Item number: A3375／A3378

Reference number: LZ-DMQP#2314 (A3375)／LZ-DMQP#2313 (A3378)

Year: AD 1628-1644 dated, AD 1912-1949 presumed

Material: Brass

Size: 24.6 x 24.8 mm (A3375)／25.3 x 25.3 mm (A3378)

Weight: 7.3 g (A3375)／6.7 g (A3378)

Provenance:

1. Spink 2022

2. Dr. Werner Klaus Burger Collection

These are Chongzhen tongbao coins cast in the name of Emperor Sizong of the Ming dynasty under his reign title Chongzhen.

All coins conform to the typical Sinosphere form of a round coin with a square central hole. The obverse inscription Chongzhen tongbao (崇禎通寶) is written in regular script, read vertically from top to bottom and right to left. In the character zhen (禎), the first stroke of the 礻 radical is rendered as a horizontal line; in the character bao (寶), the 缶 component is written as 尔, forming the variant 寳.

On specimen A3375, a horse is depicted around each side of the central square hole, with its hooves touching the inner edge of the outer rim in a galloping posture. The relief carving on the coin’s surface is coarse along the raised edges, and the field is shallow and uneven. The file marks on the reverse are irregular in direction and inconsistent with the workmanship of official Ming mint production. The source attributes this piece to a Republican-era imitation.

On specimen A3378, a single horse appears above the central hole, its hooves resting on the inner rim in a running position. The raised edge of the relief is similarly rough, and the coin’s surface shallow. Much of the obverse inscription is blurred to varying degrees, and the file marks on the reverse are randomly oriented, inconsistent with official Ming minting standards. The source also attributes this specimen to a Republican-era imitation. The design corresponds to the horse-type coins recorded in numismatic catalogues, except that the lower horse is missing.

This type of coin featuring horse imagery is colloquially known as the “Running Horse Chongzhen” or “Chongzhen Horses Charms.” 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.

Werner Klaus Burger (AD 1936–2021), a German numismatist, was renowned for his pioneering research on Qing dynasty coinage. Born in Munich, he completed his studies in Sinology at the University of Munich in AD 1962. In 1963, he went to teach German at Fudan University in Shanghai. However, during the Cultural Revolution in 1965, after the closure of academic institutions, he was reassigned to tend sheep in Suzhou. Subsequently, he relocated to Hong Kong, where he devoted himself entirely to numismatic research. In AD 1974, he completed the first doctoral dissertation on Chinese numismatics, which was later expanded into his magnum opus, Ch’ing Cash, a chronologically organised catalogue of Qing dynasty coinage. His collection encompassed a comprehensive range of Qing coins and related archival materials. Burger passed away in Hong Kong in 2021 at the age of 85. His contributions to the field of numismatics remain profoundly influential.

物件編號: A3375／A3378

參考書目編號: LZ-DMQP#2314 (A3375)／LZ-DMQP#2313 (A3378)

年代: 標示為公元 1628-1644 年，推測為公元 1912-1949 年

材料: 黃銅

尺寸: 24.6 x 24.8 mm (A3375)／25.3 x 25.3 mm (A3378)

重量: 7.3 g (A3375)／6.7 g (A3378)

來源:

1. 斯賓克拍賣行 2022

2. 布威納博士舊藏

這是一些以明思宗崇禎帝之年號，所鑄行之崇禎通寶。

錢幣的形制均為漢文化圈典型的方孔圓錢。錢面錢文「崇禎通寶」楷書。四字由上至下，由右至左對讀。「禎」字「礻」旁首點寫為橫劃；「寶」字「缶」旁寫為「尔」，呈「寳」。

A3375之錢幕錢穿四周各有一馬，蹄踏外輪內側作奔跑狀。錢面幕陽刻邊緣粗糙，地章平淺。錢幕銼痕方向無序，不合明代官爐工藝。來源稱民國年間倣鑄。

A3378之錢幕錢穿上方有一馬，蹄踏內廓作奔跑狀。錢面幕陽刻邊緣粗糙，地章平淺。錢面多字漫漶，程度不一，銼痕方向無序，不合明代官爐工藝。來源稱民國年間倣鑄。圖樣與譜載對馬錢相符，唯缺下方馬。

錢幕有馬圖的崇禎通寶俗稱「跑馬崇禎」。歷史上以動物為主題的貨幣極為少見，有先秦魚幣，漢武帝「白金三品」銀錫幣中有圓形龍幣、方形馬幣、橢形龜幣，唐代乾元重寶則有瑞雀幕圖，僅此寥寥。宋代馬錢則非供行用，乃為「打馬格錢」遊戲之道具，核心玩法類似當代飛行棋。此馬錢雖名為錢，實則為棋​。以史載名馬、名將為主題，姿態各異，設計多元。

