Category Archives: china history collections

Protected: THE History Of The First Qing Empress Dowager Xiao Zhuang Wenhuang

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

The Northern Sung History Collections

THIS THE SAMPLE OF E-BOOK IN CD-ROM ,THE COMPLETE CD EXIST BUT ONLY FOR PREMIUM MEMBER PLEASE SUBSCRIBED VIA COMMENT

The Ancient Chinese  Numismatic History collections

Part One(4)

Northern SongDynasty

 

Bronze 30mm North Song Orthodox script Ta Kuan tong bao

Created By

 

Dr Iwan Suwandy,MHA

Copyright@2012

Private Limited Edition In CD-ROM

FORWARD

I have collecting china numismatic including coins and papermoney from ancient to modern era almost 50 years, and starting to study the collections in 25 years.

At first very difficult because during President Suharto era 1966-1998 forbidden to read and collected Chinese literatures but the china numismatic could found easily with cheapest price until 1988 after the open diplomatic relationship between Indonesia and China I can found a little informations.

Since the President Gus Dur (abdulrahman Wahid) Era

my son anton for him this e-book dedicated

the Chinese overseas origin or Tionghoa ethnic became the Indonesian Ethnic nationality in the years 2000 I can found some informations and I could study in legal.but the collection very difficult to find because many chese nationality visit Indonesia and they swept all the Chinese numismatic collections.

I have visit china three times, first in 2007 to south china from Hanoi to

 

 Nanning of Jiangsi autonom province by

 

Bus and Train ,  in 2008 visit

Xianmen city

 

at Sin Hua Book store near my Hotel where I found Chinese coin catalogue

 

Native market like in Indonesia

 

 

 

 Xianmen with beautiful Gulangyu island, by bus to

 

 my grandpa homeland

 

 Chiangzhou city to find more info and look

 

 

 the amazing tallest pagoda Kai yuan with

 

 oldest turtle stone and

 

 

 

 

old village where my grandpa was born , from Xiamen by flight to

 

 Beijing by China Airlines to look

 

olympic games station,

 

 

With my wife Lily

 

 

forbidden city,

 

 great wall ,and at least in 2009 by flight and bus to

south china Guangzou(canton),Hangzou to Guillin to look the amazing dancer on the river,

3.THE SHI BA SUI WATERFALL AT HEZOU
The common waterfall was decorated with Handmade lake, beautiful and clean road to the waterfall which made the exciting landscape . the clever decrated area must be copy by many countries like Indonesia where more exciting waterfall still in the riginalsituations the same with another place , if the landscape were ddecrated like the picture below , I think will be more beautiful an interesting area.

 

4.THE TEMPLE OF DRAGON’S MOTHER AT WUZHOU
The temple of the mother of China Emperors Prince Crown was from Wu Zhou, in this temple there were the Statue of the China Empires Prince Crown during the ancient Emprire Before Christ, at the top of the hill beside the Yuanyang River was the Dragons Mother statue. Dragon was the symbols of the China Emperor, I think She was a concubine and his son became the crwn prince because the Empress didnot have the sons (the same as the Empress Dwager Xi Cie). Look at the paintings and the monument below (the Mother and crown prince will illustrated at the unique collections from WuZhou.

 

 

5.YUE XIU PARK GUANZHOU
This beautiful and exciting park sitatuated at YueXiu Hill in the Guan Zhou (before Canton), consist seven hill, three builded Lake and The Goat Statue of Guan Zhou city emblem ,look at that city emblem photo illustrations below.

.at guangzhou night market I found many achina numismatic collection with colour illustration which help me much to open the mystery of chinese cast coin script and code of reign

I have write in e-book CD-ROM about this and upload the sample in my web blog with caption  the dr iwan Adventure in China.

I bought the first catalogue Krause in 1989, in 2008 the Chinese coin catalogue with Chinese character,in 2008 my son Anton bought the best coin catalogue that made more understand how to read the chine native script  and in the same years I found several numismatic catalogue at Guangzhou.

I am starting writing about Chinese numismatic in my old web blog hhtp://www.iwansuwandy.wordpress.com which visit by 80.000 collectors.

This day I just found very best information about Chinese numismatic collections,and with this informations my study finish and I have writing the amazing e-book in CD-ROM about the report of my study with notification which coin ever found in Indonesia with mark @,this the first study ever report,and this informations will be the fact related to Chinese traded in Indonesia, the sample I upload in my other web blog hhtp://www.Driwancybermuseum.worpres.com which visit by 210.000 collectors from all over the world. The complete e.book in CD-ROM exist with full info and illustrations which made everyone can understand about the Chinese numismatic including the value ,but this only for premium member of the blog,that is why please subscribed via comment.

Why I am interesting to reasech about Chinese cast coin, the first reason that the coin came from My Grandpa homeland which relatated with my father and my self also hole family. The second reaond  this unique cast coin with hole in the center which known in Indonesia as Gobok coin and many find in Bali because they used as the magic lucky charm alhouth they didn’t now that the charm with rosette hole, from every character ,type of script  and position from the hole top,bottom,left andf right of the hole have their own name and used for special charm of magic power.They cannot read the Chinese character,the Hindu Bali native people gave tir own name,

like the grass script (scribbling or fast script) of  Yuan Feng tong bao,the yuan like flower and thy named the flower coin

 

.the eror printing cast coin with double print ar reverse which look like crescent moon they called  the Moon coin.

 

The grass script(Scribling) of Zhi Dao Yuan Bao,the character  at left  of circling they named as the symbol of happiness(bahagia) ,the owner will always happy all the time and they name this the happiness coin.

 

The Jian(Chien) Yen  tong Bao of southern song the yen character like grass,and they used as the lucky charm coin for the ranch of Horse because the horse eating the grass

 

Read at the souther Song dynasty history collections.

The metal of cast coin many from bronze, rare from iron and also from tin the heaven money coin.

All the Chinese cast coin collector will have the informations how to read the character Top-Bottom-left-Right or Top-Right-Bottom-ring contra clock wise the bali native called

 

the coin ‘s the position like cheng ho

tong bao,the ho char at  bottom 

, also info the difference between four type script from orthodox,Seal,grass(scribbling) and Li script.

Also info the character many used like Yuan,Tong ,Bao, Thien,Thay,Ho etc. 

I understand that this study not complete,more info and correction still need,please send your comment,for that thanks very much.

Jakarta April 2012

 

Dr Iwan Suwandy,MHA

 


China was unified again by

the Song Dynasty

 (960 – 1279).

The Song dynasty produced a complex series of coins. Song emperors used many reign titles

and different calligraphy styles were used in the coins.

 

A particular type of coin is the “matched coin” (dui qian).

These are coins with inscriptions of different calligraphic style but identical make

(rim, thickness, hole and size). This is a unique feature of Northern Song coins.


The seal script  Tian Sheng Yuan Bao

 

 

seal script Zheng ho tong bao

is an example of a dui qian. It existed in

 seal script

 

Tian Sheng Yuan Bao cash, Emperor Ren Zong (1022-1063), China

 

li script and regular orthodox  scripts

also

@

n

seal script Xi Ning yuan  bao (熙宁元宝) inscription.

Xi at top,Ning at lef and yuan at bottom,this charm coin look the rosette hole

 compare witn above coin hole square

This inscription, however, is written in seal script.

Coins with this style of calligraphy were cast during the years 1068-1077 of the reign of Emperor Shen Zong.

; attributed to Emperor Ren Zong who used

 orthodox script tian sheng tong bao , tian at top,sheng at left clockwise read

as the period title of the years 1023 to 1031.

 

THE SUNG or SONG DYNASTY (960-1279)  

Over 300 years of Sung history is divided into the two periods of Northern and Southern Sung.

Because of the barbarian occupation of northern China the second half of the Sung rule

was confined to the area south of the Huai River. (Photo – painting of a scholar 11th century).

    Northern Sung (960-1126).

 General Chao K’uang-yin, later known as

 

Sung T’ai Tsu,

 was said to have been coerced to become emperor in order to unify China.

Wary of power-hungry commanders, Sung T’ai Tsu made the military into a national army under his direct control. Under his less capable successors, however, the military increasingly lost prestige.

Unfortunately for China, the weakening of the military coincided with the rise of successive strong nomad nations on the borders.

    In contrast to the military’s loss of prestige, the civil service rose in dignity.

The examination system that had been restored in the Sui and T’ang was further elaborated and regularized.

 Selection examinations were held every three years at the district, provincial, and metropolitan levels.

    Only 200 out of thousands of applicants were granted the jinshi degree, the highest degree,

and appointed to government posts. From this time on, civil servants

became China’s most envied elite, replacing the hereditary nobles and landlords.

   

Sung dominion extended over only part of the territories of earlier Chinese empires.

The Khitans controlled the northeastern territories, and

 the Xi Xia (Western Xia) controlled the northwestern territories. Unable to recover these lands,

the Sung emperors were compelled to make peace with the Khitans in 1004

 and with the Hsi Hsia in 1044. Massive payments to the barbarians under the peace terms depleted

the state treasury, caused hardship to taxpaying peasants, and gave rise to a conflict in the court among

advocates of war, those who favored peace, and reformers.

(Photo – Star Chart from Su Song’s Xin Yi Fa Yao published in 1092).

    In 1069

Emperor Shen Tsung (left)appointed Wang An-shih (right)as chief minister. Wang proposed a number of sweeping reforms based on the classical text of the `Rites of Chou’. Many of his “new laws” were actually revivals of earlier policies, but officials and landlords opposed his reforms.

When the emperor and Wang died within a year of each other, the new laws were withdrawn. For the next several decades, until

the fall of the Northern Sung in 1126,

 the reformers and antireformers alternated in power, creating havoc and turmoil in government.

   

In an effort to regain territory lost to the Khitans,

the Sung sought an alliance with the newly powerful Juchens from Manchuria.

Once the alliance had expelled the Khitans, however, the Juchens turned on the Sung and occupied the capital of Kaifeng.

The Juchens established the dynasty of Chin,

 a name meaning “gold,” which lasted from 1115 to 1234, in the north. They took the emperor and his son prisoner, along with 3,000 others, and ordered them to be held in Manchuria. (Photo – Astronomical Clock Tower from Su Song’s book, 1092).

    Southern Sung (1126-1279).

Another imperial son fled south and settled in 1127 at Hangzhou,

where he resumed the Sung rule as the emperor Kao Tsung. The Sung retained control south of

 

the Huai River,branch of Yangtse river at Hangzhou

where they ruled for another one and a half centuries.Although militarily weak and limited in area,

Hangzhou
杭州

In 2009

Dr Iwan ever Visit Hangzou by bus from Guangzhou to Guillin and sailed around

the Hangzhou lake

 

with many beautiful villa around the lake

 

at the hill espacially during sunset

—  Sub-provincial city  —

杭州市

At HANGZHOU IN THE MORNING AT THE FROM HOTEL

 dr iwan found local phone card with the picture of native china dancer, and the old man and women TAI Chi dancer sport, and many plays table tennis Pingpong.

Read more info in another CD-ROM

Dr Iwan Adventur In South China

The sample also exist at

Hhtp://www.iwansuwandy.wordpress.com and

Hhtp://www.Driwancybermuseun.wordpress.com

Look the amazing landscape of

 Hangzhou

below

 

 

Location of Hangzhou City in Zhejiang

 

 

Hangzhou

Location in China

Coordinates: 30°15′N 120°10′E

 

   

 

 

  

THE NORTHERN SUNG DYNASTY

This is a guide to the coins of

the Northern Sung Dynasty

(AD 960 to 1126),

the coin uncommon and rare.

Dr Iwan Notes

The Nothern Song found many than the Southern Song Coins in Indonesia before 1980,but after that became scarce.

The rare of another song cast coin are

the rosette hole ,lucky cham coin,

 Dr Iwan only found one coin ching te tong bao

soory no illustration

 

The Sung Dynasty, established in AD 960,

 saw relative stability in China, although conflict with the Tartars and Mongols continued. In AD 1127 the northern provinces were lost to them

and

 the capital had to be moved from

 

 K’ai-feng Fu (Pien-liang) in the north

 

To

 

 

 Lin-an Fu (Hangchou) in the south.

We now refer to the period before the move as the Northern Sung and after the move as Southern Sung.

This is a complex series, with nine Emperors using dozens of reign titles and many inscription and calligraphy variations which defined dates and mints. If the variations were catalogued, they would number in the thousands. Unfortunately the key to understanding them no longer exists..

Song Dynasty,

Is Many Armor Leaves (Iron Sheet) One Kind Of Iron Armor Which Connects With The Rawhide Or The Armor Nail Becomes. It Protects The Whole Body Nearly, For China Ancient Armor’s Apex.

AD960-AD1279


Northern Song Dynasty

 

 
       

Emperor Song Taizu

Emperor Song Taizong

Emperor Song Huizong

Emperor Song Gaozong

 

 

 

 

 

 

Emperor Taizu – Song Dynasty

sorry no illustration 

[ ] Emperor Taizu [Tai-tsu] , the first emperor

 

 sorry no illustration

[ ]Emperor Taizong

 

 illustration only for premium member

 

[ ]Emperor Zhengzong

 illustration only for premium member

[ ] Emperor Renzong

 illustration only for premium member

[ ]Yinzong

 illustration only for premium member

[ ]Shenzong

 illustration only for premium member

[ ]Zhezong

 illustration only for premium member

[ ]Huizong

 illustration only for premium member

[ ]Qinzong

 

OUTLINE OF THE BRONZE COINS

At the standard in use since the T’ang, the Northern Sung monetary system was based on full weight bronze 1 cash averaging 3.5 grams, 2 cash averaging 7 grams cast sporadically after AD 1093, and on a few occasions, usually during times of war, bronze 3 and 10 cash fiduciary coins cast to the 2 and 3 cash standard. In addition to bronze coins, fiduciary iron coins were also cast through much of this period.

AD 960 to 1041.

 

 The only bronze northern song coins were full-weight 1 cash.

 

 

AD 1041.

 

 Fiduciary 3 cash (S-505) of about 7 grams and 29 mm. This was the earliest North Sung issue higher than a 1 cash. As a fiduciary issue it proved unpopular and subject to counterfeiting and in AD 1059 was devalued to 2 cash, consistent with the weight.

AD 1070.

 

Fiduciary bronze 10 cash (S-538) of 7.2 grams and 30 mm were issued to raise funds for the Western Wars. As with the earlier fiduciary issues, these were unpopular and subject to counterfeiting and were devalued to 2 cash at the war’s end. Iron 10 cash were also issued at this time.

 

 

 

 

AD 1093.

 

 Full-weight 2 cash of about 7.0 grams and 29 mm. (S-575) were introduced as a regular part of the currency, but only issued sporadically.

AD 1102.

 Fiduciary 10 cash (S-621) were cast in an attempt to introduce them as a regular part of the coinage. At about 11 grams and 31 mm these contained 3 cash worth of metal and were devalued to value 3 cash in AD 1111.

AD 1107.

 A full weight 10 cash was issued (S-630) at about 27 grams and 50 mm, but was withdrawn within a year. These appear to have been hoarded, and used as a cheap source of metal for counterfeiting the fiduciary 10 cash issues still circulating from the issue of AD 1102.


 

 

 

 

 

 

OUTLINE OF THE IRON COINS

 

The earliest northern Song iron coins

 consisted of non-fiduciary 1/10 cash. Schjoth (page 28) records: “In the 2nd year of Ching-te (AD 1005) large iron coins were cast in the two localities of Chia-ting Fu and Chiung-chou in Szechuan, value one copper cash or ten small iron cash. These all circulated jointly and gave much satisfaction.”

The large iron coins, of bronze 1 cash value, seem to be S-472 (10.83 grams, 35 mm). We believe

 

the “small iron cash”

valued at 1/10th of a copper cash are the well known iron issues of bronze cash size and weight which start with the T’ai-p’ing (S-462) issues of AD 976-984. This would explain a passage where Schjoth records Mr. Hu, in AD 978, paid for copying some sacred classics with

 

120 strings of iron money. Recording payment specifically in iron money would not be necessary unless iron and copper cash were valued differently. This establishes iron at about 1/10th the value of copper, a figure very important to understanding other iron issues. The larger iron coin (S-472), at about 11 grams, was fiduciary with only about 0.3 cash worth of iron.

A careful analysis of the coins, as well as the literary evidence, suggests the following sequence:

AD 978. Non-fiduciary 1/10 cash iron coins are first cast. It is possible that earlier specimens may one day come to light.

AD 990. Non-fiduciary 1/10 cash iron coins cease to be cast, but continue to circulate until at least AD 1005.

AD 1004 (possibly a little earlier). Fiduciary iron 1 cash ware introduced (S-472) at 11 grams, 35 mm and issued sporadically throughout the Northern Sung period but at ever-reducing weights and sizes.

AD 1017. The standard for iron 1 cash is reduced to about 7 grams, 28 mm (S-483).

AD 1023. The size of iron 1 cash is reduced to about 25 mm, but the weight remains at about 7.0 grams (S-487).

AD 1070. Fiduciary iron 10 cash (S-542a) of 35 mm and variable weight between 7.5 and 11 grams are issued to finance the Western Wars. At the end of the war these are devalued to 2 cash.

AD 1093. Iron 2 cash (S-580) introduced at the same standard as the 10 cash of AD 1070, but prove an unsuccessful experiment and by the end of AD 1094 are trading at scrap iron prices (about 0.4 cash).

AD 1101. The weights of iron 1 cash become variable (S-615) averaging about 5.75 grams but specimens between 3.5 and 7 grams are encountered. The size remains consistent at about 25 mm.

AD 1111. Iron 2 cash (29 mm, 7-10 grams) (S-643) and

3 cash (32 mm, 9-11 grams) are cast but again faile to be accepted.


 

THE NATURE OF THE FIDUCIARY ISSUES

When we were first writing this site, the issuing and later devaluations of fiduciary coins appeared somewhat random, but it quickly became obvious this was not the case.

All of the iron coins, with the exception of the early 1/10 cash issues were fiduciary. Fiduciary 1 cash iron coins were accepted throughout this period, but all attempts at higher denominations were rejected.

It appears that almost all fiduciary bronze coins, and most fiduciary iron over 1 cash, were only cast during times of war or other emergencies and afterwards the bronze coins were devalued to denominations consistent with their size and weight, while iron coins were demonetized and withdrawn from circulation.

Fiduciary bronze was always cast to standards consistent with lower denominations, allowing them to be devalued later and still fit into the pre-existing coinage system. This shows planning, suggesting they were cast with the full intent of a future devaluation. (The same is not true of fiduciary iron coins).


 

INSCRIPTION VARIETIES

Northern Sung coins present a complex series of inscription variations which, while easily catalogued, are poorly understood. Date and mint codes are probably hidden in these variations, but it is possible we will never understand them.

 

CALLIGRAPHY STYLES

Schjoth’s introduction to Northern Sung coinage (page 27) says: “As regards the style of writing, the coins in the ‘seal’ writing come first, followed by those in the clerkly or orthodox writing, and ultimately finishing up with the ‘running’ hand, or ‘grass-character’ style of writing.”

By using “or” he is saying “clerkly” and “orthodox” are one script style, “running hand” and “grass-character” are a second. Seal script is the third style. A quick examination of the coins shows his statement of only three styles of calligraphy are correct.

1)    “SEAL” –

 

Seal script Zhong he (Cheng ho)tong bao@

a very formal style of writing. Rounded characters with a fixed form and all details of each character included. The differences between coins are minor. There is no real Western equivalent, but type set block capital letters come closest.

 

 

 

2)    “ORTHODOX” –

 

Orthodox script Chong he (cheng Ho) tong bao

 

Orthodox script Ta chung tung pao

also referred to as “clerkly”. Angular characters with a generally square or rectangular appearance in which most details are made up of distinct either straight or slightly curved stokes. The general layout of a character is fixed, but small details can be left out. From coin to coin there can be significant differences. The closest Western equivalent is handwritten small-case printing.

 

 

 

3)    “GRASS” –

 

Grass script sheng song  yuan bao@

 

grass script Yuan feng tong bao@

The feng char at left of hole  like flower,the Balinese native people called the flower coin

Compare the same coin in seal script

In Bali the native people called this circling Yuan char as  the emblem of Hapiness,the happiness coin which made the owner always happy(Bahagia)

Li script

li script yuan feng tong bao

li script Jing Kang Tong Bao

Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127,

Jing Kang Tong Bao, 1126, iron 1 cash, H16.518, S-669, Li script, aVF $180.00 sold 7/4/2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

also referred to as “running hand”. Flowing characters on which several details of a character can be represented by a single wavy or jagged line. A form of shorthand in which a character can show major differences from coin to coin. This is distinctly like Western handwriting (as opposed to hand printing).

Confusion throughout the general listings, such as for S-633-637 (page 33) where he states the type exists in both “clerkly” and “orthodox” script leads us to believe Schjoth did not write this part of the catalogue. It must have been written by someone working from his rough notes in which must the terms have been used interchangeably.

We relied on Schjoth’s drawings and descriptions to determine the calligraphy style of most issues, but the drawings are not always accurate. Some of the drawings show coins with a mix of orthodox and grass characters, in which cases we list the coin by the style of the 12 o’clock character. If actual specimens confirm this mixing of types, we will comment on them later.

 

S-630
Orthodox slender gold Script@

“TA-KUAN YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script, with very fine calligraphy said to be in the Emperor’s own hand, which Hartill refers to as

 “slender gold” script.

 

CALLIGRAPHY VARIETIES

From the work of Mr. Berger, we know the Ch’ing Dynasty (AD 1644-1911) used subtle calligraphy variations indicating dates, with two changes per year at each mint. With many mints operating, this produced hundreds of variations for any type issued for more than one or two years. Northern Sung coins also have many variations per issue, suggesting a similar system was already in use, but unlike the Ch’ing coins, for which many official records have survived, and the code has been broken, the Northern Sung code is unlikely to be completely understood (we are told Mr. Berger is trying).

 

INSCRIPTION ENDINGS

In his introduction to the Northern Sung coinage, Schjoth (page 27) writes “It will be noted that the Yuan-paos, implying the ‘opening’ or ‘beginning’ currency are placed before the T’ung-paos, implying the principle of the ‘flowing’ currency.”

A simple examination of the coins shows no such relationship exists. There is also a third ending,”Chung-pao”, which Schjoth has ignored in this passage. We have noted the following pattern in the use of these endings:

 

 

AD 960 to 989 –

 

all coins use “T’UNG PAO”.

AD 990 to 1007 –

 

 all coins use “YUAN-PAO”.

AD 1008-1016 –

 both “T’UNG PAO” and “YUAN-PAO” during the same reign title.

AD 1041 –

 

Chung ning chung pao

a third ending of “CHUNG-PAO” was introduced.

AD 1017-1041 –

 only one ending was used during any reign title, but it could be either “T’UNG PAO”, “YUAN-PAO” or (after AD 1041) “CHUNG-PAO.

AD 1053-1126 –

 no evident pattern. Anywhere from one to three endings used in any reign title. In the cases where only one was used, it could be any of the three.

At this time we cannot comment of the significance of these endings, but there must be one. Coins of some reign titles are very rare and it is possible new types may turn up which will help establish a more significant pattern.

 

INSCRIPTION ORIENTATIONS

Northern Sung coins occur with inscriptions reading either

@

TOP, BOTTOM, LEFT, RIGHT

Tai ping tung bao

or

@

TOP, LEFT, BOTTOM, RIGHT.

Grass script Northern Song Dynasty, Sheng Song Yuan Bao 1101-1106A.D.

1cash “Knotted Sheng” – Price 55 USD

Other example

 

Seal script Yua Ping yuan bao@

 

Orthodox script Tong Seng Yuan bao

Both orientations occur throughout and some issues can be found either way. We have not yet been able to determine any significance of these two orientations.


 

MINTING TECHNIQUES AND WEIGHT VARIATIONS

Starting in the late 5th century AD, the majority of Chinese coins were cast in two-piece moist sand molds into which a master coin (called a seed) was used to make many impressions. Channels were cut to connect the impressions and, after joining the two pieces, molten metal was poured in. When taken apart, the mold yielded what looked like a tree studded in coins, which was then cut apart.

The impression of the mold’s sand grains leaves a granular surface. The coins were run over a rasp to smooth the surfaces, leaving a series of parallel file marks which wear off very quickly and are only visible on very high grade specimens (a few Ming Rebel issues have courser file marks that do not wear off). The lower points on the coin are not affected by the rasp and usually retain some evidence of the pebbled surface on all but the most worn coins (difficult to see on a heavily patinated coin).

Cutting the coins from the tree left a rough spot on the edges which was then filed smooth. The coins were cast with wide rims to allow for this filing.

This method was easy, very fast and, because all of the coins were impressed with the same seed coin, thousands and even millions of identical coins were possible, allowing calligraphy variations to be used as mint and date control marks. Each coin would be exactly the same diameter except for small size variations caused by filing the edges. The only major drawback was in controlling the weights. It was impossible to control the exact depth of each seed impression, and a slightly deeper impression gave a heavier coin and a shallow one a light coin. Weights could vary as much as 25% from coin to coin, so officials concerned themselves with the average weight of one thousand coins, not the weight of each individual coin, as discussed earlier.

 

Java tin imitation song coin

 

 

Compare with original song coin

Earlier Song  coins were often cast in handcarved stone (steatite) moulds.

 No two molds could have identical calligraphy, and controlling the exact depth of the carving was difficult, so coins cast by this method (many of the knife, spade and ban-liang) could vary considerably in weight. The molds had a limited useful life and one could not cast tens of thousands of identical coins. Other early coins were cast in non-reusable clay molds which were produced with a type of seed coin, but the mould-making process was too slow to serve the needs of China’s expanding population. The Chinese were aware of lost-wax casting, and used it for many purposes, but the process was far too slow for casting hundreds of millions of coins.

It is difficult to determine the intended denomination of a coin simply by weight. The problem is not too bad with Northern Sung bronze 1 cash which were cast to a standard of 3.5 grams, but could weigh between 2.75 and 4.5 grams. It is worse for 2 cash which at a 7 gram standard vary from 5.5 to 9 grams and overlap with 3 cash at a 10.5 gram standard but vary between 8.25 to 13.5 grams. As can be seen, the heavier 2 cash can weigh more than a light 3 cash. The problem gets worse for higher denominations.


 

SIZE AND DENOMINATION

These small copper coins did not have a lot of purchasing power and except for the smallest transactions, they were tied together in strings of 100 coins. In this form it was impossible to weight each coin, so how could one be sure a string was not of mixed denominations? The answer is fairly simple. Make each denomination a consistent size and without any special equipment and even a blind man would be able to tell if there were a few small coins in the middle of a string of large coins (or vice versa).

 

 

 

 

 

The following chart shows the sizes and average weights known to exist for bronze coins of each reign title (omitting reign titles for which no coins are known). It leaves little doubt that there were distinct size ranges.

