Lectures on Ancient Indian Numismatics (Carmichael Lectures, 1921) c8.56

c8.56

That different places had their constant and regular groups of symbols or mint marks peculiar to them not only can be apprehended by a critical study of these punch-marked coins, but is also attested by a passage from the *Visuddhimagga* of Buddhaghosha to which I have already drawn the attention of scholars in my report on the excavations at Besnagar.² It describes how a lot of coins lying on a wooden slab would strike an inexperienced boy, a man from the village, and a shroff or money-changer. The boy would notice simply that some coins were oblong, some round and some elongated in shape. The rustic would know all this, and also that coins were, like gems, worthy objects of enjoyment to mankind. The shroff, on the other hand, not only would be conversant with all this, but also would be in a position to decide, after handling the coins in a variety of ways, which of them were struck at which village, mufassil town, capital city, mountain and river bank, and also by what mint master. Is it not clear from this passage that every place which issued coinage had its own distinguishing mark or marks stamped on it, by observing which the shroff of the ancient day could at once tell from which place any particular coin came? In regard to villages and towns we have just seen that Takshaśilā, Pāṭaliputra and Vidiśā had their own individual marks on their coinage. And when a new hoard of Kārshāpaṇas is discovered, we have only to notice their provenance and such distinguishing marks in order that we might obtain knowledge of the characteristic symbols of the coins of other villages and towns. The passage from the *Visuddhimagga* also speaks of coins struck near hills or on river banks. Those who have examined the Kārshāpaṇas found at Besnagar or Eraṇ are already familiar with the sign—a zig-zag—denoting a river-bank.¹ The same sign occurs on the coins of the Western Kshatrapas along with another, which was so long wrongly supposed to stand for a *stūpa* or *chaitya* but which is now rightly perceived to represent a mountain.² Mr. Theobald has written an interesting paper on the significance of the symbols on punch-marked coins, and we have only to refer to the plates of his article to be convinced that there were many variations of one and the same symbol, *e.g.*, that representing a hill or a riverbank.³ These variations of the symbols the shroffs of the early periods must have been conversant with, to enable them to tell from what different hills and river banks the coins came.