Two New Uighur Coins

Author(s): Yang Fu-hsüeh

Source: East and West, Vol. 45, No. 1/4 (December 1995), pp. 375-380
Published by: Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757225 .
Accessed: 02/01/2014 04:54

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to East and West.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.64.128.180 on Thu, 2 Jan 2014 04:54:35 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Two New Uighur Coins

by Yang Fu-hs?eh

InOctober 1990,Mr Wang Ping-ch'eng, Director of theCutural Properties Administration,

Kimsar, in the Sinkiang Uighur Autonomous Region, presented me two photographs which
showed both the obverse and reverse sides of a coin preserved in the Administration. He
had hoped that I would be able to decipher the inscription. After a detailed study I understood
the meaning of the letters and the date fromUighur manuscripts
According to the information provided by discoverer Mr Wang, in 1981 this coin was
recovered in Liu-hu-ti of San-t'ai inKimsar county i.e. Feng-luo-shou-chou Town of the T'ang
era. This garnisoned town became a part of the capital of the Qoco Uighur Kingdom. This
coin is circular in shape with a square hole in the centre. Its diameter is 2.3 cm, thickness
0.15 cm, the diameter of the hole about 0.7 cm, and its quality comparitively good with a
copper texture. The inscription on the obverse is:

It can be read as W tuym'isy(a)rl(i)r-inga

0) See Yang Fu-hs?eh 1991: pl. II, nos. 1-2. But thisnumber of the Journal inwhich my paper
was published, ofwhich the circulationwas very limited,is ratherrare in librariesand private collections
in Europe and the lapse of nearly two years since I finished that studyhas enabled me to improveon
some points. Besides this,my studywas published in Chinese, for theWestern scholarswho do not
know Chinese, it is as difficult to understand as theUighur inscriptionon coins. This is the reason
why I am publishing it here, by the kind permission of the editor.

[1] 375

This content downloaded from 132.64.128.180 on Thu, 2 Jan 2014 04:54:35 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Another coin of the same category was published by Japanese scholar Okudaira Sh?kho
(n.d.: vol. 9) with a brief account. The minting and purpose of these coins has not yet been
studied in detail because of the paucity of historical accounts. We can only give the initial
discussion from the inscription of the coins.
The inscription on the coins must belong to the period of ck?l bilg? buyuy uighur t(?)ngri
qaxan', for,according to the numismatic conditions of theCentral Plain ofChina and other areas,
this conclusion is beyond any doubt. Now, the problem is tomake sure of the period ofXaqan
(Khan). We had initially concluded that the coins belonged to theQoco Uighur Kingdom period.
Firstly, one of the two coins was discovered in the summer capital of theQoco Uighur Kingdom
viz. Pei-t'ing (Kimsar) which was the political, economic and cultural centre at that time.
Moreover, since theUighur script had been created in the latter half of the 8th century, but
not being widely used itwas in forceonly up to themid-800's when theUighurs migrated westwards
toQoco, Pei-t'ing, etc. They established their own kingdom and theUighur script gradually
prevailed and only under thishistorical situation, was itpossible tomint theUighur coins. Until
the later period of theQoco Uighur Kingdom, approximately fromAsan Temur Iduq-qut and
Barchuart Tegin Iduq-qut almost all thekings had the titleIduq-qut'. Moreover, the title 'Khan'
was not used again (Ch'eng Sho-luo 1983: 13-23), therewas no accordance between the king's
name and that on the coins. In addition, the social and economic documents of theUighurs
during theMongol-Y?an Dynasty fromTurpan and other places mention various currencies,
such as cloth money (e.g. b?z) (Yang Fu-hs?eh 1989: 14-17), paper money (e.g. Chung-t'ung
pao-tsao and so on) and themetal coins (e.g. golden coins, silver coins and T?nga coins) (Id.
1992), only the bronze coins under discussion were not mentioned. It can be said that in the
laterQoco Uighur Kingdom, theminting of thiskind of coin was very limited. It isquite possible
that thiskind of coin was only a commemorative issue and not currency. This hypothesis provides
and explanation, even if a partial one, why there are so few of this kind of Uighur coin, up to
now I only know of the existence of the two coins mentioned above.
As iswell known, the Qoco Uighur Kingdom lasted for four or five centuries from the
mid 9th centurywhen theKingdom was established, to themid 14th centurywhen theKingdom
ended. Unfortunately, due to the shortage of sources, the royal titles of the Kingdom have
remained very few, only 20 odd titles being recorded (Ch'eng Sho-luo 1983: 13-23). Among
them the majority belongs to the period after Asan Temur and Barchuart Tegin, only five
kings such as P'ang T'e-ch'in, P'u-ku Ch?n, Lu-sheng, Chih-hai and Pi-le-e are from an earlier
period. All the titles do not correspond to those of the inscription on the coins. Fortunately,
by chance I found the key to this problem from an Uighur inscription on a wooden tablet
which was discovered in Turpan and published by F.W.K. M?ller. The first four lines of
the content are as follows (M?ller 1915: 22):

