Volledige afbeeldingen bekijken — gratis registratie
Doorgaan met Google — het is gratis of registreer met e-mail

Waarom registreren? Alleen om bots buiten ons catalogus te houden. Uw e-mail blijft privé — we delen het nooit en sturen u niets zonder uw toestemming. Dat garanderen wij u!

11/2 Falus - Ahmad Shah III

Uitgever Gujarat, Sultanate of
Jaar 1555-1559
Type Log in om details te zien
Waarde Log in om details te zien
Valuta Rupee (1396-1583)
Samenstelling Log in om details te zien
Gewicht Log in om details te zien
Diameter Log in om details te zien
Dikte Log in om details te zien
Vorm Log in om details te zien
Techniek Log in om details te zien
Oriëntatie Log in om details te zien
Graveur(s) Log in om details te zien
In omloop tot Log in om details te zien
Referentie(s) Log in om details te zien
Beschrijving voorzijde Hammered copper flan bearing a multi-line Arabic legend arranged across the field, reading 'al-Sultan Ahmad Shah ibn Mahmud Shah', attributing the coin to Sultan Ahmad Shah III, son of Mahmud Shah, ruler of the Gujarat Sultanate. The inscription is executed in a bold, somewhat irregular Naskh script typical of mid-16th century Gujarati copper coinage. The field shows no figural imagery, consistent with Islamic numismatic convention. The coin surface displays characteristic green and red patination with encrustation from long burial.
Schrift voorzijde Arabic
Opschrift voorzijde Log in om details te zien
Beschrijving keerzijde Log in om details te zien
Schrift keerzijde Log in om details te zien
Opschrift keerzijde Log in om details te zien
Rand Log in om details te zien
Muntplaats Log in om details te zien
Oplage Log in om details te zien
Aanvullende informatie

Ahmad Shah III ruled Gujarat for less than four years before the Mughal emperor Akbar absorbed the sultanate in 1572 — though Ahmad himself was deposed well before that, removed by his own nobles in 1561. This issue dates to his effective reign, a period of acute internal instability during which the Gujarat sultanate was losing coherence faster than it was losing territory. Coinage continued because commerce demanded it, not because the court had any firm grip on monetary administration.

MISSCHIEN OOK INTERESSANT