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 | Samarqand (ancient) |
|---|---|
| Year | 575-601 |
| 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 | Log in to see details |
| Diameter | 22 mm |
| 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 | Stylized bust of a ruler facing right, depicted in low relief within a circular border or ring. The portrait is rendered in a schematic, heavily abstracted Sogdian artistic style typical of pre-Islamic Central Asian coinage, with minimal facial detail discernible due to the broad, flat flan and heavy surface patination. No visible inscription or legend surrounds the effigy. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | Central device consisting of a stylized tamgha or dynastic symbol, possibly a trident or arrow-like motif, set within a circular border or ring. The device is rendered in the schematic manner characteristic of Sogdian civic coinage of Samarqand during the late 6th to early 7th century. The field is otherwise plain, with no surrounding legend visible. |
| 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 |
Samarqand's pre-Islamic bronze coinage from this period operated within a complex web of Sogdian city-state authority, often striking in the name of local rulers whose identities remain unresolved in the written record. Smirnova's corpus, published in 1981, remains the foundational reference for this material, though attribution continues to be revised as new finds from Central Asian excavations refine the typological sequence.
The "uncertain ruler" designation here is not evasion — it reflects genuine gaps that decades of scholarship have not closed.