early imitations of the gold florin of in the name of theodore i

Early Imitations of the Gold Florin ofFlorence and the Imitation Florin of Chivasso

in the name of Theodore I Paleologus,Marquis of Montferrat (1306-1338)

WILLIAM R. DAY. JR*

INTRODUCTION

In the later middle ages governments throughout Europe and the Mediterraneanadopted gold coinage mainly for use in the settlement of large internal andinternational payments. This signalled the general return to gold in the West afterCharlemagne's monetary reforms of the later eighth century and the abandonmentof gold in much of Europe for nearly five hundred years.1 The new gold

* This paper stems from work on Medieval European Coinage, vol. 12: North Italy (Cambridge.forthcoming). The author wishes to express his gratitude to the co-authors of the volume, PhilipGrierson. Michael Matzke, and Andrea Saecocci, who have all read the paper in one form or anotherand have commented upon i(. He would also like to thank Marc Bompaire. Giorgio Pea. and LuigiProvero lor their many useful comments and suggestions and Marcus Phillips for his help in editingthe text.

Additional abbreviations: AARA - Aui deWAecademia rovereiana degli agiati; AESC = Annates:economies, societes, civilisations; AMSSSP = Atti e inemorie delta Societa savonese di storia pallia;ASI= Arcliiviostorico italiano; BEC = Bibliotheque de t'Ecole des Charles: BSSS= Bihlioteea deltaSocieta storica subalpina; EME = Early medieval Europe; JMII = Journal of medieval history;MemRAST = Memorie delta Reals Accademia delle Scienze di Torino; MGH Const. = MonumentaGermaniae Historical Conslitutiones ct Acta Publico Imperatoritm el Begum (Hannover 1826-):NeueZl-TV = Neue Zeitschrift des Eerdinadeums fiir Tirol and Vorarlherg; RIS = Rerum ItalicarumScriptores, 25 vols (Milan 1723-51): RSI= Rivista storica italiana.

1There is a considerable body of literature on both the monetary reforms of Charlemagne and thereturn to gold in Europe occasioned lirst by the introduction of the gold coinages of Florence. Genoa,and Veniceover the course of the second half of the thirteenth century, and then by the wide diffusionof imitation and hybrid florins and ducats in the fourteenth and fifteenthcenturies. On Charlemagne'smonetary reforms, see P. Grierson. 'Cronologia delle riforme monetarie di Carlo Magno', RIN 56,1954 (1954). pp. 65-79: P. Grierson, 'Money and coinage under Charlemagne', in Karl der Grosse:Lebenswerkund Nachleben. ed. Helmut Beumann (Diisseldorf. 1965). pp. 501-36: C. Wickham, 'Theuse of money in Lombard Tuscany and the monetary reforms of Charlemagne', in Isiiiuzioniecclesiastiche delta Toscana medievale (Galatina. 1980). pp. 27-34; S. Suchodolski, 'La date de lagrande reforme monetaire de Charlemagne'. QT 10 (1981). pp. 399-409: W.R. Day. Jr. 'The monetaryreforms of Charlemagne and the circulation of money in early medieval Campania". EME 6 (1997),pp. 25-45. On the return to gold in the West, see R.S. Lope/. 'Settecento anni fa: II ritorno all'oronell'Occidente dueccntesco'. RSI 65 (1953). pp. 19-55, 161-98; R.S. Lopez, 'Back to gold. 1252',EcllR n.s.. 9 (1956). pp. 219-40; A.M. Watson. 'Back to gold - and silver'. EcHR n.s.. 20 (1967). pp.1-34; T. Walker. 'The Italian gold revolution of 1252: shifting currents in the pan-Mediterranean flowof gold', in Precious metals in the later medieval and early modern worlds, ed. J.F. Richards(Durham. 1983). pp. 29-52.

184 WILLIAM R. DAY

currencies of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries were based largely on theFlorentine florin and the Venetian ducat, which were originally struck at virtuallythe same standard.2 For the most part, mints in western and central Europe at firstmodelled their gold coins after the florin, while mints in the easternMediterranean used the ducat as their model.3 The adoption of theFlorentine/Venetian standard as the international benchmark for the new goldcurrencies was an important part of the 'commercial revolution of the middleages'.4 because it helped to lower the cost of trade by making it easier todetermine exchange rates and by decreasing opportunities for fraud.5

In western and central Europe, three important factors appear to haveconverged in the early fourteenth century to encourage rulers throughout to issuetheir own imitation florins.6 First, around 1320. the Angevin king of Hungary,Charles Robert (1308-42). intensified his exploitation of the gold deposits in hismines at Kremnica (Kormocbanya, Kremnitz), near Banska Bystrica in modernSlovakia and, as a direct consequence, the amount of gold coming into centraland western Europe increased enormously.7 Second, in September 1322, PopeJohn XXII (1316-34) began to issue papal florins from the mint of the Avignonpopes at Pont de Sorgues. These coins, struck with the direct assistance of theFlorentine commune, were the earliest imitation florins, as opposed to hybrids or

2 The mint at Florence first began to strike its gold florin in 1252. and Venice issued its ducat forthe first time in 1285. The florin initially had a fineness of twenty-four carats and were struck atninety-six to the Florentine libbra. or pound, which gives a theoretical weight of 3.5368 g. The orderthat provided for the introduction of theducat in Venice, issued on 31 October 1284. declared that thenew coins were to be at least as fine as the florin. On the introduction of the florin and its

characteristics,see M. Bernocchi. Lemonete deltaRepubblica fiorentina. 5 vols (Florence, 1974-851,III. pp. 58-62. On the introduction of the ducat see N. Papadopoli. Monetedi Venezia. 3 vols (Venice.1893-1919). I. pp. 123-36: F.C. Lane and R.C. Mueller, Money and Banking in Medieval andRenaissance Venice I: Coins and moneys ofaccount (Baltimore and London. 1985). pp. 280-5: A.M.Stahl. Zecca: the Mint of Venicein the Middle Ages (Baltimore and London. 2000). pp. 30-3.

1 Curiously, no European or Mediterranean ruler issued a gold coin modelled after die genovino ofGenoa, which was first issued around the same time as the Florentine florin.

4 1have borrowed the phrase 'commercial revolution" from R.S. Lopez, The commercialrevolutionof the MiddleAges. 950-1350 (Cambridge. 1976).

5 On the 'internationalisation' of the florin, see S.R. Epstein. The rise of states and markets inEurope. 1300-1750 (London and New York. 2000: Routledge explorations in economic history 17).p. 59. See also P. Spufford. Moneyand its use in medieval Europe (Cambridge. 1988). pp. 319-21.

6 In the interest of clarity, the term 'imitation' is used here to refer to coins that are modelled afteranother coinage. They bear the same obverse and reverse types as the originals - in the case of florinimitations, the fleur-de-lis and the standing image of St John the Baptist, respectively - but not thesame legends. Instead, the legends typically give the identity and/or location of the issuer. In mosicases, imitationswere slightly less fineand/or lighter than the originals but were still struck al a goodstandard. The term 'counterfeit" refers to coins of unknown origin and varying standards that attemptto reproduce the legendsof the original and were presumably intended to pass as such.

7 A. Pohl. Ungarische Coldgulden desMittelalters (1325-1540)(Graz. 1974). pp. 22-3: LaneandMueller. Moneyand banking(n. 2). pp. 434-6: .Spufford, Moneyand its use (n. 5). pp. 267-71; Stahl.Zecca (n. 2), pp. 47-50.

EARLY IMITATIONS OF THE GOLD FLORIN 185

counterfeits.8 It was the introduction of the florin by Pope John, probably morethan anything else, that set the precedent for the wide diffusion of florinimitations.9 Third, the far-reaching activities of Florentine merchant-bankersthroughout western and central Europe in the textile trade, in the collection andtransfer of papal revenues, and even in mining, minting and mint administrationfurther facilitated the broad dissemination of the florin and helped to make itpopular.1" Already in 1317. Florence had negotiated a comprehensive treaty withPisa that afforded its merchants improved access to the port of Pisa, thus

" The earliest florins after those of Florence were the florins of the Roman Senate, struck in 1305.but they were hybrids rather than imitations because they replaced the fleur-de-lis with a shield,surrounded by the legend ROMA GAPVT MVNDI in the margin. See Bernocchi. Le monete. V(n. 2). p. 55. nos 23-4.

