Chapter XII: Part 12

Barnby-in-the-Willows c. 1300 Both sides.
(_a_) Basford 13th cent. S.W.
Burton Joyce 14th cent. S.W.
South Collingham. 14th cent. S.W.
Costock 14th cent. S.W.
Flintham 13th cent. Both sides.
Gedling 13th cent. S.W.
(_a_) Halam 14th cent. N.W.
Haughton Chapel ruined S.W.
Keyworth 13th cent. S.W.
Laxton 14th cent. S.E.
Low Marnham 14th cent. S.W.
Normanton-on-Soar 13th cent. S.W.
(_a_) Nuthall 14th cent. S.W.
Orston 13th cent. S.W.
Stanford-on-Soar 14th cent. S.W.
Trowell 13th cent. N.W.

(_a_) These are built up, thus making classification somewhat
uncertain.

(_b_) _Glazed Openings._--Early in the fourteenth century the screen developed into an imposing and extensive structure. Surmounting it were the images of Christ, Mary the Mother, and John. A loft about five feet wide was necessary to give access to the lamps which were kept burning before the images, to the row of lights placed along the top of the hand-rail at the great festivals, and for the purpose of veiling the images during Lent. The projection of the loft generally formed a canopy for the two altars which stood on the west side of the screen, but there is evidence that in some instances the projection was eastwards, _i.e._ into the chancel, thus necessitating a special arrangement of the fenestration, in order to get light either for general purposes, or to enable the priest to read his hours at the desk, which otherwise would be dark when thus placed under the soffit of the loft.[88]

With these facts in mind, let us examine the work at Car Colston, one of a series of beautiful churches built by a peripatetic band of masons known as the York School, and the only chancel in Nottinghamshire built by them which contains a low side window. It is evident that the rood-loft in this case projected eastwards, for the eastern face of the chancel arch is quite plain, and the mouldings on the responds are not returned, but cut off square and flush with the walling. No trace of a staircase or door for entering the loft can be found. A comparison between the work here and the chancel at Arnold--built about thirty years earlier by the same school--where a stone newel staircase leading to the rood-loft is worked in the south pier of the chancel arch, well lighted by a small aperture in the angle, leads me to conclude that a similar arrangement was adopted here, but probably the stairs in this case were formed in wood instead of stone. It would therefore be necessary to get light at this point, and the skill of the builders is manifest in the introduction of this small but beautiful window of two lights, each 7½ inches wide and 36 inches high to the springing, and 6½ feet from ground to sill. It has a sloping sill to throw the light downwards, while the absence of a rear arch and the substitution of a flat soffit indicates that it came up quite close to the floor of the rood-loft. A quadrant splay to the westward distributed the light and gave access to the rood stairs, and there was a square reveal to the eastward, because the window was separated from the priest’s doorway by a jamb only 8½ inches wide.

Wherever the rood-loft projected far into the chancel, it was necessary to obtain light beneath it; and where the original fenestration did not admit of this, a small special window was introduced for the purpose. I think it will be found that in all cases where the jambs were not originally rebated for shutters, the low side window has been inserted after the introduction of the rood-loft for lighting purposes. During the first half of the thirteenth century the lighting of churches received but little consideration. Narrow lancets with sills high above the floor were deemed sufficient, while the north wall was often built without any windows at all. When the friars came, they were supposed to know the service by heart, and manuscript sermons were unknown. But as time went on, the desire for more light was felt, and it was first met by setting the lancets in pairs, and later in triplets; and not unfrequently the small east window was taken out and fixed at the west end of the south wall of the chancel, and a new and larger east window provided (Sutton St. Ann’s). At Kneesall portions of the original lancets may still be seen in the south wall blocked up with masonry, and in their stead two beautiful three-light, square-headed windows were introduced when the chancel was extended eastwards in the fifteenth century; and a similar thing occurred at East Leake, where a portion of the lancets still remain, though now superseded by larger windows. At Burton Joyce, in addition to the shuttered opening in the chancel, there is a small lancet fixed low down in the centre of the north aisle wall. This does not command any essential feature within the church. The probability is that it was introduced to light the priest’s desk in a chantry chapel which occupied a large space on this side of the church, and contained the tombs of the dominant owners.

At a later date builders did not hesitate to insert large windows in the walls in place of the original lancets wherever light was needed for any special purpose, and in many instances the original shuttered openings were altered and converted into lights (Barnby-in-the-Willows). In some cases where chancels were entirely rebuilt, the S.W. window of the chancel was made with a low sill and a transom--an obvious development of the earlier shuttered window--but never intended for any other purpose than to give light, for both on the outside and inside the jambs are widely splayed and beautifully moulded (Wilford). In other cases the S.W. window has been kept low in conformity with ancient custom, and also probably because the S.E. window has had to be kept high up to clear the sedilia (Plumtree).

Examples of windows for lighting purposes may be found at:--

Balderton 15th cent. insertion in 13th cent. South side.
Barton-in-Fabis 14th cent. S.W.
Car Colston 14th cent. S.W.
Cropwell Bishop 13th cent. N.W.
East Bridgeford 13th cent. S.W.
East Leake 13th cent. S.W.
Kneesall 15th cent. insertion in 13th cent. S.W.
Laneham 15th cent. insertion in 12th cent. S.W.
Lowdham 13th cent. S.W.
Normanton-on-Trent 14th cent. S.W.
Oxton Late insertion in 12th cent. work S.W.
Plumtree 15th cent. S.W.
South Muskham Late insertion in 13th cent. work S.W.
Sutton Bonington St. Ann’s 14th cent. S.W.
Upton 14th cent. S.W.
West Leake 14th cent. S.W.
Wilford 15th cent. S.W.

Plumtree may be taken as a typical example of a dozen or more
fifteenth century chancels having the sill of the S.W. window at
a lower level than the others.

