English EIC: Copperoon, Bombay Presidency, 1674 AD

[mitresh]

English East India Company, Bombay Presidency, Copperoon, 13.42g, 1674 AD



Obv: MON / BOMBAY / ANGLIC / REGIMS / A.0 9.0 in five lines, within a beaded circle, surrounded by an inscription: A: DEO: PAX: & INCREMENTVM

Rev: The Shield of Arms of the Honourable East India Company within a beaded circle surrounded by an inscription: HON: SOC: ANG : IND : ORI :


Source:  The Bombay Pice Struck by the English East India Company During the Reign of Charles II, by H. Alexander Parsons, British Numismatic Journal, 1929 (adapted and abridged)

The earliest pice struck for circulation in Bombay by the English East India Company, i.e. in the time of Charles II, have always been of intriguing interest, not alone for their rarity, although this is of a high degree, but also, and mainly, for their unusual legends and the elusive way they are dated.

The early trading efforts of the East India Company were much hampered by the lack of possession, on the west side of India, of a settlement which they could themselves completely control, and the fortuitous acquisition, by England, of the Island of Bombay, ceded by Portugal in 1661 as a part of the dowry of Catherine of Braganza, when she became the consort of Charles II, formed the opportunity of meeting the Company's need, although some years elapsed before the island was placed at its disposal. It was, in fact, not until 1665 that the transfer, to Charles II, of the island was finally arranged, and three more years elapsed, namely, in 1668, before it was ceded, at an annual rent of 10 Pounds, by the King, to the Company. From the latter year the island was carefully developed with a view to the transfer to it, from Surat, of the Company's Headquarters and amongst other ideas for development was one which aimed at the institution of a coinage bearing the superscription of the Company and showing its English origin. By this means it was hoped, as in the case of the earlier Portcullis money of Elizabeth, and of the later Britannia dollars of Victoria, largely to supersede the native currencies, at least in the districts operated in by the Company.

The initial steps towards this end are to be seen in a series of letters from the Company (preserved or recorded in the India Office)
which were first fully published by Mr. William Foster. The first of these letters was dated February 22. 1671, and it ran as follows :-
" Wee doe thinck it convenient for us to have a coyne of our owne there (at Bombay). Wee would have you therefore consider of such a coyne, soe as it bee not our Kings majesties or any stampe resembling the same, and of such sorts as will best suite with the traffique and exchange of the country, both in bigger and lesser speties. And if you shall find it necessary to have for change a small sort of copper coyne let it apeare to be what it is; but what you shall coin of gold and silver, let it have an intrinsique value as to what it is stampt for, that it may be to our honnor and the begetting and preserving the esteeme thereof. But we would not have you coin any copper or other inferiour mettall before you coyne gold or silver, for to begin with that would be a disparagement to us."

Nothing appears to have been done to carry the command conveyed in the above letter into effect until the latter part of the following year when President Aungier wrote to· the Company under the date October 7, 1672, as follows :-
" Of the copper which we have taken ashoare ... what we have not sold wee intend to coyne into pice for the use of your island which we hope will also turne you to proffitt."

A further letter from President Aungier, dated December 21, 1672, informed the Company of the erection of the mint, of the weight and fineness adopted, viz., as used for the native coins of Surat, and of the inscriptions and design. These latter were decided upon as
follows, to quote from Mr. Foster's copy of the letter :-
"On the one side the Honourable Company's armes, with this inscription within a circle incloseing the armes: Honorabilis Societas Anglicana Indiarum Orientalium, writ in short; on the other side, within the inward circle is engraven Moneta Bombayae Anglicani Regiminis Anno Septimo, and within an outward circle is inscribed the words 'A Deo Pax et Incrementum.' "

The names adopted for the coins, their weights and relative values were also communicated in the same letter, the copper coins being known as copperoons and the silver coins being called Anglina. Forty-eight of the copperoons went to one Anglina, i.e. the existing rate between the native rupees and pice. With the letter were sent specimens of the money, and a request that if the design were disapproved of some indication of what was required in place could be furnished.

That the design and inscriptions met with general approval is evident from the coins which have survived. These copper coins are usually roughly struck on flans too small for the dies, a common fault with Indian currency, and it is very doubtful whether specimens showing the complete inscriptions are in existence.

