on the coins of the dynasty of the hindú kings of kábul / by edward thomas

8/7/2019 On the coins of the dynasty of the Hindú kings of Kábul / by Edward Thomas

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/on-the-coins-of-the-dynasty-of-the-hindu-kings-of-kabul-by-edward-thomas 1/23

Wwfww



Aar. VI.?On the Coins of the Dynasty of the Hindu Kings of

Kabul. By Edward Thomas, Esq., Bengal Civil Service.

[Read OthJune, 1846.]

In a work by M. Reinaud, entitled, Frngmens Arabes et Persans

relatifs ? l'Inde, lately published at Paris, is to be found the followingtranslation of a passage from the Arabic Manuscript of A bul Rihan

Mohammed Alb?r?n?, which enables Indian numismatists to fix both

akingdom and a dato for a class of coins, regarding

thehistory

of

which much uncertainty has uj) to this time prevailed: Alb?r?n?'s

original Arabic version, designated Tarikh-i-Hind,was

composedin

India between the years 1030 and 1033 a.D. His evidence, therefore,

in thepresent

instance is of thehighest value, as

having been com

mitted towriting

in thecountry

to which it refers, at aperiod

imme

diately contemporaneous with the existence of one of the short list of

kingswhoso

historyit concerns.

"Lo dernier roi de cette

dynastie*

fut Laktouzcman. Ceprince

avait ?>our vizir un Brahmane nomm? Kaller. Ce vizir ?tait favoris?

par la fortune, et il trouva dans la terre des tr?sorsqui

lui donn?rent

do la force et accrurent sa

puissance.

D'un autre c?t?, la fortune

tourna le dos ? son ma?tre. En effet, il y avait bien long temps que

cette famille ?tait ma?tresso dupouvoir.

Laktouzemanj>rit

une direc

tion mauvaise; il se livra ? une conduite honteuse; et, comme les

plaintesarrivaient de tout c?t? au

vizir, celui-ci fitcharger

leprinco

de cha?nes et renferma pour lecorriger.

Ensuite le vizir se laissa

aller ? la tentation d'?tre le ma?tre unique:il avait des richesses

sufiisantes pour lever tous les obstacles. Ils'empara

donc du tr?ne et

eut pour successeur lo Brahuic Samanda. Celui-ci fut remplac? pur

Kamalava, puisvinrent successivement Bheema, Djayap?la,

Anauda

pala,et

Nardadjanp?la.Celui-ci monta dit-on, sur le tr?ne l'an 412

de PHcgirc(1021 de J. C). Son fils, Bhccmapnla, lui succ?da au bout

decinq

ans. La souverainet? Indiennes'?teignit dans la personne de

co dernier, et il no restaplus d'individu de cette famille pour souiller le

feu2."

Prior to thediscovery

of this passage, the kingdoms andepochs

1 The Turk Kings of Kabul. The previous relation closes with the reign of

Kank.* u

La nouvelle dynastie me parait avoir remplac? le Bouddhisme par le

Brahmanisme, et j'attribuea ces

princes la s?rie de m?dailles que M. Wilson a crue

d'origine Rajepout."?Reinacd.

N 2



assigned to the dynasty who had issued the series of coins, heretofore

denominated Rajput, were manifold indeed. However, admitting all

the doubt reasonably attendant upon the early discovery of a limited

number of medals, andmarking

the various and unlooked-for ramifica

tions into which this class of coinscvcutually extended, we

may, in the

case inpoiut, fairly

claim adegree

of credit of noordinary

character for

the science of Numismatics, which in spite of all obstacles enabled thoadmirable Secretary of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, James Prinscp,to announce with confidence so

long agoas 1837, on information

derived almost solely from the medals themselves and their places of

discovery, that the species of coins which form the subject of the

present notice, extendedtf

upwardsto the Brahmanical rulers of the

Punjab, and probably of Kabul:" an opinion now seen to be justifiedto the very letter.

Professor Wilson also, in adjudging the coin of Prithvi Raja to

its right owner, the Lost Hind? king of Delhi (a.D. 1192), was able to

conjecture,with sonic

certainty,that the

early princesof the

dynasty,

win? had introduced medals of the liko device, had reigned in tho

Punjab at the end of the tenth, and early part of the eleventh cen

tury. In addition, then, to a confirmation of thespeculations

of Pro

fessor Wilson and James Prinscp, we derive, from this passage in

Alb?r?n?, the distinct information, that a Brahmanical

dynasty

suc

ceeded a race of Turk kings inKabul. A full list of these Brahman

sovereigns, broughtdown to a timo when other Mohammedan authors

beginto notice Indian

history,enables us, in a most

satisfactory

manner, to make a correct attribution of avery extensive, if not

important,class of medals.

The dates of the reigns of the last two princes of this line are fixed

by Alb?r?n? ; and these alone would be sufficient to enable us to form

an approximate estimate of tho epoch of Samanta, and that of his

predecessor,the founder of this

dynasty.Wc have, however, in addi

tion, asingular piece of collateral evidence, illustrative of the period

sought,in the discovery

of one of Samanta's coins,so

latelyas 1842,

at aplace

calledObrzycko,

in the provinceof Posen, in company with

those of thirty different kings of Europe and Asia, all of whom reigned

priorto 015 a.D.1 Considering

the distance thissolitary

coin of

Kabul had to travel, (probably ouly in the simple course of commerce)

prior to its inhumation, in seeking for a satisfactory era for thismonarch, we may justly admit a margin of forty or

fifty years, pre

For the notice of this discovery, asbearing upou the era of the Brahman

kings of Kabul, we ?re indebted to M. A. de Longperier, whose valuable commu

nication on this subject is printed at the end of M. lleinaud's work.



viou8 to this date, and assume his accession at any period proximate

to i)35 A.n. Over and above these evidences,we find a more

specific

date for ourpurpose, and one less removed from the

periodin

question, in the known fact of Jeip?Ps existence as king of Lahore,

priorto the death of

Aleptegin,which took

placein 706* a.D., as

Jeip?l is noticed by Mohammedan historians asopposing Sabak

tagin in his early expeditions into India, while this last was still onlythe

general ofAleptegin: allowing, then, forty years upward.?

from

07? (a dateby

no meansproved

to be that of the commencement of

Jeip?l's reign,)for the united reigns of Samanta, Kunilowa, and

Bhiin, we shall scarcelyerr in fixing the accession of the first of the

three asearly

as 9.35 A.D. This mode ofcomputation, however, under

any circumstances, is butimperfect,

and the utmost the materials

at our command enable us to assert with any degreeof

certaintyis

that Syala's usurpation took place early in the tenth century.

