CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
3 1924 066 284 781
/ V "
.
JOURNAL
OP THE
ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.
VOL. LXI.
PART I. (History, Antiquities, &c.)
(Ros. I to IV. — 1892; with 11 Plates; and an Extra¬
number with 30 Plates.)
EDITED BY
THE
JT O NOR ARY j^HILOLOGICAL
i3
ECRETARY,
“ It will flourish, if naturalists, chemists, antiquaries, philologers, and men of science
in different parts of Asia, will commit their observations to writing, and send them to
the Asiatic Society at Calcutta. It will languish, if such communications shall be long
intermitted; and it will die away, if they shall entirely cease.” Sir Wm. Jones.
CALCUTTA :
PRINTED AT THE BAPTIST MISSION PRESS,
AND PUBLISHED BY THE
ASIATIC) SOCIETY, 57, PARK STREET.
1898,
CONTENTS
OF THE
JOURNAL, ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL, Vol. LXI, Part I,
for 1892.
Page.
No. I.
Discovery of Buddhist Remains at Mount UreninMungir ( Monghyr )
district , and Identification of the site with a celebrated Hermit¬
age of Buddha. — By L. A. Waddell, M.B. (With, four
Plates)
Lamaic Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses. — By L. A. Waddell, M. B.,
The ‘ Tsam-chho-dung ’ ( rtsa-mclihog-grong ) of the Lamas , and their
very erroneous identification of the site of Buddha1 s death. By
L. A. Waddell, M. B., ...
Troy Weights and General Currency of ancient Orissa. — By M. M.
Chakravarti, Subordinate Executive Service of Bengal
Graeco-Roman Influence on the Civilization of Ancient Lidia.
Second Paper— By Vincent A. Smjth, 1Y1.R.A.S., Bengal
Civil Service. Parts I. and II.
No. II.
The Dinajpur Copper-plate Inscription of Mahipdla. — By Pro¬
fessor F. Kielhorn, C.I.E., Gottingen
Same of the Muhammadan Coins collected by the Afghan Boundary
Commission from an historical point of view. — By Major H.
G. Raverty. ...
On a Symbolical Coin of the Wethdli Dynasty of Arahan. — By W.
Theobald
Rdma-tankis. — By M. M. Chakravarti, M.A., B.L., Subordinate
Executive Service of Bengal. (With, one Plate)
Note on the Topography of the River in the 1 6th Century from Ilugli
to the Sea as represented in the ‘Da Asia ’ of De Barr os. By C.
It. Wilson, M.A. (With one Plate)
Rajah Kdns. — By H. Beveridge, C.S.
Note on the date of Nur-Qutb ’ Aland s Death. — By H. Beveridge,
0 . . ... ... ... ... ...
A Vocabulary of the Korwa language; — collected by W. Crooke,
B . * \ . , C . .... ... ... ... ...
The Korkus. — By W. H. P. Driver,
No. III.
The Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. — By L. A. Waddell, M. B.
(With three Plates)
The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries : A Geographical and His¬
torical Study. — By Major H. G. Raverty, Bombay Army
(Retired). (With two Plates.)
No. IV.
The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. — By Major H. G. Raverty.
(Continued.) ...
1
24
33
43
50
77
87
102
104
109
117
124
125
128
133
155
221
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2018 with funding from
BHL-SIL-FEDLINK
• * 4 \
\\
*V
https://archive.org/details/journalofasiatic6118asia
LIST OF PLATES
IN
JOURNAL, ASIATIC SOCIETY OE BENGAL, Yol. LXI, Part I,
for 1892.
Plate
Plate
Plate
Plate
Plate
Plate
Plate
V-
VI-
(p. 104).
-(p. 109).
Plan of Uren.
The Lota-Mark Chaitya-figures.
Buddha’s Promenade.
Mt. Uren Buddhist Inscriptions.
Rama-tankis.
River in the 16th Century from Ilugli to the
Sea, as represented in the “ Da Asia ” of De Barros.
VII — (p. 133). Fragment of a Wheel of Life from Ajanta.
VIII— (p. 133). The Buddhist Wheel of Life.
Villa — (p. 133). Key to Plate VIII.
IX — (p. 221). Map of Panjab and Sind.
X — (p. 221). Map of Sind.
(
INDEX
TO
JOURNAL, ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL, Vol. LXI, Part I,
for 1892.
il BD-ULLAH-I-WASSAF, p. 261.
Abu-lshak-al-lstakhari, pp. 186, 196,211.
Abu-l-Fath, Muhammad, pp. 87, 88.
Abu-1- MuzafEar, Takish, pp. 87, 88.
Abu-Rihan-al-Beruni, pp. 186, 190, 196,
219, 259.
Abu-Zaid-al-Hasan, pp. 186, 188.
Ahmad, son of Yahya, Al-Balaziri, pp.
186, 187, 231, 234.
A’in-i-Akbari, quoted on the Ab-i-Sind,
p. 293.
Ajanta “ Zodiac,” pp. 133, 153.
Alasadda, p. 59.
Al-Idrisi, pp. 187, 191, 205, 224.
Al-Mas’udi, pp. 186, 189, 195, 206.
Ananga Bhima Deva, pp. 43, 46, 48.
Asura Maya, p. 60.
Avolokita, or Chenresi, pp. 135, 139, 153.
J3aRROS, J. de, map of the Hugli,
p. 109.
Belekan, p. 89.
Betor, pp. 110, 111.
Beveridge, H., Rajah Kans, p. 117.
- - - , date of Qutb Alam’s
death, p. 124.
Buddha’s death, reputed site of, p. 33.
Buddhist Wheel of Life, p. 133.
Bukhara house of Timur, coins of, p.
98.
DaMODAR, pp. 114, 115.
dGra-lha, the Tibetan war-god, pp.
141, 144.
Dramma and dinara, pp. 50, 64.
Driver, W. H. P., the Korkus, p. 128.
Fl'RU'Z SHAH, pp 265, 266, et seq.
Formulas, Buddhist votive, p. 53.
Formulas for Lamaic rosaries, p. 30.
(jANDHARA sculptures, date of, p. 57.
Gondophares, era of, p. 55.
Gopimitha Deva, p. 48.
Gupta characters at Mt. Uren, p. 13.
Guzarwan, p, 90
Graeco-Roman influence on the civili¬
zation of ancient India, p. 50.
Greek names in Hindu epics, p. 61 .
- science, philosophy, and reli¬
gion in India, p. 69.
- tales in India, pp. 60, 66, et seq.
- words in Sanskrit and Pali, pp.
64, 65.
JLllUEN TSIANG, pp. 2, 5, 13, 15, 21,
41.
Ilugli, topography of, p. 109.
ChAKRAVARTI, M. M., troy weights
of ancient Orissa, p. 43.
- , Rama-tankis, p. 104.
Chorganga, p. 43.
Coins, Muhammadan, collected by the
Afghan Boundary Commission, p. 87.
Coin, symbolical, of the Wethali dynasty,
p. 102.
Crooke, W., a vocabulary of the Korwa
language, p. 125.
IbN AL-WARDX'-AL-KARSHf, pp.187,
195, 205.
Ibn Batutah, p. 263.
Ibn Haukal, p. 186, 190, 214.
Ibn Khurdad-bih, pp. 186, 188, 195, 206.
Images destroyed by Muhammadans, p.
19.
Inscriptions at Mt. Uren in Monghyr, p,
17.
- - ou a Masjid in Assam, p. 37.
Index.
viii
tJ A JIT GHAUR, p. 11 .
Junaid, son of ’Abd-ur-Rahman, pp 255,
256.
K HU SR AU, captured by the Mughals,
p. 260.
- , his Tarikh-i-’Ala’i, p 261.
Kielhorn, Professor F., copper-plate in¬
scription of Mahipala, p. 77.
Korkus, p. 128.
Korwa language, vocabulary, p. 125.
IjAMAIC Rosaries, p. 24.
Lutf-ullah, p. 37.
MadALA PANJI, pp. 43, 45, 47, 49.
Mahipala, copper-plate inscription of,
p. 77.
Mangutah invades Hindustan, pp. 156,
157, et seq.
Mirhan of Sind and its tributaries, p.
155.
Mir-Ma’sum, p. 261.
Moga, era of, p. 55.
Mongol Il-Khans of Persia, p. 95.
Mount Uren, Buddhist remains at, p. 1.
Muhammad, son of Kasim, invades Sind,
pp. 231 , 232, et seq.
Multan, pp. 156, 157, et seq.
Murasid-ul-I’tila, p. 230.
NrISIMHA DEYA IV, of Orissa, p.
47.
OrISSA, Hindu currency of, p. 43.
PaLA KINGS, successors of Narayana
Pala, pp. 77, 80.
Picholda, pp. 112, 113.
Purushottama Deva, of Orissa, p. 48.
QuTB-ALAM’S Death, date of, pp.
122, 124.
Rajaii kans, p. 117.
Raj shay e, p. 120.
Rama-tankis, p. 104.
Ilaverty, Major II. G., Mihran of Sind
and its tributaries, p. 155.
- , Muhammadan
coins collected by the Afghan Bound¬
ary Commission, p. 87.
Safawi' Dynasty, coins of the, p. 100.
Senart on Graeco-Roman influence in
India, pp. 52, 53 et seq.
Shafurkan, or Shaburghan, p. 89.
Shamsabani Tajziks of Ghur, p. 90.
Shams-i-Saraj, p. 264.
Shinie Chho-gyal, the Tibetan god of
death, p 139.
Sijistan, coins of, p. 95. .
Smith, Vincent A., Graeco-Roman in¬
fluence on the civilization of Ancient
India, p. 50.
T ARI'KH-I-ALFI', p. 267.
Timur marches to Multan and Delhi,
pp. 279, 280, et seq.
• - , his Tuzxik, p. 280.
Theobald, W., symbolical coin of the
Wethali dynasty, p 120.
Tsam-clilio-dung, a place of Buddhist
pilgrimage in Assam, p. 33.
U CHCHH, pp. 156, 159 et seq.
V AKULA, a YaTcsha, p. 6.
ADDELL, Dr. L. A , Buddhist picto¬
rial Wheel of Life, p. 1 33.
, discovery of Bud¬
dhist remains at Mount Uren, p. 1.
- ; - , Lamaic rosaries,
p. 24.
- , the Tsam-chli6-
dung of the Lamas, p. 33.
Weber on Graeco-Roman influence in
India, pp. 50, 58, et seq.
Wilson, C. R , the topography of the
Hugli, p. 107.
YaHYA', son of Ahmad, the Sahrindi,
p. 274
Yavanas, i.e , Greeks, pp 58, 59, et seq.
■ZaKABJ'YA, the Kazwini, pp. 187, 195,
203 and 205.
JOURNAL
OF THE
ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL
Part I.— HISTORY, LITERATURE, &e.
No. I.— 1892.
Discovery of Buddhist Remains at Mount TIren in Mungir ( Monghyr )
district , and Identification of the site with a celebrated Hermitage of
Buddha . — By L. A. Waddell, M. B.
( With four Plates) .
Seldom is it possible to identify an ancient site so perfectly as
that now reported ; for it seldom happens that the historical description
is so very detailed, the geographical position so well defined, and the
remains themselves so little disturbed as in the present case. And in
addition to the discovery of the hermitage where Buddha spent the
rainy season (the so-called ‘ Buddhist Lent ’) of the sixteenth year of his
ministry, it is interesting and important to find that a famous incident
in the legendary life of Buddha, which occurred here and which has
hitherto been considered a solar myth, is in fact an almost unembellished
record of a local event. Evidence is also offered of the forcible expul¬
sion hence of Buddhism by the Muhammadan invaders, in opposition to
the opinion expressed by many writers that Buddhism died out of India
through its own inherent decay.
Discovery of site. — The antiquities at the village of Uren have quite
escaped the notice of archaeologists. On passing through the village
some months ago, I observed numerous fragments of Buddhist statues
scattered everywhere around, and was so led to explore the locality
during the limited time at my disposal, with the result of discovering
that the hill adjoining the village is one on which Buddha rested a season,
2
L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains
[No. 1,
during the rains, and a celebrated place of pilgrimage in olden times,
very fnlly described by the Buddhist pilgrim Hiuen Tsiang* in the
seventh century A. D.
Remains being destroyed by quarriers. — It is a pity that the site has
remained so long undiscovered, for the unfortunate proximity of the
hill to the railway, and the excellent quality of the rock (granite) have
induced the railway authorities to use the hill as a quarry for ‘ road-
metal ’ ; and only about six years ago two of the most interesting of the
rock-sculptures were in this way demolished and the fragments further
broken up and carried off as ballast ; and the blasting operations have
now extended to within a few feet of the more important rock-sculptures
and markings still remaining. Many of the inscribed statues also have
been carried off from time to time by the overseers or contractors super¬
vising the quarrying operations — one of these in particular, a Mr. S — —
is reported to have carried off, about thirty-six years ago, a full cart-load
of the best preserved statuettes, the ultimate destination of which cannot
now be traced. Sufficient evidence, however, still exists to place the
identification of the site beyond all dispute, and I am glad to have been
the means of rescuing these ancient remains, more especially the rock-
markings, from imminent destruction. f
Hiuen Tsiang'' s description of the site . — The I-lan-na-po-fa-to ( Hira -
nya-parvata) country of Hiuen Tsiang is held by the recognized autho¬
rities Julien,| Fergusson§ and Sir A. Cunningham|| to have coincided ap¬
proximately with the hilly portion ( i . e., the eastern half) of the modern
district of Mungir (Monghyr) in the province of Bihar, with its capital
at the site of the present town of Monghyr. In describing this country,
Hiuen Tsiang writes : —
“ On the western frontier of the country (I-lan-na-po-fa-to), to the
# Si-yu-Tci, Buddhist Records of the Western World, translated from the
Chinese of Hinen Tsiang by S. Beal, Yol. II, pp. 190-91, London, 1884.
f Since writing the above I have again visited the site and find that further quar¬
rying operations have been extensively carried on since the submission of this report
to the Society. The western cliff, bearing numerous chaitya figures, has been in great
part removed by blasting, only the fractured bases of a few of the chaityas still
remaining. Also at the south-east margin of the hill, where the rock was highly
polished and contained ancient markings, most of this surface has been removed
by blasting. And a blast had been put in within two yards of Buddha’s footprint, but
had miscarried in explosion. All this destruction has occurred subsequent to my
report to the Societ}\
t Memoires sur les Contrdes Occidentales , traduits du Chinois, Paris, 1853.
§ Jour. Roy. As. Soc ., Vol. Yi, p. 230.
|| Ancient Geography of India, p. 476 j and Arch. Survey of India Reports, Yol.
XY, p. 16. f Beal, loc. c it., Yol. II, p. 190.
1892.]
at Mount TJren in Mungir ( Monghyr ) district , Sfc.
3
“ south of the river Ganges, we come to a small solitary mountain with
“ a double peak rising high (Beal here notes ‘ The passage might be
translated “ there is a small solitary hill with successive crags heaped
up.”) “ Formerly Buddha in this place rested during the three months
“ of rain, and subdued the Yaksha Vakula (Yo-o’ha Po-khu-lo). Below
“a corner of the south-east of the mountain is a great stone. On this
“ are marks caused by Buddha sitting thereon. The marks are about
“ an inch deep, five feet two inches long, and two feet one inch wide.
“ Above them is built a stupa. Again to the south is the impression
“on a stone where Buddha set down his kiun-chi-kia (hundika or water-
vessel). In depth the lines are about an inch, and are like a flower
“ with eight buds (or petals). Not far to the south-east of this spot
“ are the foot- traces of the Yaksha Vakula. They are about one foot
“ five or six inches long, seven or eight inches wide, and in depth less
“than two inches. Behind these traces of the Yaksha is a stone figure
“ of Buddha in sitting posture, about six or seven feet high. Next, to
“ the west, not far off, is a place where Buddha walked for exercise.
“ Above this mountain top is the old residence of the Yaksha. Next,
“ to the north is a foot-trace of Buddha, a foot and eight inches long
“ and perhaps six inches wide and half an inch deep. Above it is a stupa
“ erected. Formerly when Buddha subdued the Yaksha, he commanded
“ him not to kill men nor eat their flesh. Having respectfully re-
“ ceived the law of Buddha, he was born in heaven. To the west of this
“ are six or seven hot springs. The water is exceedingly hot.”
General Cunningham'’ s identification with Mahddeva hill. — So very
detailed a description of this site ought to render its identification com.
. paratively easy and certain ; and it seems remarkable that guided by
such a minute description the identification should have been so long
delayed. It may be that this is partly owing to Sir A. Cunningham
having already in his official report* identified the Mahadeva peak in the
Kharakpur hills with the site just described by Hiuen Tsiang. But it
had so happened that about two months previous to my visiting Uren,
I had occasion to be in the neighbourhood of the Mahadeva hill referred
to by General Cunningham, and I took advantage of the opportunity
to visit the hill, book in hand— with the pilgrim’s account and General
Cunningham’s remarks side by side for reference on the spot. And I
confess to being thoroughly disappointed. In this case certainly the
remarks applied by Fergusson to another identification of General Cun¬
ningham’s are agaiu fully applicable, viz.t that aftei aibitianly altering
the direction given by his author, lie fails in every instance to “ bring
* Archmoloyical Survey of India Reports, V ol. XV, p. 1J, Calcutta., lyyj.
4 L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains [No. 1,
“ the natural features of the country into accord with the descriptions
“ of the pilgrim.”
Mahddeva hill certainly not the site. — That the Mahadeva hill is
certainly not the site referred to by the pilgrim is evident from the
following facts : —
1st. It is not ‘‘on the western frontier,” but rather on the eastern
frontier of I-lan-na-po-fa-to.
2nd. It is not “ a small solitary hill,” but is within and among the
hills and not a detached hill ; it is only a lower
shoulder of a higher hill of the range behind.
3rd. Ithaswo£“a double peak rising high” — the 2nd peak really
belongs to another hill of the range.
4tli. It has no “ successive crags heaped up ” — on the contrary its
sides are trim and sub-conical.
5th. It has not “ to the west not far off ” any place suitable for a
promenade.
6th. It has none of the very numerous rock-markings described by
Hiuen Tsiang (so far as is known, and special inquiry
and search for these were made),
th. It has no remains of the several stupas erected on the site.
Qth. The hot springs are not “ to the west ” of the hill, but actually
upon the hill itself and on its eastern and N. E.
slope.
9th. Lastly it has no Buddhist remains, nor remains of any kind
(except a small brick shrine about 4 feet square
housing a linga [Mahadeva], nor is there any history
or likelihood of there ever having been remains
hereabouts ; and the situation is so remote from rail
and roadways and villages, that had any buildings or
remains ever existed here, it is scarcely possible that
every trace of them could have been swept away.*
Mt. Ur en fully satisfies description in every detail. — Finding thus that
the Mahadeva peak was certainly not the place referred to by the pil¬
grim, I was, at the time I stumbled on the Uren ruins, on the outlook
for a site which would be more in harmony with the pilgrim’s account ;
and that Mt. Uren fully satisfies the pilgrim’s description, even to the
minutest detail, will be abundantly evident from the following parti¬
culars : —
a Situation of Mount Uren. — Mount Uren is situated in the Mungir dis-
* The Pdnch Kumar figure referred to by Genl. Cunningham was found about
five miles from here and is only a live-faced ‘ linga’ (phallus).
5
1892.] at Mount Uren in Mungir ( Monghyr ) district , 8fc.
trict and on the Western frontier of the I-lan-na-po-fo-to ( Hiranya-parva -
ta ) country, formerly included in the ancient kingdom of Magadha,
and within the Buddhist Holy Land. It is about twenty miles distant
from the town of Mungir in a S. W. direction, and about seven miles
south of the present course of the Ganges, but in the rains the Ganges
flood reaches almost up to Uren. In the Survey map the name is spelt
“ Oorein,” but the local pronunciation and spelling of the name is
JJren.
Local traditions. — Tradition is singularly meagre both in regard to
the hill itself, and the ruins and remains at its base. The only story
which is current amongst the villagers is, that the hill was formerly the
abode of a demon or deified giant called Lorik, famous in the nursery
tales of Bihar. And to this Lorik were ascribed the known markings on
the hill, viz., the lota- mark, the two footprints, and that portion of the
hill called ‘ the house.’ The existence of Buddha’s footprint and the
numerous inscriptions on the summit of the hill, and a footprint and
inscriptions at the S. E. base were, however, unknown to the villagers,
until I pointed them out.
Conformation of Hill identical with Hiuen Tsiang's description
Of the hill itself no more concise description could be given than that
contained in Beal’s translation,* viz., “ a small solitary hill with succes¬
sive crags heaped up.” The hill is also “ a small solitary mountainf
with a double peak rising high.” In appearance, therefore, the hill
literally satisfies both the original and alternative descriptions. The hill
is bare and devoid of vegetation, except in a few chinks in the rock
where a scanty soil and debris have accumulated. Its black naked
rocks, rising in a rugged series of crags abruptly from the plain, give
it a most weird appearance. The rock consists of granite of a pale
bluish colour on fracture, and its surface, where unpolished, becomes
covered over with a black lichen. The hill is isolated and solitary,
being distant about two miles from the mass of the Mungir hills, here
consisting of what Buchanan calls ‘ silicious hornstone ’J, and separated
from these by a stretch of plain, now under rice cultivation. The height
of the hill seems to be about 250 feet above the surrounding plain. The
shape of the hill is seen in the accompanying sketch-map (see Plate I),
which also indicates the position of the remains and rock-markings.
The southern peak is the higher and forms the true summit of the hill.
# Loc. cit.
+ One of the translations gives ‘mountain’ instead of hill, but Beale shows
that the word also means ‘ hill,’ and there are no mountains in this part of India.
J Eastern India , II, 166. It is commonly known as quartzite.
6
L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains
[No. 1,
The numerous remains noted by Iliuen Tsiang identified seriatim. —
In identifying seriatim the remains noted by Hiuen Tsiang, it is con¬
venient to describe these in a slightly different order to that given
by the pilgrim, as at least two of the rock “ traces” have lately been
removed, respectively five and six years ago.
The residence of the Yaksha. — 1$£, “ Above this mountain top is the old
residence of the Yaksha ( Vakula ).” This to the present day is one of the
sights of the hill. The villagers call it Lorik ka ghar or ‘ the house of
Lorik the giant ’ ( i . e., Yaksha). It is a somewhat flat area on the top of
the hill, below the S. E. side of the summit, and is surrounded on three
sides by vaguely columnar rock, slightly suggestive of rude walls.
The local survival of the name of the Yaksha , viz., Bakula. — In regard
to the name of the Yaksha, viz., Vakula ,* which in modern Hindi
becomes Bakula, it is remarkable to find the local survival of this name
and the awe in which it is still held. Immediately behind Uren is the
mouth of a pass which leads into the wild Singh ol hills ; and the pass
and the hills beyond were the retreat of banditti till long after the
Muhammadan invasion. The older banditti are popularly alleged by
the villagers to have been cannibals, and their raids are still spoken of
by the lowlanders here with dread. These highland aborigines were
formerly called rakshas or ‘ demons ’ by the plains-people ; and the
oldest settlement of these raksha or yaksha tribes is about five miles
beyond the mouth of the pass, and is called Bakura — which is identical
with the name of the ‘ yaksha ’ given by Hiuen Tsiang — l and r being
interchangeable, and indeed such interchange is the rule hereabouts ;
thus the common word givdl, a cowherd, is ordinarily pronounced gwdr.
And in Chinese transliteration r is expressed by l. It is a common
practice to name villages after their founders : thus Bakura village =
‘ the village of Bakura.’ And so great was the dread inspired by
this Bakura that he is even now worshipped by the semi-aborigines
of the plains (the Dosadhs and Gwalas) at a shrine in the village
of Jalalabadf, about eight miles east from Uren, under the name of
‘ Ban-Bakura Nath or the ‘ Savage Lord Bakura.’ His image is in basalt
and represents a squat muscular man in a semi-sitting posture. He has
a large sensual head, thick lips and curly hair which latter is fastened
in a coil with a scimitar-shaped dagger, as with the aborigines in
* A Hindu legend of a man-eating demon, bearing the somewhat similar name
of Vaka, is told in the Mahabliarata (Wheeler’s Transl., p. 110), the demon being slain
by Bhima. But the great Asura Raja, named Vaka, lived near the city Ekachakra ,
which is believed to be within the modern district of Shahabad, abont two hundred
miles to the north of Uren. This may be a Hindu version of the Buddhist storv.
t And six miles north-east from Kharagpur.
1892.]
at Mount Uren in Mungir ( Monghyr ) district, fyc.
7
the Barhut Sculptures. And it is interesting in regard to Hiuen
Tsiang’s note that the Yaksha was converted to Buddhism, to find that
these tribes had acquired profound respect for the remains at Uren; for
they had carried off from the ruins to the pass several inscribed Buddhist
stones and images, some of which are reverently disposed under trees
at the foot of the pass and others on the summit of the pass, where they
are rudely worshipped by daubing with vermillion. And most of these
fragments show fractures so sharp as to lead to the belief that they had
been carried off and deposited where they now are very shortly after
the destruction of the Buddhist establishment at Uren.
Foot-trace of Buddha. — 2nd. “ Next to the north is a foot-trace of
tl Buddha, a foot and eight inches long, and perhaps six inches wide and
half an inch deep." This foot-trace of Buddha is to be found to the
north of ‘ Lorik ka ghar ’ and about five yards from the summit of the
hill; see No. 5 on the plan (Plate I). It is of the right foot, and its
dimensions are 23 inches long by 10 \ inches broad and about J to \ inch
in depth. It is directed to the N.N.E.
The footprint is partly natural and partly artificial, the outer border
of the print, for the greater part of its extent, is outlined by a linear flaw-
in the granite rock, into which has poured a quartzoze material, part of
which had been picked out to give greater distinctness to the outline.
The inner border of the footprint is also a natural line, and the depres¬
sion of the heel and sole seem also natural ; but the rock, forming the
ball of the great toe and the marks of the toe-tips, has all been arti¬
ficially chipped, the operation having been assisted by the rock in
this situation slightly tending to scale, or peel off in one or two layers.
No chiselling seems to have been resorted to, nor was it needed. In the
depression from the root of the toes to the heel, the rock is highly polish¬
ed and contains traces of numerous inscriptions, all, except the one regis¬
tered in two lines on the ball of the toes, so indistinct as to give no legi¬
ble impression — and even this one, I fear will prove unreadable.
The stupa above footprint. — 3rd, “ Above it (the foot-trace of Buddha)
is a stupa erected .” Five yards above the foot-trace, and in line with
the direction in which it points, is a mound of bricks, the most prominent
feature on the hill top, and suggestive of the remains of a small stupa.
The bricks are small, flattened and well-baked, and many of them are
wedge-shaped. The narrowness of the rocky base, viz,, about 12 feet
by 12 feet, would not admit of a very large stupa being built here. In
the village below are collected numerous bevelled and sculptured basalt
blocks which formed the facings of small stupas. At the N. E. base
of the brick mound is seen outcropping a part of the base of a thickly
plastered wall, but its direction is nearly straight, and as it is dis-
8
L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains
[No. I,
posed somewhat radiatingly to the centre of the brick mound, it may
be the remains of a wall bounding a path leading up to the stupa ;
but as I had no leisure to explore the mound properly, I left it undis¬
turbed. The villagers report that at the last quarrying operations,
about four years ago, the overseer carried off a black stone which was
on the top of this brick-mound, and there is a square arrangement of
the superficial bricks around the centre of the mound suggestive of the
existence of a small square shrine here. The position being on the very
top of the hill, it is quite possible that there may have been here a rela¬
tively modern shrine to a Bralimanic god, erected on the ruins of the
stupa and built with the bricks of the latter. Some of the villagers say
that the officer of the ‘ fort ’ had his house here, but this is mani¬
festly absurd, as there is no room for a dwelling house in such a
circumscribed spot. This brick mound, therefore, demands careful
exploration, although it is extremely improbable that any relics will be
found here, as the depth of bricks now remaining is only about 3 feet
or so.
Buddha's lota-print. — 4th. “ Again to the south is the impression on a
11 stone on which Buddha set down his kiun-chi-kia (kundika or water -
“ vessel). In depth the lines are about an inch and are like a flower with
“ eight buds (or petals)." This mark, which is locally known as Lorik’s
1 lota- mark’ — lota being the modern term for the ancient kundika , — is
still an absolutely fixed point, although the mark itself no longer exists,
the portion of rock on which it was graven having been blasted about five
years ago. Several of the villagers whom I separately interrogated led
me always to the very same spot. Fortunately, however, in this case
we are not dependent on the mere testimony of the villagers. On
several parts of the hill are sculptured on the rock the figures of stupas
or chaityas of most elaborate patterns. And I observed that these groups
of stupa-figures have their apices pointing towards one or other of the
footprints and other sacred markings. In this case, the group of stupa-
figures which are situated immediately below, and with their apices
directed towards the reported site of the lota- mark are supplemented by
figures of the lota or water- vessel very specially and prominently dis¬
played ; see Plate II.
The lota is here figured in no less than three and probably four
different phases, viz. : —
(a) The small single circle to the left of the stupa (No. 1, PI. II.),
■which is reported to be the exact facsimile reproduction of the actual
circumference of the body of the original lota- mark — now destroyed as
above noted ; its diameter measures 7J inches.
( b ) The elongated pear-shaped figure (No. 2, PI. II), immediately
1892.] at Mount JJren in the Mungir ( Monghyr ) district.
9
opposite the circle, on the right of the stupa, is the same lota seen in
profile, with four leafy projections at rim and with rope attached. To
prevent all mistake as to the object here represented, the Buddhist
artist (probably a monk) has added the indication of the four fingers
in the act of grasping the rope, from which the lota is suspended.
(c) Below the circle, representing the circumference of the lota ,
is the profile of an ascetic’s pitcher (No. 3), such as are still used by Hindu
mendicants under the name of hamandalu. In this case also are repre¬
sented four fingers in the act of grasping the rope-liandle of the lota.
( d ) The looped figure (No. 4) by the side of the lotci profile on the
right is evidently the coiled drawing rope of the lota. When straightened
out, it measures 3 feet 4^ inches.
The remaining figures, except the large concentric circles (which
may possibly represent cymbals, being much too large for a begging
bowl), are merely accessories of worship, viz., a pile of granular
material (evidently intended for rice and sweetmeats) on a raised tray,
and the sanJcha or conch sliell-trumpet (fig. 6) blown at the hours of
worship also on a stand. These are evidently representative of the
offerings and worship which were daily being made at the lota- print
of Buddha, at the time when the drawing was executed. The inscrip¬
tion, contained in the base of this cliaitya, seems to be merely the
Buddhist creed, and is written in characters of the 8th or 9fch century
A. D.
Regarding the original lota- print, the villagers concur in report¬
ing that its depth was a little over the length of the terminal phalanx
(1st joint) of the index-finger, thus concurring with the pilgrim’s
description of “ about an inch deep.” The small circle, above noted as
measuring 7| inches across, is said to have been equal to the circum¬
ference of the shoulder of the Zofa-print ; but the rim of the print was
of about one inch greater width all round than the base, and the whole
depression was ornamented ‘ like a flower ’ (N. B. — this was a sponta¬
neous expression of one of the villagers, thus agreeing with the pilgrim’s
account.) It is not recollected by the villagers how many petals were
represented: but in the lota- profile (fig. 2), represented to the right of
the stupa-figure, are four petaloid appendages to the rim, two of which
are distinctly subdivided (see also larger tracing No. 2a. at the foot of
Plate II) thus affording evidence of the subdivision of the flower into
eight petals as described by Hiuen Tsiang.
Further, the villagers report that all around the Zojfd-print, the
rock was highly polished and covered with numerous inscriptions in
unknown characters. That the rock hereabouts was highly polished, I
find to be the case as the rock containing the lota- print was on a ter-
B
10
L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains [No. I,
race, about 2| feet above the plane of its stupa-figures below, and a por¬
tion of this old surface, about four feet above tbe site of ZoZa-print,
lias escaped dislodgement by the blasting and shows towards its lower
border a commencing area of high polish. Finally the ZoZa'-print was
situated on the southern portion of the hill (see Plate I) as stated by
the pilgrim.
Foot-prints of the Yaksha. — 5th. “ Not far to the south-east of this
“ spot are the foot-traces of the Yaksha Vakula. They are about 1
“ foot 5 or 6 inches long, 7 or 8 inches wide and in depth less than 2
“ inches.” In the exact direction and position here indicated, viz..,
south-east from the ZoZa-mark and at a distance of about 100 yards, were
the two “footprints of Lorik ” (see No. 4 on Plate I.) These marks,
which were well-known to the villagers were blown up only four years
ago. The two footprints were each about 18" long by 7 or 8 inches
wide (described by villagers respectively as one hath (cubit) and two
palm-breadths) and about 2 inches in depth. The divisions of the
toes were clearly incised, and the surrounding stone was highly
polished. One footprint was in front of the other, and they tended
S. E. in the direction of Lorik-ka ghar , the abode of the yaksha.
I would here refer to the unfortunately erratic manner in which these
blasting operations are being conducted. At this particular part of the
hill the only portion of the rock blasted was that which contained these
two footprints and about 1J feet on either side of them — as if this over¬
seer (a European) had purposely demolished these ancient marks. I
believe the fact really is, that these markings were made on the most
compact and undecomposed rock — the so-called jitd pathar ‘ the living
stone ’ of the quarriers, and its highly polished surface attracted their
unkind attention.
Colossal statue of Buddha. — 6th. “ Behind these traces of the Yaksha
“ is a stone figure of Buddha in sitting posture about six or seven feet
“ high.” No superficial trace of this image now exists, unless a small
splinter of basalt, which I found a few yards lower down and which had
formed part of some image, can be considered as such. At this site,
however, is a hollow, between two shoulders of rock, which has become
filled up with the debris of ages, so it is possible that excavation here
might reveal traces of this statue.
Buddha's promenade. — 7th. “Next to the west (of Yaksha’s foot¬
prints), not far off is a place where Buddha walked for exercise.”
In the situation here indicated is a narrow level tract between two long
massive shoulders of rock, see Plate No. III. Before the great accumu-
lation of debris had taken place, the rock on either side must have
stood up like walls and bounded a rocky lane— a most suitable pro-
1892.]
at Mount TJren in the Mungir (Monghyr) district.
11
menade for the great ascetic, affording an outlook only to the distant
hills and overhead the sky.
Marks where Buddha sat down. — 8th. “ Below a corner of the south¬
east side of the mountains is a great stone. On this are marks caused
by Buddha sitting thereon. The marks are about an inch deep, 5
feet 2 inches long and 2 feet 1 inch wide. Above them is built a
stupa.” Julien, however, notes* the existence of a cave here in which
Buddha dwelt. He says “ Au bas d’une caverne situee au Sud-est ; ”
yet, Beale makes no remark when giving a different translation, viz .,
‘ corner.’ It will be seen presently that Julien’s translation seems the
correct one. I have left the identification of this site to the last, because
the whole of the old surface of the S. E. corner of the hill has been
removed by blasting, and the markings on the rock here must have been
demolished by the quarriers. Evidence, however, is still extant of the
former existence of a Buddhist sacred spot within the quarried area
near the point marked No. 7 on Plate I, “ on the south-east side of
the hill.” On the vertical face of the rock, about twenty and thirty
yards to the south and S. W. of that spot, are carved two stupas pointing
to that spot, and the old surface of the rock on the verge of the quarry and
about seven or eight yards above that spot shows the commencement of
an area of high polish such as is only found at the sacred spots ; and here
are numerous traces of short inscriptions but mostly illegible. Evidence
also is found of the existence of a cave here. On this edge of the
quarry, in comparatively modern Devanagari characters, is cut the
inscription Jaju ghaur, i. e., £ Jajii’s cave or house. ’f This Jaju was
evidently a modern occupant of the cave in which Buddha formerly
dwelt, which was close to the large pipal tree ( Ficus religiosa ), see
No. 7 on Plate I, and which was removed by the railway quarriers.
But the villagers possess no tradition of any ascetic or local worthy of
the name of Jaju, nor indeed were they aware of the existence of this
inscription, till I pointed it out. He must have lived several genera¬
tions ago. The greater portion of this side of the hill was blasted about
thirty years ago, but farther blasting was done' three years ago and
also this year, and as the ballast coolies gather up fragments of bricks as
well as stones, the remains of the stupa here must have been removed.
In a hollow in the rock immediately to the west of this are the numer¬
ous remains of broken bricks presumably those of the stupa.
The Hot Springs in relation to Uren. — The above are the remains
* Op. cit., Ill, p. 70.
f Ghaur is the Mithila vernacular for ghar, a dwelling, and this portion of
Monghyr district is included within the Mithila range of dialect. Griekson’s
Bihar Peasant Life , p. 331.
12
L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains
[No. 1.
noted by Hinen Tsiang as existing on tlie bill. Bat immediately follow¬
ing the pilgrim’s description of the hill is the paragraph : “To the west
of this are six or seven hot springs. The water is exceedingly hot.
To the south the country (I-lan-no) is bounded by great mountain
forests in which are many wild elephants of great size. Leaving this
kingdom, &c.”
General Cunningham considers this note regarding the hot springs
as being related to the description of Buddha’s hermitage on the hill.
But that it is so related, is open to doubt in view of the fact that (a)
Hiuen Tsiang, as Beale remarks,* was evidently writing from the capital
of I-lan-no-po-fo-to, not having himself visited this hill, and ( b ) the pre¬
ceding paragraph seemingly disposes of this hill with the words, “ For-
“ merly when Buddha subdued the Yaksha, he commanded him not to
“ kill men nor eat their flesh. Having respectfully received the law of
“ Buddha, he was born in heaven,” and the succeeding paragraph would
seem to refer to the country of I-lan-no and not to this hill.
This paragraph therefore, regarding the direction of the hot springs,
may equally well be taken as indicating their direction from the capital
instead of from the hill. West from the capital of ‘ I-lan-no po-fo-to
which, as before noted, Vivien de Saint Martin, Fergusson and Cunning¬
ham are agreed was situated at or near the present town of Mungir,
are two groups of hot springs the water of which “ is exceedingly hot,”
viz., the hot springs of Janamkund, distant about 20 milest to the south
west, and the hot springs of Bliimband, distant about 25 miles to the
S. S. W. and mentioned by General Cunningham. Dr. Buchanan visited
these springs about the year 1810 and found the temperature of the
waters to be in both cases 150° Fah.J. And a more modern observation
records the temperature as being 145°F. and 146 Y°F. respectively. §
But even were the reference to the hot springs taken as an essential
part of the description of the hermitage hill, then hot springs are still
to be found not far off from Uren, and in a direction not altogether out
of keeping with the pilgrim’s description. The hot springs of Singhi
Rikh are about three miles due south from Uren, and the hot springs of
Janamkund are about twelve miles south-east from Uren; but, as a
range of hills intervenes, the road leading from Uren to both of the
above springs proceeds south-west for about four miles so as to get
round the shoulder of this range of hills. So that on enquiring from
certain villagers, at Uren, the way to the hot springs of Singhi Rikh
* Op. cit., ii, foot-note, No. 11, p. 190.
t The pilgrim does not specify any distance for the springs.
J Eastern India, II, p. 198.
§ L. A. Waddell, J. A. S. B. Vol. LIX, II, p. 226.
13
1892.] at Mount TJren in the Mungir ( Monghyr ) district.
and Janamkund, I was directed to go south-west , and only subsequently
ascertained that these springs really lay to the south and south-east
respectively.
To describe, therefore, these springs in general terms as lying to
the west of Uren is perhaps allowable under the circumstances, as the
pilgrim was noting down a mere hearsay report, and the determination
of such niceties of direction for distant places, where tortuous passages
among hills are concerned, is possible even in modern times only to those
provided with a compass. At each of these two sites the hot water
outflows at six or seven separate springs.
„ Remains on hill additional to those noted by Hiuen Tsiang. — In ad¬
dition to the above described remains and markings noted hy Hiuen
Tsiang, I observed on the hill the following additional remains : —
(a) Part of a roc/c-cut inscription in large cuneiform headed
characters on the summit of the hill about four feet to the east of
Buddha’s footprint, (see No. 4, Plate IV.) The rock here is much
scaled, so that only a fragment of the inscription is apparent. The
inscription seems to be in 5 or 6 lines. The fragment given in the plate
is the only portion legible and seems to be a portion of the 3rd line.
This inscription is bounded by four lines forming a square with a
side of about 7 feet ; the borders of which are in exact relation to
Buddha’s foot-print.
( b ) Short rock-cut inscription in later Gupta characters, on highest
peak of rock, and about three feet above Buddha’s footprint. See No. 5,
Plate IV).
(c) Innumerable names in a great variety of archaic characters
cover the surface of rock, at the summit for several square yards.
These are written across one another in every direction, and are evi¬
dently in most part the names of pilgrims. On such an exposed situa¬
tion and worn away. by the feet during so many centuries, the words are
well nigh obliterated and will I fear prove quite illegible. The ordinary
process of copying by ink-impression is much too rough for such mark¬
ings and only indicates those written in the larger sized letters. On
one part of the rock, at No. 9 on map, are characters of a distinctly
Burmese type forming a closely written series of about ten lines.
(d) A footprint with modern Hindi inscriptions and traces of
words in older charactere is found on the south-east portion of the hill at
the point marked No. 6 on Plate I. The footprint measures 24 inches
in length, by 9 inches in breadth ; its outline is rather indistinct, and
compared with Buddha’s footprint it has a relatively modern appearance —
the presence, however, of same letters in the Kutila character show that
it must be of considerable age, although probably subsequent to the
time of Hiuen Tsiang.
14 L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains [No. 1,
(e) Numerous chaitya figures sculptured on the rock on various
parts of tlie hill. The site of these are indicated on Plate I, and they
all have their apices pointing to one or other of the holy spots. On the
base of the large chaitya figure of the lota- mark, and also on a vertical
oue at the south-west corner of the hill, are inscriptions, but these seem
merely to contain the Bnddhist creed.
Resume of evidence identifying Mt. Uren with the hill described by
Hiuen Tsiang. — Taking a brief resume of the evidence for the identifica¬
tion of Mt. Uren, with the hill described by Hiuen Tsiang, we see that
the identity is proved by : —
1st. The geographical position.
2nd. The physical conformation of the hill.
3rd. The actual presence and co-existence of all the very numerous
and specialized remains and rock-markings noted by
Hiuen Tsiang.
4tli. The very numerous votive Buddhist statues and chaityas and
the thousands of names carved on rock, indicating a
sacred place of Buddhist pilgrimage.
5th. The survival of the old tradition recorded by Hiuen Tsiang
that the hill-top was the abode of a demon, and his
abode and footprints and the lota- mark still being point¬
ed out, and the survival of the name and worship of
‘ the Savage Lord Bakura.’
The Remains at Base of the Hill.
I now proceed to describe the superficial remains at the base of the
hill. Running out from the north base of Mt. Uren is a small flat and
somewhat rocky spur on the northern extremity of which is situated
the village of Uren. Occupying the north-eastern portion of this spur
and adjoining the base of the hill, is a terraced area of broken bricks
and fragments of Buddhist statues and hewn stones, locally known as
“ Indardaun kd garh — the fort of Indardaun, see No. 13 on Plate I.
Xndardaun (the Indradyumna of Buchanan*), whose name still lingers in
the memory of the people, was the reigning king of Magadha, at the
time of the Muhammadan invasion in 1195 A. D., and he is believed by
Buchanan to have been one of the Pala dynasty which was Buddhist,
and on his flight from Bengal he is stated to have built the temple of
Jagarnath, the original Buddhist character of which seems undoubted.
The so-called ‘ garh,' or fort, evidently a monastery. — Although it is
not improbable that some of Indardaun’s troops may have occupied this
* Eastern India , II, 23. Also Cunningham’s Bepts ., Ill, p. 132.
\
1892.]
at Mount TJren in the Mungir ( Monghyr ) district.
15
post wlien being hard-pressed by the Muhammadan invaders, — the his¬
torical accounts, however, state that his troops fled without offering resis¬
tance — still the whole appearance of the place seems to justify the belief
that the so-called ‘ garh ’ or fort at Uren was originally and essentially
a Buddhist monastery. It is much too small in size for a fort, nor has it
the outline ditch or earthworks of one or any cavity or depression
within. On the other hand it teems with fragments of Buddhist statues
and rough-liewn lintels and door-jambs, and seems to have been an
almost solid mass of brick buildings. An old resident states that when
the greater part of the ruins were being dug up for bricks on the con¬
struction of the adjoining railway embankment over thirty years ago,
the appearance revealed was that of innumerable small rooms, and in
one of these he saw on a slielf-like recess in the wall a folded-up cloth
like a sash, which crumbled to dust on being touched.
Historic reference to this monastery . — No mention is made by Hiuen
Tsiang of a monastery at this place : this may be owing to his not hav¬
ing himself visited the locality. That a monastery did exist at such a
sacred place, hallowed by the residence of Buddha and containing so many
visible “traces ” of his presence, and itself a place of pilgrimage, may be
considered certain. From another source we find what seems a reference
to this monastery. The fullest accounts of Buddha’s life, yet known, are
preserved in the Southern Scriptures, and from these it would appear
that this hill is the place where Buddha spent the Vassa (rains — July to
September, the so-called Lent) of the sixteenth season of his ministry.
Reference is only made to one occasion on which Buddha converted a
solitary man-eating demon ; and both the Sinhalese* * * § and the Burmesef
versions of the legend agree in placing the scene at the place spelt
respectively A-low and A-la-wi, which bears a remarkably close resem¬
blance to the name of Uren — seeing that the old Sinhalese and Burmese
translators being unable to pronounce the letter r, either elided it or
substituted an l, thus habitually mangling Indian names. The general
details of the attendant circumstances of that event also favour the view
that this was the same incident which Hiuen Tsiang narrates. The
Sinhalese version further states that the place was 30 yojanas (i. e., over
400 miles according to Sinhalese calculation^) distant from the great
Jetavana Vihara near STavasti, which St. Martin§ indicated and Genl.
* Spence Hardy’s Man. of Buddhism, 2nd ed., p. 269.
f Bigandet’s Legend of Gautama, I, p. 245.
X According to Indian calculation, the yojana is considered to be only about
seven miles. It is generally believed, however, to have been greater than this in
anoient times.
§ Loc. cit., p. 355.
16
L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains [No. lf
Cunningham* afterwards identified as a spot in the neighbourhood of
Sahet-Mahet in S. Oudh, and the direct distance hence to Uren is by
the map about three hundred miles, but by road it would be much
greater. Both versions note that the place was near the Ganges, and
that the demon killed and ate human beings, and was converted
by Buddha. The Sinhalese account states that the abode of the demon
in the forest was high and conspicuous as this hill is ; and the Burmese
version further states that “ Buddha spent herein the sixteenth Season,”
and adds “ on that spot where so glorious and unexpected a conversion
“had taken place a monastery ivas erected .**
As the hill of Uren itself offered no room for a monastery this
would naturally be built on the spur at the base, now occupied by the
mounds of brick ruins.
Sketch of its extent and superficial remains. — In the accompanying
map (Plate I) will be seen the position, extent and outline of the mass
of brick debris, which seems to be the ruins of the monastery. I should
mention that in surveying the site I took the measurements by pacing, and
one step is taken as being equivalent to one yard. Before the railway
excavations commenced about thirty years ago, the ruins are said to have
formed high mounds of bricks outlining the position of the walls. But
the railway operations removed all the superficial bricks and the greater
portion of the foundation of the walls were also dug up. The old
villagers report that the bricks thus exhumed from the foundations were
of enormous size, viz., about 18 inches X 10" or 12" and of a thickness
like ordinary modern bricks. Notwithstanding the hundreds of cart¬
loads of bricks thus dug up and removed, it is said that a considerable
portion of the foundation still remains intact underneath the present
mounds of brick debris ; so that excavation may yet reveal the exact plan
of the building. The surface of these terraced mounds is strewn with
fragments of statues and other sculptured stones. At the point marked
No. 14 on the map are fragments of what appears to be a life-sized
standing statue of Buddha, and these seem to be more or less in situ.
The numerous Buddhist images throughout the village are reported
to have been all collected from this site and carried to where they now
are for greater safety. At the point marked No. 15 on the map were
exhumed two ornamented pillars. The points, marked No. 13 on the
map, indicate unusually high mounds of broken bricks and rough-hewn
granite blocks. There is no evidence that any large village ever existed
here.
Multitude of inscribed images and votive chaityas. — The multitude of
inscribed Buddhist images and votive chaityas of high artistic merit is
* Arch. S. Rept ., I. 634.
1892.]
17
at Mount Uren in Mungir ( Monghyr ) district , SfO.
only to be accounted for on the supposition that this was a famous place
of pilgrimage in olden times. The stone employed is, with few excep¬
tions, a fine, almost homogeneous bluish basalt, which is worked into a
high polish. No such rock exists in the neighbourhood. The curved
appearance of several of the sculptured slabs shows that they formed
portions of small stupas, such as those which existed on the hill.
These blocks were clamped together with iron bolts.
The Inscriptions. — Nearly every image bears an inscription. This, in
most instances, is merely the Buddhist creed, commencing with ‘ Oin ye
dharmma-hetu , &c.,J such as is usually engraved on votive images. But
a few of the longer inscriptions may contain interesting information.
For one of these see No. 3, Plate 1Y. Four of these inscriptions are
in the curious cuneiform headed character, found in the upper rock-cut
inscription, with wedge-like terminations to the up-strokes, suggestive
of the old Assyrian style of letters. These appendages are also attached
laterally to certain of the letters. This is possibly the same character
as that contained in the two specimens, referred to by Mr. Bendall*
as not having yet been deciphered by archaeologists, but he does not
appear to have figured them. This form of character, although Sanskritic
has little in common with the style of the so-called ‘ nail-headed ’
characters, even were the apex of the triangle directed downwards in¬
stead of up. That their style is distinctly wedge-headed is evident
from the rock-cut inscription, shown in No. 4, Plate IY ; and it will be
interesting to find, if they have a north-west origin. Mr. Fleet also
notesf having lately received from Gaya a specimen of what may
possibly be this character in an inscription on the bottom plate of a
brass image of Buddha, which he has not yet made out. The three
inscriptions, shown in Nos. 1, 2, and 4, of Plate IY, of which the first two
are entire and seem to contain the Buddhist creed, may afford a key to
this rare style of character. The style of the characters shows that
the majority of the inscriptions date from the 8th to the 12th century
A. D. ; but the letters of the rock cut wedge-lieaded inscription when
divested of their cuneiform appendages are almost Asoka-like. One of
the smaller inscriptions kindly translated by Dr. Hoernle runs 4 This
is the pious gift of STi Udaya.’
Old TanJc-names in the vicinity. — It is worth while, here, to give a
list of the names of the old tanks or ponds ( pukliar ) in the vicinity ;
especially as the names are evidently ancient, and survivals of names
which are now meaningless to the villagers.
* Journey in Nepal, Sfc., p. 5 1, 1888.
f Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum , Yol. Ill, p. 19, Calc., 1889.
C
18
L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains
[No. 1,
1. Dhaka kunda gadrahi.
2. Shamar garlii pukhar.
3. Kumukhar.
4. Jliar Kathi pukhar.
5. Sarpandani pukhar.
6. Amroura do.
7. Salian do.
8. Sifcahi do.
9. Uraiya do.
The first three are in the immediate vicinity of Uren, and the others
within |th to |th of a mile of that place. In connection with the first
named I would note that Gadrabha is said to be the name of the house¬
keeper of the Yaka of A-low* (Uren), and it is remarkable that
the tank retains the old Hindi word kunda in stead of pukhar. The
second tank is at the side of the so-called garh or fort, and seems to be
named in this relation. As this tank borders what is evidently the
monastery, it is possible that Sliamdr may be a corruption of Shaman =
Skt. ‘ SYamana ’ a Buddhist monk. The third tank-name may mean
the “Prince’s” \_S'akya] or the “potter’s” tank — there have been
no potters living here within the recollection of the villagers. f The
fourth name evidently means the tank of ‘ the Katli forest ’ — Kath is
the name of a kind of tree occasionally worshipped by the aboriginal
Musahars, and is to be found some miles off, although not now near
this tank.
The purity of the Buddhism . — The purity of the form of Buddhism
prevailing at this establishment is evidenced by the almost total ab¬
sence of S'ivaic images and the very orthodox nature of the truly
Buddhist images, and this is in keeping with Hiuen Tsiang’s statement
that most of the monasteries in this district were of the Hinayana
school — the more primitive and pure sect. The majority of the images
represent Buddha in the meditative form, others show him in a sitting
posture as Teacher expounding the Law, and a few represent him standing
and entering into the state of Parinirvdna. He is as frequently re¬
presented crowned, as with the tonsure. The monkey episode and the
crouching elephant are frequent accessories. The central supporting
figure in most of the basements is a squat human male figure with
snake-like locks of hair, see Plate IV, No. 2. The upper two-thirds of
a female figure in sandstone with leafy ornaments are somewhat after the
* Spence Hardy Op. cit., p. 270.
f [The name means neither. It is a contraction of Skr. KumbhapushJcara, lit.
‘ jar-tank '. It contains no reference either to a prince or a potter. Ed.]
1892.]
19
at Mount TJren in Mungir ( Monghyr ) district , 8fo,
style of the Mathura sculptures figured by General Cunningham.* At
a hamlet about a mile to the west is a perforated screen and a portion
of a slab with an elegant scroll design.
The only trace of impurity, observed by me, was found in a small
four-armed figure of Avalokitesvara and a small highly carved marble
image of the Bodhisattva Tara of the Nepalese and Tibetan Buddhists.
On the back of the latter image is inscribed the Buddhist creed in
mediaeval Kutila characters, and in the base are portrayed the seven
treasures of a Ghakravarti raja, such as Srakyamnni was to have been, had
he not adopted the life of an ascetic ; viz., (1) a wheel (chahra-ratna),
(2) elephant ( hasti-ratna ), (3) horse (asva-ratna) , (4) a jewel on a trifid
pedestal (manihya-ratna) , (5) a general (senapati-ratna) , (6) a minister
(grahapati-ratna) and (7) a good wife (stri-ratna) .
In its palmy days, this rocky hill, studded with stupas and its pro¬
fusion of images and ministering monks, must have formed a most pic¬
turesque sight.
Date and mode of destruction of this Buddhist establishment.
Buddhism is known to have been the state-religion in Magadha so
late as the reign of Mahipala, whose inscription, notifying this fact, is
dated 1026 A. D. It would thus appear, in Magadha, at least, to have been
little, if at all, affected by the Brahmanical persecution under S'ankar-
acharya.f General Cunningham statesj that Buddhism “ continued to be
“ the dominant religion of Magadha from the middle of the eighth century
“ down to the time of the Muhammadan conquest, when the monasteries
“ were destroyed, and the monks put to death by the ruthless and il-
“ literate Musalmans.” But it is not apparent on what grounds the
General makes the latter portion of this statement, and the attitude to¬
wards Buddhism of the Pala kings, subsequent to Matiipala, does not
yet appear to be definitely known. Some evidence, however, seems to
be available regarding the approximate date and mode of destruction of
this Buddhist establishment at Uren which favours the above statement.
The latest Buddhist inscriptions on the images are written in medieval
Nagari characters, such as commenced to be current about the 12th and
13th centuries A. D. And local tradition ascribes the destruction of
the ‘garb’ aud the temples containing the images (Buddhist) to the
# Arch. Survey Reports., vol. I, pi. 40, and vol. Ill, pi. 6.
t “ Ce fut dans ce temps (9th century A. D.) que parurent des ennemis terribles,
pour les bouddistes. Qankaraatchareia et son disciple Bataatchareia, qui exterminer-
ent le Bouddisme, le premier dans le Bengale, le second, a Ori^a.” — Taranath ir.
Vassilief’s Le Bouddisme , p, 53.
% Arch. Survey Report., vol. Ill, 119.
20 L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains [ISo. 1,
Pathan soldiery at tlie Muhammadan invasion of Bihar, which event
took place in 1195 A. D. under the Afghan General Bakhtyar Khilji.#
Stewartt states that Indradyumna’s troops fled without offering any
resistance ; thus the teeming monasteries were left unprotected, and the
Muhammadans appear to have regarded the monks as the soldiery of
the enemy, and massacred them wholesale. What happened in the
neighbouring monastery of Bihar ( vihdra ) has been chronicled by one
of the historians of the invaders, and it is typical of what must have
happened a few days later at Uren. He saysj “Muhammad Bakhtyar
“ with great vigour and audacity rushed into the gate of the fort and
“ gained possession of the place. Great plunder fell into the hands of
“ the victors. Most of the inhabitants of the place were Brahmans with
“ shaven heads. They were put to death. Large numbers of books
“ were found there ; and when the Muhammadans saw them, they called
“ for persons to explain their contents, hut all the men had been killed.
“ It was discovered that the ivhole fort and city was a 'place of study (madra-
“ sah). For in the Hindi language the word vihdra means ‘ a college.’ ”
In the above account the_occupants of the monasteries are described as
‘ Brahmans with shaven heads.’ These were quite evidently Buddhist
monks, as the rude idol-hating invaders were ignorant of the religious
distinctions of the Indians, and having killed all the Buddhist monks,
the subsequent historian merely designates the massacred priests by the
title of the surviving priests of the people. In support of this view
is the reference to shaven heads, which condition is a characteristic of
Buddhist monks, and not of Brahman priests, who leave a tail of
hair uncut at the crown and do not differ in this respect from the
laymen.
Invading Muhammadans the destroyers. — This tradition is also fully
supported by the appearance of the remains. The deep-rooted respect
paid by Hindus to images and idols of every description, even though
these be of strange gods, is as well known as is the Muhammadan’s re¬
ligious abhorrence of images ; and Pathans are amongst the most fana¬
tical of Muhammadans. Most of the large statues have been shivered
into pieces, and of the smaller ones scarcely any have escaped serious
mutilation ; and that the mutilation was deliberately done is evident
from the heads being broken off and features chipped, even when these
were in depressed positions and not readily reached ; the marks of
hatchet cuts are also visible. This same spirit for mutilating images,
* Blochmann in Statistical Acc ., Bengal, XV, p. 63. Stewart (Hist. Bengal, p.
39), puts the date at 1199 A. D.
f Loc. c it.
X Minhaj -i- Sir aj in Tabaqdt-i-Ndsin, transl by Elliot, II, p. 306.
1892.] at Mount Uren in Mungir ( Monyhyr ) district , Sfc. 21
on religions grounds, still survives amongst Muhammadans. I lately
witnessed in Upper Burma this work of destruction taking place under
very similar circumstances to what obtained at Uren, viz., a force, con¬
sisting mainly of Muhammadan (and these mostly Pathan, i. e., Afghan)
troops invading a country actively Buddhistic and hoary with the anti¬
quity of its Buddhist monuments. Although stringent orders had been
issued to respect the temples and their teeming images, it was found im¬
possible to repress the Muhammadan soldiery from clandestinely mutilat¬
ing the very numerous alabaster images of Buddha which abounded in
every village. One image would be dashed against another, and the head,
thus broken off, used as an instrument to mutilate the features of all the
other images within reach, and the heads finally thrown far away. Had
these men been altogether unrestrained, the work of destruction must
have been enormous. As further illustrating the fanatical spirit of these
Muhammadan invaders is the historical note* regarding their invasion of
Koch Bihar: the chief (Mir Jumlah) issued “ directions to destroy all
the idolatrous temples and to erect mosques in their stead. To evince
his zeal for religion, the General himself with a battle-axe broke the
celebrated image of Uarain, the principal object of worship of the
Hindus of that province.” This image is known to be the mutilated
image of Buddha, still at Koch Hajo and worshipped by Hindus under
the name of Madliab, one of the titles of Uarayana or Vishnu. And at
Uren itself, when photographing the two ornamental pillars which are
now deposited in the garden of a Muhammadan gentleman of the place,
I expressed a regret that the figures had been mutilated ; on which
the aforesaid gentleman stated that when the pillars were exhumed a
few years ago, some of the features still remained entire, but he
with his own hands completed the mutilation, as otherwise he could not
have tolerated the pillars near his dwelling.
Mediaeval Brahinanic idols similarly destroyed. — At the time of
Hiuen Tsiang’s visit to Magadha in the seventh century, although the
dominant religion was Buddhism, many Brahmanical temples with their
priests existed throughout the country. One such small Brahmanical
temple appears to have become established at Uren, at the point marked
Ho. 16 on Plate I. It was far removed from the Buddhist settlement
and it enshrined one or all of the following idols, which are still found
there : —
(1) A four (?) armed Durga.
(2) A Hara-Gauri (S'iva and Parvati).
(3) A pot-bellied god squatted in front of a palm-leaf-like
canopy ? (Ganesa).
* Stewart Ibid., p. 289.
22 L. A. Waddell — Discovery of Buddhist Remains [No. 1,
The last noted idol has an inscription in mediaeval Nagari, and all
of them are of very coarse workmanship. But here is the interesting
point, as bearing on the destruction of the Buddhist settlement : all
these Brahmanic images have been mutilated in exactly the same manner
as the Buddhist images : the heads being broken off and the features
deliberately smashed. No Hindus, nor the hill tribes, who especially
worship stones, even unsculptured, could have been the destroying
agents here. It is, therefore, only reasonable to believe, as the local
tradition relates, that the Muhammadan invaders, not discriminating
between Buddhist and Brahmanic images, mutilated both alike. Uren,
it is to be noted, must have felt the full force of the invasion, as it
lay directly in the line of route to Mungir, a stronghold in which the
“ invaders soon established themselves, as it seems to have been the
second town in Southern Bihar ”* at that period.
Conservation of Buddhist images by the Hindus. — The relatively good
state of preservation in which many of these fragments of Buddhist
images are found after the lapse of so many centuries is directly due to
the extreme veneration, in which images of every kind are held by Hindu
villagers. The numerous Buddhist images and sculptured stones, now
collected on the brick mound, marked No. 16 on Plate VI, which seems to
be the ruins of the deva temple and is now the Kali shrine of the village,
are reported to have been gathered by the Hindus from the ruins of the
garh and deposited there, where they now are treasured up. And as
further fragments from time to time are unearthed, they are added to the
collection or deposited under one or other of the pipal ( Ficus religiosa )
trees in the village, where the larger ones are worshipped by daubing
with red lead. The images of Buddha are thus worshipped under the
names of Mai ( = mother) or Chandi Mai , Parbati or Devi ( = goddess),
all of them names of S'iva’s consort — the mild benign expression of the
images being interpreted as indicating a female ; and the votive chaityas
are worshipped as lingas (phallus) . In such veneration are these images
held that I had the greatest difficulty in copying the inscriptions and
taking the photographs. The villagers at first gathered in a rather
threatening manner, and said that they would not allow their gods to
be desecrated by the hands of any person, whether Hindu or not. I ex¬
plained to them that these Buddhist images were not Hindu gods at all ;
but the villagers still persisted in saying that they had for generations
become accustomed to regard these images as the grdma-devatd (village-
gods) of the place, and they would not now give up that belief. Ul¬
timately they were somewhat appeased on my promising to touch the
* Blochmann, oc. c it.
1892.] at Mount TJren in Mungir ( Monghyr ) district, fy*c. 23
images as little as possible, and to replace them again exactly as I found
them ; but seeing that the process was a rather tedious one, a guard was
always kept at the place to see that I did not carry off any of the
stones.
Such an attitude on the part of the villagers — who are here mostly
bigoted Babhans of the Rajput caste and possibly descendants of the
original Buddhist community — has undoubtedly tended to conserve
these remains.
It must not, however, be supposed that the protection thus offered
by Hindus to Buddhist images is knowingly given out of pious regard
for Buddhism. This is not the case. In every instance the images are
cherished in the belief that they are truly Hindu gods. The real at¬
titude of Hindus towards Buddhist images is well seen at Bodh Gaya
where the Hindu pilgrims to the adjacent Brahmanical shrines may be
seen scowling and even spitting upon the Buddhist images now con¬
served there by Government. Indeed the Gaya pilgrimage, which
every good Hindu must perform is one of direct hostility to Buddhism—
the great Gaya Asura demon, whose suppression is the raison d'etre of this
pilgrimage, being none other than Buddha himself. This should be well
considered by those who believe that the adoption of Buddha as an
incarnation of Vishnu by certain of the Hindus in mediaeval times ne¬
cessarily implies that Buddhism disappeared from India by amicable
amalgamation with Brahmanism.
Concluding remarks. — In conclusion, I would draw especial attention
to the following points, the importance of which is indeed self-evident,
viz.,
1st. The necessity for Government-conservation of the hill with¬
out delay, in order to prevent further removal, by the quarriers, of
these surviving remnants of antiquity.
2nd. The desirability of thoroughly exploring the monastery
mounds and stupa-like sites, &c., as excavation will doubtless reveal
numerous remains now buried among the ruins.
3rd. That the legend of this Yaksha is not a mere Sun-myth as
supposed by Rhys Davids following Senart,* but is founded on a certain
basis of fact. Divested of its embellishments, the story resolves itself
into the conversion by Buddha of a notorious and dreaded non- Aryan
free-booter and possibly a cannibal whose reputation still survives
till the present day. In addition to the particulars already given of
these so-called ‘ demons ’, it is remarkable that the detailed account
of the ‘Yakas’, given in the Sinhalese Scriptures, is an almost exact
* Buddhism by Rhys Davids, p. 73, Lond., 1887.
24 L. A. Waddell — Lamaic Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses. [No. 1,
description of the disposition and leading traits of these wild aborigines
up to the present day.*
4th. The light thrown by the local tradition, coupled with the
appearance, age, &c. of the remains, on the probable manner in which
Buddhism became extinguished in this part of India, viz., a sudden and
complete extinction by the fierce onslaught of the Muhammadan invaders.
The Buddhist monks, crowded together in large communities and in
special buildings, surrounded with idols, must have appeared to the fana¬
tical invaders as the idolators par excellence, and as such were undoubtedly
the so-called ‘ unopposing Brahmans with shaven heads ’ of Muhammadan
liistoryfi who were massacred by the troops. On the massacre and
flighty of the monks, the destruction of the temples, &c., and the per¬
manent occupation of the country by the Muhammadan invader, it is not
surprising that Buddhism, which, for its popular existence, depends so
essentially on its monastic establishment, should have utterly dis¬
appeared. Brahmanism, on the other hand, being a much more personal
and domestic religion, with comparatively little display of its idols, could
still survive the torrent of Moslem fanaticism.
5th. The presence of so many inscriptions in the novel cuneiform
headed character is remarkable.
And lastly, additional testimony is here afforded to the marvellous
accuracy of that illustrious traveller, Hiuen Tsiang, as a geographer.
Lamaic Rosaries: their Kinds and Uses. — By L. A. Waddell, M. B.
The rosary is an essential part of a Lama’s dress ; and taking, as it
does, such a prominent part in the Lamaic ritual, it is remarkable that the
Tibetan rosary does not appear to have attracted particular notice.
As a Buddhist article the rosary is especially peculiar to the
northern school of Buddhists ; and the outcome of the esoteric teachings
of the Mahayana school, instilling belief in the potency of muttering
* “ The dwelling-place of the Yakds is not in the narakas (hell) ; .... they are
found in the earth . They marry and delight in dances, songs and other amuse -
ments ; their strength is great ; and some of them are represented as possessing
splendour and dignity,” and from what follows they are much addicted to “ intoxi¬
cating drinks .” — Spence Hardy’s ‘ Manual of Buddhism,’ p. 46.
t Loc. cit.
J Many of the fugitive monks, seem to have escaped into Nepal and Tibet. —
‘ Sketches from Nepal’ by H. A. Oldfield, M. D., II, p. 67.
25
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Laniaic Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses.
mystic spells and other strange formulas. In the very complicated
rosaries of Japan* it has attained its highest development.
The rosary is not enumerated in the southern Scriptures among
the articles necessary for a monk. But incidental mention is made by
Slnvay Yoef of a rosary with 108 beads ; and several of the Burmese
monks I have met possessed a rosary called ‘ Bodhi ’ consisting of 72
black sub-cylindrical beads which I understood, were composed of slips
of a leaf inscribed with charmed words and rolled into pellets with the
aid of lacquer or varnish.
