1887.] C. J. Rodgers— Notes on the coins of the Tabaqat-i-Nasiri. 169 
Shah Jahan also struck coins with his Ilahi year on them in the first 
years of his reign. He was afterwards content with just putting the 
year of his reign and the Hejirah year. Aurangzib was the first to 
write on his coins sanat-i-julus so and so. This was on the reverse 
along with the mint. The year of the Hejirah was almost invariably 
on the obverse along with the emperor’s name. This custom was after¬ 
wards followed by all the Sultans of Dehli down to Bahadur Shah the 
mutineer. 
It seems strange that I, who have been hunting in the Panjab for 
coins for the last twenty years, should never have seen a coin like the 
one mentioned by Major Raverty. Mr. Thomas never saw one. The 
British Museum has not got one, neither has the Asiatic Society of 
Bengal. Out of the thousands of coins sent to me for reading and 
description not one has yet appeared bearing such inscriptions. Coins 
of the type, mentioned by Major Raverty, are of the time of Aurangzib, 
or later. 
Major Raverty’s coin of Khusrau Malik reads “ Zahir-ud-Daulah 
wa ud-Din.” I have by me over 50 coins of this king. They all read 
either “ Tdju-d-daulali ’ only, or “ Surdju-d-daulah.” Major Raverty 
in his text calls him “ Tdj-ud-Daulah ” (p. 114). 
While on this point it may be as well to notice that Major Raverty 
(p. 109) calls Bahram Shah of Ghazni Mu’izz-ud-Daulah, following, 
strange to say, “ chiefly modern authors,” although “ Fasih-i ” and 
“Guzidah” and ten silver coins in my cabinet unite in calling him 
“ Yamin-ud-Daulah.” Four coins given by Mr. Thomas have the same. 
In note 1, page 4S8, Major Raverty says “ I imagine it is this title of 
his (Mu’izzu-d-din Sam’s) coins ( ) which Mr. Thomas 
reads as the name of the Khalifah. Un-Ha sir-ud-Din ’Ullah was cer¬ 
tainly Khalifah at this period.” Mr. Thomas does not mention “Hasir-i- 
Amiru-l-Muminin ” in connexion with the coins of Mu’izzu-d-din Sam. 
Major Raverty has mis-read and misrepresented Mr. Thomas. 
Again in note 3, p. 497, Major Raverty says “it is quite a mistake 
to suppose that I-yal-duz [ jMj only is on the coins] ever styled himself 
Sultan-i-Mu’azzam.” His coins, however, have the y e ry 
words. 
On pp. 524-5 we have “ It is stated in another work, the Khuhisat- 
-ut-Tawarikh that Kutb-ud-Din ascended the throne, at Labor, on the 
11 tli of Rabi’-ul-Awwal, 603 H., and that he read the khutbah for himself, 
and coined money in his own name, and yet, although the coins of others 
are, comparatively, so plentiful, it is stated that not one bearing the 
name of Kutb-ud-Din has ever been found. A work in my possession, 
which contains specimens of the different coins of the Sultans of Hind, 