T. III.

1. qutluY ki ot qutluy qoin yil ? ikinti ai ??c yangi'-qa ?k?n ai t(?)ngrid?qut bulmis uluy
2. qut ornanmis alpin ?rd?minel tuymisalp arslanqutluy k?l bilg? t(?)ngrixan(i'miz?).xan
?
olurmi's ?ngt?n saciu
3. kidin nuc barsxan-qat?gi ilinu ?rksin? yrl'iqayur oyurda...xan...t(?)ngrik?n.el ?g?si alp
tutuy
4. ?g? qutluy qoco ulusu-fbaslayur ?rk?n..m?n uc ?rd(?)nik?.s?z?k kirtg?nc

376 [2]

This content downloaded from 132.64.128.180 on Thu, 2 Jan 2014 04:54:35 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The title 'k?l bilg? t(?)ngrixan' in the 2nd line coincides with that of Khan on the obverse
side of the coins and the titleW tuymiV on the same line is inscribed on the reverse side
of the coins. Hence it can be said that the coins must belong to the period of this Khan.
As for the time when the inscription on the tablet was created, scholars were in
disagreement for a long time. At firstMr M?ller, who published this inscription, considered
it to be 767 A.D. (1915: 26). Nevertheless, at that time the centre of the Uighur Empire
was still inOrkhon River Valley. The power of the Empire never reached theWestern Region.
No need to examine that Qoco and Pei-t'ing became the capitals. From this, we can only
suggest the probable date of the Qoco Uighur Kingdom. This problem was considered by
L. Bazin in his research. But I wonder what led him to explain the 'qutluy ki ot qutluy qoin
yiV as 'the year of Suu-wei' (Bazin 1974: 100-326). His viewpoint coincided with that of
Mrs A. von Gabain who reached this conclusion earlier than him. After doing her research,
she came to the conclusion that itmay belong to 1019 A.D., give or take 60 years (Gabain
1973: 20). Japanese scholarMoriyasu Takao also accepted this theory but he doubted whether
in 1019 A.D. the territory of theWestern Uighur Kingdom reached the Issyk-kul and Syr
River or not. He said,

according toAbe, during thewhole of the 10th century,the territory of theWestern Uighur
Kingdom extended to the SyrRiver Valley. However, in the same book he also said that in
early 11th century,at the latest in 1010 A.D. theWestern Uighur Kingdom and thePei-t'ing
Kingdom of east and Karakhanid of west were completely split. Hence it can be said that
the inscriptionon thewooden tablet can be dated to 959 A.D. (Moriyasu 1980: 337, fn. 55).

