Iron Age Coinage in Kent

IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE DA YID HOLMAN Over the past few years, Iron Age Kent has seen increasing research on settlements, cemeteries, ceramics and numismatics. As part of this research, efforts to improve the general level of co-operation between Kentish archaeologists and responsible metal-detector users has led to a very significant increase in our knowledge of several classes of metal artefact. Perhaps most important has been the dramatic rise in the number of Iron Age coins recorded, particularly from the east of the county. In 1976, Allen commented that Iron Age coinage in Kent was as yet poorly understood and that there must be many more coins to be found and recorded (Allen 1976, 100). In September 1991, an independent (part-time, unfunded) research project - the Kent Iron Age Coin Project - was established by the writer in an attempt to make a record of all new finds. By the end of 1999 a total of 1,318 previously unreported Celtic coin finds from the county had been recorded, tripling the number to 1,974. Recording is continuing as new finds are made. Full details have been forwarded to the Celtic Coin Index, held at the Institute of Archaeology, Oxford. The work of the Project has not only greatly increased the number of coins known, but has also significantly altered the distribution pattern of certain types, whilst confirming the previously mapped distribution of others; many gaps have now been filled. As noted by Haselgrove (1987, 213), single coin finds are of particular value in understanding coin circulation patterns and these patterns have provided perhaps the most beneficial results of the current study, allowing new ideas and interpretations to be put forward. AN OVERVIEW OF IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT An attempt at reconstructing something of the political history of late Iron Age Kent can be made by using the coin evidence (Mack 1975; 205 DA YID HOLMAN Van Arsdell 1989 - also abbreviated to VA). The large number of additional coins now recorded might be expected to clarify matters, but if anything the situation appears to be far more complex than previously thought. The lack of any other contemporary evidence for most of those individual rulers named on the coins means that any attempt to establish the political history of late Iron Age Kent from the numismatic evidence will always be open to question. Even the names themselves are not always certain. The general sequence of Iron Age coinage in Kent was established by Mack (1953) and has been further refined by Rodwell (1976), Haselgrove (1987) and Van Arsdell (1989). The most recent review is that by Hobbs (1996, 9). The following overview is based on all the numismatic evidence now available. All dates given are subject to an error range of plus or minus ten years. Kentish coin types are found scattered across much of South-East England, and occasionally beyond, but they concentrate in Kent and can be seen as originating in the County. The development of Iron Age coinage in Britain can be sub-divided into phases. Haselgrove has studied the subject in some detail (1987, 75-101 ). The phasing used in this paper, which is in general usage for Iron Age coin studies, is based on Haselgrove's work, but includes an additional category for the Kentish Primary Series potins and some minor amendments to the other phases to take account of recent research. Although in part contemporary, non-gold Continental imports and potin coinages are kept separate from phases 1-5 as they appear to have had a different function. The same applies to the individual potin coinages. Potin coinage - a total of 789 coin finds from Kent (British types only), comprising: Kentish Primary Series ('Thurrock type')[446 coin finds] The French term potin is used to describe high tin content, cast bronze coinages in both Britain and Gaul. The earliest coinage to be produced in Kent, and indeed in Britain, was the series of potin coins now commonly referred to as the 'Thurrock' type follo wing the discovery of a large hoard of these coins at Corringham , near Thurrock, Essex in 1987, but which is described here as the 'Kentish Primary Series' in order to more accurately reflect its apparent area of origin. The only other hoards of this type are both from Kent : Folkestone (Holman, forthcoming) and possibly Gravesend. O􀂐ce very rare, these coins are now by far the commonest Iron Age cows found in Kent. On archaeological evidence (e.g. Haselgrove J 988, 206 IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE TABLE 1. COINAGE PHASES USED Phase Notes Date (+/-10 yrs) P:KP Earliest British potin coinage 2nd century BC (Kentish Primary) P:FLI First potin coinage of 'flat' Late 2nd - l st module (Flat Linear I) century BC P:FLII Latest British