Immobilized 930 - 980
details below
The Birth of French Feudal Coinage in the 10th Century
La Naissance des Monnaies Féodales dans le Dixième Siècle
Main Home Page
Any coins currently owned are kept in a safe deposit box (DW)
In the 9th century coinage in France was strictly controlled by the royal issuers. Louis the Pious went through several coinage types and ended up with his extensive XPISTIANA RELIGIO series which was largely uniform and hard to attribute to individual mints. Charles the Bald likewise had several distinct types and controlled his later coinage by the Edict of Pitres. While many other mints soon joined in producing his GRATIA D-I REX coinage it remained largely uniform and under royal control.
After his death in 877 the Carolingians ran into a series of succession problems and short lived rulers. As a result the Carolingian empire began to unravel. (See the Carolingian Decade Horribilis.) While Carolingian influence lasted into the 10thcentury, rulers such as Charles III and Louis IV were significantly weaker than their 9th century counterparts and their writ did not cover as extensive a territory as did their predecessors.
William II of
Brioude (918 - 926) and his successors
Immobilized 930 - 980
For a larger image click here
AR denier, 21mm, 1.2gr. Obv: +ULELMO COMS, central cross, Rev: +BRIUVCES::, central cross. Mint is Brioude. R4062; Boud 371v; PdA 2218v (XLVIII-22 for a similar coin) ; Fecamp 8491 - 8510; Dup 817. There are many variations of this coin. This is a very early feudal coin. Dumas (257) observes "Le monnayage de Brioude au nom de Guillaume est l'un des premiers monnayages independants de Francie occidentale." She notes it starts early in the 10th century and continues through the century. This coin is at the heavy range of the 30 coins she catalogues in the Fecamp hoard. She argues that the larger flan (21 - 23mm) is a later rather than earlier coin. Regardless, this type represents the earliest of French feudal coinage. According to Depeyrot Brioude was never a royal mint. It is unusual in that it started out as a feudal mint, reflecting both the absence of strong royal control and the need for a local coinage.
William Sanche, Comte
de Bordeaux (977-997)
For a larger image click here
AR denier, 20mm, 1.19gr. Obv: SANCHIVS, central cross. Rev: BVDEGAL, central degenerate monogram. Mint is Bordeaux. R4053; Boud 456 (10 as the rarity estimate) as AR; PdA 2711-13 as billon; Dep 1006. This coinage dates from the 2nd half of the 10th century and continued into the 11th century. Bordeaux apparently fell out of use as a royal mint after the death of Charles the Bald until it was revived by Lothaire (954-986) and Louis V (986-7). After that it became a feudal mint.
Bernard William, Duc de Aquitaine (984-1010)
For a larger image click here
Bill. denier, 21mm, 1.11gr. Obv:
+GIVILIIMO, four central crosses. Rev: +BVRDEGIILA, central cross. Mint
is Bordeaux. R4303v as BW; Boud 464 (as William X and common. He cites
nothing close under BW); PdA 2735 as BW (closest match to legend); Dup
1020v (as William IX and X). Size (21mm) argues
for BW whose coins are larger than William IX and X (16mm). Depeyrot (221) cites an obol of Bernard William but no denier.
AR denier, 21mm, 1.29gr. Obv: +MISERICORDIA D, central monogram. Rev: +TVRONES CIVITAS, central cross. Mint is Tours. Dep 1045 (DEI) as Robert I (no examples studied). PdA 1616 as Robert or Eudes. Gariel XLVIII 3-5 as Robert. Not in R. MEC says Robert did not have coinage, as does Prou (XXIII “n’a pas laisse de monnaies.”) Gariel notes that the monogram is Robert's, altered from Eudes. Below is a comparison of two Tours monograms (Eudes to the left, Robert to the right). In favor of Gariel is the fact that the Robert coin has a distinct RO, in contrast to the PO of the Eudes coin below. The attribution is uncertain but there is evidence that supports the case that this coin was minted by Robert. From Depeyrot, Tours was a royal mint up to Eudes. MG notes that Charles the Simple (898-923) also had Tours coinage. Robert would have picked up minting after Charles' death and his coinage is an early feudal coinage from the north.
