^{page 138 note 1} If Col J. Abbott's collection—formed on the eminently favourable soil of the Hazárah country—prove as rich in Ghaznaví treasures as the choice specimens of his Bactrian series may lead us to expect, the numismatic history of the house of Subuktagín will be greatly enriched.

^{page 138 note 2} Vol. xxi. p. 115.

^{page 140 note 1} “Táríkh A′l Subektegín, Historia magna Ghaznavidarura pluribus voluminibus comprehensa, Auctore Abu'l Fadhl Al Beihacki.”—Flugel's Hájí Khalfa. See also notices of this author in my earlier paper, J.R. A.S., ix. pp. 277, 331, 376.

^{page 140 note 2} In quoting the Persian text of the original passage in 1847. I remarked:— “The subjoined account of the succession to Alptagín's chieftainship is given entire from the Tabakát-i-Násirí, as offering a version of the question to which it refers widely differing from that to be found in the writings of the more generally known authors; and although there are many objections to the unqualified admission of its verity, yet the Násirí's undoubted antiquity and usual accuracy entitle the statement to full consideration.” (J.R.A.S., ix. 303.) At the period when this extract was made, I was ignorant of the remarkable facilities and advantages enjoyed by the author from whose works the Tabakát-i-Násirí reproduces the statements embodied in the text. We still only know Abúl Fazl Baihakí by one of his many works; the “Táríkh-i-Masa'udí,” being the only one of the series which seems to have been preserved to us; but taking that production as a specimen of the whole, we have indeed reason to regret the loss of the remainder. Oriental students will be glad to learn, that the Persian text of the “Masa'údí” is already prepared for publication, and is expected to appear under the editorship of Mr. W. H. Morley.

^{page 140 note 3} The Tabakát-i-Násirí was completed in a.h. 658. The author, Minháj us Suráj Juzání, composed his work at Dehlí, dedicating it to Nácir ud dín Mahmúd, the reigning Emperor of Hindustán. See ante, Journal, ix. pp. 377, 304. Háji Khalfa (vol. iv. p. 153) has the following note regarding this work:—

“No. 7928. Tabakát el Násirí classes Nasiricæ Auctore Minháj Jorjáni filio ejus, qui vulgo Siráj dictus est anno—mortuo; Historia Persica, quam de expeditionibus bellicis Nasir ud dmi Mahmud Shah ben Iletmish Dehlewi composuit.” See also Stewart's Catalogue, No. xi. p. 7; and Mr. Morley's Catalogue of the Roy. As. Soc. MSS., No, xii, p. 21.

^{page 141 note 1} The word is variously written in the different MSS. as and The former is adopted in the East India House MS., the Paris copy, and that of Gen. Brigg's now in the library of the Royal Asiatic Society. I propose, with but slight hesitation, a rectification of the orthography to or “Lumghán,” the Lampagæ of classical writers; the of the Unpublished MS.; Kánún-i-Masa'údí of Albírúní; and the of the same author as quoted by M. Reinaud; Fragments Aṛabes et Persans; Paris, 1845, p. 131. See also Erskine's Memoirs of Baber, p. 143; and M. St. Martin (p. 298), Mémoire Analytique snr la Carte de l'Asie Centrale et de l'Inde, appended to M. Stan. Julien's Memoires sur les Contrées Occidentals. Hiouen-Thasang, (Paris, 1868).

^{page 141 note 2} “Eight years” is the time given in all the MSS.

^{page 141 note 3} Two copies, out of the three I have at this moment the opportunity of consuiting, give ten instead of two; the former, however, is a palpable error.

^{page 141 note 4} The name of this place varies in the different MSS., appearing in the several copies as and Col, W. Anderson, C.B., of the Bengal Artillery, who has served in Afghánistán, and given much attention to the geography of the country, identifies the locality with “Cherth,” which is mentioned in the Ayín-i-Akbarí as “one of the dependencies of Toomáu Lahooker (Lóhgar)." AA. ii. p. 181. Báber had previously furnished this indication, in his Memoirs, to the effect, “Lohnger (Lohgar) is another Tutnân, the largest town of which is Cherkh. … Cherkh has numerous gardens, but there are none in any of the other villiages of Lohuger, The men are Aughân-Shâl.—Erekme's Memoirs, p, 148.

^{page 142 note 1} See important coin of Alptagín, J.R.A.S., ix. p. 295, “Vierzehn unedirte Samaniden-Münzen; von P. saweljew (Lu le 10 Mars, 1854).”

^{page 142 note 3} St. Petersburg, 1826. Prof. Dorn has lately published the first portion of M. Fræhn's Posfliuinoas Works (St. Petersburg 1855).

^{page 142 note 4} Bulletin de la Classe Hiatorioo-Philologique de l'Académie Impériale des Scieaees de Saint-Pétersbourg, tome xii. (A.D. 1855) p. 90.

^{page 143 note 1} The following is Prof. Fræhn's description of this coin:—

“No. 229, d. Rariss. Notabilissim. cus.

(deest,)

in Balch a. eod. 324

A. ii. p.p. Nuh fil. Nasri ∥ Jusuf.

A. ii. p.p. Er. Easzi-billah ∥ Nasr. fillus Ahmedis.

Inf. est nomen, quod … tegin referre videtar.”—Recensio, p. 569.

