Clash of Cultures: The crown counterstamps

[Rangnath]

While I now have Richard Plant's "how to read Arabic coins", I am only on page 14.  And I do not yet have an 18th century catalog either.  The date appears to be 1759. But where was the coin minted? And which European entity counter stamped the coin?

[Rangnath]

Yes, and which side is the Obverse?

[Rangnath]

Would you like a close up of the counter stamp?
Richie

[Figleaf]

At last, an easy one 

This coin started life as a British colonial rupee of Madras in the name of Alamgir II with fantasy date 1172/6 (top line, upper picture) which is 1764, while it was actually struck in the beginning of the 19th century. The British were hoping their coins would look old and therefore good if they put that name and date on, forgetting that the steaming natives were quite capable of distinguishing a milled coin from a hammered coin. The mint name, Arcot is the lowest line on the lower picture and the mint mark closed lotus (slightly above second line of the lower pic, looking a bit like a lollypop on a broken stick) makes this KM 415.1.

However, the counterstamp makes this coin very special indeed. It makes it Ceylon 1-1/3 rix dollar, KM 86 instead. Why did this happen? Ceylon was a Dutch colony. During the Napoleonic wars the British kindly took care of it. This saved the Dutch from resolving a problem of their own making. With sloppy arithmetic, they had succeeded in undervaluing silver in terms of copper. Therefore, silver was melted and exchanged for copper. Paying larger amounts in copper was laborious, so paper money had been introduced. However, by overemissions, the paper rijksdaalder (rix dollar) steadily devalued against copper and the Spanish colonial 8 reales (peso).

The British sought to remedy this deplorable situation a mere 24 years after taking over the colony (I am skipping over the issues of 1802 and the fanam token for the sake of simplification; these are just more examples of colonial arithmetic). They issued silver rix dollars in 1821 and anchor money in 1820 and 1822. Since these coins were shamelessly underweight (while the coin contained the equivalent of 1/5 in silver, it was tariffed at 1/9), the ignorant natives were somewhat reluctant to accept them, unless persuaded by bayonets.

When the British realized that a different solution should be found, they declared the Madras rupees valid in Ceylon on 22 March 1823 at a rate of 1-1/3 rix dollar - in terms of the natives: 16 fanam. Since this rate overvalued the Madras rupee, it was decided to counterstamp rupees and quarters with a crown, so that the stupid natives would not export all of Madras' silver to Ceylon. Predictably, this measure was also an abject failure because the good silver coins were added to, not replacing the grossly overvalued paper rix dollar.

A Treasury minute of 11th February 1825 puts it this way: "The rix dollar coined in England expressly for the use of Ceylon is rated very much above its intrinsic worth, measured by British currency; and neither that, nor the paper rix dollar is exchangeable at the will of the holder, at its nominal rate against British money, or other description of coin." Note that there is no mention of other silver. The Treasury sensibly recommended that the rix dollar be devalued to 1/6, all old money, including the paper rix dollars be withdrawn and British money be introduced.

Peter

[Rangnath]

An easy one my lass!
Thanks for the "simplified" detail!
There is a color imparted by the counter stamp; copper?

Incidentally, I attempted to read the mint.  At least I now know where to look for it! I had trouble with the "k" in Arcot.  I guess for the sake of calligraphic appearance many letters are gracefully stylized. 
Richie

[Figleaf]

I have been looking at the counterstamp for some time. The underlying coin looks perfectly genuine to me, but I am not 100% sure of the counterstamp. Chances are that it too is genuine. I have attached a pic of a coin that was auctioned by a renowned house, so we can safely assume that it is genuine. The general countours and presentation of the countermark are similar enough for me. There are some missing dots in the interior, but the hub may have been worn. I find the colour of the countermark troublesome, but it may be dirt that would come off relatively easily. If so, try futzing around in the countermark with a wooden toothpick. Soak the coin in olive oil for a night first if the toothpick is ineffective.

