Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
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!
Unknown Æ - Wanwan Kanju, 2nd period, regular tamgha
| Issuer | Kangju Kingdom |
|---|---|
| Year | 201-601 |
| 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 | Crude bust of a long-haired, diademed ruler facing left, rendered in a debased provincial style characteristic of Central Asian coinage of the period. The hair falls in thick, roughly delineated strands framing the face, and the diadem is indicated by a band across the forehead. The portrait occupies the full field of the flan, with no visible legend or inscription on the obverse. The overall execution reflects the declining engraving standards associated with later Kangju issue types. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| 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 | ND (201-601) |
| Additional information |
The Kangju were a semi-nomadic confederation controlling the middle Syr Darya basin during a period when Chinese sources — particularly the Shiji and Hanshu — document them as a power capable of fielding 120,000 mounted archers and playing Han China against the Xiongnu for leverage. The "Wanwan Kanju" attribution places this within the local dynastic coinage system identified by Shagalov and Kuznetsov, whose classification remains the primary framework for this poorly-documented series. The 400-year date range reflects genuine scholarly uncertainty, not carelessness.
The tamgha — the clan or dynastic mark — is the key diagnostic element distinguishing issues within the series, more reliable than fabric or weight alone given the inconsistency of production across generations of rulers whose names are almost entirely unrecorded.