Category Archives: Tokens from West of the City Walls

Here are listed some some of my brief reseach notes on a random selection of 17th century tokens that were issued by tradesmen living to the west of the old walls of the City of London

04/04/2015 · 3:55 pm

Humphrey Vaughan of White Hart Yard, Westminster

A half penny tradesman’s token issued by Humphrey Vaughan at White Hart Yard, Westminster

The above copper half penny token measures 18.3 mm and weighs 1.70 grams. It was issued in 1666 by Humphrey Vaughan a tradesman of White Hart Yard off Covent Garden in Westminster. Its design may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: (sexfoil) HVMPHRY . VAVGHAN . IN . , around a beaded inner border, within the depiction of a man wearing a hat walking left carrying a sack over his shoulder.

Reverse: (sexfoil) WHITE . HART . YARD. 1666, around a beaded inner border. Within the legend HIS / HALF / PENY in three lines.

The portrayal of a man carrying a sack found on the obverse of this token is not unique as at least two other examples are known from the London area. These were issued by a coal and lime merchant respectively. This could act as a clue to Humphrey Vaughan’s trade.

There were several White Hart Yards in and around 17^th century London including examples in Stepney, Holborn, Drury Lane, St. Martin’s Lane, Tothill Street, Bermondsey, and Southwark. Research into this token’s issuer (as outlined below) has confirmed that the White Hart Yard in question in this case was that which lead west off Drury Lane in the south-east part of the parish of St. Paul’s in Covent Garden. The street derived its name from its location immediately behind the White Hart Inn which fronted onto the Strand and is recorded as early as 1570₍₁₎.

White Hart Yard, Covent Garden, c.1720

White Hart Yard no longer exists in Westminster’s modern street plan. It ran to the south of, and in a parallel alignment to that of, today’s Tavistock Street along the stretch leading into Drury Lane. Its course is now lost under the Waldorf Hilton Hotel.

In Search of Humphrey Vaughan

Humphrey Vaughan’s half penny token offers very little information about its issuer. While it clearly states the address of his premises in 1666 as White Hart Yard it is unclear as to which of the various locations of this name, in and around 17^th century London, is being referred to. Often the obverse pictorial design selected for such tradesman’s tokens offers an indication as to the issuer’s trade. In this case we are left unclear although, as has previously pointed out, this particular design is known from at least two other similar London tokens whose issuers were coal and lime merchants respectively. Fortunately sufficient references to Humphrey Vaughan remain in the historical record to allow us to further address these questions and many others relating to his family’s history.

The following partial life history of Humphrey Vaughan has been constructed from contemporary parish registers, rate book entries, various tax return registers and probate records. While there is always the chance of confusing the historical records relating to different individuals who share the same name, the use of specific time line, family relationship and geographical identifiers can often be used to help eliminate or minimise the risk. Where available such criteria have been applied in this case (Note 1 and 2).

The first clear record of Humphrey Vaughan, the token issuer, appears in 1646 in the parish registers of St. Botolph’s Aldersgate in the city of London.

3^rd December 1646 – Marriage of Humphrey Vaughan and Rachell Clarke

Humphrey’s age or home parish are not recorded but on the assumption that this was his first marriage we might estimate his then age as being early 21 to 25. This gives us an estimated period for his birth as 1621 to 1625. Assuming the couple followed tradition their marriage was likely held in the bride’s home parish.

Just over 9 months later the couple’s names again appear, this time in the parish registers for St. Martin-in-the-fields, Westminster, within a record of the christening of their daughter Jane;

5th September 1647 – Christening of Jana, the daughter of Humphridi Vaughan and Rachellae

Humphrey’s association with this parish thereafter continues for the rest of his recorded life.

The same set of parish resisters go on to record the birth and death of further children to Humphrey and Rachel over the next 9 years;

16^th October 1648 – Christening of Elizabeth, the daughter of Humphridi Vaughan and Rachellae

21^st September 1651 – Christening of Rachel Vaughan, daughter of Humphridi Vaughan and Rachelis

3^rd April 1654 – Christening of Humphrey, son of Humphrey Vaughan and Rachell (born on 2^nd April 1654)

31^st July 1656 – Burial of Humphrey, son of Humphrey Vaughan and Rachell

In the same year as the death of his son (i.e. 1656) Humphrey Vaughan is recorded as living in Russell Street, Covent Garden in the parish of St. Martin in the Fields. A series of entries in the Westminster rate returns books record him, and we can presume the rest of his family, in this street until at least 1663₍₂₎. Interestingly this is further backed up by the numismatic evidence from the following tradesman’s token.

A farthing tradesman’s token issued by Humphrey Vaughan at or by the sign of the Goat in Russell Street, Westminster

The design of this brass farthing may be described as follows;

Obverse: (cinquefoil) HVMPHRY . VAVGHAN , around the depiction of a goat walking left.

Reverse: (cinquefoil) IN . RVSSELL . STREET , around a twisted wire inner circle, within a triad of initials comprising H | (mullet) V (mullet) | R , with a (mullet) blow.

The style and denomination of the token arguably suggests an issue date of the mid-1650s to early 1660s. The triad of issuers’ initials on the reverse of the token are those of Humphrey and Rachel Vaughan. The token clearly confirms Humphrey Vaughan’s business address as being at or by the sign of the goat in Russell Street. However, it falls short in confirming his occupation.

In a time before the formal address numbering of buildings the use of ornate and memorable trade signs, in association with specific street names, were the standard means of expressing a location’s address. Trade signs were typically suspended from support rods at an elevated position on the street facing outer wall of their owner’s business premises. After the great fire of 1666 many of the new brick built buildings and business premises in London incorporated trade signs in the form of carved stone reliefs which were built at height into the outer wall of the buildings’ fabric.

An analysis of Humphrey’s trade sign (i.e. the goat) offers few clues as to his trade. The first record of this sign in London is recorded in Cheapside in 1260₍₃₎. No particular set of tradesmen appear to have adopted the sign as being representative of their occupation although the image of a goat or a goat’s head does appear in the crest or as a supporter in the coats of arms of several of the city’s Livery Companies including the Haberdashers, Curriers and the Cordwainers. This particular example of the use of the sign might have a more locational and historical significance. Russell Street, variously built between c.1610 and c.1632, was named after Francis Russell, the 4^th Earl of Bedford, who was largely responsible for developing his family’s earlier grants of land in and around Covent Garden₍₄₎. The image of a goat had been adopted by the Russell family as an armorial badge. As such the goat may well have been adopted by some of the tenant tradesmen in the area in honour of their landlord’s family.

As stated above it is possible that Humphrey Vaughan’s business premises were by and not necessarily at the sign of the goat. If this were the case then the trade sign depicted on his token may not have been his own. Between 1633 and 1634 a well-documented Covent Garden vintner by the name of William Clifton, was the proprietor of the Goat tavern at the north-west corner of Russell with Bow Street. If this were the sign referred to in Humphrey’s token it would arguably put his premises very close by, if not adjacent to, the tavern. As an alternative conclusion of the evidence presented is that at the time he issued his farthing trade token Humphrey Vaughan was the proprietor of the Goat tavern in Russell Street. However, subsequent reviews of the master and apprentice records of the Worshipful Company of Vintners for the early to mid-17^th century has failed to identify any mention of a Humphrey Vaughan₍₅₎ .

A map of the Covent Garden area (c.1720) showing White Hart Yard and Russell Street plus the location of the Goat Tavern (in red)

While unaffected by the Great Fire of London of 1666 the Covent Garden area was hit hard by the Great Plague of the previous year. It is not known how the Vaughan family fared during this tumultuous period in the city’s history but by Lady Day of 1666 it appears that they had moved out of Russell Street into alternative premises close by. This is apparent from the Hearth Tax returns for this year which record Humphrey as paying tax on a property with three hearths in White Hart Yard ₍₆₎.

A further series of entries in the Westminster rate returns books, plus a listing in a tax return list for 1693 (Note 3) record Humphrey Vaughan, and presumably his remaining family, in White Hart Yard from 1672 to 1705₍₇₎₍₈₎. The 1693 tax listing referred to above records Humphrey’s property in White Hart Yard as having a rental value of £25 and the value of his stock as £50.

At some time prior to 1686 it would appear that Rachael Vaughan died as indicated by the following entry from the parish registers of Holy Trinity, Minories.

24^th June 1686 – Humphrey Vaughan, widower of St. Martin Fields, and Elizabeth Bowman, spinster of St. James, Westminster, married by Mr. Anderson.

No further records of Humphrey Vaughan have been found after 1705 and it can only be assumed that he died sometime shortly after this date. A copy of Humphrey’s Will, dated 22 July 1698, exists in the London Metropolitan Archives₍₉₎. This throws considerably more light on his occupation and later life.

At the time Humphrey made his Will in 1698 he describes himself as being in good physical and mental health. He confirms his home parish as being St. Martin-in-the-Fields and states his occupation as a “coals seller”, i.e. the seller of lump wood charcoal and sea-coal. In the 16^th to 18^th century London all mineral coal would have been referred to as “sea-coal” as it was almost exclusively brought into the capital by sea via fleets of collier vessels. Cargo from the latter would have been brought into wharves and stockyards distributed along the north bank of the River Thames via barge. Such small boats were used to transfer coal from the collier vessels which were moored downstream of Old London Bridge. At this time most coal supplied into London was shipped out of the north-east coalfield via the River Tyne.

A late 17th century or early 18th century trade card belonging to Philip Fruchard, Coal Merchant at the Golden Heart in All Hallows Lane off Thames Street. The image depicts porters transferring bags of sea-coal off a barge into an awaiting cart

It is not clear if by the term “coals seller” Humphrey Vaughan was a small-scale fuel seller or if he was a fully established woodmonger trading in larger quantities of domestic fuels from his own wharf and or stockyard. Unfortunately most of the records of the Worshipful Company of London Woodmongers (which would have included sea-coal traders) have not survived and so we are unable to search them for any mention of Humphrey Vaughan.

The central obverse detail of Humphrey Vaughan’s half penny token compared with that of a coal seller from a mid-17th century copy of “The Cries of London”. The latter could possibly have been the die sinkers source for the former token design.

The size of Humphrey Vaughan’s estate, as outlined in his Will, is unclear but appears very modest as do his monetary bequests. The will mentions no surviving children only three grandchildren the bequests to which were as follows;

Thomas Caton – £20 to be paid to him on his 21^st birthday and that Humphrey’s wife Elizabeth should provide and help in his upbringing until such time as he can be bound into a suitable trade apprenticeship which Elizabeth was to assist in finding for him.
Humphrey Hodge – 40 shillings.
Elizabeth Hodge – 20 shillings in addition to what Humphrey had already given to her prior to making his Will.

The remains of Humphrey’s estate and goods were to be left to his wife Elizabeth and then for the bequest of a final sum of 40 shillings to his friend, fellow parishioner and supervisor of his Will, Thomas Roades. This bequest was intended for the purchase of a mourning ring by which Thomas could remember him by.

A mid 17th Century Deaths Head Type Funerary Ring from London

Notes:

1) During the research for this article several other references to a Humphrey Vaughan were made in various other London parish registers. As they do not appear to be related to Humphrey Vaughan the token issuer of St. Martin-in-the-Fields they have been omitted from the above partial life history. However, for completeness they are recorded below;

(a) 4^th May 1664 – Burial of Humphrey Vaughan, aged 1 year, at the parish church of St. Botolph-without-Bishopsgate.

(b) 22^nd July 1674 – Baptism of Humphrey Vaughan son of Humphrey at the church of St. Katherine-by-the-Tower.

(c) 7^th January 1694 – Birth and christening of Rebecca daughter of Humphrey and Anne Vaughan at the parish church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields.

As Humphrey Vaughan the token issuer is recorded as marrying Elizabeth Bowman in 1686 and an Elizabeth is recorded as Humphrey’s wife in his Will of 1698 it is difficult to see how he could have been married to a lady called Anne in 1694. It is also noted that there is no reference to either an Anne or a Rebecca in Humphrey’s Will.

2) The Four Shillings in the Pound Aid (Note 3) tax listings for Westminster list a second record for a Humphrey Vaughan in Sheer Lane Ward of the parish of St. Clement Danes₍₁₀₎. The tax assessment records his property’s rental value as £20 and the value of his stock as £0. It is assumed that this tax assessment is either for a different Humphrey Vaughan to that of our token issuer or alternatively for a second property belonging to the token issuer.

3) The Four Shillings in the Pound Aid – This Aid or Assessment was collected in London and Westminster in order to finance the wars fought by King William between 1689 and 1697. Two Acts of Parliament passed in 1692 and 1693 specified the collection of four shillings in every pound (a 20 per cent tax) on the rental value of all property, income earned in public service, and stock or ready money held as part of a personal estate. Individuals whose property was worth less than 20 shillings were exempt. The tax was administered by the City Chamberlain, and raised £296,160 8s 10 3/4d, in 1693 from the metropolis as a whole.

References:

1) Way, A. – Letter from ALBERT WAY, Esq. Director S.A., to Sir HENRY ELLIS, Secretary, accompanying an Indenture of Lease from the Earl of Bedford to Sir William Cecil, of a portion of pasture in Covent Garden. Read 25^th January 1844. Archaeologia, Or, Miscellaneous Tracts Relating to Antiquity: Volume 30. (The Society of Antiquaries of London, 1844).

2) Westminster Rate Books 1634-1900 Transcription – Entries for Humphrey Vaughan for 1656, 1663, 1666, 1672 and 1705.

3) Lillywhite, B. – London Signs: A Reference Book of London Signs from Earliest Times to about the Mid Nineteenth Century. (London, 1972).

4) Bow Street and Russell Street Area: Russell Street. Survey of London: Volume 36, Covent Garden. (London, 1970).

5) Webb, C. – London Livery Company Apprenticeship Registers. Volume 43. Vintners’ Company 1609-1800. (2006).

6) Davies, M.; Ferguson, C.; Harding, V.; Parkinson, E. & Wareham, A. – London and Middlesex Hearth Tax. The British Record Society. Hearth Tax Series Volume IX, Part II. (London, 2014).

7) Ibid 2.

8) City of Westminster, St Martin in the Fields, Drury Lane Ward, White Hart Yard – Four Shillings in the Pound Aid 1693/4. Centre for Metropolitan History (London, 1992).

9) London Metropolitan Archives and Guildhall Library Manuscripts Section, Clerkenwell, London, England; Reference Number: AM/PW/1704/086.

10) City of Westminster, St Clement Danes, Sheere lane Ward, – Four Shillings in the Pound Aid 1693/4. Centre for Metropolitan History (London, 1992).

6 Comments

Filed under Tokens from West of the City Walls

Tagged as 17th century, 17th century token, Covent Garden, exonumia, Hearth Tax, History, London, London History, numismatics, Paranumismatics, Russell Street, token, Westminster, White Hart Yard

18/01/2015 · 10:03 pm

At the sign of the Lobster by the Maypole in the Strand

A farthing tradesman's token issued at the sign of the Lobster in the Strand, Westminster.

A farthing tradesman’s token issued at the sign of the Lobster by the maypole in the Strand, Westminster.

The above copper farthing token measures 15.6 mm in diameter and weighs 0.85 grams. It was issued by a tradesman who operated from premises on the Strand in Westminster in the mid-17^th century.

The design of the token may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: (mullet) THE. LOBSTER. AT. THE around the depiction of a lobster palewise.

Reverse: (mullet) MAIPOLE. IN. THE. STRAND around E (rosette) G

The initials on the reverse of this token are those of its issuer. Unfortunately reviews of hearth tax returns from the 1660s for the Strand area have failed to identify these initials with any specific individual. What is not in doubt is the location of the token issuer’s trade premises. This is made clear from the token’s obverse and reverse legends as being at the sign of the Lobster, adjacent to the maypole in the Strand.