Having said that, I think this is an admirable piece, illustrating colonial arrogance, financial mismanagement and the ascent of what would become Victorian mores. Congratulations. Please keep posting such beauties.

Peter

[Rangnath]

I'll try using a tooth pick and let you know. 
Counterfeiting a counter mark on a genuine period coin is a rather sophisticated way to make a buck. Is that a common practice?

[bart]

@Rangnath,

about Figleaf's statement: "At last, an easy one".
As you have noticed, Figleaf has a particular good sense of humor.
On a Dutch forum, Figleaf keeps our minds vivid with very difficult questions about numismatics. One of his questions was: "Which areas issued coins with a denomination 1 1/3?" Answers were: Anhalt-Cothen (KM26 of 1747), Stolberg-Stolberg (Cr54 of 1796) and ... Ceylon 1 1/3 rixdollar, in fact a Arcot rupee with crown counterstamp. So this is a coin we discussed already there. And that's why Figleaf can notice: "At last, an easy one".

By the way, our global moderator Willy68 created a very beautiful and artistic website with all the questions of this Trivia. I am afraid it is still only in Dutch (you can find Numismatic Trivia here. The question about your coin is question 91.)

bart

[Figleaf]

Counterfeiting a counter mark on a genuine period coin is a rather sophisticated way to make a buck. Is that a common practice?

Countermarks are often imitated by contemporaries, since they are small, usually simple and a hub is easier to hide than a full pair of dies. If this one is a contemporary forgery, it is very well done. If it would have been a modern forgery, the patina woud have been better. If the yellow stuff turns out to be mud or something, there's no lingering doubt. If it's metal there's a problem...

Peter

[Rangnath]

Yes, tomorrow I will look for mud.
Bart, thanks for the heads up on Peter's numismatic omniscience.  As for learning Dutch, I've got my hands full with Arabic and Spanish!  Too bad.  It looks like a great forum.
Richie

[Overlord]

Very nice thread.

Here is mine, without the counterstamp...




What's the exact translation of the inscription?

[Oesho]

The legend read:
Obv.: Sikkah Mubarak / Bad Shah Ghazi / Aziz al-Din Muhammad Alamgir /1172.
Rev.: Zarb Arkat/ sanah 6 (lotus mark) Julus / Maimanet / Manus.

[Figleaf]

Receiving this coin made my day in a big way. The host is an Arcot quarter rupee, KM 413. The countermark makes it a Ceylonese 1/3 rixdollar (rijksdaalder).

As the British took over Ceylon from the Dutch, the money in circulation consisted of copper coins and banknotes only. This was due to wrongheaded tarification of silver coins, making them good money, driven out by copper bad money. The paper money, denominated in rijksdaalders, was constantly devaluing, making the paper rijksdaalder worth less and less copper.

The British tried to remedy the situation by issuing silver to replace the banknotes. There were three emissions: in 1821, a rix dollar (KM 84), intensely unpopular because of its very light weight, anchor money in 1820 and 1822 that was accepted only when accompanied by a short fused soldier and his bayonet. Finally, on 22 March 1823 the Madras rupee was declared legal tender at a rate of 1-1/3 rix dollar per rupee. Although this was also a form of official theft, at least it didn't insult the intelligence of the Ceylonese as crudely as the previous attempts. Rupees and quarter rupees were countermarked to show their validity on Ceylon. This series cleared the way for the introduction of money on the British Indian standard in 1825.

Peter

[Rangnath]

Nice coin!
We discussed a slightly larger denomination over two years ago.  TWO YEARS!
Yikes.
richie

[Figleaf]

Oops! At least the two stories were similar. Isn't it pretty, that counterstamp carefully applied where it would interfere least with the original design? These were among the first machine-struck coins on the Indian sub-continent. I can imagine an Indian craftsman looking at it and thinking, "now there's a really well made piece" before hammering the counterstamp in it.

Peter