Mughal Rupee: Muhammad Shah, Dar al-Khilafat Shahjahanabad

[Rangnath]

I received five Rupees from an ebay auction; all lacking an attribution.  I found that two were from Emperor Aurangzeb and one was from Farrukhsiyar.  But I am having difficulty with the last two coins.
They are as "identical" as two hammered coins can be in terms of design. The small one weighs 11.5 grams and is just less than 20 mm across.  The larger of the two weighs 11.3 grams and is 22 mm across. 
   The reverse design is a common one.  It appears in coins attributed to Rafi-ud-Darjat (1719), a "pretender", Emperor Jahandor Shah (1712) and Shah Jahan II (1719).  I also saw the design in use in Km 710 (1788-1799) of Shah Alam II.
     The obverse eludes me.  I've tried to Richard Plant my way into translation without success.  Part of the middle line appears in the obverse of Km 560, another coin attributed to Shah Alam II. 
     Because there are two coins with virtually the same design on both sides, I have the impression that the coin must be common.  My guess is that somewhere in the obverse is the name of the Emperor, probably in the middle line.  Anyone want to make a guess?
Richie

[Rangnath]

In someways, the second coin is in better shape, though I wonder at the green color.  Am I dealing with billon instead of silver?
Yes, there are numbers at the bottom of the reverse on both coins.  But what do they represent; a partial date or reignal year?  The top coin has 11 or is that XX11?  The bottom coin has 02 or perhaps 020 or XX02 or X020.  That is not much of a help, at least to me.
richie

[Figleaf]

When it comes to Indian coins, you're in good shape, Richie, so if you can't find it in India, maybe it isn't Indian. My first impression was Iran, so I worked through the centuries worth of KM pictures without finding it. That doesn't mean it is or isn't Iran. I've looked at Afghanistan also, but I don't think they are Afghani. What can you read from the script?

Peter

[Rangnath]

The idea that the coin could be from Persia hadn't occurred to me. 
Still, I think that this coin is a Mughal one.
Take a look at the coin I have identified (meaning "I" could very well be mistaken; my skills are pretty meagre!) as having been minted in the name of Emperor Farrukhsiyar. 
The reverse of this coin is the same as the reverses in the two coins posted above, though quite different in style. 
The obverse of the Farrukhsiyar coin is completely different than the two posted above. 
Richie

[Rangnath]

As for "reading" the coin;  hmm.  I think that the top line of the reverse in all three coins says something like "all the Shahs"  or perhaps it is part of a larger sentence like "in the name of all of the Shahs".

the beginning of the second line (from right to left):  "minted in"?

and then I don't know.  I tried finding a mint with similar letters to that represented on the coin, but to no avail. 
Nor do I have a good guess about the meaning of the obverse in the original two coins.  My "bad" guess is that the top line says something about Shah Alam or Shah Alamgir.

The number on the reverse side of the coin is problematic.  If you take a look at the coin I've just posted, on the reverse appears a "2" or maybe a "3"?  And, in a similar location on the original two coins, there is a number also.  However, in the Farrukhsiyar coin, I based my identification on a coin attributed to this Emperor. It was identical to it in every way but for the date. And the Date was located on the Obverse of the coin, circled in red on the next post.  On the coin attributed to Farrukhsiyar, the date was 1129 AH. On my coin, that would make the date 11(3)0, with only the 0 actually appearing on the Flan.  That would place the coin squarely within the reign of Farrukhsiyar, 1713 to 1719.
So what do the numbers mean on the reverse of the coins?  I don't know. 

Richie

[Rangnath]

I realize that this is overkill.  Any way, here's the coin that allowed me to give an attribution of "Farrukhsiyar" to my coin.  I found it on http://www.ancientcoins.ca/india7.html, a good site for examples of coins.  But I don't know how accurate they are.
Richie

[Overlord]

Richie, I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that these are Rupees of Muhammad Shah (AH 1131-1161/1719-1748 AD) with the obverse title "Sahib Qiran Sani" (second lord of the conjunction). The year is off the flan on both, but the regnal year seems to read "2" on the second coin (which should make the year 1132 AH). The regnal year seems to be on the flan in the first coin too, but I just can't read it! As for the mint, I think it is Shahjahanabad.

[Oesho]

Yes, Overlord is correct. Both the coins on the top are in the name of Muhammad Shah. The first one seems to be Ry. 11 and the other Ry.20. They were struck at Dar al-Khilafat Shahjahanabad. The coins bear the so-called Sahib Qiran Sani legend. This means the second Sahib-i-Qiran. The title of Sahib-i-Qiran, lord of the planetary conjunctions, indicates an omnipotent emperor, a Lord of the supernatural powers and was first used by the the great Timur, the ancestor of the Mughal emperors.

[Rangnath]

thanks Overlord.  But for you, the coin would have been mis-labeled for years.
And thank you Oesho.  I had eventually labeled the first coin in question Km 377.55, of Farrukhsiyar.  While I accept that the designation must be in error, I can not find major differences between my coin and Km 377.55.  What is the correct Km number?  Km 437.4?   And did Farrukhsiyar (the "happy natured" one) also use the same reference to his ancestor Timur?
richie

[Oesho]

The coin in the name Muhammad Shah is indeed KM#437.4.
The coins of Farukhsiyar bear the following couplet:
sikka zad az fazl-i-haq bar sim-o-zar
bad shah bhre-o-bar farrukhsiyar.
(Struck coin on silver and gold by the grace of the truth
Monarch of sea and land, Farukhsiyar)

Only on one issue of Tata mint and only for Ry.1 a different couplet is used, viz.:
sikka-i-zad az fazl-i-haq bar seem-o-zar
salis sahib-i-qiran arrukhsiyar.
(Struck coin on silver and gold by the grace of the truth
the third lord of the conjunctions, Farrukhsiyar)

Timur was the first to use the title Sahib-i-Qirani
Shah Jahan I was the second emperor who used the the title Sahib-i-Qiran Sani (2nd Sahib Qiran)
Murad Bakhsh refered to his his predessor as Sahib-i-Qiran, viz.:
Took the heritage of the "Lord of conjunctions' Shah Jahan
Murad Bakhsh Mohammad Shah the second Sikander (= second Alexander)
A number of other Mughal emperors, like Shah Alam Bahadur, Jahandar Shah, Rafi-ad-Daulah (Shah Jahan II), Farukhsiyar, Muhammad Shah, Alamgir II and Shah Alam II used the title Sahib-i-Qiran or refered to the Sahib-i-Qiran = Timur.

[Rangnath]

Thank you Oesho.  This has been a great lesson.  I hope that with the corrected attribution, Farukhsiyar, Monarch of sea and land, and Muhammad Shah, the fourth lord of the conjunctions, both rest easier. I know I will.
richie

[Oesho]

and Muhammad Shah, the fourth lord of the conjunctions, ....

However on the coins he called himself the second Lord of the of the planetary conjunction So he overruled all his predecessors

[Rangnath]

I suspected that I was making mistake with that one!
An apology is in order. I am sincerely sorry. I have no wish to insult Muhammad Shah, the Second Lord of the Conjunctions, now or ever, let alone twice in one day. 
I remain,
both repentant and chastised,
richie