Please help identify this 'something'

I've got this in a pack of coins from eBay. I am not even certain this is a coin at all...




About 15mm in diameter, almost 4mm thick, weighs 7.1 grams

http://www.zeno.ru/showgallery.php?cat=5083
Maldives one of these.
On my phone having trouble browsing.
Also first pic is upside down.

This one has the date ah1294 (1877AD)
Regnal year 11
2 lari
KM# 36.1

Wow, interesting!

Can someone please point out for me where are year and denomination on this coin?

I rarely see coins with which I have absolutely no idea what to look at. It's so fascinating...

In yellow is the mint year (NOT ascension year) - but i see it as 1254; that 5 could easly be a 9 tho, like Petrus said.

EDIT: Oh, and the denomination, you can tell from the weight & diameter.

EDIT 2: WRONG information removed. It seems coins from the Maldives read differently that regular arabic coins.
It seems that in blue we have the MONTH, not the regnal year. Please see information in this coin description: http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=109113

ah yes! correct!
I learned again about this type of coins.
 

I also would be sure it is 1254, only 1254 doesn't exist according to the 2012 Standard Catalog of World Coins 1801 - 1900, 7th edition. But 1294 does:



According to the weight, it can only be the 2 Lari although your coin only weights 7.1 gr. and it should be 8.60 gr.
The 1/2 Larin (Kuda) 1294 only weighs 1.20 - 2.80 gr., so it's certainly not a 1/2 Larin.
Concerning the existing differences in weight for the 1/2 Larin, I shouldn't worry to much about the different weight between your coin and what Krause says. Krause also states varieties exist, so probably also in weight.

Quote: Essor ProfI also would be sure it is 1254, only 1254 doesn't exist according to the 2012 Standard Catalog of World Coins 1801 - 1900, 7th edition. But 1294 does:

It probably is a 9. The numbers are quite crudely written - look at 9s here:
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=46049
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=95435
They sorta look like the one in this thread.

Krause has a lot of errors.
But here it is 9 not 5

Yes, you're right. At first sight it looks like a 5, but after a closer look (in combination with the fact that the 1254 doesn't exist) I was agree it is a 9. A 5 should be small at the top and wide at the base (the opposite of the number on this coin) and you can see a little slash under what looks like a 5 at first sight and that slash makes it a 9.