mules' in the carolingian series / k.f. morrison

8/9/2019 'Mules' in the Carolingian series / K.F. Morrison

1/12

THE

NUMISMATIC

CHRONICLE

AND

JOURNAL

OF THE

ROYAL

NUMISMATIC

SOCIETY

Edited

by

JOHN

WALKER

M.A.

.LITT.

.B.A.

.S.A.

Keeper

f

CoinsBritish

useum

E.

S. G.

ROBINSON

C.B.E. .A.

.LÍTT.

.B.A.

.S.A.

and

C. H. V. SUTHERLAND

M.A. .LITT.

.S.A.

Keeper

f

Coins

Ashmolean

useum

SEVENTH

SERIES

Volume

PRICEFOURPOUNDS

LONDON

THE

ROYAL

NUMISMATIC SOCIETY

1961

This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Thu, 28 May 2015 17:10:32 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


2/12

©

The

Royal

Numismatic

ociety

961

PRINTED

NGREAT

RITAIN

N

962

AT

HE

NIVERSITY

RESS

XFORD

BY

VIVIAN

IDLER

PRINTER

O

HE

NIVERSITY



3/12

'MULES' IN

THE

CAROLINGI AN

SERIES

Known mules

n

Carolingian

ssues are

very

ew,

nd,

as errors f

mintage,

hey

are

poorly

represented

n

scholarly

writing

nd

in

public

and

private

ollections.

Yet,

in

a series

where

questions

of

attribution

re

largely

till

unresolved,

hese

pieces

are of

great

m-

portance;

presenting

wo

contemporary

bverses

or

two contem-

porary

everses,

hey

re evidence

hat

t

one time nd at one

place

certain iverse ypes orone sideof the oin wereknown nd struck.

I intend o consider

hese

pieces

more

fully

n

a later

essay,

but,

n

the

hope

thata list

of

mules

presently

nown

may

ead to the

dis-

covery

f still

more,

propose

n this

note to

describe

he ones

now

on

record

nd

briefly

o indicate

heirhistorical

ignificance.

The

mules

now known

re

listedbelow:

I.

TwoObverses

1.

+HLVDOVICVSHP

circumscriptional.

ross.

Rev

+

H

LOT

ARJ

WI

P

circumscriptional.

ross.

Denarius.

ran-

çois LeBlanc,Traité istoriquees monnaiese FranceParis, 690),

106,

no. 1.

One

may

lso mention

everal

orgeries

f

related

ypes:

(a)

+LVDOVVICVS*

IMP*

circumscriptional.

emple.

Rev

+

HLOTHARJVSM

circumscriptional.

ross

with ne dot

in eachcorner.

opper

denarius.

10

gr.

CNI

v 15.

(b)

+

HLVODOVVICVSIMP

circumscriptional.

ross.

Rev. H

LOTH ARI

VSI

MP

circumscriptional.

ross. ecker or-

gery.

.

F.

Hill,

Becker he

Counterfeiter,

i

(London,

925),

3,

no.

309,

l.

xvi.

This

piece

ccurs

n theNelson

ollection,

ow he

property

f

the

Liverpool

City

Museums

Inventory

umber

53.114.1857),nd is probably hatreferredo byA. Soetbeer,

'Beiträge

urGeschichte

es

Geld-

und Münzwesens

n

Deutsch-

land:

II,'

Forschungen

ur

deutschen

eschichte

vi

1866),

6.

2.

+LOTHARJVSR.EXIMPE

ircumscriptional.

ross.

+GRATI

AD-IRwEX

ircumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

enarius.

E.

Gariel,

es

Monnaies

oyales

e

France

ous

a

deuxième

ace ii

(Strassburg,

883), l.

ix,

. Cf.

M.

Prou,

es

Monnaies

arolingiennes

(Paris,

896),

ix.

3.

+LVDOVICVHM

circumscriptional.

ross.

+GRATIAD-RE circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

enarius.

Glizy

ind

deposited

.

880)

Gariel

,

106; i,

pl.

xxxvii, .

B

9944

Q



4/12

226 K. F. MORRISON

4.

+CAROVSVED

circumscriptional.

ross.

+

ORATI

AD-RE

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

bolus.

Moulin-Gargot

ind

deposited

.

880-f).

F.

Roger,

Mémoires e la

Société

es

Antiquaires

uCentre

Bourges),

xix

1905),

1-93,

o. 18.

5.

+CAROVSVER

circumscriptional.

ross.

