History Podcasts

Gold Coin of Mamluk Sultan Al-Mansur Ali

Gold Coin of Mamluk Sultan Al-Mansur Ali


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.


The other day I was reading about Shajar Al Durr, a prominent woman figure in the old history of Egypt. Along with the Sultan Izz al-Din Aybak (whom she brought to power), Shajar Al Durr “firmly established the Mamluk dynasty that would ultimately repulse the Mongols, expel the European Crusaders from the Holy Land, and remain the most powerful political force in the Middle East until the rule of the Ottomans”.

Reading this history and the woman’s name of course bring to mind the traditional Egyptian dessert Um Ali, which is a bread pudding originally made with bread, milk and honey that was created in honour of Shajar Al Durr’s death!

Yes Um Ali, the dessert, comes with a somewhat dark history! And while I had posted the recipe on this blog a few years ago (this is the link), I never told you its history. So I thought to revisit this dessert and tell you its story, because I suppose there is nothing more interesting than learning about food in history, or the history of food! (yes I know, I am one of those food nerds!)

Very similar to the Turkish Hareem Al Sultan Drama, that most are watching on TV these days, the history from which this dessert originates is filled with betrayals, murders, and rise-to-power dramas! However, this story took place during the Egyptian Mamluk era before the Ottomans’ rule over Egypt. It seems back in history, the stories were all very similar. The hierarchies within a Sultan’s entourage and the power struggle within them especially in the Harems were all of similar narratives and this is the narrative of UM Ali…

The Originally Turkic, pretty and intelligent Shajar al-Durr was purchased as a bondmaid by Assalih Ayyoub, before he became Sultan. Then when he became Sultan in 1240, she accompanied him to Egypt and had their first son Khalil (aka al-Malik al-Mansour), and she became also known as Um Khalil Shajar al-Durr. Shortly after this birth, the sultan married her and made her a Sultana.

In 1249, after ruling Egypt for almost 10 years, the sultan died, however Egypt was under attack by the crusaders, and therefore Shajar al-Durr decided to conceal his death. Along with the commander of all the Egyptian army, they secretly buried the sultan, without declaring his death. She declared that the sultan was very ill and unable to receive any visitors, and had the servants continue to cook his meals and bring them to his private tent. Prior to his death, the sultan had not left a testimony of who should succeed him, however, he left behind a large number of signed blank papers, which Shajar al-Durr and the chief of the army used as sultanic communications, decrees and orders and eventually as a Sultanic order to swear the oath of loyalty by the Mamluks and soldiers.

News of the Sultan’s death reached the crusaders who decided to march into Cairo, then moved on to Al Mansurah, where Shajar al-Durr resided. With the help of Baibars’ plan to which she agreed, the Egyptian army and townspeople, they managed to trap the crusaders, kill Louis IX ‘s brother Robert I of Artois and annihilate the crusader force. Later, and due to the arrival of the dead sultan’s son Turanshah to Egypt, Shajar al-Durr announced the Sultan’s death. Together, Shajar al-Durr and Turanshah completely defeated the crusader forces capturing Louis IX. With this Shajar al-Durr gained power among the Mamluks who supported her to remain powerful by assassinating Tarunshah, the last of the Abbasid sultans. Afterwards the Mamluks and Emirs decided to announce Shajar al-Durr as the new monarch with Izz al-Din Aybak as the commander in chief, to which she agreed. She took the royal name “al-Malikah Ismat ad-Din Umm-Khalil Shajar al-Durr” as well as the title “Malikat al-Muslimin” (Queen of the Muslims) and “Walidat al-Malik al-Mansur Khalil Emir al-Mo’aminin” (Mother of al-Malik al-Mansur Khalil Emir of the faithfuls). She had coins minted with her titles and she signed the decrees with the name “Walidat Khalil”. She used these titles including her son’s and late husband’s names to gain respect and legitimacy for her reign as an heir of the Sultanate.

However, during the Ayyubid era, the custom was that the legitimacy of the sultan was only gained through the recognition of the Abbasid Caliph, and he refused to recognise her as a the new sultana. She therefore married Izz al-Din Aybak, making him the ruling Sultan. However, Shajar al-Durr wanted to stay in power, and wanted the sole rule of Egypt, therefore concealed Sultanate affairs from Aybak and prevented him from seeing his other wife insisting he should divorce her. Dispute and suspicions became part of the two’s relationship, and Aybak, was searching for supremacy and security too. He wanted to form an alliance with a strong Amir, who could help him against the threats of the Mamluks and against his own wife’s strong will. He therefore decided to marry the daughter of Badr ad-Din Lo’alo’a the Ayyubid Emir of al-Mousil. Word reached Shajar al-Durr who in turn killed Aybak and claimed it was a sudden death during the night. After investigations and testimonials of her maids, it was proven that Shajar al-Durr killed the Sultan, and was therefore banished and imprisoned.

This illustration was created by Lebanese Illustrator for an article in BrownBook Magazine

The 15-year-old al-Mansur Ali, the son of Aybak, was made the new Sultan and his mother, Um Ali, ordered her bondmaids to kill Shajar al-Durr in revenge for stealing her husband and killing him as well as plotting against her son becoming the new Sultan. Shajar al-Durr was beaten to death in the Hammam by Um Ali’s bondmaids and in celebration, Um Ali ordered the cook to create a new and delicious dessert and distribute it to everyone announcing that the dessert is celebrating the death of Shajar al-Durr. Not stopping at that, Um Ali ordered that a Shajar al-Durr gold coin be placed in every dessert bowl for the people to have. All the people were happy with the delicious dessert, the gold coin and the reign of their new sultan and his mother Um Ali. They were chanting her name in thanks and called the dessert after her.

Um Ali, the dessert became known as the dessert of celebrations in Egypt, the dessert served at big events and in congratulating newlyweds, newborns, and in celebration of Ramadan too. It moved on to become a well loved and celebrated dessert all over the Middle East, however not many know what this dessert actually celebrates! The death of Shajar al-Durr!

As ever, food is way more than just the act of cooking and eating. Food is culture, history and the stories of a given people and time. This is exactly where food is most interesting.


