Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
The Votive Deposit in Field 49
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="EWC3, post: 4305617, member: 93416"]I cannot comment in this context - but I certainly recognise the idea! For a while when I was trying to figure out jitals similar problems cropped up. Around 1200 to 1220 or so two powers were contending for Afghanistan. The Khwarezm Shah and the Ghorids. To distinguish them - at the very bottom of the inscription it ought to say Muhammed Sultan (Khwarezm Shah) or Muhammed bin Sam (Ghorid). In an awful lot of cases the last bit was just scribble, as if the die engraver was hedging his bets. Added to that, we have some fascinating private letters found hidden in a cave from 1211. They are from a guy whose job it apparently was to buy up old silver bullion coins using debased fiat jitals. He complains that he is frighted and seems to want an armed guard. But also, although his is involved in the financing of the Ghorid side, he apparently gives the superior title to the Khwarezm Shah, as if he knew total defeat was already predictable (events proved him right).</p><p><br /></p><p>Actually, in the end I abandoned the idea in that case, but other anonymous issues during the wars with the Mongols, and later coins at Delhi citing only the caliph, both again look like cities or mints might be hedging their bets in uncertain times.</p><p><br /></p><p>Rob T</p><p><br /></p><p>PS - its nice to see a "votive deposit" that actually is a votive deposit![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="EWC3, post: 4305617, member: 93416"]I cannot comment in this context - but I certainly recognise the idea! For a while when I was trying to figure out jitals similar problems cropped up. Around 1200 to 1220 or so two powers were contending for Afghanistan. The Khwarezm Shah and the Ghorids. To distinguish them - at the very bottom of the inscription it ought to say Muhammed Sultan (Khwarezm Shah) or Muhammed bin Sam (Ghorid). In an awful lot of cases the last bit was just scribble, as if the die engraver was hedging his bets. Added to that, we have some fascinating private letters found hidden in a cave from 1211. They are from a guy whose job it apparently was to buy up old silver bullion coins using debased fiat jitals. He complains that he is frighted and seems to want an armed guard. But also, although his is involved in the financing of the Ghorid side, he apparently gives the superior title to the Khwarezm Shah, as if he knew total defeat was already predictable (events proved him right). Actually, in the end I abandoned the idea in that case, but other anonymous issues during the wars with the Mongols, and later coins at Delhi citing only the caliph, both again look like cities or mints might be hedging their bets in uncertain times. Rob T PS - its nice to see a "votive deposit" that actually is a votive deposit![/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
The Votive Deposit in Field 49
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...