The rosary is not conspicuous amongst Southern Buddhists ; but
amongst Tibetans, it is everywhere visible. It is also held in the hand
of the image of the patron god of Tibet — Che-re-si (Skt. Avalokitesuara) ,
And its use is not confined to the Lamas. Nearly every lay-man and
woman is possessed of a rosary on which at every opportunity they
zealously store up merit ; and they also use it for secular purposes,
like the sliding balls of the Chinese to assist in ordinary calculations :
the beads to the right of the centre-bead being called ta-thang and
registering units, while those to the left are called cliu-do and record
tens, which numbers suffice for their ordinary wants.
Description of the Rosary and its Appendages.
The Tibetan name for the rosary is {&phreng-ba,’ pronounced
theng-wa or vulgarly theng-nga, and literally means ‘ a string of beads.’
The rosary contains 108 beads of uniform size. The reason for this
special number is alleged to be merely a provision to ensure the repeti¬
tion of the sacred spell a full hundred times, and the extra beads are
added to make up for any omission of beads through absent-mindedness
during the telling process or for actual loss of beads by breakage. Che-
re-si and Do-ma have each 108 names, but it is not usual to tell these on
the rosary. And in the later Kham editions of the Lamaic Scriptures —
the ‘ 5kah Agyur,’ — the volumes have been extended from 100 to 108.
And the Burmese foot-prints of Buddha sometimes contain 108 Sub¬
divisions.]; This number is perhaps borrowed like so many other Lamaic
fashions from the Hindus, of whom the Yaishnabs possess a rosary with
108 beads.
The two ends of the string of beads, before being knotted, are passed
# Note on Buddhist Rosaries in Japan. By J. M. James, Trans. Jap. As. Soc.,
p. 173, 1881.
t The Burman : His Life and Notions I. p. 201.
J The Burman, 8fc., I. p. 201.
D
26 L. A. Waddell — Lamaic “Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses. [No. 1,
through three extra beads, the centre one of which is the largest. These
are collectively called dok-dsin (tcl'Q^3)’ rdog-Msin) or ‘ retaining or
seizing beads.’ The word is sometimes spelt mdo-/«dsin, and pronounced
dd'dsin, which means ‘ the union-holder.’ In either case the meaning
is much the same. These beads keep the proper rosary beads in position
and indicate to the teller the completion of a cycle of beads.
This triad of beads symbolises ‘ the Three Holy Ones ’ of the Bud¬
dhist Trinity, viz., Buddha, Dharma (the Word) and Sangha (the
Church, excluding the laity). The large central bead represents Bud¬
dha, while the smaller one intervening between it and the rosary beads
proper represents the Church and is called ‘ Our special Lama-monitor ’
(jr^a-g-sr), the personal Lama-guide and confessor of the Tibetan
Buddhist ; and his symbolic presence on the rosary immediately at the
end of the bead -cycle is to ensure becoming gravity and care in the act
of telling the beads, as if he were actually present.
The Geluk-pa, or ‘ reformed ’ sect of Lamas, usually have only two
beads as dok-dsin , in which case the terminal one is of much smaller
size, and the pair are considered emblematic of a vase from which the
beads spring. In such cases the extra bead is sometimes strung with
the other beads of the rosary, which latter then contains 109 beads ;
thus showing that the beads really number 111.
Attached to the rosary is a pair of strings of ten small pendant
metallic rings as counters. One of these strings is terminated by a
miniature dor-je (the thunderbolt of Indra) and the other by a small
bell — in Tantric Buddhist figures the dorje is usually associated with
a boll. The counters on the dorje-string register units of bead-cycles,
while those on the bell-string mark tens of cycles, The counters and
the ornaments of the strings are usually of silver, and inlaid with tur¬
quoise. ^
These two strings of counters are called dang-dsin grang-
fodsin) or ‘ count-keepers ; ’ but vulgarly they are known as chub-she
5cliu-bshad) or ‘the ten makers.’ They may be attached
at any part of the rosary string, but are usually attached at the 8th
and 21st bead on either side of the central bead.
They are used iu the following manner. When about to tell the
beads, the counters on each string are slid up the string. On com¬
pleting a circle of the beads, the lowest counter on the dorje-string is
slid down into contact with the dorje. And on each further cycle of
beads being told, a further counter is slid down. When the ten
have been exhausted, they are then slid up again, and one counter
is slipped down from the bell-string. The counters thus serve to regis¬
ter the utterance of 108 x 10 x 10 =10,800 prayers or mystic formulas,
1892, 3 L. A. Waddell — Lamaic Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses. 27
The number of these formulas, daily repeated in this way, is enormous.
The average daily number of repetitions may, in the earlier stages of a
Lama’s career, amount to 5,000 daily, but it depends somewhat on the
zeal and leisure of the individual. A layman may repeat daily about
five to twenty bead-cycles, but usually less. Old women are especially
pious in this way, many telling over twenty bead-cycles daily. A mid¬
dle-aged Lama friend of mine has repeated the spell of his tutelary
deity alone over 2,000,000 times. It is not uncommon to find rosaries
so worn away by the friction of so much handling that originally globu¬
lar beads have become cylindrical.
Affixed to the rosary are small odds and ends, such as a metal
toothpick, tweezer, small keys, &c.
Material of the Beads.
The materials of which the Lamaic rosaries are composed may to a
certain extent vary in costliness according to the wealth of the wearer.
The Khen-bo or abbot of a large and wealthy monastery may have rosaries
of pearl and other precious stones, and even of gold. Turner relates*
that the Grand Taslii Lama possessed rosaries of pearls, emeralds
rubies, sapphires, coral, amber, crystal and lapis-lazuli.
But the material of the rosary can only vary within rather narrow
limits. Its nature being determined by the particular sect to which the
Lama belongs and the particular deity to whom worship is to be paid.
Kinds of Rosaries.
The yellow rosary or Setheng is the special rosary of
the Ge-luk-pa or ‘ reformed school,’ also called 1 the yellow hat
sect’ ( Sha-ser ). The beads are formed from the ochrey yellow wood
of the Ghang-chhub tree literally ‘the Bodhi tree’ or tree of
supreme wisdom, which is said to grow in central China. The wood
is so deeply yellow, that it is doubtful whether it be really that of the
pipal ( Ficus religiosa ), of which was the Bodhi tree under which Gauta¬
ma attained his Buddhahood. These beads are manufactured whole¬
sale by machinery at the temple called by Tibetans Ri-wo tse-nga and by
the Chinese U-tha Shan , or ‘ The Five Peaks ’ about 200 miles South¬
west of Pekin. Hue gives a Sketch f of this romantic place but makes
no mention of its rosaries. This rosary is of two kinds, viz., the usual
# Embassy to Tibet, p 261, 1800.
f Travels in Tartary, Tibet and China. By M. IIuc. Hazlitts’ trails. I. p. 79.
28
L. A. Waddell — Larnaic Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses. [No. I,
form of spherical beads about the size of a pea, and a less common form
of lozenge-shaped perforated discs about the size of a sixpence. This
rosary may be used for all kinds of worship, including that of the
furies.
The Bo-dhi-tse rosary is the one chiefly in use among the
Nying-ma-pa, or ‘ old, (i. e., unreformed) school’ of Lamas, also called the
Shd-mar or ‘ red-hat sect.’ It is remarkable that its name also seeks
to associate it with the Bodlii tree, but its beads are certainly not
derived from the Ficus family. Its beads are the rough brown seeds of
a tree which grows in the outer Himalayas. This rosary can be used
for all kinds of worship, and may also be used by the Ge-luk-pa in the
worship of the fiercer deities.
The white rosary Tungtheng (strQyc;-), consists of cylindrical
perforated discs of the conch shell (Tib. tung ), and is specially
used in the worship of Che-re-si — the usual form of whose image holds
a white rosary in the upper right hand. This is the special rosary
of nuns.
The rosary of plain crystal or uncoloured glass beads is also peculiar
to Cheresi.
The red sandal-wood rosary Tsen-den-mar theng
consists of perforated discs of red sandal-wood ( Adenanthera pavonina )
or other wood of a similar appearance. It is used only in the worship of
the fierce deity Tam-din (Skt. Hayagriva ) a special protector of Lamaism.
The coral rosary — Chi-m-theng (§'&') — is also used for Tam-din,
and by the Nyingmapa sects for their wizard-saint Padma Sambhava’s
worship. Coral being so expensive, red beads of glass or composition
are in general use instead. With this rosary, it is usual to have the
counters of turquoise or blue beads.
The rosary, formed of discs of the human skull — the thb-theng
— is especially used for the worship of Dorje-jik-che (Skt.
Yama) one of the forms of the King of the Dead, It is usually inserted
within the Bo-dhi-tse or other ordinary rosary ; and it frequently has
its discs symmetrically divided by 4 large Rak-slia beads into 4 series,
one of these beads forming the central bead. There is no rosary formed
of finger bones, as has been sometimes stated.
° , ^ “V - X
The ‘elephant-stone’ rosary — Bang -chhen- do-pa ) — is
prepared from a porous bony-like concretion, which is sometimes found
in the stomach of the elephant. It also, being suggestive of bone, is used
in worship of Yama. The real material, however, being extremely
scarce and expensive, a substitute is usually had in beads made from the
fibrous root of the bow-bambu ( Zhu-shing ) which has on section a struc-
29
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Lamaic Rosaries : thier Kinds and Uses.
ture very like the stomacli-stone, and its name also means ‘ stomach or
digestion’ as well as ‘ bow.’
The rak-sha rosary formed of the large brown warty seeds
of the Elceocarpus Janitrus, is specially used by the Nyingmapa Lamas in
the worship of the fierce deities and demons. The seeds of this
tree are normally five-lobed, and it is interesting from a botanical point
of view to find, how relatively frequent is the occurrence of six lobes.
Such abnormal seeds are highly prized by the Tibetans as being the off¬
spring of the miraculous seeds of Padma Sambliava’s rosary — the legend
stating that the saint’s rosary string broke while at his Halashi hermitage
in Nepal, and several of the detached beads remained unpicked up, and
from these have resulted the six-lobed seeds. The demand for such un¬
common seeds being great, it is astonishing how many of them are
forthcoming to diligent search. This rosary is also commonly used by
the indigenous Bon-po priests, and it is identical with the rosary of the
Sivaic Hindus — the rudraksha = Rudra’s, i. e., fierce Siva’s
eyes), from which the Tibetan name of rak-sha is supposed to be derived.
The Nang-ga pa-ni rosary is only used for the worship of Nam-se,
the God of Wealth (Skt. Kubera) ; and by the Ngak-pa or wizards in
their mystical incantations. It consists of glossy jet-black nuts about
the size of a hazel, but of the shape of small horse chesnuts. These are
the seeds of the Lung-thang tree which grows in the sub-tropical forests
of the S. E. Himalayas. They are emblematic of the eyes of the Garuda
bird, the chief assistant of Vajra-pani (Jupiter) and the great enemy of
snakes — hence is supposed to be derived the Sanskritic name of the
beads, from ndga, a serpent. Its use in the worship of the God of
Wealth is noteworthy in the association of snakes — the mythological
guardians of treasure — with the idea of wealth.
The rosary of snake-spines (vertebrae) is only used by the sorcerers
(N gak-pa) for purposes of sorcery and divination. The string contains
about fifty vertebrae.
The complexion of the god or goddess to be worshipped also de¬
termines sometimes the colour of the rosary-beads. Thus a turquoise
rosary is occasionally used in the worship of the popular goddess Do-ma
who is of a bluish green complexion. A red rosary with red Tam-din,
a yellow with yellow Jam-yang ; and Nam-se who is of a golden yellow
colour is worshipped wdth an amber-rosary.
The rosaries of the laity are composed of any sort of bead accord¬
ing to the taste and wealth of the owner. They are mostly of glass
beads of various colours, and the same rosary contains beads of a variety
of sizes and colours interspersed with coral, amber, turquoise, &c., vide
The number of beads is the same as with the Lamas, but each of the
30
L. A. Waddell — Lamaic Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses. [No. 1,
counter strings are usually terminated by a dorje : both strings recording
only units of cycles, which suffice for the smaller amount of bead-telling
done by the laity.
Mode of Telling the Beads.
When not in use the rosary is wound round the right wrist like a
bracelet, or worn around the neck with the knotted end uppermost.
The act of telling the beads is called tang-che which literally means
* to purr ’ like a cat, and the muttering of the prayers is rather sugges¬
tive of this sound.
In telling the beads the right hand is passed through the rosary,
which is allowed to hang freely down with the knotted end upwards.
The hand with the thumb upwards is then usually carried to the breast
and held there stationary during the recital. On pronouncing the
initial word ‘ Ora ’ the first bead resting on the knuckle is grasped by
raising the thumb and quickly depressing its tip to seize the bead against
the outer part of the 2nd joiut of the index finger. During the rest of
the sentence the bead, still grasped between the thumb and index finger,
is gently revolved to the right, and on conclusion of the sentence is
dropped down the palm-side of the string. Then with another ‘ Ora ’
the next bead is seized and treated in like manner, and so on throughout
the circle.
On concluding each cycle of the beads, it is usual to finger each of
the three ‘ keeper-beads,’ saying respectively, ‘ Ora ! ’ ‘Ah!’ ‘ Hung ! ’
The Mystic Formulas for the Beads,
The mystic formulas for the beads follow the prayer properly so-
called, and are believed to contain the essence of the formal prayer, and
to act as powerful spells. They are of a Sanskritic nature, usually con¬
taining the name of the deity addressed, but are more or less unintelli¬
gible to the worshipper.
The formula used at any particular time varies according to the
particular deity being worshipped. But the one most frequently used by
the individual Lama is that of his own iji-dam or tutelary deity, which
varies according to the sect to which the Lama belongs.
The formulas most frequently used are shown in the following
table : —
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Lcimaic Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses.
31
* It is noticable that the Tibetans habitually transliterate the Sanskrit j by the
softer palatal sibilant ds.
32 L. A. Waddell — Lamaic Rosaries : their Kinds and Uses. [No. 1,
* The repetition of this spell ad infinitum forms one of the earliest elocution
exercises of the boy-pupil.
1892.]
L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddha s death.
33
The laity, through want of knowledge, seldom use with their rosaries
other than the well known Lamaic formula iOm! ma-ni pe-me hung',
L e., ‘Hail! to the Jewel in the lotus! Hung.’ This refers to the
Bodhisatwa Cheresi (Skt. Padma-pani ), the patron-god of Tibet, who,
like Buddha, is usually represented as seated or standing within a lotus-
flower, and who is believed to have been born from such a flower. This
formula is of comparatively modern origin, first appearing in the
legendary history (&lcah bum) of king Srong-tsan-gam-bo, which was
one of the so-called ‘ hidden ’ treatises, and probably written about the
twelfth or fourteenth century A. D. or later. With this formula, which
is peculiar to Tibet, may be compared the Chinese and Japanese spells
‘ Ndmo Butsu ' ( = Skt. Namo Buddhaya, i. e., Salutation to Buddha !)
and Ndmo O-mi-to Fu ( = Skt. Namo Amitabhaya, i. e., Salutation to
The Boundless Light, - the fictitious Buddha of the Western Paradise.)
The Burmese, so far as I have seen, seem to use their rosary merely for
repeating the names of the Buddha Trinity viz., 1 Phra ’ or Buddha,
‘Tara’ or Dharma and Sangha. And the number of beads in their
rosary is a multiple of 3 X 3 as with the Lamas. On completing the
cycle the central bead is fingered with the pessimistic formula ‘ Anitsa,
Dukha, Anatha.’
In conclusion may be noted the frequent use of the terms ‘ Rin-
chhen theng-wa ’ and ‘ Norbu theng-waf i. e., ‘ the Precious Rosary ’
and ‘ the Jewelled Rosary ’ as the titles of anthological books contain¬
ing choice extracts, especially from sacred literature.
The ‘ Tsam-chho-dung ’ (rtsa-mchhog-grong*) of the Lamas, and their
very erroneous identification of the site of Buddha's death. — By L. A.
Waddell, M. B.
In conversations some years ago with Lamas and lay Buddhists at
Darjiling, I was surprised to hear that Asam contained a most holy
place of Buddhist pilgrimage called ‘ Tsam-cliho-dung ,’ which, it was
alleged, next to the great temple of Dorje-denf (Sanskrit Vajrdsana ) at
Bodh Gaya, was the most holy spot a Buddhist could visit. Asam is
usually regarded as being far beyond the limits of the Buddhist Holy
Land, -and the Chinese pilgrims Pa Hian and Hiuen Tsiang in the fifth
and seventh centuries of our era, to whom we are mainly indebted for our
knowledge of ancient Buddhist geography, not only do not mention any
* II
t Vl'GSV rdo-rje-^dan.
£
34
L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddha's death.
[No. 1,
holy site in Asam, but Hiuen Tsiang, who visited Gauhati at the invita¬
tion of the king of Kamrup, positively notes the absence of Buddhist
buildings in Asam.* Sir W. Hunter also in his statistical account of
Asam statesf that 4 there are now no traces of Buddhism’ in Asam.
I therefore felt curious to learn further particulars of this impor¬
tant site in Asam, which had apparently been overlooked by geographers.
In Jiischke’s Tibetan Dictionaiy* I found 4 rtsa-mckhog-grong ’ de¬
fined as a 44 town in West Asam where Buddha died,” and this state¬
ment, it is noted, is given on the authority of the 4 Gyalrabs ’, a vernacu¬
lar history of Tibet. Csoma de Koros also notes§ that “ the death of
Sliakya, as generally stated in the Tibetan books, happened in Asam
near the city of Kusa or Cama-rupa (Kamrup).”
Here then was a clue to the mystery. Buddha’s death, it is well
known, occurred between two sal trees near Kusinagara or Kusanagara
in the Nortli-West Provinces of India, thirty-five miles east of Gorakhpur
and about one hundred and twenty miles N. N. E. of Benares ; and the
site has been fully identified by Sir A. Cunningham || and others from
the very full descriptions given by Hiuen Tsiang and Fa Hian. The
name Kusanagara means 4 the town of Kusa grass^[ ’ ; and as the
early Lama missionaries in their translation of the Bauddha Scriptures
habitually translated all the Sanskrit and Pali names literally into
Tibetan, Kusanagara was rendered in the 4 6Kah-/igyur ’ (the Tibetan
version) as Vtsa-mchhog-grong,’ from 4 rtsa-mchhog,’ kusa grass +
4 grong ’ a town ( = Skt. nagara).
Now, near the north bank of the Brahmaputra, almost opposite
Gauhati, the ancient capital of Kamrup, is, I find, an old village named
Sdl-Kusa, and it lies on the road between Gauhati and Dewangiri, one
of the most frequented passes into Bhotan and Tibet. With their
extremely scanty knowledge of Indian geography the Lamas evidently
concluded that this 4 town of Sdl-Kusa ’ was the 4 town of Kusa,’ where
Buddha entered into nirvana between the two sal trees — seeing that
the word sal was also incorporated with the equivalent of 4 Tsam-chlio-
dung ’, and that in the neighbourhood was the holy hill of Hajo, where,
# Si-yu-Tci, trans. by Beal, II, p, 196.
f I. p. 39.
t p. 437.
§ Asiatic Researches, XX, p. 295.
H Arch. Surv. India Repts., 1, 76; XVII, 55 &c.
IT Eusa grass ( Poa cynosuroides ), the sacrificial grass of the Hindus, is also prized
by the Buddhists on account of its having formed the cushion on which the Bod-
dhisattva sat under the Bodhi tree. It is also used as a broom in Lamaic temples and
as an altar decoration associated with peacock’s feathers in the pumpa or holy water
vase*
1892.]
85
L. A. Waddell — On the site af Buddha s death.
as will be seen hereafter, there probably existed at that time some
Buddhist remains.
No description of this Buddhist site seems to be on record, except
a very brief note by Col. Dalton* on the modern Hindu temple of Hajo,
which shrines a Buddhist image. As I have had an opportunity of
visiting the site, and enjoyed the rare advantage of being conducted
over it by a Khams-pa Lama, who chanced to be on the spot, and
who had previously visited the site several times and possessed the
traditional stories regarding it, I beg to present the following brief
description of the site to the Society, in illustration of how the Lamas,
originally misled by an identity of name, have subsequently clothed the
neighbourhood with a legendary dress in keeping with the story of
Buddha’s death, and how this place, with its various associated holy spots
is now implicitly believed by the pilgrims to be the real site of Buddha’s
parinirvdna. And in this belief, undeterred by the intemperate heat of
the plains, Buddhist pilgrims from all parts of Bhotan, Tibet and even
from Ladak and south-western China visit these spots and carry oft
scrapings of the rocks and the soil in the neighbourhood, treasuring up
this precious dust in amulets, and for placing beside their dead body, as
saving from dire calamities during life and from transmigration into
lower animals hereafter. Authentic specimens of this dust, I was in¬
formed, commanded in Tibet high prices from the more wealthy residents,
who had personally been unable to undertake the pilgrimage.
The Hajo hill, or rather group of hills, where is situated, according
to the current tradition of the Lamas, the spot where Buddha ‘ was de¬
livered from pain,’ lies to the north (right) bank of the Brahmaputra
about nine miles north-west from Gfauhati (Kamrup), north latitude 26°
11' 18" and east long. 91° 47' 26", and four or five miles north of Sdl-Kusa.
The hill rises directly from the plain, forming a strikingly bold and pic¬
turesque mass ; and it is a testimony to its natural beauty to find that
the hill has attracted the veneration of people of all religious denomina¬
tions. The semi-aboriginal Mech and Koch worship it as a deity under
the name of Hajo, which means in their vernacular ‘ the hill.’ The
Buddhists formerly occupied one of the hillocks, but are now displaced
by the Brahmans who restored the temple, which is now one of the most
frequented Hindu temples in Asam. The Muhammadans also have
crowned the summit of the highest peak with a masjid.
The cluster of hills presents a very symmetrical appearance as seen
from a distance, forming a bold swelling mass culminating in three tri¬
dent-like peaks, the central one of which is pre-eminent and is regarded
by the Buddhists as emblematic of Buddha. The high peaks on either
* J. A. S. B, 1855, LXXI, p. 8.
36 L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddha s death. [No. I,
side of this are identified with Buddha’s two chief disciples, viz., Sari-
putra and Maudgalaputra. This triad of peaks is seen from a great
distance, and it is only on near approach that the smaller hillocks are
observed. These latter number about sixteen and are called Nc-ten chu -
du* or ‘ the sixteen disciples ’ of Buddha.
The most holy site, according to the Buddhists, is a bare flattisli
shoulder of rock, about eight yards in diameter, situated at the north-west
base of the hill. This is stated to be the Si-wa tsha-gi tnr-dof or ‘ the
pyre of the cool grove ’ where Buddha died, and where his body was cre¬
mated. The rock here bears several roughly cut inscriptions in Tibetan
characters of the mystic sentences ‘ Om mani padme hung,’ ‘ 0?n ah
hung ,’ ( Om ’ &c., and coloured rags torn from the vestments of the pil¬
grims are tied to the bushes in the neighbourhood. The Hindus have
carved here on the rock a figure of the four-armed Vishnu, which the
Brahman priests call Bhuhi, or 1 the washerwoman of the gods and the
rock they call ‘ Letai dhupinir pat.’
It is worthy of note that the Lamas, for the benefit of the resident
population of Tibet have made copies of this spot in at least four places
in Tibet, viz., at : —
(I). Ra-gyab,X in the south-east outskirts of Lhasa city.
(II). Pha-pong kha,§ in the north suburbs of Lhasa.
(III) . Phur-mo chhe, || about twelve miles to the north-east of
Tashilhunpo.
(IV) . She-dag.%
These sites were consecrated by placing on them a piece of rock
brought from this Asam site, now under report ; but the latter spot
bears the distinctive prefix of Gya-gar or Indian, implying that it is the
original and genuine site.
A high cliff, close to the west of this spot, is called ‘ the vulture’s
mound hill,’** as in Tibet vultures usually frequent the neighbourhood
of the tur-dd cemeteries.
A short distance beyond this spot, in the jungle, is a roughly hewn
stone basin, about six feet in diameter, called by the Lamas, Sang-gydmd
ho-ho, or the pot in which the Sin-je— the death-demons— boil the heads
of the damned. The Brahmans, on the other hand, assert that it is
the bowl in which S'iva or Adi-purusha brewed his potion of lust-excit-
* II
-.6
t ^\<jr*r&<jre'5VHS it
t
5 srqc'pu; |)
II SVafaS l|
f IT
** it
1892.]
37
L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddha s death.
ing Indian liemp, and they point to its green (confervoid) watery
contents in proof of this. They also state that a snake inhabits the
depths of the bowl ; but it was certainly absent at the time of my
visit.
Advancing along the pathway, leading up-hill, we pass a few columnar
masses of rock lying near the path, which are pointed to as fragments of
Buddha’s staff*, with which he unearthed this monster bowl.
Climbing up the hill we reach the temple of Kedaranath, which is
approached by a very steep roughly paved causeway. At the entrance
is a long inscription in granite in old Bengali characters, those being
the characters adopted by the Asamese. Adjoining this temple is the
shrine of Kamalesvar or 1 the Lord of the lotus.’ Here is a tank called
by the Lamas ‘ Tsho mani bhadra ’ f or ‘ the lake of the notable
gem ’ ; and they state that many waters-sprites ( Ncigds , serpents or
dragons) came out of this pond on the approach of Buddha and presented
him with jewels. A small cell by the side of this pond is said to be the
place where Buddha set down a mass of butter which had been brought
to him as a gift, and the stone linga and yoni (phallus and its counter¬
part), now shrined here by the Hindus, are pointed to as being their
petrified butter.
Crowning the summit of the hill is a large masjid built by Lutf-
ullah, a native of Shiraz, in the reign of the emperor Shah Jahan, in
1656 A. D. It contains the following Persian inscription : —
y fjjf
^ ^ •»
j; kiw J ii,6T — +x> )y — y'"-'0 J
| y* i ^y*o CIjL }j tS l &)
£
J J 0^/0 ya* % JJ+*-'0 t &&
4^/0^ ^ lAj l*V0
Cl
| ♦ y &bu> ^IvA/Oj cs* <xllf &D <?dJl
* gE)'Qr»X || t *hlT3f ||
[X The text here is corrupt. Ed.]
38
[No. 1,
L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddlia s death.
Translation ,*
[la the time of the Governorship of the just Sultan, the monarch
of the world and the prince of religion,
Abu-l-Ghazi Shuja’u-d-din Muhammad, the sovereign and son of a
sovereign, an auspicious ruler,
When Lutfullah of Shiraz founded a sacred Masjid, beautiful like
Paradise,
In the peaceful town of Shuja’-abad well known in all countries, ...
At the time when the standards were marching towards Bengal with
glory and grandeur.
May this house of religion be ever crowded (with worshippers ) for
the sake of the sanctity of .
May this august foundation in stone be ever firm by the blessings
of Ni’amatullali.
When Reason sought for the year of the date of that foundation, a
voice came : — “ Jail Shud Khanah-i-din ” (the house of religion became
resplendent).
Be it not concealed to the minds of the seekers of information
that Lutfullah, the humblest devotee of the threshold, the disciple and
believer of Shah Ni’amatullah, brought this grand Masjid to completion,
in the reign of His Majesty the Second Sahibqiran, Shahjahan, the
victorious emperor, in the month of the blessed Ramazan, in the year
1067 Hijrah.]
A detached conical hillock, about 300 feet above the plain, lying about
half a mile to the north-east of the hill, and now crowned by the Hindu
temple of Madliavaf, is identified with the great chaitya or Ghhoten
chhen-boX , which was erected over the cremated relics of the Tatha-
gatha’s body.
The present shrine of the temple seems to be the original shrine of
an older Buddhist temple, which, according to both Buddhist and
Asamese tradition, formerly existed here — the upper portion only is
modern. Col. Dalton has described§ the general details of this build¬
ing, and he states, “ The Brahmans call the object of worship Madhab ,
“ the Buddhists call it Mahamuni, the great sage. It is in fact simply a
“ colossal image of Buddha in stone. Its modern votaries have, to conceal
[* The translation has been supplied by Maulvi Abdul Hak Abid, B. A., of the
Calcutta Madrasah. Ed.]
t \
§ loc • cit.
1892.]
L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddha's death.
39
“ mutilation, given it a pair of silver goggle-eyes and a hooked gilt silver-
“ ed nose and the form is concealed from view by cloths and chaplets of
“ flowers ; but remove these and there is no doubt of the image having
“ been intended for the ‘ ruler of all, the propitious, the asylum of cle-
“ mency, the all- wise, the lotus-eyed comprehensive Buddha.’ ”
This large image of Buddha is called by the more learned Lama- visi¬
tors Munir Muni Mahamuni , i. e., ‘ the Sage of Sages The Great Sage.’
It is the original image of the shrine, and is stated by the Brahmanic
priests, who call it Mddhab , to be of divine origin and an actual embodi¬
ment or avatar of the god, in contra-distinction to the other images which
are called mere ‘ murtis ’ or hand-fashioned copies of typical forms of the
respective gods represented. This may merely mean that the Brahmans
found this image here, while the others were brought from the neigh¬
bourhood or elsewhere. What seems to be the history of the mutilation
of this image is found in the account of the invasion of the Koch king¬
dom of Lower Asam by the Musalmans under Mir Jumlah in 1661 A. D.
This chief issued “ directions to destroy all the idolatrous temples and
“ to erect mosques in their stead . To evince his zeal for
“ religion, the General himself, with a battle-axe broke the celebrated
(t image of Narain, the principal object of worship of the Hindus of
“ that province.”* Narayana is one of the names of Madhab and a
patronymic of the Koch raja’s ; and Hajo was a seat of the Koch rajas.
And it was at Hajo that Mir Jumla took the Koch king prisoner, f
The other images, not mentioned by Dalton, but which must have
existed at the time of his visit, are also of stone and are placed on
either side of the large image. They are four in number and are of con¬
siderable size. According to the Lama-pilgrims they are all Buddhist
images; but the crypt was so dimly lit, and the images so enveloped in
clothes and wreaths of flowers that I could not distinguish their specific
characters, with the exception of the head and peculiar trident of the
first, and the head of the second, which were characteristic and justified
their recognized names, viz. : —
No. 1. — Ogyen Guru to the left of Mahamuni.
,, 2. — Dorje DolbX to the right of ,,
,, 3. — Shahya Thuba ,, ,, ,, No. 2.
,, 4. — ‘ Sencha' Muni. ,, ,, ,, „ 3.
Although Hindu priests, as a rule, are not very methodical in their
bestowal of names upon the images which they have appropriated from
* Stewart’s History of Bengal , p. 289.
f Beveridge, Cal. Review July 1890 p. 12.
40
L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddhas death,
[No. 1,
Buddhist ruins, still I here give the Brahmanical names as reported by
the attendant priests, as, this being a wealthy temple, the priests were
more learned than usual, and the names should give some idea of the
nature of the images. After stating that the Buddhist pilgrims gave
the above-noted names to the images, these priests said that the Brah¬
manical names were as follows, which I give in the order of the previous
list : —
No. 1. Dwitiya Madhaber murti.
No. 2. Lai Kanaiya Bankat Biharer murti.
No. 3. Basu Deber murti.
No. 4. Hayagriber murti.
In the vestibule are lotus ornamentations and several articles of the
usual paraphernalia of a Buddhist temple including the following: — A
pyramidal framework or wheeless car like the Tibetan Ghhang-ga chu -
tuJc , with lion figures at the corners of each tier, such as is used to seat
the image of a demon which is to be carried beyond the precincts of
the temple and there thrown away. The present frame is used by the
priests of this temple to parade in the open air one of the smaller images
of the shrine ( ? Hayagriva), but the image is again returned to the
shrine. Above this throne is stretched a canopy called by the Lamas
Nam-yul. It contains the figure of an 8-petal led lotus flower and has,
as is customary, a dependant red fringe. On either side is hung a
huge closed umbrella. These articles have been in the temple from time
immemorial.
Of the external decorations of the temple, the row of sculptured
elephants along the basement, evidently a portion of the old Buddhist
temple, has been figured by Col. Dalton in the paper above referred to ;
and is identical with the decorative style of the Kylas cave temple of
Ellora figured by Fergusson in plate XV of his ‘ Gave Temples ’. The
upper walls are covered with sculptured figures nearly life size. The
ten avatdras of Vishnu are represented with Buddha as the ninth.
The remaining figures are of a rather nondescript character, but they
are mostly male, and nearly every figure carries a trident ( trisula ) — the
hhatam of the Buddhists. The Lamas state that these figures were for¬
merly inside the temple, but that Buddha ejected them. And it is
stated that the temple was built in one night by Jo-wo gye-bo Bish-wa-
Karma* the V ulcan of the Hindus and Buddhists.
Attached to the temple is a colony of Natl or dancing girls, f
t “ Asam, or at least the north-east of Bengal (i e., Kamrup) seems to have
boon in a great degree the source from which the Tantrica and Sakta corruptions
1892.]
L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddha's death .
41
who are supported out of the funds of the temple, and who on the numer¬
ous feast days dance naked in a room adjoining the shrine. These orgies
are part of the Shakti worship so peculiar to Kamrup, but nowhere is it so
grossly conducted as at this temple.* The Nati and the idol-car are also
conspicuous at the degenerate Buddhist temple of Jagannath at Puri.
At the eastern base of the hillock, on which this temple stands, is a
fine large tank, called by the Lamas Yon-chhah tshof , or ‘ the lake of
excellent water.’ This pond, it is said, was made by Buddha with one
prod of his staff, when searching for the huge bowl already described
which he unearthed here. This pond is also said to be tenanted by
fearful monsters.
I have been unable to ascertain positively whether any Buddhist
building existed here previous to the Lamas’ fixing on the site as the
Kusanagara of Buddha’s death. Certainly no monastery existed here at
the time of Hiuen Tsiang’s visit to the Kamrup (Gauhati) court in the
seventh century A. D., for he says of this country that ‘ the people have
“no faith in Buddha, hence from the time when Buddha appeared in the
“ world even down to the present time there never as yet has been built
“ one Sanghdrama as a place for the priests to assemble. The refer¬
ence which Taranath§ makes to the great stupa of Kusanagara as being
situated here, in Kamrup, was taken from report and thus would
merely show that the present Lama-tradition was current during his
time. Any cliaitya or other Buddhist building would seem to have been
subsequent to the seventh century ; and in all probability marked a
site visited by the great mediteval apostle of Lamaism, Guru Rimbochhe
or Padma Sambhava. The different accounts of this great teacher’s
wanderings vary considerably, but he is generally credited in the
Padma Kahthang and elsewhere with having traversed most of the
country between Lower Asam and Tibet. There is no evidence of
Buddha having visited Asam. And in this view it is to be noted
that the Bhotan Lamas call the chief image of this shrine Ndmo Guru
or ‘ The Teacher,’ one of the epithets of Padma Sambhava. And the
images on either side of it are also those of Padma Sambhava, viz.,
‘ Ogyen Guru,' a mild form, and Dorje Dol'd, a demoniacal form of this saint.
Further, the chief of 1 the eight Sages ’ or rig-dsin || ( i . e., receptacle of
knowledge) of the Lamas is named Hungkara; and a common title
of the religion of the Vedas and Puranas proceeded.” — H. H. Wilson, Preface to
Vishnu Purdna.
* They have their counterpart in the lepoSouAoi of the Greek Strabo VIII, 6 p. 20.
t t op. dt.
§ Vassilief’s Le Bouddisme , trad, du Rnsse par M. G. A. Comm©, p. 44,
II
T
42
L. A. Waddell — On the site of Buddha s death.
[No. 1,
for Padma Sambhava is ‘ the great Rig-dsin while Hung is the usual
symbolic term for him. And a very common Lamaic hymn connects
Hungkara with this site, viz., — “ In the wondrous great shrine of ‘ the
Pastern Pyre of the Cool-grove ’ dwells the rigdsin Hungkara (or Lo-
pon Hungkara). Shower on us thy blessings ! Come Guru ! Come demi¬
gods ! Come fairies ! Come ! ” No local mention is made of the especial
saint of Bhotan, viz., Zhab tung Nga-wang Nam-gyal,* which might
have been expected, had he entered Bhotan by this route.
The form of Buddhism here represented is of the highly Tantrik and
demoniacal kind, propagated by Padma Sambhava and now existing
n the adjoining country of Bhotan. Even this mild form of the image
of Ogyen Guru has decapitated human heads strung on to his trident.
The second image is of a more demoniacal kind. The third image is, of
course, Shakya Muni (Buddha). The fourth image, from its Brah-
manical name, is Tam-din (Skt. Hayagriva) , one of the fiercest forms of
demigods and an especial protector of Lamaism. The trident is every¬
where conspicuous in the hands of the sculptured figures on the walls,
and Shakti rites are more pronounced here than in any other place in
Northern India. f It seems therefore quite possible that a visit to
Xamrup, as well as Kashmir, and the mystic traditions of his own land
— Udyana (Tib. Ogyen) — may have accounted for the excessively Tantrik
form of Buddhism professed and taught by Padma Sambhava.
It is also remarkable to find that the high-priest of the Hajo
temple, in common with the other high-priests in Kamrup, is called
Dalail, — a title which is usually stated to have been conferred on the fifth
Grand Lama of Lhasa by a Mongolian emperor in the seventeenth century
A. D. ; but the Tibetan equivalent of this title, viz., Gyd-tsho or ‘ ocean ’,
is known to have been used by grand Lamas previously. As, however, the
word is Mongolian, it is curious to find it naturalized here and spon¬
taneously used by Brahmans. It seems also to be the title of village-
headman in the adjoining Garo hills. The dalai of this temple is a
married man, but the office is not hereditary. He is elected by the local
priests from amongst their number, and holds office till death. He
resides at the foot of the hill, below the 'temple, in a large house, the
exterior of which is profusely decorated with the skulls of wild buffalo,
wild pig, deer, and other big game, &c., like the house of an Indo-
Chinese chieftain.
* <3WV? 5W 5W ||
■f Dancing girls appear to figure to some extent in certain Lamaic ceremonies in
Bhotan, vide Turner’s ‘ Embassy to Tibet’, p. 32.
f He writes his title vfcr.
1892.] M. M. Chakravarti — Troy weights of ancient Orissa.
43
Troy weights and General currency of ancient Orissa. — By Babu M. M.
Chakravarti, Subordinate Executive Service of Bengal.
Little is known regarding the measures of weights of gold and
silver, or of the coins and currency in use in Orissa at the time of Hindu
kings. Sterling incidentally mentions certain weights in his lucid
history of Orissa. But Dr. Hunter was the first to apply European
criticism to fixid out the relations between g'old, silver and other market¬
able articles of Orissa.* As an intelligent attempt to clear up an ex¬
tremely obscure question, his History of Orissa deserves all praise. It
was published in 1872. Since then no one has tried to tread in his foot¬
steps, probably owing to the absence of any reliable data. The following
facts, therefore, are published in the hope that some ripe scholar may be
induced to take up the threads and weave them into a harmonious whole.
My information is chiefly derived from “ Madala Panji ” or the
Chronicle of the Temple of Jagannath at Puri. This work mentions the
various measures in use, and furnishes details which indirectly reveal
the proportions between the measures. The problem is to convert them
into modern equivalents, otherwise they will not be properly understood.
Here the greatest difficulty arises. Hot much help is obtainable from
contemporary Muhammadan historians. Orissa was one of the last
kingdoms to come under the rule of the Pathans and Mughals, and even
then, being an out-of-the-way region, attracted little notice.
The Madala Panji was begun after the erection of the present
temple of Jagannath, the generally accejited date of which is 1197-98
A. D. It does not mention the names and relations of the measures in
use before this time. Probably they were the same which we find later
on. Orissa appears to have formed a part of Kalinga, and was often the
battle-field between the emperors of northern Hindustan and kings of
Kalinga. Kalinga was essentially a kingdom of the Deccan ; and the
Deccan measures must have prevailed in Orissa.
Chorgangaf conquered Orissa in the beginning of the 12th century,
and founded the well-known Gangavamsa. He came from far South,
and the system in force in S. India came into full operation in Orissa
during the reigns of his descendants.
According to the Madala Panji, Ananga Bhima Deva of this dynasty
built the present temple of Jagannath, and liberally endowed it with
* History of Orissa, Yol. T, ch. Y, notes 309 and 337.
[f His Identity is uncertain, see Sewell’s Sketch of the Dynasties of S. India , pp. 18,
19,44,51,07. Ed.]
44 M. M. Ohakravarti — Troy weights of ancient Orissa. [No. 1,
ornaments and furniture. In giving a description of these endowments,
the chronicle says : —
W ^ f?T ^«TT W W Vi fi V
fiTB^ <?*T ^ HT *= cT ^TT *TT ? W 3GT fH
V W* ^ I ^ t K f iir W ^IT'infi t^r BT * *tt ^
^ SNtrc i?T ^ Vl W ^ ^ W *** «F ^T *><>** cf I
“ All these (ornaments) in gold and silver — 73 pieces. Gold work
55 pieces = 859 pals of gold, or at the rate of pala measure used for gifts
and ceremonies, viz., 1 pala = 8 marhas, = 6872 marhas. Silver work
18 pieces = 135 palas, or at the rate of 8 marhas per pala, = 1080 marhas
(in weight) of silver, or at the rate of 1 marha of gold = 5 marhas of
silver, = 216 marhas of gold. Total (in weight), gold and silver work
8073 marhas, or (in value), gold 7088 marhas.”
^ Trf^ TTf^ i?r 1 1 *ffaT
“For net 62 turns (of worship), at the rate of 3 chinas (per turn)
18 marhas, 6 chinas.”
These two extracts suffice to show the following proportions : —
10 chinas = 1 marha
80 ,, =8 ,, =1 pala.
A measure, very similar to this, still continues in the interior of the
Puri District : —
4 ratis = 1 china
40 ,, =10 ,, =1 marha
80 „ = 20 „ = 2 „ =1 tola.
For the highest weight, we have here a tola. But a pala is an old
weight found in Manu and the Atharva Parisishtha.* In the Institutes
of Manu, the measures of gold are stated to be
5 ratis = 1 masha
80 ,, = 16 ,, =1 suvarna (agrees with tola)
320 ,, = 64 ,, =4 ,, =1 pala or nislika (agrees
with the pala of Madala Panji).
The coins of ancient India were used not merely as an exchange for
articles, but as weights also. Their study therefore, throws much light
on the troy measures. In South India, of which Orissa was to all
intents and purposes a part, the fan am (xfH[ of Lilavati) was the standard
coin of gold, lhe chinam appears to be another name of fanam, both
being equal to 4 ratis. One rati is generally accepted to be equal to
1*75 grains on the average. f A standard fanam or chinam is, there-
# Quoted in Thomas’ Chronicles of the Pathan kings of Delhi, page 221, note 1.
t This ratio is accepted by Thomas and General Cunningham. But Mr. Smith
differs (see his article in this Journal, Yol. LIII, of 1881, pages 14G-7).
1892.1 M. M. Chakravarti — Troy weights of ancient Orissa.
45
fore, equal to 7 grains. All old fanams approach this weight closely,
varying from 6 to 7'5.* * * § A marha, which is ten times a chinam, would,
therefore, be 70 grains iu standard weight. Several old coins have been
found approaching this weight. Sir W. Elliot mentions one coin of S.
India weighing 66'9 grains. f Mr. Fleet has described six coins of
E. Ohalukya kings varying from 65 9 to 66‘8.£ In another essay I hope
to show that Chorganga, the founder of the Gangavamsa dynasty of
Orissa, is connected with the E. Ohalukya and Chola dynasties of the
1 1th century A, D. The coins, described by Mr. Fleet, would seem to
be the marlias of the Madala Panji. The difference of 4 to 5 grains is
due partly to wear and tear, but chiefly to the fact that fanams, which
formed the unit of measurement, were generally in actual weight 6‘5 to
6 ‘75 grains.
That a coin approaching to 70 grains in wt., was in use in S. India
is apparent from the cotemporaneous Muhammadan records. ’Alauddin
Muhammad Shall was the first to invade the Deccan, and according to Mir
Khusru, he contemplated the introduction of a new coin of 140 grains,
a weight exactly double the standard weight of a marha § His successor
Muhammad bin Tughlaq, who transferred the capital from Delhi to
Daulatabad (Deogir) in the Deccan, actually issued a silver coin of a
standard weight of 140 grains. || Then again I find that ’Alauddin
before his installation distributed “ 5 mans of star gold ” daily, and
bribed some of the Maliks and Amirs to the extent of 50 mans of gold
each.^[ Ferista mentions that Malik Kafur’s plunder amounted to 96,000
mans of gold.* These mans are evidently misspelt for marlias, for 96,000
mans of gold is an amount too preposterously enormous for such a
rare metal as gold.
So far as I see, therefore, the proportions were as follows : —
175 grains = 1 rati
7 ,, = 4 ,, = 1 fanam or chinam
70 ,, = 40 ,, = 10 ,, = 1 marha (? varaha)
560 ,, = 320 ,, = 80 ,, = 8 ,, 1 pala.
In course of time, the Gangavamsa dynasty was superseded by the
* See the list given by Sir W. Elliot in Thomas’ Chronicles , p. 170, note 1.
f See his remark in Thomas’ Chronicles, note 2 to page 223.
J Indian Antiquary, Yol. XIX, 1890, page 70 et seq.
§ Tarikh ’Alai of Mir IDiusrd, quoted in Thomas’ Chronicles, pp. 158-9 note 1,
and p. 247, note 1.
|| Coins 180, 181 and 182 of silver, pp. 213 and 214 ; half coin of brass No. 199,
p. 250 of Thomas’ Chronicles. Also Eiruz Shah’s coins, Nos. 228 to 233, pp. 275-6.
Thomas’ Chronicles, page 157 and note 1.
|| Brigg’s translation, I, 374.
46
M. M. Chakra? arti — Troy weights of ancient Orissa.
[No. 1,
Gajapati Suryavamsa dynasty. Its founder was Gajapati Kapilesvar
Deva, and it is lasted from 1434 to 1535 A. D. or thereabout. During
this time the marha coins diminished in weight to 61 grains. The
reason is not clear, but the dearness of gold probably played some part in
it. The fanams must have similarly diminished in weight. The gold
coins described by Mr. Bidie are 60"24 and 60’75 grains. % Other coins
of similar nature have been given in Mr. Wilson’s “ Description of select
coins. *
In 1568 A. D., Orissa was conquered by Kalapahar the general of
Sulaiman Qirani, king of Bengal. f With this conquest, Orissa again
became connected with Northern India, and the local coins were replaced
by the mohurs and tankahs of Delhi. Regarding them, I need not
trouble my readers.
From gold I come to silver. No silver coins of Orissa are to be
found. Ferishta says that there was no silver coin in the Deccan. X
Silver must however have been used for ornaments &c., though probably
sparingly. The Madala Panji enumerates several silver ornaments and
utensils. The measures of silver were the same as those of gold.
Much discussion has taken place about the ratio of gold to silver.
This ratio differed in different times. The first extract (see supra)
shows a ratio of 1 : 5 at the time of Ananga Bhima Deva. This is the
lowest ratio for gold that I know of. But it is by no means improbable.
Gold was plentiful in Orissa, nay, in the whole of the Deccan. In the
upper beds of the rivers Mahanadi, Baitarani and probably of the
Rishikulya, gold is still found,* thoughin small quantities. The Malabar,
and the Nilgiris, particularly the district of Wainad are noted for
their gold mines. While therefore gold was comparatively abundant,
silver was dear on account of the difficulty in communication with North
India, the home of Indian silver. Silver was so dear that no coins of
that metal were issued in the mediaeval period. I am not surprised,
therefore, to see the value of gold fallen to 1 : 5. No better illustration
of the abundance of gold can be given than the fact that the spoils
alone of ’Alauddin and Malik Kafur from the Deccan reduced the ratio
of gold to silver in North India from 1 : 10 to 1 : 8 and then to 1 : 7.f
Journ. As. Soc. Beng., Vol. LII, Pt I, No. 1, page 40.
* Asiatic Researches , Vol. XVII, p. 593.
f The year of conquest has been fixed with accui’acy as 1568 A. D. See Dr.
Hunter’s note to page 10, Vol. II, and Mr. Beames’ article in this Journal, Vol. LII,
p. 233 note.
X Brigg’s translation, Vol, I, p. 374.
* Statistical Accounts of Bengal.
f Thomas’ Chronicles, page 235.
1892.] M. M. Chakravarti — Troy weights of ancient Orissa.
47
From silver to copper is an easy descent. No mention of copper
coins is to be found in the Madala Panji. Most probably in Orissa,
such coins were not used in ordinary transactions. Their place was
taken by the time-honoured cowries.
The cowries were counted by numbers, which were the same before
as now.*
4 cowries = 1 gunda
20 „ = 5 gun das = 1 buri
80 ,, = 20 ,, = 4 = 1 pan
1280 ,, = 320 ,, = 64 = 16 ,, = 1 kalian.
In the Madala Panji the accounts of Ananga Bhima Deva are given
in marhas, and no mention of cowries as units is to be found. This
continued as long as the Gangavamsa dynasty lasted, for I find, that in
the copper-plates of Nrisimha Deva IV, the marhas are given as equiva¬
lents. With the advent of the Gfajapati Suryavamsa, cowries became the
units, and their gifts appear to have been calculated in cowries and
silver tankahs.
“ The original gift in cash Rs. 192-8’ or at the rate of 8 kahans
per rupee = 1,540 kahans.”
See also No. II of the left side inscriptions at Jaybijay door of the
Jagannath temple : — “ paddy 500 bliarans, cowries 2000 kahans.”
While the measures of cowries have remained the same, the ratio of
them to other measures of the currency did not remain the same. The
following shows the various proportions between coins and cowries,
reduced to one common standard for facility of comparison.
I. In the Lilavati completed by Binds karacharya in 1150 A. D.f
16 panas (of cowries) = 1 bharma of silver
16 bharmas = 1 nishka of silver
.*. 1 nishka = 16 kahans, and 1 bharma = 1 kalian.
Colebrooke adds that the comparative value of silver, copper and
shells was nearly the same then as in his time, viz., 4 kahans per rupee.
N. B. — If these bharmas be identical with Puranas, the average
weight of which was from 50 to 54 grains, § then
1 modern rupee = 165 grains of pure silver = = 3T\ bharmas or
= 3t3q kahans.
# ’Ain-i- Akbari, Gladwin’s Translation, Vol. II, p. 15.
f It. C. Dutt’s History of India, Vol. Ill, p. 379.
4 Colebrooke, in Asiatic Researches , Vol. V, p. 91. Quoted in Prinsep’s Indian
Antiquities, Vol. I, p. 211.
§ Thomas’ Ancient Indian Weights.
48
M. M. Chakravarti — Troy weights of ancient Orissa. [No. 1,
II. In the time of Ananga Bliima Deva. (The latter part of the
12th century A. D.)
JTTY f 3\T Y ^TT *TT \ V
*TT ^$1° ^ |
“Total of the two cowries 281250 kalians. At the rate of 15
kalians per one marha of jiti gold =■ 18750 marhas.”
1 marha of gold = 5 marhas of silver
= about 350 grains of silver
= 15 kalians of cowries
a rupee of 165 grains (pure silver) =
165 x 15
350
kahans.
= 7^ kahans.
III. In the time of Purushottama Deva (1470 — 1497 A. D.)
1 tankah = 8 kahans.
This tankah is probably one of the Bahmani kings, described by
Thomas.* Thomas does not give the weights, probably because the
weights were nearly the same as those of the contemporary Delhi kings.
Only one, I find, is stated to have been 165 grains. f The pure silver
would not have been more than 160 grains in these tankahs,
/. a rupee of
165 grains =
165x8
160
a
= 8^ kahans.
IV. ’Ain-i-Akbari of Abul Fazl (1590 A. D. circa) J
1 rupee = 10 kahans.
Akbar’s rupee was of pure silver nearly and 175 grains in weight, §
. ™ • 165x10
rupee of 165 grains = —
= 9-f kahans.
VI. In the time of Gopinatha Deva (1726 A. D.), an owl sat upon
the crown of Jagannath accidentally. A purificatory bath with yajha
had to be performed in consequence. The Madala Panji gives details
from which it appears that in the bazar
1 tankah = 2 kahans 2 pans of cowries.
But in the account one tanka was calculated at 2 kahans, 3 pans. Taking
the higher value, I find
1 tankah (of the Mughal emperors)
= 175 grains
# Thomas’ Chronicles, pp. 342, 346.
f Thomas, ibid., p. 342.
t Gladwin’s Translation, Yol. II, p. 15.
§ Prinsep’s Useful Tables, Yol. II, p, 22 (Ed. Thomas).
1892.] M. M. Cliakravarti — Troy weights of ancient Orissa.
49
165 grains = - - ~ — kalians
= 2tV kahans.
VI. In the beginning of this century (1803 A. I).), the official
rate was
1 rupee = 4 kahans.*
VII. The present rate (1891 A. D.) is
1 rupee = 3-g- to 3-f kahans,
being at the rate of 16 to 18 gundas per pice.
A glance at these figures will show that the cowries became cheaper
and cheaper, till we come to the beginning of the eighteenth century.
Then, all on a sudden, they became dearer, extraordinarily dearer, if the
Madala Panji is to be believed. After some time, the value of the
cowries fell to 4 kahans. At present tlie copper pices have driven them
from the field. In the mofussil, cowries are now used only for fractions
of pices and annas.
I conclude this brief essay with an estimate of the income of the
Orissa kings as given in the Madala Panji. Ananga Bhima Deva, the
most celebrated monarch of the Gangavamsa, is said to have issued a
mudul (royal order), reported in extenso in the aforesaid Chronicle. In
that mudul he is made to say : —
“ My predecessors beginning with Kesari kings had an income of
1,500,000 marhas in jiti gold ; I extended my kingdom and added an
income of 2,000,000 marhas in jiti gold ; my total income is 3,500,000
marhas.”
( Abri dged translation . )
1,500,000 marhas of gold = 7,500,000 marhas of silver
= 525,000,000 grains of silver
525.000,000
= - — - - modern rupees
lb5
or 3,181,818 Rupees
Similarly 3,500,000 marhas of gold
= Rs. 7,121,212.
Dr. Hunter estimates the first income at Rs. 4,602,500f or nearly
50 per cent, more; but, if my reasonings be correct, neither his measures
of gold, nor his ratio of gold to silver, can be accepted. In fact he him¬
self has expressed some doubts about their validity.
* Dr. Hunter’s History of Orissa, Vol. 1, note 337.
f Ibid., Yol. I, note 309.
G
50
V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
Grceco-Boman Influence on the Civilization of Ancient India. Second
Paper. — By Vincent A. Smith, M.R.A.S., Bengal Civil Service.
PART I.
While my essay on ‘ Graeco-Roman Influence on the Civilization of
Ancient India,’ published in Part I of this Society’s Journal for 1889,
was passing through the press, two important papers bearing on the
same subject appeared, one in France, the other in Germany. I propose
to give in this communication some account of the papers referred to,
and to discuss the views of the writers, especially when they differ from
those which I have advocated.
The French essay is written by Mr. E. Senart, and is entitled ‘Notes
d’ E'pigraphie Indienne.’* The veteran Professor Albrecht Weber is
the author of the German paper, to which he has given the name of
‘ Die Griechen in Indien.’f
Mr. Beveridge, our President, in his Annual Address remarked that
Professor Weber’s discourse “well deserves to be translated.” It is
beyond doubt a valuable contribution to learning, but I think an abs¬
tract account of its contents, accompanied by a discussion of doubtful
topics, will be of more interest to the Society than a formal complete
translation.
Professor Weber concentrates his attention almost exclusively on
the literary monuments of ancient Indian civilization, and devotes only
a few lines to the subject of Hellenistic influence on the architecture,
sculpture, and numismatic art of India.
JL6 m +
912’ 913/ +
He laments
the want of works dealing more fully with these topics. I trust that
I may, without presumption, claim to have partly supplied this want.
In a much discussed passage of the Mahabhashya, which mentions
that the avaricious Maurya king offered for sale the images of the gods,
he is inclined to see the first reference in Indian literature to coined
money. But this is a very dubious and far-fetched notion.
The remarks on the words Dramma , Spa^py, and dinar a , Syvapiov ,
are worth translating in full.
“ The words dramma , Spa^py, and dinara, Syvapiov, in the special
sense of silver and gold money respectively, remained in use as late as
* Extrait du Journal Asiatique, III. Paris, Imprimerie Nationale, MDCCCXC.
f Sitzungsberichte der Koniglicli Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
zu Berlin ; XXVII, 1890 ; Sitzung der-philosophiscli-historisclien Classe vom 17
Juli.
+ In the references to Professor Weber tbe upper number indicates the page of
the reprint, the lower that of the Sitzungsberichte.
1892.] V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
51
the fifteenth century A. D., or possibly even later. According to a
friendly communication of Mommsen’s, the borrowing of the word
hy]vapiov itself (always neuter) from the Latin denarius dates at the
earliest from the time of Ceesar and Augustus, who first introduced a
gold coinage current throughout the empire, which was therefore desig¬
nated by a Latin word, commonly aureus , though the term denarius
aureus is also used.
The transference of the word dinar a to India, and the introduction
•*
of it into Indian literature can hardly have taken place so soon, and we
may well assume another century approximately as necessary for such
introduction. From this the inference follows that no Indian work in
which the word dindra occurs can be older than the second century of
our era.”
The Gupta inscriptions show that the use of the word dindra for
certain gold coins was well established by A. D. 400, and suggest that
the dindra was distinct from the suvarna.* I have elsewhere stated
my belief, which I am still inclined to hold, that the term dindra in
Gupta times was restricted to the coins which followed the weight
standard of the Roman aureus denarius , based on the Attic stater of
134’4 grains, and that the term suvarna designated the heavier gold
coins struck to the native standard of 80 ratis, or 146 grains. f
* Sanchi inscription of Chandra Gupta II, dated 93 = A. D. 412-13 ;
ditto , dated 88 = A. D. 407-08 ;
Kumara Gupta, (No. 8), date lost,
ditto (No. 9), dated 98 = A. D. 417-18.
ditto, or Skanda Gupta, dated 131 = A. D. 450-51.
ditto (No. 64), date lost.
“ Lines 7 to 12 (scil. of this last inscription) appear to have recorded certain
grants fixed in dvndras, for the purpose of providing food in a sattra or almshouse,
and also to provide pairs of upper and lower garments . The second part,
again, refers to food in an almshouse, recording something in connection with it at a
cost of nineteen gold coins of the kind called suvarna .” (Fleet, Corpus Inser. hid
Vol. Ill, pp. 33, 38, 39, 40, 41, 262, 265.)
f The Coinage of the Early or Imperial Gupta Dynasty of Northern India (.7.
Boy. As. Soc.for 1889, Vol. XXI, N. S.,p. 43.)
The jurist Brihaspati is, however, against this supposition. He says : —
14. A Nishlca is four suvarnas. A Pana of copper is a Karshika (having the
the weight of one Karsha.) A coin made of a Karsha of copper has to be known as
a Karshika Pana.
15. It is also called Andika. Four such are a Dhanaka. Twelve of the latter
are a Suvarna. This is also called a Dinara (denarius).” ( Brihaspati , X, 14, 15 in
‘ Minor Law Books, Ndrada and Brihaspati,’ translated by Jolly being Vol. XXXIII
of the Sacred Books of the East, page 317.) I do not doubt the accuracy of Brihaspati’ s
statement, but it can perhaps be interpreted to mean that both a suvarna and a
[No. 1,
,52 V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
It is interesting to observe that etymologically the word Spa\M
(a from Spaccro/uxi, and so, strictly, as much as one can hold in the hand ,
L. and S.) is the equivalent in meaning of the Indian pana, xpn, (akin to
pdni, qifw., ‘ hand ’), which originally meant ‘a handful of cowries.’
( Cunningham , Avchceol. Reports. Vol. A, p. 78).
I may also be permitted to call attention to the fact that the limit¬
ing anterior date determined as above for the transfer of the Latin
word denarius to India is the date which I have independently fixed
as that from which strong Graeco-Roman influence on Indian art can be
traced.
Leaving for the present Professor Weber, I shall now turn to the
essay of Mr. Senart, which is principally concerned with the stone re¬
mains of the Kabul River valley, or Gandhara, the chief subject of my
former disquisition.
Mr. Senart’s paper is divided into two parts, the first of which deals
with inscriptions in the Arian (Gandharian, Kharoshtri) character, and
the second with sculptures recently obtained by Captain Deane from
excavations at a place called Sikri, near the well-known site of Jamal -
garhi.
The observations of the distinguished French scholar mark a great
advance in the interpretation of the Arian inscriptions, though much still
remains obscure. He gives facsimiles in photo-type from paper casts of
three inscriptions, all in the Lahore Museum, viz., (1) that from Takht-
i-Bahi, (2) a short one from a locality not known, and (3) the Zeda
record, and offers readings and interpretations, more or less complete,
of all three, besides remarks on several other connected documents.
It is satisfactory to learn that there is no doubt that the Takht-i-
Bahi inscription is really dated in the year 26 of king Guduphara
(Gondophares), and in the year 103 of an era the initial point of which
is still undetermined.
dinctra had the same subdivisions, and, in any case, whatever may have been the
usage elsewhere, the writer of the inscription at Gadhwa must surely have considered
the suvarna and dinar a to be different, or he would not have distinguished them.
Narada (ibid, page 231) writes to the same effect as Brihaspati.
Narada probably wrote in the fifth or sixth century A. D., (ibid page XVIII') ;
and Brihaspati in the sixth or seventh century A. D. While these pages have been
passing through the press, a valuable little work by Sir A. Cunningham, entitled
‘ Coins of Ancient India’ (Quaritch, 1891), has appeared. The earliest Indian coins
and metric systems are there discussed. I have above, as in my previous publica¬
tions, reckoned the weight of the rati to be T825 grain, and that of the pana, karsha,
and Suvarna as 146 grains. Sir A. Cunningham now uses 1*8 and 144 respectively, as
the elements of his calculations. He used to follow Thomas in his erroneous
estimate of the weight of the rati as 1*75 grain. The figures 18 and 144 aro very
convenient.
1892.] Y. A. Smitli — On the Civilization of Ancient India. 53
In connection with this inscription, which records the presentation
of a votive offering, Mr. Senart discusses the varieties and development
of Buddhist votive formulas. He is inclined to think that the later and
fuller forms were imitated from Grceco-Roman formularies. This parti¬
cular manifestation of western influence on India has not, I think, been
previously noted, and I therefore quote in full the passage in which the
theory is broached.
“ En somme, c’est au Nord-Ouest que commcncent les formules
votives developpees, elles affectent un caractere qui ne s’explique pas
bien par le jeu naturel des idees natives.
Est il necessaire d’admettre que Limitation des formules epigraphi-
ques de 1’ Occident ait contribue a les faire adopter ?*
A cet egard, une double particularity) me frappe dans nos deux
dedicaces indo-bactriennes. L’une et l’autre afflchent en bonne placo
un souci particulier de la ‘ sante,’ de la ‘ prosperite ’ du roi et do sa
famille. Le trait est si peu indou qu’ il ne se rctrouve, que jo saclio,
nulle part dans 1’ Inde interieure ; il est si bien entre ici dans les mcours
qu’ il se perpetue jusqu’ a une epoque assez basse : V inscription de
Kurra, datee du regne de Toramana, au Ye si&cle, le reproduit encore.
Comment ne pas songer aux voeux si frequents daus les epigraphes
greco-romaines ‘ pour le salut des empereurs ’ ? Le mot agrabhaga, que
j’ai traduit par ‘ prosperite,’ et qui ne peut guere, d’apres le contcxte,
s’eloigner de ce sens, constitue une locution speciale dont T usage n’est
pas consacre par la litterature. Ne semble-t-il pas reveler la recherche
d’ un terme approprie pour cette idee de ‘fortune,’ qui sort quelquo peu
de 1’ ordre des notions familieres a l’esprit Indien ? et ne representerait-
il pas un essai de traduction directe ou indirecte de V dyaOg rx>xq du
grec P
On me pardonnera d’ avoir, en passant, signale cette impression.
Je sens de combien de reserves il convient d’ entourer de pareilles con¬
jectures.”
The conjecture seems to me highly probable. It may bo remem¬
bered that several years ago I traced in the devices of the Gupta coinage
reminiscences of the Greek dyaOg rv^rj and her representative the Roman
Eortuna.
While on the subject of Roman influence on the form of Indian
inscriptions, I may note another conjecture which has occurred to me,
namely, that the well known Indian practice of inscribing a record on
several plates of copper joined by a ring may very likely have been
# Il est superflu de rappeler ici les expressions tres-variees de ces voeux de sante,
de bonheur, qui accompagnent tant de dedicaces grecques et latines. On en trouvera
des enumerations plus ou moms completes dans les traites d’ epigraphie.
54 V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient Lulia. [No. 1,
borrowed from the Romans. “ Inscriptions on bronze tablets sometimes
occur. These are tabulae honestce missionis , diplomas, or good conduct
discharges. They are copies of decrees, promulgated at Rome, confer¬
ring upon the soldiery, as a reward for distinguished service, the privi¬
lege of Roman citizenship and the right of marriage. They seem to
have been usually inscribed on two sheets of metal, which, being united
by thongs, folded together like a book. Examples of these tablets
have been found from the year A. D. 34 of the Emperor Claudius to the
year of the Emperor Maximian, A. D. 300. They were invariably
suspended on the walls of the temple in the Capitol for public exhibition.”*
Mr. Senart devotes several pages to the consideration of the dated
Haslitnagar inscription first published by me in the Indian Antiquary
for 1889, and to a discussion of the era used in it and other inscrip¬
tions from the same region. The subsequent publication in this Journal
of a photograph of the inscribed pedestal from Haslitnagar will, I think,
remove the doubts which Mr. Senart felt as to the presence of the symbol
for 100. He was inclined to read the date, as shown in the rougher
facsimile of the Indian Antiquary, as being 84 only, but it is certain that
the date is either 274, as formerly read by Sir A. Cunningham, or 284.
The character preceding the 4 is certainly almost identical with each of
the three characters for 20 which precede it, and so may be read also as
20, but it is not absolutely identical, being slightly straighter and narrower
in shape, and this minute difference may be held sufficient to warrant us
in reading it as the symbol for 10. So far as the historian is concerned
it makes little matter whether the date is 274 or *284, but I think it
more probable that 274 is the correct interpretation.
I altogether disagree with the opinion of Mr. Senart that “ nous
sommes forces d' admettre que 1’ alphabet du Nord-Ouest, dans lequel
est gravee T inscription, etait, au milieu du IVe siecle, des longtemps
hors d’ usage.” But on this question I have nothing to add to wrhat I
have already printed, nor have I anything to retract.
Mr. Senart makes an important correction in the reading cf the
inscription by substituting praushthapada for emborasma as the name of
the month. f
# Westropp, Handbook of Archaeology, p. 500, 2nd edition, Bohn’s Illustrated
Library, 1878.
f In ‘Coins of Ancient India’ (Quaritch, 1891) Sir A. Cunningham incidentally
{page 37) accepts Mr. Senart’s reading of the date as 84. But the figures for the
centuries are certainly in the record. Dr. Buhler reads “Sam II C XX XX XX X
IV Postavadasa masasa di[va] sammi pam[cha]mi 5 [11*]”, and translates “The
year 274, on the fifth, 5, day of the month of Praushthapada ( i . e , Blmdrapada or
August-September).” He observes that in the name of the month the reading
1892. J V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
55
I should have mentioned that there are a few scratches or imperfect
characters on the stone below the inscription, but these do not seem
ever to have had any meaning.
I was inclined to refer the date 284 or 274 to the S'aka era of A. D.
78 rather than to that of Gondophares and Moga (Manas), chiefly on
account of the inferiority of the style of the figures on the pedestal as
compared with that of the best Romano- Buddhist sculpture.
But, when discussing the remarkable statuette of the Emaciated
Buddha of which he gives a plate, Mr. Senart points out {note, p. 43) that
the execution of the principal figure is far superior to that of the minor
figures of the relief on the pedestal. “A cet egard, on remarquera
l’ecart qui s’ accuse entre la figure principale et le basrelief qui decore le
socle, et qui est traite assai sommairement, sans doute comme une scene
conventionelle multipliee en nombreuses repliques par des artistes
inferieurs. II y’a la un avertissement qui ne doit pas etre perdu pour ceux
qui s’ attacheront a etablir la serie chronologique des ouvrages greco-
buddhiques.”
