Civil War 'A' mint discussion

[Rob 3,152]

Background info

The coins from Charles I's 'A' mint are currrently attributed to Ashby de la Zouch in Leicestershire as a result of research done by the late George Boon, based primarily on the use of a Bristol halfcrown die which was subsequently used at both 'A' & 'B' mints with the A mark overcut on the BR mongram and the use of other dies of Bristol origin. He argued that following the fall of Bristol in September 1645 to the Roundheads the garrison marched out of the city and headed for the Royalist capital of Oxford with their belongings unsearched, amongst which was this halfcrown die. According to historical records, Ashby was reinforced from Oxford on the 24th September and held out until 28th February 1645 (os). Following the fall of Ashby, the garrison then marched to Bridgnorth which fell on 26th April 1646. Boon argued that the most logical fit for A & B mints were Ashby and Bridgnorth based on the circumstantial evidence that mint workers and their dies accompanied these reinforcements and if the letters actually meant anything, then these two locations were the most plausible fit if the letters actually represented a fixed location.

Discussion

The important A over BR halfcrown obverse die provides the link between Bristol and 'A'. That this die was subsequently used at 'B' clearly indicates a degree of continuity between the various locations. The use of the Bristol style declaration with REL PROT / LE AN LI PA in two lines also indicates links to engravers with Bristol roots. It is reasonable to assume that A & B do in fact refer to locations beginning with these letters because of the use at other locations of letters e.g.BR Bristol, W Worcester, EX Exeter, OX Oxford and CHST at Chester etc. All 'A' halfcrowns use this die whereas the reverses for the halfcrown include dies where A is struck over BR together with one where A is not overstruck and one where there is no A. The Bristol die was further recut with a plumelet over the A below the horse at 'B' mint where additionally a die is found with plumelet not over A.

Considering the documented timings for the fall of Ashby and Bridgnorth, I think there is a breakdown in the logic based on the evidence of the coins. 'B' mint has a large number of dies for what can only be a minimal length of time to produce them. 'B' employed at least 3 halfcrown obverses, 5 reverses; shillings 2 obverses & 3 reverses; sixpences 2 of each; groats 1 obverse and 2 reverses; threepences 1 of each; half groat 1 of each. This is a large number of dies for what can be no more than one month to make and produce. 'B' mint coins are relatively common, though 'A' mint coins are decidedly rare. If the garrison marched out of Ashby unchecked (as assumed by Boon for Bristol in September 1645) and went to Bridgnorth, then it would be reasonable to expect that the dies used at 'B' would include a considerable number of 'A' dies recut for use at 'B', but the only one is the halfcrown obverse. Furthermore, the style of the reverses changes at 'B' whereby the top line above the declaration is replaced by a scroll, though the Bristol style declaration is retained. I think it is inconceivable that the Bristol mint workers would change their habits and make a radically different reverse design in the month available. The scroll to me has all the hallmarks of Rawlins influence, though the retention of REL PROT/LE AN LI PA is not of his character. Therefore I would postulate that the dies were produced at Oxford in advance with a view to sending them to Bridgnorth (if it is Bridgnorth) prior to the movement of the Ashby garrison, but made by workers formerly at Bristol. This is supported by the view that Bridgnorth was expected to hold out for a considerable length of time. But, if the Bristol mint workers went from there to Oxford and to Ashby almost straight away, they couldn't be in Oxford if the B mint dies were made there. The use of the Bristol halfcrown obverse die suggests that there should be some continuity of movement, but the plethora of 'B' dies is contrary to this.

'A' mint shillings use a bust of Bristol style and the plumes above the declaration are of the crude Bristol style also. One 'B' mint shilling die was a Bristol die in earlier times.

We therefore have a number of dies which are not found at A but which subsequently turn up at B. We have no dies with B over A clearly overstruck, though one halfcrown may possibly be so (the mark is right on the edge of the flan). Why?

The find spots for 'A' mint coins are mostly in Wales and on the welsh border with a terminal date of 1646 or just possibly late 1645(os). This doesn't exclude Ashby, though none have been found in this area.

The metrology indicates that the silver is finer than .925 and so the source could well be ducatoons which were .950 fine.