Mamluk Heraldic Devices in Jerusalem – Parts I & II

One of the most significant events in the history of Islam was the decision by the Abbasid caliph al Mutassim to import young Turks from the Central Asian Steppes as slaves to serve as highly trained, mounted archers. This process of importing these young Turks would continue for centuries and would soon change the course of world history. Known as “Mamluks” (“owned”), these young men spent their childhood and young adulthood training in military exercises and sports, and once a full-fledged soldier, could eventually win freedom, or in exceptional cases, be elevated to the position of amir (Coinage, 5). As slaves, they were owned and supported by their patron and indoctrinated in both Islamic theology and loyalty to their patron by the 10th century, whole armies were comprised exclusively of these Mamluk soldiers. Due to their intensive military training, Mamluks dominated warfare as mounted archers and proved virtually unstoppable on the battlefield, able to accurately shoot over their backs at a full gallop. With their invincibility came the inevitable confidence that they could make or break the Islamic leadership, which they did from time to time. Mamluk power and influence continued to grow in the Islamic realm until Baybars, himself a Mamluk, received the investiture as sultan from the Abbasid caliph such investitures continued throughout the life of the Mamluk state, which managed to survive in various parts of the lands of Islam until the Ottomans defeated them under Selim I in January 1517 (Coinage, 7, 11). As the Mamluk influence grew, the Caliph’s power correspondingly diminished to such a point that he eventually ruled as solely a de jure figure-head who in fact served the Mamluk power structure by bestowing legitimacy on their rule. Their unique combination as warrior-rulers meant that Mamluks had significant impact on history-changing battles, both as the decision-makers and as the soldiers who fought and won the conflicts. Under Baybars, the Crusaders were roundly defeated along the Syrian coast, the Mongol army was defeated, and in 1268 the Crusader stronghold of Antioch fell (Coinage, 7). The Sultan Qala’un, a Mamluk, decisively defeated the Mongols near Hims, and then proceeded to drive out the Crusaders to such an extent that by his death, Crusaders held very little remaining territory in the region Qala’un’s son, al-Ashraf Khalil destroyed the last Crusader stronghold, ‘Akka (Coinage, 7).

It was not, however, exclusively the military victories which earned the Mamluks their enduring place in history Mamluk architectural achievements which can still be seen in Egypt, Syria and Israel, testify to their permanence as a historical society worthy of study. These architectural achievements include madrasas, mosques, mausoleums, zawiyas, ribats, and minarets. An additional aspect of Mamluk architecture which heightens the appeal of its study is the Mamluk use of heraldic emblems on some of their buildings. In Jerusalem, such Mamluk heraldic devices include chalice, napkin, and polo sticks, among others.

Apart from the handful of buildings in Jerusalem that display Mamluk heraldic emblems, such devices are found in rich abundance on the coinage of the Mamluks, thus a discussion of Mamluk coinage is helpful for a proper understanding of the use of heraldic emblems on Mamluk architecture.
Unfortunately, there are few sources for scholarly investigation of heraldic devices, the main body of knowledge is found primarily in a handful of English language sources including L.A. Mayer’s Saracenic Heraldry, Paul Balog’s The Coinage of the Mamluk Sultans of Egypt and Syria, and to a lesser extent, Michael Burgoyne’s Mamluk Jerusalem.

It is the goal of this paper to discuss those heraldic devices used on Mamluk architecture in Jerusalem and to detail their meaning where possible, and to briefly discuss Mamluk heraldic emblems on Mamluk coinage. This paper will progress as follows: section I will give an overview of Mamluk heraldic emblems Section II will discuss heraldry on Mamluk coinage, Section III will contain a photographic tour of the buildings in Jerusalem which contain such emblems and Section IV will offer concluding thoughts.
Section I: Mamluk Heraldic Emblems

In his work, Saracenic Heraldry, L.A. Mayer gives an extensive overview of Islamic heraldry in general, touching upon those emblems employed by Mamluks . Defining his terms, Mayer cites Fox-Davies’s definition of “blazon” as a coat of arms “‘that requires the twofold qualification that the design must be hereditary and must be connected with armour’”, and continues by stating that, based on that definition of “blazon”, Saracenic blazons do in fact qualify as true “blazons” (Mayer, 1). Such blazons were found on “every possible object” including architecture, houses, window-grilles, doors, column capitals, weapons, coins, textiles, plates, coats of mail, and horse armour, just to name several (Mayer, 2). Unfortunately, however, information on such heraldry is extremely limited: in Arabic literature, the occurrences of the word “blazon” number less than fifty, and seals, which provide great insight into the heraldic devices of other countries, carry no heraldic emblems in Saracenic lands (Mayer, 1-2). The shi’ar, or “charges”, fall into several categories (Appleton, 2). The first, the animal, is represented by three animals: the lion passant, the eagle (or falcon), and the horse passant, although there is disagreement among scholars as to whether the horse is actually a blazon, or whether it is just the bearer of the true emblem, the ceremonial saddle (Appleton, 2). The second category of charges is represented by the fleur-de-lis, the crescent, and the bend, although here, too, scholars are uncertain as to how the fleur-de-lis came into Islamic usage, and whether the crescent represents a horse-shoe and, thus, the amir akhur or ‘master of the stable’ or whether the fleur-de-lis is simply a “cant” on a name such as “Hilal” which means “crescent” (Appleton, 3). The third category of charges is also the largest, and is represented by emblems relating to the office held by the bearer, such as the penbox which was used by those holding the office of secretary (Appleton, 3). The remaining categories are represented by symbols about which little is known, such as the “trousers of nobility”, the gubbah, or “ceremonial saddle”, the tamghas, which originated with the Mongols or Turks, and other miscellaneous charges such as the letter aliph (Appleton, 3). Regarding the “trousers of nobility”, Balog presents an interesting hypothesis. This emblem has born numerous descriptive titles, all of which attest to the fact that we know little about it – titles such as the above-mentioned “trousers”, “horns of nobility”, and even L.A. Mayer’s “powderhorn” (“Problematic”, 328). Based on the Mamluk disdain for the use of firearms, believing the use of such weapons to be beneath the dignity of Muslim “noblemen”, Balog argues that it is highly unlikely that a “powderhorn” would have been used as a heraldic symbol, thus another explanation is required (“Problematic”, 329). Balog’s conclusion is that the horns represent the elevated status of certain amirs, especially the tabl-khana, who, as a special class of amirs were entitled to the pomp of a military orchestra three times a day (“Problematic”, 329). Thus Balog reasons that these horns were heraldic representations of the brass horns used in the military orchestra, and would have been an excellent choice as a symbol to show the Sultan’s favor for high ranking officials (“Problematic”, 334).

