India, Mughal India, 1705 AD., Aurangzeb, Burhanpur mint, Rupee, KM 300.24.
India, Mughal empire, Muhi ud-din Muhammad Aurangzeb Bahadur Alamgir I (1658-1707), Burhanpur mint, dated AH 1116 / regnal year 49 (= 1705 AD.),
Rupee (ø 23-24 mm / 10,91 g), silver, axis irregular alignment ↑↖ (ca. 320°), one x-shaped punchmark on edge,
Obv.: … ۱۱۱۶ ... , Sikka [Zad, Dar Jahan], Chu Badr-e-munir, 1116, Shah Aurangzeb Alamgir (“Stamped coin, in the world, like the bright full Moon, 1116, Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir“), emperor, “Badr Couplet“ and AH-date, circular test punch at uper center.
Rev.: … ۴۹ … , manus maimanat, sana jalus 49, zarb Burhanpur (“Struck at Burhanpur in the 49th year of his reign of tranquil prosperity“), circular test punch at center.
KM 300.24 ; Zeno 30654 .
For the mint name location cf. http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,16067.msg111542.html#msg111542 . For most of the other words : http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,30083.0.html .
“Salvete“ on http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,5731.msg36040.html#msg36040 :
“The difference in character and religious outlook (which greatly affected what was allowed to be depicted on coins) between Aurangzeb Alamgir and his predecessors is legendary and the word 'bigot' has been bandied about by his detractors. When little bits of decoration began to appear on his coins, it was taken as a sign that, because of his stretching of the empire's resources in the Deccan campaign, and tunnel vision regarding everything else, that he was beginning to 'lose his grip.' Not only on the empire, perhaps also on reality? A very sad end to a troubled and unhappy life. Followed by a bloody and pointless war of accession because 'there is only room for one king in each land.' India is such a small place, after all!! Burhanpur was regarded as 'Gateway to the Deccan'. “
After Aurangzeb, the Mughal empire had gradually begun to break up and the history of India in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is one of a multitute of independent States. But outwardly they maintained the prestige of the Mughal empire.
Kontakt 
![India, Mughal India, 1705 AD., Aurangzeb, Burhanpur mint, Rupee, KM 300.24.
India, Mughal empire, Muhi ud-din Muhammad Aurangzeb Bahadur Alamgir I (1658-1707), Burhanpur mint, dated AH 1116 / regnal year 49 (= 1705 AD.),
Rupee (ø 23-24 mm / 10,91 g), silver, axis irregular alignment ↑↖ (ca. 320°), one x-shaped punchmark on edge,
Obv.: … ۱۱۱۶ ... , Sikka [Zad, Dar Jahan], Chu Badr-e-munir, 1116, Shah Aurangzeb Alamgir (“Stamped coin, in the world, like the bright full Moon, 1116, Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir“), emperor, “Badr Couplet“ and AH-date, circular test punch at uper center.
Rev.: … ۴۹ … , manus maimanat, sana jalus 49, zarb Burhanpur (“Struck at Burhanpur in the 49th year of his reign of tranquil prosperity“), circular test punch at center.
KM 300.24 ; Zeno 30654 .
For the mint name location cf. http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,16067.msg111542.html#msg111542 . For most of the other words : http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,30083.0.html .
AH Year (AD.) // regnal Year / Mint Mark / Mintage / Details
1078 (1668) //10
1085 (1675) //18
1086 (1676) //18
1086 (1676) //19
1087 (1676)
1089 (1678)
1090 (1679)
1091 (1680)
1092 (1681)
1093 (1682)
1094 (1683)
1095 (1684)
1096 (1685)
1097 (1686)
1098 (1687)
1099 (1688)
1100 (1689)
1101 (1690)
1102 (1691)
1103 (1692)
1104 (1693)
1105 (1694)
1106 (1695)
1107 (1696) //39
1108 (1697)
1109 (1698)
1110 (1699)
1111 (1700)
1112 (1701)
1113 (1702)
1114 (1703)
1115 (1704)
1116 (1705)
1117 (1706) //49
1117 (1706) //50
1118 (1707) //51
“Salvete“ on http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,5731.msg36040.html#msg36040 :
“The difference in character and religious outlook (which greatly affected what was allowed to be depicted on coins) between Aurangzeb Alamgir and his predecessors is legendary and the word 'bigot' has been bandied about by his detractors. When little bits of decoration began to appear on his coins, it was taken as a sign that, because of his stretching of the empire's resources in the Deccan campaign, and tunnel vision regarding everything else, that he was beginning to 'lose his grip.' Not only on the empire, perhaps also on reality? A very sad end to a troubled and unhappy life. Followed by a bloody and pointless war of accession because 'there is only room for one king in each land.' India is such a small place, after all!! Burhanpur was regarded as 'Gateway to the Deccan'. “
After Aurangzeb, the Mughal empire had gradually begun to break up and the history of India in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is one of a multitute of independent States. But outwardly they maintained the prestige of the Mughal empire.
Schlüsselwörter: India Mughal Aurangzeb Burhanpur Rupee](images/image.gif?id=491535008528 "Klicken für Bild in voller Größe
==============
India, Mughal India, 1705 AD., Aurangzeb, Burhanpur mint, Rupee, KM 300.24.
India, Mughal empire, Muhi ud-din Muhammad Aurangzeb Bahadur Alamgir I (1658-1707), Burhanpur mint, dated AH 1116 / regnal year 49 (= 1705 AD.),
Rupee (ø 23-24 mm / 10,91 g), silver, axis irregular alignment ↑↖ (ca. 320°), one x-shaped punchmark on edge,
Obv.: … ۱۱۱۶ ... , Sikka [Zad, Dar Jahan], Chu Badr-e-munir, 1116, Shah Aurangzeb Alamgir (“Stamped coin, in the world, like the bright full Moon, 1116, Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir“), emperor, “Badr Couplet“ and AH-date, circular test punch at uper center.
Rev.: … ۴۹ … , manus maimanat, sana jalus 49, zarb Burhanpur (“Struck at Burhanpur in the 49th year of his reign of tranquil prosperity“), circular test punch at center.
KM 300.24 ; Zeno 30654 .
For the mint name location cf. http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,16067.msg111542.html#msg111542 . For most of the other words : http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,30083.0.html .
AH Year (AD.) // regnal Year / Mint Mark / Mintage / Details
1078 (1668) //10
1085 (1675) //18
1086 (1676) //18
1086 (1676) //19
1087 (1676)
1089 (1678)
1090 (1679)
1091 (1680)
1092 (1681)
1093 (1682)
1094 (1683)
1095 (1684)
1096 (1685)
1097 (1686)
1098 (1687)
1099 (1688)
1100 (1689)
1101 (1690)
1102 (1691)
1103 (1692)
1104 (1693)
1105 (1694)
1106 (1695)
1107 (1696) //39
1108 (1697)
1109 (1698)
1110 (1699)
1111 (1700)
1112 (1701)
1113 (1702)
1114 (1703)
1115 (1704)
1116 (1705)
1117 (1706) //49
1117 (1706) //50
1118 (1707) //51
“Salvete“ on http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,5731.msg36040.html#msg36040 :
“The difference in character and religious outlook (which greatly affected what was allowed to be depicted on coins) between Aurangzeb Alamgir and his predecessors is legendary and the word 'bigot' has been bandied about by his detractors. When little bits of decoration began to appear on his coins, it was taken as a sign that, because of his stretching of the empire's resources in the Deccan campaign, and tunnel vision regarding everything else, that he was beginning to 'lose his grip.' Not only on the empire, perhaps also on reality? A very sad end to a troubled and unhappy life. Followed by a bloody and pointless war of accession because 'there is only room for one king in each land.' India is such a small place, after all!! Burhanpur was regarded as 'Gateway to the Deccan'. “
After Aurangzeb, the Mughal empire had gradually begun to break up and the history of India in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is one of a multitute of independent States. But outwardly they maintained the prestige of the Mughal empire.
Schlüsselwörter: India Mughal Aurangzeb Burhanpur Rupee")