3 904 ] 
Numismatic Supplement. 
231 
pronounced counterfeit for reasons which appear to be inconclusive 
The coin has as far as I know never been figured. 
The legends are as follows :— 
Obverse. Reverse. 
In a square with traces of an 
outer circle. 
«» ^ 
In a circle. 
Fr | 
Margin. 
AjU*x«» j j ^5!^^ 'Sj^iaA <$£Jf 
The weight is 173 grs., and size ’9" 
Major Stubbs gave the following six reasons for believing the coin 
to be not genuiue :— 
1. jA.\ is written This criticism is obviously due to a 
mistaken assignment of the dots on the coin. The two dots which have 
been taken to represent the letter “ ye” really belong to the two “ nuns ” 
in the word just below it viz. : It is noticeable that on this 
coin as in several other specimens of Muhammad bin Tughlak’s coinage 
the dots distinguishing various letters are scrupulously recorded. Cf. 
Chronicles No. 182. It is true the curve of the ^ is not very full. It 
is, however, not unlike the form of the same letter on some other coins 
of the period. 
(2) Date in figures impossible. 
(3) Difference of date in words and figures. 
These remarks refer to the figures pr I in the reverse area. Major 
Stubbs assumes that they represent a blundered date, a different date be¬ 
ing given in words in the margin. It is difficult to conceive that anyone 
who was able to imitate with such precision and intelligence the entire 
inscription of a coin, and must have been aware of the meaning of that 
inscription, should stumble through ignorance over a date in figures and 
for vr v should substitute the figures pr I Some other explanation of these 
figures must, I think, be sought for. This I am unable to supply, but 
it is worth remembering that equally unexplained figures appear on 
coins of Islam Shah Sim, vide Chronicles No. 359, PI. V, 190. 
From the above considerations it may, I think, be assumed that the 
figures pr f were not a blundered representation of vrv. They possibly 
have no connection with the date of the coin. 
(4) The word is omitted. 
This does not appear to me a serious objection to the authenticity 
