INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 7386
www.rsisinternational.org
Off-Metal Strikes and Transitional Coinage in the Bengal Presidency:
The Case of a Copper “Half-Rupee” in the Name of Shah Alam II
Dr. Engr. Md. Zakir Hossain Khan
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Bangladesh Army University of Engineering and
Technology, Natore-6431
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000601
Received: 30 October 2025; Accepted: 05 November 2025; Published: 19 November 2025
ABSTRACT
This paper examines a curious copper coin described as a “half-rupee” struck in the name of Shah Alam II (r.
1760-1806) under the jurisdiction of the Bengal Presidency of British India, which appears outside the
standard catalogue specifications for the silver half-rupee series of the Presidency. By situating this specimen
in the broader framework of Bengal Presidency minting, the Mughal-British political interface, and the
transitional coinage systems of late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth century eastern India, this study argues
that the piece is best viewed as an off-metal strike (OMS) or experimental issue reflecting fiscal pressures,
metallurgical irregularities, and the evolving monetary regime of the region. After a review of Bengal
Presidency coinage under the East India Company and Mughal suzerainty, the paper offers a typological and
metallurgical discussion of the copper anomaly, considers possible causes (metal shortage, overstriking,
experimental alloys), and assesses its significance for numismatic scholarship and monetary history. The
conclusion calls for further metallurgical analysis and hoard studies to clarify the circulation status of such
anomalies.
Keywords: Bengal Presidency, Shah Alam II, Mughal coinage, East India Company minting, off-metal strike,
monetary transition, colonial India.
INTRODUCTION
The coinage of the Bengal Presidency occupies a critical juncture in South Asian monetary history, sitting at
the intersection of the declining Mughal imperial authority and the rise of British colonial financial control.
The region known as the Bengal Presidency (also called the Presidency of Fort William) emerged from the
trading and territorial expansion of the East India Company, and at its peak it covered large parts of what is
now eastern India, Bangladesh and beyond [1, 2, 3, 4]. The presidency issued its own coinage, often in the
name of the nominal Mughal Emperor, even as the Company’s fiscal and minting authority gradually grew [4,
5].
In parallel, the Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II (born Ali Gohar, reigned first 1760-88, then 1788-1806)
presided over an empire whose real power had dramatically contracted [6]. The nominal authority of the
emperor remained relevant, especially in coin-issuance: coins in his name continued to be struck in Bengal and
other territories under Company suzerainty.
It is within this liminal period of overlapping sovereignty and minting regimes that the coin under discussion
occurs: a copper coin with a weight of approximately 8.9 g, diameter 24.8 mm, thickness 2.2 mm, letter-
pattern near identical to contemporary silver half-rupee issues of the Bengal Presidency in the name of Shah
Alam II (circa 1830). According to standard catalogues, the silver half-rupee of the Bengal Presidency for the
name of Shah Alam II was struck at about 5.5–6.5 g, diameter ~22–23 mm, thickness ~2.0 mm. The much
heavier copper piece raises questions of its status: Is it an off-metal strike (OMS), a deliberate
pattern/experiment, or a mis-attributed coin?
This paper explores this anomaly in the broader numismatic context: the Bengal Presidency minting practices,
the Mughal-British monetary transition, and possible technical explanations for off-metal strikes. It argues that
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 7387
www.rsisinternational.org
the piece likely represents a transitional issue produced under unusual circumstances (metal shortage, minting
transition) and contributes to our understanding of late-colonial East Indian minting.
The Bengal Presidency as an administrative unit of the British Indian territories emerged from the earlier
provincial structure of Mughal Bengal and the expansion of the East India Company. According to historical
sources, the Company first established factories in Bengal from 1612 onward [3]. In 1757 the Battle of Plassey,
and in 1764 the Battle of Buxar, decisively shifted sovereignty: in the Treaty of Allahabad (1765) the Mughal
Emperor (Shah Alam II) granted the East India Company the Diwani (revenue-collection) rights over Bengal,
Bihar and Orissa [7].