^{page 143 note 2} I have been unable to discover the authority for this statement under the reference indicated; but, assuming that Fræhn's Neue Sammlung (Leipzig, 1844, p. 124) contains the full reprint of his original paper, I must conclude that the date of a.h. 865, here given, is an interpolation of M. Dorn's, for which Prof. Fræhn is not responsible. The latter author does not specify from what source he derives his historical information, hence further means of comparison in this direction are denied me.

^{page 144 note 1} See the various authorities quoted at the foot of p. 298, Jour. R. A. S. vol. ix. Also Mirkhond, Histoire des Samanides, edited and translated by M. Defréinery, Paris, 1845, pp. 164, 166, and note, p. 263; likewise Price, quoting the Khalásat al Akhbâr, ii. 277.

^{page 144 note 2} Ibn Haukal, who had every means of knowing the facts connected with the early conquest of this city, would seem to imply that it was not occupied as a capital by the Muhammadans till 355 a h. See St. Martin, Mémoires sur l'Arménie, ii. 21. Reinaud, Mémoire sur l'Inde, p. 244; and J.R.A.S., ix. p. 286, note 2.

^{page 144 note 3} Ferishtah definitively places this revolt in a.h. 351; the expressions made use of are—

See p. Bombay-Lithographed Edition.

The Táríkh-i-Guzíah gives “six years” as the interval that elapsed between Mansúr's accession and Alptagín's revolt; if we correct the years into months we obtain a more probable period. (See MSS. Táríkh-i-Guzídah, E. I. House Library, Nos. 80 and 649.)

[Since the above note has been set up in type, I have had an opportunity of examining Colonel Sir H. C. Rawlinson's MS. copy of the of Ibn Athír, Under the miscellaneous heading of the year 351, appears, seemingly, the first mention of Alptagín, as reproduced in the subjoined passage, whence it will be seen that Mansúr did not call upon Alptagín to appear at Bukhárá till the third month of a.h. 351. It is a matter of regret to me that Colonel Rawlinson's copy of this rare work ends with the annals of A.H. 363, while the published edition of Thornberg (1851–53) commences only with the year 527, (being continued on to a.h. 628).

Hájí Khalfa notices the Kámil ul Tawáríkh to the effect:—‘No. 9733. Kamil el tewáríkh, liber historiarum perfectus. Tredecim volumina, anctore Sheikh Izz-ed-dín A'li ben Mohammed Jezeri, vulgo Ibn-elathir dicto et anno 630 (inc. 18th Oct., 1232) mortuo. Incepit ibi a rerum initio, et ad annum 628 (inc. 9th Nov. 1230) progressus eat.” V. 25.]

^{page 145 note 1} A'bd-ul-Malik died in Shawál, or the tenth month of a.h. 350. Abúl Fidá, Annales Mualemici, Reiske (1790) ii. 470.—“11th Shawál, 360.”—Kitáb Yamíní, p. 270.

^{page 145 note 2} In this redistribution of the intervening epoch, it is of course necessary to reject all notion of the Ferwán Toghrá coins, Nos. B, C, D (Jour. ix. 201–2), of the years 365 and 366, having formed part of the Mint issues of Alptagín; nevertheless they may still be taken to have constituted a portion of a serial coinage, based upon models of earlier introduction, continued under his auspices and retained by his successors after him. Such an amended theory is likewise demanded by the numismatic evidence recently brought to light, which explains satisfactorily the otherwise anomalous reiteration of the name of Nasr bin Ahmad throughont the series. As he is shewn by M. Dorn's coins (Samaniden-Münzen von P. Saweljew, St. Petersbonrg, 1855, Nos. 11, 12, 13) to have been the first to adopt and introduce into Mint use the distinctive motto of on the occasion of the victory of his army over the Delemites at Muhammadia (Rai) in a.h. 329.

^{page 145 note 3} Ibn Khaldún, as quoted by M. Defrémery (p. 263) affirms—“Alptésuin était au nombre des affranchis des Samanides et gouverneur de Ghaznah et du Khoraçan. Son fils, Abou-Ishac, était son lieutenant dans cette dernière province, et comptait Sébuctéguin parml ses serviteurs. II l'investit du poste de chambellan. Abou- Ishac se rendit à Bokhara sous le règne d'Alsésid-Mançour, fils de Nouh.

Sébuctéguin remplissait alors les fonctions de chambellan auprès d'Abou-Ishac. Alptéguin mourut à Ghaznah, et son fils Abou-Ishac fat envoyé dans cette ville pour le remplacer. II mourut peu de temps après son arrivée.” U'tbi, in his Kitáb í Yamíní, under the authority of Abúl Hasan Kházin, also mentions Abú Ishak as commandant of the forces in Khorásán, from which post, the text would seem to imply that he was promoted direct to the government of Ghazní. See M. de Sacy. Notices and Extracts, iv. 330, and translation of the same work, likewise from the Persian version, bythe Rev. J. Reynolds. O. T. F., London, 1858, p. 22.