「跑馬崇禎」於史無載，觀其形制，則官私皆鑄。與明末亂局相合，引發許多歷史解讀和民間聯想。其鑄行原因，其一為屬相說，言崇禎生肖屬馬，錢局鑄錢以頌聖。但崇禎於萬曆三十八年生，屬相為豬；天啟七年即位，屬相為兔，毋論和者，與午馬年誤差皆頗多。其二為祖訓說，言崇禎帝鑄馬錢以崇奉太祖朱元璋之《良馬說》，慨歎人才之難得與易失，令人聯想到崇禎帝冤殺袁崇煥一事，但未有史料證明。

而行用後，以其設計罕見，「非瑞則妖」，在民間附會讖緯，形成時識，謠曰：「一馬亂天下」。具體附會事例其一為「一馬進門，推翻明王朝」，「一馬進門」即「闖」字，符應先後自稱闖王的民變領袖高迎祥、李自成等人，後李自成果陷北京。其二為南京俗謠：「中書隨地有，翰林滿街走。監紀多如羊，職方賤似狗。蔭起千年塵，拔貢一呈首。掃盡江南錢，填塞馬家口。」 馬即馬士英，南明弘光朝起復，秉政南京，期間公然賣官鬻爵以補軍資，政府威信大失。弘光帝與馬士英內閣亦無法調和復社、東林黨人與閹黨之矛盾。當時更有人在閹黨阮大鋮門前貼文：「闖賊無門，匹馬橫行天下；元凶有耳，一兀直犯神京。」又有對子云：「闖用牛，明用馬，兩般禽獸；清用銓，明用鋮，一塊金錢。」其不得人心若此。後引發江北將領左良玉「清君側」，馬士英令史可法盡撤江防以禦左良玉，清軍乘隙而入，史可法回防揚州，最終殉國。弘光帝率潮棄城出逃，仍被清軍所執。據稱弘光帝被押回南京時，百姓夾街唾罵擲瓦。「跑馬崇禎」官私皆鑄，有論者認為私鑄者乃復會讖緯，祈明速亡，因鑄此錢。

崇禎帝，廟號明思宗，諡號明莊烈愍帝，名朱由檢。於天啟七年至崇禎十七年(公元1627-1644年)在位，為明朝第十六位也是最後一位皇帝。崇禎帝即位初期致力於整飭吏治、削除宦黨，力圖振興國政，然時局已極艱難，內有李自成、張獻忠等農民起義勢力崛起，外有後金(清)日益強盛，邊患頻仍。政治上，朝廷派系紛爭不斷，崇禎帝多疑任性，頻繁更易大臣，導致決策失當。加以國庫空虛，軍費難支，民變愈發熾烈。崇禎十七年(公元1644年)，李自成攻陷北京，崇禎帝自縊於煤山，明朝遂告滅亡。後世一方面視明思宗為君主殉國的悲劇人物，另一方面也批評其為無力守住江山的昏庸君主。

李自成，陝西米脂人，原為明朝的一名驛卒。明末因天災頻仍、官府苛政與民變四起，他投身民變軍，並迅速崛起為主要領袖之一。公元1644年，李自成率軍攻入北京，崇禎帝自縊，明朝滅亡。他隨即自立為帝，建立大順政權，年號「永昌」。然而其政權僅存數月，旋即因軍紀敗壞、不得人心，加上明將吳三桂引清兵入關，李自成兵敗潰退。次年(公元1645年)，李自成在湖北九宮山一帶遇害，一說被地方武裝所殺，一說死於自盡。他被後世視為推翻明朝的重要人物，但也因未能建立穩定政權、導致清軍入主中原，而評價褒貶不一。

弘光帝，名朱由崧，公元1645年在位，為明神宗孫、福王朱常洵之子，是南明第一位皇帝。公元1644年明朝滅亡，朱由崧於次年在南京即位，改元弘光，試圖延續大明正統。然而弘光政權內部矛盾重重，權臣馬士英與阮大鋮專權，朝政混亂，文武對立激烈，地方軍閥如「四鎮」擁兵自重，拒不聽令，導致抗清部署紊亂。同年，清軍南下，明將史可法戰死揚州後，南京失守，弘光帝在逃亡途中被降將劉良佐擒獲，送往北京，次年(公元1646年)被處死。其在位時間短暫，政治無為，未能有效整合南方力量抗清，後人多認為其昏庸怯弱，是南明失敗的開端。

馬士英是南明弘光政權的重要權臣。崇禎年間為東林黨人，後來因政見與利益轉向，與閹黨人物阮大鋮合作，擁立弘光帝，主導弘光朝政。然而馬士英一方面缺乏有效的政治遠見與整合能力，另一方面又沉溺於權術與利益，導致朝廷黨爭不斷，忠誠有志之士接連離去，作為江北藩衛的四鎮亦漸失掌控，嚴重削弱了政權的穩定性與凝聚力。