The reference to the “maypole” on this token allows the trade premises of its issuers to be tied down to a very specific area of the Strand and arguably a specific period in time. Namely 1661 to 1672. This period coincides with a time when both the use of tradesmen’s tokens were current in London (i.e. 1648/9 to 1672) and during which the Strand’s celebrated maypole stood (i.e. pre 1644 and then again post April 1661).

The site of the maypole was on a patch of ground in the middle of the Strand east of Somerset House and at the southern end of Little Drury Lane and on which the construction of the church of St. Mary-le-Strand was later commenced in 1714.

The Strand, Westminster (c.1720) showing the location of the Church of St. Mary-le-Strand (in yellow)and the approximate location of the Strand maypole (in red).

The Strand, Westminster (c.1720) showing the location of the Church of St. Mary-le-Strand (in yellow) plus the approximate location of the Strand maypole (in red).

As a trade sign the lobster is recorded by at least four separate examples in London during the 1650s and 1660s ₍₁₎. According to one authority₍₂₎ this sign is believed to have reference not to shell-fish but to a locally raised regiment of soldiers who during the Civil War were commonly known as the “Lobsters” or “London Lobsters” because of the bright steel shell armour in which their upper bodies were covered (Note 1).

The example of the lobster trade sign located at the maypole in the Strand is documented from two separate sources both of which are mid-17^th century token issues. The first reference is that on the farthing described above. On the grounds of style and denomination this token likely dates from the 1650s to early 1660s. The second token referencing the sign of the lobster in the Strand is a halfpenny which, on stylistic grounds, likely dates to the mid to later 1660s. The details of this second, scarcer token, are outlined below.

Obverse: The legend ST. HARRISE IRONMONGER around the depiction of a lobster.

Reverse: The legend AGAINST Y^E and HIS ½ around the depiction of a maypole and a small building covered by a domed roof.

This token was issue by Stephen Harris, an ironmonger, who we can assume either;

Took over the business premises formerly occupied by the previous token issuer, i.e. the as yet un-identified individual whose initials were E. G.
Occupied adjacent business premises, possibly in the same building, to the as yet un-identified token issuer whose initials were E. G.

Assuming the first of the above options to be the most likely it is possible that the premises selected by Stephen Harris in which to set up his business had previously been an ironmongery. Such continuity of use would have allowed him to tap into the previous owner’s reputation (presuming it to have been a good one) and established customer base. If this was the case then it follows that the issuer of the earlier farthing token at the sign of the lobster was also an ironmonger. A review of the names of masters belonging to the Worshipful Company of Ironmongers during 1650s ₍₃₎ indicates only one whose initials match those on the farthing token (i.e. E.G.). This was Edward Gardener. Much further research is required to positively link this individual as being the issuer of the above illustrated token. If the issuer can be proven to be an ironmonger it will help substantiate the earlier noted theory that this trade sign has associations with iron clad men at arms.

A Brief History of the Maypole in the Strand

The maypole in the Strand was a well-known land mark in 17^th century London and was arguably the most famous of all the capital’s maypoles which, according to one contemporary writer “were set up at every crossway” after the restoration of King Charles II ₍₄₎.

The first maypole in the Strand was erected in the late 16^th or early 17^th century and was estimated to have stood 100 feet tall. Its precise location was close to where the remains of a medieval stone cross (the Strand Cross) stood and where, in the reign of King James I, was cited a windmill powered water pump and a watch-house ₍₅₎. This site lay approximately on the western part of the plot now occupied by the church of St. Mary le Strand.

In 1634 the site of the maypole played host to the first dedicated Hackney Carriage stand in England. A former sea captain by the name of John Bailey invested in a fleet of four Hackney carriages which he based at the maypole. His drivers were each instructed to charged fixed price fares to various destinations within the city and its environs. Other private hire carriage men soon followed Bailey’s lead by working to a set of fixed fares and by using the maypole as a base and central pick-up point ₍₆₎.

During the early years of the Commonwealth period the Puritan government viewed traditional maypoles as vile throwbacks to heathenism and on 6^th April 1644 a Parliamentary ordinance outlawed them. This included the famous one in the Strand which was pulled down.

Shortly after the restoration of King Charles II a new and taller maypole was setup amid much ceremony and rejoicing. From a contemporary pamphlet entitled “The Citie’s Loyaltie Displayed” we learn that the second maypole was of cedar and stood 134 feet tall. While its erection had royal backing it was paid for by subscriptions from local parishioners at the head of who is understood to have been a farrier by the name of John Clarges (Note 2) ₍₇₎. Clarges is believed to have operated a forge located on the west side corner of the junction between Little Drury Lane and the Strand ₍₈₎.

According to the contemporary pamphlet mentioned above the maypole was brought in two parts from where it was made, below London Bridge, to Scotland Yard. From it was conveyed on 14^th April 1661 to the Strand accompanied by a streamer flourishing before it and the playing of music and the beating of drums all along the route. To provide the specialist skills require for erecting the maypole Prince James, Duke of York and Lord High Admiral of England, commanded twelve seamen, who were familiar in erection of masts and rigging, to officiate the business. In order to facilitate their work they brought cables, pullies, and other tackle including six great anchors. On arrival at its destination in the Strand the two halves of the maypole were joined together and bound with supportive iron bands. It was topped with a purple streamer and around its middle was suspended a decorative hoop, like a balcony, on which was supported four crowns and the royal coat of arms. Then with the King and Prince James looking on, and amid sounds of trumpets and drums and loud cheers from the surrounding crowds, the maypole was slowly raised. It took the sailors 4 hours to fully elevate it upright and fix it into a socket on the ground where, or close to where, the previous maypole was remembered to have stood. Then amongst much celebration a party of Morris dancers, wearing purple scarfs and half-shirts, came forward commenced to dance around the maypole to the sound of a tabor and pipe ₍₉₎.

The only contemporary images of the maypole, standing at its full height, are known from five separate issues of contemporary tradesmen’s tokens. Two of these are illustrated below.

Two tradesman's tokens of the mid-1660s depicting the maypole in the Strand, Erstminster. The token on the right shows a sugar loaf and three pepper corns possibly indicating its issyer was a grocer.

Two tradesman’s tokens of the mid-1660s depicting the maypole in the Strand, Westminster. The domed roof building shown in the token on the left is possibly the Strand Conduit House. The sugar loaf and three pepper corns shown either side of the maypole depicted in the right hand side token possibly indicating its issyer was a grocer as such were synonymous with this trade.

The author is of the opinion that the small building shown adjacent to the maypole on the first of these tokens is a conduit house. Accounts of such a stone building, erected over a spring, are recorded adjacent to the site of the maypole. For some time the fresh water from this spring was used to supply the local neighbourhood. By the time of Strype’s Survey of London and Westminster was published in 1720 the conduit house and spring were no longer in use ₍₁₀₎. Contemporary with the maypole in this part of the Strand was also a pillory along with a Watchhouse which Strype confirm stood adjacent to the Conduit House ₍₁₁₎.

This maypole erected in 1661 continued to be the site of May Day celebrations in the Strand for some 52 years until the second half of 1713 when due to general decay and a large amount of storm damage, incurred in 1672 ₍₁₂₎ , it was taken down ₍₁₃₎ . According to Strype only a mere 20 foot tall stump of the pole then remained ₍₁₄₎. Following the maypole’s removal the site was cleared in preparation for the laying of the foundations of the church of St. Mary le Strand.

However, that wasn’t the final chapter in history of the maypole in the Strand. On 4^th July 1713 amongst great joy and festivity a third maypole was erected on a site close by, slightly to the west of the previous location and adjacent to Somerset House. In much later times this site is said to have been marked by a water fountain ₍₁₅₎ .

A contemporary print depicting a procession of the Houses of Parliament and Queen Anne along the Strand between Exeter Exchange and the maypole on 7th July 1713.

While it is uncertain it is probably the third of the Strand maypoles that is depicted in the above print by George Vertue. This depicts a procession of the Houses of Parliament and Queen Anne along the Strand between Exeter Exchange and the maypole on the way to a peace celebration in St. Paul’s Cathedral on 7^th July 1713. The back drop to this view is the north side of the Strand, punctuated by the southern terminus of Catherine Street plus an array nearly 4,000 Charity School children seated on specially arranged temporary board seating ₍₁₆₎.

Detail of the maypole in the Strand from a print by George Vertue showing a procession in the Strand on 4th July 1713.

This third maypole in the Strand had only a short existence. By 1717 it had been taken down so ending an era (Note 3).

Notes:

1) The London lobsters, Haselrig’s Lobsters or just Lobsters was the name given to the cavalry unit raised and led by Sir Arthur Haselrig, a leading Parliamentarian who fought in the English Civil War ₍₁₇₎. The unit received its name because, unusually for the time, they were cuirassiers, wearing extensive armour that covered most of their upper body making them resemble lobsters. Only two cuirassier regiments were raised during the English Civil War, the other being the Lifeguard of the Earl of Essex. Full armour had largely been abandoned at this time, with cuirasses and helmets only worn by some cavalry commanders and pike units. The armour of a cuirassier was very expensive. In England, in 1629, a cuirassier’s equipment cost £4 10s, whilst that worn by a lighter cavalryman was a mere £1 6s ₍₁₈₎. The Lobsters were probably the last unit to fight on English soil in near full armour, and one of the last in Europe.

2) John Clarges (born c.1590s) started his working life as a blacksmith and farrier at the Savoy, Westminster. In the second half of the 1610s he married Anne Leaver. The couple went on to have two children, Thomas and Anne (or Nan). Thomas became an apothecary while Anne became a milliner and seamstress. Some sources record both John and his wife dying in 1648. However, this isn’t confirmed and does not fit with additional references to John being one of the pre-eminent parishioners responsible for commissioning the second maypole in the Strand in 1661. So how did a lowly blacksmith come into such good fortunes and become largely responsible for commissioning such a famous restoration period London landmark? The answer starts several years earlier with John’s daughter Anne having the good fortune to becoming the wife (1652) of none other than General George Monk, 1st Duke of Albemarle, one of the leading architects of the restoration of King Charles II in 1660.

A contemporary print of the Ducke and Dutchess of Albermarle – George Monk & Anne Monk (nee Clarges).

In 1644 Colonel George Monk, then head of the royalist forces in Ireland, was captured by Parliament and imprisoned in the Tower of London. Here he languished until November 1646 when, after the defeat of the Royalists in England, he took an oath of loyalty to Parliament and was released for service in Ireland. In 1647, he was appointed commander of Parliament’s forces in Ulster. Under the Commonwealth he went on to serve as a General-at-Sea in the 1^st Anglo-Dutch War. He also served further in the army eventually becoming head of the Parliamentary forces in Scotland. By December 1659 he was arguably one of the most powerful men in the Kingdom being head of the army in both Scotland and England.

During his time in imprisonment Monk was regularly visited by Anne Clarges who it appears had secured a contract to supply clean linen to several of the wealthier prisoners in the Tower in addition to providing her services as a seamstress. By this time Anne had married Thomas Ratford and ran a shop at the sign of the Three Gypsies in the New Exchange off the Strand. According to John Aubrey ₍₁₉₎ Anne was kind to the Monk during his imprisonment in a double capacity, eventually becoming his mistress. Despite her low social status, plain looks and at times coarse behaviour, Monk became increasing fond and reliant on Anne, even once released from the Tower. He continued to stand by her when she eventually became pregnant by him. After the separation and alleged death of Anne’s first husband she and the now General George Monk were married in Southwark in January 1652/3. This officially opened the doors of high society to Anne along with many new opportunities for her and her family. Despite Anne’s new elevated status she seemingly never lost her ill manners and was inclined to violent outbursts of rage and coarse language even when in the company of refined society. Despite having an apparent happy marriage it is thought that George was unquestionably afraid of Anne and that she considerably influenced and manipulated him in order to best promote their fortunes and public standing. It was no doubt through Anne’s influence that her brother Thomas Clarges became closely associated with Monk, initially as a physician to the army and later as Monk’s agent in London. This allowed him to move in elevated social circles and by 1656 he himself had become a member of parliament. Thomas’s future association with power and the nobility was secured in May 1660 when he was commissioned by Monk and Parliament to convey to the exiled Charles II the formal invitation to return to England and take up the throne. On presenting Charles with this communication the king knighted him on the spot. Thereafter Thomas’ future success in life, and those of his family, appears to have been secured.

On his return to England, in recognition of his services as a leading architect of his restoration, Charles II raised Monk to the rank of Lieutenant-General of the armed forces and elevated him to the peerage bestowing several honours and titles on him including that of 1st Duke of Albemarle. This meant that Anne was now a Duchess and a member of the court.

The naval administrator Samuel Pepys mentions Anne and Thomas Clarges several times in his famous diary. He generally speaks of Anne in a fairly derogatory fashion and on one occasion describes her as a “plain homely dowdy”.

The memorial to George and Anne Monk plus their third son Nicholas (Westminster Abbey).

George Monk died 3^rdJanuary 1669/70 but the funeral did not take place until 30^thApril as the King Charles II offered, but failed, to pay the expenses. Anne Monck died soon after her husband on 29^th January 1670. The couples were interred in a vault in the north aisle of Henry VII’s chapel in Westminster Abbey.

3) After the final maypole in the Strand had been taken down it was purchased from the parish by Isaac Newton in 1717. In April 1718 it was subsequently sent by Newton to his friend the astronomer Rev. James Pound of Wanstead in Essex ₍₂₀₎. Pound used the pole as a means of mounting a large lens (with a focal length of 123 feet) lent to him by the Royal Society. This lens, and its associated mountings and remotely held eye piece etc., formed part of an aerial telescope of the type crafted and designed by the Huygens brothers (Christiaan and Constantine) of Holland. The apparatus was gifted to the Royal Society by Constantine Huygens in 1691 ₍₂₁₎ but had not been experimented with up until then owing to the difficulties associated with mounting its lens off a high fixed structure. Previous to James Pound experiments with the aerial telescope the Society had requested both Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley to investigate using the high scaffolding associated with the construction of the new St. Paul Cathedral as a possible means for supporting its lens. Such plans appear not to have come to fruition ₍₂₂₎.

Huygens' aerial or tubeless compound rtpe telescope from a print of 1684.

Huygens’ aerial or tubeless compound type telescope from a print of 1684.

Despite the telescopes various operating challenges Pound appears to have put it to good use. By 1719 he had made measurements using the telescope that also allowed him to develop an equation for the transmission of light. Further of his observations using the telescope allowed Halley to correct his predictions of the movements of Saturn’s moons. Other of Pound’s measurements relating to Jupiter, Saturn and their satellites were employed by Newton in the third edition of the Principia. Some decades later Pierre-Simon Laplace also used Pound’s observations of the movements of Jupiter’s satellites to calculation the planet’s mass ₍₂₃₎.

References:

1) Lillywhite, B. – London Signs: A Reference Book of London Signs from Earliest Times to the Mid Nineteenth Century. (London, 1972).

2) Ibid.

3) Webb, C. – London Livery Company Apprenticeship Registers, Ironmongers’ Company 1655-1800. Volume 24. (Society of Genealogists. 1999).

4) Aubrey, J. Edited by Barber, R. – Brief Lives: A Modern English Version. (Woodbridge, 1982).

5) Thornbury, W. & Walford, E. – Old and New London: Volume 3 (London, 1878).

6) Richardson, J. – The Annals of London: A Year-by-year Record of a Thousand Years of History. (University of California Press, 2000).

7) Ibid 5.

8) Ibid 4. Foot note. Page 206.

9) Wheatley, H. B. – London Past and Present: Its History, Associations and Traditions. Volume II. (Cambridge University Press, 1891).

10) Strype, J. – A Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster. (London, 1720).

11) Ibid 10.

12) Ibid 4.

13) Ibid 9.

14) Ibid 10.

15) Ibid 9.

16) Diprose, J. – Some Account of the Parish of St. Clement Danes (Westminster): Past and Present. (London, 1868).

