Author Topic: Mahmudi in the name of Akbar the Great: 1618 to 1638?  (Read 4029 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rangnath

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2 714
Mahmudi in the name of Akbar the Great: 1618 to 1638?
« on: January 25, 2008, 06:55:05 PM »
Not only don't I know which is reverse or obverse, I don't know which side is up or down.  The coin appears to be silver. It is 5.7 grams and 15 mm across; appropriate in size for a half rupee or, I guess, a Kori. 
And what does it say?  In what I have indicated as the obverse, I think that I see the word "Allah". 
richie
« Last Edit: January 26, 2008, 02:09:38 AM by Rangnath »

Offline Oesho

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3 400
Re: Complicated Half Rupee
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2008, 01:00:25 AM »
Richie, the reverse should be turned 90oclockwise.
It's a Mahmudi in the name of Jalal al-Din Akbar, struck (many posthumously) at Mulher by the Raja of Baglana. Ref.: KM#72.1
They were struck on order of Surat traders. The Surat mint couldn't always fulfil the demand for currency and as much of the coins was drained away in trade, there was often, due to brisk trading, shortage of money. As the Mahmudi was a local coin it was not used in overland trade, but for paying the local taxes and tolls as well as the servants. They continued to be struck (in the name of Akbar) well into the reign of Jahangir and probably later.

Offline Rangnath

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2 714
Re: Mahmudi in the name of Akbar the Great: 1618 to 1638?
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2008, 02:20:29 AM »
This is exciting news Oesho!
I've got to run,
but here's the correction.
richie

Offline Rangnath

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2 714
Re: Mahmudi in the name of Akbar the Great: 1618 to 1638?
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2008, 05:29:07 AM »
I'm quite thrilled by this appellation! I hoped that this would be an interesting coin and it sure is that. Thanks so much for the information.
Oesho, is there a single book that does for Moghul coins what the Goron and Goenka text does for the Sultanate coins that preceded the Moghuls?
richie

Offline Oesho

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3 400
Re: Mahmudi in the name of Akbar the Great: 1618 to 1638?
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2008, 12:52:01 PM »
Dear Richie, no there is no such book, like that of the Sultanate coins for Mughal coins. So far we have to depend on the several museum catalogues, special publications and the KM-catalogues. Even then you will find un-recorded mints, denominations and of course many new dates.

Regarding the use of Mahmudi's I got my information basically from two publications by H.W. van Santen (both in Dutch), viz.: De Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie in Gujarat en Hindustan, 1620-1660. (The United East-India Company in Gujarat and Hindustan, 1620-1660) This was a thesis presented on the 1st of December 1982 at University of Leiden.
The 2nd: publication is: VOC-dienaar in India; Geleynssen de Jongh in het land van de Groot-Mogol (VOC-servant in India; Geleynssen de Jongh in the land of the Great Mughal, published in 2001).
From economic point of view it is a very interesting phenomenon that two types of coins functioned side by side. One trade coin, the Surat rupee struck in the name of the Great Mughal, and a local coin for daily use as payment of taxes, servants and buying local commodities.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2010, 10:56:57 PM by Oesho »

Offline Figleaf

  • Administrator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32 415
Re: Mahmudi in the name of Akbar the Great: 1618 to 1638?
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2008, 04:14:19 PM »
I never cease to be amazed about the fantastic coins and the equally fantastic scholarship displayed here.  8)

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

Offline Rangnath

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2 714
Re: Mahmudi in the name of Akbar the Great: 1618 to 1638?
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2008, 06:31:12 PM »
I agree with you Peter. I'm completely amazed.  If Peter or Oesho should ever give a Numismatic Lecture in the US, please let me know!!!!
Oesho, when people ask me to describe India, I usually pause, take a deep breath and respond that it is like trying to describe Europe in a paragraph.  It is just too complicated. The longer I stayed in India, the more complicated it seemed to become.
I have heard people say that India is communal. From the surface, the Surat of today may look like one entity, but in actuality it is an irregular quilt of multiple insulated ?communities?, each with its own religion, culture, economy, political life, language, occupation, ethnicity, caste, values and so forth. Perhaps the India of old is more like the New India in that way.  More than in any other place to which I have traveled and lived, I can see two parallel currencies working together within one geographic locality because of this ?harmonious? fragmentation. Any way, that?s my take on the Mahmudi and the Rupee coexisting in 17th century Gujarat.
As for the absence of a compelling text on Moghul coinage, OUR LOSS!!!!  :(
Have you noticed an increase in accuracy with the Standard Catalog for the 17th century with recent editions? (In other words, do I gain in buying a more recent edition in terms of image quality and accuracy?) Was there ever a thought on producing a 16th century catalog?
richie