Andrew Dalby Posted January 23, 2007 Report Share Posted January 23, 2007 They were. These coins are dated XII C. Sorry. You didn't say that before! But my impression of this thread is that you are making assumptions and asking others to explain them. It may also help if you question your assumptions! As GO says, some Muslim rulers have produced portrait coins and still do, so, clearly, the rule is not applied in the same way by all. And I don't know on what grounds you tell us that the people you're talking about couldn't mint coins of the quality you describe. But it may be true, and it is also possible for coins to be restruck. Can you perhaps put up a link to pictures of the coins or to some fuller report of them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philhellene Posted January 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2007 But I already gave the link to Artuqid coin collection (see my first posting). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Dalby Posted January 23, 2007 Report Share Posted January 23, 2007 But I already gave the link to Artuqid coin collection (see my first posting). Apologies for asking for the link you had already provided! OK, these are not Arabian. If I am looking at the right coins, they are from the Artuqid (or Ortoqid) dynasty of northern Iraq-eastern Anatolia. It is, and was, a mainly Kurdish-speaking region, but the dynasty is Turkic and the language of the coins is no doubt Arabic (I leave it to others to read them!) I have not enough knowledge of coins of that region in that period to say in advance whether, somewhere in the area, there was the ability to strike such coins -- but it seems not unlikely, if it had in the past been under Byzantine and Persian control, and if it included cities such as Mosul, where coins might well have been struck over a long period. They don't look like restrikes to me -- they look like imitations, and it is indeed curious and very interesting that so many different styles are being imitated. A melting-pot of culture, it appears. Thanks very much for the link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Divi Filius Posted February 12, 2007 Report Share Posted February 12, 2007 (edited) I don't believe these were actually Arabs. The Artuqids were s Turkic dynasty in Anatolia. During this period the dynasties that took over with the split up of the Selcuk empire were still unlearned in administrative arts. It's very likely that they simply retook the coins and made them "theirs" by putting the inscriptions. Okay, Dalby answered it right above me. I didnt see it. Sorry! Edited February 12, 2007 by Divi Filius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Dalby Posted February 13, 2007 Report Share Posted February 13, 2007 I don't believe these were actually Arabs. The Artuqids were s Turkic dynasty in Anatolia. During this period the dynasties that took over with the split up of the Selcuk empire were still unlearned in administrative arts. It's very likely that they simply retook the coins and made them "theirs" by putting the inscriptions. Okay, Dalby answered it right above me. I didnt see it. Sorry! Well, it's nice that we turn out to agree, Divi Filius! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.