Author Topic: Crusader dirham (Read 524 times)

Bebek2006 · « **on:** February 12, 2023, 11:52:30 am »

Hi,
I don’t read Arabic, can You help me with legend translation?
Is this coin have replaced name of the prophet Muhammad with that of the Archangel Michael, or any other christian inscriptions?
And which catalogue number in Metcalf is it?
Regards,
Karol

Jan P · « **Reply #1 on:** February 12, 2023, 12:57:22 pm »

Hallo Bebek 2006,
I asked Google to transcribe and translate your coin. On the obverse nor on the reverse, Mohammed or the Archangel Michael seem to be mentioned.
Here is Googles work on the first side:
Other side follows.

Jan P · « **Reply #2 on:** February 12, 2023, 01:02:13 pm »

And here is the other side:
(For what it is worth)

Jan P · « **Reply #3 on:** February 12, 2023, 01:16:05 pm »

Numista says: Metcalf 1# 238 - 239.

JamesC11 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 12, 2023, 02:09:18 pm »

The reverse margins, where Michael would replace Muhammad, are pretty much obliterated. The main fields look all right as far as they go, but the calligraphy varies significantly from the example sketched in Malloy, COINS OF THE CRUSADER STATES, page 135 number 6 and illustrated in plate III.

Curtis JJ · « **Reply #5 on:** February 12, 2023, 03:31:56 pm »

I'm always fascinated by multicultural coins like this (and/or bilingual, bi-religious, and so on). It's interesting that multicultural/bilingual coins kept appearing again and again in the same regions over 1,000-1,500+ years, each time involving completely new sets of colliding cultures, languages, and religions (especially in the "Holy Land," also around Baktria, Sicily, Spain, and I'm sure elsewhere).

Quote from: JamesC11 on February 12, 2023, 02:09:18 pm

...margins, where Michael would replace Muhammad, are pretty much obliterated....

It's too bad that the crosses, if any, are obliterated too. (If I understand right, I think they'd be above the square, obv., and below on rev.?)

I'm new to these, but does Malloy CCS 6 correspond to other reference numbers you can search (e.g., Bates, Wackerlin, etc.)? Is it possible to find a die match w/ better margins in ACSearch, e.g.: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?term=malloy+michael+dirham OR michael+dirham+crusade [LINK] OR michael+dirham+Jerusalem [LINK] or substituting in reference numbers?

It won't help here, but below is my one example, dated 648 AH (1250/1 AD). I don't read Arabic (yet!), but the main legends look close (calligraphy a bit different).

Kingdom of Jerusalem. Imitating Ayyubid AR Dirham (20mm, 2.91 g, 10h) of Dimashq (Damascus), AH 648 (AD 1250/1). Ex Wackerlin (217.2) & Galst (Triton XXV, 6767):

Apparently right after this came the Papal edict prohibiting the Islamic legends (c. 1250/1)? Hence the switch from Muhammed to Michael?

Jan P · « **Reply #6 on:** February 12, 2023, 04:28:43 pm »

The Crusader Dirhams with christian text are these underneath.
As Curtis JJ said, they were struck later than the coin of our topic.

JamesC11 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 12, 2023, 08:00:22 pm »

Curtis JJ is correct as to the usual appearance of small Christian crosses on this type (III in Malloy following Bates) which is dated 643 AH, or A.D. 1245, where visible. In the example at issue here, one area is toast and the other off-flan. There is a corresponding half-dirham with crosses. The date may or may not be genuine. (All this is according to Malloy.) There are also Mikha'il dirhams without the marginal crosses, classed as Type III also. Trying to find die matches without even legible dates on Arabic script coins is a job for more patient minds than mine. Salaam.

Jan P · « **Reply #8 on:** February 13, 2023, 03:40:21 am »

Yes, JamesC11, I found a Dirham as those you are talking about.
I put it here underneath the species of our topic, so we can compare the texts:
To my opinion, these texts are pretty much the same.
In a minute I will post a comparison between the Michael text and the specimen I gave the text from to Google.

Jan P · « **Reply #9 on:** February 13, 2023, 04:01:14 am »

Here is the one, which delivered the texts in Replies# 1 and 2 to compare with the "Michael"-specimen underneath:
I think, I see three times the same text here ...