124 H. Beveridge —On the death of Qnth Alcun's death. [No. 2, 
Note on the date of Nur Quth Alam’s death.—By H. Beveridge, C. S. 
I think that we have now got some more light on this vexed ques¬ 
tion. In my paper on Rajah Kans, I gave the date 851 A. H., which 
is that mentioned by Mr. Blochmann, and which therefore was probably 
correct. At the same time, I pointed out that it differed from the date 
(808) given in the Ain, and also from that mentioned in Ravenshaw’s 
Gaur (828). I am now convinced that 851 is wrong. It is much too 
late for one who was a contemporary and fellow-student of Ghiassuddin. 
I find too that the chronogram Shams-ul-Hidayat referred to by Mr. 
Blochmann, which gives 851, is apparently a recent invention. As has 
been pointed out to me by Maulavi Fazl Rubbi, the Divan of the Nawab 
Bahadur of Murshidabad, Mufti Ghulam Sarwar of Lahore claims,* 
to be the author of the chronogram His book, the “ Khazinatu-1- 
Asfiya ” was only published in 1864. It is true he refers to an earlier 
author Shaikh Hisamuddin of Manikpur, writer of the Rafik-ul-Arfin, 
as giving the date 851, but I have not been able to see that work, and 
so I do not know what its age and authority are. Ghulam Sarwar says 
nothing about the date given by Abul Fazl. 
The best authority on the point should be the book in possession 
of the Kliadim, or Guardian of the Shrine,f at Pandua. The existence 
of such a book is mentioned in Ravenshaw’s Gaur, but when I wrote 
for a copy to Mr. Batabyal, the Magistrate of Maldah, he informed me 
that the book was reported to have been stolen. However, he has sent 
me an extract from the late Maulvi Elahi Baksh’s history, which supplies 
the necessary information. Maulvi Elahi Baksh tells us that the in¬ 
scription “ Kitaba,” in the possession of the Khadim, gives 7 Zilqada 
818 as the date, and jy, Nur bnur shud, as the chronogram. This 
may be interpreted “ Light went to Light ”, or “ Light was with Light ”, 
and is neater and more poetical than the Shams-ul-Hidayat of Ghulam 
Sarwar. It gives the figures 818 (1415-16). 
I submit that this date should be accepted as correct; first because 
it is that preserved at the shrine; secondly because it is more de¬ 
tailed than the others, as it gives the date of the month as well; and 
thirdly because it nearly agrees with Abul Fazl’s date of 808, and corres¬ 
ponds with history much better than 851. Jalalluddin, the son of Rajah 
Kans, or Ganes, apparently began to reign about 818, and the Riyaz tells 
us that when he ascended the throne, he sent for Shaikh Zaliid, the 
grandson of Nur Qutb, from Sonargaon, and was henceforth guided by 
his advice. This implies that Nur Qutb was then dead, or very old, and 
at all events a man who was a grandfather in 818 is not likely to have 
lived till 851. 
* See his book, page 383. 
f It is called the Chliai Hazari endowmeut as consisting of 6,000 bighas. 
