Talk:Anglo-Saxon pound

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of numismatics and currencies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NumismaticsWikipedia:WikiProject NumismaticsTemplate:WikiProject Numismaticsnumismatic articles

Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms articles

Untitled

When banking was nationalised during the early 20th century, the Bank of England took control of the nation's currency, and the Pound Sterling became the nation's official currency. -- not terribly relevant to the Saxons, and not correct in any case. The BoE was created as the banker of the English Government in 1694 and has issued notes since soon afterwards. The BoE was nationalised in 1946, but the rest of the banking industry wasn't. -- Arwel 20:12, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

According to Banknote, 1st European paper money was 1660, also well after the Saxons! 80.43.170.138 17:26, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

According to the Daily Telegraph?

Currently the date of the Anglo-Saxon pound is referenced as "According to the Daily Telegraph it came into use around 775." I believe we can do better. Martin Rundkvist (talk) 13:00, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Expert needed: Use of L for currency symbol

The article repeats information from other articles about the use of L as the origin of £. Surely this would have been long after the Anglo-Saxon period? Before Arabic numerals, they were presumably using Roman numerals, which include the letter L. Using a letter as a symbol before numbers also represented by letters would have been very confusing. I have no sources for any of this. Does anyone have any more information? I'm going to add an expert needed template to the article. MClay1 (talk) 04:09, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted my earlier reply which, although true, is (like the question), irrelevant because the material about the L or £ notation should never have been in the article in the first place. There is no evidence that the Anglo-Saxons even used the Latin alphabet, let alone the letter L for pound. I have deleted that text and ditto a load of forked content from the pound (mass) article. That reduced the article to a stub, which may encourage an expert to develop it. They certainly weren't going to do so from the article as it was. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:51, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously by the time of Christianisation and certainly by Venerable Bede, they were using the Latin alphabet. But nothing cited says that they were also using L for pound sterling, nor is there anything at pound sign that far back. Any material that refers to the time after 1066 is irrelevant. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to make this article a redirect

The only coin in wide use in Anglo-Saxon England was the penny and pound and shilling were just units of account. I have three books on Anglo-Saxon coinage and none of them have pound (except Roman pound) in the index. There is no article on Anglo-Saxon shilling and anglo-Saxon pound is not notable enough to deserve a separate article. I propose that this article should be moved to #REDIRECT Pound sterling#Anglo-Saxon, c 800 CE. I cannot find a formal procedure for changing an article to redirect and if anyone knows of one please advise. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:46, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, given that the article is now just a stub after removal of irrelevant post-Conquest text and forked material about the Anglo-Saxon penny, I seriously question whether the article has any value whatever. I have asked for contributions on the talk pages of related articles and got nothing back. So I strongly support your proposal and suggest that you wp:BEBOLD and just do it. If anyone complains, let's see their sources. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would be better to make it a disambiguation article? (a) to your suggestion and (b) to Pound (mass)#Tower pound, though the information there is uncited and originally depended on this article for its support. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 09:49, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think it would be helpful to link to the Tower pound section as it has no reliable information on the Anglo-Saxon period. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:57, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm content because I agree. There are pages of arguments at talk:pound (mass) about the various English measures, and the conclusion seems to be that nobody really knows. We can say honestly that we have given the idea due consideration and dismissed it fairly. Again, if anyone disagrees, let them come forward with sources. Given the crashing silence for the past month while I was nuking the article, I don't expect any and suggest that you just do the redirect now. I'd do it except that I have already done so much that it looks like a one-man campaign if no-one else contributes. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have already done it. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like it was the right call. MClay1 (talk) 15:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]