Crusader coin types: Overstrikes put them in chronological order.

Some overstrikes are easy to decipher and some are not. The second coin below is overstruck and the sequence is easy to see. Another example (further below) is not so easy to determine.

Why? Why would a ruler have his own coins overstruck?  It was a way used in medieval times to collect taxes called "Renovatio Monetae". Under this system coins don't circulate permanentely. The government occasionally announces that the current types will soon be demonetized. Then coins must be replaced by taking them in and having them (over)struck with the new type. However the state returns fewer of the new type and the rest is its profit (a type of tax). Use of the old types becomes illegal with draconian penalties. Schindel thinks this happened yearly and dates the types using this assumption. 

Most crusader coins are poorly struck--many badly off-center--which sometimes allows parts of the undertype to not be obliterated and still be recognizable outside the area struck by the overtype. The first and second coins are of the same type, but the second has an undertype which can be identified.

21 mm. 3.00 grams.
A type of Tancred. CCS Antioch 5. 

Bust of Christ
Cross with letters for "Tancred" in the quadrants
TA  NK
 P     H 
and floral ornament at the base of the cross. 

Many examples of that type are struck over earlier types and reveal the undertype. 



This coin is of the same type. The coin is well-centered, but it was struck on an older coin which was not well-centered. There are letters from the undertype reasonably clear at 12:00 on the obverse which are from the first line of the reverse of his first type: 
KЄBOI

Next is a good example of the undertype. Its reverse is under this obverse.
 
 

Tancred's first type, the undertype of the above coin. The flan for that coin was a coin of this type struck off-center such that this reverse was shifted upward so the first line was partially off the edge of the flan.
 

 


Overstruck, but which strike is on top? This crusader coin of Tancred is overstruck.  Which strike is first and which is over it?


23-20 mm. 4.11 grams.
Image 1

First let's identify the two types involved.

 

 Here is one type in the right orientation. Perhaps the reverse is the easiest to match up. 


21 mm. 3.00 grams.
CCS Antoch 5. Tancred.

Bust of Christ
Cross with letters for "Tancred" in the quadrants and floral ornament at the base of the cross. 

Next is the other type involved, followed by a different image of the overstruck coin oriented that same way.
 


The overstruck coin has the reverse of the next type is on the side of the obverse of the previous type. 
 

22 mm. 4.18 grams.
Also attributed to Tancred.
St. Peter standing
Plain square cross with single letter in each quadrant

There is nothing in the types which says one type preceded the other. However, the overstruck coin has relevant information. The next image is oriented like this "St. Peter" type.
 

Image 2 of the same coin as Image 1, rotated slightly.

Standing figure, upright and weak, arm out toward 9:00. 
9:30 die axis.
There is a bold S with a bar above it at 10:00 in the photo and below it at 7:30 is an O, as on the "St. Peter standing" type (both above and next, for comparison). Just at the top of the vertical of the cross a head can be seen and below it the right arm exending out to the left in blessing as on the "St. Peter standing" type. 
In this orientation on the reverse the cross and the lettering below the horizontal are very clear (F and T with an extra crossbar).

Next is the first image again:

Image 1
Bust of Christ upright
9:30 die axis.
The facing bust of Christ with a halo with a single dot in each band is evident. On the reverse, the right half of the reverse is bold including the vertical of the cross, its right side, the 
NK
 H
in the right quadrants, and the right side of the "floral ornament" at the base of the cross. 

 

Decision time. So which type is the undertype and which type was struck over it? 

That is a tough call!  An additional piece of information is the curvature of the flan.
In image 1 the left image is concave, unlike most obverses. Usually reverses show slight concavity.

I think the "cross with D S/F T" side is the reverse of the most recent strike. "St. Peter Standing" is the overtype, weak as it is. That means St. Peter standing (CCS 6) follows the Bust of Christ type (CCS 5). CCS agrees, but Metcalf has it the other way around. 
 

Another interesting overstrike: Tancred over Tancred
 
19.8-17.8 mm. 1.92 grams. Thin and light. 6:00 die axis.
This orientation has Tancred's first type up. (CCS Antioch 3)
Bust of St. Peter facing, holding long cross over his left shoulder. Evidence of smaller letters at 3:00: POC (the last part of "St. Peter")
4-line legend showing only parts of the top two lines:
     +
KЄBOI
ΘHTOΔV  

 
This orientation has his second type, CCS Antioch 4, up.
Half-length bust of Tancred facing, holding up sword with his right hand.
IC  [XC]
NI  [KA]  in the angles of a cross with crossbars near each end.
Tancred's first type (with St. Peter, above) is normally 23 mm. This flan, at 19.8-17.8 mm, has been cut down, as you can see from the straight edges, especially in the upper photo, to be the smaller size appropriate for Tancred's second type . However, the strike was accidentally angled to impress only the left side of the new type deeply (the 6:00 die axis makes the left side of the new reverse also deeply struck). That leaves significant parts of the undertype somewhat flattened, but visible and identifiable. His type 2 is after his type 1.
 
 

More about overstrikes. 
 

If you closely inspect this green Baldwin II coin (23-21 mm. 3.85 grams, CCS Edessa 12), you can see a small cross at 3:00 on the obverse. If that is from the undertype, imagine that at the top because crosses are often at the top middle (second photo).


See the cross at the top and the standing figure on the right? It looks a lot like coins with two standing figures, of which we see only the figure on the right. (A full-length standing figure with head at 1:30. ) 

Possibly like this?
Heraclius and son (610-641), Sear 810.



 
 

I do not show the reverse at a new angle because at no angle can I find anything I recognize so I don't know which way to orient up.

So, what is the undertype?  I don't know. There are no crusader types with two standing figures. Contemporary Byzantine types are too large to be the undertype. The two-standing-figures type (Sear 1853) of Constantine X (1059-1067) typically weighs 6-10 grams and is 27-30 mm--much too large. Could it be Armenian? After all, Edessa was Armenian when Baldwin I took it over. A close look at Nercessian's book, the standard comprehensive work on Armenian coins, finds no suitable type to be the undertype. Could it be a really old Byzantine coin from centuries earlier? I don't know. Mabe the undertand does not have two standing figures.  (I solicit your thoughts. )   

 

Return to the page on crusader coins.