Author Topic: Muhammad Shah. Mint Aurangnagar  (Read 2970 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline asm

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6 846
  • Ahmedabad, India
Re: Muhammad Shah. Mint Aurangnagar
« Reply #15 on: February 03, 2011, 11:42:00 AM »
I have not been able to digest the information provided by Oesho and will take some more time to do so. However a short check on google maps shows Vidisha - current name for Bhilsa is over 500 KM from Ahmedabad where as in one of the discussions, I had read that Mulher is just 60 KM NE of Ahmedabad.

Amit
"It Is Better To Light A Candle Than To Curse The Darkness"

Offline Oesho

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3 400
Re: Muhammad Shah. Mint Aurangnagar
« Reply #16 on: February 03, 2011, 12:25:51 PM »
 Dear Amit, Sorry that I confused you. Mulher is another place than Bhilsa.
I better hadn't introduced the problem of Alamgirpur, versus Aurangnagar.
I discussed this hypothesis earlier with Arthur directly. That's why I mentioned it.

In this discussion with Arthur, I suggested that their might have been three places known as Alamgirpur on the coins. One is Bhilsa (present Vidisha) which was, after being captured by Aurangzeb Alamgir, renamed as Alamgirpur. The problem now is that we have series of coins in the name of Aurangzeb Alamgir with the mint name Alamgirpur (one series has the mint name on the top and the other series attributed to Bhilsa have the mint name at the bottom and a third Alamgirpur may be located in Bengal).
Where were the coins struck with mint name Alamgirpur (on he top) as Bhilsa can’t be the place of issue? To me the most logical candidate seems to be Mulher which was named Aurangnagar. This name was given by Prince Aurangzeb when captured the fort on behalf of his father Shah Jahan.
There is a possibility that, after he imprisoned his father and raised to the throne as Aurangzeb Alamgir, he renamed Aurangnagar (temporally?) as Alamgirpur.
However, after the capture of Bhilsa, which was than named Alamgirpur, they might have gone back to the previous name Aurangnagar. Mulher is known by that name on the coins of later Mughals from Farukhsiyar onwards.
Is it just a hypothesis which can not be proved as yet, but searching into that direction may lead ultimately to a solution.

Offline asm

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6 846
  • Ahmedabad, India
Re: Muhammad Shah. Mint Aurangnagar
« Reply #17 on: February 03, 2011, 12:38:48 PM »
Thank you Oesho for the information.

Amit
"It Is Better To Light A Candle Than To Curse The Darkness"

akona20

  • Guest
Re: Muhammad Shah. Mint Aurangnagar
« Reply #18 on: February 03, 2011, 12:41:25 PM »
Hi Oesho,

As you have suggested, the examination in the style of the coins is a key here in a number of instances. This is rather painstaking but synergies can be found. I am waiting confirmation of a couple more points on the Alamgirpur suggestions. There is also the hint of an unlisted mint in certain correspondence but that is still a little way off discussing. Perhaps some translation steps have been taken a fraction too far on this. This discussions are really very fascinating.

Offline asm

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6 846
  • Ahmedabad, India
Re: Muhammad Shah. Mint Aurangnagar
« Reply #19 on: February 03, 2011, 01:26:01 PM »
Dear Oesho,

Do I understand you correct when I say that there are three towns known as Alamgirpur during Mughal / IPS times. One was located towards Bengal and which is not of any interest to this discussions. Of the other two, Bhilsa (modern day Vidisha in MP) also known as Alamgirpur issued coins with the mint name on bottom. Earliest observed date 1096/Ry.29. Which is a few years after Aurangzeb captured and renamed Bhilsa as Alamgirpur.

That leaves the coins with dates AH-/RY4 to 1095/Ry.27 of Aurangzeb which have the mint name at the top. Prince Aurangzeb captured Mulher and renamed it Aurangnagar and had coins issued in the name of Shah Jahan with the mint name Aurangnagar. When he came to the throne, he renamed the town Alamgirpur in line with his assumed title. Coins of this mint were then issued as Alamgirpur (with the mint name at top). Then, when Bhilsa was taken and named Alamgirpur,  the name of Alamgirpur (Mulher) was changed back to Aurangnagar.(this is a theory or an explaination without any conclusive proof yet). The mint there issued coins with this name till the time the mint was in operation under various authorities – Mughal / Nizam / Maratha. 