As there was some discrepancy to be detected between the French and English versions of this important quotation, and as each pretended to be DO more than a mere translation of a translation, I thought it worth while to refer to the original Arabic text; and, having collated the excellently written M.S. in the British Museum, with a very elaborately commentated lithographed edition, printed at the Delhi Madrissa, I sought the assistance of Mr. H. T. Prinsep in securing an accurate and independent rendering of the somewhat obscure passage. The result is appended below.

“This account of him [Subuktagín] was related to me by Abúl Hasan Ja'far, son of Muhammad the Treasurer,—‘That he [Subuktagín] came to Bukhárá in the days of the good Amir Mansúr Bin Núh, in the suite of Abú Ishak, son of Alptagín, who was commandant of the armies of Khórásán. Then (literally, when he, Abú Ishak, was that)—he [Subuktagin] was his [Ishak's] Hajib Kabír, or Master of the Ceremonies. And he had a noble countenance, and the burthen of Ishak's affairs was on him, and the management of all his business was in his hands. The nobles of that state (i.e. Bukhárá) remarked in him the qualities of high courage and kindness of disposition and generosity, with energy an promptitude, and anticipated for him a career of exaltation because of his high aspirations and acuteness. At the time of Abú Ishak's return to Ghazní, as Váli and chief in his father's place, he [Subuktagín] returned with him in the suite,—that is, in command of his troops, and discharging the duties of the chamberlain's office. But Ishak, very soon after his return, finished his career and lost his life, leaving none of his race or kin fit for his position and place. Then a number of his [Ishak's] servants and of those of his father were in great anxiety and trouble as to the succession to the chiefship and [the choice of] a person in whose good management of all partíes they could confide; and they did not cease differing about the chiefship and quarreling about relative fitness, until at last, by the assent of all voices, it was agreed to make him [Subuktagín] the Amír; and all opinions combined to approve his arrangements and to obey his orders for bringing forward or postponing.”

^{page 146 note 1} As I have already remarked in my first paper, a parallel system of recognition of the Sámání lords of Bukhárá was seemingly maintained on the Ghaznaví currency up to the date of the extinction of the suzerain dynasty. See J.R.A.S. ix. 268, and coins Nos. 9. 10, 22, 23, &c, old series.

^{page 147 note 1} J. R. A. S., ix. p. 326, No. 48.

^{page 147 note 2} Rauzat-as-safá, vol. iv. c. 14. I quote from the Persian MS. of the R. A. S. No. xxv., as I have not been able to meet with the Vienna translation. “Historia priorum regum Persarum, ex Mohammede Mirchond. Persicè et Latinè, 4to Viennæ, 1782.” See also Habib-us-Siyar, vol. ii. c. 4. (Bombay lithographed edition, 1857), and Price, quoting Khulásat-al-Akhbár, , “Mohammedan History, London,” 1821, vol. ii. p. 243Google Scholar.

^{page 148 note 1} Notices et Extraits dea Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale, vol. iv. p. 336. Histoire de Yémineddoula Mahmúd (Kitáb Yémini), traduite de Persan, par A. I. Silvestre de Sacy; and also The Kitáb-i-Yamíní, translated from the Persian version of Ul-Utbi, by the Rev. J. Reynolds (Oriental Translation Fund), 1858, p. 51.

^{page 148 note 2} Ibn Athír, a.h. 353; Rauzat-as-sufa, a.h. 353; Habib-us-Siyar, A H. 350.

^{page 148 note 3} In a h 353, according to the Khulásat al Akhbár. Price ii. 43.

^{page 148 note 4} The following coin of Hussain-bin-Táhir is to be found in Colonel Rawlinsou's collection:—

Margin illegible

^{page 148 note 5} Reynolds, p 52. The name is not given by De Sacy.—Not. et Ex. iv. 337.

^{page 148 note 6} “Ark,” De Sacy, iv. 337–8; and Kitáb i Yamíní, p. 59.—Ibn Athír. See also Histoire des Samanides, par Mhkhond, traduite par M. Defrémery, Paris, 1845, p. 265: Col. Anderson supposes this name of Ark (the Greek αρχ) to used for the citadel of Zaranj, the capital of Seistán. Under the description that town in the Ashkál al bilád, we are told—“Inside the city, between Kurkoonuh and Meeshuk gates, is a grand building called the Urk–it was the treasury of Omar.” See Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, xxi, 365, 372.

^{page 149 note 1} About A.H. 371. Price ii. 245. Defrémery, p. 265.

^{page 149 note 2} Albírúní Kánún MS.— For see also Ouseley's Oriental Geography, pp. 208, 211,212. Möller, T. H., Climatum, Liber, (Istakhrí), Gotha, 1839, p. 103Google Scholar; and Col. Anderson's Translation of the Ashkál bird's Account of Seistán, Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, xxi. pp. 369, 371, and 373.

^{page 149 note 3} Dow's Translation of Ferishtah, i. 22 Brigg's ditto, i. 16. Kitáb-i Yamíní 43. Reinaud, l'Inde, 250. Maleom's Hist. Persia, i. 316.

^{page 149 note 4} Kitáb i Yamíní, p. 273.

