No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
The discovery of an undisturbed hoard of no less than 13,500 coins in Kooch Bihár, inhumed some five centuries since, recently claimed attention both from the number and importance of its representative specimens, which so effectively illustrated the history of the kingdom of Bengal for a consecutive period of some 107 years. The earliest date thus accorded towards the purely Initial Coinage of the country under its newly-installed Muslim administrators did not reach higher than the reign of the Empress Riẓíah, A.H. 634–637 (A.D. 1236–1239), or more than 34 years after the first entry of the adventurous Khilji and Túrkí troops into the recognized Hindú capital of the lower Ganges. A still more recent discovery of a comparatively poor man's cache, in the fort of Bihár, elucidates an earlier chapter of the local annals; and though the contents of the earthen vessel in this case are limited in number to a total of 37 pieces, and restricted in their dates to a term of 13 years, they, in some respects, compete advantageously with the previously-recovered unexampled store, in the value of their contributions to the obscure records of the Gangetic Delta, and in priority of date bring us more than 20 years nearer to the first occupation of Bengal by Muhammad Bakhtyár Khiljí in 600 A.H. As in the larger and almost-regal treasure trove of Kooch Bihár, the specimens in the present instance prove to be essentially of home or indigenous fabric.
page 339 note 1 Journ. R.A.S. (N.S.) Vol. II., 1866, p. 145. Reprinted in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. xxxvi., 1867, p. 1.
page 339 note 2 The name of Nuddea, 
Navadwipa, the “new island” (converted into 
by the Muslims), would seem to imply a southerly movement, in concert with the silt of the Ganges, of the seat of Government down to the comparatively modern occupation of this site, on the abandonment of the successive traditional capitals of earlier dynasties.
page 339 note 3 I have no information as to the exact circumstances of the discovery of this small hoard, beyond the general intimation that it was secured by Mr. A. M. Broadley, C.S., in or near the Fort of Bihár. The coins have now become the property of Colonel Guthrie, who had already contributed the materials for my earlier notice of the Initial Coinage of Bengal. I understand that a description of these pieces is to be included in Mr. Broadley's forthcoming account of bis antiquarian researches at Bihár (Proceedings As. Soc. Bengal, July, 1872, p. 120); but 1 have not considered that such a promised publication need interfere with a completion of my previous article in this Journal by the aid of these new acquisitions.
page 340 note 1 J.R.A.S. (N.B.) II., p. 148. See also Hamilton's Hindustán, i., p. 40.
page 340 note 2 Mr. Stirling says, under the Ganga Vansa line, for a period of nearly four centuries (from A.D. 1132), the boundaries of the Ráj of Orissa may be stated as follows: … “North, a line drawn from the Tribeni or Triveni ghat above Húglí, through Bishenpúr, to the frontier of Patkúm: East, the river Húglí and the sea.”—As. Res. xv., p. 164. Hunter, i., p. 280. “To the north of the mouth of the Saraswatí lies the broad and high Tribení Ghát, a magnificent flight of steps, said to have been built by Mukund Deo, the last Gajpati of Orissa.”—Blochmann, As. Soc. Bengal, 1870, p. 282.
page 341 note 1 On the above occasion, likewise, a new coin and seal were struck by the Rája's orders, with the titles which are used to this day by the Khúrda Rájas, who claim to represent the majesty of this once powerful race. They run thus: Vira Srí Gajapati, Gauréswara, etc. “The illustrious Hero, the Gajapati (Lord of Elephants), sovereign of Gaura (Bengal), Supreme Monarch over the rulers of the tribes of Utkala, Kernáta, and the nine forts,” etc.—Stirling, As. Res.xv., p. 272.
page 341 note 2 Asiatic Researches, xv., p. 271. Mr. Stirling, however, seemed to imagine that the, sum named for the total revenues, as tested by this estimate, was too high; but later investigations fully support the reasonable measure of the King's boast.
page 341 note 3 J.R.A.S., II., pp. 169, 170. Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 221.
page 341 note 4 “Orissa,” a continuation of the “Annals of Rural Bengal,” (London, Smith & Elder, 1872), i., pp. 316, 317Google Scholar. Dr. Hunter, like myself, has endeavoured to make his antiquarian researches instructive in their application to the defects of our own government in India, consequent upon the too frequent disregard of the superior local knowledge and hereditary instincts of the races we are appointed to rule over.
