In the wake of Peroz's defeat at the battle of Herat nearly all of the Sassanian nobles and royal family were wiped out, lucky enough Kavadh was a guest (hostage) of the Hephthalite Huns and was spared Peroz's fate. Kavadh was later rescued by a Persian statesman Sukhra, he would return to capture his throne from his uncle Balash with the help of the Hephthalites. Balash would eventually be deposed, blinded and exiled. It was said that in reality, Sukhra controlled all aspects of the Empire with the exception of wearing the crown. Sukhra's power did not go unnoticed and with help of Shapur of Rayy he defeated the Sukhra's loyalists and eventually had him captured and executed. Kavadh supported a communist movement in Persia lead by Mazdak who taught the belief that the rich should share their wealth and their wives with the poor. Saying there was not enough women for the poor and the rich lived a polygamous life in the extreme. Mazdak fell out of favor with Kavadh and the teaching refuted,. In 529 AD Mazdak was hunted down and executed. In need of money to pay the Hephthalites for their service he approached the Romans for a hand out, stingy Anastasius said, "Nope!" This forced Kavadh to attempt to take the money by any means. Collectively called the Anastasian War, few short lived territorial exchanges resulted in little permanent gain. In 505 AD Huns invaded Armenia and the Romans and Persians sought a mutual armistice. Kavadh appealed yet again to the Romans, this time Romans ruled by Justin I, refused to adopt Khusro I, the heir apparent of Persia. Fighting broke out between the Romans and the Persians in 524 AD. Fighting would abruptly come to an end with the death of Kavadh in 531 AD. Khusro I, would succeed him after several attempts made by family members to steal the throne. Khusro I did what any ancient king would do...have everyone executed! Kavadh I Second Reign (498-531 AD) Rayy, Iran (DYNAW) Dated yr. 33 (521 AD) AR Drachm 27 mm x 4.08 grams Obverse: Bust of Kavad I single boarder Stars and Mood ornaments. Reverse: Date and Mint. Zoroastrian Fire Alter flanked by attendants. Double border reverse. Ref: Gobl III/2 Type 190. Note: Beautiful toning. Superb Example. First year of Double boarder reverse.
As I've said before, I can't afford to start another collection so I do not collect these. However, I can appreciate them in your collection when you share.
Excellent example of the issue AN. Looks a little clipped since the reverse should have some space between the outer rim and the edge of the flan, but otherwise a superlative example.
Practicing my date and mint reading....I am thinking that THC's coin is yr. 16? Maybe the mint of WRC. Whatchu got THC?
Very nice coin. Not too interested in the India region but I have recently ordered two coins from there.
Good thing this coin is not Indian. Would I be able to keep your interest if I told you the coin was minted in Iran (Persia.) What did you get from India? The sky is the limit in that place.
Well, hard as it is to have a geographical name to the entire area but I consider that the India region. Iran and Iraq are right between the middle east and India, China, etc. Here is a link to the post of the two coins that I haven't received yet. https://www.cointalk.com/threads/two-new-budget-coins.256288/
On mine i decided that i was not certain whether this was a regular Kavad issue or an early hunnic imitation.
I hear you sir, as it does look a touch low engraving quality, but I thought all hunnic imitations had countermarks. I thought they only imitated when they ran out of official host coins, but either on host coins or on the imitations, (either counterstruck or on host die), they had their unique countermarks. I have Hepthalite imitations of Peroz, Kavad, and Khusro I but all have Hepthalite countermarks.
There is a great deal of uncertainty here. I was inclined to believe THC's specimen was an official issue, everything appears to be legible but that cannot be used as means of determination, as Gobl states most mint and date cutters were illiterate. I am still leaning towards official. As far as countermarks, who knows and I suppose your guess is as good as any.
The lack of a clear countermark is one of my reasons for doubt in attribution. But there is this structure in front of the face which looks like mix of a tamgha and the normal twirling band which goes up there. But overall contrasts on this coin are very low and that does not seem to be caused by merely a weak strike or wear. So, i agree, engraving quality was subpar. Looking at some others, is see more lousy quality engravings, also with the blob in front of the face. So that may have been the offical standard at some time
