Evidence coverage: 1296–1932. 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.
A documented account-unit or currency-system transition supports this predecessor identity; not admitted from a specimen or inherited label alone. Extend Persian toman/dinar accounting into its inherited Ilkhanid and post-Ilkhanid tradition. Scholarship explicitly identifies inherited money of account. Earlier regional dinars and tomans retain qualified identity associations; no universal common value across regions is asserted.
No distinct predecessor currency is established in the loaded view.
Evidence within this identity, not separate currencies.
Dated changes of monetary basis; founding ancestry remains above.
Nader Shah’s implemented 1740 reform deliberately aligned Iranian rupee/naderi reckoning with Indian rupees and set one silver toman equal to 20 silver rupees. Record a qualified unit-adoption event, preserving Iranian ancestry; no continuing market peg is inferred.
1740 · qualified unit adoption event
1 Iranian silver toman = 20 silver rupees in the reform.
Accounting orders and replacement rupee/naderi issues explicitly aligned to the Indian rupee; supported by VOC and EIC reports reproduced in scholarship.
Qualified donor association and implementation scope. Commerce remained heavily copper-based. This is an adoption event, not a claim of enduring market parity or uniform compliance.
Unit adoption is a historical event; no continuing peg is inferred. Excluded from ancestry, sibling relationships and depth.
Evidence and relationship details Register entry →The VOC embassy journal beginning in 1651 records the Persian toman as a unit for debts, taxes, fees and transfers, reckoning 100 mahmudis to a toman. Placement in the later Persian continuity is qualified; not every regional toman variant is treated as identical.
Sources and qualifications →From about 1776 existing Persian coins were revalued against the toman currency of account rather than simply reduced in size. Placement in the later Persian continuity is qualified; not every regional toman variant is treated as identical.
Sources and qualifications →The qeran was introduced as a 1,000-dinar denomination reckoned within the toman system; this does not by itself create a new currency identity.
Sources and qualifications →Treat central Persian toman accounting across the documented Safavid and Qajar observations as a continuing account lineage, with coin standards and denominations recorded as epochs. This qualified identity extension does not claim every local Persian toman variant was interchangeable.
Sources and qualifications →Extend Persian toman/dinar accounting into its inherited Ilkhanid and post-Ilkhanid tradition. Scholarship explicitly identifies inherited money of account. Earlier regional dinars and tomans retain qualified identity associations; no universal common value across regions is asserted.
Sources and qualifications →Mustawfi’s revenues for 1335 are reported in currency dinars, including 2,871,200 for Fars and 325,000 for Khuzistan. The fiscal witness is explicit; association with the later Persian account lineage is qualified.
Sources and qualifications →Rumlu reports a payment of 300 kepaki tomans in 1506. Preserve the regional name and qualify its association with the later consolidated Persian profile.
Sources and qualifications →Barker’s 1626 account describes reckoning in tomans and decimal amounts rather than naming the coins used in payment.
Sources and qualifications →Olearius in 1637 explicitly identifies the toman as a unit of account.
Sources and qualifications →Nader Shah’s implemented 1740 reform deliberately aligned Iranian rupee/naderi reckoning with Indian rupees and set one silver toman equal to 20 silver rupees. Record a qualified unit-adoption event, preserving Iranian ancestry; no continuing market peg is inferred.
Sources and qualifications →The reviewed account continuity does not close the gap to Sasanian or Achaemenid money. A shared dinar name or coin-weight imitation does not establish those ancestry links.
Sources and qualifications →Ghazan’s1296 system defined the dinar as an account multiple of six silver dirhams. Bates follows its subsequent changes through the toman to the 1931 rial subdivision; association with the retained Persian profile remains qualified.
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 →Dated evidence, not exact birth or extinction dates.
The VOC embassy journal beginning in 1651 records the Persian toman as a unit for debts, taxes, fees and transfers, reckoning 100 mahmudis to a toman. Placement in the later Persian continuity is qualified; not every regional toman variant is treated as identical.
C1495From about 1776 existing Persian coins were revalued against the toman currency of account rather than simply reduced in size. Placement in the later Persian continuity is qualified; not every regional toman variant is treated as identical.
C1496The qeran was introduced as a 1,000-dinar denomination reckoned within the toman system; this does not by itself create a new currency identity.
