1870.] Arabic and Persian Inscriptions in the Hugli District. 301 



The characters of the inscription are Tuglird ; but unlike those of 

 the Tribeni inscriptions, they abound in round strokes (dawair), 

 which brings the writing nearer to modern Nasta'liq. 



The modern Qutb f ahib Mosque, so called from Hazrat Shah 

 Qutbuddin, a pious man who is said to have come from Bhigalpur 

 to Panduah, has the following inscription. 



Inscription XIV. (Persian). 



Hence the mosque was built in the 9th year of Muhammad Shah 

 of Dihli, A. H. 1140, or A. D. 1727-28, by one Fath Khan, son of 

 Shuja' Afghan Sur. The poet A'zad, who mentions, himself in the 

 last line, I am told, was the son of Munshi Shakir, of whom a 

 letter- writer exists, entitled Insha i Shakir. The first hemistich of 

 the second verse is faulty in metre ; for in scanning the 'ain of 

 Shuja' has to be eliminated, and ^ must be read &&fatah, accord- 

 ing to the Hindustani pronunciation. The TdriTch also is awkward. 

 The last migrd' gives 1 130 ; and the hamzah over the final h in ha' bah 

 must be counted, as it does in scanning, for a yd, which gives 10 

 more; hence 1140. 



Birbhum near the old Padishahi road by that King, -was published in 

 Journal A. S. Bengal, for 1861, p. 390. The inscription mentions the year 

 A. H. 922 (A. D. 1516). Two others of A. H. 908 and 909 (A. D. 1502 and 

 1503) will be fonnd in the Proceedings for 1870, p. 112, note and p. 297. 



The legend on the Husain Shah published by Laidley, PL V. No. 21, is very 

 unclear. The words after assultdn are evidently a du'd on the king. The 

 first word looks like abqdhu or abqdhd, the second seems to be Ul-haffah ; then 

 comes a broken word, after which there is a minanulm iva rnahdmiduhu 

 li'indyat (?) illdhi. The rest is clear. 



