1892.] 
H. G. Raverty —Some Muhammadan Goins. 
97 
rather unusual occurrence at that time of the day. I went again on 
the following morning to wait upon him, and inquired as to the cause 
of his absence on the previous day. He replied, ‘My absence was 
caused through Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, Mang-barni, having been received 
into the Almighty’s mercy.’ I inquired, ‘What, had he been living all 
this time ?’ He answered, ‘ You may have noticed a certain aged man, 
with a mole upon his nose, who was wont to stay at a certain place,’ 
which he named. I had often remarked the venerable devotee in 
question ; and that was the heroic, but unfortunate Sultan, Jalal-ud- 
Din.” According to this account Sultan Jalal-ud-Din could not have 
died until 688H., about sixty years after the period above-mentioned. 
From all this it is quite clear, that the coin in question, Ho. 153, 
must be that of one of the Musalman Maliks, a feudatory of the Khali- 
fah, Un-Hasir-ud-Din U’llah, who had to submit at the time of the 
inroad of the Hu-yins, Jabah and Swidae, in 617 H. (1220 A. D.), who 
passed through those parts like a destroying whirlwind, and returned 
by the northern shores of the Caspian to the presence of the Chingiz 
Khan in the fourth month of 620H. (1223 A. D.) 
I may also mention, that, in no history is it stated that the Chingiz 
Khan coined money , nor is it stated that he ever assumed the title of 
Khakan, which, as I have said before, is much more applicable to 
Uktae than to his grandfather, and to stamp coins with the name of 
the Khalifah is still more impossible ; and, besides, they would have 
Mughal inscriptions, on one side at least, even if coined in I 7 -ran Zamin. 
For a considerable period the Mughals coined ingots (balisht) only.* 
The Tl-Khanian dynasty, moreover, was not established for thirty-four 
years after the death of the Khalifah above-mentioned, and the total 
fall of the Khilafat at Ba gh dad; and the first Il-Khan was Hulaku 
Khan himself. 
Coin Ho. 174. There was no member of this dynasty named 
“ Quazan,” but Gliazan ( ) Khan, the seventh of the dynasty, 
was one of the most illustrious of them. He was the son of Arghun 
* The balishts of Uktae Ka’an are mentioned in several histories. One, the 
Lubb-ut-Tawarikh, goes farther and says, referring to the great liberality of the 
Ka’an, that no one ever left his dargah without experiencing it, and that daring 
his reign he expended in this manner no less than 160,000 tomans of Idlishts of 
gold. It is also stated, that, according to some accounts, the bdliskt-i-zar contained 
500 miskdls; according to other accounts, it was of the value of eight dirams and 
two ddngs ; and according to others, of the value of eight dinars and two ddngs. 
The Musalmnn diram and dinar are said to have been equivalent to a sequin or 
ducat. Another writer, under the head of bdlisht-i-zar , says, it contained eight 
miskdls and two ddngs of gold, and was in use by the sovereigns of the Turks and 
Mughals. See also Tabakat-i-Nasiri, p. 1141. 