17) Bennett, M. – Historical Dictionary of the British and Irish Civil Wars, 1637-1660. (Abingdon, 2000).

18) Haythornthwaite, P. – The English Civil War: An Illustrated History. (Blandford Press, 1983).

19) Ibid 4.

20) Ibid 9.

21) Jungnickel, C. & McCormmach, R. – Cavendish. (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society, 1996).

22) King, H. – The History of the Telescope. (2003).

23) Hockey, T.; Trimble, V. & Williams, T. Editors – Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers. Entry for James Pound. (2007).

2 Comments

Filed under Tokens from West of the City Walls

Tagged as 17th century, 17th century token, exonumia, General Monk, Hearth Tax, History, London, London History, maypole, maypole in the Strand, Newton, numismatics, Paranumismatics, Pepys, Strand, telescope, token, Westminster

24/11/2014 · 1:04 pm

Howard’s Coffeehouse in New Street, Covent Garden

A penny token issued by Joseph Howard in 1671 for use in his London Coffee-house.

The above brass penny token measures 24.3 mm in diameter and weighs 2.71 grams. It was issued by Joseph Howard, a London coffeehouse proprietor, in 1671.

The design of the token may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: (cinquefoil) IOSEPH (cinquefoil) above an arced underline. Below, the depiction of a half-length figure of a man holding a cup. Above a hand issues from a cloud holding a coffee-pot which pours into the cup below. Adjacent is a table or cabinet on which there are two clay pipes and what appears to be a tobacco roll.

Reverse: Legend in five lines surrounded by a radial arrangement comprising a sexfoil and ten cinquefoils HOWARD / COFFE . HOV / SE . IN . NEW / STREET / 1671

There are several “New Streets” in and around London so attributing this token to one of them in particular without any additional evidence is difficult. However, nineteenth century token researchers ₍₁₎ ascribed this token as being issued by a coffeehouse in New Street (now renamed New Row), off Covent Garden in Westminster. While this location appears perfectly plausible, and possibly more so given the less salubrious alternative “New Street” locations in the capital, I can find no contemporary evidence for it or its proprietor, Joseph Howard other than the evidence left in the paranumismatic record. This comprises two varieties of the above token. Both of these are dated 1671 and struck from very similar yet different sets of dies (Note 1). The existence of two die varieties of this token suggests they were issued in some considerable numbers. This is further confirmed from their relatively high survival rate in modern collections of this token series.

New Street, Westminster (c.1720) pff the west end of King’s Street in Covent Garden.

Approximately 80 different coffeehouse tokens were issued in London during the period 1663 to 1672 with the majority (at least 50%) of them being attributed to the brief period 1669 to 1671₍₂₎. Nearly all of them were valued at either a half penny or penny. The comparative large size of Joseph Howard’s token suggests it to be of a penny denomination. Penny tokens appear late (i.e. post 1668/9) in the issuing series of mid seventeenth century tradesmen’s tokens which extended from 1649 to 1672. This example is clearly dated 1671.

As in this case many of the tokens issued by coffeehouses illustrated a hand or person serving coffee from a pot (invariably of the Turkish-ewer type) into a cupped dish or cup.

The Coffeehouse Revolution of the mid-17^thCentury

The last ten years has seen a rapid increase in the popularity of London’s coffeehouse culture with branded establishments offering comfortable surroundings in which to buy hot beverages and catch-up with the latest news and gossip. However, the real coffeehouse revolution in the city took place in the mid-1600s to early 1700s. During this period as many as 1,000 such establishments played host in the capital to caffeine-fuelled debate, wheeler-dealing and gossip-mongering usually in smoke filled surroundings. While the coffeehouses were predominantly a male abode they catered for all classes of society as long as all obeyed certain basic house rules of etiquette.

The first English coffeehouse was opened in Oxford by a Lebanese Jew by the name of Jacob who traded from the sign of the Angel in 1650₍₃₎. The exact origins of the first London coffeehouse are a little confused. However, by combining the evidence presented by several early sources it is possible to piece together a credible account of its opening and the interrelationships of the various persons associated with it.

In 1651 Thomas Hodges, a London grocer and Turkey merchant, welcomed a young draper and Levant Company merchant by the name of Daniel Edwards into his home in Walbrook with the prospect of the young man marrying his daughter. Edwards had returned from Izmir with his Greek servant Pasqua Rosee with a habit for drinking coffee, the principle ingredient for which, the coffee bean, he also brought back home in quantity. The novelty of coffee at Hodges’ home, which attracted many friends and neighbours who soon got the taste for the new drink, impeded the family’s work, so Edwards and his now father-in-law set up Rosee in a stall in St. Michael’s churchyard, Cornhill to sell coffee to the public ₍₄₎. This was the first coffeehouse in London and traded under the sign depicting the head and shoulders of its proprietor, Pasqua Rosee ₍₅₎. The sign of “The Turk’s Head” (although not necessarily that of Rosee) would soon become synonymous with coffee-houses through England and the sign image was often reproduced on the obverse of many of the tokens issued by such establishments.

Rosee proved to be a shrewd businessman and popularised his new business by issuing printed handbills that which made some extravagant medicinal claims about the new wonder drink, “coffee”. He claimed it helped cure hangovers, cured dropsy, gout and scurvy, helped prevents miscarriages and even facilitated the breaking of wind!

Pasqua Rosee’s handbill of the 1650s advertising the virtues of the new wonder drink “Coffee” and its availability at his establishment in St. Michael’s Alley, Cornhill.

Ale seller’s close by Rosee’s stall, presumably angry at his new business stealing some of their traditional customers, queried his right as a foreigner to trade in the City. This issue was overcome by Rosee going into partnership with Christopher Bowman. Bowman had been apprenticed to Hodges until 1654 when he gained his freedom from the Worshipful Company of Grocers. Their business continued to flourish and by 1656 had moved into enclosed premises in nearby St. Michael’s Alley. However, the partnership was short lived and Rosee and Bowman ended up running rival coffee-houses on opposite sides of the alley to each other. Rosee shop traded under the sign of his own head and shoulders while Bowman’s operate under the sign of a coffee pot ₍₆₎.

It is believed that Rosee left London for The Hague to set-up business there on his own ₍₇₎ while Bowman continued to trade on his own in Exchange Alley until his death in 1663. While this first coffee-house didn’t survive the ravages of the Great Fire of London in September 1666 a further establishment, the Jamaica Coffee House was built on the same plot in 1667. Today this historic location in St. Michael’s Alley is marked by the later built Jamaican Wine House together with an official City of London plaque commemorating the spot of London’s first coffeehouse.

The Jamaica Wine House in St. Michael’s Alley, Cornhill occupies the spot of London’s firsr Coffeehouse. The commemorative plaque (see inser top right) was errected in 1952.

The popularity of the new drink soon encouraged similar businesses to spring up throughout the capital and by 1714 it has been estimated that there was 1000 coffeehouses in London, Westminster and their immediate environs ₍₈₎.

Prior to the advent of the coffee house men had gathered in taverns to do business and exchange ideas. However, such establishments were often unpleasant, rowdy and, owing to the effects of the ale they sold, were unproductive venues. Coffee, on the other hand, as Pasqua Rosee’s advertisement for the new beverage put it “will prevent drowsiness and make one fit for business”.

Soon, intellectuals, professionals and merchants thronged to the coffeehouses to debate, read and distribute pamphlets, do deals, smoke and, of course, consume one of the new imported hot beverages on offer. Amongst these were tea, imported from the East Indies; chocolate, first introduced from South and Central America by the Spanish; and coffee introduced to Western Europe by traders returning from the Ottoman Empire. Additionally it is clear from the paranumismatic evidence that some 17^th century coffee-houses also offered a further imported beverage in the form of sherbet. Sherbet was another import from the Ottoman Empire and comprised a drink made from diluted fruit juice and sugar and cooled with fresh snow or crushed ice when possible.

The reverse of a London Coffeehouse penny token of the early 1660s advertising the various commodities on offer to its patrons. As stated in the central field of the token these included “Coffee, Chocolat, Tea, Sherbett & Tobac sould in Exchange Alley”.

Newsletters and gazettes (the precursors of newspapers) were distributed in coffeehouses which also functioned as reading rooms and notice boards announcing sales, sailings, and auctions to the businessmen who frequented them. The coffee houses were commonly referred to as “penny universities”. As for the inclusive admission charge of a penny, a suitably dressed man could gain access to the well-heated and furnished premises where he could expand his mind by choosing to enter into discourse with his fellows or reading one of the many pamphlets and newsletters on offer. The coffeehouses offered all this in addition to a dish of hot coffee and a clay pipe full of tobacco ₍₉₎.

A contemporary print depicting a typical 17th Century London Coffeehouse.

The best known began to attract a distinct clientele. By the late 1680s, Edward Lloyd’s Coffee House on Tower Street, had earned a reputation as the place to go to organise marine insurance. It later evolved into world-famous insurance market, Lloyd’s of London. In 1698, the owner of Jonathan’s Coffee House in Exchange Alley began to issue a list of stock and commodity prices entitled “The Course of the Exchange and other things” so starting of the London Stock Exchange. The auction houses Sotheby’s and Christie’s had similar coffeehouse origins.

Certain coffeehouses attracted likeminded professionals and traders. For example physicians frequented Batson’s coffee house in Cornhill which doubled to many as a consulting room. The Chapter Coffee House, at the corner of Chapterhouse Court, on the south side of Paternoster Row was the chosen meeting place for publishers and booksellers. Scientists and members of the newly inaugurated Royal Society, such as Sir Isaac Newton and Edmund Halley preferred the Grecian on the Strand. While the wits of the day, including the playwright Dryden, gathered at Will’s coffee house in Russell Street, Covent Garden.

However, not everyone was in favour of the new wonder drink or the almost exclusively male establishments from which it was sold. Those that lived close by to coffeehouses often complained about the continual polluting smell of beans being roasted. Tavern keepers were also raised apposition to the new coffee houses as they threatened their business. One contemporary satirical poem referred to coffee as “syrup of soot” or “essence of old shoes”. Many women also objected to the amount of time their husbands spent in the new “penny universities”. In 1674, a pamphlet entitled “The Women’s Petition against Coffee” was published in which it was said that coffee, “made men as unfruitful as the deserts whence that unhappy berry is said to be brought”.

A pamphalet of 1674 entitled “The Women;s Petition Against Coffee”.

This was answered almost immediately by the male supporters in a reply pamphlet entitled “The Men’s Answer to the Women’s Petition Against Coffee”.

A pamphlet of 1674 entitled “The Men’s Answer to the Women’s Petition Against Coffee”.

Another opponent of the new coffeehouses was King Charles II. Despite earning substantial revenues from the sale of coffee, in 1675 he attempted to ban the establishments, condemning them as, “places where the disaffected met, and spread scandalous reports concerning the conduct of his Majesty and his Ministers” ₍₁₀₎. However, the popular outcry generated from the king’s attempt to outlaw the coffee house movement soon caused him and his government to back down from their proposals.

By the mid-18th century, coffeehouses began to wane in popularity as the nation’s tastes turned to drinking tea which was becoming far more affordable given the increased trade with the East Indies. Those coffeehouses that remained began to attract a more gentile and select clientele, with many of them charging membership fees. And so was born the Gentleman’s Club.

Notes:

1) Examples of both token die varieties can be seen in the Museum of London’s on-line collection (see collection items numbers NN17949 and NN17948).

References:

1) Akerman, J.Y. – Tradesmen’s tokens current in London and its vicinity between the years 1648 and 1672. (London, 1849).

2) Berry, G. – Seventeenth Century England: Traders and their Tokens. (London, 1988).

3) Wood, A. – Athemae Oxonienses. An Exact History of Writers and Bishops who have had their education in the University of Oxford. Vol. I. Edited by Bliss, P. for the Ecclesiastical History Society. (Oxford, 1848)

4) Thompson, R. – London Coffee-House Tokens. The Journal of the London Numismatic Club. Volume VIII, Newsletter No.10 (2007)

5) Cowan, B – Rosee, Pasqua. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (On-line edition, Oxford University Press, 2004-14).

6) Ibid.

7) Ukers, W. H – All about Coffee. The Tea and Coffee Trade Journal (New York, 1922).

8) Brandon, D. – Life in a 17th Century Coffee Shop. (Sutton Publishing, Stroud, 2007).

9) Cowan, B. – The Social Life of Coffee – The Emergence of the British Coffeehouse. (Yale University, 2005).

10) Anderson, A. – An Historical and Chronological Deduction of the Origin of Commerce from Earliest Accounts. Vol. II (London, 1787).

Further Reading:

Brandon, D. – Life in a 17^th Century Coffee Shop. (Sutton Publishing, Stroud, 2007).

Cowan, B. – The Social Life of Coffee – The Emergence of the British Coffeehouse. (Yale University, 2005).

5 Comments

Filed under London Coffee House Tokens, Tokens from West of the City Walls

17/05/2014 · 4:16 pm

Richard Athy at the sign of the Fleur de Lys in St. James Market Place, Westminster

A half penny token issued by Richard Athy at or by the sign of the “Fleur de Lys” in St. James Market, Westminster

The above octagonal brass half penny token measures 19.8 mm by 19.9 mm and weighs 2.06 grams. It was issued in 1668 by a tradesman named of Richard Athy whose premises were at or close by the trade sign of the “Fleur de Lys” in St. James Market Place, Westminster. The design of the token may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: (mullet) RICHARD. ATHY. 1668 ∙:∙ within inner and outer octagonal borders, around a central Fleur de Lys.

Reverse: Legend within six lines divided by five horizontal beaded lines reads, IN S^T. / IAMESE^S / MARKETT / PLACE . HIS. / HALFE / PENY

St. James Market, Westminster (c.1720).

This particular token was struck relatively late in the series of mid-17^th century tradesmen’s tokens whose issue extended from 1648/9 to 1672. This is clear not only from the token’s legend, which indicates the date 1668, but also from its very distinctive shape. From or just prior to 1668 token manufacturers introduced four new shapes of flan on which they began to strike half penny and penny tokens. In order of their frequency of occurrence these were;

1) Octagonal

2) Heart-shaped

3) Square

4) Diamond-shaped

It has been suggested that these additional shape options were a marketing ploy to try and revitalize the token makers’ business which, by this date, had passed its peak.

Richard Athy’s token clearly infers the location of his business premises as being at or close by the sign of the “Fleur de Lys” in St. James Market Place, Westminster. Unfortunately this particular sign was adopted by a variety of tradesmen in London in the 17^th century ₍₁₎ and so offers no definitive clues as to Richard’s occupation. A review of several sets of surviving contemporary records has similarly failed to shed any light on Richard’s vocation. However, the records of the Worshipful Company of London Vintners list a Richard Athey as taking on four apprentices between 1672 and 1679 ₍₂₎. These were;

Samuel Crew – The son of Robert, citizen of London and dyer on 1^st October 1672
Phillip Scarlett – The son of Laiton, Warden and gentleman of Shropshire on 6th July 1676
John Lattimer – The son of John, citizen of London and cloth worker on 3^rd October 1676
William Harris – The son of a late London grocer on 6th May 1679

Assuming that the master of above apprentices is one and the same person as our token issuer we can reasonably assume that he was a vintner who ran a tavern in St. James Market Place which traded under the sign was the fleur-de-leys.

Interestingly there appears to be no record of a Richard Athey ever being an apprentice of the Worshipful Company of London Vintners. This may indicate that he served his apprenticeship under a master tradesman belonging to a different (and as yet un-identified) London Livery Company. Examples of apprentices taking up final employment in a different trade to that in which they were originally trained is not unknown in the 17^th century and became increasingly common in the 18^th and 19^th centuries.

There appears to be no listings for an Athey (or Athy) family in the Westminster Hearth Tax returns for 1666. However, analysis of transcribed London parish registers together the Westminster Highway and Poor Relief Rate Books has yielded more positive results.

