tooled forgeries of kushan coins

7/25/2019 Tooled Forgeries of Kushan Coins

1/4

Supplement to Journal of Oriental Numis

Autumn 2008. P. 33-37.4. Paghava-Turkia-Janjgava 2010 - Pagh

Janjgava G. Some New Denomination CMinted in Georgia. Journal of Oriental202, Winter 2010. P. 13-15.

5. Paghava 2010 [Paghava I. The TbiliStandard, Denominations System and(Afsharid Dynasty Period). Studies

Contemporary History, 1(7). Tbilisi: Univ532.] (Original text in Georgian: faRavmonetebis woniTi standarti, nominmoWris teqnika (avSarianTa dinasaxali da uaxlesi istoriis s

Tbilisi: universali, 2010. gv. 515-536.

Pakhomov 1910 [Pakhomov Ye. Coins(Pre-Mongol Period). St.-Petersburg, 191Russian: . (). .-

7.

Pakhomov 1970 - [Pakhomov Ye. Coins1970.] (Original text in Russian: . , 1970.)

8. Turkia-Paghava 2008 - Turkia S., Pagha

Sirma Coinage: The Sirma Abazi of ADating. Caucasian Numismatics, PapersKartl-Kakheti (Eastern Georgia), 1744-1

Journal of Oriental Numismatic Society,P. 28-32.

COIN WITH GANDHA

MAURYAN SYMBO

By Hans Loeschner

The flat c. 17 mm diameter coin enlarged i

unpublished.62,

63,

64

The coin shows on oGandharan symbol65(Figure 2a) and on theelephant walking to right, there is a Mauryanof a three-arched hill surmounted by a crescent

a) b)

Figure 1: coin, c. 17 mm , 3

62 The coin shown was obtained in April 2009 fvendor at low price. There is no indication that the

63Bob Senior, private communication April 17th,far as I know unpublished and probably extrem

reverse symbol coming from the bent-bar silver co64 Robert Bracey, private communication April 22n

with this as with all unique or previously unpubli

are not what they seem to be. A colleague sugge

one could take a genuine coin and add other ma

rarer. That certainly does happen. This p

acknowledged.65 Alexander Fishman, Previously unknown Ga

from a recent hoard, JONS No. 222, pp. 26-28Society, London, Winter 2010).

17

atic Society, #197,

va I., Turkia S.,oins of Nadir Shahumismatic Society,

i Coinage: Weightinting Technique

in Modern and

rsali, 2010. P. 515- i. TbilisurialTa sistema datiis periodi).kiTxebi, #1(7)..)of Georgia. Part I

.] (Original text in. I

, 1910.)f Georgia.Tbilisi, .

a I. The Start of

H 1166 and itson the Coinage of01. Supplement to

197, Autumn 2008.

AN AND

S

n Figure 1 is so far

ne side a 6-armedther side, above ansymbol, consisting(Figure 2b).

.32 g

om a well respectedcoin is false.

009: The coin is asly important with the

ins.d, 2010: The dangershed items it that they

sted to me that some-

rks to make it appear

ossibility should be

ndharan punchmarks

(Oriental Numismatic

a)

Figure 2: a) Gandharan s

Whereas uniface silver scyphate

are quite common65

and some unithe silver units) have been founwith a Gandharan symbol asunknown.

The combination of an elepwell known from Taxila coinsBC68.

Scholars disagree about the tbar and scyphate coins; some overy long time period, stretchicentury BC69to possibly into theto this, through the study of ancicame to the conclusion that thebent-bar and scyphate coins shoul

Thus, without additional iGandharan and Mauryan symbolsattributed to a broad time span frhalf of the 2ndcentury BC. The pothe Mauryan empire, from the poof Taxila, or early Indo-Greek rul

Ackowledgements

The author thanks Robert Bracdiscussions on this coin.

A SPATE OF NEW, T

OF KUSHAN AND P

By Pankaj

One of the banes of the coin collin the coin market. Forgeries cancomplete fantasies, purporting toas the coin pictured in Figurecopies of known coins, perhaps hexamples, where the best, maybethe fakes is to spot mould replicat

66 Dilip Rajgor, Punchmarked CoiBooks International, California, 20

67 John Allan, Catalogue of the CLondon 1936 edition by Oriental

Delhi, 1975), pp. 223-224 and Plat68 Zeno.ru website, #2938469 Osmund Bopearachchi and Wilfri

Indicopleustoi Archaeologies of tTurnhout, 1998), pp. 7-10.

70Joe Cribb, Dating Indias EarliestArchaeology, edited by J. Schotsm

71Joe Cribb, Money as a Marker oCentral Asia, pp. 333-375 in AIslam, edited by Joe Cribb and GeBritish Academy Vol. 133 (Oxfor2007), p. 336 and p. 342, Fig. 4.

