Evidence coverage: AD 531–AD 683. This is the span of collected observations, not the currency’s lifetime.
This record includes associated currencies and earlier interpretations. The article selects the evidence relevant to its own history.
Broaden the Qom profile to Sasanian and early Islamic eastern drahm–dirham reckoning. Retain local Qom documents and qualify earlier regional associations; neither uniform empire-wide values nor identical tax institutions are asserted.
Evidence within this identity, not separate currencies.
Berk.67 records a fiscal account apparently involving twenty stēr. The reading of the denomination is explicitly uncertain; retain this as a qualified earlier observation.
Sources and qualifications →Berk.34 records an agreement concerning vineyard taxation in the Qom district, with the liability described in drahms. This establishes local fiscal reckoning; the precise nature of the religious differential remains interpretive.
Sources and qualifications →Berk.154 values agricultural produce in drahms toward a money-tax payment and totals 45 stēr. Benfey identifies the total as 180 dirhams: stēr is an account multiple within this reckoning.
Sources and qualifications →Admit a locally evidenced account identity from monetary tax assessment and valuation of in-kind payments. Drahm/dirham and its stēr multiple belong to one profile; coin issues are not separate nodes.
Sources and qualifications →Broaden the Qom profile to Sasanian and early Islamic eastern drahm–dirham reckoning. Retain local Qom documents and qualify earlier regional associations; neither uniform empire-wide values nor identical tax institutions are asserted.
Sources and qualifications →Under Khusro I, annual poll assessments were graded at 4,6,8 or12 dirhams. The531–579 reign bounds a retrospectively reported fiscal witness, not a currency foundation or contemporary dated document.
Sources and qualifications →Umar’s diwan selected the Sasanian silver unit, called dirham, for cash stipends. The634–644 reign bounds the reported practice; later mint reforms remain profile history, not dynasty-only currencies.
Sources and qualifications →Dirham is also an account unit without a corresponding current coin. Reported Isfahan bread prices in 1052 use dirham adl despite the supposed silver-minting gap. This is frontier evidence, not a proven extension of one uniform eastern currency.
Sources and qualifications →The checked sources do not yet establish the intervening account inheritance from the early eastern dirham to Ilkhanid reckoning. Neither the shared word nor a gap in minting settles that relationship.
Sources and qualifications →Morony explicitly derives the Sasanian fiscal drahm from the Attic drachma spread east by Alexander and transmitted through Seleucids and Parthians. Admit compressed, qualified ancestry; intermediate identity boundaries and dates remain unresolved.
Sources and qualifications →Cribb traces medieval Indian dramma denominations through Sasanian imports; Deyell connects that branch to named Pratihara epigraphic forms. Combined with Siyadoni obligations, this supports qualified compressed ancestry through Hunnic and regional stages, not a direct Qom-to-India transfer.
Sources and qualifications →Dated evidence, not exact birth or extinction dates.
Berk.67 records a fiscal account apparently involving twenty stēr. The reading of the denomination is explicitly uncertain; retain this as a qualified earlier observation.
C1817Berk.34 records an agreement concerning vineyard taxation in the Qom district, with the liability described in drahms. This establishes local fiscal reckoning; the precise nature of the religious differential remains interpretive.
C1818Berk.154 values agricultural produce in drahms toward a money-tax payment and totals 45 stēr. Benfey identifies the total as 180 dirhams: stēr is an account multiple within this reckoning.
C1819Under Khusro I, annual poll assessments were graded at 4,6,8 or12 dirhams. The531–579 reign bounds a retrospectively reported fiscal witness, not a currency foundation or contemporary dated document.
C2026Umar’s diwan selected the Sasanian silver unit, called dirham, for cash stipends. The634–644 reign bounds the reported practice; later mint reforms remain profile history, not dynasty-only currencies.
C2027Dated observations, not a proven complete lifespan.
Berk.67 records a fiscal account apparently involving twenty stēr. The reading of the denomination is explicitly uncertain; retain this as a qualified earlier observation.
Berk.67 lines1–4; Benfey section Berk.67
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Catalogue displays contradictory numerical dates (0697–0698) beside 667–668; the transcription, translation and Benfey discussion consistently support year 16 = 667/668.
Berk.67 lines1–4; Benfey section Berk.67
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Berk.34 records an agreement concerning vineyard taxation in the Qom district, with the liability described in drahms. This establishes local fiscal reckoning; the precise nature of the religious differential remains interpretive.
Berk.34 lines3–9
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Complete edited transcription and translation inspected.
Berk.154 values agricultural produce in drahms toward a money-tax payment and totals 45 stēr. Benfey identifies the total as 180 dirhams: stēr is an account multiple within this reckoning.
Berk.154 lines5–13; Benfey pp.411–414
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Complete edited transcription, translation and date fields inspected.
Berk.154 lines5–13; Benfey pp.411–414
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Admit a locally evidenced account identity from monetary tax assessment and valuation of in-kind payments. Drahm/dirham and its stēr multiple belong to one profile; coin issues are not separate nodes.
Berk.34 and154; Qom corpus
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Complete edited transcription and translation inspected.
Berk.34 and154; Qom corpus
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Complete edited transcription, translation and date fields inspected.