 

Kai yuan tong bao coin@

 

Tai ping tong Bao Coin@

DURING THIS ERA THE ROSETTE HOLE LUCKY CHARM COIN DIFFICULT TO FOUND, I HAVE ONLY ONE,LOOK THE DIFFERENT BETWEEN ROSETTE HOLE(LEFT) AND SQUARE HOLE(RIGHT)

 

 

sorry after this the illustration only in complete CD-ROM special for premium member ,subscribe via comment to look the illustrations of the amizing collection of 50 years research

DATE

TITLE

under
23
mm

23-26
mm

27-30
mm

31-35
mm

over 35
mm

968-975

KAI-PAO

 

 

Sung yuan tong bao

3.2 grams

976-984

T’AI-P’ING

@

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.1 grams@

990-994

SHUN-HUA

@

 

 

@

3.2 grams

995-998

CHIH-TAO yuan pao

@

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.5 grams

998-1004

HSIEN-P’ING Yuan Pao

 

@

 

3.6 grams

1004-1007

CHING-TE yuan pao

@

3.5 grams

1008-1016

HSIANG-FU

 

 

3.7 grams

1017-1021

T’IEN-SHI

 

@

3.2 grams

1023-1031

T’IEN-SHENG

@

3.7 grams

1032-1033

MING-TAO@

 

3.9 grams

1034-1037

CHING-YU@

3.7 grams

1038-1039

PAO-YUAN

huang yu tong pao @

 

 

 

3.6 grams

1040

K’ANG-TING

3.3 grams

1041-1048

CH’ING-LI

 

3.3 grams

7.2 grams

1049-1053

HUANG-YU

2.7 grams

1054-1055

CHIH-HO

@

3.7 grams

1056-1063

CHIA-YU yun pao

 

3.5 grams

1064-1067

CHIH-P’ING yuan pao@

 

3.6 grams

1068-1077

HSI-NING@

 

3.5 grams@

7.2 grams@

1078-1085

YUAN-FENG@

 

3.3 grams@

7.0 grams

1086-1093

YUAN-YU@

 

3.2 grams

7.8 grams

1094-1097

SHAO-SHENG@

 

3.7 grams

7.0 grams
@

1098-1100

YUAN-FU@

 

1.7 grams

3.2 grams

7.4 grams

1101

CHIEN-CHUNG

Shen shung yuan pau

 

2.0 grams

3.6 grams@

6.5 grams

1102-1106

CH’UNG-NING@

 

2.7 grams

10.3 grams

1107-1110

TA KUAN@

3.85 grams

?? grams

23.5 grams

1111-1117

CHENG-HO@

 

 

3.3 grams2

7.2 grams

1118

CHUNG-HO

4.9 grams

1119-1125

HSUAN-HO

3.4 grams

6.1 grams

6.7 grams@

1126

CHING-K’ANG

7.3 grams

 

 

 

Read more example

let’s practice your knowlegdge

CHINA, coins of the Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127,
    Generally speaking, a few centuries of peace.  Culture encouraged.  Excesses of rich people constrained for a time.  Scientific advancement.  Dynasty faced pressure from the north – horse barbarians.  Had to abandon the capital and move south.

276-117. CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Tai Ping Tong Bao, 976-94, 1 cash, H16.20v, S-461v, horizontal line R rev., VG $36.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Xian Ping Yuan Bao, 998-1004, S-470?, FD-878, 9mm outer rim obv., rev. blank, center hole not created, 33mm bronze, 26.5g, VG $135.00 sold 6/17/2010
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Xian Ping Yuan Bao, 998-1004, S-470?, FD-878, 9mm outer rim obv., rev. blank, 33mm, 19.3g, F $140.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song Dynasty, 960-1127, Xian Ping Yuan Bao, 998-1004, S-470?, FD-878v, 9mm outer rim obv., rev. blank, 33mm, 19.3g, 30mm, 10.3g, line & dot R rev., F $140.00 sold 6/17/2010
.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

273-119. CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Jing De Yuan Bao, 1004-07, iron 10 cash, H16.51, S-472, FD-882, VG $55.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Xiang Fu Tong Bao, 1008-16, iron 3 cash, H16.58, S-478, aG $36.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Tian Sheng Yuan Bao, 1023-31, iron 2 cash, H16.80, S-487, orthodox script, VG $76.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

273-128. CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Huang Song Tong Bao, 1038, iron 2 cash?, H16.118, S502v, 27mm, 7.4g, ex-Dan Ching, choice F $45.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

273-133. CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Zhi He Tong Bao, 1054-55,1 cash, H16.141, S-513, 2 mould breaks nicely placed on obv rim, rev. 25% offset, nice looking error coin, F $45.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Zhi He Zhong Bao, 1054-55, iron 3 cash, S-nl, FD-927v, orthodox script, choice VG-F $71.00 sold 4/7/2009
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Zhi He Zhong Bao, 1054-55, iron 3 cash, S-nl, FD-932, orthodox script, VG $25.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Zhi He Zhong Bao, 1054-55, iron 3 cash, H16.144, S-nl, Fang top rev., Fangzhou, Shaanxi, VG $89.00 sold 4/7/2009
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Zhi He Zhong Bao, 1054-55, iron 3 cash, H16.145A, S-nl, Tong top rev., Tongzhou, Shaanxi, VG $61.00 sold
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Xi Ning Yuan Bao, 1068-77, 1 cash, H16.181, S-nl, FD-954, orthodox, Heng top rev., F/G 45.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Xi Ning Yuan Bao, 1068-77, 1 cash, H16.181, S-nl, FD-954, orthodox, Heng top rev., F/G $45.00 sold 11/20/2007
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 

277-149. Xi Ning Yuan Bao, 1068-77, 1 cash, H16.181, S-nl, FD-954, Heng top rev., F/G $45.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

277-152. Xi Ning Yuan Bao, 1068-77, 1 cash, H16.184, S-531, spectacularly off center rev., aF $45.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Xi Ning Yuan Bao, 1068-77, 1 cash, H16.184, S-531,  orthodox script, double outer rim rev., aVF $25.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Yuan Feng Tong Bao, 1078-85, iron 3 cash, S-561, FD-978v, seal, down pointing moon top rev., F $53.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Yuan Yu Tong Bao, 1086-93, iron 3 cash, S-581, FD-989, grass, excellent F+ $41.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Shao Sheng Yuan Bao, 1094-97, 1 cash, H16.308v, S-591v, running script, bar across top of Sheng, 4mm rev. rim, VG $10.00 sold 6/18/2009
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Yuan Fu Tong Bao, 1098-1100, iron 3 cash, H16.336, S-nl, FD-1015, seal script, aVF $36.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Yuan Fu Tong Bao, 1098-1100, iron 1 cash, H16.348, S-nl, seal script, Shang top rev., aF $100.00 sold 11/20/2007
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Yuan Fu Tong Bao, 1098-1100, iron 1 cash, H16.348, S-nl, seal script, Shang top rev., VG $81.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Sheng Song Yuan Bao, 1101, iron 3 cash, H16.371, S-nl, FD-1032, seal script, aVF $36.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Chong Ning Tong Bao, 1102-06, H16.398, S-619, aF $56.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Chong Ning Zhong Bao, 1102-06, 10 cash, H16.400v, S-621v, FD-1040v, big & deliberate nailmark bottom R rev., F $33.00 sold
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, N. SONG Dynasty, 960-1127, Chong Ning Zhong Bao, 1102-06, iron 3 cash, S-nl, FD-1052,  horns projecting from top left & bottom left corners of inner rim rev., 33mm, 9.5g, aVF $48.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Da Guan Tong Bao, 1107-10, 10 cash,  S-630, FD-1062, a beautifully made large coin, VF $17.50 sold
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Zheng He Tong Bao, 1111-17, 2 cash, S-640, FD-1078, Fugo-49 var (R2 – second highest rarity), orthodox, “Wen” Zheng, strangely drawn characters, aF $175.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 

273-139. CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Zheng He Tong Bao, 1111-17,iron 3 cash, H16.440, S-643, FD-1087, VF+ $30.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Chong He Tong Bao, 1118, 1 cash, H16.465, S-nl, seal script, aG $160.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Chong He Tong Bao, 1118, 1 cash, H16.466, S-647,  Li script, VF $182.00
(Might not be genuine – I’m not sure.  Usual guarantee.)
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Chong He Tong Bao, 1118,1 cash, H16.466, S-647, Li script, aG $90.00
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 
 
 
 

tttb
CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Jing Kang Tong Bao, 1126, iron 1 cash, S-670, FD-1138, orthodox, 2 specimens on hand, @ aVF $155.00 each both sold 3/21/2009
Click pictures for enlargement.
    It has been noted that many of the coins of this batch have been treated by a rub with a file or sandpaper followed by a dusting of white powder to improve their appearance.  As, um, the face of a conventionally beautiful woman is said to be enhanced with cosmetics yet few will think the worse of her, quite the contrary in fact, so with these coins, rare and beautiful even if covered with dirt.
 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Jing Kang Tong Bao, 1126, iron 1 cash, H16.513, S-669, orthodox script, aVF $170.00 sold 3/21/2009
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 
 

 

CHINA, Northern Song dynasty, 960-1127, Jing Kang Tong Bao, 1126, iron 1 cash, H16.518, S-669, Li script, aVF $180.00 sold 7/4/2011
Click picture for enlargement.
 
 

 

Included in the average weights are numbers of worn coins which reduce the average weight slightly. In most cases, the original weights were probably about 0.2 grams higher than the average of the surviving coins.

Many of these issues are extremely rare and, for many types, we have been unable to locate actual specimens from which to take weights and measurements. The only readily available source of this information is the Schjoth catalogue, so we have based this table, and our descriptions of the types, on information provided by Schjoth. It is possible, especially for sizes, that some errors are included, but we will modify our listing if actual specimens indicate discrepancies.


 

 

COUNTERFEITS

It is important to read our discussion of weights before proceeding in this section.

 

TYPE 1

By counterfeit, we refer to illicit castings made at about the same time as the official castings, with the intent of spending them. These can be difficult and in some cases impossible to tell from official castings. Coins made recently, with the intent of fooling collectors, are called forgeries and are generally much easier to spot. No discussion of the forgeries will occur on this site as it would inform the forgers as to what they are doing wrong and allow them to make forgeries that are much more difficult to spot.

Chinese cash were all cast, making the counterfeiter’s job very easy, as casting is also the easiest of all counterfeiting methods.

By gathering heavier coins and recasting them as lighter coins, a counterfeiter could turn one hundred coins averaging 4 grams into 145 coins averaging 2.75 grams, a profit of 45%. Assuming an official coin was used as the master, each counterfeit would be at the low end of the acceptable weight range with the correct alloy, size, and calligraphy.

These coins must have been very difficult to spot back then, and almost impossible today. We can safely assume many coins at the lower end of the weight standards are counterfeits, but cannot be sure which ones. Official and counterfeit coins freely circulated side by side at the time, so both are part of China’s numismatic history and we therefore see little reason to worry about them.

 

TYPE 2

Many coins, including some listed by Schjoth, are much smaller and generally lighter than the normal standard. It is likely that most of these are illicit castings. There are some documented cases of very crude, small, light coins with Northern Sung (and other) types being cast for local use in parts of Southeast Asia. They were never meant to fool anyone in China and in some cases were cast hundreds of years after the official castings. They are an interesting collecting area unto themselves.

 

 

Emperor CHAO K’UANG YIN
AD 960-976

Chao K’uang Yin, chief General of the Posterior Zhou Dynasty disposed of Emperor Shih Tsung in AD 959, declaring himself Emperor and casting

 

Posterior Zhou coins with the “ZHOU-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” inscription. Within one year he established the Northern Sung Dynasty, adopting

 

the T’ai Tsu reign title.

 
 

Emperor Song Taizu

 

 

 

Emperor CHAO K’UANG YIN
AD 960-976

Chao K’uang Yin, chief General of the Posterior Zhou Dynasty disposed of Emperor Shih Tsung in AD 959, declaring himself Emperor and casting Posterior Zhou coins with the

“ZHOU-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” inscription.

Within one year he established the Northern Sung Dynasty, adopting the T’ai Tsu reign title.

 

Reign title: T’AI TSU, AD 960-968

 

Schjoth (page 27) lists “T’ai Tsu” as the Emperor’s name and not a reign title. We cannot identify any coins of this period, but the

 

“SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” @

issues attributed to the following reign title may have first been cast at this time, as one would expect these to have been Chao K’uang Yin’s first issue.

Compare with  Dr Iwan Collections

 

 

Seal  script Sung Yuan Tong Bao

 

 

 ROSETTE HOLE LEFT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: KAI-PAO, AD 968-975

 

S-451
Orthodox Script@

 

Kai-pao is Chao K’uang Yin’s second reign title, but does not appear on his coins as it was considered incorrect for the character for “Pao” to occur twice on the same coin. Rather, “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” (referring to the coinage of Sung) was used.

 

S-451. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Average (10 specimens) 25.2 mm, 3.40 grams.

VG   $2.50     F   $4.00@

 

We recently notice some specimens of this type that were only about 23.0 mm and around 2.40 grams (not included in the average above) while this type is nearly always over 25 mm and greater than 3 grams (we have seen one that was 25.7 mm, 4.20 grams). At this point we are not certain what the status of these smaller coins is, but suspect they are either contemporary counterfeits, or possibly Japanese or Annamese imitative coins.

 

S-452-8. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: any of various nail marks, dots and vertical strokes, but there are more types than Schjoth lists. Average (4 specimens) 25.0 mm. Average 4.71 grams.

VG   $5.00     F   $7.50     VF   $11.50@

 

We have noted the following variations:

 

TOP

 

crescent

 

UPPER RIGHT

crescent

   

RIGHT

vertical stroke

   

LOWER RIGHT

     

BOTTOM

crescent

   

LEFT

 

crescent

vertical stroke

UPPER LEFT

crescent

   

 

S-459. Iron 1/10 cash (see above). Obverse: “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 4.09 grams. We have not seen one of these and cannot assign a value at this time.

 

These are reported to have been cast in Szechuan, Shansi or Fukien. Ding Fubao (Fisher’ s Ding) suggest these might be mother cash (models used to cast the seed cash), but average rim width makes that impossible.

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: T’AI TSU, AD 960-968

Schjoth (page 27) lists “T’ai Tsu” as the Emperor’s name and not a reign title. We cannot identify any coins of this period, but the “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” issues attributed to the following reign title may have first been cast at this time, as one would expect these to have been Chao K’uang Yin’s first issue.

Emperor T’AI TSUNG
AD 976-997

 

 

Emperor Song Taizong

 

Reign title: T’AI-P’ING, AD 976-984

 

S-460
Orthodox Script@

 

S-460. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “T’AI-P’ING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script (meaning “Money of the Heavenly Kingdom”). Reverse: blank. Average (4 specimens) 24.8 mm, 3.21 grams.

F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

Dr Iwan collections

Orthodox script Tai Ping Tung Pao(two coins)

 

 

 

 

                

 

S-461. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “T’AI-P’ING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: crescent at top. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 3.1 grams We have not had one, and cannot provide a value at this time (this does not necessarily mean it is rare).

 

S-462. Iron 1/10 cash. Obverse: “T’AI-P’ING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 4.16 grams. These are rare and we have no record of a value for the issue.

 

(The 1/10 cash denomination is based on information discussed above.)

It is recorded that a proposal was put forward to cast larger iron coins for this reign title. We assume the larger 1 cash similar to those of the “CHING-TE” reign title were intended, but we find no evidence they were cast.

 

Reign title: ??, AD 985-989

Schjoth, Fisher’s Ding and Mitchiner record no information about this period, but clearly show a gap between the preceding and following reign title. We will have to look further into this in the future.

 

 

Reign title: SHUN-HUA, AD 990-994

   

S-463
Orthodox Script

S-464
Running hand Script@

 

S-463-464. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse:

 

Rosette hole “SHUN-HUA YUAN-PAO” in orthodox

and

 

 

running hand script.@

Schjoth says there is a grass script type by we have not seen one, and neither Schjoth nor Hartill lists one. Reverse: blank. We have noted specimens with star holes. Average (4 specimens) 24.4 mm, 3.3 grams.

F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

 

 

Compare dr Iwan Collections

Running hand or  grass script Shun Hua Yuan Pao

 25 mm

 

27 mm

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title : CHIH-TAO, AD 995-998

     

S-465
Orthodox Script@

S-467
Mixed Scripts

S-468
Grass Script@

 

 

 

 

 

 Dr iwan collections

Orthodox script Chi yuan bao

24 mm(not clear)

 

26 mm(best illustration)

 

 

 

 

 

Grass script Chi Tao yuan bao

      

  

 

 

 

S-465-468. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHIH-TAO YUAN-PAO” in orthodox, grass script and one type of

 

 mixed scrip (top and bottom in grass script, left and right in orthodox script). Reverse: blank. 24.6 mm. Average (12 specimens) 3.58 grams (excluding a 2.2 gram specimen must have been a contemporary counterfeit).

F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

 

Reign title: KAI-PAO, AD 968-975

 

S-451SUN YUAN TUNG PAO
Orthodox Script

 

Kai-pao is Chao K’uang Yin’s second reign title, but does not appear on his coins as it was considered incorrect for the character for “Pao” to occur twice on the same coin. Rather, “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” (referring to the coinage of Sung) was used.

 

S-451. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Average (10 specimens) 25.2 mm, 3.40 grams.

VG   $2.50     F   $4.00

 

We recently notice some specimens of this type that were only about 23.0 mm and around 2.40 grams (not included in the average above) while this type is nearly always over 25 mm and greater than 3 grams (we have seen one that was 25.7 mm, 4.20 grams). At this point we are not certain what the status of these smaller coins is, but suspect they are either contemporary counterfeits, or possibly Japanese or Annamese imitative coins.

 

S-452-8. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: any of various nail marks, dots and vertical strokes, but there are more types than Schjoth lists. Average (4 specimens) 25.0 mm. Average 4.71 grams.

VG   $5.00     F   $7.50     VF   $11.50

 

We have noted the following variations:

 

TOP

 

crescent

 

UPPER RIGHT

crescent

   

RIGHT

vertical stroke

   

LOWER RIGHT

     

BOTTOM

crescent

   

LEFT

 

crescent

vertical stroke

UPPER LEFT

crescent

   

 

S-459. Iron 1/10 cash (see above). Obverse: “SUNG-YUAN T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 4.09 grams. We have not seen one of these and cannot assign a value at this time.

 

These are reported to have been cast in Szechuan, Shansi or Fukien. Ding Fubao (Fisher’ s Ding) suggest these might be mother cash (models used to cast the seed cash), but average rim width makes that impossible.

 

 

 

 

Emperor CHEN TSUNG or Zheng zong
AD 998-1022

 

 

[ ]Emperor Zhengzong  

 

Reign title : HSIEN-P’ING, AD 998-1004

 

S-470
Orthodox Script@
Broad rims

 

S-469-470. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSIEN-P’ING YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. There is only one caligraphy style for this issue, but it comes with both narrow (S-469) and wide (s-470) rims. Average (6 specimens) 24.5 mm, 3.54 grams.

F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

Dr Iwan collections

 

Orthodox script Hsien Ping Yuan Pao

 

 

 

Type one

 

 

Type two(imitation from bali?)

 

Reign title: CHING-TE, AD 1004-1007

 

S-471. Bronze cash. Obverse: “CHING-TE YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Average (9 specimens) 24.6 mm. 3.78 grams

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00

 

 

Schjoth (page 28) records 1,830,000 strings of this issue were cast in each of the four years of this reign title. Each string was 100 coins, indicating about 732 million coins cast.

 

S-472. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “CHING-TE YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 35 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 10.83 grams. Rare, no value can yet be assigned.

 

In spite of the weight, it is fairly certain these were issued as 1 cash (see our discussion of iron coins). He records (page 28) these were cast in the second year of Ching-te (AD 1005) at Chia-ting Fu and Chiung-chou in Szechuan.

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Chen Tsung, AD998-1022, Large IronCash, Value 3 – CH’ING-TE YUAN-PAO

Price US$ 60.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: HSIANG-FU, AD 1008-1016

   

S-474
Orthodox script
Yuan-Pao ending

S-477
Orthodox script
T’ung Pao ending@

 

With “T’UNG PAO” and “YUAN-PAO”, this is the first occurrence of multiple inscription endings during a reign title (See our discussion of inscription varieties).

 

Dr Iwan collections

 

 

 

Orthodox script Hsiang fu yuan Pao

 

          

Orthodox script Hsiang fu Tong Bao

 

S-473-474. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSIANG-FU YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script (large and small calligraphy). Reverse: blank. Average (5 specimens) 24.9 mm. 3.94 grams.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00

 

S-475. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSIANG-FU YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Schjoth’s specimen was 26.0 mm. 5.58 grams. This coin has very wide rims, is 1.2 mm larger than usual, and is considerably above the 1 cash standard weight range. It has all the characteristics one would expect from a SEED CASH and as such should be considered a very rare specimen, however the size is in line with 2 examples of S-477 we describe below, and in fact this may turn out to be fairly common. More research needs to be done on this issue, and we cannot currently assign a value to it.

 

S-478. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “HSIANG-FU YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 34 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 10.82 grams (about the same as S-472). This is a rare coin and we cannot provide a valuation.

 

S-476-477. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSIANG-FU T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script (large and small calligraphy) Reverse: blank. Average (2 specimens) 25.7 mm, 4.55 grams (Schjoth shows his specimens as about 24 mm. Average 3.8 grams, however the 2 specimens we recently examined averaged 25.7 mm, 4.55 grams, suggesting Schjoth’s listing may have been in error).

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00

 

Reign title: T’IEN-HSI, AD 1017-1021

   

S-479
Four different scripts.

S-480
Orthodox Script@

 

Dr Iwan collections

Orthodox script Tien-Hsi(Xi) tong bao

 

 

 

 

Schjoth (page 29) records that during the last year (AD 1021) at least four mints were casting copper coins (Yung-ping at Jao-chou in Kiangsi, Yung-feng at Ch’ih-chou in Anhui, Kuang-ning in Fookien, and Feng-huo at Chien-chou in Shansi) and a few other mints may have operated briefly at Pien-liang (the capital) and Hangchow. Three mints cast iron coins (Chiung-chou, Chia-ting-fu and Hsing-chou, all in Szechuan) and in one year 1.5 million strings were cast, but it is not clear if this includes the iron issues.

He also records a formula for the bronze alloy: in 5 cattie of coins was 3 cattie 10 ounces of copper, 1 cattie 8 ounces of lead and 8 ounces of tin.

 

S-479. Not in Hartill or FD, so a scarce type.

 

Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “T’IEN-HSI T’UNG-PAO” in rare four different scripts. Reverse: blank. Average (1 specimens) 23.8 mm, 2.79 grams.

F   $25.00     VF   $45.00.

 

BECAREFUL different WITH common Tien-“hsi”seal script

 

Dr Iwan collections

Seal script Tien “hsi” Yuan Bao

 

 

 

Schjoth states that this type has a different calligraphy styles on each of the four characters:

“T’IEN” – seal script, “HSI” – orthodox script, “T’UNG” – grass script, “PAO” in li (official) script, and while this is not clear from his drawings, the specimens we have now seen bare this out.

This is the earliest occurrence of seal script on a Northern Sung coin, possibly an experimental coin to see how it would look. However, this is controversy over this type, as while Schjoth believed it to be a Chinese issue (hence we include it here) there are others that think it is an Annamese issue, but there appears to be no clear consensus on this.

 

S-480,482. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “T’IEN-HSI T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Average (2 specimens) 24.5 mm, Schjoth had two specimens, one of 24 mm. 4.16 grams. Schjoth has a specimen that was only 21 mm, 2.48 grams, which is likely a counterfeit of the period and which has be left out of our average size and weight figure.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

              

S-481. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “T’IEN-HSI T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: crescent at top left. 24 mm. 3.15 grams. We have not had this type and cannot provide a valuation at this time.

 

S-483. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “T’IEN-HSI T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 28 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 7.52 grams. This is a very rare coin and we cannot provide a valuation at this time.

 

This is smaller and lighter than the iron coins cast during the previous two reign titles, but slightly heavier than those of the next. Please see our general discussion of the iron coins for why we believe they are 1 cash and not 2 cash as Schjoth suggests.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CH’IEN-HSING, AD 1022

No coins seem to have been cast for this reign title.

 

Emperor JEN TSUNG
AD 1023-1063

 

 

[ ] Emperor Renzong  

 

Jen Tsung used nine reign titles,

 

casting coins for all of them. He used as many as ten denominations of mixed iron and bronze, with numerous variations in script style and orientation, providing dozens of major and hundreds of minor varieties.

 

 

 

Reign title: T’IEN-SHENG, AD 1023-1031

   

S-484
Seal Script@

S-486@
Orthodox

 

S-484-486. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “T’IEN-SHENG YUAN-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. Average (12 specimens) 24.8 mm 4.11 grams.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

Dr Iwan collections

 

Orthodox script Tien Sheng yuan Bao

 

Type 1

 

 

 

 

 with back double print   half rim board coin like moon crescent in bali they called moon coin (RARE)

 

        

Type 2

 

 

 

back blanc

 

 

S-487-488. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “T’IEN-SHENG YUAN-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. Schjoth had two specimens of 25 mm and averaging 6.6 grams, smaller and lighter than those cast in the previous reign title. This type is rare and we have not been able to establish a value for it.

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Jen Tsung, AD1023-1063, T’IEN-SHENG YUAN-PAO

Price US$ 30.00

 

 

Reign title: MING-TAO, AD 1032-1032

Dr Iwan Collections

 

 

S-489
orthodox Script@

S-490
Seal Script@

 

Dr Iwan collections

 

Seal Script Ming Tao Yuan Pao

 

 

Back broad  rim

 

Orthodox script ming Tao yuan pao

 

S-489-490. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “MING-TAO YUAN-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. 25 mm. Schjoth had two specimens averaging 4.0 grams. The orthodox script variety is common but we are not certain about

 

the rarity of the seal script type.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

 

S-491. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “MING-TAO YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. 25 mm. Reverse: nail mark in top left corner. Schjoth had one specimen of 3.55 grams. We have not yet determined a value for this variety.

 

Schjoth does not record any iron coins for this reign title.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CHING-YU, AD 1034-1037

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-492
Seal Script@

S-494
Orthodox Script@

 Dr Iwan collections

 

May be seal script Ching Yu Yuan Pao reverse blanc(no example exist),but this is also may be sheng sung yuan pao

 

 

Seal script Sheng sung yuan Pao

 

 

S-492-494. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHING-YU YUAN-PAO” in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 25 mm. Average 3.73 grams.

   

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $5.00@

 

S-495. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “CHING-YU YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script.@ Reverse: blank. 25 mm. 6.8 grams. We have not handled one of these and cannot provide a valuation for it.

 

Schjoth records: “Hsu Chia’s proposal to cast coins by a chemical process, of fusing copper and iron, was adopted.”. We assume this refers to a copper-iron alloy but have not been able to determine which coins these were. As copper was worth more than iron, it makes little sense to issue iron coins with a copper content, but a considerable saving could be had by adding some iron to mostly copper issues. Some years ago we had a few North Sung cash that looked like rusty iron, but were non-magnetic, which we assumed just had a peculiar patination. However, they were issued under the reign title HSUAN-HO around AD 1119-1125 which is 100 years after this

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: PAO-YUAN, huang Sung Yuan Po AD 1038-1039

   

S-498
Seal Script@

S-500
Orthodox Script

 

“Huang-Sung” @was used instead of “Pao-Yuan” on these coins. To do otherwise would have repeated the character “Pao”, a practice considered to be incorrect.

Dr Iwan collections

 

 

Seal script Huang Sung Tung Pao

S-496-500. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HUANG-SUNG T’UNG-PAO” (Imperial currency of Sung) in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank but one example with a star shaped hole. Average (2 specimens) 24.5 mm. 3.35 grams.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

 

S-501-502. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “HUANG-SUNG T’UNG-PAO” (Imperial currency of Sung) in seal and orthodox script. Schjoth had two specimens, one of 24 mm, 7.53 grams and the other of 25 mm, 7.07 grams. These are rare and we cannot provide a valuation at this time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: K’ANG-TING, AD 1040

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-503
Orthodox Script

 

Jen Tsung only used this reign title for less than a year and very few coins were issued. We have never seen one.

 

S-503. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “K’ANG-TING YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 18 mm. 3.35 grams. This specimen is far too small for an official casting, but the weight is too high to suggest a contemporary counterfeit. As this is very rare and does not fit with then normal structure of the coinage, it may be a modern forgery. We note Fisher’s Ding (Ding Fubao) lists two Iron 1 cash for this reign title, but no bronze coins.

 

Schjoth (page 29) records: “In the K’ang-ting year, the official, Pi Chung-yuan, drawing attention to the bad state of the finances and the requirements for frontier expenditure, proposed the issue of a large currency, ‘value ten’ of copper and iron.” We have found no evidence that value ten cash were cast during this or either of the next two reign titles, but this passage is important as it shows that iron and copper coins could be cast and be circulating at identical denominations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CH’ING-LI, AD 1041-1048

   

S-504
read from top, then
around to the right

S-505
read top-bottom-right-left

 

S-506. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CH’ING-LI CHUNG-PAO” in orthodox script reading top-bottom right left. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. 3.35 grams. We have not recorded a value for this type.

 

S-504 and 505. Bronze, 3 cash. Obverse: “CH’ING-LI CHUNG-PAO” in orthodox script with orientations reading top-bottom right-left (504) and top around to the right (505). Reverse: blank. Average (10 specimens) 7.4 grams with a range from 6.2 to 8.6 grams, 30-31 mm (the 8.6 gram specimen was 32 mm).

