1920.] Numismatic Supplement No. XXXIV. 225 
the State Deolia-Partabgarh. As recently as 1869, the chief 
was described in an extradition treaty then ratified as the 
‘Rajah of Dowleah and Partabgarh ° ” Op. cit., ed. 1908, XX, 
-10 
Elsewhere in the same work, we read : “ Deolia (or Deogarh) 
—The old capital of the State of Partabgarh, Rajputana, 
situated in 24° 2’ N. and 74° 40’ E. about 73 miles due west 
of Partabgarh town.” (Jbid., XI, 247.) 
Turning to the ‘‘ Central India > of Malcolm, we find him 
speaking of ‘‘ Dewla named also Pertaubgurh-Dewla,” as a 
fortified town in the province of Ajmeer, the residence of the 
‘Raja of Pertaubgurh.” (Op. cit., II, 398.) 
Elsewhere he says that ‘“ Dewla is eight miles west of 
Pertaubgurh ” (IT, 417), and at p. 284 of the same volume, he 
informs his readers that Dewla or Deogarh is in Lat. 24° 2’ 9” 
and Long. 74° 43’ 40”. _ It is clear then that Deola or Deogarh 
was the old capital, and even in Malcolm’s time, it was the 
chief residence of the Raja. (Z6., 1, 15 
In aw 
that on these issues, the year is always either 1199-25 or 
1199-29 (26 2) or 1236-diw 45 (Webb, 24-5). 
Some confusion is created by the circumstance that 
Deogarh rupees and half-rupees of a very different type and 
apparently having little in common with them except the 
mint-name are also in existence. There are two specimens 
with the date 1193-20 in the Panjab Museum. (P.M.C., 
Nos. 3008-9.) Mr. Nelson Wright informs us that he has one 
of 1190-17, and Mr. W. &. Talbot possesses a similar coin of 
1198 A.H. (N.S., XIII, 241.) It is difficult to ascribe these 
coins to the Deogarh of Partabgarh, and the probabilities seem 
to be in favour of their belonging to some other atelier. 
Jnfortunately, Deogarh is a place-name of very common 
is 
which no historical or political importance can be claimed dur- 
ing the period to which the coins are restricted, and all but 
one of them are absolutely ignored in the M 
In the first place, Deogarh is iven as the ancient Hindu 
name of Deogir or Daulatabad, but that obsolete form is hardly 
likely to have been resuscitated on coins in the last quarter 0 
