Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
1 Kasu - Mysore
| Issuer | Kingdom of Mysore |
|---|---|
| Year | 1745-1780 |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | 3.0 g |
| Diameter | Log in to see details |
| Thickness | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Technique | Log in to see details |
| Orientation | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | The reverse displays a bold geometric checker or lattice pattern filling the entire field, composed of intersecting raised lines forming a rectilinear grid of sunken squares, arranged in rows and columns. This distinctive reticulated design is a hallmark of Mysore kasu coinage of the Hyder Ali period and serves as the principal reverse type across several denominations. The pattern is deeply incuse between the raised dividing ridges, giving the surface a strongly textured, waffle-like appearance. The design extends to the irregular edge of the flan with no border or inscription. |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Plain |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
The Kingdom of Mysore under Hyder Ali — who seized effective control from the Wodeyar dynasty around 1761 — maintained a complex parallel coinage system, with small copper kasu pieces serving local market transactions that silver and gold fanams never reached. KM#149.2 distinguishes itself from the closely related 149.1 by subtle die differences that remain incompletely catalogued, leaving attribution of borderline specimens genuinely contested among specialists.