Author Topic: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.  (Read 4561 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Husain Makda

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 282
Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« on: November 15, 2012, 06:03:21 PM »
Shah Alam I Fatehbad Dharur Rupee, 1124/6, Unlisted in major catalogues,
Blessed by the Masters.

Offline saro

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3 542
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2012, 04:25:56 PM »
Congratulations for the quality of your pictures; Pls for information could you give the weight of this coin ? (so that for your other amazing rupees).
Many thanks
"All I know is that I know nothing" (Socrates)

Offline Husain Makda

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 282
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #2 on: November 17, 2012, 05:34:56 AM »
Thank you saro. i will try to mention the weight and diameter from my next post. This one is 23mm and 11.48gms.
Blessed by the Masters.

Offline Oesho

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3 400
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2012, 10:11:33 PM »
Quote
Shah Alam I Fatehbad Dharur Rupee, 1124/6, Unlisted in major catalogues,
I would say, not reported as yet. An extremely rare mint for Shah Alam I.

Offline Husain Makda

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 282
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #4 on: November 18, 2012, 05:44:58 AM »
Thankyou very much sir.
Blessed by the Masters.

Offline cmerc

  • Indexer
  • Meritorious Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #5 on: November 18, 2012, 07:47:34 AM »
Shah Alam I Fatehbad Dharur Rupee, 1124/6,

I am a little confused by the dates on this issue.  My knowledge of Mughal coins is limited, so any corrections would be very much appreciated. 

Shah Alam {I} (aka Bahadur Shah {I}) had a relatively short reign of 4 years 253 days, from
   Raby al-awwal 1119  to  Muharram 1124
  (June 1707)                     (February 1712).

What puzzles me is that the regnal year is 6, whereas Shah Alam {I} didn't make it even to his 5th year of reign.  To me, the possibilities appear to be:
  • a posthumous issue with frozen year 1124,
  • a mismatched obverse-reverse die pair,
  • the Mughals were not very good at arithmetic.

This date discrepancy reminds me of the Bengal Pres EIC issues INO Shah Alam II where the dates sanh-19 and AH-1205 were completely fictitious.  Is this a similar case?  Are inconsistencies in the AH date and regnal year common for Mughal issues?
Defending this hobby against a disapproving family since 1998.

Offline Husain Makda

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 282
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #6 on: November 18, 2012, 09:37:39 AM »
Sir 22.4.1707 he was declared king. And he died on 18.2.1712, that would be 5 complete years and about 10 mnths, so that would be his 6th ruling year.
Blessed by the Masters.

akona20

  • Guest
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #7 on: November 18, 2012, 09:53:51 AM »
Please note that Oesho has written an article on dating that appears on the Mughal rulers site that explains the correct dating for this period.

The correct start date to the reign was April 16, 1707. Please review the correct calendar for these dates.

Offline Husain Makda

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 282
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #8 on: November 18, 2012, 10:29:47 AM »
Excuse me, but can we have any online refrence for JONS?
Blessed by the Masters.

akona20

  • Guest
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #9 on: November 18, 2012, 10:34:25 AM »
I will send you the article within 24 hours.

However note the change in Julian and Gregorian calendar date for both England and elsewhere and the reflections in real dates for the period not assumed dates of today.

Offline cmerc

  • Indexer
  • Meritorious Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #10 on: November 18, 2012, 10:48:30 AM »
Sir 22.4.1707 he was declared king. And he died on 18.2.1712, that would be 5 complete years and about 10 mnths, so that would be his 6th ruling year.
That would be around 4 years and 10 months.  Anyway, despite the changes in the calendars, we can agree that Shah Alam I ruled for less than 5 years.  The error would not be more than a few days. 

Please note that Oesho has written an article on dating that appears on the Mughal rulers site that explains the correct dating for this period.
The correct start date to the reign was April 16, 1707. Please review the correct calendar for these dates.
Arthur, can you please post the link or send me the article?  Does this explain the dates on this coin, or does it instead deal with the regnal accession dates of Shah Alam I?  Thanks!

I am just a little puzzled with the dates on this coin and trying to understand Mughal coinage better.  This strange date combination probably makes this a special coin. 
Defending this hobby against a disapproving family since 1998.

Online Figleaf

  • Administrator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32 345
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #11 on: November 18, 2012, 10:54:33 AM »
Not sure if it applies to this coin, but I can remember a case where a mughal ruler predated his own reign, to have him reigning when in fact a competitor for the throne was holding power.