^{page 149 note 5} R. S. iv. 15. On Sámsám ud doulah Buíyah's accession to power at Shiráz, i. e. [about] 379 a.h. Abúl Faraj, a h. 379, p. 212. See also D'Herbelot in voce; and Price ii. 265, a h. 387–98.

^{page 149 note 6} R. S. vol. iv. cap. 15. The Habib us Siyar, ii 4, in commenting on his and a second similar murder, says—

^{page 150 note 1} Dow, i. 51. Bujerac, Not. et Ex. Bagrachak. Arabic text, Tarikh Yamíní R.S.

^{page 150 note 2} a.h. 390. T. Y. p. 279.

^{page 150 note 3} Not. et Ex. p. 739. T. Y. 280.

^{page 150 note 4} T. Y. 285. Mirkhond does not adopt this preliminary statement of U'tbi's but he is quite clear as to the treachery, and adds—

^{page 150 note 5} R. S. Ták So also Price, K. A. 282.

^{page 150 note 6} Price dates this expedition of Mahmúd in 394 (p. 282, vol. ii.) D'Herbelot in voce, 393 a.h. p. 533. De Guignes, ii. 155, a.h. 393.

^{page 150 note 7} R.S. H.S. De Sacy proposes to amend this to Dhouzdjan. Not. et Ext. iv. p. 353.

^{page 150 note 8} The Khalásat ul Akhbár sums up his character thus:—“This Kholf, the son of Ahmad, is represented, at the same time, as equally adorned and distinguished by his acquirements in all the learning of his age and country, by the liberality and benevolence of his mind, and by his unbounded patronage of genius and science, however exhibited.” Price, vol. ii. 243.

^{page 151 note 1} This coin has been engraved for the forthcoming number of the Numismatic Chronicle as No. 5, vol. xx. p. 56, to illustrate a paper on the special subject by Mr. Vaux.

^{page 153 note 1} This coin has likewise been engraved for the illustration of Mr. Vaux's paper in the Num. Chron. xx. p. 56.

^{page 157 note 1} Professor Wilson was at first inclined to suggest a transcription of Sri prabhweka for the opening phrase, but upon examining more closely the formation of the original letters and comparing them with repetitions or variations on other portions of the coins, he decided upon the reading given above, representing Avyaktamekam, “the indiscrete, the invisible one”—specially used to signify the first cause or supreme universal spirit.

^{page 159 note 1} See geographical summary at the end of this section of the paper.

^{page 160 note 1} An engraving and description of the fellow minár will be found at the end of the coins of Masẚúd.

^{page 160 note 2} This quasi shrine seems to have been respected from the very first; and even the all-destroying A'lá-ud-din Jehánsóz withheld his hand from the tomb of Mahmúd.

^{page 160 note 3} These gates are now preserved in the fort of Agra. Elaborate drawings of them have been published in the Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, vol. xii. (1843), and reduced facsimile models are to be seen in the Crystal Palace at Sydenham.

^{page 161 note 1} The above is extracted verbatim from the Jour. As. Soc. Bengal (1843), vol. xii. p. 77. The imperfect state of the monument from whence this inscription has been copied, must necessarily detract from the conclusiveness of portions of the transcription; however, in the absence of authentic facsimiles, it is given on the faith of the officials employed by General Nott, for it is not definitively stated, nor can I otherwise discover, under whose direct supervision the professed reproduction and too obvious restitutions were made.

^{page 162 note 1} I have reproduced the Arabic text given above from the Kufic facsimile of Lieut. Studdart. The more minute Kufic legend on the band below the main inscription is too imperfectly rendered in that officer's lithograph to bo susceptible of decipherment. It appears, however, to commence with the usual

^{page 162 note 2} It will be seen that a counterpart definition of the date of Mahmúd's decease is given by Baihaki.—Jour. Boyal Asiatic Society, ix. 331.

^{page 163 note 1} This nomination is deposed to in his brother Masaúds own words:— MS. Táríkh-í-Masaúdí. I observe that Muhammad was at his seat of government at the moment of his father's death. One copy of the Masaúdí inserts the following passage to this purport, after the word in the extract already given from a less perfect MS., at p. 331, vol. ix. line i, note 1:—

^{page 163 note 2} See Journal, vol. ix p. 312.

^{page 163 note 3} The jealousy existing between these twin brothers, as well as the subject of Oriental pomps and ceremonies, is amusingly illustrated in the following speech of Masaúd:—

^{page 164 note 1} There are traces only of the commencement of the unit number I adopt 421 a h. as the more probable date, in preference to 411 a.h.

^{page 164 note 2} Nos. 50, 53, Old Series, and No. 21. New Series, p. 156.

^{page 164 note 3} See Journal, ix. p. 316; also geographical notes immediately following the Table of dates, infra.

^{page 164 note 4} “a patronymic, or a filionymic.”

^{page 164 note 5} The legible legends on coin No. 19 now enable me to explain the imperfectly formed monogrammatic heading on the reverse of Coin LVII., which proves to be the identical designation of

^{page 165 note 1} See note on this mint city, Jour. R. A. S. ix. pp. 316 and 339; and also the geographical recapitulation at the end of this article.

^{page 169 note 1} See also remarks upon the same subject apropos to Coin No. XCVIII., Old Series, ix. p. 353; and note, p. 173, infra; also Elliot, Historians of India, 117; and Kitáb i Yamíní (Reynolds), p. 405.