Before entering upon the question of the identification of any of

the doubtful names in ourlist, it is

necessaryto

premise,that great

latitude is to be allowed in any attemptto reconcile Hind? names,

writtenoriginally

in the Sanskrit character, with atranscription of

the same into Arabic. All who areacquainted

even with Ihe

letters of these twolanguages

will beprepared

to admit the difli

eultyhere adverted to. Tho Arabic

Manuscriptfront which the

presentFrench translation has been made is

acknowledgedto be of

modern execution: hence, asmight be

expected,we labour under full

disadvantageof tho errors of

succeeding manuscript copyists. These,

werethey

notamply notorious, are

sufficiently provedto have existed

inperhaps

more than their usual force in the present instance, where

M. Iteinaud is found giving four possible readings of the name of

Nardadjanp?l from his own manuscript, besides adverting to three

other readings by Otbi and Ferishtah.Keeping

the above in view, then, wepropose, instead of endeavour

ingto

identifyHindu names

through the mazes ofuncertainty

of the

Arabic manuscript, boldlyto correct the Arabic from the

unquestion

able records of the coins themselves; and instead ofapplying

coins to

kings, applythe kings

to their own coins.

Beforeproceeding

with the nomenclature of the Brahmanical kinjrs,

it may bo proper to notice in thisplace,

the coincidence between the

Arabic name of tho celebrated Turk king, Knnk, jCxT, and the Sri

Vanka dev ^ft ^ of the Elephant aud Lion type of coin which

precededthe Bull and Horseman money introduced

bythe Bralnnans.

The similitude of names and the needfulcorrespondence of all avail



able evidence, arcsurely

sufficient to authorize ourindicating

Vanka

dev, as the hero the history of whoso rule immediately precedes the

extract abovegiven.

The first king in this Kabul dynasty, named in the Arabic, "Kalar

Brahman," is, wc have little doubt, theSyalapati

of our coins. There

is less difference in sound between Syala and Kalar, than would at

first be imagined, so that if our translator Alb?r?n? wrote his Arabicversion from oral tradition, this slight chango in the initial pronunciation of tho name would be fairly probable. If this supposition be

rejected, there is still in reserve the very likely substitution by suc

ceeding copyists of the Arabic Manuscript, of a& for an?j?. It will

be seen that in this argument, all account of the latter part of tho

name found on the coins is rejected. The Pati was probably,as it is

at thepresent day,

used as a secondname;

or we

may fairlylook

upon Syala as a popular abbreviation of the somewhat long title of

Syala pati dev.

For the third king's identification, it must be confessed, that wo

have to demand to the full, all tho consideration above claimed, to justifyour appropriation of the medal bearing the legend Khvadavayaka, or

Khedavayaka, to our Arabic author's king, \A>+S, Kamlowd: Khcdava

and Kumlowa are not, even to liberal cars, quiteaccordant in sound;

still their soumis, with the causes of disturbance stated above, might

well be farther removed one from the other.Supposing

theoriginal

native name to havo beencorrectly

rendered into tho Arabic in

the first instaucc, the mutation from Kad?v?, JAxf > to Kamlowd,

\JUJf, might easily have occurred. A blot in tho middle of the

word, or a carelessrunning

of one letter into another, wouldreadily

convertAj. dav,

intoA^>,

inlu. Thestylo

ofcoin,

as well as tho

metal it iscomposed of, agree exactly

with those of three out of tho

four first rulers of ourvery limited

dynasty;so much so, and so much

evidence does it bear of belonging to one of the earlier kings of this

race, the laterprinces

of our listhaving adopted

a mixed silver and

copper currency, that wemight almost assume from the

negative fact

that it does not bear the name of any of the other three princes, that it

was once the propertyof the third Kabul Brahman.

Referring to the name of Nardadjaiip?l, seeing theuncertainty

as

to its correctorthography

avowedby

M. Remand, wonaturally

hesi

tate in any attemptat numismatic

identification,more

especiallyas

we are disposed to doubt whether the denomination here quoted is a

name at all, ami whether it is not rather a mere indication of the rela



.

tionship of tho successor of Anungp?l to his grandfather, the great

Jcip?l. In the lithographed Persian copy of Ferishtah, the words

JUa?. */?>>> "gra"dson

ofJeip?l"

have beenadopted. The R?zut

al-saf? as well as itsabridgment

the Habib-al-sair, both works of

early date and high authority, give no name, mentioning only the

accession of Pal, the son of Auungpal.

Thereadings

of the coins of the three other sovereigns in Albi

rt'ini's list of whose moneywe have specimens,

do not appear to

require any special notice, as the Hindi and Arabic namesagree most

satisfactorily.

With a view ofassuring ourselves of the

probablewealth and

extent ofkingdom

of each ruler of this race, it may be as well that we

should advertgenerally

to thocomparative abundance,

as well as to

the localities in which this class of coins is discovered. The medals of

Syalaare found in considerable numbers in Afghanistan. They are,

however, comparativelyless abundant in the Punjab,

ami North of

India; whereas, the monies of Samanta,common as

theyare in and

around Kabul, are, weimagine,

even moreplentiful

in thePunjab,

and

the north-western provincesof Hindustan. We can at all events,

from our ownexperience,

assert that theyare met with in

surprising

quantities

in the North of

India,

aud in actual amount and number

nowpreserved,

far surpass those of any other Indian king antecedent

to the Mohammedan conquest. We are, asyet,

aware of the exist

ence ofonly

fourspecimens

of the money of Khedava. The coins of

Ilium are found in K?bulistan, but are seldom, if ever, met with in

India. The coins ofAnungp?l

are common, and arcplentiful

in the

Punjab, and the northern parts of tho Ganges D??b. Of Jeip?l,

Nardadjanp?l,and

Bh?mp?lno medals are known.

Numerous as Syala's coins arc, their bond fide production, both

from his mint and front his own resources, does not appear beyondthe

reach of probability, explained as it is, in a measure, hy Albinmfs

mention of his great riches.

