190 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XVI, 
appearance of this curiously-named mint in the reigns of 
Akbar’s successors (the three known exceptions only prove the 
rule), lends some support to this conjecture. We know from 
Roe, Bernier and Manucci that the emperors continued to be 
accompanied in their progresses by all the Imperial karkhanas. 
We may be sure that the Mint was one of them, and that coins 
were freely struck and the )p»é= Gydl th or ‘His Majesty’s 
wn Mint,’ 
S. H. Hopivara. 
THE COLLEGE, 
Junagadh, 1st May, 1920. 
211. NOTES AND QUERIES REGARDING MUGHAL 
MINT-TOWNS. 
ITAWAH AND ITAWA. 
In the Notes on ‘ Kanji’ and ‘ Manghar’ (N.S., XX XT), I 
have laid some stress on the fact that the Mughal spelling of 
Indian place-names is neither so capricious nor so arbitrary 
as 1S Sometimes supposed, that all those toponyms which are, 
or deserve to be well known, are written in a fairly uniform 
nmianner by the better authors, and that when there are alterna- 
tive or double forms, it is often possible to account for them. 
I beg to invite attention to-day to the raison détre of the 
form 14 which is familiar to numismatists. 
he earliest known coin of this mint is a Nisar of 1097 A.H., 
the earliest coin published a rupee of 1098 A-H. The latter is 
in the Indian Museum, which possesses “a fine series of the 
rupees ’”’ of Aurangzeb ‘Alamgir. “In 1109—forty-second year, 
the mint which hitherto had been written 86) is spelt} sU) "and 
this spelling is retained to the end.” (H. N. Wright, 1.M.C., 
III, Introd., xlv.) 
The question is, why was the orthography altered? To this 
the contemporary historian Khafi Khan furnishes an answer 
which is quoted and translated below : 