After enumerating the ascertained totals of the revenue of the province at various periods, the author goes on to say, “From time immemorial Orissa, like some other parts of India, has used a local currency of cowries. When the province passed into our hands in 1803, the puhlic accounts were kept and the revenue was paid in these little shells.” We “however stipulated that the landholders should henceforth pay their land-tax in silver, and fixed the rate of exchange at 5120 cowries to the rupee.” (In 1804 the official exchange was 5120, and the practical rate of exchange from 6460 to 7680.) … “Had our first administrators contented themselves with taking payment in silver at the current rate of the cowrie exchange, the Orissa land-tax would now have been double what it is at present. But had they resolved to collect it at a grain valuation, according to Akbar's wise policy, it would now be more than double; for the prices of food have rather more than doubled since 1804. The system of paying the land-tax by a grain valuation appears to me to be the best means of giving stability to the Indian revenues.”—Orissa, ii., p. 172. DrHunter, had not seen my notice of “The Revenues of the Mughal Empire” (Trübner, 1872)Google Scholar when this was written. I had equally appreciated the equity and suitableness of the system of estimate by agricultural produce, which had come down to Akbar's time from the earliest dawn of the civilization of the nation at large; but I had to condemn Akbar for introducing a new element in the shape of a settlement to be paid in silver, on the average of the prices of previous years—an assessment he hoped, in defiance of the proverbial uncertainty of Indian seasons, to make immutable; furnishing, in effect, the leading idea we so unwisely followed in that deplorable measure, Lord Cornwallis's “Permanent Settlement of Bengal.”
page 342 note 1 Prinsep's Essays, U.T., p. 7.
page 342 note 2 Chronicles of Pathán Kings, pp. 3, 167, 223, 224 (note). Dr. A. Weber, in the Zeitschrift for 1861, p. 139, cites the parallel designation of Ṣata Kṛishṇala, from the text of the Black Yajur Veda (circa 800 B.C.). The commentator uses the local name above quoted.
page 343 note 1 Numismatic Chronicle (N.S.), iv., p. 40, et seqq. J.R.A.S. (N.S.) II., pp. 150, 166, 168. Chronicles of the Pathán Kings of Dehli, pp. 161, 252.
page 343 note 2 Pathán Chronicles, coin No. 207, p. 252. See also pp. 218, 219.
page 344 note 1 I was mistaken in my first impression that the Bengal tankahs themselves might have a claim to this obnoxious designation. J.R.A.S., II., p. 160.
page 344 note 2 In Akbar's time, even, the progressive alteration in the value of gold, since so much accelerated, had only reached the proportion of 9·4: 1. Chronicles, p. 424. J.R.A.S., II., p. 63.
page 344 note 3 Pathán Chronicles, p. 235. In my previous article in this Journal, I was led by Ibn Batutah's indiscriminate use of the terms “Dirhams and Dinars,” in their local application in Bengal, to suppose that his definition of coin exchanges referred to the relative values of gold and silver, and that it in so far supported my estimate of 1: 8 (J.R.A.S.. II., p. 61, note 1). I now find that towards the close of Muhammad bin Tughlak's reign, the exchange had come for the moment to be 1: 10 (Chronicles, p. 227), in lieu of the ordinary 1: 8. The entire difficulty of the obscure passage in the Journal of the African Voyager has, however, been set at rest by the more comprehensive tables of values furnished by the Egyptian traveller Shaikh Mubárak Anbati (Notices et Extraits, xiii., p. 51), which shows that the dinár of silver (i.e. the tankah) was equal to 8 dirhams (hasht-káṇi). See also Elliot's Historians, iii., pp. 577, 582.
