Post Your Denomination Runs

Now that is something different.

Sorry, you won't get a better photo until at least the weekend - I was using a smartphone to make my last few photos, and my mother took it on a camping trip this week.

But you were actually a lot closer with your idea than even my "much warmer" comment would indicate.
Check your figures carefully (you were a bit off) and think of what it means.

(I'll give a "hint": the letters are CH. That's all the legend on this side; all the other dots really are dots [well, mostly lines, technically].
The legend on the other side is a lot longer, but not important to the record, and very little of it shows up on this example anyway.)

It does, and 5508 BC specifically. (Indeed, 7113-1605=5508.)

I repeat - to the best of my knowledge, this is a record over the entirety of numismatics. You almost got it.

EDIT: the pre-1700 dated kopeks of Peter I are not very common, which is why you might have trouble finding stuff online.
Actually, this particular date is even less common than the others - can you figure out why?

Bingo! As far as I can tell, the date on this coin (specifically, 7208, though they didn't actually mention the thousands) is the higher non-error numerical date ever mentioned on any coin ever.
When errors are included, some coins ended up with a higher number in the date position (most recently, I believe, the 7971 dated coin of Hungary).

I don't know whether anyone else made coins dated in Greek after that (and it wasn't really Greek anyway, technically, though probably close enough).
Of course, the system used for dates on Israeli coins today is of the same origin as the Greek system (to the best of my knowledge, they also hold the record for the highest numerical date printed in full, 5776, though that is likely to change soon because the series is ongoing and it's already 5777).
And the specific calendar was only very briefly used on coins, anyway (at least, I'm not aware of anyone other than the Russians using it, and the Russians didn't make any coins with it until 7104 aka 1596 AD).

I've actually posted about that record before, but I didn't know about this coin then, so the figure I gave was 7207.

Incidentally, can you figure out why it's less common than the other nearby years? I've probably explained enough for you to guess correctly.

Here is a snapshot of my current pet project:



 

Similarly long to the drachm run I posted above, but one of the largest and most mysterious gaps in our knowledge of medieval Indian numismatics. Collectively, most of these are known as either Indo-Sassanian drachms, or "Gadhaiya Paisa" which is a misnomer because they were probably worth much more than a paisa, and the aim of my pet project is to show that they were introduced by the Huns, not the Ghardabhiya dynasty, as was assumed nearly a century ago when the West became aware of these coins. At any rate, these are all silver of varying fineness, and weigh between about 3.7g and 4.3g so it is safe to assume these constitute a straight denomination run, spanning the years 469 to ca. 1300.

To sum up a very complex history, the Sassanian (they were the Persian dynasty that Muhammad overthrew) emperor Peroz I went to war in 469, hiring a legion of Hepthalite huns to act as his mercenaries. They betrayed him and sacked one of his cities, so he went to war with them. He lost a battle and was unable to retreat, so he was taken hostage and forced to pay millions of silver coins to ransom his release. He attempted to launch a revenge campaign in 484, but was killed in battle and the Sassanian empire barely survived the subsequent invasion from the Hepthalites.

This surge of silver drachms led to their establishment as the de facto trade currency of the Silk road, which was now under Hunnic control. Peroz's coins eventually became worn out, so the Huns started making their own imitations. The southern branch of the Huns (remember, they had just toppled the Gupta empire) used these coins, so the emerging kingdoms of central India naturally adopted the designs with their own flair. These coins are all anonymous and anepigraphic, but some Ph.D level research into hoard finds have postulated that these were made by the Chavdas  (Gujarat area, c. 690-942), Chaulukyas (Gujarat and central India, c. 950-1189), Vaghela (Gujarat, 1243-1299),  Silaharas  (Goa region, c. 1200-1300), and finally the Omkara monastery (Malwa, 1200- after 1300). Each successive dynasty played "telephone" with the design until it became utterly unrecognizable.

All coins feature:

Obverse: Bust of king right wearing wide brimmed, winged hat topped with ornament. Prominent ribbons at left and right, shoulders seen below

Reverse: Zoroastrian fire altar flanked by necklaced female attendants, moon and sun above

So, left to right, top to bottom:

1. Official Peroz drachm, later style (probably near the time of the ransom)
2-3. Hunnic imitations
4-6. "Chavda" type
7-9. "Bent head" type (unknown attribution... the Alchon hun nobility practiced cranial deformation as attested on their coins, so this was probably inspired by those. Note also the distinctive line through the eye to mimic an Asian eye shape)
10-12. "Gadhaiya paisa" type
13. "Vaghela" type
14. "Malwa" or "Ja" type, probably related to 15
15. "Omkara" type, base of fire altar has been replaced with legend "Sri Omkara". Hypothesized to be minted for use at the Omkara monastery as an offering.
16. "Silahara" or "Horseman" type, reverse depicts cavalry rider attacking two foot soldiers
17. Base copper type, related to 15, but reverse just has a stylized "OM"

As the coins get smaller, they get thicker, so the overall mass is preserved. The design gets more chunky and dotted, which some theories is the result of over-engineering these coins to be able to stand up to hundreds of years of continual use. Silver purity does decline, but not significantly until coin 13 in this picture. Apparently, these coins were so Culturally entrenched in the region, that as late as the 1960s small village bazaars would accept them as currency.

This is just a teeny tiny snapshot of my larger collection of these, which I hope to use to clear up some uncertainties about exactly how these coins relate to one another. Check the Ancients board in about a month when I am done with the write-up!

Very nice run, Finn! The additional historical perspective is appreciated.

I liked the history on the Panama 2& 1/2 cents. Where did you read this? very interesting.