Vol. V, No. 9.] Numismatic Supplement. 379 
[N.S.] 
peror, and inserted the year of Akbar. 
I still think it highly improbable that Jahangir would after 
merely a continuation—with or without Jahangir’s knowledge— 
of a practice that had sprung up in the last year of Akbar’s 
rei 
It is rather a curious circumstance that Salimi was a coin- 
designation at least ten years before Jahangir’s accession : see 
Blochmann, p. 30. But in this instance, the term had, I think, 
nothing to do with Sultan Salim, but was used with reference 
to Shaikh Salim of Fathpur Sikri, just as M‘uini referred to the 
saint of Ajmer. 
H. BEveripGe. 
72. Nore on Mr. BEVERIDGE’S ARTICLE ON THE SALiMi 
Corns. 
Through the kindness of the editor of the Numismatic 
Supplement I have been privil to read the manuscript of 
Mr. Beveridge’s interesting article on the Salimi coins, and an 
Opportunity is thus afforded me of reply. My contention that 
these coins in silver and in copper wereissued after Akbar’s death 
is in the main based upon the date—the year and month—exhi- 
bited on the coins themselves. Akbar died on the 10th of Aban, 
1014 H., and the earlier Salimi coins bear the name of that 
month Aban and of the four succeeding months of the year 
designated 50. Mr. Beveridge writes, ‘‘ If the date 50 means 
alive.” Butcan this dictum be accepted ? Several Salimi coins 
are dated Isfandarmuz 50, yet before the first day of Isfandar- 
muz Akbar had been nearly four months dead, and certainly at 
the time of issue of these Isfan. 50 Salimi rupees Akbar was 
not alive nor was he supposed to be alive. The ‘‘ 50” must 
evidently bear some other interpretation, and I fancy it is not 