There are two examples in the county that call for special treatment, as they do not belong to either of the foregoing classes--Mansfield and Linby.

At Mansfield side chapels were added in the fifteenth century on either side of the chancel. Near to the east end of the wall on the south a narrow opening has been formed 4½ feet above the floor level, which has been described as a “leper window.” One side of this squint is formed with an ancient incised slab, and several stones with the Norman chevron moulding have been used. It does not appear ever to have been external, and in my opinion it was cut through the old wall after the chapel was built, in order to give a view between the two altars.

_From photographs by_ Mr. H. GILL.]

At Linby there is a small squint at the east side of the doorway of the north porch which has given rise to much controversy. I am of opinion that it was made to enable the ringer in the belfry under the tower at the west end of the church to see to the Top Cross in the village street, which may have been used in the elaborate service of Palm Sunday, when, after the palm branches had been blessed and distributed, the priest bearing the Blessed Sacrament went out with his attendants and took up his station at the Palm Cross. Then the choir and people came out of the church in procession with their palms to meet him at the cross and accompanied him back to the church with the singing of “Hosannas” and other appropriate anthems, in memory of our Lord’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem. This porch is always said to have been built in 1548, but the style of architecture indicates an earlier date; and the shields on the gable and buttresses, Strelley, Hunt, and Savage, lead me to think that it is the work of the grand-daughter and heiress of Thomas Hunt (died in 1427, seized on a moiety of the manor of Linby), who was married first to John Strelley (died 1487), and the year afterwards to James Savage.

While making this survey, I took particular notice of the relative positions of the manor-house, parsonage, and village, in relation to the church, and also the direction and lie of the main roads; but I found that none of these had any effect upon the low side window. The date of erection and the internal arrangement of the church appear to have been the sole determining factors.

THE NOTTINGHAM MINT

BY FRANK E. BURTON, F.R.N.S., J.P.

In contributing a paper upon the coins and tokens either relating to or struck in the city of Nottingham, or in the county of Nottingham, it is quite impossible for me to give a complete history or even a brief description of each coin or token, or to describe all the different dies from which they were struck in the space kindly allotted to me by the editor; but the illustrations taken from amongst those specimens in my possession should, I hope, give the reader a very good idea of what these coins and tokens are like, and although there are many varieties, these in most cases only differ in detail in wording and dates; in fact, generally some small alterations in the die.

_The Nottingham Mint._--In Saxon and Norman times this mint must have been an important one, considering that we know of eleven kings who coined silver pennies here. No coins were struck above the value of one penny, and the coinage of the whole kingdom at this period practically consisted of silver pennies.

In 924 Edward the Elder captured the town from the Danes, and afterwards rebuilt it, but we do not know if he established a mint, as no coins of his are known to have been struck at Nottingham; but the mint was in operation in the reign of his successor, Athelstan, 925–940.

According to Domesday Book there were two moneyers in Nottingham in the days of Edward the Confessor, and they paid to the King the sum of forty shillings.

This amount had been increased to ten pounds by the Conqueror when Domesday Book was written, thus showing that the Nottingham Mint was then a royal one.

One pound sterling was understood to be a pound weight of silver coined into about 240 pennies. One penny would, in Saxon times, more than pay a workman for his day’s labour, so that ten pounds was a large sum of money in those days.

When we consider that the yield from this mint and these moneyers had increased from two pounds to ten pounds, I think we may rightly assume that they were looked upon as a considerable source of income by the Exchequer.

Accepting this and knowing that such a large number of varieties of coins were struck during the long period of about 230 years, in which this mint is known to have existed, it is rather strange that these early coins should be so seldom met with, and that some should be so excessively rare. I know of no coins struck in Nottingham by any king after the reign of Stephen.

_The Newark Mint._--As far as is known, only one Saxon King is supposed to have struck money here, and only two Kings of later periods.

The first coin said to have been struck at Newark is that of King Edwy, 955–959. Although the British Museum describes it as Newark, Northamptonshire, there is little doubt that it was struck at Newark, Notts, as Newark, Notts, is the only Newark mentioned in Domesday Book.

The next two Kings who were supposed to have issued pennies were Henry I., 1100–1135, and Henry II., 1154–1189, and the place of minting Ne, short for Newark. It is questionable if any coins were struck at Newark in the reign of Henry I. It is probable that Henry I. granted a charter to the Bishop of Lincoln to coin money at Newark, as we know a charter to this effect was confirmed by Stephen, and coins of Stephen’s reign struck at Newark are known to exist.

Henry II.--It is extremely doubtful if any coins of this reign were struck at Newark.

_The Torksey Mint._--Ethelred II. (979–1016) is supposed to have struck money here, but opinions differ upon this question. Turc being short for Torksey, I am very much of opinion that these coins were struck at Torksey, for in Saxon times Torksey was probably the most important town between Nottingham and the Humber.

_The Shelford Mint._--Earl Sitric, who was killed in the battle of Ashdown, A.D. 870, is understood to have struck coins here.

The first coin illustrated is that of Athelstan, 925–940. (No. 1.)

_Obverse._ Edelnod on Snotenceham.
_Reverse._ Edelnod on Snotenceham.

There is a coin of this reign in the British Museum with this same reading on the reverse, and on the obverse--Edelstan re Saxorum.

This coin is rare and extremely interesting. It does not bear the King’s name or any of his titles. Edelnod is the moneyer’s name, and he was the moneyer for Nottingham and also for Derby. It has the same reading on both sides, which is exceptional, and it is the first authenticated coin struck at Nottingham, and the only coin having the full reading Snotenceham; in all other Saxon or Norman coins struck in Nottingham by any other Kings, the name of the city is abbreviated.

This abbreviation of the name of the city often occurred in deeds of the period; in fact, we find it as late as in the charter granted by Henry II., 1155, to Nottingham, and where the name reads “Noting” and “Notingh.”