*
AR denier, 21mm, 1.155g. Obv: RICARDVS, central + with four besants. Rev: ROTOMACVS, with 'C' on its side, central temple avec besant au center du fronton. Mint is Rouen. Dumas 773-2669. There were 46 of these coins in the 1.15 weight category, of a total of 332 of all Richard types in this weight category. This is the most common of the Fecamp coins. This was identified as 'ex Fecamp.' Not in R, PdA. Rouen has an early history as a royal mint, producing coins for Charlemagne, Louis the Pious and Charles the Bald. It then fell out of use as a royal mint until it was briefly revived by Louis IV (936-54). Before Louis IV Meyhew (33) notes that Rouen was used by Guillaume Longue-Epee (Long Sword) for the first Norman feudal coinage. After Louis IV it was used by both Richard I and Archbishop Hugues.
AR denier, 20mm, 1.15gr. Obv: RICARDVS, central cross with four besants. Rev: ROTOMANAaVS, central Carolingian inspired monogram, formed from G, T, H. Dumas 4147-6047. Mint is Rouen. The difference between the coins of Richard and Hugues issued in Richard's name is the fact that Richard generally has a temple in the reverse field while Hugues has a Carolingian style monogram in the reverse field. A common Fecamp coin, with about 90 found in this weight.
These two coins represent a significant development in French history. From Bates (p28-9) ".. The fact that these coins were produced demonstrates (Norman) integration into the Frankish environment: the right to control the minting of money, once a monopoly of earlier Carolingian emperors and kings was in the process of passing to territorial princes and others lower on the social scale during the tenth century." It is part of the marking of the end of Carolingian control and part of the onset of a rich profusion of feudal coinage lasting until the final emergence of modern France centuries hence. This coinage from Rouen was very much in a Carolingian style, reflecting Norman connectedness with west Francia.
Bishops of Le Puy
10th century
For a larger image click here
AR denier, 22mm, 1.05gr. Obv: SCE
MARIAE, central six armed cross. Rev: +MONETA, central cross.
Mint is
Le Puy, c 950-980. Illegible legends. R-; Dup 837; Boud
372; Dep 795; Dumas 8522-42,
several varieties. Dumas dates these types from c 970. PdA
2224-28 calls this coin a 'remarquable denier, qui appartient a la fin
du X siecle." This coin is from an ecclesiastical mint. Raoul granted
the first royal concession to mint in Le Puy in 924, affirmed by
Lothaire in 955.
While Lothaire affirmed Le Puy's minting rights, he did not have
coinage from here. The only royal coinage was from Raoul (926-36).
Meyhew (21) uses this coin as an example of the erosion of royal
control ("inexorably but informally"). While Raoul granted the royal
minting concession to the bishops, "it was only in the second half of
the century that Raoul's name was replaced by that of Sancte Marie on
the coinage and the distinctive six armed cross appeared." Le Puy
became an ecclesiastical mint.
Abbey of St. Martin of
Tours
Late 10th, early 11th centuries
For a larger image click here
AR denier, 21mm, 1.2gr. Obv: +SCS
MARTINVS, central Carolingian style temple. Rev: +TVRONIS CIVITAS, central
cross. Mint is St. Martin de Tours.
This coin dates from the end
of the 10th century to the beginning of the 11th century. R4851; Boud 183; PdA
1622/24 XXXI 3 and 5. Later versions have a more degenerate temple and
end in CIVI. PdA observes "Ces monnaies appartiennent a l'epoque
carolovingienne." Dup 408 extends the type into the 11th century. The city of
Tours was a royal mint up through Eudes. The Abbey of St. Martin
produced royal coinage through Charles the Bald. It then fell out of
royal use until revived as a feudal mint. Dumas (213) does not cite
this type of coinage in Fecamp but notes "Depuis la fin de IXe siecle,
l'abbatiat laique etait entre les mains de la famille du roi Eude qui
... y aurait fait monnayer au type de son ancetre plutot qu'au
monogramme carolin."
AR denier, 20mm, 1.27gr. Obv: SCI
MEDARDI CAPAT, central head right. Rev: Legend unclear, central design.
Mint
is Medard in Soissons. R4962v (10th and 11th centuries); Boud
1900v (CAPVT);
PdA 6513 CLI-24. He writes a long critique of another cataloguer who
said this
was a modern imitation without suggesting a date. Dumas -. Roberts is
the only source that puts this in the 10th century (and into the 11th). Given
the style of the head and comparing it to early similar coins from
Blois, this is quite possible. Similar coins are not in Fecamp. If 10th
century, it is late 10th. The Abbey of St. Medard had a brief history
as a royal mint, only producing coins for Charles the Bald and Carloman
(879-84).