The observation is perfectly correct, and I readily accept the warn¬
ing. I am quite willing to admit now that the era of either Gondophares
or Moga is most likely that in which the Hashtnagar pedestal is dated,
and that its approximate date is therefore about A. D. 220 or 230.
Very probably the principal statue, which Mr. King was unable to ap¬
propriate, was executed in a style much superior to that of the pedestal.
On this supposition the work is contemporary with the Jamalgarhi
sculptures, and my arguments concerning the date of those remains are
strongly confirmed. My approximate date for the best sculptures at
Jamalgarhi is A. D. 250.
It is still uncertain whether the eras used by Gondophares and
Moga are identical or different. Mr. Senart ( p. 19) shows that the
mode of expressing the date in the Taxila inscription, namely, “ in the
year 78 of the great King Mogas,” does not imply that the era used
was founded by that sovereign. “ Rien n’ est moins vraisemblable. II
suffit de se reporter aux epigraphes de Mathura (par example nos 1, 4,
6, compares a 2, 4, 7) pour se convaincre que le nom du roi ajoute, au
genitif, a 1’ indication de 1’ annee n’ implique ni que la date donnee se
refere a une ere fondee par lui, ni qu elle ait pour point de depart le
commencement de son regne. Comme, d’ autre part, quand un nom de
roi est indique, il marque regulierement le souverain regnant, il faut
pothavadasa is linguistically possible. ( Indian Antiquary for Nov. 1891, Vol. XX,
page 394). Sir A. Cunningham now calls the Arian alphabet by the name Gandhari-
an, which is, I think, the best of the many names more or less current.
56
Y. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
certainement entendre notre date ; ‘ 1 ’ an 78, sous le regne du grand roi
Mogas.’ L’ imitation des formules grecques par le genitif absolu
j3aaL\ivovTos ou. Tvpavi/ovvros, etc., explique suffisamment, par 1’ influence
naturelle du monnayage, ce que la locution pourrait au premier aspect
avoir de surprenant.”
The last observation calls attention to yet another case in which
Indian practice has been affected by Greek example.
Following Sir A. Cunningham, I described (page 142) in my former
paper a brief record at Jamalgarhi as “ seven unintelligible letters, read
as Sapliae danamukha , incised on the back of the nimbus of one of the
statues supposed to be those of kings.” Mr. Senart (page 24) shows
that the correct reading is saphala danamukha , “ c’ est a dire ‘don meri-
toire.’ ” This word danamukha is unknown in literature, but occurs in
the inscriptions on the Bliimaran vase and. the Manikyala cylinder.
Mr. Senart is unable at present to decide whether or not the word ddna-
mukha implies a shade of meaning slightly different from that of the
simple ddnatn, and contents himself with noting (page 26) that in the
inscriptions where the longer expression occurs it is not accompanied by
the name of the gift in apposition, like ddnam thambho, thdpo ddnatn , etc.
Pages 27-31 of his paper are devoted by Mr. Senart to the discus¬
sion of the Zeda inscription. He is unable to give a complete translation
of this record, but it is satisfactory to find that it is certainly dated in
the year 11, in the reign of Kanishka, as deciphered by Sir A. Cunning¬
ham.
The short record, which is numbered II by Mr. Senart, is also a
votive inscription, and, subject to certain reservations, is thus translated
( page 27) ; “An 68, le seizieme (16) jour du mois Praushthapada. Don
de... vadhitirana et de ses compagnons.”
It is not known to what object it was attached, but doubtless it
was a sculpture of some sort. The era is, of course, also undetermined.
If it is that of Kanishka, the date would be 78 -f 68 = A. D. 146. If it
is that of either of Moga or Gondophares the date would be about A. D.
20. Either date is quite possible, but, if the earlier one is correct, we
may be quite certain that the sculpture showed no trace of Roman in¬
fluence, though it may have been Hellenistic in style.
The two statuettes from Sikri of which M. Senart gives excellent
phototype plates are both well executed, and seem to belong to the best
period of the Gandhara school.
The first represents the Buddha seated, reduced to a state of ex¬
treme emaciation by the austerities which he practised in the first stage
of his religious life. Mr. Senart cannot remember having seen any other
ancient representation of the Buddha in this condition, but notes (page
1892.] Y. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancien t India.
57
33) that the Musee Guimet contains three modern figures of the ema¬
ciated Buddha. One of these is a fine Chinese bronze attributed to the
last century. The others come from Japan, one being in wood, and the
second in bronze, and are supposed to date respectively from the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries. All three represent the Buddha in a stand¬
ing posture.
The second statuette figured is that of a woman standing, carrying
on each shoulder a small standing figure, and suckling an infant, which
sits astride, Indian fashion, on her right hip. The interpretation of this
group is as yet unknown. Mr. Senart conjectures that the small figures
on the shoulders may be intended to mark the divine rank of the prin¬
cipal figure, and that they are offering her a diadem or garland. Pro¬
bably the woman is Maya, the mother of the Buddha. The comparison
with images of the Madonna Lactans is obvious, and is of interest when
considered in connection with the numerous cases of resemblance between
Buddhist and Christian works which I have cited.
The last twenty-one pages of Mr. Senart’s essay are devoted to a
discussion of the date of the Gandhara sculptures. His view is sub¬
stantially the same as that advocated by Sir A. Cunningham ( page 149
of my former 'paper') . The following passages express Mr. Senart’s
general conclusions : —
“ II est fort possible que la tradition de 1’ architecture et de la
sculpture greco-buddhiques se soit au Nord-Ouest continuee pendant
une periode plus ou moins longue. Un point cependant doit etre con-
sidere comme etabli, c’ est que la periode de floraison et de grande
expansion de cet art est anterieure a la seconde moitie du IIe siecle ; que,
des cette epoque, 1’ evolution dont il a ete 1’ initiateur dans 1’ iconogra-
pliie buddhique etait achevee, consacree. It sera.it des lors bien arbi-
traire en dehors de preuves positives qui n’ ont point ete produites, de
ramener a une epoque plus basse les monuments principaux qui nous en
sont parvenus, ceux surtout qui paraissent les plus caracteristiques et
dont 1’ aspect est relativement ancien,” ( page 42).
The date of the statuette of the Emaciated Buddha is decided to be
“not later than the end of the first century A. D.” ( page 44).
“ Pour la date, la premiere moitie du IIe siecle parait marquer le
moment ou 1’ imitation a ete la plus active, et il n’ y a aucune probabi¬
lity qu’ elle se soit prolongee tres-longtemps au dela. Si elle s’ etait
exercee a une epoque plus tardive, posterieure a la grande floraison du
buddhisme sous Kanishka et Huvislika, il est a penser qu’ elle ne serait
pas si exactement circonstrite dans V art Buddhique” ( page 52).
When the passages quoted were written Mr. Senart had not seen
my paper on the subject, and I shall therefore abstain from discussing
H .
58
V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
his views at length, and content myself with the observation that in my
opinion he has been misled by his fail are to perceive the Roman charac¬
teristics of the greater part of the Gandhara sculptures. He refers,
certainly, to Fergusson’s brief remarks on this topic, but dismisses them
as being of little weight. To my mind, on the other hand, the strong
Roman influence on the Gandhara school seems to be an obvious, palpa¬
ble fact that cannot be ignored.*
Mr. Senart seeks in Parthia, not in Rome, for the special variety of
Hellenistic art which supplied the model to the Gandhara sculptures.
“ Au commencement du Ier Siecle avant J. C., le retour offensif d*
influences occidentales representees par le philhellenisme des Arsacides,
et maintenues par la creation de la dynastie partbe particuliere a cette
region expliquerait V etablissement d’ une sorte d’ ecole penetree des
traditions classiques ; a la fin du Ier siecle apres J. C., T etablissement
de la puissante dynastie de Kanishka, tributarie au point de vue de la
civilization de ses voisins de T Iran, marque le moment ou, sur la base
la plus large qu ’eut jamais conquise dans T Inde une race etrangere,
cette ecole greco-parthe a pu le mieux propager son influence dans
T interieur du pays ” (jpage 48).
I cannot discover in the Gandhara sculptures any distinct trace
of Parthian influence, though the Persepolitan form of capital which is
seen in some of the earlier works is, of course, a proof that the artists
of the Gandhara school were naturally not ignorant of the art of
Persia.
PART II.
Professor Weber opens his interesting essay by the intimation that
it is designed to give a cursory view of what is known, partly from
certain data, and partly from more or less plausible conjectures, con¬
cerning the position and influence of the Greeks in India.
The Greeks are called by Indian authors ‘ Yavana,’ that is to say
lonians. This word seems to have been introduced through Persia, and
has been successively applied to the Greeks, Indo-Scythians, Parthians,
Persians, Arabs (or Muhammadans), and, finally, to Europeans.
[The use of the word is in fact analogous to the modern use of
wilayat , which includes Europe as well as Afghanistan, and other
countries on the North-West frontier. V. A. S .]
The oldest mention of the term ‘yavana’ is found in the grammar
of Pan mi (4, 1,49), who is now generally supposed to have flourished
* Mr. Ed. Drouin informs me that both he and Mr. Silvain Levi agree with me
in the opinion that “the Roman element had a real influence on the sculptures of
the northern schools.”
59
1892.] V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
about the beginning of the third century B. 0. He teaches the forma¬
tion of the word ‘ yavanani ’ to indicate the writing (lipi) of the
Yavana.
[The jurist Gautama (IV. 21 ; page 196 of Buhler’s translation)
enumerates Parasavas, Yavanas, Karanas, and Sudras together. His
date is probably as early as that of Panini. V. A. $.]
The well known passage in the thirteenth edict of Asoka which
mentions the Yona (Yavana) kings, Antiochus, etc., is, of course, the
earliest historical reference to the Yavanas, the date of which is certain.
Some scholars have discovered the name of Alexander in the
Kalsi version of the edicts, but the reading is doubtful.
A distinct trace of the name of the great conqueror is found in the
appellation of the city Alasadda, or Alasanda, mentioned in the
Mahavansa and the Questions of Milinda. This name is obviously
identical with Alexandria. Some have supposed the city to be situated
on the Indian Caucasus, or Hindu Kush. [But it would seem rather to
have been situated on an island in the Indus, if we may trust the author
of the Questions of Milinda.
“ The Elder replied : ‘ In what district, 0 king, were you born ?”
‘ There is an island called Alasauda. It was there I was born.’
‘ And how far is Alasanda from here ?’
‘ About two hundred leagues .
* In what town, O king, were you born ?*
‘ There is a village called Kalasi. It was there I was born F 5
‘ And how far is Kalasi from here ?’
‘ About two hundred leagues.’
‘ Ho w far is Kashmir from here ?'
‘ Twelve leagues ?”
Professor Rhys Davids is inclined to think that the town of Kalasi
is identical with the c Karisi nagara,’ which seems to be mentioned on a
coin of Eukratides (acc. circa B. C. 190) and that the coin was struck in
commemoration of the fact of the Greeks having reached the Indus.*
If the coin is rightly read, this conjecture seems extremely probable, but,
unfortunately, the legend quoted is only “ the conjectured reading of
General Cunningham.” (Gardner, Coins of Greek and Scythic Kings ,
page 19, note, and Plate VI, 8).
Professor Weber next proceeds to argue in favour of a highly
conjectural theory connecting the name Skanda with Alexander, but I
think my readers will excuse me from reproducing his very unsatisfac¬
tory arguments. V. A. $.]
* “ The Questions of King Milinda,” translated from the P;ili by T. W. Rhys
Davids, being Vol. XXXV of Sacred Books of the East, pp. XXIII and 126.
60
V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India . [No. 1,
Apisali, one of the teachers cited by Panini, speaks of the formation
of the compound £ Kshaudraka — Malava ’ ( scil . 1 sen a), ‘ the army of the
Kshaudrakas and Malagas,’ the ’O^rSpaKot and MdAAot of the Greek his¬
torians. Inasmuch as we are told by them that these two peoples were at
bitter enmity with one another, and only combined from fear of Alexander,
it is possible that the grammarian may have had in his mind the invasion
of Alexander. If this supposition is correct, both Apisali and his dis¬
ciple Panini must belong to a period later than that of Alexander.
The Sauvira city Dattamitri seems to be Demetrias ; and the Sau-
vira names Phantahriti, Mimata, and Jamunda mentioned by Panini
(4, 1, 148, 150) and his scholiast, suggest the Greek names Pantarchos,
Mimas, and Diomedes.
The Greek name Ptolemaios or Ptolemy appears in Asoka’s edict
under the easily recognized form Turamaya, but it seems also to have
been adopted by Hindu literature and mythology under the form Asura
Maya, and with a double signification. In the second book of the Malia-
bharata Asura Maya, the architect of the Asuras, appears as the friend,
of king Yudhishtliira, and builds for him a palace, the marvels of which
excite general wonder and astonishment. This Asura Ma}^a seems to
me to be an appropriation by means of a popular etymology of the name
Turamaya, and his skill as an architect appears to refer to the buildings
of the Ptolemies, or even to the wonderful buildings of ancient Egypt.
Another circumstance lends support to this supposition. A second
application of the name Asura Maya is that which occurs in the extant,
though certainly secondary, text of the Surya-Siddhanta (1, 2), where
he appears as the father of Indian astronomy. In this case, of course,
there is no reference to king Ptolemy, but the person meant is the
astronomer of the same name who flourished in the first half of the
second century of our era.
It is to be observed that on both occasions the name entered India
through the medium of the same mythical personality.
In the Jnanabhaskara, the astronomer Asura Maya is placed in
connexion with Romakapura, which must mean either Alexandria or
Byzantium, or, more generally, the lands of the barbarians ( mlechchha ).
The eighth book of the Kathasaritsagara tells of the conquest of the
gods under the command of Indra by the Asuras under the leadership
of Maya. The terms Danava and Asura must often be understood to
mean foreign peoples.
[It may be remembered that I have suggested (page 133 of my
former essay ) that the whole conception of the Asuras and their con¬
flicts with the gods was borrowed from the Greek legends of the Gigan-
tomachia. The myths above referred to seem to give support to my
conjecture. V. A. $.]
1892.] V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
61
Other Greek names also may be recognized in the Hindu epics.
Tod long ago identified the Yavana king Dattamitra, who is des¬
cribed in the Mahabharata as taking a direct part in the struggle, with
the Bactrian king Demetrius ( jior. circa 180-165 B. C.), and this identi¬
fication was accepted by Lassen. The city Demetrias built by him
appears in the Ramayana under the further corrupted form Danda-
mitra, and in a votive formula of Buddhist tendency as Dattamitiyaka
Yonaka. The name of Bhagadatta, the king of the Yavanas who ruled
over Maru, or Marwar, and Naraka in the West and is specially mentioned
(M. Bhar. 2, 578, 579) as an old friend of the father of Yudhishthira,
has been regarded by A. v. Gutschmid as a translation of the name of
the Bactrian king Apollodotus ( flor . circa B. C. 160), and this supposi¬
tion appears to me a happy one,
The name of the Kashmir prince Jalauka, mentioned in the Maha¬
bharata, may be identified, though not without reserve, as a corruption
of Seleucus.
Finally, the name of Menander is certainly represented by that of
Milinda, king of Sagala (£ayyaA.a), who plays an important part in the
tradition of southern Buddhism, and was remembered even down to
Puranic times. The ‘ Milindapanha ’ will be referred to again on a
later page.
The allusions to the Yavanas in Paniiii and the Mahabhashya should
be here considered. The teaching of Panini concerning the formation
of the word ‘ Yavanani ’ to signify the writing (lipi) of the Yavanas
has already been referred to. But it seems as if a direct use of the
Yavana characters by Panini may be detected.
According to Goldstticker ( Panini , page 53) he uses the second
letter of the Indian alphabet as a sign for the numeral two, and Burnell
{Elements S. I. Palceogr ., page 96, and Aindra Grammarians , page 77)
supposes that he was in this passage influenced by the similar use of
the letters of the Greek alphabet as numerals.
The characteristic remark in the Calcutta scholium on the passage
in 3, 2, 120 say ana bhuhjate Yavandh, ‘ the Yavanas eat reclining,’ is of
interest. This remark is not found in the Mahabhashya (see Ind. Stud,
13, 381), and it clearly rests on an older observation, or rather, tradi¬
tion.
Two examples given in the Mahabhashya on Panini 3, 2, 111, are of
the highest interest, namely, Yavano ’ runan MadhyamiJcdn, 1 the Yavana
prince oppressed the Madhyamikas ’ ; and Yavano ’ runat Saketam , ‘the
Yavana prince oppressed Saketa.’ These examples are given as illustra¬
tions of the use of the imperfect tense to signify an event which hap¬
pened a short time previously, and therefore show that the oppression
62
V. A, Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
of the Madhyamika people and of the city of Saketa must have occurred
shortly before the composition of the examples. Unfortunately the
geographical position neither of the people or city is ascertained with
precision, but Saketa, the Greek Say^Sa is probably the modern Ajodhya
or Oudh. [Fergusson, however, thought that its site should more pro¬
bably be sought at Lucknow. It certainly was situated in the province
of Oudh. Dr. Fiihrer ( Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions, N.-W.
P. and Oudh, p. 275) is satisfied that Sanchankot, or Sujankot in the
Unao District, on the Sai river, 34 miles north-west of Unao, represents
the ancient Saketam, the Sha-chi of Fa-Hian. According to him Ajo¬
dhya is the Visakha of Hiuen-Tsiang, but not the Sha-chi of Fa Hian.
V. A. 8.] The passage in the Mahabliashya indicates an extension of
Greek dominion in the interior of India, which could not be suspected
from perusal of the Greek writers. The reality of this extension is
further supported by the chapter of the Garga- Samhita named Yuga-
purana, which mentions, not only the occupation of Saketa by the
Yavanas, but their further advance to Kusumadhvaja or Pushpapura,
that is to say Pataliputra (UaXifioOpa). But it is possible that we
should rather suppose the text to refer to the advance of the Indo-
Scjdhians, to whom the name of Yavanas was transferred.
The Garga family, which, notably enough (with the exception of a
single passage in the Kathaka), is mentioned first in the latest sections
of the Bralimanas and Sutras, but comes specially to the front in the
Mahabhashya (see Ind. Stud. 13, 410, seqq.), is repeatedly placed by
legend in close connection with the Yavanas. Specially, a verse, which
honours the Yavanas as teachers of astronomy, is ascribed to Garga.
In order to dispose of all the legendary- historical information con¬
cerning the Yavana princes of ancient times which can be extracted
from the Mahabharata, etc., it must here be noted that the Kala-
Yavana or 4 Black Yavana ’ is brought into special relation with Krishna
and Garga. The name Black Yavana appears intended to distinguish
the bearer of it from other kinds of Yavanas.
We must further observe that the Yavana king Kasernmant is
shown as occupying a hostile, or more exactly, a subordinate position.
I have already expressed an opinion (Ind. S/cizzen , pp. 88, 91 ; and. Akad.
Vorl. in. L. G. 205) that the name of this Kaserumant is a reminiscence
of the Roman Caesar, and Mr. Leon Feer has since shown ( Comptes Bendus
de VAcad. des Inscr., 1871, pp. 47, 56, 60), that the expression Kesan
ndma saw gram ah, 4 Caesarean or Roman order of battle/ occurs in the
Buddhist Avadana-sataka. If these passages belong to the period of the
great deposits of Roman coins in India they supply a certain legendary
back ground for them.
1892.] V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
63
Finally, we mast note the prominent position which the Yavanas,
in common with the Kambojas, S'akas, Pahlavas, Balhikas, etc., take in
the Mahabharata, as well as in the Ramayana, and which is so signi¬
ficant for the determination of the period of composition of these
works. The Romakas are also mentioned there, though but rarely.
The city Romakapura, which plays a special part in astronomical
literature ( see above ) should not be understood to mean Rome itself,
but Alexandria, or perhaps, Byzantium.
The city Rauma mentioned in the Vishnu-purana ( Wilson- Hall f
1, 130) must be understood in the same way. A Romaka-siddhanta
appears to have been one of the earlier works used by the astronomer
Varalia Mihira, who lived between A. D. 504 and 587.
The well-known part which Yavana women play in the dramas of
Kalidasa (who is supposed to have flourished in the middle of the sixth
century A. D.) as personal attendants of the king may be in some degree
explained by the trade in “ good-looking girls for concubinage,” which,
according to the author of the Peri plus, was carried on between
Alexandria and India. Samudra Gupta’s Allahabad Pillar inscription
[Fleet, Corpus Inscr. Ill , p. 14, V. A. S ] mentions the delivery of maidens
as tribute by the Sassanian king of Persia, who is there called the
Shahanushahi. The superior culture and education of these foreign
girls may be the explanation of the introduction of certain peculiarities
in the attributes of the Indian god of love, Kmnadeva. The chief of
these is the dolphin ( makara ) banner which he carries, like the Greek
Eros. He is also sometimes described as the son of the goddess of
beauty, who, like Aphrodite, rises foam-born from the waters. But
this latter myth may be of primitive Indo-Germanic origin, and refer
to the dawn. Sometimes he is represented as the consort of the god¬
dess of desire. The ancient image of Aphrodite, accompanied by Eros
and the dolphin may be dimly made out in a relief on the temple of
Bhu vanes vara in Orissa, which seems to date from the seventh century
of our era ; but the form is very degraded in execution.
It is very difficult to understand how the Kimnara, or monkeys in
the guise of men and women, can have been turned into ‘ heavenly choris¬
ters,’ for even Indian taste can hardly regard the screeching of monkeys
as melodious. Perhaps the Kivvpa used by the Greek maidens at the
courts of the Indian princes may be at the bottom of the conception.
[Ktrupa was a ten-stringed instrument, and /arupo's and cognate
words mean ‘ wailing.’ The coniecture seems to me a verv far-fetched
one. V. A. £.]
Another bold conjecture would explain the amended reading ‘ Khe-
rdn ’ in the Paniniya S'iksha, when it is explained to mean the form of
64 V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
greeting used by the women of Surashtra, to be the Greek ^ai'peiv. This
conjecture is supported by the facts that Greek influence lasted late in
Surashtra, and that in Byzantine inscriptions ^ai'peiv, written as x€PLV>
is used as a salutation formula instead of the imperative ^aipe.
With reference to the political position of the Greeks in India the
direct transfer into Sanskrit and Pali of the words avpiyi and ^a/Wos
in the forms surungd (underground passage ; mine), and khalina (= bridle,
rein, especially the bit of a horse’s bridle) is of interest.
Merely for the sake of completeness some words may be noticed
which occur only in dictionaries. Examples of these are yavanapriya,
1 pepper,’ yavaneshta , ‘ tin,’ ydvana , ‘ incense.’ But in these cases the
term Yavana may refer, not to the Greeks, but to other foreign nations
who succeeded them.
Many articles of commerce have Indian names identical with the
European, e. g ., hastira , Kao-atTepos ; kasturi , Kacrriopeiov ; marakata ,
cr/xdpaySos ; sringavera, zingiber ; and others.
But in these cases it is uncertain whether India was the borrower
or the lender, and in a large number of instances there is no doubt as to
the Indian origin. Examples are : — oVaXos, upala ; (3ypvXXo<;, veluriya ( vai -
durya , vaidurya) ; KapvocfrvXXov, katukaphala ; Kiwafiapi, khinnavari, etc.
[The Professor then devotes a few words to the Graeco-Buddhist
sculptures and the origin of coinage in India, but his general observa¬
tions are only of a cursory nature, and need not be translated. I have
already translated his note on the words dramma and dinara. He
refers to the essay of Stephani, ( Nimbus und Strahlenkranz ; in the
Memoires de ’ V Academic de St. Petersbourg , 6 sei\ t. LX) as establishing
the probability that the rise of the nimbus in art, which Spence Hardy
regarded as of eastern origin, is more probably an importation from
the West. On this question Mr. Senart has no doubt at all, and boldly
says ( page 38) that the classical origin of the nimbus is certain. It is
quite possible that a close examination of the Buddhist sculptures of the
Gandhara school with reference to the use of the nimbus may help
to settle their date. V. A. $.]
According to Halevy, who has recently republished his views, the
Indian alphabet itself, as it is first met with in the time of Piyadasi
(Asoka), is derived from the Greek. But this theory appears to deserve
little credit, and it is much more probable that the importation of the
Semitic writing into both India and Greece occurred at the one period,
and that the great resemblance between several of the most important
characters is thus to be explained. In any case, the further inference
impugning the antiquity of Indian literature, which Halevy draws from
his theory, completely fails, because the oral transmission of ancient
texts undoubtedly reaches back to very early times.
1892.]
Y. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
65
The fact is of interest that the Greek names of the colour ‘ black ’
fiiXav, and of the reed-pen, KaXapos, both found admission into Sanskrit
under the forms respectively of meld and kalama. Mela occurs in the
romance of the Vasavadatta which seems to be related to a Milesian tale
(see 'post). The observation as to Icalama applies only to the word when
used in the sense of c pen,’ and not to the form of the word, itself, ( see
Mala (1881) Vorw., p. XV H, Monatsbericht , 1871, p. 623).
It appears almost certain further that the Sanskrit word pustaka ,
‘ book,’ should be regarded as an inversion of a possible Greek form
7 TV^LKOV’
[It is certain that pustaka was introduced into Sanskrit at a com¬
paratively late date. It occurs in the Pancliatantra. The form ttv^lkov
is not known to occur, but ttv&ov is used in Aristophanes, Frag. 671, in
the sense of a tablet for writing on. Liddell and Scott quote the same
passage as a reference for the form ttv^lSlov, which seems to be a various
reading. V. A. $.]
We thus arrive at the most important matter in which Greek in¬
fluence on India is demonstrable, namely Poetry, Science, etc. We have
already seen that in the epics the Greek princes are brought into direct
relations with the actors in the narrative. Great analogies and coinci¬
dences certainly exist between the Mahabharata, and, still more, between
the Ramayana and the Iliad and Odyssey. The rhetorician Dio Chrysos¬
tom (who lived in the time of Trajan A. D. 98—117) refers to these
peculiarities of the Mahabharata when he ascribes to the Indians a
knowledge of the poems of Homer as transferred to their own language
and dialect. This passage was formerly interpreted as indicating merely
the existence of the Mahabharata in the time of Dio Chrysostom, but,
in the light of facts recently brought to light, the hypothesis that the
author of the so-called £ battle-section ’ of the Mahabharata actually
made use of the Homeric legend, cannot well be absolutely rejected.
The Rama legend in its Buddhist dress differs greatly from that
presented by Valmiki, and there seems to be no doubt that the Buddhist
version is of higher antiquity. It is thus quite possible that Valmiki
may have used the Homeric legend for his arrangement of the story
{see Weber. Abhandlung “ uber das Ramayana ” 1870.)
The patriotism of the Hindus is grievously wounded by this theory,
but no one wishes to argue that the Ramayana is copied from Homer.
There is, however, no reason to reject as a priori impossib'e the theory
that it has been influenced by Homer. It daily becomes more]clear that
elements of Homeric myth, e. g. Leukothea and the Trojan horse, have
entered into Buddhist historical legends. But, when the mutual ex¬
change of legendary epic materials is considered, it is^ rarely possible
I
66
V. A. Smith— On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
in such discussions to obtain a result of objective certainty. Conviction
may be attained, demonstration is impossible.
So far as coincidences of this sort are not to be ascribed to a purely
spontaneous, natural origin and development in both places, two further
possibilities must be kept in view. The first is that the coincidences in
question need not necessarily be ascribed to borrowing from either side,
but may be derived from primitive nature myths of early Indo-Germanic
times. The second is that, granted borrowing in historical times, the
Grecian legend may not have been of Greek origin, but may have first
come from the East, and travelled back again to India.
What has been said above of epic myths holds good for the forms
and materials of fairy tales and stories of enchantment, for folklore in short.
Indian literature, thanks to the activity of the Buddhists, and, in later
times, of their rivals the Jains, is specially rich in compositions of this
class. Some of these, in their existing shape, date from tolerably recent
times, but it is plain that they rest on old traditions and lost works,
which were partly composed, not in Sanskrit, but in popular dialects.
The older works of this kind are generally associated with the
name of S'atavahana ; the more recent with that of Vikramaditya.
Both of these kings are alike connected by tradition with the con¬
quests of foreign rulers, especially the S'akas, or Indo-Scythians, and
are themselves represented with features of foreign origin.
In yet another branch of literature a similar great agreement be¬
tween Greece and India is apparent, that is to say, in what may be
called the iEsopian Fable.
India has for some time past been considered the parent country of
fables. With regard to the transfer of collections of Indian fables to
the West since the sixth century A. D the statement holds good, especi¬
ally for many beast stories, which, so to say, have been pressed into the
service of politics, to serve as a mirror for princes. Accordingly, in this
department, and for the period named, we must add to the three, or
rather four, possibilities to be weighed in estimating the value of coin¬
cidences between India and the West, yet a fifth.*
But, as regards older times, we must absolutely give up the notion
that India is the parent country of the iEsopian fable. On the con¬
trary, the Greek form of the fable (putting aside the question of its
* The five possibilities referred to seem to be : — (1) Borrowing by India from
Greece, (2) Spontaneons, natural, independent development in both countries, (3)
Derivation from primitive Indo-Germanic (Aryan) nature myths, (4) Borrowing by
Greece from India, and re-importation into India from Greece, (5) Transfer of
political apologues from India to Europe in sixth century A. D. and later. [F. A. 0.]
But see post .
67
1892.] V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
possible independent origin) gives, when compared with the Indian, a
more distinct impression of simplicity and originality.
The beasts who take special parts in the beast stories either do not
belong distinctively to the Indian fauna, or do not exhibit the charac¬
teristics which the Hindus attribute to them.
There is reason to suppose that two words borrowed from Greek
fables occur in Sanskrit, viz., lopdka , ‘ jackal,’ from dAohn^, (the old
Indian form being lopasa) ; and Jcramelaka, ‘ camel,’ from ; both
forms being based on a meaning obtained by popular etymology. Lassen
is inclined to seek a Semitic origin for hramelaha, but the termination
ela is decisive against this supposition.
[The word is, however, said to occur in all Semitic languages.
Prof. Weber’s position is hardly intelligible without further explana¬
tion. He refers to his Ind. Stud. 8, 336, Monatsber. d. Berl. Akad. 1871,
p. 619. V. A. £.]
In this case also the Buddhists have been the chief carriers of
Western materials to India, especially in their Jataka stories.
So far we have dealt with essentially popular materials, and with
appropriations made, so to speak, by word of mouth.
There is, however, an artistic form of Greek literature, the Greek
romance, which appears to have found direct entrance into India.
Peterson, in his preface to his edition of Bana’s Kadambari (1883,
p. 101) compares the style of the author directly with that of the
Alexandrian, Achilles Tatius (A. D. 450).
I have already in my remarks on that work ( D . L. Zeitung, 1884,
p. 120) pointed out that it was very natural that the “ good looking
girls,” the Yavana maidens, at the courts of the Indian kings should
have formed a means of communication for Milesian love stories.
Material resemblances, moreover, exist between the Vasavadatta of
Subandhu, a predecessor of Bana, and a tale of Athenseus (13, 35),
( flor . circa A. D. 230) and both Indian authors describe the bringing to
life of a stone statue by an embrace, so as to recall the story of Pygma¬
lion.
In this connection the fact is of special interest that in one of the
tirades in the bombastic style usual in the Vasavadatta the word ‘ink ’
is expressed by meld , i. e., /xe\ av The passage (Vasav. p. 239) is to the
following effect : — “ Though the heaven became the page, the sea the
ink-bottle (gneldnanda) , and the writer a Brahman, yet could he not
describe in many thousand ages the agonies of love which she has suf¬
fered on his account.” The same conceit is still popular in modern
Greek love songs, and, according to Hall, is found also in the Quran.
(18, 109). It probably goes back to the Milesian literature.
68
V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [N"o. 1,
It appears to me proper, before I go further, to insert here a brief
review of what is known as to the coincidences between the subjects of
Greek and Indian tales.
I shall not undertake in individual cases to decide which of the
five points of view is the true one, that is, to decide whether each story
(1) developed naturally, (2) or is of Indo-Germanic, or (3) of Western, or
(4) of Greek origin, or (5) was conveyed from India to the West. At
present such a determination is for the most part impracticable. But
I can at least arrange the whole generally in a certain chronological
order.
[Prof. Weber then proceeds to give, with references in each case,
a long catalogue of myths relating to the sun-bird, Garuda, Cinderella,
the wisliing-cow, etc., which are all descended from primitive, Indo-
Germanic, Vedic times. He classes in the same category the stories of
enchanted princes, castles, etc., etc., in which German folk-lore is so
rich. Some of these myths may have arisen in India, and the Greeks
and Romans knew a good many of these things on their own account.
An extensive and rich field of investigation here lies open. I may note
that the Indian Antiquary for several years past has published numerous
stories of Indian folk-lore, which are not here referred to by Prof.
W eber.
He then gives a similar list of myths which have travelled from the
West to India, such as the treasure-chamber of Rhampsinitus, the Rape
of Ganymede, the Sibylline books, Orpheus and Eurydice, etc., etc.
Christian legends wrill be dealt with further on. He then proceeds to
discuss the origin of the Indian drama. He holds that the germ of the
Indian drama is to be found in indigenous religious festivals, resembling
the German Passion plays, and that this opinion is strongly confirmed
by passages in the Mahabhashya ( see Ind. Stud. 13, 490 seqqf. But the
beginnings of dramatic art thus indicated are of a simple and grotesque
kind, separated by a very wide interval from the finished work of Kali¬
dasa. The scope for Greek influence was found in this interval. He
then briefly notices with approval the treatises of Brandes and Windisch,
which I have discussed in my former essay.
He next takes up the subject of astronomy, his remarks on which
I shall translate at greater length. V. A. S .]
So far as the sciences are concerned, astronomy is above all that in
which Greek influence is plainly and clearly visible. The [Indian astro¬
nomers themselves expressly describe the Yavanas as being their
teachers. Among the five ancient Siddhantas which the astronomer
Varahamihira (A. D. 504-87) has specially made use of there are two,
the Pulisa and Romaka Siddhantas, which [prove this by their very
1892 ] V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
69
names. The name Pulisa must be understood as equivalent to Paulus
Alexandrinus.
I have already mentioned ( ante , p. -gVV) that the extant Surya
Siddhanta represents Asura Maya of Romakapura as the first founder
of astronomy, and that I regard him as being the Greek astronomer
Ptolemy. I have also identified Manetlio, the author of the Apotoles-
mata, [not earlier than the 5th century A. D., according to Smith’s
Classical Dictionary. V. A. $.], with Manittha, or Manindba. Others
regard the name of the Yavana teacher ( Yavanesvara ) Asphuvi[d]-
dhvaja (Sphujidhvaja) as a corruption of a Greek name Aphroisios or
Speusippus.
Whilst the oldest Indian astronomy, resting probably on a Baby¬
lonian basis, occupies itself witli the moon and its mansions ( nakshatra ) ;
the succeeding phase, under Greek influence, concerns itself chiefly with
the planets and the sun, that is to say, the zodiac.
The direct consequence of this is the conversion of the Krittika
series of the nahshatras, hitherto current, and corresponding to a Taurus
zodiac, into the Asvini series, corresponding to the Aries zodiac. More¬
over, not only have the names of the planets and zodiacal signs passed
by direct transcription into Sanskrit, and remained to some extent in
use till the latest times (eg. dr a — ’A prjs, and heli — rjXios), but numerous
technical terms also have been incorporated into the language. Some
of these have been worked into the poetic vocabulary, for example,
jdmitra (— Sia/xerpov) occurs in Kalidasa’s Kumarasambhava. [The
correct form is Sia/xerpos, not Si a/xerpov V. A. $.]
According to H. Jacobi, the allusions to ancient astrological notions,
such as occur in Kalidasa, are chiefly based on the works of Firmicus
Maternus (A. D. 336-354). [The work of Firmicus Maternus is known
under the title, ‘ Matheseos Libri VIII,’ and is described as being a
formal introduction to judicial astrology. V. A. $.].
With regard to arithmetic and algebra, in which the Indians are
well-known to have accomplished much, Colebrooke (Misc. Essays, 2,
401, 446) was inclined to accept the fact of Greek influence, especially
that of Diophantus.
On the contrary, Dr. Hoernle, in the preface to his excellent dis¬
sertation on an ancient arithmetical text, composed in the Gatha dialect,
and seemingly of Buddhist origin, decides for “ the entirely native
origin ” of Indian arithmetic. The text in question is supposed to date
from the third or fourth century A. D , but the extant manuscript does
not seem to be older than the eighth or tenth century. [Compare
Major Temple’s exposition of Burmese arithmetic in Indian Antiquary,
Vol. XX (1891), p. 53. The Burmese system is said to be much the
70
Y. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1
same as that used by astrologers in India, and certainly does not seem
to show the slightest trace of the influence of western science.
V. A. $.]. Woepcke {Mem. surla propagation des chijfres In dienes , Paris,
1863) supposes that there is an agreement between the so-called Are-
narius of Archimedes (B. C. 287-212) and the problem concerning the
atomic contents of a yojana set at the wedding examination of Buddha.
If the alleged coincidence be accepted as established, it would be simpler
to believe that the Buddhist statement, the age of which is in no way
established, rests on borrowing, then to hold with Woepcke that the
problem was borrowed from India. It is even possible that both the
Greek and Indian forms of it are the results of Babylonian influence.
Quite recently a Sanskrit version of the Elements of Euclid has
come to light. In its existing form this work does not go back to a
period earlier than the beginning of the last century. The information
about it is, however, extremely vague. We do not know whether this
work rests on an earlier one of ancient date, or whether it is to be
referred to the beginning of the preceding, that is to say, the 17th
century, as the result of modern European influence, possibly that of
the Jesuit fathers at the court of the emperor Akbar (1556-1605).
In any case the discovery is of interest, because the foreign material
of the book has been completely melted down into an Indian shape,
which fact offers an excellent parallel for similar precedents in older
times.
[This melting down into Indian forms is characteristic of almost
all the Indian borrowings, and is the reason that the foreign origin of
so much of Indian civilization has been so tardily and unwilling re¬
cognized. I have already commented on the fact with reference to
architecture, sculpture, coinage, and the drama. (See my previous essay ,
p. 189.) The only exception to the rule seems to be the sculpture of
the Gandhara school, which is obviously western in character. V, A. $.]
Notwithstanding these possible, or even very doubtful, examples of
Greek influence, the Hindus have certainly gone their own way in the
province of arithmetic, geometry, etc. The oldest, and rather curiously
framed, rules upon permutations and combinations are naturally con¬
nected with metrical problems, such as ‘ How many variations based on
the quantity of the syllables are possible in a foot of two, three, four
or more syllables ’ ? Here no foreign influence can well be detected.
Similarly the rules in the so-called S'ulvasutra are derived from
practical experiments on the methods of modifying the typical bird-
shape of the regulation fire-altar built of bricks. These experiments
actually led to the discovery and solution of the theorem concerning
the relation between the hypotenuse and the sides of a right-angled
1892.] V. A. Smith — On tlce Civilization of Ancient India. 71
triangle ascribed by the Greeks to Pythagoras, and even to attempts at
the quadrature of the circle.
In connection with this subject, L. v. Schroder has recently (in
1884) maintained the pi*oposition that this very theorem was borrowed
along with other things by Pythagoras from India.
But nothing is known concerning the date of the S'ulvasutra, which
is itself only an appendix to one of the so-called S'rautasutras of the
Yajur Veda. Pythagoras is generally assumed to have flourished be¬
tween B. C. 540-500, and this is rather an early period in which to
suggest importation from India.
It is in reality unnecessary in this case to adopt the hypothesis of
borrowing at all, for it is quite possible that correct mathematical results
may be attained independently in different places. The definite rules
of the S'ulvasutra were elaborated as the result of practical experience.
It should further be observed that the S'ulvasutra has remained quite iso¬
lated in India, and has, according to all appearance, undergone no
further development. We shall come later to the consideration of the
supposed studies of Pythagoras in India.
Indian medicine also appears not to have been uninfluenced by
Greek. The tendency of early writers was to exaggerate the high
antiquity of medical science in India. Haas has gone too far in the
other direction in supposing the Susruta to have been subject not only
to Greek but to Muslim influence, though it is possible that some modern
works of Indian medicine may have been affected by Muhammadan
teaching. Rudolf Roth has shown in an interesting way the relation
between the Asclepiad oath and the teaching of the Charaka concerning
the duties of the physician. The identity of the doctrine of the three
humours is obvious. Should further coincidences of the kind be estab¬
lished, chronology, at any rate, will oppose no obstacle to the deriva¬
tion of the Indian doctrines from Greek sources.
So far as concerns philosophy, and religious ideas, which in India
are hardly separable from it, the statements of the Greek authors leave
no doubt that the Indian ascetics, yuyuvoo-o</>i<7Tai, v\o/3lol made a deep
impression on Alexander and his companions. The voluntary burning of
Kalanos at Athens aroused a feeling of profound, but at the same time,
compassionate astonishment. Nor is any doubt possible that the doc¬
trines of the Alexandrian Neo-Platonists and Neo- Pythagoreans, especi¬
ally the doctrines of Philo of Alexandria, and the doctrine of the Aoyos
derived from him as given in St. John’s Gospel, bear Indian features,
or rather appear to have been impregnated with Indian ideas.
But to go back to still earlier times, and to derive the Pythagorean
doctrine of metempsychosis also from India appears to me, on the
contrary, to be doubtful.
72
Y. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
L. v. Schroder, who has recently advocated this theory, does not,
indeed, go so far as one of his predecessors, who wished to explain the
name of Pythagoras as equivalent to Buddliagurn, but even he maintains
that the Pythagorean doctrine of transmigration of souls is derived
from India, that is to say, from Buddhism. In fact only the latter
assumption need be made, for it would seem that before Buddha this
doctrine had not gained acceptance in India, whilst with him it forms a
corner stone for his preachings intended for the people, especially the
Jataka legends. Now the still imperfectly ascertained date of Buddha
corresponds at least approximately with the fixed date of Pythagoras,
namely, B. C. 540-500, or perhaps a little later.
On mere a priori grounds it seems in a high degree unlikely that
Buddha was the teacher, and Pythagoras the learner. Since direct
relations between the two men are not to be thought of, but only in¬
direct ones by way of Egypt or Persia, we must, considering the diffi¬
culties of communication in those times, allow at least several decades,
even if that be sufficient, for the establishment of such relations. More¬
over, the doctrine of transmigration of souls is in itself so agreeable to
the human mind as a means of equalizing the injustices of life on earth,
by reward or punishment of the actions of men, that it may be regarded
as an idea of natural growth. Of course, we cannot affirm of it, as of
the so-called Pythagorean theorem, that it gives an accurate result, but
it may very well have arisen independently among various peoples, in
various parts of the world, without obliging us to assume a mutual
borrowing.
When, however, we find Socrates, in the Gorgias, using the formula
rd KaXd, dxpeXtfxa, rj Sea (or, as it is rendered in Latin, ‘ honestum, utile,
dulce,’) to express the ideal of legislation and morality, this formula
agrees so closely with the three Indian objects of living, dharma, artha ,
hama, and has such an individual colouring, that it is at least difficult
to suppose that the conception originated independently in both places.
In India this triad does not appear in the most ancient period, but
only in more recent times, so that in this case I do not hesitate to give
priority to Plato.
The Brahmans of the Yedic period were not acquainted with the
formula. The Buddhists and Jains lay special stress on it. They fre¬
quently use the words dharma and artha together in the senses respec¬
tively of ‘ law or precept,’ and ‘ meaning, or signification of dharma ,’
which differ completely from the sense the same words have when used
in combination with the third word hama. This circumstance indicates
that the triad was formed in consequence of a foreign suggestion.
Just as Greek stories have fouud their way into the Jataka legends
1892.] V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. 73
of Buddha, these Platonic ideas may very well have been transferred
in a similar way.
Even the bridge by which they crossed may probably be recognized.
For should not the dialogues between the Yavana king Milinda (Me¬
nander), and the Buddhist priest Nagasena, as given in the ‘ Milinda-
panha,’ be regarded as connected with the Platonic dialogues P May
we not even look upon them as an intentional Indian imitation ? Olden-
berg suggests that reminiscences of meetings between Indian monks and
Greek rhetoricians are preserved in these dialogues.
In the preceding case we have to deal not so much with a doctrine
belonging to the peculiar systems of Indian philosophy as with a, so
to speak, popular view. Nevertheless, even for these systems the
chances of literary history are very unfavourable to their priority as com¬
pared with those of the old Greek philosophy, inasmuch as the former,
on the whole, belong to a much later period than the latter.
When, therefore, in any direction a special agreement between the
old Greek and Indian philosophies is found to exist (such, for example,
as may be the case with regard to the Indian atomic theory, developed
later in a very peculiar fashion), and that agreement cannot be regarded
as a spontaneous, independent, mental product of both peoples, we
must always assume a borrowing from Greece.
An example of the contrary may here be noted, though it is con¬
cerned with a popular conception rather than with a doctrine of syste¬
matic philosophy. In India, besides the above mentioned triad of the ob¬
jects of human life we find another of a purely ethical kind, namely, a
classification of sins into those of thought, word, and deed, which testifies
to a very high and pure popular moral consciousness. This triad occurs
in the Avesta and Veda, as well as with the Buddhists, and so dates
from the Aryan period, during which the later Iranians and Indians still
formed one nation.
When, therefore, we find it in our Christian litanies from the time
of Pope Damasus in the middle of the fourth century down to Paul
Gerhardt (“with heart, mouth, and hands”) we must recognize an
Indian, probably Buddhist, influence on the western form. Some points
of connection with the Protagoras of Plato, as well as with certain
biblical expressions, may also be traced, but not enough to establish any
systematic ethical doctrine, such as is expressed in the litanies.
In this connection must be considered the question recently pro¬
pounded by Rudolf Seydel, Jul. Happel, and others, as to how far we
may assume possible Buddhist influence on the Christian legends, and
even on the gospels themselves.
It is obvious that, even if the supposed influence is established, the
j
74
Y. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
teaching of Christ suffers no disparagement, and is in no wise touched
as regards its peculiar meaning.
The question whether parables, such as those of the prodigal son,
and the Samaritan woman at the fountain, which occur in nearly iden¬
tical forms in Buddhist literature are of Christian origin, or, conversely,
the result of Buddhist influence on Christianity, still seems to me one
that is altogether open. Especially, because I do not agree with those
who attribute to the Buddhist texts concerned an antiquity so high as
is generally supposed.
But it is quite clear that Buddhism by means of its convents for
monks and nuns, its legends of saints, its worship of relics, its towers, its
bells, and, above all, through its rich ritual and hierarchical pomp, did
exercise influence on the development of Christian worship and cere¬
monial.
The influence of Indian Buddhism on the development of Gnosti¬
cism and Mainchoeism is also established. The doctrine of the Trinity,
likewise, might possibly be connected with the triad of the Avesta, —
Ahuramazda, Zarathustra, and the congregation, — as well as writh the
Buddhist triad, Buddha, D harm a, and Samgha.
It is, moreover, well-known that the two Catholic saints Barlaam
and Josaphat simply owe their origin to a mistaken appropriation of a
Buddhist legend. Finally, the rosary of the Catholic Church, is, accord¬
ing to all appearance, of Indian origin, and its very name seems to be
due to an erroneous apprehension of the word japamald, the Sanskrit
term for c prayer-necklace.’*
But we must also look in the opposite direction, for nowhere does
continual give and take more constantly occur than in these matters,
which so profoundly concern the human spirit.
When then, for example, it is said in the Kathaka Upanishad
(1, 2, 23) “ This atman (here the term practically is equivalent to
* God ’) is to be apprehended not through instruction, nor insight, nor
yet by much learning, but only by him whom He chooses that through
him He may be known,” the connection of this doctrine, the idea of
which is otherwise foreign to India, with the doctrine of ‘ election by
grace ’ in the Epistle to the Romans is so apparent that it seems to me
that Christian influence must here be assumed. In my opinion the
position of this text in literary history, as the work is now extant in
the Atharva recension, is in no way inconsistent with this view.
According to Oldenberg ( Buddha , p. 5G, (1890)), however, the
Kathakopanishad should be regarded as prae-Buddhist, and, if this be
* Jap A means China rose in Kiratarjuniya and S'isnpala vadha ( Benfey , Diet.)
[V. A.S.]
75
1892.] V. A. Smith- — On the Civilization of Ancient India.
true, the question must be decided in the converse way. For the doc¬
trine referred to is not one of such natural growth as to justify the as¬
sumption that it arose independently in India as well as in Galilee.
As to the Bhagavadgita it is certain that it shows the influence of
Christian teaching, though Lorimer goes much too far in maintaining
this proposition.
Wilson long ago traced back to a Christian basis the whole doctrine
of hhaldi , the unconditional, believing devotion to the Lord, that is to
the sectarian god with whom the work is concerned.
The frequent designation of the teacher under the traditional epi¬
thet of sveta, white, or of a name in which sveta forms a part, seems to refer
to white men, Christian missionaries.
The full information given in the Mahabharata (12, 12771, seqq.)
about the travels of the Indian wise men (Ekata, Dwita, Trita, and
especially, Narada) over the sea, as far as S'vetadwipn, the ‘ Island of the
(sveta) white men,’ in order to learn there the doctrine of the One God,
is intelligible only when understood to refer to the journeyings of pious
Indians to Alexandria, and the knowledge of Christianity which they
there acquired.
The knowledge of the name of Christ, the son of the divine Virgin,
obtained in this way, and further diffused by Christian missionaries and
the residence of natives of India in Christian countries, aud by the
partially divine honour paid to him by his followers could not fail to
remind the Indians of the semi-divine Krishna, son of Devaki, whose
name seems to mean divine. r
Thus it has come to pass that many Christian incidents and legends,
especially those of Christ’s birth among the shepherds, the stable,
the manger as his place of birth, the taxing by Osesar Augustus, the
massacre of the innocents at Bethlehem, and others of the sort, are
repeated in the Indian legends of Krishna.
The ordinary legends state that the child Krishna, in order to save
him from hostile machinations, was removed on the night of his birth
from the lying-in-room by his father and made over to his foster-
parents, the shepherd couple, Nanda and Yasoda. But certain detailed
rules concerning the festival of Krishna’s nativity exist, and are found
in texts of quite modern date, which narrate the incidents in a different
way, that clearly betrays a foreign origin. According to this version,
Devaki, the child’s mother, stays quietly lying in the manger, nursing the
infant, while numerous groups of shepherds, angels, and others stand
around blessing and praising. Even the ox and ass are not wanting. The
star, which stands still in the sky, and fixes the date for the festival,
is Roliini, or Aldebaran.
76
V. A. Smith — On the Civilization of Ancient India. [No. 1,
Concerning the early existence of Christian congregations in India,
supposed to have been established by the Apostle Thomas, no doubt can
be entertained. According to the testimony of Nilos Doxopatrios, who
lived in the twelfth century, the Patriarch of Antioch, even at that late
date, sent a KaOoXiKos, or deacon, to 'Pcopnyrpi, or Ramagiri, in India.
In the sixteenth century the Portuguese found the Christians of the
Church of St. Thomas in Malabar using Syrian books and Arian forms
of worship. They gave themselves a great deal of trouble to convert
these heretics. A certain image of Devaki, nursing the infant Krishna,
which recalls the representations of the Madonna Lactans, may be ex¬
plained as a result of the delicate diplomatic skill of the Jesuit Mis¬
sionaries at the court of Akbar the Great, but it is possible that its
origin should rather be traced back to an ancient Byzantine motive.
In conclusion, an early reference to Christian missions, in connec¬
tion, not with the worship of Krishna, but with that of Rama, whose
mild form is much more appropriate for the purpose, must be brought
forward. I allude to the legend of S'ambuka, the pious S'udra, which
is used by Kalidasa in the Raghuvansa (XY, 50), and by Bhavabhuti in
the Uttara Ramacharita. ( Act II, Wilson, Hindu Theatre, Yol. I,
p. 319).
In the Raghuvansa version S'ambuka simply meets his death at the
hands of Rama as a penalty for having applied himself to ascetic
practices in order to attain the rank of a god (surapadam) , although as
a S'udra, he was not entitled to do so. He was therefore regarded as a
disturber of the public peace, and is stated to have failed in attaining
his object {gatim na prdpa).
In Bhavabhuti’s work, on the contrary, the victim actually appears
on the scene as the man-god, in divine form, and gives thanks to Rama
for having been aided by his coming to attain death, and there!7 y divine
rank and blessedness.
K. M. Banerjea, in the preface to his edition of the Narada-
Pancha-ratra, has recognized, and probably with justice, in this legend
an allusion to the settlement of Christian missionaries on the coasts of
Coromandel and Malabar. It is possible that in the form of the legend
as given by Bhavabhuti a faint reference to Simeon of St. Luke’s Gospel
(II, 25, 29) may dimly be discerned, but, if this be so, Simeon has been
terribly disfigured by his Indian disguise.
Last of all, it should be observed that when a modern text, the
S'ukraniti, in enumerating the 32 Indian sciences, gives the last place
to the Ydvanam matam , which is explained as meaning ‘ the doctrine of
the unity of God,’ the reference is more probably to the Koran than to
the New Testament. G. Oppert, however, the editor of this work,
considers it to be very old.
1892.] F. Kielhorn — Copper-plate Inscription of Mahipala.
77
The Dinajpur Copper-Plate Inscription of Mahipala. — By Professor
F. Kielhorn, C. I. E. ; Gottingen.
Some time in 1886 the Society before which I have the honour to
lay this short paper received from Mr. Giridhari Basu, Deputy Inspector
of Schools at Dinajpur, several rubbings of a newly discovered copper¬
plate inscription. They were submitted to the late Dr. Rajendralala
Mitra, who pronounced the find an important one, but was prevented by
the state of his eyes from attempting a decipherment. About six months
ago the same rubbings were sent by Dr. Hoernle to myself, with an in¬
vitation, if possible, to edit the inscription for the Society. In now com¬
plying with Dr. Hoernle’s request, I may well say that this new Diuajpur
copper-plate is indeed of great value, because, together with the Society’s
Amgachhi plate of which I owe an excellent impression to Mr. Fleet, it
settles beyond dispute the line of succession of the so-called Pala dynasty
of Bengal, from Narayanapala down to Yigrahapala III. The new plate,
it is true, in its historical portion contains nothing which is not in the
Amgachhi plate ; but it enables us to read what before in that plate was
illegible, just as the Amgachhi plate supplies much of what would other¬
wise be doubtful or illegible in the Dinajpur plate. And having care¬
fully compared both plates, I may state with confidence that, beginning
from Naravanapala, the line of Pala kings was as follows : —
(1.) R arayanapala.
(2.) His son Rajyapala.
(3.) His son Gopala II.
(4.) His son Yigrahapala II.
(5.) His son Mahipala.
(6.) His son Hayapala.
(7.) His son Yigrahapala III.
Of these, Narayanapala is the donor in the Society’s Bhagalpur
plate, Mahipala the donor in this new Dinajpur plate, and Yigrahapala
III. the donor in the Amgachhi plate.
Like the two other plates, the new Dinajpur plate is a single one,
measuring about 1' broad by 1' 2|" high. It is surmounted by a highly
wrought ornament, fixed on the upper part and advanced some distance
on the plate, and apparently containing, within a circle, about 2f" in
diameter, the word S'ri-Mahipdladevasya. The plate is inscribed on both
sides, the front containing 34, and the back 28 lines of writing. On the
front down to line 13, and on the whole of the back the writing is
generally well preserved ; but the middle of the front all the way down
below line 13 has suffered much from corrosion, so that many aksharas
K
78
F. Kielliorn — Copper-plate Inscription of Mahipala. [No. 2,
liave become more or less illegible. Besides, two ahsharas are entirely
gone at the lower proper right corner, where the plate is damaged. The
engraving apparently is deep and carefully executed ; it was done by the
artisan Mahidhara, an emigrant from the village of Posali (line 62), the
father of the artisan S'as'ideva who engraved the A'mgachhi plate. The
size of the letters is about T\". The characters are the kind of Nagari
wliich about the 10th and 11th centuries appears to have been current
in the eastern part of northern India, and one peculiar feature of which
is, that r, preceding another consonant, is ordinarily denoted, not by the
superscript sign, but by a short line, sideways attached to the upper
right side of the following consonant. Essentially the same alphabet is
employed in the Mungir copper-plate of Devapala, in the Budal pillar
inscription of which I owe an impression to Dr. Burgess, and in some of
the Gaya inscriptions. The language of our inscription is Sanskrit.
Lines 1-24, with the exception of the introductory om svasti , and lines
54-62 are in verse ; the rest is in prose. As regards orthography, b is
throughout denoted by the sign for v, and the dental sibilant is occa¬
sionally employed instead of the palatal, and the palatal instead of both
the dental and the lingual sibilants.
The inscription is one of the devout follower of Sugata (Buddha),
the Paramesvara Paramabhattdralia Malidrdjdclhirdja Mahipdladeva, the
successor of the Maharajadhiraja Vigrahapaladeva (1. 30). From his
residence at Vi[la]sapura 1 2 * (1. 29), Mahipaladeva informs the officials
and people concerned that, to increase his parents’ and his own merit
and fame and to please the holy Buddha (1. 46), after bathing in the
Ganges at the time of .a Visliuvasamhrdnti 2 (11. 49 and 50), he has given
the village of Kuratapallika (exclusive of the part called Chutapallika),
— a village in the Gokalika mandala of the Kotivarslia vishaya of the
Pundravardhana bhuJdi 3 (11. 30 and 31), — to a learned Brahman, the
bliattaputra Krishnadityasarman, a son of the bliattaputra Madhusudana
and son’s son of the bhattaputra Rishikesa, 4 of the Parasara gotra and
with the pravara S'akti, Vasislitha and Parasara, an inhabitant of the
village of Chavati, to where he or his ancestors had migrated from the
village of Hastipada (11. 47-49). The king moreover appeals to his
1 The second altshara of this name is indistinct in the rubbings. — A different
place is mentioned in the Amgachhi plate ; but it is not Mudgagiri.
2 i. e., either the Mesha- or the Tula-samkranti.
2 The Kotivarsha vishaya and Pundravardhana bhulcti are mentioned similarly
in the Amgachhi plate.
feo the name is given in the plate. The correct spelling would be Hrishikesa.
The plate also mentions the Yeda and sd/chd of the donee, but the words for both
are illegible.
1892.] F. Kielhorn — Copper-plate Inscription of Mahipdla. 79
successors to respect this grant, and commands the villagers to make
over to the donee all due taxes and shares of the produce (11. 50-53).
The wording of the prose passage (11. 24-53) of which the preceding
is an abstract agrees most closely with the phraseology of the Bhagal-
pur plate.5 6 The royal residence of Vi[la]sapura and Mahipaladeva
himself are described exactly as Mudgagiri and ISTarayanapaladeva are in
the other plate. And the long line of officials enumerated, the quali¬
fications of the village granted and the exhortation to future rulers, etc.
are almost identical in both plates. A difference which may be pointed
out is that, while in the present inscription, just as in the A'mgachhi
plate, the donation is made to please the holy Buddha, in the Bkagalpur
plate bTarayanapala, though also described as a devout follower of
Sugata, professes to please the holy S'iva and actually makes his gift
in favour of that deity.
As is the case in the other inscriptions, this grant was dated (in
line 53) in regnal years ; but the figures for the year and day and the
name of the month are illegible in the rubbings. The date is followed
(in lines 54-61) by seven of the usual benedictive and imprecatory verses
of which five occur also in the Bkagalpur plate, while all are given, in
the same order, in the A'mgachhi plate. And these again are (in line 61)
followed by another verse which records that the dutaka for this grant
was the minister Bhatta Yamana. The inscription closes with a verse
containing the name of the engraver which has been already mentioned
above.
I have reserved for the end my account of the introductory
poetical part of the inscription (lines 1-24), which gives the genealogy
of the Pala princes from Gopaladeva I. to the ruling prince Mahipala¬
deva. It consists of twelve verses.6 Verses 1-5 are identical with the
verses 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7, and the sixth verse is a slightly altered version of
verse 10, of the Bkagalpur plate. And the genealogy furnished by these
six verses undoubtedly is, as Dr. Rajendralala Mitra and Dr. Hultzsch
have put it : —
1. Gopala.
r - A
2. Dharmapala. Vakpala.
r - A - — \
3. Devapala. Jayapala.
4. Vigrahapala.
5. Varayanapala.
5 See Dr. Hultzscli’s edition in the Indian Antiquary, vol. XV, p. 304.
6 All the verses occur in the Amgachhi plate.
so
F. Kielliorn — Copper-plate Inscription of Mahipala. [No. 2,
I am aware that, as regards Devapala, this statement of the relation¬
ship of the earlier Pala princes does not agree with the account of the
Mungir copper-plate7 which makes that prince (not the nephew, but)
the son of Dharmapala and his queen, a Rashtrakuta princess ; but I see
no way of reconciling the difference. Considering that the Mungir
grant was issued by Devapala himself, it is more than probable that
what is stated in it is correct, and that the other inscriptions in this
particular are wrong.
Having brought down the genealogy to Narayanapala, our inscrip¬
tion proceeds as follows : —
( Verse 7.) ‘ His (i. e ., Narayana’s) son was the protector of the
middle world, the illustrious Rajyapala, whose fame is proclaimed by
water-tanks as deep as the sea and by temples the walls of which equal
the noblest mountains.
(8.) As the store of light proceeds from the eastern mountain, so
sprang from that king of the east a son, born from his fortunate queen,8
a daughter of the high ( tuiiga ) high-crested ( uttuhga-mauli )9 moon of
the Rashtrakuta family, — the illustrious Gfopaladeva, who long was the
sole lord of the earth, gaily clad by the four oceans which are lustrous
with many precious stones.
(9.) Him, richly endowed with the qualities of a king, the fortune
of regal power, — energy, good counsel and majesty, — worshipped as her
lord, dear and attached to him, and serving the earth like a fellow wife.
(10.) From him sprang in the course of time, augmenting the in¬
numerable blessings of his parent, Vigrahapaladeva, who, dear to all,
stainless and versed in every art, when he arose, alleviated like the
moon10 the distress of the world.
(11.) When the huge elephants of his army had drunk pure
water in the water-abounding: eastern land, and had roamed about at
will in the sandal forests at the foot of the Malaya range, they like
clouds took possession of the ridges of the snowy mountain, cooling the
trees with showers of drizzling rain.11
7 See the lithograph in the Asiatic Researches, vol. I, p. 123, plate I, line 14.
8 Or Bhagyadevi may be the proper name of the queen.
9 Undoubtedly the writer, by the words tungasyottungamauleh, means to sug¬
gest the name of the Rashtrakuta king spoken of ; or he may even have used Tunga
as a proper name, for Jagattunga. I understand the prince referred to to be the
Rashtrakuta Jagattunga II., who must have ruled in the beginning of the 10th cen¬
tury A. D. — See Fleet’s Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts, p. 36 ; and Bhandarkar’s
Early History of the Bekhan, p. 53.
U The epithets of the king may, of course, in different senses be applied also to
the moon.
11 Viz., the water discharged from the elephant’s trunks.
81
1892.] F. Kielliorn — Copper-plate Inscription of MaMpctla.
(12.) From liim has sprung the protector of the earth, the illus¬
trious Mahipaladeva. In the pride of his arm having slain in battle all
opponents, and having obtained his father’s kingdom which had been
snatched away by people having no claim to it, he has put down his
lotus-foot on the heads of princes ?
Comment on these verses appears unnecessary. I will only say
that exactly the same verses occur also in the Amgachhi plate, with this
difference only that verse 11 in that other plate is applied to Mahipala-
deva’s grandson Vigrahapaladeva III. For the Amgachhi plate carries
the genealogy two generations further than our Dinajpur plate, in two
verses which I would venture to read and translate thus : —
foRfa wsmv f^fiwcrr
ciwrts
t?}cn WfilsfNt: xpTT^Tffi:
«5ri% vgvtsfirefi vfcci: f % faffvur i
'spsftafe Uf cra> vrajjrr ] n
‘ From him, (i, e., Mahipaladeva), in consequence of his religious
merits, was born the fortunate prince Navapala. Renouncing the attach¬
ment to sin, putting down his foot on the heads of princes, eagerly
fulfilling all desires, free from mental blindness, beloved by his subjects
and the one home of affection, — he was like the sun which, when it
rises above the eastern mountain, moves away from the night, touches
with its rays the tops of mountains, opens up quickly all the quarters,
drives away darkness, and is pleasant and red.
‘ From him is born the illustrious prince Vigrahapaladeva, full of ma¬
jesty. Eagerly gazed at by good men, always anxious to worship Smara’s
enemy, expert in battle even more than Hari, a god of death for the clan
of his enemies, and a supporter of the four castes, he pleases the world
with the abundance of his bright fame.’12
12 I am unable, in my translation, to do justice to this verse. Vigrahapala,
yellow ( pita ), red ( ralcta ), green (harita), and black (Jcala), and thus the substratum of
four colours ( chaturvarnya ), yet pleased the people by his white colour.
82
F. Kielhorn — Copper-plate Inscription of Mahtpala. [No. 2,
TEXT.13
Eront.
L, 1 [ arf ]14 | 15^wf
2 ibnft’ *rercRp*t(mt)ftifa-
3 i f%-
4 mi v- [^n^iftnH^nfwr^ sn^ft-
5 jutti nififj « sftms'srN’iTvV6 sjsrfer ?-
6 jihlTO^V II 175T#5i5ftfiT-
7 %cT5I TtB VW 5JTWT TI^^IUIl^Trfeciqc.mVT-
*r*rt *jJ3crm I nsnuift^T-
8 g^PiTcr: ^fmsrf^T^^mrtfvf^mT’a'fif^nffTTT ^t-
Si
v&rnrat -sir* ii
9 3Z'rtfiw5icm^»3JTg^qt ija: ^Vn^sqtr? gwifvm gra-
qrcraungsn 1 *r: ^ftwsr-
10 5jf^9iff51iq?lfct»5ifg: fsglcr: J^i: 3^qcTTf%^tfm3i*Y-
^SRUPTOT || I8€T^RT-
11 smT 5i^qranmT i
scnfacn sfv 5=
12 q«i% Tj^isnimisgsriftcr 11
ftw 5rici; i ^r^faciTsmTO-
13 From tlie rubbings.
14 This sign of iff is preceded by the alcshara which is also put at the end of
the first line, after The same ahshara fa is also engraved in the upper
right and left corners of the Bhagalpnr plate, and it appears to be similarly em¬
ployed in the Amgachhi plate. I am unable to explain its meaning.
15 Metre, Sragdhara.
16 Read ^fajift
17 Metre, S'ardulavikridita ; and of the next verse.
13 Metre, Vasantatilaka.
19 Metre, Arya.
1892.]
13
83
F. Kielhorn — Copper-plate Inscription of Mahipdla.
n “fgnantfc t^ftnrwrow g*r[cf
%%] ft*HST*jpRcl
14 ?tw(r)»J3 cRn nrcrani *r srgjr i g: ^"hifttrfcifw: fstcf [nftt-
^ *\ *N.
15 rntTTpst^qiT5: ^Kct: %7[q yr^f^jr] || "cft5(T[9l]§^f«-
[agr_«i]jnftcar^f ^rr ^
16 I f?WcT€tffR[JT?]fR-^ cTR R^RERRI
SlfcT WSJlTnfaroRls I 23cf^I-
17 cqRf^fcfETTfsfErftg mm ^rT5f*^%-
cHift Sf-
18 ^ff: i ^tw?Ji>qra%qf^q;5iT;rr[q%t5R]qw3t ftqft HTihjfhr-
19 fq^rfgqimt: n 24g nriffR T?r[ncr?;T]f kfrt i
urV «•-
20 TmtfjR ii qn%]*r
^ 1 ft’avlfsft-
21 nr nrara^ Sr«?tfg%sr gfsreft [»tr]r anr ii s6[%§t
snfn] rjgRRra ^r^rrfN n>-
22 rq crgg u^'Ttq^TqrT’a^ij [ i ] nwT
si^crf] nffatksqgrgn: m%5i[^]-
23 : 3R ii ~Ty^|>Ri]Rq^: [m-
(R)^]gnik;ify§RfalH’ cirr-
20 Metre, S'ardulavikrklita.
21 This is the reading of the Amgachhi plate also. Read
22 Metre, Vasantatilaka.
23 Metre, Sragdhara.
24 Metre, Indravajra.
25 Metre, Vasantatilaka.
26 Metre, Mandakranta. In the Amgachhi plate this yorse occurs in the des¬
cription of Vigrahapaladeva III. (lines 19 and 20).
