Quote:
I do want to add that I think it's more than mere coincidence that the coin portraits of the Turkmen rulers of Mardin at the beginning of the 13th century so often resemble those of the Turkmen lords of Chach centuries earlier. Much is made of classical (Greco-Roman) prototypes for the figural Islamic coins but the Turkic tribes did not arrive in the West empty-handed and culturally bereft.
By the time these coins had started to be made, the Turkic peoples of northern Mesopotamia and central Asia had been Muslim, and therefore anti-graven-images, for 500 years. However rich and varied their pre-Islamic culture may have been, much of that knowledge had been lost or suppressed, replaced by a new culture equally rich and varied - but portrait-less. So there wasn't really a continuous tradition of sculpture and portraiture to fall back on.
It really comes down to which coins are most likely to be sitting around in the ground in south-eastern Turkey and northern Iraq for the locals to dig up and give to the artists to use as models. The Chach bronzes, like most ancient and mediaeval bronze coins, didn't really circulate very far from Tashkent, so aren't likely to be found over 3000 kilometres further down the Silk Road. The Greek silver coins came from much closer to hand and circulated much more broadly, and hoards containing them have been found in Syria and Iraq, as well as western Turkey. The odds seem to favour the "Greek coin" hypothesis.
But whichever model was used, the truly astonishing thing about them is that, once that handful of ancient "idolatrous" coins were dug up back in the 1200s, the local rulers didn't say "Well, these are graven images, better melt them down", but instead said "Hey, these are good, we can find a way to use these". And that's what makes these coins, and the culture they came from, unique in the mediaeval Islamic world.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis