Bombay Presidency: Surat Rupee

Started by Rangnath, January 18, 2008, 05:16:32 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Rangnath

This is a lovely coin, isn't it?  Some took great pains to mint this properly.  But exactly who? 
I assume that the coin was minted in the name of Shah Alam II; 1759 to 1806.  But coins were minted in his name long after Shah Alam's death. 
At 11.6 grams, 19 mm across, who ever minted this was not cutting back on the silver. 
Richie

Oesho

Correct, the rupee is struck in the name of Shah Alam II, the mint on the coin is Surat. The Ry. is 46, but than the complexity starts.
In May 1800 the control of the Surat mint passed to the British East India Company, and following this change, the Surat rupee was adopted by the Company as the standard currency unit for Western India.
In November, 1800, the Bombay mint recommenced coinage and from that date until 1815, the mints of Bombay and Surat struck and issued coins of the same design and standard. On the 31st of October 1815, the Surat mint was closed and Bombay became the only mint for the Presidency. (Native mints under European supervision excepted).
According to Pridmore, from 1800 till 1815, no additional mark was added to the design of the Surat rupee struck at Surat. Besides, 'Surat'-rupees struck at Bombay, do bear an addtional mark. THe mark of a star above the 'He' of Shah (as on this coin) is attributed by Pridmore to the period 1800-1824.
The 46 san or Julus appear on all the Company's Surat rupees, whether struck at Surat or Bombay and is in fact an anomally. The 46th year of Shah Alam II commenced on 29th July 1803 and not in the year 1800.
On the machine struck Surat coins minted in Calcutta in 1822-25, and similar issues of the new Bombay mint in 1832, they bear, in addition to the 46th julus date, the AH date 1215 which commenced 25th May 1800. Again there is a discrepency in the dates. The AH date 1215 on the machine struck coins represents the year the Surat rupee was adopted as the standard currency unit of the Western Presidency and is correctly shown. It would seem that the adoption of the 46th julus year was an error.

Rangnath

I read your post several times.  I think that I understand the difficulty in making a determination about where this coin was minted.  To sum up the mint location problem; the coin is a Surat Rupee minted in either Surat or Bombay between 1800 and 1824. Yes?
I can not find "46" as the regnal year.  In the following post, have I located the date
correctly? 
I remember staying over night in a Surat train station.  Too bad I have no recollection of the city.  It is now the second largest in Gujarat and the ninth largest city in India. 
richie

Rangnath

#3
In the standard catalog, this is the coin offered for km 212.2, with the privy mark the same as in my coin. Coins of that era can change so dramatically when shifted to the right or left.  Is that the beginning of "Surat" at the bottom of the reverse? I love the clarity of the "fi" on my coin. 
richie

Oesho

Sorry, if I was not clear enough with my explaination.
The coin was struck at Bombay (despite the mint name 'Surat'). The 4 you marked correctly, the 6 is located on the edge of the flan. The 'N' of 'sanah' (=year or julus) is pointed up like an arrow, but is no part of the regnal year.

Figleaf

There are other British EIC coins where the regnal year makes no sense if memory serves (it usually doesn't). The officials may have used them as a "code" for coins of a certain standard, in order to be better able to withdraw them from circulation when the standard was changed. Most Europeans in India weren't very good on reading non-Latin characters :-\

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

Oesho

The so-called 'fi' as mentioned by you, above the 'S' of Surat, is the diacritical vowel to indicate the 'u'-sound in Surat.

Rangnath

From Oesho:
"Attached you will find a 'Surat' gold mohur of Bombay mint (KM#246) on which the
regnal year is very clear."



Rangnath

#8
Yes! The "46" is quite clear and I am now able to read my coin with more understanding!  Thanks so much Oesho. In terms of scholarship and aesthetics, I can also see good reasons to collect gold coins in this mohur.

richie

Figleaf

What a beauty!

I am wondering now if the Indians didn't gild the silver rupees to make them home-made mohurs. Or were the mohurs tested every time they changed owner?

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

Rangnath

Interesting question Peter.  I thought the answer would be obvious and that the gold mohur would be a different than the rupee.  I checked.  The mohur and the rupee are quite similar in both size and weight!
Gilding is easy enough. I've done it, though on wood, never metal.  I should think the edges would scratch revealing the truth all too easily. But, would it not be worth a try?
  Was there ever a cottage industry of creating mohurs from rupees?
richie

Oesho

#11
The specific gravity of silver and gold makes all the difference. I have handled many rupees and also quite a number of gold mohurs, but you immediately feel the difference. Furthermore gold coins were used for hoarding of wealth and for commercial large transactions of capital goods which was mostly done through moneychangers/bankers (Sarafs). In these cases they wouldn't be fooled by gilded silver coins.

Rangnath

Some day I would like to try the feel of two coins of equal weight; one of gold and one of silver. My own subjective test of specific gravity. What a pleasure.
richie

Figleaf

I happened to stumble on this interesting piece:

In my own house in India, in earlier times when Silver coins were still in use and the collections were so much that they needed to be wieghed in hundreds of kilograms At that time my grand mother tells me our family used to employ specialized people who had a keen sense of hearing, who would make these sliver coins flow out from thier hands onto a marble slab. As they feel down the countefiet ones made a very different sound from the real ones, and these speacialized people simply kept rejecting the fake coins based on the acoustics. It was a foolproof method. Pallava Bagla

23 Jan, 2008
Source: Nature News

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

BC Numismatics

Quote from: Rangnath on January 22, 2008, 05:00:33 PM
From Oesho:
"Attached you will find a 'Surat' gold mohur of Bombay mint (KM#246) on which the
regnal year is very clear."




Jan,
  That is a very nice Surat Mohur that you've posted up.I don't understand what the symbolism is behind the upside down British Crown on the obverse.I do understand if the British Crown was depicted the right way up.

Aidan.