To account for the enormous amount of the money of Samanta,

there may bo assigned two different causes; either, an actual legi

timate issue from his mint of the number of coins of which the medals

now extant are therepresentatives, (rendered possible by

the mag

nitude of his possessions); or, tho recoinagc of the money of his

predecessor, arising from a desire of aggrandizingeither himself as

an individual, or thereligion

of which he was aprominent follower,

by replacing with his own name and asymbol

of his creed, those of his

predecessors of anopposing faith. Samantas celebrity,

from whatever



source derived, is evidencedby

the uniform retention of his name on

the coins of his successors, from the time of Anungp?l down to tho

Mohammedan conquest of Delhi in 1192 ; by the adoption of the device

of Nandi, superscribed by his appellation, by tho later Ghaznevidcs;and

bythe

assumptionof the Horseman reverse of a

coinageat that

time completely identified as his, by the Ghorians, on their first exten

sion of their dominions. It would appear also, from the number ofSamanta's proper coins still extant, and the

varietyof countries they

are to be found in, that ho must have held under his sway some

very rich and extensive kingdom. That under him the originalKabul territory of Syala was carried to tho extreme limits of the

Punjab and Sirhind, is rendered likely by the number of his medals

still found in those parts, and by the fact, that coins bearing the Brah

manical deviceconjoined

with Samanta's name, andevidently

imita

tions from the Kabul originals,are found in use

byhis

earlysucces

sors, andregularly

continued as the currency of those countries for

nearlytwo centuries.

Keepingin view, in this

inquiry,that Samanta

was not the actual founder of hisdynasty,?at

all events as far as

the original kingdom of Kabul is concerned?if he had not made

himself remarkable, eitherby conquest,

orby

the advancement of

Hind? ascendancy, it is difficult to explain why the name of Syala,the first of the

line,

was not the one chosen for a mintmotto,

or oven

that of Bhini, the last Brahmanpredecessor (as

we shallpresently

show)of those who introduced the use of bi-nominal coins. This

custom, be it observed, was in all likelihood derived from tho prac

tice of Hie Mussulmans inscribing the titles of the mundane head of

their religionon the reverses of their medals, but in the present

instance the name of Samanta supplied the place of the Moslim

Imam; if the idea now advanced be correct, it in itself supplies us

with another indication, over and above those we have yet to advance,of Samanta's

priestly supremacy.

It may be as well here to notice, that the silver and copper coins

bearingthe single word "Samanta" over the bull, without any name

on the reverse, cannot, under any circumstances, be taken to be tho

coins of a class of nionarchsusing

oneparticular form of medal,

as distinguished from one individual bearing the appellation; as

Samanta's immediate successors inscribe their own names above the

figure of Nandi, on the obverse of their own coins.

It is somewhatworthy

of remark in thisplace, and with reference

to thisparticular

view of Samanta's greatness, that Ward, in his list

ofKings

of Hindustan, extracted from the Pu ranas, notes Sumoodru

Palu, as the founder of aYogi dynasty of paramount nionarchs,



numberingsixteen kings; among these sixteen, we find the names of

no less than three princes,whose coins we now have to show, bearing

the identical Bull and Horseman device of the Kabul Brahmans. Two

of these, Bhiin and Anunda, correspond in name with two of tho

successors of Samanta recordedby Alb?r?in?. Moreover, this same

list of Ward's, brought down through many Ilajas, ends in Prithvi

Raja, the last Hind? monarch of Delhi, andone

who,we

have alreadyseen, retained Samanta's name and

styloof coin. If we

acceptthe

evidence of the Punir?as in this coincidence, it will be seen that fol

lowingWard himself, we must

entirely reject theirchronology.

That Samanta should, from a motive of individualvanity, have

recoined, in his own name, all the money of hispredecessors within

his reach, is highly probable; indeed, we have an instance of a like

act in acountry

not too far removed to have furnished him anexample;

as the author of the Raja Tarangini informs us, that Toramana, king

of Kashmir, from 415 to 430 a.d. melted down the ancient coin of the

country,and struck di?ara in his own name.

Saman ta's renown as aking, whether he were a

conqueroror not,

wasprobably

connected with the progress of Brahinanisui, inopposition

to Buddhism, the former of which is shown by Colonel Sykes to have

made suchimportant

advancesjust about this

period1:at the same time

there is evidence sufficient, aided by that afforded by Alb?r?n?, to

justify us in supposing that the Turk kings of Kabul were Buddhists.

Fromreligious

zeal to advance Brahmanism, it waspossibly Samantas

objectto remove, as

earlyafter the

usurpationof the

monarchy byhis

familyas he

safely could, all traces of Buddhistascendancy.

In the

East, where these thingsare much considered, in no

way would a

man's ideas turn morereadily

in anattempt of this nature, than to

the destruction of the coins of formerkings, and the increase of his

own.

Were there nothing intrinsically indicative of areligious motive in

the assumption by these Brahman kings of the Nandi type of coin, the

entirechange

in the device of the coinage of akingdom, concurrent

with the accession of aruling power professing

a different creed, would

in itself attract attention to thesubject, especially when, in addition,

we have reason to think that the coins of the Turkkings, in their die

of the elephant, refer to the Buddhist faith. The fact of the entire

absence ofany single specimen

ofthe silver coinage of the Turk kings

of Kabul is most remarkable; especiallyas the copper pieces, bcarin?'

theirelephant

and lion device, areplentiful,

we cannot with any

1Vide Journal Royal Asiatic Society, No. XII., Art. XIV.



reasonimagine thcso

kingsor their

countryso

poor,as to have been

absolutely wantingin a silver currency. The careful suppression

of

these silent recordsby

a successful adversary, then, isperhaps

one of

the few ways ofaccounting

for their non-existcucc. The copper coins

beingmore

perishable, may have been allowed to escape; nay more,

of so little importancedoes the copper currency

seem to have been

considered, that we have instances of Samanta's name appearing on

coins of the old die,even after

Syalahad introduced copper money of

the same form and size as his silver currency. The issue of these

elephantcoins may, indeed, have occurred

earlyin Samanta's reign,

before his bigotry gained head, otherwise itmilitates somewhat againstthis

explanation of the causo of hisapparent

wealth.

The association of the names of Hindu Deities in several distinct

instances, on the coins ofMadanp?l,

Prithv? Rajaand others, as

prefixesto the name of Samanta, testifies in an obvious manner the

sacerdotal eminence of this last.