27 Metre, Malini.
84 F. Kielhorn — Copper-plate Inscription of Mahvpala. ['N’o. 2,
24 i fjrff ajf§
*
26 ?r i 28fa?;fct^^^ra^3TiiCTW9m^WK[>*#]*r«T*;si(a*)-
?J5ficf5i^BH5I?i^TcT I
C\
<\
28 ?rr?r i q^^^rain^TTm^^’ft^^raT^iTKTcw?;-
i t%[^T
29 i trcn^Wt fl^TOsnRrciwtfa-
30 TRWVIfl f ^ I
32 ^miTr i + ]jrciTijgj;T^^m^ i i I
KT5iTflT(5f | n-tTeTftjfimf?-
33 i w^ngrefsisfi i jrvmjT5?!/9 i Tjvdmqfa l tTgrafcr-
tnc i TNTwrafasfr i wvtIXI^t-
34 [sro]30 i flVTfflTOirrar i TTatw^tvNft^r i I
'trk'fasKfflJSfi i *ufc[>r] i [^tIwtt-
25 Here and below many of the signs of punctuation, which it is unnecessary to
point out separately, are superfluous.
29 This appears to be engraved, but the Bhagalpur and Amgachhi plates have
fi^T^T^^T instead.
S° These aksharas are almost entirely broken away.
1892.] F. Kielhorn — Copper-plate Inscription of Mahipala. 85
BACK.
L.35 [fir]* i *rt(3rl)Pas* I I iher i rt-
36 5fRT?r i jqra i i cx^ra-
37 i *^’sfte'tfa(3r)®3lT-
38 RcT^ | %9Tfo^XJxfaf?®J5IXfTT-
39 *x«i^ | | JTfTurfrr^ |
40 I fAmfn | tJXTXTXfcT | [cTfO* I lf% I TTl^Tf I
tstxi w® I fifw I l ®r[3 l]
41 tXXS | ITS I [l] ^Rlt^I^fwTS KT’TqTTf'Tsftf^'T'
pfcT^ifeitt srx(m)n®tTO:t* i At tx-
42 irtTWfffj^(f^)iT;tJi%^ir?r^T®T?nfgiTnsT i i
Tt(^T)yTjffT I ?IHtf?9lfcT ^ fgfccl-
43 ath TT^si i ®x®: ^ttms’JUTifcrjfl-wK'T^TT-
SJ C\
«cx*t: I Tim-
44 H*: I *5pSXTSXTSI! | TOXWRTZ1 I ^SITTOR: I ST^VtsW I
RfCf<W^Nfts: I ^xfTS-
45 ttsrw: i ff]:31 1 5u«nTR*ftir®T:f??:T5itf<a5iTTr-
46 i ^r?^t4f^fcrTrrr^T5TTT i uxcxxfWfcxsfH^ stsjxuxt-
(7fT)f«5^% I WTTOri 3(l)^HfTT:-
47 ^1%T?T I WTTT(3T.)T:TTjft^ra I 91% I RfST® | TO®(9rK-
IR^XR |1 . . . % I ?TT5T-
48 . 9rmi^if^ I j^®T^raraT;®ciiif<T?iTfTr%52 1 ^fec^sjuT-
fgf^^crra i TOxfsinfl3W3jx-
51 The Bhagalpur and ALingachhi plates have
52 Read *?fat*?T**
86
F. Kielhorn — Copper -plate Inscription of Mahip&la. [No. 2,
49 ® i i l
[^nHifV]3re('jr)mir Pra(Vpt»P?iT-
50 =rft faPn?<T I JIBUTI *aWT Ttra^tsnsf I *ra>
51 ij i inftftiKfir »jxifcrtlT: l ’iSr^fawwjffc^w i ^mirir ^
52 i nfcj^nfaPra i to
53 • tPt ii • • •
[*t ?]f^ • i33 «3prt
54 ^*nfg3t(sn)f%’!i ^hfT* II M^)«f*TsfojT ^tIT tT^faWUT-
ftfir: I S'fiT W 3STT cIRT
55 tr,«w ii »jfn' w sfcreiBTfcr »ifi? yq^fcr i 3*^ eft'
TOffi^TWlf Pr^cT ^TJTTpTift II
56 UTTpfit <J%J-T3)3H"frsl*T I fK^lffltflTkTpT
>J ^
57 f® ^iwf ®W«T I «qr$HT ^Tf fl^T tf <Tt% *R% 3?pT II
^Tnwrc^Tti 5ft ?rf ^Tcr
58 sts^rcm i ® ft>(m)fn^T PisPr: ?r^ i
MTpTCS XTlf^l^T^ ȣ,-
59 KTH! I ^THT5^ «^T%(%)gStrTffli 3\T% ^1%
C
tmrahft ii 36s;pr
60 «rpj(»5)ft^wt®i fera®gpr»RT |
fcT^ ^(l)^t *T P? OT<?: HWtI-
Si
S3 The figures for the year and day and the name of the month are entirely
illegible in the rubbings.
34 Metre, S'loka (Anushtubh) ; and of the next four verses*
35 Metre, S'alini.
36 Metre, Pushpitagra,,
87
1892.] H. G\ Raverty — Some Muhammadan Goins.
61 fwf[ajn] i) ?]qtf%% I *r[f]-
5ft3Tfl*rf Trre^T fcf=s: fjcr: ||
62 [TfNpfftumftgfa . . . ft<wfeg»n] i
^ffarttTCfitPsiKr ||
Some of the Muhammadan Corns collected by the Afghan Boundary Com¬
mission from an historical point of view. — By Major H. G. Raverty.
I beg to be allowed to offer a few remarks on the coins procured by
the Afghan Boundary Commission, described by Dr. A. F. Hoernle, the
Supplementary No. IV of 1889 of the Society's Journal having just
reached me.
I do not pretend to a knowledge of numismatics, but of history : my
object here is to clothe these dry bones with a short account of some of
the chief events in the lives of those rulers in whose names they were
coined ; and even from this, brief as it is, we shall again have a proof
that truth is often stranger than fiction, and we shall find that there is
more connection between some of these rulers in their lives and mis¬
fortunes than might be expected.
The coin, serial number 41, which has been described as of “ ’Ala-
ud-din Muhammad bin Takash,” belongs really to his father, who ascended
the throne of Khwarazm in Rabi’-us-Sani, 569 H. (1173-74, A. D.), and
died in the middle of Shawwal, 596 H. (1199 A. D.) ; for if the inscription
be read, we shall find that it is “ Us-Sultan-ul-A’zam, ’Ala-ud-Dunya wa
ud-Din, Abu-l-Muzaffar, Takish, bin Khwarazm Shah.# He obtained
possession of Nishapur, the capital of Mu’ayyid-i-A’inah-dar’s territory,
mentioned farther on, in 569 H. (1173-74 A. D.).
That it is a mistake to call this a coin of ’Ala-ud-Din Muhammad
may be seen from the following coin 44, which bears this inscription,
“Us-Sultan-ul-A’zam, ’Ala-ud-Dunya wa ud-Din, Abu-l-Fath, Muham¬
mad, bin us- Sultan Takish.” The title, Abu-1- Muzaffar, being that of
Takish Khan, and Abu-l-Fath, that of the son. The other title, ’Ala-ud-
37 Metre, S'loka (Anushtubh).
33 The a/csharas in brackets are illegible here ; but the word is quite
clear in the Amgachhi plate.
# See Tabakat-i-Nasiri, pp. 239 — 244.
88
H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Goins.
[No. 2,
Dunya wa ud-Din, was borne by both. Before the latter came to the
throne he was styled Kutb-ud-Din, Muhammad, but, on his accession,
assumed that of ’Ala-ud- Din, the title borne by his father.* The inscrip¬
tions given on all the other coins after No. 44 ; namely 49, 50, 71, 98,
100, 101, 103, 105, 106, and 109, although not worded in the same
manner, all have Abu-1- Fath, and only one (No. 44) has Abu-l-Muzaffar.”
Sultan Takish Khan, “the Khwarazm Shah.” as the Turk rulers of
that territory were styled, was a very wise and sagacious Monarch of
whose witticisms many anecdotes are related. He had a strong-minded
wife, who, out of jealousy, on one occasion, shut him into a hot bath ;
and when some of the lords of his Court, who became aware of it, re¬
leased him, he was quite livid, and one of his eyes was nearly destroyed.
He was disloyal to the Khalifah, and this disloyalty was, subsequently,
the cause of much misfortune to his son and successor, and his grandson,
Sultan Jalal- ud-Din, Mang-barni. He was also hostile to the Shansabani
Tajzik rulers of G-liur.
Sultan Muhammad, the Khwarazm Shah, son of Sultan Takish
Khan, was that famous, but unfortunate, Sultan whose extensive empire
was invaded by the Chingiz or Great Khan and his Mughal hordes, an
account of whose reign is given in the Tabakat-i-Nasirl, pp. 253-279.
His sway extended over a great part of Asia, from the frontiers of China
to the frontiers of the present Turkish empire, and from the Indus to
the Persian Sea.f He came to the throne in the middle of 596 H. (1200
A. D.). He reduced Hirat on three different occasions, and, towards the
close of his reign, penetrated into Siberia, where “ the light of twilight
did not disappear to the vision; and, in the direction of the north, the
glow seemed merely to incline from west to east, and the light of dawn
appeared, and the day broke.” He died in great misery and distress of
mind and body in Shawwal, 617 H. (1220 A. D.). His son was the
famous hero, Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, Mang-barni, the Khwarazm Shah,
who, after keeping the Mughals at bay with a handful of men, plunged
into the Indus on his charger before the Chingiz Khan and his sons, and
the whole Mughal army, and crossed in safety notwithstanding the
volleys of arrows showered on him.J
* Tabalcat-i-Nasiri, p. 253.
f He likewise held sway over the tract called Banian, and sometimes known as
the territory of tlie Koh-i-Jud, that is, the country east of the Indus, as far as the
banks of the Jihlam or Bihat, north as far as the mountains of Kashmir, and south
as far as, and including, the Koh-i-Jud or Salt Range. The Karlugh Turks in the
Sultan’s service held it for him. This tract now comprises what are termed the
“Hazara” and Rawal Pindi districts of the Panjab.
J See Tabakat-i-Nasiri, p. 291.
89
1892.] H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Goins.
The mint name at page 10, which, it is said, has been read as
“ Baluquan ” or “ Taluqudn ” by Mr. Rodgers, is an error for —
Belekan, a city of Arran, between Shir wan and Azarbaijan.
That on page 11 read as “ Taliquan,” is o&Kh — Tal-kan, with no
‘i ’ in it, and does not refer to the place styled “ Talikhan” in Walker’s
and other maps, which was called “ Tal-kan of Tuhhdristdn ,” east of
Kundoz, but “Tal-kan” here meant (also written — Tae-ghan by
the Mughals and other Turks who change k into gh), “ of Khurasan ”
situated between Balkh and Marw-ar-Rud on the Murgh-ab, three days
journey from Marw-ar-Rud in one direction, and the same from Sha-
burghan or Shafurkan (the “ Shibarghan ” and “ Shibirkhan ” of the
maps j in another, the Murgh-ab river separating them. Tal-kan of
Khurasan was a famous stronghold ; particulars respecting it will be
found at pages 1003 and 1008 of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri, and also of its
capture by the Mughals, at page 1012.
The officers of the Afghan Boundary Commission were several times
within a few miles, and sometimes close to, most of the famous strong¬
holds captured or invested by the Mughals at this period, without know¬
ing anything about them. I could have furnished them with much
information on this subject ; and had the Government of India supplied
them with a copy of my translation of the work in question, they might
have found, and explored, many famous places, and not have been ignorant
of their past history.^
The mints of the coins Nos. 58 and 59 are the same Shaburghan or
Shafurkan, according to the same change of letters. Sultan Muhammad
first obtained sway over Hirat in 598 H. (1201-2 A. D.), and, on that
occasion, coin No. 72 appears to have been struck; and again in 600 H.
(1203-4 A. D.), and finally in 607 H. (1210-11 A. D.). The district
called the Zamin-i-Dawar followed, and on that occasion No. 71 was
probably coined.
The mint name of Nos. 76 and 81 must certainly be — Sughd,
not which is meaningless, nor Sughd means a depres¬
sion, a place where rain water collects ; and the name of a town and
* The following is a specimen. In a book lately published, entitled “ Northern
Afghanistan, or Letters from the Afghan Boundary Commission” by Major C. E.
Yate, C. S. I., p. 184 is the following: — “ What the name of Panjdeh, literally the
five villages, originally arose from, I cannot say. From the fact of the Sariks being
divided into five clans or sections, each with its separate settlements, it would look
at first sight as if they had given the name to the place ; but this is not the case,
as the name is of ancient date, being mentioned, so Rawlinson says, by Hafiz Abru
in A. D. 1417.”
In the Tabakat-i-Nasiri he would have found that Panj-dih was a well known
place three centuries and a half before Hafiz Abru wrote.
90
H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Corns.
[No. 2,
small district near Samr-kand, famous for its salubrity. Here tlie rulers
generally took up tbeir quarters, and it is famous as the Suglid of Samr-
kand. The Sultan reduced that territory in 608-609 H. (1212-13 A. D.),
and subsequently put its ruler, the Afrasiyabi Khan. ’Usman, to death.
Likewise, the correct name of the mint of Nos. 77, 78, 84, 87, 88,
89 and 90, is not but a well-known place called Guzarwan —
^ Ijjj?. The point of the ) appears to have been mistaken for j.
The ’Arabs, and people of ’Arab descent, called it Juzarwan — ^(5
changing hard ‘ g ’ into soft ‘ j,’ as in Pushang and Fushanj, Sijis-stan
and Sigiz-stan. I notice in the note at page 51 of the paper on these
coins, that Prof. Tiesenhauser read this word assuming that
the point was on the third instead of the second letter. It is a well-
known tract, and appears in our very latest new map under the incorrect
name of “ Gurziwan
The Sultan obtained possession of Ghaz-m7t [nih is the Tajzik for a
cityf : “ Ghaz nah ” is incorrect] by surprise during the absence of Sultan
Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz, in 611 H. (1214-15 A. D.).
Respecting the Shansabani Tajziks of Ghur and their coins, the
letters read as_jku^ after the name SamJ, cannot be correct, much less
which is purely Turkish. The full title of this Sultan, the elder
brother and suzerain of Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-Sam of
Ghazni h, the conqueror of Hindustan, who established the Muhammadan
religion and power at Dihli, was, Us-Sultan-ul-A’zam, Ghiyas-ud-Dunya
wa ud-Din, son of [Baha-ud-Din] Sam [See XI of the Shansabani
Tajziks of Ghur, Tabakat-i-Nasiri, p. 341], Kasim- i-Amir-ul-Mumimn
Consequently, the letters supposed to be and are, doubtless,
the word Kasim — in the last title of the Sultan.
Coin, No. 124, with the names and titles of both brothers on it,
and the date 699 H., was coined, probably, immediately after the death
of Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Muhammad, when his brother, Sultan Mu’izz-
ud-Din (always mis-called Shihab-ud-Din by Firishtah and such com¬
pilers, and Shahab-ud-Din by English writers) became supreme Sultan
of Ghur and Ghaz-nih, and their dependencies.
No. 126 with the names of “ Taju-d-din Ildaz ” and Sultan Mu’izz-
ud-Din, Muhammad, said to be thereon, but the inscriptions on which
are not given, would be one of Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz’s coins, after the
assassination of the Sultan by the Khokhars (always mistaken for
Gakhars,” even in Imperial Gazetters , under the grotesque names of
* See Tabakat-i-Ndsiri, pp. 376, 1003, and other places.
f In the oldest histories, and also by Babar Badshah, the name is written as
above, Ghazni is a modern form of the name.
It No. 116, Ed.]
1892.]
H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Goins.
91
“ Gickers,” u Ghukkurs “ Gahhhars ” and the like). Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-
duz, was his favourite Mam-luk, and held the government of Ghaz-nih
and its dependencies ; and it was always intended by his sovereign, who
had no son, and but one daughter, that he should succeed him on the
throne of Grhaz-nih.* After his death, Sultan Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz,
is said to have coined his money with the name of the late Sultan thereon,
in which he styled himself, “ the servant and slave of the Martyred
Sultan ”.f Both this Turk slave, as well as his Tajzik sovereign, like
others before and after them, have been turned into “ Pat tins” or
Afghans, and this ridiculous term is still applied to Turks, Tajziks,
Jats, Sayyids, etc., as well as Afghans, after it was shown to be
wrong and mis-applied, by Elliot in his work a long time ago, as well
as by myself. Sultan Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz, was the first of the Turk
Mam-luks who succeeded to sovereign power after his Shansabani Tajzik
sovereign was assassinated.
No. 139. Coin of Malik Tughan Shah. Tughan Shah was the
second of the Mu’ayyidiali Maliks of Nishapur and its dependencies.
His father was one of the Turk slaves of Sultan Sanjar, who was entitled
Mu’ayyid-ud-Din, and he was the Sultan’s X’inah-dar, or Mirror-bearer,
hence he is generally styled Mu’ayyid-i- A’inah-dar. When Sultan Sanjar
raised several slaves to rule over the great provinces of his empire,
Mu’ayyid-ud-Din was made ruler of the Nishapur territory. After the
Sultan’s captivity with the Ghuzz Turks, and his subsequent release and
death, Mu’ayyid-ud-Din pretended to pay obedience to the late Sultan’s
nephew, Sultan Rukn-ud-Din, Mahmud, son of Muhammad Khan, son of
the Bughra Khan, who had married Sultan Sanjar’s sister, and who had
been set up over Mawara-un-Nalir and part of Khurasan, but Mu’ayyid-
ud-Din subsequently seized him in the fifth year of his stormy reign, and
put out his eyes, after which he himself assumed sovereignty over Nisha¬
pur and parts adjacent ; and his sway extended for a time from Rai to
Hirat.
He subsequently joined Sultan Shah ( Sultan Shah is his name, not
a title), who had rebelled against his brother, the Sultan, Abu-l-Muzaffar-
i-Takish Khan, the Khwarazm Shah, and was taken captive in battle by
the Sultan and put to death in 570 H. (1174-75 A. D.) the date on the
coin.];
Malik Tughan Shah, Mu’ayyid-ud-Din’s son, who succeeded him,
passed his days in riot and jollity. In order to strengthen himself
against the Khwarazm Shah, he contracted a marriage for his son, named
Sanjar Shah, with the daughter of Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-
* Tabakat -i- N asiri, p. 500. % Tabakat-i-Nasiri, p. 128.
f Tabakat-i-Nasiri, p. 497.
92
[No. 2,
H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Coins.
Sam of Gliur, the enemy of Sultan Takish ; but, as soon as Malik Tughan
Shah died in 581 H. (1185-86 A. D.), Sultan Takish invaded his terri¬
tory, seized Malik San jar Shah, and carried him off to Khwarazm.
Sultan Takish then contracted marriage with Sanjar’s mother, and
married him to a daughter of his own. Consequent on this, and his
captivity, the marriage contract with the daughter of Sultan Ghiyas-ud-
Din, Muhammad-i-Sam, was annulled, and she was contracted to her
kinsman, Malik Ziya-ud-Din, Muhammad, surnamed “the Pearl of
Gliur,” son of Malik Shuja’-ud-Din, Abi-’Ali. He was the uncle’s son of
the two Sultans, her father and uncle; but he had previously contract¬
ed marriage with a Turkish liand-maid, the mother of his son, Rukn-ud-
Din, I'-ran Shah,* and therefore he was not capable, according to the
author of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri, of consummating his marriage with that
princess. On the death of Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-Sam,
her father, in 599 H. (1202-3 A. D.), her uncle, Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din,
Muhammad-i-Sam, conferred on Ziya-ud-Din, Muhammad, the throne of
Firuz-Koh, the territories of Ghur, Gharjistan. and the Zamin-i-Dawar,
and the title, Malik-ul-Haji — for he had performed the pilgrimage to
Makkah and Madinali — ’Ala-ud-Din, Muhammad, was assigned him.
He was dispossessed of his territory by his kinsman, the son of Sultan
Ghiyas-ud-Din, Muhammad, namely, Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Mahmud ;
and the coins Nos. 133, 134, 135, and 136, are Mahmud’s, on which he
is styled “ Us-Sultan-ul- Azam, Ghiyas-ud-Dunya waud-Din, Abu-l-Fath,
Mahmud, son of Muhammad-i-Sam.” It was this Sultan Mahmud, who
confirmed Malik Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz, in the sovereignty of Ghaz-nih,
and Malik Kutb-ud-Din, I'-bak-i-Shil, in the sovereignty of Dihli. After
Sultan Mahmud’s assassination in 609 H. (1212-13 A. D.), the Malik-ul-
Haji, ’Ala-ud-Din, Muhammad, was restored for a time to the throne of
Ghur by Sultan Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz, in 611 H. (1214-15 A. D.), and
he then took the title of Sultan, after the death in battle of Sultan ’Ala-
ud-Din, Utsuz, of Ghur, (No. XXI). The Malik-ul-Haji was the last
of the Shansabani Tajzik sovereigns of Ghur. He, out of necessity, sub¬
mitted to Sultan Muhammad, the Khwarazm Shah, and retired voluntarily
to Khwarazm in 612 H. (1215-16 A. D.).f
Respecting the princess — the virgin bride — the daughter of Sultan
Ghiyas-ud-Din, Muliammad-i-Sam, betrothed to Malik Tughan Shah’s
son, Sanjar Shah, and afterwards to the Malik-ul-Haji, we have some
* Rukn-ud-Din, I -ran Shah, was put to death in 607 H. ; and the author of the
Tabakat-i-Nasiri, then in his 18th year, was standing at the palace gate at Fmiz-
Koh when his head was brought in. See my translation, p. 396.
t See Tabakat-i-Nasiri, pp. 346, 391, and 417, where more about him will be
found.
1892.]
93
H. G. Ray er ty — Some Muhammadan Coins .
interesting particulars from one personally acquainted with her and
the other personages here named. She was styled Mah Malikah, and
entitled, Jalal-ud- Dunya wa ud-Din ; and her mother was the daughter
of Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, Husain-i-Jahan-soz (No. XI Y). She knew the
Kur’an by heart, knew likewise the Shihabi traditions, and her hand¬
writing “ was as pearls befitting a king.” The reason why she passed
from the world a maid has been already mentioned. The author of the
Tabakat-i-Nasiri says (p. 392), that, “In beauty, purity, and self-
restraint, she had no equal in the world,” and adds: — “The mother of
the writer of these pages was the foster-sister and school-companion
of this princess ; and this devotee [himself] was brought up in the
princess’s own hall of favour and her haram of chastity, up to the
period of his entering upon the bounds of adolescence, in the service
of her royal dwelling, and her private apartments. The maternal uncles
of this devotee and his maternal ancestors, were all attached to the
service of that princess’s Court, and to the Court of her father ; and
this humble individual [himself] received many proofs of that lady’s
favour and bounty. God reward her ! At last her martyrdom and
death took place in the territory of ’Irak during the calamities which
arose on the irruption of the infidels [the Mughals]. The mercy of the
Almighty be upon her!” After Sultan Muhammad, the Khvvarazm
Shah, herein mentioned, had reduced the territories of the Sultans
of Ghur and Ghaznih under his sway, all except their territories beyond
the Indus, the members of the different Shansabani families were taken
to Khwarazm, and the princess was there dwelling, when her last
betrothed husband — Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, Muhammad, the Malik-ul-Haji
and “Pearl of Gliur” reached it. He took up his residence near her ;
and in the Khwarazm dominions they dwelt for some time, until his
death about three years after. He was buried adjacent to the tomb of
the Shaikh Abu-Yazid at Bustam.* The princess had yet to bear
further vicissitudes of fortune ; but, at last, found rest from the world’s
troubles, as just related.
Respecting Coin No. 141, and the “ Beni Zengi Atabegs of Mosil ”
Badr-ud-Din, Lu-lu, was, certainly, a ruler of Mausil, and exercised
sway oveb it, but cannot be correctly styled one of the Bani Zangi. They
were Turks, and their ancestor, entitled the Kasim-ud-Daulah, was
Ak-Sunkar, but whose name and Musalman titles were, Abu Sa’id-i-
’Abd-U’llah. He was familiarly known as Baban, the Chamberlain,
one of the mam-luks or slaves of Sultan Malik Shah, the Saljuk, who
made him Wall of Halab in 481 H. (1088-89 A. D.).
Malik Badr-ud-Din, ’Abu-l-Faza’il, Lu-lu, was an Armenian slave,
# See Tabakat-i-Nasiri, pp. 419-20.
M
94
H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Goins.
[No. 2,
one of the mam-luks of the Malik-ul-’ Adil, Niir-ud-Din, Arsal&n Shah,
ruler of Mausil, Sham, and the Diyar-i-Bakr. On the death of Arsalan
Shah, the tenth of the dynasty, in Rajab, 607 H. (1211 A. D.), his son,
Tzz-ud-Din, Mas’ud, entitled the Malik-ul-Kahir, succeeded. He left the
power in the hands of Badr-ud-Din, Lu-lu. When ’Izz-ud-Din, Mas’ud
died on the 27th Rabi’-ul-Awwal, 615 H. (1218 A. D.), his brother,
’Imad-ud-Din, Zangi, who was governor of ’Amadiah, ruled over that
part for a time, but shortly after died. His infant son for a short time
succeeded, but he also soon died, and the dynasty terminated. Malik
Badr-nd-Din, Abu-l-Faza’il, Lu-lu, who used to direct the affairs of
his territory, continued to rule over Mausil. On the appearance of
Hulaku Khan, the Mughal, in those parts, Lu-lu tendered submission
to him at Maraghah, in Rajab, 650 H. (1258 A. D.), and was con¬
firmed in possession of the territory.* Badr-ud-Din, Lu-lu, died in
657 H. aged 96, but some say he was over a hundred. His son, ’Isma’il,
entitled the Malik-us-Salih, was permitted to succeed him, and Hulakti.
Khan gave him in marriage the daughter of the gallant, but unfortunate
Sultan, Jalal-ud-Din, Mang-barni, the Kliwarazm Shah, then with other
Muhammadan princes and princesses, captives in the hands of those
infidels. The Malik-us-Salih unable longer to bear this iron yoke,
subsequently joined his co-religionists of Misr against the infidels, but
he was taken captive, after holding Mausil against them for several
months, in Ramazan, 661 H. (1263 A. D.), and put to death in the most
brutal manner by Hulaku’s orders. The ferocious barbarian — “ the
great Hulagu” — directed that he should be enveloped in fat tails of the
dumbah or fat-tailed sheep, sewn up in felt, placed on his back with his
hands and feet fastened to the ground by four pegs, and then exposed to
the burning heat of the summer sun, until, after a week, as was intended,
the tails became putrid, and swarming with maggots, which began to attack
the wretched victim, who, for’ a whole month, lingered in this Mughal
torment. It was to such devilish doings as these that Kuduz, the Mam-
luk ruler of Misr,f referred when, after he had overthrown the Nu-yin,
Kaibuka, the Nae man, and taken him prisoner, near the ’Ayn-i-Jalut —
Goliatt’s Spring — in Syria, he taunted him, saying that “ they could do
nothing like men.” The Malik-us-Salih, ’Isma’il, left a son, a babe of
two or three years old, named ’Ala-ud-Din, who was taken back to Mausil,
and cut in twain, one-half of the child’s corpse being suspended on one side
of the Dijlah, and the other on the Mausil side, and left there to rot as a
warning of Mughal vengeance. What became of Sultan Jalal-ud-Din’s
daughter, the Malik-us-Salih’s wife, has not transpired.
* See also Tabakat-i-Nasiri, p. 1247.
t He was a Tnrk-man, and the Turk-mans were the hereditary enemies of the
Mughals.
1892.]
95
H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Coins.
It will be seen, therefore, that a great and curions connection
exists between the whole of the persons here mentioned, and the rulers
whose names are impressed on these coins, from Sultan Takish IDian
of Khwarazm, to the Malik- us -Salih ’Isma’il of Mausil.
Coins of Sijistan.
Coin No. 149, read as that of “ Asadu-d-din bin Harab,” cannot
possibly refer to Asad-ud-Din, for Asad, which I presume the top
word on the reverse is supposed to represent, is written not
as on the coin, and this last is certainly meant for }uzd — ‘ support,
‘assistance,’ also c an aider or supporter,’ and part of the title, ’Uzd-
ud-Din. When Malik Shihab-ud-Din, Mahmud, son of Harab (Malik
IX in the list), took possession of Sistan, another party set up Shah
’Usman, a grandson of Nasir-ud-Din, ’Usman, son of Taj-ud-Din-i-Har-
ab, who sought assistance from the Khwarazmi officers of Kirmans,
and when Malik Shihab-ud-Din, Mahmud, was put to death, his brother,
Amir ’AH, the Zahid or Recluse, was set up. Subsequently we are told
(page 200 of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri,) that, “ the rival Maliks of Nim-roz
were struggling against each other,” and, that, “ the grandson of Nasir-
ud-Din, ’Usman, whom they styled by the name of Shah, sought assist¬
ance from the Malik of Kirrnan,” etc. The coin in question may pos¬
sibly have been coined by one of these rivals, who assumed the titles
of ’Uzd-ud-Din, and Abu-l-Mnzaffar. It must also be remembered that
the Khwarazmi officer sent to the aid of Shah ’Usman, Binal-Tigin,
the Turk, who appropriated Sijistan on his own account, was entitled
Taj-ud-Din. Be these speculations what they may, I can only say,
that the names given in my list in the Journal Part I, for 1885, are the
whole of those mentioned in history ; and I have left no accessible
history unsearched.
“ Mongol Il-Khans of Persia.”
I am much puzzled to understand why some European writers,
who surely must know better, will persist in styling the Chingiz or
Great Khan — for that is the meaning of the word Chingiz — “ Jinjis ”
Khan (see Journal No. 2 of 1887, page 90, first line in the lower
inscription,)* and why they suppose that he coined money, more
particularly coupled with the name of the Khalifah, “ Un-Nasir-
ud-Din U’llah, Amir-ul-Mumlnin ” thereon. The title Khakan-i-
A’zam ” is much more applicable to the Ka’an, Uktae, or even to Hula-
* When it is even cut in stone or marble on a tomb not^xGa^ people
will still call it Jingiz and Jinjis .
[No. 2,
96 H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Goins.
kii Khan, the first of the ri-Khanians, than to his grandfather, the
Chingiz Khan,* * * § but the coin, No. 153 is evidently that of a Musalman
ruler, a feudatory of the Khilafat, who had to submit to the hard yoke
of the infidel Mu glial st and to impress it with the semi-Turkish title of
Khakan-i- A’zam ; for Khakan is a purely Turkish word. The Khalifali,
Un-Nasir-ud-Din U’llah, died in Ramazan, 622 H. (1225 A. D.), up to
which period the Mughal s had made no permanent conquests in Tran
Zamin ; and Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, the Kliwarazm Shah, was still powerful
in those parts until 628 H., six years after that Khalifah’s decease. Tt
was not until the reign of the Ka’an (^T^' ), Uktae, after his becoming
firmly established on the throne — for it was not filled for two years and a
half after the death of the Chingiz Khan — that armies were despatched
westwards since the return of the Chingiz Khan, and his death. In 626
H. (1229 A. D.) the Nu-yin, Jurmaghun, was sent into ’Irak, against
Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, the Kliwarazm Shah, and the Nu-yin, Mangutah,
(the same who afterwards invested Uchchli) towards Ghaz-nih. It is
stated in the history of that reign, that to Mangutah was assigned the
occupation of Tukharistan, Kunduz, and Tal-kan ; for the then Musalman
Maliks of Khurasan, Ghiir, Kirman, and Fars, all proceeded to the pre¬
sence of the Great Ka’an, Uktae, at Kara-Kuram, and requested that
Shahnahs or Intendants might be sent to them, thus placing their
necks under the yoke£ “ After this,” says the historian, “ Khurasan
began to thrive again but the army of above 100,000 horse
under Jurmaghun slaughtered and ravaged all the tracts they passed
through § ; and it was part of Jurmaghiin’s forces which surprised
the camp of Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, the Kliwarazm Shah, who was put
off his guard by the false report of a patrol. The Sultan, who was
asleep at the time, succeeded in making his escape. He turned devotee
and disappeared from the scene, but is said to have lived for sixty
years after that. The Shaikh, ’Ala-ud-Daulah, Al-Byabanki-us Sim-
nani, relates under the events of the year 688 H. (1289 A. D.) as
follows “ When at Baghdad, I used daily, at noon, to wait upon the
pious and venerable Shaikh, Nur-ul-Hakk wa ud-Din, ’Abd-ur-Rahman-
i-Isfaraim may his tomb be sanctified ! I happened to go upon one
occasion, at the usual hour, and found him absent from his abode, a
* I do not think any history can be named in which it is stated that Timur-chi,
the Chingiz Khan, ever assumed such a title as “ Khaqan or Khakan, and in the
absence of some such authority for the assertion that he did, the statement may be
regarded as purely imaginary.
i See Tabakat-i-Nasiri pp. 995 and 1266.
X See also Tabakat-i-Nasiri pp. 1115 and 1126.
§ See Tabakat-i-Nasiri p. 1117.
1892.]
H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Goins.
97
rather unusual occurrence at that time of the day. I went again on
the following morning to wait upon him, and inquired as to the cause
of his absence on the previous day. He replied, ‘My absence was
caused through Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, Mang-barni, having been received
into the Almighty’s mercy.’ I inquired, ‘What, had he been living all
this time ?’ He answered, ‘ You may have noticed a certain aged man,
with a mole upon his nose, who was wont to stay at a certain place,’
which he named. I had often remarked the venerable devotee in
question ; and that was the heroic, but unfortunate Sultan, Jalal-ud-
Din.” According to this account Sultan Jalal-ud-Din could not have
died until 688H., about sixty years after the period above-mentioned.
From all this it is quite clear, that the coin in question, Ho. 153,
must be that of one of the Musalman Maliks, a feudatory of the Khali-
fah, Un-Hasir-ud-Din U’llah, who had to submit at the time of the
inroad of the Hu-yins, Jabah and Swidae, in 617 H. (1220 A. D.), who
passed through those parts like a destroying whirlwind, and returned
by the northern shores of the Caspian to the presence of the Chingiz
Khan in the fourth month of 620H. (1223 A. D.)
I may also mention, that, in no history is it stated that the Chingiz
Khan coined money , nor is it stated that he ever assumed the title of
Khakan, which, as I have said before, is much more applicable to
Uktae than to his grandfather, and to stamp coins with the name of
the Khalifah is still more impossible ; and, besides, they would have
Mughal inscriptions, on one side at least, even if coined in I7- ran Zamin.
For a considerable period the Mughals coined ingots (balisht) only.*
The Tl-Khanian dynasty, moreover, was not established for thirty-four
years after the death of the Khalifah above-mentioned, and the total
fall of the Khilafat at Baghdad ; and the first Il-Khan was Hulaku
Khan himself.
Coin Ho. 174. There was no member of this dynasty named
“ Quazan,” but Gliazan ( ) Khan, the seventh of the dynasty,
was one of the most illustrious of them. He was the son of Arghun
* The balishts of Uktae Ka’an are mentioned in several histories. One, the
Lubb-ut-Tawarikh, goes farther and says, referring to the great liberality of the
Ka’an, that no one ever left his dargah without experiencing it, and that daring
his reign he expended in this manner no less than 160,000 tomans of Idlishts of
gold. It is also stated, that, according to some accounts, the bdliskt-i-zar contained
500 miskdls ; according to other accounts, it was of the value of eight dirams and
two ddngs ; and according to others, of the value of eight dinars and two ddngs.
The Musalmnn diram and dinar are said to have been equivalent to a sequin or
ducat. Another writer, under the head of bdlisht-i-zar , says, it contained eight
miskdls and two ddngs of gold, and was in use by the sovereigns of the Turks and
Mughals. See also Tabakat-i-Nasiri, p. 1141.
98 H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Coins. [No. 2,
Khan, son of Abaka Khan, son of Hulaku, who succeeded in the year
694H. (1294-95 A. D.). He was the first of them who became a convert
to Islam in that same year, and commanded all churches of the Chris¬
tians, and idol temples (of Mughals) at Tabriz to be destroyed ; conse¬
quently, previous to that period, any coin with the Musalman kalimah
thereon, even with the name of one of the Il-Khans on it as well, would,
in all probability, be a coin of a Musalman feudatory under the yoke of
these Mughals. who would scarcely have adopted the Musalman kalimah
on their coins when they were more inclined to the Christians. Hula-
ku’s wife, Dukiiz Kliatun. and several others among them, were Chris¬
tians. On his conversion, Ghazan Khan assumed the title of Sultan
Mahmud-i-Ghazan Khan. He died in Shawwal 703 H. (1303 A. D.),
near Kazwin, and was buried at Tabriz, where a lofty domed tomb was
raised over him, and is probably still in existence.
With respect to the coin No. 178, with the name of “ Sultan
Arghun,” thereon, the words OiJ ^ tSUJf i_H*J on the margin,
is part of a verse from the Kur’an, Chapter 58 : — “ Possessor of all
power, Thou givest dominion unto whom Thou wilt , and Thou takest
away dominion from whom Thou wilt ; Thou exaltest whom Thou
wilt, and Thou humblest whom Thou wilt.” This is the same verse
which Abu Suliman, Da’ud-i-Jaghar Beg, the Saljuk, heard the Mu’az-
zin at Marw reciting, when the envoy of Sultan Mas’ud of Ghaz-nih,
presented himself before him. Da’ud was at that time seated on his
saddle cloth spread on the ground, with his saddle to support him, and
he ordered this verse to be written down and given to the envoy as
his answer to the Sultan’s demands.
The mint name on coin No. 183, is not as “read by Mr.
Rodgers,” but the well-known place called — Janushan.
“ Bukhara House of Timur.”
Respecting coin No. 188, it is hardly correct to style the Sultan
Shah Rukh Mirza, as “ of the Bukhara, House of Timur,” because
soon after his accession in Ramazan, 807 H. (1404 A. D.), he ruled
the whole of his father’s dominions, from Kbit a to Rum, and from
Tabaristan to Hindustan, in the western part of which, under the
Masnad-i-A’la, tbe Sayyid, Khizr IQian, the khutbdh was read for him
and the money stamped with his name. His capital was Hirat, which
territory he had governed seven years during his father’s lifetime,
while his father’s capital was Samr-kand, not Bukhara. Sultan Shah
Rukh Mirza, was not “ Timur’s youngest son,”* but his second son of
four, the eldest having died before his father. Sultan Shah Rukh
* See Journal for 1887, page 88.
1892.] H. G. Raver ty — Some Muhammadan Coins. 99
Mirza died 29fcli Zi-Hijjah, 850 H. (29th March, 1446 A. D.), after
reigning forty-three years, consequently, the coin No. 191 assigned to
him, if the date 848 H. is correct, is his, of course, but if 868 H. it is
not. It is said to be counter-struck with the name of Sultan Abu-Sa’id.*
In the ’Arabic character given at page 41 of Journal, it is
instead of Sultan — Mirza Abu-Sa’id, Bahadur Khan — was the
grandson of Mirza Miran Shah, Timur’s fourth son, who ruled in
Mawara-un-Nahr and Turkisten, and whose capital was Samr-kand. He
ascended the throne of Samr-kand in Jamadi-ul-Awwal, 855 H. (1451
A. D.), and, some years after, dispossessed the descendants of Sultan
Shah Rukh. Mirza of Khurasan and parts farther west, and acquired the
whole power over Sultan, Shah Rukh Mirza’s dominions, in 861 H.
(1456-57 A. D.,) and lost it again, but regained it in 863 H. (1458-59
A. D.,). He was at last put to death, after being taken captive in battle
by the Turk-man, Hasan Beg, the Ak-Kunilu, who gave him up to
Mirza Yad-gar Muhammad, son of Sultan Muhammad, son of Mirza
Ba’e-Sunkar, the last of Sultan Shah Rukh Mirza’s descendants, who
put him to death 22nd Rajab, 873 H. (January, 1469 A. D.) in retalia¬
tion for his putting to death, most unjustly, when he gained possession
of Hirat the first time, in 861 H., Gohar-Shad Bigam, t the venerable
consort of Sultan Shah Rukh Mirza. He ruled over Mawara-un-Nahr,
etc., eighteen years, and ten years over those parts and Khurasan and
the rest of the empire possessed by the last named monarch.
Coin No. 193. “Husain Baikara, Governor of Khorasan ” (?).
Mirza Husain-i-Ba’e-kara, was the son of Mirza Sultan Mahmud, one of
the sons of Sultan Mirza Abu-Sa’id, Bahadur Khan, above-mentioned,
who succeeded his brother, Mirza Sultan Ahmad, over Mawara-un-Nahr
at Samr-kand. When his father died in Muharram, 900 H. (October,
1494 A. D.), Mirza Husain-i-Ba’e-kara, who succeeded, deprived his
brother, Mirza Sultan ’Ali, of his sight, as was supposed, but his eye-sight
was not wholly destroyed. He fled to, and raised an army at, Bukhara,
and advanced to Samr-kand. Ba’e-kara was unable to oppose him,
concealed himself in the city, and subsequently escaped in disguise,
and retired to the Hisar-i-Shadman, the place of his birth, — the
* Whether the counter striking of coins had any particular signification I am
not certain, but it seems to me, that it had in this instance, and that it was done
by Sultan Abu-Sa’id, Bahadur Khan, to indicate that he had dispossessed the
family of Sultan Shah Rukh Mirza of that monarch’s empire.
f Mirza Yad-gar Muhammad was her great-grandson. The Pul-i-Khan that
one used to hear so much about when the Russians seized upon the Afghan
dependencies of Hirat, and were allowed to keep them, is said to have been erected
at the expense of this Princess.
100
II. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Goins.
[No. 2,
“ Hissar ” of our maps — where he was subsequently blinded and put
to death by the Hakim of that part, Amir Kliursau Shah, after he had
set him up as sovereign there, in Muharram, 905 H. (August, 1199
A. D.) “ Husain Baikara ” was, consequently, never “ Governor of
Khorasan.”
Of course, this “ Husain Baikara, Governor of Khorasan ” cannot
be meant for Sultan Husain Mirza, son of Mansur, son of Ba’e-kara, son
of ’Umar Shaikh, son of Amir Timur. Sultan Husain Mirza was, per¬
haps, the most illustrious of the dynasty which ruled over Khurasan,
and during his reign Hirat became the chief seat of learning and the arts.
This Prince, in the struggle for power, drove the Turk-mans out
of Astar-abad and its territory and assumed sovereignty over it, but
his position was precarious on account of the superior power of Sultan
Abu-Sa’id, Bahadur Klian. then ruling at Hirat. When the latter fell
into the hands of the Turk-maus, Sultan Husain Mirza made a dash upon
Hirat, possessed himself of it, and again assumed the sovereignty.
Mirza Y ad-gar, Muhammad, however, with his adherents, and aided
by the Turk-mans, moved against him, and he had to fly in Ramazan,
874 H. (1470 A. D.). He soon recovered it again. Having made
a forced march with a small following from Maimanah, he surprised
Mirza Yad-gar, Muhammad, asleep in a drunken state, in the Bagh-i-
Zaghan of Hirat, in Safar, 875 H. (August, 1470 A. D.), and put him
to death. Sultan Husain Mirza was now without a rival, and he
reigned uninterruptedly from that time up to the year 911 H. (1506
A. D.), when the Uzbaks under their Sultan, Shaibani Klian. invaded
his territory. He was ill at the time ; and on the 16th of Zi-Hijjah
of that year (May) died at the halting place of Baba Uldi of the well
known district of Badghais, for centuries the mustering place for armies
on account of its luxuriant pasturage, and convenient proximity to
Hirat, but respecting the past history of which almost nothing was
known to the authorities when the Russians lately seized upon the
best parts of the province of Hirat, and not much more now, but I
shall throw some light upon it in the concluding portion of my “ Notes
on Afghanistan.”
“ Safawi Dynasty of Persia.”
With regard to the coins said to be of the Safawi Dynasty of
Persia, that dynasty finally terminated with Shall Husain in 1135 H.
(1722 A. D.), for his son, Thamasib, and the latter’s infant son, ’Abbas,
were but puppets in the hands of Nadir Kuli Beg, the Afshar Turk-man,
afterwards Nadir Shah. The Safawi dynasty having been subverted
by the Glial zi Afghans, coins Nos. 207 and 208 are not of the Safawi
1892.]
H. G. Raverty — Some Muhammadan Coins.
101
dynasty, blit of the Ghalzi dynasty, being coins of the two Ghalzi Saltans,
Mahmud and Ashraf. Neither can coins of Nadir Kuli Beg, the
Asharf Turk-man, and his sons, be styled of the Safawi dynasty, any
more than those of Karim Khan, the Zand, who, during the struggle for
power, after the fall of Nadir Shah, ruled over southern Persia, nor
those of his rival, and subsequent true friend and adherent, the Afghan,
A'zad Khan, nor coins of the Kachar Turk-mans, who finally obtained
the power, and who still retain it,# and, therefore, Nos. 212, 213,
and 214 are not those of the Safawi dynasty, but of the Afshars and
Zand dynasties.
The coins Nos. 225, 229, 230 and 231, classed under “ Afghanistan ”
along*with those of Durrani sovereigns, but undetermined, cannot possi¬
bly be styled correctly as belonging to Afghanistan, nor to an Afghan
dynasty. Hirat was the capital of Khurasan ; and in 919 EL (1513 A. D.),
the period mentioned thereon, there was no Afghan State, nor for some
two centuries after that period. What Afghanistan means will be found
in my “ Notes ” thereon, page 453. In the year in question, 919 II.,
Shall Isma’il, theSafawi, was in possession of Hirat and Khurasan.
He had, after the overthrow of Shaibani Khan, the l/zbak Sultan,
near Marw, in 916 H. (1510-11 A. D.), annexed Hirat and Khurasan
to his dominions. In 918 H. (1512-13 A. D.), while Zaliir ud-Din,
Muhammad Babar Mirza, afterwards the founder of the Mughal dynasty
in India, was fighting against the U'zbaks, and had been defeated by
them, the Kazil-bash troops, under the Safawi leader, known as the Najrn-
i-Sani,f at Babar’s urgent call, again advanced into Mawara-un-Nahr
to his aid ; but they were overthrown and put to flight by the Uzbaks,
and the Safawi general killed, on the 7th Ramazan, 918 H. On this
the U'zbaks at once entered Khurasan again, and Muhammad Timur
Khan. Shaibani’s son, ruler of Samr-kand, assumed the sovereignty
over Hirat and its dependencies ; while his brother’s son, Abd-ullak
Khan, who held the Bukhara territory, seized upon the Mashhad-i-
Rizawi and other parts of Khurasan. On this, Shah Isma’il, Safawi,
* When the present Shah, who is a Kachar Turk-man, visited England lately,
one of the London newspapers of some repute assured its readers, that he was
descended from the ancient fire-workshiping kings of the Medes and Persians, if
not a direct descendant from Jamshed or Noshirwan the Just !
f I notice in several places in recent numbers of the “Journal” and “Pro¬
ceedings,” that ’ Aziz-ud-Din, Muhammad, the Second ’Alam-gir, Badshah of tho
Dihli empire, who ruled in the stormy period between 1754 and 1759, has been
turned into “ Zan f.” Although not a very bright genius, and very unfortunate, he
was not an idiot : he was quite compos mentis. The word of his title after ’Alam-
gir is the ’Arabic word sdni — ’Alam-gir i-Sani, not “ Zani,” and of course signifies
‘ second’ — “The Second ’Alam-gir.” See “Proceedings” for 1890, page 180,
N
102
W. Theobald — Symbolical Coins of the Wethali dynasty. [No. 2,
once more hastened into Khurasan to drive out the U'zbaks, for which
purpose lie set out in the spring of 919 H. (1513 A. D.). On his
approach the U'zbaks fled. He remained in ILhurasan and Hirat after
that for two or three months, and conferred the Government of Hirat
and all Khurasan on Zanil Beg, the Shamlu Amir; but, in 921 H.
(1515 A. D.), he nominated his son, Tliamasib, then a mere child, to
the government of Hirat and Khurasan, with Amir Khan, one of his
great nobles, as his Atabak or Lalali (governor). The coin in question,
No. 229, must, consequently, have been struck while Shah Isma’il
was at Hirat, or soon after, by Zanil Beg, the Shamlu, as governor of
Khurasan.
On a future occasion I may offer some remarks on the Afrasiyabi
Khans of Mawara-un-Nahr and their coins.
On a Symbolical Coin of the Wethali dynasty of Arakan. — By W. Theobald
In his article on the coins of Arakan, Pegu, and Burma, in the Numis -
mata Orientalia Lieutenant-General Sir A. P. Phayre describes and
figures nine coins which he refers to four kings, viz., Varma Chandra, Priti
Chandra, Varma Vijaya, and Yari Kriya, the last represented by a single
coin only, the initial character of which is not clear. I have lately become
possessed of a second specimen of this coin, also unfortunately not quite
clear as regards the first letter of the king’s name. General Sir A.
Cunningham points out, however, that the first and last letters, on both
my coin and that figured by Sir A P. Phayre are clearly different, and
the name cannot therefore be Yari Kriya, which, moreover, is no name.
He suggests as a possible reading the name ‘ Arikiya ’ but more per¬
fect specimens must be discovered before this reading can be confident¬
ly accepted. The coin, however, clearly belongs to the ‘ recumbent bull ’
type of the symbolical coins of Arakan, and may be thus described : —
Obverse. A bull to the left, recumbent (though from the poor execu¬
tion of some coins the animal might be considered as standing), within a
circle having exteriorly a beaded margin. The king’s name written
straight across the coin, above the bull’s back.
j Reverse. A central upright ‘ thyrsiform ’ object or pole, with an
upright sickle-shaped support on either side; all three being supported
by, or contained within, a concave horizontal base, but unconnected
therewith. From the point of either ‘sickle’ shaped object, flows back¬
wards and outwards, a curved fillet or plume-like band ornamented with
seven globes, connected with the fillet by curved items imparting an
elegant wavy or arborescent effect ; while below the central ornament
103
1892.1 W. Theobald — Symbolical Goins of the Wethali dynasty.
are six dots or spheres, and above it, generally, the sun on the left and
crescent moon on the right ; the whole design being bounded by a circle,
with beaded margin as on the obverse.
The central object on the reverse has been variously described. Lieu¬
tenant Latter, in describing these coins# refers to this emblem as “ the
trident of Siva ” and adds : — “ On each side is a scroll, and beneath are
certain round dots.” To term the object a ‘trident’ however is quite
inadmissible, as it is impossible to conceive a trident, which has no handle,
or staff, and in none of the coins in question, is there the slightest indica¬
tion of any central staff whatever. Moreover, in the best preserved
coin, the so-called ‘trident’ and its constituent parts do not appear to
be united to the curved horizontal bar, but to merely rest thereon, and
not always even in contact therewith ; and in no case is there any trace
of a handle or prolongation of the central prong below : so that the
notion of this object representing a trident must, I think, be rejected.
General Sir A. P. Phayre thus describes the symbol : — “ Trident of
Siva, with garlands pendent from the outer blades. Sun and moon above.
Below nine dots.”t The term ‘ garland’, here applied to the lateral orna¬
ments of the symbol in question, is even less appropriate than the term
‘scroll ’used by Latter, as ‘garland’ involves the idea of an annular
object, which is certainty not intended here. Assuming that the sickle-
shaped objects are intended for snakes, the ‘ scroll ’ which commences
near the extremity of the head of each would represent a flowing re¬
curved crest ornamented with five or seven dots, or jewels, each of which
may stand for a separate head of a five-headed or polycephalic Naga.
That the symbol is not Sivite, or intended for the trisul of Siva, is
the opinion of General Sir A. Cunningham, who remarks in a letter: — •
“ The fact that the symbol was chosen by the Burmese King to place
upon his coins ought to be sufficient evidence of its Bhuddhist origin.”
As the term ‘trisul’ or ‘ trisuliform ’ would infer a connection with
Sivite worship, it will be better to call it, the tripartite symbol, whether
Bhuddhist or not, though it might have become ultimately associated
with Sivite worship, or, not improbably, converted into the ‘ trisul by
a very slight process of development. All that was requisite thereto,
was the addition of a staff below, and this merely involved the downward
prolongation of the central upright stroke, which I have ventured to
compare with the Greek ‘thyrsos.’ In like manner I am inclined to re¬
gard the side supporters as snakes or Nagas, without thereby intending to
regard them as Sivite symbols, but rather as symbols adopted into both
Buddhism and Sivaism from a cult older than either of those religions.
* J. A. S. B., XV, 239.
f Numismata Orientalia, p. 2S, Coins of Arakan, Pegu, and Burma,
104
M. M. Chakravarti — 1 Idma-tankis.
[No. 2,
We moderns have surprising difficulty in realizing the wealth of
imagination which in early days was lavished on religious symbolism,
and the Protean forms and shapes which the triform conception of
deity generated in the early theopneustic mind. In occasional in¬
stances even now, where the religious sentiment is strong and united
with an emotional or imaginative temperament, the mind seizes on any
prominent object, as a symbol of the ruling idea. For example, I was
once walking in Calcutta down ‘ Chowringhee ’ with a friend, when
he suddenly grasped my arm, and pointing towards the tall Ochterlony
Monument, asked me in an impassioned tone what that reminded me of.
As I hesitated as to what I should answer, my friend went on — ‘ Is
not that an emblem of Christ, towering above mankind, as that pillar
does above yonder plain ? ’ In like manner any triform object, of what¬
ever elements the symbol might be composed, would to the imaginative
believer in a triform godhead, stand as an appropriate symbol of deity ;
whether the object was made up of a pair of snakes turned towards a
central ‘ thyrsos ’ or rod, as in the ‘caduceus’ ; or the triskelis, or wheel
of three spokes ; or its modem homologue, the Isle of Man symbol of
three legs radiately arranged round a common centre. In the published
coins, the dots below the tripartite symbols are five, seven, or nine
in number, but on the coin in my possession they amount to six only.
This coin appears to be a variety of one figured by General Sir
A. P. Phayre* and referred to £ Yari Kriya’, though no such king appears
in the list, nor is that reading (in the opinion of General Sir A Cunning¬
ham) supported by the coin itself. The bull on my coin has no necklace,
and the snake supporters of the ‘ thyrsos ’ (using that phrase for want
of a better) have seven-jewelled in place of five-jewelled crests. The
diameter of my coin is 1*25 in., and the weight 105 grains.
Bama-tanJcis. — By Bablj M. M. Chakravarti, M. A., B. L., Subordinate
Executive Service of Bengal.
(With one Plate)
Rama-tankis (sometimes spelt ‘ Rama-tinkis ’) are gold medals which
bear on the obverse figures purporting to be Rama and Sita seated on
a throne and surrounded by attendants, the most prominent of whom is
the monkey Ilanuman. The figures on the reverse vary. These medals
are always in gold, circular in area, with flat or concave sides. They
are found in small numbers, chiefly in the Deccan. They are much
prized by the Hindus, particularly by the Vaishnavas, and are daily
* Ibid. PI. II, Fig. 12.
1892.]
M. M. Cliakravarti — Rama-tciulcis.
105
worshipped with offerings of flowers and sandal paste. Their rarity
and sanctity fetch for them fancy prices, and have often, it is said, led to
forged specimens.
These medals, though rarely seen in the bazars, have not escaped
the keen eyes of coin collectors. Stray pieces have been described by
Mr. Marsden in his Numismata Orientalia , and by Sir W. Elliot in his
Coins of Southern India. The Honorable J. Gibbs has dealt with them
more fully in his article on “ Rama-tinkis ” in the Journal of the Asiatic
Society of Bengal. Some have been presented to the British Museum.
Mr. Sewell notes one in the possession of a merchant named Vellaturu
Rammaya* of the Cuddapa District.
I now proceed to describe the specimens in my possession. They
are what are called Quarter Rama-tankis.
Ho. I. Obverse. — On a throne seated, Rama facing towards the
left, and Sita to his right. A bow and an arrow in Rama’s hands. Be¬
low the throne, and towards left, is a person (S'atrnghna) holding an
nmbrella. Below the throne and towards the right, is a lion, or monkey
(Hanuman), holding Rama’s right foot; over it is a monkey, or man,
dressed, and apparently reading a book.
Below the throne is a ghata, or pitcher, with mangoe leaves over the
mouth. On its right, impressions of two feet ; on its left, two stars.
Reverse. — A platform of two lines with dots between and pendent
scrolls. Over the platform are eight figures, facing towards left, and
carrying fans and chamars. Over them are scrolls.
Below the platform are certain lines, which may be scrolls, or letters.
Figures less distinct than Ho. II, and rubbed with sandal paste.
Work very rude.
Ho. II. Obverse. — On a throne seated, Rama with a bow in his left
hand and an arrow in his right hand, and Sita to the left. Both crown¬
ed. Further left, and below the throne, stands a figure (S'atrughna)
* Sewell's list of Antiquarian remains in the Madras Presidency, Yol. I, p. 132.
106
M. M. Chakravarti — Rama-tanTcis.
[No. 2,
bolding a chhatra, or umbrella, over the seated persons. A monkey to
tlie right side and below tlie throne, touching the feet of Rama. An¬
other figure over the monkey (probably Jambuvan or Sugriva), dressed
and apparently reading a book. Below the throne is a ghata, or pitcher,
with mangoe leaves on the top, and having letters, or scrolls, on the right
and left. Above the chhatra is a sun, with letters, or scrolls, on the
right and left. Border dotted.
Reverse. — A platform with dots and scrolls pendent. Above the
platform are eight figures, standing with face to the right, dressed, and
carrying chamars and fans. Over them are ten letters resembling Pali.
Over them are scrolls. Below the platform are a number of letters look¬
ing like Pali. Dotted borders.
A finely struck medal, figures distinct.
No. III. Obverse. — A platform of two lines with dots between.
Over the platform a throne, on which are seated Rama and Sita facing
towards the right, Rama holding a bow and an arrow. Below the
throne, and towards the left, stand three figures, one holding an umbrella,
another a fan, and another a chamar. Below the throne, and towards
the right, are Hanuman holding the feet of Rama, and over him the bear,
Jambuvan. Stars and moon at the top.
Below the platform are a number of lines apparently letters.
Reverse. — A platform of two lines with dots between. Over the plat¬
form are seven persons, standing dressed with face to the right, holding
fans and chamars in their right hands, and kamandalus in their left.
Below the platforms are some curved lines looking like letters.
The figures are distinct, but the workmanship is rude.
No. TV. Obverse. — A platform of two lines with dots between.
Over the platform is a throne, on which are seated Rama, and to his left
Sita facing towards the right side. Both crowned. Rama carrying a
bow in his left hand, and an arrow in his right hand, his right leg dang¬
ling below the throne. Further to the right, and below the throne, are
Hanuman holding his foot, and Jambuvan standing. To the left of Sita
are three figures in a standing posture, one holding a chhatra, another a
fan, and another a chamar. On both sides of the umbrella top are dots
representing stars.
Below the platform are undecipherable lines. The rim consists of
dots between two circles.
Reverse. — A platform of two lines with dots between. Five figures
standing on it dressed like math-dharis , facing towards the right, and
carrying fans and chamars. One letter to be seen on the right, and two
letters on the left.
Below the platform are five or six letters. The rim has two circu-
M. M. Chakravarti — Rama-tankis.
107
1892.]
lar lines, between which are seven letters, those towards the left being
less distinct. Figures distinct, workmanship rude.
(N. B. — All the letters look like Telugu.)
No. V. Similar to No. IV, bat shorter in diameter and thicker,
and in weight heavier, by 70*8 grains.
On the obverse, beyond the circular lines enclosing letters, are dots.
The coin is duplicate of N o. IV. It is worshipped daily by a local
zemindar.
It will be seen that the specimens described are variants of one type.
In all of them the obverses are nearly the same. In the reverses the
prominent difference is in the number of figures, which are 8, 7, or 5. With
the exception of No. II, the workmanship of the coins is rude, and, there¬
fore, I once thought them to be forged. But that idea 1 have now given
up. For a somewhat similar medal see Dr. Bidie’s No. 2*. For a speci¬
men that is certainly forged see No. 113, Plate III, in Sir W. Elliot’s
Coins of Southern Indiaf. He calls it “ a modern Ham-tanka of no value.”
On the reverse he says is a “ Nagri legend not read.” From the autotype
copy, I find, on the reverse, a monkey (Hanuman) in the middle, with a
Nagari legend, which I read as ^ ^ Iwr -f lift ?) 1 -+
The weight — 123*4 grains — is sufficient to mark it as forged. No
Rama-tanki of such a low weight is known.
The illustrations depict the abhisheTca of Rama and Sita on their re¬
turn to Ayodhya from Lanka.
c?rf: ^ srerfr Sit sfost I
TTit ^ft<T lUc* II
rRnfafv w a w
tht: i
Tm: II ^ II
^ I
V* 'J ^
iffW II ^ ||
I
n id: w
# Journ. As. Soc. Beng., Yol. LIII, No. II, 1881, p. 212.
t Coins of S. India, p. 152E,
108
M. M. Chakravarti — Uamci-tanJds.
[No. 2,
According to Ramayana, S'atrughna held the umbrella, Sugriva tlio
cliamar, and Vibkishana, the king of Rakshasas, the wreath of one hun¬
dred lotuses.
I do not think the Rama-tankis were ever issued as coins. No one at
present uses them as such, and no tradition exists of their having been
so used in the past. Besides, the numbers found are too small for use
in a currency. They are to be considered as medals struck for some special
purpose. For what purpose ? The nature of illustrations indicates that
they were struck at the time of the Abhishehas , or enthronements, of kings.
This idea is supported by the name by which they are known in Orissa,
1 IdmdbMshekis. — In short they may be considered as coronation medals,
which were distributed among the Brahmins and others who assisted in
the ceremony.
The dates of these medals have not yet been ascertained. Popularly
they are ascribed to the time of Ramchandra in the Treta Yuga. Fol¬
lowing the tradition of a math in S. India, Mr. Gibbs came to the conclu¬
sion that some of them might be 800 or 900 years old. Sir W. Elliott
would bring them down to the reign of the Narasinha line of Vijayanagar
(1488-1550 ?). In the absence of any reading of the inscriptions, it is dif¬
ficult to date the medals. From the following general considerations I am
inclined to think that the oldest cannot be earlier than the 14th century
A. D. The Ramatankis are S. Indian medals, and are chiefly known there.
A glance at the list of S. Indian coins as given by Sir W. Elliott,* and by
Dr. Bidie, f will show that the earliest coins bore the marks of animals,
plants, or geometrical figures. Next to them came coins bearing the
figures of gods such as S'iva, Parvati, and Vishnu. So far as I see, these
latter coins began with the Vijayanagar kings (Harihar began to reign in
1336 A. D.{). Now Ramatankis are Vaishnava medals, with Rama and
Sita as the principal figures. They cannot therefore be put before the
Viyayanagar kings, who were the first to introduce figures of gods and
goddesses on the coins. Sir W. Elliott has found a coin of Tsvara with
Rama and Sita seated, on the reverse. Tsvara belongs to the second line
of Viyayanagar kings §. Thus this unique coin supports the above view.
As regards the Ramatankis herein described, I imagine they are still
more modern. The find spot is interesting. They have all been found in
Puri, and it is remarkable that the numismatists who have collected else¬
where are not acquainted with this type. Dr. Bidie, who describes the
# Coins of S. India, pp. 152 — 152H.
f Journ. As. Soc., Bengal Vol. LII No. I 18S3 pp. 33 — 53.
X Sewell’s sketch of S. Indian dynasties p. 103.
§ For the Coin see “Coins of S. India” No. 108 p. 152E.; for I'svara see Sewel
p. 108.
1892.] C, E. Wilson — Topography of the Hugli in the 1 6th century . 109
single similar specimen in the Madras Museum, does not name the place
where it was found. It might have been sent from Ganjam, or indeed
from any Telugu speaking district. One of the present coins has on the
obverse letters which look like Telugu. From these considerations I am
inclined to infer that the kings who struck these medals ruled over
Telingana, and probably Orissa. Could they have been the Orissa kings
of the Suryavaiisa dynasty (1431-1538 ?), who were contemporaneous
with the 2nd line of Vijayanagar kings, who were powerful enough to
conquer the districts of Kistna and Godavery, and who appear from
their inscriptions to have been Yaishnavas by religion ? I should not be
surprised if further researches establish this view.
Since the above was written, I have come across another specimen.
It has a diameter of 1t3q- inches and a thickness of nearly. Its
weight is 217 grains.
This weight is unique. The five specimens above described are
either 3 or 4 times of 65 or 66 grains, the usual weight of a Marha.*
But this weight (217 grains) cannot be so classified.
The following is a detailed description of this new specimen.
Obverse. — This is divided into two parts by a line with dots under.
The upper part contains Rama seated on a throne, and to his right
Sita, both facing towards the left. Rama has in one hand a bow and in
the other hand (raised) an arrow. Below, and to the left, are llanuman
holding Rama’s foot, and Jambuvan standing. Below, and to the right,
is Bharat holding an umbrella. Under the throne is conch shell.
The lower part has some undecipherable indistinct figures.
Reverse. — Five human figures standing with chamars in their hands.
The outlines are very indistinct.
Note on the topography of the river in the .1 6th century from Hugli to the Sea
as represented in the Da Asia of De Barros. — By C. R. Wilson, M. A.
(With one plate.)
The topography of the Hugli has been very ably discussed by
Blochmann and Yule, and I do not propose in the present paper to re-open
the general discussion. I wish to limit my observations to the course of
the river as represented in the Da Asia of the Portuguese historian De
Barros. The first decad of this work was originally printed in 1552, the
second in 1553, the third in 1563, the fourth decad, as completed by La-
vanha, appeared in 1613. It is in the fourth decad that we find the De-
* For Marha see my essay on the Currency of Orissa, published in the Jouru.
As. Soc. Beng. Vol. LXI, No I, p. 45.
0
110 C. R. Wilson — Topography of the Tlugli in the 1 6th century. [No. 2,
scripnao do Remo de Bengalla. The map suggests two or three topogra¬
phical questions which it will be well to keep distinct as far as possi¬
ble. (1) What is the meaning of the map as it stands ? (2) How far
is it the original work of De Barros ? (3) How far can it be trusted as
accurate ? I shall try to deal with these questions so far as they are
concerned with the course of the river from Hugli to the sea.
I. The map does not contain the name “Hugli ” at all. The
river is called the Ganges ; and, instead of the town Hugli, we have
Satgaon standing on the Sarasvati, close to the junction of that river
with the Ganges and the Jamuna. Below Satgaon come Agarpara,
Xore (which Bloclimann identifies as Dakhinshor), and Baranagar.
