60 A. F. 11. Hoernle— A New Find of Early Muhammadan Coins. [No. 1, 
Ohv. 
° *9 
A 9 
j LvJtxl) > 
9 y 9 
I y\ 
-No margin. 
Rev. 
- ° 
-jk/ot &L’L* 
s 
Oj? 
^lJ ^ . ^ .V X/0 
No margin. 
No. 10. (Plate II, 10). Silver. Weight 169 grs. Mint Laknauti. 
Date [645]. Unique. 
The obverse of this coin is an almost exact reproduction of the obverse 
of No. 9, with the exception only, that the four segments contain words 
instead of scrolls ; viz., above yjA>, on the left ; below (?), on the 
right The reverse differs from that of No. 9 altogether, but, on the 
other hand, it is apparently an exact reproduction of that of coin No. 110 
in Thomas’ Chronicles , p. 129, with the exception of the date, which is 
probably 645. The date is almost wholly wanting ; there is however room 
for three numerals, and the traces left of the first numeral best agree with 
five; and considering that this coin shares the peculiarity of the 
reading Mahmud Shaliu-bnu-Sultan with No. 9, the date in all probability 
is 645. For in his later coins of 652, 654, 655 Nasir-ud-din always de¬ 
scribes himself as Mahmudu-hn-us-Sultan. 
It may be noted that the inscription on the obverse of Mr. Thomas’ 
No 110 is the same as on the obverse of the present coin, with the excep¬ 
tion of the omission of aU> after Mahmud and the addition of the article 
<Jt al before edk-Ls and of a few almost illegible words at the end. Among 
the latter, however, in the left hand corner, the word yuzbak is quite 
distinct, written precisely as in the coins of Mughis-ud-din, Nos. 11 and 12. 
The mention of the name Yuzbak fixes the date of the coin as being during 
the governorship of Ikhtiyar-ud-din, before he assumed independence under 
the title Sultan Mughis-ud-din. The coins Nos. 11 and 12 show that he 
was already independent in 653 ; hence the date must be either 651 or 
652 probably the latter.* 
* According to Mr. Thomas’ transcript, one numeral is omitted before 5 and one 
after. The latter, of course, is 6 ( = 600) ; the former must he 1 or 2.—This coin 
was, at first, thought to be lost, hut I found it afterwards in the Society’s Cabinet, and 
it is described below, see No. 29, pp. 68, 69. 
