Among primitive peoples trade was carried on by barter, that is,
exchange in kind. Gradually, with the spread of civilising influences
the inconvenience of promiscuous exchange made itself felt, and certain
media were agreed upon and accepted by the community at large. Wealth
in those early times being computed in cattle, it was only natural
that the ox or cow should be employed for this purpose. In Europe,
then, and also in India, the cow stood as the higher unit of barter.
At the lower end of the scale, for smaller purchases, stood another
unit which took various forms among different peoples—shells, beads,
knives, and where those metals had been discovered, bars of copper or
iron. In India the cowrie-shell, brought from the Maldive Islands, was
so employed, and is still to be seen in many bazars in the shops of the
smaller money-changers. The discovery of the precious metals carried
the evolution of coinage a stage further: for the barter unit was
substituted its value in metal, usually gold. The Greek _stater_ and
the Persian _daric_ certainly, and possibly the Indian _Suvarṇa_, so
frequently mentioned by Sanskrit authors, was the value of a full-grown
cow in gold, calculated by weight. However this may be, in ancient
India gold dust, washed out of the Indus and other rivers, served the
purposes of the higher currency, and from 518 B.C. to about 350 B.C.,
when an Indian province or satrapy was included in the Achæmenid Empire
of Persia, 360 talents in gold dust was, Herodotus tells us,[1] paid
annually as tribute from the province into the treasury of the Great
King.
[1] Herod III, 94. Quoted in Cunningham, _Coins of Ancient India_, p.
12.
Silver from natural sources was at that time less plentiful in India,
but was attracted thither in large quantities in exchange for gold,
which was cheaper there than elsewhere in the ancient world. The
transition from metal weighed out to the required amount to pieces of
metal of recognized weight and fineness regularized by the stamp of
authority is not difficult of explanation. The great convenience of
the latter would recommend them at once to the merchant, and to the
ruler as the receiver of tribute and taxes. Both in Asia and Europe
this transition can be illustrated from extant specimens; but, whereas
in Europe and Western Asia, from the inscriptions which appeared early
on the coins themselves and from outside evidence, we know the origin
of the earliest coins and the names of the cities or districts which
issued them, the origin of India’s earliest coinage, like so much of
her early history, is still shrouded in mystery.
This much can be said, that in its earliest stages the coinage of
India developed much on the same lines as it did on the shores of
the Aegean. Certain small ingots of silver, whose only mark is three
circular dots, represent probably the earliest form: next in order are
some heavy bent bars of silver with devices stamped out with a punch
on one side.[2] These two classes of coins are computed to have been
in circulation as coins at least as early as 600 B.C., but they have
not been found in any quantity. The time as well as the territory in
which they circulated was probably therefore restricted. On the other
hand, from almost every ancient site in India, from the Sundarbans in
Bengal to Kābul, and as far south as Coimbatore, have been recovered
thousands of what are known to numismatists as “Punch-marked coins”
and to Sanskrit authors as _Purāṇas_ (“ancient”) or _Dharaṇas_. These
are rectangular (Pl. I, 2) and circular (Pl. I, 1) flat pieces of thin
silver (much alloyed), or more rarely copper, cut from a hammered sheet
of metal and clipped to the proper weight. One side (the obverse)
is occupied by a large number of symbols impressed on the metal by
means of separate punches. In the oldest coins the other, the reverse
side, is left blank, but on the majority there appears usually one,
sometimes two or three, minute punch marks; a few coins have both
obverse and reverse covered with devices. These devices appear in
wonderful variety—more than three hundred have been enumerated; they
comprise human figures, arms, trees, birds, animals, symbols of
Buddhist worship, solar and planetary signs. Much further detailed
study of these coins will be needed before anything can be definitely
stated about the circumstances under which they were minted. It seems
probable that in India, as in Lydia, coins were first actually struck
by goldsmiths or silversmiths, or perhaps by communal gilds (_seṇi_).