The Company’s minting rights in Bengal expanded accordingly. The series of coins struck in the name of the
Mughal Emperor but under Company authority became a hallmark of the region: the Bengal Presidency issues
often bore the emperor’s name, mint location (Calcutta sometimes termed Murshidabad or Bangal), and secret
mint-marks such as crescents [8]. Standard works note that the Presidency issues imitated earlier Mughal
coinage designs in order to facilitate acceptance among the local population [5].
The catalogue of Bengal Presidency coins records a wide range of denominations (rupee, half-rupee, quarter-
rupee, copper pice, anna, etc.) and shows that minting continued under the name of Shah Alam II well into the
early nineteenth century. For example, Numista lists the half-rupee silver struck in the name of Shah Alam II
with weight ~5.5–6.5 g and diameter ~22–23 mm [9].
The Mughal currency system had been robust during its high period (1556-1707): the standard silver rupee,
gold mohur, copper dam/pice formed a stable tri-metallic system [10]. But by the eighteenth century, the
empire was in evident decline: Shah Alam II himself ruled over a fragmented polity and was heavily reliant on
British protection [11].
From a monetary perspective, the twilight of Mughal sovereignty yielded interesting hybrid coinage: coins
struck in the emperor’s name but under provincial or colonial control, off-metal or experimental strikes, and
eventual transition to British-style coinage. The essay by Beaulieu (2016) explains how in the Bengal
Presidency the pice (copper fractional coin) was struck from 1795 under the Bengal Provincial Minting
regulations, naming Shah Alam II, but with fixed “frozen” regnal years to avoid devaluation by money-
changers [12]. Thus, the coin-issuance at this juncture reflects overlapping authorities: the emperor as nominal
sovereign, the Company as practical minting authority, and the evolving monetary demands of a colonising
regime.
The Bengal Sultanate, 1205–1576, ruled a populous country blessed with a consistent surplus production of
agricultural commodities and textiles which they redistributed through their system of state revenue and
expenditure [13, 14]. Also, traders drew on this surplus for the Indian Ocean trade. The Bengal Presidency’s
coinage under the East India Company marked a gradual shift from Mughal designs to European-style
machine-struck issues. Early Presidency issues often retained Persian inscriptions, Mughal legends and weight
standards; later machine-milled pieces (from the 1830s onwards) introduced English legends, milled edge, and
changed weights/metals. The Wikipedia entry on the “Coins of British India” notes that although each
Presidency had its own issues, a unified coinage across India was introduced in 1835 [5]. The existence of off-
metal strikes and pattern coins further signals a transitional phase: experiments in copper, alloy shifts, and
issues of legality and acceptance in local markets. As one forum post notes, such pieces were sometimes struck
but not legal tender, their value lay in metal content and collector interest rather than circulation [15].
In sum, the Bengal Presidency coinage under Shah Alam II provides a fascinating case of numismatic
intersection: the Mughal monetary legacy, the East India Company’s minting experimentations, and the
impending modernization of the Indian monetary system. Objective of this study was to examine OMS Half
Rupee of Shah Alam II
The investigation of this anomaly follows a typological and deductive method:
1. Review known weight/metal/size ranges for the relevant issue series.
2. Compare the anomalous specimen with those ranges to assess deviation.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 7388
www.rsisinternational.org
3. Explore possible explanations (off-metal strike, pattern/experiment, mis-labelled) in light of contextual
historical evidence (metal shortages, mint policy, transitions).
4. Situate the speculation within the broader monetary history of the region (Bengal Presidency, Mughal
decline).
5. Identify directions for further research (metallurgical assay, hoard evidence, die-link studies).
No destructive testing has been performed on the specimen; the analysis is based on physical measurement,
comparative typology and historical/numismatic data.
RESULT AND DISSUASION
The specimen under consideration is a copper coin bearing the name of Shah Alam II, attributed to the Bengal
Presidency, and described as a “half-rupee”. Obverse and reverse of the copper coin shown in figure 1.
