Digital museum showcasing the collection of worldwide legends over the years! 千古不朽博物館展示多年來收藏的世界傳奇故事!
Ming Dynasty,
Chongzhen Tongbao
(Reverse With Four Horses, Forgery Version)
明
崇禎通寶
(背四馬倣製品版)
Item number: A3375
Year: AD 1628-1644 dated, AD 1912-1949 presumed
Material: Brass
Size: 24.6 x 24.8 mm
Weight: 7.3 g
Provenance:
1. Spink 2023
2. Dr. Werner Klaus Burger Collection
This is a “Chongzhen Tongbao” coin cast in the name of Emperor Chongzhen of the Ming dynasty.
The coin takes the form typical of the Sinosphere: a round coin with a square central hole. The inscription on the obverse reads “Chongzhen Tongbao” in regular script, arranged top to bottom, right to left. The radical “礻” in “禎” is written with a horizontal stroke in place of the customary dot, while the component “缶” in “寶” is rendered as “尔”, forming the archaic variant “寳”. Surrounding the square hole on the coin’s field are four galloping horses, each with hooves raised toward the inner rim of the coin’s circular border.
This type of coin featuring horse imagery is colloquially known as the “Running Horse Chongzhen.” Coins bearing animal motifs are exceedingly rare in Chinese monetary history. Notable precedents include fish-shaped coins from the pre-Qin period and Emperor Wu of Han’s “Three Grades of White Metal” coinage, which included round coins with dragons, square ones with horses, and oval ones with turtles. During the Tang dynasty, the Qianyuan Zhongbao featured auspicious birds on its reverse. Song dynasty horse coins, however, were not currency but gaming pieces for a game known as “Dama Geqian,” which closely resembles modern-day Ludo. These game pieces, though termed “coins,” were in fact tokens depicting famous horses or generals, each distinct in posture and design.
There are no historical records of the “Running Horse Chongzhen” in official chronicles, yet its form suggests it was minted both officially and privately. It coincides with the chaotic conditions of the late Ming, prompting various interpretations and folk associations. One explanation posits that the coin commemorated the Emperor’s supposed birth year under the zodiac sign of the horse. However, Chongzhen was born in the 38th year of the Wanli reign (AD 1610), a year of the pig; he ascended the throne in the seventh year of the Tianqi reign (AD 1627), a year of the rabbit—neither supports the horse association. Another theory holds that the coin honours the Ming founding emperor Zhu Yuanzhang’s essay “On Fine Horses,” which laments the rarity and tragic loss of true talent. This reading evokes Chongzhen’s execution of the loyal general Yuan Chonghuan, though no historical evidence confirms a direct link.
Due to its unusual design, the coin was seen as either auspicious or ominous and soon became enmeshed in apocalyptic folklore. A popular rhyme claimed, “One horse throws the world into chaos.” One interpretation of this prophecy connects the phrase “a horse enters the gate” (馬進門) with the Chinese character “闖” (chuǎng), meaning “to charge” or “to break in,” which was used as the title by rebel leaders Gao Yingxiang and Li Zicheng. Li Zicheng’s eventual capture of Beijing seemed to fulfil this omen. Another interpretation draws from a satirical folk verse from Nanjing: “Secretaries abound everywhere; Hanlin scholars flood the streets. Inspectors are as numerous as sheep; military officials are worthless as dogs. Patronage resurrects ancient dust; exam quotas decided with a nod. Jiangnan’s wealth is drained to stuff Ma’s mouth.” Here, the reference is to Ma Shiying, a prominent minister under the Hongguang regime who notoriously sold offices to fund military campaigns, eroding the government’s legitimacy. Tensions between Ma’s cabinet and factions such as the Fushe and Donglin parties proved irreconcilable. At the same time, posters denouncing Ma’s ally Ruan Dacheng appeared: “The bandit has no gates; one horse gallops through the realm. The traitor has ears; one coin assaults the capital.” Another couplet read: “The rebel rides a bull, the Ming a horse—beasts both. The Qing values merit, the Ming values Ruan—a heap of coin.” These verses reflected the people’s deep discontent. This unrest prompted General Zuo Liangyu to rise under the banner of “cleansing the court.” Ma Shiying responded by ordering Shi Kefa to abandon the northern defences and confront Zuo instead. The Qing exploited this vulnerability and invaded. Shi Kefa returned to defend Yangzhou, where he ultimately perished. The Hongguang Emperor fled with his court but was captured by the Qing. It is said that when he was paraded through Nanjing, the people lined the streets to hurl tiles and spit at him. The “Running Horse Chongzhen” coins, whether officially or privately minted, were interpreted by some as expressions of fatalistic prophecy, wishing for the Ming’s swift demise.