9 On the florin of Pope John XXII and his successors, struck at the Avignon mint of Pont deSorgues, see V. Capobianchi, 'Nuove osservazioni sopra alcune monete battute dai papi nel contadovcnesino d'Avignone'. RIN 3 (1890). pp. 217-35; R. Vallenlin du Cheylard. 'Lc scigneuriage auxateliers pontilicaux de Sorgues. d'Avignon et de Carpentras". SNR 3 (1893). pp. 183—1; C. deCastellane, 'Observations sur le classcment des premiers florins pontificaux du Comtat-Venaissin etd'Avignon'. RN* 10(1906), pp. 35-50; E. Martinori, 'La zecca papaledi Pontedella Sorga (contadovenesino)', RIN 20 (1907), pp. 231-42; G. Mollat, 'Les papes d'Avignon ct lew hotel des monnaiesa Sorgues (Comtat-Venaissin)', RN* 12 (1908), pp. 252-66; M. Bompaire, 'Le monnaie de Pont-de-Sorgues dans la premiere moitic de XIVc siecle', RNb 25 (1983), pp. 149-52, 156-8, 167-70. TheFlorentines were involved in the minting of florins for the Avignon popes from the very beginning.For example, see A. Coulon, ed.. Lettres secretes et curialesdu RapeJean XXII (1316-1334) relativesa la France extraites des registres du Vatican (Paris. 1906). II, coll. 177-8, no. 1546. Amongnumismatists, only Gamberini di Scarfea appears to have sensed thai the Avignon florin was theearliest imitation of (he Florentine coin. See C. Gamberini di Scarfea. Leimitazioni e le contraffaz.ionimonelarienel mondo:prima tenlalivo di uno studiogeneratee pratico ad uso dei niimismatici 3: Leprincipal! imitazioni e contraffazioni ilaliane e stranieredi monele di z.ecclie italiane medioevali emoderne (Bologna. 1956). p. 234. no. 644.

10 For an idea of the geographical extent of Florentine merchant-banking in the fourteenth century,see A. Evans (ed.). 1m pralica delta mcrcaiura di Francesco Balducci Pegolotti (Cambridge. Mass..1936); Y. Renouard, 'Le compagnie commercial] liorentine del trecento (dai document! dell'ArchivioVaticano)'. ASI96 (1938), pp.41-68. 163-79.On the roleof Florentines in theearlydevelopment ofpapal finance, see G. Olsen. 'Italian merchants and the performance of papal banking functions in theearly thirteenth century", in Economy, society, and government in medieval Italy: essays in memoryofRobert L. Reynolds. D. Herlihy, R. S. Lopez, and V. Slessarev (eds) (Kent. Ohio, 1969). pp. 43-63;W.R. Day. Jr. "The early development of the Florentine economy, c. 1100-1275' (Doctoraldissertation. London School of Economics and Political Science 2000). pp. 235-9. On the politicaland diplomatic relations of Florence with the Avignon popes, see P.Partner. 'Florence and the Papacy.1300-1375".in John Rigby Hale. John RogerLoxdaleHighfield. and Beryl Smalleyed. Europe in thelate middle ages (London. 1965). pp. 76-121. On the involvement of Florentines in mining andmintingal Kremnica itself, see P. Spufford.The merchant inmedieval Europe (London. 2002),p. 371.Florentines were also involved in striking the earliest florins for Count Amedeo VI of Savoy in 1352.See li. Biaggi. Otto secoli di sloria delle monele sabaude 1: / conli e i duclii del medioevo da Oddonea FilibertO II. sec. XI 1504 (Turin. 1993). p. 131; G. Di Gangi, L'attivila mineraria e meiallurgicanelle Alpi occidental! italiane net medioevo. Piemonte e Voile d'Aosta: fonti serine e material!(Oxford. 2001;BAR International Series951), pp. 214-15, esp. 215, n. 1473. To my knowledge,thereis no single work on the activitiesof Florentineor Tuscanmini-masters and moneyersin Italyoutsideof Tuscany and elsewhere in Europe, but see A.M. Nada Patronc. 'Uomini d'affari in Tirolo nei secoliXIII e XIV. ASI 121 (1963). pp. 176-86; G. Bcrnardi and A. Cosanz Bruni. 'I Toscani nella zeccapalriareale*.Alessandro Malcangi (ed.), / Toscani in Eriuli. Alii del Convegno. lldine. 26-27 gennaio1990 (Florence, 1992), pp. 74-82; M. Allen, 'Italians in English mints and exchanges', in C. Given-Wilson (ed.). Fourteenth centuryEnglandII (Woodbridge. 2002), pp. 53-62.

186 WILLIAM R. DAY

precipitating a notable expansion of Florentine trade and the furtherinternationalisation of the florin. Commercial relations between Florence and

Pisa collapsed in 1322. but the Florentines and their Guelf allies in Tuscany, withthe support of Pope John, compelled the Pisans to subscribe to a new treaty in1329."

The idea that the introduction of the papal florin in 1322 precipitated the entirephenomenon of florin imitations raises serious questions about the conventionaldating of several individual issues of imitation florins. Bernocchi. in his catalogueof imitation and hybrid florins,dates a number of imitations to rulers whose datesstretch back before the advent of the Avignon florin and. in one instance, to aperiod that antedates the introduction of the papal coin altogether.12 Bernocchi'sdatings are sometimes based on mistaken attributions. This indeed is the case forthe florins that Bernocchi attributed to Count Henry II of Gorizia (1304-23),'(toArchbishop Gaillard de Saumate of Aries (1317-23)." to Count Dietrich III ofIlohcnlimburg (1308-64).IS and to Florent of Hainaut as prince of Achaia

11 For the treaties of 1317 and 1329. see F. Dal Borgo (ed.). Raccolta di scelti diplomi pisani (Pisa.1765). pp. 322-48. 361-89. For chronicle accounts of these episodes, see G. Villani. Nuova cronica.ed. Giuseppe Porta (Parma. 1991). II. pp. 287-90 (bk. 10. chap. 82). 361 (bk. 10. chap. 165). 690-2(bk 11. chap. 135). Sec also G. Volpe. 'Pisa, Firenze. Impcro al principio del 1300 e gli inizi dellasignoriacivile a Pisa'. Studi storici: periodica Irimestrale di A. Crivellncci e di E. I'ais 11 (1902). pp.177-203. 293-337. csp. 314-16: R. Davidsohn. Sioria di Firenze, trans. Giovanna Ballisla Klein. 8vols (Florence. 1977). IV. pp. 832-4. 922-4. 1199-1203; A. Astorri, La mercanzia a Firenze nellaprimameld del trecento(Florence. 1998: Biblioteca storica toscana 34). pp. 162-5.

i: Bernocchi. Le monete (n. 2). V." Rizzolli has securely dated the introduction of the anonymous gold florin of the counts of

Gorizia to 1351 on the basis of the order for the minting of the earliest issue. See H. Rizzolli.Miinzgeschichle des Alttirolischen Raumes im Miltelalter und Corpus Numinorum TirolensiumMediaevalittm 1: Die Miinzstatten Brixen/lnnshruck. Trient. I.ienz und Meran vor 1363(Bolzano/Bozen. 1991). p. 285. Rizzolli attributed the earliest issue to Henry III (1342-63) andMeinhard VII (1342-74). but Saccocci has suggested that it ought to be attributed to Albert III(1342-74) as well. Although Albert ruled over a pari of ihe county that was distinct from the parigoverned by Henry and Meinhard. he nevertheless continued lo issue coins from the mint of thecounts of Gorizia at Lienz. It is therefore likely Albert shared a role in the minting of the anonymousflorins with his co-rulers. See Saccocci. unpublished manuscript, forthcoming in MEC 12: North Italy.

