I assume the original poster means a diameter of 23.87 mm, and I read the date as AH 1254, corresponding to about AD 1838. Looking through Krause, I don't see any Bengal Presidency gold mohurs dated after 1202. Am also unable to find a match in the Zeno database. Hopefully another member will be able to read the coin and provide a better attribution.
@rsirian1Thank you! The coins are round in shape. But then, 1204 places it out of the Bengal Presidency. I did search the Numista database and a few others before I posted them. Took it to an offline coin certifier in India only to be told that they were only 50 years old. This was way back in 2022. They don't look to be only 50 years old. Would really appreciate some help.
I assume the original poster means a diameter of 23.87 mm, and I read the date as AH 1254, corresponding to about AD 1838. Looking through Krause, I don't see any Bengal Presidency gold mohurs dated after 1202. Am also unable to find a match in the Zeno database. Hopefully another member will be able to read the coin and provide a better attribution.
Thanks @Seeker55 Am sorry for that confusion. The assay report said it is 23.87 carats. Not diameter.
Thank you for the clarification, which is helpful. What is the diameter to the nearest mm? This should be listed in all ID requests to help with searching databases.
Also, it is possible the coin might be a “jeweler's copy” of relatively modern manufacture (in which case worth about bullion value). Again, hopefully another member will be able to determine the identity of the coin.
Islamic date digits are often difficult to read, especially because there are often extra ornaments intermixed. It's my understanding and experience that in general a small dot represents the Islamic digit for zero, while a larger circle represents a five. But as mentioned, in either case it hasn't turned up a match for this coin.
@Seeker55@rsirian1Thanks for all of those inputs. On speaking to my aunt and other elderly relatives the following has come to light: My grandfather's great grandfather served as Khajanchi (treasurer) to the local ruler and was rewarded with Ashrafis for his service. And passed many of these on to his heirs. The diameter of the coin is 35mm. Aunt also indicates that Mom sold several of these earlier to a certified coin collector.
Also, these seem to have been around with mom for the last 80-odd years!
The mint is clear and it's Bahawalpur, now part of Pakistan, l would think it might be a jewelers piece as l don't recognise it as a known type, It has nothing to do with Shah Alam or presidency. One side is typical of some Durrani coins, i.e standard Mughal formula but with lots of ornament, but not the other as far as can see
The comments of @Vic65 are very helpful, and it's good that you're asking an offline numismatic expert. I think the diameter of 35 mm is very significant. It's very high for a gold mohur. Gold mohurs of the Bengal presidency and Shah Alam have diameters of about 26 mm. The coin has about the right weight (slightly low compared to the standard of 11.66 g), but unless it's a rather thin coin the volume might not be right for pure gold and raises the possibility that it might possibly be plated.
@Seeker55 Mom had the coins assayed for composition (in 2018), wondering the same thing, was it gold plated. Here's the assay report. There are 2 of these coins. The other one has a gold % of 97.90. Here's the side view, showing thickness/thinness
Yes, I believe the assay but it was probably conducted by XRF or other spectrometric means, which may only measure the surface. DId the assayer say the coin was solid gold throughout?
If you have some calipers it would be helpful to measure and state the thickness. A density test would be informative, to see if the coin has about the right density of gold.
Yes, I believe the assay but it was probably conducted by XRF or other spectrometric means, which may only measure the surface. DId the assayer say the coin was solid gold throughout?
If you have some calipers it would be helpful to measure and state the thickness. A density test would be informative, to see if the coin has about the right density of gold.
@Seeker55@rsirian1 Yes, the assayer said it was solid gold throughout. The jeweler that I use for all the antique jewelry said it was solid gold too. He also said that it was near identical to coins that his mom has. So, there's two people on this quest now. He said he would reach to friends in Pakistan to see if they could shed more light on this. Will borrow calipers and measure and then post. Thanks a ton!
As the coin bears no rulers name and the regnal year is missing then I'm wondering if perhaps they are some kind of gift presentation coins, maybe for a wedding or similar made by a jeweler,?
However, the date of this coin is interesting as it fits for a treaty made with the British Raj the same year!
From wikipedia- The political relations of Bahawalpur with the British Raj were regulated by a treaty made in October 1838, when arrangements were in progress for the restoration of Shah Shuja to the Kabul throne in Afghanistan
So, the offline coin certifier has reverted, although he has not given a definitive answer. He says, however that the coins are
Solid gold through and through
They are not jeweler's copies.