F   $15.00     VF   $25.00

Rare coin

 

These weights are correct for value 2 cash, but Schjoth (page 30) records: “In the 4th year of Chia-yu (AD 1059), owing to the increased casting by the people of illicit coins, the ‘value three’ coins of the heavy issue of Ching-li chung-paos were reduced to the value of two cash”.. This clearly suggests the heavier “Ch’ing-li” coins were issued as a fiduciary three cash, making them subject to counterfeiting.

 

Reign title: HUANG-YU, AD 1049-1053

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-507
Orthodox Script

 

S-507-508. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HUANG-YU YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. 23 mm. Schjoth had two specimens weighing 2.15 and 3.2 grams.

This issue is rare and we have no record of a price for it.

 

It appears from Schjoth (page 30) that during this reign title an order was given to cast value 10 large copper and iron coins, but there is no evidence that these coins were actually cast.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CHIH-HO, AD 1054-1055

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

 

S-509
Seal Script
with YUAN-PAO@

S-511
Orthodox Script
with YUAN-PAO

 

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-512
Seal Script
with T’UNG-PAO

S-513
Orthodox Script
with T’UNG-PAO

 

S-509-511. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHIH-HO YUAN-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Average 3.72 grams.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00

Dr Iwan collections

 

 

 

Seal script Chih Ho Yuan Pao reverse blanc

 

S-512-513. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse:

“CHIH-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox script.@ Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Average 3.62 grams. We have no valuation records for this type

 

Reign title: CHIA-YU, AD 1056-1063

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

 

S-514
Seal Script

S-515
Orthodox Script

 

S-514-515. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHIA-YU YUAN-PAO” in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank. We have noted an orthodox script example with a star shaped hole. 24 mm. Average 3.87 grams.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00

 

S-516-518. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHIA-YU T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Schjoth notes an orthodox script example with a star shaped hole. 24 mm. Average 3.32 grams.

VG   1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Emperor YING TSUNG
AD 1064-1067

 

 

[ ]Yinzong  

 

Reign title: CHIH-P’ING, AD 1064-1067

   

S-519
Seal Script@

S-522
Orthodox Script

S-519-523. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHIH-P’ING YUAN-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Average 3.34 grams.

VG   1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

 

This type often exists with an unusual style of “CHIH”. Munro believes these were cast in Japan, which is possible. We will elaborate on this at some future date.

 

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-524
Seal Script

S-526
Orthodox Script

 

S-524-526. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHIH-P’ING T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Average 3.97 grams. Our records do not include a price for this type, but it is probably the same as those above.

 

Schjoth (page 30) records that during this reign title, 1,700,000 strings of cash (100 coins per string) were cast annually from six minting departments.

Dr Iwan collections

Seal script Chih Ping Tung Pao reverse blank

 

Compare withthis almost same and What the different between 

 

Orthodox script chi ping

with

 

Hsien ping

 

hsien ping beloe

Dr Iwan collections

 

Orthodox script Hsien Ping Yuan Pao

 

 

 

Type one

 

 

Type two the leg of yuan  script off

 

 

 

Emperor SHEN TSUNG
AD 1068-1085

 

 

[ ]Shenzong

 

[ ]Zhezong  

 

 

 

 

Emperor Shen Zong

Schjoth (page 31) records that as many as twenty-six mints operated during this period, with a combined annual mintage as high as five-and a half million strings.

 

 

Reign title: HSI-NING, AD 1068-1077

 

Seal Script version 1
with Yuan-pao

 

@?

Seal Script version 2
with Yuan-pao

 

Dr Iwan collections

 

Seal script “Hsi”-Ning yuan Pao

 

@

xi ning tong bao inscription.

This inscription, however, is written in seal script.

Coins with this style of calligraphy were cast during the years 1068-1077 of the reign of Emperor Shen Zong.

 

 

 

@

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dr Iwan collections

 

Orthodox script  “Hsi-Ning” Yuan Pao

Orthodox Script (one of several styles)
with Yuan-pao

     

S-527
Seal Script version 1
with Yuan-pao

S-529
Seal Script version 2
with Yuan-pao

S-535
Orthodox Script (one of several styles)
with Yuan-pao

Compare sela script  xi ning yuan pao above with the coin below(not same this sheng sung yuan bao)

 

     

S-538
Seal Script
with Chung-pao

S-537
Orthodox Script style 1
with Chung-pao @

S-542
Orthodox Script style 2
with Chung-pao

 

All coins of this reign title read from the top around to the right. Early in the reign only 1 cash coins were cast, and those with orthodox script tend to be style 1. Later in the reign the large denominations were cast, on which those with orthodox script tend to be style 2. It is not yet clear to me is the 1 cash denomination continued to be made after the larger denominations were introduced.

 

 

EARLY ISSUES

S-527-530 and 532-535. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSI-NING YUAN-PAO” in seal (two different versions) and orthodox scripts (3 different versions). Reverse: blank. Average (2 specimens) 23.8 mm. Average 3.12 grams. One with a star-shaped hole has been noted.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00

 

One of Schjoth’s specimens weighed only 1.63 grams. It is probably a contemporary counterfeit and in not included is the average weight calculation.

 

S-531. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSI-NING YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: crescent at bottom. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 3.7 grams. We have not recorded a value for this type.

 

S-544. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “HSI-NING YUAN-PAO” (or “T’UNG-PAO”) in orthodox script. Schjoth’s specimen must have been in poor condition as the exact reading was uncertain). Reverse: blank. 25 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 7.53 grams. We cannot provide a valuation for this type at this time.

 

At 7.53 grams and 25 mm, this appears to be a 1 cash and must have been part of this early series.

 

S-536-537. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSI-NING CHUNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. 25 mm. Average 3.57 grams. Our records do not currently include a value for this type.

Schjoth describes these as larger than usual, but 25 mm is not enough larger to be significant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

LATER ISSUES

Schjoth (page 31) records the following passage:

“During the years the armies moved westward, coins value ten were cast. When the war was ended and the armies withdrawn, the illicit casting of coins set in, and the value of the large coinage had to be reduced to ‘three’ and eventually to ‘two’.

On the recommendation of some high officials, henceforward, of the larger issues of coins only value two were cast and these circulated throughout the empire.”

 

S-538-42a. Bronze 10 cash. Obverse: “HSI-NING CHUNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank. The size of these varies between 30 and 32 mm, with significant weight variations between about 6.5 and 8.5 grams. Based on 43 specimens we found an average weight of about 7.8 grams. These fit a 2 cash standard but appear to have been issued at 10 cash, later devalued to 2 cash. We have noted one example with a star-shaped hole.

VG   $2.50     F   $4.00     VF   $7.50, gVF   $9.00

 

From a recent hoard we noticed that the type S-538 seems to come in both the 30 to 32 mm size (later re-valued to 3 cash) and in the 28 to 29 mm size (later re-valued to 2 cash). It is possible that the 28-29 mm specimens were a distinctly different issued from the 30-32 mm specimens.

 

S-543. Iron 10 cash. Obverse: “HSI-NING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. 35 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 10.54 grams. These are rare and we have not seen one, and cannot provide a valuation for it.

 

The passage about war-issue 10 cash coins (see above) does not mention iron coins, but at 35 mm these are large coins and are likely of this series as they do not fit anywhere else.

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: YUAN-FENG, AD 1078-1085

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

   

S-546
Orthodox Script

S-545
Seal Script

S-556
Grass Script@ok

 

Dr iwan collections

 

Seal script yuan Feng tung pao

 

Grass script Yuan Feng Tung Pao

1 CASH ISSUES

S-545-550. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FENG T’UNG-PAO” in seal, orthodox and grass scripts. Reverse: blank or with crescent. We have also seen one example with a star hole (add about 60% to the price for a crescent or star hole). Average (36 specimens) 24.5 mm, 3.90 grams. We have noted that there is a range of sizes with specimens noted from 23.5 to 25.1 mm.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.75     VF   $5.00@

 

S-551-552. Bronze larger 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FENG T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. Average (3 specimens) 25.6 mm, 3.56 grams (range 2.87 to 4.15 grams). These are interesting coins, and the consistently large size suggest they are a separate issue from those above, but the weights are well within the 1 cash weight range. At this point, we do not know why the two issues exist, but we do not that coins of this size were cast during earlier reign titles (see S-477 above).

VG   $7.50     F   $9.75     VF   $12.50@

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD1068-1085, AE 2 Cash
grass script yuan feng tung pao

 

Price US$ 35.00

S-563-564. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FENG T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. Schjoth had two specimens of 25 and 24 mm. Average 7.05 grams. The same weight and size as the iron 1 cash cast prior to the war and appear to be a re-introduction of that denomination at the end of the war. We have not seen an example of these and cannot provide any valuation for them at this time.

 

LARGE ISSUES

S-553, 556. Bronze 10 (2) cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FENG T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass script. Reverse: blank. These vary between about 28 and 31 mm (average is 30 mm), and based on 31 specimens we found an average weight of 7.44 grams. We have also seen some examples with a star hole which should be worth a small premium).

 

VG   $2.50     F   $4.00     VF   $6.00

 

 

 

 

Dr Iwan collections

 

24 mm Grass script Yuan feng tung Pao

 

26 mm Grass script Yuan feng tung Pao

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD1068-1085, AE 2 Cash

Yuan feng tong bao

Price US$ 35.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

China, 1078-1085 AD., Northern Sung dynasty, emperor Shen Tsung, 2 Cash, Schjoth 556.

China, Northern Sung dynasty (906-1127 AD.), emperor Shen Tsung (1068-1085 AD.), reign title: Yuan Feng (1078-1085 AD.), 1078-1085 AD.,
Æ 2 Cash (29-30 mm / 5,68 g),
Obv.: Yuan / Feng / T’ung / Pao , in Chinese grass script, clockwise top-right-beneath-left of central hole.
Rev.: (plain) .
Fredrik Schjoth. Chinese currency. Oslo, 1929, no. 556 .

 

S-554, 555, 557-559. Bronze 10 (2) cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FENG T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass script. Reverse: several varieties with an assortment of dots and crescents. 28 mm. Schjoth had 5 specimens averaging 6.45 grams. We do not have any records of valuations for these variations, but they should be worth some premium over the plain-reverse examples above.

 

S-560-562. Iron 10 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FENG T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse blank or with a nail mark. 30 mm. Averaging 11.88 grams, these are of the same standard as the fiduciary 10 cash issues cast during the previous reign title.

 Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD1068-1085, Iron Cash, Value 3
seal script yuan feng tong bao
Price US$ 75.00

 

The Western Wars were ongoing during the early years of this reign title, so these heavy coins were probably a continuation of the fiduciary 10 cash of the previous reign title which were devalued at first to 3 and then to 2 cash.

Schjoth records (page 31): “In the 8th year of Yuan-yu ‘(AD 1086)’, when Che Tsung ascended the throne, fourteen of the old mints were closed. During the eight years that followed Shansi had orders to re-issue its small currency.”

It appears Shansi issued larger coins until AD 1086. We have not found the year in which the Western War ended, but it appears to have been before AD 1086 indicating some of these heavy coins were cast at a 2 cash denomination (we believe this probably only applies to the bronze issues). As the bronze 10 cash were cast to the two cash standard, it is probably not possible to differentiate early 10 cash from later 2 cash.

 

 

 

Emperor CHE TSUNG
AD 1086-1100

 

Reign title: YUAN-YU, AD 1086-1093

   

S-565
Seal Script

S-567
Grass Script@

 

 

 

 

 

Dr Iwan collection

 

27 mmm grass script Yuan Yu Tung Pao

 

S-565-8. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-YU T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. 24.5 mm. Average about 3.85 grams (17 specimens).

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

 

S-569-572. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-YU T’UNG-PAO” in seal script. There are unusual North Sung issues with the following reverses: S-569 – numeral 1, S-570 – numeral 2, S-571 – “Ch’uan” (a stream) and- S-572 – characters meaning “ten months”. 24 mm. Average 2.96 grams. These are rare. We have never seen one and cannot provide a valuation for them.

 

These coins do not fit with the rest of the North Sung series. Schjoth’s suggestion that these may have been cast is Japan could be correct. There is no indigenous coinage from Japan during the Northern Sung period and it appears Japan used Chinese coins during this period, so it is likely some North Sung types were cast in Japan.

 

S-573-574. Metal ?? value ??. Obverse: “YUAN-YU T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Schjoth lists these as bronze 1 cash, but the weights of 6.06 and 5.52 grams fit into the weight/size standard for iron 1 cash. Until we are able to confirm the alloy and weights of these two coins, we do not wish to classify them. We would appreciate hearing from anyone with access to the Schjoth collection (we think it is in Oslo, Norway) who can check them for us.

 

S-577-578. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-YU T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. 24 mm. Averaging about 7.12 grams.

The weight and size are at the iron 1 cash standard suggesting these are early issues of this reign title. Schjoth does not mention orthodox script for this type, but his illustration of S-578 shows “YUAN” in orthodox script. We have not handled any of these and cannot currently provide a valuation for them.

 

ISSUES OF AD 1093

Schjoth (page 31) records value two cash were re-introduced in AD 1093, but discontinued in favor of 1 cash after two years. This title ends in the first year, so some must have been cast under the following reign title. Schjoth indicates all two cash were discontinued, but numismatic evidence indicates only iron 2 cash were discontinued while bronze two cash continued to be cast.

 

S-575-576. Bronze 2 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-YU T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. 29 mm. Average 7.85 grams (the weight standard previously established for bronze 2 cash). We note these usually show up in gF or better.

F   $3.50     VF   $5.50

 

 

S-580-581. rare Iron 2 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-YU T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. 34 mm. Average 11.03 grams (the standard used during the previous two reign titles for 10 cash later reduced to 2 cash).

F   $25.00     VF   $37.50

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Che Tsung,

yuan yu tong paoAD1086-1100, Iron Cash, Value 3

Price US$ 85.00

 

These are the earliest Northern Sung iron coins we have seen available in recent years. It is very possible they came from a single hoard and may turn out to be scarcer than the values we have seen would indicate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: SHAO-SHENG, AD 1094-1097

   

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-582
Seal Script
with YUAN PAO

S-586
Grass Script
with YUAN-PAO

S-592
Orthodox Script
with T’UNG-PAO

Dr Iwan collections

 

24 mm seal script Shao  Sheng yuan Pao

 

30 mmm seal script shao sheng yuan bao

 

23 mm shao sheng yuan pao(bali mint?)

 

 

 

Name: S586. Che Tsung AE Cash
Description: Northern Sung Dynasty, Emperor Che Tsung, 1086 – 1100 ADAE Cash. Obv: grass script Shao Sheng Yuan Pao
Pao. Schjoth586
Price: US$ 5.00 (2007-04-25)

 

 

ISSUES OF AD 1094

S-597-598. Iron 2 cash. Obverse: “SHAO-SHENG T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. 34 mm. Average 11.0 grams (the size and weight standard of the iron 2 cash issued in AD 1093).. These must be part of the series discontinued after AD 1094.

F   $25.00     VF   $42.50@

Rare coin

 

Schjoth records that the “Book of Economical Economy of Sung” (v. Hui-k’ao, vol iv p. 24a) states: “During the first years of the Shao-sheng style, the copper coins were daily becoming more scarce, while the iron ones were increasing numerous, a thousand copper-cash were received in exchange of two thousand five hundred of iron.”

This is an interesting passage. It appears bronze coins were being issued at their metal value of about 3.5 grams per cash (see below), but the 11-12 gram iron 2 cash had been demonetized (or people refused to accept them) and were trading at their scrap iron value. Two and a half iron 2 cash, between 27.5 and 30 grams of iron, were exchangeable for a 3.5 gram copper 1 cash (an 8 or 9 to 1 ratio). This supports our earlier belief that iron was worth about 10% of copper and that this had changed little by the late Northern Sung period.

The government’s response was to withdraw the iron 2 cash coins, although it appears that iron 1 cash were still cast and accepted. We find no evidence of iron 2 cash being cast again during the balance of the Northern Sung period, but some brief but unsuccessful attempts at other denominations did occur.

 

OTHER ISSUES OF AD 1094 AND LATER

S-582, 585, 586, 591. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SHAO-SHENG YUAN-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse blank. Average (4 specimens) 24.5 mm, average 3.90 grams (excluding S-585 which at only 21 mm and 1.82 grams is probably a contemporary counterfeit).

F   $2.50     VF   $4.50@

 

583-584, 587-590. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SHAO-SHENG YUAN-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: a variety of crescents and dots. Average (6 specimens) 24.5 mm, 3.87 grams. We have no records of values for these, but they should be worth some premium over the blank-reverse type.

 

S-596. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “SHAO-SHENG YUAN-PAO” in grass script. 24 mm. Reverse: blank. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 7.02 grams. We have no records of value for this type at this time.

 

S-593-595. Bronze 2 cash. Obverse: “SHAO-SHENG YUAN-PAO” in seal and grass script. Reverse: blank. Average (3 specimens) 29.3 mm, 6.85 grams.

F   $3.50     VF   $5.50

 

S-592. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SHAO-SHENG T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse blank. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 2.94 grams. We have no record of handling this type.

Read more info

 
 
Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD1068-1085, AE 2 Cash

Price US$ 35.00

    Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD1068-1085, Iron Cash, Value 3

Price US$ 75.00

 
 
Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Che Tsung, AD1086-1100, Iron Cash, Value 3

Price US$ 85.00

    Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Chien-Chung, SHEN SUNG YUAN-PAO

Price US$ 30.00

Sorry, this item has been sold.

 
 
Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, IRON Value 1, CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 185.00

    Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CH’UNG-NING CHUNG-PAO

Price US$ 85.00

 
 
Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 85.00

    Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 75.00

 
 
Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 85.00

Sorry, this item has been sold.

    Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD1101-1125, Value 2 Cash, Title Hsuan-ho (AD1119-25), HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 35.00

 

 

 

 

Reign title: YUAN-FU, AD 1098-1100

 

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-606 vareity
Seal Script
with T’UNG-PAO@

S-602
Grass Script
with T’UNG-PAO

 

S-599, 602. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FU T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. 23 mm. Average about 3.21 grams.

F   $2.50     VF   $4.50@

 

S-600-601. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FU YUAN-PAO” in seal script. Reverse: crescents in various positions. 23 mm. Average about 3.41 grams. We have no record of handling these.

Dr Iwan collections

 

25 mm Seal script Yuan Fu Tung Pao

 

25 mmm orthodox script yuan Fu Tong Bao

S-603. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FU T’UNG-PAO” in grass script. Reverse: blank. At 21 mm and 1.66 grams this is probably a counterfeit.

 

S-606. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FU T’UNG-PAO” in seal script. Reverse: blank. 29 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 5.86 grams. We do not have a valuation for this type.

 

S-604-605. Bronze 2 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FU T’UNG-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. 28 mm. Average 7.40 grams.

VG   $2.50     F   $3.50     VF   $6.50

 

H-16.336 (Schjoth does not list this denomination). Iron 3 cash. Obverse: “YUAN-FU T’UNG-PAO” in seal script. Reverse: blank. Average (1 specimen) 34.2 mm, 13.23 grams.

F   $30.00     VF   $45.00

 

 

Rare “YUAN-FU T’UNG-PAO” in seal script.

Average (1 specimen) 34.2 mm, 13.23 grams.

F   $30.00     VF   $45.00

 

Emperor HUI TSUNG
AD 1101-1125

 

[ ]Huizong

 

 

Hui Tsung’s coinage is very complex with several attempted reforms, including the introduction of some new fiduciary issues.

We have done our best to sort these out, but in some cases only speculations can be offered.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CHIEN-CHUNG CHING-KUO, AD 1101

 

sheng –sung yuan pao

   

S-607
Seal Script

S-609
Grass Script

 

An unusual reign title, composed of four rather than two characters, which does not fit the normal coin layout. “SHENG-SUNG” was used instead.

Dr Iwan collection

(two coins)

 

 

 

 

Seal script Sheng sung yuan Pao

S-607, 609. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SHENG-SUNG YUAN-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. Average (3 specimens) 24 mm. Average 3.65 grams.

VG   $1.75     F   $2.50     VF   $4.00

 

S-608, 610. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse “SHENG-SUNG YUAN-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. S-608 at 19 mm, 1.92 grams and S-610 at 21 mm, 2.16 grams. The size and weights suggest Schjoth’s specimens were contemporary counterfeits, but the types do exist at regular size and weight.

 

S-611. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “SHENG-SUNG YUAN-PAO” in grass script. Reverse: crescent. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 3.28 grams. We have not handled one of these and cannot currently suggest a value.

 

S-612-614. Bronze 2 cash. Obverse: “SHENG-SUNG YUAN-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank. 28 mm. Average 6.53 grams.

VG   $2.50     F   $3.50     VF   $5.50

 

The iron coins of this reign title are a little perplexing. This is one of the areas where we can only offer speculations, and more study is needed.

 

S-615-617. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “SHENG-SUNG YUAN-PAO” in seal and grass scripts. Reverse: blank.



Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD1068-1085, Iron Cash, Value 3

Price US$ 75.00

The sizes and weights of Schjoth’s specimens are very inconsistent. One of 23 mm, 3.91 grams, one of 25 mm, 5.67 grams and one of 21 mm, 2.72 grams.

VG   $55.00     F   $70.00     VF   $100.00

 

During the balance of the Northern Sung, 23 to 24 mm iron coins were sporadically cast at both a 5 to 6 and 3 to 4 gram standard. It is important to remember iron coins are fiduciary, even at the heavier standard containing about 0.2 cash worth of metal. It has been our observation that size is more significant than weight in determining denomination, and that both of these standards are intended to be value 1 cash. We believe the 21 mm specimen above may have been a counterfeit of the period.

 

S-618. Iron coin of uncertain denomination. Obverse: “SHENG-SUNG YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. At 33 mm and 12.59 grams this coin is larger and heavier than the iron 2 cash issued earlier, but the same as the earlier iron 10 cash that were later demonetized. This appears to be an attempt to introduce a large fiduciary iron coinage, but we have found no evidence to suggest the intended denomination, although the size is the same as the bronze 10 cash of the next reign title. Rare, we have no valuation currently available.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CH’UNG-NING, AD 1102-1106

   

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-620
Orthodox Script
CH’UNG-NING CHUNG-PAO
read top-bottom-right-left

S-621
Orthodox Script
CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO
read top-right-bottom-left

S-626
Orthodox Script
CH’UNG-NING YUAN-PAO
read top-right-bottom-left

 

While the coins with the Chung-Pao ending, and those with the T’ung-Pao ending, appear to have very different caligraphy styles, they are both variations of Othodox Script.

Schjoth lists value 1, 5 and 10 cash for this series, but his literary reference mentions only 10 cash. We have so far found no convincing evidence of any coins cast with the intent of a 5 cash denomination.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REGULAR SERIES

S-626. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “CH’UNG-NING YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. 25 mm. 6.04 grams. We have not seen an example of these and cannot provide a valuation at this time.

LOOK IN AUCTIONS

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125,

IRON Value 1, CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 185.00

 

Schjoth does not list any bronze coins with the “YUAN-PAO” inscription, but the existence of this iron coin proves the inscription was used. It is likely that bronze issues exist but are very rare.

 

S-619, Rare bronze 1 cash, “CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO”. Orthodox script. 25 mm. 3.27 grams. This is consistent with a 1 cash denomination. The 1 cash is rare with this inscription.

VF   $90.00

 

S-625, iron 1 cash, “CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO”. Orthodox script. 24 mm. At 3.46 grams, this is consistent with the iron 1 cash denomination (S-615) issued under the previous reign title. We have not seen one of these and cannot provide a value.

 

S-620, bronze 1 cash, “CH’UNG-NING CHUNG-PAO”. Orthodox script. 25 mm. At 2.12 grams it is unlikely that this is an official issue, but it may be a contemporary counterfeit of a value 1 cash coin of this type. We cannot provide a value for this type at this time.

 

FIDUCIARY 10 CASH SERIES

 

Schjoth records (page 32): “In the 1st year of Ch’ung-ning (AD 1102) the Board of Revenue directed that the four minting departments of Chiang, Yao, Shih and Chien should hand in samples of the new currency …… Each string of a thousand of the value-ten coins weighed 14 catties 7 liang, 9 catties 7 liang 2 mace being copper, 4 catties 12 liang 6 mace being lead, 1 catty 9 liang 2 mace being tin, the waste by melting being 1 catty 5 liang. Each coin weighed 3 mace.”

As far as we have been able to determine 3 mace is about 11 grams, so this passage must be referring to an issue of larger bronze coins. We also note that the two halves may not belong together. The first is about testing 1000 coins that already exist. In the second part “waste by melting” suggests the formula is the amount of metal needed to cast 1000 coins, including the casting sprew that is left after the coins are removed from the trees. This is still open to interpretation.

Schjoth (page 33) also records: “In the 1st year of Cheng-ho (AD 1111), orders were issued that ‘value ten’ coins, which grasping officials for momentary gain some years before had issued to the harm of the government and the people, should be reduced to ‘value three’. The Minister Chang Shang-ying (died 1121) obtained leave to demonetize all the spurious ‘value 10’ coins met with and cast them into light weight Hsiao-p’ing cash”.

Bronze 3 cash should weigh about 10.5 grams, but this passage also makes it clear that 10 cash coins were being cast to a 3 cash standard. It is also clear that counterfeits were abundant. We believe the large coins of this period are the coins referred to, and that any under 8 grams are probably examples of the counterfeits.

 

S-621. Bronze 10 cash (Schjoth calls it a 5 cash). Obverse: “CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Average (8 specimens) 34.1 mm, 11.47 grams (at the 3 cash standard). These are generally well cast coins with bold characters and fairly high rims.

F   $8.00     VF   $15.00     XF $22.50

 

S-624 is a double-obverse example of the S-621 issue (31 mm, 12.38 grams). Double-obverse coins were never a tradition in China and it is unlikely to be an authentic issue. There are other double-sided fantasy coins that are believed to have been cast during the 19th century for the collector’s market.

 

S-622, 623. Bronze 10 cash. Obverse: “CH’UNG-NING CHUNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Average (7 specimens) 9.65 grams, with the range between 7.6 and 13.3 grams. The range from 34 to 36 mm. Two of the specimens were under 8 grams were poorly cast and probably old counterfeits, leaving an average of 10.5 grams for the remaining specimens. These are generally bold, well cast coins.

F   $10.00     VF   $15.00

 

Schjoth (page 32) records a story of the enemy melting iron coins to manufacture iron weapons, so tin and lead were added to the alloy to make the metal soft and brittle, not suitable for weapons. The iron coins of this series may be those referred to. “Enemies making weapons” shows these fiduciary coins were cast in a time of war, just as similar coins were cast during the Western Wars 35 years earlier.

 

S-627. Iron 10 (?) cash. Obverse: “CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 32 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 10.07 grams. This is in the same weight and size standard as the bronze 10 cash issue, suggesting this was intended to circulate at that denomination. Rare.

 

Reign title : TA KUAN, AD 1107-1110

 

 

S-630
Orthodox slender gold Script@

“TA-KUAN YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script, with very fine calligraphy said to be in the Emperor’s own hand, which Hartill refers to as

 “slender gold” script.

They come in a number of different denominations, in both bronze and iron, all with blank reverses. In later times this was a popular model for amulets with a wide variety of reverse types, which are are not coins.

 

 

Bronze 1 cash, 23 to 24 mm, average 3.85 grams. S-628-629.

F   $2.50     VF   $4.00@

Dr Iwan collections

 

 

Bronze 23 mm Ta Kuan Yuan bao

 Uncommon,

and the rare 29 mm below

 

 

 

 

Rare Bronze 2 cash, 29 mm. FD-1059, Hartill 16.421.

F   $60.00     VF   $85.00

 

Rare Bronze 10 cash, average (5 specimens) 41.0 mm, 17.5 grams. S-630.

VF   $25.00     XF   $45.00

This is a large and impressive type first cast in AD 1107, which is reported to have been withdrawn in AD 1109 due to excessive counterfeiting, although we expect that report is a little muddled. When these were issued at about 17 grams, the 11 to 12 gram value 10 coins of the previous reign title were still circulating and counterfeiters could make a significant profit melting these and using the bronze to cast the earlier type. The recall was probably to stop this counterfeiting of that earlier type. These are far too common for a coin officially withdrawn after only two years, suggesting they were hoarded in large numbers at the time.

Schjoth’s specimen weighs 23.52 grams and 40 mm, equivalent to value 8 cash, but it was double-sided and probably an amulet made much later (probably Ming or even Ching period).

