1917.] Numismatic Supplement No. XXVI II. 97 



epithets are left out. The only double dams known to me are 

 the two specimens mentioned on p. 236 of N.S. XXV, one of 

 Jahangir and the other of Shah Jahan. Each I think is still 

 unique. 



It is curious that the almost invariable use of the word 

 tanka by historians — Mr. Hodiwala gives instances of the 



seventh , tenth , fourteenth, regnal years— is not reflected 



on the coins themselves. Numismatists call by the name of 

 dams all the usual copper issues of Akbar of the appropriate 

 dimensions which bear no denominational epithet, especially 

 those which were struck before the ilahl era came into use in 

 Akbar's thirtieth year. They reserve the term tanka for those 

 issues on which the epithet occurs, and these are unknown to 

 coin collectors till Akbar's fortieth year. This is the date of a 

 half tanka of Agra mint in the Panjab Museum — Panjab Museum 

 Catalogue, Vol. II, No. 614. The date of this very coin was read 

 by Mr. C. J. Rodgers as forty-five — see Indian Antiquary, July 

 1890, Rare copper coins of Akbar, Fig. 36. I should be grateful 

 if numismatists would communicate to me the dates of early 

 specimens of the tanka issue. A numismatist would therefore 

 expect to find the term dam used by historians when they refer 

 to transactions which took place in Akbar's earlier years. 



Mr. Hodiwala shows that Dowson and Lowe in their trans- 

 lations more than once omit the word muradl from what is in 

 the original muradl tanka. Similarly the word tanka is omitted 

 in one original, and the word muradl in another. So though the 

 full form is muradl tanka, we also have the abbreviated epithets 

 muradl and tanka. Unless we are to blame the copyists for 

 incorrect and partial renderings, the inference seems to _be 

 that the word muracfo is not indispensable, and that muradl 

 tanka and tanka mean the same thing. This is the conclusion 

 that Mr. Hodiwala finally arrives at from other considerations. 

 I suggest that muradl is a redundant word which signifies that 

 the tankas were copper money or currency. In support of this 

 view I cite the fact that the word muradl is still used, though 

 much more rarely than the usual epithet muazl, to denote 

 amounts of copper money less than one rupee in value. Thus 

 muradl ath ana chhe pai can be used for muazl dth ana chhe pat. 



The further consideration arises, — Was the tanka merely a 

 money of account like our guinea at the present day ? Mr. 

 Hodiwala deduces from the passages quoted by him that the 

 tanka was current from the twenty-fifth to the fortieth year of 

 Akbar's reign, and that it was not merely a money of account. 

 The latter contention is supported by the facts that Badaoni 

 mentions one crore of tankas in cash, and that this historian 

 says that he himself received ten thousand of them from the 

 hands of the emperor. Also one Nazar Beg actually received 

 twenty- four thousand of these tankas, along with one hundred 

 ashrafis, and fifteen hundred rupees. This event occurred in 