page 345 note 1 J.R.A.S. (N.S.) II., p. 157. The new and unworn pieces in the Kooch Bihár trouvaille averaged 166 grains; and the earlier issues, of 188, 189 grains, found with them, had generally been reduced in weight to correspond with the later official standard.
page 345 note 2 Variants 
Text, p. 158, and MSS. I have preserved Stewart's version of the name in my text, but the site of Gangautri has not been identified. There is a town called Gurguri (24° 23', 86° 55') on the line of country between Bihár and Nagore, but it is not known to have been a place of any mark. There is also a celebrated fort of high antiquity on the same line of communication, named Ghidúr (24° 53', 86° 55'), which may have served as an outpost of the Bihár head-quarters.
page 345 note 3 Deokót (lat. 25° 18', long. 88° 31'), the chief place in Gangarámpúr (district of Dinájpúr), is now known by the name of Damdamah. Hamilton states that “it received its present appellation from its having been a military station during the early Muhammadan Government” (p. 50). Muhammad Bakhtyár, his first success against the King of Bengal at Nuddea (lat. 23° 25', long. 88° 22'), contented himself with destroying that town, and withdrew his troops nearer to his base of communications, to a position about 90 miles to the northward, somewhere about the site of the future Lakhnautí, Deokót again being some 50 miles N.N.E.
Minháj-us-Siráj, in describing Lakhnautí, at a later date (641 A.H.), mentions that habitations were located on both sides of the Ganges, but that the city of Lakhnautí proper was situated on the western bank. The author adds, that an embankment or causeway 
extended for a distance of ten days' journey through the capital from Deokót to Nagore in Bírbhúm, (lat. 23° 56', long. 87° 22').—Stewart's Bengal, p. 57. Persian text of Tabakát-i-Násiri, pp. 161, 162, 243. Aín-i-Akbari, ii. p. 14. Elliot's Historians, ii., p. 318; iii. p. 112. Rennell's Map, p. 55. “Wilford, As. Res. ix., p. 72.
The subjoined curious notice of the distribution of the boundaries of the kingdom of Bengal shortly before the Muhammadan conquest has been preserved in Hamilton's Hindustán. The compiler does not give his specific authority.
“During the Adisur dynasty the following are said to have been the ancient geographical divisions of Bengal. Gour was the capital, forming the centre division, and surrounded by five great provinces.
“1. Barendra, bounded by the Mahananda on the west; by the Padma, or great branch of the Ganges, on the south; by the Kortoya on the east; and by adjacent governments on the north.
“2. Bangga, or the territory east from the Kortoya towards the Brahmaputra. The capital of Bengal, both before and afterwards, having long been near Dacca in the province of Bangga, the name is said to have been communicated to the whole.
“3. Bagri, or the Delta, called also Dwípa, or the island, bounded on the one side by the Padma, or great branch of the Ganges; on another by the sea; and on the third by the Hooghly river, or Bhagirathi.
“4. Rarhi, bounded by the Hooghly and the Padma on the north and east, and by adjacent kingdoms on the west and south.
“5. Maithila, bounded by the Mahananda and Gour on the east; the Hooghly or Bhagirathi on the south; and by adjacent countries on the north and west.”
“Bollal sen, the successor of Adisur, is said to have resided partly at Gour, but chiefly at Bikrampúr, eight miles south-east of Dacca.” Bollal sen was succeeded by Lakshmana sen, who was defeated by Muhammad Bakhtyár. The author continues, “It is possible that the Rája only retired to his remote capital, Bikrampúr, near Dacca, where there still resides a family possessing considerable estates, who pretend to be his descendants. We also find that Soonergong, in the vicinity of Bikrampúr, continued to be a place of refuge to the Gour malcontents, and was not finally subjugated until long after the overthrow of Rája Laksmana.” —Hamilton's Hindustán (1820), i., p. 114.
page 346 note 1 
Text, p. 158— 
Stewart's Bengal, p. 51. Elliot's Historians, ii., p. 315.