In a discussion with Edward Besly from the NMW at Cardiff who used to work with George Boon I speculated that 'A' may have been an alternative location. I suggested Abergavenny as a possibility because Charles I was there and at Raglan from 3rd July-2nd August with a view to raising an army from Wales. This would require coin to pay the recruits and so I suggested that the 'A' mint could possibly have been Abergavenny which was easily reached from Bristol in a day by crossing the Severn and travelling up the river Usk, and could be supplied with dies and men from Bushell's mint at Bristol. Charles I left the area on 2nd August to head up to Chester and meet the Scottish reinforcements heading south. This date would allow the Bristol workers to return to the city and their dies to leave with them for Oxford on 11th September or soon afterwards. He pooh-poohed the idea not unreasonably on the grounds that there was no evidence to back it up, but in my mind the case for Ashby is equally suspect given the lack of overmarks where they would be expected and the design changes for B compared to A.

Food for thought. All input welcome.

Edited December 22, 2010 by Rob

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

I'd love to be able to make a meaningful contribution Rob, but I can't really. The only literature that I have is Brooker, Schneider and Nelson's work on the Obsidional issues.

I'd like to chuck Blandford and Bridgewater into the pot, as they were both important west country Royalist garrisons. The only other contribution I can make is one of context, Charles knew he was beaten in 1645 after Naseby, reading Ashley I came across this reply from Charles to Rupert who had counselled peace talks;

"If I had any other quarrel but the defence of my religion, crown and friends, you had full reason for your advice; for I confess that, speaking as a mere soldier or statesman, I must say there is no probability but my ruin; yet, as a Christian, I must tell you that God will not suffer rebels and traitors to prosper, nor this cause to be overthrown..."

Looking at the detailed breakdowns in Nelson of who contributed what plate, I'd also like to put forward the possibility that not all the mint marks represent places and that some might represent the contributor ?

It's a fascinating period in our history, really it's the English revolution.

Sorry I can't weigh in with a heavier numismatic contribution.

[Rob 3,152]

Anyone can make a contribution. As there is no documentary evidence to suggest coining took place at any of Ashby, Bridgnorth or Abergavenny we are all potentially talking b******t. I'm trying to get people to expand their minds a little instead of taking everything that is written down to be gospel. Documentary evidence of the period is incredibly sparse, so if you want an even more nebulous topic, we can discuss the Worcester/Salopia and Welsh Marches mints.

Bridgwater can be discounted on the grounds that it fell before Bristol and so was out of the equation by 1646. Blandford I'm not sure about, but suspect it must have been about the same time. There isn't any evidence for individual contributors of plate having their names applied. The plate was offered for use by the king and a receipt given indicating weight and value, so there would be no reason to mark coins struck in the name of the monarch additionally with the initial of the contributor. The unambiguous nature of EX, BR and OX in particular suggests that the letters indicate a location and if anyone was to be recognised for their contribution it would surely be the Oxford colleges who contributed a vast amount of plate for the cause, but there is no evidence to support any marking.

A & B have also been variously attributed to Appledore, Coome Martin and Lundy or with the possibility that B stood for Bushell, but I think that argument can be discounted because although Bushell moved to Lundy following the fall of Bristol, he made no claim for setting up a mint there after the war. As he claimed for the provision of various supplies including those provided at Bristol, an element for Lundy could be reasonably expected if expenses were incurred. The argument against any mint in Devon is that the commission for Devon & Cornwall was held by Sir Richard Vyvyan at Exeter, though with the caveat that he was gaoled by the Governor of Exeter sometime later in 1645 for speaking civily about the New Model Army and remained incarcerated until Exeter fell to Parliament on 13th April 1646. Coombe Martin can be disregarded because the local silver mines were unworkable by this time. Although Bushell was on Lundy and had various arrangements to facilitate trade whilst garrisoning the island, the lack of connection between most of the A & B mint dies is completely incompatible with him striking coins in Appledore and then Lundy. This sequence of events would have resulted in a very closely linked set of dies in my opinion. B standing for Bushell is fanciful. The terms of his indenture required him to mark his dies with a plume, such as that found on his attested output from Aberystwyth, Shrewsbury and Bristol.

The metrology is interesting as any silver of higher fineness than required must almost certainly have come from pieces of eight or ducatoons with fineness of around 0.940-950. This would suggest a supply from an area close to a port where international trade prevailed. Ashby is about as far from the coast as is possible in this country.