Coins with devices on one side only are certainly the oldest type, as
the rectangular shape, being the natural shape of the coin when cut
from the metal sheet, may be assumed to be older than the circular;
on the other hand, both shapes, and also coins with devices on one
as well as on both sides, are found in circulation apparently at the
same time. It has also been recently shown[3] that groups of three,
four, and sometimes five, devices on the obverse are constant to
large numbers of coins circulating within the same district. It may
perhaps therefore be conjectured that the “punch-marked” piece was a
natural development of the paper _hundī_, or note of hand; that the
coins had originally been struck by private merchants and gilds and
had subsequently passed under royal control; that they at first bore
the seal of the merchant or gild, or combination of gilds, along with
the seals of other gilds or communities who accepted them;[4] and
that, when they passed under regal control, the royal seal and seals
of officials were first added to, and afterwards substituted for, the
private or communal marks. Be that as it may, we see here in the very
earliest coinage the commencement of that fascination which the square
coin seems to have exercised upon Indian moneyers of all periods; for
it continually reappears, in the coins of the Muhammadan kingdoms of
Mālwā and Kashmīr for example, in some beautiful gold and silver issues
of the Mughals, Akbar and Jahāngīr, and even in the nineteenth century
in copper pieces struck by the Bahāwalpūr State in the Panjāb. Most
writers agree, as indeed their shape, form, and weight suggest, that
the “punch-marked” coins are indigenous in origin, and owe nothing to
any foreign influence. In what part of India they originated we do
not know: present evidence and the little knowledge we possess of the
state of India in those times indicate some territory in the north. As
to the period during which they were in active circulation we are not
left so completely at the mercy of conjecture. Finds and excavations
tell us something: contemporary writers, Indian and foreign, drop us
hints. Sir John Marshall records, during the recent excavations round
Taxila, the find of 160 “punch-marked” coins of debased silver, with a
coin in fine condition of Diodotos of Bactria (circ. 245 B.C.).[5] Then
there is the interesting statement of the usually trustworthy Latin
writer, Quintus Curtius, that Omphis (Āmbhi) presented “Signati argenti
LXXX talenta”—“80 talents of stamped silver”—to Alexander at Taxila.
These and similar pieces of evidence show us that “punch-marked” coins
were well established in Northern India during the fourth and third
centuries B.C., when the great Maurya Empire was at the height of its
power. The large quantities continually being unearthed suggest a long
period of circulation, so that in their earliest forms “punch-marked”
coins may go back to the sixth century, and may have remained current
in some districts of the north as late as the second century B.C. At
some period, perhaps during the campaigns of the great Chandragupta
and the settlement of the Empire under his grandson Aśoka, these
coins became the established currency of the whole Indian peninsula,
and in the southern districts, at least, they must have remained in
circulation for three, perhaps four, centuries longer than in the
north, for in Coimbatore district “punch-marked” coins have been found
along with a _denarius_ of the Roman Emperor Augustus; and some of the
earliest individualistic coinages of the south, which apparently emerge
at a much later period, the so-called “padma-ṭaṅkas,” for instance,
seem to be the immediate successors of these “punch-marked” coins.
[2] Cf. _I.M.C._, p. 136, Nos. 1, 2, 3 (ingots), Nos. 4, 5, 6 (bars).
[3] By Dr. Spooner, Dr. Bhandarkar, and E. H. Walsh. Cf. _Journal of
the Bihār and Orissa Research Society_, 1919, pp. 16-72, 463-94.
[4] Even in Mughal times bankers were in the habit of placing their
mark on the rim or even on the face of coins which passed through their
hands.
[5] _Guide to Taxila_, p. 117.
Now the distinction between north and south which has just been drawn
in tracing the history of this primitive coinage is very important; for
this same distinction enables us to divide the remaining ancient and
mediæval Indian coins down to the fourteenth century into two classes,
northern and southern. The reason for this is that Northern India,
during that period, was subjected to a series of foreign invasions;
the indigenous coinages of the north were therefore continually
being modified by foreign influences, which, with a few exceptions
to be noted, left the coinages of the south untouched, to develop by
slow stages on strictly Indian lines. The coins of the south will be
described in a separate chapter.
To return to Northern India: at the time of Alexander’s invasion the
whole of North-Western India and the Panjāb was split up into a number
of small states, some, like the important state of Taxila, ruled by a
king, others governed by “aristocratic oligarchies.” Almost all the
coins about to be dealt with are either of copper or brass, and the
earliest of them were struck, doubtless, by the ruling authorities in
these states. Even after their subjection to the great Maurya Emperors
some of these states may have retained their coining rights, for it
is a salient fact in the history of coins that coinage in the base
metals in India and elsewhere has not, until quite recent times, been
recognized, like coinage in gold and silver, as the exclusive privilege
of the ruler. A striking example is afforded in the copper token money
issued by private tradesmen in England during the eighteenth and early
nineteenth centuries. On the break up of the Maurya Empire, at the
close of the third century, a number of small independent kingdoms
sprang into existence, and these proceeded to issue coins, some bearing
evident traces of foreign influence, but on the whole following Indian
models closely enough to be included here.