Berk.34 and154; Qom corpus
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Broaden the Qom profile to Sasanian and early Islamic eastern drahm–dirham reckoning. Retain local Qom documents and qualify earlier regional associations; neither uniform empire-wide values nor identical tax institutions are asserted.
p.39 Attic/Alexander/Seleucid/Parthian derivation; pp.99–107 fiscal assessments; Umar’s diwan, Sasanian unit adoption,698–99 reorganization and regional accounts; BSOAS87, pp.395–420 (volume dated2024; online11Feb2025); Introduction and section Berk.154: evidence for persistence of Khusrō I’s misāḥa system?
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
p.39 Attic/Alexander/Seleucid/Parthian derivation; pp.99–107 fiscal assessments; Umar’s diwan, Sasanian unit adoption,698–99 reorganization and regional accounts; BSOAS87, pp.395–420 (volume dated2024; online11Feb2025); Introduction and section Berk.154: evidence for persistence of Khusrō I’s misāḥa system?
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
p.39 Attic/Alexander/Seleucid/Parthian derivation; pp.99–107 fiscal assessments; Umar’s diwan, Sasanian unit adoption,698–99 reorganization and regional accounts; BSOAS87, pp.395–420 (volume dated2024; online11Feb2025); Introduction and section Berk.154: evidence for persistence of Khusrō I’s misāḥa system?
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Under Khusro I, annual poll assessments were graded at 4,6,8 or12 dirhams. The531–579 reign bounds a retrospectively reported fiscal witness, not a currency foundation or contemporary dated document.
p.39 Attic/Alexander/Seleucid/Parthian derivation; pp.99–107 fiscal assessments; Final substantive paragraphs: dirham assessment versus payment in produce/labor; source limits
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
p.39 Attic/Alexander/Seleucid/Parthian derivation; pp.99–107 fiscal assessments; Final substantive paragraphs: dirham assessment versus payment in produce/labor; source limits
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Umar’s diwan selected the Sasanian silver unit, called dirham, for cash stipends. The634–644 reign bounds the reported practice; later mint reforms remain profile history, not dynasty-only currencies.
Umar’s diwan, Sasanian unit adoption,698–99 reorganization and regional accounts
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Dirham is also an account unit without a corresponding current coin. Reported Isfahan bread prices in 1052 use dirham adl despite the supposed silver-minting gap. This is frontier evidence, not a proven extension of one uniform eastern currency.
Opening monetary-unit definition; medieval cessation and resumption of minting; Naser-e Khosrow in Isfahan1052; bread prices in dirham adl
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Opening monetary-unit definition; medieval cessation and resumption of minting; Naser-e Khosrow in Isfahan1052; bread prices in dirham adl
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
The checked sources do not yet establish the intervening account inheritance from the early eastern dirham to Ilkhanid reckoning. Neither the shared word nor a gap in minting settles that relationship.
Opening monetary-unit definition; medieval cessation and resumption of minting; Final two paragraphs of Islamic section:1296 six-dirham account, toman and1931 rial subdivision; Naser-e Khosrow in Isfahan1052; bread prices in dirham adl
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Opening monetary-unit definition; medieval cessation and resumption of minting; Final two paragraphs of Islamic section:1296 six-dirham account, toman and1931 rial subdivision; Naser-e Khosrow in Isfahan1052; bread prices in dirham adl
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Opening monetary-unit definition; medieval cessation and resumption of minting; Final two paragraphs of Islamic section:1296 six-dirham account, toman and1931 rial subdivision; Naser-e Khosrow in Isfahan1052; bread prices in dirham adl
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Morony explicitly derives the Sasanian fiscal drahm from the Attic drachma spread east by Alexander and transmitted through Seleucids and Parthians. Admit compressed, qualified ancestry; intermediate identity boundaries and dates remain unresolved.
p.39 Attic/Alexander/Seleucid/Parthian derivation; pp.99–107 fiscal assessments; Umar’s diwan, Sasanian unit adoption,698–99 reorganization and regional accounts
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
p.39 Attic/Alexander/Seleucid/Parthian derivation; pp.99–107 fiscal assessments; Umar’s diwan, Sasanian unit adoption,698–99 reorganization and regional accounts
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Cribb traces medieval Indian dramma denominations through Sasanian imports; Deyell connects that branch to named Pratihara epigraphic forms. Combined with Siyadoni obligations, this supports qualified compressed ancestry through Hunnic and regional stages, not a direct Qom-to-India transfer.
pp.666–669, Staters and drachmas; distinguish Indo-Greek and later Sasanian routes; pp.1–2, Indo-Sasanian currency zones; epigraphic vigrahapala and adivaraha forms; DOI10.1002/9781119399919.eahaa00595; pp.167–169: deeds11,21 and final rent; Vikrama969,1005,1025
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
pp.666–669, Staters and drachmas; distinguish Indo-Greek and later Sasanian routes; pp.1–2, Indo-Sasanian currency zones; epigraphic vigrahapala and adivaraha forms; DOI10.1002/9781119399919.eahaa00595; pp.167–169: deeds11,21 and final rent; Vikrama969,1005,1025
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
pp.666–669, Staters and drachmas; distinguish Indo-Greek and later Sasanian routes; pp.1–2, Indo-Sasanian currency zones; epigraphic vigrahapala and adivaraha forms; DOI10.1002/9781119399919.eahaa00595; pp.167–169: deeds11,21 and final rent; Vikrama969,1005,1025
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Edition abstract/translation and chronology pp.167–169 inspected in OCR; copied older deed dates distinguished from inscription production.