potin coinage Mid 1st century (Flat Linear II) BC C (Potin, Imported base metal and Mostly c. 60-30 AE, AR) silver coinage BC 1-5 (AV) All imported gold coinage Late 3rd century and earliest British - c. 50 BC types 6 Kentish Uninscribed Series, c. 50-25 BC other uninscribed British types 7 Dubnovellaunos; Sam--; c. 25 - 1 BC Vosenos; Tasciovanus 8E (early) Eppi!lus, early Cunobelin C. AD 1- 25 types 8L (late) Later Cunobelin types; c. AD 25 - 40 Amminus 9 Latest British coinage C. AD 40 - Conquest I 03), they are likely to be of mid-later second century BC date and copy Southern and Central Gaulish prototypes. The precise prototype is uncertain (Haselgrove 1993, 37), but most likely is a medium size bronze of Massalia (Marseilles) or a close copy. Flat Linear I {231 coin finds] The Kentish Primary Series was superseded by a new series of potin coins referred to here as 'Flat Linear I'; these had probably appeared by I 00 BC and may be connected with the imported gold coinages known as Gallo-Belgic A and B (Haselgrove 1995, 6) (see below). A rare transitional type (VA 102) exists with features from both the Kentish Primary and Flat Linear I series. Both Flat Linear I and II potins (see below) have been classified chronologically by Allen as classes A to L (I) and M to P (II) (Allen 1971 ). The Flat Linear I coins were cast with thinner flans and a linear design, the earliest of which 207 DAVID HOLMAN show a stylistic affinity with the early potin coinage attributed to the Sequani tribe of Eastern Gaul (Haselgrove 1993, 37), imported examples of which are known from Kent. Of the earlier classes of Flat Linear I, the commonest type in east Kent is Allen type D although type B is fairly well represented. Allen type L, which it has been suggested may be concurrent with Caesar's activities in Britain and Gaul (Haselgrove 1995, 5) is still the commonest of the later types. Previous tentative suggestions that these coins originated in the Medway valley (Haselgrove 1987, 151-157), based on the proportion of early Flat Linear I types there, no longer bear scrutiny and origins further east must now be postulated. Flat Linear I potins were frequently hoarded. In Kent, hoards are known from Birchington, Broadstairs and Lenham Heath. Flat Linear II [Jl2 coinfinds] The design of the Flat Linear I po tins became progressively simplistic until their final degradation around the middle of the first century BC by which time they had become smaller with childlike designs. This latest potin series is referred to as 'Flat Linear II' and is generally scarce in east Kent, except at Canterbury and Folkes tone. Their overall distribution seems to indicate an origin primarily in west Kent and beyond, with an increasing number coming from the northern Home Counties. Evidence from excavations in Canterbury seems to indicate that the later Flat Linear I and Flat Linear II potins circulated for many years, perhaps even until after the Roman Conquest (Blockley et al. 1995). In contrast, there is some evidence that the Kentish Primary Series and earlier Flat Linear I types had largely ceased to circulate before the end of the first century BC. Potin coins probably ceased to be produced in the third quarter of the first century BC, at which time struck, rather than cast, bronze coinage started to make an appearance in Kent. This period may be illustrated by a hoard reportedly found near Deal containing late Class I and early Class II potins, supposedly with clay moulds, and a Caption for Plate I opposite I) AV Stater, Gallo-Belgic C (VA 48) 2) Patin, Kentish Primary series (VA !406) 3) Potin, Flat Linear I series (VA 129) 4) Potin, Fial Linear IT series (VA 139) 5) AR Unit, Kentish Uninsc. series (Uncatalogued type) 6) AR unit, Dubnovellaunos (VA I 78) 7) AE unit, Dubnovellaunos (VA 180) 8) AR unit, Tasciovanus/Sego (VA I 85 I) 9) AE 1/2 unit, Sam--- (Uncatalogued type) 10) AE unit, Eppillus (VA 451) 11) AE unit, Cunobelin (VA 1973-1) 12) AR unit, Amminus (VA 194) 208 IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE PLATE I • 2 3 4 • 􀀁 • - 5 6 7 8 •• 9 10 l l 12 Some examples of Kenrish Iron Age Coins 209 DA YID HOLMAN Kentish Uninscribed struck bronze coin (Haselgrove 1995, 6); however, this discovery has not been verified and is not included in the statistics owing to its dubious authenticity. Early Gold (206 coin finds: all British and Continental, phases 1-5) Circulating at the same time as the potin coins were a large number of imported gold coins and their insular derivatives (Haselgrove I 987, 78-92). The very earliest imports are gold staters dating from the third century BC which imitate coins of Philip II of Macedon (359-336 BC); three such imports have been recorded from east Kent, at Ringwould (two) and Alkham. There are also a few half staters of a type known as Gallo-Belgic