It will be remarked, on a reference to Alb?r?n?, that a notablo

change takesplace

in the termination of the names of the sovereigns

after the fourth on the list.Syala, Samanta, and Blum, call themselves

d?va; Jeip?land the rest are all

palaelevas. At the same time, our

plate shows a considerable variation in thostyle

ofcoinage;

in the medals

of

Syala,Samanta, Khedava, and Bhim d?va, we have the name over

the bull on the obverse, the reversebeing occupied by

tho horseman,

accompanied by what, as far as we know, are mere mint marks, ami

the Arabic word J?? (just), whereas, in thomoney of Anung pal d?va

we find the designation placedon the reverse, occupying the place of

the mint marks just noticed, the bull on the obverse being superscribed

(as has been before mentioned) by the title of Samanta; and this

practice is continuedby succeeding

nionarchs of the race. Tho in

scription of the name of a preceding prince on the coins of his suc

cessors cannot butpoint,

notonly

to thecelebrity

of the former, but

to the acknowledged relative inferiority of the latter; hence we

naturally inquire,if Khedava and Bhim considered themselves

equal

to their immediate predecessor, why Anung pal,and most

probably

Jeip?l, admitted their own subordination] We havo it, on tho autho

rityof Ferishta.li, that Jeip?l was the son of Hisp?l; and we learn

that he was king of Delhi, and that he extended his dominion

to Lahore'. This must be taken to mean, thatJeip?l conquered

theprovince of Lahore, and as we find him noted as one of the suc

cessors of the Kabul dynasty, we might well suppose that he con

' Journal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Useful Table*.



quered Kabul ?also; but Abul Fazl tells us that Aleptegin possessed

himself of Kabul as well asGhazni, and we know from Ferishtah and

Mirkhond, that Jeip?Ps dominions extended westward only to Peshawar

and Lughm?n; clearly proving that ho did not own Kabul. If such

bo the truth, theonly way of accounting

for Jcip?l's being recorded as

aking

of tho Kabul race, is, to conclude, as Samanta's coins giveus

reason to do, that the early princes of the line possessed the Punjab,

and that Jeip?l, in taking this from them, succeeded to all they then

had left, and, with their lands, took the honours of one of their line.

It is possible also, if the Brahmans did not possess the Punjab, that, on

their loss of the kingdom of Kabul, leaving, as it did, the owner of

tho land of the five rivers, the nearest neighbourof tho advancing

Mohammedans, Jeip?l may have put himself forward as the"

Fidei

Defensor,'* and,as such, called himself successor to these

priestly

kings. In identifying the Jeip?l of Delhi with Albir?ui's king of

Kabul, we may very fairly conjecture that, being of the Delhi Tuar

line, Jeip?l was a Tuar Rajput and no Brahmau. If objection be

taken to the sufficiency of the data upon which the identification of

the Delhi with the Lahore monarch is founded, there is still much to

favour thesupposition

that Jeip?lwas a

Rajput;his name as well as

tho caste of hispeculiar subjects

admit theprobability

of his being

aBh?tt?,

orshepherd.

Thischango

of caste in a line of Hind?

monarch?, would at onceexplain any acknowledgment

ofinferiority.

There are, however, objectionsto the too

readyadmission of this

solutiou of thedifficulty,

as Ferishtah unquestionablymentions

Jeip?l

as "of the Brahman race:" this, in a Mohammedan author, may

merelymean one of a line heretofore of that caste, or as a

king

identified with Brahmanism by promoting and defending that creed.

The samo remark, indeed, mightbe

appliedto the statement of Albi

r?n? himself, on tho subject of the caste of the early Kabul king1?,

exceptthat the allusion to the Brahman origin

ofSyala

and Samanta

is distinct and reiterated; whereas the othersovereigns

areonly

indicatedby

name assucceeding

each in his turn, without any precise

reforonco to tho class from whencethey sprang.

It is not a little singular,amid the profusion

of the medals of

other kingsof the dynasty,

that nosingle specimen of the

pro?luce of

Jcip?l'smint has as

yetbeen brought

to light.It would be unreason

able to infer from this that Jeip?l did not coin money; the Eastern

feelingon the

subject,his long reign,

and his richkingdom, all

oppose this deduction. We must conclude, then, that the extensive

currency of Samanta sufficed for the generalwants of the time, ami

that Jeip?Ps frequent employment inwar, left him little time to attend



to the arts of peace, and induced him to content himself with a verylimited issue of coin.

Touching the extent of the kingdoms possessed by each prince of

the line, but little information is accorded to usby Alb?r?n?; he

simply alludes to the revolution which placed the first of the race at

the head of the kingdom of Kabul, and then satisfies himself with

ascanty notice

ofthe rest of the dynasty.

We have already ventured to infer from the record borne by

medals, that one of the first kings of this dynasty added tho Punjabto his somewhat limited Kabul state. Tho dominion of Jeip?l is

shownby Mohammedan authors to have "extended from Sirhind to

Lanigh?n, and from Kashmir toMultan." Tho Hind? annals of the

countries themselves bear witness that he was alsoking

of Delhi.

Anungp?l,in

succeedingto theso

possessions,was not able to retain

the full vigour of his sovereignty against the repeated attacks of theMohammedans. In his

reignJessalmir is noted as

tributary,and

held under him by a local king. This and many other states, regard

ingwhich no distinct information has come down to us, there is reason

to believe, must have been attached to the kingdom during Jeip?Fs

time. Indeed, whatever the peculiar dominions of each king mayhave been, all testimony

on the subject demonstrates that Jeip?l,

Anungp?l,and his successor, were

recognisedas

paramountnionarchs

of Northern India. The readiness with which the troops of the local

rajas were collected at their demand, their usually being found at the

head of the army when assembled, and theprotection they

extended

to states not in their own immediatepossession,

all show this supre

macy.It would seem never to have been the custom of Indian con

querors to occupy the kingdoms they subdued, they satisfied them

selvesapparently

withexacting submission, demanding

as aproof

of

such,cither a nominal tribute or an

obligationof service. Narda

djanp?l (known among the Mussulmans as Jeip?l IL), finally lost

Lahore, which from thisperiod became an

appanage of the Ghazne

vides. In the absence of any other evidence, we mustconjecture

thatBh?inp?l succeeded to tho territories his father was ablo to save

from Mohammedan conquest.