^{page 170 note 1} Jour., ix. p. 282.

^{page 170 note 2} Jour., p. 286.

^{page 170 note 3} Jour., ix. p. 284, foot note.

^{page 170 note 4} Coins of the Kings of Kábul, Jour. R.A.S., ix. 177.

^{page 170 note 5} Journal, ix. 349.

^{page 170 note 6} Journal, ix. p. 303. Coins 2, &c. See also general remarks on the subject, p. 288, ibid.

^{page 170 note 7} As I have lately had occasion to review the dynastic bearing of this name in connection with the employment of another title on one of the numerous offshoots from the standard type of coin, I may as well extract my observations on the subject:—

“I do not know that there are any more exclusively Hindu novelties in this section of numismatics that I can usefully refer to; but, before I leave the subject, I may be permitted to make some observations in reference to an original suggestion of my own, that the on the reverse of the immediately succeeding Moslem coins, was designed to convey the title of the spiritual representative of the Arabian Prophet on earth, embodied for the time being in the Khalíf of Baghdád. Sir H. M. Elliot, placing himself under the guidance of Captain Cunningham, has contested this inference. (Elliot's Muhammadan Historians of India, 152.) I am not only prepared to concede the fact that Muhammad-bin-Sám uses this term in connection with his own name on the lower Kanauj coins, but I can supply further independent evidence, that my opponents could not then cite against me, in the association of this title with the names of the early Sultáns of Dihlí in the Pálam Inscription (a. 1333, Víkramáditya); but on the other hand, I can claim a still more definitive support in an item of testimony contributed by the consecutive suite of the selfsame fabric of coins, where the is replaced by the word —Khalífa. As far as I have yet been able to ascertain, this transition first takes place on the money of 'Alá-ud-dín Masa'úd (639–644 a.h.): and here again I can afford, in all frankness, to cite further data that may eventually bear against myself, in recording that this reverse of is combined in other cases with a broken obverse legend of .... .... which, being interpreted to stand for the of the Arabic system, may either be accepted as the Sanscrit counterpart legend of Altamsh's anonymous coins in the Persian character, or be converted into a possible argument against my theory, if supposed to represent the independent spiritual supremacy claimed by subsequent Sultáns of Dihlí; which last assignment, however, will scarcely carry weight in the present state of our knowledge. As regards the difficulty raised respecting the conventional acceptance of the of the coins as an historical, rather than an individually titular, impress, I have always been fully prepared to recognise the linguistic value of the word Samanta, and yet claim to retain the Sri Samanta-deva—which comes down to us, in numismatic sequence, in the place of honour on so many mint issues—as an independent name or title, to which some special prestige attached, rather than to look upon it as an ordinary prefix to the designation of each potentate upon whose money it appears. And such a decision, in parallel apposition to the succession of the titles of Srí Hamíra and Khalífa just noticed, would seem to be strikingly confirmed by the replacement of this same legend of Srí Samanta-deva, on the local coins of Cháhad-deva, by the style and title of the Moslem suzerain to whom that lája had eventually to concede allegiance.“—Prinsep's Essays John Murray. London, 1858, i. 332.

^{page 171 note 1} Eventually published under the Auspices, of Mr. Murray.

^{page 172 note 1} See infra, under the Ghorí dynasty.

^{page 174 note 1} A number of incidents curiously illustrative of the manners and customs of the day and the state of civilization of the Ghazuavi court, at this time held at Balkh, are developed in the course of the narration of this bit of diplomacy. The difficulties incident to the absolute necessity of the use of a foreign and very imperfectly known language on this occasion are vividly brought to light. And while detailing the official ceremonies attendant on the public recitation of the counterpart treaties in the two languages, and the signature of the several documents by Masaúd himself, our author takes the opportunity of enlarging on the accomplishments of that prince as a Persian scholar, in contrast to the general amount of book-learning, which was clearly limited, as one of the chief officers whose countersignature was required, was obliged to have that duty performed for him by another!

^{page 174 note 2} Abú Rihán Muhammad bin Ahmad al Bírúní al Khawárizmí was born about a.h. 360, and died in a.h. 430.—Elliot, Historians of India, p. 96.

^{page 175 note 1} M. Defiémery proposes to correct the original text of into the Zamín dáwar, on the Helmund, of the present day. As the MS. of Ibn Athír and Ibn Khaldún, cited in support of this rectification, seem to be conclusive on the point, otherwise sufficiently reasonable in itself, I readily concur in the substitution.

M. Defrémery, in the same article (a critique on my previous paper on the Kings of Ghazní, in the Paris “Revue Numismatique” for 1849, p. 230.), while adding much valuable information from independent sources, takes further occasion to amend certain readings and omissions of mine. I may as well, therefore, advert to them all seriatim in this place.

