1889.] 



Editor — Mums and Antiquities of Rdmpdl. 



2:i 



Rarnpal right up to the Padma. The latter is called Kaehki Dwarja, 

 The roads are now overgrown with trees and shrubs, and have in many- 

 places been broken np by the cultivators' plough, but what still remains 

 clearly shows that they were once spacious roads as wide as thirty cubits. 

 I once proposed to utilize the first mentioned road in constructiug one 

 from Munshiganj to the Police outpost at Rajabari, a distance of about 

 twelve miles, but it was found impracticable. The Kaehki Dwarja is 

 named after the fish of that name. The astrologers had predicted, so 

 the story runs, that Raja Ballal Sen would die of bones of fish sticking 

 in his throat. To avoid such an unnatural and painful death, the 

 king refrained from eating any fish, except the kaehki which was devoid 

 of bones. He therefore constructed the road to the Padma, to enable 

 fishermen to supply his table daily with the boneless fish. 



[Note bt the Editor. — The inscription, of which a reduced facsi- 

 mile, based on three ink impi'essions, is published in Plate V, 1 eads as 

 follows : 



Line 1 :—^> ^\ f^l *^l£"= l**^ *H ±*.Lj\ Jjj ill) Jlj - 

 Line 2 :— J% jyUaLJl )) & i2Uxi (¥ !a*Jl iSJUJl t *(s: , t 



It is dated " in the middle of the month of Rajab in the year 

 888 A. H., during the reign of Jalalu-d-dm Fath Shah." Mr. Gupta 

 reads the date as "the 2nd day of Rajab 880," on the authority of a 

 Maulawi of Dacca, who deciphered the inscription for him. But this is 

 certainly wrong. The date can be quite clearly read. It is expressed 

 in words : above sanat there is l+» samd ; by the side of sanat, to the 

 left, there is i^Ui samdnin ; above samdnin again is *jUi*i' samanamiyat 

 (sic) ; below the latter word is one j ivaw, and below samdnin is the 

 other j ivaw of the date. Thus the whole reads sanat samd wa samdnin 

 wa samanam iyat, i. e., eight and eighty and eight hundred. Nor does the 

 date specify " the 2nd day," but simply says ausat or " the middle." 



On comparing this inscription with that published by Blochmann 

 in this Journal for 1873, Vol. XLII, p. 284, there can be no doubt that 

 the two inscriptions are identical. There are, indeed, three slight 

 divergences. In the date Mr. Blochmann reads i^Ui but the inscription 

 has only Li (without the final nun). This is apparently a mere blunder 