The “S” in the name of Nottingham was first dropped in the foundation charter of Lenton Priory about the year 1108.

_From photographs by_ Mr. S. BARLOW VINES.]

Athelstan was the first monarch who paid any considerable attention to his coinage, and it is from his laws that we first obtain any authentic information about the mints.

In 928 he held a grand synod, at which Wulfhelme, Archbishop of Canterbury, and all the great and powerful men of the kingdom were assembled. They decided that the whole coinage of the realm should be alike, and should bear the King’s portrait only, withdrawing the privilege from the bishops, abbots, barons, &c., of having their portraits struck upon the coins.

They also agreed that money should only be minted in a town, and decided that each burg was entitled to one moneyer, but certain places, on account of their importance, were entitled to two or more. Nottingham had two, London eight, Canterbury seven, Winchester six, and Rochester three. The penalty for establishing a private mint was death. Considering that in these days Nottingham was divided into two burgs, it is extremely probable that there were two mints--one for each burg.

The names of sixty different towns are known where money was minted.

From the fact that the coin illustrated has no portrait upon it, it leads one to suppose it was struck in the early part of Athelstan’s reign before the above law was enacted.

ETHELRED II., 979–1016, issued money from Nottingham.

The sceptre first appeared on the coins of Ethelred in front of the profile, and this usage in subsequent reigns became general.

CANUTE, 1016–1035.

_Obverse._ Cnut recx. Head crowned to left with sceptre.
_Reverse._ Blamiam O Sno. (No. 2.)

_Obverse._ Cnut recx a. Head to left having on a conical helmet,
with sceptre.
_Reverse._ Bruninc on Snoti. (No. 3.)

_Obverse._ Cnut recx a. Head to left with sceptre; on head is a
conical helmet.
_Reverse._ Blacaman on Sno. (No. 4.)

All the coins of this reign have the place of mintage and the moneyer’s name mentioned. The moneyer was responsible for the purity of the coins and their just weight, under various penalties--firstly, his hand was cut off, secondly, death; but in some few cases fines were imposed, as instanced in the case of Swein, who was a moneyer at Nottingham during the reign of Henry I. and Stephen. He was fined 100 shillings.

Numerous varieties of this coin are known, of which the three illustrated show two different dies and three different moneyers. It is not surprising to find coins of this monarch struck at Nottingham, as his coins bear the names of more places of mintage than those of any other reign.

HAROLD I., 1035–1040.

Two coins of this reign are known with the reading: Harold Rex and the Moneyer Blacaman or Sacgrim. The abbreviated name was Sn.

HARDICANUTE, 1040–1042.

Although this King is mostly styled Harthacnut or Harthecnut, Re or Rex, with the mint and moneyer always mentioned, in a known example struck at Nottingham the reading is “Hardacn” and on the reverse, “Plunod on Snot.”

EDWARD THE CONFESSOR, 1042–1066.

_Obverse._ Edpard Re.
_Reverse._ Blaceh on snotine. (No. 5.)

On all coins the Saxon “P” is used for “W” with one or two rare exceptions.

His coins are very varied. On some of them the head is bearded. They vary exceedingly in size and weight, but all appear to have had the same nominal value.

Considering that eight different varieties of coins exist, which were struck at Nottingham, with the place of minting Sn., Sno., Snoti., Snotih, and Znot, it seems strange that they should be so seldom met with. During this reign halfpennies and farthings were first formed by cutting the pennies in two or four parts, but none are known relating to Nottingham.

HAROLD II., 1066.

_Obverse._ Harold Rex angl. Bust to left with sceptre.
_Reverse._ Forna on Snotn, and Pax between two beaded parallel
lines (No. 6).

Several varieties of these coins are known, but they are uncommon.

WILLIAM I., 1066–1087.

When the rule of England changed from Saxon to Norman there was no alteration in the style of the coinage, and silver pennies continued to be the sole current coin of the realm.

WILLIAM I., 1066–1087.

WILLIAM II., 1087–1100.

_Obverse._ Pillelm Rex.
_Reverse._ Iitsere on Snotin. (No. 7.)

_Obverse._ Pillelm Rex.
_Reverse._ Mana on Snoti. (No. 8.)

In the reigns of the two Williams the number of moneyers increased considerably and at least ten are known, and the following abbreviated readings of Nottingham are found on the coins:--Sn, Sno, Snot, Snoti, Snotin, Snotig, Snotine, Snotinc, Snotinge, Snotigne.

Many varieties of coins were struck, but it is somewhat difficult to assign the coins to their respective issuers.

HENRY I., 1100–1135.

_Obverse._ Henricus R. Front face with sceptre; at the side
of the neck is a cross of four pellets.
_Reverse._ Aldene on Sno. Quatrefoil inclosing cross of
pellets with a star in the centre. Fleur de lis in
the angles. (No. 9.)

STEPHEN, 1135–1154.

The coins of this reign are of very great interest, and more is known about them since two hoards were found--one in 1867 at the old Hall at Sheldon, near Bakewell, the other in 1880 in Rose Yard, Bridlesmith Gate, Nottingham; a large portion being of the reign of Stephen and of the Nottingham Mint, amongst them some few not previously known. During this reign money is supposed to have been much debased, but none of these debased specimens exist.

_Obverse._ Stiefne.
_Reverse._ Spein on Snot. (No. 10.)

_Obverse._ Stiefne: Re.
_Reverse._ Spein on Snot. (No. 11.)

_Obverse._ Stiefne: Re.
_Reverse._ Spein on Snot. (No. 12.)

Swein was the moneyer, the Saxon “P” being used for “W.”

It will be noticed that the obverse of each is defaced with a small cross over the King’s face.

