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 | Golden Horde |
|---|---|
| Year | 1280-1310 |
| Type | Standard circulation coin |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| 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 | A two-line Arabic religious inscription in Kufic-influenced script occupies the central field, enclosed within a raised square cartouche. An additional line of text appears above the square frame, partially visible near the upper edge. The inscription reads 'huwa al-hayy al-thaqi' (He is alive), a divine epithet. The square cartouche sits within a plain circular field bounded by the irregular flan edge, consistent with the anonymous coinage of the Bulghar mint under the Golden Horde. |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | هو الحي الثاني (Translation: He is alive) |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Anonymous Bulgar dirhams of this type were struck during the period when the Golden Horde's monetary administration was deliberately decentralized, with frontier mints like Bulgar operating under considerable local autonomy. The tamga mark functioned as a dynastic identifier rather than a ruler's name — a practical solution when political authority at the center shifted fast enough to make named coinage an administrative liability.
The crescent-above-tamga combination on this emission has been the subject of attribution disputes; Sagdeeva and Singles diverge on the precise date range, reflecting genuine uncertainty about which khan's reign these anonymous pieces actually served.