The Puck (Mrzezino) hoard and procedures of the Prussian Monarchy towards coin finds. Treasure legislation in the Prussian monarchy shared hoards between the finders and the owners of the ground. This regulation produced archival evidence dating back to the eighteenth century. The large gold hoard, found in what is nowadays Mrzezino in northern Poland in 1795, was reported to Berlin shortly after its discovery. In the beginning, mainly juridical questions were discussed, but in 1798, this moved to the discussion of what to do with the coins and where and to whom they should be sold. The archival reports reveal that the coins were mainly of Anastasius, some of Zeno’s and only a few of Leo, Basiliscus and Theodosius and, as their value was above intrinsic value, they were sold to the royal collection in Berlin as well as to collections in Prussia and Poland.

Amongst the early variations of the so-called Otto-Adelheid-pennies are coins with five pellets within the church. They exist in two varieties in respect of the distribution of the four letters ODDO in the cross angles. It can be shown that both are from the same unlocalised mint. The number of dies is rather small and that the variety with O-O-D-D precedes O-D-D-O. Issuing must have started soon after 983/984 and probably was ended before c. 993.

Amongst the first imported silver coins from western Europe in hoards in the territories of the western Slavs after the decline of silver import from Central Asia are issues anonymous in both respect of ruler and mint which have been in discussion since the early nineteenth century. In research they have been called by various names such as Sachsenpfennige, Hochrandpfennige, Kreuzpfennige (German) or krzyżówki (Polish) and must originate from mint(s) in Eastern Saxony bordering Slavs. They are of importance for the understanding of the use and chronology of coined silver in Slavic lands, especially in Poland and eastern Germany. The example of the Strandby hoard in Denmark, where these occur in a larger number, are well documented and to a larger part are unfragmented, allows us to show that the hitherto used dating (Kilger 2000) is incorrect. All known varieties must have been struck before 983/984 and not up to c. 1000. There is no continuation to younger series with hammered edge appearing since early eleventh century.