While on the subject of the coins of the kings of Kabul, itmay be

proper that we should briefly advert to several medalsdisplaying

more or less relation to the original type, but inscribed, at the samo

time, with Cufie letters. No. 19 of ourplate

is a coinevidently

imitated from Syala's money, bearing on the one side the bull, but

little altered, with the exception of the removal of the sign of the

trident of Siva from the animal's haunch to a moreprominent position



on tho field of the coin ; the space usually occupied by the name of

Syala, is here supplied by that of the Khalif, ???b .j?Jt+H AI Muk

tadir billah;on the space above tho bull is also to be seen a mono

gram, apparentlyone of the Sanskrit double letters, ?T??,found on

some types of the money of Syala, reversed; this mark, in itself,

identifies the coin most intimately with those we suppose it

to bo derived from: the reverse exhibits the horseman, somewhat

altered from the original,in the absence of the spear, and the nearer

approximation of the head-dress to tho form used by the Imams;

tho whole is superscribed Jul=*. ?JJ"

Lilian Jafer," Jafer being

supposed to bo tho real name of tho Khalif himself, or that of bis

Vizir, to either of whom, itcorrectly belongs. This coin is

conjec

tured by M. A. de Longperier to have been issued by some quondam

Hind?princo newly

converted to Mohammedanism, who must have

been in a measure connected with the state of Kabul. There are

several casts of similar coins in the British Museum, and oneoriginal

in thoBiblioth?que

du Roi at Paris. That thero was much intercourse

and someunexplained connexion between the Hindus and Moham

medans in the days of Syala, there is further evidence in his coins

themselves: for the curious monogram )-f- in front of the horse on bis

medals and those of his successors, is discovered from a clear cut die

of a coin of Khedava, to be astrange perversion

of the Arabic word

jAcAs the Mohammedan specimen

errs in its reversal of a Hindi

letter, and would seem to indicate itself the work of a die cutter

versant in Cufie, but ignorant of Sanskrit; so, the coins of Syala,both in this instance and those about to be noticed, prove their art ist

a master of Sanskrit, though wofullyuninstructed in Arabic. On

other of Syala's coins (especially on three presented to tho British

Museumby

Colonel Lafont),are to be found what, at

present, in

theimperfect

state of the medals themselves, appears to be a some

what lengthenedPersian inscription, in front of the horseman. These

coins are hero alluded to, in thehope

ofdrawing the attention of

possessors of betterspecimens

to thesubject,

with a view to its full

elucidation. In order to embrace a reference to all medals having any

bearingon this

question,wo

may note the publication of four coins in

the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vide Plate XLIX.,Vol. IV., Figures 27, 28; and Plate XI., Vol. II., Figures 14 and 17.

Tho Sauskrit inscriptionon these has not been satisfactorily deci

phered. The Persian reads clearly j4>vlL LJjJl y^UN?sir



cd-din, it is to be observed, was the title of Subuktagin,a title adopted

by no succeeding Indian potentate till 1210 a.d.

In the scries ofkings using tho bull and horseman currency wo

have a break extending from Bhimp?l to Prithvi Raja, aperiod of

nearlya

centuryand a half. Into this extensive gap

wo are at

present able to introduce, with historical certainty, onlyone king,

Mndanp?l. (Fig. 15.) The name of Sallakshanp?l (vide Figs. 11 and

12),claims insertion in our

list, but the local annals extant do not

enable us to fix its due position. Tho make of the coins, and the

form of character with which theyare inscribed, suffice to point to an

early reign; as such, we have placed this king before Madanp?l. We

have, also, the coins of threeprinces (Nos. 16, 17, and 18 of our

plate',) who will probably be found to have reigned during this

interval ; however, thepaucity

of specimens, and the abrasion of the

letters on themargin

of these medals, do notpermit

us tosuggest

the full titles they once bore. The name of Mahap?l is distinct on

the smallpiece, Fig. 1.5, and the devico seems to bear some

affinity

to the Kabul type. This will probably be found to bo a coin of

Mahip?l,otherwise Bh?p?l, king

of Benares and G?ur, a.d. 1027.

We must not omit, in this casual mention of the coins ofMadanp?l

and Prithvi Raja, to allude to tho titles of M?dhava and As?wnr?, to

be discovered on each

respectively.

M?dhava is ono of the

manynames of Krishna, and its

adoptionon the money of a

kingof Kano?j,

for as such woidentify Madanp?l,

isappropriate,

inasmuch as tho

classic land of Mathura, the birth-place of this divinity, was in all

probability a fief of Kano?j. The As?wuri, another title of D?rg?,

may evidence a separate dynasty and a race of kings of a different

Rajput family, who may have adopted for their local goddess, tho

mountain-born Parvuti.

The unassigned coin ofWT'" ^ (Fig. 16), displays the As?wuri,and hence may teach us to look for the identification of its master

> Sec also Figs.21 and 28, Plate XIX., Ariana Antiqua.

*Were it not venturing beyond what the strict reading of the inscription on

this coin altogether permits,itmight well be attributed to Sdmcswar, the Choh?u

King of Ajmir, the fourth in descent from the great V?sala dev.

In the transition state of the Dcvanagari alphabet at this period, the initial letter

of the name, which undoubtedly (referring to the modem forms) looks more like a

Tj p than any'othcr consonant, may possibly have been used to represent an s^f,

and what appears of the remainder of the word tallies well with^ffti^? "?cT

"Somcswar dev." Vide Tod, Vol. I. p. 225; and Vol. IL p 451.



among the families of tho Chohans, or the Tuars, to whose throne

theysucceeded.

