Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 16

ISSN 0484-8942

REVUE -------------------------------------------------- NUMISMATIQUE


Dirige par

Secrtaires de la rdaction

C. Morrisson, M. Amandry,
M. Bompaire, O. Picard

Fr. Duyrat, A. Hostein


C. Grandjean

2011

(167e volume)

Publie avec le concours de lInstitut National des Sciences Humaines et Sociales


du Centre national de la recherche Scientifique

---------------------------------------------------SOCIT FRANAISE DE NUMISMATIQUE


Diffusion : Socit ddition Les Belles Lettres
2011

Nicholas J. Mayhew*

A Thirteenth-Century French Coin List


Summary Publication and discussion of a neglected coin list, found in a mathematical treatise
and published by Victor in 1979. The larger part of the list appears to have been composed
in the first half of the thirteenth century.
Rsum Publication et brve prsentation dune liste de monnaies figurant dans un trait mathmatique rcemment publi (Victor 1979). Cette liste en franais semble pour une large part
fonde sur une documentation de la premire partie du xiiie sicle ce qui en ferait le premier
tmoin de ce type de document.

This paper returns to the intriguing coin list, published by Victor, which I first
drew to the attention of the numismatic community at the Berlin International
Congress in 1997. It is greatly to my shame that I have not returned to this
subject sooner, particularly because in the intervening years I have enjoyed
the benefit of much helpful advice from a number of colleagues. I would like
particularly to mention Jack Williams, my Oxford colleague who first drew this
document to my notice; Marc Bompaire, many of whose perceptive comments
I refer to in the text below; Lucia Travaini, who generously made her work on
the Columbia list available to me at an early stage, to which I also repeatedly
refer below; Ccile Morrisson, who wrote with important insights particularly
on the Byzantine coins and their imitations, and on the evidence supplied by
modern metal analyses, above all those conducted here in Orlans; Alan Stahl,
for his advice on Venice; and of course to Philip Grierson, who not only wrote
offering specific advice on particular readings, but has inspire the work of all of
us who work on medieval European coins.
Unfortunately, despite the passing years and the advice of so many colleagues,
my progress has been limited. A number of the readings remain as puzzling as
they first seemed in 1997. Nevertheless it is possible to make some observations
and to identify some key questions.
The first observation concerns the value of comparing the Victor list with
others of about the same period. Comparison with the Columbia document,
while not actually resolving many questions, shows clearly how our knowledge
can grow with each comparable document brought to light. Even though the
Columbia document is evidently Italian compared with Victors French texts,
looking at similar material from a French and an Italian stand point, does help.

* Ashmolean Museum and St Cross College, Oxford. Mail: nick.mayhew@ashmus.ox.ac.uk.


RN 2011, p. 33-46

34

NICHOLAS J. MAYHEW

It throws up the geographical origins of the two documents clearly. It also


throws light on the date of the documents, since the Columbia document often
speaks of new and old issues, contributing useful chronological information.
Columbia and Victor both clearly ante-date Pegolotti.
Nevertheless perhaps the most crucial unanswered question for the Victor
document remains its date. Bompaire and Williams have both pointed out to me
that this document refers in the main to coins in use in the earlier part of the
thirteenth century. And yet the reference to a gold Venicien de Venice of high
fineness seems clearly to point to a date after 1284. Yet the matter is not straightforward. Stahl was affronted that the fineness of the Venetian ducat was underestimated, and Williams has wondered if this Venetian gold might be some
unrecognised eastern bezant.
Moreover the gold Quinunois dAscorgne presents problems. If it is indeed
the florin of Auxonne (which would be supported by the likely geographical
origin of the document, and the absence of any alternative attribution for this
name), it would be the only fourteenth-century coin in the list. And note too the
absence of the other major thirteenth-century gold coins of Florence and Genoa.
My own tentative explanation is that the bulk of the text dates to the first half
of the thirteenth century, but that certain additions were made, (notably the gros
tournois, the ducat of Venice, and the quinunois dAscorgne) to the source
document from which the two extant versions of this document were copied.
In many ways this is an unsatisfactory conclusion, which reduces the value
of the text. An integral firmly dated text would be of much greater use to us.
Nevertheless, in combination with other texts, and with what we know of the
coins, there remains much to intrigue us. Moreover, the bulk of the text appears
somewhat earlier than the Columbia document, possibly making this text, at
least in its source form, the earliest such coin list known to us.
The early date, and its presence in what is clearly essentially a mathematical
document, reminds one of the coin calculations contained in Fibonacci. And yet
the arrangement of the material in descending order of metal fineness, and the
absence of any actual exercises in arithmetic, suggest the list was of more use
to practising merchants or mint staff. We should also note that in contrast to both
Fibonacci and the Columbia list, the French document used Roman numerals.
This would in fact be consistent with a relatively early date, and French origin.
Northern Europe seems to have failed to grasp the enormous competitive
advantage enjoyed by Italians familiar with Indo-arabic numbers. Despite skill
with the abacus or with casting counters, there remained certain questions
which it was difficult even to ask, let alone solve, without the new numbers.
Yet it was not till the fifteenth century, that north European merchants can be
seen using Indo-arabic numbers, and formal documents, especially state papers
and government accounts cling to the old ways for much longer.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

A THIRTEENTH-CENTURY FRENCH COIN LIST

35

12d
draant de damas
Dirhem. From Saladin to al-Adil I, Damascus dirhems are 94% fine. Balog, p.39.
11 3/4d
venicien
Venetian grosso. Papdopoli, p. 86, 137, 96.5%, but Bompaire, p. 176 found
them better than argent-le-roi.
Stahl
11 3/4d = 97.9%.
Columbia: Veniciani grossi sonno a oncie 12 m(eno)1/3.
grousenois
gros tournois ?
Columbia: Tornesi grossi sonno a oncie 11 e 1/2.
roial dacre
Not known. Duplessy 199? St Louis dirhem of St Jean dAcre. Gros of King
John of Brienne, presumed minted at Acre.
roial de Marseille
Pegolotti and Datini refer to les royaux marseillais c. 1290s.
But the gros of Marseilles (since 1216) would be of the right fineness though
not royal, while the royals are much less fine.
Columbia: Reali di Marsilia sonno a oncie 11 e 1/3.
Columbia: mistura: Reali di Marsilia so a oncie 3 den. 17 di chantora.
11 1/5d
esterlin
Sterling
Columbia: Sterllini sonno a oncie 11 e 1/2.
hollandois
Petit deniers of Holland.
11 1/4d
artisien noef
New Artois, Arras. Bompaire suggests new refers to the issues of Robert and
Mahaut in contrast to those of Philippe Auguste.
Columbia: Aretini (Arezzo) or artesini.
Artteni vecchij sonno a oncie 11 e 1/2.
Artini mezzo chongno sonno a oncie 11.
Artini nuovi dalo. o. sonno a oncie 10 e 1/2.
Arttini vecchi so a oncie 2 m(eno) 2 di chantora.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

36

NICHOLAS J. MAYHEW

messaig
Metz. Dieudonn, p. 274 describe the signed petit deniers of 1163-1279 as
excellent silver.
11d
Trossien
Too strong for Troyes.
liegois
Liege, but seem to be better than the 77.8% indicated by Ghyssens, CENB1980,
p.18-25. Could they be Liege sterlings, which would make them late?
10 1/2d
brouselois
Brussels: sterlings rather than deniers?
10d
frizacois
Friesacher. Slightly better than suggested by Pegolotti and Datini, but in line
with analyses published by Luschin v. Ebengreuth.
Columbia: Fresciachini daquileia sonno a oncie 10.
Fescichini de la Magna sonno a oncie 10 1/4.
9d
Ramnes borgois
Victor suggested the reduced money of Bourges, but 9d is far too strong (CEB,
p.51, gives 5 or 6d.) Bompaire suggests Rammelsberg.
Columbia: Renesburge sonno a oncie 7 (? No 10 1/2)

