With the recent and indeed quite sordid proliferation of gambling festivities within the ranks of the Marksmen, the question of historically accurate coinage has arisen. In particular, while patronizing the gaming table at the 2004 Winter Scout at Lake George, the participants wondered what types of coins a British Private Soldier, or a woman accompanying a company, might be most likely to carry. Accordingly, I agreed to initiate a simple study of this question. Relatively rapidly, it became apparent that this is in fact a considerably more complicated issue than at first imagined. However, I believe that this missive will provide members of the Company of Select Marksmen with an excellent idea of what coins they should be carrying, and why.

Five (5) historic topics influence what coinage a British Private Soldier or company woman would be carrying:

• What British coins were being minted and were available;
• Whether British soldiers were being regularly paid in America;
• What coinage was being used to pay the British army serving in the colonies;
• What coinage was available in the North American colonies, that might be available to a soldier or woman through the local economy; and
• What is the archaeological evidence of such coinage.

First, by the middle of the 18th Century, the British government had a well-established monetary system, based upon what modern economists refer to as a “bi-metallic” standard. The basis of this system, as established by George I, was the 21-shilling gold guinea, which weighed 129 and 39/89 grains. The size and weight of other coinage was then determined by the relative value of the coin and metal. Thus, a shilling contained 93 grains of silver or the value of 1/21st of a gold guinea; and a halfpenny contained 152.2 grains of copper, or the value of 1/24th of a shilling.¹

George I and II both issued large quantities of coinage, while George III issued a reduced quantity of coinage, as succinctly described below.²

Three specific considerations heavily influenced the issue of British coinage during the 18th century. First, Spain was the source of most silver throughout this period. Tensions with Spain, and eventually war (declared by Great Britain on January 4, 1762) had a catastrophic effect upon the availability of silver for coinage, and essentially terminated issues of British silver coinage after the Seven Years War. Second, a chronic shortage of small coins severely inhibited the British economy. As a result, a number of privately produced coins or tokens were intermittently issued up to and during the American Revolution. Typical of these was the minting by William Woods of 40,000 pounds of halfpence and farthings intended for issue in Ireland in 1722 and 1723, and limited minting of a version intended for issue in America in 1724 and 1733. To avoid British counterfeiting laws, these copper coins had to be distinctive from the British mint issues. Various privately issued coins and tokens have been recovered at historic and archaeological sites throughout North America.³ Third, because of the chronic shortage of small coins, a massive surge of counterfeiting arose throughout the North American colonies and Great Britain. By the reign of George III, there were so many copper counterfeits in circulation that the legitimate British coins were almost overwhelmed, and in fact the reign of George III all but abandoned minting copper coins.⁴

The second major topic of discussion is to confirm that British soldiers were being paid in North America. There is strong evidence that the British soldiers were indeed being regularly paid. Historian John Shy noted “Between 1768 and 1774, the principal money contractors carried about 94,000 pounds sterling into North America annually for the payment of various ‘extraordinary’ expenses.” Shy also estimated that the British army based in North America spent approximately 90,000 pounds sterling annually.⁵

The third topic concerns what coinage was used to pay British soldiers in the North American colonies. Probably of greatest import, and not generally known, is that British law prohibited the export of British silver coinage to North America.⁶ Because of the chronic shortage of small specie (particularly silver) in Great Britain, it was apparently felt that silver should be sent from the colonies to England, and not the other way around. Thus, English silver coinage was not used to pay British soldiers serving in Colonial America. Supporting this is the documentation from two ships known to have carried payments of British military coinage, one to repay the Colony of Massachusetts, one from the Colony of New York to support military operations against Canada; and an inventory by prominent merchant Thomas Hancock of the baggage of British General Whittmore, who fell overboard near Boston in 1762.

“In 1749, the largest shipment of British coppers to be sent to the colonies arrived in Boston on the ship Mermaid. The British parliament sent Massachusetts Bay almost two long tons of Spanish silver coins (650,000 ounces in 217 chests) as well as ten long tons of English coppers (in one hundred casks), in order to reimburse the Colony for the assistance it provided to the Louisburg Expedition on Cape Breton Island, Novia [sic] Scotia, during the French and Indian War. The coppers included over 800,000 halfpence and more than 420,000 farthings, all dated 1749; approximately thirty percent of the entire mintage for the year.”⁷