14 Orsini attributed the florin of Aries with the legend G ARQL ARCh'P on the side with the fleur-de-lis to William II de La Garde (1361-74), but Poey d'Avant assigned it to Archbishop Gaillard.Engel and Serrure argued that the florin arleien was first introducedonly under Stephan tie La Garde(1351-61) sometime before 1354 and they therefore assigned the coins with this obverse legend toWilliam. Giard continued to follow Poey d"Avant*s attribution, but the hoard evidence clearlysuggests a later dating, and numismatists now accept that the coin was struck under William. See I.Orsini. Storia delle monete della Repubblica Jiorentina (Florence, 1760). p. xlv; F. Poey d'Avant,Monnaies feodales de France, (Paris. 1858-62), vol. 2. p. 341. no. 4103; A. Engel and R. Serrure.Traile de numismaiique dumoyen age. (Paris, 1891-1905),vol. 3. p. 1019:J.-B. Giard. 'Le florin d'orau Baptisle et ses imitations en France au XlVe siecle', BEC 125 (1967). pp. 121-2. esp. 122; M.Bompaire and J.-N. Barrandon, "Les imitations de florins dans la valleedu Rhone au XlVe siecle'.BEC 147 (1989). pp. 164. 186. 193-4.

15 Bernocchi evidently followed Gamberini di Scarfea both in dating Dietrich incorrectly to1297-1348and in assigning the florin withthe legend DSORI GrOOMSS on the side with the lleur-de-lislo the mint at Hohenlimburg under Dietrich III of Limhurg. but the original attribution was made by de


(1289-97)."' Other florins, including the coin of the Chivasso mint struck in thename of the Marquis Theodore I Paleologus, are datable to periods of rule thatbegan before 1322 but were introduced after that date. These coins include theflorins of Edward III of England as duke of Aquitaine (1317-62. king of Englanduntil 1377),'7 of Duke Eudes IV of Burgundy (1315-50),'8 of the DauphinGuigues VIII of Viennois (1319-33)," of DukeJohn III of Brabant (1312-55),20of Count Louis II of Nevers orCreey (1322-46),2I of Charles Robert of Anjou as

l.imburg-Stinim. See C.T. de Limburg-Stirum. 'Monnaies des comtes de Limburg-sur-la-I.enne. pt I'.RBN 52( 1896). pp. 265-90. esp. 278-k): Gamberini di Scarfea. Le imitazioni (n. 9). p. 255. no. 747. andp. 263. no. 790; Bernocchi.Lemonete (n. 2). p. 112.no. 298. Neither Bernocchinor Gamberini di Scarfeaacknowledged the work of Berghausand Spiegel, who listed this particular florin among a group of coinserroneously attributed to the counts of Limbing. They suggest that it is more likely attributable to DietrichIII of Moers (1356-72) on the grounds that one of the coins of Count John of Moers (1346-75) bears thesame single-footed eagle thai appears as the symbol following the legend on the side with John theBaptist, but they are also unwilling toexcludethe possibility that it maybelonginstead to Dietrich III ofHeinsberg-Looz(1331-61). See P. Berghaus and J. Spiegel. 'Die Miin/en der Grafen von Limbing', inDie Geschichte der Grafen und llerren von Limbing und l.imhurg-Siyrum und Hirer Be\ii:ungen(Minister. 1968). pp. 301-8. esp. 304-5. At any rate, (he attribution to the counts of Limbing is nowu idely considered incorrect, and the only other possible attributions woulddale the coin well after theintroduction of the papal florin. I would like to thank Ulrich Klein for his assistance on this question.

"' This coin was struck in the Piedmont regionof Italyby the marquises of Carretlo sometimeafterthey had submitted to the marquisesof Salu/./o in 1322. See below n. 62.

17 Hewlett argued thai Edward must have struck his florins sometime before 1337. the year inwhich he assumed the title of king, on the grounds that the coins identify him simply as DVXAQITANIG rather than R6X. but Gamberini di Scarfea believed that Edward fust stuck his Anglo-Gallic imitation florin only after the peace of Bretigny in 1360. See I..M. Hewlett. Anglo-Gallic coins(London. 1920), p. 33: C. Gamberini di Scarfea. Le imitazioni (n. 9). p. 241. no. 670. Capra andDuncan Elias nevertheless independently dated Edward's florin lo the early 1350s. and recent researchnow accepts this dating. See P. Capra. 'Les especes. les ateliers, les frappes et les emissionsmonetaires en Guyenne anglo-gasconne aux XlVe et XVe siecles'. NC 139 (1979). p. 42; E. R.Duncan Elias. The Anglo-Gallic coins (London. 1984). pp. 71-2: Bompaire and Barrandon. 'Lesimitations dc florins' (n. 14). pp. 152-3.

" The florin of Eudes is first attested in the documentary evidence in a mint ordinance ofNovember 1327. The ordinance does not rule out the possibility that Eudes might have introduced hisflorin prior to that date, as Dumas noted, but it probably does signal the earliest issue of the coin. SeeF. Dumas. 'Le monnayage d"Eudes IV de Bourgogne (1315-1349)'. Annates de Bourgogne 37(1965). pp. 262. 266-9: E. Dumas-Dubourg. Les monnayage ties dues de Bourgogne (I.ouvain-Ia-Neuve. 1988: Publications diastolic de Tan et d'arclieologie de TUniversile catholique de Louvain53: Numismalica Lovanensia 8). pp. 279-80. 391-2.

19 An ordinance of 7 February 1327 establishes the earliest possible date on which Guiguesintroduced his florin. See H. Morin. Numismaiiqiie feodale du Dauphine: archeveques de Vienne.cvcc/ucs de Grenoble, dauphins de Viennois (Paris 1854). pp. 69-70; Poey d'Avant, Monnaiesfeodales. III. p. 50, nos 4857-8, note. See also L. Blancard. "Sur le florin provencal (pt 1)'. RN} 4(1886). p. 50: Bompaire and Barrandon. 'Les imitations de florins' (n. 14). p. 158. The coinsthemselves are first attested in the accounts of the Avignon popes on 30 July 1328. See E. Giiller, ed..Die Einnahmen der Aposiolisclien Rammer unier .lohann XXII (Paderborn 1910; ValikanischeQuellen zur Geschichte der Pdpsilichen llof und Einanzverwaliung. 1316-1378, 1). p. 508;Bompaire, 'Le monnaie de Pont-de-Sorgues' (n. 9). p. 158.

" The precise dating of John's florin is unclear, but Philip Grierson and Serge Boffa have arguedthat it was probably first struck between 1330 and 1337 (unpublished typescript, forthcoming in MEC7: Low Countries).

:i Louis's florin was probably introduced in 1335 and is mentioned in accounts of the mint at Ghentfrom 1336 to 1338. See again MEC 1.

188 WILLIAM R. DAY

king of Hungary (1308-42), of Count John I of Luxembourg as king of Bohemia(1310-46),22 and of Duke Bolco I of Munsterberg in Silesia (1301-48).23

It is also important to bear in mind that even the Florentine florin appears notto have been immediately successful. The Florentine chronicler Paolino Pieri.who was probably writing around 1305, noted that virtually no one wanted thecoin at first.24 Florins began to figure prominently in the collections of the papaltithe in Tuscany and north-central Italy only towards the very end of the thirteenthcentury.25 Apart from the genovino of Genoa, other gold coins introduced in thetwo decades after Florence first struck its famous gold coin all proved short lived,and when Venice decided to introduce its gold ducat in 1284. the extant recordsuggests that the Venetian counsellors were not especially enthusiastic aboutdoing so.26 By the beginning of the pontificate of John XXII in 1316. however,the use of gold coins had spread beyond Italy into France, where Florentineflorins begin to appear in the hoards,often alongside French gold coins.27

THE IMITATION FLORIN OF CHIVASSO

The marquises of Montferrat first began lo issue their own coinage underTheodore I Paleologus (1306-38). the son of the Byzantine emperor Andronicus

- Both Charles Robert and John I lirst began lo strike their florins in 1325. The Hungarian florinis first attested in the written evidence in 1326, but it was probably introduced a year earlier whenCharles Robert initiated a wide-ranging reform of the mint. See B. Homan. Magyar penztorienet,1000-1325 (Budapest. 1916). pp. 406-7: B. Homan. 'La circola/ione delle monete d'oro in Ungheriadai X al XIV secolo e la crisi europea dell'oro nel secolo XIV. RIN 35 (1922). pp. 118-21. On theBohemian florin, see K.O. Castelin. 'Die Kurse bohmischer Groschen und Goldgulden in den Jahren1300-1350', Nnmisniaiickysbornik 12 (1973), pp. 146-7. with further references.