To sum up:
Coins issued in the time of Shah Jahan were with mint name Aurangnagar.
Coins of Aurangzeb till AH-/RY4 to 1095 / RY 27 with mint name Alamgirpur (this is an assumption and is yet to be actually setteled)
Later coins of Aurangzeb if issued at all from AH 1096 / RY 29 with mint name Aurangnagar
Coins issued in the time of his successors were with mint name Aurangnagar till 1724 AD when the Nizam al-Mulk declared the Deccan independent from Delhi. There after they would be Nizam issues till about 1760 AD when the area came under Maratha administration. Coins were issued in the name of the reigning Mughal monarch.

Amit

PS: I would love to have the corresponding AH dates when the Nizam declared independence and when Aurangnagar was taken by the Marathas.
"It Is Better To Light A Candle Than To Curse The Darkness"

akona20

  • Guest
Re: Muhammad Shah. Mint Aurangnagar
« Reply #20 on: February 03, 2011, 09:29:40 PM »
I'll leave Oesho give his summary on this topic. There are a number of twists and turns.

Offline Oesho

  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3 400
Re: Muhammad Shah. Mint Aurangnagar
« Reply #21 on: February 03, 2011, 10:16:31 PM »
Dear Amit,
As Arthur correctly pointed out, some parts of your conclusions are too pertinent at stage of our knowledge. I was writing with an open mind and discussing certain possibilities. No conclusions can be drawn from it, definitely not as you wrote.

Quote
Do I understand you correct when I say that there are three towns known as Alamgirpur during Mughal / IPS times
There may have been three different localities were, at a certain period of time, the mint name Alamgirpur may have been used.
Quote
One was located towards Bengal and which is not of any interest to this discussions.

The fabric and calligraphy of one issue points, in my opinion, into the direction of Bengal. So the idea of a Bengal origin is entirely based on fabric and calligraphy.
Quote
When he came to the throne, he renamed the town Alamgirpur in line with his assumed title. Coins of this mint were then issued as Alamgirpur (with the mint name at top). Then, when Bhilsa was taken and named Alamgirpur,  the name of Alamgirpur (Mulher) was changed back to Aurangnagar.
It may have happened that way, but since we have not any proof as yet, it must be regarded as highly tentative.
Quote
The mint there issued coins with this name till the time the mint was in operation under various authorities – Mughal / Nizam / Maratha.

Correct, the mint Aurangnagar changed hands from time to time, as did many other mints too.
Quote
To sum up:
Coins issued in the time of Shah Jahan were with mint name Aurangnagar.
Coins of Aurangzeb till AH-/RY4 to 1095 / RY 27 with mint name Alamgirpur (this is an assumption and is yet to be actually settled)
Later coins of Aurangzeb if issued at all from AH 1096 / RY 29 with mint name Aurangnagar
Coins issued in the time of his successors were with mint name Aurangnagar till 1724 AD when the Nizam al-Mulk declared the Deccan independent from Delhi. There after they would be Nizam issues till about 1760 AD when the area came under Maratha administration. Coins were issued in the name of the reigning Mughal monarch.
Coins issued from Mulher in the time of Shah Jahan bear the mint name Aurangnagar.
As there appears a wide gap in the issues of coins with the mint name Aurangnagar, I suggested that Mulher may have been renamed Alamgirpur by Aurangzeb Alamgir.
But let it be clear we have no proof of whatsoever for this assumption. It is something to store in mind, when researching the period and the area concerned.
One thing can be said for sure that there must have been a mint Alamgirpur, prior to the renaming of Bhilsa as Alamgirpur (1682 or later), and this place most likely was located in the southern part of the Mughal realm (Deccan)
Quote
PS: I would love to have the corresponding AH dates when the Nizam declared independence and when Aurangnagar was taken by the Marathas.
Corresponding AH date for 1724 when de Nizam acted as independent from Dehli, is AH1137/38.  The Maratha influence of Mulher is more complicated and also somewhat obscure. At various times they captured the place, but have to give it up soon after. The best you may read Maratha Mints and Coinage, page 71.