Shah Jahan Rupee with date error AH1006

[capnbirdseye]

Am I seeing things or is this dated  AH 1006 ?

[Oesho]

Very curious, even if it is an error for 1056, than the regnal year 14 or 4 doesn't fit. Have no explanation, unless it's a contemporary forgery using two different coins, but even than the date 1006 is an error.

[capnbirdseye]

I'm probably crazy but the coin intrigues me & I have bought it to add to my tray of curiosities, if the coin arrives & turns out to be some modern fake concoction then it will be returned for refund but if it appears genuinely old I will keep it.
The seller is a UK coin dealer of Asian origin who specialises in Indian coins but is not aware of the odd date & frequently lists coins wrongly attributed or with the coin photo upside down  ;

So watch this space later in the week 

[asm]

Very curious, even if it is an error for 1056, than the regnal year 14 or 4 doesn't fit. Have no explanation, unless it's a contemporary forgery using two different coins, but even than the date 1006 is an error.

How about 1060 / 24........ the 1006 for 1060 is a distinct possibility (I have coins of Shah Jahan as well as Aurangzeb with such error ) while the 14 may as well be 24 (reading error from the small image)........

I'm probably crazy but the coin intrigues me & I have bought it to add to my tray of curiosities,...

You are not alone.........

So watch this space later in the week

Look forward to a larger image soon.........

Amit

[capnbirdseye]

The coin arrived today, seems perfectly legit to me as far as I can tell, it just feels right & certainly not a modern concoction.

So the date is 1006  RY 23 so from that we should be able to work out the correct date from the RY now it can be seen clearly,  1060/23 would mean the die cutter got 0&6 the wrong way round

 the seller listed it as Surat mint which I can see clearly

 weight at 11.40g

EDIT:  just found this error listed under KM# 235.23 so it's a known error,

[Oesho]

Yes, Amit was right with his suggestion that 1006 would be an error for 1060.
In respect of the regnal year, you mention 23. Are you sure? It might also be 24.

[capnbirdseye]

Yes, Amit was right with his suggestion that 1006 would be an error for 1060.
In respect of the regnal year, you mention 23. Are you sure? I might also be 24.

On  close inspection I think it probably is a 4 or a very elongated 3, I need some higher magnification to check for sure, I'll see what I can come up with & post back

[Oesho]

It would regard it as a 4. The digit for 3 would be more like a flag.

[capnbirdseye]

I think it's definitely a 4 , so unlisted altho it's odd that the die engraver would carry over the error to another RY without spotting it

[Overlord]

This one at Zeno seems to have used the same obverse die. The reverses seem a bit different, but I could be wrong. I have one that is very similar, but with the correct AH year (1060). The mint name is compeltely off on mine, but based on stylistic similarities, I would assume it to be of the same mint. Will post images this weekend.

[capnbirdseye]

It does look very similar although the Zeno one looks less finely cut unless the die was more worn out by the time it was struck, also a difference appears in the word  'rasul' where another letter appears by the drill hole to touch the bottom of the 'L' but seemingly not on mine ?
 Don't know if any others are known with RY 24 as I can only find 23 as is the Zeno one so different die used there for sure
 
Presumably errors like this are because the die engraver, although being skilled at what he does, probably cannot read or write but simply copies what he is presented with

[Overlord]

Thanks, capnbirdseye. I see the differences in the die from your description.

However, the way I see it, the last digit of the RY on the specimen at Zeno could be a "4" as well (i.e., RY 24), which has been misread as "3" (click the coin at Zeno for an enlarged image). Given that it a bit tricky to to make out the "4" from a "3" on this type, could the listing in Krause (RY 23) be a misreading as well?

[capnbirdseye]

Although Krause list the error, it's value is not much more than the other dates so presumably there are quite a few known?  Perhaps Oesho might know more,

[Overlord]

Here is the one I have, with the correct AH year. It has curious countermarks all along the edge.
I wonder how they went about the whole process. An experienced person preparing a "master design" for the year, which was copied by less skilled, illetrate (cheaper) hands, thus resulting in errors on some?

Obverse


Reverse


Edge countermarks

[capnbirdseye]

Your coin has very broadly cut calligraphy compared to mine & the Zeno one, also from Surat , & as you pointed out the mint is off the flan so I wonder if perhaps it's from a different mint & as they are all of the same year AH1060 then I would doubt the die cutting would be so varied ?

Yours has certainly been well tested by all the drill holes & marks etc, some coins seem to attract this 'testing' of the metal & weight for some reason, others may survive intact but might have been hoarded for years & not circulated, I wonder if the marks can be attributed to any particular moneyer or tax collector or whatever?


Vic