Lectures on Ancient Indian Numismatics (Carmichael Lectures, 1921) c7.25.1

c7.25.1

It is, however, a mistake to suppose that Nishkas were the only class of gold coins known to the Jātaka literature. Not unfrequently we meet with an expression in which the words *hiraṇya* and *suvarṇa* are associated together. Thus the Bhūridatta Jātaka gives us another tale of a snake-king tamed by a snake-charmer who amassed a fortune by making him assume various appearances and exhibit dancing powers. At the very first performance that he gave in a village, the people, we are told, were so pleased that they heaped on him *hiraṇya*, *suvarṇa*, *vastra*, *alaṃkāra* and the like.¹ Of course, *vastra* and *alaṃkāra* mean ‘garments’ and ‘ornaments’ respectively. But what about *hiraṇya* and *suvarṇa*? For both signify ‘gold,’ and consequently one of these words becomes superfluous. On the other hand, *suvarṇa* denotes a specific kind of gold coins, which the other word, *viz.* *hiraṇya*, does not. It is true that Suvarṇa denotes a certain weight as well as a gold coin of this weight, and it is no doubt possible to suppose that in this particular Jātaka story, the word *suvarṇa* means merely gold bullion of this weight. But according to this supposition, *suvarṇa*, like the other word, *viz.* *hiraṇya*, would signify gold only, and thus there remains no distinction between the two. Are we not therefore compelled to infer that *suvarṇa* in this as in other places where it is associated with *hiraṇya* must stand not for ‘gold’ but a ‘type of gold coins’? But this is not all.