+

ORATI AD-R

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

enarius.

Prou 1082

Gariel

i,

pl.

xli,

37,

this

iece).

6. (a) +CAROLVSRER circumscriptional.ross.

+

ORATI

AD- REX

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

Denarius. rou

1078.

(b)

+CARLVSRER

circumscriptional.

ross.

+ORATIAD-R

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

bolus.

Marsům

ind

deposited

.

880).

P. C.

J.

A.

Boeles,

Les Trouvailles

de monnaies

arolingiennes

ans

les

Bays-Bas',

Jaarboek oor

Munt-

n

Penningkunde

ii

(1915),

6.

Koninklijk enningkabinet

(The

Hague)

nv.

17650,

-50

gr.

7.

+CAROLVSRER

circumscriptional.

ross.

+CRATI AD-IPI circumscriptional.arolus

monogram.

enarius.

Prou

1079.

8.

(a)

+CAROLVSDJ.P.

circumscriptional.

ross.

+C

RATI

AD-

R.

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

Denarius. rou

1081.

{tí)

+

O

ARO

VSRE

R

circumscriptional.

ross.

+CRATIAD-ER

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

Denarius. ariel

i,

pl. xli,

36. Prou

1080.

9. +CAROLV3RE circumscriptional.ross.

+

ORATI

AD-

RX

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

bolus.

Prou

1083.

10.

+CARLVSREXFR

circumscriptional.

ross.

+CRATI AD-IREX

ircumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

enarius.

LeBlanc,

39.

11.

+CARLVSREXFR

circumscriptional.

ross with

ne

dot

in

each

corner.

CAROLVSREXFR

ircumscriptional.

emple

with

hree

riangularly

arrangedotsbeneath.Wagenborgeninddeposited. 860).Boeles,88.

Koninklijk

enningkabinet

The

Hague)

nv.

17657,

-95

r.

frag-

ment).



5/12


6/12

228 K. F. MORRISON

6.

CONSTANTI AC

V

circumscriptional.

rosswith ne dot n

each

corner.

X

PISTI

AN

ARE

CIO

circumscriptional.

emple.

Denarius,

road

flan. uerdale

ind

deposited

.

903).

Unpublished.

ritish

useum.

7.

+BITVRICESCIVIT

circumscriptional.

ross.

+BITVRICESCIVITA

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

Denarius. uerdale

ind.

ritish

useum.

rou749.

8.

+BITVRIGESCIVIT

circumscriptional.ross.

+BITVRJ

GESCI

VIT

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

Denarius.Gannat

ind

deposited

. 880

).

Gariel

i,

pl.

xxii,

5.

9.

+BITVRICESCIVITA

circumscriptional.

ross.

+BITVRICESCIVITA

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

Denarius.

Gariel

i,

pl. xxii,

6.

10. +METVLLO

circumscriptional.

ross.

META/LLVM

in two

ines.

Denarius.

eBlanc,

88,

no.

7.

Cf.

A.

Richard,

Les

mines

d'argent

t

l'atelier

monétaire

e

Melle,'

RN

1893,

19.

11.

+

P

CT

A

V

C

IV

circumscriptional.

ross.

+METXVLLO

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

enarius.

Bonnevaux ind

deposited

.

880),

hree

xamples.

ariel

,

125.

12.

+CLAROMIIATX

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

+D IVI

O

NC ASTRO

circumscriptional.

ross.

Denarius.

ourgneuf

find

deposited

70-80).

.

Pinette,

Le

Trésor

e

Bourgneuf,'

ulletin

num.

rang,

(1897),

no.

45.

Prou,

xxi.

13. +1 .

.

.

KAMERACVSC

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

+SCIGAVGERICIMON circumscriptional.ross.Denarius.Le-

Blanc,

129.

14.

+CAINONICASTRO

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

+TVRON ESC

VITAS

circumscriptional.

ross.

Denarii.

vreux

I

find

deposited

20-50),

4

examples.

ariel

,

128

f.

15.

+

.

. .

ADTPE+CIOA

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

+...NO...CODEONITII

circumscriptional.

ross

with

dot

in

each

corner.

enarius.

Gariel

i,

pl.

1,

7

Cabinet

e

France).

rou

97

(the

ame

piece?).

16. +INVICODEONANT (retrograde) ircumscriptional.arolus

monogram.

INVICODEONAN

circumscriptional.

ross.

Obolus.

Gariel

i,

pl. 1,

28.