:i Friedensburg believed that the Silesian florins of Munsterberg and Sehweidnitz could not havebeen struck under the same authority and therefore attributed the former with the legend BOLGODVX-SLS on the side with the fleur-de-lis to Bolco 1 and the latter to Bolco II (1326-68). See F.

Friedensburg. 'Schlesiens Miinzen im Mittelalter (pt 2)". ZfN 10 (1883). pp. 48-9. Kiersnowskinevertheless assigned both florins to Bolco II, dating the Miinslerberg florins to the period 1345-51and the Schweidnitz florins to 1351-c. 1365. and these attributions are now widely accepted. Sec R.Kiersnowski. 'Floreny slaskie z XIV w i ich obieg w Europe", WN 20 (1976). pp. 65-88. whichincludes a summary in English. I would like to thank Borys Paszkiewicz for his assistance with thisreference.

Zi P. Pieri, Cronica di Paolino Pieri Florentine delle cose d'Italia dall'anno 1080 fino all'anno1305. ed. Antonio Filippo Adami (Rome. 1755). p. 27. See also Lopez. 'Settecento anni fa' (n. 1), pp.167-9: Lopez. 'Back to gold" (n. I). pp. 223-4.

25 See P. Guidi, ed.. Rationes Decimarum llaliae: Tuscia I: Im decima ilegli anni 1274-1280(Vatican City, 1932: Studi e lesti 58): M. Giusli and P. Guidi (eds). Rationes Decimarum Italiae:Tuscia 2: La decima degli anni 1295-1304 (Vatican City. 1942; Sludi e tesli 98). On the circulationof florins in Tuscany in 1296. based on the tithe receipts published in the latter of these, see J. Day.'La circulation monetaire en Toscane en 1296*. AESC 23 (1968), pp. 1054-66.

2" Stahl. Zecca {n. 2), 30-1.27 Spufford. Money and its use (n. 5). p. 183. Florins were present in boards found in 1876 at La

Bouteille. near Vervins in Picardy. and in 1913 at Longvillers. near Etaples in Pas-de-Calais. Both ofthese hoards also included French gold coins of Philip IV (1286-1314) and they were both depositedor closed by about 1315. See J. Duplessy. Les tresorsmonftaires midiivaux et modernesdicouvertsen France 2: 1223-1385 (Paris. 1995). p. 44. no. 65. and p. 85. no. 188.


II (1282-1328). Theodore inherited control of the marquisale after John I ofMontferrat died without heirs in January 1305. On his deathbed John had madeprovisions for the succession to the marquisate.28 In the absence of any childrenthat his wife, Margaret of Savoy, might have by him after his death, hesupposedly named as his successor, in the second instance, his sister Yolanda, thesecond wife of the By/.anline emperor Andronicus. and her sons.29 Yolanda.renamed Irene at the time of her marriage to Andronicus. favoured her eldest sonJohn, who was nineteen years old. but the patriarch of Constantinople AnastasiusI (1289-93. 1303-9) opposed John's candidacy on the grounds that John and hisdescendants might conceivably become heirs to the Byzantine throne.Andronicus was then inclined to send his youngest son Demetrius, who was bornin 1296. but he ultimately decided to despatch Theodore, who was five yearsolder than Demetrius. Theodore arrived in Genoa on his way to assume controlof the Montferrat marquisate late in the summer of 1306 at the tender age offourteen or fifteen, already engaged to be married to Argentina Spinola, thedaughter of a Genoese aristocrat named Obizzino Spinola.-"1 The new marquisentered the Montferrat region in September and occupied Chivasso in December.There survives no explicit grant of minting rights to either Theodore or hispredecessors.Theodore nevertheless began to strike denariimperiali based on thedenaro of Milan soon after he took control of Chivasso,31 though he did not beginto strike florins in his own name until later.

Theodore's florin, first published by Morel-Fatio,'2 has the legend +TbEODMARCKO on the side with the fleur-de-lis and the usual legend -S-IOHANNES-B, followed by a nail (Ital. chiodo) as the symbol for Chivasso, on the sidewith the standing St John the Baptist." In his chronicle of Montferrat, Benvenuto

* A. Tallone (ed.). Regesto del marchesi di Saluzzo (1091-1334) (Turin. 1906; BSSS 16). pp.191-2, no. 729.

•"' The document published in register form by Tallone (see above, n. 28), drawing mainly onSaluzzese sources, makes no mention whatsoever of Yolanda or her sons, but the account of thesuccession lo the marquisate by the Montferrat chronicler Benvenuto di San Giorgio, writing around1500, clearly identifies Yolanda and her sons as the legitimate heirs of second resort. See R1S XXIII.coll. 408-13; G. Vernazza (ed.), Cronica di Benvenuto di Sangiorgio, Cavaliere Gerosolimitano(Turin. 1780). p. 84. Because the marquis Manfred IV of Saluz/.o (1296-1340). who John named asfifth in the line succession, was also a claimant to the marquisate, it is reasonable to suspect that theSaluzzese sources sympathise with Manfred. Historians typically accept Bcnvenuto's version ofevents because he based his chronicle on older sources and often quoted from the documentary record,and indeed he presents his account in the form of an Italian translation of John's original instrument.He also included in his chronicle Theodore's autobiography and the marquises biased and somewhatconfused account of his succession to the marquisate. See RIS XXIII. coll. 450-7. esp. 450-3;Vernazza, ed., Cronica di Benvenuto di Sangiorgio. pp. 117-22. esp. 117-20.

w On Theodore's succession to the marquisate and bis engagement to marry Argentina Spinola, seeA.E. Laiou, 'A Byzantine prince latinized: Theodore Palaeologus. marquis of Montferrat'. Byzaniion38(1968). pp. 386-410.

" The chronology of the earliest coinage of Montferrat is discussed in MEC 12: North Italy.,: A. Morel-Latio. 'Monnaies inedites des marquis de Montferrat. frappees a Chivasso. Casal, etc'

RBN 44 (1866). pp. 191-3. See also below. Fig. I. from Morel-Fatio." CW II. p. 203. no. I.

190 WILLIAM R. DAY

di San Giorgio clearly identified Chivasso as the location of Theodore's mint. Healso wrote that an ordinance of 27 September 1336 fixed the standard of the florinat twenty-four carats and the seigniorage at thirty soldi per one hundred florins.34This reference provides the earliest written evidence for Theodore's florin, and itled both Promis and Fava to date the introduction of the coin to 1336,35 butBenvenuto's chronicle account does not necessarily establish the date of thecoin's introduction,"' and most numismatists have preferred to date the coin moregenerically to the period of Theodore's rule." Morel-Falio nevertheless dated theflorin to 1312 on the basis of a passage in the famous chronicle of the Florentinemerchant and government official Giovanni Villani (c.1276-1348).38 In 1312.according to Villani, Henry VII (1309-13. crowned emperor in 1312) granted themarquis of Montferrat and the Genoese exile Obizzino Spinola the right to strike'counterfeit" florins in their dominions while at the same lime prohibiting theFlorentines from striking gold and silver coins.39 Galeani Napione believed thatthe marquis of Montferrat already enjoyed minting privileges by that time andthat the concession merely afforded him the right to strike florins in addition tothe coins he was already striking.4"

Giorcelli also based his dating of Theodore's florin on Villani's report, but heargued that the marquis must have struck his florins between 1313 and 1316because Villani stated that Henry granted Theodore and Obizzino the right to

u RIS XXIII. col. 459: Vernazza (ed.). Cronica di Benvenuto di Sangiorgio. (n. 29) p. 124.}i D. Promis. Sidle monele del Piemonte. memoria lerza: Monele dei Paleologi. marchesi di

Monferraio (Turin. 1858).pp. 11-12;A. S. Fava, "I ,e monetedelle zeccliedi Casale". in Quarto congressodi antichita e d'arte (20-24 aprite 1969. Palazzo Langosco) (Casale Monferrato 1974). p. 268.