C1497Mustawfi’s revenues for 1335 are reported in currency dinars, including 2,871,200 for Fars and 325,000 for Khuzistan. The fiscal witness is explicit; association with the later Persian account lineage is qualified.
C1998Rumlu reports a payment of 300 kepaki tomans in 1506. Preserve the regional name and qualify its association with the later consolidated Persian profile.
C1999Barker’s 1626 account describes reckoning in tomans and decimal amounts rather than naming the coins used in payment.
C2000Olearius in 1637 explicitly identifies the toman as a unit of account.
C2001Ghazan’s1296 system defined the dinar as an account multiple of six silver dirhams. Bates follows its subsequent changes through the toman to the 1931 rial subdivision; association with the retained Persian profile remains qualified.
C2033Dated observations, not a proven complete lifespan.
The currency law and 1932 rial notes replaced the official qerān–toman reckoning. Qerān-denominated obligations establish an account unit, not merely a coin type.
Bank-e Melli section, first note series
The VOC embassy journal beginning in 1651 records the Persian toman as a unit for debts, taxes, fees and transfers, reckoning 100 mahmudis to a toman. Placement in the later Persian continuity is qualified; not every regional toman variant is treated as identical.
Printed pp. 25–26, section 3
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Original-source analysis and annotated translation.
From about 1776 existing Persian coins were revalued against the toman currency of account rather than simply reduced in size. Placement in the later Persian continuity is qualified; not every regional toman variant is treated as identical.
Paragraph beginning Nāder Shah’s successors
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
The qeran was introduced as a 1,000-dinar denomination reckoned within the toman system; this does not by itself create a new currency identity.
Paragraph beginning In 1241/1825–26
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Treat central Persian toman accounting across the documented Safavid and Qajar observations as a continuing account lineage, with coin standards and denominations recorded as epochs. This qualified identity extension does not claim every local Persian toman variant was interchangeable.
Transaction journal; explicit account-money revaluation; qeran denomination
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Original-source analysis and annotated translation.
Transaction journal; explicit account-money revaluation; qeran denomination
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Extend Persian toman/dinar accounting into its inherited Ilkhanid and post-Ilkhanid tradition. Scholarship explicitly identifies inherited money of account. Earlier regional dinars and tomans retain qualified identity associations; no universal common value across regions is asserted.
pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80); Safavid standards; Rumlu payment in 1506; western/Khorasan distinctions
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80); Safavid standards; Rumlu payment in 1506; western/Khorasan distinctions
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Mustawfi’s revenues for 1335 are reported in currency dinars, including 2,871,200 for Fars and 325,000 for Khuzistan. The fiscal witness is explicit; association with the later Persian account lineage is qualified.
p. 54 note 1; reported 1335 revenues; pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80)
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Publisher extract and complete relevant note inspected; full article/manuscripts not accessed.
p. 54 note 1; reported 1335 revenues; pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80)
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Rumlu reports a payment of 300 kepaki tomans in 1506. Preserve the regional name and qualify its association with the later consolidated Persian profile.
Safavid standards; Rumlu payment in 1506; western/Khorasan distinctions
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Barker’s 1626 account describes reckoning in tomans and decimal amounts rather than naming the coins used in payment.
pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80)
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Olearius in 1637 explicitly identifies the toman as a unit of account.
pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80)
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Nader Shah’s implemented 1740 reform deliberately aligned Iranian rupee/naderi reckoning with Indian rupees and set one silver toman equal to 20 silver rupees. Record a qualified unit-adoption event, preserving Iranian ancestry; no continuing market peg is inferred.
pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80)
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
The reviewed account continuity does not close the gap to Sasanian or Achaemenid money. A shared dinar name or coin-weight imitation does not establish those ancestry links.
Safavid standards; Rumlu payment in 1506; western/Khorasan distinctions; pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80)
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Safavid standards; Rumlu payment in 1506; western/Khorasan distinctions; pp. 20–22 (notes 50–55), 159–160 (notes 77–80)
Not a complete origin, lifespan or current-status audit.
Ghazan’s1296 system defined the dinar as an account multiple of six silver dirhams. Bates follows its subsequent changes through the toman to the 1931 rial subdivision; association with the retained Persian profile remains qualified.
Final two paragraphs of Islamic section:1296 six-dirham account, toman and1931 rial subdivision
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.