7/12

'MULES' IN THE CAROLIN GIAN SERIES 229

17.

+NOVIRIO-M

circumscriptional.

arolus

monogram.

+BRVCVI/IOVTI

circumscriptional.

ross.

Denarius. Gariel

ii,

pl.

xxvii,

6.

Prou949.1

Of the

pieces

under

the first

eading,

hose which

combine

the

names

of two rulers

nos.

1,

2,

3)

are

certainly

he most

nteresting.

Unfortunately,

ne

cannot

deduce

the

places

where

hey

may

have

been

minted

hrough

nalogous

types

on

normal

pieces.

The

types

of no. 1 are

common, specially

n the series

whichbears

the

words

'Christiana

Religio'

on the

reverse

nstead

of a

city

name.

Further,

the Lothaire'

type

f

no.

2,

otherwise

nknown,

s

paralleled

nly

y

the

nscription

OTARIVSRE+AGVSTVI/I

on a

unique

Christiana

Religio'

denarius

n the

Muizon-les-Maines

ind,2

nd

the

Gratia

Dei Rex'

type

s

known

for

mostmint

ities

f the

middle

nd

later

ninth

entury.

his ast

difficulty

s also valid

for

no.

3,

whose

Louis'

style,

ike

thatof

Lothaire',

s

otherwise nknown.

Although

oet-

beer

was

nclined o

accept

variant

f

no.

1

possibly

forgery)

s a

joint

ssue

acknowledging

he

laim of

Lothaire

to

equality

nomis-

mate'withhisfather,3nemust lso accept hepossibilityhat twas

struck

under Lothaire

and his

son,

Louis

II,

who

was

crowned

Emperor

n

850,

five

years

before

Lothaire's

death.

The

other

wo

pieces

can

be

more

accurately

ttributed:

o.

2 can

only

represent

Lothaire

and Charles

the

Bald,

and

no.

3,

because

of

the

find-

context,

ouis

the tammerer

nd

Charles

he

Bald.

Two

explanations

1

Although

he

ollowing

ieces

ppear

o

beof

Carolingian

abric,

exclude

hem

from

he

ist fmules

boveince

heir

ypes

re ot

losely

nalogous

ith

ypes

n

he

normal

arolingian

eries

1.

+TRJECASICIVI

ircumscriptional.

ross.

+ RHEM SCIVITA O circumscriptional.arolusmonogram.indof

S.

Paolo uorieMura

confessional

ffering

eposited

n heleventhentury?).

RN,

1846,

23.

Gariel

,

154

.,

i,

pl.

i,

66.

2.

+

RO

TOM

CI VI

TAS

circumscriptional.

arolus

onogram.

+SA-TEAV&OEI/II

circumscriptional.

ross.

rou

94.

3. +

ROT O

M

C

IV

T

AS

circumscriptional.

arolus

onogram.

+SATEAVTOEI/II

circumscriptional.

ross.

rou

95.

Types

arallel

o those

f no.

1

appear

n a mid-twelfth

entury

ind

f

Troyes

(+MELPISCIVITAO/+TRECASICIVI),

and am

nclined

o

consider

he

piece

n

uestion

n leventh-

r

welfth-century

triking.

ee

Ann.

e

a Soc.

ranç.

e

num.

tďarch.

i

1887),

6, 0,

2f.

nscriptions

imilaro

he

ouen

ype

f

nos.

and

appear

n oins f

Louis

V

Prou

93),

ut nnoother.

onsequently,

hese

pieces erelmostertainlytruckn hemid-tenthenturyr ater.2H.RoosensnRBNxxxvi1950),03-8.

3

See

my

rticle,

TheGold

Medallions

fLouis he

ious

nd othaire

and he

Synod

f

Paris

825)',

peculum

October

961.



8/12

230 K. F. MORRISON

have been advancedwith

egard

o no.

2,

which

may

be extended o

nos. 1 and

3

Engel

nd

Serrure

roposed1

hat

t

ndicated n alliance

between

he

two

rulers,

nd

Prou,

rejecting

hat

proposal,

was in-

clined

o

believe

hat

n

old die of

Lothairewas

mistakenly

sed with

a die

of

Charles fter

harles

had assumed

government

ver

part

of

Lotharingia.

rou's

explanation

s

clearly pt

for

no.

3,

where die

of the son and

successor s combinedwith ne of his

father, nd,

to

be

sure,

t

may

apply

to

nos.

1 and 2 as

well.