A search of London parish registers has to date identified fifteen separate entries mentioning a Richard Ath(e)y and his immediate family. However, not all of these necessarily refer to the same individual who issued the above token. By viewing the records as a whole it is obvious that they refer to at least two separate individuals who shared a common name and lived in London during the same period. From the total of fifteen records two in particular stand out as being highly suspect as referring to a different Richard Ath(e)y to that of the token issuer. For completeness these entries have been recorded at the end of this article (see Notes 1 & 2).

The following record was entered on 24^th January 1663/4 in the parish registers of St. Mary Somerset, which was located off Upper Thames Street in the Queenhithe Ward of the city.

Richard Athy and Susana Dix spinster one Northamp’sher one Essex, married

Further details relating to the above couple are available from their marriage license ₍₃₎, reproduced below;

January 16^th 1663/4 – Richard Athy, of Little Billing, co. North^ton,Bach^r, 23, & Susan Dix, Sp^r, 21, dau. of John Dix, of Romford, co. Essex, Gent., who consents; at St. Mary Mounthaw or St. Mary Somerset, London.

It is clear from the above that Richard was born in c.1640/1 and originated from Little Billing, Northamptonshire. Interestingly this small village, located approximately four miles west of the County town of Northampton, was the home of another mid-17^th century London token issuer, John Athy, who shared the same surname as Richard and who was slightly older than the latter (see Note 3). It highly likely that the two men were directly related, possibly being either brothers or, possibly given the age difference, uncle and nephew.

It is reasonable to assume that Richard’s marriage to Susanna in 1663/4 was his first marriage and that only a few years previously he had completed a standard seven year trade apprenticeship. It is likely that this was served under a master tradesman belonging to one of London’s ancient livery companies. However, no record of his apprenticeship has yet been found.

Returning to the earlier mentioned parish register entries we find a total of 12 children being christened to a Richard and Susana(h) Ath(e)y within the bounds of London and Westminster between 1666 and 1686. These are listed below in chronological order;

1) Elizabeth – Christened at St. Martin in the Fields, Westminster – 9^th December 1666

2) Susanna – Christened at St. Martin in the Fields, Westminster – 18^th January 1667/8

3) Richard – Christened at St. Martin in the Fields, Westminster – 24^th February 1669

4) Ester – Christened at St. Martin in the Fields, Westminster – 21^st May 1672

5) Mary – Christened at St. Olave, Old Jewry, London – 20^th June 1673

6) John – Christened at St. Olave, Old Jewry, London – 17^th March 1674, Died 19^th May 1675

7) Susana – Christened at St. Olave, Old Jewry, London – 19^th July 1676

8) Rebecah- Christened at St. Olave, Old Jewry, London – 4^th November 1674

9) Susanah – Christened at St. Olave, Old Jewry, London – 4^th May 1679

10) Oliver – Christened at St. Martin in the Fields, Westminster – 2^nd June 1681

11) Frances (Miss) – Christened at St. Martin in the Fields, Westminster – 28^th March 1682

12) Henry – Christened at St. Martin in the Fields, Westminster – 1st December 1686

Given the high mortality rate of children in London in the mid-17^th century it is doubtful if all of the above survived infancy. It is clear from the respective parish register entry that their son John died in infancy. The fact that the couple named three of their daughters Susanna is a possibly indication that the first two had both died prior to each other whilst still in infancy.

The above list of christenings indicates that prior to 1673 Richard and Susanna Athy’s home parish was St. Martin in the Fields. This was the adjacent parish to St. James, Westminster where, at least in 1668, we can be fairly certain that Richard was a vintner plying his trade from premises at or by the Fleur de Leys tavern in St. James Market Place.

Between c.1673 and c.1679 it appears that the Athy family was living in the City of London where they had been married in 1663/4. By 1681 it appears that they were once again living in Westminster. This temporary move out of Westminster is further reflected by the short-term absence of Richard Athy’s name from the Westminster Highway and Poor Relief Rate Books. This is indicated by the summary of dated entries from both sets of books as listed below.

1672 – Two houses in the Market Place, St. Martin in the Fields, Westminster.

1682, 1683 & 1684 – Charles Street, south side, St. Martin in the fields, Westminster.

1684 (post May) & 1685 – Knigbridge, St. James Piccadilly, Westminster.

1688, 1690, 1693, 1694, 1695, – New Pye Street, St. Margaret’s, Westminster.

1696 – Orchard Street, St. Margaret’s, Westminster.

There is a possibility that the above listings relate to two or more individuals sharing a common name. For example some of the later entries (i.e. those after 1690) could be references to Richard Athy Junior (i.e. the token issuer’s son). Evidence to suggest that all the above entries are for Richard Athy the token issuer can be found in the Will of his son Richard junior ₍₄₎. This document was prepared in 1689 and amended in 1692. During this period The Will states that Richard junior was a Lieutenant serving under Captain and Commander Charles Hawkins on Their Majesties Ship Advice, a fourth-rate Royal Navy frigate armed with 48 guns ₍₅₎. The Will states that the principal beneficiaries of Richard’s estate were to be his father Richard Athy (Gentleman) of the parish of St. Margaret, Westminster and William Medgate (Scrivener) of London. Thus it is confirmed that after 1685 Richard Athy, the token issuer, moved out of the St. James area of Westminster and sequentially took-up residence in two separate addresses in the parish of St. Margaret, Westminster between 1688 and 1696.

After 1696 no further documentary references to Richard Athy (the token issuer) have yet come to light. It is likely that he died shortly after this date although no burial record has yet been found for him or his wife Susanna.

A Brief History of the early history of St. James Market, Westminster

In the 1650s the open space west of the Haymarket and north of Pall Mall, known as St. James’ Fields was considered ripe for development but hitherto this had been forbidden by the Crown. In March 1661/2 the Earl of St. Albans was granted a lease of much of this area by the Queen Mother. Development of the area was given further impetus in July 1662 when a meeting of commissioners for reforming the streets and buildings of London ordered the “paving of the way from St. James’, north, which was a quagmire, and also the Haymarket about Piqudillo”. A further Act of that same year also made provision for the paving of Pall Mall, the Haymarket and St. James’ Street. By 1663 the development of St. James’s Fields by the Earl had begun. As part of this development he established a market to serve the growing number of people who had come to live in the new buildings in the vicinity (1). This is the Westminster (or St. James) Market Place referred to as being the issuing location of the above token.

A view of Westminster by the Dutch engraver Jan Kip (c.1722).

The Earl’s new market is first mentioned in a building lease of July 1663. The Westminster rate books confirm that it had been laid out and houses built around it before the end of the year. Building in Market Lane and St. Albans Street soon followed. The market itself was proclaimed on 27th September 1664 and facilitated the sale of all sort of provisions every Monday, Wednesday and Saturday. By 1665 the new market place had its own purpose built market house and had also been made the new venue for the ancient St. James’ Fair (1).

“Whereas St. James Fair has been formerly kept in the Road near the House of St. James; be it known, that hereafter it is to be kept in St. James’ Marketplace to begin the 25th of July 1665, and to continue for 15 days at least in the Place aforesaid: A special care being taken for a better Regulation of the People thereabouts then has been formally.”

This annual fair had been held in the vicinity of St. James’ Fields since 1290. By the mid-17th century it had gained the reputation of being a boisterous and at times rowdy event. There is no record of how long the fair continued to be held in its new location.

On 1st April 1666 Samuel Pepys, the celebrated diarist and naval administrator recorded visiting the new market;

“So all up and down my Lord St. Albans his new building and market-house, and the taverne under the market-house, looking to and again into every place of building, and so away and took coach and home…”

Pepys mentions the market a second time in his diary in his entry for 11th April 1669.

“My wife and I out by coach, and Balty with us, to Loton, the landscape-drawer, a Dutchman, living in St. James’s Market, but there saw no good pictures. But by accident he did direct us to a painter that was then in the house with him, a Dutchman, newly come over, one Evarelst, who took us to his lodging close by, and did shew us a little flower-pot of his doing, the finest thing that ever, I think, I saw in my life; the drops of dew hanging on the leaves, so as I was forced, again and again, to put my finger to it, to feel whether my eyes were deceived or no. He do ask £70. for it: I had the vanity to bid him £20.; but a better picture I never saw in my whole life; and it is worth going twenty miles to see it.”

The Dutch artists being referred to above can be identified as Jan Looten (1618 to 1681) and Simon Verelst (2).

In 1720 John Strype (3) describes St. James Market as follows;

“St. James’s Market, a large place, with a commodious Market-house in the midst, filled with butchers shambles; besides the stalls in the Market Place, for country butchers, higglers, and the like; being a market now grown to great account, and much resorted unto, as being well served with good provisions. On the south-west corner is the paved alley, a good through-fare into Charles Street, and so into St. James’s Square, and those parts; but is of no great account for buildings or inhabitants. On each side, or square, of this market is a Row of houses, inhabited by such as have a dependence on the market, kept twice a week, but that on Saturdays is the most considerable.”

Parts of St. James Market house were occasionally used for purposes unconnected with trade. Richard Baxter, the Presbyterian preacher, held a number of meetings in rooms above Market-house and on one such occasion, in 1674, the size of his congregation was so great that the central supportive beam which supported the market’s upper story split and had to undergo emergency repairs before the upper rooms of the market could be re-opened (2).

The Market House in St. James Market Westminster from Strype’s Map of 1720 and Jan Kip’s engraving of Westminster of c.1722.

I have been unable to find any contemporary images of St. James Market other than for the long distant partial view plus the schematic representation illustrated above. The first of these is Johannes Kip’s early 18th century print entitled “A Prospect of the City of London Westminster and St James’s Park”. In this the partial view of the Market shows a large building with a simple front, probably classical in style, having a pedimented centre facing down St. Albans Street and twin pediments at each end. Although this cannot be accepted as definite evidence of the building’s appearance, it is likely to be a more reliable representation than that the above mentioned schematic representation shown in John Ogilby and William Morgan’s survey (map) of London and Westminster of 1681/2. This representation of the market house shows it as a Jacobean building of two stories, with three entrances separated by projecting turrets which rise against a high hipped roof.

Notes:

1) A christening record, dated 16^th August 1643, exists for Richard, the son of Richard Athy in the parish registers of St. Mary Magdalene in Milk Street, London.

2) A christening record, dated February 1665, exists for an Anne Athey from the London parish of St. Mary le Bow. Anne’s father was recorded as Richard Athey.

3) John Athy has been attributed ₍₉₎ as the issuer of two separate farthing tokens from the King’s Head Tavern in Leadenhall Street. His family is recorded in the parish registers of St. Peter’s Church, Cornhill between 1642 and 1665 ₍₁₀₎. The apprentice records of the Worshipful Company of London Haberdashers records him being bound to a Peter Hunt in 1633 by his farther, Simon Athy of Little Billing, Northamptonshire. Assuming he entered his apprenticeship at the usual age of 12 this would put John’s approximate year of birth as 1620/1 ₍₁₁₎. For the very short period between 11^th to 23^rd Jul 1667, John was the Alderman of the Vintry Ward of London. He was discharged from this position “in consideration of his late great losses and many children, and other evident causes disabling him to the charge and execution of the office” ₍₁₁₎. John died c.1693/4 and according to the provisions of his Will was buried with his first wife, Jane, in whose name his farthing tokens of c.1655-60 were issued.

References:

1) Lillywhite, B. – London Signs: A Reference Book of London Signs from Earliest Times to about the Mid Nineteenth Century. (London, 1972).

2) Webb, C. – London Livery Company Apprenticeship Registers. Volume 43. Vintners’ Company 1609-1800. (2006).

3) Chester, J.L. – Allegations for marriage licenses issued from the Faculty Office of the Archbishop of Canterbury at London, 1543 to 1869. Church of England. Province of Canterbury. Faculty Office of the Archbishop of Canterbury at London. Harleian Society (London, 1886).

4) PROB 11/441/102 – Will of Richard Athy, Lieutenant aboard their Majesty’s Ship Advice (6^th November 1697), National Archives, London.

5) Lavery, B. – The Ship of the Line – Volume 1: The development of the battlefleet 1650-1850. (2003).

6) Sheppard, F.H.W. – Survey of London: Volumes 29 and 30: St James Westminster. Part 1 (1960).

7) Wheatley, B & Cunningham, P. – London Past and Present: It’s History. Associations and Traditions. (2011).

8) Strype, J. – A Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster. Volume II, Book VI (London, 1720).

9) Rogers, K. – “On Some Seventeenth Century London Tokens”. Numismatic Chronicle, 5^th Series. Volume VIII. (1928).

10) Boyd, P. – Inhabitants of London. A genealogical Index held by the Society of Genealogists, London.

11) Woodhead, J.R. – The Rulers of London 1660-1689: A biographical record of the Aldermen and Common Councilment of the City of London (1966).

2 Comments

Filed under Tokens from West of the City Walls

Tagged as 17th century, 17th century token, exonumia, Hearth Tax, History, John Ogilby, London, London History, numismatics, Paranumismatics, Pepys, Samuel Pepys, St. James Market, token, Westminster

04/04/2014 · 4:47 pm

At the sign of the Old Man’s Head in St. James Market Place, Westminster

A farthing token issued by a tradesman operating at or by the sign of the “Old Man’s Head” in St. James Market, Westminster.

The above brass farthing token measures 15.9 mm and weighs 1.80 grams. It was issued by a tradesman whose premises were at or close by the trade sign of the “Old Man” in St. James Market Place, Westminster. The design of the token may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: (mullet) AT. THE. OLD. MAN. IN, around the left facing bust of a man with a receding hair line, moustache and beard.

Reverse: (mullet) WESTMIN. MARKET. PLA , around twisted wire inner circle, within a triad of initials comprising W | .F. | .I

While this particular token is undated, on stylistic grounds its appearance is suggestive of one from the 1650s. However, on the grounds that its issuing location (i.e. Westminster or St. James Market Place) was not officially established until 1663 a more probable date for the token’s striking would be the mid-1660s.

The triad of initials on the reverse of the token are those of its issuers, a Mr. “W.F.” and his wife Mrs. “J.F.”. As yet these individuals have not been identified. Unfortunately they do not match those of any of the local inhabitants listed in the 1666 Hearth Tax returns for this part of Westminster.

St. James Market, Westminster (c.1720).

A view of Westminster by the Dutch engraver Jan Kip (c.1722).

On 1st April 1666 Samuel Pepys, the celebrated diarist and naval administrator recorded visiting the new market;

Pepys mentions the market a second time in his diary in his entry for 11th April 1669.

The Dutch artists being referred to above can be identified as Jan Looten (1618 to 1681) and Simon Verelst (2).

In 1720 John Strype (3) describes St. James Market as follows;

The Market House in St. James Market Westminster from Strype’s Map of 1720 and Jan Kip’s engraving of Westminster of c.1722.

It is not apparent from the information presented on the above farthing token what particular trade its issuer (Mr. W.F.) was engaged in. However, it is clear from the information on presented on the token’s obverse that he traded at or close by to the sign of “Old Man” or “Old Man’s Head”. The suspension of distinctive trade signs above the entrances to trade premises in a particular street acted as an early form of address prior to formal building numbering in the mid-18th century. Certain very popular and early established trade signs, particularly those used by taverns (i.e. the Red Lion, Bell or Mermaid etc.), were by the mid-17th century common throughout London and the rest of the country. Others however were more obscure and transient in their use. The trade sign of the “Old Man” is one such example.

Bryant Lillywhite’s extensive survey of ancient London trade signs has recorded thousands of different examples by date and location which were variously adopted by the practitioners of different trades around the metropolis (4). Most such signs are know from a multitude of examples from across the city. However, only a single example of the sign of the “Old Man” was recorded in his survey. A further review of the occurrence of this trade sign is possible from an examination of its depiction on tokens within the city’s mid-17th century paranumismatic record (5)(6)(7). Such an evaluation confirms the example identified by Lillywhite plus identifies a further example. These are listed below;

· Westminster (i.e. St. James) Market Place – Mr. W.F. & Mrs. J. F. at the sign of the Old Man or Old Man’s Head (as per above brass, farthing).

