194 M. M. Cliakravarti — Date of gold coins from Angul. [Aug., 



Being in Simla, away from all reference books, I cannot enter fully 

 into the Babu's queries ; but it appears to me very likely that both his 

 suggestions may be correct, that some of the coins should rather be 

 ascribed to Anagga Bhima, and that the numeral figures should be read 

 as he proposes to read them. 



Gaya, lOth July, 1898. 

 My dear Sir, 



Your interesting notes on the Gagga coins received from 

 Angul, I have only lately come across. May I suggest the following 

 points for your consideration and remarks ? 



All the coins are ascribed to one king, Anantavarman alias Coda- 

 gagga. May I ask why they should be presumed to belong to only 

 one king ? Three coins bear letter-groups indicating a name. No. 29 

 has been correctly read as *^ Cn-ga(m*)-ga ; " No. 22, seems to bear 

 the letters " Cri-ana . . . ; " No. 18 has letters hardly legible, such as 

 Cri ? ?, but possibly they are Ori-ana... The letters " (^rl-ana^' might 

 be the initial letters of Anantavarman, Anagga Bhima, or Aniyagka 

 Bhima. Of these, Anantavarman is not probable, because it is merely 

 a title common to the early Graijga kings and on such small coins only 

 the names of the kings would have been stamped. I find Dr. Hultzsch 

 has taken Codagaijga to be a surname, but it is the real name, while 

 Anantavarman is the surname. Then again Aniyagka Bhima appears 

 to be only a variant of the name Anaqga Bhima ; and the only king 

 named Aniyaijka has also been called Anaqga. Would it not be there- 

 fore better to infer that No. 22 (and possibly No. 18), are coins of 

 Anarjga Bhima Deva ? Some of the other coins might also belong 

 to any other early Gaqga king, other than Codagaijga. 



May I ask how the date has been arrived at ? The earliest 

 figures used in Orissa (and probably in Kaliqga) will be found in the 

 copper plates printed in J. A. S. B., 1896, Plates VIII to XVIII (left 

 hand side near the holes). From the figures there given and from 

 others which I recollect, the figui es 3 and 9 of the coins as now read 

 would seem to be 2 and 5. Hence the following would appear to be the 

 correct reading : — 



in No. 17, 22 for 33. 



„ No. 18, 12 for 13. 



„ No. 19, 2 for 3. 



„ No. 21, 5 for 9. 



„ No. 22, 24 for 34. , * 



„ No. 23, 24 for 34. 



„ No. 27, 15 for 19. 



„ No. 28, 22 for 33. 