In reality, the 'qutluy ki ot qutluy qoin yiV is not 'the year of Suu-wei' but corresponds
to 'the year of Ting-wei' of the Chinese calender. So this year can only be dated as 947 or
1007 or 1067 A.D. A detailed study of their date has been made by me (1990: 73) and I
think that itmust be 947 A.D., and obviously my view coincides with that of J. Hamilton
(1955: 143) and is also near to 959 A.D. proposed by Moriyasu.
It is interesting to find new material which can help us to ascertain the date when the
Khan died, in another Uighur inscription on a wooden tablet published also by F.W.K. M?ller
(1915: 6):

1. ym? qutadmis qutluy toprayqutluy bicin y'il-qa?dr?lmis ?dg? ?dk? qutluy qoluqa
2. toquzunc ai t?rtotuz-qa purva pulguni yultuz-qa k?n ai t(?)ngrit?gk?s?ncig k?rtl? yaruq
3. t(?)ngrib?g(?) t(?)ngrik?nim(i)zk?lbilg? t(?)ngri ilig-ningorunqa olurmis ikintiyilinga

The wooden tablet was erected in the year of qutadmis qutluy topray qutluy bicin yil
'the year ofWu-shen', viz. 948 A.D. (detailed study, see Hamilton 1955: 143 and Moriyasu
1973: 38). The inscription on this tablet can be dated to the 2nd year of k?l bilg? t(?)ngri
xaqan, viz. the Khan of wooden tablet no. T.III and the k?l bilg? buyuy uighur t(?)ngriqaxan
in the coins, so, the Khan's death must have taken place in 947 A.D. Thus the Uighur coins
must have been cast in or before 947 A.D. when this k?l bilg? buyuy uighur t(?)ngriqaxan
was on the throne, i.e. approximately during the early half of the 10th century.
Interestingly when I was examining the coins, another Uighur coin, which is preserved
in Shanghai, was published. This bronze coin is also circular in form,with a square hole in

[3] 377

This content downloaded from 132.64.128.180 on Thu, 2 Jan 2014 04:54:35 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
the centre, its diameter is 2 cm, width 0.55 cm, weight 2.3 g and a plain reverse. The
inscription on the obverse is as follows (2):

iduq y(a)rliq y?ris-?n

The content is completely different from the inscription on our coins. In order to take
1
into consideration its appearance, theword y?ris-?n9 is divided into two sections. According
to Kiang Ch'i-hsiang who has done the research on this coin, two inscriptions follow the title
'iduq1, but they are too blurred to be deciphered. The meaning of 'iduq1 is 'sacred' or 'bright',
which is written as I-tu-hu in Chinese records. As far as I know 'iduq1 was used as a title

obverse reverse

by the Uighur rulers from around the 9th century, however in the early period of the Qoco
Uighur Kingdom this titlewas seldom used. Only by the end of the 12th century and beginning
of the 13th century did it become a common title (Yang Fu-hs?eh & Niu Ju-ki 1990: 51).
Taking into consideration the script of the inscription, we can opine thatUighur copper coins
belonged to the end of the laterQoco Uighur Kingdom and are at least 200 years later than
our coins, from thiswe can conclude that our coins are the earliest existing coins in ancient
Uighur history.

(2) Kiang Ch'i-hsiang 1990: 66. Among them, the second word was misread as yorl?j.

378 [4]

This content downloaded from 132.64.128.180 on Thu, 2 Jan 2014 04:54:35 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 As iswell known, theQoco Uighur Kingdom is a very important period for the political,
economical and cultural development of theUighurs (Ch'eng Sho-luo 1984: 1-8). Handicrafts
developed considerably. From the 'Account of Qoco' in Sung Shih, it can be said that the
Uighurs were very artistic and good at working gold, silver, and at making bronze and iron
tools and perfected jade carving. A Manichaean manuscript of the 9th centurymentions that
the throne of the king of the Qoco Uighur Kingdom was made of gold, and the ornaments
were made of precious stones (Arat 1964: 151-52 and Yang Fu-hs?eh & Niu Ju-ki 1990: 48-49).
Moreover, the commerce of the Qoco Uighur Kingdom also reached a certain stage of
development. The discovery of theUighur coins not only provides us with precious material
objects for a better understanding of the development and level of the handicrafts and commerce
of the Uighur Kingdom, but also fills in the gaps in the historical accounts and enriches the
history of Chinese numismatics.
As mentioned above, our coins are circular in formwith a square hole, like the Uighur
coin published by Mr Kiang. This kind of shape is completely similar to that of the Chinese
Heartland, and itmanifests the deep influence of Chinese culture on the ancient Uighurs.