The first objection taken (at p. 236.), is to my retention of the negative prefix in the word in the passage extracted from the Tárikh Guzídah, under note 1, p. 272, Journal, vol. ix. M. Defrémery has so much of justification for this somewhat gratuitous emendation, that one copy of the work in question, in the E.I.H. library (No. 160), does omit this initial nun, and it is possible that the Paris M.S. he had occasion to consult was equally deficient in the single dot, which constitutes so often an important element in Persian writing! I was fully aware at the time I made my quotation, of the variation between the two MSS., and I deliberately and intentionally selected an inferior and infinitely worse engrossed MS. (E.I.H., No. 649) as my avowed authority, because that copy made sense of the passage and the other did not. If I could have any doubt remaining on this merely critical issue (for I see M. Defrémery coincides with me in the ultimate interpretation) it would have been completely set at rest by the text of the Rauzat-us-Safá, which is phrased in a nearly similar manner, and which I alluded to without thinking it necessary, either then or now, to reproduce in confirmation of so obvious a meaning.

The next rectification concerns a more positive error of my own, which I am at a loss to account for, except on the supposition of insufficient reference to the text, whose general purport I was embodying in the current evidence applying to a particular issue Suffice it to say, that the words “in all nine years,” (line 17, p. 279, vol. ix. of this Journal), should be corrected to “according to another statement, nine years.”

Finally, M. Defrémery has pointed out (note, p. 242.), with regard to my remark (at p. 281. ix.) on Mirkhond's taking no notice of the vassalage of Bahrám Sháh, under Sanjar—that this statement is only partially correct, as although the author in question does not allude to this feodality in its proper place in the history of the Ghaznavía, he does speak of it under the section of his work devoted to the annals of the Suzerain Seljúks. See Journal Asiatique, October, 1848, p. 335.

^{page 180 note 1} 1st, A copy of Sir H. M. Elliot's, from which I have given the Persian text in the Jour As. Soc Bengal, xxi. p 121; 2nd, a MS in my own possession, (without date), once in the library of Ranjít Sing; and, 3rd, an old large-paper copy, the property of H. T. Prinsep, Esq

^{page 181 note 1} is the word used in my MS. It does not, however, appear in either Sir H. M. Elliot's copy or that of Mr. H. T. Prinsep. The Jital or Chital is a measure of value of special currency in the Delhí series, at which capital our author wrote during the reign of Altamsh (a.h. 607—633). See remarks on “Jitals,” in my “Supplementary Contributions to the Coins of the Pathán Suitáns of Hindustán,” printed at Delhí in 1851, p. 30, and Reprint in the London “Numismatic Chronicle,” vol. xv. p. 154.

^{page 181 note 2} The text in my copy of “Jámi' al Hikáyát” is:—

The passage is not so fully given in Mr. Prinsep's MS.

^{page 181 note 3} The exact words used are

^{page 181 note 4} In my MS., “the merchants” are the authorities stated to have been consulted on this occasion.

^{page 181 note 5} An imaginary sum; the original expression is

^{page 181 note 6} I hare already partially illustrated, from ths statements of Indian authors, the simple and easy process by which the Eastern Mint-masters coined money (Journal, ix. 281). The following account of the means employed for this end in India, almost to the present day, will give a more vivid idea of the facilities enjoyed by the evil disposed, under Native governments, for forgery and the production of debased coin:—

“March 22, 1848.—Pind Dadud Khan visited the Mint here, which is under the superintendence of Misser Bula Ram. Silver is collected in all directions in the shape of old rupees, bangles, and silver ornaments, which, after being refined, are converted into the new Lahore rupee. … The silver being obtained of sufficient purity to constitute the new rupees, which are said to be pure silver, it is cut into bars about the breadth of a rupee, and handed over to an artificer, who cuts these into the necessary weights to constitute the rupees. This being done, the rough bits of silver are heated to redness on hot charcoal, and when hot are beaten on an anvil with a round-headed hammer into the shape and size of the standard rupee. In this state they are handed over to a man who finishes them, by impressing the necessary inscription, which is done on a die of the most simple description, being an anvil with a round and highly-tempered steel surface, on which the inscription is engraved in reverse. On this the rupee is placed, and on, it a punch with a round and highly tempered steel face, on which the inscription to be impressed on the upper side of the rupee is carved. The punch being applied to the rupee, a smart blow from a heavy hammer is given by a man who stands in front of the one in charge of the die, and who holds the punch in his left hand, and a handful of raw rupees in his right, the lower die being firmly fixed in a strong case. In this way forty rupees were passed through the die, well engraved, in one minute; and the artificer said, that on an average he could engrave [strike] 1500 per hour.”—Dr. Fleming's Diary of a Trip to Find Dadud Khan and the Salt Range in the Punjab. Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, vol. xviii. (1850) p. 667.

^{page 183 note 1} I do not definitively assign the coin from which the subjoined legends are taken to Bahrám Sháh, for several reasons, without, however, having much doubt of its having issued from his mint. It will be seen that the legends are very imperfect. The first title of is most crudely formed; the second, is not used on his other coins; and, finally, his name is only conjecturally deciphered.

As regards the obverse surface, the designation of the Khalíf creates no difficulty, but the absence of the name of Sanjar, while suggesting a grave doubt as to the due attribution of this piece, in itself constitutes its interest in the question it gives rise to, as to whether it may not have been struck during a period when Bahrám had temporarily failed in his allegiance to that potentate.