"' G. Giorcelli. 'Zecca di Chivasso. il liorino d'oro ed un grosso di Teodoro 1 inedito o pocoeonoseiuto". RIN 23 (1910). p. 213.

-" H. Dannenberg, 'DerGoldguldeo von Florentiner Geprfige',NZ 12(1880). p. I52.no. 2:OV/II.p. 203. no. I; Gamberinidi Scarfea,Leimitazioni (n. 9). p. 236. no. 653: Bernocchi.Lemonete (n. 2).V,p. 51. no. I: E. Biaggi. Leantiche monete piemontesi (Borgone di Susa. 1978). p. 200: E. Biaggi.Monele e zecche medievali italiane dai sec. VIII al sec. XV (Turin. 1992), p. 113. no. 609; A. Varesi.Monete italiane regional/: Piemonte, Sardegna. I.iguria. Isola di Corsica (Pavia. 1996). p. 79. no.376.

a Morel-Fatio. 'Monnaies inedites' (n. 32). pp. 191-2."'• Villani. Nuova cronica (n. 11). II. pp. 253-4. bk 10. chap. 49.4" G. Galeani Napione. 'Osservazioni inlorno ad alcune antiche monete del Piemonte'. MemRAST

(I SI 2). pp. 191-3. esp. 193.


strike florins 'in loro terre', that is 'in their own lands'. At the time of the

supposed grant both Theodore and Obizzino were far from their own dominions,travelling in the king's entourage, and it was only after Henry's death in August1313 that Theodore was able to abandon the royal retinue and return to Chivasso.Theodore remained in Chivasso until 1316 when he received word of the death

of his mother and left to join his father in Constantinople." Both Promis and Favaagreed that Theodore's right to strike florins stemmed from Henry's 1312concession, but they believed that he began to exercise the privilege only twenty-four years later.

There is no other evidence to corroborate Villani's claims, but Villani, who

wrote his chronicle mainly in the 1340s, was alive at the time that he supposedthe concession to have been made, and his accounts of events that occurred

during his lifetime are generally very reliable. It must also be remembered thatVillani spent the early part of his career as a merchant in the Peruzzi merchant-banking company of Florence, and he later became a minor official in theFlorentine government, even working in the mint of Florence in 1317 and againin I327."'2 It is likely that he would have been very well aware of monetarydevelopments in Italy that had any bearing on the coinage of Florence. It istherefore necessary to take full account of Villani's report, even in the absence ofcorroborating evidence. Villani himself certainly believed that the widespreadcounterfeiting of the florin in the early 1320s followed a precedent alreadyestablished by Theodore and Obizzino and led Pope John XXII to issue a bullagainst the counterfeits in I324.13 In a 1328 bull, which includes a reference tothe earlier bull of 1324, the pope even mentioned the source of the counterfeitsas lying in upper Lombardy. the Marches, and the territory of Genoa.41 None ofthis necessarily means, however, that the king officially granted Theodore andObizzino the right to strike florins or that he explicitly prohibited the Florentinesfrom striking gold and silver coins.

Before dealing with Henry's alleged grant to Theodore and Obizzino to strikeflorins, it will be useful to consider Villani's claim that the king banned the goldand silver coinage of Florence. The absence of corroborating evidence makes thisassertion very difficult to interpret. Villani, whose account uses Henry's one-dayjourney from Poggibonsi to Pisa on 9 March 1312 as a chronological point of

11 Giorcelli. 'Zecca di Chivasso" (n. 36). pp. 177-214. esp. 203-5. 211-1342 Orsini. Storia delle monete (n. 14). pp. 23. 38: Bernocchi. Lemonele (n. 2), I. pp. 22. 43." Villani. Nuova cronica (n. II). II. p. 448. bk 10. chap. 278.14 K.ll. Schaler (ed.). Die Ausgaben der Aposiolischen Hammer unter Joliann XXII nebsl den

Jalueshilanzen von 1316-1375 (Padcrbom. 1911; Valikanische Quellen z.ur Geschichte der I'dpsllichenllof mid Finanzverwaltung, 1316-1378. 2), pp. 138-9. The 1328 bull leaves little question thai thesecoins were counterfeits of Florentine florins, 'secundum formam, signa el cunium ac circumfercntiasliterarum, qui in civitate l;loreniin|a| a tempore, cuius non extat memoria. cudi et I'abricari consueverant.et cuduntur el t'abricantur eliam in presenti. [...]'. See also Villani. Nuova cronica (n. 11). II. p. 365. bk10.chap. 171, and p. 448, bk. 10. chap. 278. 'Upper Lombardy" here refers to inland northern Italy westof Pavia, including the Piedmont, while 'the Marches' probablyrefers lo Romaniole. or limilia Komagna.

192 WILLIAM R. DAY

reference, probably saw the ban in the context of the emperor's siege of Florencein September and October later in the same year.45 It is conceivable that Henrymight have declared the ban as a means of putting pressure on the Florentines tosubmit to royal/imperial authority in advance of resorting to military force, butthe evidence does not support any such proscription. It is perhaps more likely thatthe Florentine chronicler was merely extrapolating from what he understood tohave been the principles underlying Henry's monetary policy in Italy.

Between August 1311 and January 1312, Henry issued a series of monetarydecrees, the most famous of which was the celebrated grida of 7 November1311."' None of these decrees explicitly prohibited the Florentines from strikinggold and silver coins, but Villani might have understood one or more of thedecrees as carrying such a ban. One of the clauses in the Constitutio MagistriMonetarum of 10 August 1311, for example, stipulated that no coins were to bestruck in imperial Italy other than the new imperial coinage issuing from royalmints.47 The grida of 7 November nevertheless included no such provision, andneither did it mention any proscription against Florentine gold and silver coinage,even though it explicitly banned the coins of several Piedmont mints. The last ofHenry's monetary decrees, an edict of 13 January 1312, was likewise silent on thematter. The grida even specified the rate of exchange between Henry's denariimperiali of Milan on the one hand and the gold and silver coins of Florence andother Italian mints on the other, and it identified a Florentine. Richard Ughetti, asone of the masters charged with the development and implementation of Henry'smonetary policy in Italy.48 The 1312 edict also established the rate of exchange

43 E. Baluze and G. Mollat (eds). Vltae Paparum Avenionensium: hoc est Historia PoniijicuinRomanorum qui in Gallia sederunt ab anno Christi MCCCV usque ad annum MCCCXCIV. 4 vols(Paris.1914-27). III. pp. 549-53: W.M. Bowsky, Henry VII in Italy: the conflict of empire and city-state, 1310-1313 (Lincoln, Nebraska, I960), pp. 170-6.

"' Henry's 1311 grida established, by royal proclamation, the value of a variety of coins then incirculation against a money of account based on the denaro imperialt of Milan, which was struck inthe nameof the king. It also bannedthe imitation grossiand denariimperiali of the mintsof Chivasso,Cortemilia. Incisa. Ivrea. and of the marquises of Ponzone. See MGH Const. IV. pt 2. pp. 1270-73.no. 1220: B. Giovanelli. 'Alterthumliche Entdeckungen im Siidtirol im Jahre 1838. und libereine ausdas alte tirolische Munzwesen beziigliche Urkunde Kaisers Heinrich VII', NeueZFT\' 6 (1840). pp.138-69: D. Promis. Monele del Piemonte inedile o rare, memoria prima (Turin. 1852). pp. 42-5. no.2: F. Bonaini (ed.). Acta Henricii VII. Romanorum Imperaioriim el Monumenla quaedam alia suorumtemporum historiam illustrantia, 2 vols (Florence. 1877), I, pp. 206-8, no. 130; Q. Perini. 'La gridadi Enrico VII imperatore del 1311'. AARA scr. 3. 7 (1901), pp. 249-59; G. Canonica. Im zecca diCortemilia dei marchesidel Carreito (Carmagnola. 1914), pp. 95-8: Biaggi, Le antiche monete (n.37). pp. 551-3: Rizzolli. Munzgeschichte (n. 13). pp. 221-4.