AR denier, 19mm, 1.18gr. Obv: +S MAVRICI, central cross. Rev: +VIENNA, central S. Mint is Vienne. R4027; Dep 1150b (115 examples); Boud 1040; PdA-.
Anonymous Comital Coinage
Billon denier, 21mm, 1.47gr. Obv: +CIPVI+TATIS, central monogram. Rev: +CARCASONA, central cross. Mint is Carcassonne. R4233v (different monogram); PdA 3779v (different monogram) who places this in the 10th century with production into the 11th century; Dup 1513 also as 10th into the 11th century. Dup notes the monogram is a degenerate monogram of Eudes. Not in Boud. or Dumas. Carcassonne had a modest history as a royal mint, producing coins only for Charlemagne and Eudes.
Sens
Late 10th, early 11th centuries
(for a larger image of this coin, click here)
For a larger image click here
AR denier, 22mm, 1.38gr. Obv: +AVTSIOCER
CI (first C retrograde), central cross. Rev: no legend, 3 besants, central
cross. Mint is Auxerre.
R4451; Boud 1730; PdA 5880-82 CXXXVI-1-3; Dumas 6678-6723, pointed
cross, 46 examples. The small point on the arms of the obverse matches
her image 6695. She says the group weighing 1.30 grams is among the
oldest
of this type. Those from Luzy weighed in at 1.6 grams, those from
Fecamp averaged 1.3 grams, those from Chateauneuf sur Cher in the
middle of the 11th century weighed no more than 1.1 grams and by the
12th century the weight declined to .8 grams. It is reasonable to
assume that this is a 10th century coin. If so, these coins were minted
under the authority of Henri, duc
de Bourgogne (961-87) who succeeded his brother Otton in 961. Auxerre
was a royal mint for Charles the Bald, Carloman and Lothaire (954-86).
After that it became a feudal mint. The large number of late 10th
century specimens that is known of this type of coin suggests the mint
was in fairly continuous operation after Lothaire's rule.
AR Denier, image
courtesy of Bill Hyder. Obv: stylized head facing right. Rev:
+BLESIANIS CASTIO, central cross. Dup 572 as between 950 - 970. Dumas
6927-28 with weights .955 and 1.045 grams respectively. Boud 191v; PdA
1677v-1678v XXXII 7. PdA shows many varieties but none match this
legend. Dep 169v. Thibaut le Tricheur was comte de Blois from
922-978.
Charles the Bald
from Tours (immobilized)
(for a larger version of this coin, click
here)
AR denier, 18 mm, .95gr. Obv: GRATIA D-I REX, central KRLS monogram. Rev: TVRONES CIVITAS (?), central cross. Mint is Tours. This 10th century immobilized coin was part of the Fecamp hoard. The Fecamp hoard dates from approximately 980. The coin appears clipped. Dumas 6935+. #6952-53 are listed as .96gr. This would make this coin among the lightest in this subset of coins. This is possibly one of these two coins. The hoard included 1407 immobilized coins from Charles the Bald, most commonly from Quentovic and Mans. There were 31 Charles the Bald Tours mint coins in the hoard. This is one of several Fecamp era coins on the web site. For background on the hoard and to see these Fecamp era coins please visit Fecamp. MG note a denier of Charles III from Tours and Depeyrot indicates there was no later Carolingian era coinage from Tours. It makes sense that immobilizations would go back to the last royal coinage, whether it is Charles the Bald as Dumas indicates or a later Charles. The monogram is similar for both Charles.
Charles the Bald
from Le Mans, likely immobilized by Hugh I (Hugues) Count
of Maine (955-992)
AR denier, 1.48gr., 21mm. Obv: +XERI-DAITAIC, retrograde with central mangled monogram. Rev: +CIHOHANIS CVITAS, central cross. Mint is LeMans. Dumas 8331-8336, 1st series (weights 1.35 - 1.02). Dumas breaks the hoard into two series. The first is earlier and similar to a hoard dating from the 920s. It is characterized by elongated letters and heavier weights. Hugues I was comte de LeMans 955-1015. This coin is significantly heavier than the other Fecamp coins with similar legends. It is also better struck than other LeMans cons. In light of Dumas' comments, I think this coin is earlier than Fecamp. My estimate is circa 940s/950s, based on the continuity of the similar retrograde legend found in Fecamp but higher weight and better condition.
