We found 172622 price guide item(s) matching your search
There are 172622 lots that match your search criteria. Subscribe now to get instant access to the full price guide service.
Click here to subscribe- List
- Grid
-
172622 item(s)/page
Lot 147
SELECTION OF FASHION JEWELLERYcomprising a Thomas Sabo Charm Club pearl bracelet with stiletto charm; a Thomas Sabo Charm Club silver necklace with an ice cream cone and an 'R' charm; a Swarovski crystal bangle; a Michael Kors bangle; and a Mi Moneda silver gilt carrier pendant with crystal set coin and chain
Lot 40
ABBASID, AL-MUSTA‘IN (248-251h), Dinar, Tiflis 248h. OBVERSE: plain, without name of heir. WEIGHT: 4.21g. REFERENCES: Bernardi type 160; cf Pakhomov II, 23 [a dirham of this date with similar legends]. CONDITION: Minor marks, very fine and of the highest rarity, apparently unpublished and the only known Abbasid gold coin from this mint
Lot 11
UMAYYAD, TEMP. YAZID II (102-105h), Dirham, al-Andalus 105h. OBVERSE: Annulets (if any) off-flan. REVERSE: Annulets o o o o o. WEIGHT: 2.95g. REFERENCE: cf Klat 118.b, citing a single example of this type. CONDITION: Good very fine and extremely rare. During the course of the year 105h the calligraphy at the mint of al-Andalus underwent a major stylistic change. Early dirhams of 103h and 104h show the curved style of lettering associated with Damascus and mints in the North and West, while later coins have the angular script associated with Wasit and the East. Only one other example of a dirham dated 105h with this earlier calligraphy appears to have been published (Klat 118.b), on which the diameter of the obverse field is considerably smaller meaning that the annulets in the outer border are clearly visible. The present coin, which is of full weight and struck on a broad flan, has a much wider obverse field, meaning that the marginal legend is almost at the rim of the coin and no border is visible. If the obverse die did carry annulets, these must have been placed outside the triple circle around the marginal legend, and it is difficult to see how they could ever have been visible on a coin struck on a regular flan.
Lot 3
OBVERSE: In field: Armoured bust to right, holding sheathed sword in right hand, with name of the Sasanian ruler Khusraw in Pahlawi to right and gdh apzwt (‘may his glory increase’) to left. In border: bismillah la i- laha illa Allah wa – hdahu Muhammad ra – sul Allah, divided by stars-in-crescents except above the bust, where the star-in-crescent is replaced by a pellet-within-annulet. REVERSE: In field: Arch supported on columns, within which is a vertical barbed spear which has two pennants floating to the left just below the head; to right and left of the columns: khalifat Allah - amir al-mu’minin; to either side of the spear-shaft: nasr – Allah. In border: Four stars-in-crescents, with Pahlawi ap (‘praise’) at one o’clock. WEIGHT: 3.54g. REFERENCES: Treadwell 2005, 2 same dies; Walker p.24, ANS.5, same reverse die = Gaube 2.3.2.4. CONDITION: Very fine to good very fine, excessively rare and a type of considerable historical significance. One of the greatest and most sought-after rarities of the Arab-Sasanian series, the ‘Mihrab and ‘Anaza’ drachm has been rightly described as ‘extraordinary’ (Grabar, O., The Formation of Islamic Art, revised and enlarged edition, Yale, 1987), and ‘a very valuable little archaeological document’ (Miles, ‘Mihrab and ‘Anazah’). Many of the difficulties of interpreting this piece stem from the fact that it lacks both date and mint-name. Most scholars have assumed that it was struck at Damascus. Firstly, the mean weight of extant specimens is about 3.6-3.7g, which is somewhat lighter than the standard maintained at mints in the East but consistent with other Arab-Sasanian issues struck at Damascus in the early-mid 70s. Secondly, Damascus was the Umayyad capital where other experimental drachms were struck, including the Standing Caliph type with which the Mihrab and ‘Anaza drachms have often been compared. This may very well be correct, although it will be suggested below that other possibilities should also be considered. The latest study of this issue is that of Treadwell (2005), who plausibly interprets the imagery on this coin as a reaction to perceived problems with the design of the Standing Caliph drachms, which he argues must have been struck immediately before the Mihrab and ‘Anaza type. On this analysis, the Standing Caliph type was produced to accompany the Standing Caliph dinars and fulus introduced in Syria in the previous year. Treadwell notes that the gold and copper issues conformed to ‘the traditional numismatic formula that located the ruler on the obverse and a religious symbol on the reverse,’ while the ‘Standing Caliph’ drachm ‘contained two conflicting images of rulership…it is the Shahanshah’s imposing bust that dominates the imagery of the coin, not the cramped figure of the caliph on the reverse’ (Treadwell, p.11). The Mihrab and ‘Anaza type rectifies this by changing the design of the Sasanian bust so that it is recognisably the Caliph who appears on the obverse, and by replacing the standing figure on the reverse with an image of the Prophet’s spear mounted within an arch. Unfortunately, while this argument neatly explains the imagery, it clashes awkwardly with the legends. The bust which Treadwell identifies as the caliph himself is in fact labelled in Pahlawi as that of Khusraw, while the spear on the reverse carries the legends khalifat Allah – amir al-mu’minin. It is possible to argue, as Treadwell does, that ‘the Standing Caliph drachm was an unsuccessful hybrid that had been cobbled together at speed [and so] it would not be surprising if its hastily executed substitute were also deficient in some respects.’ But the addition of nasr Allah beside the spear on the reverse shows that the legends were not merely slavishly copied from a preceding type, and it seems hard to imagine that such sophisticated thought should have been given to the imagery only for the legends to have been applied so inappropriately. Furthermore, closer examination reveals that the images on both sides of this type are less straightforward then they may first appear. The figure on the obverse, whom Treadwell identified as being the caliph, wears a peculiar type of headgear, has cross-hatching across his breast to represent a different type of dress from the norm, and rather awkwardly carries a sheathed sword. Treadwell notes that the figure on the reverse of the Standing Caliph drachm, like that on the obverse of the gold and copper Standing Caliph types, similarly carries a sheathed sword, and he therefore suggests that this feature identifies the Mihrab and ‘Anaza bust as that of the caliph also. He has no explanation for the design of the crown or helmet, beyond noting that it is does not look like any other crown seen on the coinage of any Sasanian ruler. As for the cross-hatch pattern on the figure’s breast, Treadwell’s explanation is that this is chiefly an artistic rather than a naturalistic feature, designed to allow the sheathed sword to feature more prominently. Unfortunately, neither the cross-hatching nor the headgear looks even remotely like the dress of the Standing Caliph figure and so, much as with the problematic legends, these features do nothing to support to the suggestion that the Mihrab and ‘Anaza drachm was designed to improve and rectify the Standing Caliph type. The object on the reverse, to which Miles devoted most of his attention, has traditionally been identified as a spear or lance within a mihrab. It was Miles who refined this, specifiying that the spear was the ‘anaza of the Prophet himself, and suggesting rather more cautiously that the mihrab could be identified more precisely as the niche type (mihrab mujawwaf). If so, this coin would be the earliest depiction of this important Islamic architectural feature. Miles’ interpretation of the arch as a mihrab has met with a mixed reception among later scholars. Some have endorsed his view that the feature is indeed a Muslim mihrab rather than any other kind of arch, while others (including Treadwell) have pointed out that arches of this type are found on coins struck by all three Abrahamic religions. Connections with the Christian sacrum in Jerusalem (the arch which stood over the True Cross) have been suggested. In this way, this remarkable coin would have played its part in the so-called ‘war of images’ between the Christians and Muslims during this period. It is perhaps worth remembering, however, that the Mihrab and ‘Anaza type is not so securely tied to Damascus during the mid-70s Hijri as some might imply. Treadwell reports that Miles himself ‘did not consider that the coin, as he had described it, fitted smoothly into the series of Damascus silver coinage of the mid-690s.’ The type is not dated, and while the metrology does argue against these drachms having been struck as part of the main series produced in the East, Damascus was not the only place where lighter Arab-Sasanian drachms were being issued at this time. Drachms struck in Armenia and the North (see lot 1) during the 70s seem to have been struck to a weight standard in the region of 3.3g, and like the Mihrab and ‘Anaza type carry on the obverse a bust which is clearly Sasanian but is obviously different from the familiar Khusraw II type which had become the standard in the East for decades. Another curious feature of the Mihrab and ‘Anaza drachms is the large number of dies used: the seven specimens listed by Treadwell were struck from seven obverse and six reverse dies. Is this consistent with a short-lived, experimental type concocted hastily in Damascus and quickly abandoned, or might this be better explained in the context of a short-lived, specific event such as a military campaign?For the full version of this footnote please see the PDF at www.mortonandeden.com/pdfcats/85.pdf
Lot 90
FATIMID, AL-MAHDI (297-322h), Dinar, without mint-name, 311h. OBVERSE: In field: billah | la ilaha illa | Allah wahdahu | la sharik lahu | amir al-mu’minin. REVERSE: In field: ‘Abdallah | Muhammad | rasul | Allah | al-Mahdi. WEIGHT: 4.22g. REFERENCE: cf Nicol 93a, with different legends in fields. CONDITION: Edge marks, otherwise about very fine and extremely rare. The arrangement of legends in the fields on this coin appears to be unpublished.