In Nos. 11 and 12, which are from the Nottingham find, we have, in addition to the cross, a small pellet and a line cut in the die, and so almost obliterating the King’s head.

It is now a very generally accepted fact that the partisans of Matilda, having no dies except Stephen’s, used his dies, but did not wish to acknowledge his title, and so cut a cross in the die to deface the King’s head.

Probably these coins were issued by William Peverel II. of Nottingham during Stephen’s captivity in 1141. Peverel, being Governor of Nottingham and holding the Castle, would no doubt have control of the mint during this troublous time. Examples exist with larger shaped crosses and different from the above.

_Obverse._ Stiefner.
_Reverse._ Spein on Snot. (No. 13.)

_Obverse._ Stiefne: R.
_Reverse._ Spein on Snot. (No. 14.)

_Obverse._ Stiefne: Rex.
_Reverse._ Spein on Snot. (No. 15.)

_Obverse._ Stiefne.
_Reverse._ Spein on Snotig. (No. 16.)

Nos. 13, 14, 15 are from the Nottingham find, and have very fine large profile busts, and are exceptionally fine specimens for coins of Stephen. In No. 16, though the lettering is somewhat worn, the portrait is good, but quite different from the others, it being struck in the early part of his reign. It has the rare name of the place of minting “Snotig.”

Other varieties exist struck at Nottingham, also cut halfpennies.

_Newark Siege Pieces._--During the years 1645 and 1646, the Royalist party held Newark and set up a mint.

Many Royalist supporters gave their silver and silver gilt cups, flagons, dishes, and family plate for the Royalist cause; others sold their family plate for so much per ounce to be coined into money. This coining down of thousands of ounces of silver plate belonging to the nobility and gentry of the surrounding districts must have caused a barbarous destruction of many ancient, rare, and valuable relics of the highest interest to the towns of Nottingham and Newark.

_Extract from the Kings Proclamation at York._

“And such of our subjects as shall come to us--either to our
said town of Nottingham or to any other place where we shall
happen to encamp--and whosoever shall in this our danger and
necessity supply us either by gift or loan of money or plate.”

_From the circular letter of Loan which was sent about and delivered
by Troopers_:--

“... desire you forthwith to lend us the sum of Twenty Pounds
or the value thereof in Plate, touched Plate at five shillings,
untouched Plate at four shillings and fourpence per ounce ...
which we promise to repay as soon as God shall enable us.”

Charles I. was quite an old and experienced hand at borrowing money as instanced in the private instructions sent to the Commissioners of Nottingham some years previous to the siege of Newark:--

“That in your treating with your neighbours, about this
businesse, yee shew your own discretions and affections, by
making choice of such to begin with, who are likely to give the
best examples; and when yee have a competente number of hands
to the roll or liste of the lenders, that yee shew the same to
others as they come before yee, to lead them to lend in like
manner.”

In the Memoirs of Hampden we read:--

“The Midland Counties of England, however, undertook with great
alacrity to bear this charge. They voluntarily subscribed their
money and their plate. The Cities of London and Westminster were
forward and liberal in their contributions. The women brought in
their rings and jewels; the goldsmiths and silversmiths their
stock.”

In 1642 the King when at Nottingham, just about the breaking out of the Civil War, received as a loan from the Universities nearly all their plate, which was to be repaid at so much per ounce for white silver and so much extra for the gilt silver. Most of this silver was minted at York, but some was paid out in its original form to be sold for the pay of the troops.

_From photographs by_ Mr. S. BARLOW VINES.]

In 1644 Parliament ordered all the King’s plate to be melted down and coined, notwithstanding a remonstrance from the Lords alleging that the curious workmanship of these ancient pieces of silver made them worth more than the metal.

To such dire necessity were the Royalist party put for money, that even at Newark some “regal” service of plate was used. These pieces of money were roughly cut and curiously shaped. The city being besieged, there would no doubt be an urgent demand for money, and the Royalists, not having any dies or skilled workmen who could make them, they made the best they could; for even if a man could not cut the likeness of the King, he might not have much difficulty in cutting a crown, a few letters, and figures. They were all struck upon lozenge-shaped flans, which flans were cut direct from the silver plate.

The coins were of the value of 2s. 6d., 1s., 9d., and 6d., and must have been struck from various dies, as several varieties exist dated 1645/1646. Numerous specimens are found gilt, showing they must have been cut from services of gilt plate.

The general design of these coins is the same, namely:--

_Obverse._ C.R. (Carolus Rex) with a crown between, with
value expressed beneath in Roman numerals all within a single
pearled border.

_Reverse._ Obs. (Obsidium-Siege) Newark, with date beneath
in Arabic figures.

The two half-crowns, Nos. 17 and 18, show differently designed crowns.

On No. 18 may be seen marks of the pattern of the cup or salver from which it was hastily cut.

The four shillings, numbered 19, 20, 21, and 22, show four distinct crowns. On No. 19 a double pearled border may be traced.

On the reverse of No. 20, part of the Royal Arms may be seen; undoubtedly this silver at one time formed part of some regal service of plate. This is an extremely uncommon and interesting piece.

No. 21 has the letter “L” beneath the date 1645, which appears to be a silversmith’s private stamp indicating the source from whence it originally came.

On Nos. 19 and 22 the reading is “Newarke.”

The four ninepences, numbered 23, 24, 25, and 26, show three different crowns, Nos. 25 and 26 being replicas. On the obverse of No. 25 there are two “K’s” at the end of the word “Newarke,” showing this coin was doubly struck.

The sixpences, numbered 27 and 28, are alike.

_Tokens._--During the seventeenth century money continued to be extremely scarce, especially that of small denomination, probably owing to the exactions made for the wars and to the poverty of the inhabitants, and tokens--chiefly halfpennies and farthings of copper or brass--were struck by corporate bodies, chamberlains, and all descriptions of tradesmen with the names of the owners thereon to facilitate easy purchase and ready settlement. These tokens were superseded, after 1672, by the coinage of the realm.