^{page 184 note 1} The simple numbers refer to the old series in the Journal for 1848; the numbers in this paper are distinguished by the addition of the letters ‘N.S.’ Simple dates where unaccompanied by mint identifications are omitted from this list—excepting only in certain instances, where even in default of the definite name of the locality, the typical peculiarities of the coin itself authorize its legitimate assignment to a given city.

^{page 184 note 2} (Khalaf bin Ahmad, A.H. 355, No. 1, N.S.; 375, No. 3, N.S.)

^{page 185 note 1} Journal, ix. p. 376.

^{page 186 note 1} The Luknow Ashkál-ul-bilád has transformed this name into See Col. Anderson's paper, Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, xxii. p. 152.

^{page 187 note 1} See note upon Kundúz. M. St. Martin, Mem. Analytique (Hiouen Thsang), ii. p. 288. Major Cunningham identifies the O-li-ni of Huen Thsang with the Valm of the Arab geographers (J.A.S.B., xvii. 54). M. St. Martin is not satisfied with the conclusiveness of this assignment (Mem. Anal., p. 420).

^{page 187 note 2} See Journal B. A. S., xii. p. 299. Tabarí here notices it in association with Mervalrúd and Tálakán. It is indifferently written as or The government is also prominently mentioned by the same author so early as A.H. 31 (A D. 651–2.) on A'bdullah bin A'mar's reconquest, when the new distribution of A'mar's lieutenancies on this occasion is detailed as follows:—

Huen Thsang, who visited these countries at a still earlier period (Circá, a d. 630.) refers to the province of Júzján; though the details and particulars of its then existing government furnished to his biographers have not been preserved to us, the following is M. St. Martin's note on the subject:—

“Peudant son séjour à Balkh, Hiouen Thsang vit arriver plusieurs personages envojés par les rois de Joui-mo-tho et de Hou-chi-kien, pour obtenir de lui qu'il vînt à leur cour. II se rendit, quoique à regret, à ces invitations honorables, et ce fut pour lui nne occasion tie recueiller sur ces pays des renseignements qu'il a consignés dans ses Mémoires (Hoeï-li les a supprimés). Jouï-mo-tho était un petit pays … situé dans la montagne, vers le sud-ouest de Balkh; Hou-chi-kien, état beaucoup plus important (500 li de l'est à l'ouest, 1000 li du sud au nord), était au sud-ouest de Jouï-mo-tho. …

“Hou-chi-kien nous parait devoir se rapporter au district de Djouzdjân (nom que les Persans prononcent aussi Djouzkân), entre Balkh et le district de Mérou-erroûd. On peut voir les éclaireissements instructifs que Silvestre de Sacy a donnés sur le nom et la situation de ce district dans son ‘Mémoire sur deux provinces de la Perse orientale.’ (Tiré des Mines d'Orient et reproduit dans les Annales des Voyages, 1813). Nous ne trouvons ni dans les auteurs Musulmans, ni dans les sources plus modernes, aucune indication qui nous puisse fournir la synonymic du nom de Jouï-mo-tho.”—St. Martin, Mém. Analytique; Hiouen Thsang, ii. 289. See also Histoire de la vie de Hiouen Thsang (Stanislas Julien), Paris, 1853, p. 67.

^{page 188 note 1} See Coin No. 14, p. 291, vol. xii. J. R. A. S.; and also mint No. 65, p. 404, and Plate I. No. u, Vol. xiii.

^{page 188 note 2} These figures with all their imperfections should be reasonably valid inter se. I may note that Mervalrúd is placed in 34° 30′—86° 40′; Bámíán in 34° 55′— 92° 50′; and Balkh in 36° 41′—91° 5′.

^{page 188 note 3} The Mírásid ul Ittilá has the following note on Júzján:—

^{page 189 note 1} Anderson, Jour. As. Soc. Beng., xxii. 152.

^{page 189 note 2} See also Ouseley's Oriental Geography, p. 221.

^{page 190 note 1} In addition to the Persian text of two MSS. of this work (No 1952, E I.H, and No. 12, R.A.S.), I have availed myself of M Dorn's translation of this division of Mirchond's Rausat-as-Safá, appended to the history of the Afgháns (London, O. T. Fund, 1829), and M. de Frémery's Histoire des Sultáns Ghoundes, from the Persian text of the same author, illustrated by valuable notes, which appeared in the Paris Journal Asiatique for 1843

^{page 195 note 1} See Nos. 5 and 7, Old Series; also No. 42, infra.

^{page 195 note 2} Ibn Athír, among the events of a.h. 602, relates that when Ilduz got possession of Ghazní from Alá-ud-dín, he made a display of obedience to Ghíás-uddín, except that he did not order the Khutbah to be read in his name, or in any one else's; but he had the Khutbah read for the Khalíf, and prayed for mercy on Shaháb-ud-dín (i.e. Muiz-ud-dín) the Martyr—p. 145.

On the subsequent occasion of the capture of Ghazní from Alá-ud-dín, in a.h. 603, Ghíás-ud-dín is stated to have written to Ilduz to claim to have the Khutbah read in his name; on a repetition of this demand, Ilduz directed the Khatib to read the Khutbah in his own, name, after the prayer for mercy on Shaháb-ud-dín, p. 163.