Then comes the town of Betor. It is here that I take up the question
of the interpretation of the map. Bloclimann* says : “ Belor has not
yet been identified, unless it is intended for the insignificant village
of Belur, opposite to Chitpur, with which it agrees in position.” It
appears that Bloclimann read Belor instead of Betor, although the t
is quite clear in the map : hence perhaps the difficulty, for Betor is men¬
tioned several times by writers in the 16th century, and was certainly not
an insignificant village. The Bengali poets, Mukundarama Chakravarti
and Madhava Acharya, each wrote a Lay of Chandi, and they both speak
of Betor f It was a sanctuary of the goddess Chandi, and also a good
riverside market to stop at to buy provisions. Caesar Frederick thus de¬
scribes the place. “ A good tide’s rowing before you come to Satagan
you shall have a place which is called Buttor, and from thence upwards
the ships do not go because that upwards the river is very shallow, and
* Geographical and Historical Notes on the Burdwan and Presidency Divisions,
at the end of Hunted s Statistical Account of the 24 Varyands.
f For instance in the ordinary printed editions of the Chandi Mahgal we read : —
srcro rift *rr I
II
f^rr n
tinx i
?TT*jwrr rw d
Similarly Madhava Acharya says : —
* syifarei my *TT^ry i
1892.] C. R. Wilson — Topography of the Hugli in the 1 6th century. Ill
little water. Every year at Buttor they make and unmake a village
with houses and shops made of straw, and with all things necessary to
their uses, and this village standeth as long as the ships ride there, and
till they depart for the Indies, [i. e., Goa] and when they are departed
every man goeth to his plot of houses, and there setteth fire on them,
which thing made me to marvel. For as I passed up to Satagan, I saw
this village standing with a great number of people, with an infinite
number of ships and bazars, and at my return coming down with my
Captain of the last ship, for whom I tarried, I was all amazed to see
such a place so soon razed and burnt, nothing left but the sign of the
burnt houses. The small ships go to Satagan and there they lade.”
Where then was this Betor which it would seem was in 1565 se¬
cond only to Satgaon in importance P (a) According to Caesar Frederick,
it was a good tide’s rowing from Satgaon. ( b ) According to De Barros’
map, as interpreted by Blochmann, Betor is somewhere opposite Chitpur.
(c) The ordinary printed versions of Mukundarama’s Chandi give us
the following sequence of villages — Chitpur, Salikha, Kalikata, Betar.
There can be no doubt then that this Betor, the original nursery of
the trade which was afterwards transplanted to Calcutta, is the Betor
which lies to the west and south of the modern Sibpur, which is even
now reverenced as an old sanctuary of the goddess Chandi.
This identification of Betor leads to many interesting reflections.
(a) Calcutta, or what is practically the same Betor, is the oldest
seat of European trade in Bengal, its importance being due to the fact
that above Betor the river became much shallower, and consequently the
Portuguese when they first came to Bengal were unwilling to trust their
ships higher up the river.
(5) From the coming of the Portuguese in 1530, to their establish¬
ment at Hugli in about 1570, Garden Reach was annually crowded with
Portuguese shipping, and even after 1570 it still remained a favourite
reach to anchor in, as Mr. T. R. Munro has recently told us.
(c) It is this early importance of the place which explains why the
the Setts and Bysacks came and colonised Govindpur and opened Suta-
nuti Hat, which again led Job Charnock to select Calcutta as the site of
the English settlement.
( d ) Critics are wrong when they argue that the main stream of
the river flowed down Tolly’s Nulla, or the Adi-Gaiiga, as late as the 16th
century, because in the Chandi Mahgal the voyagers go this way. The
native boatmen avoided the present course of the river to Hijili, not be¬
cause it was too shallow, but because it was too deep : so deep as to be
readily accessible to the galliasses of the Arracanese pirates, whom the
voyagers were most anxious to escape.
112 C. R. Wilson — Topography of the TTiiglt in the 1 Gth century. [No. 2,
Between Betor and the sea De Barros gives the following topo¬
graphical details. On the west side the Damodar* enters the Ganges
by three mouths forming two islands, and lower down the river Ganga
just before its junction with the Ganges bifurcates and encloses a
small delta; between the Ganga and the Damodar are Pisolta and
Pisacoly. On the east side there are two tributaries answering ap¬
proximately to the northern mouths of the Damodar and the Ganga, and
between these two tributaries lies Pacuculij. Pisolta is just above the
point where the Ganga joins the Ganges, and in the first chapter
of the ninth book of the first decad of the Da Asia we read that the
“ Ganga discharges into the illustrious stream of the Ganges between
the two places called Angeli and Pieliolda in about 22 degrees.” The
Ganges and the Ganga are respectively the Hiigli and the Rupuarayan,f
Angeli is Hijili, the coast land from the mouth of the Rupnarayan to
near Jaleswar, and hence it becomes pretty clear that Picholda, which
is wrongly spelt Pisolta in the map, is the same place as Picliuldoho, a
small village and market on the north of the Rupnarayan, close to Fort
Mornington Point. £
II. Having thus identified Betor and Picholda, it will be necessary
for me, before going further, to deal with my second point, and consider,
how far the map is the original work of De Barros, and how far it has
been prepared by subsequent and inferior hands. And this is the more
important because I think that De Barros was a much better informed
authority than the writers who came after him, and who seem to borrow
from De Barros often without understanding him. For instance Faria
de Sousa, finding in the Da Asia the statement about the Ganga, which
# The name is not given in the map, but there can be no doubt as to the identity
of the river.
f The Ganga is the Rupnarayan. Sir Henry Yule says, “ It is the Ganga of A.
Hamilton; and is marked as “ The Ganges ” in Warren and Wood’s Survey which
appears in the Filot of 1748, names arising from some old confusion not easily ex¬
plained. It is now known as the Rupnarain ” (see Hedges’ Diary , Yol. Ill, p. ccx.)
J Since I wrote the above, Pandit Haraprasad Sastri has pointed out to me
that Pichhalda is mentioned more than once in the Chaitanya Charitd. In Book II,
Chapter 16, we read : —
trrc ws n
Wrl *3? fTFC 1
stk yiy ii
And again : —
vrmiK ^ ^ qr?; i
Wri ti; wr ii
1892.] C. R. Wilson — Topography of the Huglt in the 1 6th century. 113
I have just quoted, reproduces it in the following fashion : — “ The Ganges
falls into the sea between the cities of Arigola and Pisalta in about lati¬
tude 22°. ” In the same way, an inferior hand seems to have been em¬
ployed in the preparation of the Descripcao do Beino de Bengalla , for
which De Barros had probably left only rough drawings. It was not
De Barros, I imagine, who put Baranagar on the wrong side of the river,
or mis-spelt Picholda, or left out the name of Hijili altogether ; it was
not De Barros who inserted the existing erroneous degrees of latitude
and fallacious scale of leagues ; it was not De Barros who congregated
together in one map a number of heterogeneous plans of Bengal without
any attempt to make their measurements uniform. For, if we take the
trouble to make a slight calculation, we shall find that the ostensible
scale of the map is certainly not the scale of that portion which repre¬
sents the course of the river from Betor to the sea, the portion which
must have been best known to De Barros. The distance between the
22nd and 23rd degrees of latitude as given in the plan is in. Hence
68 miles = -§• in , or 1 in. = 58-f- miles ; and this is no doubt the mea¬
sure indicated by the accompanying scale of leagues, each of these
leagues being equal, it would seem, to 3'814 English miles. Roughly
speaking, then, we may say that the ostensible scale of the map is
1 in. = 60 miles. How, if this were the actual scale of the plan
of the river from Betor to the sea, the direct distance between Be¬
tor and Picholda would be 56 miles, and the direct distance between
Picholda and Sagar would be 68 miles, whereas the true distances are
28 and 40 miles respectively. And again, if 1 in. = 60 miles were the
actual scale, and if the 22nd degree of latitude be approximately correct,
then the 23rd degree of latitude will pass south of Betor, which is really
only three or four miles north of latitude 22° 30'. The preparer of the
map has not shrunk from this last absurdity, and accordingly has mark¬
ed latitude 23° at what is approximately latitude 22° 30/. From these
three instances it is obvious that the true scale of the map of the river
from Betor to the sea is 1 in. = 30 miles. This gives Betor the correct
latitude 22° 30' + j makes the direct distance between Betor and Pi¬
cholda exactly right, viz., 28 miles ; and makes the direct distance between
Picholda and Sagar 34 miles, i. e., 6 miles too little. This scale, how¬
ever, will not do for the river above Betor, and in fact no hypothesis
will help the plan here, or explain how Agarpara should be at least ten
times nearer to Satgaon than it is to Betor, or how Baranagar comes to
be on the wrong side of the river. These mistakes seem to show that
De Barros was not so well acquainted with the river above Betor, or,
more probably, that the maker of the map was not sufficiently well in¬
formed to be able to properly piece together his materials.
114 C. R. Wilson — Topography of the Jlugli in the 1 6th century. [No. 2,
I. ( Resumed ) I shall now return to my first point, and shall try to
identify Pacuculij and Pisacoly. Blochmann* * * § says : —
“ Pacuculij has hitherto defied all attempts at identification, and the
same may be said of the places Pisaculy and Pisolta, marked by De Barros
as lying in Hijili.f Van den Broucke throws a doubt on the correctness
of these three names, inasmuch as he leaves out Pisaculy and Pisolta, and
only gives Pacuculi, ‘on the authority of Portuguese maps.’ In position,
but only faintly resembling in sound, Pisaculy corresponds to Mahishadal,
the form given in the Ain ; and Pacuculi corresponds in sound, and almost
in position, with the old pargand Penchakuli, or Pencil akoly, which
lies just opposite to the present mouth of the Damodar, and opposite to
the ‘ James and Mary Sands.’ But we rather expect a place a little fur¬
ther doivn.X I am, however, not satisfied ’with this identification, because
Penchakuli is after all the name of a pargand , and not of a place, § at least
at present, and I am rather inclined to avail myself of a conjecture pro¬
posed by Colonel Gastrell, and take the word to be a misprint for Pa-
cucuti, with a t instead of an 7, — which would clearly be a corruption of
pakka kuthi , or ‘ brick-house,’ and may refer to a pucca house, or 4 logie,’
built by the Portuguese at the entrance of the Hiigli. Such houses,
belonging to various human beings, are, or were, quite common on the
banks of the Hiigli ; they served as depots or retreats, and, when sur¬
rounded by a ditch, were even dignified with the name of 4 forts.’ ” A
little before this Blochmann refering to the three mouths of the Damo¬
dar, says that they 44 stand for the Saraswati, the Damodar, and the
Rupnarayan and further that “ Pacaculi is placed opposite to the
mouth of the river which we have identified with the Rupnarayan.”
From all this it appears that Blochmann’s TrpwTov i^eDSos was the iden¬
tification of the Rupnarayan with one of the mouths of the Damodar, and
that this caused him to miss Pichuldoho and brought him into the great¬
est difficulties with regard to Pisacoly and Pacuculij. Sir Henry Yule’s
correct identification of the Rupnarayan with the Ganga has led at once
to the discovery of Pichuldoho, and entirely does away with Bloch¬
mann’s arguments about Pisacoly and Pacuculij. Accordingly when
Blochmann argues that we cannot identify Pacuculij with Penchakuli
* Geographical and Historical Notes on the Bardivan and V residency Divisions, at
the end of Huntei’’s Statistical Account of the 24 P arganas, p. 384.
f This is a mistake. De Barros says that the Ganga enters the Ganges between
Hijili and Picholda, consequently Picholda, or Pisolta, could not here been in Hijili.
X The italics are mine.
§ Blochmann seems to think that Pacuculij is the name of a place only, and
not of a region ; but Do Barros distinctly says that it is the name of an island, i. e.,
of a region.
1892.] C. R. Wilson — Topography of the Hugli in the 1 6th century. 115
opposite the mouth of the Damodar, because “ we rather expect a place
a little further down,” I reply that the identification is unsatisfactory,
because we expect a place a little further up. In fact if, as I think, the
scale of the map is 1 in. = 30 miles, Pacuculij is 13 or 14 miles above
Pichuldoho and must therefore be somewhere opposite Ulubaria. Be¬
sides Penchakuli is undoubtedly the modern representative of Pisacoly ;
for (a) Penchakuli in 1760 was written Pichacooley*, and this, if 4 ch ’
be pronounced soft, is the exact equivalent of Pisacoly; and again (6)
Pisacoly is 5 or 6 miles above Pisolta, which is about the distance of
Penchakuli from Pichuldoho. It is true that Pisacoly is on the west
side of the river while Penchakuli is a fiscal division on the east side ;
but this does not avail against the general argument. Either, as is
quite possible, Pisacoly, like Baranagar, has been misplaced, or, as is
more probable, Pisacoly once extended to both sides of the river, the
town being on the west side, and the disappearance of the town is due
to a change in the course of the river Damodar. Pacuculij must have
stood somewhere near Royapore, where also stood Calcula in the 17th
century, according to Sir Henry Yule ; but unfortunately the names
4 Pacuculij ’ and 4 Calcula ’ seem to have altogether disappeared.
Having dealt as well as I can with the places along the side of the
river from Betor to the sea, I must add a few words as to the meaning
of the various tributary streams shown in the map. There can be no
doubt about the two western tributaries. One is the Damodar which en¬
ters the Granges, ( i . e., the Hugli) by three mouths somewhere near Ulu¬
baria : in fact, if we reckon 1 in. = 30 miles, the middle mouth will be
16 miles above Pichuldoho is exactly at Ulubaria. The other river, the
Ganga, is meant for the Rupnaiayan. It has two mouths. The upper
one is perhaps 5 or 6 miles below the present mouth of the Rupnarayan,
the lower one seems to correspond to the Haldi river. The two eastern
tributaries are not so easily identified. The lower one is probably the
Rogue’s River of which we read in the 17th and 18th centuries, and
which is identified by Sir Henry Yule with the Kalpi Creek. The
upper tributary joins the Hugli at a point north of Pacuculij, or Roya¬
pore, which seems to preclude us from identifying it with the river of
Calcula. It may perhaps be the 44 Bangala river ” which Sir Henry Yule
considers to be the same as 44 the Loonghee Bungla Khali of modern
charts, just below Jarmaker’s Reach.”
III. I now come to my third and last point : how far we may trust
De Barros’ map as an accurate picture of the river at the beginning of
the 16th century. This question has, of course, been partially answered
by what has been already said, but it is as well to deal with it separately.
# Long’s S 'elections from Unpublished Records , p. 205,
116 C. R. Wilson — Topography of the Hugli in the 1 6th century. [No. 2,
I regard the map as fairly accurate for the course of the river from Betor
to the sea. Mr. Blochmann doubted the very existence of Pacuculij,
Pisacoly, and Pisolta ; but I have found Pichuldoho in the very place
indicated by De Barros and have also been able to account for Pacucu¬
lij and Pisacoly. Nor is there any reason to distrust the way in which
the map arranges the tributary streams. Colonel Gastrell* has argued
that the principal outfall of the Damodar, even as late as 1745, was the
Jan Perdo river, which he identifies with the Kana Damodar, one mile
north of Ulubaria, but which Sir Henry Yule identifies with the present
Ulubaria Khal ; and this conjecture is in complete harmony with De
Barros’ map, for it represents the Damodar as entering the Ganges
(Hugli) by 3 outfalls at a point somewhere about Ulubaria. I am not
quite so sure about the accuracy of the map as regards the outfall of the
river Ganga or Rupnarayan. To-day the Hugli on meeting the Rup¬
narayan is deflected sharply to the east, and after describing a large
semicircle returns once again to its former longitude and flows due south
past Sagar. In De Barros’ map there is no such semicircular deflec¬
tion, the river empties itself directly into the sea. Instead of the
tract of land which now extends between the mouths of the Rupnarayan
and the Haldi and forms the police circle by Sutahata in the Tamluk
subdivision, we have a small delta enclosed between the two arms of the
Ganga. If this be accepted as a true picture of the state of things in
the 16tli century, w’e must suppose that the eastern portion of Tamluk
(i. e., the police circle of Sutahata) has been thrown up since then by
the deposits of the Rupnarayan, and that hence has been formed the
Diamond Harbour, the Diamond Sand being merely the last and least
result of this very process.
Having thus reached the Diamond Sand, I am tempted to add one
more remark, by way of conclusion, which has to do with the topography
of the 17th and not the 16th century. Sir Henry Yule says that “ the sand
probably got its name from some ship,” and notes that “ a ship in the
company’s employ called the Dyamond is pretty often mentioned circa.
1620-1640.” I have found some more definite evidence on this point.
From a journal kept by Job Charnock and his Council, during the time
when the English were quarrelling with the Nawab of Bengal, we learn
that in 1688 Captain Herron’s ship was called the Diamond. Under the
date 14th November 1688 the diary notes : — “ In the evening anchored
at Sumbereroe treesf, where Captain Walthrop came on board of us to
know when we intended to go over the Braces ; which was resolved of,
* Hunter’s Statistical Account of Bengal , Vol. Ill, pp. 258-261.
f Kitesal.
1892.]
II. Beveridge — Rajah Kdns.
117
to be with the morning light : he informed us how, on the 12th current,
at night, he left the ship Diamond ashore, with her head at Buflilo
point,* but in little danger, being taken care for by Captain Heath, and
supposeth she got off with the flood then coming in.” After this Char-
nock and the Council set sail and reached Ballasore. And on the 18th
“ the ship Recovery arrived in the Road, from the Braces, bringing news
of the ship Diamond' s being in safety.” I think it likely that the
Diamond Sand got its name from this incident, the more so as, accord¬
ing to Sir H. Yule, Herron, the Captain of the Diamond, was the author
not only of the earliest instructions printed in detail for the navigation
of the river Hugli, “ but probably also of the earliest chart of it that
has any claim to quasi- scientific character.”
Rajah Kans. — By H. Beveridge, C. S.
The publication by our Society of the Riyazussalatin is a valuable
contribution to the history of Bengal. It is to be hoped that it will
lead to the discovery and publication of the sources of that work. For
though Glhulam Husain’s book was the foundation of Stewart’s History
of Bengal, he is too recent a writer for his statements to be of authority,
except when he is quoting from a risalah, or little book, by some
unknown author, or is giving the local traditions of Dinajpur and
Maldah. It is a pity that so little is known about Ghulam Husain.
He was a native of Zaidpur in Oudh, and was Dak Munshi under Mr.
George Udny, the Commercial Resident at Maldah. He died there, and
his tomb is still shown.
We owe to Ghulam Husain the fullest account that we possess of
the Hindu whom he and other Muhammadan writers are supposed to
designate by the name of Rajah Kans. I hope to show later on that
his real name was Ganes, and that the early Muhamedan historians
probably wrote his name as Gans or Ganes. Ghulam Husain represents
Rajah Kans as a cruel and bigoted tyrant. He describes him just as
a worshipper of Krishna would describe Rajah Kamsa of Mathura, and
no doubt allowance must be made in both cases for religious prejudices.
But, cruel tyrant or not, Rajah Kans is the most interesting figure
among the kings of Bengal. We feel that this obscure Hindu, who
rose to supreme power in Bengal, and who for a time broke the bonds of
Islam, must have been a man of vigour and capacity. He reminds us
of the unfortunate Hemu who opposed Humayun. Ghiassuddin, one of
* At the north edge of the Diamond Sand.
P
118
H. Beveridge — Ha] all Kdns.
[No. 2,
Rajah Ivans’ predecessors, was a joennd and able prince, and the story
about the Kazi’s calling him to justice for having by misadventure shot
the widow’s son is worthy of Herodotus. But the only other king of
Bengal who can compare in romantic interest with Rajah Kans is
Husain Shah. He is known in history as Alanddin Abnl Mozaffar
Husain Shah, but the people of the Rarh in Murshidabad call him the
Rakhal Badshah, or Shepherd King, from a tradition that he was origin¬
ally a herdsman in the house of a brahmin at Chandpnr, or Chand-
para, near Mirzapur, in the Subdivision of Jangipur.* * * §
In Buchanan’s account of Dinajpurf Rajah Kans is called Gones.
He says that Ghyassuddin was succeeded by his son Saifuddin, and
he by his slave Shihabuddin, and that then “ Gones, a Hindu and Hakim
of Dynwaj, (perhaps a petty Hindu chief of Dinajpur) seized the
government.” It does not seem certain that this Dynwaj is identical
with the town of Dinajpur. It may have some connection with the
Dhinaj Rai mentioned in Stewart, page 72, as a chief of Sonargaon.
But the Riyaz, page 78, calls him Bhoj Rai.
Mr. WestmacottJ was apparently the first to point out the identity
of Kans and Gones. Mr. Blochmann§ doubted the identity, but I
presume that his doubt was only as to the proper spelling of the
name ; for it is impossible to doubt, that, whatever be the true name,
the person described by Buchanan as Gones is the Kans of Firishta
and the Riyaz. Mr. Blochmann remarks that Gonesh is a common
name, and that Muhammadans must have been acquainted with it.
“ But all MSS. spell the Rajah’s name Kans, not Ganes.”
The reply to this is that g and k are often written alike in MSS.
There is no g in Arabic, and in Meninski’s Dictionary we find g and k
treated as one letter. In his remarks on the letter K he says that it is
also written with three dots and called gef, “ sed raro in libris invenies
expressa ilia puncta, unde et hie ea passim omitto.” Another way of
distinguishing between g and k is by writing or printing the former
with a second slanting line, thus <A, but this is very often not done in
* J. A. S. B. XLIT, 227 note. The story is that when Husain Shah became
king he rewarded his old master by giving him a zamindari at the quit-rent of one
ana. Hence the place is called Ekana Chandpara to this day. Another tradition
abont Husain Shah is that he made a road from Deoghar to Jagannath. This he
did to propitiate the god who had threatened him with death for having entered his
temple. The road runs from north to south through the Rarh or western half of
Murshidabad and is still in use. There are many tanks along side of it which
Husain Shah is said to have excavated for the benefit of travellers.
+ Eastern India , II, 618.
J Calcutta Review, LY, 208.
§ J. A. S. B. XLIY, 286-87.
1892.]
119
H. Beveridge — Rajah Kdns.
MSS. The old name for Rajmahal is written indifferently Akmahal
and Agmahal, and in the Qandahar inscription published by M. Dar-
mesteter in the Journal Asiatique for 1890, page 205, we find that Ghora
Ghat, Gaur, and Bangalah, were engraved on the rock as Kora Kat,
Kaur, and Bankalah. M. Darmesteter remarks on this peculiarity in
a note at page 219. It seems therefore quite possible that the name in
the MSS. was written Gans, or Ganes. This is very nearly Ganesh, or
Ganesa. Sometimes the approximation is even closer, for at page 115 of
the Asiatic Society s edition of the Riyaz, we have, in a foot note, the
various reading Kons, or Kans, i. e., I submit, Ganes.* Besides,
it does not seem correct to say that all MSS. give Kans. At least one
MS. must apparently have given the letter as a g, for Buchanan pre¬
sumably got the name Gones from his Pandua manuscript.fi The fact
that the name Ganesh still lives in the memories of the people of
Dinajpur is a strong argument in favour of the identification and of
Ganesh being the real name.fi If the name was Kans, and if Kans
was a different man from Ganesh, we have the improbability that a
Hindu chief of great celebrity has been forgotten by men of his own
country and religion, and remembered only by Muhammadans. Then
too it seems very unlikely that a Hindu should have borne the name of
Kans in the beginning of the 15th century. On the other hand Ganesh
is a very likely name, and we find that Ganesh was a good deal
worshipped in Dinajpur, for Buchanan § gives an engraving of a re¬
markable image of Ganesh, which had been originally at Bannao’ar. I
submit that the evidence is sufficiently strong to justify us in writing
the name as Ganesh.
But, however that may be, it is clear, as I have already observed,
that the Gones of Buchanan is the same person as the Kans of the
Riyaz. The two accounts perfectly agree. Buchanan tells us that Gones
put Shaikh Badar-al-Islam to death for not doing homage to him, and
the Riyaz, page 1 11, tells us the same thing. Both tell us that the Rajah
had a son called Jadu, who afterwards turned Muhammadan, and reigned
as Jalalluddin, and both tell us of the interposition of Qutb Alam and
the invasion of Ibrahim of Jaunpur. Indeed it is clear that either
Buchanan’s manuscript was simply the Riyaz, or some work which the
author of the Riyaz has made use of. It is interesting to find that the
Riyaz represents Qutb Alam as applying the title of Hakim to Rajah
# Stewart, p. 93 spells the name Kanis. This seems nothing but Ganes. In
the Ain I, 413 and 415, he is called Kansi Bumi.
fi See Eastern India, II, 616.
fi I got this fact from Babu Hari Mohan Singh, Manager of the Dinajpur Raj.
§ Eastern India , II, 625.
120
[No. 2,
H. Beveridge — Rajah Kans.
Kans. Hakim was Goues’ title, and Mr. Westmacott tells ns that it is still
in use among the ryots of Dinajpur when speaking of their zamindars.
The Riyaz calls Rajah Kans Zamindar of Bhaturiah. Mr. Bloch¬
mann* says that he does not know if this name is an ancient one, and
that it does not occur in the Ain. But there is good evidence of
the antiquity of the name. Gladwin, in his Revenue Accounts published
in 1790, at page 13, mentions Bhaturiah as giving its name to a sir of
a particular weight, and Grant in the Fifth Report, page 347, tells us
that Bhaturiah was an ancient division, and was the jaghir of Mir
Jamla. In Jaffar Khan’s settlement of 1722 or 1135 A. H., Bhaturiah
was included in Cliakla Ghora Ghat.t I a11! also inclined to think
that the name does occur in the Ain. Grant tells us, page 338, that
Bhaturiah belonged to Sarkar Bazuha, and in the Ain, page 404 of
the Persian text, we find a Bahuriabazu, or Bahsuriabazu, entered as a
large mahal in that Sarkar. It is very likely that two dots have been
omitted in copying, and that the name should be Bliaturia. Bazu is
an affix to all the estates in Sarkar Bazuha, as Mr. Blochmann has
pointed out.J Mr. Blochmann has also pointed§ out that Bliaturia is
the name given in Rennel’s Bengal Atlas, Sheet No. 6, to a large tract
east of Maldali. It included Nattore. In the same map we have the
town Battorya marked, and this is probably Bhaturia. It lies near
the Ganges, and about half way between Pabna and Rampur Bauliali.
Mr. Blochmann has hazarded the conjecture that the name Raj-
shaye is a reminiscence of Raja Kans. This, however, seems very
doubtful. Rajsliaye does not seem to be an old name. Apparently it
does not occur in the Ain, for Graut places Rajsliaye in Sarkar Audam-
bar, or Tanda, and the name does not occur under that Sarkar in the
Ain. Moreover Rajshaye proper was on the west of the Ganges, and is
so marked in Rennel. It therefore was no part of Kans or Ganesh’s
ancestral property. There is not even a pargana of the name of Raj¬
shaye in the modern district of that name. The pargana Rajshaye,
which probably gave the name to Rani Bliowani’s immense zamindari, is
far away to the west of the Ganges and lies chiefly, if not entirely, in
Birbhum. Rajshaye is probably a compound word of the same class
as Rajmalial. It is possible even that the last syllable may not be con¬
nected with Slidli , but may be the Arabic shai , i. e., property. The
Rajah referred to in it is not improbably Rajah Man Singh. There is
a large pargana in the same neighbourhood, of which the Rajshaye
pargana is, I believe, a dependency, which goes by the name of Kumar
* J. A. S. B. XLII, 263.
f Vide Fifth Report , pp. 264 and 338.
t J. A. S. B. XLII, 216.
§ ib. p. 263.
121
1892.] H. Beveridge — Uajali Ivans.
Pratap. This is an old name, and occurs in the Ain, and probably
refers to Pratap Sing, the son of Bhagwas Das, and brother of Man
Singh.*
It is to be regretted that the information about Rajah Kans or
Ganesh is so scanty. Perhaps a diligent inquiry in Dinajpur and
Bogra might lead to further discoveries. Firislita represents him in a
good light, and as half a Muhammadan. The Riyaz pictures him as a bi¬
goted tyrant. Perhaps both accounts are partially correct. Probably
his severity to Badar-al-Islam was the result of political rather than re¬
ligious motives. Even the Riyaz tells us that he allowed his son to be
made a Muhammadan, and that he himself would have become one but for
the influence of his Rani. At page 618, Buchanan calls the son Godusen,
but in his Appendix, page 28, he calls him Juddoo Sein. This is important,
for it seems to show that Ganesa was connected with the old Sein kings
of Bengal. f
I now proceed to discuss the chronology of Rajah Kans or Rajah
Ganesh’s reign. This is a very obscure matter. There can be no
doubt that the dates given in the Riyaz are wrong, for they disagree
with the evidence of coins, and also with the author’s statements about
Sultan Ibrahim of Jaunpur. There is one clear date, not on a coin,
which, I think, throws light on the subject. This is the date of the
* Blochmann’s Ain, 447, and Stewart, 188.
f At one time I thought that Rajah Ivans might be identified with the Kama
Sein who ruled at Rangamati in the Murshidabad district. Kama might easily be
changed into Kan, if not into Ivans ; and Captain Layard, J. A. S. B. XXII, 282, was
told forty years ago that Kama Sein was a famous Maharajah of Bengal who
resided chiefly at Gaur. The story of the Riyaz about Rajah Ivans’ making golden
cows might also agree with the name Gowkaran and the legend told to Captain
Layard about that place. Gowkaran, is 3 or 4 miles from Rangamati. The natives say
that it is the place where Rajah Kama kept his cattle, and that Gobarliatti, between
it and Rangamati, is where the dunghill was. It is also curious that Buchanan, II,
682, heard of a “ Gokarna Rajah ” at Ghora Ghat in Dinajpur. Finally there is
the fact that the name of the village near Rangamati where the ruins of the Rajbari
used to be, and where the moat is still pointed out, is Jadupur, which might point to
Jadu alias Jdlalluddin. It is quite possible that the legends about Rajah Kama
Sein may have become mixed up, but I could not hear anything at Rangamati about
Rajah Kans or Rajah Ganesh. What I was told was that Kama Sein drowned
himself in the Chauti Bhil, when attacked by the Mahomedans, and that he had a son
named Brisha Ketu. It may be noted that there is a Ganeshpur north oF Jiaganj
in Murshidabad.
Mr. Westmacott informs me that Dr. Buchanan’s MSS. are now in the
Library of the Royal Asiatic Society in London. It might be worth while to^ exa¬
mine them and to see if they say anything more about Rajah Ganesh than what Mr.
Montgomery Martin published.
322
H. Beveridge — Rajah Kdns.
[No. 2,
deatli of the famous saint Nur Qutb Alara. He is buried at Pandua,
and the date of his decease is fixed by the chronogram, Shams-ul
Hidayat, as 851 A. H. or 1447 A. D.* General Cunningham has also
used this argument in volume XV of his Archceological Reports , page
175. If the inscription at page 83 of that volume refer to Nur
Qutb Alam, he died even later than 851, viz., in 863. However 851 is
enough for our purpose, and is in all probability the correct date.f
According to the Riyaz, the saint was of the same age as Sultan
Ghyassuddin, and was his fellow-student under Shaikh Hamiduddin of
Nagore.J And the Riyaz adds that Sultan Ghyassuddin reverenced
the saint all his life. But this is inconsistent with the supposition that
Ghyassuddin died in 799. Qutb Alam must have been very young then,
and he had not succeeded his father Ala-ulhaq, who was also a distin¬
guished saint, and who died in 800. Ghyassuddin according to one
account reigned 16 years, and before that he had been for many years
in rebellion against his father. He cannot then have been young when
he died, and it is extremely unlikely that liis fellow-student survived
him for more than fifty years.
According to the evidence of coins Ghyassuddin was reigning in
812, and, as the editor of the Catalogue of Muhammadan coins in the
British Museum observes, there is no good reason for supposing that
the coin was a posthumous issue. Further, we have the apparently
indisputable evidence of the Chinese annals, quoted by General Cun¬
ningham, to the effect that Ghyassuddin did not die till 814, when he
was succeeded by his son Saifuddin. It is true that there is the diffi¬
culty, not noticed by General Cunningham, that there are coins of
Saifuddin Hamza dated 799. § But it is easier to believe in contem¬
poraneous than in posthumous issues, and we find that Ghyassuddin
himself issued such coins in the lifetime of his father. It is to be
remembered that Ghyassuddin appears to have lived latterly at Sonar-
# J. A. S. B. XLII, 262.
t 851 is the date given by Mr. Blochmann, and he supports it by the chronogram,
but it is curious that in the Ain II, 220, the date of Qutb Alam’s death is given as 808.
In Ravenshaw’s Gaur p. 52 the date of NurQutb’s death is given as 851, but at p. 50
it is stated that according to a book belonging to the endowment Nur Qutb died in
828 (1245). The same book also gives the date of his father’s death as 786. It
must be confessed that 828 is a more likely date for a contemporary of Ghyassuddin
than 851. [Mr. Beveridge wrote this in April. Three months later, having gained
further information, he was able to fix the date of Nur Qutb Alam’s death as 818
A. H. Mr. Beveridge’s reasons will be fonnd in the note which immediately follows
this article. Ed.]
t Mr. Blochmann says that this is in Jodhpur and not in Birbhum, l.c. 260/».
§ See B. M. Catalogue 28.
1892.]
H. Beveridge — Rajah Kans.
123
gaon for his tomb is there. This may have facilitated Saifuddin’s
usurpation, or may have been accompanied by a division of the king¬
dom. Saifuddin reigned three years and seven months according to
the Riyaz, and his slave, or adopted son, Shihabuddin reigned three
years and four months. Reckoning 814 as the year of Grhyassuddin’s
death, this brings us to 821. Bat this is too late, for Jalalluddin’s coins
go back to 818. There must therefore be some mistake about the length
of the reigns of Saifuddin and Shihabuddin. There is also the seven
years’ reign of Rajah Kans to be accounted for, but I think we may
well believe that part of it was contemporaneous with Shihabuddin’s
reign, and part with that of Jalalluddin. The Riyaz tells us that when
Rajah Kans was pressed by Sultan Ibrahim, he resigned the throne, and
that his son Jadu was proclaimed king under the style of Jalalluddin.
But when the Rajah heard that Ibrahim was dead, he resumed his power.
May not the coin of 818 refer to the time when Jalalluddin became
Sultan in his father’s lifetime ? He was a boy of twelve then, according
to the Riyaz, so that the real power would remain with the father.
The Riyaz mentions the tradition that Sultan Ibrahim died shortly
after his retreat from Graur. This must be incorrect, for Ibrahim
reigned till 844. It is curious that the Jaunpur annals do not say any¬
thing about the expedition of Ibrahim to Bengal. They tell us that
Khwaja Jahan and his son Mubarak levied tribute from Bengal, and this
fact and their apparently sudden deaths would make the story of the
Riyaz square better with their reigns than with that of Ibrahim. But
it is not likely that a mistake of names was made, especially as Bucha¬
nan also has the name Ibrahim. He, however, does not identify him
with Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi, and describes him as being the grand¬
father of Husain Shah, and as having been put to death by Jalalluddin.
This must surely be all wrong.
Though Firishta does not say anything about Ibrahim Sharqi’s
attacking Rajah Kans, he describes him as having set out on an expedi¬
tion against Delhi in 816, and as having returned to Jaunpur after
making some marches.* Perhaps this is the occasion referred to in
the Riyaz. Firishta also tells the story about Shihabuddin Qazi’s
silver chair, so that there can be no doubt that the Ibrahim of the
Riyaz is the Sultan of Jaunpur. Perhaps both Firishta and Grhulam
Husain derived their information from the history of Bengal by Maho¬
med Qandahari, which unfortunately seems to be no longer in existence.
# See also the Sharqi architecture of Jaunpur by Dr. Fiihrer, p. 7. Ibrahim
made another expedition in 1435 A. D. (839) ibid 8. The Riyaz gives it as a rumour
that both Ibrahim and Shihabuddin died shortly after their interview with Nur
Qutb Alam. It is true that both died at about the same time, but this was long
after Rajah Kans’ time.
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.
1892.]
W. Crooke — Vocabulary of the Konva language.
125
A Vocabulary of the Korwa language ; — collected by
W. Crooke, B. A., C. S.
The following vocabulary of the language spoken by the Korwas,
of whom there are a few families in the jungles of the southern part
of Mirzapur, may be of interest in connection with Mr. Driver’s paper
in the 2nd number of the Society’s Journal, Part I, for 1891. I have
compared the list casually with Mr. Hislop’s vocabulary of what he
calls the Kuri and Muasi dialect, and some words are certainly iden¬
tical : but I leave the analysis of the language to some one skilled in
the Gondi and Kolarian dialects. The glossary was taken down care¬
fully from a Korwa, who could speak Hindi intelligibly as well as his
Q
126
W. Crooke — Vocabulary of the Korwa language. [No. 2,
1892.] W. Crooke — Vocabulary of the Korwa language .
127
The tribal dance or sarangmi.
To stand up, rimumi.
To sleep on the ground, gendjimi.
To wake, jag ami, (Hind, jagna).
The spud for digging rami , (Hind, rambha).
roots.
128
W. H. P. Driver — The Korkus.
[No. 2,
Morning,
Midday,
v Evening,
To ascend,
Cold weather,
Hot weather,
To bathe,
Barren,
To sleep,
To be bald,
To cook,
The rice is cooking,
Naked,
jhdtkanti.
tiken kend.
ay up kend.
rikatimi.
ledrtand.
ogartand.
mudn.
menehe'punwd,
gitimi.
Jcodnd uptido.
badelangi sinmd .
leti dova senidd.
uturkend.
The Korkus — By W. H. P. Driver.
The Korkus are the most westerly of all the Kolarian tribes. They
inhabit the Satpura, Mahadeo, and Maikul Hills in the Central Provinces,
and a few are to be found in the valley of the Tapti.
They are found in various stages of civilisation, but they mostly cling
to the hills and jungles, only visiting the nearest towns in the plains for
marketing purposes.
They have retained their aboriginal language (a dialect of Kolarian),
and also their aboriginal songs and dances, which plainly show their
affinity to the Kols of Chota Nagpore.
They are in fact closely allied to the Korwas of Sirgooja, whose
traditions connect them with the Mahadeo Hills.
The following short vocabulary shows the similarity in language : —
1892 ]
W. H. P. Driver — The Korlcus.
129
In appearance the Korkus vary according to the state of civilisation
which they have reached. In the wilds they
clothmgranC0 an^ have little clothing and are very dark-skinned.
Round about Chikalda in the Ellichpore district
(where I saw them) the men are copper-coloured and the women much
fairer. The men wTear ‘ dhotis,’ coats, and ornamental ‘pugrees,’ which
at the Fagooa festival are hung with beads and bells, and they have
country-made fancy waist cloths, the ornamental ends of which are
allowed to hang down in the same style as the Uraons of Chota Nagpore.
They also wear metal bracelets and large earrings.
The women wear the 1 sari ’ tucked up like a divided skirt, accord¬
ing to the fashion of the country, but they hide the ugliness of this
fashion by bringing the end ronnd in front like an apron. They also
cover the head, and wear the short jacket common in those parts. All
this gives them a very non-Kolarian appearance, which, however, is
counteracted by the number of earrings, necklaces of beads, armlets,
bracelets, anklets, and rings, with which they deck their persons. The
anklets are thin and loose, so that they make a loud jingling noise when
they walk or dance.
The Korkus are a quiet peace-loving people ; they do not know the
use of the bow and arrow, and they live chiefly
Occupation. by cutting and selling bamboos, firewood, and
other jungle produce.
They do a little in the way of cultivation wherever they can find
a level piece of ground, but the “ dhya ” system has been put a stop to
by Government, and the valuable timber trees are carefully preserved
by the Forest Department.
Their staple food consits of “ Kutki ” (Panicum) , which they boil
and eat like rice ; but they also grow “ Kodo ”
(Paspalum), and sometimes a little coarse rice
besides pumpkins and beans. They also feed on various jungle products,
such as the flower of the ‘ Mhowa ’ (Bassia latifolia), the plum of the
ebony-tree (Diospyros melanoxylon), the fruit of the wild mangoe, the
berries of ‘ Chironji ’ (Buchanania latifolia), the ‘ Ber ’ (Zizyphus Jujuba),
the seeds of the * Sal ’ (Shorea robusta), the bean of the giant Bauliinia
creeper, the seeds of the bamboo, a wild arrow-root (Curcuma), wild
yams, and others.
They are very fond of all kinds of meat, and will eat buffalo, bison,
pig, goat, and other animals, but not cows or monkeys, which Hindus
have taught them to revere.
The Korkus divide themselves into two classes : the ‘ Roopa,’ or
Divisions and Septs. greater > and the ‘ Bondoe, ’ or lesser. There is
also a small tribe of alien origin named ‘ Nehals,’
130
W. H. P. Driver — The Korkus.
[No. 2,
who work as cowherds for the Korkus, and have successfully grafted
themselves on them, adopting their language, customs, and beliefs. These
Nehals are the remnants of a once numerous tribe that inhabited the
Gawalgart hills, but were broken up and nearly exterminated by Sindia’s
soldiers. The Korkus, though otherwise mixing freely with the Nehals,
will neither marry nor eat with them. These remarks of course only refer
to the Korkus of Berar.
The Korkus are divided into 124 “ Gots,” or Septs, as follows : —
1 Busum ... thatch grass.
1 Jambu ... a wild edible fruit tree.
1 B&the ... do.
1 Siloo ... do.
1 Sewathi ... a small thorny creeper.
1 Chilathi ... a large thorny creeper.
1 Lota ... stalks of the Makai Jawari, &c.
1 Athoa ... a wooden ladle made from Bethe wood.
1 Kollia ... ashes.
1 Kasda ... a ravine.
1 Dhikar ... descendants of a woman who gave birth while out
fishing on the banks of a river.
1 Mawsi ... An ancient people who did not live in houses.
Hijra ... Hermaphrodites. There seem to be a number of
these, and they live by begging.
A wealthy Korku may have several wives ; but a woman may not
have more than one husband. They do not
Marriage and Mar- marry before the age of maturity. People of
nage Customs. J \ 1
the same Got are not allowed to mter-marry,
and children belong to the Got of the father. Widows and divorcees
are allowed to re-marry, and the younger brother is supposed to take
his defunct elder brother’s wife. Divorce, or more properly separation,
is very uncommon, and it is looked upon as very disgraceful for married
people to separate under any circumstances.
If a wife separates from her husband, and returns to her father, the
money, if any was paid for her, is returned to her husband. If a wife
leaves her husband to live with another man, the bereaved husband
brings pressure on her, through the elders of the village, or public opinion,
and tries to get her to return ; but no money compensation is ever sought
or offered. Sometimes the aggrieved husband takes a bloody revenge,
but this is not a common occurence.
The price of a wife is Rs. 100 nominally ; but very few ever pay
this price. More commonly the man serves his intended father-in-law for
a term of years. The proper term is 12 years, but this is seldom or
W. H. P. Driver — The KorJcus.
181
1892.]
never completed : for the young people, after once having lived together
under the same roof, have the upper-hand of the stern parents, who
are only too glad to compound the matter. Should the parents not
acquiesce, the young people elope. It is, however, always considered
disgraceful not to propitiate the parents, and public opinion, which is a
very strong factor among these people, is always in favour of a proper
ceremonious marriage.
Sundays and Fridays are considered propitious days for marriages.
The ceremony is very like that of the Aborigines of Chota Nagpore.
The marriage bower is erected in front of the bridegroom’s house.
The bridegroom goes to the bride’s house, and carries her over to the
marriage bower, when the usual ceremony of anointing, tying of cloths,
and marching round together, is gone through. Then follows the usual
wedding feast, which lasts late into the night.
For five days after a birth the mother is looked upon as unclean.
Then a fowl is sacrificed and a feast is given
Customs regarding relations and friends.
children.
Children are named without ceremony after
they are 10 or 15 days’ old. The parents are supposed to dream of some
ancestor, after whom the child is to be named.
Girls are tattooed on the forehead, temples, arms, and the back of
the hand, but not on the legs or feet.
The Korkus have no ‘ Dhamkuria ’ or bachelors’ quarters.
They bury their dead about 4 or 5 feet below the surface of the
t» •>. , , __ _ ground, and put stones over the graves to pre-
vent animals irom digging them up. A handy
with some rice is placed on the grave, but none of the dead man’s
belongings are put in his grave. The surviving relations wear the
clothes and ornaments that belonged to the dead. Some time after a
burial they erect a ‘ Munda ’ in honour of the dead. This is an upright
post carved with figures of the sun, moon, and a horse. They offer
sacrifices before these monuments, and dance the ‘ Siduli.’
The wife inherits her husband’s property, and after her the male
children.
The Korkus say they sometimes see the ghosts of their dead rela¬
tions in their dreams, and whirlwinds are supposed to be the ghosts of
the dead flying about, but they are not mearly so superstitious as the
aborigines of Chota Nagpore.
They have different dances for the various seasons. During the
‘ Fagooa ’ the men wear long grass stems in
their pugrees, and the women leaves in their
hair. They dance the ‘ Tewar ’ at the ‘ Pola ’ or cattle festival. At the
Dances.
W. H. P. Driver — The KorTcus.
132
[No. 2,
Dasliera tlie men dance the ‘ Kombakulapa,’ a step which reminds one
of the Scotch Hoolachan.
The men have a great variety of steps in their dances. They stand
erect, sway about, and hop more than the women. The women usually
bend forward. They sway about their arms as well as their bodies, and
sometimes link their hands. In all this they resemble the Kols of Chota
Nagpore, but a distinctive feature of the Korku women’s dancing is the
stamping of the feet, their anklets jingling in time with the music.
Their musical instruments are chiefly wooden drums and bamboo
flutes. The men play on the drums, sometimes sitting, and sometimes
whilst dancing.
Their tunes have a distinct resemblance to those of the Chota
Nagpuris, but they have a peculiar custom of finishing their songs with
a kind of ‘ Yodel ’ with the back of the hand to the mouth, and then
screaming like jackals.
The Korkus have their own priests, or ‘ Bhumkas ’, who offer sacri¬
fices for them at certain stated times. Their
Religion. office is hereditary.
They worship the following the gods or demons : —
“ Gomoij,” or the sun, who receives a sacrifice of a goat once a
year at the Dasliera ; Kala Bliairam, the most dreadful of the demons,
who receives a goat ; Bag Deo, Khera Deo, Chumria Deo, Daora Deo,
and Dular Deo, who each receive a goat; Bhal Deo, who receives a cock
and an egg ; Hanuman Deo, and Mahabir Deo, who each receive flour,
sugar, cocoonuts, and the like.
These demons inhabit high trees, hills, and streams. The Akhari
Deota lives at the village Akkra.
The following are the names of their festivals : —
Dasliera, Pola, Dewali, Sewrat, Fagooa, Chait-puja, Bhawe, and
Akhari.
In cases of individual sickness the head of the house offers a sacri¬
fice to the offended demon.
The ‘ Churil ’, or ghost of a pregnant woman, is driven out of the
party possessed by blowing, and by burning chillies down the throat.
They do not believe much in wizards and witches, and they have
no superstition about wearing the hair matted (Jatta) as in Chota
Nagpur.
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life .
133
Its interest.
And Importance.
The Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. — By L. A. Waddell, M. B,
(With, three plates).
One of the most striking of the many frescoes which adorn the
interiors of lamaic temples is the Sid-pa-i
Khor-lo# (in Sanskrit Bhavachahra ) or ‘ Cycle
of Existence,’ a symbolic and realistic picture of the most leading law
of Buddhism — Metempsychosis — the secret of Buddha having con¬
sisted in the means he devised for escaping from this ceaseless round
of re-births and its attendant suffering.
But although this picture of ‘The Wheel of Life ’ is so interesting
in itself as an epitome of Buddhist principles,
and, perhaps, one of the purest relics of Indian
Buddhism that the lamas have preserved to us ; and extremely valuable
as portraying in concrete and traditional form several of the abstract
metaphysical conceptions of the Indian Buddhist philosophers, that are
only known to the western world by their ambiguoust Sanskrit and
Pali terms and Tibetan equivalents, as found in the old Buddhist Scrip¬
tures, it is remarkable that not even the most cursory description of it
has yet been published. Gfeorgi in his Alphabetum Tibetanum appears |
to have given a rough sketch of a rather confused copy of this picture,
and his wood-cut has been in part reproduced by Foucaux,§ but no
description of its details seems to have been attempted.
Owing, doubtless, to its execution in perishable painted form and
, not as a sculpture, I can find no trace of its
Its hitherto unde- . 1 ’ .
tected presence at modern existence m India except among the
Ajanta. cave-paintings of Ajanta. The painting at the
left end of the verandah of Cave XVII, the so-called ‘ Zodiac ’ of
Indian Archaeologists, of which there is in the Society’s collection the
fine photograph here shown, vide Plate VII, is a fragment of a Buddhist
Pictorial Cycle of Existence. And I am glad to be able, by means of
lamaic sources of information, to interpret its hitherto unknown
details and restore its blanks caused by the ravages of time.||
w Srid-pa-i hkhor-loi phyag-rgya : | (In Skt. Bliava-
chakramudrd ) .
t Koppen gives ( Die Religion des Buddha I. 604) for one of these terms, viz.,
Sansl&ra, which is pictorially symbolized in this fresco, a long list of the different
renderings which have been attempted, each with widely different sense. And most
of the other Nidana terms are equally vague.
I I have been unable to consult Georgi’s work.
§ Le Lolita Vistara traduit du Sanskrit par Ph. Ed. Foucaux, Paris. 1884,
p. 290, (forming Tome sixieme Annales du Muse'e Guimet).
|| I have no doubt but that careful search at Ajanta, Ellora and other Buddhist
caves in India would discover more of these pictorial cycles.
R
134
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
Its objects.
There are three forms of this pictorial wheel current in Tibet, viz.,
(1st) the complete form showing all of the 5
Its forms. or 6 regions of re-birth ; (2nd) the form devoted
solely to the human and animal form of existence, and (3rd) the variety
devoted to existence in the various hells. The 1st is by far the most
common in Tibet, and is here exhibited, vide Plate VIII. The 2nd form
is that which is depicted in the Ajanta Cave. All agree in being con¬
structed in the form of a disc held in the teeth and clutches of a
monster ; and displaying in compartments around the margin of the
disc, in symbolic form, the twelve recognized Causes of Re-birth — the
Niddna — and usually in the centre of the disc the three Original Sins.
The avowed object of this picture is to present the causes of re-birth
in so vivid a form that they can be readily per¬
ceived and overcome ; while the realistic pic¬
tures of the evils of existence in its varied forms and the tortures
of the damned are intended to intimidate evil-doers. The value of this
picture for teaching purposes is fully utilized by the Lamas. It is
placed in a conspicuous position, usually in the vestibule,* and is occa¬
sionally, as at Samye, 10 to 15 feet in diameter. Its strange objects
and varied scenes strongly excite the curiosity of the junior monks and
the laity, whose inquisitiveness is only to be satisfied, or whetted, by a
short explanatory sermon. And so great is the belief in the power for
good of this picture that Tibetan artists eagerly compete for the
execution of so meritorious a work.
Before examining the details of the Ajanta picture it is desirable
to study the more complete pictorial cycle as
now found in modern Lamaism and here exhi¬
bited to the Society, vide plate VIII. And
first of all as to the history of this latter form of the picture.
The picture, in its present form, is said to have been brought to
Tibet from India. According to the Chronicles
of the first Dalai Lama, a Sid-pa-i Khor-lo in
‘the old style* was painted in the Samye Temple by the Indian
Buddhist Monk Bande Ye-slie in the 8th century A. D. And a slightly
different version called ‘ the new style ’ was brought to Tibet by the
great Indian Pandit Atisa, or as he is properly called Dipankara STi
Jnana about the middle of the lltli century A. D. Buddha himself is
reported to have been the author of the original figure which, in order
to illustrate his oft repeated dogma of the Causes of Existence, ( Bhava ),
he drew in diagrammatic form with grains of rice from a stalk-in-ear
Its form in
ism.
Lama-
Its History.
* And usually on the left side as at Ajanta.
135
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life .
which lie had plucked while teaching his disciples in a rice-field. And
Nagarjuna, the Fourteenth Patriarch who lived about the 2nd century,
A. D. and the reputed founder of the Mahayana School, is credited with
having introduced the pictorial and graphic details of what is called the
‘ old ’ style.
The ‘ new ’ style differs from the old only in the addition of a
. , . figure of Buddha and Avalokita to the outside,
The 4 new ? style. 7 . o
and the introduction or a thub-pa or mum- iorm
of Avalokita into each of the six worlds of re-birth ; and in one or two
different pictorial symbols for the causes of re-birth, as will be detailed
presently. Its origin is evidently later than the epoch of Nagarjuna.
Buddha, it is reported, personally directed its preparation at the re¬
quest of the indigent king yZugs-clien-snying-po (Skt. Rupavatisdra) of
* the middle country,’ as a return gift to the heretic ( mutek-pa ) king
Utrayana* of the •mThah-khob sgra-sgrogs ( = the resounding barons)
country. And this latter king by the mere inspection of the picture
was converted to Buddhism. A copy of this famous picture fell into the
hands of the great Tantric monk Phag-pa Thogs-med (Skt. A'rya Asahga )
about the Sixth Century A. D. ; and later Atisa brought it to Tibet as
aforesaid. Many of the pictorial details are Indian ; but most of them
are cast in Tibetan mould, as is to be expected where the artists for
several centuries have been Tibetans.
The picture consists of a large disc with two concentric circles,
the circular form symbolizing the ceaseless
round of worldly existence— the 4 whirling on
the wheel ’ of Life. The disc is held in the
clutches of a monster whose head is seen overtopping the whole. This
ferocious demon, f who grips the disc with his claws and teeth, typifies
the passionate clinging of worldly people to worldly matters. In the
centre of the disc are symbolized the three original sins, and round the
margin is the twelve-linked chain of Causes of Re-birth. While the
remainder of the disc is divided by radii into six compartments re¬
presenting the six regions of re-birth. This latter portion, together
with the central part of the disc, are supposed to be in a state of per¬
petual rotation. In the upper part of the region representing hell is
the Bar do or state intermediate between death and the great judgment.
Outside the disc, in the upper right corner is a figure of Buddha
pointing to the disc typified by a moon,! and in the left hand corner a
* (?) King Udayana of Kaushambi. f Named ma-ta-ru-ta |
% The figure in the moon’s disc is represented and regarded by the Tibetans as
a hare. One of the Jataka storios connects this with Buddha’s incarnation as a
hare. *
General
tion.
deserip-
136
L. A. Waddell— Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
figure of Chenresi (Skt. AvaloJcita) the patron god of Tibet and in¬
carnate in the Dalai Lama — who has also in the six thubas a presiding
representative in each of the worlds of re-birth. These two external
figures as well as the thubas are absent from the ‘ old ’ style of the
picture.
The three original sins or ‘ chief Causes of Demerit ’ are depicted
as (1) a pig which has hold of the tail of (2) a
The 3 Oiiginal Sins. cocjc -which has hold of the tail of (3) a snake
which in its turn, has hold of the pig’s tail. The triad thus form a circle
which revolves continuously around the world. The pig* symbolizes
Ignorance, the cock animal Desire or Lust, and the snake Anger or
Hate.* These are at the core of re-birth, and if these three sins be
avoided or overcome then virtue results and merit is accumulated.
The causes of re-birth, or Niddna (Tib. ten- del) f are categorically
given as twelve in the form of a linked chain,
b^ttf causes re" the result of the first cause being the cause of
the second and so on, the ultimate result being
suffering. In isolated fashion each ‘ cause ’ is also considered as a veil
©
which hides the truth.
The Illustrations which metaphorically symbolize these causes,
and their paraphrase according to the tradi-
The illustrations of tional interpretation of the lamas, which must
these causes. prove so valuable to students of Buddhist
philosophy, are the following : —
I. A blind old woman groping her way = Ma-rig-pa or ‘ want of
knowledge’ (Skt. Avidyd ) which is the cardinal cause of
existence and misery, leading people to mistake for happi¬
ness the miseries of existence. In the ‘ old ’ style a man is
figured leading the blind woman.
# These three sins are thus graphically described by Sir Edwin Arnold in The
Light of Asia, p. 164 : —
“ Patigha — Hate —
“ With serpents coiled about her waist, which suck
“ Poisonous milk from both her hanging dugs
“ And with her curses mix their angry hiss.
“ Then followed Ruparaga — Lust of days —
“ The sensual sin which out of greed for life.
“ Forgets to live ; and Lust of Fame * * * (the) Fiend of Pride
###### And — Ignorance, the Dam
“ Of Fear and wrong, Avidya hideous hag
“ Whose footsteps left the midnight darker.”
f Eten-hbrel I
1892.]
II.
L. A. Waddell — Bnddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
137
A potter with his wheel making’ pots — Du-che* or 4 impressing
or con-joining -f action ’ (Skt. Saiiskdra), showing the fruits
of worldly labour are perishable objects — action being mis¬
directed as a result of ignorance. The Sanskrit equivalent
Sahskdra is usually translated as 4 tendencies or inherited in¬
stincts ’ ; but neither the pictorial metaphor nor the Tibetan
equivalent easily admit of this interpretation.
III. A monkey eating fruit = Navi-shef or ‘entire-knowledge’ (Skt.
Vijndna) of good and evil fruits — tasting every fruit in
the sense of a roving libertine, thus engendering Conscious¬
ness.
IV. A dying man with a physician feeling his pulse = Ming-zug%
or 4 name + body ’ or form (Skt. Ndma-rupa ), i. e , individual
being as the result of consciousness. Its fleeting character
is shown by the individual being about to lose his name and
personality in death. In the 4 new ’ style the picture shows
passengers being ferried across the ocean of life or indivi¬
dual existence.
V. An empty house = Kye-chhed§ literally 4 birth brothers,’ or the
5 mortal sense-organs and volition (Skt. Shaddyatana) , illus¬
trating the organs and will which are the 4 result ’ of in¬
dividual being; — the hollowness of these is typified.
VI. A pair of lovers kissing = Peg-pa or 4 contact,’ (Skt Sparsa')
which results from the exercise of the sense organs and the
will. In the 4 new ’ style this is also represented as a man
ploughing with a pair of oxen, or manually tilling a field.
VII. An arrow entering a man’s eye = Tshor-wa or ‘perception’
(Skt. Vedand ), the result of contact. It includes emotions as
well as physical sensation and pain.
VIII. A man drinking wine = Sre-pa|| or 4 desire for more ’ (Skt.
Trishnd) which results from the exercise of the perceptive
faculty.
IX. A man gathering a large basketful of fruit = Len-pa or 4 taking’
(Skt. Updddna ) — :grasping indulgence in worldly matters
and amassing of worldly wealth, as the result of desire.
X. A pregnant woman = Snd-pa or ‘continuity of existence’ or
reproduction (Skt. Bhava ), as the result of the clinging to
worldly life and wealth.
XI. A mother in child-birth = Kye-wa^ or ‘birth’ (Skt. Jdti) as
a result of No. X.
QS ^ | + SiW’W | * 5e;-ei3=llV I 5 I 11 WS I T ^ I
138
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No.
XII. A human corpse being carried o R=Ga-shi* or ‘ decay 4- death ’
(Skt. Jardmarand) with attendant sufferings and associated
re-hirtlis which are thus made to he the ultimate results of
ignorance.
I leave to Sanskrit and Pali scholars the detailed analysis and com¬
parison of these lamaic pictures and their paraphrases.
The six regions of re-birtli (‘ gro-bai rigs,’ Skt. Gdti) are shown in
the middle whorl. They are demarcated from
birth3 re^°nS 16' each other by rainbow-coloured cordons repre¬
senting the atmospheric zones that separate the
different worlds. No place is allotted to the other phases of existence
believed in by the lamas, viz., the everlasting existence in the Western
Paradise of Bevachen , and of the celestial Buddhas and demoniacal
projectors of lamaism, and the expressed absence of such expressions
of the current modern beliefs favours the claim of the picture to con¬
siderable antiquity. Some of the older pictures in Tibet agree with the
doctrine of the southern Buddhists, f in omitting from their theory of
metempsychosis, the world of the Asuras, enumerating only the remain¬
ing five worlds of re-birth.
Classed in the order of their superiority, the six worlds are : —
ls£. The heaven of the gods of the Hindus or Lhd ( = Sanskt.
Sura or Deva) the highest world.
2nd. The world of the ungodly spirits or Lhamayin ( = Skt. Asura.)
The world of man or mi. (= Skt. Nara ).
The world of the Beasts or du-do. (= Skt. Tiryyali).
The world of the Tantalized ghosts or Yi-dag ( = Skt. Preta).
Hell or Nyal-kham, (Skt. Naraka ) the lowest of all.
BournoufJ writing from Chinese and Ceylonese sources classes
mankind above the Lhamayin, but the order now given is that adopted
by the lamas. Existence in the first three worlds is considered superior
or good and in the last three inferior or bad. And these worlds are
shown in this relation in the picture, the highest being heaven and the
lowest hell.
Theoretically the place of one’s re-birth is determined solely by
one’s own deeds (Zas=Skt. karma) during the latest worldly existence ;
but the lamas now make faith, charms and ritual take to a large extent
3rd.
4 th.
hth.
6th.
* |
f Hardy’s Man. of Buddhism, p. 37. The lamaic account is contained in the
‘ mngon-pa-i mdsod * translated by Lotsawa Bande-dpal rtsegs from the work of the
Indian Pandit slob-dpan dbyig-gnyen.
% Lotus de la Bonne Loi, p. 377.
139
The
scene.
judgment
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
tlie place of the good works of the earlier Buddhists. Happiness and
misery in this life are the result of the virtue and vice of past exis¬
tences ; while virtue and vice in the present life are only rewarded or
punished in the next existence.
The judgment in every case is done at the impartial tribunal of
Shinje Ghho-gyal* or ‘ Religious king of the
Dead ’ — a form of the Hindu Yama. He is
painted of fearful form, enveloped in flames
and wielding a flaming sword, but this is his appearance only to the
wicked. The religious see him in the mild form of Chenresi ( Avalohita )
as incarnate in the Dalai Lama of Lhasa — who he really is, according
to the lamas and to give effect to this idea he is usually given a monster
attendant on either side as representing Manjusri and Vajrapani — this
triad forming the defensor es fidei of Lamaism. The judgment scene is
figured in the upper portion of the compartment devoted to the Hells.
Here are seen entering the presence of The Great Judge the souls of a
lama, a king, a man, woman, and child :
“ Souls that by Fate
“ Are doomed to take new Shapes.”
They are coming from Bar do, that is the ghostly state which
intervenes between death and judgment, and during which the spirit
is free to roam among its old haunts, and work harm on its quondam
enemies and friends. During the interval of Bardo therefore, which
lasts only for 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 43, and at most forty-nine days, lamas
are employed for a longer or less period, according to the means of the
relatives, to prevent the wandering ghost harming the surviors. On
arrival in the presence of the king of the dead, the soul is stripped of
its clothes and manacled, by the attendant Shinjes or underling Yamas.
And at this juncture the personal angels of the individual who have
accompanied him throughout his worldly life and also in Bardo — the
good angel or lha who sat on his right shoulder and inspired him to
good deeds, and the bad angel or dud (literally demon) who sat on
his left shoulder and tempted him to sin — those two angels now leave
him and become incorporated in the god and demon, who stand respec¬
tively on the right and left hand of the king of the dead as recording
angels and advocates ; and they now bear witness for and against the
soul which is being tried. These personal angels are practically identi¬
cal with the Bonus Genius et Malus Genius of the Romans — the Genium
Album et Nigrum. f
The good angel pours out as white counters the good deeds done
* iWj'S-iVihV I
f Iio rat. 2 Epist.
140
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
Determination
place of rebirth.
of
by the individual during life ; and the demon by black balls exposes
the sins.* These are weighed one against the other in scales to ascer¬
tain which preponderates, and the result is called out to the judge. f
There is also a record of the deeds in the book named las-gya de.
But this impartial judge does not implicitly trust his subordinates.
He consults a divine mirror, J which he holds in his left hand, and in
which the naked soul and all its past deeds, good and bad, are reflected,
and he gives judgment accordingly.
If the virtues are in excess of the sins then the soul is reborn in
one or other of the first three forms : as a god
if the virtue be of the first degree, as an un¬
godly spirit if the virtue be of the second
degree, and as a human being if the virtue is of the lowest order.
While those whose sins preponderate are reborn in one or other of the
last three forms, the most wicked going to hell and the least wicked to
the beasts.
The details of these several regions and their inhabitants accord-
ins; to Tibetan books and traditions are as follow : —
I. The Gods or IjHA. These are the gods of Hindu mythology
rendered finite and subject to the general law
The Gods. Gf metempsychosis. Their life is the longest
and most blissful of all the six states of being, but they too must die
and be reborn in hell or another of the six regions. Their abode is an
Olympus on the summit of Mount Ri-rab (Skt. Meru) an invisible
mountain-heaven in the centre of the universe according to Hindu and
Buddhist cosmography.
The atmosphere of this region is golden yellow. The picture of
the region of the gods pourtrays the following states : —
1. Godly Birth. The god is born at once fully developed within
a halo of glory from a lotus flower, and is provided with the special
attributes of a god, — the oriental symbol of immaterial birth — viz.,
(1) a lotus footstool, (2) splendid dress and ornaments, (3) goddess
companions, (4) a pag-sam-shing (Skt. Kalpataru)§ or wish granting
tree which instantly yields any fruit or food wished for, and bends
# This demon is more powerful than the good angel ; and to indicate this and
his knowledge of futurity the demon is given the 3rd eye — the eye of fore-know¬
ledge.
f A similar ordeal by scales is a part of the creed of Muhammadans. Washing¬
ton Irving’s Life of Mahomet, p. 286.
J The las-kyi melong or ‘ mirror of deeds.
§ The Wish-granting tree of Indra’s heaven is described in the 45th Section of
the S'ilpa B'astra.
141
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
to the hand of the gatherer, (5) a wish grantingcow which yields any
drink wished for, (6) self-sprung crops (usually painted as Indian corn
or maize), (7) in a golden stall a jewelled horse-of-fore-knowledge
which Pegasus-like carries his rider wherever wished, throughout the
worlds of the past, present, and future, (8) a lake of perfumed nectar
(Skt. Amrita) which is the elixir vitce and the source of the divine bodily
lustre. Shining is a pecularly divine attribute : the usually accepted
etymology of the word for ‘ divinity,’ viz., Skt. Leva and Latin Deus, is
the root Div, 1 to shine.’
2. Godly Bliss. The bliss of the gods is depicted by an assembly
of be- jewelled gods and goddesses enjoying themselves in splendid
palaces in the midst of a charming garden enamelled with flowers of
which they make their wreaths. Gay birds warble in the foliage, and
noble animals peacefully roam together there. Amongst the quadrupeds
are deer, lions, and elephants with jewelled heads. Amongst the birds
are the peacock, parrot, cuckoo and the ‘ Kala-pinha * which repeats
the mystic ‘ Om mani padme, Hung.’ ! One of the blissful conditions of
godly life especially dwelt upon, is that the most dainty morsels may
be eaten without sense of repletion, the last more being as much
relished as the first.
In the centre of this paradise, and on a somewhat more magnifi-
cient scale, is the palace of the superior gods entitled “ the peerless
palace of Indra,”f which is situated in the celestial City of Amaravati
— Indra’s Capital. It is invested by a wall and pierced by four gates
which are guarded by the four divine kings of the quarters. It is a
three-storied building ; Indra occupying the basement, Brahma the
middle and the indigenous Tibetan war-god — the dGra-lha the upper¬
most story.
This curious perversion of the old Buddhist order of the heavens
is typical of the more sordid devil-worship of
The Heavens of the majority of the Lamas. The more learned
Lamas. J J
Lamas, however, adhere to the orthodox Bud¬
dhist cosmogony and they pourtray the series of the heavens graphically
in the form of a Cliaitya, which I here reproduce, and which is very
similar to that used diagrammatically by the Southern Buddhists. J
# 1
f ‘ The transcondentally superior house of LiiA-f dbang-po brOja-bjin.
J Utham’s History of Buddhism in Ceylon, p. 74.
S
142 L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
THE HEAVENS OF THE NORTHERN BUDDHISTS.
The Trailohya (Tib. ‘ Khams psum ’ or ‘The Three Regions ; com¬
prise The Regions of —
I. Desire, Kamadhdtu (Tib. Dod-pai Khams). The lowest of tlie
3 regions, comprising the earth and the six devalohas (Tib.
Lha-Yul) or Heavens of the Gods.
II. Form, Bupadhatu (Tib. gzugs Kyi Khams) or form free from
sensuality. It comprises the 18 Brabmalokas ; wliicli are
divided into 4 regions of contemplation (Dhyana).
III. Formlessness, Arupadhatu (Tib. ^/zugs med-pai Khams). The
Highest of the Heavens and near to Nirvana.
The Six Devalokas are in series from below upwards : —
1. Ghaturmahardjahdyihas. — The abode of the 4 Guardian Kings
of the Quarters.
Trayastrinsas (Tib. Sum-chu tsa sum) or ‘ The 33’ Vedic Gods
2.
1892.]
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
143
3.
4.
5.
6.
with Indra (Jupiter) as chief. This heaven is the Svarga of
Brahmanism.
Yama.
Tushita. (Tib. dG a Zdan) or ‘ Joyful place ’ — the paradise of the
Bodliisattvas prior to their final descent to the human world
as Buddhas. Maitreya, the coming Buddha dwells at present
in this heaven.
Nirmdnarati (Tib. /iphrul dg a).
Paranirmita Vasavartin (Tib. r/zhan Tiphrul dbang byed) — the
highest of the heavens of the Gods and the abode of Mara.
The Eighteen Brahmalokas are 1. Brahma parisadya, 2. Brahma
purohita, 3. Maha Brahma, 4. Paratabha, 5. Apramana, 6. Abhasvara,
7. Paritasubha, 8. Appramanasubha, 9. Subhakritsna, 10. Utpala,
11. Asanasatya, 12. Avrilia, 13. Atapa, 14. Sudasa, 15. Sudasi, 16. Pu-
nyaprasava, 17. Anabhraka, 18. Akanishtha (Tib. Og-min) or ‘ The
Highest’ — the abode of the Primordial Baddha-God, the Adi Buddha of
the Lamas, viz., Samantabhadra or Kuntu-zangpo. This together with
next subjacent Brahmaloka placed above the Arupa Brahmalokas.
The Four Arupa Brahmalokas are 1. Akasanantayatana, 2. Vi-
jiianantayatana, 3. Akinchanayatana, 4. Naivasanjnana Sanjnayatana.
In the Pictorial Wheel however only three heavens are depicted,
viz.: the sensual heaven of Indra, the Trayastrinsa ( = 33), with its
desire in various forms ; above which is Brahma’s pure heaven free from
passion, and approaching nearer to Nirvana. But according to the
Nyingmapa Lamaic scheme the passionate war-god of the Tibetans is
held to be superior even to the divinely meditative state of the
Brahmaloka.
3. War with the Asuras. The Tibetan war-god is also figured as
directing the army of the gods in their war with the Lhama-yin or
Asuras who are constantly trying to obtain some of the precious fruit
of the great Yong du sa tol* (Skt. Pdrijdta ) tree, or “ tree of the con¬
centrated essence of earth’s products,” whose branches are in heaven,
but whose root trunk are in the country of the Lhama-yin. The climber
which encircles this tree is called the Jambuti tree, and is the medium
by which the quintessence of the most rare delicacies of Jambudvipa is
instilled into the larger tree.
To account for this high position thus given to the War-god, it is
related that formerly in fighting for the fruits
of this tree the Asuras were victorious ; and
the defeated gods under. Indra besought <7 Sang
The story
War-god.
of the
* WN'QVWgOJ l
144
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
bai-frdag-po* for counsel. This divinity advised the gods to call to their
aid the war-god dGra-lha and also to obtain from the depths of the
central ocean the invisible armour and the 9 self-created weapons, viz.,
(1) rMog-bya khyung-Jceng-riis , a helmet of the skeleton bones of the
Garuda bird. (2) Khrab-nyi-shar-lto-rgyab , the coat of mail shining like
the sun. (3) Lba-khebs-rdorje-go-chha , necklet. (4) Lak-hay-mtshon-chhd-
lavi-lok, a weapon resisting and returning glove. (5) Snying-khebs-mdah-
mtshon-hun thub, a breast-plate entirely able to withstand arrows and
other weapons. (6) Piis-khebs-nyes-pa-skyobs-ched, a knee-cap which
defends against destruction. (7) Phubm-sba-dmar-gling-drug a 6 emboss¬
ed shield. The nine sorts of weapons are: — (l) a hKorlo or spiked-
wheel which entirely routes the enemy ; (2) a dGra-sta, or an axe which
chops the enemy ; (3) a ral-gri or sword which slices the enemy ; (4) a
Gzhu or bow which scatters the brains of the enemy ; (5) a ‘ mdah ’ or
arrow that pierces the vitals ; (6) a zhagspa or noose which ensnares
the enemy ; (7) a mBung or spear which pierces the hearts of the foe.
(8) a Ur-rdo a whirring sling-stone that produces the sound of a
thunder-dragon, and (9) a Dorje or thunder-bolt which demolishes the
enemy. The story seems founded on the Bralimanical legend of Indra’s
obtaining from the Sea the talismanic. banner which conferred victory
over his enemies.f
The gods having obtained these weapons and armour invited the
war-god dGra-lha , who came enveloped in thunder-clouds and attended
by his nine sons, but he demanded worship from Indra and the other
gods as the price of his assistance. On receiving this adoration the
dGra-lha marshalled the forces of the gods and repeating ‘ Hung !’ thrice
the warriors became dazzling bright, and shouting Kye-kye ! thrice their
armour shone, and saying Bswa-bswa ! thrice they became heroes in
strength; and shouting Ha-ha ! thrice they assailed and utterly routed
the Lhamayin. Since this time the gods have systematically worshipped
the dGra-hla.
The dGra-hla , who has many of the traits of the Hindu Rahu, the
monster who causes solar eclipses, is figured of
■War^(^danC0 white colour clad in golden mail and flying on a
white horse through the clouds. In his up¬
lifted right hand he holds a whip with three knots and in his left hand a
red banner. His bow-sheath is of a leopard hide and his quiver of tiger
skin. A sword is thrust into his waist-belt, and from each shoulder
springs a lion and a tiger. The mirror of fore-knowledge is suspended
# *=? Dorje-chhang.
f Brihat Sanhita, translated by Dr. Kern, J. Roy. A. S., YI, p. 44.
145
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
from his neck. He is accompanied by a black dog, a black bear, and a
man-monkey ; and birds circle around his bead. Under his direction
the warrior-gods are burling their weapons across the frontier with
appaling effect on the army of the Lhamayin.
4. The misery of the Gods. The misery of the gods is also de¬
picted. The god enjoys bliss for almost in-
Misery of the gods. calculable
time ; but when bis merit is exhausted
then bis lake of nectar dries up, his wish-granting tree, cow and horse
die, his splendid dress and ornaments disappear, his garden and flowers
wither, his body no longer bathed by nectar loses its lustre and his
person becomes loathsome to his goddess-companions and the other
gods who shun him, and he dies miserably. If he has led a virtuous
life during his existence as a god then he may be reborn in heaven other¬
wise he goes to a lower region and may even be sent to hell.
II. The Titans or ‘ Ungodly Spirits’ — the LHAMAYIN. These
are the Asuras of Hindu mythology. Their lead-
The Asuras. ing trait is pride, and this is the world of re¬
birth for those who during their human career pharasaically boast of
being more religious than their neighbours. The class of Lhamayin were
originally gods ; but, through their pride, they were like Satan expelled
from heaven ; hence their name, which means ‘ not a god.’*
They occupy the region at the base of the Mount fti-rab and are
therefore intermediate in position between heaven and earth.
They have a duration of life infinitely greater than the human,
and they have great luxury and resources for enjoyment ; but through,
their pride they envy the greater bliss of the gods, and die prematurely,
fighting vainly against the gods for some of the fruits of the heavenly
wish-granting tree and the nectar.
Into this world, as into heaven, people are born at once fully grown
from a lotus flower ; and each immediately on birth receives a beauteous
wife and a wish -granting tree and cow. The wish -granting tree and cow
yield respectively whatever food or drink is wished for. But they re¬
ceive no horse of fore-knowledge, or lotus-carpets like the gods.
They have three chiefs, the highest of whom is named sGra-chen-hdsin
(Skt. Bdhula). The 3rd is ‘ the Commander of the Heroes’ in their
conflict with the gods under Lhai-wang-po gya jin (Skt. Devendresvara) .
Their region is represented of an almost colourless atmosphere.
They live in a large fort, the chief building in which is the three-storied
palace of their king occupying the highest and the Commander-in-chief
the lowest. The ground, both inside and outside the fort, is carpeted with
* Analogous to this is the common colloquial term mi-ma-yin or ‘ not a man
applied to those who lead vicious and dissolute lives.
140
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
flowers of which the inhabitants, male and female, make the wreaths
and garlands which they wear. They are dressed in silk ; and when
the heroes are not engaged in fighting they spend their times in all
sorts of gaiety with their wives. In the right hand corner is shown
the birth from the lotus flower and the acquirement of a mate, a wish¬
granting tree and a cow. The rest of the picture is devoted to their
misery, which consists in their hopeless struggle and fatal conflict with
the gods. The commander of the forces is seen in conclave with his
leaders,* horses are being saddled and the ‘ heroes ’ are arming them¬
selves with coats of mail and weapons. Another scene shows the battle
raging along the border separating their country from heaven, and the
General mounted with his staff as spectators in the background. The
warriors of the first line are all killed and horribly mangled by the
weapons hurled at them by the gods, these weapons being composed of
adamant ( [Dorje phdllom ), while the weapons of the Lit amayin are of
mere iron. The Dorje — the thunderbolt of Jove is the peculiarly potent
weapon of the gods. A most deadly weapon possessed both by pods and
Lhamayin is a spiked wheel, which is thrown so as to revolve like a cir¬
cular saw and each of the spikes is armed with a different sort of
weapon. The other weapons used by both combatants are arrows,
spears, swords, and hatchets. The second line of the troops is in full
flight on perceiving the absolute defeat of their companions at the front.
The ultimate fate of every Lhamayin is to die painfully warring
against the gods with whom they are in constant
The misery of the c011fhct and they have no access to the nectar
with which a wounded god obtains instant
recovery. Another scene depicts the women of the community gathered
round “ The Reflecting Lake of Perfect Clearness ” after the departure
of their mates to the battle. In this lake are mirrored forth all the do¬
ings and ultimate fate of their absent mates, and there is also shown
the region of rebirth of themselves and their spouses — which is nearly
always hell owing to the passionate life which they lead in the Asura
world. And while their lovers die painful and passionate deaths, the
misery of the womenfolk of this world is to look into this fascinating
lake and experience the horror of such hideous spectacles. In the pic¬
ture some women are shown peering into the lake and on the other two
banks they are giving vent to their grief.
One of the chief sources of the miseries of the Lhamayin world is
that it has no book and is therefore void of religion. In this view
it is lower than the human world, though otherwise of higher rank.
* Note that greatness ut‘ rank is shown by enlarged bodily dimensions,
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
147
III. Mankind. The atmosphere of this region is colourless or
blue. It shows the miseries and strife of hu-
Mankind. • , n c
man existence as well as some ot its pleasures.
The following phases of life are depicted amongst others : —
1st. Birth in a cottage.
2nd. Children at play.
3rd. Manhood, village scenes, people drinking wine under shade of
a tree, a man playing a flute, women spinning and weaving,
a borrower, two traders, a drunken man.
4 th. Labour by sweat of brow, men tilling a field, gathering
fuel in a forest, carrying a heavy load.
5 th. Accident, a man and horse falling into a river.
6th. Crime, two men fighting, one under trial before the judge, and
one undergoing corporal punishment.
7 th. Temporal Government : the king and his ministers.
8th. Old age — decript old people.
9th. Disease, a physician feeling pulse of a patient.
10th. Death, a corpse with a lama feeling whether breath be
extinct, and a lama at head doing worship, and a woman
and other relatives weeping.
1 1th. Funeral ceremonies. A corpse being carried off to the
funeral pyre on the top of a hill preceded by a lama blow¬
ing a thigh-bone trumpet (J Wangling) and rattling a damaru
drum : he also has hold of the end of a white scarf which
is affixed to the corpse. The object of this scarf is to guide
the soul by the white path to the pyre so that it may be
disposed of in the orthodox manner and have the best
chance of a good re-birth, and may not stray and get
caught by outside demons. Behind the corpse-bearer is a
porter with food and drink offerings and last of all a
mourning relative.
12th. Religion is represented by a temple placed above all other
habitations with a lama and monk performing worship ;
and a hermit in his cell with bell dorje, and kangling ;
and a chhorten (chaitya) being circumambulated by a
devotee.
The most pessimistic view is taken of human existence. It is made
to appear as almost unalloyed miserv — the
Human miseries. ,. , J _ __ J .
sensations ot ordinary heat and cold, thirst
and hunger, depression of surfeiting with food, anxiety of the poor for
their daily bread, of the farmer for his crops and cattle, unfulfilled desires,
separation from relatives, subjection to temporal laws, infirmities of
148
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
The Beasts.
old age and disease and accidents are amongst the chief miseries refer¬
red to. The lamas categorically divide the miseries of human existence
into 8 sections, viz. : — The miseries of (l) birth ; (2) old age ; (3) sick¬
ness ; (4) death ; (5) ungratified wishes and struggle for existence ; (6)
misfortunes and punishments for law-breaking; (7) separation from
relatives and cherished objects ; (8) offensive objects and sensations.
IV. The Beasts. The atmosphere of this region is darker, but
it has hills and trees and also some men as hun¬
ters and cattle owners ; as it is merely a differ¬
ent phase of the human world. This is a state of greater misery than
the human.
This is the world of re-birth for the ignorant, irreligious, and mu-
steg-pa (viz., Brahmanical and other heretics) abusive disputators and
savages (Ha-Mo).
The inhabitants of this world are divided into (1) the ‘free’ (kha-
/ithor) or land and air animals, and (2) the imprisoned (hying) aquatic
animals.*
The picture shows animals of various kinds devouring one an¬
other, the larger preying on the small ; and also small ones combining to
hunt and kill the larger ones. Human hunters also are setting nets for,
and others are shooting game. Domestic animals are shown laden with
burdens or ploughing and being goaded, some are being milked and
shorn of their wool, others are being branded or castrated or having
their nostrils bored, others killed for their flesh or skin, &c. All are
suffering great misery through anxiety and pain of preying or being
preyed upon.
In the water is shown a merman — Naga's house, with its inmates in
grief at being preyed upon by the Garuda a monster bird like the fabled
roc which by the rush of air of its wings cleaves the sea to its depths
in search for Nagas.
V. The Tantalized Ghosts or YIDAGS. The atmosphere of this
region is of a dark smoky colour. This is
the special world of those who in their earth¬
ly career were miserly covetous, uncharitable or gluttonous. It is a
kind of outer hell. Its inhabitants are in constant distress through the
pangs of hunger and thirst. Jewels, food and drink are found in
plenty, but the Yidags are given microscopic mouths and gullets no
thicker in diameter than a hair through which they can never ingest a
satisfying amount of food for their huge bodies. And when any food
The Yidags.
# Ruskin says “ a fish is much freer than a man ” — but the Lamas think other¬
wise.
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
119
is taken it becomes burning’ bot and changes in the stomach into sharp
knives, saws, and other weapons which lacerate their way out from the
bowels to the surface making large painful wounds. Their constant
thirst is expressed by a flame which is seen to issue from their mouth
and whenever they attempt to touch water it changes to liquid fire ;
frequently Avalokita is figured in the act of giving water to these
Yidags to relieve their misery. And their tiny legs are unable to sup¬
port comfortably their large bodies. Four kinds of Yidags are specified,
viz., — (1) 'phyiyi sgrib-pa chan or ‘ the foreign or gentile polluted beings.’
(2) Nang-gi sgrib-pa chan or the lamaic polluted beings, (3) Zas-skom-
gyi sgrib-pa chan or the eating and drinking polluted beings — these are
they who on eating and drinking have the ingested material converted
into lacerating weapons, and (5) kha-thor or free Yidags.’ These are
not confined in the Yidag prison but are free to roam about in the
human world where they endeavour to injure man.
VI. The Hells or NYAL-KHAM* (Skt. Ndraka). The atrnos-
„ ,, phere of the hells is represented of the deepest
The Hells. 5. . 1 1
black :
“ Light was absent all. Bellowing there groan’d
A noise, as of a sea in tempest torn
By warring winds, the stormy blast of hell.”
Dante Canto V. 29.
The lamaic hell is a true Inferno situated in the bowels of the earth
like Hades. Only eight hells are mentioned in the older Buddhist
works ; but the lamas describe and figure eight hot and eight cold hells
and give two extra hells, named respectively nyal-tshe-waf which in¬
cludes the state of being flies and insects in the human world, and nye-
khor-wa an outer Hades through which all those escaping from hell
must pass without a guide.
The Nye-khorJ is at the exit from, and outside Hell, preperly so
called. It is divided into five sections. The
U er 6 S* first bordering hell consists of hot suffocating
ashes with foul, dead bodies and all kinds of offal. Then is reached a
vast quagmire, beyond which is a forest of spears and spikes. Then
a great deep ocean of freezing water ; on the further shore of which the
ground is thickly set with short squat tree trunks each surmounted by
three sharp spikes which impale the unwary groping fugitives. Befer-
* I
t - ‘ near to life.’
^ -v
I 30 ‘ near to cycle’ ( i. e., re-birth).
T
150
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
Hot and cold Hells.
The Hot Hells.
ence to these last two localities occurs in the ordinary Litany for the
dead which says ‘ may his chhu-wo-rak-med ocean become a small rivulet,
and the shal-ma-ri tree a pag-sam shing or divine wish-granting tree.”
Those who have sinned in anger are sent to the hot hells ; while
those who have sinned through stupidity go
to the cold hells ; and each receive punish¬
ment appropriate to his misdeeds during life. The duration of stay
in the cold hells is very much shorter than in the hot hells as the sin
is of a more passive and venial kind.
The hot hells are seen in the picture to to the left (of the specta¬
tor) and the cold hells to the right. The hot
hells of the lamas bear names of apparently
identical meaning with hells of the Southern Buddhists. The cold
hells seem to be an invention of the lamas.
J. The Hot Hells. These are enveloped by a wall of fire and
many of the fearful scenes are fit to illustrate Dantes’ Inferno. The
shinjes or executioners are hideous flame-enveloped monsters with heads
of various animals, and all their pincers and other instruments of
torture are red-hot. The following are the hot hells.
1. Yang so* (Skt. Samjiva ) = ‘ again revived.’ Here the bodies are
cut and torn to pieces and then reunited, only to have the process repeat¬
ed ad infinitum throughout the period spent in hell. This restoration
of the body is an essential part of the process in all the hells. The
body when thoroughly mangled is restored and the racking torture ap¬
plied afresh, so that the agony never ceases.
2. Thi-nagf (Skt. Kdlasutra) = i black lines.’ Here the bodies are
nailed down and 8 or 16 black lines drawn aloug the body which is
then sawn asunder along these lines by a burning hot saw. Another
punishment here is the especial one of the slanderer or gossiper who has
his or her tongue enlarged and pegged out and constantly harrowed
by spikes ploughing through it.
3. Du-jomX (Skt. Samgliata) = ‘ concentrated oppression.’ Here
bodies are squeezed between animal headed mountains, or monster iron
books, this last is an especial punishment for monks, laymen and infidels
who have disregarded or profaned the scriptures, and also for priests
who have taken money for masses which they have not performed.
Others here are pounded in iron mortars and beaten on anvils.
4. Ngu-bod§ (Skt. Baurava) — ‘ weeping and screaming.’ The
torture here is to be kept in glowing white iron houses and have melted
iron poured down the throat.
* Wiq'NN I t I t S"VQfSf V I § ctqxS |
1892.] L. A Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
151
The Cold Hells.
5. Ngu hod chhenpo (Skt. M ahdraurava) = i greater weeping and
screaming.’ Here they are cooked in cauldrons of molten iron.
6. Tshawa # (Skt. Tdpanai) — ‘ heat.’ The body is cast upon and
transfixed by flaming iron spikes in a fiery chamber.
7. Bah tu tshawa (Skt. Pratapana ) = ‘ highest heat.’ A three spiked
burning spear is thrust into body, and the latter is then rolled up within
red-hot iron plates.
8. Nar-med\ (Skt. Avichi — 1 endless torture.’ This is the most
severe and longest punishment. The body is perpetually kept in flames
though never consumed. This is the hell for those infidels and others
who have injured or attempted to injure Lamaism or Buddhism.
II. The Cold Hells are encircled by icy mountains and have
attendants of appalling aspect, as in the hot
hells.
1. Chhu-hur chen (Skt. Arhuda) = ‘ blistered or chapped.’ The
torture here is constant immersion of the naked body in icy cold water,
under which the body becomes covered with chilblains.
2. Chhu-hur dolwa tSkt. Nirarhuda ).J The chilblains are forcibly
cut and torn open producing raw sores.
3. A-chhu (Skt. Atata) = ‘ Achhu ’ an exclamation of anguish beyond
articulate expression — which resounds though this hell.
4. Kyi -hiid (Skt. Hahava). A worse degree of cold in which the
tongue is paralysed and the exclamation Kyi-hii or Ha-ha alone possible.
5. So-tham-pa (Skt. Ahaha). Here both jaws and teeth are spas¬
modically clenched through cold.
6. Tit-pal tar ge-pa (Skt. Utpald).§ Livid sores which become
everted like blue Ut-pal flowers.
7. Pema tar ge-pa (Skt. Padma). The raw sores become like red
lotus flowers.
8. Pema Chhenpo tar ge-pa (Skt. Pundariha) . Raw sores where the
flesh falls away from the bones like the petals of the great red lotus ; and
which are continually pecked and gnawed by birds and insects with
iron beaks.
It is a redeeming feature of the Buddhist hell that its torment is
not everlasting. After the sins which have
^or” been committed in the previous existence are
expiated — which may require a period ranging
from a year, or two, to thousands of years, the soul is reborn in another
world, usually the human. This result is due to the merit of good works
done in a former existence. The lamas explain it by saying that it is
Duration of
ment in hell.
152
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
[No. 3,
like the discharge of a criminal who has expiated his offence in jail ; on
release he gets back his clothes and any other properties he can justly
lay claim to, and also the benefit of any virtuous deeds he formerly had
done.
But through the aid of the lamas the duration of the stay in hell can
be reduced to a few days or even hours. Al-
by the Lamas though the ordinary mass tor the dead urges
the spirit to proceed direct to the Western
Paradise, in practice the vast majority of human beings go inevitably
to hell — the proportion of those who escape hell being not greater than
the proportion which the quantity of earth which can lie on a finger
nail bears to a fistful of earth. As a consequence special prayers
to neutralize this hell-going tendency are always done within the
period of Bardo, i. e., 49 days succeeding death ; and when the Bardo
period is over, it is customary to apply to the lamas for information as
to where the soul then is. The lamas on casting lots and referring to
certain books find the particular hell in which the soul is being tor¬
tured. An elaborate and costly worship is then prescribed for the
extraction of the soul, and this is usually declared successful, though
not unfrequently it is declared — as in the case of the priest and his
client in Lever’s Story — to be only partially effectual, and then it
has to be repeated on a still more costly scale. The usual worship
done in such cases is called dge-ha or virtue. It consists of offerings
of (1) food, lamps, &c., to the Gods ; (2) food, money, and other pre¬
sents to the Lamas ; (3) and of food, beer, clothes and other charity to
the Poor. And the Lamas in return for their fees do masses, and
especially appeal to Thule je Ghhenho or ‘ The Greater Pitier ’ who pre¬
sides over the six worlds. The lamaic hell is not of a purgatorial or
cleansing nature. It is merely a place of expiation where punishment
is awarded in proportionate degrees for offences committed during the
previous existence.
The six Thub-pas ( = Skt. Muni ) who preside over the six worlds
_ . _ appear only in the 1 newer ’ style of the Wheel
The six Thub-pas. y r *vTn , „
ot Lite. they are ail emanations from
Chenresi in his form of ‘ the great pitier.’ Out of pity for the
misery of the animal beings of the six worlds he became incarnate in
each of these worlds. (1) In the world of the gods as rGya-byin dhar-po
or the white, vast giver (Indra), with a harp and the mystic six-
syllables^’. e., Om mani padma Hung /) he soothes the gods’ misery of
hpho-thing. (2) In the Lliamayin world as Thags-bzang-ris Ijang-khu or
the green weaver of good figures (and 2nd in rank to Rahula) dressed
in full armour or holding a coat-of-mail he assists the Lhamayin in their
1892.] L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life.
153
The Ajanta
ac.’
Zodi-
battles, but at the same time represses their fighting propensities.
(3) In the human world as Shaky a Ser-po or ‘ the Golden S'akya Muni ’
holding an alarm stick and begging bowl he preaches salvation to men.
(4) In the world of the beasts as Senge-rab-rtan mthing-ga or 4 the Indigo
coloured highest supported Lion,’ holding a book he preaches the six
syllables. (5) In the world of the Yidags as Kha-hbar dmar-po or
‘ the Red Burned Mouth, holding a cowrie-shaped box, he preaches the
six syllables. (6) In hell as Ghhos-rgyal nag-po or the Black King of
Religion, holding water and fire he preaches the six syllables.
It is possible that this introduction of Chenresi into each of the
six worlds and his identification also with the Judge of the Bead was
the invention of the great Priest-King, Lama Kgag-wang Lo-zang, with
the view of increasing his own and successors’ prestige as the human
incarnation of Chenresi (Avalokita), the Judge of the Bead and the
Regent of each of the worlds of Existence.
We are now in a position to examine the mutilated fragment of the
Indian picture — the so-called ‘ Zodiac ’ — in the
Ajanta cave. When Mr. Ralph visited this
cave in 1828,* only about a third apparently
was then wanting. In 1879 Mr. Burgess notes that only £ a mere frag¬
ment now remains, ’f and it is the photograph of this fragment which is
the only illustration now extant ; and as this photograph has not been
published and it is essential for comparison with tlie Tibetan form of
the picture it is here re-produced vide plate VII.
This Ajanta picture it will be at once remarked differs from that
above described, mainly in is realistic details
being restricted to different phases of human
and animal life.
The monster who holds the disc has, as in the Tibetan picture, gripped
it with his tusks ; but his hands have not seized
it with such firmness, and he wears bracelets
and other ornaments — in some of the Tibetan pictures he is also re¬
presented with ornaments. Burgess notes,]; that the arms of this
monster are green. It is probable that originally brown pigment has
become thus changed, by oxidation or otherwise, during the lapse of
centuries, as in Tibet the monster who holds the disc is always painted
brown.
In the centre of the disc are no symbolized orginal sins ; but the
snake which is oue of this triad is figured
outside and to the left of the disc holding
Its details.
Its monster-holder.
The external snake.
* B. A. S. J., 1836.
f The Bauddha Bock-Temples ef Ajanta , 1879, p. 62.
% Op. cit., p. 62.
154
L. A. Waddell — Buddhist Pictorial Wheel of Life. [No. 3,
persons in a variety of occupations enslaved in its coils. It is possible
tliat the remaining two original sins were also figured outside the disc.
An animal resembling a pig seems to have seized hold of the head of
this snake.
The pictures around the margin of the disc illustrating the causes
of re-birth are of special interest for their
P^c^or^a^ Nida - metaphorical meaning. Burgess’ statement
LL do* A
that these have been sixteen in number was
evidently deduced from the first pair almost coinciding with one of the
internal divisions ; but it will be noticed that none of these pictures
really bear any such exact relation to the internal divisions. The origi¬
nal number must have been twelve.
As the fragment comprises little more than defaced portions of
tbe upper half of the disc, we have only the first six and the last three
pictorial causes of re-birtli for comparison with those of the lamaic
picture.
1st. Avidya — which seems here to have been made the twelvth
Nidana — is figured as a man leading a (blind P) camel, instead of a man
leading an old blind woman as in the lamaic picture. The idea is practi¬
cally the same ; but the difference in the emblem picture, it seems to me,
is easily explained. The Lamas constructed many of their copies of
the larger Indian Buddhist pictures and images from the written des¬
criptions and notes of pilgrims. The Tibetan word for ‘ a camel ’ is
‘ rnga-mo ’ and for ‘ an old woman ’ ‘ rgad-mo ’ (the d is silent) ; and as
camels are almost unknown in Central Tibet, the word for camel was
evidently interpreted as £ an old woman ’ to which word it bears such
close resemblance. We may take it for granted that the camel of the
Indian picture was Mind , as blindness is always an essential part of the
Lamaic definition of this emblem.
2nd. Sanshara. This is identical with the Lamaic picture, viz , a
potter making pots.
3rd. Vijnana. This too is identical with the lamaic picture.
4 th. Nama-rupa. This too is identical with the lamaic picture.
5 th. Shaddyatana or 1 The sense organs' This is pictured by a mask,
— which is a much better representation of ‘ the empty house ’ of the
senses than the empty house ordinarily depicted by the lamas.
6th. Sparsa or 1 Contact .’ Only the feet of two figures are seen,
but the attitude and dress seem to indicate ‘ a pair of lovers kissing ’
as in the l'amaic picture for No. VII. In most Tibetan pictures I have
noticed that causes Nos. VI and VII are transposed.
10 th Bhava. What I consider to be No. X, may be a pregnant
woman drinking nourishment.
155
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries .
11th. Jati or ‘Birth’ represents a child connected by a ‘ navel-
string ’ with its parent.
12th. Jaramarana or 1 Decay and Death’ This is a sitting figure,
which the lamas, to whom I have shown the picture, say is a corpse
bound and ready for removal.
The body of the disc appears to have been divided by radii into
A pictorial cycle of compartments, of which only portions of
Buddha’s own exis- five now remain. The scenes in these com-
tence. partments, seem to me, illustrations of some
of the more celebrated of the mythical former births of Buddha as
contained in the Jataka tales, e. g ., a brahman giving charity, existence
as Indra and earthly kings, a garuda and snake, an elephant, a deer, a
monkey, a pigeon, a thief, ascetic, &c., &c. This Ajanta picture therefore
seems to be the Pictorial Cycle of Existence of Buddha himself.
The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries : a Geographical and Historical
Study. — By Major H. G. Raverty, Bombay Army (Retired).
(With three plates).
The identification of the routes taken by Alexander the Macedo¬
nian, and the countries, towns, and rivers mentioned in his campaigns,
extending from the mountains of Hindu- Kush to the Persian Sea, in¬
cluded in the present Afghan state, the territory of the Panj-ab, and
Sind, has exercised the ingenuity of many oriental scholars, and also
of many students of oriental subjects.1 Later on come the travels of the
Chinese pilgrims, Fa Hian and Hwen Thsang, of whom the former
visited India about seven hundred, and the latter nearly one thousand
years, after the time of Alexander ; and these also exercise the in¬
genuity of scholars and students, and exercise it very greatly too, parti¬
cularly the travels of the last named pilgrim, who enters into much
greater detail. He remained many years in India, and is said to have
been “ well- versed in the Turki and Indian languages,” but he chose to
write all the names of places and persons in the Chinese.
Most of the writers on these subjects, if we exclude their 11 identi¬
fications ” in the Afghan state, appear to have based their theories
chiefly upon the present courses of the rivers of Northern and Western
India, which, probably, have altered their courses a hundred times over,
and to have expected to find places on their banks 'now as they stood
1 I make a difference between the two, as between those who can refer to the
native writers for themselves, and those who have to depend upon Dow’s and
Briggs’s ‘ Ferislita,’ and the like.
156
H. Gr. Raverfy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
more than two thousand years ago.2 I am not going to attempt, in the
present paper, to improve upon these interesting researches, although I
cannot help, farther on, pointing out two or three palpable errors.
What I propose to do here is to notice some of the numerous fluctua¬
tions in the courses of the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus,3 and of the
rivers of the Panj-ab. The changes in the courses of two of these rivers,
together with the drying up of the Hakra, Wahindah, or Bahindah
were so considerable that they reduced a vast extent of once fruitful
country to a howling wilderness, and thus several flourishing cities and
towns became ruined or deserted by their inhabitants.
At page 1150 of my “ Translation of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” there
is an account of the despatch of armies into different parts on the acces¬
sion of Kyuk Khan as ruler over the Mughal empire founded by his
grandfather, the Chingiz, or Great Klian.
One of these armies was detailed for the invasion of Hindustan ;
and the Nu-in or Nii-yan (both modes of writing this title being correct),
Mangutah, who was at the head of the Mughal mings or hazarahs occupy¬
ing, or located in, the territories of Tukharistan, Khatl-an.4 and Ghaz-
nih,5 6 was appointed leader of the forces in question. He was an aged
man, and had been one of the Chingiz Khan’s favourite officers.
In the year 643 H., which commenced on the 28tli May, 1245 A. D.,
he invaded the Dihli Kingdom by way of the Koh-i-Jud, Namak-Sar,
or Salt Range, and the Sind-Sagar Do-abah, keeping along its western
frontier, and entering the province dependent on Multan. His object
was first to assail the frontier strongholds of Multan and U'chchah or
TTchchh, both then situated in one and the same Do abah, the Sind-Sa-
gar above mentioned. He began with 1/chohh, which, at the period in
2 See note farther on.
3 I need scarcely mention that the name Indus was, and is unknown to Oriental
geographers and historians. It was Europeanized, if I may say so, by the Greeks out
of Sindhu, or they may have called it the Indus as being the river separating Hind
from I-ran-Zamin, their “ Ariana,” and not intending it to be understood that
Indus was the proper name of the river ; for it was known to the Hindus as ‘ Sin¬
dhu’ or ‘ the River,’ and ‘ Ab-i-Sind’ by the early Muhammadan writers, and some¬
times ‘ Nahr-i-Mihran.
4 Incorrectly styled “ Khotlan” in the “essay” by Yule, in Wood’s “ Oxus ”
and other books of travels : the first vowel is short ‘ a.’ This district or territory
was famous for its horses, which, from the country, w^ere known as Khatli horses.
6 The name of this famous city is thus written by the oldest authors, nih being
the Tajzik for city. The other forms of the word are merely vitiated forms of the
above. “ Ghazna,” as some European authors write it, is totally wrong. The other
forms of the word are Ghaz-nm, and Ghaz-ni, but the first is the correct one.
157
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
question, was under the charge of the Khwajah (Eunuch) Salih, the
Kot-wal, who was acting as the Deputy of the feudatory of the district,
Mu-ayyid-ud-Din, Hindu Khan, the Treasurer of the Dilili kingdom.6
At this period, Multan and its territory was in the possession of Malik
Saif-ud-Diu, Hasan, the Karl ugh, Karlugh, Karluk, or Karluk Turk, who
was not a vassal of the Dihli kingdom,7 and who had lately been dispos¬
sessed of his own territories beyond the Indus by the Mughals, and had
recently seized upon Multan.
In due course the Nu-in Mangutah, reached the banks of the Sind
near l/chchh — it must have been about the middle of October of that
year, as the news reached Dihli in the following month, in Rajab — and
Malik Hasan, the Karlugh, speedily abandoned Multan, and, embarking
on the A'b-i Sind, started down that river in order to gain Sindu-stan,
as the city of Siw-istan and its territory, since known as Sihwan, was
then called, to gain the port of Dewal or Debal (‘6’ and ’ being in¬
terchangeable) on the sea coast of Sind.8
6 See under “ Shamsiah Maliks,” no. ix, page 744 of the “Tabakat” Transla¬
tion, and also page 809. There it says the Mnglials “invested the fortress of
U'chchh, which is one of the famous strongholds of the country of Sind, and the
territory of Mansurah” ; and, that, “Within that fortress, a Khwajah-Sarae
[Eunuch], one of the servants of Malik Taj-ud-Din, Abu-Bikr, named Muklilis-nd-
Din, was the Kot-wal Bak [Seneschal], and a slave of Kabh* Khan, Ak-Sunkar, by
name, was the Amir-i-Dad [Lord Justiciary].
7 He was independent, and coined money in his own name. At the period
referred to, after having previously submitted to the Mughals, he found their yoke
so unbearable that he abandoned Ghaznih, Karman, and the territory north of, and
including, the Koh-i-Jud or Salt Range, and occupied Multan. Some of the coins of
this same Karlugh Malik have recently been found near the village of Chittah in that
very Koh-i-Jud. The tribe of Karlugh, Karlugh, Karluk, or Karluk Turks gave
name to the tract of country in the Panj-ab, miscalled by us “Hazara” but in
history, called the country or district of the Hazarah-i-Karlugh, that is, where
the ming , or hazdrah , or legion, consisting of Karlugh Turks, was located when the
Khwarazm Shahs dominated over those parts. See the Society’s “Transactions”
for November, 1889, where the coins of Saif-ud-Din, Hasan, the Karlugh, are noticed
under the designation of “ Qurlagh.” In Thomas’s “ Puthdn Kings of Behli,” he is
called “a rebel” at page 97, but, as he was never subject to the Dihli rulers, he
was not a rebel. lie was a feudatory under the Khwarazm Shahs who held those
parts, and, after their fall, had to submit to the Mughals. More respecting him and
his son will be found in my Tabakat-i-Nasiri. See notes on page 175, and page 177.
His son, Malik Nasir-ud-Din, Muhammad, was neither “ a powerful monarch,” nor
did he ever hold dominions in Sind. See “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” pages 781, 859, 877,
and 1154.
8 If Multan had then another broad and unfordable river immediately on its
west side, as the Chin-ab now flows, Malik Hasan would scarcely have needed to
evacuato Multan, and probably would not have done so, and, certainly, not with
U
158
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
Mangutali having made his preparations, proceeded to invest
U'ohohh. The author of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri says, that he first destroyed
the environs and neighbourhood round about the city. “ The people
of the fortress put forth the utmost exertions and diligence, and used
immense endeavours in defending the place, and despatched great num¬
bers of the Mughals to hell.” Having failed in all their endeavours to
take the place, and, in the last assault, having lost one of their principal
leaders, and hearing of the near approach of the forces of the Dihli
kingdom under Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, Mas’ud Shah, in person, they began
to give up hopes of taking the fortress. To continue in the words of
the author : “ When the sublime standards reached the banks of the
river Biah, the army moved along its banks9 towards ITchohh, as has
been previously related and recorded. On the Mughal forces becoming
aware of the advance of the forces of Islam, and the vanguard of the
warriors of the faith having reached within a short distance of the
territory [dependent on ITchchh], they did not possess the power of
withstanding them. They retired disappointed from before the fortress
of Uchchh, and went away; and that stronghold, through the power of
the sovereign of Islam, and the Divine aid, remained safe from the
wickedness of those accursed ones.”
This detailed account of the investment of U'ohohh is kept by the
author for the last part of the Tabakat, but he also refers to the event in
two earlier passages. Under the reign of Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, Mas’ud
Shah, page 667, he says : “ In the month of Rajab of this same year,
news was received from the upper provinces, of an army of infidel
Mughals having advanced towards Uchohh, of which force the accursed
Mangutali was the leader. Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, Mas’ud Shah, for the
such precipitation as he used on the occasion in question. At that period, however,
no river intervened between Multan and the A'b-i-Sind or Indus, which was almost as
close to it then as the Chin-ab is now, and, consequently, Malik Hasan’s retreat
might have been cut off. He, accordingly, embarked on the combined rivers Chin-
ab (including the Bihat) and Rawi, which then ran north and east of Multan, and
united with the Biah some miles farther south, and so, placing a river between him¬
self and the Mughals, he was enabled to get down into Sind, without danger of
molestation, by the Biah and Hakra, or Wahindah, into Lar, or Debal.
What afterwards became of him has never been mentioned in history, and it is
not improbable that he may have reached the Dakhan, and have taken service there,
and there ended his days. An account of the Karluglx or Karlugh Turks will be
found in my “ Translation of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” note to page 877, and note to
page 1130.
9 This was after the combined Bihat, Chin-ab, and Rawi had united with it,
and below the point of junction indicated in the map showing the ancient courses of
these rivers at the period in question whioli will be given later on.
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 159
purpose of repelling the Mughal forces, assembled the troops of Islam
from various parts. On their arrival on the banks of the Biah, the in¬
fidels withdrew from before ITohchh, and that success was gained. The
writer of this work was in attendance on the sublime Court on that ex¬
pedition; and persons of understanding and men of judgment agreed, that
no one could point out to view anything of an army like that host and
gathering in years gone by. When information of the numbers and
efficiency of the victorious forces of Islam reached the infidels, they
decamped, and retired towards Khurasan again.”
In his account of Malik Ghivas-ud-Din. Balban,10 who, before lie
succeeded to the throne, bore the title of Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam,, the
author says : “In this same year [643 H.], Mangutah, the accursed, who
was one of the Mughal leaders,11 and of the Maliks of Turkistan, led
an army from the borders of Tae-kan and Kunduz, into the territories
of Sind, and invested the fortress of Uehohli, which is one of the
famous strongholds of the country of Sind, and of (i. e included in)
the territory of Mansurah. ^ # # While every one of the [other]
Amirs and Maliks was showing indecision about this undertaking,
Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam showed determination in carrying it out ; and,
when the royal standards moved forwards towards that [threatened]
quarter, Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam — Be his power prolonged ! — despatched
guides in advance on the line of route, so that [the troops] used to get
over the marches with rapidity. He was wont to represent to the troops
that the [next] halting place would be about eight huroh off, and [con¬
sequently] about twelve huroh , and even more than that, they used to
march, until the troops reached the banks of the Biah, and passed over
that river ; and he conducted them to the banks of the Rawah [Rawi]
of Labor.18
10 See the Hhamsiah Maliks, No. XXV, page 809.
11 This same leader had been one of the commanders with the Bahadur, Ta-fr,
who, in the sixth month of 639 H. (December, 1241 A. D.), had attacked and sacked
Lalior, the whole of the inhabitants of which were either massacred or carried off
captive. See “ Translation,” pages 727, and 1132-1136.
12 As the Biah and Rawi then flowed, centuries before either the Sutlaj or the
Biah deserted its bed, the Dihli forces would be in the fork between the Rawi and
the Biah, in the Bari Do-abah, near their junction, with their flanks protected by the
rivers, and in a position to threaten the Mughal line of retreat. Having crossed
the Rawi above the junction, or below the junction of the three rivers, they could
have marched down the Do-abali to U'chchh without having any other river to cross,
and reinforcements from Multan could have joined them. On the other hand, they
would have caught the Mughal s in the fork between the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, which
flowed near U'chchh on the west, and the Sind Rud, described further on, on the
east, both unfordable rivers, and, in case of defeat, the Mughals would have been
1(50 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . [No. 3,
“ In this manner used he to show such-like determination on this
expedition, and such lion-heartedness, and was wont to stimulate the
Sultan and Maliks to repel the infidel Mughals, until Monday, the 25th
of the month Sha’ban, 613 H. (about the last week in January, 1246
A. D.), when intimation reached the royal camp that the army of infidel
Mughals had raised the investment of Uchchh. The cause of it was,
that, on reaching the vicinity of the river Biah, Ulugh Khan i-A’zam
appointed couriers, and directed so that they wrote letters from the
sublime presence to the garrison of the fort of Uchohh, and announced
to them the approach of the royal standards, the vast number of the
array and elephants, the host of cavalry with the army, and the courage
of the soldiery in attendance at the august stirrup, and despatched them
towards the fortress of Uohchh. A division of the army was moved on
in front, to act as a reconnoitring force and form the advanced guard.
“ When the couriers reached the vicinity of Uchchh,13 a few of
these letters fell into the hands of the host of the accursed,14 and some
reached the people of the fortress. On the drum of joy being beaten in
the fort, and the subject of the letters, the advance of the victorious
army, and approach of the royal standards, becoming manifest to the
accursed Mangiitah, and the cavalry of the advanced guard approaching
the banks of the river Biah of Labor, near to the frontiers of the terri¬
tory of Sind, fear and terror became manifest in the heart of the Mughal
[leader].
“ When Mangiitah became aware of the advance of this great army,”
the author continues, “ and that it moved towards the river Biah,15 near
the skirts of the mountains, and from thence, in the same manner, was
inarching downward along the banks of that river,16 he made inquiry of
caught in a trap and annihilated. Snch being the case, the Mughals retired by three
divisions, up the Sind-Sagar Do-abah by the route they had come, keeping close to
the east bank, before any of the Dihli troops, beyond the detachment referred to,
had crossed the Rawi.
13 It is probable, nay, almost certain, that these couriers came down the right
bank of the Biah the whole way, leaving the great army when it crossed the Biah and
the Rawah or Rawi on the way to Labor. A glance at the map indicating the
former course of the Biah and the other rivers will show why they did so.
14 The author had good reason for calling the Mughals “ accursed.” They had
ruined and depopulated his native country and the parts adjacent, the tracts between
Hirat and Kabul and Ghaznin, exceedingly populous and flourishing before the
invasion of the Mughals, from whose devastations they have not recovered to this
day.
13 Thus showing that it still flowed in its old bed ; for, after it left it, it lost its
name, and that was only in the last century.
16 Below the junction with the others previously mentioned as uniting with it
near Multan to the south.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 161
some persons what might be the reason of the deviation of the army of
Islam towards the skirts of the hills, because that was a longer route,
while that by Sarasti and Marut was nearer. They replied, that, on
account of the number of islands on the banks of the river,17 there might
not be a road for the army of Islam. Mangutah remarked : “ This is a
vast army : we have not the power to resist it : it is necessary to retire
and fear overcame him and his army, lest, if they remained longer,
their line of retreat should be cut off.13 Their army was formed into
three divisions, and routed, they fled, and numerous captives, both
Musalman and Hindu, obtained their liberty. ”
Before I proceed to adduce my authorities and information on this
subject, I had better refer, as briefly as possible, to an article which
appeared in a late number of the Calcutta Review , entitled “ The Lost
River of the Indian Desert.”19
The writer of the article in question, in support of his arguments
respecting the period at which he supposes the Hakra to have disap¬
peared, or, more correctly, the period at which its waters ceased to flow,
quotes the “ Tabakat-i-hTasiri ” as his authority, from a 'portion only of
that work contained in Elliot’s “ Indian Historians,” Vol. II, p. 363,
which was translated by the late Mr. J. Dowson, Hindustani Professor
17 To this the following note was appended. “ Long, narrow banks of sand,
probably extending, in places, for several miles, and sometimes, of some height, are
doubtless meant here, such as are found after the annual inundations, with water,
sometimes of considerable depths between ; and to the effects of the past inundation,
the people no doubt referred. These would have caused great obstruction, and
have taken much time to cross, as well as have entailed great trouble, therefore, the
forces of Dihli kept farther north, and made their march a flank movement at the
same time, which may have been the original intention. In what direction they
went may be seen farther on.” Here it has been already related.
18 I wish this last expression to be particularly noticed. See also, and compare,
this passage with that in Elliot’s Historians, Yol. II, pp. 363-64.
19 I may mention that part of the present paper was originally intended as a
note to the investment of U'chchh in my “Translation” [See page 1155], but, on
after consideration, on account of its length, I thought it would be more advisable
to publish it as a separate article in the “ Journal,” after completing the Tabakat-i-
Nasiri. I unfortunately mislaid the rough draft, which our lamented friend, Mr.
Arthur Grote, saw and read over ; and lie agreed with me, that it was better adapted
for publication in a separate form. In March 1887 I found the MS. quite unex¬
pectedly, among some maps, after I had given up all hope of seeing it again, as I
feared I had burnt it, by mistake, along with some old proofs of the “ Translation.”
The appearance of another article on the same subject, by Mr. R. D. Oldham, in the
Society’s “ Journal,” No. IY of 1886, determined me no longer to delay its pub¬
lication. What I have here stated will explain my reference to “ a late number of
the Calcutta j Review.”
162
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
at the Staff College, previously alluded to, from the incorrect Persian
text of the original published at Calcutta ; but, from that translated
portion contained in Elliot’s work, the detailed account of the invest¬
ment of ITchchli is omitted altogether. Thus it will be seen, that the
observations contained in the Calcutta Review article, are based entirely
upon this single extract in Elliot’s “ Historians. ”20 The writer, con¬
sequently, has been partly misled by the rendering of an incorrect
passage in the Calcutta printed text, as stated in a note to my “ Transla¬
tion,” and partly by his own errors in reading “ drough t ” where “ fissures ”
are mentioned in Elliot, and in losing sight occasionally of the old course
of the Biah, or “ Bias ” previous to its junction with the Sutlaj, when
both rivers lost their names and became the Hariari, Nili or Gharah.
The passage quoted from Elliot occurs in the account of the Ulugh
Khan-i-A’zam, under the events of the year 643 H., and is as follows.
“ In this year the accursed Mankuti (Mangu Khan)21 marched from the
neighbourhood of Talikan and Kunduz into Sindh. * * * The Dilili
army arrived on the banks of the Biyah, made the transit of the river,
and reached Labor on the banks of the Ravi. * * * Trusty men record
that when Mankuti heard of the approach of the army of Islam, under
the royal standard, that it proceeded by the river Biyah, near the skirts
of the hills, and that it was advancing along the banks of the river, he
20 My translation of this particular portion of it, perhaps, had not reached India
at the time.
21 The late Mr. J. Dowson, the Editor of Elliot’s “ Historians of India,” and
translator of some, and reviser of all the extracts from the Tabakat-i-Nasiri contained
in that work, turned the old, one-eyed leader of the time of the Chingiz Khan into
Mangu Khan, his grandson, and called him Mankuti instead of Mangutah. The
Great Ka’an, Mangu, was the son of the Chingiz Khan’s youngest son, and did not
succeed to the sovereignty until five years after this investment of l/chchh, which
happened during the reign of Kayuk, and, moreover, he was never near the Indus in
his life, nor within hundreds of miles of it. See “ Tabakat,” Translation, note to
page 1180. Blochmann, in his printed text of the A’in-i- Akbari, where this invest¬
ment is briefly referred to, has the shoulder of the vfJ being left ont, made
that letter ‘ l ’ instead of ‘ g,’ and the letter 3 — ‘ t * — has been turned upside-down and
made 2 — ‘ y .’ These are probably printer’s errors, because in the MSS. of the work
the name is correctly written. The author of the “ Notes on the Lost River,” pre¬
sently to be noticed, also has “Mangu Khan,” but “ Mankuti” is left out altogether !
It is wonderful how people will jump at impossible conclusions ; and because
one of the Mughal sovereigns was called — Mangu— which name they may have
read of, immediately they see the word — Mangutah — they at once assume
that the former must be meant, and this, too, when the author in another place had
stated, that Mangutah was an aged man, with dog-like eyes — [some copies have
‘ one-eyed’], and that he had been one of the Chingiz Khan’s favourites.
See “ Tabakat,” Translation, note to page 1180.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 163
made inquiry of a party (of prisoners)22 why the army of Islam marched
along the bases of the mountains, for the route was long, and the way
by Sarsuti and Marut (Mirat ?)23 was nearer ? He was answered that
the numerous fissures on the banks of the river rendered the way impossible
for the army.’’2i
The writer of the Calcutta Review article on the “ Lost River,”
might have noticed, that, in a foot-note, the editor and translator says,
“ The text — j _^25 is far from intelligible and ap¬
parently contradictory . The royal forces are said to have marched along
the banks of the river , although that route is declared to have been im¬
practicable. The whole passage is omitted in Sir H. Elliot's MS.”
The translator and editor appears to have been much puzzled,
certainly, and seems to have forgotten that he took the army “ across the
river “ Ravi ,” as far as Labor, just before, because it was doubtful
whether it could proceed along the banks of the “ Biyah.” He has
confused one river with the other ; and, if the route along the left or
east bank of the Biah was supposed to be impracticable, it did not follow
that there was no way along the right or west bank. As previously
stated, there were other reasons for not following the course of the Biah
direct to TJohchh, even if the route had been practicable on the other
or on both sides of “ the river,” which referred to the Hakra, which
flowed past Marut, and not to the Biah at all.
The 11 Review ” writer, further says : “ In the same volume, page
22 There is not a word about “ prisoners” in the original.
23 Here it will be seen, that, in two places where the author was perfectly
right as to the names Mangutah and Marut, Mr. Dowson thought he knew better,
and turned the first into “ Mangu Khan,” and the latter into “Mirat,” and has
thereby shown the extent of his historical and geographical knowledge. Mirat is
justjfrt'e degrees east of Marut, and, more than that, lies north-east of Dihli, in a to¬
tally opposite direction.
24 See Elliot’s Historians, Yol. II, page 364.
25 I have noticed in my “Translation,” in note 3, page 812, that the word j ^
supposed to mean “fissures,” is but part of the plural form of namely
part of the word being left out in the Calcutta text, signifying ‘ islands,’ etc. Under
any circumstance, j ^ — jar — does not mean either a fissure or fissures, but the Hindi
— char — means, ‘ a bank,’ ‘ an island.’ This word is used in the Panj-ab for such
shoals, banks, or islands as are found on, and near the banks of rivers after the
subsidence of the annual inundations, and this local word may have been used by the
people of whom Mangutah made inquiry.
See the large scale map of the Bahawal-pur territory, and some idea may be
formed respecting such ‘ islands ’ or ‘ banks ’ as the author refers to, still to be
seen in the ancient channel of the Hakra or Wahindah, and also the notice of that
channel which will be found farther on.
164 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries . [No. 3,
344, the same expedition is referred to, but there it is merely stated that
when Sultan ’Alau-d-din arrived on the banks of the Biyah, the infidels
raised the siege of Uch.”
From the correct version of this identical passage, as it occurs in
the Persian text of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” given at page 812 of my
“ Translation,” it will be noticed, that, as usual with its author, he has
not mentioned the details therein, but retained them for his account of
the invasion of the Mughals, which I have given at the beginning of this
article.26
What are the facts respecting this investment of Uchchh? The
Dihli forces having first crossed the Biah, coming from Dihli in the
direction of Labor by the direct route between the two places, Malik
Gliiyas-ud-Din, Balban, afterwards raised to the title of Ulugh Khan-i-
A’zam,27 who was the Sultan’s chief of the staff, so to speak, or rather, the
real commander, conducted the army of Hind towards the Rawah, as it
is called, as well as Rawi, of Labor. We also learn from the passage
in the account of Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam, which has just been discussed,
what determined the Mughal commander to raise the investment of
Uchchh. It was not only that one of the most famous of the Mughal
leaders had perished in the recent assault, and that the invaders had
been repulsed in making it, as stated in the detailed account, but, on
reaching the banks of the Biah on the way from Dihli to Labor — I
am referring to it as it flowed in its old bed, not as it and the Sutlaj
flow now under the names of Hariari and Gharah — Malik Gliiyas-ud-
Din, Balban, despatched couriers to Uchchh23 with letters foe the
defenders, some of which were purposely allowed to fall into the ene-
26 At page 1150 of my “Translation.”
27 Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Mahmud Shah, who was set up as ruler of Dihli in the
following year, after Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, Mas’ud Shah had been imprisoned, married
the daughter of the Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam. After the decease of his son-in-law, who
died childless, he succeeded to the throne under the title of Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din,
Balban. He was a Turk of the Ilbari tribe, but compilers of Indian Histories and
Gazetteers, and archaeological experts, turn him, like many other Turks, Tajziks,
Jats, and Sayyids, into “ Pathdns,” which is synonymous with Afghan, it being the
vitiated Hindi equivalent of Pushtun, the name by which the people generally
known as Afghans call themselves, in their own language.
A specimen of this “Pathan” fallacy appears in the “Transactions” of the
Society for November, 1889, page 226. Referring to a find of coins from the Koh-i-
Jud or Salt Range, they are described as “all of one kind, viz., coins of the Pathan
Sultan of Dehli, Ghaiasu-d-Din Balban.” Now this very personage is no other than
the Ulugh Klian-i-A’zam mentioned above, who was an Ilbari Turk, not an Afghan or
“ Pathan.” If the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” were more studied, such great errors would
not occur. It is quite time to give up Dow and Briggs’ “ Ferishta.”
23 See note 13, page 160.
1892. j H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
165
my’s hands, intimating, in somewhat exaggerated terms, the advance,
and near approach, of a vast army with numerous elephants: and, in
truth, it was said to have been the most formidable army that had been
assembled for a very long period. Malik Ghiyas-ud-Dm, Balban, im¬
mediately after the army had passed the Biali on the route to Labor,
had also pushed forward a considerable body of cavalry towards the
frontier of Sind, and this force, at least, went by the right or west bank
of the Biali, through the Bari Do-abah, between it and the Rawi. On
the couriers reaching Uchchh, the drums and other so-called musical
instruments announced to the Mughals that the defenders were aware
that succour was at hand, and that they would speedily be relieved ; and
what with their own recent, unsuccessful assault, and the loss of one of
their famous leaders, it became clear to the Mughals that Uchchh was
not to be taken as easily as they had expected.
Another important point to be considered is, that this match from
Dihli towards Labor and the Rawi was a flank movement, to cover, and
succour Multan29 if necessary, and threaten the line of the Mughals’
retreat towards the Jud Hills — the Namak-Sar or Salt Range — the route
by which they had come against Uchchh.30
It will also be noticed that the Nii-in Mangutah was quite alive to
this flank movement, when, on hearing of the route taken by the
Musalman forces, he said it was “time to retire,” and the author adds,
“ lest, if they remained longer, their line of retreat should be cut off.”
Another reason for the advance of the Dihli army towards Lahor,
instead of going direct from Dihli to Uchchh through the now desert
waste, was, that the Biah and Rawi, which, did not flow then as they do
now, were more easily crossed higher up at the season in question — the
months of December and January31 — when these operations took place,
29 Multan and Uchchh, as before mentioned (see note 8, page 157, and note 12,
page 159) were then situated in the same Do-abah, no great river intervening between
them, but a cutting from the river Chin-ab, called the Loll Wa’-han, flowed past
the fortifications of Multan, and filled its ditch, or formed a wet ditch around it,
which, in the cold season, could be filled at pleasure. There were likewise several
canals about, at lesser or greater distances.
The Ab-i-Sind or Indus, at this period united with the Biah and its tributaries
near Uchchh on the west, as confirmed by tradition mentioned in note farther on,
and continued so to do down to modern times.
30 The Ranah, Jas-Pal, Sihra or Sehra, and his Khokhar tribes, acted as the
Mughal guides, for which they were severely chastised in the following year, 644 II.,
the first of the reign of Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Mahmud Shah. See pages 678 and 815
of my “ Translation.”
31 The Mughals raised the investment of Uchchh on the 25th of the month
Sha’ban, about the end of January, 1246 A. D.
V
166
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
and lay through the most populous parts of the country, on the main
route from Dihli through the north-western provinces, where facilities
for crossing this vast army were ready at hand, where supplies were
abundant, and where some of the great feudatories of those parts
would join the Sultan’s army en route with their contingents.82
At this period the Biali flowed in its old bed past Debal-pur and
the Wiliat or Bihat, the Chin-ab or Chin-ao, and the Rawah or Rawi,
having united into one stream to the north-east of Multan, flowed
near it on the east side, and united with the Biali some twenty-eight
miles to the southward of that city, and east of tTohohh, instead of west
of it, as the united rivers of the Panj-ab now flow. This movement
enabled the Dihli forces to threaten the Mughal’s line of retreat north¬
wards, consequently, there would have been no road open to them except
down stream or across the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, and these alternatives
were, evidently, not approved of by Mangutah.88 As stated by the
author of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” who was present in attendance on the
Sultan and his army in his ecclesiastical capacity, as soon as the Mughal
Nii-in became aware that the army of Islam was marching down the
east bank of the Rawi (which was generally fordable) through the Bari
Do-abah, near the junction of the rivers, in order to reach Uchehh, he
immediately found it necessary to retire ; and, as the author of the above
work84 states, “ The advance of the victorious army, and approach of the
royal standards, becoming manifest to the accursed Mangutah, and the
cavalry of the advance force approaching the frontier of Sind [below the
Even if the Dihli forces had taken the direct route by Marut, they would still
have had the Hakra and the Biali below the junction of its tributaries to cross, both
deep, broad, and unfordable rivers, in order to reach Uchchh, which then lay
between the Sind liud or the Biah and its tributaries, and the Ab-i-Sind or Indus.
Moreover, the Mughals before Uchchh might then have been in a position to oppose
their crossing the former river.
32 In crossing higher up stream, the Sultan of Dihli merely did as Alexander the
Great is said to have done before. Strabo, in his Geography (B. XY), says : “ He
resolved therefore to get possession of that part of India first which had been well
spoken of, considering at the same time that the rivers which it was necessary to
pass, and which flowed transversely through the country which he intended to
attack, would be crossed tvith more facility near their sources. He heard also that
many of the rivers united and formed one stream, and that this more frequently
occurred the farther they advanced into the country, so that from want of boats it
would be more difficult to traverse.”
33 He probably had no means of crossing the Ab-i-Sind, consequently he had to
beat a hasty retreat up the Sind-Sagar Do-abah, by the same route as he came
down against Uchchh.
34 See pages 812, and 1156.
167
1892.] H. G. Rrverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
junction of the Rawi and other rivers with the Biah south-south-east of
Multan], * * * he made inquiry of some persons [natives of the country,
without doubt], what might be the reason of the deviation of the army
of Islam towards the skirts of the hills, because that was a longer route,
while that by Sarasti and Marut was near. They replied, that, on ac¬
count of the number of islands on the banks [of the river],35 there might
not be a road for the army of Islam.”
The writer in the Calcutta Review , misquoting, as it will be seen,
his own authority, says : “ It is said in the Tabakat-i-Nasiri that, when
Uclih was besieged by the Mughals in H. 643 (A. D. 1245), the army
sent [the Sultan, ’Ala-ud-Din, Mas’iid Shah, commanded it in person]
was unable to march by Sarsuti and Marot , in consequence of the drought
on the bank of the river u ! What river he does not say ; but, in Elliot’s
“ Historians,” which he quotes, there is not one word about “ drought ,”
and in the author’s text there is not one word to indicate that “ the
numerous fissures rendered the way impassable,” as Mr. Dovvson trans¬
lated the words fcfj — rah na-bdshad — which means that there might not
be a road — a doubt, not a certainty. Consequently, as far as the authority
of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” is concerned, there is not the least reason for
supposing that either the Rawi or the Biah had then changed their
courses, or that the Hakra had dried up.
“ Marot,” the writer continues, “ is now in the heart of the desert,
but then the high road from Delili to Multan passed under its walls,
and followed the course of the Hakra from Sarsuti to within a few
marches of Uchh. After this period, armies marching from Dehli to
Multan always took the road by Abohar and Ajohdan ; but the more
direct way by Marot was occasionally taken by travellers for some time
later -”86
All this, like the “ drought ,” is mere surmise. That there was a
route by Marut is certain, but no scrap of evide?ice can be produced to
show that armies, going from Dihli to Multan “always ” took the route
by Marut, nor would the writer be able to point out any place where it
is stated that the route by Marut was the “ high road between Dehli
and Multan,” or any authority for the statement, that armies marching
36 As I have before noticed, which of the rivers is not mentioned, and in comino*
from Dihli by way of Marut the Hakra would have had to be crossed, under any
circumstances, unless the troops crossed the Ghag-ghar at Sarasti or near it, and
after that had been crossed, the Biah and its tributaries, forming the Sind Rud,
would have to be crossed likewise.
36 Yet', at page 3 of his article in the Calcutta Review, the writer says : “ Our
knowledge of the condition of this tract of country previous to the time of Sultan
Firuz Shah in the fourteenth century is very vague.”
168 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
from Dilili to Multan, “ after this time always took the road by Abohar,”
or to name a single instance of an army taking that route in preference.
The Marut road was taken both by bodies of troops and travellers
long after, aud was taken by an English traveller — Arthur Conolly — in
company with a caravan of that branch of the Tarin Afghans com¬
monly known as the Sayyids of Pusliang, as late as 1830.
As to the route being “closed at this period and after” because of
the disappearance of the “western branch of the Naiwal,” which “ was
the last of the channels connected with the Hakra which, therefore, at
this time (about A. D. 1220) finally ceased to flow,” the writer of the
article in the “ Review,” himself says, that “ a great part of the Indian
Desert has undergone little change since pre-historic times,” and, that
“ its ancient name of Marustliali (region of death) proves this.” Does
the “ seige of Uch” belong to pre-historic times? The writer at¬
tributes the movement of the Dilili army towards Labor, instead of fol¬
lowing the route by “Marot,” to the drying up of the Hakra ; while, in
other places he says, that, “ the downfall of the Sumras must have
occurred between A. I). 1223,” and, that that year had “been preceded
by the disappearance of the Hakra river.” Now the year 1220 A. D. is
equivalent to the year 61 7 H., which commenced on the 7th of March of
the above year, or twenty-six years before the investment of Uchehh ;
and the year 1223 A. D., is equivalent to 620 H., which began on the
3rd of February, or just three years less. This is certainly very con¬
tradictory.
“ If the “ Hakra river ” had dried up in 1220 A. D. or in 1223, the
route by “ Abohar ” between twenty-three and twenty-six years after ,
would have been no better than that by “ Marot.” Both routes would
have lain through much the same description of country ; for Uboli-har87
was situated on one of its tributaries, and we know from Ibn Batutah
that there was no want of water in that part eighty years after the invest¬
ment of l/chchh.
Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah the Turk,38 who ruled over the terri¬
tories of Sind and Multan, on the sudden death of Sultan Kutb-ud-Din
I'-bak-i-Shil, from the effects of the accident which befell him when
playing at the game of chauahdn at Labor in 607 H. (1210-11 A. D.),
annexed all the country east of Multan and U'chchh, as far as Tabar-
hindali (the old name of Bhatindah), Kuhram, and Saras ti. 39 This fact
37 The derivation of this name, which in error is written Abuliar generally by
the Muhammadan historians, will be found farther on.
38 He is one of those turned into a “ Pathan” by the experts.
39 Sarasti is the ancient name of Sirsa : Sursuti is the name of a river, the
ancient Saraswati.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 169
. clearly shows, that, at this period, the Kaji Wa-liali, Hakra, or Wallin-
dah, by which two latter names it is best known in the annals of Sind
and Multan, had not ceased to flow, and that Sultan Nasir-ud-Din,
Kaba-jah, annexed all the intervening territory between the banks of
the Hakra, which bounded the then dependencies of Sind and Multan
on the east, up to, and including, those districts abovenamed, which its
tributary, the Chitang, bounded on the south. It is beyond question
that he would not have annexed a howling wilderness or “ a region of
death.” It has also been proved beyond all doubt, that Sultan Shams-ud-
Hin, I-yal-timish, set out from Dihli by way of Tabarhindah for l/chohh
with his forces in 625 H. (1228 A. D.) to oust Kaba-jali therefrom, and
take possession of Sind and Multan, and came through this present
desert tract; that the Biali and its tributaries, or Sind Riid, flowed near
to l/chohh on the east at that time; for the latter’s fleet was moored in
front of the kasbah of — llrrawat40 — and that one of the Amirs of
I-yal-timish, Taj-ud-Din, Sanjar-i-Gajz-lak Khan, who commanded the
advanced troops of his army, had been placed in charge of the district of
Wanjh-rut on the Hakra, a place which is known to this day, and which
then gave its name to the district.41 It is very evident that the Malik
abovenamed would not have been placed in charge of a desert, as Wanjh-
rut would have been, if the Hakra had disappeared in either 1220 A, D.
or 1223 A. D., because these events happened Jive years after the last named
date , in 625 H. (1228 A. D.).
The author of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” himself proceeded by way of
Hansi42 and Abuhar [Uboh-liar] to Multan on the 24th of Zi-Hijjah, 647
H. (the end of April, 1248 A. D.), four years after the investment of l/chchh
40 This place has disappeared, and its site is now unknown, as far as I can
discover, which is not surprising, considering the vast changes which have taken
place in this part.
41 Perhaps it will not be forgotten, that there were a number of flourishing
mahalls or sub- districts of the Bakhar and Multan sarkars of the Multan siibah — three
of the former sarkar and seven of the latter — east of the present bank of the Indus
and Gharah near Uchchh, and extending to the Hakra, and probably beyond, of
which one is Dirawar on the very bank of the Hakra, which are still well-known.
These alone paid no less than 78,01,510 dams of revenue, equal to 1 lakh and 9,537
rupis, or £ 10,953, per annum, not including free grants, and furnished 1,370 horse¬
men, and 8,600 foot for militia purposes, in the reign of Akbar Badshah.
42 He mentions why he went by Hansi and Uboh-har. He says (page 687) :
“ When he reached the Hansi district [it was the fief of his patron, the Ulugh
Khan], the author took possession of the village conferred upon him by Ulugh Khan,
and opportunity offered to proceed to Multan by way of Abuhar ; and, on Sunday,
the 11th of the month, Safar, 648 H., an interview was obtained with Malik Sher
Khan-i-Sunkar on the banks of the Biah.”