That the whole countryof Hindustan was, during

thecentury

and

a half above adverted to, in a state of extremeanarchy,

incident

upon the frequent inroads of the Ghaznevides, there can be little

doubt; that there was agreat subdivision of monarchies and con

sequent general insignificance of their rulers, we have cvidenco

enough to show, did wo not find proof of it in bearingof the com

bination of no less than ono hundred andfifty kings

to oppose the

invasion of Mohammed bin Sain

It is dillicult, amongso

many sovereignties,to know where to turn

to seek the owners of our coins, or toconjecture

in what line, andby

what process of descent, theright to strike these medals was continued

from monarch to monarch, till we find it fixed in Prithvi Raja. It is

possible that the mere possession of the capital, in itself constituted its

lord a nominal Maharaja, and that with the capital also went the die,which had long been in use for the currency of the dependent coun

tries. That this particular species of coin was regarded as the fixed

currencyof tho dominions of the successors of the Kabul

kings,is

sufficiently proved by its acceptation, in part, by Ibrahim; its beingfound in use by Prithvi Raja; and its recognition and retention by

Mohammed bin

S?m,and his successors on the throne of Delhi. At

tho sametime, it is not

unlikely,as the

prestige attachingto the

lordshipof the old scat of government gradually

became weaker,as

itsprinces became less

powerful, that thiscoinage, in

continuingto be

recognised among the Hindus as atype of their faith, was adopted at

will by any of the numerous rajas of that belief, who, for the time

boing, attainedascendancy

sufficient to entitle them, in any way,to

assumo the leadership of their brethren in their opposition to the

advance of Mohammedan conquest.

It has been mentioned above, that the Mohammedanprinces

of

Ghazni and Ghor imitated, in part, the coinage of the Kabul kings:somo notice of these currencies

may not, therefore, be out ofplace

in ourpresent inquiry. The copper money of the later MiiHsulm?ii

kings of Ghazni has ono of its surfaces ornamented with the bull N?ndi,

abovo which is inscribed, as in his owncoins, the name of Samanta;

the other surface bears the name and titles of the Mohammedanprince

in Cufie characters. The first Ghaznevide of whom we have moneyof this

description, is Ibrahim(a.D. 1058), Plate, fig. 20, and its use

seems to have been continued until the close of thereign

of Khusr?

Shah (11(10). The adoption of asymbol so

purely Hind?, superscribed

by the name of a Hind?king, by

a sect sobigoted in these matters as



the followers of Mohammed, is singular, but may bo accounted for,

cither by the supposition that the Ghazni sultans, in virtue of their

conquestof a

partof the territories of Samanta's successors, assumed

a reverse for their coins indicative of such success; or, moreprobably

still, this device may have been borrowed by the Ghaznovides from

motives of policy, originating in a desire to conciliate the feelings of

their new subjects, in continuing a symbol connected with tho Hind?faith, to the rejection

of the invocation of Islamism, up to this time used,

in itsplace,

on their own coins. It is to be observed, that this change

was not made till the sultansbegan

to trust themselves among their

Indian subjects, by taking up their residence at Lahore The last of

the race of tho Ghnznevidcs, Khusru Malik, discontinued tho use of tho

bull reverse, and issued money having Cufie inscriptions on both sides.

The house of Ghor appear to have assumed one of thesymbols

of the Kabul money, after they had won Ghazni in 1171: instead,

however, of following their fellow-Mohammedans in aflecting the

bull, they adopted the opposite surface, and issued a copper cur

rency, decorated, on oneside, with the horseman, accompanied by

the words Sri Haniira,W *?*m.i, inscribed, on tbo reverse, with their

own titles. The device thusadopted

was continued, on the ono hand,

through the Delhi successors of Mohammed bin Sam up to the time

of N?sir-ed-d?n Mahm?d (a.d. 1266), and on the other, having been

employed severally by Mahm?d (Plate, ?g. 22), the son and Afghansuccessor of Gh??th-cd-d?n Mohammed bin Sam, and

T?j-ed-d?n,tho

slave king of Ghazni, it fell with this last territory into the hands of

its Kharizm conquerors, by whom it was retained in a slightly altered

form (Plate, fig. 23) till the fall of their family in 1231. This styleof coin was also employed by another slave of the house of Ghor,

Kub?cha of Sindh, whose money may be referred to in fig. 19, Plato

XX., of Ariana Antiqua.

In addition to adopting the reverse just noticed, Mohammed bin

S?m, on his conquestof Delhi, continued the use of the Bull and Horse

man coin of Prithvi Raja, in the full purity of its original device,

varying only the inscriptions, the "Sri Samanta dev" being replaced

by his own titles, and theplace of the Hind?

king'sname over tho

horseman being supplied by the "Sri Haniira" already inscribed on

the Ghazni medals. Specimens of this moneyaro extant, carrying

the

Delhi Mohammedan succession down as far as Al?-ed-d?n Mas?ud,

a.d. 1216.

A remark occurs to us, relating to this, the latest specimen of the



Kabul imitations, which may, with propriety, be introduced in this

place. It is singular that the word Hamira,so

long supposedto

bo aproper name, and so

eagerly soughtfor in the annals of the

Hind? kings of India, proves to bo a title which must even have

borno reproachto the cars of the votaries of that faith, being

simplyan abbreviation of the full title of the Khalif of Baghdad,?

"Amir ul Muminin," continued

by

the Mohammedans in this cur

tailed form, from the Arabic reverses of their own Ghazni money,when

they adoptedthe

styleof coin found current in the countries

theyhad

subdued. Thisreading

of themeaning

of thismuch-disputed word, is

wellupheld by

the fact, that the earliest instance of its use is on the

reverse of the firstoccupying

Mohammedan conqueror of Delhi ; as

well asby

its retention unalteredby

his successors, solong

asthey

continued to employ this form of coin: tho abbreviation of the full

titles of the Khalif into Sri Hamira will be seen to have been necessary,

as the space occupied bythe device did not admit of the intro

duction of manymore Hindi letters, of the size it was the custom to

employ.

Woappend, in a tabular form, for

facilityof reference, a list of

the kingsof the Kabul

dynasty, giving the names in Arabic, as found

in Alb?r?n?; and in Hindi, as found on the coins themselves; where

possible, adding the dates, ami the probable kingdoms ruled over byeach.