REFERENCES

Arat, R.R. (1964) Der Herrshertitel Iduq-qut. Ural-Altaische Jahrb?cher, Bd. 35, pp. 150-57.

Bazin, L. (1974) Les calendriers turcs anciens et medievaux. These presentee devant PUniversite de Paris

III, le 2 dec. 1972, Service de Reproduction des Theses, Universite de Lille III.
Cheng Sho-luo (1983) Kao-ch'ang-hui-hu-i-tu-hu-p'u-hsi-k'ao (Note on Iduq-qut's Genealogy of the Qoco

Uighurs). Hsi-pei-shih-ti, IV, pp. 13-23.

Ch'eng Sho-luo (1984) Kao-ch'ang hui-hu-wang-kuo cheng-chih ching-chi wen-hua shu-lio (A Brief Account
of Politics, Economy and Culture of theQoco Uighur Kingdom). Hsi-pei-shih-tiyIV, pp. 1-8.
Gabain, A. von (1977) Das Leben imuigurischenK?nigreich vonQoco (850-1250). 2 vols. Wiesbaden.
Hamilton, J. (1955) Les Ouigours a Vepoque des Cinq Dynastiesd'apres lesdocumentschinois. Bibliotheque
de Tlnstitut des Hautes Etudes Chinoises, 10. Paris (rev. ed. Paris 1988).
Kiang Ch'i-hsiang (1990) I-mei-hui-huch'ien-pi (AnUighur Coin). Hsin-kiangwen-wu, II, pp. 65-70.
Moriyasu, Takao (1973) Uiguru Bokyoshiryo to shitenobogen monjo (Wooden Tablet Documents as
theHistorical Sources of theUighur Buddhism). Shigakuzashi,LXXXIII 4, pp. 38-54.
Moriyasu, Takao (1980) Uiguru toTonk? (TheUighurs and Tun-huang). K?za Tonk?, II, pp. 297-338.
Tokyo.

M?ller, F.W.K. aus den Turfanfunden.Abhandlungen der Preussischen

(1915) Zwei Pfahlinschriften
Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Klasse, no. 3. Berlin.

Okudaira, Sh?kho (n.d.) Towasenshi (Account of the East Asian Numismatics), vol. 9.
Fu-hs?eh (1989) Ku-tai shih-wu huo-pi (B?z as Currency in Ancient Hsin
Yang Hsin-kiang ts'u-mien-pu
Kiang). Chung-kuo ch'ien-pi, III, pp. 14-17.

Fu-hs?eh (1990) Kao-ch'ang te hsi-pu-kiang y? wen-t'i (Note on the Western

Yang hui-hu-wang-kuo
Territory of the Qoco Uighur Kingdom). Kan-su min-tsu yen-chiu, III-IV. pp. 69-78 & 41.

[5] 379

This content downloaded from 132.64.128.180 on Thu, 2 Jan 2014 04:54:35 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Yang Fu-hs?eh (1991) Ki-mu-sa-?rh wen-kuan-so-shou-ts'ang-te-i-mei hui-hu-wen ch'ien-pi (An Uighur
Coin Preserved in the Cultural Properties Administration of Kimsar). Chung-kuo ch'ien-pi, III,
pp. 11-15 & 26.

Yang Fu-hs?eh (1992) Ts'ung hui-hu-wen shu-k'an kao-ch'ang hui-hu-wang-kuo te chih-ch'ao y? chu-pi
(On the Paper Money and Coins of theQoco Uighur Kingdom from theUighur Manuscripts).
Chung-kuo she-hui king-ki-shih yen-chiu, I, pp. 8-14.

Yang Fu-hs?eh & Niu Ju-ki (1990) Ts'ung i-fen mo-ni-wen wen-shu- t'an kao-ch'ang hui-hu te-ki-ko wen-t'i

(Problemsof theQoco Uighurs froma Document inManichaean Script). K'a-shih shih-fanhs?eh

y?an hs?eh-pao, IV, pp. 46-52 & 31.

380 [6]

This content downloaded from 132.64.128.180 on Thu, 2 Jan 2014 04:54:35 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions