"The Watlington Hoard" Topic
6 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't make fun of others' membernames.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Medieval Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestMedieval
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleCommand figures for the 1410 Teutonics.
Featured Workbench ArticleJay Wirth shows how using inks makes it easier to paint a 15mm scale army.
Featured Movie Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
redcoat | 17 Jan 2017 11:39 a.m. PST |
Hi all, This (Viking?) hoard of silver coins and other broken pieces of silver, buried around the 870s, was reviewed recently on British TV in the 'Dig for Britain' series, in which Dr Alice Roberts posited that it posed serious questions for Alfred's military reputation. In short, the coins show Alfred and Ceolwulf II, little-known King of Mercia, seated side by side in C4th Roman 'Two Emperors' fashion – i.e., proclaiming the significance of their political unity (against the Vikings, presumably). Roberts indicated that this showed Ceolwulf must have been much more important than Alfred's supporters later allowed in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, where he is (dishonestly?) written off as a foolish Viking puppet of no significance. Parallels with Stalinist airbrushing of 'non-persons' has been suggested in the press. What Roberts et al didn't say was who is believed to have minted the coins . Was it Alfred? Was it Ceolwulf? Surely the significance of the message depends totally on *whose* message it was? I could mint coins proclaiming wildly that 'Donald Trump acknowledges me as master of the universe' – none of which means anything unless Donald himself verifies my claims. The Guardian article online indicates that the coins were jointly issued. Is that a bold overstatement? And was such a thing even possible? Does anyone have any thoughts on this fascinating issue? |
Cerdic | 17 Jan 2017 12:09 p.m. PST |
Based on what we 'think' we know, my opinion is this. The coins could have been jointly issued. The 'twin emperors' design probably was to emphasise English unity in the face of the Viking threat. It may have also been a political move to flatter Ceolwulf. The Chronicle implys that he was a puppet of the Vikings. Maybe Alfred wanted him to change allegiance and become a puppet of Wessex? Alfred certainly seems to have had a long term plan to unify the English kingdoms, preferably under the King of Wessex! I think the coins do show that Ceolwulf had more independence than the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle suggests. |
willlucv | 17 Jan 2017 12:10 p.m. PST |
This has been a feature of archaeology programming for years. Every new find of significance has to completely change our understanding of the people it relates to. There is a show fronted by Neil Oliver at the moment that seems to have dusted off the old single point of origin theory and applied it to Neolithic stone circles, it's complete and a poor reflection of Orcadian prehistoric archaeology which is a travesty, given how well preserved it is. |
Rhysius Cambrensis | 17 Jan 2017 12:38 p.m. PST |
Im glad I am not the only one huffing and puffing in anger over the rubbish spouted by that BBC series regarding the archaeological digs and the Ordadian culture that existed in the Orkneys in the Neolithic period. |
Wackmole9 | 17 Jan 2017 1:33 p.m. PST |
Haven't British archaeologists already throw out the Saxon Chronicles as being unreliable. |
uglyfatbloke | 17 Jan 2017 3:53 p.m. PST |
Hooray for Will and Rhys. |
|