Ancient -> Kushanshah Hormizd I AE Drachm!

Be careful, i do not think we know if this was the same Hormizd. Ardashir was the same both places, but after that kushanshahs were frequently non-crown princes sent to rule this new territory. So, while they shared the same names, they were different rulers.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Another place where we don't know much about the rulers...


Just like Elymais...


Would you happen to have the books for this series that tell the approx. date of this coin and any more information about it?

 

This coin deserves a better photo. The reverse appears to show four prongs on the tamga (just under the horse's mouth) making this the less common mint (Balkh?). It appears to be a decent specimen but out of focus to the point we can't see the letter shapes that are diagnostic as to mint ID.

 

I do, its called From Persepolis to the Punjab, or the Sunrise Collection, but I am traveling this week and do not have access to them. Hopefully someone else has them here.

 

I believe in this case the name is the same as the Persian ruler. Ardashir used the same name, Shapur used the same name and even later Shapur II used the same name. I would be inclined to think that the coin is the same Hormizd of the late 3 rd century. This is the period of direct Persian rule over the Kushans. If I am not mistaken you do not see the crown princes until after Peroz (Faruz), during the Hephthalite/Kidarite period. Then you see a gap in direct Persian rule from about 400-600 ish AD. I would be inclined to think that this coin is from the first Indo-Sassanid Period, when Zoroastrian religion was a must.

 

Elymais is a complete mystery. It would be nice if we could read the coins.

 

The legend should read...
AUHRaMaZDI MaLKA, Bust of the king right, wearing a lion crown / Pehlavi inscription: BWRZ'Y NDY YZTY, . The coin is described as having a half length figure of Ahura-Mazda rising from altar, holding wreath and trident.

 

OK DS I will re-photo and post later today.

 

For you DS. Its a very small piece, difficult to photo with my equipment.
Wima Takto 85-105 AD 1/4 unit

 

That is a nice coin for a 1/4.

 

I agree with DS thats a great quarter unit, well centered and very pleasing! The new photo is much improved. I also know how difficult it is to photograph the "smalls".

 

eh-hem ...

=> awesome coin ... Windchild






Yah, I thought that I'd toss that in there (I'm just sayin') ... but you guys are great

I'm the biggest hypocrite!!

 

Where do you read that? From Persepolis to the Punjab they were prett clear the name Shapur was most likely NOT referring to Shapur I shah of Sasanid Persia, but a prince of the same very common name. From all I read, only Ardashir lines up chronologically with Sasanid rulers.

Historically these rulers were lined up with the shahs, but my understanding of the last fifteen years at least that chronology is not being followed. I agree older references will still attribute these pieces that way, like Mitchiner ACW and others.

 

Very cool! Thumbs up!

 

Admittedly Chris, you are far more well read than myself, I don't have and do not have access to these sources. What I can tell you, is my main dealer is a well known expert in these types of coins and he mainly uses Michiner ACW. He sells many of these pieces and he actually had a specimen the same as Windchild's and described it as such.

These Kushanshah's do seem to line up with coins of the Persian authority, up until the Peroz/ Hephthalite period, based on his listing and corresponding crown types. I must also confess that I am at the mercy of second hand information and possibly antiquated resources.

For clarification, Do you disagree with the idea that the crown is that of Hormizd? The crown type is also different for Shapur I while the Ardashir I coins seems to be of a different style.

Gifterrec lists this coins as dating from 265-295 AD. Assuming this is a more accurate date. I would have to assume that rather than this Hormizd conveniently having the same name as the Persian shah. I would ASSUME that in 265 Hormizd was made "governor" or the equivalent of Bacteria, before he was Shah, before the death of Shapur.

The later 295 date could be explained... I would guess at this point the coins circulating in 265 were still in circulation for years if not decades after the death of Hormizd, probably due to the remoteness and turbulence of this frontier region.

 

Simply look at Peroz issues in the third century of these to see the name of the kushanshah leaders really had nothing to do with the shah. Btw Shapur and Hormizd are two of the most common names in the Sasan family tree in this period, with many named those names in the family at any given time.

I am just saying using Mitchiner ACW for dating these nowadays is not the best source. I don't use it and I own it. I use more modern references preferably by men like Cribb.