But for

these

atter

pieces,one mustacknowledge till furtherossibilities.t is clear

that

Lothaire I

and his father

did,

as Soetbeer

proposed, enjoy

equality

n

the

right

f

coinage,

nd,

as there

was

no territorialivi-

sion

between

hem,

heymay

well have

used

the same

mints.The

mule could

have

been

struck, herefore,

hen

the

dies for the two

emperors

ere

mistakenly

ombined

y moneyer

mployed

y

them

both.

Presumably,

similar

tateof affairs xisted nderLothaire

and Louis

II. The

same

explanation

ould

hold

forno.

2,

for n

some

cities the

sons

of

Louis the

Pious shared

proprietory ights.

or

example,

Charlesthe

Bald ceded

the

city

of

Arras,

which

ay

in his

territory,o Lothaire ,2and laterLothaire ededthemonasteryf

St.

Vaast

in

Arras to

Charles.3

f,

indeed,

special

coin had

been

designed

o

celebrate

n

alliance uch s

Engel

and

Serrure

uggested,

it

would

probably

have

been

an

issue

patterned

n

those oins n the

Papal/Imperial

eries

whichbear a

chiasmus

f

monograms

nd cir-

cumscriptions

elating

ne

side of

the coin to the

other,

ather han

the

crude

stamping

f two

standard

obverses

ogether.

he

actual

origins

f

these

hree

ieces

will

perhaps

never

be

known,

but

they

surely

ay

in

technical

rror ather

han

n

design.

The

next

nine

mules re to

be

ascribed

o

the

ater

years

f

Charles

the

Bald,

as

they

llustrate

he

confusion

ollowing

pon

his effortn

864

to

establish

ne

uniform

ype

or

ll his

coinage:

Ut

in

denariis

novae

nostrae

monetae ex

una

parte

nomen nostrum

habeatur

n

gyro

t

in

medio

nostri

nominis

monogramma,

x

alteravero

parte

nomen

civitatis t in

medio

crux

habeatur.'4

They

are

especially

important

n

that

they

upport

one

interpretation

f the

Edict

of

Pitres:

namely,

ecause of the

combination

f

monogram

nd the

words

Gratia Dei

Rex',

they dentify

he

Gratia Dei Rex'

type,

ot

the

Carolus

Rex

(Fr)'

type,

s the

norm

prescribed

n

the Edict.

1

Traitéenumismatiqueumoyen-âgeParis, 891),,257.Annalesertiniania. 843),MGH nusumchol..30.

Annales

ertiniani

a. 866),

MGH n

usumchol.

.

82.

Edictum

istense,

GH

Cap.Reg.

r.

i,

p.

315.



9/12

'MULES' IN THE CAROLINGI AN SERIES 231

Gariel

accepted

he Gratia Dei

Rex'

pieces

as those

conforming

o

the

Edict,

but

Prou

rejected

hem as

such.1 shall

return o

this

problem

n a

more

extensive

ssay,

but t

may

be

remarked

hat

he

apparent

ambiguity

etween

the

'nomen' of the

Edict

and

the

'nomen' ofthe

Edict

type

s to be

explained

n

terms

f

ninth-century

political

hought.

or

ninth-century

uthors,

he

king

ad two

nomina

his

own

e.g. Carolus')

and the

nomen

regis',

he

royal

itle,

which

he shared

with

Christ.2t was

this

ombination

f nomina

which,

we

maybelieve,wasprescribedytheEdictofPitres ndexecuted nthe

"GratiaDei Rex'

type.

The

next hree

ieces

n

thefirst

roup

neednot

detain

us. The

first

is

certainly

arlier han

heother

wo,

nd

may

n

fact

be

dated

to the

period

before

he

monetary

eform f 864. The

inscription

ARLV-

SREXF s

common,

ut

t

s not

known

n

combination ith

temple

as one

type,

lthough

CARLVSREXFRANCO

does so

occur

on a

denarius of

Melle

(Gariel

ii,

pl.

xxi,

8),

as

do KARLVSGRATI-

AD

REX

on

a

denarius f Laon

(Gariel

ii,

pl.

1,

33),

and

CARLVS-

REX

on

an

issue

of

St. Martin f

Tours

Prou

441,

&c.).

These atter

piecesare also to be ascribed o thereign fCharles he Bald prior

to

864;

nos.