There are a number of other CB immobilized coins from LeMans on the web site. Just one of them will be represented here.
AR denier, 19mm, 1.38gr. Obv: +CRATIA D-I REX, central degenerate Carolingian monogram. Rev: CINONANIS CIVITAS, central cross. Mint is Le Mans. Dumas 7900-8086 ID's 10 of this type at this weight. PdA-; R -.
Based on the number of examples studied by Depeyrot (2181) Charles the Bald had extensive Le Mans coinage. Eudes did not have coinage here but Charles III did. Depeyrot indicates Raoul (923-36) had coinage but cites MG reference 1405, which is a coin of Charles III. MG do not cite any Raoul coinage from LeMans. Gariel LIV 25 cites Raoul coinage likely from LeMans ("LeMans?"). Given the popularity of CB's extensive coinage, and the apparent modesty of any Raoul coinage, immobilizing in the name of a Charles made sense.
Charles the Bald
Quentovic: 10th century immobilized
after 950
For a larger image click here
AR denier, 20mm, 1.19gr. Obv: +---IA D-I REX, central HRLS monogram. Rev illegible but possibly: CVVENTOVVICI, central cross with besants in quadrants 2 and 3. Mint is Quentovic. MEC 998 describes this coin and cites MG 718, which is a denier of Charles le Chauve. Dumas 6051 - 6323 covers many varieties of this coin with ---IA D-I REX. 6085-6099 and 6161-6185 cite an H rather than K in the monogram. By weight this falls in the range for both groups. The first group ranges from 1.3gr to 1.09gr and has an average dimension of 20.5mm. The second group ranges from 1.3 to 1.1 grams and is identified as a large flan coin. The first group is pictured with an annulet and a besant whereas 6172 in the second group is pictured, I think, with two besants, but a smaller cross. Best estimate - from one of these groups after 950. Quentovic is another mint that stopped royal production after Charles III, so immobilization in the style of the Charles' coins is not a surprise.
Charles the Bald
10th
century palace mint immobilized
(for a larger version of this coin, click
here)
AR denier, 21mm, 1.25gr. Obv: +CAL.CIAITEX, central monogram with besants in each quadrant. Rev: +IAIATIHHIoIE, central cross. Immobilized palace mint in the name of Charles the Bald. Palace mint. Dumas 6589-6591. Dumas attributes this to the palace mint but it is hard to assign it to a specific ruler. The coin's monogram is similar to that of Amiens and she suggests it was influenced by that city. She offers several ideas but doesn't subscribe to any of them with certainty. It might be Lothaire, whose coinage often has HLOLARIVS. Or she suggests the monogram might belong to Herbert of Vermandois, although he'd be early for the hoard. Her third suggestion is Herbert II le Vieux, again without enthusiasm. She concludes "Faute d'elements plus precis, nous ne pouvons resoudre les problemes que posent ces pieces." I wonder how with a palace mint attribution it is possible to consider non-royals, unless the mint also did minting for others. I am unclear on this. Regardless, this is a 10th century coin.
Charles the Bald
10th
century Melle
(for a larger version of this coin, click here)
AR denier, 21.5mm, 1.26 gr. Obv:+CVLLSE+E, central cross. Rev: +MET+VLLO (retrograde), central degenerating KRLS monogram. The following discussion is aimed at helping me determine if this is a royal coin in the name of Charles or an immobilized comital coin. There are two tracks to follow. What is the evidence that Charles III had coinage from Melle or Poitiers and did Charles reign or rule in Melle and Poitiers. To cut to the quick, this is a feudal coin. Here’s the reasoning.
MEC (I-544) notes this type of coin was struck by Charles the Bald and immobilized “during the last quarter of the 9th century and continuing possibly down to the middle of the 10th.” The argument continues that the METxVLLO indicates minting at Poitiers rather than at Melle itself. All the coins cited in MEC are CARLVS REX FR and weigh above 1.5 grams. A rougher version of the coin (#940-#961), still METxVLLO, extends into the 10th century, but still only with the fuller obverse legend. They cite no Charles III coinage from Melle/Poitiers. This coin is close to PdA 2377 LII-22, which has E+F ending the obverse legend and weighs 1.49 grams. PdA indicates this series is late 9th century and early 10th century. For the various CARLVS coins in this early feudal period series (2357-2401) his coins almost all weigh more than this coin, by a significant amount. For the 29 coins for which he gives weights, they run 1.8 grams+ (1 coin), 1.6+ (10), 1.5+ (4), 1.4+ (8), and 1.3+ (5). He has one coin (2375) with a large legend variation that weighs only 1.17 grams. PdA refers to this as feudal rather than royal coinage.
