155 
1890.] A. F. R. Hoernle — Copper Coins of the Surt Dynasty. 
published in this Journal, vol. LV, p. 184 (PI. VIII, fig. 4, 5), figures of 
a dam of Ibrahim as well as of a dam of Sikandar. 
All the coins of the hoard, which I am now going to describe, are 
diims. There is not a single one of a lower denomination among them. 
The copper coinage of the Siiri Dynasty is distinguished by a 
strange circumstance, which, if it has been noticed, has never been 
explained. Nor am I able myself to offer any satisfactory explanation. 
The manual and artistic execution in the majority of specimens, 
especially of Shor Shah, is remarkably good, so as to give the impres- 
sion that the dye-sinker must have been quite familiar with the Arabic 
or Persian characters which he engraved. Yet the legends are disfigured 
by the grossest blunders, indicating great ignorance of the language in 
which they are composed. Thus on the obverse the legend which ought 
to run or bicJl j commonly exhibits the follow- 
ing form •ioji. The {nun) of tid-dindn is generally placed 
across the top of the I {alif) of !■> (n»). It may be seen in the obv. mar- 
gin of fig. 2, and on the face of figs. 13, 29, 38. In fig. 17, is placed by 
the side of 9 in the usual fashion. Occasionally the correct phrase is 
met with, or at least what closely approaches to it ; as in figs. 14, 15 
where we have (^^1 j On Islam Shah’s coins occasionally an- 
other blunder is met with, viz., the foi’m as seen clearly on 
fig. 28. A clue to the origin of the blunder seems to be afforded by 
the obv. of fig. 16. Here we have the phrase given correctly, except 
that a dot is placed over dunyd, thus j tbeJl. It is easy to see how 
lb with a dot over it, might come to be mistaken for tjJ {i. e., (^), 
and that thus the phrase ( ), as seen on Islam’s coins, 
would arise. The first word Ibelt having been changed to the 
second word was, by some not quite intelligible process of reason- 
ing, or rather un-reasoning, changed to and the intermediate 
j was omitted. The phrases or are absolutely 
unmeaning. The word jybeJt might be read ad-dindn, as a sort of 
hybrid plui’al form of din ‘ a day ’ ; but even granting such a form, 
the phrase would make no sense. 
Another curious blunder is very common in the legend of the 
obverse area of some coins. The legend ought to run ^s>. 
Instead of this form, we very often find the following w* 
, or iXije as on fig. 8, or sometimes oven 
These forms give absolutely no sense ; almirah is nonsense ; 