· Holborn, Chancery Lane – Mr. D.P. & Mrs. E. P. at the sign of the Old Parr’s Head (from a brass, half penny).

It is likely that both the above tokens depict trade signs having a common origin. The second of the two examples listed clearly identifies the derivation of this sign, namely “Old Parr”. Even today the sign of “Old Parr’s Head” can still be found above several public houses within the London area.

The sign board hanging above the entrance to the Old Parr’s Head Public House in Islington.

Old Parr was the name given to one Thomas Parr who reputedly lived to the record age of 152! This remarkable character first came to public notice in 1635, when the poet John Taylor published a lively account of his life in a pamphlet entitled “The Old, Old, Very Old Man”.

Parr was reportedly born in 1483 at Alberbury near Shrewsbury in Shropshire. At the age of 80 Thomas married Jane Taylor. The couple had a son and a daughter both of whom died in infancy. At the age of 105 Parr did penance for committing adultery with Katherine Milton. After 32 years of marriage Jane Parr died. A decade later, at the ripe old age of 122, Thomas married his second wife, Jane, widow of Anthony Adda, of Guilsfield in Montgomeryshire.

By 1635 Thomas Parr was blind and had one tooth, his beard was neat, his hearing and digestion were good and he slept well. In that year, whilst visiting his Shropshire estates, the 21st Earl of Arundel learned of Thomas. He paid for the old man to be brought to London where he was put on show. He had his portrait etched by Dutch artist Cornelius van Dalen and was presented to King Charles I.

Contemporary images of Thomas Parr by Cornelius van Dalen (left) and Peter Paul Rubens (right).

In November 1635, six weeks after his arrival in London, Thomas Parr died suddenly. The Royal physician, William Harvey, conducted an autopsy on the old man’s body. Uncritically accepting that Parr had been 152 years of age, Harvey noted that his reproductive organs were in a healthy state, this being consistent with the story of his adultery and with his second wife’s report that he had regular sexual intercourse with her until about twelve years previously. Harvey attributed Parr’s death in part to his sudden exposure to rich food and strong drink after a lifetime’s diet of cheese, buttermilk, and coarse bread. The main cause of death in his opinion was due to the adverse effects of London’s polluted atmosphere upon someone accustomed to the clean country air of Shropshire.

Thomas Parr’s tomb and memorial in Westminster Abbey.

By arrangement of King Charles I, Thomas Parr was buried in Westminster Abbey on 15 November 1635.

References:

1) Sheppard, F.H.W. – Survey of London: Volumes 29 and 30: St James Westminster. Part 1 (1960).

2) Wheatley, B & Cunningham, P. – London Past and Present: Its History. Associations and Traditions. (2011).

3) Strype, J. – A Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster. Volume II, Book VI (London, 1720).

4) Lillywhite, B. – London Signs: A Reference Book of London Signs from Earliest Times to about the Mid Nineteenth Century. (London, 1972).

5) Thompson, R.H. & Dickinson, M.J. – Sylloge of Coins of the British Isles – Volume 59 (The Norweb Collection) – Tokens of the British Isles 1575 – 1750. Part VII – City of London. (London, 2007).

6) Thompson, R.H. & Dickinson, M.J. – Sylloge of Coins of the British Isles – Volume 62 (The Norweb Collection) – Tokens of the British Isles 1575 – 1750. Part VIII – Middlesex and Uncertain Pieces. (London, 2011).

7) Williamson. G.C. – Trade Tokens Issued in the Seventeenth Century in England, Wales and Ireland by Corporations, Merchants, Tradesmen, Etc. – A New and Revised Edition of William Boyne’s Work. – Volume 2. (London, 1967).

3 Comments

Filed under Tokens from West of the City Walls

Tagged as 17th century, 17th century token, exonumia, Hearth Tax, History, John Ogilby, London, London History, numismatics, Paranumismatics, Pepys, Samuel Pepys, Thomas Parr, Westminster

10/03/2014 · 9:20 pm

The Bell Tavern in King Street, Westminster

A farthing token of the Bell Tavern, King Street, Westminster

The above brass farthing token measures 15.9 mm and weighs 0.89 grams. It was issued in the name of The Bell Tavern which was once located in King Street in St. Margaret’s Parish, Westminster. The design of the token may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: (mullet) THE. BELL. TAVERN. IN, around twisted wire inner circle, depiction of a bell within.

Reverse: (mullet) KINGS. STREET. WESTMINS, around twisted wire inner circle, within a triad of initials comprising C | .D. | .M

While this particular token is undated on stylistic grounds its issue date can be attributed to the 1650s.

The triad of initials on the reverse of the token are those of its issuers, a Mr. “C.D.” and his wife Mrs. “M.D.”. As yet these individuals have not been identified but it is likely that Mr. C.D. kept the tavern at some period between 1641 and 1655. The later part of this period fits with the stylistic dating of the token. It is reported ₍₁₎ that a William Austen kept the Bell in 1641 while between 1655 and 1664 the tavern was kept by the London vintner Samuel Walker and afterwards by his widow ₍₂₎. A review of the 1664 Hearth Tax returns for King Street in Westminster confirms that Samuel Walker was paying tax on a property with 20 hearths in the southern end of the street.

King Street was a narrow but very busy thoroughfare which once linked the southern side of Whitehall Palace with Westminster Abbey. Today its original course is largely marked by that of Parliament Street.

King Street, Westminster (c.1720) – From right to left – Downing Street (Red); Axe Yard (Blue); Bell Yard (Purple) & Bell Alley (Green).

At the north end of King Street, the corner of what is now Downing Street and what was then the southern side of Whitehall Palace, stood a gate called the King’s or Cock-pit Gate. It had four domed towers; on the south side were pilasters and an entablature enriched with the double rose, the portcullis, and the royal arms.

King’s Gate at the north end of King Street and southern entrance to Whitehall Palace. Demolished in 1723.

At the south end of King Street at the entrance to Palace Yard stood a second gate known as High Gate the construction of which commenced under King Richard II in 1384. These gates were demolished in 1723 and 1706 respectively _(3).

There were innumerable courts, alleys and lanes leading off King Street. On the west, south of Downing Street, were Axe Yard, Charles Street, Gardiners Lane, Sea Alley, Bell Yard, George Yard, Blue Boar Court, Antelope Alley and Bell Alley. The street was the home for many of the principal taverns of Westminster which included the Blue Boar’s Head, the Swan, the George, the Angel, the Antelope, the Black Dog, the Old Rhenish Wine House, the Sun, the Trumpet and the Bell. Amongst the notable inhabitants of the area in the 17^th century were;

Oliver Cromwell and his mother who allegedly lived in a house close to the Blue Boar tavern.
Erasmus Dryden, Member of Parliament for Banbury and grandfather of the famous poet John Dryden, lived in a house just north of the Sun tavern.
Samuel Pepys, the famous diarist and Naval Administrator, who lived in Axe Yard off the north-west side of the street before moving to Seething Lane.
Wenceslaus Hollar, the notable Bohemian artist and engraver, who died in poverty in a rented house off King Street in Gardiners Lane.

Although narrow, King Street was wide enough to accommodate all the pageantry of state coronations, funerals and other such pageants that passed through it. The street was reportedly picturesque₍₄₎;

“The houses rose up three and four stories high; gabled all, with projecting fronts, story above story, the timbers of the fronts painted and gilt, some of them with escutcheons hung in front, the richly blazoned arms brightening the narrow way.”

However it was reportedly also dirty ₍₄₎;

“The roadway was rough and full of holes; a filthy stream ran down the middle, all kinds of refuse were lying about.”

King Charles I travelled down King Street on the way from Whitehall Palace to his trial at Westminster. He went back by the same route as a condemned man. In 1658 Oliver Cromwell’s funeral procession followed the same route. Cromwell himself narrowly escaped assassination in the street, where he had a house north of Boar’s Head Yard. While travelling along the narrow and crowded street in his state carriage he became separated from his guard. As the carriage passed a cobbler stall in the street Cromwell’s companion in the coach, Lord Broghill, saw a door in the premises open and shut, while something glittered behind it. Broghill immediately dismounted from the carriage and hammered at the cobbler’s door with his scabbard, when a tall man, armed with a sword, rushed out and made his escape into the crowd.

The Blue Boar’s Head in King Street – A mid 19th century view of the inn post its re-building in the mid 18th century.

Even in the mid-17^th century the Bell tavern was regarded as an ancient establishment. The first known mention of the tavern occurs in 1465. Approximately 50 years later it is referred to as follows ₍₅₎;

“A tenement called the Bell with a medowe and all the tenementes perteynyng to the same sett in the Kynges strete of Westminster.”

Not surprisingly the Bell Tavern was one of half a dozen taverns in King Street that was regularly visited and mentioned by Samuel Pepys’ in his diary. This particular tavern gets five mentions in the diary between March 1660 and February 1666/7 and was the location of one of his many extra marital liaisons on at least one occasion.

Shrove Tuesday 6^th March 1660 – “So I went to the Bell, where were Mr. Eglin, Veezy, Vincent a butcher, one more, and Mr. Tanner, with whom I played upon a viall, and he a viallin, after dinner, and were very merry, with a special good dinner, a leg of veal and bacon, two capons and sausages and fritters, with abundance of wine. After that I went home…”

Monday 2nd July 1660 – “Met with purser Washington, with whom and a lady, a friend of his, I dined at the Bell Tavern in King Street, but the rogue had no more manners than to invite me and to let me pay my club.”

Saturday 9 January 1663/64 – “After dinner by coach I carried my wife and Jane to Westminster, leaving her at Mr. Hunt’s, and I to Westminster Hall, and there visited Mrs. Lane, and by appointment went out and met her at the Trumpet, Mrs. Hare’s, but the room being damp we went to the Bell tavern, and there I had her company, but could not do as I used to do (yet nothing but what was honest) …”

Friday 14 December 1666 – “So I to Westminster Hall, and there met my good friend Mr. Evelyn, and walked with him a good while, lamenting our condition for want of good council, and the King’s minding of his business and servants. I out to the Bell Taverne, and thither comes Doll to me…”

Friday 1 February 1666/67 – “Thence by water to Billingsgate; thence to the Old Swan, and there took boat, it being now night, to Westminster Hall, there to the Hall, and find Doll Lane, and ‘con elle’ I went to the Bell Taverne, and ‘ibi je’ did do what I would ‘con elle’ as well as I could, she ‘sedendo sobre’ thus far and making some little resistance. But all with much content, and ‘je tenai’ much pleasure ‘cum ista’. There parted, and I by coach home.”

Based on the place-name evidence apparent on the earlier illustrated plan of King Street (c.1720) at first glance there appear to be two possible locations for the Bell tavern. These being;

1) At the eastern entrance to Bell Yard at the northern end of King Street.

2) At the eastern entrance to Bell Alley at the southern end of King Street.

Thanks to the survival of a late 17^th century hand bill advertising the sale of several paintings at in Westminster during mid-October 1691 the precise location of the Bell tavern becomes very apparent;

“At the Bell-Tavern over against the Gate-House in Kings-Street Westminster. Will be exposed to sale a curious collection of paintings; being most originals, by the best masters of Europe, on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, the 13th 14th 15th and 16th of this instant October, 1691 Beginning exactly at four of the clock in the afternoon, and so will continue till all be sold.”

The hand bill clearly places the tavern at the head of Bell Alley at the southern end of King Street adjacent to “the Gate-House”. It is most probable that the gate house being referred to is that linking King Street with the western corner of New Palace Yard.

The southern end of King Street (c.1720) showing possible locations of the Bell tavern at the head of Bell Alley (marked in green).

This gate house can be clearly seen behind the ornamental fountain in the upper right hand side of a contemporary view of New Palace Yard as viewed from Westminster Stairs.

New Palace Yard 1647 by Wenceslaus Hollar – The Gate House in the north-west corner is that which is described as being adjacent to the Bell tavern in 1691.

During the reign of Queen Anne (1702 to 1714) the Bell tavern was the headquarters of the October Club, a boisterous fellowship of Tory parliamentarians who took their name from the strong winter ale they reportedly drank at their meetings.

In “A Journal to Stella”, Jonathan Swift makes an indirect reference to one of the October Club’s meetings at the Bell tavern ₍₆₎;

10^th February, 1710/11 – “We are plagued here with an October Club that is a set of above a hundred Parliament men of the country, who drink October beer at home and meet every evening at a tavern near Parliament, to consult affairs, and drive things on to extremes against the Whigs, to call the old ministry to account, and get off five or six heads.”

A few months later when Swift happened to be eating at the Bell tavern some prominent Octoberists invited him to join them at their dinner. But, he reported;

“I sent my excuses, adorned with about thirty compliments, and got off as fast as I could. It would have been a most improper thing for me to dine there, considering my friendship with the Ministry. The Club is about a hundred and fifty, and near eighty of them were then going to dinner at two long tables in a great ground-room.”

During the first quarter of the 18^th century the Bell tavern was also the meeting place of a Freemason’s Lodge. By 1751 it appears that the tavern had been re-named as the Crown tavern ₍₇₎.

References:

1) Berry, G. – Tavern Tokens of Pepy’s London. (London, 1978).

2) Latham, R.C. – The Diary of Samuel Pepys. Volume 10 – Companion. (London, 1995).

3) Brayley, E.W. & Britton, J. – The History of the Ancient Palace and late Houses of Parliament at Westminster. (London. 1836).

4) Besant, Sir W. & Mitton, G.E. – The Fascination of London: Westminster. (London 1902).

5) Cox, M.H. – Survey of London: Volume 10: St. Margaret, Westminster, part I: Queen Anne’s Gate Area. (London, 1926).

6) Rogers, P. – October Club (act. 1711–1714). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. (Oxford University Press, 2013).

7) Whatley, S. – England’s Gazetteer: Or, An Accurate Description of All the Cities, Towns, and Villages of the Kingdom. Volume 2. (London 1751).

2 Comments

Filed under Tokens from Pepys' London, Tokens from West of the City Walls

Tagged as 17th century, 17th century token, exonumia, Hearth Tax, History, London, London History, numismatics, Oliver Cromwell, Paranumismatics, Pepys, Samuel Pepys, token, Westminster, Whitehall Palace

08/02/2014 · 9:33 am

Thomas Springall of the Castle Tavern in St. Clement’s Churchyard.

A half penny token of Thomas Springall of the Castle Tavern, behind St. Clement Danes Church, Westminster

The above copper half penny token measures 19.2 mm and weighs 1.27 grams. It was issued by Thomas Springall a vintner who operated from premises behind St. Clement Danes church in the Savoy Ward of the Westminster.

The design of the token may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: (mullet) THOS. SPRINGALL . AT. THE , around a beaded circle, within the depiction of a castle comprising gateway with portcullis supported by two towers with conical caps and a similar central tower behind.

Reverse: (mullet) BEHIND . S^T. CLEMENTS, around a beaded circle, within the legend in three lines HIS / HALFE / PENNY with a mullet above and below.

The token is undated but on stylistic grounds probably dates from the mid to second half of the 1660s.

Based on the obverse design of Thomas Springall’s token it is almost certain that he was the proprietor of the Castle Tavern. A tavern of this name is known to have been located in the vicinity of St. Clement Danes based on earlier numismatic evidence. A total of three separate farthings plus a half penny token, all evidently commissioned by the same landlord, were issued in the name of the Castle Tavern between c.1655 to c.1663 _{(Note 1)}. These earlier tokens variously state the location of the Castle Tavern as either “Behind” or in the “Churchyard” of St. Clement Danes. A review of the Hearth Tax returns for 1666 indicates that a Thomas Springall, of the Savoy Ward of Westminster, was paying tax on a property with 17 hearths. This would be typical of a good-sized London tavern of the period. Thomas was paying tax on the second highest number of hearths listed for any single person in the Ward except for a handful of well to do inhabitants who were obviously living in very palatial residences.