No attempt can be made to deal with this class of coins exhaustively:
a few typical examples only can be selected for description and
illustration. The reader who wishes to pursue the subject further is
referred for guidance to the Bibliography at the end of this book; and,
since at present little attempt has been made to classify or examine
these coins in any detail, fewer fields of research are likely to yield
a richer reward to the patient student.
The earliest of these copper coins, some of which may be as early as
the fifth century B.C., were cast. The casting of coins by pouring
molten metal into a cavity formed by joining two moulds together must
have been a very ancient practice in India. Sometimes the moulds of
several coins were joined together for the casting process, and the
joins thus left are not infrequently found still adhering to the coins
(Pl. I, 3).[6] These coins are for the most part anonymous. Even after
striking from dies had superseded this clumsy method in the North-West,
we find cast coins being issued at the close of the third century by
the kingdoms of Kauśāmbī, Ayodhyā and Mathurā, some of which bear the
names of local kings in the Brāhmī[7] script.
[6] This process was in operation in Morocco until the middle of the
nineteenth century. Nearchus, the companion of Alexander, says that the
Indians used only cast bronze but not hammered. Strabo XV, C. 716.
[7] Brāhmī (Fig. 1), Phœnician in origin, was the native script of
Northern India, and was written from left to right. Kharoshṭhī (Fig. 2)
was a derivation from the Aramaic script, and was written from right
to left; it is believed to have been introduced during the Persian
domination of Western India, and continued in use on the North-West
frontier until about the fourth century A.D.
The earliest die-struck coins, with a device on one side of the coin
only, have been assigned to the end of the fourth century B.C. Some
of these, with a lion device, were certainly struck at Taxila, where
they are chiefly found. Others present various Buddhist symbols, such
as the _bodhi-tree_, _svastika_, or the plan of a monastery, and may
therefore belong to the time of Aśoka, when Buddhism first reached
the North-West, or Gandhāra, as the territory was then called. The
method of striking these early coins was peculiar, in that the die was
impressed on the metal when hot, so that a deep square incuse, which
contains the device, appears on the coin. A similar incuse appears on
the later double-die coins of Pañchāla (Pl. I, 4), Kauśāmbī, and on
some of Mathurā. This method of striking may have been introduced from
Persia, and was perhaps a derivative from the art of seal-engraving.
In the final stage of die-striking, devices were impressed on both
sides of the coin, and the best of these “double-die” coins show not
only greater symmetry of shape, either round or square, but an advance
in the art of die-cutting. Some of the earliest of this type have been
classed as gild tokens. The finest were struck in Gandhāra: among these
one of the commonest, bearing a lion on the obverse, and an elephant on
the reverse (Pl. I, 5), is of special importance, since an approximate
date can be assigned to it, for it was imitated by the Greek princes,
Pantaleon (Pl. II, 2) and Agathokles, who reigned on the North-West
frontier about the middle of the second century B.C. In the execution
and design of some die-struck coins from the North-West there are
undoubted traces of foreign influences: but such devices as the humped
bull, the elephant and the religious symbols are purely Indian. There
is, on the other hand, little foreign influence traceable in the
die-struck coins, all closely connected in point of style, which issued
during the first and second centuries B.C. from Pañchāla, Ayodhyā,
Kauśāmbī and Mathurā. A number of these bear Brāhmī inscriptions,
and the names of ten kings, which some would identify with the old
Śuṅga dynasty, have been recovered from the copper and brass coins of
Pañchāla, found in abundance at Rāmnagar in Rohilkhand, the site of the
ancient city Ahichhatra. Similarly twelve names of kings appear on the
Mathurā coins, but we have little knowledge of these kingdoms beyond
what the coins supply. Certain devices are peculiar to each series:
thus most of the Ayodhyā coins have a humped bull on the obverse, the
coins of Kauśāmbī a tree within a railing.
In the coins of Eraṇ[8] we have an illustration, as Rapson says, “of
the development of the punch-marked system into the die system.” These
coins are rectangular copper pieces (Pl. I, 6), and the device on each
consists of a collection of symbols like those which appear on the
“punch-marked” coins, but struck from a single die. They are specially
interesting in that they represent the highest point of perfection
reached by purely Indian money. Some of these, in common with a class
of round coins found at Ujjain (Avanti), display a special symbol, the
“cross and balls,” known from its almost universal occurrence on the
coins of ancient Mālwā as the Mālwā or Ujjain symbol.
[8] Eraṇ, or Erakina, the capital of the ancient East Mālwā kingdom, in
the Saugor district, Central Provinces.