(Travaini suggests Regensburg).
8d
bialvoisien
Beauvais. CEB, p.57-58, suggests 7d for Beauvais. Bompaire notes these were
not struck after Philippe Auguste.
toulousain
Toulouse. CEB, p.61 says they should be 7d fine , but have been analysed at
7 1/2d and 6d. Bompaire dates the reduction from 10d to 7d to the eleventh century,
making 8d too high. There is no mention of toulousains royaux.
molain de gascoigne
Morlaas. CEB, p.66 says 8d or better, confirmed for the late 13th century by
Bompaire, p.167-168. Bompaire confirms an alloy of 7d 18g citing Lippo di Fede.
Columbia: Morlani de la Magna sonno a oncie 7 e den. 9 di chantora.
RN 2011, p. 33-46

A THIRTEENTH-CENTURY FRENCH COIN LIST

37

7 1/2d
blanc de valchienes
Valenciennes. Wyffels, p. 1121 says 8 d. c.1250. Bompaire notes that blancs de
Valenciennes and Cambrai were seized at Sommieres in 1301, but this fineness
argues for late 12th century issues.
6 3/4d
masois
Mansois. Bompaire, p.162-163 has old Mansois at nearly this rate, while the
new issues from c.1265, were not so good. Bompaire notes there is no mention
of new or old in the current document.
Columbia: Mansesj vecchio sonno a oncie 5 1/2 doncia.
Mansesi nuovi sonno a oncie 5.
6 1/4d
Cambrisien
Bompaire notes that blancs de Valenciennes and Cambrai were seized at
Sommieres in 1301, but this fineness argues for late 12th century issues.
6d
fors de laon
Lyon, rather than Laon which was already more debased by the 12th century.
Bisson, and Guibert de Nogent. Bompaire confirms forts de Lyons, and notes
the regional group including also Vienne, Savoie, Valence etc. Pegolotti, p.290
has fortaddeona of about this fineness.
Columbia: Fortti da Leone sonno a oncie 11e 1/3.
mistura: Fortti da Leione sonno a oncie 5 e den. 15 1/2 di chantora.
Medalglie forte da Leone so a oncie 3 den 3 di cantora.
fos de suse
Susa, mint of the count of Savoy. Secusain forts, Segugini vecchi of this fineness
in Pegolotti, p.290. Bompaire knows also of a susain petit.
Columbia: Seghuscini vecchi so a oncie 5 e den. 14 di chantora.
5 1/2d
masconois
Mcon. Dieudonn, p.111-112, notes coins of Mcon in 1229 were better than
tournois, and the county was reunited with the crown by St Louis in 1239.
However, Bompaire points out the last issue from Macon dates to Philippe I!
clingnisien
Cluny. See Dieudonn, p. 111, as above.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

38

NICHOLAS J. MAYHEW

tunitsois
Millarenses of Tunis should be finer than this (Spufford, p. 175, Pegolotti,
p.291). Bompaire suggests an error for Tornusois (Tournus)?
Columbia: Melgliaresi di Tunissi sonno a oncie 11 e 1/2.
Maroscini di Francia vechi sonno a oncie 5 e 1/2 doncia.
Melgliaresi dAlexandria vecchi sonno a oncie 3 e 1/2 doncia.
scalongedardane
Ardannenques. Mentioned by Bompaire, p.167, were weaker (3 1/4d) by the
fourteenth century. Alternatively he suggests Chalon, but not of the Ardennes.
moritien
Maurice suggest Vienne, which also occurs elsewhere in the list, so perhaps
these are of St Maurice dAgaune (Dieudonn, p.356), which Bompaire notes
fits this regional Burgundian group.
d. de losane
Lausanne, making them slightly stronger than tournois, as Spufford suggests
(Handbook, p.184, dated 1275).
5 1/4d
vienois
Viennois, known to Bompaire at 5d 6g and also at 2d 12g. For the weaker issue
see below.
susain petit
Susa. See above, contrasting with susain fort. Though Pegolottis maille was
3 once 18 den.
emperial
Imperial of Frederick I in Lombardy, mid 12th century, about 6d fine? Spufford,
p. 225, 401.
Columbia: Ravignani enpiriali e bolognini e palmasciani sono melglio che
cartonesi nuovi fiorini 10 lb.
pncois dantioce
Prince of Antioch. Metcalfs barehead type of Bohemund was 35-40% silver,
but these are scarce and early, c.1140s. The helmet type from the 1160s is
c.27% silver.
marbotin de saint quentin
Marebetino or maravedi were initially gold, but silver and billon issues are
known (Spufford, Handbook). But the link with Saint Quentin is inexplicable.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

