90 
H. G. Raverty —Some Muhammadan Corns. 
[No. 2, 
small district near Samr-kand, famous for its salubrity. Here tlie rulers 
generally took up tbeir quarters, and it is famous as the Suglid of Samr- 
kand. The Sultan reduced that territory in 608-609 H. (1212-13 A. D.), 
and subsequently put its ruler, the Afrasiyabi Khan. ’Usman, to death. 
Likewise, the correct name of the mint of Nos. 77, 78, 84, 87, 88 , 
89 and 90, is not but a well-known place called Guzarwan— 
^Ijjj?. The point of the ) appears to have been mistaken for j. 
The ’Arabs, and people of ’Arab descent, called it Juzarwan —^(5 
changing hard ‘ g ’ into soft ‘ j,’ as in Pushang and Fushanj, Sijis-stan 
and Sigiz-stan. I notice in the note at page 51 of the paper on these 
coins, that Prof. Tiesenhauser read this word assuming that 
the point was on the third instead of the second letter. It is a well- 
known tract, and appears in our very latest new map under the incorrect 
name of “ Gurziwan 
The Sultan obtained possession of Ghaz-m7t [nih is the Tajzik for a 
cityf : “ Ghaz nah ” is incorrect] by surprise during the absence of Sultan 
Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz, in 611 H. (1214-15 A. D.). 
Respecting the Shansabani Tajziks of Ghur and their coins, the 
letters read as_jku^ after the name SamJ, cannot be correct, much less 
which is purely Turkish. The full title of this Sultan, the elder 
brother and suzerain of Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-Sam of 
Ghazni h, the conqueror of Hindustan, who established the Muhammadan 
religion and power at Dihli, was, Us-Sultan-ul-A’zam, Ghiyas-ud-Dunya 
wa ud-Din, son of [Baha-ud-Din] Sam [See XI of the Shansabani 
Tajziks of Ghur, Tabakat-i-Nasiri, p. 341], Kasim-i-Amir-ul-Mumimn 
Consequently, the letters supposed to be and are, doubtless, 
the word Kasim —in the last title of the Sultan. 
Coin, No. 124, with the names and titles of both brothers on it, 
and the date 699 H., was coined, probably, immediately after the death 
of Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Muhammad, when his brother, Sultan Mu’izz- 
ud-Din (always mis-called Shihab-ud-Din by Firishtah and such com¬ 
pilers, and Shahab-ud-Din by English writers) became supreme Sultan 
of Ghur and Ghaz-nih, and their dependencies. 
No. 126 with the names of “ Taju-d-din Ildaz ” and Sultan Mu’izz- 
ud-Din, Muhammad, said to be thereon, but the inscriptions on which 
are not given, would be one of Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz’s coins, after the 
assassination of the Sultan by the Khokhars (always mistaken for 
Gakhars,” even in Imperial Gazetters , under the grotesque names of 
* See Tabakat-i-Ndsiri, pp. 376, 1003, and other places. 
f In the oldest histories, and also by Babar Badshah, the name is written as 
above, Ghazni is a modern form of the name. 
It No. 116, Ed.] 