Mínháj-us-Siráj tells us that Muhammad bin Sam's name was recited in the public prayers in the mosques at Delhí even unto the time when he himself wrote.

^{page 195 note 3} No. 6, Old Series, bearing the inscription reproduced below, possibly illustrates the earliest phase of Táj-ud-dín's independent coinage, wherein he alludes to his martyred lord, and styles himself “the great King, Sultán of the East,” &c. I am bound, however, to add, that a doubt as to the exact period of the mintage of this piece is suggested by the imperfectly-preserved foot-lines of the date, which would best answer to an original die-definition of a.h. 612.

Obverse Area—

Reverse—

Margin—

^{page 196 note 1} Lady Sale's valuable collection, chiefly formed in Afghánistán, at a considerable outlay, has, I regret to say, been plundered and dispersed during the late disturbances in India. See Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, “Coin Collections lost during the late Rebellion,” by Freeling, G. H., Esq., B.C.S., No. ii. of 1858, p. 169Google Scholar.

^{page 197 note 1} Including a small suspending loop.

^{page 198 note 1} See coins of the Pathfin Sultans of Dehll (London, 1847), p. 11. There pieces bear a legend of

^{page 202 note 1} Recensio, pp. 146. 595.

^{page 202 note 2} Ariana Antiqua. Pl. xx. fig. 28, p. 437. See also the article of Soret, M. on the Sultáns de Kharesm, in the Revue de la Numismatique Beige (Bruxelles 1854), tome iv., p. 591Google Scholar.

^{page 203 note 1} J. A. S. Bengal, xxi. p. 127.

^{page 203 note 2} Prinsep's remarks are as follows:—“Fig. 2, a copper coin, also unique: it escaped my detection among a number of old Bukhára Musalmán coins, or it should have appeared along with the Bull and Horseman, or Rájput series, of December, 1835. It seems to link this curious outline group with the full-faced Sassanians of Vasudeva, &c.; for on the border of the obverse are Pehlví letters. The features of the supposed face are barely admissible as such, even to the lowest estimate of native art. The horse on the reverse is more palpable, but it seems more like a tughrá, or nourish of Persian letters, than ever. It is also reversed in position, and has no Nágarí legend.”

“The coins of this genus, although we have found them connected with Delhí sovereigns and Málwa rájas at one end of the series, evidently reach at the other to the Bráhimanical rulers of the Punjáb, and probably Kábul. They are procured much more abundantly at the latter place (and on the site of Taxila, according to M. Court) than in any part of India. Some of them exhibit on their reverse the style of Arabic now known to belong to the Ghaznaví Sultáns, while others agree rather with the Ghorí type, and contain known names of that dynasty.”

^{page 204 note 1} See Journal Asiatique, September, 1844: Fragments Arabes et Persans, par M. Reinaud; also the letter addressed to M. Reinaud by M. A. de Longperier, on this subject, annexed to the translation of the former.

^{page 204 note 2} My own comments on this piece were to the effect:—“In the absence of the coin itself, it would be rash to speculate upon the true purport of this obverse, or the tenor and language of the partially-visible legend. The reverse figure of the horseman, however, offers tempting material for the exercise of analytical ingenuity.

“That the lines of which the device is composed were originally designed to convey, in more or less intelligible cypher, some Moslem formula, there can be little question. How much latitude in the definite expression of the letters was conceded to the needful artistic assimilation to the normal type, it may be difficult to say. But, though I should hesitate to pretend that my eye could follow the several letters of the full kalimah of , I have no doubt that those words are covertly embodied in the lines forming portions of the general outline. The Kufic is palpable, when reading upwards from the front of the butt-end of the spear; portions of the may be traced along the spear itself, and the rest may be imagined under the reasonable latitude already claimed; and, lastly, the may be conceded in virtue of its very obvious final , which appears over the horse's hind quarters.

“The practice of reticulating words and names into device embellishments for the coinage was in high favour with Sámání mint-masters; and we have numerous instances of a similar tendency among the Muhammadan races who succeeded to much of the civilization of the Bukhárá empire, with the modified boundaries or altered seats of government, incident to their progress towards the richer provinces of the south. To confine myself to a single exemplification, however, I may cite the Ghaznaví (Láhór) currency, with the recumbent bull in Tughrá on the obverse, and with a Kufic legend on the reverse. In the lines of this ancient and revered Hindú device may here be read, in all facility and in two several directions, the name of the prophet of the Arabs,

page 204 note * Fræhn's Recensio Numorum Muhammedanorum: Emiri Samanicæ. Petropoli, 1826.

page 204 note † Ex. gr., see Jour. Boy. As. Soc, ix. Pl. iii. fig. 153, O.S.

^{page 205 note 1} Owing to a defect in my original note upon the subject, I am unable to say positively whether this particular reverse belongs to Ilduz or Muhammad bin Takash. However, as the sole interest of the piece consists in its geographical record, I have associated it with the coins of the like locality bearing the name of the latter monarch.

^{page 205 note 2} This name of Karmán does not refer to the extensive province of that designation, but to a city noticed in Ibn Athír as situated between Ghazní and Láhór. I. A., ii. p. 140. elsewhere (i. p. 108) he adds See also Geographical Index, infra.