VOL. IX. O



Since writing tho above, we have had anopportunity of examining

the Arabic copy of the J?mi-al-Taw?r?kh in the Library of the RoyalAsiatic

Society,as well as a valuable Persian MS. of the same work

in the British Museum', the texts of whichgive

us some reason to

questionthe accuracy of the Paris MS. of Alb?r?n?, in as far as

regardsthe

passage quotedat tho commencement of this article. It

is not by anymeans

proposedto

impugn tho generalcorrectness either

of the Arabic version or M. Rcinaud's translation, at tho samo time we

cannot be too cautious inreceiving

asfact,

a relationbearing upon

a

period, the history of which has hitherto been completely obscure, and

regardingwhich we now for the first timo obtain any written evi

dence; keeping in view also that this testimony (with the exceptionof the collateral support to be derived from coins) stands alone, it is

requisite, should there be any doubt of its exactitude, to submit it tothe most

rigoroustests within our reach. The first in order, aud

perhapsthe

onlyone available on this occasion, is that which may bo

said to be contained within itself, the due correspondence of different

copies. Unfortunatelyno second transcript of Alb?r?n? is available,

wherebyto check the errors of the MS. whence M. Reinaud derives

his text; we are therefore necessitated toapply

to aseparate

com

pilation, which however displays so much of the letter and spirit of

theoriginal,

that its version may readilybe accepted in correcting a

doubtful passage even in a copy of that original itself; it is to bo

borne in mind that the absence of a record of any given fact in

the work of Rashid-cd-din docs not in any way shake theveracity

of

tho author whom he quotes; it is only in cases of actual discrepancythat there is reason to

questionthe accuracy of the sole existing

tran

script of Tarikh-i-IIind of Alb?r?n?.

Itmay

bonecessary briefly

to allude to the connexionexistingbetween these two works, and to mention that Rash?d-ed-d?n, the

author of the J?mi-al-Taw?r?kh, acknowledgesto have derived all

tho materials for the composition of that part of his history which

relates to India, from tho Arabic version of Alb?r?nTs Tarikh-i

Hind. Tho formerproduction

wascomposed

in Persian about the

year 1310 a.D., and almostsimultaneously

translated into Arabic, one

1This MS.(No. 7G2H, Addit.)

is also a

veryancient and

seeminglytrust

worthy copy. It is said to have been once the property of the great Oljaitu Khan

himself, under whose auspices part of the work was written. Be this as it may,

there seemsgood reason to believe that it was once owned by Shah llokh, the

son of T?in?r. The MS. is the work of different hands, and badly written at tho

part quoted below.



of tho earliest copies in whichlanguage

we are now in aposition

to

cite as ourauthority1.

It is true that, underordinary circumstances, a

transcriptof an

originalwork ought to be considered a better

authoritythan a com

pilationformed from extracts of the same; but, in the present instance,

we find that, although Rash?d-ed-d?n left unnoticed much that was to

be found inAlb?r?n?,yet

in the case of the extract to which we refer,

as in many others, he transferred whole passages in all their original

integrity, though,of course, not

alwaysin tho identical words, in

which they wero found in the Tarikh-i-Hind.

Hence thequestion,

as to the confidence duoseverally

to tho

London and Paris Arabic MSS., resolves itself into whether, allowing

even for re-translation, an extract collated under the eyeof an

eminent scholar and admirablelinguist

like the author of the J?ini

al-Taw?r?kh, tho actual document of whichwe are

ablo to refer to,and which was

engrossedso

long agoas 1314 A.n.

supportedas it is

by unexceptionable parallel passages in a secondlanguage,

be not

preferableto a modern copy of an

original, which, for all we know,

may havepassed through

the hands of an endless series of mero

mechanical transcribers.

The Asiatic Society's Arabic MS. iswritten in so careful a manner

and so clear a hand, that it is next toimpossiblo

to err in the mere

perusal; and with referenco to tho subjoined extract, the exactness of

its text isstrongly

corroboratedby

acounterpart

account to be found

in tho British Museum Persian copy, and in several MSS. of tho

Tar?kh-i-Bin?kit?, anabridgment of the J?mi-al-Taw?r?kh, under

taken during the lifetime of the author of this last; thus in pointof date being nearly equal

to itsoriginal,

andpossessing

anadvantage

in the presentcase over

any actual copy of the work from which it was

compiled,inasmuch as, issuing

from the same source, its information is

brought down to us through another and independent channel.

We now transcribe our Arabic version, adding its translation,as

well as tho Persian extracts from the J?mi-al-Taw?r?kh and tho

Tar?kh-i-Bin?kit?, merely pausingto notice that

"Kuttuur" is men

tioned by Elphinstonoas tho ?amo of one of the tribes of Kafirs

of tho Hindu Kiisli', and that Barnes informs us that the chief of

Chitral to thisday

bears the title of "Shah Kutore," and boasts of hi*

Macedonian lineage'.

1For full accounts of this manuscript, vide Join nil of the Royal Asiatic

Society, No. XI., p. 20.*

KlphiiiHtoue's Cabul, Vol. 11., p. 37?.3 Uurnes's Bokhara, Vol. IL, p. 20?, Hvo. e.lit.

0 2



s y ?~ ^

Cl>^ l\?J**jy? &y^? j^ >* 3 **i?$3 J' ?S? 2^>j ^

uuvX\ c^Xsj ^uai ?j x^- JL?j 3 cl^y? J?? ^

^O - ^ ? - O - si

?XJUL? ?Xxj?* ^ JuLoLw?*?>!jjJ! ?*p^*

cJC? *jUj?x*j ^ S?515

to

t * * *fK^j

x?Xxj ^ ^XJ*"

And Kank returned to his country, and he was the last of tho

Kutaurman kings, and ithappened

that tho times were prosperous

for him, and fortune exalted him; and ho lighted upon many of tho

treasures of formerkings,

and grew strongin consequence;

and ho

shone with these sources of wealth and treasure until ho grew proud,and

forgothis

duty,and committed some

great wickedness, and the

people turned from him in complaint towards his vizir because

of his wicked deeds, and confined him for correction. Then he ac

quired dominion again, and after his death there reignedover them

of Brahmans, Samund, and after Samund, Kumloo, and after him

Bhim,"&c.a

Corresponding Persian passage from J?mi-al-Taw?r?kh in the

British Museum.

/^jlibLinJU (-r^j-2*' 3 *y cIjJjIa* ?ys* clXi?^lj ?ou $

?lib *x?jjjL* 2 jQ&Z? ?,'y^ 3 ^-^l^ *4jVjI

**aSU(jjl?-i

***

i Sic in orig.*

J?mi-al-Taw?r?kh, Tart III., Sec. 5, Royal Asiatic Society.* This translation is from the pen of Mr. 11. T. Friusep.*

?U?X?JU



> S> _

jAJ)?J*S ?JA r?/J* ? ?Old? <Jbtt>. *Lo *y?