170 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
by the Mughal Nu-in, Mangutah (at which time also he accompanied
the relieving army from Dilili as already mentioned), and returned from
Multan by way of the fort of Marut and Sarasti to Hansi again, in
Jamadi-us-Sani of the following year, about the middle of October, 1248
A. D. He had gone to Multan for the purpose of despatching forty
head of Indian captives — male slaves43 — to be turned into money, “ to
his dear sister in Khurasan ”; and, although he set out in the hot season
— the end of April — he says nothing about any “ impossibility ” in the
route, “drought,” or “fissures,” nor does he mention any difficulty or
obstruction whatever. Besides all this, he had an interview with Malik
Slier Khan-i-Sunkar, one of the greatest Amirs and feudatories of the
Dilili kingdom, “ on the banks of the Blah , after leaving Abuhar [Uboli-
har], and this would have been simply impossible if the Biah had left
its old bed and had united with the Sutlaj. Moreover, if one great river
[the Hakra] had recently dried up, or disappeared, and if another river
nearly as large [the Biah], on the banks of which his interview with
Malik Slier Khan actually took place, had abandoned its old bed to meet
another [the Sutlaj], halfway, which must have also similarly abandoned
its channel, so that a vast tract of territory previously populous and
fruitful had been turned into a desert, can it be conceived for a moment,
that, if such vast changes had really taken place he would not even
have hinted at them ? Besides, it would have been physically impos¬
sible for him to have held an interview on the banks of the Biah with
Slier Khan, if any change had taken place, because, when it deserted
its bed, it ceased to be the Biah. In going by this route he must have
crossed both the Hakra, and its tributaries, including the Sutlaj as well
as the Biah, to reach Multan by Uboh-har, and the Biah and the Hakra
again on his return by way of Marut.
In another place (page 782), he says, he went to Multan on the
occasion in question, and reached it in Rabi’-ul Awwal, 648 H. (June,
1250 A. D.), a journey which few would have attempted at that season,
if all the rivers had dried up ; and, that two days before his arrival,
Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban-i-Kashlu Khan (not Ghiyas-ud-Din, Balban,
the Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam, but a totally different person) had reached
Multan from U'chchh, and was then investing it ; that he, the author,
remained at Multan for two months — July and August — during which
time Malik Balban relinquished the investment and retired to U'chchh
again ; and that he himself returned to Dilili by nearly the same route
as he had come.44
43 Turned into “ 100 beasts of burden,” by Mr. Dowson, See Elliot’s Historians,
Vol. II, page 350, and “ Tabakat-i-Nasirj,” pages 686, 783, and 822.
4)4) At page 822 of the “Translation” he says he set out from Dihli for Multan
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 171
At pages 787-88, under Malik Badr-ud-Din, Sunkar-i-Sufi, entitled
Husrat Klian. it is stated, that, “ in 657 A. H. [which began on the 28th
of December, 1258 A. D.] he was placed in charge of the then western
frontier districts of the Dihli kingdom, namely, the city of Tabarhindah
[subsequently called Bhatiudali], Sunam, Jhajhar, and Lak-wal [Lakhhi-
wal],i5 and the frontiers as far as the ferries over the river Biah,” which
shows that the Biah still flowed in its old bed, and also tends to
prove that the parts between the places mentioned above and the Biah
were not then deserted by the rivers, and not reduced to a desert. Had
they been so, of what use was it defending the line of a dried-up Biah
and its “ ferries ” from the waterless desert side ? The Mughal s. or
their vassals and tributaries, including Malik Tzz-ud-Din, Balban-i-
Kashlu Khan, were then in the possession of the tracts on, and west of,
the Biah, consisting of the provinces of l/chchh, Multan, and Lahor.
The author adds, that, “up to the date of this book being written [his
history], he [Nusrat Khan] is still stationed on that frontier, with
ample military resources and a large army.”46
In several other places in his work, the author throws considerable
light on this subject. At page 723, he says, that, after he first came to
U'chchh from Ghaznin by Banian, in Safar, 625 H., he went to the camp
of Malik Taj-ud-Din, Sanjar-i-Gajz-lak Khan, at the time Sultan I-yal-
timish was about to invest Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah, in that
stronghold, Taj-ud-Din, Sanjar, having lately been put in possession of
the district of Wanj-rut (properly, TV anjh-rut)47 of Multan. This place
in Zi-Ka’dah [the eleventh month], 647 H., by way of Hansf and Uboh-liar, right
across the present desert tract. He adds : “ When the rainy season set in, and the
rains of compassion fell, on the 26tli of Jamadi-ul-Awwal [the fifth month of the
following year], he set out on his return by way of the fort of Marut, Sarasti, and
Hansi [page 688], and reached the capital in the following month. See also note to
page 823 of that work.
45 Now generally known as the Lakhhi Jangal. It is described farther
on.
46 Malik Sher Khan-i-Sunkar appears to have again been placed in charge of
the western frontiers after his kinsman, the Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam, became Sultan.
The author of the Tarikh-i-Ffruz Shah-i (who follows the author of the Tabakat-i-
Nasiri after a lapse of ninety-five years, however, but there is no contemporary writer
between them), states, that, “ Sher Khan-i-Sunkar, who was the brother’s son of
Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Balban, held charge of all the western frontier in the begin¬
ning of his reign, and held it up to the time of his own death, four or five years after.
He says : This Sher Khan held charge of all the western frontier, Sunam, Lohowar
[Lahor], Debal-pur, and other fiefs exposed to the Mughal inroads. See note
farther on.
47 Miscalled “ Beejnot,” in the maps. There is another place called Wanjh-rut,
in Upper Sind, near the western channel of the Hakra and the old bed of the Biah,
172 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
is now in the midst of the desert, in the Baliawal-pur state, but, at the
period referred to, it was the chief place of a district on the banks of the
Hakra, extending upwards towards l/chchh, but, chiefly, along its right
or east banks. Multan had been already taken possession of by one of
the Sultan’s Maliks, the feudatory of Sarasti, who had marched down
the Bari Do-abah from the direction of Labor.
The author of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” repeatedly mentions the
river Biali up to the time when his history closes, and, perhaps, it will
not be amiss to state briefly what he says.
I have mentioned that Malik ‘Izz-ud-Din, Balban-i-Kashlu Khan
had attempted to recover Multan from Malik Sher Khan-i-Sunkar,48
when the author was there in 643 H. (1250 A. D.) The latter had,
some time before, wrested Multan out of the hands of the Karl ugh
Turks, who had compelled Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balkan, to surrender it to
them. After Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban had withdrawn from Multan,
Malik Sher Khan marched against 1/chahh. At this time Malik ’Izz-ud-
Din, Balban, was absent at Nag-awr, or “ Nagor,” and he at once
hastened from thence towards U'chchh to endeavour to save it : and,
thinking that Malik Slier Khan would take into consideration that they
were both servants of the same sovereign, and would abandon his designs
upon l/chchh, he presented himself in his camp ; but Malik Sher Khan,
who appears to have known that he was a traitor at heart, detained him
as a prisoner until he consented to surrender the place. This he did,
and had to retire to Nag-awr again. The author says that, with l/chchh
given up to him, all Sind came under Malik Sher Khan’s sway. Now,
the route from Nag-awr to l/chchh led across the Hakra, and through
the vast tract at present chiefly desert ; but Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban
and his following do not appear to have had any difficulty, either in
going or coming, with regard to water or forage.49
and which was included in the same district, which extended from the Bikanir
border to the banks of the Hakra, and the first named place appears to have been
its chief town.
43 In the “ Mujmal-i-Fasih-i,” under the events of the year 648 H. (1250 A. D.)
it is stated, that, in that same year, Sher Khan-i-Sunkar retook Multan from the
Mughals, and ousted a rival Malik of the Dihli Court, who was disaffected, and
intriguing with the Mughals, from l/chchh; and that, soon after, he had himself to
retire to the urdu of Mangu Ka’an, while his rival went to Hulaku. Multan was
retaken from the Karlughs, who were for some time vassals of the Mughals. The
“ disaffected Malik,” of course, refers to ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban-i-Kashlu Khan.
The year 648 H. commenced on the 4th April, 1250 A. D.
49 Nag-awr then formed an important fief and province of the Dihli empire,
which Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban-i-Kashlu Khan was allowed to hold, as well as
Sind and Multan. Its dependencies adjoined those of l/chchh and Multan on the
173
892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
In Shawwal, 650 H. (January, 1253 A. D.), Sultan Nasir-ud-Din,
Mahmud Shah, set out from Dikii with his forces in the direction of
Labor, with the intention of marching to Multan and U'chehh, in order
to recover them from Malik Sher Khan, and restore them to Malik
’Izz-ud-Din, Balban. Malik Sher Khan was the kinsman of the Ulugh
Klian-i-A’zam, and this movement against him was the first step in a
plot which was then on foot, to overthrow the power of the Ulugh Khan-
i-A’zam, and remove him from the court. The forces marched from
Dihli by Kaithal, because the feudatories of Buda’un, Bhianah, and other
parts, were to join with their contingents. The troops reached the banks
of the Biah, but, as the conspirators had succeeded in getting the Ulugh
Khan-i-A’zam banished to his fiefs of Hansi and the Siwalikh territory,
the Sultan, who was a mere tool in their hands, marched back with
them to Dihli in the first month of the following year.
Towards the close of that year the Sultan again put his forces in
motion for the purpose of securing Uchchh and Multan. On reaching
the banks of the Biah, a force was despatched towards Tabarhindah,
another of Malik Sher Khan’s fiefs ; but he, leaving those places in the
hands of his dependents, had retired towards Turkistan, to proceed to
the presence of the Great Ka’an, Mangu Khan ; and those provinces
were taken from Malik Slier Khan’s dependents, and entrusted to the
charge of Malik Arsalan Khan, Sanjar-i-Ohast ; and the Sultan again
retired from the banks of the Biah, beyond which the forces did not
move, and returned to Dihli.
About 653 A. H., the traitor, Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban, (1255
A. D.), was again placed in charge of Uohchh and Multan, apparently,
west. Can any one imagine it would have been possible or desirable to have held
Multan, Uchchh, and Nag-awr, with a howling waterless desert between, and those
districts also half a desert, with the principal river dried up, and two others merged
into one, and thus rendering another vast tract desolate ?
Nag-awr, at the period in question, was generally held by a separate feudatory,
but ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban, possessed great interest with the rulers of the Shamsi
dynasty, to whom he was related by marriage, having espoused a lady of the family
of Sultan I-yal-timish. He rebelled several times, and yet his conduct was passed
over, and he was again and again restored to favour, as may be seen from the
“ Tabakat-i-Nasiri.’’
In Akbar Badshah’s reign, Nag-awr was one of the two western sarkdrs of the
Ajmir sub ah ; and Bikanir, of which Jasal-mir was only a mahdll or sub-district, wras
another sarkdr of Ajmir. Even in that day, when some of the rivers had greatly
changed, and a great deal of desert intervened between Nag-awr and the Multan
siibah , it contained thirty-one malidlls, and yielded a revenue of 40,389,830 dams,
equal to 1,009,743 rupis, or upwards of ten lakhs, It is now a dependency of Jodh¬
pur in the territory of Mar- war,
W
174 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
to counteract the designs of Malik Sher IGian in going to the presence
of Mangu Ka’an, the supreme ruler of the Mughal empire. With the
assistance of Malik Shams-ud-Din, Muhammad, the Kurat, who held
the fief of Hirat, and other parts adjacent, as a vassal of the Mnghals —
and heavy was their yoke — and through him, he tendered allegiance
to Hulaku Khan,60 then in f-ran-Zannn on the part of his brother
Mangu Ka’an, and requested that a Shahnah or Commissioner should
be sent to l/chchh. This was done, and the Nii-in, Sail, or Salin, also
written Sari,61 was sent thither at the head of a body of Mughal troops
in 654 A. H. (1256 A. D.).
In 655 H. (1257 A. D.)63 Malik Tzz-ud-Din, Balban-i-Kashlu Khan,
who, with the troops of U'chohh and Multan,63 was then on the banks of
the Biah, advanced up the do-dbah in order to effect a junction with
other disaffected Maliks of the Dilili kingdom.64 Having united, they
pushed on to Mansur-pur, Kuhram, and Samanah, their object being to
seize upon Dilili if they could.66 The Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam, who had
again regained the greatest power in the state, moved against them at
6° See preceding note, and “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” pages 786 and 860.
61 In this word, as in many others, the letters ‘ r’ and ‘l’ are interchangeable.
62 According to some other writers, in the preceding year.
63 The reason why Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban-i-Kashlu Khan was able to hold
these places, although at the same time in open rebellion against his sovereign, the
Sultan of Dihli, was, because Lfohchh and Multan, and their dependencies, chiefly, lay
%vest of the Biah and Hakra, and between the latter and the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, which
then flowed much nearer to Multan, and farther west and beyond the Rawi and
Chin-ab. Both strongholds, likewise, lay in the same do-dbah or delta, the Sind-
Sagar Do-abah, and this rendered them liable to attack from the Mughals coming
downwards from the direction of the Koh-i-Jud, Namak-Sar, or Salt Range, in the
same do-dbah, which was in the possession of the Mughals. The fact that Malik
Hasan, the Karlugh, evacuated Multan immediately on the Mughals approaching the
banks of the Ab-i-Sind to attack U'chchh in 643 H., and retired precipitately into
Sind, to Siw-istan and the sea coast, confirms this. To do so, he did not take boat,
on the Ab-i-Sind, or he might have been captured, but he embarked on the Biah or
Sind Rud, below the confluence of the three other rivers of the Panj-ab with it, and
from it got into the Hakra or Wahindah, and by it reached the neighbourhood of
Bakhar, and subsequently Lower Sind.
When Abu-1-Fazl wrote, Multan was in the Bari Do-abah, and U'chchh in the
district known as Berun-i-Panj-Nad, or Extra Panj-Ab or Panch Nad, that is, lying
on either side of the united five rivers below their junction.
64 Including Malik Kutlugh Khan, who had married the mother of Sultan Nasir-
ud-Din, Mahmud Shah, who had rebelled against that Sultan in 653 H. (1255 A. D),
and coined money in his own name, hence he is not allowed to appear in the list of
the Sultan’s Maliks He, too, was a Turk , not a “ Pathan.” See “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ’*
pages 673 and 703. Also the Society’s “Transactions,” for 1889, page 226.
66 See “ Tahakat-i-Nasiri,” page 785.
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
175
the head of the Sultan’s forces. They managed, however, to give him
the slip when within ten huroh of them ; for, having fellow traitors
within the walls of the capital, who offered to open the gates to them,
they made a forced march of one hundred huroh in the space of two days
and a half, and reached it on the evening of the Thursday. The Ulugh
Khan-i-A’zam had, in the meantime, received intimation of these doings,
and he set out in pursuit of them. In the interim the traitors within
had been secured ; and Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balkan, and his confederates
found the walls manned and gates closed ready for a vigorous defence
when they perambulated the place on the evening in question. On the
Friday morning, the Sultan’s forces under the Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam
having appeared upon the scene, the insurgents took to flight ; and Malik
’Izz-ud-Din, Balban, being deserted by the troops of Uchehh and Multan
in their precipitate flight, was left with only about 200 or 300 followers.
He, however, succeeded in effecting his escape. This was in Jamadi-ul-
Akhir of the year above mentioned (July, 1257 A. D.).
At this time, the Nu-m Sail or Salin or Sari, having entered the
territory east of the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, reached Uchehh, and Malik
’Izz-ud-Din, Balban, had to join his camp. After this the Mughal leader
despatched the Kurat Malik, Shams-ud-Din, Muhammad, who had to
accompany him on this expedition whether he liked it or not, to occupy
Multan;66 and the Shaikh of Shaikhs. Baha-ul-Hakk wa-d-Din, Zakariya,
who appears, in the absence of a settled government, to have been the
chief authority there, or, at least, the person possessing the most in¬
fluence, had to pay down 100,000 dinars to save the place from being
sacked. The fortifications are said to have been dismantled by Sail’s
command, and a Turk mamluk or slave of Malik Shams-ud-Din, Muham¬
mad, the Tajzik Kurat feudatory of Hirat and Ghur, Ohingiz Khan, by
name, was made Hakim of Multan.67
Both Malik Sher Khan-i-Sunkar, and Malik Jalal-ud-Diu, Mas’ud
Shah, brother of Sultan Kasir-ud-Din, Mahmud Shall, ruler of Dihli,
55 Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban, was probably ashamed to accompany those infidels
thither to the presence of the Shaikh, therefore, the Tajzik Kurat Malik of Hirat
and Ghur was made the means of communication.
67 I hope this Chingiz Khan will not be mistaken by the archaeological experts
for Timur-chi, the Mughal, the Chingiz or Great Khan, because history states that he
did not coin money ; while the coins, if they may be so called, of his immediate suc¬
cessors were balishts or ingots. Many of those petty Musalman rulers, who were
reduced to vassalage by the Mughals. like Malik Hasan, the Karlugh, and Shams-ud-
Din, Muhammad, the Kurat, had to put the names of these “ infidels ” on their coins .
See Thomas’s “ Pathan Kings of Dehli,” pages 91 — 98. Neither Hasan, nor his son,
Nasir-ud-Din, Muhammad were very” powerful monarclis.” See also “ Tabaka t-i-
Nasiri,” Translation, pages 781, 859 — 863, and 1128 — 1132 for an account of them.
176 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
who liad gone to the presence of Mangu Ka’an, and had been honourably
received, were also permitted to return ; and the latter was allowed to
hold the province of Labor, independent of Dihli, as a vassal of the
Mn glial s, but he did not long retain it.
It is stated in another history68, that, after settling the affairs of
ITchehh and Multan, Sail marched towards Labor, which was then in
the possession of Kuret Khan, or Kliwan as it is written in the original,
and that Sail entered into an accommodation with this person, on the
payment of 30,000 dinars , 30 kharwdrs of soft fabrics, and 100 captives ;
and that, after this, the Kurat Malik of Hirat and Ghur, Shams-ud-Din,
Muhammad, who, as the vassal of the Mu glial s, had to accompany the
Nu-in with his contingent and was probably quite weary of acting against
his co-religionists on the side of the Mughal infidels, left the Nu-in,
Sail, and retired towards Ghur.
This person, Kuret Khan, who was in possession of Labor, does not
appear, however, to have been a feudatory of the Dihli kingdom ;69 and
the city of Labor was in ruins, or in a very ruinous state, it having been
sacked and depopulated and destroyed by the Mu glial s in 639 H. (1211-
42 A. D.). After that time, the ruins were occupied by the Khokhars,
a powerful Jat tribe. These people have always been mistaken for
Gakhars (by those who knew no difference between them), and the
Gakliars for Khokhars.
A great army was assembled at the capital for the purpose of mov¬
ing against the Mughal invaders and the traitor, Malik Tzz-ud-Din,
Balban, but serious disturbances broke out in the hill tracts of Mewat
and parts adjacent, that had first to be quelled. Respecting this, the
author of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” says, at page 850 : “ Nevertheless,
it was impossible to chastize that sedition by reason of anxiety conse¬
quent on the appearance of the Mughal army, which continued to harass
the frontier tracts of the dominions of Islam, namely, the territory of
Sind, Labor, and the line of the Biah ;6° until, at this period, emissaries
of Khurasan, coming from the side of ’Irak, from Hulaii [or Hulaku],
the Mughal, had arrived in the neighbourhood of the capital.”
These emissaries had not come on Hulaku’s part, but respecting a
matrimonial alliance mentioned at page 859 of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri.”
Malik Nasir-ud-Din, Muhammad, who then ruled over the khittah of
63 “ The Mujmal-i-Fasih-i ”
69 There is a Malik named Taj-ud-Din, Sanjar-i-Kuret Khan, among the feuda-
tories of Dihli, but he had never been in charge of L&hor according to the “ Tabakat-
i-Nasiri.” See page 756.
69 Had the Biah been dry, they could easily have passed the frontier, but it was
an unfordable river in the direction here referred to.
177
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
Banian in the Kob-i-Jud,61 was desirous of giving a daughter of his in
marriage to the son of the Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam, and an agent had been
sent to him by the Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam agreeing to his request. As
Malik Nasir-ud-Din, Muhammad, was a vassal of the Mughals, at that
time, and as Hulaku Khan, the ruler of I'-ran Zamin on behalf of
his brother, the Great Ka’an, Mangu, was therefore the Malik’s imme¬
diate superior, the Malik had deemed it necessary to send the agent of
the Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam to Hulaku Khan to obtain his sanction for
the proposed alliance. It was this Karl ugh emissary who had arrived
along with the agent of the Ulugh Khan at this juncture, and with him
had come a Mughal Shahnah, or Commissioner, resident in Malik Nasir-
ud-Din, Muhammad’s territory, probably to spy out the nakedness of
the land. Advantage was taken of the arrival of these emissaries, who
were detained for a time at some distance from the capital.63 The Ulugh
Khan-i-A’zam set out at the head of the troops,63 and making forced
marches, suddenly and unexpectedly entered the hill tracts of Mewat,
and attacked the rebels with vigour and effect. The rebellion was crush¬
ed, the rebels severely punished, and the forces returned to Dihli. The
Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam advised the Sultan to give these emissaries
a public reception ; and so they were conducted with great pomp
and parade to the Sultan’s presence, and 200,000 footmen well armed,
and 50,000 cavalry fully equipped in defensive armour, besides numer¬
ous war elephants, were assembled for them to behold and report on
when they returned into Khurasan. This stroke of policy had the
desired effect ; and the author says : “ Hulau [Hulaku] sent orders to
the Mughal forces under the standard of Sari [Sail], the Uii-m, saying :
‘ If the hoof of a horse of your troops shall have entered the dominions
of the Sultan,64 the command unto you is this, that all four feet of such
61 He was the son of the late Malik, Saif-ud-Dfn, Hasan, the Karlugh, who had
possessed himself of Multan shortly before the Mnghals invested Uchchh in 643 H.
62 At a place called Barutah. See “ Translation,” page 851, note 8.
63 The Ulugh Khan-i-A’zam had a body of 3,000 Afghans, horse and foot, along
with him in this expedition, the first time they are mentioned by a contemporary
historian as in the service of any of the feudatories of the Dihli kingdom. They
were only now become sufficiently numerous to take service under the Muhammadan
nobles of the Dihli state. The territories north, west, and south of their mountain
home — I am referring to “ the Afghanistan,” as described in my “ Notes” on those
parts, not to the Afghan state — were either in the possession of the Mnghals, who
were infidels, or their vassals, who groaned under their yoke, like Nasir-ud-Din, the
Karlugh, above referred to.
6* This, of course, only refers to the country east of the Biah, for the Muglials
or their vassals were in possession of all west of that river at the period in question,
and had been for some time, a fact which Indian history compilers (up to date), do
not appear to have been cognizant of.
178 H G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tuibutaries. [No. 3,
horse be lopped off.’ Such like security did tlie Most High God miracu¬
lously vouchsafe unto the kingdom of Hindustan through the felicity
attending the rectitude of the Ulugh- Khani counsels.”
All these facts show, that, at the period in question, the Biah still
flowed in its old bed, and that the Sutlaj river had not united with it.
The writer of the article on the “Lost River” in the Calcutta Review,
however, again quoting the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” from Elliot’s “ Histori¬
ans,” in reference to the investment of Uchehli, says, that, “ when he
[Saltan ’Ala-ud-Din, Mas’ud Shah] arrived on the banks of the Biyah
the infidels raised the siege of Uchh,” and that, “ here the allusion is to
the united streams. The Satlej is not mentioned although the writer
was with the army, that river having become merged into the Biyah.”56
Here again the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” is not correctly quoted, and the
writer contradicts what he mentioned before from that work. It was
only after the Dihli troops had crossed the Biah, and moved towards the
Rawah or Rawi of Labor, and were marching down the left or east bank
of the latter river, in the Bari Do-abah, between that river and the
Biah, and the troops were approaching TTchoJih from the northwards,
that the Mughal s, who had been repulsed in a recent assault, in which
they had lost one of their famous leaders, finding their line of retreat
threatened, raised the investment and “ retired in three divisions.”
In no instance throughout the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” is such a river as
the Sutlaj referred to ; and I totally fail to see what proof the writer
of the article has to show that the author “ makes allusion to the united
streams,” when no such river as the Sutlaj is mentioned in his work,66
nor in any history of that period.
65 Mr. R. D. Oldham, too, in his recent paper previously alluded to, appears to
have been unaware that the Biah flowed near to Multan at this period, or at least he
does not refer to it as if he had been aware of the fact ; and at this period no
Hariari or Grharah, miscalled the Sutlaj, existed. The Sutlaj was then a tributary
of the Hakra, and flowed much farther to the east. See note 67.
66 What “ we call it now ” is no criterion of its correctness ; and the writer in
the Calcutta Review (page 11) himself says, that, “ The modern term Satlej is rarely
if ever used, except by those who have been brought into contact with Europeans.”
The “ modern term,” too, is at least as old as the A’in-i-Akbari.
It will perhaps be well to state, to make the subject clear, that, as long as the
Sutlaj or Shattluj flowed in its own separate bed, that is, before it and the Biah both
left their respective channels and united into one river, the Sutlaj was a; tributary of
the Hakra or Wahindah. After the junction of the two rivers for a time, they both
lost their old names, but, having again soon after separated, the Sutlaj returning to
its old channel, they flowed apart for about one hundred kuroh, equal to about one
hundred and seventy-five miles, and again took their old names of Biah and Sutlaj.
After this, in the last century only, they again united, and lost their old names once
more, and from that time have flowed in one channel, both having deserted their
179
1892.] H* G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries .
When the Biah and Sutlaj finally nnited their waters, it was not
that the Sutlaj flowed in the bed of the Biah, but both left their old
beds and united midway, as their deserted channels remain to show.
Moreover, after their junction, both rivers lost their names, and thence¬
forward they were known as the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah.67 If the Biah
had left its old bed, and had moved from thirty-five to forty miles fur¬
ther eastwards, thus still more reducing the Dihli territory, the author
would certainly have mentioned such a fact, but, as the Sutlaj did not
then exist in that part, being then a tributary of the Hakra, it is by no
means strange that it is never mentioned in his work. The author does
not mention the Hakra, nor the Ohitang, nor the Chin-ab, nor the Ghag-
ghar, but that, too, is no proof that they did not exist, for we know that
they did.
Malik Tzz-ud-Din, Balban’s march upwards along the banks of the
Biah in 655 H , is also considered a proof that the two rivers, the “ Biyali,”
and the “ Satlej,” had united, or rather that the “ Satlej had merged
into tlie Biyah;” but I have already mentioned, at page 174, why Malik
’Izz-ud-Din, Balban, took the route in question. The extracts I have
given from the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” clearly show, that, up to the period
its author wrote, namely, up to 658 H. (1259 A. D.), the Biah had not
left its old bed ; and, furthermore, it is certain that it still continued
to flow in its old bed for more than one hundred and fifty-seven years
after the investment of LTchchh by the Mughals, up to the time of the
invasion of India by Amir Timur, the Giirgan, in 801 H. (1397-98 A. D.),
as I shall presently show ; and, moreover, there are people still living,63
ancient beds. The names of the river while nnited were Machhu-Wah, Hariari,
Dancl, Nurni, Nili, Ghallu-Gharah, and Gharah, the two last being only applied to
the lower part of the stream, after the final junction. See the account of the Sutlaj
farther on.
About the only writer who describes the Hainan or Gharah correctly and in a
few words is Elphinstone, who says (Yol. 1, p. 32), respecting Bahawalpur : “The
river winds much at this place, and is very muddy, but the water, when cleared, is
excellent. It is here called the Gharra, and is formed by the joint streams of the
Hyphasis or JBeyah, and Hysudrus or Sutledge.”
67 Abu-1-Fazl, in the A’in-i-Akbari, calls it Gharah, Hariari, or Nurni. The
Dand or Dandah refers to a minor branch described further on, but not to be con¬
founded with the high bank of the old channel of the Sutlaj further east, which in
the dialect of the people of that part is called dandah.
63 There lately died in the village of Dhoki in the Montgomery (the old “ Goo-
garia ”) district, an old Jat named Bagh Mall, who, according to a Labor paper,
which gave an account of him a little while before, had reached the advanced age of
118 years, having been born in A. D. 1770. The account says : — “ Though so old, Bagh
Mall can still walk about, and goes as far as the village well, about 100 yards or so,
and also to the village dharmsala every day. His vision is a good deal impaired, and
180 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
wlio remember the time when the Biah first deserted its ancient bed,
and the Sutlaj finally left its last independent channel, now known to
the people as the “ Great I) an dab,” and the two nnited and formed the
Hariari, Nili. or Gharah as they now flow.
I certainly fail to see that because “ the Tartar chief, Kadar ” [a Mu¬
ghal, I presume, and Mughals are not Tartars, although both are branches
of the Turks] “ came with an army from the Jud mountain in 695 A. H
(A. D. 1296) and crossed the Jhelam, Beyah, and Satladar (Satlej) ”
[which the writer just before said had “ merged into the Biyah ” fifty-
two years previously, when the army marched from Dihli to relieve
U'chchh] and was “ defeated near Jhalandar,” therefore “he must have
crossed them above their junction” [the two latter, I presume, are
meant, but three are named], The “ must ” here is merely to sup¬
port the previous theory that the Sutlaj had united with the Biah
and flowed in the latter’s bed, which it never did do. This “ Tartar
chief” could not have crossed the Sutlaj at all, to have been defeated
near Jalhandar,69 even after the Biah and Sutlaj had united into one
stream and ran as it runs to this day, because, if he had crossed the
Sutlaj from the west to the east bank, he would have passed out of the
Jalhandar Do-abah, and have left Jalhandar some twenty-eight miles to
the northward. That Do-dbah refers to the tract of country lying be¬
tween the Biah and the Sutlaj (in whatever direction they flowed, and
may flow), which latter river now bounds it on the south. To reach
that Do-dbah from the Koh-i-Jud, Namak-Sar, or Salt Range, the Ohin-
ab and the Rawi would have to be crossed as well as the “ Jhelam ” and
“ Beyah,” but not the “ Satladar (Satlej) and if it is a proof, because
the Sutlaj is “ not mentioned ” by the author of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ”
on the occasion of the investment of U'chchh, that it must have “ merged
into the Biyah,” we might just as well say that it is a proof that the
Chin-ab and Rawi had merged into the Jhilam, or some other river,
lie is rather deaf, but otherwise seems in wonderful health for his wonderful age.
# # # His descendants number eighty persons — children, grandchildren, and
great-grand children, — who take great care of him. The old mau’s memory is, of
course, somewhat gone ; but as a proof of his age he says he can remember the drying
up of the Bias [Biah], which is supposed to have occurred some hundred years ago”
“ Allen’s Indian Mail,” January 21st, 1889.
When Wilford wrote his remarkable “ Essays,” showing that he was far in
advance of his time, and Rennell published his “ Memoir on a Map of Hindoostan,”
in 1788, the Biah and Sutlaj had not yet united and formed the Hariari, Nili, or
Gharah, but they did so very shortly after.
69 Abu-1-Fazl always writes it Jalandhar. The Survey account I shall presently
refer to has the name as above. The correct name of this do-dbah is Bist- Jalhandar,
and it was also known as Sehir-Wal.
181
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
since they are not mentioned in the case of this “ Tartar ” invasion,
which was one of the numerous inroads of the Mughals into the Panj-ab
territory.
1 may mention here, that, when the Mirza, Pir Muhammad, son of
Jahan-gir, son of Amir Timur, in Rabi’-ul-Awwal, 800 H. (December,
1397 A. D.), crossed the Ab-i-Sind or Indus and invested Uohqhh as the
Nii-in, Mangutah had done in 643 H., reinforcements under Taj-ud-Din,
Muhammad, the Na’ib of Sarang Khan, who was then governor of the
provinces of Lahor and Multan, were despatched to the succour of
Uchchh. Pir Muhammad, obtaining information of this, raised the in¬
vestment of that place, and marched to meet Taj-ud-Din, Muhammad,
whom he fell upon on the banks of the Biah, and overthrew him. He,
with difficulty, re-crossed the river, but, in so doing, lost a number of
his men, who, in their hurry to escape, threw themselves into the Biah
and were drowned. Having effected the passage, Taj-ud-Din Muham¬
mad retired precipitately towards Multan, which he succeeded in reach¬
ing, but was closely followed by the Mughals, who invested him therein.
To effect these movements, if the Biah and Sutlaj bad united, both
pursuer and pursued would have had to cross the Gharah , but they had
not yet united. The Rawi still flowed east of Multan and united with
the Biah, which still flowed in its own bed ; but, the Ohin-ab, having
separated from the Rawi and Biah, and altered its course more towards
the west, passed Multan on the west instead of the east, and thus Mul¬
tan was in the Rachan-ab Do-abah, and Uchchh in the Bist-Jalhandar,
instead of the Sind Sagar, while at present, consequent on other changes
in the courses of the rivers, Multan is in the Bari Do-abah, and Uohqhh
has long since been shut out of the Do-abahs altogether.
So much for the Biali and Sutlaj having merged into one before the
investment of Uohqhh in 643 H.
The old bed of the Hakra can be traced much farther south-west
than “ Kururwalla, in Lat. 29°, 53', Long. 73°, 53'. ” It can be traced
down to the sea coast of Sind, as I have here traced it.
The writer of the article in the “ Calcutta Review ” has also stated,
that the upper part of the Hakra “ is called Sotra , which is probably a
corruption of Satroda or Satruda, the old name of the Satlej70 [in the
“Tartar invasion ” he called it the “ Satladar ”]. “Hakra,” he con¬
tinues, appears to be the modified form of Sagara , the letter S being
pronounced H in Rajputana and Sindh.” It might have been added,
that this inveterate propensity likewise prevails in Kathiawar.71 But,
70 Only the Sutlaj was not the Hakra, bat merely one of its tributaries. See the
notice of the Hakra farther on.
71 Lieut. A. H. E, Boileau, of tho Hon’ble Company’s Bengal Engineers, in his
X
182
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
how comes it that the ‘ k ’ in Hakra is changed into ‘gr’? The name
Sagarali (or Shagarali in some MSS.) is as old as the time when Al-
Mas’udi wrote, as will appear farther on.7?*
He also says that u the Satlej when it abandoned the western
Naiwal [Na’e Wall, the eastern and western, are names of old channels
in which, in ancient times, the Sutlaj flowed] entered the valley of the
Biyas. * * * At this time [the siege of Hchclih. in 643 H.] therefore,
took place the first junction between the rivers, and their combined
streams were henceforth known as the Beyah.” What is the difference ?
and what name may it have previously borne if it was only henceforth
called the “ Beyah ” ?
This, however, is nothing less than a contradiction on the writer’s
part of his own previous and succeeding statements. He must have
meant to say, or ought to have said, that, after their junction, whenever
and wherever that might have happened, they lost their respective
names, and were henceforth called Hariari, Nili, or Gharah; and, in
any case, the Sutlaj never entered the valley of the Biah, nor did
the Biah enter the valley of the Sutlaj, because the tracts through
which the Biah flows after leaving the hills, and a goodly por¬
tion of which I have myself traversed, and that through which the
united streams now flow, is perfectly flat from their point of junction.
The right or western bank of the old bed of the Biah, like that of
other rivers of this part, is much the highest, and forms the eastern
side of the great central plateau separating the valley in which it flowed
from the valley of the Rawi, and forms the greater part of the Ganjf
Bar, described in the account of the two rivers farther on ; and beyond
this high bank the Biah could not possibly pass, unless it had risen
some forty feet to do so. The old bed of the latter river lies some
thirty miles on the average farther west than the united stream, the
Hariari, Nili, or Gharah. The Sutlaj and Biah met half way, so to speak,
both leaving their old beds, and formed a new one for a short distance,
but they soon separated, and did not unite again until low down in the
south-west part of the Multan district, as will be described in its proper
“ Personal Narrative” says, that “ the Bhatee borderers substitute a guttural hh in
place of s, as “bukhtee” for “ bustee o for a [for ‘ ah” as a final letter, as in
Sind] ; and sh for s,” etc. Tod, on the other hand (as in the extract above, which
is really from him), says the natives of these parts cannot pronounce the sibilant,
so that ‘ s ’ is commuted into ‘ b’.”
72 S 'agar is the Sanskrit for ‘ocean,’ ‘sea/ etc., and it is still known as the
Sind-Sagar near the sea coast. Tod calls it the “ Sankra,” which is another form
of the name ; and it is called the Sankrah in the treaty entered into by Nadir Shah,
and Muhammad Shah, Badshah of Dihlf, when ceding all the territory west of it to
the Persians. The substance of that treaty is given farther on.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 183
place. It was only towards the close of the last century that they
again united, again lost their respective names, formed a new river and
a fresh bed, and commenced to flow as at present.
The writer also states that, “ the application of the name Satlej to
the stream below its confluence is a modern innovation, and is not to be
found in old writings, Hindu or Mohammedan.” In this he is perfectly
correct. It was stated by Abii-l-Fazl in the A’in-i-Akbari nearly three
centuries ago, that, “ after the junction of the two rivers they both lose
their names , and the united streams are known as the Dand, or Dan dab,
Hariari, and Nurni, and lower down, as the Gharah or Ghara (both
modes of writing being correct).” Then quoting Tod, the Review writer
says, “ Tod, in his “ Annals of Rajast’han,” says, that the Bhatti tradi¬
tions say the Garrah is always called Beah. To this day, the river below
Firozpur is known to the boatmen as Biyali [sic] or Garrah. The
modern term Satlej is rarely if ever used, except by those who have
been brought into contact with Europeans.”73
I may add that the boatmen never call it “Satlej,” nor Sutlaj
below the confluence of the two rivers, and that, more correctly speaking,
we might say that the Sutlaj unites with the Biah, instead of the Biah
uniting with the Sutlaj. The Sutlaj was the interloper, and its entering
the channel of the Biah at Loh or Loh-Wal temporarily, caused the
Biah to desert its ancient channel altogether.
Before closing these remarks upon the article in the “ Calcutta
Review,” I would point out what appears so very contradictory in the
writer’s statements. At page 10 he says, that, “ when the Sultan (’Ala-
ud-Din, Mas’ud Shah), reached the banks of the Bey ah, the Mughals
raised the siege of IJchh,” and that “ the allusion is to the united
streams, the Satlej having become merged into the BeyahT How, after
stating that “ the Satlej is an interloper, and the Beydh the original
stream,” which last statement is undoubtedly correct, he says that “ the
Satlej is no other than the Hakra or Naewal”; that “ the Abohar ”
was the last which deserted its bed in the first half of the thirteenth
century ; that, although they met at Hariki Pattan [Hari ke Patan — The
Ferry of Hari] in 1593, they have only flowed in the same bed since
73 Tod in his “ Rajast’han,1 ” says, note page 262, Yol II, that “ The Garah is
invai’iably called the Behah in the chronicle [which he is supposed to be quoting].
Gharah, or Gharra, is so called, in all probability, from the mud (gar) suspended in
its waters. The Gharah is composed of the waters of the Behah and Sutlej
Gara ( )} not “ gar ” is mud in Hindi, but kneaded and prepared for pottery
or building, but the name of the river is Ghallu-Gharah ( ) and Gharah*
See notes 66 and 67.
184 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
1796 ” ; and that “ since then the lands on the banks of the old Jttyas
became waste.”74
If these last statements are correct, then the former one, that,
when the Mn glia Is raised the siege of Uchchh in 1245 A. D., “ the
allusion is to the united streams , the Satlej having become merged into the
Biyah ,” is incorrect ; as must likewise be the statements, that, after this
siege of TJqhqhh, “ armies inarching from Dehli to Multan were obliged to
abandon the direct route by Marot, in consequence of the disappearance of
the Hakra” which we are now told “ is no other than the Satlej or
Naewal and that afterwards, they “ always took the road by Abohar
and Ajodhan must be equally wrong, since the writer adds, that “ the
74 Mirza S]iah Husain, the Arghun Mughal ruler of Sind, after gaining possession
of I J chclih in 931 H. (1524-25 A. D.), and destroying its defences, marched from
thence towards Multan, and reached the banks of the Gharah ; and the Langah Jats
of Multan took post on the banks, and there awaited his attack.
This clearly shows that the Biah and Sutlaj had then, in Mirza Shah Husain’s
day, already united above Firuz-pur, and become the Hariarf, Dandah, or 1ST urni, as
afterwards described by Abu-l-Fazl. But they soon separated again, and each re¬
sumed its former name, the only difference being that an intermediate, but very
minor branch remained, called the Dandali. After flowing apart for about one
hundred kuroh, they again united and formed the Gharah, as described in note 66,
page 178, and in the notice of the rivers farther on ; for, until they again united in
the south-western part of the then Multan territory of the Langah Jats, there was
no Gharah. The latter, however, was not then as it subsequently became, and now
is, because it then passed some miles east of the site on which Bahawal-pur now
stands, and also east of U'chchh, to unite with the Ab-i-Sind, or Indus.
Mirza Shah Husain, moreover, is stated to have made peace with the Langah
ruler of Multan, on the stipulation, that the Gharah, in future, should form the
boundary between the Multan territory and Sind, and that all to the southwards of
the Gharah should belong to Sind. The point where the two rivers again united
after flowing apart, will be found in the account of Ibrahim Husain Mirza’ s capture
farther on.
It is further mentioned that Mirza Shah Husain attacked the fortress of Dir-awar
(since become the chief stronghold of the Da’ud-putrah chiefs of Bahawal-pur), which
through ( l’ and 1 r ’ being interchangable in these parts, is also called at times
Dil-tiwar and Dir-awal, and that he had to take a month’s supply of grain and water
sufficient for his forces along with him, because it was “ situated in a desert tract, so
that even the birds of the air were afraid to glance at it.” This place is close to
the west bank of the deserted Hakra or Wahindah, about fifty miles south-south¬
west of Bahawal-pur. This statement also shows that the Sutlaj had then ceased
to be a tributary of the Hakra as it had hitherto been, and that by the Sutlaj uniting
with the Biah, both rivers, under the new names of GMrah, etc., had become tribu¬
taries of the Ab-i-Sind or Indus.
The above information I may mention is from Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar, the
historian of Sind, who wrote as far back as near the close of the reign of Akbar
Badshah.
185
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
western branch of the Naewal was the last of the channels connected with
the Hakra which , at this time ( about 1220 A. D.) finally ceased to flow
for tlie investment of U'chchh occurred twenty-five years after this last
channel according to that statement, finally ceased to flow !75
My geographical and historical information concerning the Biah,
the Sutlaj, and the ancient Hakra or Wahindah, and its tributaries, and
concerning the other rivers of the Panj-ab, differs considerably from that
contained in the article in the “ Calcutta Review, ” but it agrees gener¬
ally as to the “ Lost River ” itself ; and, in justice to the writer, it
must be allowed that he was one of the first,76 in the present day, to call
prominent attention to the fact that the Hakra did once run through
the so-called “ Indian desert,” which appeared almost to have been
forgotten.
A good deal of my information is taken from a geographical work,
the result of a personal survey, by a well read and very intelligent native
of India of foreign descent, made previous to 1790 A. D., which was the
year in which his work was completed, or just six years before the time
the writer in the Review above mentioned, in his last statement just
quoted, says, that the Biah and Sutlaj “ first flowed in one bed.”
Farther on I shall give some extracts from his admirable Survey record.
Before attempting to describe the changes which have taken place
in the courses of the rivers of the Panj-ab, and the Sindhu, A'b-i-Sind,
or Indus, and the disappearance of the Hakra or Wahindah, it will bo
well to give a few extracts from the old Musalman geographers and
historians ; and although some part of what they say, is, seemingly,
mere nonsense, we must allow for the conjectural spelling of translators
(in cases where we have not. the original works to refer to), who have
attempted to render names, which, in the MSS. translated, have often
no vowel points whatever. Indeed, for geographical purposes, and
recording proper names in general, the ’Arabic character is, from the
carelessness of copyists, and the nature of the characters themselves, an
unfortunate one.
75 Thus far I had written twelve years since, as a note to the investment of
U'chchh at page 1155 of my “ Translation of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri.” I have allowed
it to stand just as it was then written.
76 The Report of Lient. J. G. Fife, of the Bombay Engineers, to the Government
of that Presidency on the project of “restoring water to the ancient channel of the
Indus called the Eastern Narra,” in which the Hakra is referred to, as having once
flowed through these parts, is dated as far back as September 1852, and Burton
also refers to it in his work on Sind, published in 1851.
186
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
The geographers and geographical works I propose to quote are the
following. Ahmad, son of Yahya, son of Jabir-al-Balaziri, who wrote his
“ Futuh-al-Baladan ” about 270 H. (883-84 A. D.).77 Abu-l-Kasim-i-
’Ubaid-ullah, known as Ibn Kkurdad-bih, who wrote about 275 H. (888-
89 A. D.), or, certainly, before 300 H. (912 A. D.). Abu-Zaid-al-Hasan,
a native of Siraf, who appears to have written shortly after Ibn Kliurdad-
bih ; for the writer who follows, met him at Basrah in 303 H. (916 A. B.),
and seems to have compared notes with him. Abu- Hasan, surnamed Al-
Mas’udi, who wrote his “ Muruj-uz-Zahab wa Ma’adin-ul- Jauahir ” in 332
H. (943-44 A. D.) ; Abu-Ishak-al-Istakhari.78 who wrote between 340 and
350 H. (951-52 and 961 A. D.). The “ Kitab-ul-Masalik wa Mamalik,”
written a few years after the preceding, and nearly about the time that
Muhammad, Abu-l-Kasim, son of Haukal, hence, chiefly known as Ibn
Haukal, wrote his u Aslikal-ul-Bilad,” whose work bears a considerable
resemblance to the “ Masalik wa Mamalik ” in many places. Ibn Haukal
completed his work in 366 H. (976 A. D.). He appears to have met
Al-Istakhari in his travels somewhere in Sind, or in the Multan territory.
The next in point of date is the celebrated Abu-Rihan, Muhammad, son
of Ahmad, familiarly known as the TJstad or Master, Bu-Rihan, surnamed
Al-Beruni, who wrote about the year 420 H. (1028 A. D.),79 or soon
77 He died in the year 279 H. (892-93 A. D.).
73 He is not called “ Istakhri,” because he was a native of that famons Persian
city called Istakliar or Persepolis. The word means a pond, lake, or sheet of water.
’Arabs write the name Istakliar.
79 He finished his work, the Tahkik (not “ Tarflch ,” as in Elliot and Sachan) -ul-
Hind by the first day of the year 423 H., which commenced on the 18th of December,
1031 A. D. In the year preceding, in several places in his work, he styles it “ our
year,” because it was that in which his great patron, Sultan Mas’ud, obtained the
restitution of his rights as the eldest son and heir of his father, and assumed the
throne at Hirat in the fifth month of that year. He did not compose it in “ Afghan¬
istan” nor in “ the Afghan-Indian empire ,” as Prof. E. Sachau, the editor of the
text and translator of the same, assumes, because Ghazni, or Ghaz-nin or coi'rectly,
Ghaz-nih, but never “ Gliaz-na,” although included in the modern Afghan state, is
not, and never was, included within “ the Afghanistan,” or native country of the
Afghans. What that means and constitutes may be seen from my work entitled
“ Notes on Afghanistan,” etc., page 453 to 470 ; and the world has not yet seen an
“ Afghan-Indian Empire ,” and Sultan Mahmud was a Turk, not an Afghan.
Some errors of a similar kind will be found in the English Preface to the ’Arabic
text, and also in the Preface to its translation by the same learned Professor.
Abu-Rihan was not brought to Ghaznih, under any compulsion, nor was he
detained against his will by Sultan Mahmud in his dominions ; for his contemporary
and admirer, Abu-l-Eazl-i-Baihaki, tells us, that he first came to the Sultan’s court,
in the suite of the Khwarazmi ruler, the son-in-law of the Sultan, and that of his oxen
accord he entered Sultan Mahmud’s service. It was in the train of that conqueror,
and that of his chief patron, Sultan Mas’ud, that Bu-Rihan had the opportunity of
187
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
after. He is extensively quoted by the author of the Jami’-ut-Tawarikh.,
and by the Fauakati, but honestly so ; for they both acknowledge what
they have extracted from his “ Tahkik-ul-Hind. After him comes Abu-
* Abdullah, Muhammad, surnamed Al-Idrisi, who wrote his work
“ Nuzhat-ul-Mushtak,” about the middle of the twelfth century of our
era, about 545 H. (1150-51 A. D.). The next is Zakariya, the Kazwlni,
who wrote his “ Asar-ul-Bilad ” a century or more after Al-Idrisi, about
661 H. (1263 A. D.), a short time only after the siege of U'chchh by the
Mughals, before noticed. He, however, quotes chiefly from the “ ’Aja’ib-
ul-Baladan ” of Mus’ir,80 son of Muhalhil, the ’Arab, who travelled into
India and China in 331 H. (942-43 A. D.), and these quotations may
really be considered to refer to the places noticed as they existed when
the latter wrote. Lastly, the work of Ibn-al-Wardi-al-Karshi, who wrote
between 668 and 684 H. (1269-1285 A. D.), or about twenty years after
the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” was completed.
Ahmad, son of Yahya, al-Balaziri,81 states in his “ Futuh-ul-
Baladan,” that Muhammad, son of Kasim, after his conquest of Sind,
advanced to Multan, and, that “ the Muhammadans discovered there,
beneath the idol- temple a Bait [*=*&], ten cubits in length and eio-ht in
breadth, containing a considerable quantity of gold.” The ’Arabic word
“ bait ” here used does not mean “ a house ” only, as some appear to
have assumed, but it signifies also “ a vault,” “a chamber,” “recepta¬
cle,” “ repository,” and many other meanings of a similar kind, and
here refers to a receptacle or repository for the treasure, such as was not
visiting Hind, and instituting his inquiries respecting that country. He may have
visited parts farther east along with the troops of those Sultans in their expeditions,
hut he appears not to have dwelt any time in those parts, except at Multan, and
Lahor — at that period the seat of Government of the Muhammadan territories
recently conquered from the Hindus — aiid here he was enabled to institute his in¬
quiries (tahkikat, hence the title “ Tahkik-ul-Hind”) respecting Hind and its people.
He is neither called “ Biruni ,” as in Elliot, nor “ Alheruni ,” as in Sachau, but was
entitled Al-Beruni. He is not so entitled because of any place so called ; for he was
a native of Khwarazm, and there was no place so called in that country. Being a
foreigner, or rather a stranger — for, when he wrote, Khwarazm was an integral part
of the Ghazniwi empire — when mentioned as Abu-Rihan, that being not an uncommon
name by any means, by way of distinction, he was styled Abu-Rihan or Bu-Rihan,
the Beruni, that is, the outsider — the stranger or alien.
80 This name in ’Arabic signifies, ‘ one who notices any novelty,’ ‘ a spectator,’
‘ observer,’ ‘spy,’ etc. Mis’ar, as in Elliot, Yol. I, page 95, is meaningless.
8J- He is so called because he was addicted to the use of a mixture — some say
intoxicating — made from the balazir, or Malacca bean, which is used in medicine.
The word is an ’Arabic one, and written with the letter 8, He is incorrectly called
“ A1 Biladuri,” “ Beladsori,” “Biladori,” and the like, anything but by the coi’rect
name.
188
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
unusually, but generally, contained in Hindu idol-temples, beneath where
the idol stood, and such as Sultan Mahmiid-i-Sabuk-Tigin discovered
beneath the idol in the temple of Som-nath.82 The Balaziri continues :
“ There was an aperture from above into this receptacle through which
the gold was poured in ; and it is from this circumstance that Multan
is called ‘ the Far/ch or Temple containing the Bait or Receptacle
for Gold.’ The idol-temple of Multan received rich offerings from the
people of Sind, and others who made pilgrimages thereto.”
This writer details the history, rather than the geography, of Sind
and Multan.
Ibn Khurdad-bih, whose work does not contain much on the sub¬
jects here discussed, says : “ Multan is called ‘ the Farkh [ ] or
Temple of the Bait or Receptacle of Gold,’ because Muhammad, the son
of Kasim, the conqueror of Sind, and lieutenant [of his uncle and father-
in-law], Al-Hajjaj, acquired forty buliars 83 of gold in a depository or
receptacle in that place, which was henceforth called ‘ the Bait or Re¬
ceptacle of gold.’ * * * From the Mihran to [ sic in MSS. and in
the printed text of M. Barbier de Meynard], which is the first place
on the borders of Hind, is four day’s journey.”84
Abu-Zaid-al-Hasan of Siraf states, that “ the idol [temple] called
Multan or Multan lies on the frontiers of Mansuriyah ;85 and people
come a distance of many months’ journey, and make pilgrimages there¬
unto. They bring thither the ’ud-i-kumari [the sweet-smelling wood
82 The depositing of treasure in a vault or chamber in the midst of idol-temples
was not peculiar to Multan, as shown from the fact here related, under or beneath
the idol, and not in its “ belly,” as some of the “ Firishta” translations have. Mir
Ma’sum of Bakhar also states, that, when Muhammad, the son of Kasim, early in
94 H., captured Asal Ivandah or Askandah, north of the Biah, and a considerable
distance above l/chchh for which it has been “ identified ” (see note further on),
its idol temple was destroyed, and in the midst thereof, deposited, an immense
treasure was found.
At this very time (1889 A. D.), the Mahant , or religious superior of the idol tem¬
ple of Tripati, in the Madras Presidency, has been convicted of robbing the vault or
chamber under the idol, and appropriating the treasure contained therein. See also
page 191, and note 97.
83 See page and note just referred to respecting this word and its meaning.
84 Elliot (Historians, Yol. I, page 15) actually makes Balcar out of this, by
which he of course means Bakhar on the Ab-i-Sind or Indus. The word, as it now
stands, is unintelligible, but might 'possibly refer to Basmid [ ]. Besides, the
author says “ on the borders of Sind” while Bakhar is, and always has been, since
its foundation, in Sind , but, at the period in question it was unknown. The place
referred to lay, no doubt, east of Multan.
85 The territory dependent on it, at that period, all Sind, of which Mansuriyah
was the capital.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
189
brought from Kamrun], so-called from the country where it grows.
# # * This ’ ud is presented to the attendants of the temple, who use
it as incense. * # # It is valuable, fetching, at times, as much as two
hundred dinars the mann. * # * The merchants purchase the wood
from the attendants.” * * * This is all he says either respecting
Multan or Mansuriyah.
Al-Mas’udi says: “Respecting the rule over Multan, we have
already said that it belongs to the descendants of Usamah, son of Luwai,
son of Ghalib, [one copy has “descendants of ’Usman” i. e., the Bani
’Usman], a Kuresh, who has a powerful army. Multan is one of the
frontier territories of the Musalmans,86 which they compute to contain
within its limits of about 120,000 villages and estates [one copy has
“towns and villages,” which is absurd],87 We have already mentioned
the bud or idol of Multan, which is also known as Multan. * * * At
the time of my arrival in that city, after the year 300 H. [912-13
A. D.], the Malik then ruling was named Abu-l-Lihab-al-Munnabih, son
of Asad-al-Kureshi [in one copy, Abu Dilahat, son of Asad-ul-Munabbih-
us-Sami-ul-Kureshi]. It was at the same time that I visited Mansuriyah.
Abu-l-Munzir, ’Umar, son of ’Abd-ullah, then ruled over that territory.
I also saw his Wazir, Riyaha [ ^0; ], also his two sons, Muhammad and
’All. I also met an ’Arab, one of the Sayyids, among the Maliks [there],
who was noted under the name of Hamzali. A great number of the
posterity of ’All [the Khalifah], son of Abu-Talib, and of ’Umar, son of
’Ali, the offspring of Muhammad, son of ’All, had taken up their re¬
sidence there.88 Between the Maliks of Mansuriyah, and the family of
the Kazi, Abi-ush-Shawarib, there was close relationship, and a common
origin. In fact, the Maliks who, at present, rule over that territory are
86 What at that period was considered the frontiers of Khurasan, not as it is
known at present. The territory dependent on Multan extended to the skirts of the
mountains west of the Indus, as far up as the southern boundary of Bannu.
87 What are known as mauza’s and cliaks, and might be termed villages and
haTnlets, consisting of tracts of land containing a few inhabitants.
One of the “Gazetteers” I have referred to, tells us, that, “ Al Mcizudi [sic]
describes Mooltan as surrounded by 120,000 hamlets — an evident exaggeration, but
one which gives an idea of general prosperity.”
The territory dependent on Multan was about two hundred and fifty-six miles in
breadth from S. E. to N. W., and rather more in length from N. E. to S. W., narrow¬
ing to about one hundred and eight.
83 This was written about two centuries after it was founded, and it is referred
to centuries after, consequently, Mansuriyah was not so “ short lived ” as some
have imagined, nor was it such a small fortress, seeing that in Al-Tstakhari’s time it
was twico the size of Multan. Sec “Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society” for
1881, page 282.
Y
190 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
descended from Habbar, the son of Al-Aswad, and are known under the
designation of Bani ’Umar, from ’Umar, son of ’Abd-ul-’Aziz, the
Kuresh. This ’Umar must not be confounded with ’Umar, son of
’Abd-ul-’Aziz, son of Marwan, the Umaiyah [Khalifah].”89
“ From Multan to Mansuriyah is seventy-five farsangs of Sind,
that is to say, the farsang of eight mil” At eight miles to each, as here
given in the text, the distance would be just six hundred miles from
Mansuriyah.90
In another place he says : “ This territory (Multan) obeys a Kureshi
of the Bani-us-Samah, the son of Lawi, son of Grhalib ; and this place is
the general rendezvous of the kdfilahs which proceed into Khurasan.”
“ The Kitab-ul-Masalik wa Mamalik says : “ Multan is a city about
half that of Mansuriyah, and is called ‘ the FarJch-i-Bait-uz-Zahab [The
Temple of the Receptacle or Vault of Gold].” Multan has a strong
hisar , but Mansuriyah is more populous. The reason why Multan is
called the Farkh-i-Bait-uz-Zahab is, that, when the Musalmans captured
it, they were poor and needy. They there found much gold, and they
supplied their wants, and acquired strength.
“ About half a farsang outside Multan there are kushks [lofty edifices],
and there the Amir of Multan has his residence. * * * He is a Kuresh
of the descendants of Sam [ ^ ]91 son of Luwai [ ], who seized upon
Multan. He does not pay obedience to the Kliudawand [Master,
Possessor, Lord, etc.] of Mansuriyah, but reads the khutbah for the
Khalifah.”
Ibn Haukal’s statements agree with the preceding pretty well so
far, but here he states, that, “ About half a farsang from Multan are
lofty edifices called Qhandrawar, the residence of the Amir, who never
enters Multan except on Fridays [to say his prayers in public]. He is
a Kuresh, of the sons of Sam, son of Nuh,93 who first occupied this part ;
and he reads the khutbah for the Khalifah.”
Abu Rihan-al-Berunx says “ there was a famous temple at Multan
89 See note farther on.
90 The direct distance, as the crow flies, is about three hundred and fifty miles
or about one hundred and ten ordinary farsangs. Eight miles to the farsang cannot
be correct : it is about three. The yojdnah was eight mil, and this, I expect, is how
the distance became confused. However, in any case, the distance is not correct.
See Bu-Rihan’s computation of the farsang at page 191, and also note 118, page 209.
91 The “Bani Usamah” of Al-Mas’udi above.
92 This word Z^ — Nuh — which was without a point, is, without doubt, meant for
LSZ — Luwai — as mentioned by Al-Mas’udi, and in the Masalik wa Mamalik. Both
works concur in the first name — -Sam. Respecting this word, and these Amirs, a
strange mistake has been made. See farther on.
191
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
dedicated to the sun, and, consequently, styled ei*af [Aditya]. * * *
When the Karamitahs [descended from this Sam, son of Luwai, just
named] took possession of Multan, the subduer thereof Jalam,93 son
of Shaiban, destroyed the idol and broke it to pieces, and slew the
priests. The fcasr [the ’Arabic of hit shah previously mentioned] which
was constructed of kiln burnt bricks on an elevated position,94 he made
the Masjid-i-Jami’ [Friday Masjid] instead of the old one, which he
commanded should be shut up, out of hatred towards every thing
that had been done previously under the governors on the part of the
Bani Umaiyah.”
In another place he says, with reference to the changes in the
names of cities, that Multan was originally called Kasht-pur [;>J aJLS
— Kashya-pur ?], then Hans-pur [; then Bag-pur [ ^ ],
then Saub or Sanab-pur [jj-J ]? and, at length, Mulistan [ ^ULJj/o ],
mud signifying, ‘ root,’ ‘ origin,’ ‘ lineage,’ etc. (also c the nineteenth
lunar mansion ’) and istan, a place.95
He also refers, but not expressly, with reference to the Farhh of
the Receptacle or Repository of Gold, to the weight known as bhdr ,
wkich, he says, is mentioned in the annals of the conquest of Sind, and
states, that it is equal to the weight of two thousand fids or puls [ fulus —
small copper coins about the weight of an Indian paisah~\, which absurd
statement makes it equivalent to the weight of an ox.”96 In another
place he computes the farsahh or farsang as equivalent to four mil or
16,000 cubits [ ], not yards.
Then comes Al-Idrisi, who states, that, “ Multan is close to Hind ;
indeed, some writers place it in that country. It equals Mansuriyah in
size, and is called £ the Bait or Receptacle of Gold.’ * * * Multan is a
large city, which is commanded by a fortress having four gates, and
93 See page 189 what Al-Mas’udi says about the rulers, and the preceding
paragraph. Mas’udi wrote a century before Bu-Kihan, and knew more about the
rulers of Multan than that writer, who evidently is mistaken in the name, or the
text is wrong. The Amir who is referred to is the one who, on the part of the ’Ab-
basis, ousted the Amir on the part of the Umaiyahs, named Musa, son of Ka’ab-ut-
Tamimmi, from this territory.
94 There are no elevated positions there now, except the position on which the
fortress stands, and the Mandi-Awa, which, at the siege of Multan, was captured and
occupied by the Bombay column, on the day of the attack on the suburbs the
26th January, 1849. I am inclined to believe that that is the spot indicated.
95 Shahamat ’All, author of the “ Sikhs and Afghans,” who served in political
employ for many years in this vicinity, in his abbreviation of the “ Annals of the
Da’ud-putrah Nawwabs,” says, that Multan at different periods was known as Hest-
pur, Bakhar-pur, etc.
96 See following note.
192
H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind mid its Tributaries. [Xo. 3,
surrounded by a wet ditch. * * * It [Multan] is called ‘ the Far Teh
[ ] or Temple of the Chamber or Receptacle of Gold,’ because
Muhammad, son of Kasim, found forty buhars of gold concealed in a
bait [vault, chamber, repository, receptacle, and the like] there. Farlch
and Bihar [or Wihar, ‘ b ’ and ‘ iu ’ being interchangable, and miscalled
vulgarly “ Vihar”] have the same signification.97 The environs of this
97 It must be remembered, that Abu Zaid-al-Hasan, and also Al-Mas’udi, just
quoted, state, that the idol and its temple also were called Multan : the city which
sprung up around it was so called after the idol. Consequently, the finding of so
much gold “ in Multan,” does not refer to the city or town, but the temple of the idol,
Multan.
Elliot, in the first volume of his “ Indian Historians.” page 14, quoting from a
French translation of Ibn Khurdad-bih’s work, has translated the name applied to
this temple as follows : —
“ Multan is called “the farj of the house of gold,” because Muhammad, son of
Kasim, lieutenant of A1 Hajjaj found forty bahdrs of gold in one house of that city,
which was henceforth called “ House of Gold.” Farj (split) has here the sense of a
“ frontier.” A bahar is worth 333 mans , and each man is two rails.”
As to this very strange translation, he makes no comment ; and, in other
places, although the correct word is given by him, and its correct meaning also
(which has thus been turned into farj) clearly shown, it was not perceived by him
or his Editor apparently.
At page 35 of the same volume, in his extracts from Ibn Haukal, Elliot has :
“Multan is half the size of Mansura, and is called “ the boundary of the house of
gold.” To this is appended the following footnote : — “ The Ashkalu-l-Bilad says
“ burj ” or bastion [this in the original character would be j} without points ; so
it will be seen how this fearful blunder has arisen], which, at first sight, would
seem a more probable reading ; but the reasons assigned for reading the word
11 farj” are so strong [! !] as set forth by M. Hamaker, in his note to the Lescriptio
Iracce (p. 67), that we are not entitled [! !] to consider “ burj” as the correct reading.
(Quatremere concurs in reading “farj.” Jour, des Sav. See also Ibn Khurdadba
and the account given in the Cliachnama).”
The letters of this word, in the originals generally, are without points, the
scribes deeming it unnecessary to point so well known a word. Some igno¬
rant scribe mistook it for Z.J' and so made — burj — a bastion of it, and another
took it for j *°, and so made — marj — a meadow of it, and never guessed what
the correct word was ; but they very properly, did not think themselves “ entitled ”
to write it ‘farj.’ Three words can be made of this namely: — 1. js — farj,
which I am certain will not be found so pointed in any MS. copy of any of the works
quoted by Elliot; 2. q* — farah — which signifies ‘joy,’ ‘gladness,’ ‘ cheerfulnes/
etc.; and 3. — farlch — which signifies, as described in the Muhammadan diction-
aries, ‘ a pagan temple,’ and also ‘ an idol,’ the plural form of which is —
farlch dr — signifying ‘ idol temples ’ in general, and likewise idols ; and, in this sense,
the word will be found mentioned in Abu-Rihan-al-Beruni’s “ A'sar-ul-Bakiyat,”
a translation of which was lately published by Prof. C. E. Sachau, in which
193
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries .
city are watered by a little river [a canal or water-cnt, no doubt]
which unites with the Mihran of Sind. At one mil from Multan
the author uses the word farjchar with another, plainly showing (as Al-Idrisi also
shows), their significations ; namely, bihar or wihdr thus — “ farkhar wo iuhar ” —
the first referring to Hindu temples, and the latter to Budhist convents or mo¬
nasteries.
Certainly, our dictionaries, among other meanings, describe “farj ” as “the
confines of a hostile country,” “ a dangerous place,” “ splitting,” “ separating,” and
the like, but the more general and universally applied and understood meaning is,
“ pudenda turn mavis turn femince ; ” but why on earth this latter word, “farj,” bear¬
ing such a meaning, should have been chosen instead of “ farlch ” is inexplicable,
unless the French translator was quite ignorant of its existence, or of its correct
signification and application. Besides, there was no plausible reason for selecting
the word “farj ” in preference to the two other words which the unpointed letters
zf are capable of representing.
In his extracts from Idrisi’s geography, (p. 82) Elliot himself renders the word
“ farlch” ; and the reason why Multan was called “ the farlch of the bait of gold”
is clearly mentioned by the ’Arab author. In his extract from the Balaziri’s work he
has also “farlch,” and yet he failed to perceive that his previous rendering from the
French translation was wholly unsuitable, and must be wrong, and that bait had other
meanings than simply “ a house.” Had he given it a moment’s thought, he certain¬
ly would have rejected “farj.”
Again, in his extracts from the “ Ohach-Nama,” on the very same subject, he
has (Yol. I., p. 205) : “ I have heard from the elders of Multan that in ancient times
there was a chief in this city whose name was Jibawin, and was a descendant of the
Rai of Kashmir. He was a Brahman and a monk, he str ictly followed his religion,
and always occupied his time in worshipping idols. When his treasure exceeded all
limit and computation, he made a reservoir on the eastern side of Multan, which was
a hundred yards square. In the middle of it he built a temple fifty yards square,
and he made there a chamber in which he deposited forty copper jars each of which
was filled with African gold dust. A treasure of three hundred and thirty mans of
gold was deposited there. Over it there is a temple in which there is an idol made
of red gold, and trees are planted round the reservoir.”
This is not quite what the Chach Nam ah states, which is literally to the following
effect : —
“ It was thus ascertained from the elders of Multan, that, in ancient days, and
in times long past, in this city there was a Ra’e, Jas-want [ — Jas-win P] by
name, of the posterity of the Ra’e of Kash-mir. He was a Brahman and a priest,
and in the observance of his religion strict and zealous. He was constantly occupied
in the adoration of idols. When his treasures exceeded the bounds of computation
and calculation, he constructed a reservoir of water, 106 gaz long, by 106 gaz broad ;
and in the midst of the reservoir lie erected an idol-temple, 50 gaz by 50 gaz, and
therein made a receptacle [ ], and there deposited forty copper jars or vessels,
each of which was filled with fragments of African gold, amounting to 300 manns of
buried treasure. Over the receptacle was the place for an idol, and there an idol
was set up, formed of red gold. Round about the reservoir trees were planted.”
