Ottoman occupation of Tabriz / falus dated 1003 AH

[saro]

Cu / 24mm/ 8,99g date in words. (1003 AH / 1595 AD)
I read it as : " ضرب) تبريز في سنة ألف وثلاثة) " (struck at) Tabriz in year one thousand three
reverse : floral geometrical design
If I am not wrong, according  to the date and mint, this copper coin  should be an ottoman issue struck during Tabriz occupation after the Constantinople treaty, ending the 2nd ottoman-persian war.
1003 AH is the year of the death of Sultan Murad III and 1st regnalyear of Mehmet III (5 V 1595 AH /16/01/1595 AD)
Tabriz was occupated by Ottomans in 993 AH till 1012 AH.

I haven't been able to find any reference for it but maybe it is recorded somewhere? rare ?
 any help will be welcome

[Figleaf]

TFP saro! A coin of unusually high interest.

Since the coin mentions date and mint, there can be no doubt that is was struck in the period Tabriz was under Ottoman control,
The city fell into the hands of the Turks in 993 AH and will still remain there  till 1603 AD / 1012 AH.

That leads to the question on whose authority it was struck. The legend gives no clue, so let's look at other stuff. This is about the time the Osmanli started to use the toughra on their coins. Searching for Iranian Tabriz-struck coins, it looks like the mint had no problems picturing animals (they would have been anathema to the Ottomans, I suppose). Zeno has no coppers struck in Tabriz in this period, but many in the period afterwards. My conclusion is that the coin's design is neither Ottoman nor Iranian.

The third option is of course that it is purely local and had the approval of neither party. It is not difficult to imagine that Tabriz was short of small change after it was occupied. Trade patterns would have had to be changed radically and people would have hoarded coins of all sizes and metals. Petitions to the Ottoman powers that be would have fallen on deaf ears: permission to mint would have had to come from Constatinople, where it would have been seen as an expense for the benefit of Shias (the Ottomans are Sunnis).

In that situation, a private issue would have been the solution. Local merchants could organise it, but they had a very large interest in offending neither party - there was always the chance of an Iranian return, as indeed they did in the second Ottoman-Persian war. In other words, no name of a ruler, no national symbols, no animals, but also no toughra. A geometric design that could be explained as a flower or a plant would have been a neat solution.

I could also imagine that the Ottoman local powers quickly forbade the issue, explaining why your specimen looks like it didn't circulate long. Its lack of legality would make it very hard to find today.

If this piece remains undocumented, I would like to signal it to our partner sites.

Peter

[saro]

Thank you Peter for these remarks and suggestions.I would really pleased to learn more upon this coin.

I notice that the date is written in arabic and not in persian.
Different scripts are found for the mintname "Tabriz", here it is similar as found on a later (persian) coin of this mint :

[Figleaf]

As you will undoubtedly know, I know minus zero on this coin. All I can do is speculate and I am keen to do that, if only because I suspect it pleases you.

The best thing I can think of is taking your pictures to a specialised museum with numismatic staff. However, I'd need the name of a contact person. That will take some time. So, patience, my friend, but trust that I'll do what I can.

Peter

[aws22]

Dear Saro, this is a rare coin; just one word to be added to the text of left photo:
 " ضرب تبريز في سنة ألف وثلاثة " (struck at Tabriz in year one thousand and three)

Maythem

[saro]

Yes Maythem,of course you are right when translating the " و ", but I thought that in english "and" is omitted, giving  "one thousand three", I'm wrong?

With the kind help of Peter  , I'll try to learn more upon this coin...