Emperor Chongzhen, temple name Ming Sizong and posthumous title Emperor Zhuangliemin, personal name Zhu Youjian, reigned from AD 1627 to 1644 as the sixteenth and final emperor of the Ming dynasty. At the beginning of his reign, he worked to reform the bureaucracy and eliminate eunuch dominance, hoping to restore imperial authority. However, the Ming was already in steep decline. Internally, peasant uprisings led by figures such as Li Zicheng and Zhang Xianzhong spread across the land; externally, the rising power of the Manchus (Later Jin, later Qing) posed an increasing threat. Politically, the court was divided by factionalism, and the emperor’s suspicious and impulsive nature led to constant ministerial changes and poor decision-making. Financial exhaustion and inadequate military resources further fuelled rebellion. In AD 1644, as Li Zicheng’s forces entered Beijing, Chongzhen hanged himself on Coal Hill. The Ming dynasty thereby came to an end. Posterity views him with ambivalence—both as a tragic monarch who died with honour and as a weak ruler who failed to preserve the realm.
Li Zicheng, a native of Mizhi, Shaanxi, originally served as a courier under the Ming. Amid the famines, corruption, and widespread unrest of the late Ming, he joined a peasant rebellion and quickly rose to prominence. In AD 1644, he led his army into Beijing, prompting the Chongzhen Emperor’s suicide and the fall of the Ming dynasty. Li then declared himself emperor and founded the Shun dynasty, adopting the reign title Yongchang. His rule, however, lasted only a few months. With poor military discipline and waning public support, he was soon defeated, especially after the defector Wu Sangui invited the Qing army into China. In AD 1645, Li Zicheng died in the Jiugong Mountains of Hubei, either killed by local forces or by his own hand. He remains a controversial figure: seen both as a key agent in ending Ming rule and as a failure who enabled the Qing conquest.
The Hongguang Emperor, personal name Zhu Yousong, was the grandson of the Wanli Emperor and son of Prince Fu, Zhu Changxun. In AD 1645, one year after the fall of the Ming, he ascended the throne in Nanjing and adopted the reign title Hongguang, becoming the first emperor of the Southern Ming. However, his regime was riddled with internal conflicts. The court was dominated by Ma Shiying and Ruan Dacheng, while civil-military tensions ran high and regional warlords, such as the “Four Garrisons,” acted autonomously. These divisions crippled resistance against the Qing. Later that same year, after the death of General Shi Kefa in the defence of Yangzhou, Qing forces captured Nanjing. The Hongguang Emperor fled but was eventually captured by Liu Liangzuo, a surrendered Ming general, and delivered to Beijing, where he was executed in AD 1646. His short reign was marked by political impotence and strategic failures, and he is often remembered as a feeble ruler whose incompetence hastened the Southern Ming’s collapse.
Ma Shiying was a key official in the Hongguang court of the Southern Ming. Originally aligned with the Donglin faction during the Chongzhen reign, he later shifted alliances and collaborated with Ruan Dacheng, an influential eunuch-affiliated figure. Together, they supported Zhu Yousong’s ascension and held substantial power in the Hongguang regime. However, Ma lacked political foresight and the ability to unify various factions. Obsessed with power and self-interest, he became a symbol of corruption. His governance alienated loyal officials, weakened central authority, and allowed military leaders in the north to slip beyond control, thereby destabilising the regime.