Ancient: Gadhaiya paisa family portrait

Both in Western and Eastern cultures there have been series of coinage that have been in use over centuries. One of these types is the gadhaiya paisa from Northern india. Originally based upon the Sasanian drachms of Peroz I this became the ubiquitous "silver penny" of the region around the Millenium.
A fine overview of these was given on the page of Doug Smith: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/gadpaisa.html
I decided to make my own virtual coin tray of some of my specimen of this series:
The middle two rows are what are usually considered gadhaiya paisas in the strict sense. The upper row shows some predecessors in its development. the lower row shows two later derivatives. The sasanian fire altar on the reverse has disappeared here. In the coins on the left it is replaced by a battle scene where a horse rider tramples a victim lying on the ground. In the coins on the right the fire altar is largely replaced by a nagari inscription.
The fabric of these coins changes over time from nice silver on a thin Sasanian style flan to virtually no silver at all on a small dumpy flan.

​

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That's a nicely done virtual tray and the coins are interesting.

 

Sweet => THC, that's an awesome effort (congrats on a great virtual tray) ...

Sadly, other than my Peroz-I example, I really don't have any examples to toss into your great thread

 

Nice collection. Dont see many focusing on these. I just have this.


INDIA, CHALUKYAS of GUJARAT (1030 - 1120 A.D.)
AR Drachm (gadhaiya paisa)
O: Degenerate Indo-Sasanian style bust right, sun and moon (crown?) above.
R: Stylized fire altar, sun (consisting of rosette of dots) above left, crescent moon above right.
4.4g
17mm
Deyell 158, Mitchiner Non-Islamic 427

 

Thanks for the comments, and the addition Mat ! That is a very typical specimen of the type.
The curves above the head are indeed remnants of what was once the crown. The S shape and horizontal stripes above this are the remains of the ribbons in front and behind the bust of the Sasanian prototype. The oblique lines next to the fire altar are what is left of the arms of the standing attendants.

 

Mind as well toss this in the mix too. One of my best buys this year.


Sasanian Kingdom, Shapur I (241-272 A.D.)
AR drachm
O: Bust of Shapur I right, wearing diadem and decorated tiara terminating in eagle head.
R: Fire altar flanked by two attendants wearing diadems and mural crowns.
4.33g
Göbl type I/1

 

Nice one ! Here the style is still very naturalistic. From then only 1000 years of repeated copying and small adjustments to go to the last abstracted Gadhaiya paisa descendants.

 

Hmmm, seems like we're being encouraged to toss-in our Sasanian examples, eh?

=> well okay then ...

Sassanian Kingdom, Peroz I AR Drahm
459-484 AD
Peroz I & Fire Altar Attendants

 

I have one ordinary example of the commonly seen Gadhaiya Paisa drachm.

 

@TIF: may be common, but isn't that design extrra-ordinary ? And that's a great photo, Picasso would have loved it !
@steve: Yep that's the common ancestor of all these. However, if you compare the early types, the actual source this was based on seems to be the Peroz I coin with the other crown with curved wings. Might include that in the picture sometime.

 

Yes, the Picasso-esque design of this coin is why I wanted an example. It's a long story... this is not the coin I selected but it is mine now anyway. I can always get another one

 

I agree with the desirability of including a Peroz prototype and might ask you to go through the thought process on how you will select the coins to fill the missing spaces on the tray. To many people, all these are a bit alike just like all Morgan dollars are alike to me. Your designing the tray with spaces suggests that you are looking for something. Would we appreciate the differences?

FWIW: I consider Peroz one of the "must have" Sasanian rulers. He comes with an interesting life story and his coins are really nice with the spread flan but not as degenerated as the later rules. He is relatively common, used good metal and tends to have readable mintmarks.