Saracenic heraldic emblems come in two basic forms: simple in which there is one emblem, examples of which can be seen on page 8 of Mayer’s Saracenic Heraldry, and composite in which there are several simple emblems contained within one heraldic device (Coinage, 24). Granted by the sultan, blazons corresponded to the position the amir held when the blazon was bestowed (Mayer, 3-4). Abu-l-Fida, author of History, identified certain offices with certain heraldic emblems: secretary (dawadar) used the pen-box the armour-bearer (silahdar) used the bow, the superintendant of stores (tishtdar) used the ewer, the master of the robes (jamdar) used the napkin, the marshal (amir akhur) used the horseshoe, and the jawish used the golden qubbah (Mayer, 4). Furthermore, there are seven blazons which, considered along with the accompanying inscriptions and the biographies of their respective owners, are considered with a high probability to be emblems of a particular office: a cup for the office of cup-bearer (saqi), a napkin for the “master of robes” (jamdar), polo-sticks for the polo-master (jukandar), a round table for the taster (jashnigir), the pen-box for the secretary (dawadar), the sword (most likely also the dagger and scimitar) for the amour-bearer (silahdar), and finally the bow for the bowman (bunduqdar) or for the armour-bearer (Mayer, 5). Several other blazons with no accompanying inscriptions can be identified with particular offices with still a relatively high degree of certainty: the pair of banners for the office of standard-bearer (alamdar), the drum and sticks for the office of drummer (tabldar), the trumpet for another member of the musicians, a rounded, three fielded shield for the office of postman (baridi), and a shoe (some uncertainty remains as to this emblem) for the office of shoe-bearer (bashmaqdar) (Mayer, 5). Interestingly, it seems that amirs kept their original blazons, even when the office they held changed (Mayer, 6). As an example, the emblem employed initially by Bahadur was a six-petalled rosette, but despite the fact that he changed titles/offices over his career, the heraldic emblem on his mausoleum in Damascus, which was built toward the end of his life, was the same rosette (Mayer, 6). While the aforementioned blazons are “simple” in that they represent one charge, composite blazons were also used which combined several charges in one blazon. In fact, prior to the first Circassian sutlan, Barquq, Bahri Mamluk heraldic blazons were fairly simple in that they contained one or two heraldic symbols on a field, or on two-fielded shields (“Problematic”, 326). Beginning with Barquq, Circassian heraldry presented several symbols on a three-fielded shield (“Problematic”, 326). Michael Meineke postulated that the Circassian Sultans able to build up their own Mamluk contingents either “bestowed” their amiral emblem to their Mamluks or permitted their Mamluks to use it as their personal heraldic emblem (“Problematic”, 326). Thus, from Barquq through to the mid-ninth century (Muslim calendar), blazons are believed to have been “individual, personal badges” (“Problematic”, 326).

Composite blazons are also seen on some Mamluk coins (Coinage, 24). As an example, Figure 1 shows two of the composite blazons used by the sultan Barquq: a lion passant on a three fielded shield, and another blazon composed of a cup, polo sticks, and crescent on a three fielded shield (Coinage, 24).

In Mamluk society, the ‘blazon’ was a “prerogative” of the amir, as evidenced by the fact that only sultans and amirs are recorded in literature as having used them, and only sultans and amirs appear in the accompanying inscriptions (Mayer, 3). Interestingly, in Europe, blazons became so important that institutions developed to regulate them including registration, ‘Colleges of Arms’, and protection by law, however, in Saracenic countries, blazons never reached that status (Mayer, 4). Furthermore, in Islam there was no “hereditary caste of nobility” as represented by knights in the west, yet Muslims appointed to important positions in the government and given the title “amir” (“noble”), as well as knighted Mamluks and Mamluks who were granted their freedom formed a de facto class which did use heraldic emblems to identify themselves (Coinage, 2). Much like the heraldic symbols used on the coats of arms of European armies, Islamic and Mamluk heraldic emblems have significant meaning, giving details about the patron who constructed the structure. Unlike European heraldry, however, inaccuracies and deviations occur in the same Islamic blazons, perhaps due to the less regimented view of heraldry in the world of medieval Islam such deviations, such as Baybars’ lion passant facing both left and right in different emblems, would, in European heraldry, indicate a new blazon (Coinage, 20).
With regard to the question of whether or not Mamluk heraldic emblems were hereditary, there is, according to L.A. Mayer, scholarly difficulty. Mayer held that the emblems were hereditary in cases where the heir held the rank of amir, and Balog concurs with this hypothesis (Coinage, 24). Mayer based his theory on two factors: first, in the instances in which the blazons of both father and son are known, they are identical (Baybars and his son Baraka Qan, Kitbugha and his son Muhammad b. Kitbugha, Sha’ban and his son Haffi, and Sha’ban and his son ‘Ali) second, when the blazon of only the son is known, the blazon is what scholars would expect to have been the emblem of the father (Coinage, 24). Balog adds his own findings to support this theory – namely that many heraldic coins which belong to several generations of the same family bear the same heraldic emblems, which, Balog asserts, is proof positive that the Mamluk blazons were indeed hereditary (Coinage, 24).
Section II: Mamluk Heraldry on Coinage

Heraldic symbols are most commonly seen on the coinage used in medieval Islam, thus it is appropriate to include a brief discussion of such devices on coins as this bears directly on heraldic emblems used in Mamluk architecture. Interestingly, of the 47 Mamluk heraldic emblems identified by L.A. Mayer, Balog was only able to identify 16 of the 47 as appearing on coins (Coinage, 20). It was under Baybars I, the fifth Bahri Mamluk sultan, that Mamluk coinage took its “proper form”, with the blazon as its most prominent feature (Coinage, 12). As an example, a series of Egyptian emissions belonging to al-Nasir Muhammad uses the napkin, or “buqjah” as a heraldic device on the copper fulus coins (Coinage, 13).

