1901 .] 
Supplement to Part 1. 
3 
lias some resemblance to wliat Sir A. Cunningham calls the “Ephtlialitic 
Symbol (Num. Chron., 1894), but this may perhaps only be accidental. 
“You have noticed the difference in style of the pencilling of the 
character liu, ‘ six.’ I may add that the style of the other characters 
on the same coins varies accordingly. The style of the writing on this 
variety strikes me as older than that of the rest of the small coins (with 
the horse) [ i.e ., Nos. I, II, III in the woodcut on p. 10]. The Chinese 
inscription in the small coins of the first variety takes two distinct types 
[Nos. I and II in the woodcut], of which No. II is the more archaic. 
But after all, a more archaic style does not certainly indicate a more 
ancient coin, as it may depend on the individual fancy of the engraver 
of the die. These engravers must, I think, have been Chinese, as the 
inscriptions are so well pencilled, with the exception of those on the 
coins of the fourth variety which are markedly degraded in style as well 
as in sizq. 
“ The earliest pieces of the series appear to me to date from the 
earlier Han rather than the later, judging only from the style of the 
lettering, and I would observe that the Chinese had conquered, and 
appointed viceroys over, Eastern Turkestan during the former Han, 
until the usurpation of Wang Mang, after which, for a period of 65 years, 
there was independence, or rather re-subjugation by the Hiung-nu 
Turks, ending in a second submission of Khotan and the other cities 
to the Chinese dominion.” 
Pages 18-22. Dr. Bushell has kindly supplied also the following 
note on the Chinese coins. 
(a) Ancient Coins. 
“ (1) Coins without legends. Specimens like these are frequently 
dug up in China, mixed with others of similar type inscribed pan Hang 
and wu chu , referred to the Han dynasties, especially to the former or 
Western Han. In the beginning of this dynasty private mintage was 
allowed, and the coinage became utterly debased, the inscriptions disap¬ 
peared, and the pieces became thinner and thinner, till they were 
currently known as “ thread cash.” There was more intercourse wdth 
Khotan at this period than would be gathered from Remusat’s “ Histoire 
de la Ville de Khotan.” 
(2b) One of these specimens is correctly attributed to Wang Mang, 
but is not the other inscribed wu chu ? 
(2c) Seems to me the most archaic piece in the series. The symbol 
reminds one of the undeciphered symbol on the small Indo-Chinese 
3 On the right of the coin as shown in the Plate II, No. 3, where however, it 
appears to be placed upside down. The symbol chin stands on the left, and is the 
first element in the character 3 of the legends shown in the woodcut on page 10. 
