Money and Moneyers. 407 



word Monige, the German Mmitz, the French Monnoie, the 

 Italian Moneta, and the Spanish Moneda, are palpably all trace- 

 able to the same Latin root from which comes the Eno-hshword 



O 



money. When Britain became subject to the Romans, no 

 coined money was lawful unless it bore the effigies of Cassar : 

 it was called tribute-money. This tribute-money was not only 

 impressed with the effigy of the emperor, but with certain in- 

 scriptions indicating rent money, represented by symbolic coins. 

 Thus, for large cattle, the tribute-money was stamped with the 

 figure of a horse ; for less, with that of a hog ; for corn-fields, 

 with an ear of corn ; and for a poll-tax, with the head of a man. 

 The coins of the British prince Cunobeline were not only im- 

 pressed with the figures of animals, but with the word tascio, 

 which signified task, tax, or tribute. Without venturing further 

 into the history of money, generally, we may at once come to 

 its history, so far as England is concerned, and give some 

 account of those who have been entrusted from time to time 

 with its hteral production. It is established, then, on the most 

 conclusive bases, that in the earliest periods at which coins, or 

 records of coining, exist in this country, mints were established 

 in every large town. From about the close of the ninth to 

 the middle of the sixteenth century, the practice prevailed of 

 stamping on coins the name of the town or city at which it was 

 minted. Thus, therefore, we possess evidence of the existence 

 of numerous mints. In early periods, moreover, several persons 

 as the king, certain archbishops, bishops, abbots, and others, 

 exercised by royal prerogative, by usurpation, or by grant, the 

 privilege of minting in the same place at the same time. Pre-, 

 vious to the union of the seven or eight Saxon kingdoms, each 

 of the petty kings, and several archbishops and bishops, appear 

 to have exercised the right of coining independently, and to 

 have put their own effigies and devices on the coin produced. 

 After the transformation, however, of the heptarchy into one 

 monarchy, Athelstan, who reigned a.d. 920-940, at a grand 

 council or parliament, ordained that there should in future be 

 but ' ' one money" throughout the kingdom. This expression 

 undoubtedly meant that there should be but one authority, 

 effigy, and device — namely, those of the monarch himself — 

 attached to, or ornamenting the coinage of the realm. At the 

 same time that Athelstan and subsequent monarchs denied to 

 their subjects the right of minting independently, they conceded 

 to some of them the privilege of minting vicariously, as grantees 

 of the crown. Accordingly, we find that royal, episcopal, and 

 abbatical mints were in being, and in full operation long after 

 Athelstan's " order in council.'''' 



For instance, it is on authentic record, that that monarch, 

 the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Abbot of St. Augus- 



