58 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, [N.S., XVII, 
Historical Society, Vol. IV, 1915, p. 94. (See also Ibid., p. 
44 ) 
It is obvious that there is a mistake or confusion some- 
where. If the coins were struck by Ranjit Dev himself, these 
dates must be wrong. If the dates are correct, the coins must 
have really been issued by some one else in his name after his 
ea 
coins have been figured, the Jodhpur coin in Num. Chron. 
1896, Pt. ii, Pl. xii, fig. 8, the Daru-l-Barakat rupee in P.M.C., 
Pl. XVII, No. 2839. -It seems to me that there is a very close 
resemblance in the style of the lettering which is, by itself, of 
a somewhat peculiar type. The obverses, in particular, are so 
similar as to indicate that the dies of both were either cut by 
the same person or that the engraver of the second had the - 
el 
throw some light on the origin of the epithet. Tod writes - 
Of the twelve sons of Ajeet [Ajit Singh, Raja of Jodhpir], 
Abhe Sing and Bukht Sing were the two elder 
but he executed the deed with his own hands, under circum. 
stances of unparalleled atrocity.” (‘ Annals and Antiquities of 
Rajasthan,’ Calcutta Reprint, 1898, I, 763. ; 
This was in Vikram Samvat 1781 (1724 A.C.). On coming 
to the throne, Abhay Singh not only fulfilled his promise to his 
brother, but added to it the fief of Jhalor. (Jb, T, 764.) After 
a reign of twenty-six years, Abhay was succeeded by his son 
Ram Singh in 1750 A.C. Bakht Sing ‘ absented himself from 
the inauguration, and sent his nurse as his proxy. This was 
construed as an. insult by Ram Singh who resumed the fief 
of Jhalor. *“ (Ibid., IT, 944.) A civil war broke out. Ra 
o the palace of Joda from the spoils of Ahmedabad. He re- 
taliated the injuries on the intolerant Islamite, and threw down 
