i897.] 



C J. Rodo'ers — Coins struck at NaJian. 



85 



said Bahadur Shall was the General of the Maharaja of Nepal. From a 

 study of the present coin which belongs to W. S. Talbof, Esq., C. S., 

 Settlement Officer, Jhelum, I see I was wrong and hasten to coreeet my 

 mistake. On the coins of the later Nepal Maharajas the names and 

 titles generally come, in Nagari letters, thus : — " Cri Cri so and so Vikrama 

 §laha Deva." On this copper coin, reading from the bottom we have ; — 



where we see some alterations: — the insertion of ''•^ Maharaja ^^ and 

 the alteration of '^ Beva'' to ^^ Bahadur." ^X^m ^^f^W,^ is changed 

 to (*j^i »Ji>-^ ^^^.j4' I clo Jiot recollect seeing the title " Maharaja " on 

 any other coin of Nepal. It is common on the coins of Kangra, and 

 the coins of Sikkim have =it ft ^ f%f%^ ^rT JIT'^TTT^I on tliem, with tiie 

 last word spelt ^^T^T«t, as a variant. i^\j^^ is also on the coins of Sri- 

 nagar in Garhwal, stiuck by Pradip Sah, Lallat Sah and Parduman 

 Sah. So this coin of Nahan follows the coins of Srinagar somewliat. 



On the obverse the word I read o^i^jj-b^ I now read o^a^-^s, althongh, 

 the year 1227 is the Hijri year = 1812 AD. 



The only excuse I can offer for these mistakes is that I mistook 

 ^j^ for f*)^ ^^^ then, having started a theory, I made If'-^ j,il^ a person, 

 whereas the three words ji)\i l^^ j*^ are the titles of Girvan Yuddli. 

 I can only plead that, in my library, I possess no history of Nahan 

 except the stray notices given of it, in the eleventh volume of the 

 Gazetteer of the North-West Provinces. The Gazetteer of the Panjab 

 takes up only the British possessions, so it was useless looking in that 

 for anything about Nahan. The Panjab Government would be con- 

 ferring a benefit on the public by getting out a Gazetteer of the Native 

 States, in and around the country under immediate British rule. 



The second coin I give, I take to be one of Path Shah Bahadur 

 Maharaja, but I cannot make out all the legend on the obverse. He 

 was Maharaja of Sarmur. The year seems to be 1877 on the reverse 

 and if this is Samvat, it is equal to 1820 A.D. There is no doubt 

 about the mint Nahan. 



NAHAN COtNa 



k 