72 I wish to thank Peter Linenthal foaround Buddha coins and for sharing73According to Joe Lang, coins suchwestern China.

b)

mbol, b) Mauryan symbol

coins with the Gandhara symbol

face scyphate coins (imitatingd and published,66 flat coinshown in Figure 1 are so far

ant and the Maurya symbol is67which are allocated to ca. 200

ime period of Gandharan bent- inethat they were inuse over a

g from as early as the 6th/5thearly 2ndcentury BC. In contrastent coin hoards, Joe Cribb 70, 71minting of the Gandharan silverd be allocated to c. 350 - 250 BC.

formation, this coin withcan, for the time being, only bem the 3rdcentury BCto the firstsible issuers are authorities fromst-Mauryan Gandharan city staters.

y and Bob Senior for valuable

OLED FORGERIES

RATARJA COINS

Tandon72

ctor is the presence of forgeriescome in many forms. Some aree unique, exotic new types such

1.73 Others are very well-madeigh-pressure cast copies of actualeven the only, way to recognises exact copies of one another.

s of Early Historic India (Reesha1), p. 105, Type 566 and 567.oins of Ancient India, (reprint of

Books Reprint Corporation, New-

XXXII.

ed Pieper, Ancient Indian Coins,he Indian Ocean Vol. 2 (Brepols,

Coins,pp. 535-554 in South Asianns and M. Taddei (Naples, 1983).Cultural Continuity and Change in

ter Alexander Central Asia before

orgina Herrmann, Proceedings of thed University Press Inc., New York,

many helpful discussions centeringome photographs with me..s this one are being manufactured in


2/4


3/4

(a) Tooled billon drachm

(b) Genuine coin of same typ

Figure 4: Tooled and genuine drachms

A third example is another Pratarja coin tenough that I published the coin as genuine.78previous two coins, I decided to re-examineconcluded that it is false. I believe the coinormal quarter drachm of the Pratarja,shows the coin in panel (a) along with a genuithe same obverse die (and possibly the same r(b). Here, both sides of the coin have been heathe now-familiar edges on both the front anaround the neck and the back of the head showmatches the one on coin (b), but the facialentirely created.79More egregious is the reversfrom the ground, the reverse must haveencrusted: we see the remnants of that encr

edges of the coin even now. So the coin preand the forger had to decide what to create onPratarja coins have a swastika on the revseemed logical to the forger to insert a swastithe Yolamira quarter drachms actually do nreverse, as we see from the coin in panel (b)actual reverse design has been obliterated in ththe coin.

(a) Tooled coin

(b) Genuine coin

Figure 5: Quarter drachms of Yo78 See Pankaj Tandon: New Light on the PrChronicle166, 2006, coin T9 (p. 177).79 I suspect some very slight tooling around the nos(b) as well.

19

e

f Bhimarjuna

hat had me fooledBut after seeing theit, and I have nown was originally aolamira. Figure 5ne coin struck withverse die) in panel

vily tooled. We seed the back. Detailsthat the obverse diefeatures have beene. When it emergedbeen very heavilystation around the

ented a blank slateit. Since almost allerse, it must havea here as well. Butt have a swastika

. Unfortunately thee process of tooling

lamira

tarjas, Numismatic

e of the coin in panel

The little information I have abothey are found in the area of Lorthey then make their way to the bbe that the forgery workshop is acfrom the village where the faforgeries were made. These ebuying coins that may have beenshould watch carefully for signs

edges created when the forgerin order to create a sculptural eleIt was this awareness that ha

the past year, a number of Kreverses that appear to have beecoin types. Given the big price diand other bronzes, this would csuccessful. Exposure of these forway to warn collectors.

All these coins were circulatioffered as a Buddha coin, is quitecommon reverse such as Miirocarving the coin to enhance dsmooth down elements of the coiarm, in order to make it appear amay have been a Buddha to statamgha is clearly tooled and theThis casts doubt on the entire cchange in the patina of the coinof edge where the tooling toclearly tooled, with noticeable cidentifiable edges around the fiparts of the coins end. Coin (e)engineered, even to the extent ofappears on the gold coins but ne(f) is a smaller denomination dracoriginal deity has been carved aBuddha and the BOO legereverses matched any of the die

Buddha bronzes by Cribb.80Since these coins are norm

unsurprising to see examples inshown here. Readers are advisedcoins!