He measured them with calipers and says that 1 coin has a thickness of 0.8, while the other is 0.7mm (doesn't give any reason for variation)
Having said that he says that these are either
Commemorative/service reward coins which were still legal tender for select services and quite likely gifted/given to select officers. Their use as legal tender may be responsible for them being lower than standard weight due to wear & tear and handling
These could be a trial mint run around 1838 with limited numbers being made and hence the lower weights, non-standard thickness and diameters
Either of the two could be the reason the regnal year and ruler's name is missing from the coins.
He advises that the Numismatics Div of either the National Museum in Delhi or the VM Museum in Kolkata be approached for further information. He has advised that it is likely that the museum/s may seek to acquire the coins since these do seem to be part of history. His advice further is these are not sold as gold, as that devalues them massively.
He says he is yet to hear from his Pakistani contacts regarding them. He has also shared 2 images of coins that he & family have had across generations. Attached below, he says they are similar to what we have
3. He measured them with calipers and says that 1 coin has a thickness of 0.8, while the other is 0.7mm (doesn't give any reason for variation)
That matches what I said they should be (approximately) if they are solid gold. Your pictures are deceiving but that is just probably the angle you took them at. Anyway, looks like you're making progress!
He says he is yet to hear from his Pakistani contacts regarding them. He has also shared 2 images of coins that he & family have had across generations. Attached below, he says they are similar to what we have
. Dia: 24mm each; thickness: 0.8mm
I have to disagree and say the coin above is in no way similar to yours as it has standard Mughal titles on both sides for Alamgir II , is your offline certifier able to read Persian script though. first part of date visible 11** AH but regnal year appears missing
He measured them with calipers and says that 1 coin has a thickness of 0.8, while the other is 0.7mm (doesn't give any reason for variation)
These could be a trial mint run around 1838 with limited numbers being made and hence the lower weights, non-standard thickness and diameters
I am also pointing out that that your offline certifier severely lacks information common to collectors of this type of coin, does he even know how the flans are prepared? They are not machine made of uniform size and standard thickness ! LOL we are talking of hand made, hand struck coins so yes they will all vary in thickness and size, the mint usually had no care for this, only a close approximation to the weight was important.
I only hope you have not paid this person to offer you less info than you already found out on this thread.
Also the mention here is of two coins being measured but you have only shown one of yours on this thread, is the other one owned by the certifier that you posted? A coin I pointed out is from a completely different era? but he compared both because he had no idea they were different. I rest my case
@Vic65 This particular offline certifier has not been paid. The other guy is out of country, we will approach him later. The number of people who can actually read Persian today in India is limited. Just shared what he said, we also find a lot of info lacking in his response to us.
No, we own both coins. We have yet to check the other ones: seem to be a total of 10 coins, including 2 Queen Victoria 1841 gold mohurs. A couple of them seem to have been made into cuff links by some “high taste ancestor", (my aunt's phrasing).
@Vic65 The number of people who can actually read Persian today in India is limited. Just shared what he said, we also find a lot of info lacking in his response to us.
That's not really correct though, A person who reads Urdu should be able to read Persian and Arabic reasonably well, but not completely the other way round. The Urdu script used in India is an extension of the Persian script, and the Persian script is an extension of the Arabic script.
All three languages use the same Perso-Arabic script and share many of the letters, but Persian and Urdu extended it to include some special letters for sounds that only occur in their spoken language.
I can see that both the silver coins are struck from the same dies and also the gold pair are also die identical.
This is in itself rather unusual, it is in fact quite rare to find die identical hand struck coins and normally l would suspect modern fakes. As you pointed out they have been in your family for a very long time then obviously this would not apply.
Thank you all for the information you have shared. We still have some more coins to go through, some which are like the gold ones shared here, 2 Queen Victoria Mohurs, and 2 more sets with Urdu/Persian inscriptions. Unfortunately for us the offline experts available here either don't seem to understand Urdu/Persian or don't seem to understand coins. Here's another of the Bahawalpur coins
Those are mohurs struck under Bahawal Khan III. It is really not a great mystery, you already know the mint (Bahawalpur) and the date. Note that the the mohur attributed to Shah Shujah is really struck in the name of Bahawal Khan II. That is why the style looks so similar. As of yet, there appears to be no auction sales of this type of coin.
Dia: 24mm each; thickness: 0.8mm
Dia: 24mm each; thickness: 0.8mm
Side 2: 