XA, of late third or early second century BC date. None of these presumably valuable coins are likely to have been intended for circulation use. It is only from the mid-late second century BC that gold coinage, principally consisting of several series of coins classified as GalloBelgic A to F (Allen I 960, 99- I 3 I), was imported in any quantity. This has previously been considered to be the result of immigration (Allen 1960, 98) although this idea has met with less favour in recent years, with trade, mercenary activities and political alliances being other possibilities (Fitzpatrick I 992, 16; Hobbs 1996, 9). According to Caesar, there was immigration from Gaul, and this was probably the period when the high king Di viciacus ruled Britain and Gaul (DBG II, 4). Gallo-Belgic A and B types are scarce finds in east Kent and are more commonly found along the north coast and in the west of the County. Imports into east Kent only begin to increase with Gallo-Belgic C in the early first century BC. Some of the Gallo-Belgic C staters may be British in origin (Fitzpatrick 1992, 8, note 27) and forgeries are also known. The following stater series, Gallo-Belgic E, is very common and coins of this type were imported into Britain in substantial numbers, with many examples known from Kent. Again, some may be British copies (Haselgrove 1993, 39). Gallo-Belgic F is unknown from Kent, although a single example of the late GalloBelgic XF series inscribed 'CRICIRU' is recorded from Tonbridge. There is also a large series of quarter staters known as Gallo-Belgic DB and DC; dating from the early-mid first century BC, these are also common finds in Kent and were subsequently copied. Caesar (DBG V, 12) mentions the use of gold and bronze coins in Britain and these are presumed to have been the Gallo-Belgic gold imports and the potin coinages. Following the Roman conquest of Gaul, native gold coinage was largely suppressed and gold imports into Britain consequently ceased. 210 IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE Interestingly, the distribution of imported gold coinages differs greatly from the (mostly later) imported base metal coinage, suggesting that they served different purposes, the gold perhaps primarily used as bullion and wealth storage and the bronze as small change for daily trade. Kentish Uninscribed Series (I 81 coin finds) From early in the second half of the first century BC, coinage struck from dies rather than cast from moulds began to be produced in Kent, the inspiration for this change coming from Gaul. The earliest of these coins, lacking any attempt at inscriptions, are referred to collectively as the Kentish Uninscribed Series, and they are known in gold, silver and bronze. The large number of imports in circulation had obviated the need for much native Kentish coinage prior to this, apart from the potins. Early Kentish gold is generally very rare with the exception of a series of quarter-starers with several varieties based on Gallo-Belgic D (VA 147) and a slightly later, more debased, type (VA 151). Contemporary with these gold coins are the first native struck bronzes. Probably starting around 40 BC, this is a large and varied group with close affinities to the coinages of Northern Gaul commonly found in east Kent, particularly those coins from the Ambiani and Morini tribal areas which were closest to Kent and which provide many of the prototypes for the Kentish bronzes (Haselgrove 1993, 43). The Kentish coins are considered to have been issued over a period of perhaps 15 to 20 years, ending c. 25 BC, but their relative chronology is difficult to determine and remains a matter of contention. Some types may yet prove to be Gaulish, the lack of a detailed study (and the non-recording of detector finds) in the relevant areas of France (the Pas-de-Calais/Nord region) leaving many unanswered questions. As an example of the difficulties of this period, one type (VA 154-11) attributed to the Kentish Uninscribed Series on the basis of a solitary specimen with an illegible reverse can now be shown to be almost certainly later. Other examples are now known which show that the reverse design is a capricorn, probably copied from a coin of the Roman emperor Augustus and thereby post-dating the Kentish Uninscribed Series. A clear specimen is still awaited, but this type is likely to turn out to belong to the later inscribed series, perhaps of Eppillus. Silver coinage of the Kentish Uninscribed Series is very rare. Although three or four different types have now been recognised, they are all known from only a few examples. One uncatalogued type in 211 DAVID HOLMAN particular shows close links to the bronze coinage, both in style and in the use of common symbols in the field. The range of types, both in silver and bronze, is now rather greater than those listed by Mack (I 975) and Van Arsdell (1989). Dubnovellaunos ( 127 coin finds : Kentish issues only) From around 25 BC, inscriptions started to appear on the Kentish coinage, suggesting that there were at least some people capable of reading the names of those rulers who issued coins and wanted to emphasise their rule. Even with names, the absolute and relative dating of these coins is difficult and the problems and ramifications are discussed by Fitzpatrick ( 1992, 25-26). The first chieftain in Kent to issue coinage in his name was Dubnovellaunos (c. 25 - c. 5 BC) wh o probably also held power in Essex for a time (see below). Some of the later Kentish Uninscribed issues were probably also produced in the early years of his reign and there is clear evidence of the same die-cutters producing both uninscribed and inscribed issues. Dubnovellaunos produced gold, silver and bronze coins, until a few years ago all extremely rare but which are now far more widely known. Opinions on whether the Dubnovellaunos who issued coins in Kent was the same Dubnovellaunos who issued coins in Essex have differed over the years. Mack ( 1975) regarded them as the same person, but Van Arsdell (1989) disagreed. De Jersey (I 996) also considered them to be different while Hobbs ( 1996) indicated a preference for them being the same. This discussion shows no sign of coming to an agreed conclusion, but a pointer in favour of them having been on e person is provided by an uncatalogued bronze type which, although apparently uninscribed, is stylistically attributable to Dubnovellaunos; this type has been found in similar numbers in both Kent and Essex and includes features of both series. A case for there being only one Dubnovellaunos has also been put forward in a study of the gold coinage (Kretz 1998). Dubnovellaunos has often been considered to be the refugee Dumnobellaunos named in the Res Gestae as a suppliant to Augustus (Brunt & Moore 1967, 32), which would give a terminus ante quem of AD 14. However, this is conjectural and the person named may equally as well be the Dumnovellaunus named on certain coins of th e Corieltauvi (cf. Hobbs 1996, 28) or someone not connected with an y coinage series. Nor is there any way to date this event within Augustus' long reign (27 BC - AD 14). The tenuous link with the Res Gestae can be put in further perspective with the recent discovery of two hoards found at Alton in Hampshire, which showed that the 212 IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE Atrebatic (West Sussex, Hampshire area) chieftain known as Tincommius, usually assumed to be the Tim--- mentioned therein, was in fact named Tincomarus. This clearly illustrates the difficulty in extrapolating the full form of personal names from shortened versions (Cheesman 1998). Apart from the tentative Augustus connection, Dubnovellaunos is unknown to history with the exception of his coinage, although the quantity and range of this suggests that he was a ruler of some importance. He may have been one of the 'friendly British kings' recognised by Augustus before 7 BC. SAM--- and Vosenos (48 coin finds) The next coinage to appear in Kent was a series of silver and bronze coins inscribed SA. The silver coins have so far been found in west Kent only but the bronzes have a county-wide distribution. An uncatalogued bronze half unit extends the legend to Sam---, still only an abbreviation of a longer, probably personal, name. Contemporary with these are the extremely rare coins of Vosenos (or Vodenos), known from only a handful of examples in gold and silver, mostly from east Kent. Both Sam--- and Vosenos can be dated to the very end of the first century BC, perhaps overlapping with the latter stages of Dubnovellaunos' reign. However, apart from their coinage, these individuals are again unknown. Sego (Tasciovanus) (22 coin finds) Another inscribed series to appear in east Kent at the very end of the first century BC or start of the first century AD was that bearing the name Sego, known in gold, silver and bronze. Clearly associated stylistically with the coinage of the north Thames (i.e. the area including Hertfordshire and Essex) chieftain Tasciovanus and the Verulamium (St Albans) mint, the appearance of these coins in Kent is difficult to explain. The gold stater names both Tasciovanus and Sego. Perhaps the most likely explanation is that Tasciovanus attempted to gain a foothold in east Kent with its attendant advantages of closer Continental trading links and these coins were minted for use here, either at Verulamium or in Kent by an itinerant moneyer. Finds of gold coins of Tasciovanus in west Kent have previously been considered a sign of political dependence (Haselgrove 1988, 159). Sego may be an abbreviated personal name, but an alternative interpretation is that it was a title meaning 'the powerful one' (Celtic sego = powerful) as a direct reference to Tasciovanus himself. This view takes into account comparable inscriptions found on certain coins of Cunobelin and Amminus (see below) which probably have the same meaning (Ho!