Based on the partial addresses given for the Castle Tavern on the various tokens mentioned above, coupled with its obvious substantial size (as indicated by its large number of hearths) it is possible to hazard a guess as to its precise location. A review of John Ogilby and William Morgan’s 1676 map of London indicates one particularly large building located on the “Backside of St. Clements” adjacent to the north-west part of the parish churchyard. It is tempting to associate this building with that of the Castle Tavern.

A map of the Strand and St. Clement Danes showing the possible location of the Castle Tavern

Other than for the five separate token issues struck in the name of the Castle very little is known about this particular London tavern. In his diary entry for 21^st November 1667 Samuel Pepys, the famous Diarist and Naval Administrator, records the following which may well be a direct reference to the Castle Tavern although he does not mention it by name;

“I out and took coach to Arundell House, where the meeting of Gresham College was broke up; but there meeting Creed, I with him to the taverne in St. Clement’s Churchyard, where was Deane Wilkins, Dr. Whistler, Dr. Floyd, a divine admitted, I perceive, this day, and other brave men.”

Interestingly on four earlier occasions in 1667_{(Note 2)} Pepys visited a tavern in the Savoy Ward of Westminster which he referred to by name as the “Castle”. He also refers to this establishment as being “hard by Exeter House”; “by Exeter House” or “by the Savoy”.

26^th Jan 1666/7 – I in my Lord Bruncker’s coach, he carried me to the Savoy, and there we parted. I to the Castle Tavern, where was and did come all our company, Sir W. Batten, [Sir] W. Pen, [Sir] R. Ford, and our Counsel Sir Ellis Layton, Walt Walker, Dr. Budd, Mr. Holder, and several others, and here we had a bad dinner of our preparing, and did discourse something of our business of our prizes, which was the work of the day.”

26^th March 1667 – “…to Exeter House, where the judge was sitting, and after several little causes comes on ours, and while the several depositions and papers were at large reading (which they call the preparatory), and being cold by being forced to sit with my hat off close to a window in the Hall, Sir W. Pen and I to the Castle Tavern hard by and got a lobster, and he and I staid and eat it, and drank good wine;

27^th March 1667 – “By water to the Castle Taverne, by Exeter House, and there met Sir W. Batten, [Sir] W. Pen, and several others, among the rest Sir Ellis Layton, who do apply himself to discourse with me…”

23^th August 1667 – “So being all dusty, we put into the Castle tavern, by the Savoy, and there brushed ourselves, and then to White Hall with our fellows to attend the Council, by order upon some proposition of my Lord Anglesey, we were called in.”

It appears odd that the last four diaries entries quoted refers to the Castle Tavern by name and close by the Savoy and Exeter House while the entry later in the year (i.e. 21^st November) just refers to a tavern, without name, in St. Clements Churchyard. Are all five entries a reference to the same establishment or were there two Castle taverns in close proximity in the Savoy Ward of Westminster? On first examination such a prospect might seem unlikely. However, by reviewing the evidence preserved in the numismatic record there would appear significant grounds to suggest the existence of two taverns by the name of the Castle in the area.

A farthing token exists _{(Note 2)} in the name of a John Peek, a cook trading at or by the sign of the Castle “Against Ye Savoy”_{(Note 3)}. Thus we have clear evidence of a “Castle” adjacent to the Savoy and Exeter House plus a further one “Behind” or in the “Churchyard” of St. Clement Danes. So it does appear that there was two “Castles Taverns” in relatively close proximity to each other.

Returning now to the subject of the above half penny token’s issuer. Thomas Springall was born on 6^th March 1638. He was the youngest of five children (John b.1626, George b.1630, Edmund b.1633, Katherine 1635) born to Edmund and Katherine Springall of Petworth, Sussex. His father is variously described as a yeoman and later a tailor. Thomas was apprenticed by his father to Richard Frewen, vintner of London, on 7^th October 1651₍₁₎. By becoming an apprentice vintner Thomas was following in his brother Edmund’s footsteps. Edmund, was apprenticed to William Beswick (a London vintner) in 1647. There is no evidence to suggest that Thomas Springall ever took on any apprentices of his own.

It is assumed that Thomas Springall served a standard seven years apprenticeship under Richard Frewen before receiving his freedom (c.1658). Thereafter he presumably started out on his own career as a vintner. It may have been shortly after this time that Thomas took over the running of the Castle Tavern behind St. Clement Danes church.

A search of London parish registers has failed to identify any evidence of Thomas Springall’s marriage or the baptism records of any possible children he may have had. His single status is further backed up by obvious omissions to a spouse or children in his Will (date 5^th September 1668)₍₂₎ and the fact that his half penny token gives no indication that he was married. It was often the case, particularly on the earlier farthing token struck in the mid-17^th century, that if a token issuer was married he would often display both his and his wife’s initials in the form of a triad on the reverse of his token. This practice continued on some of the normally later issued half penny tokens of the 1660s.

Thomas made his sister Katherine’s husband, Francis Snell, the executor of his Will in which he made the following bequests and provisions;

To his widowed mother, Katherine Springall the sum of £6 to be paid in quarterly instalments.

To his brother George the sum of £5.

To Mary Challoner, his maid servant, the sum of 40 shillings.

The provision of 20 shillings to each of the following for the purchase mourning rings _{(Note 4)} ; William Collins, Henry Maurice, Daniel Bell plus his sister Katherine and her husband Francis Snell.

The rest of Thomas’ goods and estate (after the deduction of funeral costs) were to be left to his brother-in-law Francis Snell’s eldest son, who was also named Francis.

It is possible that at the time of preparing his Will that Thomas Springall knew he was dying as a month later on 9^th October 1668 his burial is recorded in the parish register of St. Clement Danes.

Notes:

1) One of three farthings and a half penny token issued in the names of Mr. J.P. alone or in association with one of his two wives (i.e. Mrs. J.P. and Mrs. A.P.) from the Castle tavern which is variously stated on the tokens to be either “Behind St. Clements”, “In St. Clement Danes” or in “St. Clement Churchyard”.

2) The farthing token of John Peek, a cook, who presumably traded from premises at or by the sign of the Castle against the Savoy Hospital, Westminster.

3) The reference to the “Savoy” in this instance is to the Savoy Hospital which was a principal waterfront landmark which gave its name to this particular Ward of Westminster. The Savoy Hospital was built by Henry VII on the site of the old Savoy Palace which had been largely destroyed by Watt Tyler’s followers during the Peasant’s Revolt of 1377. The hospital, for the poor and needy, opened in 1512.The grand structure was the most impressive hospital of its time in the country and the first to benefit from permanent medical staff. It closed in 1702 and in the 19th century the old hospital buildings were demolished.

The Savoy Hospital c.1650 by Wenceslaus Hollar

The only part of the hospital complex to survive the demolition works of the 19^th century was the Savoy Chapel. Originally dedicated to St. John the Baptist the chapel served as home to the congregation of St. Mary-le-Strand. The memory of the Savoy is today retained in the names of the famous Savoy Hotel and the Savoy Theatre along with several other local buildings which now stand on or close to its original site.

4) The presentation of mourning or funerary memorial rings was common practice in the 17th and 18th centuries particularly amongst the middle and upper classes. Many wealthy people included instructions in their will on how much money was to be set aside for the purchase and inscribing of funerary rings together with instructions as to their design plus a list of those people who were to receive them.

A mid 17th Century Deaths Head Type Funerary Ring from London

In Samuel Pepys’s Will he bequeathed the grand total of 129 mourning rings be given away at his funeral. The grander and number of rings bequeathed by an individual was often an indication of their wealth. The internal shanks of such rings were often inscribed with the name of the deceased as a memorial. The designs of such rings were often “ghoulish” by modern standards and typically included skulls and cross-bones or simply a skull (i.e. the so-called deaths head design).

References:

Webb, C. – London Livery Company Apprenticeship Registers. Volume 43. Vintners’ Company 1609-1800. (2006).
PROB/11/328. National Archives (London).

1 Comment

Filed under Tokens from Pepys' London, Tokens from West of the City Walls

Tagged as 17th century, 17th century token, exonumia, Hearth Tax, History, John Ogilby, London, London History, numismatics, Paranumismatics, Samuel Pepys, Savoy, St. Clement Danes, token, Westminster

02/02/2014 · 3:22 pm

A Ticket to Attend The Royal Touching Ceremonies of Charles II

Royal Touching Ceremony Entrance Ticket or Pass dating to the reign of Charles II

The object above is an entrance ticket or pass dating from the reign of King Charles II. It measures 29.7 mm and weighs 11.15 grams and is bi-metallic comprising an inner brass core and an outer copper collar.

Unlike the tradesmen’s tokens which are the primary focus of this website the above ticket or pass had no monetary value at the time of its use between the 1660s to 1680s. It was issued by official agents of the Crown to sufferers of scrofula as a form of official entrance ticket or pass to one of Charles II’s royal healing or “touching” ceremonies. These were held in the Banqueting House of the Palace of Whitehall throughout his reign.

The design of the ticket may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: CAR . II . D . G. M . B . FR . ET . HI . REX (six pointed star) around the depiction of a three masted ship sailing left _{(Note 1)}.

Reverse: SOLI DEO GLORIA (six pointed star) around the depiction of the angel Michael spearing a recumbent dragon at his feet.

Before considering the method of issue and use of the above types of ticket or pass it is worth explaining further the context of their use and the formal ceremony to which they gave their bearer access.

The Curative Royal Touch for King’s Evil and the presentation of Touch-Pieces

Historically in Britain scrofula or the “King’s Evil” was a name applied to a variety of skin diseases but in particular a form of tuberculosis, affecting the lymph nodes of the neck and which resulted in bulbous swellings and sores. It has been estimated that in 17^th century London 1% of the population were suffers of the disease which effected people of all social classes.

From the reigns of King Edward the Confessor in England (1003 to 1066) and Philip I (1052 to 1108) in France it was believed that a touch from the king could cure diseases given that the monarch had been granted divine powers. Subsequent English and French kings were believed to have inherited this “royal touch”, which was taken as an indication of their god given right to rule. In grand ceremonies, kings touched hundreds of suffers afflicted by scrofula. In later years those attending such healing ceremonies also received a gold coin, typically an Angel, from the monarch which was also believed to be blessed with an extension of the monarch’s healing powers. These presentational coins became known as “touch-pieces” and over time became treated as amulets and were pierced for wearing around the recipient’s neck by a ribbon.

A gold Angel of Henry VIII – First Coinage Issue, 1509-1526

The last Angels to be minted for general circulation were issued in 1642₍₁₎ from the Royal Mint which was located in the Tower of London. After this date the mint was seized by Parliament at the start of the Civil War and in whose control it remained until the Restoration of Charles II in 1660.

During the reign of James I the location of the royal touching ceremony was transferred from the Chapel Royal to the Banqueting House within the Palace of Whitehall₍₂₎ , Westminster. This continued to be the London venue for the ceremony throughout the reign of Charles I. During the Commonwealth period the practice ceased on British soil although it was continued by Charles II while in exile on the continent. On his restoration in 1660 he was quick to restore the ceremony, presumably as a means of re-affirming his rightful position as monarch through the practice of a divinely given gift (i.e. that of healing by touch).

In September 1660 Thomas Simon, the mint’s then chief engraver, was ordered to prepare sketches and dies for a new series of Angels₍₁₎.

Thomas Simon’s Sketch for the proposed new Angel coinage of Charles II

While there was an obvious early intent by Charles II to restore the Angel into common circulation within the Kingdom, and for use as touch-pieces, it never happened. However, in February 1664/5 Charles commissioned a new supply of purpose made gold “touch-pieces” from the mint at the Tower of London₍₂₎. The first issue of these new presentational medalets was struck from dies which were almost certainly cut by John Roettiers who was one of the mint’s chief engravers. Over Charles II’s reign six separate sets of dies were commissioned for the on-going striking of touch-pieces. Although the same emblems as used on the old Angels (i.e. St. Michael spearing a fallen dragon plus a ship in full sail) were maintained on the new touch-pieces their designs were different to those of the earlier Angels in that the monarch’s titles were switched to appear on the side depicting the ship, thus making it the obverse whereas on the Angel it had been on the reverse side.

A golden Touch-Piece of Charles II

During Charles II’s reign the royal touching ceremony became immensely popular. It is estimated that between 1660 and 1684 the king administered the royal touch to no fewer than 105,000 people, all of whom would have received one of the touch-pieces which contained the equivalent of 10 shillings worth of 22 carat gold₍₂₎.

During the reign of Charles II the touching ceremonies were held on Fridays between 1^st November and 18^th December, then during the months of January and for a month over Easter. It was suspended over the warmer months of the year to lessen the risk of spreading infection of any diseases amongst the gathered masses.

The first of Charles II’s touching ceremonies was attended by 600 suffers. However, thereafter the number was reduced to a more manageable 200 per session. While most of those who attended the Whitehall touching ceremony would have been from London and the Home Counties there is evidence that some of those who attended were from much further afield. Records exist of a petition addressed to the local assembly of Portsmouth, New Hampshire (USA) which was presented by a colonial sufferer of scrofula who wanted financial assistance to travel to London to be receive the royal touch₍₂₎.

The first touching ceremony performed by Charles II after his restoration was held on Saturday 23^rd June 1660. It was recorded by both the diarists Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn. Pepys’ diary entry relating to this event is only very brief₍₃₎.

“So to my Lord’s lodgings, where Tom Guy came to me, and there staid to see the King touch people for the King’s evil. But he did not come at all, it rayned so; and the poor people were forced to stand all the morning in the rain in the garden. Afterward he touched them in the Banquetting-house.”

John Evelyn’s account of the event however, is far more detailed despite the fact that it entered erroneously in his diary under the date 6^th July₍₄₎.

“His Majesty began first to Touch for the Evil according to custome: Thus, his Majestie sitting under his State in the Banqueting house: The Chirurgeons cause the sick to be brought or led up to the throne, who kneeling, the King strokes their faces or cheekes with both his hands at once: at which instant a Chaplaine in his formalitie, says, He put his hand upon them, and he healed them, this is sayd, to everyone in particular: when they have been all touch’d they come up againe in the same order and the Chaperlaine kneeling and Angel gold, strung on white ribbon on his arme, delivers them one by one to his majestie: and Who puts them about the neck of the Touched as the passe: whilest the first Chaperlaine repeates: That is the true light who came into the World: Then followes an Epistle (as at first a Gospell) with the Liturgy prayers for the sick with some alteration: Lastly the blessing; And then the Lo: Chamberlaine and Comptroller of the household bring basin, Ewer and towell for his Majestie to wash:”

(Left) Front piece from John Browne's Adenochoiradelogia (London, 1684) depicting Charless II presiding at a Royal Touching Ceremony at the Banqueting House, Westminster. (Right) The Banqueting House as it appears today.

(Left) Front piece from John Browne’s Adenochoiradelogia (London, 1684) depicting Charles II presiding at a Royal Touching Ceremony at the Banqueting House, Westminster. (Right) The Banqueting House as it appears today.

After Charles II’s death touching ceremonies continued under his brother King James II although it is understood that he was a less keen advocate of the practice as his older brother had been. After the succession of King William III and Queen Mary the ceremony was temporarily stopped until being resumed for a final period (in Britain at least) under the patronage of Queen Anne. She performed the ceremony for the last time on the 30^th March 1712 in St. James’s Palace, Westminster.