After the Bahri Mamluk period ended, the Burji period began. The traditional coinage issues of the Burjis did not differ from certain Bahri issues, however, the first Burji sultan Barquq issued new silver and copper coins, and certain of the copper fals coins displayed heraldic emblems (Coinage, 13). Dinars issued by sultans Faraj, al-Musta’in bi’llah and al-Mu’ayyad Shaykh used the heraldic fesse some dirhems issued by al-Musta’in bi’llah display the buqjah, similarly, some dirhems issued by Barsbay display a chalice and some dirhems issued by Jaqmaq display a buqjah and chalice (Coinage, 13).
Heraldic devices on coins contain certain components. One such component is the “Legend” (Coinage, 13). The attributions of the coin, the sultan’s name, the caliph’s name, the mint and date, and even the sultan’s genealogy can all appear as part of the legend, which can span both sides of the coin (Coinage, 13-14). Depending on the configuration of the particular coin, there may also, or instead, be found religious invocations for the sultan (Coinage, 15). The value of the coin is also a prominent feature on these early Islamic coins for example, the gold coins always display that they are valued as a dinar, silver coins as a dirhem, and some copper coins that they are valued at a fals (Coinage,16). Furthermore, the coinage of the Mamluks heralded a new innovation: the sultans had their coats of arms engraved on the copper fulus and less frequently on the gold and silver coins (Coinage, 18). In cases where the same sultan used several different blazons on his coins, it is believed that these different blazons are part of his composite blazon (Coinage, 20).


The Mamluks

The dynasty’s name comes from the Arabic designation for a slave, mamluk. The ruling class was made up of slave soldiers who had originally been captured among the Turkic peoples in the steppes of southern Russia or among Christians in northern Caucasus. The Mamluk dynasty emerged when some of the Ayyubids’ slave troops revolted in 1250 and took over the Ayyubid lands along the Mediterranean. From then on, the Mamluks’ might was based on a steady stream of slaves, who after being converted to Islam, educated in Arabic, and taught the art of war, supplied the military caste with new commanders. Their descendants and other free men were not, however, allowed to reach society’s highest posts. In contrast to the practice of other Islamic dynasties, succession was usually decided by a coup d’état, often by one of the former sultan’s commanders, and rarely by family ties.

The Mamluks won renown throughout the Islamic world as defenders of the true faith because they repeatedly stopped the advance of the seemingly invincible Mongols. The Frankish Crusaders and Christian principalities in the eastern Mediterranean also had to yield at last to the Mamluks, who were famous for their skill in the use of the lance, the sword, and the bow. As a result, the Mamluk Empire soon stretched all the way from southeastern Anatolia to Sudan and Libya, with Cairo as its center. The holy cities in Arabia were also under Mamluk hegemony. Despite several internal power struggles, Syria and Egypt experienced a period of economic growth under the Mamluks. This was especially due to the empire’s strategic location as a center of trade linking India, southern Europe, Caucasus, and southern Russia. Trade with India, in turn, was taken over by Portuguese ships in the course of the 15th century. At the same time, there was increasing military pressure from the Ottomans in the north. While the Mamluks clung to their traditional weapons, the Ottomans’ use of modern artillery and firearms finally decided the outcome, and the Mamluks were defeated in 1517.

Many sultans and emirs were important builders and patrons who left behind magnificent religious complexes. Their names in cursive script are found in a new monumental way in Islamic art as a decoration, not only on architecture, but also on inlaid metalwork and enameled glass, the products of techniques that flourished in this period. Another distinctive feature is the emergence of heraldic symbols. They are seen on objects made both for the local upper class and for European noble families, since the skills of Mamluk craftsmen were in demand far and wide.


325 AH (937 AD) - Muhamad Ibn Tughj was granted the right to rule Egypt and for his descendants to rule after him from the Caliph in Baghdad. He began minting coins in his name, around 331 AH, and took the title Ikhshid (Prince/Ruler). The design of Ikhshidid gold coins was similar to the Abbasid coin design and, again, was struck in Misr and Felestine (current day Palistine).

355 AH- Kafur, a slave in the Ikhshid court became the actual ruler of Egypt and struck coins in the name of the young heir of the Ikhsidid throne with the letter “ڪ” (Kaf) on the obverse and omitted the word Ikhshid. These coins are rather scarce since his actual rule was rather short.


Coins from the Islamic world

Go ahead and post your Islamic coins here. I'll start off with the following coin:

Abbasid Governors, Mesopotamia: al-‘Abbas b. Muhammad (750-760 AD) AE Fals, al-Jazira (Album-304 Lavoix-1568)

Obv: Within circle, لا إله إلا الله وحده ( There is no God but Allah alone ) in margin, أمر الأمير ألعباس بن محمد اعز الله نصره ( Ordered by the amir al-‘Abbas bin Muhammad, may his victories be the glory of Allah )
Rev: Within circle, محمد رسول الله ( Muhammad is the apostle of Allah ) pellet above first line in margin, بسم الله ضرب هذا الفلس بالجزيرة ( In the name of Allah was struck this fals of al-Jazira )

Almohads: Anonymous (ca. 1160-1269) AR Dirham (Hohertz-20 Album-496)

Obv: Arabic legend in Nashki script لا اله الا الله الامر كله لله لا قوة الا بالله ( There is no Lord except Allah The command is all up to Allah There is no power except through Allah )
Rev: Arabic legend in Nashki script الله ربنا محمد رسولنا المهدي امامنا ( Allah is our Lord Muhammad is our Messenger al-Mahdi is our Imam )

Abbasid Governors of Tabaristen, Hani ibn Hani, 1/2 dirham

Obv: Bust right, breast ornament. Hani's name in Arabic (هانی) on the right, below it Arabic letter ein ع.
Rev: Fire altar with 2 attendants star left and crescent right of flames. 3 pellets. Pahlavi date to left, mint name to right 'TPWRSTAN' (Tabaristan).

Now I can post my only medieval coin!


This thing just ruins my normal country/denomination/date image description system. It's from Iran, or is that Persia? Or was it the Ilkhanate, because at the time the country was infested with Mongols? I can definitively say that the denomination is 1 dirham. But the date. well. apparently it's from the reign of a guy called Öljeitü, Oljeitu, Olcayto or Uljeitu (they hadn't invented spelling back then), which puts it between 1304 and 1316. Not that I can verify any of this - I'm just trusting the guy who sold it to me and his coin-envelope notation.