47 MGH Const. IV, pt 1. 638-12. no. 669. esp. sec. 14: W. DOnniges. ed.. Acta llenrici VIIImperaloris Romanorum el monumenla quaedam alia medii aevi. 2 vols (Berlin. 1839). II, pp. 96-9,esp. 99; Bowsky. Henry VIIin Italy, p. 120.

•"' Interestingly, the same Richard Ughctti, or Huguel in French, directed operations in the Paris.Tournai, Troyes. and Sommieres minis in France under Philip IV (1286-1314) from lo 1305 to 1307.See M. Bompaire. 'L'aclivite monetaire sous le regne dc Philippe IV le Pel", in The Gros I'ournois:Proceedings of the Fourteenth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary history, ed. N.J.Mayhew (Oxford. 1997; RNS Special Publication 31). pp. 51-105. esp. 66. 76. 78. 92. 105. withfurther references.


between a new gold augustale (see below) and the Florentine florin. This impliesthat Henry continued to regard the coinage of Florence as an official coinage,even as late as January 1312. This is not to reject out of hand Villani's claim thatthe king prohibited the Florentines from striking gold and silver coins at somepoint after issuing his grida and the 1312 decree, but there is no evidence tocorroborate the claim. In the same passage from his chronicle, Villani alsomaintained that Henry condemned Florence and its leading citizens to pay100,000 silver marks into the royal treasury, but there is likewise no otherevidence to uphold this contention.

Villani's assertion that Henry VII granted the marquis of Montferrat andObizzino Spinola the right to strike counterfeit florins in 1312 is also difficult tointerpret. As intimated above, the 1312 edict includes provisions for a goldcoinage of twenty and a half carats (85.4% N) called an augustale, whichevidently was to have been struck to the same standard as Frederick II's augustaleof Brindisi and Messina.49 Because the florin was struck at the higher standard oftwenty-four carats, Villani might have regarded the order for the augustale astantamount to a grant of rights for striking counterfeit florins, though thechronicler must have been sufficiently familiar with Frederick's augustale torecognise it as a distinct coin type and another explanation is more likely. Theonly documented grant that Henry made to Obizzino in 1312, dated 8 February,concerned a number of properties north of the Passo dei Giovi in the Valle Scriviaon the main road between Genoa and Tortona and the right to augment his incomeby levying tolls.50 Deza, in his history of the Spinola family, wrote that theconcession included the right to strike gold coinage,51 but the grant makes nomention of minting rights.

The question perhaps revolves instead around whether any grant of mintingprivileges that the king might have issued to Theodore and Obizzino was a formalgrant or simply an inducement to strike false florins, as Villani's account indeedseems to suggest. Villani described the privilege that Henry granted to Theodoreand Obizzino as one to strike counterfeits, 'contraffatti sotto il conio di qucgli diFirenze', but he did not indicate the standard of these coins. He nevertheless

implied that they were base when he described the new papal florin of John XXII,first struck in the Avignon mint at Pont de Sorgues in September 1322, as havingthe same standard as the Florentine florin, thereby differentiating it from the falseflorins that many lords were striking in the same manner as the marquis ofMontferrat and the Spinola lords of Genoa. It is also notable that Benvenuto di SanGiorgio, in his description of Theodore's coinage and account of the 1336

49 MEC14:South Italy, pp. 172-7.50 J.C. Liinig (ed.), Codex Italiae Diplomatics,4 vols (Frankfurt and Leipzig, 1725-35), II, coll.

553^t; A. Sisto, 1feudi imperiali del Tortonese (sec. XI-XIX) (Turin. 1956; Universila di Torino.Pubblicazionidelta Facolta di lettereejilosojia 8, no. 5), p. 22.

51 M. Dcza, Istoria deltafamiglia Spinola descrilta dallasua origine fmo al secolo XVI (Piaccnza.1694), p. 184.

194 WILLIAM R. DAY

ordinance, referred specifically to coins struck under the name and sign of themarquis, 'sotto il nome e insegne sue', almost as if he wished to distinguish thesecoins from others that Theodore might have struck under a name and sign otherthan his own. This raises the suspicion that Henry might have instructed orencouraged Theodore and Obizzino to strike counterfeits of the Florentine florinaround the time of the 1312 siege of Florence with the aim of underminingconfidence in the Florentine coinage, but again there is no secure evidence for this.

Suffice it to say that any florins struck by Obizzino must have beencounterfeits. This would help to explain why no florins of Obizzino have everbeen identified. Unlike Theodore. Obizzino never ruled an independent state andtherefore never had the opportunity to issue a legitimate coinage in his own name,but there can be little doubt that Obizzino struck florins. A Florentine provisionof 1321 indeed outlawed the circulation of Obizzino's florins in Florence.52 and

in 1325, the Florentine gonfaloniere di giustizia. Corrado dei Giotti. issued afurther prohibition against the gold florins struck by Obizzino because of theirsimilarity to the Florentine coins.53 Obizzino's florins were almost certainlycounterfeits of Florentine florins, conspicuous perhaps for their low standard butwithout any other distinguishing marks.

This still leaves unresolved the matter of the florins that Theodore struck in his

own name as the marquis of Montferrat. but it undermines the reasoning thatGiorcelli used in dating of these coins to 1313-16. Benvenuto di San Giorgio'schronicle reference to the 1336 ordinance on the Montferrat coinage still remainsthe earliest evidence for Theodore's florin of Chivasso. It does not necessarilyestablish the date of the florin's introduction, as already noted above, but otherconsiderations make it possible to narrow clown the period of issue. This bringsus back to the three important factors mentioned at the outset of this paper thatconverged in the 1320s and helped to precipitate the wide diffusion of florinimitations in Europe. First, the terminus post quern not only for Theodore's florinbut also for all florin imitations, as opposed to counterfeits or hybrids, is18 September 1322. when Pope John XXII introduced his papal florin, and this isreflected in the detailed accounts of the Avignon popes. Before 1322, referencesto florins in the papal accounts invariably concernfloreni ami de Florentia orsimplyfloreni de auro. After 1322,references to other kinds of florins proliferate.The earliest reference in the accounts to any other type of florin occurs inNovember 1322, just two months after the introduction of the Avignon florin, andit identifies these coins as Piedmontese. floreni ami de emtio Pedismontis.^

a Bernocchi, Le monete (n. 2). III. p. 49.51 A. Olivieri, Monele e medaglie degli Spinola di Tassarolo, Ronco. Roccaforte. Arquata e

Vergagni (Genoa, 1860). p. 62.: For the earliest reference to florins of the Piedmont in the accounts of the Avignon popes, see

Goller. Die Einnahmen innerJohannXXII (n. 19). p. 309. See also Bompaire, 'Le monnaic de Pont-de-Sorgues' (n. 9), pp. 139-76. esp. 157-8: Bompaire and Barrandon. 'Les imitations de florins'(n. 14). p. 158.


References to Piedmontese florins in the papal accounts are sporadic at first, butthey become more common from the later 1320s onwards.55 Second, theintroduction of the papal florin roughly coincided with a conspicuous increase inthe supply of gold in Europe mainly from the Kremnica mines of the kings ofHungary.56 This is not to say that all or even most of the new imitation florinswere necessarily struck with gold that came directly from Kremnica,37 but thegeneral increase in supply levels no doubt made greater quantities of bullionavailable for minting. Third, around the same time. Florence reached itsdemographic and economic apex before the Black Death,58 and the increasinginternationalisation of the city's trade further helped to promote the diffusion offlorin imitations.