A token in money is understood to be a coin issued by a private individual or firm above its real value, but intrinsically a guarantee of good faith of the issuer that he will pay the nominal value when demanded.

The first mention of tokens is by Ruding. He quotes from the writer of the _History of Allchester_ in 1622:--“King Edward, 1272–1307, his leathern money bearing his name, stamp, and picture, which he used in the building of Carnarvon, Beaumarish, and Conway Castles.”

_From photograph by_ Mr. S. BARLOW VINES.]

In Nottinghamshire 121 tokens are known representing halfpennies and farthings, all of which were issued between the years 1650 to 1670. I only illustrate a few:--

_Nottingham._

_Obverse._ Nottingham halfe penny chainged by ye
Chamberlain 1669.
_Reverse._ Arms of the Town of Nottingham. (No. 29.)

_Obverse._ Thomas Burrowes. A rose with Sm above.
_Reverse._ In Nottingham. A. Castle. (No. 30.) ½

_Obverse._ John Blunt at the Weeke. A man on horseback with
panniers.
_Reverse._ Day Cross of Nottingham Baker his halfpenny.
(No. 31.)

_Obverse._ Roger Hawksley 1666. Merchant Tailors’ Arms.
_Reverse._ in Nottingham. His halfpenny. (No. 32.)

_Obverse._ George Borzowes 1669. In Nottingham.
_Reverse._ Salathyell Groves. ½ under three goats’ heads.
(No. 33.)

_Bingham._

_Obverse._ Thomas Markham Chandler 1669.
_Reverse._ in Bingham his halfepenny. (No. 34.)

_Collingham._

_Obverse._ Thomas Ridge his halfpenny. The Grocers’ Arms.
_Reverse._ of Collingham Mercer 1664. The Mercers’ Arms
T.R. (No. 35.)

_Mansfield._

_Obverse._ Samuel Haulton. A pair of scales hanging from
chief wavy part of the Bakers’ Arms.
_Reverse._ of Mansfield 1664. His halfpenny. (No. 36.)

_Newark._

_Obverse._ Joshua Clarke Mercer in. Grocers’ Arms.
_Reverse._ Newark his halfpenny 1666. The Mercers’ Arms
I.C. (No. 37.)

_Retford._

_Obverse._ William Hall. His halfpenny.
_Reverse._ of Rettforde 1668--W.A.H. (No. 38.)

_Southwell._

_Obverse._ Gregory Silvester. Southwell.
_Reverse._ William Leaver 1664. G.S. W.L. (No. 39.) ½

_Worksop._

_Obverse._ Thomas Lee 1666. The Grocers’ Arms.
_Reverse._ in Wourksop--T.F.L. (No. 40.) ¼

During the latter part of the eighteenth century the coinage of copper and silver money by the Government was totally inadequate for the nation’s needs. This caused the revival of tokens. They were again issued in very large numbers by all kinds of tradesmen, manufacturers, and banks. The Bank of England alone in 1811 and 1812 issued no less than fourteen million silver tokens of the value of 3s. and 1s. 6d.

Sir Edward Thomason, in his Memoirs, states:--

“The copper and silver change became so extremely scarce that
the demand for the manufacture of tokens to enable the masters
to pay their workmen their weekly wage was so great that I
had endless applications for both. I manufactured during this
year silver and copper tokens for Wales, Brecon, Gainsborough,
Newcastle-on-Tyne, and for many different establishments. In
1811 I manufactured above two million copper tokens for Samuel
Fereday, the great ironmaster, who employed 5000 people.”

Perhaps the most interesting tokens of this period were those of the firm of Messrs. Robert Davison & John Hawksley of Arnold. Both belonged to old Nottingham families; they were important business men and well-known philanthropists, Mr. Hawksley being presented with the freedom of the town of Nottingham.

_From photograph by_ Mr. S. BARLOW VINES.]

The Hawksleys were maltsters, the Davisons hosiery manufacturers. Mr. Davison gave up the hosiery business and joined Mr. Hawksley in building a factory near Leen Side, Nottingham, for worsted spinning. This factory was burned down in January 1791. They at once commenced building new works at Arnold. These works were running before the end of the year. They were situated near the site of Arnot Hill House in which Mr. Hawksley lived. They did not prove a success, and the machinery was sold and the factory demolished.

Mr. Hawksley died in 1815 and Mr. Davison in 1807.

The issuing of these tokens of such high value in copper wherewith to pay their workpeople was exceptional.

It is strange that, although they issued these tokens in Arnold, I know of none being issued from their Nottingham works. They were of the value of 5s., 2s. 6d., 1s., and 6d., and all copper, but I have some of the tokens plated in silver and in gilt. The crowns and half-crowns are the most rare of all the Nottinghamshire tokens of this period. The shillings and sixpences are not uncommon.

_Obverse._ Davison and Hawksley, and fleece suspended from
a tree.
_Reverse._ The Roman Fasces with the axe, spear, and a cap
of liberty in saltire, Arnold works. A. crown 1791.
(No. 41.)

The 2s. 6d., 1s., and 6d. pieces are similar, except in size and value.

A token for 5s. was issued from East Retford. This token was countermarked on a Spanish dollar.

The Treasury and many firms throughout the Kingdom countermarked these Spanish dollars and enormous numbers were in circulation, but this is the only Nottinghamshire one known.

Messrs. Bolton & Whatt at their Soho Mint, Birmingham, countermarked over three millions previous to 1804.

On one occasion forty tons of dollars were taken from two Spanish frigates captured by the British fleet. This specie was taken to Plymouth and then forwarded on to the Bank of England.

A silver token for 1s. was issued by the timekeepers.

