Vol. X, No. 5.] Numismatic Supplement No. XXII. 163 



[N.S.] 



and No. 34 should read 42 or 43-1215 for 40-1215 The 

 Hijrl dates wanting on Nos. 32 and 33 are more probably 

 1214 and 1215 than anything else. 



J have said above that the mark jit was maintained aJmosJ 

 continuously until 1229 a.h. The exceptions are Nos. 38 and 

 39 Aim. which bear the word KT* in the place of jit. ThedaU-s 

 are 121 and 122, which seem to indicate 1219 and 1220. It 

 this is so, the connection of this change of mark with the 

 termination and the renewal of the original four years lease in 

 1219 a h. is probable. I have not been able, however, to hit 

 upon a plausible signification of TW. Can it be a disinclina- 

 tion to continue the use of jit from the fear of the Peshwa 

 thinking it presumption after the termination of the old lease . 

 This coupled with a desire to give a hint to the inhabitants of 

 Ahmadabad, that the Peshwa had not actually resumed posses- 

 sion, as the replacement of the simple ankush might be held to 

 show, may account for this curious variation. Is it to boot a 

 pious invocation of Rama to the end that Ahmadabad may 

 remain under the Gaikwar's sway ? n , wt .. . , 



Whatever 



50 



a return to the old symbol, which is continued in the year 

 of the reign of Shah 'Alam II. A remarkable figure this, as 

 the Emperor died in the 49th year of his reign, but it shows 

 how careless was the Maratha at this period of the change ot 

 the name of his shadowy suzerain. On the com that bears tne 

 figure (No. 41) the ankush has a small mark of differentiation 

 due no doubt to the appointment of a new mint Daroga . .But 

 later a return was made to academical exactitude, ine 

 next coin (No. 42) the first of Akbar's reign has the julus year 

 to correspond with the Hijrl date, and further the correcter 

 svmbol JH (i.e. JIT + the abbreviation sign I ) is used instead ot JU 

 for the first syllable of the word jtt*i**i^. 



In No. 44 we note an additional sign, which seems to read 

 * Its meaning is obscure. It is only possible to suggest 

 it may stand for Khan, which in Gujarati frequently is so 



The resumption of the lease of Ahmadabad from the 

 Gaikwar is marked by the issue of No. 46 without the sign JIT. 

 In its place is a sign like the spectacles on a cobra s hood 

 Justice Ranade in the article referred to a few pages back 

 makes no mention of this mark, but it appears on a silver coin 

 in my cabinet bearing the date 1244 in Maratha figures Ihe 

 coin bears a very close resemblance to the Maratha Chhatra- 

 pati (v. Dr. Abbott's article in J.B.B R.A.S. , Vol. XX , No^ L\ ) 

 and its main "lieude provenance " is Poona, although my 

 specimen was discovered in Ahmadabad. These facts, it is 

 true, do not throw much light upon the mark in question, but 

 are so far useful as to suggest that it denotes an issue of the 

 Pe3hwa rather than of the Gaikwar. 