Theodore must have begun to strike florins in his own name after theintroduction of the papal florin in September 1322. By this time, the principalbullion markets in western Europe were probably already beginning toexperience the effects of the increase in gold output from the Hungarian mines. Ittherefore seems reasonable to associate Theodore's florin with the November

1322 reference mentioned above to florins 'de cunio Pedismontis' and with

subsequent references lo Piedmont florins in the receipts of the Avignon popes,though Fournial interpreted these references differently. He believed that thepapal accounts sometimes used the term Piedmont to describe the lightweightflorins of Dauphine. because the master of the Viennois mint under whom they

55 The distinction in the papal accounts between Florentine florins andthose described as 'de cunioPedismontis' is an important one. because the Piedmont florins were struck at a slightly differentweight standard. See immediately below. On references to Piedmontese florins in French sources, seeR. Vallentin du Cheylard. 'Du florin du poids de Piemont". SNR 7 (1897). pp. 70-95.

"' The coincidence is a curious one and certainlydeserves furtherscrutiny, especially in view of the factthat Hungary was al the time underAngevin rule and that relations between the popesand theAngcvinsweregenerally verygood. Forexample, was it the increase in thegold supplyfromthe Kremnica minesthat prompted the Avignon popes to issue their own florin or did thestriking of the florin by the popesStimulate investment in mining and lead lo the intensification of gold mining al Kremnica?

'" The introduction of the Avignon florin of John XXII might have depended at least as much if notmore on the release of gold stocks from the papal treasury for minting. In the Montferrat region, thereis also evidence for the sifting of gold from the sands of the river Po on the right bank roughlyopposite fromTrino Vercellese in the 1330s. See DiGangi.L'attivita mineraria (n. 10).p. 106. By the1360s. gold was being mined above the valley of the river Oreo, which empties into the Po nearChivaSSO. See P.A/ari. LiberGeslorum in Lombardia, ed. Francesco Cognasso (Bologna, 1926-39;RIS. n.s.. 16. pi 4), p. 184; Di Gangi. L'attivita mineraria. p. 76.

" On the demographic expansion of Florence in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, see W.R.Day,Jr. 'The population of Florence before the Black Death: survey and synthesis', JMH 28. 2 (2002).pp. 93-129. with further references. The economic development of Florence in the thirteenth andearly fourteenth centuries is best approached through M.B. Becker. 'Economic change and theemerging Florentine territorial stale". Studies in the renaissance 13 (1966). pp. 7-39; C.M. de LaRonciere, Florence, centre economique regional au XlVe siecle: le marche des dairies de premierenecessile a Florence et dans sa campagne et les conditionsde vie des salaries (1320 1380). 5 vols(Aix-en-Provenec, 1976); C.M. de La Ronciere. Prix el salaires a Florence au XlVe siecle(1280-1380) (Rome. 1982). On the early development of the Florentine economy in the twelfth andthirteenthcenturies, see W.R. Day. Jr. Elorence before Dante: theearlyeconomic development of theFlorentine stale, c.1115-1265 (Leiden, forthcoming).

196 WILLIAM R. DAY

were struck, one Bindarelli. was originally from the Piedmont. The florin decunio Pedismontis, according to Fournial. was a florin of account correspondingwith the lightweight florin of Dauphine.5'' Between 1328 and 1330. however, thepapal records more commonly treat the florins of the Piedmont and Dauphine.along with the lightweight florins of Florence (floreni de cunio Florentie debilisponderis), as distinct coins of equivalent value.'1" Only later did the designationflorenus ponderis Pedemontis become the unit of account commonly applied tothe florins both of Dauphine and the Piedmont.61 Fournial's explanation also failsto take into account the fact that the earliest reference to Piedmont florins occurs

in November 1322, just two months after John XXII began to strike papal florinsat the Pont de Sorgues mint, while Guigues VIII's florins of Dauphine werealmost certainly struck for the first time only in 1327.

If the florin de cunio Pedismontis mentioned for the first time in the records of

the Avignon popes in 1322 was not synonymous with the florin of the dauphinsof Viennois, then what was it? No other florin from the Piedmont or even Liguriathat approximates the standard of the florin de cunio Pedismontis can possibly bedated so early. It is true that the FLOR GX GhA florin, sometimes erroneouslyassigned to the mint at Chiarenza in Frankish Greece but attributable instead tothe marquises of Carretto, probably from the Piedmontese mint at Cortemiliasouth of Alba, might have been issued as early as October 1322. This is not onlybecause the Carretto marquises were following the precedent set by theintroduction of the papal florin in the same year, but also because the legend ontheir coin identifies il with the Cortemilia branch of the marquisate after itssubmission to Manfred IV of Saluzzo (1296-1334) on 12 October of that year/'2In any event, the Carretto florin was too base to have been considered as a florinof the Piedmont standard. The example of the Carretto florin in Philip Grierson'scollection weighs only 3.27 grams and is only fourteen and a half carats, or about

59 £. Fournial. Hisioire monetaire deTOccident medieval (Paris, 1970). p. 143. On the mint-masterBindarelli. see also Morin. Numismatiquefeodale du Dauphine (n. 19). p. 69.

(HJller, Die Einnahmen unterJohann XXII(n.19). pp. 404. 415. 434-5. 508. 511. 543. 551. 557.61 On theflorenus ponderis Pedemontis. see again Vallentin du Cheylard. 'Du florin du poids de

Piemonf (n. 55).

° After their submissionto the marquises of Saluzzo. the marquis of Carretto and his descendantsstyled themselves 'lords of Saluzzo from the marquises of Carretto' Ulomini de Saluciis QXmarchionibus de QhArreito). The legend on the FLOR 6X GhA florin derives from this designation.On the submission of the marquises of Carretto to Manfred IV of Saluzzo. see D. Muletti, Memorieslorico-diplomaticlieappartenenli alia citta e ai marchesidi Saluzzo,6 vols (Saluzzo. 1829-33). III.pp. 125-39; Tallone (ed.). Regestodei marchesi, pp. 246-7. nos 869-70. On the marquises of Carrettomore generally, see L. Provcro. 'I marchesi del Carretto: tradizione pubblica. radicamenlopatrimoniale e ambiti di afferraazione politica". AMSSSP n.s.. 30 (1994). pp. 21-50. The attributionof the FLOR 8X GhA florin is discussed in W.R. Day. Jr. 'Limitazione del liorino d'oro degli «ex»marchesi del Carretio. Piemonte, r.1350". which will appear among the proceedings of a one-dayconference held in Florence. 9 November 2002. in memory of the Florentine numismatist AlbertoBand and to celebrate the 750"' anniversary of the introduction of the Florentine florin. Theproceedings,edited by LuciaTravaini. will be published in a future volume of RIN.


sixty-one per cent fine/'3 while the Piedmontese florins, and later those of thedauphins of Viennois, weighed about 3.40 grams and were evidently struck tonearly the same standard of fineness as genuine Florentine florins.61

The florins of the mint at Ceva, a small town situated on the right bank of theriver Tanaro on the southern fringes of the Langhe region, appear to have beenstruck for the first time only towards the middle of the fourteenth century. Thecoins themselves are unknown, but a document of 1379 recalls that the marquisesof Ceva were striking florins 'in fabrica Ceve* in 1351. and the coins arementioned in the records of the Avignon popes in L363.65 The florins of Savonaand the counts of Savoy were also introduced around the middle of the fourteenthcentury.60 Because Obi/./.ino's florins were almost certainly counterfeits ofgenuine Florentine florins, this effectively leaves the florin that Theodore struckin his own name as the coin most likely identifiable with the November 1322reference to florins 'de cunio Pedismonlis* in the papal receipts.67

63 The specimen has a specificgravity of 14.53,whichgives a fineness of about sixty-one per centif the alloy is silver.

64 Unfortunately I have so far been unable to obtain a measurement of the specific gravity of one ofTheodore's florins, but Benvenuto di San Giorgio described them as twenty-four carats line. Seeabove, p. 190.