*?A?V^/?

Jy^o tiLc^ fl>j?i? $ ?/ irf^ 3 ?"fi. Srv.*?H* 'p1

"And Kank returned to his own country, and was the last of tho

Kutaurman kings. Fortune so favoured him, that he found many

treasures of(formor) chiefs, and in consequence ho became

proudand

exalted; at length he gave way to disgraceful conduct, on which

account tho people complained of him to his vizir. The vizir took

him into custody for the purpose of correction, and confined him. Anda second time he became ruler over the kingdom.

After his death

Sam und, from among tho B rah mans, becameking,

and after him

Kumlowa, and after him Bhim," &c.

The Persian sentence, correspondingwith the commencement of

the above, from twocopies

of tho T?r?kh-i-Bin?kit?, reads thus:?

8

*yi izJ^jy? (j^Lal?iM^CU^1 ? 3?^ 3 /' *** ^"and after him [came] Kank, and he was tho last of tho Kutaurman

kings."

A similar extract, from another lessperfect copy,

runs

** * * *?X? A?sl> JuLcLm *+&\jJ j\ s f\

Tho informationacquired by

this variation from thoreading

of

the Paris MS., (supposingit to be correct), does not in any material

degreo affect thopositions assumed in the abovo paper

on tho Coins

of the Kings of Kabul.

It nowappears that there was a direct

usurpationof the sove

reigntyof Kank

byhis vizir, and that no other monarch of Kank's

8 No. 119, Royal Asiatic Society, and a copy of Sir G. Ouseley's4

Sic in orig.9

Tar?kh-i-Bin?kit?. Brit. Museum : Rich Coll., No. 7b"27.



race filled the throne of Kabul after his death. The non-introduction

of Syala s name in our MSS. but little affects his identification as that

vizir: his coins, in their make and execution, indicate their ownposi

tion aspreceding

those of Samanta,as well as the Brahman origin

of

him whose namethey

bear. The re-accession of the last of the Turk

kings explainsto us, in a measure, how Samanta came to be looked

upon as a founder of a. dynasty, without at all detracting from tho

celebrity,either religious

ortemporal,

heretofore attributed to him.

The very legible penmanship of the Arabic MS. of the J?mi-al

Taw?r?kh supplies us with another version of the name of the second

Jeip?l; he is thero called ?Lo^. *?Xj Tudau Jeip?l. Tho Persian

J?mi-al-Taw?r?kh has JLa^- L*\XJ Nundowa Jeip?l.

Inbringing

these observations to a close,we

may add, that wo

have not failed to consult the Persian copy of tho J?mi-al-Taw?r?kh

in the Library of the East India House, but this MS., among its other

imperfections,has unfortunately

a lacunajust

at tho exact pointin

the history of Rank's reign where itmight othorwiso have served to

elucidate the present inquiry.

[Since tho printingof the preceding sheet a coin has been found

at the East India House, which confirms thoconjectural reading

of

"Souicswara," suggested by

tho writer in Note 2, p. 188.?Ed.



LISTOFTHEKINGSOFTHEHINDUDYNASTYOFKABULANDLAHORE.s from

Alb?r?n?;

theSanskrit ones from Coins.

No.

Name.

Syala

SamantaKhvadava

Bhim Jeip?l

Anungp?l

-?Jeip?l

Bh?mp?l

Madanp?lPrithviRaja

NameinArabic.

NameinSanskrit.

Dateof Accession.A.D. 920 935 975

10001021

1026 1070U7C

Recorded Kingdoms,andAuthorities.

Kabul.Alb?r?n?

Do. Do. Do.

Lahore. FerishtahDo.Lahoreannexedto

Guzni,1023a.D.

Delhi.

PrinsepU.T.Ab?ifazl?

Do.

Do.Perishtali

Tod

OtherStates. Jessulmir(tributary)Kano?j

Ajm?r*f

Mcutioued as kinc of Kano?j, and contemporary with Raj

apa1<>r

Benares. This l

recorded in inscriptions aa king o? Ivau?uj'iu 1090'

a.d.

Vide Bird's

3? C Q to O GJ CD



Contents op TriE Plate.

Note. The weights of the silver coins of the Kabul kings, Nos. 2 to 8 inclu

sive, average in the specimens engraved, forty-eight grains. The mixed silver aud

copper coins of the Lahore princes and their successors, Nos. 9 to 18, range as

highas

fifty-two grains. The best specimen of the copper money of Vanka dev,

No. I, only reaches

forty-three grains.

Nos. Coins of

1. Vanka dev 15ft ^

2. Syala 15ftûjff ?fr

3. 4. Samanta 13ftWT7?r

5. 6. 7- Khvadava 13ft ?T^TTcR!

8. Blum tqItfn ^

9. 10. Anungp?l, Obv. ^jr ^,Rev. T$ nntf******

11. 12. Sallakshanp?l, Obv.^ft Wim ^,Rev. 15ft^gUSKUMlg

13. Madanp?l, Obv. (mrer) ^ft Tff?a^,Rev. TjftHMIc5 ^T

14. PrithviRaja,

Obv.^rcrpr$ ^ft ^rjr^r,

Rev.^ft Hvjlq^ ^

15. Mahap?l yft H^MItf ifa*

16. Obv. t$ l?f?** ^ (fa?- ^W??H Tjft T&Ftt).

17. 18. Obv. i# ngtfe** ^,Rev.

**VJ$ ^ WfT ^.

19. AI Muktadir billah, Obv. ??U .Jj?U!) , Rev. Ji*>- <?J,

20. Ibrahim ofGuzn?,

Obv.^

^l|m^,

Rev.

JojmJI ÛaLJl

21. Mohammed biu S?m, Obv. Tjft R^TR^ *TR, i???- Tjft ^HiC.

22. Mahmud bin Mohammed? j^?^ ?A^.a? ^.l?c^l ÎLJLJl

23. Al?-cd-d?nMohammed of Kh?rizm, Obv. bJ^ll? Ja?5|^HaLJI

24. Fac-similc copy of tho Arabic word \?c from a coin of Khvadava.

1 It has been considered unnecessary to introduce a coin of Mohammed bin

S?m of this type, as the piece here givenresembles his coius, from whence it is

derived, in every respect except the name it bears.

on the coins of the dynasty of the hindú kings of kábul / by edward thomas

Documents