- 213 DAVID HOLMAN man 1999). There can be no question of any connection with the Segovax mentioned by Caesar, who ruled much earlier. Eppillus (l 0 1 coin finds : Kentish issues only) The next ruler to issue coins in Kent was Eppillus (c. AD 1-15). The prototypes for his coins appear to be mostly near-contemporary Roman issues of the emperor Augustus. Associated with the northern Atrebatic centre of Calleva (Silchester) by a separate coin series produced there, on which he styled himself 'rex Calleva', Eppillus may have held both seats of power simultaneously for a time before losing Calleva (Bean 1991 ). Eppillus described himself as a son of Commius, a (presumably) Atrebatic chieftain possibly descended from the Gaulish Commius, 'the Atrebatian • mentioned by Caesar. At one point during his reign, Eppillus appears to have formed an alliance with Tincomarus and Verica, who also describe themselves as sons of Commius, to judge from silver coins (VA 442, 443) apparently naming them in addition to Eppillus (Bean 1 991 ). Eppillus is again unknown to history except from his coinage. The comments of Caesar (DBG V, 14) on polyandry may be of some relevance in any discussion of dynastic issues. The Kentish series of Eppillus is varied, with gold, silver and bronze issues known, but it is distinct from his Calleva series which did not circulate in Kent. The gold and silver coins are still very rare, but the bronzes are now known in some quantity. There are four catalogued types of bronze for Eppillus with three or four other extremely rare uncatalogued types including half-units. A number of types we re produced showing a Victory figure which has been interpreted by Nash (1987, 137) as an indication of a political success. The same would perhaps appear appropriate for Cunobelin (see below). Cunobelin (201 coin finds : all types) Sometime around AD 15, Eppillus appears to have been replaced by Cunobelin (c. AD 10-40), a leader of the north Thames tribes based at Camulodunum (Colchester) and probably the most powerful man in Britain at the time. He is attested by Roman sources as 'Britannorum Rex' (Suetonius, Gaius, xliv). Cunobelin, who described himself as a son ofTasciovanus, was apparently successful in his attempt to annex the whole of Kent to his kingdom and many interesting features are found in his Kentish coinage. The coinage of Cunobelin has a wider and more even distribution across Kent than any other of the inscribed dynastic issues. For the first time, inscribed gold coins appeared in Kent in some quantity, 214 IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE most bearing the well-known 'corn ear' obverse design (e.g. VA 2010, 2025). However, it is the silver coinage of Cunobelin which provides particular interest for Kentish coin studies. Rodwell (I 976, 274) noted that no silver coins of Cunobelin were known from Kent at that time; this situation has now changed to such an extent that a probable east Kent mint can be deduced as producing silver (and bronze) coinage. One type (VA 2067) has a clear Kentish distribution and is far removed from the well-executed issues of the Camulodunum mint with its crude engraving, degenerating almost to 'matchstick' style. The same die-cutter was also responsible for an uncatalogued silver issue of similarly crude style, again with a clear Kentish distribution. Another silver issue of Cunobelin which may possibly, although less certainly, be associated with Kent is the late issue bearing the enigmatic legend 'SOLIDV'; this is found in east Kent but is extremely rare. 'SOLIDV', the meaning of which is unclear, could refer to a mint site (Rodwell 1976, 276), a local official, or even the name of the moneyer. Fitzpatrick ( 1992, 26) has suggested, based on distributions, that certain coins of Cunobelin were struck for use in particular regions, such as those inscribed CVNO/T ASCI F found in Hertfordshire. It now appears that certain bronze issues of Cunobelin were probably struck in Kent and were primarily used there. As with the Kentish silver coins, these bear the legend CVN or CVNO on both sides and make no reference to the mint at Camulodunum (CAM). The bronze type VA 1981 is a strong candidate as a Kentish mint product. Another type (VA 1989), bearing on its obverse a stylised ship design, may also be a Kentish issue with the reverse legend SE meaning 'powerful' (Holman 1999). One obverse die of this type shows that the legend was originally intended to read 'CAMV', but this was changed to 'CVNO' (Muckelroy et al. 1978, 439-444), suggesting that although this die was