a J.B. Moriondus (cd.), Monumenla Aqensia, 2 vols (Turin. 1789-90). II, coll. 495-6. no. 228; L.Blancard, 'Le florin dc Ceva en Provence", Memoires de TAcademicdes sciences, tellies et beau-artsde Marseille (1896-9). 221. On (he marquises of Ceva more generally, see L. De Angelis Cappabianca,'Lc vicende di una grande famiglia delTaristocrazia del contado piemontesc nei secoli XII-XIV: imarchesi di Ceva', in Felix OlimLombardia: studidipadana dedicatidagli allievi a GiuseppeMartini(Milan. 1978), pp. 67-102. The 1379 document also mentions florins of Asli, but there is no otherevidence whatsoever for these coins, and it remains highly doubtful that the Asti mint ever issued agold coin. In this particular instance, the reference probably alludes lo a moneyof account.

w' The florin of Savona is first attested in a mint contract that the commune granted to the masterBartolomeo di Pietra Caprina in 1350. See D. Promis. Suite monete del Piemonte, memoria sesta:Monetedella zecca di Savona (Turin, 1864). pp. 20-2: D. Giuria. Lamonelasavonesi (Savona, 1984),pp. 44-7, esp. 44; W. Ferro, Storia di Savona e delle sue monele dagli albori al 1528: emissioniineditedella zecca di Savona (Savona, 2001), p. 202. Sec also CNI III, pp. 575-6, nos 1-6; Biaggi.Monete e zecche (n. 37), p. 438, no. 2513: Varesi, MIR: Piemonte (n. 37), p. 354, no. 522. TheSavoyard florin is attested for the first lime in a mintcontractgranted in 1352by Count Amedeus VI(1343-83) to the master BonaccorsoBorgO of Florence for the mint al Pontd*Ain, northeastof Lyon.See D. Promis, Monele dei reali di Savola, 2 vols (Turin, 1841), I, 93-6, csp. 94; Biaggi, Monetesal>uitde(n. 10).p. 131;Di Gangi. L'attivita mineraria (n.10),pp. 214-15, esp. 215, n. 1473.See alsoCNI I. pp. 20-1, nos 1-5; Biaggi, Monele e zecche, p. 415, no. 2347.

67 This indeed is the hypothesis advanced by Blancard and more recently supported by Bompaireand Barrandon. Sec Blancard, 'Sur le florin' (n. 119). pp. 49-50; Bompaire and Barrandon. 'Lesimitations de florins' (n. 114), p. 158. Apart from [he references to Piedmontese florins in the papalaccounts, their earliest mention otherwise occurs in the late fourteenth century manual of theFlorentine merchant Saminialo di Guciozzo de' Ricci. where they are described as 'liorini genovini sichiamano di Piamonte, che anno giglio e San Giovanni, sono di car. 23?'. First written in 1396,Saminiato's manual survives in a copy of 1416, though it is by no means clear thai the florins referredlo in the manual were Theodore's florins of Chivasso. See A. Borland] (ed.), // manuale di mercaluradi Saminialo de' Ricci (Genoa, 1963; Universita di Genova. Istiluto di storia medievale e moderna.Fonti e studi 3), p. 110; L. Travaini. Monele. mercanti e malematica: le monetemedievali nei traitalidi aritmetica e nei llbri di mercalura (Rome. 2003). pp. 155-60, esp. 156. References lo Piedmonteseflorins in merchants' manuals and arithmetic tracts arc discussed in greater detail in Day.'L'imilazione del liorino d'oro degli «ex» marchesi del Carretlo'. forthcoming.

198 WILLIAM R. DAY

Certainly by 1324, Pope John had become alarmed about an increase in thenumber 'counterfeit' florins that were entering into circulation from thePiedmont.6S In a letter that he sent to communal officials in Florence in the

following year, he justified the striking of papal florins by reason of a shortage ofgenuine florins and the proliferation of coins 'in partibus Pedimontis [ ... ]habentem superscriptionem, et ymaginem ac formam quasi similes florenis quifabricantur Florentie. sed tarn in pondere quam auri puritate ac bonitatepeccantem, multumque veris florenis dissimilem in auri et ponderis veritate',6>)Both the bull of 1324 and the letter of 1325 nevertheless date from after the popehad already begun to strike his florins, and therefore do not necessarily throw anylight on the motives of the pope for issuing his papal florins in the first place.Indeed, the pope only raised the issue of the 'counterfeit' Piedmontese florins inthe years following the introduction of his own papal florin.7" perhaps suggestingthat this was what triggered the sudden increase in counterfeiting, but theevidence still does not establish conclusively that the florin de cunio Pedismontisin the papal receipts was synonymous with Theodore's florin of Chivasso.Because Theodore's coin survives in only a few specimens, the metrological dataarc scanty and leave plenty of room for doubt, but they are worth taking intoaccount. According to Benvenuto di San Giorgio, the florin that Theodore struckin his own name was made of fine gold, but it was slightly below the 3.53 gramsweight standard of the Florentine florin. The two published examples ofTheodore's florin weigh 3.40 and 3.44 grams.71 Morel-Fatio noted the discrepancybetween the weight of the example in his own collection and that of theFlorentine standard, but he also observed that his specimen, though very wellpreserved, was not what one would call jleur-cle-coin. He supposed that the tracesof wear on the coin, along with what he presumed was the inexact nature ofmedieval weights and measures, were sufficient to account for the discrepancy.

References to Piedmont florins in the papal receipts offer no comment on thefineness of the coins, which suggests they were struck at a suitably high metallicstandard, but descriptions of them as 'debilis ponderis' nevertheless indicate thatthese coins were somewhat lighter than the standard weight of the Florentineflorins and therefore contained less gold. In March 1323, papal administratorseven adjusted a receipt for 765 florins down lo 744 Florentine florins because 591of the coins were 'de cunio Pedismontis'.7- and in April 1332, administrators

68 See above, p. 191.'•'' Mollat, 'Les papes d'Avignon* (n. 59). pp. 252-66. esp. 260-1.711 The letter conies across not so much as an attempt on the part of the pope to gain the approval of

the Florentines ex ante but more as an ex post rationalisation, probably lo secure the continued consentof the Florenlincs. In the letters thai Pope John wrote to the Florentines during the period in whichpreparationswere under way for the strikingof the new coins, he made no mentionof his reasons forneeding lo do SO. See G. Garampi. Saggi di osservazione sul valore delle monele antiche pontejicie(privately printed for limited circulation, Rome. 1776). app. 4. pp. 9-12.

71 Respectively, see Morel-Fatio (n. 32). 'Monnaies inedites".pp. 191-3: CNI II p. 203. no. 1.72 Goller (ed.). Die Einnahmen unterJohann XXII(n. 19). p. 476.


valued 600 florins of the Piedmont at 572 Florentine florins plus 1 soldo and 10denari in coronati.17' In the first example, which is not only earlier but also easierto interpret because it involves only a single coin type, the adjustment from 765to 744 florins implies a shortfall of 0.125 grams on each of the 591 Piedmontflorins. This suggests that the average weight of each Piedmont florin was3.40 grams, the same weight, coincidentally, as the Morel-Fatio specimen andonly 0.04 grams less than the CNI specimen. The second example is morecomplicated because it brings another type of coinage into the calculation, but itsuggests that the average weight of the Piedmont florin was only marginallygreater at 3.36 grams. The two published specimens of Theodore's florin hardlyconstitute a representative sample, but their weights further suggest that thesecoins corresponded to the florins de cunio Pedismontis that are mentioned in thepapal receipts, that is, at least to the extent that they reflect the weight standard ofthe Piedmont florins more or less accurately. Taken together, the evidence issufficient to date the florins that Theodore struck in his own name to the periodbetween the end of September 1322 and Theodore's death in 1338, and thereferences to Piedmontese florins in the papal accounts in November 1322suggest that Theodore already was striking florins in his own name by that time.

Gollcr (cd.), Die Einnahmen timer Johann XXII, pp. 435-6.

early imitations of the gold florin of in the name of theodore i

Documents