Catalog
Drachm - Kidarites Yazdegird I-imitation
| Issuer | Kidarite Kingdom |
|---|---|
| Year | 420 |
| 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 | 3.86 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 | Draped bust three-quarter facing right, surmounted by a helmet-shaped crown adorned with four crescent ornaments and a beaded solar disk finial; four billowing streamers issue from the rear of the crown. The portrait closely imitates the style of Sasanian king Yazdegird I. A partially legible legend in uncertain Bactrian or Sogdian script runs along the periphery of the field. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Bactrian or Sogdian |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | Log in to see details |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| 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 |
The Kidarites occupied the former Kushano-Sasanian territories in Bactria and the northwestern Indian subcontinent following the collapse of Kushan power in the fourth century. This issue imitates the coinage of Yazdegird I of the Sasanian Empire — a deliberate act of monetary mimicry that signals both the Kidarites' familiarity with Sasanian administrative conventions and their interest in projecting legitimacy through borrowed iconographic authority. The imitation likely postdates Yazdegird's death in 420, meaning the prototype and the copy are nearly contemporary.
Göbl's classification of these pieces within the Kushan emission sequence remains the standard, though Mitchiner's parallel attribution reflects ongoing scholarly disagreement about precise dynastic boundaries and attribution among the successor steppe kingdoms.