 

 

S-632 – iron
Orthodox Script

 

Rare Iron 1 cash. Schjoth’s specimen was about 23 mm, 3.42 grams. S-631.

F   $40.00     VF   $75.00

 

Rare Iron 10 cash (what Hartill calls a 2 cash). Average (2 specimens) 30.5 mm. 7.35 grams. S-632. The size and weight are within the standard for fiduciary 10 cash of the previous reign and since those 10 cash were not devalued to 3 cash until after these coins were issued, we believe these were also issued as feduciary 10 cash.

F   $30.00     VF   $55.00

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CHENG-HO, AD 1111-1117

   

S-645
Seal Script@

S-646
Orthodox Script@

 

Dr Iwan collections

 

Bronze 24 mmm orthodox script Cheng(Zheng)-ho tung Pao

 

Bronze 24 mm seal script Cheng Ho Tung Pao

 

Bronze 25 mm seal script Cheng ho tung bao

 

S-633-636. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Average 3.37 grams.

F   $2.50     VF   $4.00     XF   $7.00

 

S-637. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox scripts. Reverse: crescent. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 3.11 grams. We currently have no record of a value for this type.

 

S-638-640. Bronze 2 cash. Obverse: “CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse blank. Average (4 specimens) 29 mm, 6.89 grams.

F   $3.50     VF   $5.50

 

 

S-641-642. rare Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank.

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 85.00

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 75.00

Schjoth has two specimens, one of 25 mm, 6.51 grams and another of 21 mm, 5.56 grams (possibly a counterfeit).

F   $25.00     VF   $45.00

 

No bronze 3 cash were cast during this reign title, but Schjoth (page 33) records information suggesting many bronze value 3 cash must have been in circulation: “In the 1st year of Cheng-ho (AD 1111), orders were issued that ‘value ten’ coins, which grasping officials for momentary gain some years before had issued to the harm of the government and the people, should be reduced to ‘value three’. The Minister Chang Shang-ying (died 1121) obtained leave to demonetize all the spurious ‘value 10’ coins met with and cast them into light weight Hsiao-p’ing cash”.

This passage cannot be referring to the type S-630 as these contained at least 8 cash worth of copper and had been recalled in AD 1109. The 10 cash of the western wars had been devalued long before, so the reference must be to the value 10 coins of the Ch’ung-ning reign title which contain about 3 cash worth of metal.

“Hsiao-p’ing cash” is a term that can describe any lightweight cash. In some other references it appears to refer to value 1 cash of either bronze or iron, but in a few references seems to specifically mean fiduciary iron coins where “lightweight” means coins which weigh far less than the value at which they circulated, in which case they may be the following two coins:

 

S-643-644. Iron 2 cash. Obverse: “CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse blank. 29 mm. Schjoth had two specimens, 6.82 and 9.66 grams. The size and weight of these suggests a value 2 denomination was intended.

F   $25.00     VF   $45.00

 

S-645-646. Iron 3 cash. Obverse: “CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse blank. Average (2 specimens) 31.8 mm, 32 mm. Average 9.10 grams. The size and weight of these suggests a value 3 denomination was intended.

F   $25.00     VF   $45.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CHUNG-HO, AD 1118

 

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-647
Orthodox Script

 

S-647. Bronze 1 (?) cash. Obverse: “CHUNG-HO T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 26 mm. 4.97 grams. This coin is peculiar in not fitting into any of the regular size and weight standards. If truly a medieval coin, it would probably be a counterfeit value 2 cash, and being a rare type, we would prefer to examine it for authenticity before committing to a classification for it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: HSUAN-HO, AD 1119-1125

   

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-656
Seal Script
with T’UNG PAO@

S-660
Orthodox Script
with T’UNG PAO@

S-652
Orthodox Script
with YUAN PAO

 

S-648-650 & 653-655. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Average 3.51 grams.

F   $3.50     VF   $6.00

Dr Iwan collections

Bronze 28 mmm orthodox script Hsuan Ho Tung Pao

 

 

 two illustrations

 

Bronze 28 mm seal script Hsuan ho Tung Pao (may be cheng ho?)

Compare with coin below

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD1101-1125, Value 2 Cash, Title Hsuan-ho (AD1119-25), HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 35.00

 

 

 

S-651. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal script. Reverse: crescent at the top and star (more like a donut) at the bottom. 24 mm. 3.05 grams. We have not had this type, and cannot suggest a value at this time.

 

S-662. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO”. Orthodox (?) script. Reverse: “SHEN”. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 3.0 grams. These are rare and we cannot currently assign a value to them.

 

We assume “SHEN” is a mint mark (very unusual on a Northern Sung coin). Schjoth lists this as a bronze pattern for the iron coin of the same type (see below), but at this time we have no reason to believe this to be true.

 

S-666. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox (?) script. Reverse: “SHEN” (see above). 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 3.58 grams. These are rare and we cannot currently assign a value to them.

 

S-663-665. Iron 1 cash.

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD1101-1125, Iron Value 1 Cash, Title Hsuan-ho (AD1119-25)

Price US$ 45.00

Obverse: “HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. Schjoth’ had two of 23 mm averaging 5.85 grams, and one of 21 mm, 4.16 grams. These appear to be of and iron 1 cash but the 21 mm specimen may be a counterfeit. These are rare and we cannot currently assign a value to them.

 

S-656-657. Bronze 2 cash. Obverse: “HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox scripts. Reverse: blank. Average (4 specimens) 28.1 mm. Average 6.28 grams. These are common, and must have been a huge issue as these are very common.

F   $3.50     VF   $5.50@

 

S-658-661. Bronze 2 or 3 cash. Obverse: “HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank or with a crescent. Average (five specimens) 30 mm, 6.6.84 grams. The crescent reverse should be worth a premium. These are common, and must have been a huge mintage.

F   $3.50     VF   $5.50@

 

These larger “HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO” coins are a bit of a mystery. The two distinct sizes of 28 and 30 mm suggests two denominations, but both specimens weigh in the 2 cash standard. We need to examine more specimens, and study the coins that follow in the Southern Sung, before commenting further on this series.

 

S-652. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSUAN-HO YUAN-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 24 mm. Schjoth’s specimen weighed 3.24 grams, which he notes had an alloyed appearance, but we are not certain what he meant by that. We have no record of a value for this type.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Emperor CH’IN TSUNG, AD 1126

 

 

[ ]Qinzong

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reign title: CHING-K’ANG, AD 1126

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

IMAGE NOT YET AVAILABLE

S-667
Seal Script

S-670
Orthodox Script@

Dr Iwan collections

Bronze 24 mm orthodox script Ching Kang yuan  Bao(may be another type,two times illustrations  ,because I haven’t the illustration for comparative)

 

 

Coins of this reign title are all rare although we have had a few over the years. Unfortunately we do not have a record of the prices. We are attempting to track down the purchasers in order to retrieve this information and image the coins.

 

S-669-670. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “CHING-K’ANG T’UNG-PAO” in seal and orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Schjoth had two specimens, one of 21 mm, 5.7 grams and the other of 24 mm, 7.13 grams. These fall into the weight standard for late North Sung iron 1 cash, but the 21 mm specimen is too small and may be a counterfeit. Rare, no valuation available.

 

S-667-668. Bronze 2 cash. Obverse: “CHING-K’ANG T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. 30 mm. Average 7.25 grams. Rare, no valuation available.

 

Schjoth mentions the existence of varieties not represented in his collections, including some with the “CHING-K’ANG YUAN-PAO” inscription, as well as specimens with orthodox script.


 

The dynasty name was changed to Southern Sung after the northern provinces were lost to the Mongol invaders in AD 1127. For a discussion of the Southern Sung coinage please continue to the next page.

 

 

 

Let practice your knowledge with the Northern song Coin script coin below:

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Chen Tsung, AD998-1022, Large IronCash, Value 3 – CH’ING-TE YUAN-PAO

Price US$ 60.00

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Jen Tsung, AD1023-1063, T’IEN-SHENG YUAN-PAO

Price US$ 30.00

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD1068-1085, AE 2 Cash

Price US$ 35.00

 

 

 

 

 

 Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD1068-1085, Iron Cash, Value 3

Price US$ 75.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Che Tsung, AD1086-1100, Iron Cash, Value 3

Price US$ 85.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Chien-Chung, SHEN SUNG YUAN-PAO

Price US$ 30.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, IRON Value 1, CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 185.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CH’UNG-NING CHUNG-PAO

 

Price US$ 85.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CH’UNG-NING T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 85.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 75.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD 1101-1125, Large Iron Cash, Value 3, CHENG-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 85.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD1101-1125, Value 2 Cash, Title Hsuan-ho (AD1119-25), HSUAN-HO T’UNG-PAO

Price US$ 35.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD1101-1125, AE 2 Cash, Title Cheng-ho (AD1111-17)

Price US$ 45.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Northern Sung Dynasty, AD 960-1126, Emperor Hui Tsung, AD1101-1125, Iron Value 1 Cash, Title Hsuan-ho (AD1119-25)

Price US$ 45.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Song Dynasty, “Shao Hsing Yuan Pao” iron mother coin, XF.

 

US $ 933

 

 

 

 

 

Song Dynasty, “Dah Kuan Tung Pao” (3), XF.

 

US $ 560

The end @ copyright

Please look another E-BOOK IN CD-ROM  about

China history collections

Part Southern Song dynasty and Jin Tartar,liao and xia dynasty.

 

Protected: The China Yuan Mongol empire History Collections

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

The Chinese Jin Tartar,Liao and Xia dynasty History Collections

THIS IS THE SAMPLE OF E-BOOK IN CD-ROM,THE COMPLETE ONE WITH FULL ILLUSTRATION EXIST BUT ONLY FOR PREMIUM MEMBER,PLEASE SUBSCRIBE VIA COMMENT.

The  Chinese  History collections

Part One(6)

Jin Tartar , Liao And Xin Dynasty

 

the tartar warrior painting

 

Created By

Dr Iwan Suwandy,MHA

Copyright@2012

Private Limited Edition In CD-ROM

FORWARD

I have collecting china numismatic including coins and papermoney from ancient to modern era almost 50 years, and starting to study the collections in 25 years.

At first very difficult because during President Suharto era 1966-1998 forbidden to read and collected Chinese literatures but the china numismatic could found easily with cheapest price until 1988 after the open diplomatic relationship between Indonesia and China I can found a little informations.

Since the President Gus Dur Era the Chinese overseas origin or Tionghoa ethnic became the Indonesian Ethnic nationality in the years 2000 I can found some informations and I could study in legal.but the collection very difficult to find because many chese nationality visit Indonesia and they swept all the Chinese numismatic collections.

I am starting to study the Chinese Cast coin almost 50 years, and this the report of the study consist several part.

jin emperor

This Jin Tartar Era cast coin very difficult to found in Indonesia and another country because the situations,

rare jin dynasty coin Da Ding or Ta ching  tong Bao

 and also another art work collections like

jin dynasty ceramic,

painting etc.

I hope this study can help the collectors and the scholar for their research,because this study still not complete which need more info,comment and corrections

Jakarta Mei 2012

Dr Iwan suwandy,MHA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

WHY NOTHER SUNG MOVER TO THE SOUTH?

THIS THE ANWERE


Invasion from the North During The Song Dynasty

 

Northern Invasion

Song Dynasty were endlessly to get the attack from the North since its inception. Liao, Xi Xia, and Jin are the three main threats faced.
Liao
 
The first time was known as the Khitan, Liao is a nomadic ethnic minorities appeared in the East China Sea. They live at the upper end of the Liao River. During the Late Tang and Five Dynasties, Yelu Abaoji circumcision tribe unite and declare himself emperor.
 
Year 927 AD, Son Abaoji, Yelu Deguang, took the throne and control of 16 prefectures in the North Yanmen Pass and with the help of Jin Shi Jingtang establish End. This marks the beginning of the Liao forces entered the Central Plains. Year 947 AD, Yelu Deguang change the Liao dynasty title.
 
To restore the lost territory in the North, Emperor Taizong of Song launched two punitive expedition but were confronted by army troops Song Liao. Since then, the Song Dynasty Liao did not dare to attack again. Year 1004 AD, Liao troops attacked the Central Plains. Song forces defeat the attackers, but approved the peace treaty with the Liao, where Song had to give 100,000 taels of silver and 200,000 rolls of silk to the Liao each year. Song emperor made fraternity and had to call the emperor of Liao woman as her aunt.

Xixia

Western Xia was a descendant of the People’s etnisyang group called Dangxiang. They established the kingdom in the region located in the North and Saanxi Ningxia, northwestern Gansu, Qinghai, northeastern, and western Inner Mongolia.

When the Western Xia managed to increase strength and power, he began attacking the Chinese border. However, the Xia was not successful because of the successful defense of officials such as Han Qi Song and Fan Zhongyan. Year 1004 AD, Song and Xia make a deal in which Xia Song acknowledges fellowship. Meanwhile, Song will give Xia 7200 taels of silver, 153,000 rolls of silk, and 30,000 every year the pound.

Jin

Jurchen nation is a tribe that is active in the northeast part of China. Year 1115 AD, Wanyan Aguda declared themselves as kasiar and use the title of the Jin Dynasty. In the history he became known as the Emperor Taizu from Jin. In 1125 AD, Jin army defeated the Liao and Song began eyeing the vast region.

In 1125 AD, Jin Song menyeran territory and launch attacks into the capital Bianjing. Song regimes seek peace with Jin, and Song agreed to greet the emperor emperor In as her uncle, gave Taiyuan, Zhongsan, and Hejian and offers 60,000 taels of gold and silver at Jin.

Year 1127 AD, Jin troops back toward the south and capture the Emperor Huizong and Qinzong along with 3,000 members of the royal family. In this history known as the “Disaster Jinkang.” As a result the Northern Song Period ends.

Song and Jin Negotiating Peace

After the disaster Jinkang, Emperor Gaozong make new capital Lin’an, started the Southern Song period. Jin began attacking troops continue into Song territory. Therefore, the Southern Song divided into supporters of the peace talks and support the defense.

General Yue Fei

General Yue Fei’s most famous fortifications. Yue Fei was a native of Xiangzhou tangyin. Yue Fei studied literature and martial arts in childhood. He became a skilled martial arts as adults. In 1112 AD, he entered the army, his mother tattooed his back with a four-letter “jing zhong bao guo” “Pay the State with the highest fidelity.” Yue have never failed to carry these words during his life.

yue fei when tattooed by his motherYue Fei was appointed commissioner in charge Tongtai recruit former rebels and the generals who solve their own problem. Forces Yue Fei is known for his application of strict military discipline. Whenever they arrived in the village, they will be camping on the roadside.

Yue troops have been many great win over Jin and managed to regain the lost territory. Jin troops are very scared to hear the name of Yue Fei and agree that “It’s easier than shaking the troops move mountains Yue Fei.”

In the year 1140 AD, Yue Fei’s forces defeat Jin forces by cutting off their hooves. Yue troops win battles one by one and reach a town called Zhuxianzhen. Yue Fei then immediately ordered his troops to immediately attack the capital of Jin in Huanglongfu (yellow dragon palace). When Yue Fei and other general anti Jin pertemnpuran fight against the enemy in a bloody, Prime Minister Qin Hui peace plan proposed by Jin and asked the Emperor Gaozong interesting Yue Fei with 12 orders issued royal succession. Qin Hui and then make false accusations and plans to kill Yue Fei.

Year 1142 AD, Song and Jin negotiate. Song became the State of Jin. Song had to pay 250,000 taels of silver and 250,000 rolls of silk in Jin every year. In 1162 AD, the Emperor Xiaozong seized power and sent an expedition to the North. Song and Jin negotiate once again. Emperor Jin Song should greet the Emperor as his young uncle. In 1206 AD, Song forces were attacked once again, the Song and Jin negotiate peace a third time. This time the Emperor had to call the emperor’s Song Jin as his old uncle.

 
READ MORE INFORMATIONS

 

LIAO DYNASTY, AD 907-1125

LIAO DYNASTY VESSEL

The Liao were a Tartar Dynasty known as the Ch’i-tan or Ki-tan Tartars, first established by T’ai Tsu in AD 907 during the period of the 5 dynasties. The dynasty lasted for 218 years until AD 1125, ruling from their capital at Beijing. For most of their existence they existed along side the Northern Sung Dynasty, in what appears to be somewhat less than peaceful co-existance.

The first Emperor of Liao did not issue any coins. There were five Emperors between AD 907 and 1031 who issued coins, but only a handful of each type is known to exist and it is unlikely any genuine examples will come on the market. We have not listed them here as it is unlikely anyone viewing this site to identify a coin will have one, but you will find information on them on page 216 of David Hartill’s book CAST CHINESE COINS. Schjoth (page 41) notes a record of the Liang Dynasty Emperor Mo, using the reign title Lung-te, issuing large numbers of coins during this period, which are likely what circulated in the Liao region for what little need the Liao people had of coins at that time.

The earliest readily available coins of Liao begin with the Emperor Hsing Tsung during his second reign title of Ch’ung Hsi after he established the first Liao central mint in Manchuria in AD 1053. The mint was not particularly skilled and most Liao coins are fairly crude, poor quality castings.

There are some differences in the dating of the Liao reign titles by Schjoth and Hartill, and we have chosen to use those given by Hartill as it is much more recent and almost certainly more reliable research.


 

 

 

 

 

 

 265 AD-581

AD Western and Eastern Jin Dynasty Emperors

       

Sima Yan

Sima Rui

Fu Jian

Sima Dewen

 

the Chin or Jin Dynasty

 (1115 – 1234 AD)

The Jin Dynasty was founded by

 

Wanyan Aguda

in Northern Manchuria.

The Jin conquered Northen China by conquering the Liao and defeating the Song Dynasty.

Liao and Song coins were used early on the Jin rule.

 In 1158,

Read more about Jin Dynasty

   

金朝 The Jin Dynasty (1115-1234), also known as the Jurchen dynasty, was founded by the Wanyan clan of the Jurchen

 

The Jin Dynasty was founded in what would become northern Manchuria by the Jurchen tribal chieftain Wanyan Aguda in 1115.

The Jurchens’ early rival was the Liao Dynasty,

 which had held sway over northern China, including Manchuria and part of the Mongol region for several centuries.

 In 1121,

the Jurchens entered into the Alliance on the Sea with the Song Dynasty and agreed to jointly invade the Liao. While the Song armies faltered, the Jurchens succeeded in driving the Liao to Central Asia.

 In 1125,

 after the death of Aguda, the Jin broke the alliance with the Song and invaded North China.

On January 9, 1127,

Jin forces ransacked Kaifeng, capital of the Northern Song Dynasty, capturing both Emperor Qinzong, and his father, Emperor Huizong, who had abdicated in panic in the face of Jin forces.

Following the fall of Kaifeng, Song forces under the leadership of the succeeding Southern Song Dynasty continued to fight for over a decade with Jin forces, eventually signing the Treaty of Shaoxing in 1141, calling for the cession of all Song land north of the Huai River to the Jin and the execution of

 

Song General Yue Fei

 

in return for peace.

 

Invasion from the North During The Song Dynasty

Northern Invasion

Song Dynasty were endlessly to get the attack from the North since its inception. Liao, Xi Xia, and Jin are the three main threats faced.

 

 

Liao

Lioa first emperor

 

The first time was known as the Khitan, Liao is a nomadic ethnic minorities appeared in the East China Sea. They live at the upper end of

 

the Liao River. During the Late Tang and Five Dynasties,

Liao River ,Liao He Guide

The Liao River is the principal river in southern Manchuria (1,345 km).

 

 

The province of Liaoning

And

 

 

 the Liaodong Peninsula derive their name from the river.

The Liao River originates as two stems in the west:

 

the Laoha He in southeastern Inner Mongolia,

 

 the Xinkai He (dry in its upper reaches except after thunderstorms) further north, and

 

 

 the Hulin He (which almost never reaches the main stem of the river) in the extreme northwest of Liaoning. The eastern stem of the river is known as

 

 the DongLiao River and rises in low mountains in central Liaoning. The two stems of the river meet

 

 

near the junction of Liaoning, Jilin and Inner Mongolia and flow across a vast plain to

 

 the Bohai Gulf.

 

Two major tributaries of the river,

 

the Hun He (“muddy river”)

 

and the Taizi He, both of which flow down from the

 

 

 Qianshan range, used to flow into the Liao River shortly before it flowed into the sea, but the Atlas of China (Beijing, Sinomaps Press, 2006) shows that while the two tributaries continue to follow their traditional route and flow into the sea at what this atlas still identifies as

 

 the “Liao River Kou”, the mouth of the Liao River, virtually all of the water of the Liao River has been diverted into

 

 the ShuangTaizi He, which flows into

 

 

Bohai Gulf about 35 kilometers to the northwest. Google Earth also shows this new pattern.

 

Several major cities are located on the Hun He, including

 

Shenyang, the provincial capital,

 

 

Fushun, farther upstream, and

 

 

Yingkou at the mouth.

 

 

Anshan is located on the southeastern edge of the basin.

The Liao River drains an area of over 232,000 square kilometres, but its mean discharge is quite small at only about 500 cubic metres per second – about one-twentieth that of

 

 

 the Pearl River.

Like the Huang He, the Liao River has an exceedingly high sediment load because many parts of it flow through powdery loess.

 

 

Yelu Abaoji circumcision tribe unite and declare himself emperor

.

Emperor Taizu of Liao – The First Emperor of the Liao Dynasty

The Emperor Taizu of Liao (辽太祖) was the first emperor of the Liao Dynasty (907-926). His given name was Abaoji (阿保机). Some sources also suggest that the surname Yelü (耶律) was adopted during his lifetime, though there is no unanimity on this point.

He was born in 872 and died in 926 in China. He had a turbulent childhood. His grandfather was killed in a conflict between tribes, and his father and uncles fled. Yelü Abaoji was hidden by his grandmother for his safety.

 

Year 927 AD,

 Son Abaoji, Yelu Deguang, took the throne and control of 16 prefectures in the North Yanmen Pass and with the help of

 

 

Jin Shi Jingtang establish End.

This marks the beginning of the Liao forces entered the Central Plains.

 

Year 947 AD,

Yelu Deguang change the Liao dynasty title

 

Emperor Xingzong of Liao – Emperor of the Liao Dynasty

 

Emperor Xingzong of Liao (辽兴宗) (1015–1054), born Yelv Zongzhen (耶律宗真), was an emperor of the Liao Dynasty. He reigned from 1031 to 1054.

Xingzong was the eldest son of Shenzong, and was made Prince in 1021 when he was six years old. He was crowned emperor when Shenzong died in 1031.

Xingzong’s reign was the beginning of the end for the Liao Dynasty. The government was corrupt and the army stated to fall apart. He attacked the Western Xia dynasty many times, and waged war upon the Song dynasty. However, the frequent wars were not looked kindly upon by his people, and there were much anger among them for the high taxes. Xingzong was also into Buddhism and spent lavishly for his own pleasure. He died in 1054.

 

.

 

To restore the lost territory in the North,

 

Emperor Taizong of Song launched two punitive expedition but were confronted by

 

army troops Song Liao.

 

Since then, the Song Dynasty Liao did not dare to attack again.

 Year 1004 AD,

Liao troops attacked the Central Plains. Song forces defeat the attackers, but approved the peace treaty with the Liao, where Song had to give

 

 

 

 

 

 

 100,000 taels of silver

 

and

 

200,000 roll of song silk to the Liao each year. Song emperor made fraternity and had to call

 

the emperor of Liao woman as her aunt.

Xixia

 

Emperor Jingzong of Western Xia – The First Emperor of the Western Xia

 

Emperor Mozhu of Western Xia – The Last Emperor of Western Xia



Western Xia was a descendant of the People’s etnis yang group called Dangxiang. They established the kingdom in the region located in the North and Saanxi Ningxia,

 

northwestern Gansu,

 

 

Qinghai,

 

northeastern, and

 

western Inner Mongolia.

When the Western Xia managed to increase strength and power, he began attacking the Chinese border. However, the Xia was not successful because of

 

 the successful defense of officials such as Han Qi Song and Fan Zhongyan.

 

Year 1004 AD,

 Song and Xia make a deal in which Xia Song acknowledges fellowship. Meanwhile, Song will give Xia 7200 taels of silver, 153,000 rolls of silk, and 30,000 every year the pound.

Jin

Jurchen nation is a tribe that is active in the northeast part of China.

Year 1115 AD,

 

Wanyan Aguda declared themselves as kasiar and use the title of the Jin Dynasty. In the history he became known as the Emperor Taizu from Jin.

 In 1125 AD,

 Jin army defeated the Liao and Song began eyeing the vast region.

 

In 1125 AD, Jin Song attacked  territory and launch attacks into

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 the capital Bianjing.

 

Song regimes seek peace with Jin, and Song agreed to greet the emperor emperor In as her uncle, gave

 

Taiyuan,

 

Zhongsan, and

 

Hejian

and offers 60,000

 

Results 1-25 of 724  

   
 
 
CHINA, ANCIENT CHINESE COINS, Han Dynasty (BC 206-220 AD): Gold “Ban-Liang”, 23mm, 7.6g (Ding p.49 for type). About very fine. Estimate: US$200-250

Price: 1600 USD
 
 
 
CHINA, ANCIENT CHINESE COINS, Wang Mang (7-23 AD): Gold “Huo Quan”, 22mm, 7.6g (Ding p.55 for type). Fine. Estimate: US$200-250

Price: 1100 USD
 
 
 
CHINA, ANCIENT CHINESE COINS, Northern Song (960-1127 AD): Gold “Sheng Song Yuan Bao” in seal script, 24mm, 7.8g (Ding p.95 for type). About very fine. Estimate: US$200-250

Price: 1600 USD
 
 
 
CHINA, ANCIENT CHINESE COINS, Burial Coins : Gold Uniface Burial Coins (2): “Da Tang Tong Bao”, 42mm, 2.4g; “Zhi Ping Tong Bao”, 25mm, 0.8g. Both good fine. (2pcs) Estimate: US$250-300

Price: n/a
 
 
 
CHINA, ANCIENT CHINESE COINS, Burial Coins : Gold Uniface Burial Coins (2): “Song Yuan Tong Bao”, 41mm, 2.5g; “Da Guan Tong Bao”, 42mm, 3.4g. Both about very fine. (2pcs) Estimate: US$250-300

Price: n/a
 
 
 
CHINA, ANCIENT CHINESE COINS, Burial Coins : Gold Burial Coin, 21mm, 2.4g. Very fine. Estimate: US$150-180

Price: n/a
 
 
 
CHINA, ANCIENT CHINESE COINS, Burial Coins : Gold Burial Coins (2), 5.8g and 6.2g, possibly Ming Dynasty. Both very fine with reddish brown encrustation. (2pcs) Estimate: US$500-600

Price: n/a
 
 
 
CHINA, ANCIENT CHINESE COINS, Gold Ornament : Gold Pendant, Obv two stylised characters, Rev two stylised characters, 22mm x 28mm, 5.0g. About extremely fine. Estimate: US$150-200

Price: 180 USD
 
 
     

 

song taels of gold and silver at Jin.

 

 

Year 1127 AD,

Jin troops back toward the south and capture

 

the Emperor Huizong and

 

 Qinzong

along with 3,000 members of the royal family. In this history known as

 

the “Disaster Jinkang.” As a result the Northern Song Period ends.

Read more info

Invasion from the North During The Song Dynasty

Northern Invasion

Song Dynasty were endlessly to get the attack from the North since its inception. Liao, Xi Xia, and Jin are the three main threats faced.

 

 

 

Liao

 

The first time was known as the Khitan, Liao is a nomadic ethnic minorities appeared in the East China Sea. They live at the upper end of the Liao River. During the Late Tang and Five Dynasties, Yelu Abaoji circumcision tribe unite and declare himself emperor.

 

Year 927 AD, Son Abaoji, Yelu Deguang, took the throne and control of 16 prefectures in the North Yanmen Pass and with the help of Jin Shi Jingtang establish End. This marks the beginning of the Liao forces entered the Central Plains. Year 947 AD, Yelu Deguang change the Liao dynasty title.

 

To restore the lost territory in the North, Emperor Taizong of Song launched two punitive expedition but were confronted by army troops Song Liao. Since then, the Song Dynasty Liao did not dare to attack again. Year 1004 AD, Liao troops attacked the Central Plains. Song forces defeat the attackers, but approved the peace treaty with the Liao, where Song had to give 100,000 taels of silver and 200,000 rolls of silk to the Liao each year. Song emperor made fraternity and had to call the emperor of Liao woman as her aunt.