Amongst the last 300 people that day who receive the royal touch and receive one of the last issued golden touch-pieces was a young boy of nearly three years of age who suffered from poor eyesight believed to be a result of scrofula. The little boy was the son of a book seller from Lichfield in Staffordshire. His family had been recommended to seek the royal touch for their son by Sir John Floyer, a former physician to Charles II. After making the three day journey to London with his parents and attaining an entrance ticket to the ceremony, after first being medically certified as eligible by an appointed doctor, he was admitted to the royal touching ceremony. The ceremony obviously made a marked impression on the young boy’s memory. As a grown man, many years later, he recalled his vague memories of the event and how he had met a lady wearing diamonds and a long black hood₍₂₎.While he may not have recalled receiving a golden touch-piece from her he undoubtedly did as he wore it on a ribbon around his neck for the rest of his life. After his death this touch-piece was kept safe and later found its way into the collection of the British Museum where it remains today. While this is not a particularly remarkable story it is made far more interesting once the identity boy is revealed. The boy grew up to become the famed Dr. Samuel Johnson the renowned poet, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and lexicographer.

Dr. Samuel Jouhnson Touch-Piece - Presented to him by Queen Anne 30th March 1712 at the last ever Royal Touching Ceremony held in Britain

Dr. Samuel Johnson Touch-Piece – Presented to him by Queen Anne 30th March 1712 at the last ever Royal Touching Ceremony held in Britain

Royal Touching Ceremony Entrance Tickets

The number of sufferers wishing to attend the royal touching ceremonies throughout the 17^th century was considerable. While there was a genuine belief on the part of most attending such ceremonies that they could be healed there was also the allure of 10 shillings worth of gold in the form of the presentational touch-piece they would be given. While sufferers were only meant to attend one touch ceremony in their lifetime the temptation of receiving 10 shillings worth of gold meant that many fraudulently tried and did attend on multiple occasions₍₅₎. From the reign of Charles I onwards, in order to control the numbers of people attending each ceremony and to ensure that they didn’t attend on multiple occasions, certain control measures were put in place. The list of control measures were further extended after the restoration of Charles II and by then included the following;

1) Those wishing to attend the ceremony had to obtain a special certificate or declaration letter from their parish minister and church wardens confirming that they were suffering from the “King’s Evil” and that they had not previously attended a royal touching ceremony.

2) The day prior to the ceremony those wishing to take part were to attend the Sergeant-Surgeon whose duty it was to confirm them as suffering from the “King’s Evil”.

3) On the basis that those wishing to receive the royal touch had met the above two requirements they were given an admission ticket to the ceremony in the form of a metal token or ticket. On presenting this ticket to officials at the Banqueting House on the day of the ceremony the bearer was granted admission.

Both Charles I and II employed the use of entrance tickets to their touching ceremonies. None of the entrance tickets used during the reign of Charles I have survived whist those used during the time of his son have. The entrance tickets used under Charles II were almost identical in design to the gold touch-pieces medalets commissioned in 1664/5. However, at 29 mm as opposed to 22 mm, their diameter was slightly larger than the new touch-pieces. Also the tickets incorporated six pointed stars which separated the beginning from the end of their obverse and reverse legends. Like the new touch-pieces, the dies used to strike the admission tickets were probably engraved by John Roettiers of the Royal Mint in the Tower of London. There is no evidence to confirm when in Charles II’s reign the admission tickets were introduced. The similarity of their design to that of his new touch-pieces has led some to the conclusion that the tickets were a copy of touch-pieces and so were introduced shortly after the striking of the first batch of the new medalets. However, given that Charles was conducting touching ceremonies as early as July 1660, presumably using a supply of earlier dynastic Angels, there is no reason that the admission tickets weren’t struck early in his reign and that the design of the new touch-pieces of 1664/5 was based on those of the tickets. As early as July 1660 there is official mention in the Parliamentary Journal of “tickets” being issued to gain access to the touching ceremony₍₆₎.

“His Majesty hath for the future, appointed every Friday for the core; at which time, two hundred and no more are to be represented to him, who are first to repair to Mr. Knight, the king’s surgeon, living at the Cross Guns in Russel Street, Covent Garden over against the Rose Tavern, for their tickets. That none might lose their labour, he thought fit to make it known, that he will be at his home every Wednesday and Thursday, from two till six of the clock, to attend that service; and if any persons of quality shall send to him, he will wait upon them at their lodgings, upon notice given to him.”

It is possible that the tickets referred to in the contemporary account above could have been hand written or, less likely, metallic tickets-tokens previously used in the time of Charles I.

After their collection on the day of each touching ceremony the admission tickets were re-issued for use on future occasions. However, to further reduce the possibility of people gaining fraudulent entry to the ceremonies (possibly via the use of counterfeit tickets) the organising officials randomly alternated between the use of four different varieties of the tickets which, while obviously different in appearance, varied only in as much as the metal flans on which they were struck, i.e. copper, copper with a brass centre (as per the one illustrated at the beginning of this article) brass and brass with a copper centre. The bi-metallic copper & brass tickets are much rarer than the other two types. It is noted that some surviving examples of these entrance tickets have either one or two notches filed in their upper edges. The notches have been made purposely and in a non-haphazard fashion. It has been suggested that such identifying marks were made as a further method of establishing their validity and to counter-act fraudulent entry to the ceremonies₍₂₎.

The continual collection and re-issue of the tickets would help account for their comparative scarcity. Some will have inevitably been lost in the continual process of reuse. Some examples have been clearly pierced for suspension which has given rise to the idea that these examples, at least, were actually used as touch-pieces in place of the usual gold medalets. Alternatively these pierced base metal tickets may just have escaped collection and then been pierced for wearing in the belief that they posed the same healing powers as the gold touch-pieces.

Notes:

1) The ship on both the touching ceremony entrance tickets and Charles II’s gold touch-pieces can be identified as “The Sovereign of the Seas” which was launched at Woolwich in 1637. At 1,637 tons with 102 guns the ship was the largest afloat at that time. She cost £65,000 to build which was ten times more than any other man-of-war of the time. It is ironic that Charles II should have selected an image of this ship to adorn his touch-pieces as it had contributed so much to his father’s downfall through the unpopular Ship Tax.

His Majesty’s royal ship the Sovereign of the Seas – a contemporaneous engraving by J. Payne

The ship was re-named “The Sovereign” in 1651 and then “The Royal Sovereign” in 1685. During her operational life she took part in the battles of Kentish Knock, Beachy Head and La Hogue. The vessel was accidentally destroyed by fire on 27^th January 1696 at Chatham. A few days later the diarist John Evelyn wrote in his diary₍₄₎, “The R. Sovereign burnt at Chatham, that ship built in 1637 was perhaps the original Cause of all the after trouble to this day” – a judgement written seven years after the “Glorious Revolution”.

References:

Farquhar, H. – Royal Charities. Part II – Touchpieces for the King’s Evil. – British Numismatic Journal. Volume 15. (London, 1919).
Woolf, N. – The Sovereign Remedy: Touch-Pieces and the King’s Evil – British Numismatic Journal. Volume 49. (London, 2011).
Latham, R.C. – The Diary of Samuel Pepys: Volume I – 1660 (Harper Collins, 2010).
De Beer, E.S. – The Diary of John Evelyn. (Everyman Edition. London 2006).
Lysons, Rev. D. – The Environs of London: Being an Historical Account of the Towns, Villages and Hamlets within 12 miles of the Capital. Volume I. County of Surrey. (London. 1792). Page 82, Footnote 40 siting Mercurious Politicus, 21^st February 1661.
Lysons, Rev. D. – The Environs of London: Being an Historical Account of the Towns, Villages and Hamlets within 12 miles of the Capital. Volume I. County of Surrey. (London. 1792). Page 82-83, Footnote 41 siting Parliamentary Journal, 2 to 9^th July 1661.

1 Comment

Filed under Tokens from Pepys' London, Tokens from West of the City Walls

Tagged as 17th century, 17th century token, Charles II, English Civil War, exonumia, History, King's Evil, London, London History, numismatics, Paranumismatics, Royal Touching Ceremony, Samuel Pepys, scrofula, token, Touch-Piece, Westminster, Whitehall Palace

19/01/2014 · 5:34 pm

Gabriell Marden of Durham Yard

A farthing token date 1659 issued by Gabriell Marden – A tradesman from Durham Yard, Westminster

The copper farthing token, pictured above, measures 16.0 mm and weighs 1.32 grams. It was issued in 1659 by Gabriell Marden, a tradesman operating from premises in Durham Yard in the parish of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, Westminster.

The design of the token may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: GABRELL . MARDEN , around the arms of the Marden or Morden family of Warwickshire₍₁₎.

Reverse: (pierced mullet) IN DVRHAM . YARD . 1659 , around a twisted wire circle. Within a triad of initials comprising G | (diamond) M (diamond) | C with a further (diamond) below the “M”.

The triad of initial’s on the reverse of the token are those of the issuer and his wife which in this case are “Mr. G.M.” and “Mrs. C.M.”.

The place where this token was issued, i.e. Durham Yard, no longer exists. It was located on the original north bank of the River Thames, i.e. the present day built-up area south of the Strand prior to the building of the Victoria Embankment. Today the location of Durham Yard lies on a highly developed site situated due west of the Savoy Hotel and north of the eastern part of Embankment Gardens.

A map of part of the Parish of St. Martins-in-the-Fields, Westminster (C.1720) indicating the location of Durham Yard

Durham Yard took its name from the inner court of the former Durham House which fronted onto The Strand and stretched down to the river. This medieval palace, built c.1345, was the official residence of the Bishops of Durham when visiting London. After the Reformation and until the early 17^th century Durham House passed several times between the Crown and the Bishops of Durham until the latter finally re-took control in the reign of James I. In 1553 Durham House played host to the marriage of Lady Jane Grey and Lord Dudley. Under Elizabeth I the palace was granted to Sir Walter Raleigh and after his tenancy it was used to accommodate various visiting foreign dignitaries and ambassadors before reverting back to the Bishops of Durham. By the early 17^th century much of the original palace buildings had become dilapidated. The stable block, which fronted onto The Strand, was the first part of the original palace to be demolished. In its place was built a grand market pace known as Britain’s Burse or the New Exchange. This was opened in 1608₍₂₎ .

A depiction od Durham House (c.1630) from the River Thames – By Wenceslaus Hollar

In 1640 the remaining parts of Durham House was sold by the Bishop of Durham to the Earl of Pembroke who demolished it shortly c.1650. The gatehouse of the original palace, fronting onto the Strand, remained intact until 1807. On the vacant plot where Durham House had stood the Earl’s son built rows of handsome houses descending in a street off The Strand to a further row of houses, some of which had fine gardens running down to the River Thames. This southern row of buildings also contained premises associated with two adjoining woodmongers’ wharfs from where domestic fuel (i.e. wood and coal) was landed off the river and sold₍₃₎ .

The Gate House of Durham House on the south side of the Strand which survived until 1807 - From a scketch made by Nathaneil Smith in 1790

The Gate House of Durham House on the south side of the Strand which survived until 1807 – From a sketch made by Nathaniel Smith in 1790

It was to one of these new built properties in Durham Yard that Gabriell Marden moved into c.1658 when his presence in the Yard is first recorded in a Westminster Rate Book. A review of the Hearth Tax returns for Durham Yard area for 1664 and 1666 has failed to identify a Marden/Morden/Murden family so it is possible they had moved on by this time.

On 26th April 1669 the famous diarist and naval administrator Samuel Pepys records₍₄₎ how King Charles II assisted in saving much of Durham Yard from burning down;

“…a great fire happened in Durham-Yard last night, burning the house of one Lady Hungerford, who was to come to town to it this night; and so the house is burned, new furnished, by carelessness of the girl sent to take off a candle from a bunch of candles, which she did by burning it off, and left the rest, as is supposed, on fire. The King and Court were here, it seems, and stopped the fire by blowing up of the next house.”

I cannot trace where or when Gabriell Marden was born. However, the coat of arms displayed on the obverse of his tokens suggests that his family’s ancestral origins were in Warwickshire.

A Gabrill Mardin [sic] was born in Bletchingley in Surrey on 11^th August 1618 but it is by no means certain that this is the same person as issued token farthings from Durham Yard some forty-one years later.

A record exists of a Gabriell Marden in London in 1646 when on the 2^nd April that year a person of that name married a Judith Wilson at the church of St. Nicholas Cole Abbey in the Queenhithe Ward of the city. The entry for their marriage in the Parish register records Gabriell as a “cordwainer”, i.e. a leather shoe maker of the parish of “Inn Lands in the west”. This is probably an accepted colloquialism of the period for the extra-parochial area of Furnival’s Inn. This ancient Inn of Chancery was located between Leather Lane and Gray’s Inn Lane to the west of the city walls. The home parish named for Judith Wilson is similarly given in an abbreviated or colloquial form as “Mary Cole”, i.e. St. Mary Colechurch which was located in the Cheapside Ward of the city.

A Judith Marden, the wife of a Gabriell Marden, is recorded in the burial register of All Hallows church in Tottenham (then a rural village in north Middlesex) on 5^th April 1649. Again it is by no means certain that this is the same couple as living in London three years earlier or the same Gabriell Marden as issued tokens from Durham Yard in 1659.

It is almost certain that by 1650 Gabriell Marden the cordwainer (earlier referred to) was leasing a shop against the south side of the church of St. Mary Colechurch, fronting onto Poultry₍₅₎ in the Cheapside Ward of London. He continued to hold this lease until 1660 when he sold it. The same Gabriel Marden appears to have rented a further property in the area from 1651 to 1657. This second property was just a short distance from the shop he rented in the Ward and was located close by on the eastern side of Ironmongers Lane, just south of the church of St. Martin Pomary₍₅₎ . It is possible that the latter property was where he lived while the former was his place of work. The map below indicates the approximate locations₍₅₎ of the above referenced properties. It dates from 1676 and shows the extent of the re-building of the district after the Great Fire of 1666 which consumed most of London within the bounds of the old city walls. As such it does not show the area exactly as it had been in the 1650s although the rebuilding did respect the old street layout and many of the original building foundation lines. Noticeable absences from the new street plans after the re-building of this part of the city were the churches of St. Martin Pomary and St. Mary Colechurch.

Up until this point there has been no evidential link between Gabriell Marden, member of the Company of London cordwainers₍₆₎ in 1651 and resident of Cheapside through most of the 1650s, and Gabriell Marden the token issuer of 1659 from Durham Yard in St. Martin-in-the-Fields. However, as part of the writer’s current research, it is believed that the two men can now be shown fairly conclusively as being one and the same person.

After renting a shop on Poultry in the Cheapside Ward of London in 1650, possibly after the death of his wife Judith in the previous year, Gabriell Marden re-married on 23^rd January 1650/1 in the church of St. Mary Woolnoth on the west end of Lombard Street in the adjoining Walbrook Ward of the city. The parish register entry for the marriage records that the couple was from the parish of St. Mildred Poultry and that the bride, Thomasin Matty, was a widow. It is possible that after their marriage the couple moved into Gabriell’s rented premises on the south-east side of Ironmonger’s Lane. While living in Cheapside Gabriell and Thomasin had at least two children. Both of whom were baptised locally at the church of St. Olave, Old Jewry. Their son, Gabriell, was born on 30^th September 1651 and their daughter, Jane, followed on 4^th August 1653.

A map of the Poultry area of the Cheapside Ward of London showing the house and shop rented by Gabriel Marden between 1651-57 plus churches where he and his family are recorded within the parish registers. Pink – St. Mary Colechurch; Dark Blue – St Olave Old Jewry; Licht Blue – Rented Shop; Yellow – Rented House; Green – St. Mildreds Poultry; Red – St. Martin Pomary.

It is known that Gabriell Marden relinquished his lease on the property in Ironmongers Lane in 1657. I now believe that this was due him and his surviving children moving out of Cheapside after the death of his second wife. Although I can find no record of Thomasin’s burial alternative documentary evidence confirms₍₇₎ that by the beginning of 1658 Gabriell had re-married a third time and was living in the parish of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, Westminster.