A THIRTEENTH-CENTURY FRENCH COIN LIST

39

4 3/4d
vies et les vielles monoies paresis
old parisis, slightly better than the fineness given by Duplessy 191 for deniers
parisis of Louis IX.
4 1/2d
Raencien
Reims. CEB, p.58 has 4 1/2 d.
paresis noef
new parisis. Duplessy (D221) attributed it to Philippe IV, and Wyffels also
dated it to c.1286, but Bompaire notes that Aimar de Moncel c.1273 (Avis sur
la question) specified finenesses of 4d 16g and 4d 12g, which are confirmed
in 1308 and 1313.
Columbia: Pariscini da Parisci sonno a oncie 4 1/2 doncia.
3 7/8d
certain
Chartres. CEB, p.67-68, suggests just below parisis, just below 4d. Bompaire,
p.162 gives 3d 6g. By 1315 3d 5g.
bloisois
Blois, by 1315 3d 10g.
bordelois
Bordeaux. Bompaire, p.173-175 cites a bail of 1253 at 3d 18g.
Pegolotti has 3d 16g.
Columbia: Burdellesi sonno a oncie 3 e 1/2.
sanserois
Sancerre. CEB p.60 notes a strengthening from 3 1/2d to 4d, though by 1315
they are at 3d 6g.
clermontois
Clermont. CEB, p.61 at 5d, but by 1315 at 3d 16g.
doisien
Douai? Dieudonn, p.185 suggests a third or a quarter of the artesian.
3 3/4d
Nantois
Nantes. Bompaire asks Type with the ecu?. Bompaire, p.161, 3d 13g, or the
same as the slightly weaker angevin.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

40

NICHOLAS J. MAYHEW

vendomois
Vendme, at 3d 10g in 1315.
parcerain
Perche. Equal to Chateaudun and Vendme in 1204, Dieudonn, p. 322.
dunoisien
Chateaudun. 3d 10g in 1315.
barbarin de saint tirre
Limoges, but Bompaire notes more 12th than 13th century, and saint Tirre or
Cirre makes no sense? Saint-Yrieix en Limousin.
3 1/2 d
fors de soignie
Souvigny, known to Bompaire in 13th century baux. Bompaire, p. 151, 1272 3d
18g, 1286 3d 12g.
aucerois
Auxerre. CEB, p. 59 ranging from 4d 12g to 3d 18g. 1315 3d 12g.
Bompaire notes need to date the issues.
fors de provins et li monoie ki court ensamble
Provins and the money that circulates with it. Bompaire comments Provins,
Troyes, Meaux, Besanon, noted at the same fineness in bail of 1272.
Columbia: Privisini di Roma mezzo chongno e melglio che cortonesi nuovi
fiorini 27 la lb
Torneselli di Torssa e choronati e provenciali e pictovini e tolosani
e preverescini fortti di Francia e mergholgliesi sonno melglio che
chortonesi nuovo fiorini 33 la lb.
Provisini di Roma nuovi e chiarintini e melglio che chotonesci
nuovo fiorini 25 la lb.
mistura: Previsini di Roma vecchi so a oncia 3 e 1/2 doncia.
Previsini di Roma mezzo chongno so a oncie 3 e 1/2.
Previsini nuovi sonno a oncie 3 m(eno) 3 den. di chantora.
3 1/2d
Genevois
Geneva
li vies noiret de Soisons
The old noiret of Soissons. CEB, p. 57, 3d 12g.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

