| Author |
 Replies: 5,743 / Views: 214,705 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Australia
2353 Posts |
Quote:
"in top the second digit of the year, in bottom the first digit as well as the name of the workshop". I'm not sure what is meant by "second digit" and "first digit" here - is it "five" and "fifty"?
Balog's illustration doesn't show the bottom part of the legend at all; I'm guessing on his examples it was off flan and/or otherwise illegible. But presumably if it was inconsistent with the 755 date that would have been noticed long ago. Yes, in Balog, their example doesn't have the bottom row of three, as you have stated. This led to their example (339) being categorised as Uncertain Mint, and the statement included at the end about which ruler the coin was issued by. But with the inclusion of the bottom line, the date becomes five and fifty, and there is no uncertainty. My coin shows traces of the bottom line, the left portion shows the mint, but the right side date is off flan. The top row, reading right to left, says"year five". The middle row says" righteous king" and the bottom row (from the other examples in Zeno) should say "fifty" and "hamah"(mint). FYI, if you didn't have access already, Balog is freely available at http://numismatics.org/digitallibra...95/nnan55713
The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
Edited by ttkoo
12/15/2024 7:17 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2353 Posts |
Today's coin is a 1352 C.E. - AH753 Juchid Mongol copper pul I love the green patina on this one.   The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
164103 Posts |
Quote:
1353 - AH 754 Juchid Mongols silver dirham Quote:
Today's coin is a 1352 C.E. - AH753 Juchid Mongol copper pul Nice examples! 
|
|
Moderator
United States
164103 Posts |
Unless someone objects, I am going to assume contributions are correct and regress the clock accordingly.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5042 Posts |
I was a little confused by the 754, because it wasn't very clear that the last digit was a 4... but comparing examples, the attribution seems solid enough. 753 is harder, because the supposed 3 looks a little too disconnected, and there's Zeno 148507 where a very similar final shape is attributed as 751. I'm not very sure of the assignment here. On Zeno 227877 (the coin listed as similar) the 3 is in a different, more definite, shape. It would be nice to have some participation from JohnConduitt, who had only posted once since we got stalled a few months ago. I have a probable 752/1351 for when we definitely get past 753/1352 (a coin, as it happens, that we have already seen in this thread). |
|
Moderator
United States
164103 Posts |
Thank you for your input, it is always appreciated!
I will not update the title tomorrow morning. We can freeze until we get confirmation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2353 Posts |
Quote:
753 is harder, because the supposed 3 looks a little too disconnected, and there's Zeno 148507 where a very similar final shape is attributed as 751. I'm not very sure of the assignment here. On Zeno 227877 (the coin listed as similar) the 3 is in a different, more definite, shape. Yes, I appreciate your comment, and I initially struggled with the shape of the date also. However, I put the coin into Zeno for help with attribution, and the response that I got back was 753H, from Vladimir Suchy, who is highly regarded. His only query was whether it might be a local imitation issued from Qrim.You can see his response if you search my coin 341549.
The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
|
|
Moderator
United States
164103 Posts |
Thank you for the supporting information. I will regress the date tomorrow after J1M confirms it. You do not need to wait for me to post the next year once we get the okay.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5042 Posts |
Sorry for not responding earlier, was on a long trip (still am, but managed to enter CCF from my phone).
I saw that ID! I couldn't figure out who Vladimir Suchy was (the only relevant results pointed to Zeno), and it wasn't clear if it was "753, and a Qrim imitation", or "753, or a Qrim imitation".
I think we can count it for now and try to look for a more definite example later.
|
|
Moderator
United States
164103 Posts |
Quote:
I think we can count it for now and try to look for a more definite example later. Works for me!  We Need - 1351 C. E. (a. H. 752) 1351 - JohnConduitt, ttkoo
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2353 Posts |
Quote:
I have a probable 752/1351 for when we definitely get past 753/1352 (a coin, as it happens, that we have already seen in this thread). Intruiging! 
The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
|
|
Moderator
United States
164103 Posts |
Quote:
1351 - JohnConduitt, ttkoo
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5042 Posts |
Quote:Intriguing! Might as well...   Juchids (Golden Horde) Jani Beg (1342-1357 AD) AE pul (rosette type) probably [75]2 AH = 1351 AD We discussed this coin seven pages ago, where I thought it was 762/1361. I'm now fairly sure it's not 762, though I'm still not fully confident that it's not 753.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2353 Posts |
If it were my coin, I would submit it to Zeno, seeking comment on the date. I can't see it being a 760's coin as the inscriptions are typical of the anonymous issues under Jani Beg. The latest of those on Zeno is 759h which would be posthumous. If anything, the "5" is more like a 4, and AFAIK there are no rosette types from the 740's.
As @JohnConduitt said in the previous discussion, the 7 and 5 are cut off, making it appear like a 6. However, the "6" is then wildly out of scale compared with the 2.
Also, I can't see the 3 at all, as mentioned by you.
In my mind it's a solid 752, using what I can see, and what we know of the reign of Jani Beg, and available examples of Juchid coins of that time frame.
The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
Edited by ttkoo
12/18/2024 11:14 am
|
|
Moderator
United States
164103 Posts |
Quote:
We discussed this coin seven pages ago, where I thought it was 762/1361. I'm now fairly sure it's not 762, though I'm still not fully confident that it's not 753. An excellent bonus post. Quote:
...In my mind it's a solid 752, using what I can see, and what we know of the reign of Jani Beg, and available examples of Juchid coins of that time frame. Interesting.
|
| |
Replies: 5,743 / Views: 214,705 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 12/16/2024 12:30 am