A record exists for the marriage of a Gabriell Marden from the parish register of St. Nicholas Cole Abbey on 2^nd February 1657/8. The marriage entry states Gabriell’s home parish as being St. Martin-in-the-Fields while that of his bride, Constance Griffeth, as St. Stephen Coleman Street. The latter parish was close to where Gabriell’s shop had been in Cheapside. There can be hardly any doubt that this individual is the same person who is recorded as living in Durham Yard in the Westminster Rate Book entries for 1658 and who issued a farthing token from the same location in 1659. The triad of issuer’s initials on the reverse of Gabriell’s token confirms that at the time of its issue the christian name of his wife began with a “C”. This fits with that of Constance Griffeth.

A copy of the last Will and Testament of Gabriell Marden of St. Martin-in-the-Fields survives in the National Archives₍₈₎ . It was made on 17^th November 1662 and confirms that at that time he was still married to Constance. More importantly from a historical context, the Will also confirms that he was previously married to Thomasin Matty and had two surviving sons of his own, Thomas, for whom I can find no baptism record, and Gabriell, who we know was born in 1651. The Will makes no mention of Jane Marden (born 1653) so it is assumed that she didn’t survive childhood.

One of the most revealing facts highlighted in Gabriell’s Will is his final occupation. In 1662 (and possibly from the time of first moving into Durham Yard in c.1658) he recorded his occupation as a woodmonger and not a cordwainer. It is noted that Strype’s description of Durham Yard in 1720₍₁₎confirms the presence of two woodmonger’s wharfs backing onto the yard. Exactly how Gabriell managed to make the rapid transformation from leather shoe maker to a trader in domestic fuels from the banks of the River Thames is by no means clear. It is possible that Gabriell may have inherited the property and wharf in Durham Yard after the death of one of his or his new wife’s relatives who was already an established woodmonger. This theory is further under pinned by the fact that in the description of Gabriell’s estate within his Will there is reference to 60 acres of managed woodland in the county of Essex. Presumably this woodland was the source of some of the fuel which was sold from Gabriell’s wharf at Durham Yard. After felling, and possibly a period of drying, the timber, as logs, would most likely have been shipped directly up the River Thames to Gabriell’s wharf on barges. As a London woodmonger of this period it is almost certain that Gabriell would have sold both wood and sea-coal. The latter would also have arrived at his wharf via barge. Such small boats were used to transfer coal from collier vessels moored downstream of old London Bridge. At this time most coal supplied into London was shipped out of the north-east coalfield via the River Tyne.

In his Will Gabriel names his two sons as executors. His goods and estate, which appears to have included some tenancies and freehold property in Essex, were to be equally divided between his wife and two sons only after a provision of £132 each had first been deducted and paid to his five step children (Elizabeth, Mary, Sarah, Henry and Edward). These were Thomasin’s children by her first husband, named in the Will as Edward Matty. It appears that when Gabriell married Thomasin Matty in 1650/1 he also inherited her former husband’s estate. In his Will Gabriell ensured that the residue of this inheritance was to be bequested to Edward’s children.

Exactly when Gabriell Marden died is unclear as no burial record has yet been identified for him. A probate note added in Latin into the bottom margin of his Will confirms that it wasn’t administered until 1665. Given the current evidence it is only possible to confirm that Gabriell died sometime after mid November 1662 but before the end of 1665. It is the writer’s opinion that a date closer to the start of this period is most likely.

References:

Thompson, R.H. & Dickinson, M.J. – Sylloge of Coins of the British Isles – Volume 62 (The Norweb Collection) – Tokens of the British Isles 1575 – 1750. Part VIII – Middlesex and Uncertain Pieces. (London, 2011).
Brushfield, T.N. – Raleghana. Part V. The History of Durham House. Transactions of the Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science, Literature and Art. Volume XXXV. 1903.
Strype, J. – A Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster: Containing the Original, Antiquity, Increase, Modern Estate and Government of those Cities. – Corrected, Improved, and very much Enlarged Edition. (London, 1720).
Latham, R.C. – The Diary of Samuel Pepys: Volume IX – 1668-9 (Harper Collins, 2010).
Keene, D.J. and Harding, V. – Historical gazetteer of London before the Great Fire: Cheapside; parishes of All Hallows Honey Lane, St Martin Pomary, St Mary le Bow, St Mary Colechurch and St Pancras Soper Lane. 1987.
Whitebrook, J.C. and Whitebrook, W. – London Citizens in 1651, Being a Transcription of Harleian MS. 4778.
Westminster Rate Book 1634-1900 Transcriptions. Highway Rate 1663 Poor Rate Ledger 1658-1663 Overseers’ Accounts 1658-1659. Entry for Gabriell Marden of Durham Yard, 1658. Assessed via http://www.findmypast.co.uk.
PROB/11/309. National Archives (London).
All parish register entries referenced have been accessed via http://www.ancestry.co.uk.

The Pastry Cook at the sign of the Crown in Shoe Lane

A pastry cook’s farthing token from Shoe Lane, London

The copper farthing token, pictured above, measures 15.3 mm and weighs 0.95 grams. It was issued in 1657 by a pastry cook operating from premises at or by the sign of the Crown in Shoe Lane off the north side of Fleet Street, London. Such tradesmen’s tokens normally had only a limited geographical area of circulation. Typically this may have been restricted to the immediate urban district in which their issuers lived and were known. However, some tokens inevitably travelled much further afield. Once captured amongst the small change in an individual’s pocket or purse they could have travelled great distances from their point of origin before ultimately being forgotten about and ultimately lost or discarded. This appears to have been the fate of the above example which was discovered approximately 350 years after its issue date on the River Thames foreshore at Gravesend in Kent.

The design of the token may be formally described as follows;

Obverse: (pierced mullet) PASTRY. COOKE. 1657., around a twisted wire circle. Within the depiction of a stylised crown of four arches studded with pearls and a jewelled headband with alternating decorations of crosses paté and fleurs-de-lis

Reverse: (pierced mullet) IN. SHOO. LANE -:-, around a twisted wire circle, within a triad of initials comprising I | .K. | .H

This is one of 21 different tokens issued by a variety of private tradesmen who lived and worked in Shoe Lane during the period 1649 to 1672. In the mid-17^th century Shoe Lane linked Fleet Street and Holborn Hill. St. Bride’s (or St. Bridget’s) parish church served those in the lane who lived in the southern end against Fleet Street.

The initials, in capitalised Latin letters, on the reverse of the above token are those of the issuer and his wife, i.e. Mr. “J/I.K.” and his wife Mrs. “H.K.”

It is clear from the above token image, along with those of other surviving examples, that the surname of the token issuer began with a “K”. However, it is understandable how poorer quality survivals of this token lead one earlier researcher to read this initial as an “R”. The combined initials of the token’s primary issuer could then be interpreted as “J.R.” which would fit perfectly with those of a potential issuer of the tokens who is mentioned in a contemporary survey of building sites in London a couple of years after the Great Fire of September 1666 ₍₁₎;

“Mr. John Reynolds May the 24^th 1669

One foundation set out the day above said near Fleet Street formally the Sign of the Crown in Shoe Lane belonging to the said Mr. Reynolds…”

It is understandable how such a mistake could have been made but when faced with good condition examples of the above token there is no escaping that the actual surname initial on it is a “K” and not an “R”. However, the above reference does contain some useful historical information in that;

At the time of the Great Fire of London in early September 1666 a John Reynolds is credited with owing the building plot on which the sign of the Crown in Shoe Lane stood.
The building identified by the sign of the Crown in Shoe Lane was located at the Fleet Street end of lane (i.e. the southern end).

A review of Hearth Tax returns for Shoe Lane in 1666 (just prior to the Great Fire) indicates that in the St. Bride’s (Fleet Street) Precinct of Shoe Lane a John Reygnolds [sic] paid tax on premises with 10 hearths. This is the second largest hearth count for any building in the lane. The above mentioned person is almost certainly the same John Reynolds who rebuilt the Crown in 1669. The relatively large number of hearths recorded for the premises in 1666 suggests, together with its trade sign (i.e. the Crown), that it was a good sized tavern.

A map showing part of the parish of St. Bride’s Fleet Street (c.1720) indicating the southern end of Shoe Lane

A further review of the 1666 Hearth Tax returns for Shoe Lane indicates that within a few buildings to the south of John Reynolds at the Crown was a property with an even higher hearth count of 14. More interestingly is the name of the man that is listed against this entry, John Knowles. It is possible that this man is the issuer of the above farthing trade token. The initial evidence for this can be drawn directly from his Hearth Tax return entry in that;

He operated from a building located close to the sign of the Crown (as indicated on the token).
He operated from a building containing 14 hearths (the highest count for any building in Shoe Lane). Such a high hearth/oven count would not be untypical for a pastry cook (i.e. the stated trade of the token issuer).
His initials fit exactly with those of the token issuer (i.e. “J.K.”).

Further research has uncovered additional facts concerning John Knowles that almost certainly confirms him as the issuer of the above token. A review of contemporary London parish registers has confirmed that there was a family by the name of Knowles living in the parish of St. Bride’s, Fleet Street from at least the mid-1620s and that by the mid-1660s John and Hannah Knowles, together with their children, were almost certainly living in Shoe Lane.

The first reference to John and Hannah Knowles by name in the parish records occurs in 1647. This entry records the first of several of their children’s baptisms. These include;

Elizabeth – 27^th July 1647
John Knowles – 29^th June 1648
Charles Knowles – 6^th August 1649
Mary Knowles – 9^th December 1650
Hannah Knowles – 21^st February 1651/2
Samuel Knowles – 10^th September 1654

Party of Abraham Bosse’s mid-17th century print entitled “The Pastry Shop”

Whilst it is unclear if John Knowles had always been a pastry cook it was certainly his stated trade in 1657 when he issued his token. Approximately 19 London cooks issued trade tokens during the period 1649 to 1672. However, only three of these are known to have been specifically pastry cooks.

Three decorated pies made using 17th century designs

As a pastry cook who presumably also sold his wares directly to the public from his Shoe Lane premises it is likely that all of the Knowles family would have assisted in some way in John’s busy work. His business was sufficiently large to warrant him taking on apprentices at various points in time. The following individuals are recorded in the post 1654 apprenticeship registers of the Worshipful Company of Cooks as being bound into service to John Knowles ₍₂₎;

Richard Woodroffe – 2 March 1654/5
Michael Lucas – 28th January 1658/9
Edward Jarvis – 9th June 1662
Richard Michell – 9th July 1661

Apprentices would normally be bound to a master for a period of 7 years from the age of 14. Assuming they served their time they became eligible to apply for membership/freedom of their appropriate Livery Company.

A review of contemporary records has failed to highlight any further information about the later history of either John or Hannah Knowles. There are however two burial records in the registers of St. Bride’s, Fleet Street that may relate to that of John Knowles the token issuer. Unfortunately with our token issuer having a son of the same name it is difficult to differentiate between their deaths from a simple parish register entry without any reference to a spouse’s or parent’s name. Neither of the two burial register entries offer either such clues;

8^th October 1665 – John Knoles from Shoo lane

31^st January 1698/9 – John Knowles at Leues up y^e steps popinge ally

However, given the earlier Hearth Tax evidence we know that a John Knowles was still head of the Shoe Lane household in 1666. If it had been John Knowles senior who had died the previous year it would be expected that the head of the household would have reverted to his widow Hannah, assuming she was still alive. At the relatively young age of 17 it is questionable if John Knowles junior could have legally qualified to become head of the household, even if his mother had previously died. Assuming John Knowles senior had sufficient funds it would be normal to expect him to have paid to put his sons into suitable apprenticeships or to have attained their freedom within his own Livery Company by means of “patrimony”.

Assuming that the above parish register entries relate to our token issuer and his son, and not coincidentally named individuals, the combined evidence points to the first burial record (i.e. in 1665) being that for the 17 year old John Knowles junior. The second (i.e. in 1698/9) is then likely to be that for John Knowles senior who must have returned to the Shoe Lane area after the Great Fire of September 1666 to re-establish his business.

Based on the above deduction it appears highly possible that John Knowles junior died while still working for the family business in Shoe Lane. The date of his death is significant as it coincides with a period in 1665 when London was being ravaged by one of the most infamous outbreaks of bubonic plague. Between the start of the outbreak in early 1665 and its eventual disappearance in early 1666 the plague is estimated to have claimed the lives of approximately 100,000 citizens. The death toll reached a peak during the warm Summer months but even into early October 1665 was still claiming between 2,000 to 4,000 victims per week. On the 8^th October, the day of John Knowles junior’s internment; his body was one of 10 that were buried in the churchyard of St. Bride’s Fleet Street alone, the following day saw a further 16 burials at St. Bride’s and the day afterwards another 15.

Total deaths and plague related deaths in London during 1665

The presumed burial register entry for John Knowles senior (i.e. 31^st January 1698/9) indicates him living at “Leues” (an unknown personal or business premises name) up the steps in Popinjay Ally. This ally or court ran to the east and parallel to Shoe Lane. In August 1663 the famous diarist Samuel Pepys records entering this alley via a gate way off the north side of Fleet Street and visiting an alehouse there _(3).This may have been the Green Dragon which is recorded as having issued its own farthing trade tokens during the mid-1650s to early 1660s ₍₄₎. In addition to this alehouse it is likely that the ally contained a mixture of private homes and businesses. It is possible that “Leues” was one such business, possibly a cook house (i.e. a type of hot food take away establishment popular in mid-17^th London) where in his later years John Knowles may have been living and working in semi-retirement.

References:

Mills, P. & Oliver, J. – The Survey of Building Sites in the City of London after the Great Fire of 1666. Volume II. (London Topographical Society Publication. No.103. 1967).
Webb, C. – London Livery Company Apprenticeship Registers, Cooks’ Company 1654-1800. Volume 26. (Society of Genealogists. 1999).
Latham, R.C. – The Diary of Samuel Pepys: Volume IV – 1663 (Harper Collins, 2010).

2 Comments

Filed under Tokens from West of the City Walls

Tagged as 17th century, 17th century token, exonumia, Fleet Street, Great Fire of London, Great Plague, Hearth Tax, History, London, London History, numismatics, Paranumismatics, Samuel Pepys, Shoe Lane, token

	Gareth Ross Buddell on The Wind Mill in Temple Bar Wi…
	Collin Bartlett on The Lion & Key in Thames S…
	Julian Kennedy on The Hercules Pillars in Fleet…
	Mallory on Thomas Springall of the Castle…
	Allan Hamilton-Goya on The White Horse in Stable Yard…

Category Archives: Tokens from West of the City Walls

Humphrey Vaughan of White Hart Yard, Westminster

In Search of Humphrey Vaughan

At the sign of the Lobster by the Maypole in the Strand

A Brief History of the Maypole in the Strand

Howard’s Coffeehouse in New Street, Covent Garden

The Coffeehouse Revolution of the mid-17^thCentury

Richard Athy at the sign of the Fleur de Lys in St. James Market Place, Westminster

At the sign of the Old Man’s Head in St. James Market Place, Westminster

The Bell Tavern in King Street, Westminster

Thomas Springall of the Castle Tavern in St. Clement’s Churchyard.

A Ticket to Attend The Royal Touching Ceremonies of Charles II

The Curative Royal Touch for King’s Evil and the presentation of Touch-Pieces

Royal Touching Ceremony Entrance Tickets

Gabriell Marden of Durham Yard

The Pastry Cook at the sign of the Crown in Shoe Lane

Categories

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Follow Blog via Email

Site Views

Follow me on Twitter

Category Archives: Tokens from West of the City Walls

In Search of Humphrey Vaughan

A Brief History of the Maypole in the Strand

The Coffeehouse Revolution of the mid-17th Century

The Curative Royal Touch for King’s Evil and the presentation of Touch-Pieces

Royal Touching Ceremony Entrance Tickets

Categories

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Follow Blog via Email

Site Views

Follow me on Twitter

The Coffeehouse Revolution of the mid-17^thCentury