Figure 1: Copper Half Rupee of Shah Alam II
The analyzed coin displays a set of distinctive physical and stylistic attributes that set it apart from the standard
half-rupee issues produced by the Bengal Presidency in the name of Shah Alam II. It weighs approximately 8.9
grams, a figure notably greater than that of the conventional silver half-rupee specimens. The diameter,
measured at 24.8 millimetres, reveals a marginally broader flan, while the thickness, about 2.2 millimetres,
indicates a sturdier planchet than is typical for the series. Details measurement of the coin shown in below
figure 2.
Figure 2: Details Measurement of Copper Half Rupee of Shah Alam II
The inscriptions and ornamental script bear a remarkable resemblance to those on authenticated silver half-
rupees from around 1830. The arrangement of Persian legends, regnal numerals, and decorative elements
suggests that the same or closely related dies were employed in its production. This correspondence in
engraving style reinforces the conclusion that the coin was struck within the same minting tradition as its silver
counterparts.
The most striking deviation, however, lies in its metal composition. Instead of the expected silver, the piece is
struck entirely in copper, introducing a significant material discrepancy. This substitution of a base metal for a
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 7389
www.rsisinternational.org
precious one implies that the coin was not part of the regular monetary output but rather an off-metal strike or
trial piece, possibly produced for experimental, commemorative, or emergency purposes within the Bengal
minting system.
By contrast, standard catalogue data for silver half-rupee issues of the Bengal Presidency in the name of Shah
Alam II indicate weight ~5.5–6.5 g, diameter ~22–23 mm, thickness ~2.0 mm. Photo of similar standrad half
rupee is shown in figure 3 [16]. This discrepancy (particularly the heavier weight and copper metal) raises
questions of attribution, function (circulation vs pattern vs off-metal strike), and die/weight standards.
Figure 3: Standard Similar Half Rupee of Shah Alam II
Referring to Numista’s listing for the Bengal Presidency under Shah Alam II: the half-rupee silver listing
weight matches the ~5.5–6.5 g range [9]. Coin Archives further lists half-rupee (23.5 mm, 6.16 g) for RY 19 in
the name of Shah Alam II [8]. Thus the 8.9 g copper coin lies outside the normal known spec.
The anomalous coin’s copper metal, heavier weight (8.9 g) and larger diameter (24.8 mm) contrasts
significantly with standard silver half-rupee issues of the Bengal Presidency. The letter-pattern (legend in
Persian/Urdu in the name of Shah Alam II, the mint indication of Calcutta/Murshidabad, regnal year mark)
suggests die source related to the standard series. Yet the metal and weight do not align.
In numismatic terms, such anomalies may be classified as off-metal strikes (OMS), coins struck using the dies
of a standard issue but using a different metal (or alloy) than standard. They may be experimental strikes,
pattern pieces, trial issues, or stray production due to metal substitution. The presence of a heavier weight may
indicate copper bar or thicker flan, or it may reflect an intention to approximate the silver coin’s physical size
in copper metal.
Some possible explanations are as below-
1. Metal shortage or alloy substitution: In the early nineteenth century, silver supply in India faced
constraints and rising bullion values. The East India Company may have permitted or conducted
striking in lower-value metal as a cost-saving measure or temporary expedient. The use of copper in a
nominal “half-rupee” format may signal a value judgment disconnected from intrinsic metal value
(token/representative money) rather than full silver equivalent.
2. Experiment/pattern piece: The specimen may represent a trial struck in copper to test public
acceptance, minting machinery or whether a lower-value coin could substitute the silver half-rupee.
The fact that the legend matches the standard series suggests it was not a completely separate design
but rather a trial off-metal strike.
3. Mis-attribution or mis-reading: It is possible that the coin is mis-labelled as a “half-rupee” but was
actually a different denomination (for example, a larger copper denomination) or that the die was
reused late into the presidency period, and the recorded weight and metal are non-standard because of
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 7390
www.rsisinternational.org
later overstriking or local re-striking. Yet the specimen’s size and legend strongly link it to the silver
half-rupee series in the name of Shah Alam II (circa 1830).