_Obverse._ A griffin, with wings displayed, gorged, issuant
from a ducal coronet; legend, one shilling token
sterling silver.

_Reverse._ For the use of the inns at Derby, Ashbourne,
Chesterfield, Nottingham, Leicester, Lichfield,
Burton, &c.

H. Morgan issued shillings and sixpences:--

_Obverse._ The arms of Leicester, vert, a cinquefoil,
between two sprigs of olive. One shilling silver
tokens.

_Reverse._ Notts, Derby, Leicester, Northampton, and
Rutland shilling silver tokens. The outer
legend--Morgan, licensed manufacturer, 12 Rathbone
Place, London. (No. 42.)

Messrs. Donald & Co. issued a halfpenny token:--

_Obverse._ Donald & Co., stocking manufacturers, wholesale
and retail. Promissory halfpenny, payable Notting^m, or

_Reverse._ A beehive with bees, No. 29 Hull Street,
Birmingham, 1792. (No. 43.)

There are five or six varieties of these copper tokens. When the first die was made it was found that the word “promissory” was spelt “promissary.” This error was rectified by cutting “o” over the “a.” Afterwards fresh dies were made with the word spelt correctly.

_From photographs by_ Mr. S. BARLOW VINES.]

The Newstead Abbey token for one penny:--

_Obverse._ A view of Newstead Abbey. The words Newstead Abbey,
and on the raised outer circle “Nottinghamshire,” and
in small letters the name of the engraver Jacobs.

_Reverse._ Two palm branches and the letters “T.G.”, and on
the raised outer border “British Penny” and the date
1797. Round the edge of the coin is impressed the
words--“I promise to pay on demand the bearer one
penny.” (No. 44.)

In 1811 silver tokens were issued at Newark, value 1s. There are four varieties of these. Probably the issuing of these pieces by a number of tradesmen was done in order to share the cost of the die and to procure a quantity of tokens at a cheaper rate, and also to inspire confidence.

_Obverse._ A view of the Town Hall with inscription--“Town
Hall, 1811.” Newark silver token for one shilling.

_Reverse._ The current value payable in cash notes. T.
Stansall, Cha^s Moore, Rich^d Fisher, W^m Fillingham,
W^m Readitt, and T. Wilson. (No. 45.)

Thomas Stansall was a grocer, Charles Moore a chemist, Richard Fisher and William Fillingham drapers, William Readitt a grocer, Thomas Wilson a brazier.

Copper tokens for one penny were also issued in 1811, of which three varieties exist:--

_Obverse._ A view of Newark Castle and the river, with date
1811. “Newark token for one penny.”

_Reverse._ The current value payable in cash notes. T.
Stansall, Charles Moore, Rich^d Fisher, W^m Fillingham,
W^m Readitt, T. Wilson. (No. 46.)

J. M. Fellows & Co., bankers, of Bridlesmith Gate, issued penny tokens, of which there are five varieties, dated 1812 and 1813:--

_Obverse._ A view of Nottingham Castle. One penny token, 1812.

_Reverse._ The arms of the borough in a circle, payable by
J. M. Fellows, a pound note for 240. (No. 47.)

Mansfield silver shillings:--

_Obverse._ Beehive and bees, C. & G. Stanton, Hancock;
Wakefield & Co., and W^m Ellis, Mansfield.

_Reverse._ Female seated on a bale with scales and
cornucopia. One shilling silver token, 1812.
(No. 48.)

Two varieties of this exist. Messrs. Stanton, Hancock, and Wakefield & Co. were cotton manufacturers; William Ellis a draper and woollen salesman.

In 1813, W. Baker, hosier, of Fletcher Gate, issued penny tokens:--

_Obverse._ W^m Baker, Nottingham, an ornament between Baker
and Nottingham. Legend--a pound note for 240 tokens,
1813.

_Reverse._ One penny token within a wreath of oak and
laurel. (No. 49.)

THE CLOCKMAKERS OF NEWARK-ON-TRENT,
WITH NOTES ON SOME OF THEIR
CONTEMPORARIES

BY H. COOK

Among the many inanimate things which invite us to reflect on bygone days and the life and activities associated with them, none are more insistent in their invitations than the sober faces and steady tickings of the clocks which measured out the time for our grandfathers, and often enough for our great-grandfathers. None are more reticent of the doings of the days that are gone; yet the very tickings are akin to a pulsation of energy and life which seem to invite us to search out the men who made, owned, or took pleasure in them in generations past. Nor is the invitation unheeded by some of those whose lot is cast among clocks and have the daily handling of them, and I will try, as one humble manipulator, to place on record a few of the most interesting characteristics of the makers of Newark-on-Trent, and incidentally of some of the village makers of Nottinghamshire.

The task of putting into order the whole of the makers of Nottinghamshire would be too large an undertaking for one individual; but in my many years’ experience of the “Grandfather” type of clock, I have found much of interest in the work of the Newark makers, and of others from the county which has come my way. At the outset, I am obliged to admit the meagre nature of the information to hand, as far as the early makers are concerned, for I find that Nottinghamshire, in common with the provinces generally, had, in early days of domestic clocks, to draw on the London makers, at any rate for its best clocks; especially was this the case as early as the latter part of the seventeenth and beginning of the eighteenth century, and I have found in the neighbourhood at least one clock by Tompion, one by Etherington, one by Knibb, one by George Graham, and one by Daniel Quare.[89]

These odd clocks, surviving from the seventeenth century to the present time, are sufficient to indicate the way Nottinghamshire men of those days were compelled to import from London the much-prized “Grandfather,” or cased clock, with the newly invented royal pendulum (the application of Galileo’s invention). But, however much this was the case, it soon came about that the towns in the county, and very soon a great many of the villages even, had their own clockmakers, and it is with these we are concerned for the present.