cut by someone familiar with the Camulodunum mint, that was not the intended mint for this type. Some other coin types of Cunobelin were minted at Camulodunum primarily for use in Kent to judge from their distribution, and these probably date from soon after his acquisition of Kent; the most common of all struck bronze Iron Age coins found in Kent, VA 1973-1, one specimen of which appears to bear a CAM mintmark, is a clear example. There is some evidence that this type was mass-produced within a short time span with one die showing signs of having been crudely repaired and the striking frequently being off-centre. All of the bronze coins mentioned here feature a Victory figure in the design and it is possible that this is a reference to Cunobelin gaining power in Kent. Rodwell (1976, 274-276) has previously suggested 'wreath' 215 DA YID HOLMAN and 'Victory' types were produced following the annexation of the Verulamium region and there is no reason why this should not apply to Kent also. A possible parallel for this under Eppillus has been mentioned above. It has been noted previously (Fitzpatrick 1992, 27) that late issues of Cunobelin heavily outnumber his earlier issues, a situation found on the majority of sites in the north Thames region and clearly illustrated for Northamptonshire (Curteis 1996, 27). It appears however that the situation in Kent is very different, the early issues forming the bulk of Cunobelin' s coinage in the region. Possible explanations for this will be discussed elsewhere including the possibility that some of the Kentish mint products are later than generally supposed (Holman & Parfitt, forthcoming). Amminus (25 coin finds) The final Iron Age coins to be produced in Kent were those bearing the name Amminus, probably Adminius, a son of Cunobelin who fled Britain to seek refuge under the Roman emperor Gaius about AD 39 (Suetonius, Gaius, xliv). These are known only in silver and bronze and are still very rare. They bear some comparison with the later issues of Cunobelin, in particular the silver unit VA 192, the obverse of which copies a silver issue of Cunobelin. One silver type of Amminus bears the legend SEC, again probably meaning 'powerful' (Holman 1999). However, it is the appearance of an apparent mint signature, DVNO, which provides the main interest of Amminus' coinage. This has been attributed to Canterbury (Haselgrove 1987, I 43 ), but there must be strong objections to this since Canterbury was known as Durovernum (fort by the alder-swamp) and is unlikely to have ever incorporated a DVNO- element. DVNO would seem to refer to a site on a hill (Celtic dun; Rivet & Smith 1979, 344) and the principal distribution of these coins lies to the east of Canterbury. The site of DVNO must therefore remain a matter of conjecture (Holman 1999); Bigbury is a possibility, but there is no evidence of late occupation here from the limited excavations undertaken to date. Post-Conquest Following the Roman Conquest, native Iron Age coinage in SouthEast England ceased to be produced, but it continued in circulation for perhaps another generation (Haselgrove 1993, 62) before probably being totally replaced by the new Roman coinage when t􀂆e coin supply increased after AD 64 although, as noted by Curteis 216 IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE (1996, 33), conclusive evidence is elusive. An analogous situation existed in Gaul for many years after its conquest (Nash 1978, 13-14, 27), as reflected at Chilly and Digeon although these sites were probably sanctuaries (Allen 1995, 33). The displacement of Iron Age coin types, particularly later issues, is primarily attributed to the Roman army (Haselgrove 1993, 50, n.66). One likely reason for the continued use of native coinage for several years after the conquest is that the supply of Roman coinage was initially very restricted owing to the failure of the Roman authorities to supply the quantity required in either Britain or Gaul. Copies of Claudian aes were produced in some quantity on an unofficial basis, but it is unlikely that they alone would have filled the void (Boon I 988, 118-124 ). The native coins would have been expected to continue to circulate in this situation, perhaps as an emergency coinage until the newly conquered province could be properly organised and supplied. Claudian coinage has been found at a number of sites across Kent. Many of these are contemporary copies, as is usual. Although of larger size than Iron Age coins, they appear to be scarcer as metaldetector finds. Pre-Claudian Roman coins are also present but none can be shown to have derived from a pre-Conquest context and their frequently extremely worn condition suggests a long life for many of them. Apart from the Richborough conquest period losses, the only certain Claudian coin deposit from Kent is