Xixia

Western Xia was a descendant of the People’s etnisyang group called Dangxiang. They established the kingdom in the region located in the North and Saanxi Ningxia, northwestern Gansu, Qinghai, northeastern, and western Inner Mongolia.

When the Western Xia managed to increase strength and power, he began attacking the Chinese border. However, the Xia was not successful because of the successful defense of officials such as Han Qi Song and Fan Zhongyan. Year 1004 AD, Song and Xia make a deal in which Xia Song acknowledges fellowship. Meanwhile, Song will give Xia 7200 taels of silver, 153,000 rolls of silk, and 30,000 every year the pound.

Jin

Jurchen nation is a tribe that is active in the northeast part of China. Year 1115 AD, Wanyan Aguda declared themselves as kasiar and use the title of the Jin Dynasty. In the history he became known as the Emperor Taizu from Jin. In 1125 AD, Jin army defeated the Liao and Song began eyeing the vast region.

In 1125 AD, Jin Song menyeran territory and launch attacks into the capital Bianjing. Song regimes seek peace with Jin, and Song agreed to greet the emperor emperor In as her uncle, gave Taiyuan, Zhongsan, and Hejian and offers 60,000 taels of gold and silver at Jin.

Year 1127 AD, Jin troops back toward the south and capture the Emperor Huizong and Qinzong along with 3,000 members of the royal family. In this history known as the “Disaster Jinkang.” As a result the Northern Song Period ends.

Song and Jin Negotiating Peace

After the disaster Jinkang, Emperor Gaozong make new capital Lin’an, started the Southern Song period. Jin began attacking troops continue into Song territory. Therefore, the Southern Song divided into supporters of the peace talks and support the defense.

 

 

 

General Yue Fei
General Yue Fei’s most famous fortifications. Yue Fei was a native of Xiangzhou tangyin. Yue Fei studied literature and martial arts in childhood. He became a skilled martial arts as adults. In 1112 AD, he entered the army,

 

 his mother tattooed his back with a four-letter “jing zhong bao guo” “Pay the State with the highest fidelity.” Yue have never failed to carry these words during his life.

 

yue fei when tattooed by his mother

Yue Fei was appointed commissioner in charge Tongtai recruit former rebels and the generals who solve their own problem. Forces Yue Fei is known for his application of strict military discipline. Whenever they arrived in the village, they will be camping on the roadside.

Yue troops have been many great win over Jin and managed to regain the lost territory. Jin troops are very scared to hear the name of Yue Fei and agree that “It’s easier than shaking the troops move mountains Yue Fei.”

In the year 1140 AD,

Yue Fei’s forces defeat Jin forces by cutting off their hooves. Yue troops win battles one by one and reach a town called

 

Zhuxianzhen.

 Yue Fei then immediately ordered his troops to immediately attack

 

the capital of Jin in Huanglongfu (yellow dragon palace).

When Yue Fei and other general against Jin battles  fight against the enemy in a bloody,

 

Prime Minister Qin Hui

 peace plan proposed by Jin

 and asked

 

 

 

the Emperor Gaozong of Nothern song

interesting Yue Fei with 12 orders issued royal succession.

Qin Hui and then make false accusations and plans to kill Yue Fei.

Year 1142 AD,

Song and Jin negotiate. Song became the State of Jin. Song had to pay 250,000 taels of silver and 250,000 rolls of silk in Jin every year.

 

 

 

 In 1162 AD,

 

the Emperor Xiaozong

seized power and sent an expedition to the North. Song and Jin negotiate once again.

 

Emperor Jin Song should greet the Emperor as his young uncle.

 

In 1206 AD,

 

Song forces were attacked once again Jin, the Song and Jin negotiate peace a third time. This time the Emperor had to call the emperor’s Song Jin as his old uncle.
Song and Jin Negotiating Peace

 

After the disaster Jinkang, Emperor Gaozong make

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 new song  capital Lin’an,

started the Southern Song period. Jin began attacking troops continue into Song territory. Therefore, the Southern Song divided into supporters of the peace talks and support the defense.

 

 

General Yue Fei

General Yue Fei’s most famous fortifications. Yue Fei was a native of Xiangzhou tangyin. Yue Fei studied literature and martial arts in childhood. He became a skilled martial arts as adults. In 1112 AD, he entered the army, his mother tattooed his back with a four-letter “jing zhong bao guo” “Pay the State with the highest fidelity.” Yue have never failed to carry these words during his life.

 

yue fei when tattooed by his mother

Yue Fei was appointed commissioner in charge Tongtai recruit former rebels and the generals who solve their own problem. Forces Yue Fei is known for his application of strict military discipline. Whenever they arrived in the village, they will be camping on the roadside.

Yue troops have been many great win over Jin and managed to regain the lost territory. Jin troops are very scared to hear the name of Yue Fei and agree that “It’s easier than shaking the troops move mountains Yue Fei.”

In the year 1140 AD, Yue Fei’s forces defeat Jin forces by cutting off their hooves. Yue troops win battles one by one and reach a town called Zhuxianzhen. Yue Fei then immediately ordered his troops to immediately attack the capital of Jin in Huanglongfu (yellow dragon palace). When Yue Fei and other general anti Jin battle  fight against the enemy in a bloody, Prime Minister Qin Hui peace plan proposed by Jin and asked the Emperor Gaozong interesting Yue Fei with 12 orders issued royal succession. Qin Hui and then make false accusations and plans to kill Yue Fei.

Year 1142 AD, Song and Jin negotiate. Song became the State of Jin. Song had to pay 250,000 taels of silver and 250,000 rolls of silk in Jin every year. In 1162 AD, the Emperor Xiaozong seized power and sent an expedition to the North. Song and Jin negotiate once again. Emperor Jin Song should greet the Emperor as his young uncle. In 1206 AD, Song forces were attacked once again, the Song and Jin negotiate peace a third time. This time the Emperor had to call the emperor’s Song Jin as his old uncle.

 

 the Jin Dynasty made their own coins and

 

Chinese Jin Dynasty SILVER coins:Fu Chang Tong Bao 29mm*11g US $45.00

 

Zheng-Long Yuan-Bao Coin / China Jin Dynasty AD 1156 US $9.99

 

Zheng-Long Yuan-Bao Coin / China Jin Dynasty

 

Taihetongbao Coin Of Jin Dynasty

 

 

 

 later used coins,

 

 

 

 

Song note

 

ming note

notes and

silver.

Coins cast during this period were of superb quality and excellent calligraphy.

 

The Fu Chang Yuan Bao,

 

Fu Chang Tong Bao

and Fu Chang Zhong Bao

 were three of the finest Jin coins. They were minted during the puppet regime of Emperor Liu Yu who used

 

“Fu Chang” as his period title.  

Casting coins became unprofitable when inflation starts to hit the Jin Dynasty economy.

 

Jin Dynasty Silver Coin”Fu Chang Yuan Bao” $34.00

 

Mints were closed down and coin production ceased for 30 years prior to the defeat of the Jin by the Mongols.

This coin still never found in Indonesia(Dr Iwan Notes)

Read more about Jin Dynasty

 

.

THE JIN DYNASTY

 

The Jīn Dynasty (1115–1234),

also known as the Jurchen Dynasty, was founded by the Wanyan (完顏 Wányán) clan of the Jurchens, the ancestors of the Manchus who established the Qing Dynasty some 500 years later. The name is sometimes written as Jinn to differentiate it from an earlier Jìn Dynasty of China whose name is spelled identically in the Roman alphabet. (Photo: Jade Ornament)

 

The Jin Dynasty was founded in what would become northern Manchuria by the Jurchen tribal chieftain Wanyan Aguda (完顏阿骨打) in 1115. The Jurchens’ early rival was the Liao Dynasty, which had held sway over northern China, including Manchuria and part of the Mongol region for several centuries. In 1121, the Jurchens entered into the Alliance on the Sea with the Song Dynasty and agreed to jointly invade the Liao. While the Song armies faltered, the Jurchens succeeded in driving the Liao to Central Asia. In 1125, after the death of Aguda, the Jin broke the alliance with the Song and invaded North China. (Photo: A wooden Bodhisattva)

 

On January 9, 1127, Jin forces ransacked Kaifeng, capital of the Northern Song Dynasty, capturing both Emperor Qinzong, and his father, Emperor Huizong, who had abdicated in panic in the face of Jin forces. Following the fall of Kaifeng, Song forces under the leadership of the succeeding Southern Song Dynasty continued to fight for over a decade with Jin forces, eventually signing the Treaty of Shaoxing in 1141, calling for the cessation of all Song land north of the Huai River to the Jin and the execution of Song General Yue Fei in return for peace. (Photo: The Chengling Pagoda, Hebei, built 1161 – 1189AD Wikipedia)

The Fenyang Cemetery of Jin Dynasty

 

 

Kublai Khan (Emperor Shi Zu), the grandson of Mongol conqueror Genghis Khan, conquered the whole Chinese and established the Yuan Dynasty.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE JIN TARTAR AND LIAO DYNASTY ART WORK COLLECTIONS

Ceramic

 

 

A fine and rare small ‘jun’ splashed tripod censer. Jin-Yuan dynasty.

the globular body with short wide neck and flat everted rim supported on three short cabriole legs, applied with a fine pale blue glaze liberally splashed with three copper-red blushes transmuting from misty purple to intense pinkish-red tone, later Japanese pierced white metal cover – 7.4cm., 2 7/8 in. Est. 60,000—80,000 GBP Lot Sold 91,250 GBP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YUAN / JIN DYNASTY OLIVE-GLAZED GLOBULAR JAR

 Ammonite Impressed Decoration

China, 1115-1368 A.D.  

  

Of globular form with a transparent olive glaze and short rounded mouth rim, the shoulders with a

single incised line above a body with impressed intricate spiral ammonite motifs.

Ammonites were considered in early Chinese cultures to be symbols of good luck &

prosperity, enhancing the vitality, harmony, prosperity, and overall well-being of occupants

and visitors of a home.
11″ High

 

 

    

Henan Province, China, 1115–1234 A.D.

 

The Henan-type glazed stoneware jar with tapered globular body and trumpet-form rim, the shoulders

with spur appendages; the rich black “hare’s fur” type glaze with coffee-colored streaking and mottling

and incised patterns descending to attractive tear-drop dripping toward the base

7 1/4″ High

 

 

 

A Jin Dynasty Chun Vase

 

Genuine Ancient Glazed “Celadon Green” “Hun’ping” Funerary Urn/Spirit Jar (Rare!) 300 A.D.

CLASSIFICATION: Funeraru Urn.

ATTRIBUTION: Ancient China, Jin Dynasty (about 300 A.D.). Possibly an 18th or 19th Century Revival Imitative

SIZE/MEASUREMENTS:

Height: 318 millimeters (12 2/3 inches)

Diameter: 190 millimeters (7 2/3 inches) at belly; 100 millimeters (4 inches) at base.

CONDITION: Exceptional. Entirely intact except for the normal oxidation of the glaze and one ancient chip (repairable upon request). Otherwise just the normal potting blemishes associated with crude hand production; and assorted minor bumps and bruises consistent with wear due to ancient usage and then burial since ancient times. All quite normal for a 2,000 year old vessel.

DETAIL: Although it is probable that this specimen is much older, it is also possible that this piece might be a revivalist imitative produced for the European market of the 18th or 19th century. It is widely known that Chinese porcelain and other ceramic artwork was quite popular in Victorian Europe. Carrying Chinese porcelain from China to Europe was an industry for the seafaring mariners of the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries. Entire fleets of sailing ships plied the trade, especially the Dutch and English. However in addition to porcelain, ancient Chinese ceramics were also extremely popular in Victorian Europe, where Chinese ceramic artwork was highly appreciated and in great demand.

Although the style of this specimen is very convincing and suggests it might indeed be of Jin Dynasty origin, a large portion of the antique/ancient Chinese ceramics in Europe date to the 18th or 19th century, so it is quite possible that this is an imitative revival piece. Judging by the style it is likely considerably older, but only a $1,000 thermoluminescence test would establish this conclusively (and even then the reliability and accuracy of such testing is still debated). So we’ll simply err on the side of being conservative and suggest that you consider it a revival piece, and if it is indeed older, so much the better. However whether an antique several centuries old, or an antiquity a few centuries older, this is a valuable and collectible piece of art.

This unusual green glaze jar belongs to a particular type of funerary vessel which was made during the Three Kingdoms and Western Jin dynasties. It is a wonderfully preserved specimen, with no significant blemishes other than the expected degradation of the glaze. This means that rather than being entirely glossy, some of the glaze has decomposed, and has lost its glossiness, and is rather powdery, or rough to the touch. Notwithstanding these blemishes (and a decomposing glaze is quite typical of ancient earthenware), it remains in wonderful condition! There’s a few very minor scratches and abrasions as can be seen in the images, but otherwise no damage aside from the normal little dings and bruises one would expect with an ancient earthenware vessel. As well there are the normal blemishes (warts, dimples, pimples and pits) one expects with earthenware fashioned and glazed by hand. There is one single chip – seemingly an ancient chip – which would probably never be noticed. If you look at the lowest tier of buildings, close examination will reveal that of the four structures, one is missing a roof support which was broken off. It’s a tiny little piece – there’s supposed to be one on each side of roof – and one is missing. We can repair it if requested.

Known as a “hun’ping”, or “spirit jar”, it is a funerary urn with a conventionally shaped body (much like a Han granary jar) topped by a configuration of tiered architectural elements, peoples, and animals. In some examples birds or other animals will dominate the theme. This particular piece as you can see depicts dozens of birds, lots of buildings and structures, as well as a ring of seated Buddha’s. The vessel type was generally limited to the area south of the Yangzi River corresponding to modern northern Zhejiang and Jiangsu provinces. The vessel type dates to the relatively short period of time from about 250 to 300 A.D. This magnificent example with olive-green celadon glaze covering the body possesses an extraordinarily rich assortment of modeled figures and architecture in a well-proportioned, tiered arrangement. Of particular interest is the row of Buddhas sitting in meditative postures around the waist of the vessel. These are among the earliest Buddhist images known in China.

The hun’ping reflects the southern tradition of “burial of the summoned soul.” Placed in a tomb together with armrests, banqueting tables, food, and drink, it was hoped that the soul of the deceased would return to reside in the urn, entering through the uppermost gate and building. The auspicious birds and the seated Buddhas represent mystical entities that could guide the soul to be reborn in paradise. If you would like to see some other examples of similar vessels, including one at the New York Metropolitan Museum, please click here, here, and here.

Of course, we are not trying to suggest that this piece is equivalent to these museum pieces. The glaze of this particular specimen is partly decomposed – glossy only in spots. The museum pieces here are simply extraordinary in their pristine condition – but of course they are priceless and unobtainable as well. Though clearly the celadon green glaze is partly decomposed or oxidized; most of the glaze remains intact. Furthermore, there are no significant chips, no breakage, no cracks, and no repairs. If you’d like an authentic ancient earthenware vase to proudly display, you could not go wrong with this one. It is solidly shaped, nicely featured, and nicely proportioned. Though not perfect, you could showcase this with great pride either at work home. Either way, it will certainly generate curiosity, envy, and you can be certain that outside a museum, you’ll never see another one.

HISTORY OF JIN DYNASTY CERAMICS: It was beginning with the the Han Dynasty (206BC-220AD) that grave interiors were richly furnished with a wide variety of miniature objects, usually fashioned as replicas of actual possessions, animals, or buildings. Called “spirit goods”, these items were used as substitutes for valuable possessions, and were usually produced in ceramic and were glazed or colorfully painted. The wealthy elite’s increasing interest in elaborately furnished tombs led to the mass production of armies of ceramic figures made using molds. In the case of the royal burial of the sole Qin Emperor, a terra cotta army of 6,000 was produced in full size. Burial ceramics made during the Han dynasty were decorated with simple but colorful designs painted directly onto the unglazed fired pieces or with brown and green lead-based glazes that could be fired at low temperatures.

The period between the collapse of the Han Dynasty in 220 A.D. and the rise of the Sui and Tang Dynasties (starting in 589 A.D.) was characterized by the fragmentation of China and a prolonged power struggle. Together with the period of the Western and Eastern Jin Dynasties, the “Three Kingdoms” together with “Southern” and the “Northern” Dynasties cover a period of three and one-half centuries during which, despite the chaotic conditions of the period, the ceramic industry developed rapidly and ceramic production flourished. By then, porcelain-making techniques in Southern China had been enhanced and the ceramics-making area and scale increasingly expanded with kiln sites spread throughout many provinces. Excavation of white porcelain objects from noble tombs shows that white porcelain was already in production in the Northern provinces, and its emergence paved the way for further development porcelain production in the coming Sui and Tang Dynasties.

There were many other notable advances in ceramic arts, including green-glazed stoneware, highly durable and often fashioned into bowls and jars. The discovery of what became known as “celadon glazing” was a major development during the period. Fine ash or ash mixed with clay was painted onto the vessel and after firing it turned pale green. This rare funerary urn belongs to this class of vessels. Potters of the era continued improving the quality of these early “celadon” wares both with respect to glaze color and in body clay. The production of glazed porcelain was a significant achievement in Chinese ceramic history. It was eventually exported as far as the Philippines and Egypt. Ceramic figurines produced during the period were notable for increased detail. The most profound influence on the art of the period (including ceramics) was the Buddhist religion which came from neighboring India. Objects imported from the Middle East and Central and West Asia also strongly influenced the period’s ceramic arts.

In spite of the political and social confusion of the period, major changes occurred in the spiritual life of the Chinese. Daoism, which had played a previously minor role in religious thought, was revitalized, and Buddhism reached the Chinese court from India and Tibet. The Buddhist notion of Bodhisattvas – compassionate beings who have delayed their own enlightenment in order to guide others along the right path – was integrated into existing beliefs, along with ideas of Buddhist heavens and symbols of worship. The quest for eternity gained great favor and people sought methods such as drinking mercury and other potions devised by alchemists to prolong their lives. These unsettled times were also a period of transition in the development of ceramics wares. The ‘proto-celadon’ wares described above were precursors to the renowned celadon wares of the Song dynasty (960-1279 A.D.). The increasing prominence of religion including Daoism and the emergence of Buddhism in China greatly expanded the design repertoire. Daoist Immortals, cosmological symbols and Buddhist guardians were all represented in ceramic forms. The replicas of humans and animals became more and more life-like, while images of the ‘unreal’ such as guardian spirits, became more and more imaginary and fanciful.

HISTORY OF THE JIN DYNASTY: The collapse of the Han dynasty was followed by nearly four centuries (220-589 A.D.) of relative anarchy. Petty kingdoms waged incessant warfare against one another. Unity was restored briefly in the early years of the Jin Dynasty (265-420 A.D.), but by 317 A.D. China again disintegrated into a succession of petty dynasties that was to last from 304 to 589 A.D. The Jin Dynasty followed the “Three Kingdoms” Period and preceded that of the “Southern” and “Northern” Dynasties. The Western Jin Dynasty (265-316 A.D.) was founded by Emperor Wu, and a brief period of unity followed the Jin conquest the Kingdom of Wu in 280 A.D. The entire country was united again for a brief interlude between the turbulent age of the Three Kingdoms and the devastating barbarian invasions.

For a short time, the government attempted important fiscal and political reforms, mainly intended to curb the power of the great families by regaining control of taxation and reducing the exorbitant rents that powerful landowners were extracting from the people. However the power of the great local families was never really broken, and they even continued to maintain their own private armies. Thus weakened and fragmented internally, ultimately the Jin Dynasty could meet the external challenge from the invasion of nomadic peoples after the devastating “War of the Eight Princes”. This devastating internal struggle occurred when the emperor divided the kingdom into 25 provinces, one for each son. The struggle between the 25 successors to the throne eventually distilled into a war between the eight strongest contenders.

These wars lasted a total of 16 years, killed hundreds of thousands of people and laid waste to many cities and towns. The consequences included a dislocated social economy, a paralyzed government, and an exhausted capacity to govern. Society became feudalistic, essentially controlled by great landowning families, each with hordes of serfs and their private armies. Nomandic groups like the Turks and the Avars, took advantage of the central government’s instability to attack the frontier. Their mounted archers easily outfought the less mobile Chinese forces. Crippled and fragmented, the country and the Jin Dynasty fell in 316 A.D. The remnants of the Jin court fled from the north to the south and reestablished the Jin court near modern-day Nanjing, founding the Eastern Jin Dynasty (317-420 A.D.). Militaristic authorities and crises plagued the Eastern Jin court throughout its 104 years of existence. It survived several rebellions and usurpations. During this period and for another century to follow, China was divided into two different societies, northern and southern, with a proliferation of would-be dynasties.

Millions of Chinese peasants, led or herded by aristocrats, moved from nomadic-conquered northern China down south of the Yangtze River. The Eastern Jin was racked by revolts, court intrigues, and wars with the nomadic northern states. It did not have any more success than the Western Jin in controlling the power of huge landowners; it was at the mercy of powerful families, with government controlled by changing groups of aristocratic clans. Eventually the last emperor of the Dynasty, Emperor Gong, was installed in 419 A.D. His abdication a year later ushered in the turbulent “Southern Dynasty”. Meanwhile Northern China had been ruled by the “Sixteen Kingdoms” of the nomadic peoples. The conquest of the Northern Liang by the Norther Wei Dynasty in 439 A.D. ushered in the “Northern Dynasty”. A turbulent and fragmented society was to pervade for another 150 years until the ascendancy of the Sui Dynasty in 589 A.D. and the Tang Dynasty in 618 A.D.

HISTORY OF CHINESE CERAMICS: The first Chinese ceramics archaeologists have found date back more than 10,000 years. These were earthenware, which means they were made from clay and fired at the kind of low temperatures reached by a wood fire or simple oven. In China, most ceramics made before the Tang dynasty (600 A.D.) are earthenware. They may be glazed or unglazed, and are occasionally painted, often brightly colored. Stoneware ceramics are harder and less porous than earthenware and are fired at hotter temperatures-between 2100шF and 2400шF. At these high temperatures, the surface of the clay melts and becomes glassy. Although stoneware is usually waterproof, most stoneware ceramics are glazed for decoration. The glazes often contain ash, which allows the glaze to harden at stoneware temperatures.

During the Shang Dynasty (1600-1100 B.C.) bronze metallurgy superceded ceramics as the favored art form of the ruling class. However both the ceramic and the bronze industries evolved into complex systems of production that were supported by the aristocracy. Decorative designs rich in symbolism were created first in bronze were then imitated in clay. Chinese burial customs included the tradition of placing clay replicas of material possessions, animals and people in the tomb to accompany the deceased and serve them in the next life. Although archaeological finds have revealed that glazed pottery was produced as early as 1100 B.C. during the Zhou dynasty, the production of glazed wares was not common until about 200 B.C. during the Han Dynasty. However from about 1000 B.C. onwards during the Shang and Zhou dynasties, primitive porcelain wares emerged. Real porcelain wares appeared in the Han dynasty around 200 A.D. In the process of porcelain development, different styles in different periods blossomed.

The production of porcelain became widespread by about 500 A.D. Using a special clay with ground rock containing feldspar, a glassy mineral, the material was fired at very high temperatures above 2400шF. The surface of the clay melts at such high temperatures and becomes smooth as glass. Early porcelains were undecorated and were used by the Imperial court and exported as far as the Middle East. For instance during the Han Dynasty principally celadon (green) and black porcelain were mainly produced. The famous blue and white porcelain was created with blue paint made from cobalt and then covered with a clear glaze, which can withstand the high temperatures of the kiln. The technical and creative innovations of Chinese potters are unique accomplishments in the cultural heritage of the world. Today, archaeological excavation and research in China are revealing new sites and new examples of the genius of the Chinese potter.

HISTORY OF CHINESE CIVILIZATION:

Remains of Homo erectus, found near Beijing, have been dated back 460,000 years. Recent archaeological studies in the Yangtse River area have provided evidence of ancient cultures (and rice cultivation) flourishing more than 11,500 years ago, contrary to the conventional belief that the Yellow River area was the cradle of the Chinese civilization. The Neolithic period flourished with a multiplicity of cultures in different regions dating back to around 5000 B.C. There is strong evidence of two so-called pottery cultures, the Yang-shao culture (3950-1700 B.C.) and the Lung-shan culture (2000-1850 B.C). Written records go back more than 3,500 years, and the written history is (as is the case with Ancient Egypt) divided into dynasties, families of kings or emperors. The voluminous records kept by the ancient Chinese provide us with knowledge into their strong sense of their real and mythological origins – as well as of their neighbors.

By about 2500 B.C. the Chinese knew how to cultivate and weave silk and were trading the luxurious fabric with other nations by about 1000 B.C. The production and value of silk tell much about the advanced state of early Chinese civilization. Cultivation of silkworms required mulberry tree orchards, temperature controls and periodic feedings around the clock. More than 2,000 silkworms were required to produce one pound of silk. The Chinese also mastered spinning, dyeing and weaving silk threads into fabric. Bodies were buried with food containers and other possessions, presumably to assist the smooth passage of the dead to the next world. The relative success of ancient China can be attributed to the superiority of their ideographic written language, their technology, and their political institutions; the refinement of their artistic and intellectual creativity; and the sheer weight of their numbers.

A recurrent historical theme has been the unceasing struggle of the sedentary Chinese against the threats posed by non-Chinese peoples on the margins of their territory in the north, northeast, and northwest. China saw itself surrounded on all sides by so-called barbarian peoples whose cultures were demonstrably inferior by Chinese standards.

This China-centered (“sinocentric”) view of the world was still undisturbed in the nineteenth century, at the time of the first serious confrontation with the West. Of course the ancient Chinese showed a remarkable ability to absorb the people of surrounding areas into their own civilization. The process of assimilation continued over the centuries through conquest and colonization until what is now known as China Proper was brought under unified rule.

A certificate of authenticity (COA) is available upon request.

 

Yueh jin dynasty

A small zoomorphic ewer. Yue kilns – China, Jin Dynasty (265-420 century) © Wei Asian Arts

Pale green glazed pottery. L : 15 cm – Price On Request

Notes: Determining the name and the function of these lion-shaped vessels has been subject of discussion among scholars. This example with an handle might have served as ewer.

This pale green glazed porcelaneous ware is typical of the pottery of “yue “ or celadon wares in the province of Zhejiang.

A similar example is kept in the museum of the Zhejiang Province.

Ref: “Zhongguo Daozi – Yueyao” Shanghai Remin Meishu chubanshi,pp 84, 1983
“The splendor of Chinese Celadons”, The ROC society of art collectors,pp 79-81,1991
“Chinese ceramics,the new standard guide” by He Li, pp 83, Thames & Hudson, 1995

 

A Yaozhou moon-white glazed ceramic bowl made in the Jin dynasty (1115-1234).

 

Antique Chinese Jin Dynasty Ceramic Jar

Ancient Chinese Western Jin Dynasty (265 AD – 316 AD) large ceramic jar with ovoid body surmounted by a wide mouth with short flaring rim and covered overall with olive green glaze.
MEASUREMENTS: Height: 33cm (13inches).Width: 32cm (102 5/8 inches).
CONDITION: in good condition considering its age, no repairs or restorations with beautiful old showing the age patina.


Due to the fact that the market is flooded by reproductions of Chinese antiques we would like to inform our clients that all our artifacts are 100% authentic antiques, not reproductions, and Accompanied by a Certificate of Authenticity
.

 

Antique Chinese Western Jin Dynasty (265-316 AD)

green glazed stoneware bowl.
MEASUREMENTS: Diameter: 16.5cm (6 ½ in) height: 5.2 cm (2 in).
CONDITION: chips to the rim otherwise in good condition.

ALL OUR ARTIFACTS ARE ACCOMPANIED BY A CERTIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY

 

Antique Chinese Jin Dynasty Ceramic Bowl

Antique Chinese Western Jin Dynasty (265-316 AD) green glazed stoneware bowl.
MEASUREMENTS: Diameter: 16.5cm (6 ½ in) height: 5.2 cm (2 in).
CONDITION: chips to the rim otherwise in good condition.

 

A Cizhou bowl, probably Jin Dynasty, circa 12-13th century,

 

 

 

Green Glazed Speckled Hu Pot with Handles from the Yue Kiln.Eastern Jin Dynasty (AD 317 ~ 420).Collected by Shanghai Museum.

