for the Sake of others, I will proceed fo far as to 
 remark, that the Mercian King, Wiglaf^ a Cotemporary 
 of our Prelate's, and whofe Name is fo given both on 
 the Coins (4), and in the Saxon Chronicle (5), as likewife 
 "in Florence of Worcefier (6), and Ralph Higden (7), is- 
 called by Matthew of Weftminfler (8), and William of 
 Malmjbury (9), and Henry of Huntingdon (10), TVilaf\ 
 infomuch that it feems to have been the conftant Method 
 of thefe later Hifiorians to foften thefe old Names by 
 leaving out the rough Letter G. But the Name is - 
 clearly written. Vigmund, on two Sticas in Sir Andrew 
 Fount aines x th Table, and there given to Anlaf, the Da- 
 nip King of Northumberland. For, Sir, I muft be of 
 Opinion, that thofe two Sticas .do both of them apper- 
 tain to this Prelate, the Obverfes there being put for the 
 
 (3) Wilkin? s Councils, Tom. i. p. 179.^5. 167, 168. 
 
 (4) Sir A. Fountaine, Tab. ix. 
 
 (5) Chron. Sax. p. 71. 
 
 (6-) Florentius Vigorn. paffim. 
 
 (7 ) Polychronicon, p. 254. Edit. Gale. 
 
 (8) Matth.Weftm. ^. 154. 157. 
 
 (9) Gul. Malmf. p. 345. 
 
 (10) Hen. Huntingdon, p. 346. 
 
 Reverfesj 
 
40 SECOND THOUGHTS ON 
 
 Reverfes, and, vice verfa, and Hunlaf, the Name of the 
 Mint-mafter, being taken for the Name of the Prince. 
 All this, Sir, I take to be very plain from the Legend of 
 the firft of thefe Coins, * VIGMVND VR, where the 
 two laft Letters (the laft Stroke of A coalefcing with the 
 upright Stroke of the R) . ftand for Archiepifcopus ; for if 
 this firft of thofe two Sticas be rightly interpreted, as I 
 dare fay you will think it "is, there will be no Doubt of 
 the other; and then all the Difference between thefe, 
 and our Sticas, will be^ that they were ftruck by two 
 different Mailers. 
 
 Supposing then, that thefe four Sticas, or, if you will, 
 our two Sticas only, are the Property of Archbifhop 
 Wigmund, is it not probable that Lord Pembroke s Gold 
 Penny belongs to the fame Prelate ? The Letters are 
 certainly fufKciently fimilar. And more than this, have 
 we not fome Reafon to fufpecl:, that the Letters on my 
 Lord's Coin, JVREP, have been mifread for A^XL'Y ? 
 But this, Sir, I can only put as a Query, of which 
 I muft leave the Decifion to thofe who hereafter 
 jasay have an Opportunity of viewing the -Coin more 
 accurately. 
 
 And now, Sir, let us fee what EfFe6b this new Appro- 
 priation of my Lord's Coin will have upon the Letter 
 formerly written about it to Mr. Folkes. And this truly 
 in the main will be very little or nothing. For firft, the 
 Coin ftill remains abjudicated from the Mercian Prince. 
 Secondly, it ftill proves to "be. a Coin of the, Northum- 
 brian Kingdom, as alfo of the Prelatical Series. Thirdly, 
 it was ftill coined probably in Imitation of the Sol d'Or 
 q{ Ludovicus Pius, who was Cotemporary with Arch- 
 bifhop 
 
LORD PEMBROKE'S COIN. 41 
 
 bifhop Wigmund) though not on that Occafion con- 
 jectured in the Letter. And fourthly, and laftly, it ftill 
 continues to be a ftrong Proof, that the Anglo-Saxons 
 had amongft them fome coined Gold. But in relation 
 to this Particular, it may be proper for me to note, that 
 whereas I have infinuated, in the third of the foregoing 
 DifTertations, that it might be in the Tenth Century 
 that the Saxons began to (lamp Gold, it appears now 
 that they began in the Ninth. 
 
 In the Letter to Mr. Folkes, I havealfo faid, " that my 
 " Lord's Coin was exquifite both as to the Type and 
 " Size, the Metal and Owner of it : In moft of which 
 " Particulars it is indeed an Unic-" and this was truly 
 the Cafe at that Time ; but it feems it is no longer fuch. 
 either in refpecl: of the Metal or the Owner, fince Mr.. 
 Simpforis Gold Penny, and, in my Opinion, others, will- 
 rank with it in Point of Metal ; and then as to the 
 Owner, it has been found now, at length, that we have 
 two, if not four Sticas of the fame Prelate. But, how 
 widely do the Sticas and the Gold Penny differ ? which 
 fhews what little Foundation there is for our Friend 
 Mr. North's Remark, " That the Coins of all Nations 
 " in Gold and Silver bear a Refemblance to each other." 
 For certainly there is as much Reafon for Gold and 
 Copper to be alike, as Gold and Silver, and yet nothing 
 can well be more diilimilar, as to the Type in general,, 
 than my Lord's Piece and the Sticas. 
 
 I will only trouble you with one Particular more ; 
 I have faid, in the foregoing Preface, that there are very 
 few Saxon Coins that want the Name of the Mint-mafter ; 
 but if Wigmund be the Name of the Prelate, as is here 
 
 G fuppofedj, 
 
42 SECOND THOUGHTS, etc. 
 fuppofed, this Coin of my Lord's will be another In- 
 stance. But then, Sir, the Obfervation will not be 
 greatly invalidated by that, iince there are fo few Exam- 
 ples of it, even with this Coin of my Lord's included. 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 
 Your moft obedient, 
 Humble Servant, 
 
 Whittington, 08. 
 *5> ^SS- 
 
 Samuel Pegge. 
 
 I N I S. 
 
 Lately publijhed, by J. Whiston andB. White, 
 
 In one Volume, Royal Quarto, 
 
 (Price Eighteen Shillings neatly bound) 
 
 I. TABLES of Ancient COINS, WEIGHTS, and MEASURES, 
 explained and exemplified in feveral Differtations. By John Arbuth- 
 not, M. D. Fellow of the Royal Society and of the College of Phyficians. 
 To which is added, An Appendix, containing Obfervations on Dr. Ar- 
 buthnot's Differtations on Coins, Weights, and Meafures. By Benjamin 
 Langwith, D. D. 
 
 II. A DISSERTATION upon ORIUNA, faid to be Emprefs, or 
 Queen of England, the fuppofed Wife. of CAR AUSIUS, Monarch and 
 Emperor of Britain, who reigned in the Time of Diocletian, the great 
 Perfecutor of Chriftians ; whom he was at War with for many Years, 
 until received as Collegue with him in the Roman Empire. Iliuftrated 
 with the Coin of ORIUNA, and feveral others moft remarkable of CA- 
 RAUSIUS, hitherto not made public •, this Coin of her's being lately 
 fent to France to his Moft Chriftian Majefty. Price 2 s. 6 d. few'd.