12

and 13

belong

o the

period

fter

75,

when

Charles

the

Bald

assumed he

mperial

itle,

nd

may

belong

ither

o

himor

to

his

successor,

harles

he

Fat. The

inscription

ARLVSIMPAVG

(no. 12)

s known

nly

forNevers

Prou

596,

&c.)

and

Bourges Prou

743,

&c.)

and as the

type

withwhich

t s

coupled

s known

nly

for

Lyon

Prou

633;

Gariel

i,

pl.

xxx,

134)

the

piece

was

certainly

truck

in th

Centre.

he

nscription RLV?INPERATOR(no.

13)

s

unique,

but it is

analagous

with

a denarius of Pavia with

the

inscription

KĀRLNSIMPATOR (Gariel ii,pl. xlii,22). The 'Gratia Dei Rex'

inscription

oes not

allow

of

any

more exact

dentification.f

the

last

piece

no. 14)

it

can

only

be said that he

present

uthor

hares

Mme de

Man's

perplexity.

The

first

ix

pieces

under he econd

heading

re themost

mportant

of their

group.

A

peculiarity

f the

Carolingian

eries s that

ts

largest

ingle

ssue

the

Christiana

Religio'

series cannotbe

attri-

buted as

to

place

of

mintage.

n a

stimulating

ssay

Völkers

has

recently

rawn

ttention

o this

problem,

ut

its final olution till

1

p.

xii

.

2

e.g. ynodfAachenii 861),Mansi v, 11 . . non ine raviemituostroChristianissimorincipid memoriameduximus,tnonmmemorocationisuae,

quod

omine

ensetur

pereompleat,

trex

egum

hristus,

ui

uinominis

icem

illi

ontulit

n

erris.

. .'



10/12

232 K. F. MORRISON

seems

emote.1

hese

pieces

re of

great

worth

n

the bsence

of

more

subtle nd

comprehensiveroofs,

or

they

learly

how

the

pairing

of

Christiana

Religio'

dies withdies of mint ities nd

lead to the

conclusion hat at

least

part

of the

Christiana

Religio'

serieswas

struck n

those ame cities.

The first

wo,

trikings

f thePalace and

of

Laon,

are

virtually

ontemporaneous

n theevidence f thefinds

in

which

hey

ccur,

nd

both

re

dentifiables

types

f

Charles

he

Bald

(cf.

Gariel

i,

pl.

xxxi,

168,

pl.

1,

33).

The

presence

f normal

'ChristianaReligio' denariiofCharles both n Pilligerhecknd in

Zelzate

endsfurther

upport

o

the

proposal

that

hesemules

came

from

is

ateliers. hat

s

especially

rue n thecase of

Zelzate,

where

another

nusual

piece

bears the

Laon

reverse nd the

obverse

ype

of

KAKOLVSCRATIADIREX

circumscriptional

bout

a

temple

(Gariel

i,

pl.

1,

33,

see

above).

The

type

f

Béziers

no. 3)

is

otherwise

unknown,

nd

issues of

that

ity

re so

excessively

are

that

further

identifications

impossible

Gariel

i,

pl.

xxii,36;

Engel

and

Serrure

i,

206).

Likewise the

mint

known

only

as

'Raucio

Palatio'

defies

more

exact

attribution

cf.

Prou

958,

959)

beyond

he

general

erm

'palatine'. The last ofthis lass (no. 7) is particularlynteresting:t

establishes

onstance

s a

mint

before

03,

and

at the

same

time t

suggests

hat

ity

s the

ourceof

some of

the

broad-flan

Christiana

Religio'

denarii

f

Berengar

nd

Lambertwhich

ccur

with

t

n

the

Cuerdale

find.

The

other

pieces

in

the

second

group

require

only

dating

with

referenceo

analogous

types

nd,

where

ossible,

o

find

ata.

This

follows n

summary

orm.

No.

7. The

BITVRJCESCIVIT-cross

ype,

which

onforms o

the

specifications

f the

Edict ofPitres,s otherwisenknown,lthoughthat

ircumscription

bout a Karolus

monogram

s

a

familiar

everse

of

the

Carolus

Imp

Aug'

coins

already

mentioned

nd

also

occurs

on

'Carolus Rex'

pieces

in

the

Bourgneuf

ind.2

Likewise,

the

BITVRJCESCIVITA-Karolus

monogramtype

does not

occur

in

the

regular

ssues,

although

t is

analogous

with

the

BITVRJCES-

CIVIT-Karolus

monogram

ype ust

mentioned. ts

analogy

with

this

ype

nd

its

presence

n

the

Cuerdalefind

ate

this

piece

between

875 and

903.