The only indication of the year in which these coins were struck is the reference, at the bottom of the central inscription on the Obverse, that it was in the year 7, the" Anno Septimo " of the letter sent by President Aungier to the Company on December 21, 1672. The elusive nature of this reference will be appreciated when it is recalled that the coins bear no indication of the point from which this seventh year of the English regime was calculated, and that there were several historical events which were equally likely to have been in the mind of the engraver, or the writer of the instructions to the engraver, when the dies were in process of manufacture. If taken from the restoration of King Charles II, in A.D . 1660, the year of issue would have worked out at 1667. If taken from the cession of Bombay to England, in A.D. 1661, the date would have been 1668. But the island was not handed over until A.D. 1665, and, if this were the starting-point, the date of the coins was 1672. On the other hand, the King did not transfer the island to the Company until 1668 and if this commenced the era of the coins they were first issued in 1675.

In view of the previous doubt as to the actual date of issue of these earliest Bombay pice arising out of the above historical events, numismatists are under a debt of gratitude to Mr. William Foster for bringing more clearly under notice than did Ruding, the letters which relate to the initiation of the coinage, for it will have been seen that this correspondence shows that, of the possible dates above enumerated the year 1672 was the correct one, and that the coins date from the seventh year of the time when the island was handed over to Charles II by the Portuguese in 1665.

As shown by Mr. Foster, the coins were first issued between October and December, 1672, and there is little doubt that the coinage
of 1672 was extended into 1673, although no specimens reading anno 8 have so far been discovered however that may be, it is thought that certain hitherto unpublished coins reading simply AO DO, represent the main issue of 1673. Coins of the year 9 are certainly in evidence.

See attached Obv/Rev with overlay of the complete die.

Considering the age and metal type, I would say this is one of the better preserved specimen. I think this is the first coin issued in India by the English East India Company but correct me if wrong.

[@josephjk]

Lovely coin and great info, thanks Mitresh!

[asm]

Great pick Miteresh............ In fact the best I have seen in a loooooooooong time.

Amit

[Figleaf]

Maybe not

Peter

[mitresh]

See the specimen at Fitzwilliam Museum (UK).

[Figleaf]

Yes, mine was even worse.

Peter

[capnbirdseye]

That looks a lovely genuine coin but there are fakes of these galore, a while back someone on Fb proudly posted four of these all with identical imperfections & marks showing quite clearly they were all made from the same fake die

[mitresh]

Vic - why don't you post the images of the fakes for comparison?

[capnbirdseye]

Vic - why don't you post the images of the fakes for comparison?

I trawled through FB & eventually found one of the photo's, the other showing the reverse I couldn't find but nevertheless look at these 4 coins & see how they appear to be from the same die as indeed they are - a fake die, the side with the ships was also from an identical die & all the experts who viewed it were of the same opinion -blatant fakes. noti
The lettering on all four coins are exactly the same but with clever attempts to age the coins, unfortunately the fakers failed to realise that the 'clock hands' might give the game away 

[Figleaf]

I agree 80%. The coin on the upper left looks different, though. That doesn't necessarily mean it's genuine, as it's keeping bad company, but it can't be painted with the same brush.

Meanwhile, it's useful to have a pic of the forgeries here, for the sake of having a record of what the fakes look like.

Peter

[cmerc]

Very nice specimen Mitresh! I have several of these (in varying conditions), and yours seems genuine. Disappointing to find out that fakes of this type are now becoming common...

[mitresh]

Very nice specimen Mitresh! I have several of these (in varying conditions)

Please post them, will be a great thread to see many more specimens incl the fakes posted by Vic.

[cmerc]

Please post them, will be a great thread to see many more specimens incl the fakes posted by Vic.

I will try my best to post them as soon as I can. Fair warning: none of them will match up to your specimen!

[mitresh]

Fair warning:

  This is the message displayed just before the hammer falls for a lot!

The joy and fun is enjoying the coin perse, if it looks good, fine, but if it doesn't, then it doesn't detract from the underlying historical perspective which remains nonetheless despite its condition. So go ahead and post your beauties becoz I would love to see them.

[Figleaf]

The joy and fun is enjoying the coin perse, if it looks good, fine, but if it doesn't, then it doesn't detract from the underlying historical perspective which remains nonetheless despite its condition.

Words of wisdom, Mitresh