Armenian-Sasanian. AR drachm (2.97 g, 31 mm). Imitation of Sasanian drachm of Hormazd IV (579-590), Year 6, struck probably in the second half of the 7th century CE. On reverse, for mintmark, "ZwZwN' in Pahlavi script. Zeno 313913 (this coin); Steve Album Auction 46, lot 43 (May 18-21, 2023). I previously wrote about another example of this coinage that I acquired in late 2019 (see https://www.cointalk.com/threads/sa...r-is-it-the-denomination.361981/#post-4578077 ). The unusual mintmark ZwZwN has been interpreted as possibly representing the denomination, the Aramaic-derived "zuz" (plural "zuzim") which is used in Jewish sources from the early centuries CE to describe the main denomination of silver coin, equivalent to a drachm or dirham. At that time, I concluded that "ZwZwN" was probably just a bonafide mintmark of Hormazd IV, possibly for the small city of Zuzan in Khorasan Province. However, after examining this new specimen and others, and further reading, I have changed my mind. I now believe that the "ZwZwN" coinage in the name of Hormazd IV was struck, probably in Armenia, well after the death of Hormazd IV with false dates, perhaps by local authorities without permission from the Sasanian kings or their Arab successors. There are some coins in the series that do closely resemble official issues of Hormazd IV, such as my previous coin, that may have been struck within the lifetime of Hormazd or shortly after his death. Later coins, such as the present example, deviate significantly from the normal official style, and a few late issues are known with additional Arabic inscriptions added to the design. (For examples, go to zeno.ru and use the search term "ZwZwN".) I therefore now consider this coin, and the previous one, as "Armenian-Sassanian" coinage. However, I do still have questions about the alleged use of ZwZwN as a denomination rather than as a mintmark. Why would local Armenian issuers (whether official or not) suddenly feel the need to put the denomination on coins? Sasanian coins had been circulating in Armenia for centuries by this point, presumably everyone would have recognized the designs and would not need to be told "this is a zuz". I don't have an alternative for what ZwZwN might have been intended to stand for, but I'm still not convinced that it's the denomination. Regardless, this is an interesting coin that raises a lot of questions, and that might benefit from further research. Please post whatever you have that's related, or explain to me why I'm wrong about this coin.
Those all say it's the mint. Here, look at these two. Note the bottom one that says it's the date and has the mint as "yr. 6" obviously has those two confused (e.g., how can a mint be "yr. 6?"). The top one, which is how all the others are, is how the date and mint should read; thus, I'd think, this says you're correct...
@eddiespin : I think I was unclear with my statement. When I wrote "For examples, go to..." I meant that that search term would bring up examples of the ZwZwN series from different time points, from the early possibly-official Hormazd IV, to clearly later imitations, to imitations incorporating Arabic inscriptions and thus clearly much later than Hormazd's lifetime. All the annotations in Zeno say that ZwZwN is a mintmark (except for the obvious transposition you noted), but those annotations are just what's submitted by the person uploading the photo, and while they may be based on good scholarship they can be mistaken. Of course it's natural to assume that ZwZwN is a mintmark- it's exactly where a mintmark would go on Sasanian coins- and (as I stated) I doubt the competing claim that it is a denomination. The evidence (particularly known find-spots) supports this type being minted in Armenia, over a thousand miles from the most often given potential spot of Zuzan (a tiny town in distant Khorasan), so I have no idea of the exact mint location in Armenia.
I see. They are assuming, then, and you want to know. I will just say then this is fascinating, and I enjoyed your sharing it, @Parthicus, thanks.