 

Doug, what you show here is a Peroz I specimen as i would like to include at the root indeed. As you say, many people won't notice the differences. But mine don't clearly show all the pictorial design elements i think i would need to demonstrate the evolution of the type.
The open spaces were planned to have room for additions. The upper row needs a real early Chavada specimen. A bit like your specimen C. The two shown i think are nice illustrations of an intermediate and late specimen. The intermediate still has a moustache, eyebrow and hearknot, but the ear is already detatched.
I think i have the same problem you had where to put the "curved head" type. Looking at the design there are reasons to put it both after and before the more common Chaulukya type. I'm hoping to find a intermediate type to decide on that.
Between the one labeled "intermediate" and the late ones labeled "Vaghela" i would want to put a specimen which already has the Vaghela head with square eyesocket but still some more remnants of the headdress.
However, the open spots now also function to separate customary categories. So it did not bother me to display it as is.
For a future project i might even make bit of an extension of this fairly linear descendance line to the turco-hephthalite family members, including the offspring which lead to the Pratihara-Pala type coins.
Another vague plan i have is to make an animation of the coins morphing over time. Also for that i would need some more intermediate types to prevent to many framejumps. Only other prerequisite: enough time.

 

What you have shown and written here should thrill the right collector seeking such a summery. Perhaps, someday, it will be found by that collector.

 

THcoins, the one change I would make to your chart would to be include a normal Perez and not a Hepthalite imitation. Contrary to some authors, there is zero evidence the Hepthalites ever crossed into India, so these derivative types have nothing to do with Hepthalite imitations. There are actually further devolved types attributed to Hepthalites that look nearly identical to your coins attributed to 760-950 ad. It appears there were two branches of derivatives in this timeframe, one north of India struck by hepthalites and turks, and another south in india. The Indian coins further devolved, but the hepthalite/Turkish series ended with Islam taking over the area. This timeframe is very ripe for furthe research, and I am sure 50 years from now we will know much more about it.

 

Btw, another equally interesting devolution took place in Bukhara. Starting with a Sassanids prototype, it devolved into Bukharan silver coinage, then further devolved into Arab-Bukharan coinage of the AL Mahdi type.

 

great virtual tray THC!

here's my only coin of the type..

 

IT is good to see that many people here have at least one specimen of this series fitting with its historical importance !
@medoraman: i have read a lot about the history of the region, including the central asian territory. But unfortunately knowledge is stil very fragmentary.
However, i disagree with you on the probable importance of the hunnic imitations. I think these are very likely intermediates as the ancestors of the Chavada designs.
Most important reason is time and place: The Chavadas ruled northern Gujarat from about 760 AD.
At the time Peroz I died, this region was still in the firm hands of the Gupta dynasty. With the decline of the Gupta the Maitraka of Valabhi rose in Southern Gujarat. For several hundred years there was a firm hephthalite power base to the west of Gujarat in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan. In the area between were the Kidarites who were under continuous Hepthalite pressure.
I believe conditions were favourable for a silver currency flow to northern Gujarat of imitation Peroz types during this long period. The likeliness of some Hepthalite and Gujarat specimen only supports this. It seems less probable the Gujaratis encountered the original Peroz I coinage and independently started making their own version a few hundred years later.
A pity that 50 years from now i probably won't be around any more to hear the final solution..

 

Well, I'm one of the collectors that has a common-type example of these coins...


These are the seller's attribution and notes. Are they accurate? By your image, THC, it looks like an issue of Vaghelas. (?)

Indo-Sasanian, Gadhalya Paisa 800 - 950 AD Drachm
OBVERSE: Indo-Sasanian style Kings bust right
REVERSE: Stylized fire altar, with attendants on either side.
13mm - 4.6 grams
Mitchiner Non-Islamic 427

"It is believed the imagery on these coins incorporate the Zoroastrian view of heaven and hell. The design elements on these coins have close correlation to the Book of Arda Viraf , a sacred Zoroastrian text. Based on the teachings of Zoraster , a prophet and reformer , Zoroastrianism is a philosphy and religion that first appeared in historical records in the 5th century BC. Zoroastrianism was a dominant religion in Central asia during periods of the Western Satrap, Kushan and Maurian Empires. It included essential concepts of heaven and hell and the resurrection of the dead."

Excerpts from : The Numismatist vol. 123,#3 3/10

(My third-grade daughter is my partner in crime when it comes to coin collecting, and she was charmed by this chubby little silver.)

 

@JA this is a late type, thought to be from around 1200 AD. The Vaghelas had then already taken over from the previous rulers. In the references a link to the Sasanian empire had been more logical than the others.
Thre are differnt classifications of these. I don't use Mitchiner. However, Mitchiner 427 i believe is similar to Dyell 158, but that's earlier. This would be Dyell 160.