This is why I don't have more medieval coins - I've seen too many massively overpriced and even mislabeled modern coins to be able to trust coin dealers when buying something I don't have the knowledge for. My self-imposed rule was "if I see a really old coin that doesn't look like total crap for less than $10 I'll buy it" and in two years this is the only result.

Later on I'll have to post some of my more modern coins, which I actually do know about.

Till now, my most ancient coins from these countries are minted in 1872, as 2 Tunisian coins of 1/2 kharub & 2 rials. Notice that the half-kharub has an alignment default of approx. 70-80°

@nalaberong: Most coins have already been identified and there are tons of information out there that are free for one to verify. So you don't have to outlay any money to identify coins nor do you need to post on various forums to ask someone to identify your coins. You just need time, patience, and how to properly use Google. Here is a similar coin in my collection that I took the time to identify and transcribe using free resources as well as peeking into some Google books that had some of the pages cached. If you want your coin identified, I can send you those resources if you want. And most of the information you indicated was correct :

Ilkhan:Uljaytu (1304-1316) AR 2 dirhams, AH710, Amul Mint (Album-2184B)

Obv: In double circle, ﻻ ﺍﻟﻪ ﺍﻻ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ( There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is the apostle of Allah ) followed by ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ( Ali is the vicegerent of God ), with ﺑﺴﻢ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﺍﻟﻜﺮﻳﻢ ( In the name of God, the Holy ) around in the margin, the Twelve Imams, normally as follows, ﺍﻟﻠﻬﻢ ﺻﻠﻰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺴﻴﻦ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻭ ﺟﻌﻔﺮ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺳﻰ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻟﺤﺴﻦ ﻭ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ
Rev: Within a quatrelobe, ضرب في أيام دولة السلطان الأعظم مالك رقاب الأمم الجايتو سلطان غياث الدنيا والدين خدا بنده محمد خلد الله ملكه around, four segments in upper left segment, لله الامر من قبل ومن بعد ( God is before and after ) in upper right, in Uighur, ᠦᠯᠵᠡᠢᠲᠦ ᠰᠤᠯᠲᠠᠨ ( Uljaytu Sultan ) in lower right and lower left segments, the mint and date, ﺿﺮﺏ أمل ﺳﻨﺔ ﻋﺸﺮ ﻭﺳﺒﻌﻤﺎﺋﺔ ( Struck in Amul in the year ten and seven hundred )

My Islamic coins part of the collection is a disaster.

I am not yetvable to decipher any of them, so they live in a box, until some day when I have no other coins to catalogue..
Then I will try and catalogue some of these.
The only ones I have catalogued are the ones I have gotten in swaps and then I have just trusted what swappartner says it is and catalogues it as that.
Until I have time for them.

No they are just modern coins.
But still, I can't even read dates and for half of them I don't even know what country they are from.

I have about 500 coins to catalogue at moment I think, before getting to those.
And that amount Is everchanging.

Ottoman Empire - 10 Para - Meḥmed V ("Reshat" right of Toughra) (1327 | 1915)

No they are just modern coins.
But still, I can't even read dates and for half of them I don't even know what country they are from.

I have about 500 coins to catalogue at moment I think, before getting to those.
And that amount Is everchanging. Never forget we can help you

Now here's an Islamic coin I do know something about:

Ottoman Empire, 20 kuruş, 1917

It's about the size of a silver dollar and is one of the last coins issued by that Empire, which was also the home of the last real caliph. This coin is notable for the poor condition of its reverse die - the Ottoman Empire wasn't the strongest of the Central Powers in WWI, so presumably the administration had better things to do in 1917 than make sure its coin dies were in proper condition.

No they are just modern coins.
But still, I can't even read dates and for half of them I don't even know what country they are from.

I have about 500 coins to catalogue at moment I think, before getting to those.
And that amount Is everchanging. Never forget we can help you Correct. Go ahead and post it here if you like or in the Coin Identification area. Modern coins are a bit much for me, but Medieval coins are doable (to a certain extent).

No they are just modern coins.
But still, I can't even read dates and for half of them I don't even know what country they are from.

I have about 500 coins to catalogue at moment I think, before getting to those.
And that amount Is everchanging. Never forget we can help you Correct. Go ahead and post it here if you like or in the Coin Identification area. Modern coins are a bit much for me, but Medieval coins are doable (to a certain extent). Thanks lads. Yes, that is something I plan to be doing for quite a few to get me started when I finally get to them.

No they are just modern coins.
But still, I can't even read dates and for half of them I don't even know what country they are from.

I have about 500 coins to catalogue at moment I think, before getting to those.
And that amount Is everchanging. Never forget we can help you And we love a challenge !

After the Tunisian coins I didn't authentify yet, here is my older one:

1 Kuruş - Abdülḥamīd II ("el-Ghazi" right of Toughra) KM# 735

Waiting for a Syrian Umayyad dirham but this one will have to be authentified as well to be sure.

Finally received my old Islamic coin, and seems legit on a 1st look, tell me if you've doubts about it.

Umayyad Caliphate: Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik (724-743 AD) AE Dirham, Wasit

Siglos - Darius III - Achaemenid Empire - 450-330 BC 4th type
Obverse
Crowned king Darius III right, running with the akinakès in his right hand and bow in left.
Type IV early
Type IV late (presence of rings,from 2 to 5,in the garment of the Great King)
Reverse
Incuse punch.
possibility of countermarks
Quote: "simoneo80" ​ Siglos - Darius III - Achaemenid Empire - 450-330 BC 4th type
​ Obverse
​Crowned king Darius III right, running with the akinakès in his right hand and bow in left.
​Type IV early
​Type IV late (presence of rings,from 2 to 5,in the garment of the Great King)
​ Reverse
​Incuse punch.
​possibility of countermarks
Quote: "Quant.Geek" ​
Quote: "simoneo80" ​ Siglos - Darius III - Achaemenid Empire - 450-330 BC 4th type
​​ Obverse
​​Crowned king Darius III right, running with the akinakès in his right hand and bow in left.
​​Type IV early
​​Type IV late (presence of rings,from 2 to 5,in the garment of the Great King)
​​ Reverse
​​Incuse punch.
​​possibility of countermarks
​​

​​That predates Islam and Christianity. This definitely disqualifies it for this thread. I thought it was going to be a coin written in Persian. ​sorry, but I meant persiana..beh
I get back in the game .. this is certainly fairer:

