90 
H. Beveridge —Major Francklin s description of Gaur. [No. 2, 
enough that the mosque called by him the 11 Mahajan Talah Mosque is 
really the (Jantipara one. 
Immediately after giving the inscription said by him to belong to 
the Golden Mosque of Pandua, Francklin proceeds as follows :— 
M A large space of ground formerly constituted the area, or outer court 
of this mosque, which is scarcely visible from the excessive high and thick 
jungle that encompasses the whole of the building. There are, however, 
evident marks of adjoining buildings displayed in a mass of ruins and rub¬ 
bish; these were most probably the kitchen and other offices, for the nse of 
the attendants belonging to the mosque, and places for the Maulavies, or 
readers of the Koran, the Muazzins, or criers to prayers, and other persons 
attached to the institution. 
“ Being situated on the summit of a pretty steep ascent, were the sur¬ 
rounding jungle cleared away, it would command a delightful prospect of 
the adjacent country. The column of Firoz Shah being in sight, the remains 
of the royal palace, the numerous tanks in the neighbourhood.” 
If this description relates, as grammatically it should, to the mosque 
of which he has just given the inscription, it is clear that the word 
‘ Pandua ’ must be a mistake, for the Minar and the tanks of Gaur cannot 
be visible from Pandua. But I am not sure if Francklin, after giving 
the inscription, does not revert to the Golden Mosque of Gaur. There 
are parts of the description just quoted which might apply to the ruins 
of the Madrasah, as described at p. 34 of Ravenshaw. The Madrasah is 
marked in Pemberton’s Survey-Map of 1847-49, of which there is an 
enlargement in Ravenshaw, on the north bank of the smaller Sagar tank. 
On the west of the tank there is a mosque marked at a place called 
“ Soonar Gong.” Possibly this is the golden mosque from which Franck¬ 
lin got the inscription. The village of Chandy, or Chandni, mentioned 
by Francklin, is not marked in the enlargement of Pemberton. Creigh¬ 
ton’s map, however, shows it. It was on the Pagla, and was once the 
factory of Mr. William Grant, the friend of Creighton. 
Francklin speaks of the tomb of Husain Shah as being still in 
existence, and calls it the “ Badshah-kl-qabr.” His description is quoted 
by Mr. Grote, p. 24 l. c., in a note to the photograph of Fath Khan’s 
tomb. But it is evident from the anonymous account in Glazier’s report 
on Raqgpur, Appendix A., p. 107, that the tomb had been despoiled 
many years before Francklin’s visit, and that he was probably in error 
* From Creighton’s account of Orme’s remarks, especially those about the block 
lyi n g hy the river, it seems probable that the Itaijgpur MS. is a copy of Orme’s re¬ 
marks. The question might be set at rest by examining the Orme papers, which fill 
part of a press in the India Office Library. 