Charles the Bald
10th century Melle
(for a larger image of this coin, click here)
AR denier, 21mm, 1.3 gr. Obv: CARLVS REX (with the retrograde ‘S'), central cross. Rev: MET/ALO on two lines. R3861v with the obverse legend REX F. PdA 2414 with a weight of 1.52. He says “Nous voice arrive a un changement radical de type" and dates it: "On doit placer leur emission au commencer de la seconde moite du Xe siècle." This genereal type was immobilized into the 12th century although he places this particular legend in the 10th. Dumas 8381-8421 are the general two line types but none specifically match this legend. For the 41 coins she cites, the weight distribution is 1.4+ grams (7 coins), 1.3+ (12), 1.2+ (13), 1.1+ (8), 1+ (1). She notes the declining weights of the series over time and ties weights with dates. “On constate donc un affaiblissement progressif du poids de denier depuis le milieu de Xe jusqi’a la fin du XIe siècle. Il est passé de 1.50 g vers 950 a 1.30 g environs vers 980-985 pour s’abaisser a pres de 1 g cent ans plus tard.” Based on PdA and Dumas, this coin dates from the second half of the 10th century and is a good sample of a very common type of coinage that remained in production, with declining weights, for another century plus.
In the discussion of the previous Melle coin, we see that it is Eble who introduced the new design. In Tome II Richard (23) notes the relative indifference of the counts of Poitou to the design of their coinage, which explains the long period of immobilization. Talking about Guillaume le Grand (993-1030) he says “Les comtes de Poitou sont peu preoccupies de particulariser leur monnayage qu’il est peu pres impossible de determiner a quell personage appartiennent ces pieces si nombreuses.”
Immobilized by the Vicomtes of Limoges
10th Century
AR denier,
24mm, 1.71gr. Obv: +GRATIA
D-I REX, central O+D+O. Rev: +LIMOVICA CIVIS, central cross. Immobilized Eudes type. Mint is Limoges.
R4322; Boud 388 (rarity 4); PdA
2275 L-13 matches monogram and legend, with weight of 1.52. His 2276
has a weight of 1.7 but the obverse legends ends DE. Dup 844 as end of
the 10th and start of the 11th centuries. Dumas 8458-8462. She cites
five examples with weights between 1.52 and 1.36. In her other
Fecamp coins the high Limoges weight is 1.64. The size of the Fecamp
coins is consistently 22mm. These are large coins by Fecamp standards.
Dumas cites the Cuerdale hoard found in Lancashire England and laid
down between 903 - 910. That hoard included Limoges Eudes' coins weighing
up to
1.81 grams. What makes this immobilized rather than a contemporary coin
of Eudes? After all, by weight it falls clearly in the realm of Eude's
contemporary coins. For example, see MG weights for 1332 - 1333 which
commonly have coins weighing 1.7 grams. Likewise it matches to
contemporary legends. Two factors argue for a later immobilization. The
first is size. At 24 mm this coin is larger than the typical
Carolingian coin and larger than the contemporary Limoges coins (22
mm.) I find. The second factor is the less precise monogram, compared
to other images I've seen. The central D is less clear, as are the
stylized Os. It is very well struck. Eudes' successors - Raoul, Louis
IV and Lothaire did not have their own coinage struck at Limoges. Given
the continuing needs for circulating money, Limoges continued to make
coinage in the style of the last royal coinage they minted. My best sense is that this particular coin is
10th century. Certainly this style
of coinage continued to be minted through the 10th century, as evident
from Cuerdale and Fecamp.
(for a larger version of this coin, click
here)
AR denier, 18mm, .94gr. Obv: +CRATIA D-I REX, Rudolphus monogram of Odo type. Rev: +AVRELIANIS CIVITA, central cross. Mint is Orleans. Dep -; MEC 1003 says 'probably introduced after Raoul's death at mints in the region where Hugh the Great exercise authority - immobilized to the end of the (Xth) century." Dumas 6788 - 6830; Gariel LIV 31v. Depeyrot cites 62 examples of Raoul coinage from Orleans, indicating a reasonable production volume. MG cite Orleans as the mint with the largest variety of Raoul coinage. Given its extensiveness, and the fact that he was the last 10th century royal to produce there, immobilization in his name is not unexpected.
for a larger image click here
AR denier, 21mm,
1.33 gr. Obv: +LODOICVS, central cross, vertical S. Rev: +EGOLISSIME,
small cross, four globes, retrograde Ss. Mint is Angouleme.