No.

8. The

analogies

for

no.

7

are valid

for

this

piece

as

well.

ts

presencen theGannatfind ates t880+ .

1

H.

H.

Völkers,

Die

Christiana-Religio

epräge',

BN i

1952/4),

-54.

Bulletin

um.franç.

(1897),

6.



11/12

'MULES' IN THE CAROLINGI AN SERIES 233

No.

9. See the remarks n no. 7.

A

similar

ate

is

indicated.

No. 10. The METVILLO-cross

type

ppears

on coins

of

Pippin

or I of

Aquitaine

Prou

691,

obolus)

and Charles

heBald

Prou

692,

&c.),

but s the

two-line

M

ET

A/LLVM type

s

known

nly

for

Louis

the

Pious

(Prou

715,

&c.)

and Charles

he

Bald

(Prou

726,

727)

this

mule

should

probably

e

ascribed

o the

earlyyears

of Charles

the

Bald.

No. 11.The Poitiers ypesotherwisenknowncf.Prou677),but

as

great

numbers

f the Melle

type Prou

699,

&c.)

occur

in the

Cuerdale

find ne

may

attribute

hese

pieces

to the first

art

of

the

reign

of

Charles the

Simple.

Their

position

n the Bonnevaux

find

limits hem o

the

ast

two decades of

the

ninth

entury.

No.

12.

Neither

he Clermont

nor

the

Dijon

type

s

otherwise

known,

ut both are

analogous

with

ypes

f

Charles

the

Bald

(cf.

Prou 614

and

766).

Its

position

n the

Bourgneuf

ind

ates

this

piece

somewhat

efore 80.

No. 13. The Cambrai

type

s

analogous

witha known

type

of

Charles heBald

(Prou

121),

nd the

nscription

SCIGAVGERICI-

M O N

occurs

n

a

piece

ofan

Emperor

harles

nearthed

n the

hird

find f

Courbanton

deposited

.

890;

Gariel

,

93,

Prou

125).

The

find-context

tronglyuggests

hat his

mule,

ike

Prou

125,

belongs

to the time

of

Charles

he Bald.

No. 14.

The

inscription

AI

NO

NI

CASTRO

appears

for he first

time

n the

early

enth

entury.

he

coupling

f

that

nscription

ith

the

monogram,

owever,

s unknown

n other

ontexts,

nd

suggests

that his

ype

was struck nderCharles heSimple cf.Prou470).The

Tours

inscription

s

known for Charles

the Bald

and Charles

the

Simple

Prou

450,

452),

and

the

find-context

ogether

ith

he

deposi-

tion

of

Charles

923)

dates these

pieces

about

920.

Nos.

15-17.

No

identification

n these

pieces

s

possible

beyond

the observation

hat

hey

re

of ate

ninth-century

abric.

The dies

represented

y

nos.

7,

8, 9,

10,

15,

and

16

clearly elong

to

contemporaneous

r

nearly

ontemporaneous

ints

and,

while

t

is useful o learn hat hese ypeswere n usesimultaneously,t s not

at

all

surprising.

os.

11,

12, 13,

nd

14,

however,

ith

heir

airing

of dies

from

oitiers

nd

Melle,

Claremont

nd

Dijon,

Chinon

and



12/12

234 K. F. MORRISON

Tours,

and

Cambrai

and

St.

Géry

Cambrai) especially

he occur-

rence f

Poitier/Melle

nd

Chinon/Tours

n

multiple

umbers raise

the

nterestingoint

already suggested

y

the

Christiana

Religio'

mules,

namely,

hat wo

discrete ssues

may

have been struck

imul-

taneously

t

the

same

mint.

The

possibility

hat wo or

more cities

in

a

given

district

may

have

received heir

oinage

from common

mint

must receive

onfirmationr

rejection,

owever,

rom n

epi-

graphical

tudy

f the

totalnumismatic

emains.

Carolingian umismatics aybe,as somehaveunkindlyuggested,

a

pons

asinorum.

n

any

event,

he

mules

n

that

eries

uggest

lear

solutions o

some of

the

more

perplexing

roblems

for

xample,

o

the

dentity

f some

citieswhere he

Christiana

Religio'

series

was

struck nd to the xact

ype rescribed

n the

rucial

Edictof

Pitres

and

they

may

ead

the

way

to

their inal

esolution.

K. F.

Morrison

mules' in the carolingian series / k.f. morrison

Documents