Any clock work earlier than the typical cased clock is very rare indeed around Newark, and I am not aware of any example of the table clock, and of only one example of the lantern variety. Considering that public clocks must have been in use before these days, it is a matter for wonder that there are few or none of earlier types coming to light, notwithstanding all our researches and bargain hunting. I have advertised personally, in likely quarters, and kept a sharp look-out for the last twenty-five years without success, although various pieces of supposed early work have come to me.

Beginning with Newark, I find that William Gascoigne is the earliest maker of the “Grandfather” clock we have, and Plate 1 shows the style of work he turned out in the early part of the eighteenth century. He was a maker of eight-day clocks of the usual quality of his day, when all work was good, but the illustration shows only a thirty-hour clock; for although I have an illustration of an eight-day clock, I selected this because of its unusual features; for it should be noted that, although only a one-day clock, it has a seconds dial and hand all complete, as though it were an eight-day timepiece. The quality of the work in the corner-pieces, which are nicely cut up and carved after the casting, and in the hands, which show a bit of finely drilled and pierced iron work, and in the solidity of the dial plate and hour circle with the pretty numbering in vogue in those days, make it of rather greater interest than the eight-day clocks by the same maker.

William Gascoigne bore the name of an old Newark family which for generations had mixed in the life and affairs of the town. He appears to have been in business as late as 1728, for W. Stukeley, in his _Itinerarium Curiosum_ (vol. i. p. 106, 1776), tells how he was informed by Mr. T. Hurst of Grantham, that he had seen at Mr. Gascoigne’s, a goldsmith in Newark, a large gold ring, weighing 42s., lately brought him by a countryman who had found it upon the Fosse Way, and he afterwards makes comment that it was supposed to show a wolf upon it, but he found it was a fox beneath a tree, and he bought the ring. To the name of Gascoigne also belongs, I believe, the distinction of the mention of the earliest domestic clock in our Newark annals. In 1678, March 11th, John Gascoigne, the glover, gave by his will to William Cook, “The Clock and the Jack,” an interesting note, as any allusion to domestic clocks at this date is very rare, and it gives an idea of their value and the esteem in which they were held. I have seen one at least of these early jacks, a wooden pillar on a heavy foot, carrying a gear work on the top propelled by a weight running down the back of the pillar and spinning the joint in front of a tray of metal which covers and protects both joint and jack.

But surprises come when least expected in clock research. Having heard of a marquetry-cased clock of Gascoigne of Newark far away in Devonshire, I was anxious to procure it, expecting to find the well-accredited “William” on the dial, but much to my surprise the dial bore the inscription “Owin” Gascoigne, in Newark, and this was the first and last of the Owin Gascoigne clocks I had seen, or ever expect to see. I may add that it was a very early and undeniably good month clock, and is now doing good service in a mansion in Lincolnshire. But the puzzle of how to explain the fact that William Gascoigne is well known, while Owin Gascoigne suddenly appears on the scene, is a mystery, unless we solve it by the conjecture that Owin was a relation of William, and had ordered the clock from him, a possible solution, when we remember that the family were well established in Newark, and were most likely well provided with this world’s goods. William Gascoigne seems to have flourished in the town from about 1700 to 1740, when there is a record of his death on the 23rd February.

A worthy competitor and contemporary of Gascoigne was Nicholas Goddard, and Plate 1 shows an eight-day clock of his which is in most details very like those made by his compeer Gascoigne, though he also made some arched dials, of whose manufacture by Gascoigne I have no evidence. The clock dials of both were similar, indicating that there were fashions as well as variations to tickle the popular palate in those days as much as in our times. The name of Goddard is even more impressed on our local history than that of Gascoigne, for we have a record of one Nicholas Goddard, who married in 1558, and the name runs through our history for 150 years. In 1659 “Henrie” Goddard was paid by the churchwardens for mending the chimes and for other work about the church, and, for 209 lbs. of iron for the steeple stairs, the sum of £4, 19s. 2d.

CLOCKS BY

WILLIAM GASCOYNE. NICHOLAS GODDARD.]

CLOCKS BY

WILLIAM BARNARD. EDWARD SMITH.]

Though Nicholas seems to have been the family Christian name for many generations, the clockmaker Nicholas has left his name behind him more frequently than any of his forbears, and there are a good many of his clocks still to be seen ticking away with their brass faces beaming out from dark oak cases. As far as we can tell from the little evidence we have, his death occurred in 1741. His work was fine and artistic as well as substantial.

About this time we hear of William Marshall, whose clocks are all of a rather less costly make and usually “thirty hours.” One peculiar feature in all his dials is the printing in Roman capitals of the name between the hours 7 and 5, in the usual place, but with the “William” one side of the 6, all in proper order, while the name “Marshall” was so cramped into the space between the 6 and 5 that the last two letters were always placed on the top of the “sha,” a peculiar habit, to say the least of it. His work was not so artistic as either Gascoigne’s or Goddard’s. They all made cast dial-plates and corner-pieces, but, in Marshall’s case, these were not so well carved, and there was little or no ornamental cutting on the plate or circle.

After Nicholas Goddard and William Marshall comes William Barnard, by far the most prolific of our local makers. Barnard had a peculiarity not known so far as I am aware in the work of any other maker: he was sufficiently bold to place a number on all his clocks, whether they were one-handed one-day clocks, eight-day clocks with the usual square dials, or even a moon-arched top dial. On some of his dials he put a round number and name-plate under the hour 12, in others he put the name in the place usual at the period--between the hours of 7 and 5--and the number inside the seconds dial space; or, in the case of the moon dial, the name was placed round one hemisphere and his number round the other. These small details are a pleasing feature, pointing us to the fact that he was not in the habit of making clocks for other people to sell, but was what we should prefer him to be--the maker-seller, and consequently the individual who had an interest in the future behaviour of clocks bearing his name. He also made one or two very unusual movements, one of which, an eight-inch dial with alarm works, now in the Friary House at Newark, is illustrated here (Plate 2). This is a pretty little dial, and the hand shows the alarm hour through its tail, extended for the purpose, while the cherub corners are like some I have seen on Gascoigne’s hood clocks, and the number is not very far advanced, for some of his dials are numbered as high as 1200, while some approach 1300, but I suspect that he did not begin at 1. Only on one of his clocks have I seen the dial without the name and number, and here they are both cut into the back of the movement. Though by no means certain, it is very probable that Barnard succeeded to Goddard’s business and largely added to it, for there is a similarity in the details of the mechanical portions of their work.

