Indian Antiquary Vol 27

SR No.: 032519
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications
Publication Year: 1984
Total Pages: 404
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 43

FEBRUARY, 1898.]
Bantam
Batavia
Bencoolen... Macassar
Natal
...
Malacca
Penang
Siam
China
...
CURRENCY AND COINAGE AMONG THE BURMESE.
lbs. 1 oz. 2 drs.
1
5
1
7
1
5
4 0
1
5
:::
:::
...
...
....
...
...
...
Java
Java
Acheen Amboyna Banda...
Banjarmassin... Bantam
Bencoolen
Cachao (Tongking)...(100 cash) 10
China ... Macassar
Malacca
Palimbong Penang Siam Singapore
Sumatra Celebes Sumatra Straits
8:⠀⠀⠀⠀
...
6-7ཛ༦:;ཆ:
16
Singapore...
While for what may be termed the Continental Malay and other States we find the catty stated as follows:
...
10
16
16
10
...
...
:
...
10
...
16
16
16
? 10
(30)
1
20
200
33
"
33
"2
...
"3
"
It is clear then that in order to arrive at any definite idea of the rise of the modern Malay bullion weight system, we must trust rather to the denominations themselves than to the actual weights they now represent in various places for various articles of commerce.
100
100
100
33
What the denominations were in Prinsep's time can be partly seen from the following table compiled on the information given loc. cit. :
100
100
100
100
33
100
50
100
99
1
"2
lbs. 2 oz. O drs. 12
1
5
31
1
1
""
39
3
5 ..
kobang X mace X tael X buncal X catty X pecul X bahar56 20
4.
16
5
200
1
16
1
33
""
39
د.
ار
2
11층
5
2
0
5
1
3
1
1
1
3
11
3
1
1
51
1
1
39
...
:
1
1
As, in books, weights are sometimes stated in vernacular terms, sometimes in the international commercial terms, and sometimes in a mixture of both, it is necessary before proceeding further to give a comparative statement of the vernacular and commercial terms.58
se This table must be read "kobang 4 x mace 16 x tael 5 x buncal 20 x catty 200 (x pecul 0) 1 bahar : and so on.
57 In this case 20 buncals = 1 catty of 2 lbs. and over; i. e., the Siamese catty; so that 10 bungkal would equal a Chinese catty.
os It is possible that my rendering of Malay terms may give rise to criticism. All I have to say is that the authorities on the subject never agree, old or new, owing to the great variety of dialects and the absence apparently of any standard dialect. I have before me the Malayu Vocabulary, 1810, Raffles, 1814, Crawfurd, 1852, Swettenham, 1881, Maxwell, 1882. Swettenham and the Malayu Vocabulary give the vernacular, and even in that do not agree. The careful Crawfurd varies in orthography in the two halves of his Dictionary. Sir Frank Swettenham and Sir William Maxwell, the two contemporary authors, differ as often as not in the words required here to be accurately represented.