A THIRTEENTH-CENTURY FRENCH COIN LIST

41

burgalois
Uncertain. Too strong for dineros burgaleses of Castile?
fors de Navers
Nevers. CEB, p. 59-60.
langoine
Angevin. Bompaire, p.162, citing Douai 1265 at 3d 10g, and the Changer at
3d 6g. An alternative attribution to Langres seems unlikely since 13th century
coins of this mint were so rare. (Bompaire)
Columbia: Agnivini di Francia sonno a oncie 3 e 1/2.
estievenent de besonco
Estievenent of Besanon. Bompaire, p. 164-165 cites bail of 1272 at 3d 12g,
Changer at 3d 18g.
3d
lonisien
Laon (lovisien). CEB, p. 57, 3d at nost. Bompaire notes mailles loevesiennes
were tolerated by royal regulations.
2 1/2 d
Diionnois
Dijon. Confirmed by analyses in Dumas, Bourgogne, p. 313-314, and 1315 2d
18g. Bompaire confirms Dijon, Cahors, and Rodez all close in baux of 1265
and 1272.
2 1/2d
Caorcin
Cahors. Bompaire, p. 168.
roedenois
Rodez. Customarily paired with Cahors. Bompaire, p. 168, bail 1271 2d 15g
with a tolerance.
sevois
Savoy. After Suse, the Chambery mint struck forts et faibles.
Columbia: Medalglie seghisini so a oncie 3 e den 3 di chantora.
vienois
cf Vienne above.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

42

NICHOLAS J. MAYHEW

2d
Parmesiain
Parma deniers
Columbia: Ravignani empiriali e bolgnini e palmasciani sono melglio

che cortonesi nuovi fiorini 10 lb.
venisien petit
Venice. Though worse than fineness given by Papadopoli, p. 138.
Columbia: Veneziani piczoli so a oncie 2 menu 1/2.
1 1/2d
Nacois
?
barselenois
Barcelona. Though Bompaire observes by late 13th century there were better
Barcelona issues.
1 1/4d
Papiois de Tollete
Toledo.
Generally Bompaire comments on the silver, that the dates mostly look earlier
in the thirteenth century, and indicate some concentration around Lyon and
the east, with nothing for Tours, Provence, Melgueil, Le Puy, Poitou
Gold
11 1/2d
Quinunois dAuscorgne
Auxonne struck florins marked with a cinquefoil for Eudes IV, 1327-1349.
See Dumas.
bezant de babilonie
Dinar of Cairo or Alexandria. Spufford, Handbook, p. 300.
venicien de Venice
Venetian ducat from 1284. Stahl notes the ducat was pure gold, and Williams
doubts the attribution, thinking it too late. Bompaire also inclines towards an
earlier date for the document as a whole.
11d
o de muce
Oboli de musc, the dinars of Almohad Spain and the Maghreb. See Grierson.
RN 2011, p. 33-46

A THIRTEENTH-CENTURY FRENCH COIN LIST

43

10 1/2d
Cerin
Terin, i.e., tari.
marin, marakin, molekin, et li maille ke li rois marrois fist faire
Marin, marakin, molekin (marabitino of Malaga, see Mateu y Llopis) and the
maille which the Moorish king had made. Marques 1986, p. 406 links morabitinus molequin to Malaga. Marques 1984, p. 304, mentions Almohad half
dinars mealia auri.
Columbia: Doblieri di Morrocho sonno e char 23

