Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;AnYangMan, post: 2843514, member: 87271&quot;]Well, let&#039;s give it a try. The rightmost piece, inscribed 两 Liang, is not part of the rest of the coin, I’d wager. Note that I don’t have it in hand, but the patination looks a little different than the rest of the coin. The rest of the coin seems to have a pretty raised rim, this piece does not. The other parts have an obvious square hole, this looks way more like a round hole cash. Also note the fact that, if the picture isn’t playing tricks with my eyes, the 两 part is shown in way more relief than the rest.</p><p><br /></p><p>We’ll start with this 两 Liang piece. On the right side, we obviously see part of the edge, and can thus conclude that this character appeared on the right side of a coin. That rules out most Ban Liangs, except for the rare few that have inverted charachters. There are two (three, actually) other types, with Liang to the right. There are two main varieties of the Liang Zi type, one with and one without rim. Looking at our fragment, the latter could be a candidate. The last coin with Liang on the right side is the Qin state 重一两十(二/四)铢&nbsp; Zhong Yi Liang Shi (er/si) Zhu. I highly doubt this piece originally had a square hole (look at its left edge), this, in combination with the shape Liang has (trapezoidal, with long, protruding strokes on the bottom) and the way the top stroke is tilted slight left, towards the hole, leads me to believe it is indeed the coin mentioned directly above, a Zhong Yi Liang Shi (er/si) Zhu.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now onto the rest of the coin on the bottom right. You already mention that it isn’t in Hartill. At first I was quite puzzled by the coin. A square hole? Rims? The character on the left (an archaic form for Jiu 九, nine)? As far as I know, there was never a Chinese coin denominated in nines. Then the other part, let’s call it the ‘Shan’ 山-components, for there are two next to each other (you can see this clearly on the sellers pics). I originally thought it would be a part of the Gong character, as on the coin centre-bottom. But that character on a square-holed cash simply doesn’t exist. Then it dawned on me. I have seen it! A while ago, when visiting a fellow collector, (you undoubtedly know who), I actually handled such an object. And why it isn’t in Hartill? Well, it is called Cast Chinese<b> Coins</b>. And this isn’t actually a <b>coin</b>…..</p><p><br /></p><p>Jiuling (酒令) is an ancient Chinese drinking game. I am not even familiar with contemporary drinking games, let alone those played halfway across the world two millennia ago, so I can’t comment on how it is played. The only thing I know, is that you apparently use tokens in some sort of way. This is such a token, which is the reason they aren’t in Hartill. The series is rather extensive, and many varieties exist, in terms of size, the presence of rims and inscriptions. All however feature a number, all numbers up to I believe 23 are known, and the character&nbsp; di 第. The latter translates to something along the lines of “Number”or in combination with such a number the “twentieth”, “fifth”, “eight”, etc. There are also a couple of rare varieties that seemingly denote some sort of worth in Liang (such as the top coin posted below), leading many scholars, such as Coole, to believe they were actually coins. The other comment that you make, that it is relatively heavy for a coin of such size, also checks out. The specimen pictured below weights in at 23 gram and has a diameter of 45 mm. Smaller, 33 mm, examples are also known, but they remain relatively heavy.</p><p><br /></p><p>As said, your coin has the inscription DiJiu 九<b>第</b>, “ninth”. I was originally confused, but the fragment you put at the bottom, is actually the top right part of the coin.&nbsp; Then it all adds up. Coole still included them in his catalogue, although he wrongly attributes them to the Zhou period. I have attached a couple of pictures. All these come from Coole’s catalogue, and the last piece is the one I handled, numbered “19” and rimless.&nbsp; I have not been able to find a good picture of a DiJiu 九<b>第 </b>token, but the top one actually has similar calligraphy on the&nbsp; Jiu 九character. Do you agree with my attribution?</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]673321[/ATTACH]</p><p>[ATTACH=full]673323[/ATTACH]</p><p>[ATTACH=full]673325[/ATTACH]</p><p>Concerning the age of this piece; they seemingly date to the (Western) Han. They are often found in tombs dating to this period, but almost always in a larger set. I don’t have an awful lot of data concerning this type, but one tomb sported a set ranging from number 4 to 23. Another contained token with numbers ranging from 1 to 23, but with two missing. This, in my opinion, further proves their status as not being coins. What are the odds an entire set was pulled from circulation, all in the same condition?</p><p><br /></p><p>Besides the fact that it isn’t a coin, it still has an interesting story to tell. On top of that, they are quite rare. Ding priced them at 300 dollars in 1939, an astronomical amount back then. I do find it odd that it was found in this specific lot. How did it end up in a lot of broken coins, all being datable to a century prior to its supposed issuing date? Still, an amazing deal. I mean, you could sell those Ming knives for more than $27!</p><p><br /></p><p>That being said, I wish you the best of luck with finding out whether or not they are authentic. I am afraid I am of little help in this aspect. Although I do find that Lin round coin to look a little ‘off’. I can’t put my finger on what exactly looks off though….</p><p><br /></p><p>Mika[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in