Shah Jahan (AH1037-1068), Dam, mint Daryakot, (unpublished mint), AH1045, RY 8,

[Overlord]

Mass=21.0 g

Obverse Falus Shah Jahani (Copper coin of Shah Jahan), RY 8



Reverse Zarb Narnol Sanah 1045(?) [Struck at Narnol in the year 1045 (AH)]

[asm]

As a piece of Copper, this coin does not deserve a second look. As Peter always says, an unidentified coin is a piece of metal, An identified one is a piece of history. With his magic wand, Overlord has done an unbelievelable job He has saved one more piece of metal from the smelters pot and shown easy it is to convert a piece of scrap into an object to be admired, desired & coveted.
Amit

[Rangnath]

Absolutely Splendid Overlord.
richie

[Overlord]

Another example:

Obverse


Reverse

[Oesho]

For quite some time I am puzzled about the reading of this mint. I was not convinced that it is Narnol and after up-loading the second coin I am quite confident it is not Narnol. The letter in the centre is clearly Kaaf-Waw, followed by a combined letter Be-Re or Nu-Re, but not a Lam.
Zarb Gobar.. doesn't make much sense. The nearest mintname which would fit, could be Gobin(dpur).
Perhaps Overlord has a better suggestion.

[Overlord]

Perhaps Overlord has a better suggestion.

Me having a better suggestion than you? You must be kidding  .
I did manage to find a couple of pictures showing the missing part of the mint name.

[saro]

I possess the same coin of which I join scans; they give very little more than previous except that there is clearly a letter above the "B" of zarb which forms the lower separating line of the reverse, may be a "i" ? before the mint name we can see a word which seems to be "bar" (clear on one of the previous scans).
Before "GO"  what I read on my coin as "kar" could be better "HaR" or "BaHR" , which gives : "zarb bar har gobind-i- sanah 1045"..??
that looks like a Sikh formula...but without any signification I think (Har Gobind was the Sikh guru at the time of Shah Jahan but not really in good terms with mughals..and except Gobindpur no mughal mint bears a part of this name. All the coins seems to be dated 1045 AH / yr 8 (year of death of Mian Mir the saint both veneretaed by Sikhs and Mughals :prince Dara Shukoh read his funeral ??)
It's only tentative...and I would be pleased to learn more on this coin by others.
Even not common this coin but seems not to be rare, a similar one is catalogued by M.Mitchiner under n° 3241 (World of Islam)

[Oesho]

I failed to read the mint name and finally requested Shailendra Bhandare of the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, whether he knew this type of coins. His reply was:

"The Shahjahan mint is 'Daryakot' which is apparently the same as Daryapur in Central Maharashtra although I am not too sure if this is the case. The full mint name starts with daal-re-ye (ends with a bent end = addition of 'a'), then kaaf-wav-ye-te, so the mint reads 'kw-yt' rather than '...kot' - but this is also seen on other coins where mintnames end in '...kot'. e.g. 'Bagalkot' is written 'Bagalkw-yt'. I have seen full and half fulus of Shahjahan of this mint. Coins of Jahangir are also known, of both 'Rawani' and 'Fulus-i-Jahangiri' types."

Finally the problem is solved, but the mint name is as yet not listed in any catalogue and as far I know, also not published.

[Figleaf]

Superb! Thanks for letting us know. Another great thread.

Peter

[saro]

Many thanks for these investigations, the result is of high interest and we may hope that this mint-name will appear in future catalogues.
Really, mughal die-makers have not facilitate the task of XXI century numismatists !

Bravo to Oesho !

[Rangnath]

This has become an exceptional thread; thanks to all and specially to Oesho for his persistence.
I attempted to change the subject title to reflect the discoveries.  As you know, we are limited to a finite number of spaces.  Sometimes, good information has to be deleted to make room for "better" information.
Are you satisfied with the ne subject heading?
One change that I made and have made in the past bothers me. 
To make room, I usually eliminate the AH date, though I am not consistent in this practice. It is NOT because I find the AH dates unimportant or less so than AD dates, but because some of our guests are may be more familiar with AD dates.  But it bothers me.  After all, AH dates are much more precise for the coins of Shah Jahan.
Should the "rule" be to use the date and dating system in use on the coin if there is room for only one date?

Or, am I being overly obsessive about this?  WHAT?  An obsessive coin collector or numismatist?  Heaven forbid! 
richie 

[asm]

Richie,

I prefer the AH dates as this is what is actually seen on the coin. I have no issues with the use of AD dates. However, we have to be careful since a particular AH date can spread over 2 AD dates. If the month is known, we can actuallu put an exact date.

Amit

[Rangnath]

I've thought about this and I like your reasoning.  I changed the date back to AH. 
If there is room for two sets of dates, I will include AD dates as well.  I'm a teacher by training and always look for ways to instruct.  But the dating system on the coin is the one that should go in the subject title if there is only room for one.
richie

[asm]

Dear Richie,

I am not against mentioning the AD dates and I do believe that it would be a lot easier for a lot of people to understand the time frame of the issue of the coin. Having said that, as I mentioned AH date would provide that little bit of accuracy which could mean a lot to some.

Amit

[saro]

Since last posts I have now in hand another exemplar of this dam showing some new parts of obverse and reverse and which allow to complete the legend.

On obverse :
- the word over the emperor's name is "sikkah" whose "shin" forms the upper horizontal line;
- the "i" of "Jahani" gives the median second line (over "falus")

On reverse :
- the upper line is the "i" of "fi".
- we can see a little oblique stroke (zabar) under the "kaf" which allows to read "Kyu" instead of "ku"; this stroke is clearly present on the 2 exemplars shown by Overlord.
- the 2 dots of the last "T" of the mintname are present here ,  the 2 other ones of the last "Y" of "kyuYt" are not present here (but they are legible on my previous exemplar.
other posted examplars have not this stroke and may be read "Daryahkuyt"
The only thing of which I am not sure is that the lower horizontal line of the reverse is a "i"? but I don't see anything else possible... 

I read the legends as :"sikkah Shah Jahan falus + yr. 8  / zarb i-Daryahkyuyt fi 104(5)"


I have tried to rebuilt the full legends in a small sketch hereafter.