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

akona20

  • Guest
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #12 on: November 18, 2012, 10:55:53 AM »
Both of these fine incivive articles are by Oesho and command respect. They are used with his authority in Tariq's and my work on Shah Alam 1.

Accession date 24 Muharram, AH1119 = 16 April 1707
On the first of Shawwal 1119 (=15 December 1707) Shah Alam Bahadur issued an order that his reign should commence from the 18th Zu l-hajja, 1118 = 12 March 1707, the day that he heard of his father’s death.

AH date   Commences AD      Ry.      Date Ry. commenced
1119       24-03-1707         1         16-04-1707
(Official order issued 15-12-1707 that his reign should commence from 12-03-1707)
1120      12-03-1708         2         29-02-1708
1121      02-03-1709         3         17-02-1709
1122      19-02-1710         4         07-02-1710
1123      08-02-1711         5         27-01-1711
1124      29-01-1712         6         16-01-1712
                Died 20 Muharram 1124 (= 17-02-1712)

All AD-dates are given according to the Julian calendar, for the present (Gregorian) calendar add 11 days.

Possible correct date combinations:
1119/Ahd   16-04-1707 to 29-02-1708
1119/Ry.2   29-02-1708 to 12-03-1708
1120/Ry.2   12-03-1708 to 17-02-1709
1120/Ry.3   17-02-1709 to 02-03-1709
1121/Ry.3   02-03-1709 to 07-02-1710
1121/Ry.4   07-02-1710 to 19-02-1710
1122/Ry.4   19-02-1710 to 27-01-1711
1122/Ry.5   27-01-1711 to 08-02-1711
1123/Ry.5   08-02-1711 to 16-01-1712
1123/Ry.6   16-01-1712 to 29-01-1712
1124/Ry.6   29-01-1712 to 17-02-1712


Information provided by Jan Lingen.


  Jan Lingen
       Supplement to ONS Newsletters 161

       For historical research one often has to convert the Hegira date to an AD date or the other way around. When doing this, one is often confronted with differences. When the difference in date appears to be approximately 11 days, it is clear that this is due to mixing up the Gregorian calendar with the Julian calendar. In the same article, dates can be found either according to the Julian calendar or the Gregorian calendar. When other people refer to these articles, the same mistake is usually copied. It is very important when using original sources (which is always preferred) to realise which era the AD date should be converted to.

       Introduction of the Gregorian calendar
     
      In 1582, Pope Gregory XIII introduced a new calendar to replace the Julian calendar in which the year was slightly longer. Most Roman-Catholic countries in Europe then adopted the new calendar, but the Protestant as well as the Greek-Orthodox countries changed to it much later1. England adopted the new calendar in 1752. In that year, the old Julian calendar changed to the new Gregorian calendar, when 3 September 1752 became 14 September 1752. This corresponds to the Hegira month of Dhu’l-Qa‘da, AH 1165. This was a 30-day month and the calculation is as follows:
Hegira calendar      Christian Calendar
AH 1165. Dhu’l-Qa‘da      AD 1752
1st to 3rd      31st August to 2nd September - Old Style
4th to 30th      14th September to 10th October - New Style


       Therefore, dates in original British documents, like those of the British East India Company, before the 3rd September 1752 should be calculated according to the Julian calendar. All dates mentioned thereafter correspond to the Julian calendar.
End of article.

However it should be noted that various calculators used to define dates may vary by one day in their results. The Julian dates as described will be used.





Offline cmerc

  • Indexer
  • Meritorious Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #13 on: November 18, 2012, 11:03:49 AM »
A followup: There are a number of Shah Alam Bahadur issues listed in KM that bear the date 1124-6 (Muhammadabad, Surat, Akbarnagar, Azimabad, Bunyad), and even 1123-6 (Dar-ul-Khilafat, Surat).  Very surprising why the Mughals would post-date the regnal year...
Defending this hobby against a disapproving family since 1998.

akona20

  • Guest
Re: Unrecorded Shah Alam I, Fatehabad Dharur Rupee.
« Reply #14 on: November 18, 2012, 11:27:21 AM »
The chart clearly shows the combinations and the relative lengths of the AH and regnal Year combinations. The dates shown are correct.

Please explain what you mean by post date the regnal year?