Lot 113
BUWAYHID, RUKN AL-DAWLA, Donative half-dirham with broad margins, Madinat al-Salam 347h. OBVERSE: In inner margin: bismillah duriba bi-Madinat al-Salam sanat… (i.e. without name of denomination). In field: letters ‘ayn and ‘ra above, below religious legend: Mu‘izz al-dawla | Abu’l-Husayn | Buwayh. REVERSE: In field, below name of caliph: Rukn al-dawla | Abu ‘Ali | Buwayh. WEIGHT: 1.50g. REFERENCE: cf Treadwell Ms347G, dies O2/R2 for a gold coin struck from these dies. CONDITION: Extremely fine and apparently unrecorded in silver. The mint/date formula lacks the denomination and so would be suitable for striking both gold and silver coins. The gold specimen from these dies illustrated by Treadwell (Shamma 8207) also appears to be a half-dinar by weight, much as the present coin is intended as a half-dirham, although the broad outer margins are not visible on the gold striking.
Lot 114
BUWAYHID, ABU KALIJAR, Dinar, Amul 438h. OBVERSE: In field: Shah | la ilaha illa Allah | wahdahu la sharik lahu | Shahanshah al-A- | ‘zama malik al-A- | rd. REVERSE: In field: lillah | Muhammad rasul Allah | al-Qa’im bi-amr allah | Fakhr Din Allah | Sultan Din Allah | Abu Kalijar | Buwayh. WEIGHT: 3.18g. CONDITION: Very fine to good very fine and of the highest rarity, apparently unpublished. This unrecorded coin sheds new light on the history of Amul during the fifth century. Writing in 1967 Stern knew of no coins from Amul for the century between 388h (a Buwayhid dirham) and 486h (a Seljuq dinar). Since then three dinars of Amul dated 437h, 439h and 441h have come to light (see Diler p. 27), all struck in the name of the Great Seljuq ruler Tughril Beg, suggesting that Stern was correct to assume that Amul came under Seljuq control during the course of the 5/11th century. The present piece, however, demonstrates that the Buwayhid Abu Kalijar was able to strike coins in his name in Amul for at least this one year during this period of Seljuq rule. It may have been this that prompted the Seljuqs themselves to issue coins there at this time and thereby confirm their own authority, given that Amul otherwise seems to have been largely inactive as a mint for the decades between 390-480h.
![Abbasid, fals, Jund Qinnasrin, undated (possibly 160s?), 3.15g, obv., in margin: bismillah duriba […] Musa b. ‘Abdallah bi-Ju](https://cdn.globalauctionplatform.com/40758b95-a715-4cac-b3e2-a745010a9e88/f9cf7014-e2b5-4308-dc84-dcd686c5cddb/468x382.jpg)
Lot 254
Abbasid, fals, Jund Qinnasrin, undated (possibly 160s?), 3.15g, obv., in margin: bismillah duriba […] Musa b. ‘Abdallah bi-Jund Qinnasrin, rev., in margin: bismillah mimma amr bihi al-amir […]; in field: ala yaday / Musa b. ‘Abdallah, 3.16g, almost very fine and of the highest rarity. The term ‘Jund’ denotes an administrative district, and so ‘Jund Qinnasrin’ presumably refers to the ardistrict with Qinnasrin as its principal town. This unpublished coin appears to be the only known occurrence of the mint-name ‘Jund Qinnasrin’ in the coinage record.
Loading...-
172622 item(s)/page