“An estimate of the quantity of coinage that left the colony can be gleaned from the remains of the English 32 gun frigate H.M.S. Feversham. The Feversham, along with three supply ships had been sent to New York to pick up supplies for an invasion fleet that was sailing from Boston to Quebec. While in New York City it was recorded on September 4, 1711, that the Feversham was given £569 12s 5d from the British Treasury Office in New York. It is not known if these funds were to be used to pay for the supplies recently acquired or if this was money to be brought to Quebec for future use. In either event it represented the coins then in circulation in New York City. On September 17, 1711 the Feversham along with the three supply ships set sail for Quebec. In the meantime, the British invasion fleet had been wrecked on August 14, 1711 in the St. Lawrence River, but news of the disaster did not reach New York until the day after the Feversham set sail. On Sunday October 7, 1711, during their journey north, the Feversham and the three supply ships sank on the rocks off the shore of Scatari Island near the coast of Nova Scotia. In 1984 the Feversham was found by a private group that conducted salvage operations over the next few years. Among the items found on board were £33 13s in coins, presumably a portion of the allocation that had been obtained in New York City. This hoard contained 8 English silver coins, 22 Dutch coins (Lion dollars), 5 coins from Spain, 504 New World Spanish coins (from one half to 8 reales coins) and 126 pieces of Massachusetts silver.”⁸

“…coins found by Thomas Hancock on forcing open baggage left with him by British General Whittmore who fell overboard near Boston:

• 694 5/8 joannes [Spanish gold Johanna (1504-1555)] @ 36 shillings
• 37 moidores [Portuguese gold Moydore coins] @ 27 shillings
• 300 guineas @ 21 shillings
• 8 1/2 pistoles [Spanish gold two escudo coins) @ 16 shillings/6 pence
• 1 French Guinea
• 1 dollar and 1 copper halfpenny
• 26 “small heart” bits of silver, weight 3 ounces, sold for 15 shillings
• 6 pieces gold amounting to 9 dollars, valued at 2 pounds, sixpence
• 7 pieces small silver, sold for 5 shillings, 7 1/2 pence.” ⁹

Fourth, there was a chronic shortage of specie in the North American colonies, throughout the Colonial period. As previously noted in the article on British pay, this resulted in a wide and diverse range of coins being used throughout the colonies. Spanish coinage was the most commonly encountered, but Portuguese, French, and Dutch money was also in widespread use. Further complicating the issue was that each colony used a slightly different financial standard. Newspapers and business journals of the times published tables listing the respective values of various coinage.¹⁰ The North American colonies of England enjoyed a wide and expansive trade throughout the world, which meant that coinage of practically any nation might be found. This shortage of specie also meant that small transactions were most commonly on the barter system, rather than utilizing coins.¹¹

The fifth topic is the archaeological evidence of coins discovered at British military sites of the 18th century. Unfortunately, only one comprehensive archaeological study has been performed, that by Donald Heldman of the coins at Michilimackinac.¹² This post was occupied by the British Army in 1761, and abandoned in 1781, this placing its archaeological record precisely within the period of the American Revolution. Seven farthings were recovered at Michilimackinac. Six of the farthings are so badly worn that “virtually none of their salient characteristics survive.” The remaining farthing is a 1747 George II issue. Seventeen English and Irish halfpennies were recovered at Michilimackinac. Six of these halfpence are also worn completely smooth. Three are William III halfpence (too badly worn to be dated), three are George I (all dated 1720), and five are George II (only one could be dated at 1736). The three pieces of silver money found were a Spanish medio real (1731), a two bit piece of eight, and a one bit piece of eight. The two bit piece of eight had a British broad arrow stamped prominently into it, providing clear evidence that it was being used as British military coinage. Informal discussions with Mr. Chris Fox, Curator at Fort Ticonderoga Museum, have revealed that although a number of farthings and halfpence have also been located at Fort Ticonderoga, not one piece of British silver has been recovered there. The British coppers found at Fort Ticonderoga also display considerable wear.

So, after a long and convoluted journey, we return to our original question, what coinage would a British soldier likely have used? At a net pay rate of between two and three pence a week, a British soldier would have received his pay in British or Irish copper farthings and halfpence. A woman being paid for dressing hair or laundry would also have been paid a few pence per week, almost certainly in small copper coins from the soldiers. The archaeological evidence from Michilimackinac supports this. Given the fact that no farthings were minted between 1763 and 1771, and none after 1775; and that no halfpence were minted between 1754 and 1770, and none after 1775; any copper coins used for pay purposes would have been in circulation for a number of years and would demonstrate considerable wear. Again, this is borne out by the archaeological evidence from Michilimackinac. At least a number of the coins would have been counterfeits or forgeries of various qualities. Even on the rare occasions that a British solder might be paid in silver in North America, he would not have been paid in British silver coinage because English law prohibited its official export to the colonies. Rather, he would have been paid in Spanish silver.

