264 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XVI, 
but was made up of different parts fetched from different 
directions. One of the components is the genealogy of the 
Rathoras with its bombastic preamble; the <fa =rerates 
sayTAT AT at the end of this part shows very crudely 
its separate individuality. Another component is the panegyric 
of Raya Singha, which repeats in part statements that had 
already been made in the last verses of the spas 
and which is itself composed of two, if not three, separate 
parts as indicated not only by intrinsic evidence, but also by a 
separate ees a of the verses. A third nese ae is the 
though placed together, are incongruous with one another. 
Finally, a fourth component is the mangalacarana at the begin- 
ning of the inscription, which is but a trite commonplace 
borrowed from traditional usage and prefixed to the whole. 
It is a noteworthy and fortunate arabe that sepa- 
rate records have been preserved, bot stone and on er 
of the different components of the iiaéesption. Two inscribed 
slabs walled inside the porch of the same Siraja Pola gate, on 
the right and left, have preserved to us in two identical copies 
the original from which the record of the dates at the end of 
the text (ll. 82-92) and the first ite verses in the panegyric of 
Raya Singha (ll. 67-71) have been taken. These twin slabs 
contain the original inscription eer up by Raya Singha to com- 
memorate the completion of the gate in Samvat 1650, and it is 
noteworthy that in the text of this inscription the panegyrical 
portion just mentioned comes after the first and before the 
second of the two verses given at the beginning of the pee 
of the dintea in the pradanesinace fick (ll. 82-83, ll. 84-85), a 
that by this arrangement, which is evidently the right one, ths 
incongruity noted above is eliminated. Though both the 
twin inscription and the pragastis-inscription bear the same date 
and are designed and probably also incised by the same hands, a 
significant verbal alteration in the text of the latter inscription ' 
shows that it is posterior to the twin inscription by a no 
inconsiderable interval of time.” A very interesting particular 
the — inscription is the mention of its author at the end, 
! This is the substitution of trates: wat (1. 69 of prasasti-inscrip- 
tion) for STfASTS : YX: (1. 5, and 1. 4 of the twin inscriptions), which 
unmistakably denotes i : ze 
‘has Emperor Akbar. a change in the relations between Raya Singha and 
third inseri po a Esconscomnacm identical with the twin inscri 
iption, 
ho with slight altera in the wording in the latter portion of the text, 
bared main agra the jambs of @ minor gate, now closed up and in part 
fort to the : #e bie originally gave access from the interior of the 
mpart. © peripherical path running between the moat and the main 
