Akbar, Mahmudi struck by the Raja of Baglana, KM#72.1

[Medalstrike]

I need all Info to this coin.
Silver 1/2 Rupee 14mm, 4mm thick, 5.6g
"Swastika" Mintmark.

Thanks, Dietmar

[Rangnath]

It is very similar to the Km 72.1 half rupee that I have. Mine is from Ujjain and instead of a swastic, there is a flower. I'll leave it to someone else to decide if your coin's mint can be read. 
richie

[Oesho]

KM#72.1 is a Mahmudi and not a 1/2 rupee, struck by the Raja of Baglana.

[Rangnath]

OOPS! Sorry.
And, the posted coin is also a Km 72.1, A Mahmudi struck by the Raja of Baglana?
richie

[asm]

The coin looked familiar bur I could not place it earlier. I too got confused with Ujjain.

Amit

[Medalstrike]

Both Salher and Mulher are in the Nausan district.
The latter fort contained a mint where the coins of Pratap Sah were
struck. The mahmudis were the coins of the independent Muslim
kings of Gujarat. After its conquest by Akbar, the coinage of
rupaiyas was introduced at the royal mints of Ahmedabad and
sometime after of Surat. The coming of Mahmudis was continued
by Pratap Sah at the fort of Mulher till 1637 ; his Mahmudis
were struck in Akbar 's name. Five mahmudis made two rupees.
(Side 29)
JOHN S. HOYLAND
"The Empire Of The Great Mogol"
http://www.archive.org/details/empireofthegreat035526mbp

Dietmar

[Rangnath]

Thanks Dietmar.  That was real nice info. Where does the word "mahmudi" come from?  Mah, from maha?  Mudi from ?
richie

[asm]

Or is it Mahmud - i or "of Mahmud"?

Amit

[Rangnath]

Oh.
Right.
What was I thinking?
Thanks Amit.
richie

[Medalstrike]

Another Mahmudi coin by the Raja of Baglana.
Silver, 14mm, 5.5g

Dietmar

[Rangnath]

Your coin sure gives a different view of the die, doesn't it?  Very attractive.
richie

[asm]

Or is it Mahmud - i or "of Mahmud"?

Amit

Here is what I saw on the ONS:

It "is perhaps meant to be Mahmudis though this was usually applied to a type of Indian coin weighing around 5 g and named after Mahmud I, Sultan of Gujarat." Note contributed by Stan Goron, Oriental Numismatical Society.

[Rangnath]

If I understand you ASM (and Dietmar for that matter), we would be better served to change the tittle to "Muhmudis" ? 

Speaking of which, I had an amazingly informative speaker over to my house the other day; the topic was American Afghan policy.  I refered to "Afghans" as "Afghanis".  He corrected me.  Afghani is the coin. Afghan is the person.  Afghans are the people.  And Afghanis are the coins. 

So, is it Muhmudis is the coin or Muhmudi is the coin and Muhmudis are the coins?

richie

[Oesho]

Mahmudi, plural: Mahmudis

[Rangnath]

Thanks for the clarification Oesho. 
richie