Catalog
| Issuer | Kingdom of Denmark |
|---|---|
| Year | 1035-1042 |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | 1.15 g |
| Diameter | Log in to see details |
| Thickness | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Technique | Log in to see details |
| Orientation | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | Central short voided cross with a raised annulet at its center, the arms extending to a plain inner circle that divides the field. The cross terminals are plain and the design is contained within a raised inner ring. Surrounding the inner circle is a Latin legend in angular, partly garbled characters, separated from the outer beaded border by a linear ring. The overall composition is characteristic of the Short Cross reverse type as adapted by Danish moneyers at the Lund mint during the reign of Harthacnut. |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Lund, Sweden (1014-1450) |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Harthacnut ruled Denmark and England simultaneously — one of the very few medieval rulers to manage two kingdoms across the North Sea — yet his reign was administratively chaotic on both sides. His Danish coinage borrowed heavily from contemporary Anglo-Saxon penny types, a direct consequence of the monetary influence England exerted over Scandinavian minting practices throughout the eleventh century. Danish moneyers were actively copying English dies during this period, and distinguishing indigenous production from imitation is still a matter of specialist debate.
Hauberg's classification remains the foundational reference, though it predates modern die-study methodology by over a century.