Islamic caliphates (Buyid dynasty)​
Dirham - Amir 'Adud al-Dawla - 949-983 AD Shiraz mint - Rukn al-dawla as overlord​

Abbasid Caliphate: al-Hadi (169-170AH / 785-786CE) AR dirham, al-Muhammadiya (Album-217.2 Lowick-1666 NHR-70A)

Obverse Field:
لا اله الا الله وحده لا شرك له
There is no deity except (the one) God alone. He has no equal

Obverse Margin:
بسم الله ضرب هذا الدرهم بالمحمدية سنة سبعين و مئة
In the name of God. This dirham was struck in Muhammadiya in the year seventy and one hundred

Reverse Field:
محمد رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم الخليفة الهادى
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. Caliph al-Hadi
بر below

Reverse Margin:
محمد رسول الله ارسله بالهدى و دين الحق ليظهره على الدين كله ولو كره المشركون
He sent him with guidance and the true religion to reveal it to all religions even if the polytheists abhor it.

Ilkhanate : Abu Sa'id, 2 Dirhams, Type G

Ilkhanate "Ilkhan of Persia"​ - Mongol dynasty
2 Dirhams - "Ilkhan" Muhammad Khan - 1336-1338 AD Shabankara mint - type B - House of Hulagu

Ilkhan: Abu Sa'id (1316-1335) AR 6 dirhams, AH728, Shiraz Mint (Album-2199, Type C)

Ilkhan: Muhammad Khan (1336-1338) AR 6 dirhams, AH738, Kirman Mint (Album-2228, Type B)


Rare Very Fine Fatimid Gold Coin Al-Amir or Al-Amer Dinar 518 AH Al-Muizziya Al-Qahira

Description: Gold dinar from Al-Amer bi-Ahkam Allah, also referred to as al-Imam al-Mansur, the Fatimid Caliph who ruled the Muslim empire in the period 495-524 AH (1101 - 1130 AD). Al-Amer is the twelfth caliph of the Fatimid dynasty. His full name being, Abu Ali al-Mansur al-Amir bi-Ahkam Allah. Please carefully review the scan as it is part and parcel of our description.

Date: The coin shows the date of minting as 518 AH (1124 AD).

Mint: The coin shows the mint as al-Muizziya al-Qahira which can be interpreted as Beloved Cairo or Cairo of al-Mu'izz, the caliph who founded the city of Cairo, Egypt.

Size and Weight: This is a dinar, weighs

References: It is Album #729 and it is not listed in Lane Poole's Catalog of the Khedivial Collection. It is Nicol 2559.

Condition: I would grade this coin as a very fine with nice and well centered strike. The coin retains much of its original mint luster. It has beautiful calligraphy and a well centered strike. This coin is much better than the scan shows with very well defined and legible calligraphy. A definite quality coin.

Historic Perspective: The Fatimid Caliphate is a Shi'a dynasty that ruled over the Islamic world of mostly North Africa from 5 January 910 to 1171. The ruling elite of the state belonged to the Ismaili branch of Shi'ism. They are also part of the chain of holders of the office of Caliph, as recognized by most Muslims, the only period in which the Shia Imamate and the Caliphate were united to any degree, excepting the Caliphate of Ali himself. The Fatimids were reputed to exercise a degree of religious tolerance towards non-Ismaili sects of Islam as well as towards Jews and Coptic Christians. The Fatimids had their origins in Ifriqiya (modern- day Tunisia and eastern Algeria) but after the conquest of Egypt about 970 AD, they built the City of Cairo and used it as their Capital. Abu Ali Al-Mansur Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah reigned in the period of 386-411 AH. His rule was rather capricious punctuated by intermittent periods of persecution of the Christians and the prohibition of Mulkhia, a favorite green soup of the Egyptian populace. He disappeared on 27 Shawwal 411AH or 13 February 1021 and was never found again. It is not certain what happened to him. The dynasty was founded in 296 AH (909 AD) by Abdullah al-Mahdi Billah, who legitimized his claim through descent from Muhammad by way of his daughter Fatima as-Zahra and her husband Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, the first Shi'a Imam, hence the name al-Fatimiyyen "Fatimid". Abdullah al-Mahdi's control soon extended over all of central Maghreb, an area consisting of the modern countries of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya, which he ruled from Mahdia, his newly-built capital in Tunisia. The Fatimids (Abu Tamim Ma'add al-Mu'izz li-Din Allah) entered Egypt in 358 AH (969AD) , conquering the Ikhshidid dynasty. Eventually they founded a new capital at al-Qahirat "The Subduer" (modern Cairo) - a reference to the appearance of the planet Mars. They continued to conquer the surrounding areas until they ruled from Tunisia to Syria and even crossed over into Sicily and southern Italy. Under the Fatimids, Egypt became the center of an empire that included at its peak North Africa, Sicily, Palestine, Syria, the Red Sea coast of Africa, Yemen and the Hejaz. Under the Fatimids, Egypt flourished and developed an extensive trade network in both the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean (establishing trade and diplomatic ties all the way to China under the Song Dynasty), which eventually determined the economic course of Egypt during the High Middle Ages. After the decay of the Fatimid political system in the 1160s, the Zengid ruler Nur ad-Din had his general, Saladin, seize Egypt in 1169, forming the Sunni Ayyubid Dynasty.


The Mamluks

The dynasty’s name comes from the Arabic designation for a slave, mamluk. The ruling class was made up of slave soldiers who had originally been captured among the Turkic peoples in the steppes of southern Russia or among Christians in northern Caucasus. The Mamluk dynasty emerged when some of the Ayyubids’ slave troops revolted in 1250 and took over the Ayyubid lands along the Mediterranean. From then on, the Mamluks’ might was based on a steady stream of slaves, who after being converted to Islam, educated in Arabic, and taught the art of war, supplied the military caste with new commanders. Their descendants and other free men were not, however, allowed to reach society’s highest posts. In contrast to the practice of other Islamic dynasties, succession was usually decided by a coup d’état, often by one of the former sultan’s commanders, and rarely by family ties.