page 347 note 1 Allowing 'Alí Mardán from 607–8 to 609–10, this leaves an interval up to 612, during which Hisám-ud dín 'Awz was content to remain head of the Khiljí oligarchy and local governor.
page 348 note 1 Tabakát-i-Násirí, Text, p. 163. Dr. Blochmann has an interesting paper in the September number of the Indian Antiquary (p. 259), on Muhammadan Titles. Among other questions discussed is the derivation and early application of the title of Sultán. The author remarks that “the first clear case of Sultán having been used as a title belongs to the time of Rukn-ud-daulah, deputy over Fárs, under the Khalífah Al Mutí'billah,” A.H. 338, or A.D. 949. MM. Oppert et Ménant were under the impression that they had discovered the title so early as the time of Sargon, who, in his grand inscription at Khorsabad, is said to speak of Subaco as “Silṭan, or Sultán d'Egypte.”—Journal Asiatique, 1863, p. 9, and text, p. 3. Commentary, 1864, p. 10. Some doubt has, however, since been thrown upon this identification, as the designation reads optionally, if not preferably 
—Schräder, Cuneiform and Old Testament Studies (1872), p. 157.
page 349 note 1 Mahmúd of Ghazní's favourite weapon. Tradition affirms that it was preserved in all honour by the guardians of his tomb at Ghazní.—Atkinson, Expedition into Afghánistán, p. 222. So much credence was attached to this ancient legend, that we find Lord Ellenborough in 1842 instructing his generals, in sober earnestness, to “bring away from the tomb of Mahmúd of Ghazní his club which hangs over it.” Muhammad Bakhtyár himself had also won glory by the use of his mace in his gladiatorial encounter, single-handed, with an elephant, who was compelled to retreat before the first blow of his powerful arm.
page 349 note 2 The name of Aswapatis, “Lords of Horses,” was subsequently applied specifically in Orissa to the Muhammadan conquerors. Mr. Hunter remarks, “The Telugu Palm Leaf MSS. state that between (Saka 895) A.D. 972 and A.D. 1563 three great powers successively arose. During this period the Gajapatis, ‘Lords of Elephants,’ ruled in Orissa and the north of Madras; the Narapatis, ‘Lords of Men,’ held the country to the southward. The Lords of Horses were the Musalmáns, who, with their all-devouring Pathán cavalry, overthrew the two former.”—Orissa, ii., p. 8. Stirling, Asiatic Researches, xv., p. 254. A'ín-i-Akbari, Gladwin's translation, i., p. 319. Abúl Fazl, in describing the game of cards affected by his royal master, speaks of “Ashweput, the king of the horses. He is painted on horseback, like the king of Dehli, with the Chutter, the Alum, and other ensigns of royalty; and Gujput, the king of the elephants, is mounted on an elephant like the king of Orissa.”
page 350 note 1 Reproduced from the original coin, in the collection of Col. Guthrie, already published in the Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 78.
page 350 note 2 Ḳilij Arslán, the Seljúḳ of Anatolia (A.H. 656), uses this title of 
(Fræhn, p. 156). The three sons of Kai Khusrú (A.H. 647) employ the term in the plural 
page 350 note 3 I need have no hesitation in admitting that on the first examination of this piece, as an isolated specimen of a hitherto unknown mintage, I was disposed in the absence of any dot either above or below the line of writing, to adopt the alternative reading of 
instead 
while confessing a preference for the latter transcription, on account of the need of the preposition 
(Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 79); but, at the time, I was unprepared to expect that Altamsh's sway had extended to the lower provinces, which were avowedly in independent charge of the Khiljí suceessors of Muhammad Bakhtyár. This difficulty is now curiously explained by the concurrent silver pieces, and the supposition that the local chieftain found it expedient to profess allegiance, nominal or real, to the preponderating influence of the master of Hindústán. In like manner, the recently discovered silver coins have supplied a clue to the more satisfactory decipherment of the marginal legend, and the explanation of other minor imperfections in the definition of the exotic characters of the gold coin, which it is useless to follow in detail.
