Y. A. Smith —Numismatic Notes and Novelties. [No. 1, 
result of a defeat of the Knsaris by the Persians, and was accompanied 
by cession of territory along the Oxus. 1 
Our coin, therefore, cannot be earlier than the reign of Hormazd II, 
and inasmuch as the altar on the reverse is nearly identical with 
that on a coin of Hormazd’s successor, Shahpur (Sapor)II, and also 
closely resembles that on a coin of Hormazd himself ( Num. Chron. for 
1893, PL 
XIII 
IY ’ 
8, 9) ; the conclusion seems justifiable that the date 
of this curious piece cannot be very far from A. D. 310. 
In this manner the date of the Kusan king Basana is approximately 
fixed, and a definite starting point is obtained for the calculation of the 
chronology of the Later Great Kusan coinage. 
The 13 types enumerated by Cunningham (op. cit., p, 124) do not 
I think, range over a very long period. The coins of King Sita, which 
he ranks as No. 2, certainly come early in the series, because they are 
well executed, and occasionally show traces of Greek letters. They may 
be dated about A. D. 250. Cunningham places the Basana coins last 
in the series, and he is probably right. Several of the princes whose 
names are preserved were probably contemporary in neighbouring pro¬ 
vinces, the names of which may possibly, as Cunningham suggests, be 
recorded in the right hand legends of the coins, namely Saka, or Saka 
(both forms occur), (?) Gadahara, or (?) Gadakhara, and (?) Pakalhdhi 
or ( ?) Pakandhi. 
IY. 
KAfMIR, AND WHITE HUN. 
IX. Tu[njIna ?] 
Copper, diameter '85. Wt. 96 gr. [Rawlins ] 
Obv. King standing to L, sacrificing, dressed in Kusan style in long-tailed 
coat and leggings, grasping in 1. hand a trident with bent prongs. Near 1. margin 
the legend $ Qri Tu [njma.~\ 
Rev. Goddess seated on lotus, delinenated in a peculiar way. In r. field 
far 
jaya. On extreme 1. margin Kidara. 
This is a perfect specimen in brilliant condition of the very rare 
coin figured in Coins of Med. India, Ple/te III, 1. Cunningham read the 
name as Turyamana, and treated it as a variant of Toramana. But Dr. 
Stein demurs, and rightly, to this reading. It seems impossible to 
1 The fact of the marriage is taken from Cunningham (Num. Chron. for 1893, 
pp. 169, 170, 177), who cites Khondemir , Rehatsek’s translation, 11, 340. I have not 
been-able to verify the reference. 