 

West jin dynasty

 

Near pair of Cizhou Meiping vases, Jin Dynasty, carved with bands of lotus in a cream glaze cut through to a light grey body. Height 25 cm. Provenance: Private collection, South Australia

 

 

Southern song dynasty

 

 

 

Other art

Work

Liao Dynasty Wooden Go Board and Stones

內蒙古敖漢旗白塔子遼墓出土圍棋具

[No Image Available]

Description : Wooden Go board and set of Go stones excavated in 1976 from a tomb at Aohanqi 敖漢旗 in Inner Mongolia (see Kaogu 考古 1978.2).

Date : Liao dynasty (907–1125).

Size : 40 × 40 cm.

Grid : 13×13.

Stones : 79 black and 76 white stones; 14 short of the expected 169 stones (Board Layout).


Liao Dynasty Go Board and Stones

遼寧錦西市孤山遼墓出土圍棋具

[No Image Available]

Description : Wooden Go board and set of Go stones excavated in 1984 from the tomb of Xiao Xiaozhong 蕭孝忠 near Jinxi 錦西 in Liaoning province.

Date : Liao dynasty (907–1125).

Size :

Grid :

Stones : 75 black and white pottery stones (presumably for use with a 13×13 board).


Liao Dynasty Go Stones

遼寧省凌源縣溫家屯遼墓出土陶質圍棋子82枚

[No Image Available]

Description : Set of Go stones excavated in 1979 from a tomb at Lingyuan 凌源 in Liaoling province (see Liaohai Wenwu Xuekan 遼海文物學刊 1994.1).

Date : Liao dynasty (907–1125).

Stones : 82 black and white stones (presumably for use with a 13×13 board).


Liao Dynasty Go Stones

遼寧朝陽市遼墓出土瑪瑙圍棋子

[No Image Available]

Description : Set of Go stones excavated in 1966 (or 1968?) from a tomb at Chaoyang 朝陽 in Liaoning province.

Date : Liao dynasty (907–1125).

Stones : 186 black agate and 186 white agate stones.


Mural from a Liao Dynasty Tomb

河北宣化7號遼墓壁畫

 

Source : Liao Mural Painting (Columbia University Art History & Archaeology Database) Item ID:24609

Description : Part of a mural in the tomb of Zhang Wenzao 張文藻 (d.1093) (M7) at Xuanhua 宣化 in Hebei province (see Wen Wu 文物 1996.9).

Date : Liao dynasty (907–1125) : 1093.

Grid : 13×13.


Silk Painting from a Liao Dynasty Tomb

遼寧法庫縣葉茂臺7號遼墓出土《深山會棋圖》

 

Source : 深山会棋图

Description : Silk painting from a Liao dynasty tomb at Faku 法庫 in Liaoning province. It shows a group of three people playing go. The motif of two go players and an observer derives from the story of a woodcutter who happens upon two immortals playing go deep in the mountains; the man is engrossed in the game, and when it is over and he goes back home hundreds of years have passed.

Date : Liao dynasty (907–1125).


Western Xia Brick Go Boards

拜寺溝西夏方塔出土磚圍棋盤

 

Source : Ningxia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Bàisìgōu Xīxià Fāngtǎ 拜寺沟西夏方塔 [The Western Xia Square Pagoda at Baisigou] (Beijing: Wenwu Chubanshe, 2005) Plate XX no.3

Description : Three fragments (largest shown above) of brick Go boards discovered in the ruins of the Baisigou Square Pagoda, Helan County, Ningxia. One fragment is a corner with six grid lines in each direction; one fragment is unfinished, with no vertical grid lines on the right side.

Date : Western Xia (1038–1227).

Size : A) 21.3 × 22.0 × 7.0 cm; B) 18.0 × 10.0 × 5.0 cm.

Grid : Uncertain.


Western Xia Pottery Go Board Fragment and Ceramic Go Stones

西夏圍棋盤殘塊及圍棋子兩罐

 

Source : 西夏瓷推开一扇西夏窗

 

Source : 西夏围棋子

Description : Fragment of a pottery Go board, and a set of black and white ceramic Go stones in black and white ceramic bowls, These are in a private collection, and their source is unknown, although it can be reasonably surmised that they could only have come from a robbed tomb. A number of similar ceramic Go stones were discovered between 1983 and 1986 at the site of the Lingwu kiln 靈武窯 in Ningxia province.

Date : Supposedly Western Xia (1038–1227), but with no archaeological context this cannot be verified.

Grid : Uncertain, probably 19×19 from the number of stones.

Stones : Reportedly 200 black stones and 200 white stones, but not certain whether this is an approximate or an exact count.


Mural from a Jin Dynasty Tomb

陝西甘泉4號金墓壁畫

 

Source : Wenwu 文物 2009.7 page 38 fig.34

Description : Part of a mural in a tomb dated 1189 (M4) at Ganquan 甘泉 in Shaanxi province (see Wen Wu 文物 2009.7). This is one of a set of four murals representing the four scholarly arts (琴棋書畫), all featuring female figures.

Date : Jin dynasty (1115–1234) : 1189.

Grid : 17×17 (?).


Jin Dynasty Go Stones

金上京出土圍棋子

 

Source : 围棋子 金代

Description : Go stones excavated from the site of the first Jin dynasty capital (Shangjing 上京) at Acheng 阿城 in Heilongjiang province.

Date : Jin dynasty (1115–1234).

Stones : 18 black and 14 white Go stones of various sizes.


Jin Dynasty Stoneware Pillow

金大定十八年磁州窯瓷枕

 

Source : Philadelphia Museum of Art 1957-26-1

Description : Cizhou ware stone pillow from the Jin dynasty.

Date : Jin dynasty (1115–1234) : 1178.


Southern Song Painting

《會昌九老圖》

 

Source : Gugong Bowuyuan Cang Wenwu Zhenpin Quanji [Jin Tang Liang-Song Huihua 3] 故宮博物院藏文物珍品全集 [晉唐兩宋繪畫 3] (Beijing, 2008) pages 168–175

Description : Handscroll in the Palace Museum Beijing that depicts a gathering in Luoyang during the Huichang period (specifically the year 845), including two men playing Go on a boat.

Date : Southern Song (1127–1279).

Grid : 19×19.

 

 

THREE JIN DYNASTY CERAMIC TILES,c. 265-420 AD,

decorated with a musician in polychrome mineral earth pigments, China, 46x34cm (3)Provenance: From an Australian collection Auction Location:
Galerie Finn, 23 Bay Street, Double Bay, Sydney, Australia

Previewing Details:
Wednesday 6 August – Sunday 17 August:

11:00am – 6:00pm Taxes:

  • ·GST (10%)

Buyer’s Premiums:

Shipping Details:
No Info Available

Payment Details:
Paypal is our preferred method of payment.

Accepted Payment Methods:

  • ·VISA
  • ·PayPal
  • ·See Payment Details

Important Information as Guide for Buyers

This auction is sold in Australian Dollars and subject to the information below and the Terms and Conditions of Business printed in this catalogue

Buyer Registration

All prospective buyers are required to register their name, address and telephone contact details in order to obtain a bidding number.

Buyers Premium

A charge for internet buyers 22% including GST on all successful bids.

Goods and Services Tax

Some lots may be subject to GST. This is charged on the Hammer Price at the standard rate of 10 %. The symbol * after the lot number will identify lots to which GST applies.

Estimates

These appear with each lot and should be treated as a guide regarding the value of a lot based on market trends and historic realisations. Estimates do not include the Buyers Premium or GST and actual prices realised at the sale may fall within, above or below the estimate.

Condition of Lots

It is recommended that prospective buyers thoroughly examine all lots prior to purchase. All lots are sold ‘as is’. Imperfections or defects are not necessarily indicated in the catalogue.

Condition Reports

Should a prospective buyer be unable to inspect a lot at pre-sale viewings a condition report can be made available upon request. A condition report is a statement of opinion only and not of fact.

Absentee Bidding

For prospective buyers unable to attend an auction, and auctions by Private Treaty, all bids should be lodged as Absentee Bids prior to the auction. Absentee Bids must be advised in writing. Appropriate forms are available with the catalogue and upon request. In the event of two or more buyers submitting identical bids for a lot the first bid received takes precedence.

Bidding Increments

Bidding increments are subject to the auctioneer’s discretion; however the following bidding intervals are generally used. Absentee bids that do not conform to these intervals may be lowered to the next bidding interval:

500/1,000 by 50

1,000/2,000 by 100

2,000/5,000 by 200

5,000/10,000 by 500

10,000/20,000 by 1,000

20,000 and above at auctioneers discretion.

Successful Bids for Absentee Bidders

All lots will be sold to the highest bidder at the next bidding increment and subject to reserves. For example should a lot carry an estimate of 500/1,000 and the two highest bids tendered are 500 and 3,000 the lot would be sold for 550. Should the highest bid not reach the reserve the lot may be referred to the highest bidder.

Payment

All purchases must be paid for in full and within five working days of the sale. For all purchases exceeding $2,000.00 a deposit of 20% of the full invoice amount must be paid on the day of the sale.

Method of Payment

Payments for purchases can be made with Cash via Western Union, Paypal transfers, VISA, MasterCard and International Banking Transfers. All international payments exceeding AUD $500.00 must be paid by Direct Bank Transfer. Payments by Credit will incur a charge of 2.6%. Payments by Paypal will incur a charge of 3.8%. Payments by Western Union and International Banking Transfers will incur a Banking Fee of AUD $25.00. All payments must be cleared with our bankers prior to the removal of any purchase.

Collection and Delivery

Unless prior arrangements have been organised all purchases must be collected no later than 5 days of the sale date subject to full payment being received.

Permits

The Buyer is solely responsible for obtaining any export license or permit that may be required in connection with a purchased Lot. Under the provisions of The Protection of Movable Cultural Heritage Act 1986 (and Amendments 1999) buyers may be required to obtain an export permit for certain lots in this sale from the Movable Cultural Heritage Unit, Department of the Environment and Heritage, GPO Box 787, Canberra, ACT, 2601. Tel 02 6274 1810, Fax 02 6274 2731
Website: http://www.deh.gov.au/heritage/movable/

Storage and Insurance

After five working days all uncollected purchases will attract a charge of $44.00 (Incl. GST) per lot per day. After the fall of the hammer no insurance cover is provided for any purchased lot.

Notice

Within the cultural context of Australian Aboriginal People and their societies some imagery in this catalogue may be socially sensitive and under Aboriginal Law may be inappropriate for viewing by children or uninitiated men and women. It is suggested that Aboriginal community elders be appropriately consulted prior to the general distribution of this catalogue within their communities and that uninitiated Aboriginal People obtain their elders consent prior to viewing the works at scheduled previews.

NB

There is considerable variation regarding the spelling of Aboriginal names and phrases. During the production of this catalogue, current and generally accepted linguistic spellings have been used for the sake of consistency. Information inscribed on paintings and other documents have in most cases been transcribed phonetically which has resulted in inconsistencies.

Catalogues

$60.00, $65.00 posted (Incl. GST), $75.00 overseas. Catalogues are also available via e-mail upon request. A high resolution colour copy of the catalogue is also available on a CD: $5.00, $7.00 posted (Incl. GST), $10.00 overseas

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS

The terms and conditions set out below apply to all sales by private treaty, public auction or auction by private treaty held by East Australian Trading Consolidated (EATC) to the exclusion of other terms and conditions and no modifications will be binding unless accepted by East Australian Trading Consolidated in writing.

1. Agent

EATC sells by Auction, Private Treaty and Auction by Private Treaty as Agent for the Vendor and is not responsible for any default by the Buyer or Vendor.

2. Agent Discretion

The Agent has the right at its sole discretion without giving any reason therefore to; (a) refuse any bid, to divide any Lot, to combine two or more Lots, to withdraw any Lot from the sale and, in the event of dispute, to re-offer any Lot for sale again, (b) to keep secret the existence of the Reserve Price of any Lot, (c) to bid on behalf of a Vendor or any prospective Buyer with or without disclosure, (d) in the event any Lot is not sold at auction to re-offer the Lot for sale by Private Treaty subject to these Terms and Conditions; (e) to refuse any person or persons admission to, or eject them from the premises site.

3. The Buyer

(a) The highest bidder shall be the Buyer except in the case of a dispute. If during the auction the Agent considers that a dispute has arisen, he/she has absolute discretion to settle it or re-offer the Lot. (b) Every Buyer shall be deemed to bid as principal unless prior to the auction he/she discloses to the Agent that he/she will be bidding on behalf of a principal and supplies the full name and address of his/her principal and a copy of written authority to bid for and on behalf of that principal and such authority is acceptable to the Agent.

4. Contract of Sale

(a) On acceptance of bid by the fall of the hammer or by the acceptance of a bid by Absentee Bid instructions, a contract of sale is made between the Vendor and the Buyer. EATC is not a party to the contract of sale and shall not be liable for any breach thereof by either the Vendor or the Buyer. (b) Ownership of the Lot will pass to the Buyer only when the full Purchase Price has been received by the Agent subject to clearance of funds.

5. Buyer Registration and Absentee Bidding

All bidders shall register by completing and provide proof of identification acceptable to the Agent. Buyers that are unable to attend a sale should register in writing by way of Absentee Bid Forms. Absentee Bid Forms should be lodged prior to the auction as shown in any Catalogue in respect of the relevant sale. Absentee Bids without a maximum bid will not be accepted. Appropriate forms are available with the Catalogue and upon request. In the event of two or more buyers submitting identical bids for a Lot the first bid received will be deemed to be the highest bid.

6. Bid Regulation

The Agent may at his/her sole discretion determine the advance of bidding or refuse a bid. Any bid acknowledged and relied upon by the Agent may not be with drawn

7. Reserves

(a) Each Lot is offered for sale subject to any Reserve Price placed by the Agent in agreement with the Vendor. Where a Reserve has been agreed the Vendor may not change the Reserve without the written consent of the Agent. (b) Neither the Vendor nor any person on the Vendor’s behalf may bid on the Vendor’s own property. If any such bid is nonetheless made then the Agent may sell the Lot to the Vendor without observing any Reserve and the Vendor shall pay the Agent the Buyers Premium in addition to the Vendors Commission and Expenses. (c) If no Reserve is placed on a Lot the Agent shall in no way be held liable should the Lot be purchased for a price below the lowest estimated selling price of a Lot as shown in any Catalogue in respect of the relevant sale. (d) The Vendor authorises the Agent to accept bids at less than the Reserve, provided that for the purpose of determining any amounts due to or from the Vendor under these conditions, the Hammer Price for any Lot sold at less than the Reserve will be deemed to have been the full amount of the Reserve, and not the lower price at which the Lot was actually sold.

8. Buyers Premium

The Buyer shall pay the Agent a Buyers Premium based on the Hammer Price the terms of which will be shown in any Catalogue in respect of the relevant sale. The Buyer acknowledges that the Agent may receive commissions from the Vendor.

9. GST and Vendor Authorisation

(a) A Vendor who sends for sale by Public Auction, Auction by Private Treaty or Private Treaty Sale, any item which is an asset of his/her business must disclose to the Agent whether or not he/she is a registered person for GST purposes in Australia an if so, declare his/her registered number and ABN. This information must be supplied to the Agent prior to goods being consigned. (b) The Vendor authorises the Agent to deduct from the Hammer Price and retain a commission equal to the percentage of the Hammer Price as specified at the time of consignment and as shown on the consignment notice at any time subsequent to the sale, but subject to full settlement by the Buyer with cleared funds.

10. Buyer’s Responsibility, Inspection and Warranties

(a) Each Buyer making a bid for a Lot acknowledges that he/she has satisfied himself/herself fully before bidding by inspection or otherwise as to all the sale Terms and Conditions the physical condition and description of the Lot including but not restricted to whether the Lot is damaged or has been repaired or restored. (b) Any Warranties which might otherwise be implied by the Sale of Goods Act 1923 are hereby excluded and shall not apply. All Lots are sold ‘as is’ and EATC and the Vendor make no representations or warranties regarding any Lot.

11. Rescission

Not withstanding any other terms of these Condition, if within 21 days after the sale EATC have received from the Buyer of a Lot notice in writing that in his/her view the Lot is a deliberate forgery and within seven days after such notification the Buyer returns the same to EATC in the same condition as at the time of sale and by producing evidence, the burden of proof to be upon the Buyer, satisfies EATC that considers in the light of entry in the Catalogue the Lot is a deliberate forgery, then the sale of the Lot will be rescinded and within seven Working days of the Vendor refunding to EATC the amount paid to the Vendor in respect of the Lot EATC will reimburse the Buyer for the Hammer Price paid for the relevant Lot within seven Working days.

12. Catalogue Descriptions and Statements

(a) EATC do not accept responsibility for the authenticity, attribution, genuineness, origin, authorship, date, age, period, condition or quality of any Lot, unless they have been instructed in writing by the Vendor so to certify, and in such cases EATC do so as agents of the Vendor and are not themselves responsible for such a claim. Any Illustration in the Catalogue is solely for guidance for prospective buyers and is not intended to be relied upon in terms of tone or colour or necessarily to reveal imperfections in any Lot (b) All statements, whether printed in the Catalogue or made orally, as to matters set out in (a) above are statements of opinion only and are not to be taken as being or implying any warranties or representations of fact by the Agent unless they have been instructed in writing by the Vendor so to certify, and in such cases EATC do so as agents of the Vendor and are not themselves responsible for such a claim. (c) Any claim by statute must be received in writing by EATC within ten days of the relevant sale. (d) All conditions, notices, descriptions statements or any other matters in a Catalogue and elsewhere concerning any Lot are subject to any statements modifying or affecting any Lot made publicly by the Agent prior to any bid being accepted for any Lot.

13. Illustrations and Photography

In accordance with the Consignment Form or any further written advice, EATC shall have the right to photograph, digitally record and make illustrations of any Lot supplied by the Seller, whether or not in conjunction with Sale, at a cost to the seller. The copyright of all photographs taken, digital images and illustrations made of any Lot by and on behalf of EATC shall be the absolute property of EATC.

14. Indemnity

The Vendor shall indemnify EATC against any claims in connection with and goods sold by EATC on the Vendor’s behalf.

15. Default

EATC disclaim any responsibility for default by either the Buyer or the Vendor because they act as agents for the Vendor only and therefore do not pay out to the Vendor until payment is received from the Buyer. Instructions given by telephone are accepted at the sender’s risk and must be confirmed in writing forthwith.

16. Payment and Removal of Purchases

(a) The purchase Price must be paid in full to the Agent within two working days after the sale unless such other terms or period have been specified or agreed to prior to the sale. (b) Payment shall be made in Australian Dollars either in Cash, via Western Union, Paypal, VISA, MasterCard, Bank Card and International Banking Transfers direct to the Agent. Payments by Credit will incur a charge of 2.6%. Payments by Western Union and International Banking Transfers will incur a Banking Fee of AUD $15.00. Payment by Personal Cheque is accepted at the discretion of the Agent (c) No Lot may be removed until the full Purchase Price has been received by the Agent and ownership of the Lot will not pass to the Buyer until cleared funds in payment of the full Purchase Price shall have been received by the Agent. (d) On acceptance of bid by the fall of the hammer or by the acceptance of a bid by Absentee Bid instructions the successful bidder may be required to provide a deposit equal to 20% of the Hammer Price in cash or by Bank Cheque. If the successful bidder fails to do so, the Lot may, if the Agent decides (at its absolute discretion) be re-offered for sale

17. Removal and Responsibility of Purchased Lots

(a) All Lots must be removed not later than two working days after the sale. (b) The Buyer shall be responsible for any removal, storage or other charges for any Lot not removed in accordance with the time limit specified in (a). (c) The Buyer shall be responsible for any loss or damage to a Lot purchased by him/her from the acceptance of bid by the fall of the hammer or by the acceptance of a bid by Absentee Bid instructions and neither EATC, its agents nor its employees shall be responsible for any loss or damage of any kind, whether caused by negligence or otherwise, while the Lot is in its custody or under its control. (d) The Buyer shall be solely responsible for obtaining any export License or permit that may be required in connection with a purchased Lot.

18. Non-Payment or Failure to Remove Purchases

1. If the Purchase Price is not paid in full to the Agent within two working days after the sale or according to such other terms or period specified or agreed to prior to the sale and/or the Lot has not been removed within two working days after the sale the Agent shall without further notice to the Buyer and at its absolute discretion, be entitled to exercise one or more of the following remedies: (a) To re-sell the Lot without any Reserve and the Buyer agrees that any re-sale price achieved shall be reasonable; (b) To absolutely forfeit any monies the Buyer may have paid; (c) To remove, store and insure the Lot at the expense of the Buyer; (d) To charge interest on the Purchase Price and Expenses at a rate of 15% calculated on a daily basis after as well as before judgment or order, from the date which the Purchase Price becomes payable; (e) To retain any Lot sold by the Buyer at the same or any other sale until payment of the of the Purchase Price by the Buyer; (f) To apply the proceeds of the sale of any Lot then due or at any time thereafter becoming due to the Buyer in payment or part payment of the Purchase Price; (g) To exercise a lien on, and at the Agents’ discretion, exercise a power of sale over any other property of the Buyer in the Agents control for any purpose; (h) To rescind the sale of the Lot or any other Lot sold to the Buyer at the same or any other sale; (i) To repossess any goods comprising any Lot in respect of which payment is overdue and thereafter resell the same, and for this purpose the Buyer herby grants an irrevocable License to EATC its employees and its agents to enter upon all or any of the Buyer’s premises, with or without vehicles, during normal business hours, without prejudice to any other rights of EATC; (j) To issue legal proceedings against the Buyer for damages for breach of contract; (k) To reject a bid from the Buyer at any future sale or to require the Buyer to pay a deposit before any bid is accepted by the Agent at any future sale. 2. The Buyer shall pay all legal and other costs if enforcement incurred by EATC and/or the Vendor, whether or not Court proceedings shall be issued, on a full indemnity basis together with interest thereon at the rate specified in condition 1 (d) above from the date the Buyer shall have become liable to pay costs.

19. Public Liability Risk of personal Loss or Injury

Every person on the Agent’s premises at any time including any premises where a sale may be conducted or a Lot or part of a Lot, may be on view from time to time shall be deemed to be there at his / her own risk and shall have no claim against EATC, its employees or agents in respect of any accident which may occur, or injury, damage or loss howsoever caused.

20. Law of Conditions

These Conditions of Business shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the law of the State in which the sale has been conducted and all parties concerned hereby submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of that State’s Courts.

Definitions of Clauses

“Agent and EATC”: Refers to East Australian Trading Consolidated ABN 70 095 511 603, its agents and employees
“Buyer”: The person to whom a Lot is sold
“Catalogue”: Includes any advertisement, brochure, Price List and other publication
“Expenses”: In relation to the sale of any Lot refers to the Agents’ charges and Expenses for insurance, illustration, special advertising, packaging, storage, freight, and any other Expenses properly incurred for the Sale
“GST”: Refers to The Good and Services Tax
“Hammer Price”: Refers to the price in Australian Dollars at which a Lot is sold by the Agent to the Buyer.
“Lot”: Refers to any item or items consigned with a view to its or their sale at Public Auction, Auction by Private Treaty, or Private Treaty Sale
“Purchase Price” Refers to the aggregate of the Hammer Price, the Buyers Premium and any other charges and Expenses due from the Buyer
“Reserve”: Refers to the minimum Hammer Price agreed between the Agent and the Vendor at which a Lot may be sold
“Sale Proceeds”: Refers to the net amount due to the Vendor, being the Hammer Price less the Vendors Commission, Expenses and any other amount due to the Agent from the Vendor in whatever capacity and howsoever arising
“Vendor”: Refers to the owner and /or owners of each and every Lot offered for sale
“Vendor’s Commission”: Refers to the commission due to the Agent from the Vendor upon the sale of a Lot

 

 

 

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

 

THE MONGOL EMPIRE HISTORY

 

THE COMPLETE HISTORY COLLECTIONS LOOK AT The Yuan mongol dynasty CD-ROM

 

Heavy Cavalry of the Imperial Guards

Introduction

Perhaps no empire in history has risen so spectacularly as that of the Mongols. In less than 80 years, a band of warriors originally comprised of several men grew to an empire that encompassed all from the Pacific Ocean to the Danube River. This story is about one of the most dramatic series conquests in history and how it was the Mongols themselves who shattered their own invincibility.

In the 12th century, various Turkic and Mongol-Tungusic tribes roamed the steppes of Mongolia. One of these tribes was the Mongols. Around the 1130, the Mongols emerged as a powerful tribe, defeating neighboring nomads and forcing the Jin Empire of Northern China to pay tribute. However, the glory was short lived. In 1160, the Mongol Kingdom was shattered, having been defeated by the neighboring Tartars tribe. The Mongol clans (divisions within a tribe) became disunited and fought amongst themselves for what little there was.

 

 Drawing of Genghis Khan

The leader of the Mongol Kiyad Sub-Clan was Yesugei, who happened to be a descendant of a Khan (chieftain) of the former Mongol Kingdom. In 1167, Yesguei and his wife had a son named Temujin, the one who would become Genghis Khan. When Temujin was nine years old, his father was poisoned by Tartar chiefs. Since he was much to young to rule, his clansmen deserted him. Temujin and his family (7 people total) moved to the most desolate areas of the steppes, eating roots and rodents for living. He had many great adventures, ranging from chasing horse thieves to being captured by enemies. When Temujin was 16, the Merkid Tribe attacked his family and captured his wife. With an army of five men, Temujin could not retaliate on his own, so he turned to one of his father’s old friends, Toghrul Khan of the Kereyid Tribe, who in turn, also enlisted a Mongol coalition leader, Jamugha. Together they defeated the Merkids and Temujin recovered his wife. Temujin quickly took advantage of his powerful allies, particularly Jamugha, who was also happened to be a Mongol and a childhood friend of his, and became a notable figure on the steppes. Temujin and Jamugha took control over most of the Mongol Clans, but that was not enough for Temujin.

 
According to the Secret History of the Yuan Dynasty, one day while Temujin and Jamugha were riding at the front of the Mongols, Temujin decided to “keep going” while Jamugha stopped to pitch tent. Temujin broke up with Jamugha and the Mongols were split into two groups. Hostilities soon broke out between the two parties. In a clash over a minor event, Temujin was defeated and was forced into exile. However, Temujin returned ten years later and reestablished his position. From there, he embarked on a conquest of the Mongolia that lasted several years. Unfortunately, the details are too great to be perused in this article. In short, by 1204 Temujin had subjugated all that opposed him. He defeated the Tartars, the Kereyids tribe under Toghrul Khan (who eventually betrayed him), the Naimans the Merkids, and Jamugha’s Mongol clans

 

The Empire by 1204 

The Empire by 1204

In 1206, Temujin held a great Khuriltai (assembly) on the banks of the Onon River. There, he took the title Chingis Khan. The name Chingis Khan is commonly referred to as Genghis Khan. However, “Genghis” is actually a corrupted variation, and thus for accuracy reason, he will be referred to as “Chingis” Khan. During the Khuriltai of 1206, Chingis Khan decreed the structure and laws for his new Empire. To ensure stability and cooperation between people of the tribes that he united, Chingis Khan installed a military superstructure to integrate all the peoples of his Empire. The population was divided into units responsible for maintaining a certain amount of warriors ready at any given time, thus overriding previous tribal organizations. Furthermore, he decreed many specific laws and created an efficient administrative hierarchy. Chingis Khan created the most advanced government of any steppe nation up to that time. His horde would soon prove to be the most disciplined, the most powerful and the most feared army to ride from the steppes.

 

The Khuriltai of 1206. From a manuscript by Rashid ad-Din

 The War in Northern China

 

Mongol horsemen battle Jin
Warriors in the Mountains

Chingis Khan became emperor of “all who lived in felt tents,” but his dreams was to conquer the world. First, he led his men in a series of campaigns against the Xi Xia Empire in western China. In 1209, the Xi Xia capital was threatened, but the Mongols were satisfied with tribute after their camp was unexpectedly flooded. It must be understood that the Mongols were still more interested in and tribute plunder rather than to capture cities. However, as the Empires in China discontinued to pay tribute once the Mongols withdraw, the raids soon turned into conquest.

