Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
Denier - Odo I annulet
| Issuer | Burgundy, Duchy of |
|---|---|
| Year | 1079-1103 |
| Type | Standard circulation coin |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | Log in to see details |
| 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 | Latin |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | A short cross pattée centered within a beaded circle, with a distinctive annulet placed in the third quadrant serving as the identifying mintmark for this type. The arms of the cross extend nearly to the beaded circle, dividing the field into four quadrants. The flan is irregular and the strike uneven, consistent with hammered feudal deniers of the period. The legend runs around the outer field referencing the Castle of Dijon. |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Odo I consolidated Burgundian ducal authority during a period when the duchy sat uncomfortably between Capetian royal pressure from the north and the reforming influence of Cluny — barely forty kilometers from the ducal minting center at Dijon. Whether the annulet variety reflects a die-cutter's mark, a mint official's differencing tool, or something more deliberate remains unresolved; Dumas's own tentative attribution (note the query against the reference) suggests the classification is not settled.