1904.] R. Burn— The Mints of the Mughal Emperors. 79 
is confirmed by the fact that there are other villages named Alhabas or 
Ilahahas in the Doab. When the name was written in Persian, as on 
the copper coins, somebody noticed the fact that it could be read Ilaha- 
bas and the circumstance that it was close to a very holy place of the 
Hindus easily led to the conversion into Ilahabad (founded by a god, 
not the God). 
Bindraban. —See also Muminabad. It has been suggested that 
Muminabad is the town of that name in the Dekhan, and also that it is 
Bindraban. My silver coin of Shah ‘Alam II gives both Muminabad 
and Bindraban. 
Patna. —I am not quite satisfied with the reading of Patna on 
B.M.,Nos. 209 and 215 (see Plate VI). The name is written differently 
from the ordinary way. I have a coin of Aurangzeb in which the same 
difference is to be observed, but cannot suggest a satisfactory reading. 
Peshawar. —The coin of Akbar noted from this mint is B.M., 
No. 177, which is not very rare. The B.M. Catalogue gives Sitapur as 
a preferable reading, while Rodgers read Sitpur, 1 and identified it with 
a town of this name in the Muzaffargarh District. 
Jaunpur. —The mint on a copper coin of Akbar II was read by Vost 
and White King 2 as Dar-ul-Musawwir, Deh, Jaunpur. Major Vost now 
agrees with me that the correct reading of the mint on that coin should 
be Dar-ul-Mansur, Jodhpur. The title Dar-ul-Mansur appears on coins 
struck in the name of ‘Alamgir II, 3 and also on coins struck in the 
name of Shah ‘Alam II, 4 * while the sword on the obverse of the coin 
under discussion is one of the special marks of the State. 6 I have, 
therefore, shown this coin under Jodhpur not Jaunpur. 
Chachrauli. —This is probably the capital of the Kalsia State in 
the Panjab, and it seems to me most likely that the name on the coin 
in the P.M. read Kachrauli is really Chachrauli. I have not been able 
to find any place called Kachrauli. The descriptions of the coins (Pan¬ 
jab Catalogue, No. 24, p. 236, and Calcutta Catalogue, No. 13106, p. 83), 
correspond very closely. 
Hafizabad. —Prom the style of the coin, that marked under ‘.Alam¬ 
gir II appears to be rightly assigned to that king and not to ‘Alam¬ 
gir I. 
Husainabad.—I have marked the copper coin of this mint of Shah 
1 Panjab Catalogue, p. 86. 
2 Num. Chron., 1896, p. 178, and PI. XII, fig. 13. 
8 Num. Chron,, 1896, p. 175, and PI. XII, fig. 8. 
4 Webb, currencies of Raj put an a, pp. 43, 45, and 48 
6 Ditto, p. 42. 
