346 H. G. Baverty — Bep.ly to ' Histy. and Geogr. of Bengal, No. Ill: [No. 3, 



In another place, I find, " A'zam Khan" vide Khdn-i-A'zam [see 

 example of Izafat previously given], and we find " Khan-i- A'zam" accord- 

 ingly, but Mir-i-'Adl [as I should write it] is not correct according to 

 Mr. Blochmann's theory : it must be " Mir 'AdL" For example, I will 

 give a list of some of the titular names and patronymics, and Mr. Bloch- 

 mann's different ways of writing them : — ■ 



" Chingiz Khan" in histories called " Qaan i Buzurg" ; Qadr Jahin 

 Mufti requires no izafat, but " Mufti-i-Mamalik" does, and " Umara-i- 

 Kibar" does ; " KhanKhanan" and " Khankhanan" requires none : 

 " Khan-i-Kalan" does ; and " Khan-i-A'zam" does ; " Khan 'Alam Mruz- 

 jang," " Nucratjang" and "Khan Zaman" require none: " Bustam-i- 

 Zaman," Tiizuk-i-Jahangiri, and Farhang-i-Jahangiri do : but Bahar-i- 

 Danish from me would be a dangerous innovation too, and my " Shah-i- 

 Jahan" is dangerous and un- Persian, but " Malikah i Jahan" is not ! 

 " A'caf Khan 'Abdul Majid" requires no izafat, but the same person 

 " 'Abdul Majid-i- A'caf Khan" does ; Sulaiman Kararani [by-the-bye, there 

 is no such name] requires no izafat, but, a little farther on, it requires to be 

 written" Sulaiman-i-Kararani" ! I could multiply these examples ad infi- 

 nitum. 



Burdan-kot may be due " north of Bagura (Bogra) in Long. 89° 28', 

 Lat. 25° 8' 25", close to Govindganj, on the Karataya Biver," but I fail to 

 find it in the 119th Sheet of the Indian Atlas ; but great changes must 

 have taken place since Minhaj-ud-Din wrote, when "a river" flowed in 

 front of Ms Burdan kot, " of vast magnitude, the name of which is Bag- 

 mati ; and, when it enters the country of Hindustan, they style it, in the 

 Hindu! dialect, Samund (ocean) and, in magnitude, breadth, and depth, it 

 is three times more than the river Gang" [Translation, page 561], and 'the 

 Karataya must therefore have grown " small by degrees and beautifully 

 less." 



I did not " identify Maksadah" : My words [note 4, page 576] are 

 " the Maxadabad^>ro&a&/y of the old Maps," <fcc. 



Mr. Blochmann at page 284 kindly recommends me to Mr. Thomas's 

 " Initial Coinage op Bengal," regarding the reigns of " Muhammad 

 Bakhtyar's" immediate successors ; but as I have the account of " Minhaj- 

 ud-Din," "the sole authority for the period," and some others, I can 

 dispense with it, and have already done so in my Translation. 



I am very glad to find, however, that Mr. Thomas has met with the 

 coins of Ikhtiyar-ud-Din, Daulat Shah-i-Balka, the Khalj, mentioned in 

 my Translation, page 626 and farther on, which has not appeared in the 

 " Contributions," or doubts might probably have been thrown on his very 

 existence as a ruler. 