page 351 note 1 J.R.A.S. (N.S.) II., p. 187. Cf. also Albírúní; Reinaud, Mémoirs sur l'Inde, p. 298, quoted in J.R.A.S. (N.S.) I., p. 471. As. Res. ix., pp. 72, 74; xvii. 617. Wilson's Glossary, sub voce, etc. Rennell, Map of Hindústán, p. 55. Stewart's Bengal, pp. 44, 57.
page 351 note 2 Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 107. J.R.A.S. (N.S.) II., p. 187, coin No. 14 infrà.
page 353 note 1 J.R.A.S. IX., p. 381; XVII., p. 202; Chronicles of Pathán Kings, p. 86.
page 354 note 1 Mr. Stirling, in his most exhaustive memoir on Orissa, published in the Asiatic. Researches in 1822, observes:—“Major Stewart, in his History of Bengal, places an invasion of Orissa by the Mussalmans of Bengal during this reign, that is A.D. 1243. The Chronicles of the country contain no mention of such an event. I have not Major Stewart's authorities at hand to refer to, but strongly suspect that he has been led into an error by mistaking some word resembling Jajipur, for Jajipur in Orissa. He expresses himself thus: ‘In the year 614 (A.D. 1243), the Raja of Jagepur (Orissa) having given some cause of offence, Toghan Khan marched to Ketasun, on the frontier of Jagepur, where he found the army of the Raja had thrown up intrenchments to oppose him.’ … Now, in the first place, Jajipur was never a separate principality, as here described; and there is no such place in Orissa as Ketasun. Ferishtah is altogether silent on this subject in his history of Bengal, but in his general history he ascribes the siege of Gour, in the very year in question, to a party of Mogul Tartars who had invaded Bengal by way of Chitta, Thibet, etc. Dow's mistake of a similar nature is scarcely worth noticing. He makes Sultan Balin pursue the rebel Toghral into Jajnagar (A.D. 1279), which he calls Orissa, whereas it is evident from the mention of Sunargaon as lying on the road, that Jájnagar is some place beyond the Ganges.” —Stirling, As. Res. xv., p. 274.
It seems to have escaped Mr. Stirling's notice, that Stewart had already corrected his own error in speaking of “Jagepore” as “Orissa,” pp. 61 and 65, by placing that town in its proper position in “Tipperah,” in a later passage (p. 70); and he further improved upon his advanced knowledge by saying in a note, at p. 72, “Jagenagur is said to have been a town in Orissa, near Cuttack; but this passage proves it to have been situated on the eastern side of the Burhampooter. The Jagenagar mentioned by Ferishtah should have been written Jagepore.” [?] Stewart, Hist. Bengal, p. 72. Dow, i., p, 202 (4to. edit.). Briggs, i., p. 260. See also Chronicles of Pathán Kings, p. 121.
page 355 note 1 Cf. Elphinstone (new edit, by Professor Cowell), p. 377. Elliot, Muhammadan Historians, ii., pp. 264, 344. Dr. Lee's Ibn Batutah, Oriental Tr. Fund, p. 97. Ferishtah, , Bombay Persian Text, i., p. 122Google Scholar. Badaoni, , Calcutta Persian Text, p. 88Google Scholar. Tabakát-i-Násirí, , Calcutta Persian Text, pp. 157, 163, 199, 243, 245Google Scholar.
page 356 note 1 Altamsh himself seems to have been indifferent to this distinction, but its importance is shown in the early coinages of Muhammad bin Sám, who invariably reserves the superlative prefix for his reigning brother, while he limits his own claims to the virtually comparative 
And further to mark these gradations, he prominently adopts the higher title after his brother's death. Chronicles of Pathán Kings, pp. 12, 13, 14. Ariana Antiqua, pl. xx., figs. 29, 35.
page 357 note 1 See also Marsden, No. DCCLVII. p. 564. There are two coins of this type in his collection in the British Museum. Marsden remarks, “The date of this coin, the earliest of those belonging to the princes who governed Bengal in the name of the Kings of Dehli, but who took all opportunities of rendering themselves independent, is expressed distinctly in words. ‥ ‥ The titles and patronymics of the Sultán by whom it was struck are for the most part illegible; not so much from obliteration, as from the original imperfect formation of the characters.”
page 357 note 2 The term 
is of frequent occurrence on the early Muslim coinages, and is usually associated with the name of the officer—whatever his condition— responsible for the mint issues, as 
which is translated by Fræhn as “manibus” (i.e. curâ et operâ), Ahmadis or “curante,”—a definition accepted in later days on the Continent as “par les mains de, par Us soins de,” etc.
