436 Proceedings of tlie Asiatic Society. [No. 4, 



2. From Baboo Gopee Nauth Sein, Abstracts of Meteorological 

 Observations taken at the Surveyor General's Office, Calcutta, for 

 March and April last. 



3. From Mr. E. C. Bayley, some remarks on certain coins recent- 

 ly procured for the Society from Captain Stubbs. 



Mr. Bayley remarked that the whole collection obtained from Cap- 

 tain Stubbs had not as yet been fully examined, but that he would 

 make some observations on a few of them which appeared to him 

 especially worthy of notice. 



Two of these were gold coins of Malwa, the first a fine one of 

 Mahomed Shah, the son of Hoshung Shah. 



It bore on the obverse the titles of that King " al Sultan ul Azim 

 — Taj ud dunia wa uddin Abul Mozuffer ;" on the reverse, " Mohamud 

 Shah bin Hushung Shah ul sultan" and round the margin the name of 

 the coin " al Sikah," the mint Shadiabad or Mandoo, and the 

 elate 840. 



As to the latter it was curious that Ferishtah quoting the Tari- 

 khi Alfi in two places gives dates which place the death of this 

 sovereign about two months before the close of 839, A. H. This point 

 is given with much circumstantiality and detail, so as to show that it 

 is no mere clerical error. 



The other coin which was somewhat similar in its reverse appear- 

 ance is of considerably later date. 



The obverse inscription ran thus : " ul Sultan ul Azim bin Ghieas 

 uddunia wa uddin Khilji" (bin ?), Abul Mozuffer Mahmood Shah 

 Khuld Allah Khalafalu. 



The reverse contained (imitating the coins of Alaudin Khilji of 

 Dehli) " Sekunder ul Sani Yamin ul Khalafat Nasir Amir ul mominin." 

 The reverse margin gives the same legend as the other coin, but the 

 date which was imperfect was either 908 or 909. 



The next three coins were coins of the earlier Khalifs. 



No. I. was a coin of the Abbaside Khalif al Mahcli and was struck 

 at Bagdad in 162 A. H. It is described and figured as No. XXIII. in 

 Marsden's Numismata Orientalia. 



The others were both apparently of Haroun al Rashid, dated re- 

 spectively 19 ? and 192. The date on the first named coin, however, 

 was somewhat rubbed and dubious, and the name of the mint was 

 also unfortunately imperfect. This was the more to be regretted as 

 the name of the mint seemed to be a new one. 



