Funcli-marhed coins of Hindustan, ^c. 
187 
1890.] 
69, and in the previous page Mr. Thomas observes — “ The devices, in 
the open sense, are all domestic or emblematic within the mundane 
range of simple people,” which I understand to amount to a complete 
repudiation on Mr. Thomas’ part of all connection between these Indian 
symbols, and the symbolism which originated in the religious systems 
of Assyria and Egypt. The idea that these marks are ‘ mint marks ’ or 
marks of attestation, impressed by local moneyers or money-changers, 
which both Mr. Thomas and Sir A. Cunningham are agreed in supporting, 
is wholly distinct from the esoteric sense involved in the marks them- 
selves and is one which I have no wish to challenge, whilst wholly dis- 
senting from Mr. Thomas in regarding them as of spontaneous devolop- 
ment, de novo as I may say on Indian soil. 
Take again the case of Scotland. In that noble work ‘ The Sculp- 
tured Stones of Scotland ’ issued for the Spalding Club, by its Secretary, 
John Stuart, in Edinburgh, 1856 and completed by a second volume 
issued in 1866, there are figured from Scottish stones, at least fourteen 
symbols identical with those found on Indian punch-marked coins (figs. 
260 to 269 and 271 to 274). No doubt this fact was unknown to Mr. 
Stuart, but he evidently took the same view of the local origin of these 
marks in Scotland as the “ ptirehj home fancies” (to borx’ow the words 
of Thomas) of the Pictish race, as had been taken in India of them by 
the author above mentioned. In his preface to the second volume of 
Sculptured Stones of Scotland (p. 32), Mr. Stuart remarks — “ What- 
ever inference we may draw from the similarity of monuments in different 
countries, it must, to have any value, be founded on a wide and discri- 
minating observation of numerous examples and not on mere partial 
resemblances. In the same way the casual occurrence of isolated 
figures “resembling” some of the Scotch symbols on monuments in 
other parts of the world, affords no real aid in arriving at a conclusion.” 
One might be tempted to ask what Mr. Stuart wishes to bo understood 
by “casual” or “isolated,” but it is unnecessary to cavil at this word, 
or that, or to quarrel over the phrase of symbols “resembling” one 
another, when a clear case is established of fourteen identical symbols 
common to the sculptured stones of Scotland (the undoubted product of 
a Celtic race,) and the most ancient punch-marked coins of India. 
In his first volume, however, Mr. Stuart quotes a letter from Mr. 
Chalmers which goes to the root of the matter. In a letter dated 
November 1851, Mr. Chalmers writes, “ You say you do not see any 
means of connecting Gnosticism with our Celtic population, at the time 
when these stones were probably erected. When was that ? and by 
which of the Celtic races ? But what was Gnosticism, at least as con- 
nected with Christianity ? Was it anything more, speaking generally 