e 1/3 vale sol. 35 den. 8 a fiorini.
10d
Eufosin de tollette
Anfuris, the gold morabetinos, struck in Castille up to 1221, Spufford, p. 180.
This is a slightly better fineness than that indicated by Marques 1984, p. 302,
and slightly worse than by Spufford, p. 168-169, based on Pegolotti and Datini.
Columbia: Anfrosini e marabotini den. oro sonno a char.
21 menu 1/3 valgliono sol. 26 a fiorini.
9d
leonnois et portigalois
Leon and Portugal. Reduced standard Portuguese morabetinos were known to
Marques 1986, p. 404, though he lacked documentary evidence.
Columbia: Porttughalli den. oro sonno a char.
21 m(eno) 1/3 chontasi sol. 18 a fiorini.
perpe de Constantinoble ke li emperreres Manasces fist faire
Perperi of Constantinople which the emperor Manasces had made. See Metcalf,
Latin East, p. 229-230; NC 1980, p. 113-31, esp. 127-128, 118ff. Morrison
Large issues of hyperpera of Nicaea were struck by John III Vatatzes, 16 or
17 carats fine. ? Latin hyperpera at Constantinople. Also see Williams
Columbia: Bisanti saracinati senza pezi sonno a cchar. 16.
Peczi senza bisanti sonno a cchar. 12.
Bisanti chon peczi sonno a cchar. 15.
Rocchallini den. oltra mare sonno a cchar. 4 e dane oncie 9 den. argiento.
Perperi boctazati sonno a cchar. 16 1/2.
Perperi chomunali sonno a cchar. 16 1/2.
Perperi palgliolati sonno a cchar. 15.
8 1/4d
Li perpe daquilee
?? the fineness of some tari.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

44

NICHOLAS J. MAYHEW

boisan daicre 8 1/4d et lor parfais a vi d


bezant of Acre at 8 1/4d or sometimes 6d. Metcalf, p. 47 presumes bezants of
Acre were of the upper fineness.
7d
Terin de Poelge
Tari of Apulia? Manfreds tari were slightly better.
6d
Scenaspois
??
4d
Terin de Cecille sont a iiii d. de fin or et a iiii d. dargent et a iiii d. de keuvre
Tari of Sicily are at 4d fine gold, 4d silver, and 4d copper.
Bibliographie
Marques 1986; 1984
Wyffels Valenciennes.
Balog 1980: P. Balog, The coinage of the Ayyubids, London, 1980 (RNS,
Special Publications, 12), XIII-334 p.
Bisson 1979: T. N. Bisson, Conservation of coinage. Monetary Exploitation
and its Restraint in France, Catalonia, and Aragon (c. A.D. 1000-c. 1225),
Oxford, Clarendon, 1979, XXIII-250 p.
Bompaire 1987: M. Bompaire, Un livre de changeur languedocien du milieu du
xive sicle, RN 1987, p. 118-183.
CEB: see Dumas, Barrandon 1982.
Ciano 1964: C. Ciano, La pratica della mercatura datiniana (secolo XIV),
(Biblioteca della Rivista Economia e storia, IX), Milan, A. Giuffr, 1964,
XII-255 p. [Pise, 1385].
Dieudonn 1936: A. Dieudonn, Manuel de numismatique franaise, t. 4,
Les monnaies fodales, Paris, 1936, 462 p., VIII pl.
Dieudonn 1932: A. Dieudonn, Lordonnance ou rglement de 1315 sur le
monnayage des barons, Bibliothque de lcole des Chartes, 93, 1932, p.5-54.
Dumas, Barrandon 1982: F. Dumas, J.-N. Barrandon, Le titre et le poids de fin
des monnaies lpoque de Philippe Auguste, Valbonne, CNRS, (Cahiers
Ernest Babelon, 1), 1982, 104 p.
Dumas-Dubourg1988: F. Dumas-Dubourg, Le monnayage des ducs de Bourgogne,
Louvain-la-Neuve, 1988, XVIII-419 p. 30 pl. (Publications dhistoire de lart
et darchologie de lUniversit catholique de Louvain LIII. Numismatica
Lovanensia, 8).

RN 2011, p. 33-46

A THIRTEENTH-CENTURY FRENCH COIN LIST

45

Duplessy 1988: J. Duplessy, Monnaies royales franaises, Paris, 1988.