the Bredgar hoard containing a number of aurei and dated to AD 43. Other pre-Conquest coins (217 coin finds) Apart from the many Gaulish imports and coins minted by other British tribes, e.g. Iceni, Corieltauvi, etc., a small number of early coins manufactured and used in the Mediterranean region are known from Kent. Although some may be connected with the Roman Conquest, brought in by the army, the numbers are such, particularly for certain types, that the possibility of a much earlier importation date cannot be discounted. In particular, a bronze issue of Carthaginian Sicily and a bronze issue of Ebusus (Ibiza), both of fourth to second century BC date, occur fairly regularly (ten and three respectively). The reason for such coins appearing in Kent is uncertain, as is the date of their importation, but mercenary activity and trade are both possibilities. The idea that they may have been lost in the eighteenth century (Laing 1968, 15) can safely be discounted in the case of the Kentish finds. 217 DA YID HOLMAN THE DISTRIBUTION OF IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT Kent is a well defined geographical area, being a large county with a long peninsular coastline. Its closeness to mainland Europe makes it a likely place to find evidence of Continental influence. The name of Kent derives from the Celtic Cantion, later Romanised to Cantium, which translates as rim or border, i.e. the rim of the land (Rivet & Smith 1979, 300). Topographically, the elevation of Kent ranges from marshland around the coast to chalk downland reaching in excess of 250m above OD in the extreme west. The spine of the North Downs cuts across the central part of the county, separating the north from the south. The Downs are cut by the three major rivers, the Darent, Medway and Stour, and numerous smaller watercourses give rise to downland valleys. There is a broad range of soil types and the countryside is productive, both for woodland and farming. Everitt ( 1986) has classified Kent into a number of distinct landscapes. It has been found that the vast majority of Iron Age coins come from his 'Foothills' and 'Downland' areas although an attempt to isolate separate regions of coin circulation by this method failed to produce any convincing results. Nevertheless, the geography of Kent provides a useful basis for a division based on the rivers. A general description of Kent is given by Caesar who wrote that it was by far the most civilised part of Britain with a lifestyle little different from that in Gaul. In the archaeological record, many details of the late Iron Age in Kent are still unclear. There were apparently few hillforts in the county, the most well known being Oldbury and Bigbury, and valley oppida are presumed, on archaeological and etymological evidence, to have existed at Canterbury, Rochester and Loose/Boughton Monchelsea. Much of Kent was densely populated and covered with homesteads according to Caesar (DBG V, 12). It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that there were a number of other major settlements whose names are now lost, some of which have only come to light since the advent of metal detecting. Archaeologically, Kent falls within the region covered by the core area of the late Iron Age Aylesford-Swarling cu Iture (Cunliffe 1991, 133). It was inhabited by the tribes known collectively as the Cantiaci (Rivet & Smith 1979, 299), although this name is not attested by Caesar. Caesar (DBG V, 22) mentions four kings in Kent in 54 BC, namely Carvilius, Cingetorix, Segovax and Taximagulus, but does not link them to any specific tribe; from this, it has long been postulated that the county was in some way sub-divided into four separate kingdoms (Cunliffe 1991, 146). The possible boundaries of these kingdoms have seldom been considered in detail. Cunliffe 218 I. Alkham 2. Bigbury 3. Birchington 4. Boughton Monchelsea 5. Boxley 6. Bredgar 7. Broadstairs 8. Canterbury 9. Chilham 10. Deal 11. Elham 12. Faversham 13. Folkestone 14. Frinsted 15. Gravesend 16. Higham Land above 100 metres O.D. I J 0 km 10 10 22 English Channel Fig. I Regions and Zones of Kent (showing places mentioned in the text) 􀀂 􀀃 tl'l (") 0 z ► C) z 􀀄 z :-:l ► 17. Keston I 18. Lenham Heath ...::; 19. Oldbury 20. Radfield 21. Richborough 22. Ringwould 23. Rochester 24. Ryarsh 25. Springhead 26. Stoke 27. Tonbridge 28. Tunstall 29. W esterham DAVID HOLMAN ( 1982, 48) has suggested that the principal rivers of Kent, the Stour, Medway, Darent and Thames served as central routeways with kingdoms extending on either side of them. An obvious alternative is that rivers and other topographical features served as the boundaries (Rodwell 1976, 279; Haselgrove 1987, 137). Canterbury and Rochester, both major late Iron Age settlements, are situated on the principal rivers. For the purposes