Maundy Sets

[azda 979]

I was thumbing Spink and Esc and noticed that there was no Maundy sets issued from 1713 to 1722 and then issued one in 1723 yet they issued the 4d in 1717 and 21,23 and 27 the 3d in 1717,21,23 and 1727 the 2d in those same years but added 1726 but in 1717 the didn't issue a 1d but did in 1716 and 1718, any reason behind this curious staggered mint issues?

Curious about the 1d though and why nothing in 1717, i thought with poorer peeps on the UK in those times that it would have been a common denomination?

[Gary D 76]

I was thumbing Spink and Esc and noticed that there was no Maundy sets issued from 1713 to 1722 and then issued one in 1723 yet they issued the 4d in 1717 and 21,23 and 27 the 3d in 1717,21,23 and 1727 the 2d in those same years but added 1726 but in 1717 the didn't issue a 1d but did in 1716 and 1718, any reason behind this curious staggered mint issues?

Curious about the 1d though and why nothing in 1717, i thought with poorer peeps on the UK in those times that it would have been a common denomination?

I would have thought the poorer peep were using copper not silver. I've always considered the name "Maundy set" a misnomer. The 1d 2d 3d and 4d were coins of the realm that were just bundled up and given away by the monarch on Maundy Tuesday. They weren't sets of 4 coins, just the number of coins needed to make made up the appropiate sum for that years ceremony. It would be rare for any years coins to divide up nicely into sets of four, there would more often than not be spares. I believe the nice little boxes we see were sold seperatly for anyone who wanted to make them up into sets. I suspect that in the early years whilst the coins were legal currency most got spent anyway.

Just my thoughts

Gary

[Red Riley 2]

I would have thought the poorer peep were using copper not silver. I've always considered the name "Maundy set" a misnomer. The 1d 2d 3d and 4d were coins of the realm that were just bundled up and given away by the monarch on Maundy Tuesday. They weren't sets of 4 coins, just the number of coins needed to make made up the appropiate sum for that years ceremony. It would be rare for any years coins to divide up nicely into sets of four, there would more often than not be spares. I believe the nice little boxes we see were sold seperatly for anyone who wanted to make them up into sets. I suspect that in the early years whilst the coins were legal currency most got spent anyway.

Just my thoughts

Gary

Yes, pretty much what I'd heard. Although the history of maundy sets seems to be a little bit clouded in mist, if you took maundy money as we know it to be an early 19th century invention you wouldn't be far wrong. Many so-called maundy coins are immensely common and far exceeded the numbers required for the ceremony; 1763 3d pieces are amongst the most common coins of George III's reign and turn up quite regularly.

[azda 979]

I would have thought the poorer peep were using copper not silver. I've always considered the name "Maundy set" a misnomer. The 1d 2d 3d and 4d were coins of the realm that were just bundled up and given away by the monarch on Maundy Tuesday. They weren't sets of 4 coins, just the number of coins needed to make made up the appropiate sum for that years ceremony. It would be rare for any years coins to divide up nicely into sets of four, there would more often than not be spares. I believe the nice little boxes we see were sold seperatly for anyone who wanted to make them up into sets. I suspect that in the early years whilst the coins were legal currency most got spent anyway.

Just my thoughts

Gary

Yes, pretty much what I'd heard. Although the history of maundy sets seems to be a little bit clouded in mist, if you took maundy money as we know it to be an early 19th century invention you wouldn't be far wrong. Many so-called maundy coins are immensely common and far exceeded the numbers required for the ceremony; 1763 3d pieces are amongst the most common coins of George III's reign and turn up quite regularly.

Just bought a few odds and sods of Maundy money, 1746 3d 6 over 3..1746 2d AUNC 6 over 0 appears to be unlisted 1743 2d AUNC 3 over 0 and a 1670 1d EF 70 over 69, so will wait and see

[scott 144]

maundy is usualy way out of my league

only maundy i own, the mass kintage might explain why one of the I in III looks recut

Edited November 2, 2010 by scott

[Peckris2 0]

maundy is usualy way out of my league

only maundy i own, the mass kintage might explain why one of the I in III looks recut

"mass kintage"? Surely, you meant "kass mintage"? :D