In 1211, Chingis Khan took 65,000 men and marched against the Jin Empire of Northern China. With the help of the Ongguts, a people who lived on the Jin’s northern border, Chingis Khan easily passed through the defenses and marched into Jin territory. He continued a trail of plunder until he met a large force of around 150,000 men, which he defeated. Chingis split his army and launched a multiple pronged attack on the Jin. He and his generals dealt several blows against the Jin, including capturing the strategic Juyong pass. Unfortunately, Chingis was wounded during a siege and withdrew to Mongolia. Subsequently, Jin forces began to recapture territories loss to the Mongols.

In 1213, the Mongols returned after learning that the Jin had refortified their locations. Chingis divided his army into three parts, one under command by himself and the other two, under his sons. The three Mongol armies devastated the Jin Empire, and by 1214, most of the area north of the Huang He (Yellow river) was in Mongol hands. One exception was the city of Chungdu, capital of the Jin Empire. Like other nomadic armies, Chingis Khan’s Mongol hordes were entirely cavalry, and the weakness of cavalry forces was the lack of ability to capture fortifications. Chingis realized this weakness and was quick to capture Chinese siege engineers to learn siege tactics. Despite so, Chungdu withstood the Mongols’ assaults. Chingis’s men became short on supplies and were ravaged by plague, but he tenaciously continued the siege. Accounts describe that every tenth man was sacrificed to be fed to the others. But the siege went on for so long that Chingis had to personally abandon the campaign. He then placed his general Mukali in charge. The Mongols finally entered the city in 1215, but by then, the Jin capital had already been moved south to Kai-feng.

 

 The Empire at 121

The First Move West – the Conquest of the Kwarazm-Shah Empire

Chingis lost interest in the war in China and instead, turned his attention towards the west. In 1218, he sent his general Chepe westward and conquered the Kara Khitai Empire. But the real issue was with the huge Kwarazmian Empire in Perisa. Hostilities broke out when the Kwarazm Shah attacked a Mongol caravan and humiliated Chingis’s ambassadors by burning their beards. Since Chingis sent the ambassadors for the purpose of making peace, he was outraged. Chingis prepared for the largest operation he had yet performed and assembled a force that totaled around 90-110,000 men. The total numerical strength of the Kwarazm shah was two to three times greater, but Chingis’ army was better disciplined, and most of all, better led.

In 1219, Chingis’s sons Chaghadai and Ogedei set out to attack the city of Utar located east of the Aral Sea. Meanwhile, Chingis’ general, Chepe, marched southwestward to protect the left flank during the operation. The main attack, however, was led by Chingis Khan himself, who along with general Subedei, marched through the Kizil Kum desert and outflanked the Kwarazmiam forces. The plan was that the Kizil Kum desert was considered impractical to cross, which made it a great opportunity to surprise the enemy. Chingis and his army disappeared into the desert and suddenly, out of nowhere, he appeared at the city of Bokhara. The city garrison was stunned, and was quickly defeated. Next, Chingis marched towards Samarkand, capital of the Kwarazmian Empire. The magnificent city was heavily fortified and had a garrison of 110,000 men, which vastly outnumbered Chingis’ besieging army. The city was expected to be able to hold out for months, but on March 19, 1220 its walls were breached in just ten days. After the fall of Samarkand, the Mongols overran much of the Empire. The destruction was profound. Cities were leveled and populations were massacred. At the city of Merv, accounts described an execution of 700,000. At Samarkand, women were raped and sold into slavery. Devastation was so great that the Kwarazmian Empire itself was nearly wiped away from history. The conquest of the Kwarazm also created another remarkable event. After his defeat, the Kwarazm Shah fled west and Subedei followed in pursue with a force of 20,000 men. The Kwarazm Shah died, however, but Subedei went further. He brought his army north and defeated a heavily outnumbering Russian and Cuman army at the Khalka River. He went further and attack the Volga Bulgars before returning back. As said by the famed history Gibbons, Subedei’s expedition was one of the most daring expeditions in history, unlikely to be repeated ever again.

 

The Campaign in Northern China and
the Conquest of the Kwarazmian Empire.

During the entire campaign, the Kwarazm Shah failed to assemble an army to fight the Mongols on the battlefield. The Kwarazm strategy relied on its extensive city garrisons that outnumbered the besieging Mongol armies. This of course, failed in every way. The only well organized resistance against the Mongols came from Jalal ad-Din, who after the fall of Samarkand, organized a resistance force in modern day Afghanistan. At Parwan, he defeated a Mongol force led by one of Chingis’ adopted son, making it the only Mongol defeat in the entire campaign. Chingis chases after Jalal ad-Din and destroyed his army at the Indus River. The defeat of Jalal ad-Din meant the consolidation of rule of Transoxania. However, the southern parts of the Kwarazmian Empire were left unconquered and later turned into a collection of Independent states. It is said that the Mongols decided not to advance when the sight of a unicorn demoralized their vanguard.  

At the age approaching sixty, Chingis’ health was at a decline. He sought the legendary Daoist monk Changchun for the exilir to Immortality. His wish did not come true, as Changchun had no magical exilir, but Chingis praised his wisdom and the two became good friends. Following the meeting with the Daoist monk, Chingis returned to the administration side of his objectives. Unlike Attila the Hun and Alexander the Great, Chingis Khan realized the importance of a smooth succession after his death. Before he completed his conquest of the Kwarazmian Empire, he had already carefully chosen his son Ogedei to be his successor. After Chingis returned to Mongolia to finish establish the administration structure of his empire, all the matters were in good order, except for the Tanguts. The Tangut Xi Xia Empire had long been defeated by the Mongols, but became more of a tributary rather than being annexed. However, the Tanguts had stopped complying with terms while Chingis was away. In 1226, Chingis Khan led his army against Xi Xia and captured its capital.

 
The Death of Chingis Khan

 

Chingis Khan 

The campaign against the Xi Xia was his last campaign Shortly later in August 1227, Chingis Khan died at the age of 60. The reason remains unsolved, with theories ranging from internal injuries after a hunting accident, to malaria, to prophecies of the Tanguts.

At his death, the Mongol Empire stretched from the Yellow Sea to the Caspian Sea. No other empire in history has seen such an extraordinary expansion in the lifetime of one man. Although Chingis Khan brought much destruction in his conquests, it is clear that he did not intend to commit mass genocide like that of Hitler, even though the death tolls far exceeded anything in history. Chingis’s dream was conquest, and whenever surrender was seen, bloodshed was avoided. He was exceptionally respectful to those who supported him, and it was not uncommon for him to befriend defected enemies. In any case, Chingis was a brilliant military strategiest and an exceptionally gifted leader, making him one of the most intriguing figures in history.

The Great Khan Ogedei

After the death of Chingis, the Mongol Empire was divided into four ulus, each given to his four “main” sons. Although these ulus (inheritances) were politically united in the same empire, they would later serve as the basis of future khanates. As said before, Ogedei had already been chosen by Chingis to be his successor. Two years after Chingis’ death, Ogedei was officially proclaimed as the ruler of the Mongol Empire. Ogedei took the title of Khakhan (“Great Khan” or “Khan of Khans”), a title used by rulers of the greatest steppe Empires. Chingis however, never officially used this title. Nonetheless, Ogedei ascended with a smooth transition.With the fall of Kiev, the Mongols were victorious in Russia, pulling off the only successful winter invasion of Russia in history. As the result of the Mongols’ sweep into Russia, many groups fled across the border and sought refugee in Hungary. Among these were the Cumans and Kipchaks, who were also nomadic cavalrymen like the Mongols. When Batu Khan learned of this he was furious, because they were “his subjects” and thus were not allowed to escape. Whether or not this was the case, Subedei quickly planned a campaign against Europe. The plan was a two-pronged invasion: A flanking force of 20,000 men would be sent into Poland, while he himself (and Batu) will lead the main force of 50,000 men. On March 1241, Subedei and Batu’s force dissolved into the Carpathian Mountains, appearing out of nowhere on the other side. But instead of advancing further into Hungary, the Mongols withdrew. Upon seeing this, the Hungarians became somewhat arrogant, and even dismissed the Cumans and Kipchaks, who were also nomadic cavalrymen much like the Mongols. Meanwhile, the northern army stormed into Poland, laid waste to the countryside, and sacked Cracow. On April 9, a European force led by Duke Henry of Silesia crossed into Poland and challenged the 20,000 strong Mongols. The heavily armored European knights were no match for the quickness of the Mongol horsemen, and consequently were defeated. Meanwhile, King Bela of Hungary realized that the Mongol retreat was feigned, and were now actually closing in. King Bela rode out with a force numbering 60-80,000 men and met the army of Batu and Subedei’s at the opposing side of the Sajo River. After an indecisive clash at the bridge of the river,

The “Devil’s Horsemen”

 

 The Empire at the ascension of Ogedei Khan

The first thing one Ogedei’s mind was to subjugate the remaining fragments Kwarazem Empire, which was earlier destroyed by Chingis Khan in 1221, but had been later restored in modern day Azerbaijan. This objected was completed in 1231. The next goal was to complete the conquest of the Jin Empire. The Jin Empire had already lost a great deal of territory to Chingis Khan, and later to Mukali, who was assigned by Chingis to take over as commander in the Northern China theatre. But after Mukali’s death in 1223, the Jin began to fiercely fight back. In 1231 a large Mongol army led by Ogedei, the renowned general Subedei, and Tolui (Ogedei’s brother) set off against the Jin. After a series of setbacks, the Mongols finally stormed the Jin capital of Kai Feng in 1234 with the aid of 20,000 Song Chinese auxilleries, thus ending the great sedentary Empire that oversaw the steppes for over a century.

While the Ogedei was campaigning in the Jin Empire, he had already ordered the construction of an Imperial capital for the Empire. When the city, named Karakorum, was completed in 1235, it stood as the grandest site in Mongolia. (Karakorum had already been founded long ago by Chingis, but was more of an outpost back then rather than a capital.) Although the city did not grow to an impressive size like the cities of China, the city was impressively diverse and multi-cultural flourished with professional craftsmen, as later remarked by the European traveler Rubruck.  Ogedei also made several reforms in the government, of them begin an improvement of the postal system (the Yam).

The Invasion of Russia

Although the Mongols had already made contacts with the Russians a decade earlier in 1222, during Subedei’s legendary expedition, the Mongols did not establish any permanent government in those lands. When Chingis Khan died, the northwestern territories of the empire were given to his son, Jochi. One of Jochi’s sons was Batu Khan, who inherited the westernmost territories of Jochi’s ulus. But Batu’s land was small and a great part of the land he was “given,” was not yet under Mongol control. In the Khuriltai of 1235, Batu showed his intension to bring these lands under Mongol control. This decision would create an extraordinary conquest that in the end, Batu’s army would have traveled five thousand miles! Subedei agreed to go with Batu; and in 1237, the two gathered a force that numbered 120,000 men ready to cross the frozen Volga into Russia.

During winter, the Mongols crossed the Volga River, and afterwards, ridding north into the forests to hide their presence. The first major city they came to was Riazan, which fell after a five-day catapult assault. Then they rode north and captured Kolumna, Moscow, and defeated the Grand Duke of Suzdal, the most powerful force in the northern half of Russia. From there the Mongols advanced towards Novgorod. However, the siege was abandoned after the marshes proved too frustrating to travel through. Although Novgorod became one of the only major cities in Russia to avoid the Mongol conquest, they would keep a friendly relation with the Mongols by paying tribute. After the frustration at Novgorod, Batu and Subedei rode south and attacked the city of Kozelsk, which valiantly held off the Mongols and even successfully ambushed a Mongol vanguard – a feat rarely ever been done. Kozelsk held off for seven weeks, and after it finally fell, the entire population was slaughtered in a way so great that the Mongols named it the City of Woe. The last obstacle in Russia was the great city of Kiev, often called the “Mother of all Russian cities”. Because Kiev was so important in Eastern Europe, the Mongols even tried to take it undamaged. Prince Michael of Kiev did indeed realize the inevitable capture of Kiev. Unfortunately, he fled, and his second in command was a tenacious officer and decided to resist. When the Mongols did storm the city, the only major structure that was not destroyed was the Cathedral St Sophia.

The Invasion of Europe

 

The Mongol Invasion of Europe 

With the fall of Kiev, the Mongols were victorious in Russia. Interestingly, this was the only successful large-scale winter invasion of Russia in history. As the result of the Mongols’ incursion into Russia, many groups fled across the border and sought refugee in Hungary. Among these were the Cumans and Kipchaks, who were also nomadic cavalrymen like the Mongols. When Batu Khan learned of this he was furious, because they were “his subjects” and thus were not allowed to escape. Whether or not this was the case, Subedei quickly planned a campaign against Europe. The plan was a two-pronged invasion: A flanking force of 20,000 men would be sent into Poland, while he himself (and Batu) would lead the main force of 50,000 men. On March 1241, Subedei and Batu’s force dissolved into the Carpathian Mountains, appearing out of nowhere on the other side. But instead of advancing further into Hungary, the Mongols withdrew. Upon seeing this, the Hungarians became somewhat arrogant, and even dismissed the Cumans and Kipchaks, who could’ve provided valuable cavalry support. Meanwhile, the northern army stormed into Poland, laid waste to the countryside, and sacked Cracow. On April 9, a European force led by Duke Henry of Silesia crossed into Poland and challenged the 20,000 strong Mongols. The heavily armored European knights were no match for the quickness of the Mongol horsemen, and consequently were defeated. Meanwhile, King Bela of Hungary realized that the Mongol retreat was feigned, and were now actually closing in. King Bela rode out with a force numbering 60-80,000 men and met the army of Batu and Subedei’s at the opposing side of the Sajo River. After an indecisive clash at the bridge of the river, Subedei brought a contingent south and crossed the river without the Hungarians noticing. When Subedei appeared on the other side, the Hungarians were dumbstruck. Soon Batu broke across the bridge and the Hungarian army was surrounded.

The two major victories by two separate Mongol armies in a period of mere days apart show the brilliancy of Subedei’s generalship. In one month, Poland and Hungary were defeated. Days after the victory at Sajo River, (the name of the battle is also known as Mohi) the two Mongol forces joined and laid waste to the remaining Hungarian forces, capturing cities such as Pest. The grand and splendid city of Gran was captured on Christmas day.

By early 1242, when Batu considered to go even farther into Europe, he suddenly received news from Mongolia that the Great Khan Ogedei had died. This news was significant. Batu’s concern was the possibility of his personally disfavored Guyuk Khan receiving the title of Great Khan. Since Batu had conquered so much land, the political instability in Mongolia would provide trouble. He decided to return to Russia and politically establish his domains to avoid any trouble. As a result, the Mongol army entirely withdrew from Poland and Hungary.

Europe was abandoned and Batu returned to the north of the Caspian Sea. There, he established his capital at Sarai Batu (Old Sarai), and transformed his “inherited lands” into a kingdom, or Khanate. Batu’s Khanate became known as the Blue Horde. Batu’s two brothers, Orda and Shiban, who also participated in the campaign also formed their Khanates. Orda’s Khanate became known as the White Horde, located east to Batu’s Blue Horde. Because Batu and Orda were both member of the Golden Clan, the two Khanates were in reality, depencencies of one another, and became known together under the name of “The Golden Horde”. Shiban’s Khanate, however, is obscurely known. Although the Khans of the Golden Horde would continue to recognize the superiority of the Great Khan and “remain” as part of the Mongol Empire for four more decades, in reality the Golden Horde (and all the other Khanates that would eventually form), had political independence at will.

The Great Khan Guyuk

 

 The Empire c. 1246

Guyuk succeeded as Khakhan (or Kha’an – Great Khan) in 1246. Tensions between Batu and Karakorum soared into heights. Fortunately, Guyuk’s died in 1248, just two years after his enthronement. Guyuk’s early death prevented a major civil war, but the weakness of the Mongol Empire had been foreshadowed. It would be civil disunity that would ultimately bring the Mongol Empire down. The reign of Guyuk achieved little; let alone the disunity in the Empire that it caused.

The Mongol Crusaders – The Great khan Mongke

The next Khakhan, Mongke, was elected in 1251. Upon begin crowned Khakhan, Mognke announced his ambitions to continue the line of conquests that was halted during Guyuk’s reign. The first was to conquer the Song (Sung) Empire, the last of the three pre Chingis Empires in “China” free from Mongol control. This and the long series of campaigns against the Song will be examined later. His other motive was to destroy the presence of the Assasins (Ismailis), who have been threatening the governors of the western provinces, and bring the Abbasid Caliph into submission. Thus, this campaign would travel through Persia and into Mesopotamia and towards the Middle East.

The Mongols had seen a limited incursion into the Middle East when Baiju conquered the Seljuk Sultanate of Rum in 1243. However, further campaigns into Baghdad were canceled at that time due to the instability of the newly acquired Asia Minor and the political troubles in Karakorum. Mongke’s proposed expedition, however, was planned to be a great one, and indeed it would live up to its name. While Mongke Khan was to personally lead the attack against the Song, he entrusted his brother, Hulegu, to lead the Mongol “Crusade.”

Hulegu’s “Crusade”

 

Hulegu’s campiagn 

In 1253, Hulegu departed from Mongolia to begin the largest operation since Batu’s invasion of Russia. It was also the most advanced Mongol army yet to campaign, with the latest in world siege weapon technology, and a group of experienced lieutenants. Hulegu’s expedition attracted great enthusiasm among Christian communities, including a number of Georgian and Alan volunteers. Hulegu’s army marched slowly compared to Mongol standards, taking three years to finally reach Persia. He made his way into Khurasan (region in Persia), annexing the local dynasty in the area. The first of the primary objectives was completed with the capture of the Assassins’ (the Hashashins) fortress of Gerdkuh on the south side of the Caspian Sea. Hulegu then advanced west and captured Alamut, forcing the Assassins’ Grand Master to surrender.

 

 Mongols Besiege a city in the Middle East

After the capture of Alamut, Hulegu marched toward the grand prize of Baghdad. The Caliph of Baghdad happened to be an incompetent military commander, one foolishly ignorant of the Mongol threat. When the Caliph decided to prepare for a siege, Hulegu was already closing in. Upon his arrival, a force of 20,000 cavalrymen rode out to confront the Mongols. This force was easily defeated, making the siege inevitable. Baghdad held out for a week until its east walls were breached. On February 13, 1258, the city surrendered and a devastating slaughtered ensued. The treasure was looted, the magnificent mosques were destroyed, and the populated was massacred. (An interesting thing is that all the Christian inhabitants in the city were spared.) Accounts claim a slaughter of 800,000 men. This may have been an exaggeration, as the city was later revitalized to an extent. However, there is no doubt that the greatest city in the Middle East had forever lost its glory and that there is no doubt the fall of Baghdad was one of the greatest blows to Islam.

Egypt is saved

Hulegu then withdrew almost his entire army except a minor force of 15,000 men to his general Kedburka to keep an eye on the horizon. Meanwhile, the Mameluks were expecting the full fury of the Mongols, and gathered a large force of 120,000 men. But Hulegu had already withdrawn. Thus, the Mameluks only met Kedburka’s 25,000 (15,000 Mongols and 10,000 allies) men at Ain Jalut. The heavily outnumbered Mongols lost in a battle that has traditionally been exaggerated symbolize the dramatic halt of Mongol expansion. In truth, it was the death of Mongke Khan that really saved Egypt, much like how the death of Ogedei Khan saved Europe.

Mongke’s death, Civil war and Kublai Khan

The death of Mongke Khan in 1259 was a significant turning point in the history of the empire. In the West, it meant that Hulegu’s campaign was at an end. The political envoironment in the East became unstable, and thus, Hulegu had to settle down to claim his land. Hulegu Khanate in Persia became known as the Il-Khanate. However, there was even more problems. Hulegu’s campaing agaisnt the Caliph bitterly angered the Muslim Khan Berke of the Golden Horde. With throne of the Great Khan in vacancy, unable to regulate peace, civil war erupted between Berke and Hulegu. Interestingly, this civil war also forced Berke to abandon his plans to ravage Europe once more.

In the East, two brothers competed fiercely for the throne of the Great Khan. One year after Mongke Khan’s death in 1259, Kubilai Khan was elected Khakhan in a Khuriltai. Shortly later, his brother, Ariq Boke, was also elected Khakhan at a rivaling Khuriltai. The civil war lasted until 1264 (parallel to the civil war in the west), when Kubilai was victorious over Ariq Boke, thus becoming the undisputed Khakhan. This civil war had an implied meaning. During the war, Kublai Khan based himself in China while Ariq Boke based himself in Karakorum. Kublai Khan’s victory implied that China was becoming more over important to the Empire than Mongolia, symbolizing the sinification of the Mongols in the East.

To the Empire as a whole, these years of the civil war meant an end to cohesion. A bitter divide now existed in the west, and the in the East, the Great Khan became only interested in China. Thus, one may argue that the death of Mongke Khan in 1259 meant the end of the “Mongol Empire”, (although the Mongol Empires would continue to thrive invidually). However, because Kublai Khan later became so great of a ruler, some prefer to have the timeframe of the “Mongol Empire” inclusive until the end of Kublai’s Reign, who did hold nominal power over the other Khanatse.

Kublai Khan The Conquest of the Song

The conquest of the Song Empire, sometimes called the “true” Chinese dynasty as opposed to the Jurchen-established Jin Dynasty, began during Mongke Khan’s reign. The Song Empire was the most formidable and most geographical challenging Empire to conquer due to its tough infastructure and mountainous terrain. While Mongke Khan fought in the north, Kublai Khan (who then had not yet become Khan) took a well-sized force, marched through Tibet, and attacked the Song Empire from the south. His men were eventually depleted, however, and he had to withdraw. However, Mongke Khan was able to pull off a series of success until he fell to disease contacted during war. The death of Mongke Khan and the subsequent civil war between Kublai and Ariq Boke caused a stall in campaigning for four years. In 1268, the Mongols were ready for another major assault. Kublai Khan assembled a large naval force and defeated a Song force of 3000 ships. Following the naval victory was the successful capture of Xiang Yang in 1271, which gave confidence in the war. However, the war could not accelerate to the speed of the previous conquest. Finally in 1272, a Mongol army led by Bayan, a general who served under Hulegu, crossed the Yangtze River and defeated a large Song army. The tide began to clearly favor the Mongols as Bayan then continued a line of victories cumulating in the capturing of the Song capital of Hangzhou after an exhausting siege. The Song royal family, however, was able to escape. The final defeat came in 1279 in the form of a naval battle near Guangzhou, where the last Song Emperor was killed. 1279 marked the date of the Song Dynasty’s end.

 

Kublai Khan 

Victory in China was complete and the “Mongol Empire” enjoyed its time of zenith. However, a lot had changed by now in the lifestyles of the Great Khans. Unlike his grandfather, Kubilai Khan retreated from the harsh life of being a nomad and adopted the confortable life of a Chinese Emperor. As Kublai Khan became more into the Chinese way of life, the Mongol government followed as well. In 1272, seven years before the defeat of the Song, Kublai adopted the Chinese dynastic title of Yuan – taking the traditional path of legitimizing oneself as the rightful ruler of China. Being both the Yuan emperor of China and the Great Khan of the Mongols, the Yuan dynasty and the Mongol Empire are often counted as the same during the reign of Kublai. Besides making his empire Chinese, Kublai moved the Mongol Imperial capital from Karakorum to modern day Beijing. The new capital at Beijing was named Ta-tu. The Mongol Empire experienced another dramatic change – although in a different way. Defying the style of pervious conquests, Kublai launched two naval invasions of Japan in 1274 and 1281. Both of these were ill fated and were destroyed by the “Kamikaze” typhoons. Kublai also launched a series of campaigns into southern Asia. In Burma, the Mongols were victorious, but eventually abandoned the campaign. In Vietnam, a temporary Mongol victory was turned around into defeat. A naval expedition to Java was unsuccessful as well, being forced to withdraw. Far more serious was the insurrection of Kaidu, decendent of the Ogedeites, who formed a rebel Khanate in Western Mongolia. Kublai’s reign would not see the end of this civil war

 

 

The Mongol Empires c. 1280

Final Collapse of Unity

Despite the few military fiascos taken by Kublai, there is no doubt that Kublai Khan’s reign was the zenith of Mongol rule as a whole. The dominion stretched from China to Mesopotamia to the Danube to the Persian gulf – a size five times that of Alexander’s Empire. Although much of the land suffered great destruction during the conquests, the superior organized Mongol government that followed gradually made this up. Economic activity flourished and trade spread throughout the gigantic empire. Despite the formation of the Khanates in the other sections of the Empire, the authorities of the Great Khan Kublai were recognized in all corners of the Empire. Kublai enjoyed his position as one of the powerful rulers of all time, being Emperor of an Empire that ruled most of the known world. The famed Italian traveler Marco Polo described Kublai as the “greatest lord there will ever be”.

While Kublai Khan was still recognized as the ruler of the Mongols, he himself did not seem to bother with the rest of the Empire outside of his personal dominions. The other Khanates, as well, began to develop a better sense of self-governance. The Mongols lost unity and no longer did they act as a unified government. Of course, this disunity had a long buildup, but once Kublai Khan died, the potentials for disunity finally broke loose. When Kublai Khan died in 1294, his successor would continue to hold the title of “Yuan Emperor”, but there would be no more “Great Khan of the Mongols.” The Mongols discontinued to have a universal ruler and thus, one could say the death of Kublai Khan meant the end of the Mongol Empire. This is somewhat ironic, as the Mongol Empire ended immediately after its golden age. Although the Mongol Empire had eased to exist as a whole, Mongol power remained in the form of the various independent Khanates:

The Five Khanates

 

The Empires 

The Yuan Dynasty in the Far East (also the Khanate of the Great Khan Kublai) continued their rule in China. However, after Kublai, there were no skilled rulers. A series of internal strife followed by natural disasters triggered a major rebellion. In 1368, the Yuan dynasty overthrown and was replaced by the Ming Dynasty under the rule of Ming Hong-wu.

The Il-Khanate of Persia (founded by Hulagu in 1260) did not fare so well at start, struggling with the economy and another embarrassing defeats by the Mameluks. However, under Ghaza Il-Khan, the Il-Khanate regained military superiority and began an economical surge that continued until the reign of Abu Sa’id, where during his rule, Persia enjoyed a great deal of Prosperity. However, Abu Sa’id did not have a successor, in 1335, the Il-Khanate received the same irony as the Mongol Empire -collapsing immediately after its golden age. The lands of the Il-Khanate were eventually reunited under Timer Lenk (Tamerlane) into the “Timurid” Empire.

The Blue Horde in Russia enjoyed a period of fairly good economic activity. The Khanate allied with the Mameluks and officially turned Muslim during the reign of Ozbeg Khan. But similar to the Il-Khanate, the line of Blue Horde Khans eventually came to a no successor situation in the mid 14th century. The Blue Horde collapse and fell into anarchy. It was later reunited as the Golden Horde but fell once again became fractured. This story, however, is too complex to pursue here. It should be noted that this area of the Mongol Empire is commonly a source of confusion. Often times, the entire western quarter of the Mongol Empires is named “Golden Horde.” In actuality, while the western sections, including the “White Horde” did have some type of coalition with one another, they were really separate entities until the later unification by Toktamish Khan. There are also more than one names that refer to this region of the Mongol dominion, with the “Kipchak” Khanate another name. The term “Golden Horde” appears in contemporary sources such as the account of Carpini, who uses the term “Aurea Orda” (Golden Horde).

The Chaghadai Khanate grew directly out of the ulus inherited by Chingis’s son Chaghadai. The Chaghadai grew steadily until the rise of Tamerlane, which destroyed its power. After Tamerlane’s death, the Khanate remained as a minor state until the Qing Dynasty of China annexed it in the 18th century.
 

Legacy of the Mongol Conquests

One may see the Mongol Empire as a gigantic political force, bringing almost the entire continent of Asia under the control of one Great Khan. The Mongol government was a superior one, and thus the whole continent became interconnected. During the Mongol Empire, one was guaranteed safety in travel throughout the entire empire. Thus, the Empire created a huge economical boom and a great exchange of culture and knowledge throughout the entire world. As a result of the Mongol conquests, the Silk Road was reopened and the route from Europe to Asia was no longer thought to be impassable. A great deal of knowledge reached Europe, including art, science, and gunpowder; which greatly contributed in bringing Western Europe out of the dark ages. Likewise, in Asia, we saw an exchange of ideas between Persia and China.