(a

(b

80See Joe Cribb: Kanishkas BuddhArt and Archaeology6, 1999/2000, p

t the origin of these coins is thatlai in Pakistani Balochistan, but

azaars of Peshawar. It could welltive in the Peshawar area, not farmous 19th century Utmanzaiamples suggest that collectorssourced in that area of the worldof tooling, particularly for the

tarts to dig into the coin surfaceent.s also led me to identify, withinushan bronzes with Buddha

manufactured by tooling otherparity between the Buddha coinsrtainly be a lucrative activity ifgeries is therefore desirable as a

g in the trade market. Coin 6(a),clearly not one at all, but a moreor Mao. Here, rather than re-

tail, the forger has attempted to, such as the normal raised righta front-facing Buddha. Coin (b)

rt with, but the area around thetamgha itself is not the original.in. Close examination reveals around the figure, marking a sortk place. Coins (c) and (d) areanges in the surface patina andures showing where the genuinehas had the entire reverse re-

a created legend BOO, whicher on the bronzes. Finally, coinhm or quarter unit, on which theway to be replaced by a seatedd. Incidentally, none of theseshown in the detailed study of

lly found quite worn, it is notpoor condition such as the onesto exercise care in buying these

)

)

image coins revisited, in Silk Road. 151-189.


4/4

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

Fig. 6: Tooled Buddha bronzes of

Lastly, I recently saw the photo of a rather unbeen sent to the British Museum for identifiseen in Figure 7, is a normal Kanishka tetrawith a deity, most probably Athsho, on the radditional seated figure (a Buddha accordinsent it to the Museum) at right.

Fig. 7: A tooled Kanishka bronze with create

If genuine, this coin would be unique, and wexplanation and interpretation of its reversprobably not genuine, but rather a new typwhere an entirely new design element hasgenuine coin. In the colour photograph I hadpatina around the seated figure and the head o

81I thank Robert Bracey for bringing this and themy attention.

20

Kanishka

usual coin that hadcation.81 The coin,rachm or full unit,verse, but with anto the person who

additional figure

ould cry out for ane. However, it is

of tooled forgeryeen carved onto aat my disposal, thethe deity is a fresh

ext discussed coin to

copper colour, entirely different fa normal dark green. Since I hacannot be absolutely certain abocould check to see whether the sethe high points are lower than athe change in patina around the stell-tale edge that the tooled foI am fairly certain that the reversdie as Gbl 772.5,82a Kanishka

seated figure on the coin in Figurof the flan where the legend A detect the bottom of the letterwhere it would have been on thethis would be conclusive evidenc

This coin calls to mind anothrecently published as genuine: anshowing Siva cursing Apasmwonder if this also is a tooled fora normal four-armed Siva, withseated figure at left where the tpresence of this figure is whatthis coin and made its publicationcoin in Figure 7, it behoves us toHuvishka coin also it coulworkshop, working with the sotherwise normal coins. Theinterrupts the circular dottedrendering it clear that the figuredesign. Was it added as an aftertOr was it added by a moderninteresting, unique, coin out of awas obviously done well enoBopearachchi and Pieper.

Figure 8: A genuine Huvis

In Figure 8, I illustrate a coinHuvishka elephant-rider with O if I had a die-match to the Bopeathink this is one, although it is vemy coin was the die flaw that harea on the reverse. Quite possibltamgha details broke down, givicoins once struck. On my coin,metal on the surface of the coin.hands of a forger bent upon crtypes, such a blob of metal coulsimilar to the one on the BopearFigure 7.

Knowing that there is a workPeshawar area, hard at work at althought, and one that makes it icoins from the area, especially Kin evaluating new or unusual coin

82 Robert Gbl: Mnzprgung dessterreichischen Akademie der Wisse83 Osmund Bopearachchi &Apasmarapurusa on a Huvishka coin,Society, No. 200 (Summer 2009), pp.

rom the rest of the coin, which isve not held the coin in hand, Iut my conclusion. In hand, oneated figure is in relief or whetherroper relief would indicate. Butated figure serves to provide thegeries all seem to have. Further,is actually struck from the sameronze with Athsho reverse. The

7 has been carved onto the areaO would have been. I believe Ibelow the seated figure, just

ie of Gbl 772.5. If I am correct,that the coin is a tooled forgery.

er unusual Kushan coin that waselephant-rider Huvishka bronze

rapurusa,83 and one begins togery. The coins reverse showedthe legend OO at right, but aamgha normally would be. Theas interesting and unique aboutworthwhile. But, after seeing thequestion the genuineness of the

be the product of the sameme idea of adding figures tofigure on the Huvishka coinorder of the reverse design,as not an element of the originalought by the original die-cutter?forger, attempting to create ancommon bronze? If the latter, itugh to fool experts such as

ka bronze with a die flaw

from my collection, a bronzeO reverse. I was looking to seerachchi-Pieper coin and I do notry close. What caught my eye ons developed around the tamghaa pit developed in the die as theg rise to a protuberance on the

the result is a shapeless blob ofBut I could imagine that, in theating new and interesting coin

d be turned into a seated figureachchi-Pieper coin or the one in

shop, perhaps somewhere in theering ancient coins is a soberingncumbent upon all collectors ofushan coins, to be very cautioustypes that appear in the market.

Kunreiches, Vienna: Verlag dernschaften, 1984.Wilfried Pieper: Siva cursingJournal of the Oriental Numismatic

35-6.

tooled forgeries of kushan coins

Documents