Ghyssens 1980: J. Ghyssens, Le denier ligeois daprs Jean dOutre Meuse,
Cercle dtudes Numismatiques, Bulletin, 17, 1, 1980, p. 18-25.
Grierson 1979: Ph. Grierson, Oboli de Musc, English historical Review, 66,
1951, p. 75-81, and Muslim coins in thirteenth century England, in D.K.
Kouymjian (ed.), Near Eastern Numismatics, Epigraphy and History.
Studies in honour of George C. Miles, Beyrouth, 1974, p. 387-391. Later
medieval numismatics, London, Variorum, 1979, 412 p.
La Roncire 1973: Ch. M. de La Roncire, Un changeur florentin du Trecento.
Lippo di Fede del Sega (1285 env.-1363 env.), cole pratique des hautes
tudes, VIe section, Centre de recherches historiques, (Affaires et gens
daffaires, XXXVI), Paris, 1973.
Luschin von Ebengreuth 1922: A. Luschin von Ebengreuth, Friesacher Pfennige,
Numismatische Zeitschrift, 1922, p. 89-118 and 1923, p. 33-144.
Marques 1984/1986: M. Gomes Marques (ed.), Problems of Medieval Coinage
in the Iberian Area, I, 1984 and M. Gomes Marques, M. Crusafont i Sabater
(eds.), Problems of Medieval Coinage in the Iberian Area, II, 1986.
Mateu y Llopis 1946: F. Mateu y Llopis, Glosario hispanico de numismatica,
Barcelone, 1946.
Metcalf 1995: D. M. Metcalf, The Agrinion hoard, Gold hyperpyra of John III
Vatatzes, NC, 1980, p. 113-131.
Metcalf 1995B: D. M. Metcalf, Coinage in the Latin East, 2d ed., Oxford,
1995, (Royal numismatic society, special publications, 28), XX-336 p., 48 pl.
Morrisson et al. 1985: C. Morrisson, Cl. Brenot, J.-N. Barrandon, J.-P. Callu,
R. Halleux, Lor monnay I. Purification et altrations de Rome Byzance,
(Cahiers Ernest Babelon, 2), Paris, 1985.
Morrisson et al. 1988: C. Morrisson, J.-N. Barrandon, S. Bendall, Proton
activation and XRay Fluorescence Analysis: an application to the study of the
alloy of Nicaean and Palaeologan Hyperpyra, in W.A. Oddy, M. Archibald
(ed.), Metallurgy in Numismatics, 2, London, 1988, p.23-39.
Papadopoli 1893: N. Papadopoli Aldobrandini, Le monete di Venezia, I,
Venice, 1893.
Pegolotti 1936: F. Balducci Pegolotti, La Pratica della Mercatura,
A. Evans (ed.), Cambridge Mass., 1936.
Prou 1898: M. Prou, Recueil de documents relatifs lhistoire montaire,
RN1898, p. 313-320.
Spufford 1988: P. Spufford, Money and its Use in medieval Europe, Cambridge,
1988.
Spufford 1986: P. Spufford, Handbook of medieval exchange, London, 1986.
Stahl 2000: A. Stahl, Zecca. The Mint of Venice in the middle ages, BaltimoreLondon - New York, 2000.
Travaini 2003: L. Travaini, Monete mercanti e matematica. Le monete nei
trattati di mercatura e di aritmetica, Citt di Castello, Jouvence, 2003.

RN 2011, p. 33-46

46

NICHOLAS J. MAYHEW

Victor 1979: S. K. Victor, Practical geometry in the High Middle Ages: Artis
cujuslibet consumatio and Pratike de geometrie, Philadelphia, (American
Philosophical Society, 49), 1979.
Williams 1995: J. Williams, Mathematics and the Alloying of coinage 12021700: Part I, Annals of science, 52, 1995, p.213-234.
Wyffels 1967: C. Wyffels, Contribution lhistoire montaire de la Flandre au
xiiie sicle, Revue Belge de Philologie et dhistoire, 45, 1967, p. 1113-1141.

RN 2011, p. 33-46