1881.] A. F. E. Hoe rule— A New Find of Early Muhammadan Coins. 59 
Ohv. 
o 
9 
9 
No margin. 
Fee. 
< ° 
r UJ(| o*c ^ 
9 
XA^ I All I- ^v'''~*“- V ''-^' vv ^'l 
✓ > 
n p 
&JJ 
JVb margin. 
No place of mintage is named ; hence it may be assumed to have been 
the imperial mint of Dehli. Nor is any date given ; but as the iOialif 
A1 Mustansir died in the middle of 610 A. FI., and ’Ala-ud-dm ascended 
the throne in 639, it would seem to be limited to one of those two years. 
(See Thomas’ Chronicles, pp. 120, 122). But see below, p. 61. 
The execution of the inscriptions is not good. That on the obverse 
is so crowded, as to necessitate the inserting of the two words 8U> and 
cXFl**, interlinearly, between the second and third lines. Moreover the 
consonant is never written, unless it be indicated by an almost imper¬ 
ceptible straight line; thus we have o>6aJJf, ujhal, e>* X3 on the obverse and 
on the reverse. 
V. Coin's of Nasir-ud-din Mahmud Shaii. 
No. 9. (Plate II, 9). Silver. Weight 164 grs. Date [611 ?] 
Of this coin, there are two duplicate specimens in the lot, # which are in 
every respect the counterparts of coin No. 60 in Thomas’ Chronicles, 
p, 81, Initial Coinage, Pt. I, p. 35 (J. A. S. B., vol. XXXVI) and Pt. II, 
p. 363 (J. A. S. B., vol. XLII), where it is noted as “ unique.” Accord¬ 
ing to Mr. Thomas, the margin is “ illegible.”! But from the present 
coins it is quite clear, that there is no circular margin at all; the angles 
of the square areas touch the circumference of the coin, and form with it 
four segments, containing scrolls on the obverse, and three dots on the 
reverse. In fact, they are in this respect exact reproductions of ’Ala- 
ud-din’s coin, No. 8.J No mint is named, nor any date. The former is 
probably Dehli and the latter 611, as will be shown afterwards (see below, 
p. 61). 
* The duplicate is now in Mr. Gibb’s possession, by exchange, 
f In his last reference, however, (Initial Coinage, Pt. II, p. 363) no mention is 
made of any margin at all. 
1 It is noteworthy that Marsden in his Oriental Coins (PI. XXXV, No. DCXCIV) 
figures a very similar coin of Nasir-ud-din, which also is devoid of marginal circles, 
and indicates no mint or date. But the inscriptions are somewhat different, omitting 
on the obverse, and reading } ^.xc} on the reverse. Unless, 
indeed, the margins should be worn away, as Mr. Thomas ( Chronicles , p. 126) seems to 
suppose ; but of such wear there appears to be no evidence. 