4. Circulation anomaly / hoard strike: It may have been struck for circulation under emergency, thus
outside the usual standards, for instance during a coin shortage or war-time exigency, and then not
regulated like the standard issue. Given the presidency’s complex environment of multiple authorities
and minting pressures, such ad hoc issues cannot be ruled out.
Given the weight of evidence, the off-metal strike hypothesis appears most plausible: the specimen appears to
use the standard dies of the silver half-rupee (legend matches), but uses copper, and its heavier weight suggests
an attempt to replicate the physical size/appearance of the silver coin. It may therefore have functioned as a
token substitute in a period of silver shortage or an experiment to push copper coinage into higher
denominations.
Supporting factors are:
The Bengal Presidency had a history of copper issue regulation: for example, the copper pice issue of
1795 in the name of Shah Alam II under the Bengal Mint Committee [12].
The numismatic record shows many varieties of Presidency issues in the name of Shah Alam II,
including silver rupee, half-rupee, quarter-rupee, copper anna/pice denominations [9].
The political-monetary environment was one of transition: the Mughal Emperor’s name on coins,
vested British mint authority, experiments with alloy and denomination, raising the possibility of
unofficial strikes.
Thus, the copper “half-rupee” may be best catalogued as a rare off-metal strike of the Bengal Presidency in the
name of Shah Alam II, likely non-standard, possibly experimental or emergency-issued, and certainly of
interest to numismatists and monetary historians as a marker of the transitional coinage regime.
The presence of such off-metal strikes broadens the known typology of Bengal Presidency coinage,
highlighting that the standard catalogue weights/metals (e.g., silver 5.5–6.5 g half-rupee) are not exhaustive. It
suggests that collectors and researchers should be alert to variant metals/alloys and weights, and that
hoard/archaeological evidence may yet reveal more such anomalies. The catalogue by Paul Stevens, The Coins
of the Bengal Presidency, acknowledges unlisted pieces and urges further research [17].
Furthermore, such anomalies reflect the complex minting context of the Presidency: overlapping authorities
(Mughal emperor, Company mint masters), evolving standards (transition to machine-milled coinage), and
practical constraints (metal supply, circulation demands). From a numismatic standpoint, these variants deserve
systematic documentation, metallurgical testing (to confirm alloy), and die-link studies (to verify die identity
with known standard issues).
From a monetary history perspective, the coin underscores three themes:
1. Metal shortage and substitution: The heavier copper coin suggests that the intrinsic metal value
(copper) may have replaced the standard silver content in order to maintain token value in circulation
when silver bullion was scarce. This aligns with broader patterns in late Mughal/early British India,
where silver scarcity and bullion flows complicated currency systems [18].
2. Transition of sovereignty and symbolism: Even as the Mughal emperor’s real power waned, his name
continued to appear on coins struck by the Company’s Bengal mints, signalling continuity of
sovereignty in form, if not in substance. The copper coin thus stands at the nexus of symbolic imperial
continuity and material colonial transition.
3. Monetary experimentation in colonial contexts: The East India Company, faced with administrative
and fiscal challenges, appears to have experimented with coinage formats, including copper issues at
higher denominations. The Beaulieu article documents how the pice issue of 1795 in the name of Shah
Alam II was authorized via regulation and minted at Calcutta, Benares and Farrukhabad [12]. The
copper “half-rupee” may therefore reflect further such experimentation, albeit perhaps limited and not
standardised.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 7391
www.rsisinternational.org
This study is constrained by the lack of destructive or non-destructive metallurgical testing of the specimen,
absence of hoard context, and the fact that off-metal strikes are often undocumented in formal catalogues
(hence difficult to quantify). To deepen understanding, the following are recommended:
Alloy analysis (XRF or ICP-MS) to determine the copper content, potential silver or other alloying
metals, and compare with standard copper and silver issues of the Presidency.
Die-link and planchet studies to compare edge treatment, mint-marks (crescent, secret marks), flan
characteristics, and die features with standard silver half-rupee dies of the same regnal year. If identical
dies are used, this strongly supports the off-metal strike hypothesis.
Hoard/archaeological investigations: Identifying finds of such anomalies in documented hoards would
establish circulation status (versus isolated experimental piece).