The Mamluks won renown throughout the Islamic world as defenders of the true faith because they repeatedly stopped the advance of the seemingly invincible Mongols. The Frankish Crusaders and Christian principalities in the eastern Mediterranean also had to yield at last to the Mamluks, who were famous for their skill in the use of the lance, the sword, and the bow. As a result, the Mamluk Empire soon stretched all the way from southeastern Anatolia to Sudan and Libya, with Cairo as its center. The holy cities in Arabia were also under Mamluk hegemony. Despite several internal power struggles, Syria and Egypt experienced a period of economic growth under the Mamluks. This was especially due to the empire’s strategic location as a center of trade linking India, southern Europe, Caucasus, and southern Russia. Trade with India, in turn, was taken over by Portuguese ships in the course of the 15th century. At the same time, there was increasing military pressure from the Ottomans in the north. While the Mamluks clung to their traditional weapons, the Ottomans’ use of modern artillery and firearms finally decided the outcome, and the Mamluks were defeated in 1517.

Many sultans and emirs were important builders and patrons who left behind magnificent religious complexes. Their names in cursive script are found in a new monumental way in Islamic art as a decoration, not only on architecture, but also on inlaid metalwork and enameled glass, the products of techniques that flourished in this period. Another distinctive feature is the emergence of heraldic symbols. They are seen on objects made both for the local upper class and for European noble families, since the skills of Mamluk craftsmen were in demand far and wide.


History

Bahri Dynasty

Burji Dynasty

Reign of Barquq

When Shaban II, the last effective Bahri Sultan, was suddenly assassinated in 1377, his seven-year-old son Al-Mansur Ali II was put in power. However, the vice-regent Malik Barquq, of Circassian descent, was the true power of the Sultanate at this point. When Al-Mansur died in 1381, Barquq pushed to be elected Sultan himself, but this wasn't realized until the following year in 1382. However, this sudden change of dynasty was met with a massive revolt in Syria by an alliance of local Emirs determined to invade Egypt itself in 1389. Unable to raise support for himself at this point, Barquq abdicated power until the rebels collapsed on themselves, then usurped the throne again in the following year.

Starting in 1393, Barquq recruited thousands of new Mamluks in Egypt for the military to centralize part of the nation, first by invading and crushing the rebellion in Syria, then keeping the Arabs of Upper Egypt in check. Various parts of eastern Anatolia offered vassalage to Egypt during Barquq's reign, but afterwards this power in Asia would quickly dissolve.

Crisis in the 15th Century

Tamerlane defeats Al-Nasir, 1399

first invaded Syria in 1394, but did not commit to his campaign until after Barquq's death in 1399. The Mongol invasion demolished Damascus and Aleppo, the largest centers of culture and economy in Egypt. With the combined catastrophes of economic failure, corruption, and plagues during this invasion, Egypt was reduced to a state of anarchy under the new Sultan Nasir Al-Din Faraj, who had no charisma to speak of being a boy 13 years of age. However, the Vice-Regent Izz Al-Din Abdul Aziz was much more shrewd, and possibly saved Egypt from more certain disaster the following year.

In 1400, the explorer and diplomat Ibn Tulun was sent to extend an alliance with the Ottoman Sutlan, and together the Ottomans and Mamluks negotiated for Tamerlane to leave the Middle East after receiving the treasure he desired. However, that same year the province of Hatay, along with all the vassals in the far north surrendered to the Mongol armies and was lost from Egypt and Turkey. Although Tamerlane was satisfied from looting these provinces acquired, and was able to turn his attention north towards the Golden Horde, the conqueror voiced suspicions of this new alliance between the Ottomans and Mamluks, foreshadowing the Cloaked Jihad years later.

In 1401, the Hafsid Sultanate began to devise its plan to reclaim North Africa from foreign invaders, and offered an alliance with the Mamluk Sultanate. Ibn Tulun received this offer that year, but did not return the news to Cairo until the following year after spending several months captured by pirates. In 1404, Sultan Nasir sent 3000 Mamluk troops to aid the Hafsid conquest of Libya, and supported their further campaigns as far as Morocco. However, the North African Crusade in 1407-1408 pushed back the Hafsids from this ambition and partitioned some territory between Castile and Aragon .

As an attempt to recover the tremendous economic loss, some basic trade relations were opened to replace the earlier unprofitable markets. Trade was opened with Mogadishu in 1400, and with the Duchy of Venice in 1403. Even so, Tamerlane's invasion had left most of the urban and economic centers laid to waste, depleting the agricultural resources and reducing the nation to a state of anarchy. Outside of where the Royal Military could directly hold in Lower Egypt, every other part of the nation was left in a state mostly autonomous. Although Syria and Hejaz had alternate agriculture that could be self-sustained, Upper Egypt was prone to warlords who would frequently raid and attack major cities in the north.

Local attempts of autonomy

The most charismatic of the warlords in Syria was an enigmatic figure called Ahmed Al-Ankhabut (literally "the spider"). Al-Ankhabut has become something of a Syrian folk hero, with many local stories of how he outwitted and confounded the Mamluk Emirs starting around 1400 and disappearing after 1406. Most legends depict him as stealing wealth from Mamluk nobles and giving it back to impoverished Arabs. Later romances would depict him as having a consistent band of 40 thieves, and working to defend his one true love Noora Aisha. Starting in the latr 16th century, some historians speculated that Al-Ankabut was one and the same as the Abbasid military commander, Ahmad Al-Harab. Al-Harab first appears as responsible for unifying much of Egypt in the final years of the Sultanate under Al-M'utadid, starting in 1409 and ending with his assassination in 1413. 

Starting in 1401, the Coptic Church under Matthew I took it upon themselves to restore order amidst the anarchy around Alexandria. The Pope Matthew worked throughout his reign to improve the international influence of the Coptics in general, and started the first firm communication with the Ethiopian Empire in 1404. Jealous of this attention, however, Caliph Al-Mutawakkil challenged the Pope to a series of Muslim-Christian debates in 1402 and again in 1404 in the city of Rashid, foreshadowing the later Conference of Alexandria . Pope Matthew was ultimately murdered by Sultan Jafar in 1407, after refusing to let Alexandria pay the jizya tax, leading to an interregnum of the Papacy and a persecution of the Coptics for some time.

Jaffarid Coup

Al-M'utadid's speech before Jafar (painted 16th century)

According to legend, the fates of both Nasir Al-Din Faraj and Jafar Abu sufyan were predicted by a Sufi Dervish in 1400, who related the prophesy to the Vizier and future Sultan Izz Abdul Aziz: both Nasir and Jafar will die by dogs. Izz Abdul Aziz would forbid all dogs from the citadel, with the exception for a few pets. In spite of his age, Nasir proved to be very insightful in matters of economy and military, and attempted some modest reforms in his reign. Ultimately, however, Jafar led a coup in January 1406 and locked the Sultan in prison. Because many of the nobility still favored Nasir, Jafar ordered the boy murdered in prison in July that year and his body fed to his own pets.

Jafar's reign is depicted as a great tyranny, and he is often portrayed as the main antagonist to the last years of Al-Ankabut . Jafar would use grueling taxes on the already-broken economy to fuel his personal oppulance and budding Mediterranean navy. In 1408, his carnal infatuations went one step too far as he culled groups of women in Cairo to become members of the royal harem. Caliph Al-M'utadid, backed by the revolting nobility under Izz Abdul Aziz, managed to use these sinful acts as leverage to unseat Jafar in a popular revolt, leading to his ultimate death by wild dogs. 

Although this engineered revolt was successful, it reduced the city of Cairo into a tumultuous scene of total anarchy. Izz Abdul Aziz was elected Sultan by a quick vote of the Emirs, but he unfortunately died only four months later in the spring of 1409, leading to the election of Al-M'utadid as Sultan himself. 

Abbasid Restoration

Traditional armor of the Kilab Al-Rub

Although the Abbasid Caliphate was kept entirely as figureheads to support the religious authority of the Sultan, the Abbasid family retained a high degree of influence within Egypt itself, which grew all the more during the anarchy of the early 15th century. They were mostly safe from outside anarchy in the citadel however, one raid of warlords in 1403 killed a dozen or so Abbasid family members, which led to the exile of the infant Al-Najm the Great. At the same time, the Abbasids were universally respected by both Arabs and Turks of the nation, as they represented the singular authority of Sunni Islam.

By the time of Jafar's fall in 1408, the Caliph had secured popular support from most of the Arab people at least in Lower Egypt. So when Izz Al-Din Abdul Aziz unexpectedly died in spring 1409, the Mamluk nobility concluded they had no choice but to elect the Caliph Al-M'utadid as Sultan, who assumed the throne in June that year. Placing the Arab military under the command of Ahmad Al-Harab, all the former vassals of the Mamluks in Syria, Arabia, and Egypt were annexed surprisingly quickly between 1409 and 1411. 

Many believed the peace established by Al-M'utadid was temporary, and at any point anarchy could resume. Furthermore, after the North African Crusade in 1408 many of the Mamluks feared the prospect of Christian invasion of Egypt itself. Al-M'utadid was aware of these fears, and used it to assume more real power to himself. Knowing the military was entirely controlled by the Mamluks, Al-M'utadid gathered a secret police of former Ismali assassins known as the Kilab Al-Rub ("The Lord's Hounds"), transliterated as Kilabarub.

Late in the year 1411, after slowing removing all power from the Mamluk Emirs, the Caliph declared Jihad against all the Turkic people in Egypt, and proceeded to persecute and slaughter the Mamluks until they fled in great numbers into the Timurid Empire. In 1412, Al-M'utadid officially renamed the state to the Abbasid Caliphate. Al-M'utadid was systematic in his attack, and by 1414 even peasant children were being deported. However, even as late as 1429 some Turkic people in Egypt would still revolt against the new government.


Coinage

Not only is Emirates NBD the custodian of Sultan Ali Al-Owais's pearl collection, it has also amassed a prodigious set of currencies featuring notes and coins from times of the ancient Greeks, to the Ottoman and British Empires.
The museum sheds a new light on the money and socio-economic history that helped shape the cultural heritage of the region.

  • Early coins used by traders in the Gulf came from the kingdoms around the Aegean Sea dating from the 6th or 7th century BC.
  • The Best known was the famous coinage of Athens, bearing the head of Athena on the obverse and an owl and olive branch on the reverse.
  • Later coinage from the Sabaeans and Himyarites of southern Arabia also followed these Greek models.
  • Alexander the Great produced the most famous coinage of the ancients, and imitations have continued in the Gulf for many years.
  • Roman coins circulated widely, though at the time of the Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) birth, the main coins for trade were Byzantine gold solidi and Sasanian silver drachms.

  • Islam ushered in a new approach to coinage, which dispensed with representational images and used appropriate religious references.
  • Abd al-Malik Bin Marwan experimented with earlier Sasanian models but quickly developed a highly effective system using a Gold Dinar weighing about 4.27 grams and a Silver Dirham of about 2.93 grams.
  • These coins were struck from virtually pure gold and silver and were quickly accepted as a standard means of exchange. The establishment of this stable currency helped to create the unprecedented prosperity following the Muslim conquests.
  • Coinages of the time are also valuable records of the cities where the coins were struck, the years in which rulers wielded power, their names and their political and religious relationships.

  • Despite Mongol invasions and development of powerful competing national groups, the Muslim world continued to expand. Currency and coins were equally diverse.
  • Early Mamluk gold coinage did not observe a standard weight, though later the Ashrafi and the Ottoman Sultani followed the weight of the Venetian ducat, which at a fairly standard 3.45 grams was Europe's main gold trading coin.
  • The profitable trading within the Gulf including the export of pearls, brought in gold and silver coins struck by the Sultans and Mughal rulers of northern India, especially their gold Muhurs.
  • Towards the end of this period more and more European coins appeared. Chief among them were the Spanish silver and reales weighing around 28.00 grams.

Arab Sasanian - drachm
al Hajjaj b. Yusuf
BISH = Bishapur Ummayad - dirham
'Umar b. 'Abd al-aziz
Dimashq

Abbadid 1st Period - dirham
al-Rashid
al Rafiqa Abbadid 1st Period - dirham
al-Hadi heir Harun
al Haruniya

Ikshidid - dinar
abu'l - Qasim Unujur
Misr Samanid - dirham
Ismail b. Ahmad
al- Shash

Buwayid - dirham
Mu'izz al - dawla heir 'Izz al-dawla
al Basra Rassid - dinar
al Hadi ila - 'l - Haqq
Sa'dary

Ayyubid - dinar
al - Kamil Muhammad
al - Qahira Lu'lu'id - dinar
badr al - din L'ulu
al Mawsil