The sequence of numbers on the dials has given scope for fun on many occasions. I remember well a deaf old gentleman coming into my shop and announcing that he had the oldest clock in Newark--made in 1050. After much loud questioning, I ascertained that Barnard was the maker, and when I had brought down from the workshop a similar dial, with the number 1215 on it, he was quite a long time before he realised what age Barnard must have been when he made the second of these two specimens, and I had much difficulty in persuading him that the number was only a number and not a date. Barnard flourished from 1740 to 1780, about which date William Unwin appears with work (Plate 3) very similar to that of Barnard’s later years. While all Gascoigne’s cases were of oak or veneered walnut, and Barnard’s were of oak only, Unwin introduced us to the mahogany case. Unwin’s shop was in Kirk Gate, opposite the famous stage-coaching house of Gilstrap’s, at the northern end of the Nottingham and Notts Bank premises, with a door into the passage leading down the adjacent Wheat Sheaf yard. It was here he afterwards conducted a partnership with Holt, whom we shall note later, and there is presumptive evidence that Barnard occupied the same premises, which have thus been a clockmaker’s shop for a century. Before it was pulled down it presented a very old-fashioned appearance with its bow window of many small panes, and the half-doors with the top portion filled with bull’s-eye glass. Unwin was in business here in 1780, in which year we find him a voter at the election. In 1791 he subscribed five shillings to the fund for lighting the town by lamps. I have also evidence of his being there in 1801 from a watch bearing his name and the date letter of that year which came into my hands. Unwin lived at the time of the transition from the brass dials to the cheaper iron painted ones. Occasionally on the back of these latter we find the little painted label used by the painters to indicate the style in which the dial was to be finished, a detail which shows us that the later practice of keeping dials on hand from Birmingham had not yet begun. The dial plate was made and fitted, the label stuck on at the back, and the portions printed on it which were not required were struck off, and the painter worked from the remainder. So in examining Unwin’s work we see fine brass dials, an odd but equally fine brass silvered dial, and many painted ones, and in all varieties of faces the well-worked iron hands remained. The cases, however, began to change, the long door of the earlier makers became shorter, and rather more detail appeared, but on the whole the plain school predominated.

We must now consider another old maker of importance, who, like Gascoigne and Goddard, possessed an old Newark name. Solomon Bettinson’s (so spelled for many generations, though afterwards changed to Bettison), name appears in the 1780 and 1796 election poll books, and on a particularly interesting clock (Plate 3) now in the Chantry House, with a plain oak case with cushion top, a 14-inch circular brass and silvered dial, centre seconds hand, centre day of the month hand, and a well-engraved dial whereon is inscribed his own name, Solomon Bettison, Newark, and above it, crowded in among the numbers of the days of the month, is the name of Sarah Flear, for whom Bettison originally made the clock. This Sarah Flear was married at Flintham to Richard Greene, on 4th June 1792. Richard Greene and Sarah, his wife, had a daughter, to whom the clock eventually belonged, and it was her nephew, an old man of some eighty years of age, told me how Sarah Flear had had this clock made when she was about to be married and set up a house of her own. The Flintham register supports these statements, and thus gives us the date, 1792, for the manufacture of this clock. Bettison made square dials to his clocks as well as round ones, and he seems to have been partial to those with engraved centres instead of the usual matted and lacquered ones.

But I am neglecting some of the contemporaries of Bettison and Barnard, who did good work in both square and round dial clocks. About this time, 1780, there was on both square and round a pattern much in vogue, which may be best described as the pagoda style of cutting. Some of the round dials made by Edward Crampton, Barnard’s apprentice, and by Stacey of Farnsfield, were fine examples of the engraver’s art. The centres of the square dials are, at this period, treated in the same way for the most part. Unwin, Bettison, Crampton, together with John Crampern and Edward Smith, who are described in the marriage registers, under the years 1773 and 1775 respectively, as watchmakers, were all contemporaries, and followed the fashion of the time. I am afraid it is a mistake on the part of the registers to call Crampern and Smith watchmakers; it ought to have been clockmakers, for I have never met with any watch of Newark make at this early date. Although not of the particular pattern alluded to above, the clock by Edward Smith (Plate 2), now at Ossington Hall, has a very good engraved and filled black and silvered centre dial. Though not a bit better than other contemporary work of this period (about 1780), Smith’s clock shows the fashion of the time in the preference of the graver for the matting tool. Such clocks look very well indeed in their plain oak cases, with cushion tops and well-proportioned trunks and bases. One dial by Crampern has a very interesting appearance. It is 12 inches square, and the silvered centre shows a village inn, the Chequers, on one side, while on the other is a summer-house with latticed shelter and a table on which stands a foaming tankard. Seated are two figures, one male and one female, each smoking a clay pipe.

The dials made by Thomas Stacey of Farnsfield are worth illustrating, but space forbids. Stacey was married to Margaret Gamble on 5th June 1774, and the family went to live at Southwell, finding it most likely a better centre for their business. They are to be found there until nearly the middle of the nineteenth century.

At this point it would be well to consider one or two other places in the neighbourhood which were as well provided with clockmakers as Newark.