1920.] Numismatic Supplement No. XXXIV. 223 
Talpur rule, a British resident was stationed here in terms of 
the treaty of April 20, 1838, concluded between the British 
Government and the Mirs of Sind.” (Ed. 1908, XV, 216.) 
If this is correct, and it appears to be based on reliable 
local information or official reports,! the identification with the 
capital of the Mir must be abandoned. 
There is a Khairpir in Bahawalpir State, Panjab, 38 miles 
North-East of Bahawalpar town.” ‘There is another town of 
the same name in the ‘Alipir Tahsil of Muzaffargarh district, 
Panjab, but the latter is said to have been founde i 
the 19th Century by a Bukhari Sayyad of the name of Khair 
Shah (Imp. Gaz. s. n.). 
Rodgers was the first to publish a /ulus of the type 
represented by 1.M.C., No. 462. The legend on the obverse is 
far from being perfectly clear. He boldly read it as Lrg? Gye 
srl 351 aSo, but said at the same time that he did not 
know where Khairpar was. (Indian Antiquary, 1890, p. 223, 
Pl. II, fig. 25.) Mr. Nelson Wright does not see any trace of 
the wo, or of the a&» on the obverse. (I.M.C., III, No. 462.) 
The specimen in the Panjab Museum dated 997 A.H. is of 
e 
ment’ which is found only on some coins of Ahmadabad 
and arare issue of Agra.? _Khairpir in Persian writing (493 > ) 
bears no small resemblance to Ujjainpiir y>3 wie! Cf. P.M.C., 
No. 575. I venture to suggest that the reading is erroneous 
and that the Ilahi coins of 46 and 47 R., at least, may be 
issues of Ujainpir or Chainpir. 
Junagadh, S. H. HopivALa. 
DEOGARH. 
from difficulty. Two types of coins are known, which are very 
different from each other, though both purport to have issued 
from Deogarh in the reign of Shah ‘A 
mens of the first type were published by Dr. Hoernle in 
J.A.S.B., 1897, with the following remarks :— 
miles S.E. of Pratapgarh on the railway line. They were all 
we d e same statement made in almost identical words in 
A. W. Hughes’ Gazetteer of the Province of Sindh (1874), p. 420. 
=e a han, an 
Mohammed, his cousin,” about the middle of the 18th Century (p. 40). 
3 Information received from Mr. Whitehead (February 1919). 
