In which I investigate whether a series of ninth-century coin finds can tell us anything about the distribution of power centres in early medieval Moray
Thanks Andy - yes absolutely, that's maybe a more likely scenario. I was just really taken with Adrián's suggestion that they could be evidence of a diplomatic exchange of some kind. Either way, I'd say it's pretty definite that they were worn as status symbols. Coins from elsewhere that have been mounted for wearing as brooches have the head side facing out, so perhaps it was a flex to be seen wearing a coin of Alfred or Louis the Pious.
I absolutely love reading posts like this that explore possibilities rooted in what available evidence we have--and the connection between the stone and treasure/gift giving/hoards is a great line to think through.
Thanks Freya for this - I'm glad you enjoyed it. I almost didn't post this one because it's a long way out of my comfort zone, so this is nice to hear!
Burghead: the unperforated Northumbrian coins are both copper-alloy stycas - and not silver pennies like the perforated ones - so they do indeed have a different 'cachet'. As for the silver horn-mount, it's not possible to conclude that this is definitely from a 'blast-horn' - but it certainly does not have to have been part of a drinking-horn (although that remains a possibility).
Dear James, thank you very much for this and for the comment below. I thought your argument for the horn having been a blast-horn was very persuasive (and enjoyable) but I will insert a note of caution into my text. And I'll update the bits about Trewhiddle as well. I write these blogs just to think through questions that are on my mind, so I'm very grateful for your time and expertise to guide me in the right direction!
A word of caution: you refer to the 'Trichinopoly' chain fragment in the Croy hoard as a 'silver mesh ribbon in the Anglo-Saxon Trewhiddle style', but the 'Trewhiddle style' only applies to decoration in a distinctive style of (mainly animal) ornament - and this has none - so not for a type of object. You also refer to it as having 'a distinctly Anglo-Saxon footprint', whereas the only definite example that I know of from an Anglo-Saxon context is the scourge in the Trewhiddle hoard itself. It may very well be of Irish manufacture, and in my Cuerdale volume (available online), I conclude that it is 'safer just to characterise these as being of 'Insular' origin' (p. 128; discussion on p. 123). Another note to follow!
Could it also be possible that the coins were plunder of some sort and worn as a status symbol?
Thanks Andy - yes absolutely, that's maybe a more likely scenario. I was just really taken with Adrián's suggestion that they could be evidence of a diplomatic exchange of some kind. Either way, I'd say it's pretty definite that they were worn as status symbols. Coins from elsewhere that have been mounted for wearing as brooches have the head side facing out, so perhaps it was a flex to be seen wearing a coin of Alfred or Louis the Pious.
I absolutely love reading posts like this that explore possibilities rooted in what available evidence we have--and the connection between the stone and treasure/gift giving/hoards is a great line to think through.
Thanks Freya for this - I'm glad you enjoyed it. I almost didn't post this one because it's a long way out of my comfort zone, so this is nice to hear!
Burghead: the unperforated Northumbrian coins are both copper-alloy stycas - and not silver pennies like the perforated ones - so they do indeed have a different 'cachet'. As for the silver horn-mount, it's not possible to conclude that this is definitely from a 'blast-horn' - but it certainly does not have to have been part of a drinking-horn (although that remains a possibility).
Dear James, thank you very much for this and for the comment below. I thought your argument for the horn having been a blast-horn was very persuasive (and enjoyable) but I will insert a note of caution into my text. And I'll update the bits about Trewhiddle as well. I write these blogs just to think through questions that are on my mind, so I'm very grateful for your time and expertise to guide me in the right direction!
A word of caution: you refer to the 'Trichinopoly' chain fragment in the Croy hoard as a 'silver mesh ribbon in the Anglo-Saxon Trewhiddle style', but the 'Trewhiddle style' only applies to decoration in a distinctive style of (mainly animal) ornament - and this has none - so not for a type of object. You also refer to it as having 'a distinctly Anglo-Saxon footprint', whereas the only definite example that I know of from an Anglo-Saxon context is the scourge in the Trewhiddle hoard itself. It may very well be of Irish manufacture, and in my Cuerdale volume (available online), I conclude that it is 'safer just to characterise these as being of 'Insular' origin' (p. 128; discussion on p. 123). Another note to follow!
Excellent and thought provoking.
Thank you Murray, I'm glad you liked it!