In the present instance it would seem to imply a more or less direct intervention by the Commander of the Faithful himself in favour of his nominee.
page 358 note 1 Initial Coinage of Bengal, J.R.A.S. (N.S.) II., p. 154. No. 1, note; Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 46. Of course this exceptional issue will now have to cede priority of date both to the Bengal coins of A.H. 614, etc., and likewise to he northern piece of Altamsh, No. 8, which must he taken as anterior to No. 10.
page 359 note 1 Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 15. Pl. i. figs. 4–8.
page 359 note 2 This word as designating the coin is unusual; but we have the term 
for the Mint, and the 
etc., as the ordinary prefix to the 
or 
of the Pathán monarchs. The letters on the Bengal coins look more like 
which, however, does not seem to make sense. Fræhn long ago suggested that the word 
ought to be received as a substantive, especially in those cases where the preposition 
did not follow it, in the given sentence, as a prefix to the name of the Mint city.
page 360 note 1 
Calcutta text, pp. 163, 171.—
page 361 note 1 Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 118.
page 362 note 1 Persian text, 180.
page 362 note 2 Initial Coinage of Bengal, J.R..A.S. (N.S.) II., p. 182. Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 81.
page 362 note 3 Minháj-us-Siráj, after completing his account of Náṣir-ud-dín's conquest of Ghíás-ud-din 'Awz, and the transmission of the spoils to the Sultán at Dehli, continues—
p. 
(See also Elliot's Historians, ii., pp. 326, 329.)
The Khalif s emissary arrived at Dehli on the 22nd of Rabí'ul awwal, (3rd month of) A.H. 626, p. 
and news of the death of Náṣir-ud-dín Mahmtúd reached the capital in the 5th month of the same year, p. 174.
page 363 note 1 The founder of the Ghaznavi dynasty, the Great Sabuktigín, assumed regal state under the shadow of a red umbrella. Altamsh's ensigns are described as blackfor the right wing 
and red for the left wing 
p. 
Mu'izz-ud-dín Muhammad bin Sám's standards bore the same colours, but the discrimination is made that the black pertained to the Ghóris, and the red to the Túrks, p. 
Ghíás-ud-dín Muhammad bin Sám used black and red for the two wings respectively, p. 83.
page 363 note 2 Inscription on the Tomb of Sultán Gházi [Náṣir-ud-dín Mahmúd] at Dehli, dated a.h. 629.
This Tomb, which is known as the Maḳbarat of Sultán Gházi, stands amid the ruins of the village of Mullikpúr Koyi, about three miles due west of the celebrated Kutb Minar. Asár-us-Sunnadíd, Dehli, 1854, pp. 23, 30 (No. 12, 18, Facsímile), and 60 (modern transcript revised). See also Journal Asiatique, M. G. de Tassy's translation of the Urdú text; also Journal Archæological Society of Dehli, p. 57, and Hand-book for Dehli, 1863, p. 85.
page 364 note 1 Rukn-ud-dín Fírúz Sháh, another son of Altamsh, who for a brief period held the throne of Dehli, found a final resting-place on the chosen site of Mullikpúr; and his brother in deferred succession, entitled Mu'ízz-ud-dín Bahrám Sháh, followed him into the Tombs of the Kings in the same locality.—Asár-us-Sunnadíd, pp. 25, 26. Elliot's Historians, iii., p. 382. Chronicles of Pathán Kings, p. 290.
page 364 note 2 See p. 35 infrà.
page 365 note 1 Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 46.
