102 H. Gf. Keene— On the Revenues of the Mughul Empire. [No. 2, 
“ Indian Currency consisted of hybrid pieces of silver and copper com¬ 
bined in the proportions necessary to constitute the equivalent subdivi¬ 
sions of the ruling silver tanlcah , which was never divided in practice by 
any other number than 64.” 
After explaining that the instinct of the Indian was to reckon by 
fours, and that the copper exchange against silver commenced with four 
fids to the sixty-fourth part of a silver tanlcah , the author adds : — 
“ The quaternary scale in short was all pervading; there was no 
escaping the inevitable fours, sixteens, thirty-twos and sixty-fours, the 
heritage of the masses which, having survived alike Aryan intrusions and 
Muhammadan conquest, still flourish undisturbed by the presence of British 
decimals.” 
The copper integer or “pyce” of the British currency in India is still 
64 to the Rupee ; but I am not sure that there is in this any thing anti- 
Aryan. Indeed we have in England the analogy of our avoirdupois 
weight, which still proceeds upon a scale of sixteen, as our “ crown” of five 
shillings is the fourth of the pound sterling. If, however, sixty-four was 
the necessary divisor for bringing copper tanhahs into their silver equiva¬ 
lent, it appears almost inevitable that the muradi tanlcah of Nizam-ud-din 
is the sixty-fourth of the muhligh or silver integer, which was the Rupee. 
And hence the revenue of Akbar in his 39th and 40th years was about ten 
krors of Rupees. 
If not, and we are to take the muradi tanlcah to mean merely the 
coin so called, of which (as we learn from the Ain) five went to the dam 
and two hundred to the Rupee, then Mr. Rodgers would be nearer right. 
The tanlca figured by Mr. Rodgers weighs 59 grains, that mentioned by 
Nizam-ud-din (which is however differently spelt) would only be half the 
sixty-fourth (say 50 grains). If these could he taken to coincide, the 
revenue aggregate given by the latter would have to be halved also. In that 
case the word “ Hindustan” would have to be taken in a more restricted sense, 
as meaning nothing but the Suhahs of Allahabad, Agra, Belhi and Bengal, 
aggregated by ‘ Abul Fazl at three krors and forty-three lakhs .’ And 
this, which is the only alternative solution, is equally destructive with the 
former of Mr. Thomas’ excessive estimate, which he attempts to support by 
doing violence to Abul Eazl’s words and figures. Before adopting it 
however, we must attentively study the text of Nizam-ud-din, and I believe 
it will be found impossible to suppose that the geographical area of Hindu¬ 
stan could have been intended to be thus restricted. For we are there told 
that Hindustan measures 1680 Icos from the Hindu Kush to the Bay of 
Bengal and 800 from Kashmir to Baroch: and so measured Hindustan 
will be found to comprise the whole twelve Suhahs of Abul Fazl, assessed, 
as we learn from his details, at nearly ten krors of Rupees, as well as 
Khandes and Guzrat, whose assessment is more doubtful. 
