Sure, they're teeny-tiny, but you've gotta love cheap old gold, right? I think the tininess adds to the charm. If any of y'all are in the know, I'd appreciate confirmation on these attributions. I extrapolated them from what was scribbled on the original 2x2 holders. The Cochin piece features what I believe to be a stylized beastie, though I know not what. * It is entirely possible I got one or more images upside-down. By the way, these were nicely affordable for me, but they're going to be even cheaper still to the next owners. Free, in fact. Both are in the June giveaway (along with other goodies), so if you want a chance at 'em, go post an entry!
I would say this is more a "world coin" than an ancient. Yes, it's hammered, but you wouldn't go calling a 16th century European coin ancient just because it was hammered, so likewise an 18th century Indian coin would have to be considered modern. Still nice though.
Eh, I never get hung up between ancient and medieval for stuff 1400 and earlier. Byzantine is frequently labelled ancient, so why differentiate for other cultures? Each culture had a different transition from ancient to medieval, so if I do not know which it was, I do not sweat it. Cool little coins, just got 2 thrown in on a group lot.
Well, these particular coins aren't even medieval, for the reasons @Sallent mentioned (being 17th-18th century), but they're struck in the ancient manner. Yes. The boundaries between "ancient" and "medieval" certainly are rather fluid, like you say. I also use terms like "Dark Ages" and "Early Modern", though the former has fallen out of favor with scholars. (I like the "Dark Ages" term since the period is rather mysterious, and to me, "dark" is interesting in that context, and not a pejorative term.) These fanams would fall into the "early modern" category for me.
Well, European can be tricky, but generally it is accepted that the Renaissance starts around the 1320's, which is also in the period commonly referred to as the High Medieval Period, which roughly ends around 1500 CE. Generally, the Middle East left the Middle Ages around the same time. Asian history is another matter. For example, China entered the Middle Ages 200 years before Europe, and left it 150 years before Europe. The Middle Ages for other Asian civilizations also vary, but all left the Middle Ages before the 17th century. That doesn't mean feudalism didn't last in those areas much longer than most of Europe, because it did. But Feudalism is but one element of what we describe as the Middle Ages. For example, Feudalism lasted in Russia well into the 19th Century, but you won't find anyone arguing the Middle Ages in Russia lasted that long. Some parts of the world never really saw a Middle Ages, like pre-Columbian America. Most of those societies never advanced beyond Stone age technology, though there are other periods hostorians have assigned to them. Not that it matters for our purposes as these were bartering societies without what we would call coinage, so it doesn't really matter as far as our hobby is concerned. You can't really collect coins for societies that never really had coinage. PS: Don't get too hung up on precise dates. Historians are constantly revising this stuff. I have a feeling that in 1000 years Historians might be calling our era the Middle Ages, and invent some other term for what we now think of as the medieval period. After all, you can't really refer to a period of history more than a millennium before you as the "modern era".
Yes, I believe that one is a modern fantasy, but fun nonetheless. I loved the little elephant on it, and that hot pink toning.
We're straying a bit afield of the topic of Indian fanams, but that's an excellent point, and pretty much the way I've always felt about it. The naming of historical periods is always kind of blurry around the edges, and subject to later reinterpretation.