« السابقةمتابعة »
The Mints of the Mughal Emperors.-By R. BURN.
The literature on the subject of this article has increased consider. ably since the publication in 1885 of Mr. Leggett's notes on the mint towns of the Mohamedans. That book gives few references, some of the statements made in it appear incorrect, and in view of the discoveries made in the last twenty years, it is incomplete. At pp. 277-279 of his valuable paper on "Some coins of the Mughal Emperors," Mr. Dames gives a list of the mints added to our knowledge since the publication of the British Museum Catalogue in 1892. A few publications have escaped his notice, so that this list also is not complete,
Such lists are of use in two ways. They have a distinct historical value as showing the towns included in the Mughal Empire, or in which the sway of particular emperors was recognised. To the numismatist they are necessary as a guide in ascertaining whether a particular coin is known or not. For the historian, a bare list of mint names for each king is sufficient, while the numismatist requires also to know the metal of which each coin is made, and the type of inscription on it, besides the date it bears, if any. To prepare the information required by the latter is a task involving great labour which I am not able to undertake at present, but the following table has been drawn up to provide for the numismatist more details than are available except in a number of scattered papers. Through the kindness of my friends, it contains no fewer than 222 new items of interest to the numismatist, i.e., references to coins of mints not yet published for the particular emperors in the metals shown here, while these items include 42 new mints.
The list has been drawn up on the following plan. The British Museum Catalogue was first taken, and all mints found in it were noted. Other catalogues and papers were then searched, in the order shown
1 London, Stevens and Sons, 119, Chancery Lane, W.C.; Calcutta, Thacker Spink and Co.; Bombay, Thacker and Co.
2 Numismatic Chronicle, 1902.
below, and mints found in any one of these, but not in an earlier publication were marked. To some extent, therefore, the list reduces the labour of searching when it is required to see whether a particular type or date has been published; for example an entry of R(1) shows that the coin cannot be in any of the three Museum Catalogues. Lastly, unpublished coins are shown; for private collections I am indebted to the courtesy of the owners, who have permitted me to mention their coins. Mr. H. Nelson Wright, I.C.S, has supplied me with notes of unpublished coins in the Imperial Museum, Calcutta, and one in the British Museum. The Maharaja of Gwalior kindly allowed me to inspect the collection of coins made by the late Mr. Maries, which is now in his possession. I am responsible for the readings of the coins quoted from the Lucknow Museum, of which I have prepared a rough manuscript catalogue. The form of the list is intended as a permanent record, in which additions can be noted. Unpublished coins are distinguished by the references being in italics; it will be an advantage if numismatists will kindly communicate to me or to the Society additions to, or corrections in, the list for publication. There are several published papers to which I have not been able to refer which may contain coins which should be entered, and it is possible, though care has been taken, that some entries have been made incorrectly.
1 I have treated all the coins from the Lucknow Museum as unpublished, though some of them have been described in the annual reports, because these are often not accessible.
Wolseley Haig, "Note on a find of copper
coins in the Wan District, Barár," J.A.S.B., 1902, p. 63, H(1).
N. B.—Those emperors or princes whose coins only show a few mints are shown separately from the emperors of whom many mints are known.
A complete discussion of the names of the towns given in the list is impossible. Some of the places have not been identified, and there is dispute about others. I only propose to make short notes on a few of them.
ITAWA (Ã).—The coins in the Lucknow Museum show that the change in spelling from to took place in the 42nd regnal year of Aurangzeb. Coins dated 42 julūs and 1109 A.H. are spelt in the former way, and those dated 42 and 1110 in the latter method. Khāfi Khān1 says that an order was issued to make this change (the examples he quotes being Malwa, Bangālā, Baglānā, and Parnālā) in 1103 A.H.
AJMIR.-See also under Salimgarh. I have been unable to find any reference to this name for Ajmir. It is doubtless connected with Shaikh Salim Chishti from whom Prince Salim took his name. The copper coin of Akbar bearing the mint name Salimgarh Ajmir is dated 982 A.H. Shaikh Salim died in 979 and Prince Salim was born in 977.
ISLĀMĀBĀD.—It is uncertain at which place this mint was situated. It has been usual to consider that Chittagong was meant, but Dames2 favours Chāknā in the Dekhan, on the ground that it was conquered earlier. As shown in the list, I have a coin of Shāh Alam II with Islāmābād Mathurā as the mint. Rodgers had already suggested the
1 Elliott, History of India, VII, p. 344,
2 Num. Chron., 1902, p. 282.
identification with Mathura, but it is still doubtful where the earlier coins, on which only the name Islāmābād occurs, were struck.
ف آباد the letters
AṢAFĀBĀD BARELI.-In the catalogue of the Rodgers' collection in the Lahore Museum, the late Mr. C. J. Rodgers has published a coin (No. 49, p. 231), of the Bareli Mint on which Luṭfābād was restored for A coin of Mr. Nelson Wright's shows clearly that the correct reading is Aṣafābād. This coin is dated 30 julūs and 120 (2 or 3) A.H. In 1788, which corresponds to 1202-3 A.H., Lord Cornwallis executed a treaty with the Nawab Vazīr, Āṣaf-ud-daula, permitting him to reimpose certain duties in Rohilkhand, but Asaf-uddaula had obtained practical supremacy over that tract quite ten years before, so that earlier dates may be expected.
ILAHĀBAD.-On the copper coins of Akbar ascribed to this mint, the last letter of the name is "s" and not "d, " as is pointed out in the footnote on p. 331 of the B.M. Catalogue. The inscription, however, is clearly and not, that is to say, it should probably be read Alhābās or Alhābās, not Ilahābās. The Ain-i-Akbari1 says "Ilāhābād anciently called Prayag was distinguished by His Imperial Majesty by the former name." In other places the name is spelt Ilahābās. Elliott quotes the Cahar Gulshan and other authorities for the statement that Shah Jahān changed the name to Ilahābād as the termination of bas savoured too much of Hinduism. On this Beames remarks that it is far more probable that Ilahābād was the original name given by the Muhammadans and the lower classes of Hindus altered the final syllable to a form they understood. It may be added that the termination is still commonly pronounced bas by villagers in the neighbourhood.
It seems to me, however, that the most reasonable supposition is to take Ālhābās as a purely Hindu name. All the copper coins I have seen are dated earlier than the year 40 Ilahi. On the other hand, on the well-known couplet coins of Akbar (or Jahāngīr in his father's lifetime), which are dated occasionally, the date is always in the forties, and the name is Ilahābād, as it is on the coin of Jahangir in the Panjab Museum. The statement that Shāh Jahān altered the spelling is thus incorrect. Another point is that the oldest part of the city of Allahabad is several miles away from the fort and junction, and it is quite possible that a village called Ālhābās existed near the site of the Khusru Bagh and the sarai outside it. Bās is not an uncommon termination, and the first half of the name is obviously the same as that of the hero Alhā who is well known in Northern Indian fable. This 1 Jarrett's translation, Vol. II, p. 158.
2 Memoirs, 11, p 104.
8 See Cunn. Survey Reports, Vol. VII.