Calcutta Text, p. 
Calcutta Text, p. 
In the printed text, under the first Court Circular list of the 
of Sultán Shams-ud-dín, we find the following entry, 
and in the second document, purporting to be a variant of that official return, we read, 
(pp. 
and 
) which latter version is greatly improved by the Oriental Lord Chamberlain's list preserved in a MS. in the B.M. (Addit. No. 26,189), which associates more directly the title with the name, and identifies the individual as 
page 366 note 2 The word Balká has exercised the commentators. It may be found, however, in the early Ghaznavi name of Balká-Tigín. 
means a “ camel colt,” and 
is “handsome.”
page 367 note 1 Deciphered by Mr. Wilson, C.S., Budáón.—J.A.S.B., 1872, p. 112.
page 368 note 1 Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, No. 90, p. 107. A similar coin (wanting in the date) is figured and described in the J.R.A.S. (N.S.) II., p. 186.
page 369 note 1 J.A.S.B. Proceedings, November, 1871, p. 247.
page 370 note 1 Minháj-Siráj, Persian text, p. 243. Stewart's Bengal, p. 61.
page 371 note 1 Chronicles, p. 148.
page 371 note 2 Professor Cowell's article in Journ. As. Soc. Bengal, 1860, p. 234; and Elliot's Historians, iii., p. 530.
page 371 note 3 See Buchanan's Dínájpúr, p. 50; and antè, p. 9.
page 372 note 1 Dr. Blochmann continues:—“As mentioned aboye, this inscription is quoted by Mr. Thomas in bis Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 140, wherea ‘rough’ translation by Colonel Nassau Lees is given. The ‘translation’ leaves out the name of the builder, and wrongly puts his titles in apposition to the words Khusrawe zamán. The absence of a facsimile has led Mr. Thomas tostate that Kai Káús confessed allegiance to 'Alá-ud-dín of Dihlí, who is the Sikandaruṣṣání par excellence; but the grammatical construction of the sentence, and the idiom, show that the words ‘Sikandar-uṣṣání, Ulugh-i-'Azam Humáyún and Zafar Khán,’ are merely titles of Bahrám I'tgín. He must have been a Malik of high rank, as the titles are high; but my Tribení inscriptions (about to be published in this volume) give Maliks not only similar titles, but also the phrase ‘May God perpetuate his rule and kingdom,’ and even julús names, if I may say so. ‘Shiháb-ul-Haqq-wad-dín,’ therefore, is merely the julúsname of Malik Zafar Khán, and shows, moreover, that the Sikandar-uṣṣání’ cannot be 'Alá-uddín, whose full julús name with the kunyah was 'Alá-ud-dín Abulmuzaffar Muhammad Shah.” This inscription is further referred to by Mr. W. M. Bourke (1872, p. 143), who expresses a hope that his new “rubbings,” now submitted to the Society, may resolve Dr. Blochmann's doubt regarding a portion of this Inscription, and supply the date in his No. 4 Inscription.
page 373 note 1 Tribeni or Trivení(as Mr. Money writes it, J.A.S.B., 1847, p. 393), N. of Húglí. Dr. Blochmann adds, “Tribení is often called Tripaní (“three streams”), and by the Muhammadans Tripaní Sháhpúr, or Fírúzábád (see also A'ín-i-Akbari (Gladwin), ii., p. 6; J.R.A.S. (N.S.) II. (1866), p. 201, Note I, and Note I, p. 205). Dr. Blochmann, in adverting to Marsden's coin of Táj-ud-dín Fírúz Shah (No. DCCLXXVIII., and Laidley, J.A.S.B., 1846, pl. v., fig. 17), has followed the old authorities in attributing the piece to a Bengal king of that name, and does not seem to be aware that the coin was minted in the Dakhan in 807 A.H., during the reign of the Buhmání Fírúz Sháh (A.H. 800 to 825). See my Chronicles of the Pathán Kings, p. 345. On the other part, I have to thank Dr. Blochmann for a rectification, to which he seems to attach an undue importance.—J.A.S.B., July, 1872, p. 119. In my recent work just quoted, I had occasion to notice, en passant, the contemporary coins of the local dynasties more or less connected with the central Muhammadan Imperialism. Among other hitherto unpublished specimens, I described a coin of “Ahmad Sháh bin Ahmad Sháh, Alwali, Al Bahmaní,” (p. 343), dated 856 A.H., and I submitted, without any reserve, in illustration of the piece itself, a facsimile of the original, designed and executed by an independent artist—which may be seen to be defective in both the subordinate points, in which Dr. Blochmann has the advantage of me in a better preserved and more fully legible coin lately acquired by Colonel Hyde. I take no blame to myself for reading the absolutely detached 
of the one specimen for the improved 
of the other, nor am I surprised at the appearance of the concluding word 
when it is to be found in the very next page of my work, where I had full authority for its citation.
