Bombay Mint – Silver Fifth Rupees (Fanams)

Reverse Varieties

Rev I	Rev II	Rev IIa	Rev IIb	Rev III

Rev IV	Rev IVa	Rev V	Rev VI

Reverse I:

Reverse 1 matches with obverse A inasmuch as it too is a direct derivation of the design of the Shahjahan II ‘Munbai’ issue. The chronological detail is RY Ahd or 1; the mintname is ‘Munbai’ and even the small differentiating mark of a flower is faithfully reproduced in the ‘Seen’ of ‘Julus’.

Reverse II:

The most noteworthy feature of this design is the word ‘Julus’ and the way in which the flow of execution between the ‘Jim’, ‘Laam’ and ‘Waav’ characters has been affected. In fact this remains a point worthy of note for all the succeeding reverse types. In this particular case the ‘knot’ of ‘Laam’ and ‘Waav’ has the shape of an almost isosceles triangle. The differentiating mark in the ‘Seen’ of ‘Julus’ is a cluster of five or six dots. The regnal years observed for this design are 12, 21, 24?, 25, 2, 3, 5 and 9. There are some coins that show figures other than these, but in most cases they turn out to be jumbled die engravings – like 6 occurring as a result of an incorrectly engraved 2. On a couple of coins ‘01’ was seen, which we have reasons to believe is an error for 9, with the ‘0’ emerging as the misconstrued nuqta of ‘Noon’ in ‘Sanah’, above which the RY is usually placed. Extant specimens indicate RYs 12 and 21 may also be a case of wrongly engraved dies.

Depending on minor variations, reverse 2 may be further classified into –

Reverse IIa:

Like rev 2 but no (or dot?) differentiating mark. Only seen with RY 21 and possibly RY 24. The vowel sign for ‘u’ points towards the bottom of the upstroke of the ‘Laam’

Reverse IIb:

Like rev 2 but with flower differentiating mark (flower differs from rev 3, see below.)

Reverse III:

This is similar to reverse 2, but differs in depicting a flower with a stalk as the differentiating mark, rather than a cluster of dots. Only one RY is noted for this reverse type, and that is 9.

Reverse IV:

This reverse forms the crucial link between the previous reverses and the subsequent ones in being the first where the RY 9 seems to have become a ‘fossilised’ detail. This is continued subsequently and, as will be seen, constitutes an important tool to devise an internal chronology for the Billys. This reverse has many other interesting characteristics in terms of its execution and differentiating mark. Firstly, the execution is crude as compared to any of the reverses listed so far, but it has a distinct style. Its manifestations can be judged on the same parameters as the previous reverses – the execution of the word ‘Julus’ and its constituent characters. Here we find the ‘Jim’ has a distinct ‘upward’ bent at its beak, the vowel sign of the ‘u’ above it often seems attached to the vertical stroke of ‘Laam’, and the knot of ‘Waav’ is not isosceles but projects higher vertically, on some coins being hollow. It also extends outwards from the vertical stroke much closer to its top end. The differentiating mark is a flower with a stalk, but the stalk has additional curves besides it and the flower itself has a ‘blob’-like execution. A set of vertical lines appears below the RY, indicating corruption of the curves of ‘Seen’ in the word ‘Sanah’.

Reverse IVa:

The major difference here lies in the fact that although much of the execution of the inscription is very similar to that seen on reverse 4, here the differentiating mark of the flower is replaced with a cluster of dots. On some coins it appears to be a vestige of the ‘flower’ seen on reverse 4, but without the small curvy lines that flank the stalk. The reverse retains the chronological detail of frozen RY 9.

Reverse V:

Here again the execution is markedly superior to that seen on reverse 4. However, the most noteworthy aspect is the chronological detail, where the RY is seen now definitely ‘frozen’ at 9. The differentiating mark in the ‘Seen’ of ‘Julus’ is a flower, but without a stalk, and the execution of the word itself bears close similarities with reverse 2 rather than reverse 4, with the ‘knot’ being triangular in shape, but not hollow or projecting vertically.

Reverse VI:

Like obverse F, this is by far the most distinct reverse type and there are many noteworthy aspects to it. Firstly, the execution of the word ‘Julus’ is very different from what has been listed so far. The chronological detail is surely 9, the frozen regnal year that becomes a feature from reverse 4 onwards. The mint name is preceded by what looks like a remnant of ‘Fi’, but is most likely a version of ‘Zarb’, even though a downward sloping stroke appears to its right.