MG 1646 legend match but their image shows a retrograde obverse S,
weight cited as 1.68 gr. Dep 50 (six examples) with legend match but no
weights and cites Dumas. Prou -; MEC -; Dup 942 as end of the
10th, first half of the 11th centuries but with a retrograde obverse S.
Boud 445 grand denier with regular obverse S as per this coin. PdA
2644, plate LVII, weight 1.36 grams, dates his coin to the first half
of
the 11th century. The style of the reverse cross places this as 2644,
rather
than the billon grand denier 2646. Dumas 8423 matches this legend
exactly, with a size of 20mm and weight of 1.47gr. The other three
similar but not exact coins Dumas cites weigh 1.4, 1.33 and
1.48 grams. Dumas notes the continuity of this type of coinage by
observing "on ne constate pas de signe d'affaiblissement avant le 11th
siecle." This coin is immobilized in the name of Louis IV. It is
consistent weight-wise with the Fecamp hoard. It is also possible it is
later, in the early 11th century. This specific coin can not be
exactly dated but the exact legend match is consistent with 10th
century coinage. As a royal mint, Angouleme ceased production
after Charlemagne for more than a century. Production was revived by
Raoul and Louis IV. Louis was the last royal to have production here
and immobilization continued the tradition of the most recent coinage.
AR denier, 22mm, 1.45gr. Obv: +LODOICVS, central cross. Rev: +SITCINAS, three central crosses. Mint is Saintes. R - ; Boud 450v; PdA 2704-5 LVIII-10 as the end of the 10th century. PdA cites two of these 10th century coins with weights of 1.57 and 1.52 grams. He also attributes three coins as early 11th century with weights of 1.19, 1.14 and .71 grams respectively. Given the coin's weight of 1.45, I place it with the earlier, 10th century version of the coin. Dup 989 as end of the 10th, start of the 11th. Dumas 8428-8438 cites 11 coins of this type, with weights ranging from 1.41 down to 1.085, with most in the range 1.2 - 1.29. It is interesting to note Fecamp coins with low weights comparable to those PdA places in the early 11th century. While weights overlap, there are differences in legends which influence attribution. The Fecamp coins measured 20.5 - 21mm in diameter. At 1.45 and with a 22mm diameter, this coin is larger and heavier than those from Fecamp. Best estimate for this coin: post Fecamp, pre 1000. Saintes had coinage from Charlemagne and then ceased royal production until the reign of Louis IV. Immobilization continued in the name of the last royal minter.
A Louis
AR denier , 20mm, 1.13gr. Obv: +LVOOVICVS, central cross, bezant in the 1st and 4th quadrants. Rev: legend unclear, central temple over ‘.X.’ Mint unknown. R4889 matches obverse as Louis I of Savoy (1285-1302) but rev. does not match. Does not match R1221-389, blundered and later inscriptions. MG-; Dep-; Prou-; Dumas-; PdA-. Seller references Bulletin de la Societe Francaise de Numismatique 55 (2000) p.13 as late 10th C. This note by Klaus Petry recounts his experience at a numismatic seminar at the University of Saarbruck and the discussion of two enigmatic deniers found near Saarbruck, but in French territory. These were 19mm, 1.32 gr and 20mm 1.15 grs respectively. He was unable to identify these in the literature and asked for help from anyone who might be familiar with the coins. The obverse legend is given as LVDOVICVS without title, different from the LVOO ... without title legend here. The images of the coins are unclear on the copy of the note I've seen. By dimension and weight this is similar to the second of the coins he references, but whether or not these are the same is unclear. By weight, this coin is consistent with 10th C coinage. All of this makes this an interesting coin of indeterminate age (but likely 10th C) and origin.
AR denier, 20mm, 1.20gr. Obv: +IVDOVICVS. central cross, two besants, two small triangles(?). Rev: +IAN(or H)IIEG(or C)O, central temple, besant-X-besant under temple. Seller (Singer) references Bulletin de la Societe Francaise de Numismatique 55 (2000) p.13 as late 10th C. See discussion above.
Lothaire
(954-86)
Anon Bourges:
immobilized 10th - early 11th centuries
For a larger image click here