page 374 note 1 “The two inscriptions of Hálim Khán contain the dates 1309 and 1315; the former inscription seems to have belonged to a Saraí, the latter to a Mosque.” J.A.S.B., Proceedings, 1871, p. 246.
page 374 note 2 J.A.S.B., February, 1872, p. 34.
page 375 note 1 Prinsep's Essays, ii., p. 175. J.R.A.S. (o.s.) XX., p. 119. Gen. Cunningham Num. Chron. ix. (1869), p. 230. I am now, apart from other reasons, the less inclined to accept the author's “83 of the Bactrian era”—which he derives from a quasi-monogram on the coins of Heliocles.
page 375 note 2 This is a description of the local peculiarities published in 1820. “In tracing the sea coast of this Delta, there are eight openings found, each of which appears to he a principal mouth of the Ganges. As a strong presumptive proof of the wanderings of that river, from one side of the Delta to the other, it may be observed, that there is no appearance of virgin earth between the Tiperah hills on the east and the district of Burdwán on the west; nor below Dacca and Bauleah on the north. In all the sections of the numerous creeks and rivers of the Delta, nothing appears but sand and black mould in regular strata, until the clay is reached, which forms the lower part of their beds; nor is there any substance so coarse as gravel either in the Delta, or nearer the sea than 400 miles (by the course of the Ganges) at Oudanulla, where a rocky point, part of the base of the neighbouring hills, projects into the river.”—Hamilton's Hindustan, i., p. 123.
page 375 note 3 J.A.S. Bengal, 1870, p. 282, and note, p. 37, antè.
page 375 note 4 Rennell and Stewart were alike convinced that the northern city of that name was the scene of Fírúz's contest with Ilíás Sháh. Rennell remarks: “Pundua, or Purruah, mentioned as a royal residence in Bengal, in the year 1353 (Dow, i. 340), [4to. edit, i., 326; Briggs. i., 449], is about seven miles to the north of Mauldah, and ten from the nearest part of Guur. Many of its ruins yet remain, particularly the Addeenah mosque, and the pavement of a very long street, which lies in the line of the road leading from Mauldah to Dinagepour.”—Rennell, Map, etc, p. 56.
Stewart's understanding of the localities maybe traced in the following passage: “Ilyas took post himself in the fort of Akdala; leaving his son to defend the city of Pundua (near Mauldah), which for some time past he had made his capital. The Emperor advanced to a place now called Fírozpúrábád, and commenced the operations of the siege of Pundua.”—Hist. Bengal, p. 84. See also Hamilton's Hindustan, i., 230.
page 376 note 1 Surveyor General of India's latest Maps.
page 376 note 2 These passages are given at large in my previous paper. J.R.A.S., II., p. 206. See also pp. 203–210, and Stewart's Bengal, pp. 84 note, 86 and 87; as well as Elliot's Historians, iii., pp. 294–308.
page 376 note 3 See Chronicles of Pathán Kings, 153. A'ín-i-Akbari, ii., p. 3, suppt., and Grant's Report, p. 372.
4 Proceedings As. Soc. Bengal, April, 1870, p. 121.