180 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XIII, 



il^- at, >> ^ ; f— X— x 3 



If a fjj— tf I — *i ^ — J* jl * — 



AM 





< 



(B) 





*• 



J 



;•>»*- 



& 



iS 



tb 





j *i- 



w J 











yJtftij 



^ t^ 



<* 



r 



JU 



i>^ 



8J. — ifji. 



. i> 











JU« 



• 



jlifiA 



,*. 



>A 



r. 



-w 



^ 



( AU ? ) ;^ j* 



cj 51 — ^ ;<> /? cr^ *— «*f *j 



<j^ J — -*t_> ^ 



There are some writings on both the margins of the above 

 inscription, which no doubt contained the name of the person 

 by whose order the inscription was engraved. Some words on 



ifitl)* er* **-• »<> ■>*■«-♦*» *l*J 



If this inscription be divided into three parts, it will be 

 ^een that the first or upper part (marked by me A) was carved 

 better than the second or lower part (marked B). where the 

 carver, in addition to his unfitnt 5, found no sufficient space to 

 proceed on. The second is a Ruba I with Mustazad. but I could 

 read this beautiful piece as I found it written elsewhere. 1 The 

 third part, viz. the writing on the two margins, is worst of all. 

 lne two words of the inscription overlined by me do not 



appear to be correct. In 1.2 of the Qata, the word J* f° r 

 J^ and in 1.0 the word J* for ^di is apparently "wrong. 

 Blochmann copied and translated the words, as he found them- 



Catalogue of Bankipur Library. 



