Catalog
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!
| Issuer | Sinkiang Province |
|---|---|
| Year | 1892-1893 |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | 1 Mithqual (0.1) |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | Log in to see details |
| 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 | Two large Chinese characters, 壹錢 (Yi Qian, meaning '1 Qian'), occupy the central field, arranged vertically. Arabic legends flank the central characters on either side: the denomination and mint name appear to the left and right in a cursive Uyghur-influenced Arabic script. The date in Arabic numerals (١٣١٠) appears within the legend. A beaded border circles the entire reverse, consistent with the obverse treatment and typical of hand-struck Kashgar mint issues. |
| Reverse script | Chinese/Arabic |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Kashgar's mint operated under chronic instability throughout the late Qing period — the city had only been retaken from Yaqub Beg's breakaway Yettishar state in 1877, and Beijing's grip on the region remained tenuous enough that local monetary production was largely improvised. The Kashgar issues of this period were hand-struck rather than machine-minted, which accounts for the irregular flans and off-center strikes endemic to the type.
The "without wreath" distinction separates this from the related Y#A16.1 variant. Both were produced in the same window, making the design differences likely the result of die engraver substitution rather than any deliberate policy change.