Mint archival research: Archive records of the Bengal Mint Committee, East India Company mint
instructions and accounts may yield evidence of experimental copper denominational issues or metal
substitutions around the time in question.
CONCLUSION
The copper coin struck in the name of Shah Alam II, attributed to the Bengal Presidency and described as a
half-rupee, constitutes a numismatic anomaly of considerable interest. Its divergence from standard silver half-
rupee specifications (in metal, weight and diameter) suggests that it is best interpreted as an off-metal strike,
likely experimental, emergency-oriented, or produced under metallurgical constraint. In doing so, it illuminates
the transitional monetary phase in Bengal: where Mughal imperial symbols, East India Company minting
practice, silver scarcity and early colonial coinage reforms intersected.
By situating this specimen within the broader historical context of Bengal Presidency minting, Mughal-British
relations, and the shift to colonial monetary systems, this paper underscores the importance of anomalies in
advancing both numismatic scholarship and monetary history. Future work, metallurgical testing, die-link
studies and hoard analysis, can refine our understanding of such transitional issues and help map the full
typology of Bengal Presidency coinage.
REFERENCES
1. Buckland, C. E. (1901). Bengal Under the Lieutenant-governors: Being a Narrative of the Principal
Events and Public Measures During Their Periods of Office, from 1854-1898 (Vol. 1). SK Lahiri &
Company.
2. Chatterjee, P. (1975). Bengal: rise and growth of a nationality. Social Scientist, 67-82.
3. “Bengal Presidency” Wikipedia entry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_Presidency?utm_source=chatgpt.com
4. Coin of India. https://coinindia.com/galleries-bengalpresidency.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com
5. “Coins of British India.” Wikipedia entry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coins_of_British_India?utm_source=chatgpt.com
6. Alam, M., & Subrahmanyam, S. (2006). Envisioning power: The political thought of a late eighteenth-
century Mughal prince. The Indian Economic & Social History Review, 43(2), 131-161.
7. “Treaty of Allahabad” Wikipedia entry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Allahabad?utm_source=chatgpt.com
8. CoinArchives search results: Bengal Presidency in the name of Shah Alam II.
https://www.coinarchives.com/w/results.php?search=bengal&utm_source=chatgpt.com
9. Numista Catalogue: “Bengal Presidency – coins from the name of Shah Alam II”.
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/bengal_presidency-1.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com
10. Kalra, M. A. (2018). “A Brief History of the Mughal Empire Through Its Coins.” Sarmaya Guide to
Mughal Coins. https://sarmaya.in/guides/a-brief-history-of-the-mughal-empire-through-its-
coins/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
11. Lekh Raj (2025). A study on the rise and Fall of the Mughal Empire. International Research Journal of
Human Resource and Social Sciences, 12(1), 1-22.
https://www.aarf.asia/current/2025/Jan/IyfngaSmGMsBYM9.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 7392
www.rsisinternational.org
12. Beaulieu, K. (2016). “An East Indian Coin in the Western Colonies”. Material Culture Review. (see
also ResearchGate pre-print). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10761-016-0371-
4?utm_source=chatgpt.com
13. Deyell, J. S. (2010). Cowries and coins: The dual monetary system of the Bengal Sultanate. The Indian
Economic & Social History Review, 47(1), 63-106.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/001946460904700103
14. Edward Thomas (1866). The Initial Coinage of Bengal. The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of
Great Britain and Ireland, 2(1), 145-224.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/44012027.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
15. “Jewelry Token Imitations: Bengal Presidency Rupees and Mohurs” World of Coins entry.
https://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php?topic=1601.0&utm_source=chatgpt.com
16. “Bengal Presidency” Heritage Auctions, Numista. https://en.numista.com/25856
17. Stevens, P. (2012). The Coins of the Bengal Presidency. London: AH Baldwin & Sons Ltd.
https://www.ons-sa.org/docs/Paulbookreview.8090504.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
18. Strnad, J. (2001). Monetary history of Mughal India as reflected in silver coin hoards.
https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1970586434910183066