It is conceivable that a Private soldier performing work within the local economy, or receiving change from a private businessman, might have been paid in small silver. More likely, given the dearth of specie in the American colonies, he would have been compensated in barter. Some British silver coins were certainly in circulation in North America (through merchants, sailors, visitors, British officers, etc.), and it is conceivable that a soldier might receive British silver for salary or as change. In this case, a soldier would have received a relatively small denomination coin (typically a 2-pence, 3-pence or 6-pence). A shilling would represent more than a month’s net pay, and a soldier or company woman would have infrequently held a silver coin of this denomination. And since the British government minted extremely limited quantities of silver after 1758, any English silver coinage would have been in circulation for nearly two decades and would display considerable wear. If a soldier did receive specie through the local community, he could have received coinage of nearly any nation, with Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch or French all in frequent usage. Any such coins would also have been of small denomination, and would have seen considerable previous circulation.

Thus, if we are accurately representing a British Private Soldier or company woman of the American Revolution, our purse should contain primarily British or Irish copper farthings and halfpence, of older issues, and displaying considerable wear. Some of them should be of comparatively poor quality, representing counterfeits. Any silver coinage should be distinctly limited, and should be primarily Spanish silver in relatively small denominations (one or two bits). A few small copper coins of other nations would be appropriate. Although sutlers such as Jas. Townsend offer particularly fine reproductions of historic coinage, these are almost too high quality, and do not demonstrate the wear that coins recovered from archaeological sites consistently display. To obtain more historically accurate representative coins, I recommend spending time surfing Ebay.com, amazon.com or similar auction web-sites, or visiting antique stores or flea markets, for older English Georgian coppers that display considerable wear (almost being rubbed smooth is actually preferable). Because of their poor condition such coins offer little interest for collectors, can be purchased nearly as inexpensively as reproductions, and will considerably enhance your impression.

Finally, I hope that additional British and American military sites of the American Revolution period will perform more comprehensive studies of coins recovered during archaeological studies, similar to the excellent study performed at Michilimackinac. Further investigations of archaeological collections are necessary to verify if the Michilimackinac findings are representative. Over the next few months I hope to perform a survey of coins recovered from Revolutionary War military sites at West Point, and will provide the results of that effort once it is completed.

1. C.H.V. Sutherland, English Coinage, 600-1900 (London: B.T. Batsford: 1973), 174-178. For additional information on British coinage in the Colonial era, refer to the “Coins of Colonial and Early America” project of the University of Notre Dame at http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/index.html; and “The Leslie Brock Center for the Study of Colonial Currency” at the University of Virginia (http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/users/brock/).

2. Ibid., and see the following excellent web-site for a discussion of English money: http://www.tclayton.demon.co.uk/coins.html.

3. Brian J. Danforth, “Wood’s Hibernia Coins Come to America” The Colonial Newsletter (August 2001); and http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/RosaAm.intro.html.

4. “In 1753 it was estimated that two fifths to one half of the copper money circulating in England was counterfeit.” Kenneth Scott, Counterfeiting in Colonial America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1957), 4-5; and http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/CtfBrit.intro.html.

5. John Shy, Toward Lexington, The Role of the British Army in the Coming of the American Revolution (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965), 338-339.

6. John R. Hanson II, “Money in the Colonial American Economy: An Extension” Economic Inquiry XVII (April 1979), 282; and http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/Br-Silver.intro.html.

7. Thomas A. Kays, “When Cross Pistareens Cut Their Way Through the Tobacco Colonies” The Colonial Newsletter (April 2001).

8. Ibid., and http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/Br-Silver.intro.html.

9. William T. Baxter, The House of Hancock, Business in Boston, 1724-1775 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1945), 15.

10. For examples, see http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinImages/Tables/Abraham.1759.jpg and Charlotte Epping, Editor, The Journal of DuRoi the Elder (Philadelphia: 1911).

11. For an excellent discussion of business practices in Colonial America, refer to Baxter, The House of Hancock, 11-34.

12. Donald P Heldman, “Coins at Michilimackinac” Historical Archaeology 14 (1980), 82-107.

Back to the RESEARCH PAGE