The Mongols obviously had a direct on the political situation of the world. China was once again united under a single ruler. Russia was separated from the rest of Europe, but was no longer a disunited feudalistic society. The Mongols ended the short-lived Kwarezmian Empire, and brought the fall of the Abbasid Caliph and dealt a great blow to Islamic culture. Although the Mongols did indeed bring a huge list of deaths and destruction, the economical boom that followed is obviously something not to be overlooked. One of the only ones that clearly did not benefit from Mongol conquest was Poland and Hungary, and that was because the Mongols withdrew and did not set up a revitalizing government. In conclusion, the Mongol Empire is one of great significance; for the better or worse of the world, it is not one that is to be forgotten.

Today the Mongols and their great leaders are sometimes remembered in two different: as valiant heroes who conquered vast lands against all odds to build a mighty empire or as ruthless conquerors who destroyed everything in their path. The latter is particularly interesting because it is probably more of a natural consequence of the sheer extent of the Mongol conquests rather than the actual creulty of the Mongols since conquerors like Caesar or Alexander the Great were just as cruel as Chingis Khan. Furthermore, the Mongols did not destroy everything in their path. In the end, civilization was rebuilt and benefited greatly from the newly established global economy. In any case, the Mongols should be remembered as a significant player in world history. The significance of their conquests surpasses what any history article can describe…

List of Great Khans

1206-1227 Chingis / Genghis Khan
1229-1241Ogedei Khan (Khakhan) – Son of Chingis
1246-1248 Guyuk Khan (Khakhan) – Son of Ogedei
1251-1259 Mongke / Mengku Khan (Khakhan) – Cousin of Ogedei

After the death of Mongke, in 1260, two Khakhans were elected by rivaling Khuriltais (assemblies): Ariq-Boke (brother of Kubiliai), who ruled from Karakorum, and Kubilai, who ruled from China. Kubilai defeated Ariq-Boke in 1264 to secure sole leadership.

1264-1294 Kubilai Khan (Khakhan) – Brother of Kubilai

No ruler was elected after Kubilai
*Khakhan (also Kaghan, Haqan, meaning “Khan of Khans”): Title used by Khans of the greatest steppe Empires, including the Mongol Empire. This title was officially used by all Khans of the Mongol Empire except for Chingis Khan.

Regents (Temporary rulers) during the election interludes
1227-1229 Tolui – Son of Chingis, Father of Kubilai and Mongke
1241-1246 Toregene Khatun – Wife of Ogedei, mother of Guyuk
1248-1251 Oghul Ghaymish

Chronology

1167? Brith of Temujin (Genghis/Chingis Khan)
1206. The great Khuriltai (assembly) of
1206. Temujin takes the title of “Chingis Khan”
1209-10. Campaign against the Xi Xia.
1211, 1213, 1215. Campaigns against the Jin Empire.
1214. Mongols lay siege to the Jin capital of Zhongdu (modern day Beijing), which falls in
1215. Areas north of the Huang He becomes under Mongol control. Jin capital is moved south to Kai-feng.
1218. Conquest of the Kara Kitai. Mongols raid Korea.
1220. Mongol caravan and ambassadors are murdered by the Khwarazmians. War against Khwarazm (Persia) begins. Capture of Bokhara and Samarkand.
1221. Subedei begins expedition around the Caspian Sea and into Russia.Jalal ad-Din rises in Persia and challenges the Mongols. Jalal ad-Din defeated at the battle of Indus. War with the Kwarazmian Empire concludes.
1226. Final campaign against the Xia Xia.
1227. Genghis Khan dies. War with the Xi Xia concludes.
1228. Ogedei Khan ascends throne and becomes Khakhan (Great Khan)
1235. First serious invasion of Korea.
1234. War against the Jin Empire concludes.
1235. Construction of Karakorum, Mongol imperial capital
1237. Batu Khan and Subedei begin the conquest of Russia.
1241. War in Korea concludes
1241. Batu Khan and Subedei invades and conquers Poland and Hungary. Defeat of the Europeans at Liegnitz and Sajo River. Death of Ogedei Khan
1242. Upon hearing the death of Ogedei Khan, Batu khan withdraws from Europe to secure his conquests in Russia. Political establishment of the Golden Horde Khanate, with Batu as its first Khan.
1246-8. Reign of Guyuk Khan
1251. Election of Mongke Khan as Khakhan.
1252. Invasion of the Sung Empire of south China begins.
1253. Hulegu begins his campaign into the Middle East.
1258. Hulegu captures Baghdad. Death of the last Abassid Caliph.
1259. Death of Mongke Khan.
1260. Hulegu withdraws from Syria upon hearing the death of Mongke, saving the Muslims from further invasion. A minor force left behind is defeated by the Mameluks at Ain Jalut. Hulegu settles in Persia and creates the Il-Khanate, with him becoming the first Il-Khan.
1260. Disagreement on succession of the Mongol throne leads to civil war between the two candidates, Kubilai and Ariq-boke.
1264. Kubilai is victorious over Ariq-boke, becomes Khakhan.
1266. Kubilai builds a new imperial capital at Tatu (modern day Beijing)
1271. Journey of Marco Polo begins.
1272. Kubilai adopts the Chinese dynastic title of Yuan. Kubilai becomes both the Khakhan of the Mongol Empire and the “Yuan Emperor” of China.
1274. First invasion of Japan. The fleet is destroyed in a storm.
1276. Hangzhou, capital of the Sung Empire, falls to the Mongols.
1277-8. Mongols invade Burma, installs a puppet government.
1279. Death of the last Sung emperor during a naval battle.
1294. Death of Kubilai. The Yuan dynasty continues but the Mongol Empire ceased to have a Khakhan. In name, the Mongol Empire ends, as it fractures into four clearly distinct kingdoms.
1335. Death of Abu Sa’id. The Il-khanate failed to produce a successor and becomes fractured. The Il-khanate ends.
1359. As with the Il-khanate, the line of rules of the Golden Horde ended and the khanate failed to produce a successor. The Golden Horde becomes more of a puppet government.
1330. Timur Lenk (Tamerlane) is born in Samarkand. Reunites Persia and defeats both the Russians and the Golden Horde. Builds the so-called Timurid Empire.
1368. Yuan rule in China ends.
1370. Death in Karakorum of Toghon Temur, last Yuan emperor.
1405. Timur Lenk (Tamerlane) dies. The Timurid Empire, referred to as the last great nomadic power, ends. Persia and the Golden Horde are again without a clear ruler. The Golden Horde fractures and becomes separate states.
1502. The Russians overthrow Mongol rule in Russia

The Mongol War Machine – an Overview

The Mongol (or Turkish-Mongol, actually) army was probably the most disciplined, well led, and effective fighting force ever until well into the age of gunpowder. Being “hunters all their lives,” steppe nomads were masters of the horsemanship and were deadly with their composite bow. Unlike Roman Legionnaires or hoplites who had to be trained in camps or academies, nomadic warriors were already skilled warriors. Nomadic warriors were well renown for their horse archers, being able to hit targets accurately while galloping on the horse. But the “Mongol” army was not merely a steppe army.

 

Mongol Trebuchet. The Mongols originally had no knowlege of Siege warfare, but later became masters of it through careful acceptance of new technologies 

When Chingis Khan rose to power, he set a standard of organization, discipline, equipment, and most all the mentality to fight as a group. Chingis organized his army into a decimal system, with a commander for every series of 10 units elected by the troops. Military tactics were rehearsed well in preparation and each warrior was expected to know precisely what to do from the signals of the commanders, which took form in flaming arrows, drums, and banners. The Mongol horde had extremely high discipline. Failure to maintain equipment, and desertion in battle were punishable by death. The combination of skill, discipline, tactics, and some of the most brilliant commanders in history shocked all who fought against them. When the western knights fought the Mongol horsemen, they were utterly destroyed, unable to match the Mongol horde in any category. On the battlefield, the Mongols were capable of a wide array of tricks. Being an army of entirely cavalry, the Mongols could easily dictate the positional flow of the battle, particularly feigned retreats, which could easily fool an enemy into a foolish charge, and encirclement, which is difficult for the enemy to uphold due to the speed and cavalry strength of the Mongols.

Siege machines and gunpowder learned from the Chinese and Persians played an important role in the horde. Besides their use in sieges, siege weapons were widely deployed on the battlefield. The Mongols mastered the use of quick assemble catapults that could be transported on horseback and assembled on the battlefield. Learned from the Chinese, the Mongols developed gunpowder weapons such as smoke grenades (used to hide movement) and firebombs. Both of these contributed to the Mongol success in the invasion of Europe. The Mongol’s acceptance and adaptations to such new methods meant that they were not only an army of the most traditionally skilled warriors, but also an army with the best technology the world has to offer

 

 

THE DETAILED STUDY OF Jin Tartar and Liao dynasty cast coins

CHIN DYNASTY, THE NU-CHENG TARTARS

Emperor WAN-YEN LIANG
AD 1149-1161

reign title: CHENG-LUNG, AD 1156-1161

@

S-1083. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHENG-LUNG YUAN-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average (12 specimen) 3.83 grams. 25.1 mm.

F   $6.00     VF   $8.50     XF   $12.50@

This is a fairly well cast coinage, with consistently clear characters and very well formed rims. We have found that the size and weights have very little variation within most specimens.


 

Emperor SHIH TSUNG
AD 1161-1189

 

reign title: TA TING, AD 1161-1189

 

S-1085-1086. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Average (7 specimens) 25.4 mm, 4.14 grams.

F   $6.00     VF   $8.50    XF   $12.50

 

  S-1087. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: “SHEN” at top indicating this type was struck in AD 1188. Average (2 specimen) 3.29 grams. 24.4 mm.

F   $20.00     VF   $35.00     XF   $55.00

 


IMAGE NOT
YET AVAILABLE

S-1088. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: “SHEN” at bottom indicating this type was struck in AD 1188. Average (1 specimen) 2.95 grams. 24.5 mm.

F   $20.00     VF   $35.00     XF   $55.00

 

  S-1089. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: “YU” at top indicating this type was struck in AD 1189. Average (4 specimen) 3.37 grams. 25.6 mm.

F   $22.50     VF   $39.50     XF   $60.00

We recently handled a specimen of this type that was only 2.25 mm and 2.3 grams. The patination and casting showed that the coin is genuine from the time, but we suspect it is a contemporary (of the time) counterfeit.

 


IMAGE NOT
YET AVAILABLE

S-1090. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: “YU” at bottom indicating this type was struck in AD 1189. Average (1 specimen) 3.50 grams. 25.4 mm.

F   $20.00     VF   $35.00     XF   $55.00

 


IMAGE NOT
YET AVAILABLE

S-1091. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Schjoth had such a specimen, but we doubt that it was authentic. At 2.75 grams is was light for coins of the period.

 


IMAGE NOT
YET AVAILABLE

S-1092. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: blank. Schjoth had such a specimen, which weighed 3.41 grams. We cannot confirm if the type actually exists or not, but if it does it has to be very rare and we cannot establish a value at this time.

 

Emperor CHANG TSUNG
AD 1190-1208

reign title: T’AI-HO, AD 1201-1208

 

 

S-1093-94. Bronze 10 cash. Obverse: “T’AI-HO CHUNG-PAO” in seal script. Reverse: blank. The two different Schjoth numbers are for narrow (1093) and wide (1094) rims, with the wide rim variation being the scarcer. We have seen narrow rim examples from 16.29 to 24.3 grams with the average of 3 specimens was 19.91 grams, 44.5 mm. The single wide rim example we saw was 27.75 grams, 47.6 mm.

Narrow -VF   $80.00     XF   $120.00
Wide – VF   $125.00     XF   $175.00

 

Schjoth records four specimens of this series, two with blank reverses averaged 16.35 grams, one with Ch’uan Huo on the reverse at 17.24 grams, and one that is most probably a later amulet, with the obverse repeated on the reverse at 32.92 grams. Because of the very high relief of this issue, they are never seen below a grade of VF, and are always very well made coins.

 

Chin or JIN TARTAR,
(A.D. 960 to )

 

This page is a reference guide for Chinese coins issued by the Tartar, Mongol, Ming and other medieval non-Sung Dynasties between (A.D. 960 to 1644 A listing of the ancient and medieval Chinese coins we currently have available can be viewed on our e-book in CD-ROM China coin Four collections.

 

Images used on this page represent the types, but bear no relationship
to the actual size of the coins. Where known, the actual sizes will be listed.

 

the Jin Dynasty

 (1115 – 1234 AD)

was founded by Wanyan Aguda in Northern Manchuria. The Jin conquered Northern China by conquering the Liao and defeating the Song Dynasty.

Liao and Song coins were used early on the Jin rule.

 In 1158,

 the Jin Dynasty made their own coins and later used coins, notes and silver.

Coins cast during this period were of superb quality and excellent calligraphy.

 

The Fu Chang Yuan Bao,

 

Fu Chang Tong Bao

and Fu Chang Zhong Bao

 were three of the finest Jin coins. They were minted during the puppet regime of Emperor Liu Yu who used

 

“Fu Chang” as his period title.  

Casting coins became unprofitable when inflation starts to hit the Jin Dynasty economy.

 

Jin Dynasty Silver Coin”Fu Chang Yuan Bao” $34.00

 

Mints were closed down and coin production ceased for 30 years prior to the defeat of the Jin by the Mongols.

This coin still never found in Indonesia(Dr Iwan Notes)

Read more about Jin Dynasty

 

.

THE JIN DYNASTY

 

The Jīn Dynasty (1115–1234),

also known as the Jurchen Dynasty, was founded by the Wanyan (完顏 Wányán) clan of the Jurchens, the ancestors of the Manchus who established the Qing Dynasty some 500 years later. The name is sometimes written as Jinn to differentiate it from an earlier Jìn Dynasty of China whose name is spelled identically in the Roman alphabet. (Photo: Jade Ornament)

 

The Jin Dynasty was founded in what would become northern Manchuria by the Jurchen tribal chieftain Wanyan Aguda (完顏阿骨打) in 1115. The Jurchens’ early rival was the Liao Dynasty, which had held sway over northern China, including Manchuria and part of the Mongol region for several centuries. In 1121, the Jurchens entered into the Alliance on the Sea with the Song Dynasty and agreed to jointly invade the Liao. While the Song armies faltered, the Jurchens succeeded in driving the Liao to Central Asia. In 1125, after the death of Aguda, the Jin broke the alliance with the Song and invaded North China. (Photo: A wooden Bodhisattva)

 

On January 9, 1127, Jin forces ransacked Kaifeng, capital of the Northern Song Dynasty, capturing both Emperor Qinzong, and his father, Emperor Huizong, who had abdicated in panic in the face of Jin forces. Following the fall of Kaifeng, Song forces under the leadership of the succeeding Southern Song Dynasty continued to fight for over a decade with Jin forces, eventually signing the Treaty of Shaoxing in 1141, calling for the cessation of all Song land north of the Huai River to the Jin and the execution of Song General Yue Fei in return for peace. (Photo: The Chengling Pagoda, Hebei, built 1161 – 1189AD Wikipedia)

The Fenyang Cemetery of Jin Dynasty

 


The 13th Century Mongolia Soldier,

This Is A Study Time .

 

 

LIAO DYNASTY, AD 907-1125

The Liao were a Tartar Dynasty known as the Ch’i-tan or Ki-tan Tartars, first established by T’ai Tsu in AD 907 during the period of the 5 dynasties. The dynasty lasted for 218 years until AD 1125, ruling from their capital at Beijing. For most of their existence they existed along side the Northern Sung Dynasty, in what appears to be somewhat less than peaceful co-existance. 8190

 
Liao Dynasty, “Hwang Ti Wan Sui” reverse moons, diameter 37.5mm, XF. US $ 649

 

The first Emperor of Liao did not issue any coins. There were five Emperors between AD 907 and 1031 who issued coins, but only a handful of each type is known to exist and it is unlikely any genuine examples will come on the market. We have not listed them here as it is unlikely anyone viewing this site to identify a coin will have one, but you will find information on them on page 216 of David Hartill’s book CAST CHINESE COINS. Schjoth (page 41) notes a record of the Liang Dynasty Emperor Mo, using the reign title Lung-te, issuing large numbers of coins during this period, which are likely what circulated in the Liao region for what little need the Liao people had of coins at that time.

The earliest readily available coins of Liao begin with the Emperor Hsing Tsung during his second reign title of Ch’ung Hsi after he established the first Liao central mint in Manchuria in AD 1053. The mint was not particularly skilled and most Liao coins are fairly crude, poor quality castings.

There are some differences in the dating of the Liao reign titles by Schjoth and Hartill, and we have chosen to use those given by Hartill as it is much more recent and almost certainly more reliable research.


Liao Armor ,

What Mainly Uses Is The Tang End Five Dynasties And Song’s Style, By Song Primarily. Armor’s Superstructure And Song Dynasty Are Completely Same, Only Then Leg Skirt Obviously Compared To Song Dynasty’s Short, Around Two Square Shapes Gu Tail Armor Cover Above Leg, Then Maintained The Tang End Five Dynasties’ Characteristic. The Armor Protects The Abdomen Probably To Use The Leather Belt To Hang Before The Abdomen, Is Fixed With The Waistband, This Point And Song Dynasty’s Leather Armor Is The Same, But Center The Front Large-Scale Circle Protects, Was Liao Unique.

 

Emperor HSING TSUNG
AD 1031-1055

reign title: CHING-FU, AD 1031

No coins were cast by Emperor Hsing Tsung under this title.

 

reign title: CH’UNG-HSI, AD 1032-1055

S-1065. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CH’UNG-HSI TUNG-PAO”. Reverse: blank Average 24 mm. These coins tend to be poorly cast.

VF   $250.00

 

Schjoth (page 41) records that “in the 22nd year of Ch’ung-hsi (AD 1053) a cash bureau was established at Ch’ang-ch’un in Manchuria”. We assume this is the same as saying a Mint was established there. From this time on, the coinage of Liao becomes much more abundant. We hope to one day look into the events that may have prompted them to take such a move.


 

 

 

Emperor TAO TSUNG
AD 1055-1101

reign title: CH’ING-NING, AD 1055-1064

 

S-1066. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CH’ING-NING T’UNG-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average (1 specimen) 2.57 grams, 24.3 mm (but the specimen was rather worn). These coins tend to be poorly cast, and we apologize for the image of a very worn specimen, bu it is the best specimen we have been able to image.

F   $95.00     VF   $135.00

 

Tartars (Khitan branch, ca AD 907-1125), Liao Dynasty, Emperor Tao Tsung, AD1055-1100, AE Cash

Price US$ 95.00

reign title: HSIEN-YUNG, AD 1065-1074

 

S-1067. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “HSIEN-YUNG T’UNG-PAO”. Reverse: blank. These very somewhat in weight. Th average of what we have seen (3 specimen) is 24.3 mm and 3.53 grams, but we have seen them from 2.75 to 3.9 grams. As with most Liao coins, this tends to be a a poorly cast issue. It is also the most common coin of the Liao Dynasty.

VF   $135.00

 

reign title: TA-K’ANG, AD 1075-1084

 

S-1069. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-K’ANG T’UNG-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average 24 mm. These coins tend to be poorly cast.

F   $115.00

 

S-1068. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-K’ANG Y’UNG-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average 24 mm. These coins tend to be poorly cast. We have handled this type, but it was before we started recording values and do not currently have a value for it.

This appears to be the only time when two distinct types were issued during the Liang Dynasty. We note that all Liao coins previous to this reign title were caste with “T’UNG-PAO”, and all Liao coins afterwards with “Y’UNG PAO”. We assume that means that for this reign title, the T’ung-pao issues are the earlier of the two. We wonder if this might present a clue as to why many Northern Sung reign titles also occur with more than one of these (and other) variations.

 

 

reign title: TA-AN, AD 1085-1094

 

S-1070-71.Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-AN YUAN-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average (1 specimen) 24.5 mm, 3.51 grams. There are some varieties in this type, with Schjoth noting one with a star hole, and another with a small dot in the upper left corner. We have owned a specimen with a small nail mark on the reverse. These variations would be worth a premium. These coins tend to be poorly cast with slightly irregular rims.

F   $95.00     VF   $135.00

The presence of a dot or nail mark on the reverse, or a star hole on a coin of this type is probably intentional, as similar star holes are very common on Northern Sung coins of this same period. Their meaning is as yet uncertain.

 

reign title: SHOU-CH’ANG, AD 1095-1101

 

S-1072. H 18.19. Obverse: “SHOU-CH’ANG YUAN-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average (2 specimen) 24.0 mm, 3.62 grams. These coins tend to be poorly cast and somewhat irregular rims, and that must be allowed for in their grading.

F   $95.00   VF   $145.00


 

Emperor T’IEN CHA
AD 1101-1125

reign title: CH’IEN-T’UNG, AD 1101-1110

S-1073. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CH’IEN-T’UNG Y’UNG-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average 24 mm. These coins tend to be poorly cast.

F   $95.00     VF   $135.00

 

reign title: T’IEN CH’ING, AD 1111-1120

S-1074. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “T’IEN CH’ING Y’UNG-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average 24 mm. These coins tend to be poorly cast.

F   $85.00     VF   $120.00

 

This appears to be the last coin issued by the Liao Dynasty, even though the dynasty was to last for another five years after this title ended. Hartill (CAST CHINESE COINS, page 217) discusses and additional group of coins which are sometimes attributed to the Liao Dynasty, although all are rare and seldom encountered types which we have not included here. 8188

 
Jin Dynasty, “Tai Ho Chung Pao” large money, diameter 56mmm, XF. US $ 974

US $ 5,974

8189

 
Jin Dynasty, “Tai Ho Chung Pao”, XF. US $ 812  
 

8191

 
Jin Dynasty, “Tai Ho Chung Pao”, diameter 44mm, XF. US $ 649

US $ 1,027

8192

 
Jin Dynasty, “Tai Ho Chung Pao” (2), XF. US $ 649

US $ 747

8193

 
Jin Dynasty, “Dah Ting Tung Pao”, VF. US $ 162  
                 

 

WESTERN HSIA DYNASTY

This was a dynasty fo the Tangut people. Their capital was in Kansu Province, but it is not certain if their capital was in Kanchow or Soochow. In AD 1227, after breaking a promise to support Genghis Khan, this dynasty was exterminated.


 

Emperor JEN TSUNG
AD 1140-1193

reign title: T’IEN-SHENG, AD 1149-1168

 

As S-1078 but copper 1 cash. Obverse: ‘T’IEN-SHENG YUAN PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average (13 specimens) 23.9 mm, 3.51 grams.

F   $12.00     VF   $25.00

 

These are always well cast coins with bold characters and seldom seen in a grade below gF. The the brass has a very distintive light-brown tone to it. Schjoth says that the copper of this type is rare and that iron is common, but we currently find the opposite to be true

 

reign title: CH’IEN-YU, AD 1169-1193

 

S-1080. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “CH’IEN-YU YUAN-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average (4 specimen) 24.8 mm, 3.82 grams.

F   $35.00     VF   $75.00

 


 

Emperor HSIANG TSUNG
AD 1206-1212

reign title: HUANG-CHIEN, AD 1210-1212

S-1081, “HUANG-CHIEN YUAN-PAO”. This is an unusual coin in that the inscription starts at the top and is read around to the right, rather then the usual top-bottom-left-right.

gVF   $145.00

 


 

Emperor SHEN TSUNG
AD 1212-1222

reign title: KUANG-TING, AD 1212-1222

 

S-1082, “KUANG-TING YUAN-PAO. This is an unusual coin in that the inscription starts at the top and is read around to the right, rather then the usual top-bottom-left-right. The specimens of this type that we have seen tend to be crudely cast from course sand molds. Average (1 specimen) 24.9 mm, 4.07 grams.

F   $75.00     VF   $110.00

 

CHIN DYNASTY, THE NU-CHENG TARTARS

Emperor WAN-YEN LIANG
AD 1149-1161

reign title: CHENG-LUNG, AD 1156-1161

@

S-1083. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “CHENG-LUNG YUAN-PAO”. Reverse: blank. Average (12 specimen) 3.83 grams. 25.1 mm.

F   $6.00     VF   $8.50     XF   $12.50@

This is a fairly well cast coinage, with consistently clear characters and very well formed rims. We have found that the size and weights have very little variation within most specimens.


 

Emperor SHIH TSUNG
AD 1161-1189

 

reign title: TA TING, AD 1161-1189

 

S-1085-1086. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: blank. Average (7 specimens) 25.4 mm, 4.14 grams.

F   $6.00     VF   $8.50    XF   $12.50

 

  S-1087. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: “SHEN” at top indicating this type was struck in AD 1188. Average (2 specimen) 3.29 grams. 24.4 mm.

F   $20.00     VF   $35.00     XF   $55.00

 


IMAGE NOT
YET AVAILABLE

S-1088. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: “SHEN” at bottom indicating this type was struck in AD 1188. Average (1 specimen) 2.95 grams. 24.5 mm.

F   $20.00     VF   $35.00     XF   $55.00

 

  S-1089. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: “YU” at top indicating this type was struck in AD 1189. Average (4 specimen) 3.37 grams. 25.6 mm.

F   $22.50     VF   $39.50     XF   $60.00

We recently handled a specimen of this type that was only 2.25 mm and 2.3 grams. The patination and casting showed that the coin is genuine from the time, but we suspect it is a contemporary (of the time) counterfeit.

 


IMAGE NOT
YET AVAILABLE

S-1090. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: “YU” at bottom indicating this type was struck in AD 1189. Average (1 specimen) 3.50 grams. 25.4 mm.

F   $20.00     VF   $35.00     XF   $55.00

 


IMAGE NOT
YET AVAILABLE

S-1091. Bronze 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Reverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthodox script. Schjoth had such a specimen, but we doubt that it was authentic. At 2.75 grams is was light for coins of the period.

 


IMAGE NOT
YET AVAILABLE

S-1092. Iron 1 cash. Obverse: “TA-TING T’UNG-PAO” in orthdox script. Reverse: blank. Schjoth had such a specimen, which weighed 3.41 grams. We cannot confirm if the type actually exists or not, but if it does it has to be very rare and we cannot establish a value at this time.

 

Emperor CHANG TSUNG
AD 1190-1208

reign title: T’AI-HO, AD 1201-1208

 

S-1093-94. Bronze 10 cash. Obverse: “T’AI-HO CHUNG-PAO” in seal script. Reverse: blank. The two different Schjoth numbers are for narrow (1093) and wide (1094) rims, with the wide rim variation being the scarcer. We have seen narrow rim examples from 16.29 to 24.3 grams with the average of 3 specimens was 19.91 grams, 44.5 mm. The single wide rim example we saw was 27.75 grams, 47.6 mm.

Narrow -VF   $80.00     XF   $120.00
Wide – VF   $125.00     XF   $175.00

 

Schjoth records four specimens of this series, two with blank reverses averaged 16.35 grams, one with Ch’uan Huo on the reverse at 17.24 grams, and one that is most probably a later amulet, with the obverse repeated on the reverse at 32.92 grams. Because of the very high relief of this issue, they are never seen below a grade of VF, and are always very well made coins.

 

 

 

Read more info

   
 
Tartars (Khitan branch, ca AD 907-1125), Liao Dynasty, Emperor Tao Tsung, AD1055-1100, AE CashPrice US$ 95.00Sorry, this item has been sold.     Tartars (Khitan branch, ca AD 907-1125), Liao Dynasty, Emperor T’ien Cha, AD1101-1125, AE CashPrice US$ 95.00Sorry, this item has been sold.  
 
Tartars, Western Hsia Dynasty, AD982-1227, Emperor Jen Tsung, AD1140-1193, AE CashPrice US$ 15.00Sorry, this item has been sold.     Tartars, Western Hsia Dynasty, AD982-1227, Emperor Jen Tsung, AD1140-1193, AE CashPrice US$ 45.00  
 
Tartars, Western Hsia Dynasty, AD982-1227, Jen Tsung Emperor, AD1140-1193, CH’IEN-YU YUAN-PAO (AD1169-1193), Iron CashPrice US$ 65.00     Tartars (Tangut branch), Western Hsia Dynasty, AD982-1227, Emperor Shen Tsung, AD 1212-1222, AE CashPrice US$ 120.00  

 TTHE END @ COPYRIGHT 2012

IF YOU WANT THE COMPLETE E-BOOK WITH FULL ILLUSTRATION IN CD-ROM,PLEASE SUBSCRIBED AS PREMIUM MEMBER VIA COMMENT.