of this study, Kent has been divided into four topographical regions using the sea and principal rivers as the boundaries. These provide convenient units within which the observed differences in coin distribution can be studied. These regions are as follows: Region A : east of the River Stour, including the Isle of Thanet; Region B : between the Rivers Stour and Medway, with a possible sub-division along the line of the North Downs escarpment (north and south zones); Region C : between the Rivers Medway and Darent, subdivided as Region B Region D : west of the Darent. The coin distributions in each of these regions show some reasonably well defined, although not numismatically distinct, differences. Since the number of coin finds from east Kent (Region A) is greater than the combined total of the other three regions, this area has been examined in greater depth and a detailed study is currently under preparation. A summary of the numbers of coin finds from the four regions of Kent for each phase is shown in Table 2 and i n histogram form below (Figs 2 & 3). The numbers of coins of each metal are also shown, as proposed by Rodwell (l 976, 314 ); plated coins, i.e. contemporary forgeries, have been treated as being of the metal they purport to be. The phases have been explained in Table 1 above. It is instructive to compare Regions A, B and C in their entirety, for a number of differences are apparent. Firstly, the ratio of Kentish Primary potins falls sharply west of the Stour Valley until they account for only 7 per cent of the recorded Iron Age coinage west of the Medway in Region C. Recent detector finds confirm this pattern. In Region A, Kentish Primary potins are still the most frequent finds; in Region B, they are also evident, principally immediately to the south of the North Downs escarpment, but less frequent; in Region C, they continue to be markedly scarce compared with further east. This strongly suggests that east Kent was the area of origin of these coins. In contrast, Flat Linear I potins are more frequent in Region B than in Region A, but they reduce to the Region A level west of the River 220 IRON AGE COINAGE IN KENT: A REVIEW OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE TABLE 2. COIN FINDS FROM KENT BY REGION, ZONE, PHASE AND MET A L Phase A B BN BS C CN CS D Total P:KP 406 25 2 23 13 9 4 2 446 P:FLI 157 45 16 29 20 17 3 9 231 P:FLll 82 14 12 2 4 2 2 1 2 112 C 116 8 2 6 2 2 0 1 127 1-5 86 63 31 32 46 21 25 11 206 6 132 30 11 1 9 28 22 6 6 196 7 155 37 21 1 6 41 31 10 10 243 8E 199 36 15 21 28 19 9 5 268 8L 5 4 4 1 3 8 8 0 2 68 9 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 Un-ph 57 9 3 6 7 4 3 I 74 Totals 1445 271 114 157 199 137 62 59 1974 Potin 685 87 31 56 38 29 9 23 833 AE 524 60 18 42 76 59 17 7 667 AR 101 17 5 12 19 16 3 7 144 AV 135 107 60 47 66 33 33 22 330 Notes. AE=struck bronze: AR=Silver: A V=Gold. The Mediterranean coins discussed on page 217 are not counted above, not being Celtic. lndividual coins are each counted as a single coin find. Hoards have generally been counted as one coin find; hoards including several coins from more than one phase have been counted as having one coin find for each of those phases, on the basis that such a hoard may be a deposit over a long period of time, e.g. Stoke. The figures relate to Kent finds only and do not include Kentish coins found elsewhere. Medway in Region C. West of the Stour Valley, they exceed by some margin the number of Kentish Primary potins, a fact not immediately evident on the ground because of the lack of recorded finds in the large B lean Forest area west of Canterbury, but increasingly clear around the Medway Valley. Flat Linear II potins show little variation between regions east of the River Darent, always remaining at a low level. The Region A figure is exaggerated by the large number of finds at Canterbury and Folkestone which account for the majority of Flat Linear 11 potins in that region. This may be seen to lend weight to the possibility that Flat Linear II potins were, at least in part, a north Thames coinage 221 REGION A REGIONS 50.00 40.00 45.00 35.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 30.00 25.00 ";/125.00 "/II 20.00 20.00 15.00 15.00 10.00 10.00 5.00 5.00 D.. 􀀏 5 0 It) CD ... 11.1 15 􀀓 .1 co C) z 􀀐 􀀑 􀀒 !2 :::; 5 0 '? CD .... !M .J 0, z 􀀐 􀀑 􀀒 􀀔 11. 11. co a: 11. a: a: a: D.. 0 tl a: PHASE/METAL 􀀕 PHASE/METAL D.. > < Iv s tv ::i:: Iv ZONEBN ZONEBS 0 60.00 40.00 ""􀀌􀀍.,,·.,.-.,u,,....·􀀎 .,• .,, ,.,..,... ......- .􀀫·--· ....... 􀀬,..-......... _,,.., ........i i 35.00 ! 50.00 􀀖 30.00 􀀗 40.00 25.00 ;#!30.00 '#-20.00 􀀉· 20.00 15.00 10.00 10.00 5.00 D.. :::; :::; 0 "? z 􀀑 0:: 􀀓 􀀖 I!-, u. .!. z UJ 􀀒 􀀓 !z :::i 5 0 ..,

Previous
Previous

The Construction of the Sevenoaks Railway Tunnel 1863-68

Next
Next

Maidstone Grammar School 1833-82