Muhammad, son of Kasim, having obtained information of this from the priests,
194
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
is Jand-iir [jj***- — Qhand-ur ? the Ohandrawar of Ibn Haukal, and
Jand Riid of some others], a collection of fortifications98 strongly
built, lofty, and well supplied with fresh water. The Amir of Multan
passes the spring and his leisure time here. Ibn Haukal states, that, in
his time, the Amir used to proceed every Friday from these fortifications
to Multan, mounted on an elephant, according to an ancient custom.”
had the place opened and the treasure was found. “ On being weighed, the gold
dust contained in those forty vessels or jars was found to amount to 13,200 mans of
gold.” This, together with the gems and pearls obtained in the sack of Multan,
was deposited in the treasury. I may mention that the lowest computation of the
mann is 2 lbs of 12 oz. each, but, according to some, 6 lbs ; and, by the lowest compu¬
tation, would amount to the enormous weight of 26,400 lbs, or 316,800 ounces of
gold. No wonder the place was called “ temple of the depository of gold.”
It is quite time that this “ farj ” error should be corrected and washed out.
What more can be required to do so than these accounts ?
Al-Idrisi says above, that “ fa rich and bihar have the same signification,” consi¬
dering, it seems, that, where idols are worshipped, must be an idol-temple, but the
word buhar,” written with short ‘ u ’ for the first vowel, and not ‘ i,’ as in the
word signifying a Buddhist temple, refers to a weight, said to be equal to about
400 lbs English, and it also means,” a vessel in shape like an ewer.’ The Sanskrit
word *TTT, written in ’Arabic characters pronounced bhdr, means ‘ weight,’
‘ weight of gold,’ etc., but, as the (Thach Namali says, he deposited forty jars or
vessels, the Persian word of that meaning just referred to is doubtless correct.
98 To the eastward of the fortress of Multan, facing the tomb and shrine of
Baha-ul-Hakk wa-d-Din, Zakariya (v id. “ Bahawul Hak”), at about the distance of
a mile and a half or little more, and extending a considerable distance either way,
are — or were, for they may have been demolished by the railway Vandals for railway
ballast now — the remains of many stone and brick-built buildings (as near as I can
recollect after the lapse of some thirty-five years), which bore the marks of con¬
siderable antiquity, and among them was a good size masjid. I have often ridden
to them of an evening, but never thought of instituting any inquiries respecting the
ruins, and much regret now that I did not. I certainly wondered what could have
been the object of building such structures in a perfectly waterless position ; for
there were no traces of wells near by, as far as I can remember. The ruins were
bounded farther east, I now find, by the bed of a stream, a small branch of the Rawi,
possibly, which had been utilized as a canal; and this may have been the “little
river” mentioned above. That the Rawi and all the other rivers of the Panj-ab
flowed east of Multan at the period these buildings were inhabited there is no doubt
whatever. The Loli Wa-han (which is a mere canal or cutting from the Chin-ab) ran
nearer to the fort walls on the north-east, and passed, and still passes, near the east
side of it, but it is now a very petty stream. It is noteworthy that the lands im¬
mediately south-east of the city of Multan are styled Taraf Rawi — the Rawi Side — to
this day.
It is possible that the ruins I have mentioned were connected with, or were
included in, “ the collection of forts referred to in the text above. At the time the
author of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” was at Multan there was a standing camp here¬
abouts.
195
1892.] II. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
Zakariya, the Kazwini, saj^s very little respecting Multan in his
“ A'sar-ul-Bilad,” but refers to what he had previously written from the
“ ’Aja’ib-ul-Buldan,” which agrees generally with what others have
written about it and its idol-temple.
Ibn Al-Wardi-al-Karshi, who wrote between the years 668 H. and
684 H. (1269 and 1285 A. D.), mentions Multan very briefly, but, like
all others, he says it is called the 11 Far Ml [ ~\-i-Bait-uz-Zahab ” —
The Temple containing the Receptacle or Vault of Gold.”
Haying related what the old writers say about Multan and its
‘ Far Ml,’ I will now turn to Mansuriyali as the next most important
place connected with the courses of the rivers, and having completed
that, I shall be better able to mention what they say respecting the
rivers themselves, and the places lying along or near their banks.
Ibn Khprdad-bih gives no particulars respecting it, and Al-Mas’udi
says but little. He states that Multan is seventy-five farsangs of Sind,
each farsang being eight mil [miles], distant from Mansuriyali." The
villages and inhabited places dependent on Mansuriyali [the territory]
amount to 300,000. The whole country is well cultivated, and covered
with trees and fields.100 It is constantly at war with a nation called
Med, who are a race of Sind, and also with other races on the frontier
thereof. Like Multan it is on the frontiers of Sind,101 and so are the
towns and villages belonging to it. Mansuriyali is so called from Man¬
sur, son of Jamliur, the Amir on the part of the Bani Umaiyah.”102
99 How then is it possible that Mansuriyali could refer to Bakhar as Abu-1-Fazl
(and those who follow him) erroneously supposed ? This is the greatest error ever
made by Abu-l-Fazl. See note 90, page 190.
The Multan territory extended south as far as Alor or Aror; while the territory
of Mansuriyah extended from and included Alor or Aror and its district southwards
to the sea-coast.
100 This may be somewhat highly coloured, but the lands along the course of
the Mihran, and farther east along the banks of the Hakra or Waliindah, were
remarkable for their fertility. See the “ Report on the Eastern Narra,” page 34,
paragraph 3 ; 39, 7 ; and 40, 17.
101 Others, more correctly, state, that it is in Sind, of which there is no possible
doubt.
102 It is strange that such discrepancy should exist respecting the foundation of
this place. The Mansur here referred to is Mansur, son of Jamhiir, who was the
last Amir of Sind on the part of the Bani Umaiyah, who was defeated by Musa,
the son of Ka’ab-ut-Tamimi, who was despatched from Marw by Abu Muslim into
Sind soon after he declared for the accession of the Bani ’Abbas to the Khilafat.
See farther on.
The Balaziri states (see farther on), that Hakam, Amir of Sind, about the year
120 H. (738 A. D.), built Mahfuzah, and that ’Amro (’Amr) son of Muhammad, the
unfortunate conqueror of Sind, who served under Hakam, founded Mansuriyali ; while
196 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
The I st A khar 1 says, “ Mansuriyah which is a city of Sind, is about
a mil [mile] long and a mil broad, and is surrounded [part of the terri¬
tory dependent on it] by a branch of the Mihran [as shown in the map
taken from the Masalik wa Mamalik], The inhabitants are Musalmans.”
The Masalik wa Mamalik, with which work that of Ibn Haukal
very nearly, but not altogether, agrees, states that, 11 Mansuriyah which
they call Sindiyah,103 is a city of Sind, about a mile long and a mile
broad, and surrounded [i. e part of the territory dependent on it] by a
branch of the Mihran. It is like an island. The people of Mansuriyah
are Kureshis, the descendants of Habbar, son of Al-Aswad, who seized
upon it ; and, up to this time it is in the hands of his descendants.
* * # The people in their dress and habits are like the people of ’Irak,
but their Badshahs104 are like Hindus in appearance, and have rings in
their ears.”
Bu-Rihan-al-Ber6ni enters into no particulars respecting this place,
in this part of Rashid-ud-Dfn’s history, but, in his account of the rulers
of Dillii, in another part, he says (as quoted by Rashid-ud-Din), that,
“ previous to the time of the Samanis, Muhammad, son of Kasim,
marched from the side of Sijis-stan into Sind, and subdued Bahman-no
[ y+tf ], to which he gave the name of Mansuriyah,105 and to Multan,
Ma’muriyali.”
Al-Idrisi says, on the contrary, that Mansuriyah was founded in the beginning of the
Khilafat of Al- Mansur [Abu- Ja’far-al-Mansur], the ’Abbasi, the second Khalifah of
that family, who did not succeed to the Khilafat until 136 H. (751 A. D.), some
sixteen years after the time of Hakam and ’Amro (’Amr) and some four years after
the overthrow of Mansur, son of Jamhur, the last Umaiyah Amir.
It would appear from this, if all three writers are correct, that Mansuriyah was
founded in Hakam’ s time, finished in the time of Mansur, son of Jamhur, and the
name merely continued by Abu-Ja’far-al-Mansur. Bahman-abad, or Bahman-nih,
the Bahman-no of the Sindis, was founded centuries before, by Bahman, son of
Isfandiyar, in the reign of Gushtasib, sovereign of f-ran-Zamin, who made conquests
in the valley of the Indus, and western Hind, which were retained up to within a
few years of the fall of the T-rani empire. See the following note 105, see also
my “Notes on Afghanistan,” etc. pages 318 and 509.
103 That seems to mean the Sindi Mansuriyah, or Mansuriyah of Sind, to distin¬
guish it from the other Mansuriyah.
04 This word does not refer to sovereigns here, but to chiefs. See my “ Notes
on Afghanistan,” page 154.
:°5 gee the extract from Bu-Rihan, page 219. This place, Bahman-abad or
Bahman-nih, notwithstanding that more than one old author distinctly states by
whom it was founded, European writers persist in calling “ Brahmanabad,” because
it is incorrect, seemingly.
A specimen of this dangerous system appears in Professor E. Sachau’s edition
of the text of Bu-llffian’s work, printed at the expense of the India Office. At pages
1892 ] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
197
In the printed text lately issued, this paragraph appears somewhat
different from the above. It states that Muhammad, ibn Al-Kasim, ibn
Al-Munabbih, conquered Sind from the side of Sigistan, and subdued
11, 82, 100, and 162, the printed text has ^$+1, and this word is, actually, indexed
and transliterated Bruhmandbdd ! In the same way is indexed and transli-
• •
terated “ Barygaza ” ; and the words ^ — panch nad are rendered “ Fancavada ” !!
In this way, the words of an author are changed by persons who fancy they know
better than he did; and those who have to trust to translations are thas led astray,
and the author is often condemned for the conceited errors of his editor. The
latter might, at least, say, that he had thought fit to substitute what he thought
correct, and then the student could choose between them. The Zain-nl-Akhbar of
the Gardaizi, written in the reign of Sultan Furrulch-zad 'of Ghaznih, about 445 H.
(1052-53 A. D.), a rare and highly esteemed chronicle, states, that, “ Bahman, son
of Isfandiyar, who used to be styled Ard-shlr-i-Dardz Bazd, or of the long arm,” and
respecting whom, in connection with the tracts on the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus,
many traditions are related (and to some of which I have referred in my “ Notes’
above-quoted respecting Bannu), “ founded a city in the zamin of Sind, which was
named by him Baliman-abad or Bahman-nih, and which they call [when he wrote]
Mansuriyah.” The author of the Mujmal-ut-Tawarikh, who wrote his work about
525 H. (1131 A. D.), quoting an old work from the Hindi language, translated in the
year 417 H. (1026 AD), the year in which Sultan Mahmud of Ghaznih or Ghaznin
undertook the expedition against Som-nath, says — “ In the time of Gushtasib, ruler of
T-ran-Zamin, Bahman, his grandson, surnamed Ard-shir, son of Isfandiyar, led an
army into Bind and Sind, and subdued a considerable portion of it. No member of
the family of the ruler, named Sunagh, retained any power therein. Bahman
founded a city between the frontiers or borders of the Hindus and Turks [the “ Indo-
Scythians,” as they are styled] to which he gave the name of Kand-a’il, and, in
another part, which they call Budah, he founded a city which he named Bahman-
abad ; and, according to one statement, this is Mansuriyah.” As to Kand-a’il, see
page 217.
According to Tod (Yol. II, p. 44), the Rana of Odeypoor is descended from
Bahman.
This statement, I find, is confirmed by the chronicler, Muhammad, son of Jarir,
ut-Tabari, whose statements may be considered indisputable, considering the sources
of information which he possessed. He informs us, that the Malik of Hind who
had been reduced to subjection by Bahman, threw off his allegiance, and that Bahman
despatched the ’Alim, or Sage, Akhtunush, one of the three sages who had accom¬
panied Buklit-un-Nassar against Jerusalem, with forces against the Malik of Hind,
whom he encountered in battle, overthrew, and slew. Bahman conferred that
territory on Akhtunush. When the second of the three sages (the third had previ¬
ously died), Dariush or Daryush, who held the government of the provinces of ’Irak
and Babal died, Bahman conferred them upon Akhtunush, and directed him to leave
a Khalifah or Deputy to administer the affairs of Sind and Hind [the Biah and its
tributaries, it will be remembered, is called “ the River of Sind and Hind”], as his
presence in ’Irak and Babal was the most requisite. He, therefore, leaving a Deputy
in Sind and Hind, returned as commanded. Akhtunush had put his wife [Queen
Vashti] to death on account of some misbehaviour, after which he married a woman
* Z
198 II. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
the cities of [*'■$♦> and the first-named of which he called [sic]
>»
Al- Mansuriyah, and the latter, Al-Ma’muriyah. This word ty-s+J appears
in three places with this additional letter at the end, but, in another
of the Bam IsraTI, whose name was Hadassah (Esther). lie greatly favoured the Bani
Isra’il, and released them from captivity. By his Isra’ili wife he had a son Kyrnsh
( cAy5 ) by name, who succeeded his father as ruler of ’Irak and Babal.
This ’Alim or Sage, Akhtunush, which name is also written AMiturnush — in
Hebrew, Aklisliuirus — who was made ruler over those territories, is the Ahasuerus
of Holy Writ, and Artaxerxes of the Greeks.
We also know from At-Tabari, as well as from many others, that Nushirwan,
the Just, held extensive tracts of territory in the direction of Sind, if not in Sind
itself. As to the influence of the sovereigns of f-ran-Zamin in that direction, Al-
Mas’udi states, that Kai-Ka-us founded a city in Kash-mir, and that his son, Siawakhs
[ jj/aAjLa* — Siawash ?], during his father’s lifetime, founded a city in Sind, called
Mihr-jdn. Al-Mas’udi also states, that the kings of Sind and Hind, and of all the
countries to the north and south, sent ambassadors to Nushirwan with rich presents,
and to enter into terms of peace with him, because of the greatness of his power,
the strength of his armies, the extent of his dominions, his rapid conquests, and the
vengeance he had exercised upon so many kings and rulers, and also because of the
justice of his rule.
In another place, the author of the Muj-mal-ut-Tawarikh, in his account of
“ Kafand.” a Hindu king contemporary with Alexander, the Macedonian, says : “ It is
stated that he, Kafand, sent a Brahman to Samid, his brother, directing him “ to go
to Mansuriyah, expel the T-ranis from the places which Bahman had conquered, and
erect idol temples in the place of fire temples.” The author, of course, does not
mean that this city was then called Mansuriyah, but Bahman-abad which they
called Mansuriyah when he wrote.
Strabo, in his Fourteenth Book, referring to the account of India given by
Eratosthenes, which he considers to be the most credible account of that country, says
that at the time of the Greek invasion, the Indus was the boundary of India and of
Ariana, and in the possession of the Persians, and that, afterwards, the Indians
occupied a larger portion of Ariana, which they received from the Macedonians.
There is no doubt whatever, that the rulers of T-ran-Zamin, from time to time,
held a considerable portion of the valley of the Indus, and that, up to the end of the
reign of Nushirwan, the rulers of the western most parts of Hind, including the
ancient Turk rulers of Kabul of the Budhist faith, were tributary to him. Sub¬
sequently, when the T-rani empire began to decay, some of these rulers began to
regain their independence, and thus we find one dynasty of them, Hindus, under the
title of “ the Ran-Thel,” in possession of Sind and Mukran in one direction, and
Kabul in the other, and opposing the ’Arab forces in their advance eastwards. See
my “ Notes on Afghanistan.” page 567.
The Gardaizi relates how Bahram-i-Gor, the I'-rani sovereign, came into Hind in
disguise, and that Shermah its ruler, thinking he was merely a person of a noble
I'-rani family, gave him his daughter in marriage, and conferred upon him, as her
dower, Sind and Mukran.
199
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
place, it appears as the extra y of course, being added by some
one else to make it suit the “ Brahman ” theory. Where the extra I came
from in the first word it is hard to say ; but, as both Rashid-ud-Din,
When Sultan Mnhammad-i-Sabuk-Tigm in 417 H. (1026 A. D.), marched against
Som-natli by way of Jasal-mir and Naliar- Walah, he, on his return, took another
route from thence towards Multan by way of Mansuriyah and the banks of the Jihun
[of Sind — the Hakra or Wahindah], and expelled its Karamitah ruler. See farther
on. What with the aridity of the desert near the coast, and the annoyances of
the Jats of Multan and Bhatiah on the side of Jihun [i e., the “ great river ” —
the Mihran of Sind] and other afflictions, a great number of his troops perished,
as likewise did the greater part of the cattle of his army.” The “ Tabakat-
i-Nasiri,” the earliest work written after the Gardaizi and the Baihaki wrote, sa}’s
he was purposely misled by a Hindu guide into this waterless desert part, which
refers to the ran or marsh of Kuchh. (See note 128) But from all that is said, it
appears that the country through which his route lay, for part of the way at least
towards Jasal-mir, had only recently become waterless ; and it is between, this period
and the return of Ohhotah, Amarani, as related by the Sayyid, Sadr ’All Shah, that
Bahman-nih, Bahman-no, or Bahman-abad was destroyed by some convulsion
of nature, or other calamity.
Mansuriyah can scarcely have escaped ; yet, from the way in which it is subse¬
quently mentioned, there is very great doubt whether it was much injured, and it was
certainly not wholly destroyed at the same time. One proof of this is, that Ibn Haukal
visited it in 350 H. (961 A. D.), and that when Ahmad-i-Nial-Tigin, the governor on the
part of the Ghaznin Sultan of the conquered territory immediately east of the Indus —
the present Panj-ab and part of Sind — rebelled in 425 H. (1033-34 A. D.), and had
to fly, he made towards Mansuriyah. At first he defeated a body of troops sent
against him by Sultan Mas’ud, who then despatched another and larger force, under
Tilak, the Hindu, son of a barber, and commander of the Hindu troops in the Muham¬
madan service Tilak overthrew Ahmad-i-Nial-Tigm on several occasions; and was
in the habit of mutilating such of the rebel’s followers as fell into his hands, whether
soldiery, or merchants and traders, by cutting off their noses and hands. At last
Ahmad-i-Nial-Tigm had to fly from the Lalior province, Tilak having by money
tampered with his Turk-man troops, and made for Mansuriyah of Sind, with two
hundred followers, and endeavoured there to cross the Mihran of Sind— the Hakra or
Wahindah and its tributaries - but it so happened, that, at that time, the river had
risen considerably, and all the Jats and Hindus around were in pursuit. No time
was to be lost, and in his attempt to cross he was carried away by the current and
drowned. His body having been swept along for a short distance, was washed into
an inlet or creek or side, channel (see farther on for a description of these
inlets), and brought to land, where it was recognized by his followers. The head
was cut off and sent to Balkh where Sultan Mas’ud then was. This is differently
related in the Baihaki, but the Gardaizi is much more circumstantial.
The “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” states, that, in 623 H. (1226 A. D.), about the time that
its author was at LTchchh, “a body of the Khalj tribe of Turks, part of the forces of
the Khwarazmi Sultan, after the downfall of his power west of the Indus, retiring
before the Muglials, appeared on the north-west frontier of Sultan Nasir-ud-Dfn,
Kaba-jak’s territory of Sind, and acquired supremacy over the 'arz — territory — of
200
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
and Faklir-ucl-Dm, the Fanakati, nearly six centuries ago, read this
name from MSS. copies of Bu-Rihan’s work as I have written it above,
and as travellers, older by a century than he, also wrote it, I need merely
Mansuriyah, which is one of the cities of Siw-istan, but they were defeated, and their
leader slain.”
From what the author has stated it is not certain whether, at the period in
question, the city or fortified town of Mansurijmh was inhabited or not ; but it would
appear from the context that it was, notwithstanding that he seems to refer more to
its territory than the fortified town. It can scarcely be supposed, that the earth¬
quake, which is said to have so suddenly destroyed Bahman-abad and its inhabitants,
would not have affected Mansuriyah likewise, to some degree at least, seeing that it
was only about six miles distant from it. If it was inhabited when the Khalj Turks
appeared there, it must have been in a ruinous state, and the inhabitants probably
very few.
The accounts given by modern writers respecting Bahman-nih or Bahman-abad,
are contradictory and erroneous, with few exceptions Nearly all persist in calling it
Brahman-abad because, perhaps, the shortened form of the word Brahman happens
to be Bahman, and this shortened form to contain the same letters as the name of
the son of Isfandiyar, but it never occurred to them, with a single exception, that it
was not possible for the T-rani terminations of nth and dbdd to be applied, at that
period at least, to a Sanskrit word. Burton, who is the only exception, says (in his
Scinde,” Yol. I., p. 200) : “Now Brahmanabad — a wrong name by the by — because
the word is partly Sanskrit, and partly Persian ; consequently, not Scindian.”
The Balaziri is the only old ’Arab geographer who mentions “ old Bahman-abad,”
and he wrote about 270 H. (8S3-84 A D.), but he does not mean by that that it was
in ruins or had been destroyed, but the contrary. He says, that “ Muhammad, son
of Kasim, went to old Bahman-abad where the remainder of Dahir’s forces had
rallied, and that it was situated two farsangs [little over six miles] from Mansuriyah,
which, at that time, had not been founded, and that its site, at that period, was a
jangal .” See also farther on, where he says Mansuriyah lay on the west side of the
estuary of the river, and Mahfuzah on the east side.
The Fanakati, who quotes from Bu-Rihan, says, that, “Muhammad, son of
Kasim, after the capture of Debal, first took (Bahman-no), to which he gave
the name of Mansuriyah, and to Multan (quoting from Bu-Rihan, apparently), the
name of Ma’murah.”
The error of Bu-Rihan, as to Muhammad, son of Kasim, having named Bahman-
abad Mansuriyah, I have already noticed.
This difference between the names Baliman-abad, Bahman-nih, and Bahman-no,
may be easily accounted for. Nih and dbdd are of much the same significations in
Persian, but, in the dialect of Sind, nih would become no, as in Dar-belah — Dar-belo ;
U'barah — U'baro, Thatliah — Thatho ; Hakra or Hakrah — Hakro, and the like, and
thus Bahman-nih became Bahman-no.
The Tarikli-i-Tahiri says, that Bahman-abad was destroyed after Alor or Aror
had been deserted by the Hakra through the iniquity of Dilu Ra’e, and that, at
that period, Dilu Ra’e’s brother, Jhotah or Ohliotah, Amarani, was then dwelling at
Bahman-abad, and that it was swallowed up in the earth — men, buildings, and all —
the only signs of it being, in that author’s time, a mandr or tall tower. He also
201
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
notice the fact of its appearance in the printed text, and shall not follow
it. The statement, that Muhammad, son of Kasim named Bahman-no,
“ Al-Mansuriyat,” shakes my faith in Bu-Rihan’s accounts considerably,
gays that Jhotah or Olihotah, and his Musalman wife, reached the town of Siw-istan,
that is the town or chief town of the Siw-istan district, and which, in his day — about
1035-40 H. (1625-1631 A. D.) — was called Sihwan.
Just thirty years before this, Abu-1-Fazl, in his A’in-i-Akbari, described Bahman-
abad, but his master’s Hindu proclivities led him to alter or mistake the name for
Brahman-abad, he not perceiving how strange a Sindi — Sanskrit — proper name ap¬
peared with a Persian termination. He says : “ In early times Brahman-abad was
the seat of government. It was a large city, and its fortifications had fourteen
hundred towers, and the distance between each was one tandb. To this day, of the
towers and walls, numerous indications remain. After Brahman-abad Alor became
the capital.” The tandb measure consisted then of sixty ildhi gaz, each of about
thirty inches, bat, we cannot calculate the extent of the walls, because we do not
know the diameter of the towers. I have elsewhere mentioned the terrible error
he makes in mistaking Bakliar for the site of Mansuriyah ; and he seems to have
been totally ignorant that Mansuriyah lay close to Bahman-abad.
Mr. A. H. Bellasis, of the Bombay Civil Service, who was the discoverer of the
ruins of this ancient city in 1854, identified the great mound — the tall, but not
“Thul” nor “Tul” — 'with Bahman-abad itself, and I think correctly so. He says
in his account of it : “ On first entering Brahmanabad [he, too, calls it by the Brah¬
man name], so extensive and so complete are its ruins, that you feel lost in con¬
templating its utter desolation. * * * After a little examination, the most prominent
object that presents itself is the ruin of a high tower of brick-work standing isolated
on a large heap of ruins.” This is the same as is referred to by the author of the
Tarikh-i-Tahiri, upwards of two centuries before. He supposed this to have been
the citadel, but Thomas objected to this, “because the local coins consisted exclu¬
sively of specimens of ’Arab governors of Sind, with the name of Mansur on the
margin, and because not a single piece could be attributed to any Hindu Rajah of
Sind.” It must be recollected, however, that the Musalmans had been the rulers of
Sind for more than two centuries before the destruction of this city.
While calling the ruined city “ Brahmanabad,” Mr. Bellasis also calls it
“ Bambra-ke-Thul,” and adds that “ Bambra is a name frequently applied to old
ruined cities [not to this one only] in Sind,” and that “ Thul ” means a tower or
bastion. Here he is in error : the word is the ’Arabic word tall, a heap, mound, or
hillock; and this word is in common use — “ Tall-al-Kabir ” of Egyptian fame for
example.
With Bellasis’s account before him, apparently, Cunningham (“ Ancient India,”
p. 262) makes out H wen Thsang’s chief city of middle Sind “ O-fan-cha,” to have
been called “ Bambhra-lca-Tul, or the Ruined Tower ” [“ O-fan-cha ” is the Chinese
for “ruined tower” perhaps], or simply Banbhar, which according to tradition, was
the site of Brahmanwas or Brahmanabad.” Here it will be noticed how Bellasis’s
words and meaning have been changed. The latter says Bambra — not “Bambhar”
nor “Bambhra” — is frequently applied to old ruined cities in Sind, not to “Brah¬
manabad ” alone.
Cunningham continues : “In the middle ages, under Hindu rule, the great cities
202 H. G. Ravcvty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
because we know of a certainty, that Mansuriyah was not in existence
when Muhammad was recalled from Sind, but was subsequently founded
near 13ahman-no ; and some state that it was even founded by his own
were Sadusan [what of Ptolemy ? See his “ Ancient India ” page 266], Brahmana
or Bahmanwa, and Nirunkot. * * * Close to Brahmanwa, the early Muhammadans
founded Mansnra.”
He and some others say, that “ Nirunkot” is “ Haidarabad,” meaning, possibly,
that it was founded on the site of the first named place.
In another place (pp. 272-273) the same writer says: “ Mr. Bellasis’s measure¬
ment of Bambhraka-thul [sic] was within a few yards of four miles. # * # 1 con¬
clude that the great mound of Bambhraka-thul represents the ruined city of Mansnra,
the capital of the ’Arab governors of Sindh. The Hindu city of Brahmana or Brah¬
manabad must therefore be looked for in the neighbouring mound of ruins now called
Dilura, which is only 1| mile distant from the larger mound.” This may be reversed,
I think ; for the ’Arabs are more likely to have had a small and compact fortified
town than one with four miles of wall to defend. But we are plainly told by the
Balaziri, quoted farther on, that Mansuriyah was built two farsakhs distant from
“ old Bahman-abad,” which is equal to over six miles. What is referred to as “ the
ruined city of Depur, 5 miles in another direction,” is more likely to be the site. It
lies to the north-eastwards of Mansuriyah.
Major-General C. It. Haig, for many years in the Survey Department in Sind,
in an article on “ Brahmanabad,” in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for 1874,
says: “Cunningham thinks O-fan-cha of Hwen Thsang (which Stan. Julien renders
Avanda) to be Brahmanabad, but a Budhist would avoid Brahman abominations.”
This last is assumed, of course, on account of the supposed ‘ r ’ in the name which
is entirely a modern addition. If Budhists would avoid “ Brahman abominations ”
they would probably avoid a Brahman name also for their city.
This same word, “ avanda ,” is also mentioned in the extracts from the “ Si-yu-
ki” xvi, by the Revd. Prof. Beal, contained in the same volume of the Journal above
mentioned.
Cunningham further adds, that “ the date of Dilu Rai is doubtful. M’Murdo
has assigned A H. 140, or A. D. 757, as the year in which Qhhota, the brother of Dilu,
returned from Mekka, but as Mansnra was a flourishing city in the beginning of the
tenth century, when visited by Masudi and Ibn Haukal, it is clear that the earth¬
quake cannot have happened earlier than A. D. 950 [here be is near the mark :
339 H. is 950 A. D.]. * * # But it is difficult to believe that there were any Hindu
chiefs in Bdmana during the rule of the ’Arabs in Mansnra [See what the “ Masalik
wa Mamalik’’ says on this, page 196]. * # * Mansnra must have been founded on
the site of Brahman-abad, which must have been destroyed by an earthquake.”
This too is stated after what the Balaziri has chronicled, and after, himself, say¬
ing that Mansnra must be looked for at Dilura a mile and a half away from it. I
may also mention that, even in the time of Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah, 607-625 H.
(1210-28 A. D.), there were no less than seven Hindu Ranahs who were only tribu¬
taries to him, as in the time of the ’Arabs without doubt, and that one of them is
named “ Jasodhan Akrah or Akarah of Min Nagar in the district of Bambarwa,” and
another “Chanisarof Dewal,” or Lar — Lower Sind. See “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri also,
page 614.
Rennell, D’Anville, and Vincent, all three, placed Bahman-abad within four
203
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind arid its Tributaries.
son. It is strange that this new name applied to Multan was also un¬
known to the ’Arab writers. See what the Balaziri says on this subject
farther on ; and, moreover, the Khalifah Mansur did not succeed to the
miles of Thatliah ; bat Elliot, after stating that “ there seems no reason to conclude
that Brahmanabad or Balimanabad was founded by the Persian king [he was not
king at the time], Baliman, upon his invasion of Sind,” tells ns that “his city is
expressly said to have been built in the province of Budha [this is what he some¬
times writes Nudha, and is correctly, Budah, described at pages 207, 8, and 9] which
never extended so far as the Indus.” At page 78 he tells ns, that “ Mansura” [which
he also says was close to “ Brahmanabad ”] is “ on the west of the principal branch
of the Mihran;” and at page 370, that, “ we may rest assured that it was on the
eastern side of the Indus.” Again, at page 83 he says, “from Multan to the vicinity
of Mansura the country is occupied by a warlike race called Nadha, and at page 106,
that Balimanabad was founded by Baliman in Budha ” which is “ supposed to bo
Mansura.” At page 189, also, quoting from the “ Chach-nama,” where he writes
the name “ Brahmanabad or Bain-wdh,” he has the following note : — “ The real name
of this place was Bahmanu or Bahmanwd .” At page 34 he had previously called it
“ Bamiwan,” and at page 61 “ Bahmanu Mansura.” After all this, and in several
places calling it by its correct name, and indicating its correct position, he winds up
with “ we may fairly consider that Brahmanabad [with the extra ‘ r ’], after being
immediately succeeded by the ’Arab capital, is now represented by the modern
Haidarabad.” However, all his contradictions of his own quotations, even when
correct, and all his speculations on this subject, based, apparently, on the supposition
that the Mihran of Sind always flowed west of Haidar-abad in nearly the present
channel of the Indus, have been refuted by the discovery of the ruins of Bahman-nih,
Bahman-noo or Bahman-abad, close to the ivest bank of the principal channel of the
great river, as the old geographers and historians had clearly stated it was. The
value of other similar speculations of his may be judged of accordingly. See note 147
Crow, who, in the last century, was the Honourable East India Company’s
Agent at Thatliah, also falls into error respecting Bahman-no or Bahman-abad, as
well as “ Tatta being Debal Sindy.” He says : “ Brahminabad, called by the natives
Kulan-kote , the ruins of which lie four or five miles to the south-west of Tatta,” etc.
Dr. J. Burnes (“ Visit to Sinde,” page 133), and Sir A. Burnes, following Crow’s
statement, also considered “ Kullan Kot, near Tatta ” to be “Brahmanabad.” The
correct name of the place they thus mistook for Bahman-no or Bahman-abad, is
Kalyan Kot — kalydn, in Sanskrit, meaning ‘ prosperous,’ ‘ happy,’ etc.
Tod (Vol. II, page 229, note§). among other wild assertions, actually tells us
that “ Omar, in the first century [the Khalifah ’Umar, died in 23 H. i. e. 643-44 A. D ],
had established a colony of the faithful at Bekher [as he spells Bakhar], afterwards
Mansooria while a few pages farther on (233), he says, “the celebrated Caliph
A1 Walid was the first whose arms extended to the plains of India, and one of whoso
earliest conquests and chief positions, was Arore, the capital of Upper Sind.” At
page 269 he says : “ the ancient capital of Sind was Mausoora, better known to the
Hindus as Rori Bekher .” At page 310, he states, that, “ The islandic Bekher, or
Mansoora (so named by the lieutenant of the Caliph A1 Mansoor) is considered as
the capital of the Sogdi, when Alexander sailed down the Indus ; ” and he also sup¬
poses that “the Sogdi and Soda [the Sodah tribe] are the same. At page 93 of his
first volume, he states, that “ the Soghdi country is Dhat in the desert
204 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
Khilafat until some forty-two years after the death of Muhammad, son
of Kasim, the conqueror of Sind.
At page 312, we have “The great Pviar [Pramarah] sovereignty, of which
Arore or the insular Bekher [they are all one to him], was the capital, when Alexan¬
der passed down the Indus.” Again, at page 332, we have : “ On the island of Bekher
there are the remains of the ancient fortress of Mansoora named in honour of the
Caliph A1 Mansoor, whose lieutenants made it the capital of Sind on the opening of
their conquests [it was “ Omar” at page 229, but A1 Walid at page 233).” At page
243, he says, that, “ on the final conquest of Sinde the name of its capital, Arore f
was changed for Mansoora ; ” while .at page 449 of the same volume we have the
following. Referring to abandonment of Sinde by the lord of Barnuni, he says,
in a note, “ ‘ the lord of Barnuni,’ in other places called Bahmanivasso, must apply to
the ancient Brahminabad, or Dewnl , on whose site the modern Tatta is built.”
In vol. I. p. 217, he had previously stated, that, “ Sinde being conquered by
Omar, general of the Caliph A1 Mansoor, the name Min a gar a was changed to Man¬
soora but, after that again, at page 243, he says : “ I had little doubt that Mina-
gara was the Saminagara of the Yadu Jharejahs. # # # On every consideration I
am inclined to place it on the site of Sehwan.”
Here are no less than nine or ten statements respecting Mansuriyah, all differ¬
ent, and all totally incorrect; but see note 111 for still greater errors.
McMurdo is the only European writer who. before the discovery of the actual
site of Bahman-no or Bahman abad, nearly fixed on its right position. He placed it
on the “Puran” \jmrdnah signifies ‘old,’ ‘ancient,’ etc.] afterwards called the
Lohano Dhoro, but he calls it, in error, the “ Lohana Darya,” which was “ at a
short distance from where it separates from the Puran.”
He was mistaken, however, respecting the period of the destruction of Bahman-
abad or Bahman-no in supposing it to have occurred about 140 H. (757-58 A. D.).
The most pertinent observations on the subject of Bahman-abad are those of the
Sayyid, Sadr ’All Shall of Thathah, who was consulted by Bellasis respecting the
period of its destruction. He says, that “the city of Bahman-abad appears to have
been founded before the Hindu dynasty of the Brahmans [yes : a very long time
before], which commenced in the first year of the Hijri or A. D. 622, [this is in¬
correct : Sihras Ila’e fell in battle with the ’Arabs at the close of 23 H. — October, 644
A. D.]. * * * and that Ohach, the first of the Brahman kings, subdued among
others, “Agher [Akham, the Lohanah of the Ohach Namah], chief of Bahman-
abad ”
This is the Agham, Lohana of Elliot. The Lohano Hindu race — called “ Lohanah
Jats in the Ohach Namah — “are,” he says, “the most influential tribe in Sind,
and all wear the Brahminical thread.” (Vol. I, p. 362). To suit certain other
incorrect theories, he afterwards turns these Lohano Jats into “ Lohanl Afghans” ?
It is only since the time of Aurang-zeb-i-’Alam-gir Badshah, when considerable
changes were made in the mode of writing, that the initial letter of their name,
which is, correctly, Nuharni, they being descendants of Nuh, son of Isma’il, began
to be written by Hindustani writers, Luharni, with ‘ If for ‘ nf and by those who
did not understand the Pus’lito letter ‘ rnf Luhani ; and they do not “ wear the
Brahminical thread.” The Lohanah (or Lohano as the Sindis write and say) Banit/ds
till flourish in Sind, but they have not, even yet, grown into Nuharni Afghans.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 205
Al-Ideisi says : “ Mansuriyah. is surrounded by a branch of the Mih¬
ran, although it is at a distance from the river. [In another place he also
says, that it is a mile square each way.] It lies west of the principal
branch of the river. * # * Mansuriyah was founded at the beginning
of the reign of Abi Ja’far-al-Mansur, of the Bam ’Abbas. This Khalifah
gave his name to four different cities : the first was Bagh-dad in ’Irak,
the second, Mansuriyah of Sind. * * * It is a great, populous, and rich
city, and carries on a considerable trade. The buildings are constructed
of burnt bricks, tiles, and plaster. * * * The name of the city in the
Hindi [the Sindi dialect of the Prakrit ?] language is Mir-Man [^Oo^a/o.
This seems to me to be an error in the MS.], and it is considered one
of the dependencies of Sind, like Multan, Sliarus an [Siw-istan, the
modern Sihwan],” etc., etc.
Zakariya, the Kazwini, who, as before mentioned, quotes chiefly
from the work of Mus’ir bin Muhalhil, who wrote in 331 H. (942-43
A. D.), says : “ Mansuriyah, so called after the second ’Abbasi Khalifah,
is also styled Mansuriyali-i-Sani, or the Second Mansuriyah, and a
branch of the Mihran encircles it. It is very hot, and has many fleas,
but it is a place of considerable size, and has good and sweet water.”
Ibn Al-Waedi-al-Karshi, likewise says, that “ it was one of four
cities to which Abi Ja’far-al-Mansur, the ’Abbasi Khalifah gave his
name of Mansur,106 the others being Baghdad in ’Irak, Al-Masisat on the
sea of Sham [Syria], and Al-Rafikat in the Diyar-i-Muzar.”
At page 187, in his own extract from the Chach Namah, “ the Jnts of Lohana”
are mentioned, also, that they consist of “ Lakha and Samma,” and that “they
plundered within the territory of Debal.” The Puranah, one of the old channels of
the Mihran of Sind or the Hakra, is called the Lohano Dhoro after them to this day.
Tod, in his “ Rajas’thau,” says (page 320): “The Loliana, were formerly
Rajpoots [fancy Elliot’s Afghans !], but betaking themselves to commerce, have
fallen into the third class. They are scribes and shop-keepers, and object to no oc¬
cupation that will bi’ing a subsistence, and as food, excepting their cats and their
cows, they will eat anything.” See also Burton’s “ Scinde,” Yol. I, p. 236.
Sadr ’All Shah further observes, that, “ the city must have been ruined before
the expiration of the fourth century of the Hijrah, or about 1020 A. D. [on the 26th
April, 1020 A. D., the year 411 of the Hijrah commenced], because Ohhotah, Amaranf,
brother of Dilorali, Amarani [Dilu Ra’e], who departed to Baghdad, on account
of his brother’s injustice, where he embraced Islam, married the daughter cf a
celebrated ’Arab, and returned with her into Sind before the expiration [before
the middle?] of the fourth century, along with a number of other ’Arabs, among
whom was the Sayyid, ’All Musa.” He evidently meant, before the middle of the
fourth century. He is rather too late by about thirty or forty years ; while McMurdo
is too soon by nearly two hundred and fifty. The fourth century of the Hijrah
commenced on the 24th August, 1009 A. D.
1°6 It is used as an adjective, as is the Past. Part, signifying, ‘aided,’
‘ defended,’ ‘ victorious,’ ‘ conquering,’ etc.
A A
206
H. G. Raver fcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
I will now relate what these writers say respecting the rivers, and
the places on or near their banks.
All that Ibn Khurdad-bih gayg ^ that, “from Barmasir ]107
to Dehal is eight days’ jonrney ; and from Debal to the junction of the
river Mihran with the ocean is two farsangs.1’
Al-Mas’ljdI says : “ The Mihran of Sind issues from sources well
known, situated in the holiistdn or mountain tracts of Sind, the country
p
of Kinnauj, the territory of Budah [ tzp— or — Bauudah in one
MS.], the territory of Kash-mir, and Kandhar [Kandharah or Kan-
dharo ?],109 and Tafan [ — Takin — also — Tafin — anc^ in
some MSS., which may he At-Tafah, or At-Takah, or even At-Takar],
and flows on towards Multan, where it receives the name of “ Mihran of
Gold,” the same as the word Multan signifies [!] the “ Frontier of
Gold.”110 * * *
“ From Multan the Mihran takes its course through the country of
Mansuriyah,111 and near the territory of Debal falls into the sea. * * *
It forms many inlets and creeks, such as the creek or estuary of Sind-
bur or Sand-bur [ j>yjAW> — Sand-pur ?] in the country of Bagliir —
Waghir, ‘ b ’ and ‘ w ’ being interchangeable] 112 * * *
“ The Malik of Hind is the Balhari [ ] ; and the Malik of
Kinnauj, who is one of the Maliks of Sind, is Budah [ — or Bauudah
— or Baruzah, fyj, — or Nauwarah — in as many different
i°7 In the text of M. C. Barhier de Meynard this name is written Narmashirat
( ); and in Elliot’s extracts from the same anthor, it is “ Narmasira.”
The name in Ibn Hankal is as I have given it above ; and it is a well known town of
Kirman, and is repeatedly mentioned down to modern times.
103 Thus in the original, but Elliot (p. 21), turns it into “ Banura,” and renders
the rest of the passage as follows : “and from Kashmir, Kandahar, and Tafan ; and
at length running into [sic.] Multan, it receives the name of Mihran of gold, just as
Multan means boundary of gold.” Did they find a “ house of gold” in the river too ?
109 Not Kandahar certainly, eight degrees farther west, which was not known by
that name at the period in question : it was then styled Bal-yus.
110 The word ^ j Xl — meadow — is also, without doubt, a mistake for It was
probably written without points in the original copy of the text quoted, and that
farTch is meant, the statements which follow fully confirm. See note 97.
HI Mas’udi must be wrong, of course, although he visited these parts in 331 H.
(942-43 A. D.), and wrote from personal observation ; for does not Tod, who was
never there, tell us in his “ Rajas’than,” that “ the remains of the ancient fortress
of Mansoora are on the island of Bekher” P See note 105, page 204.
112 See Burnes’ “ Travels,” vol. I, page 308. There was an old fort hereabouts,
swallowed up during the earthquake of 1819, called Sindri or Sandri. It lay on the
east or Kachchh side of the estuary of the Hakra, Wahindah, or Sind-Sagar.
207
1892,] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries .
MSS,, the Budhiyah — of the Chach Namah], which is the title of
all the Maliks of Kinnauj. There is likewise a town called by this
name, and at present it is within the pale of Islam, and is among the
dependencies of Multan.113 From thence [Budah] issues one of the
rivers which together form the Nahr-i-Mihran of Sind. # # * This
Budah, who is the Malik of Kinnauj, is the enemy of the Balhari, the
Malik of Hind. The Malik of Kandhar [Kandharah. or Kandharo before
noticed], who is one of the Maliks of Sind and its hill tracts, rules over
the territory of or [Jachch or Jachchi, the tract lying between
Uchchh and Kandharah or Kandharo, a small territory then dependent
on Multan. Jachch Wa-han, once its principal town, is still in exist¬
ence]. Out of it comes the river Ra’id [ tj ],ll4! one of the rivers which
go to form the Mihran of Sind. Kandhar [Kandharah or Kandharo] is
called the country of the Rahbut [in the original, — Al-Ralibut,
and also Al-Rahyut — — and, no doubt, meant for Raj-put —
]. Another, the third of the five rivers, is called Ha til [<J-khb ],115
and comes from the mountain tracts of Sind, and flows through the
country of Rah-but or territory of Kandhar [Kandharah or Kandharo],
The fourth river of the five comes from the territory of Kabul and its
mountains,116 which form the frontier or boundary of Sind towards
The Wagirs are still well known in the tracts between Lower Sind and Kachchb,
and Surath or Kathiawar (vnl. “ Kattywar),” and have given much trouble at differ¬
ent times. Sind-bur, or Sand-bur was certainly in Kachchh. See also the old ’Arab
map, page 213.
US This distinctly shows in what direction this Kinnauj was situated, and that
it has nothing whatever to do with the celebrated city of that name on the Kali
Nadi, near its junction with the Ganges. See also note farther on.
114 Elliot has “ Hahaj ” but for the purely ’Arabic letter to appear twice in an
Indian word is impossible. The part here referred to lay on either side of the
Hakra, adjoining Jachch on the north. The name still remains in Kandharah, or
Kandharo in the Sindf dialect, in the south-west corner of the Baliawal-pur state
adjoining Upper Sind, the “ Kundairoh,” “ Kundeara,” and “Kandera” of as
many different maps. It lies on the east bank of the old channel of the Hakra, near
its western branch, called the Ra’in. or Ra’ini, the “ Rainee Nullah” of the maps,
respecting which more will be found farther on. Jachch or Jachch Wa-han, appears
in the maps as “ Jvjja.” The petty ruler referred to in the text above was evident¬
ly one of the Ranas subject to the ’Arab rulers of Multan. As late as the time of
Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah, seven of these Ranas were tributary to Multan, and
U'chchh.
The word here given can only refer to the Ra’in branch of the Hakra or Wa-
hindah. See note 120, page 209.
115 This appears to be the same word, with the addition of another letter, as in
the extract from Bu-Rihan, who says : “ The river Kuj or Kaj, which falls from the
hill range of Bhatil.” See note farther on.
116 This cannot refer to the river of Kabul and its tributaries, since the word
203
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
[Bust?], Ghaznin or Ghaznih, [which may be Darghun. Zara’un,
or Daza’un — its whereabouts or what the correct word may be, I will
not venture to speculate on ; one copy has instead, and an addi¬
tional word ], ar-Rukhaj. and the territory of Dawar [^la — also
and ], which is the frontier of Sijis-stan. Another of the five
rivers comes from Kasb-mir, which is also part of the country of
Sind [!].”
“The territory of Budah [ 8^?],117 Malik of Kinnauj, extends to
must refer to — Bust — on the Hflrnand; and if so, shows that mighty
changes have taken place in this direction since the Mas’udi wrote. All the rivers
of the parts here referred to, now flow south-westwards, and empty themselves into
tho lake of Zarang, The only streams that come from anything like the direction of
Ghaznin and Bust are the Gumul and its tributaries, and the streams from the
direction of Kalat-i-Nicharah, hut the latter rise some two hundred miles south-east
of Bust on tho Hilmand. It will bo noticed how many rivers are said to go to form
the Mihran, which do not refer to the other rivers of the Punch Nad or Panj Ab.
I have elsewhere mentioned, that, in former times, the Ab-i-Sind must have been
joined by some considerable tributaries from the westwards ; and, from my geo¬
graphical inquiries, it is evident to me, that the river of Kurma’li {vul. “ Kurram ”),
and its tributary tho Gambilali, which still unites with it, formerly sent a greater
volume of water into tho Ab-i-Sind than at present. It is said, that, previous to the
time of Amir Timur’s invasion of Hind, in 801 II. (1398 A. D.), the country around
Laka’i of tho Mar-wats was a vast lake. Lower down again the united waters of the
river of the Jzioba’h and the Gumul used, likewise, to contribute a considerable body
of water to the main stream in ancient times ; and, doubtless, minor streams, now
changed and dried up or diverted, used to contribute their waters, as well as the
rivers lower down, from the southern Afghanistan by Siwi, the course of one of
which was changed by an earthquake in Akbar Badshah’s time, as well as other
tributaries from the Baluchistan, which united with the Ab-i-Sind when it, or a
branch of it, flowed westwards from near Rujan, as explained in the account of that
river further on. I believe that a considerable river flowed through what now con¬
stitutes the Bolan defile or pass, respecting -which I have more to say presently.
In Vol. II of his “ Archoelogical Reports,” page 27, Cunningham, strange to say,
“identifies” Ptolemy’s “ Sabbana” as “the modern town of Zhobi, at the junction
of the Zhobi and Gonial rivers. The Saparnis would therefore be the Zhobi river,
or perhaps the Gonial itself.”
The only difficulty would be where to find this “ modern town of Zhobi.” By
“ Zhobi,” I suppose he refers to the river of the Jzoba’li or Jzioba’h Dara’h in the
Afghanistan, but such a town as Zhobi does not, and never did, exist. See also pages
26 and 32 of the same “ Report.”
117 I ought to notice here, that, although the ’Arab writers mention the name of
Mihran, and sometimes, Mihran Rud, as if the Ab-i-Sind, above and immediately
below, Multan, was so called ; yet they did not mean it to be so understood, as here
shown, and as subsequently confirmed. They referred to what went to form the
Mihran of Sind, which consisted of all the rivers from the Ab-i-Sind to the Ohitang.
After all had united they obtained the name of “ Mihran of Sind,” and this name it
1802.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
209
about one hundred and twenty square farsangs , each farsang being equal
to eight mil [miles].118 Tin’s Malik has four armies, according to the
four cardinal points, each consisting of 700,000 or 900,000 men [!].
The south army defends the territory from the Balhari, Malik of Mankir
[before stated to be Malik of Hind] : while that of the north is for the
purpose of carrying on war with the Malik of the territory of Multan
[consequently, it, Kinnauj here referred to, must be south of Multan],
and with the Musalmans, his subjects, who are established on that
frontier ; while the other two armies are sent wherever an enemy shows
himself.”
“ When all these rivers [five are referred to] have passed the
“ Gate of the Bait or Receptacle of Gold,” or Multan, they unite between
it and Mansuriyali119 into one stream, at a place called Dosh-i-Ab 120 [lit.
Meeting-place of Waters, or Waters-Meet, from the Tajzik or Persian
‘ dosh ’ — ‘meeting,’ ‘ coming into contact,’ etc.], which flows towards
the town of Alror or Aldor — ],12L which lies on its western
bore, until it finally emptied itself into the ocean. The Ab-i-Sind or Indns, with
its affluents was one tributary, and the Biah, with its affluents, the Rud-i-Sind wo
Hind as it is called, another, which united with the Hakra or Wahindah and its
affluents, and formed the Mihran of Sind as above described. Consequently, the
Ab-i-Sind or Indus, and the Rud-i-Sind wo Hind, were really tributaries of the
Hakra or Wahindah ; for, after the Ab-i-Sind or Indus deserted the other, it still
remained the Mihran of Sind ; and this is borne out by the statements of all the
’Arab and native writers, as will herein appear. See note 156, page 218.
118 A vast area truly ! Even if we compute it at 44 square farsangs of 8 miles
each, 26,600 square miles is the result. The farsang generally was about three mil,
each mil being equal to 4,000 gaz, the farsang being 12,000, and each gu z being equal
to 24 fingers’ breadth measured sideways, or six clenched fists. The Sindi farsang ,
it will be noticed, is stated to be eight mil. See note 90, page 190.
119 Tod, Yol. II, page 229, note to “ Arore,” says : “ The remains of this once
famous town I had the happiness to discover by means of one of my parties in 1811.”
Any one, unacquainted with the history of these parts, would imagine from this,
that its site had remained unknown up to the period of this wonderful discovery —
“on the island of Bekher,” where Aror never stood.
120 The place of junction here referred to lay near to Sahib Garh and Baghlah of
the present day, about seventy-two miles south-west of Lfohchh. When the Mas’udi
wrote, the branch of the Hakra which flowed past Aror on the east, had not, accord¬
ing to the tradition, been as yet diverted. Elliot’s editor (Yol. 1, p. 23), unacquaint¬
ed with the meaning of ‘ dosh,’ supposed it to be “ Duab,” as he writes Do-abah.
121 The ‘ al ’ in this word, as here written, and by all the old geographers, is
not, and must not be mistaken for, the ’Ai'abic article al, because the name Alor or
Aror was the Hindi name centuries before the Musalmans had any acquaintance
with it, and it may be, and is, written and styled Aror, with ‘ ar ’ as well as with
<ai:
The derivation of the word Rurhi is evidently derived from the Sanskrit ^3" —
210
H. G. Raver fy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
[mc] bank, and is a dependency of Mansuriyah, where \i. e. at Alror or
Aldor] it receives the name of Mihran. There [but, in one copy,
“ Farther on ”] it separates into two branches, and both these branches
of the great river, styled the Mihran of Sind, fall into the sea of Sind
[or Hind] near the town of Shagarah [ — Sagarah ?], one of the
dependencies of Mansuriyah, a distance of two days’ journey from the
town of Debal.122 * * * After Tiz of Mukran [eastwards], the littoral
of Sind commences, where are the mouths of the Mihran or Nahr of
Sind, the principal river of that country. In this part stands the town
of Debal ; and it is [near?] there that the coast of Hind joins that of
Baruz ( ), where they make the spears called baruzi .”
“ The territory of Mansuriyah contains 300,000 villages and estates
[what we style mauza? s in India probably], lying in a fertile tract of
country, well planted and cultivated. This territory is continually at
war with a people called Med, originally from Sind, and also with
other races.
rur, in reference to its sitnation on the rocky limestone ridge, and the signification
of which word is, ‘ rough,’ ‘ stiff,’ ‘ rugged,’ ‘ hard,’ etc. See my “ Notes on Afghan¬
istan,” etc , page 326, note %.
Mr. A. W. Hughes, of the Bombay Uncovenanted Service, in his “ Gazetteer of
the Province of Sind,” p. 678, says it is “ the ancient Loliarkot,” but what, or whose,
“ Loharkot ” he does not inform ns, nor does he give us his authority ; and yet, on
the next page, says it was founded “ by one Saiyad Rukandin [Rukn-ud-Din per¬
haps is meant] Shah in H. 698 (A. D. 1297).
Cunningham, on the other hand, in his “ Ancient Geography of India,” says
(p. 258) : “ The true name of Alor is not quite certain. The common pronunciation
[of English writers P but how is it written ?] at present is Aror, but it seems pro¬
bable that the original name was Bora, and that the initial vowel [here the “initial
vowel,” so called, is the first letter of the alphabet, and a consonant ] was derived
from the Arabic prefix Al, as it is written Alror in Biladuri, Edrisi, and other ’Arab
authors [and also “ Aldor,” with ‘d,’ as given in Elliot’s work]. This derivation
is countenanced by the name of the neighbouring town of B ori [here a letter is
left out to support the theory], as it is a common practise in India thus to duplicate
names. So Bora and Bori would mean Great and Little Bora. This word has no
meaning in Sanskrit [as I have shown above], but in Hindi it signifies “ noise,”
“clamour,” “roar,” and also “fame.” It is just possible, therefore, that the full
name of the city may have been Rora-pura, or Rora-nagara ; the “Famous City.”
Why not, at once, call it the “ Roaring City” ?
But the “ Hindi” word here quoted by him happens to be Sanskrit ^ ; and,
unfortunately for this “ Famous ” theory, the name is not written Bori by the peo¬
ple of the country, but Rurhi — LSAJJ) ; and as J is interchangeable with J in Hindi
and other dialects, it is also called Lurhi as well as Rurhi. There is another word
Lbj ( ) — rord, of the same derivation, signifying, ‘stone,’ ‘rock,’ or r a fragment*
of either. The period when Rurhi was founded will be mentioned farther on.
122 Compare the map taken from the “Masalik wa Mamalik ” at page 213.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
211
“ Mansuriyah and its dependencies, like Multan and its territory,
is a frontier. The name, Mansuriyah, it derived from Mansur, son of
Jamliur, who had been placed there by the Bani ’Ummiyah, as Hakim,
* * * Sind is the territory nearest the Musalman dominions : Hind lies
more east. Nofir, son of But, son of Ham, son of Nuh, at the head of
his descendants and followers, took the direction of Sind and Hind,
where his posterity multiplied, and were remarkable for their gigantic
stature. They established themselves in the territory of Mansuriyah, a
dependency of Sind. This confirms the tradition, that Hind and Sind
had been peopled by the descendants of Nofir, son of But, son of Ham,
son of Nuh.”
The Istakhari says : “ Samand is a small city [or town] situated
like Multan, on the east of the river Mihran. Between each of these
places and the river the distance is two farsangsd^ * * * The town of
Alror [ yjjJ I ] is about the size of Multan. It has two walls [ ], is
situated near [not on, it will be observed] the Mihran, and near the
borders of Mansuriyah [the territory]. Nirun is about half way between
Debal and Mansuriyah. * * *
“ The river of Sind, which is called the Mihran of Sind [lower down
stream], is said to issue from a mountain range in which several of the
tributaries of the Jihun rise.184 The Mihran passes by the borders of
Samand [the Samandur of the Kazwinl, who quotes this work]186 and
Alror [or Aldor] from the neighbourhood of Multan, and from thence
to Mansuriyah,186 and farther onwards, until it unites with the ocean to
the east of Debal. Its waters are very pleasant [sweet].- 187 It is said
that there are crocodiles in it as large as those of the Nil [Nile]. It
rises and inundates the land just like that river does, and after the
waters subside seed is sown in the same manner as I have described in
the account of Misr [Egypt]. The Sind Rud [or River of Sind and Hind]
123 Compare the Mas’udfs statement, pages 189,90. If the Sindi farsangs before
mentioned, of eight mil to each far sang, the distance would be sixteen English miles,
but, according to the more correct computation, about six.
124 See my “ Notes on Afghanistan,” etc., page 563, note #.
125 See page 213 and farther on, also the old map from Purchas.
126 Elliot has, at page 30, the following : — ‘‘ The Mihran passes by the borders of
Samand and A1 Rur (Alor) to the neighbourhood of Multan,” etc. It is impossible
for the river to have flowed backwards from “ A1 Rur ” to Multan. It is exactly
contrary.
127 Compare this with the statement in the “ Masalik wa Mamalik ” and Ibn
Haukal, farther on.
Hafiz Abru says the Sind river or Ab-i-Sind runs into the territory of Man¬
suriyah, its course being from north to south, and, at the end, turning towards the
east.
212
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
is about three stages from Multan. Its waters are very pleasant [sweet]
even before its junction with the Mihran.”
This statement is important, for here we have two large rivers, the
Mihran and the Sind Rud distinctly mentioned. The following, too, is
remarkable, and shows what changes have taken place to the westwards,
respecting which I shall have more to say presently. He says: “ Muk¬
ran is mostly desert, and has but few rivers. Their waters flow into the
Mihran on both sides of Mansuriyah." m
“ The cities and towns of Sind are Mansuriyah, Debal, Ninin,
Kalwi [or Kalari], Anari, Balwi [or Balari], Maswahi, Bahraj [^-/B
the old ’Arab map,129 generally written without points], Baniyah, Manj-
anri [Manjabari of others], Sadusan [Sharusan or Siw-istan], Alroz
[with 4 z ’ — Alror before],130 etc. The cities of Hind 31 are Multan, Jand-
rud [Ohand-rud ?], Basmad, Sindan, etc.132
“ The distance from Arma’il in Mukran to Debal is four days’
journey ; from Mansuriyah to Debal, six ; Mansuriyah to Multan, twelve ;
from Mansuriyah to Famhal, eight ; between Multan and Basmid, about
two; from the latter to Alroz [Alror], three; thence to Anari,’ four,
from which to Kalwi [or Kalari] is two, and from the last-named place
to Mansuriyah one day’s journey. Baniyah [ ^b.3S — without points] lies
128 See also the Kazwini’s account, page 205. How far Mansuriyah or its
jurisdiction extended at that period may be gathered from Al-Idrisi, who says :
“ Between Kiz and Arma’il are two tracts of territory touching each other : one,
named Rahun, is a dependency of Mansuriyah, and the other, called Kalwan, depends
on Mukran.” Mansuriyah comprised all middle and lower Sind.
129 Jn the old ’Arab map page 213, it is placed west of Mansuriyah on the west-
bank of the Mihran. See page 215 and also farther on.
These are the (Falui), (Iri), or (Balui ), Maswahi,
Bahraj, (Nayatah), Manjabari, Sindusan, and Aror of the “ Masalik wa
Mamalik.”
131 This clearly shows that the Sind Rud of the Masalik wa Mamalik map just
referred to, is that which flowed between those places.
138 The Basmad, (Sarian) or (Siran or Sairan) or (j (Saidan),
and
of the before mentioned work respectively.
133 Elliot, “Historians,” Yol. I, page 15, has: “From the Mihran to Balcar,
which is the first place on the borders of Hind, is four days’ journey.” All this is
pure surmise ; for the word is unintelligible, and, in the Paris copies, according to
his own account, is illegible. In them it is which may be anything almost. In
the printed text of M. Barbier de Meynard it is ; yet, even with this before him,
Elliot made it Balcar , a place never mentioned by any of the old geographical writers
here quoted, because it did not then exist, and this too after translating the addi¬
tional passage given in this note from Idrisi thus : — “ From hence [Bania] to Mamhal
213
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
between Mansuriyah and Famhal, at one day’s journey from Mansuriyah.
and from Debal to Manjanri [Manjabari] is two days’ journey. From
Baniyali to Mansuriyab three days’ journey ; to Fahmal six days’ ; and
to Debal two.” 134
The Masalik wa Mamalik, which, as I have before mentioned, is,
in many places, like Ibn Haukal, differs from him considerably in others.
It states that, “ From Multan to Basmid or Samid [it is written both
ways in the original MS.] to the Rud-i-Sind is three days’ journey.
Basmid or Samid is a small city [or town], and that, and Multan and
Jandawar [ the original has ^ but as this purely ’Arabic letter could
never occur in a Hindi name, it is probably intended for Chanda war
or £ Jandawar] are situated on the east side of the Rud [river] of
Multan, each at a farsahh distant [but, according to the map of Sind
contained in the original MS., they are a long distance east of the
river, and in it Multan does not appear, being farther up stream].
Samid or Basmid is a city full of wealth and affluence, and is not
less [in size] than Multan, and has two walls [ ^ ], placed on either
side of the river Mihran.136 # * * The Mihran comes out near
Multan, passes the boundary or limits of Basmid, and Mansuriyah,
and east of Debal unites with the ocean. The Rud-i-Sind136 is three
days’ journey from Multan, and is a pleasant [sweet] river, and unites
with the Mihran Rud. It is subject to inundation like the Rud-i-Nil
and has likewise crocodiles.”
Here again two great rivers are mentioned, just as Al-Idrisi states,137
the Mihran, and the Sind Rud or Rud-i-Sind wa Hind, but the Masa¬
lik wa Mamalik goes farther, and adds : “ The Jand Rud [«Sjy ah*. or ^ ola.
and Kambaya the country is nothing but a marine strand, without habitations, and
almost without water, consequently, it is uninhabitable for travellers.”
No doubt the Kunchi ran is here referred to, into which Sultan Firuz Shah was
led by a treacherous guide, like as Sultan Mahmud before him, as related at page 80,
See also note 105.
1341 Al-Idrisi states that, “ between Baniyah and Fahmal (Elliot has “ Mahmal”
here), and Kambayah, the country is a salt, marshy shore, without habitation, and
almost without fresh water, and therefore it is impassable to travellers.” Its position
therefore is towards the sea coast and the Kunchi ran, or great marsh of Kachchh,
and not as Elliot supposes within fifteen farsangs of Aror. See his work, Yol I nn
61, 174, and 367. _ ’
136 The Mihran here, and the Rud-i-Multan above, both refer to the A'b-i-Sind.
or Indus, as mentioned in the preceding note 117, which see, also note 123.
136 The Tarikh-i-Tahiri, referring to the Sind Rud, says it is also known as the
Panj-Ab, and below Bakhar is known as the Bahmin [ ]. See page 216.
137 He wrote, it must be remembered, in 545 H. (1160-51 A. D.).
B B
21 4 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
Qhand Rud P — this is a different word from above mentioned] or
Samand Rud [ djj ] is also a great river, and a sweet, on whose
banks stands the city [shalir] of Jand [or Chand ?]. It unites with the
Mihrdn Bud below the Sind Bud , towards the territory of Mansuriyah.”138
We have here, therefore, three large rivers. The first is the
Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus ; the second the Biah and its then tribu¬
taries, the Bihat,139 the Chin-ab, and the Rawah or Rawi, which, in those
days, passed north-east and afterwards east of Multan, and united with
the Biah, some twenty- eight miles to the southward of the last named
city, forming the Panch Nad or Panj A'b of the geographers ; and the
third river is the Hakra, Wahindah, or Sind-Sagar, and of which,
at the period in question, the Sutlaj, was a tributary, as were likewise
the Ghag-ghar, the Sursuti, and the Chitang.
I now turn to Ibn Haukal, who states, that, “ Basmid is a small
city [ shahrhi] , and it, and Multan, and Chandwar [in another copy
— Qhand-awar] are placed on the east side of the Rud of Multan.
From each place to the bank of the river will be one farsang. Basmid
138 This is the Samand of the Istakhari in the only copy available, but the Kazwi-
ni, who quotes him copiously, says, that the Istakhari calls it the Samandur, con¬
sequently part of the word has been left out in the copy of the Istakhari quoted.
See page 51.
It will be noticed from this important statement, that the old ’Arab map hei’e
given (and likewise as shown in the map to Ibn Haukal’s work) does not quite agree
with the writer’s description. But two rivers are indicated, the Mihran Rud and
the Sind Rud, and, that between what appears as or near their junction,
down as far as and but a single river is indicated ; while farther
east, a line, with five towns on it, runs down to, and includes above noticed,
and that one of these five is Basmid, and another, Anari, two days’ journey from
Basmid. The description says, that the Sind Rud [the Rud-i-Sind wa Hind — the
Biah and its tributaries] unite with the Mihran Rud [the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind]
above Basmid, which is three days’ journey below Multan and three days’ journey
above Aror ; and that the walls of Basmid rise on either side cf the Mihran. Fur¬
ther, that the Samand Rud [the Hakra and its tributaries] unites with the other
two still lower down towards Mansuriyah, at a place known as Dosh-i-Ab. I have
not interfered with the ’Arab map, but I have indicated what is meant from the
description, which agrees with other old writers, at the right hand side of that
map.
139 There appears to have been another river besides the Bihat, Chinab, Rawi,
and Biah, and I have seen somewhere what tributary of one of these four it was,
which formed the fifth, but I cannot recall it to mind. Neither the Sindhu or Ab-i-
Sind, nor the Shuttladr, were included among the Panch Nad or Panj Ab, or Five
Rivers ; and to this day, the people dwelling near the junction of the other rivers,
including the Sutlaj, after the junction, style the united stream the “ Sapt Nad ” or
“ Sat Nad” — the “ Saptah Siudawah” of the Hindu legends — or Seven Rivers.
215
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
is a city full of affluence and convenience, and will not be less [in size]
than Multan. It has two walls [jy4— or sides ?] placed or situated
on the banks of the Mihran Rud.140
“ Debal is situated to the east [ sic in MSS.141] of the Rud-i-
Mihran, and on the sea coast. It is the harbour of that territory. They
cultivate the land without irrigation. It is a confined place [*»#>, a word
which also means ‘barren’], but for the sake of trade people take up
their dwelling there.
“ Nirun is a city situated between Debal and Mansuriyah on the
road thither, and is situated on the west side of the Mihran ; and Bahraj
or Bharaj [^rtf148— also written | and ^ ^ in other copies], Mas wae
or Maswahi or Maswa’i 0r or Sindusan or Sidu-
san or and Hanibar [ ] or Halbali [AkIa] or
Ealiyah [aJa] or Halat [Aht] or Hazah [#<>a] are situated on the west¬
ern side of the Mihran. I'ri [^;fi] or I'di or (jj^l] or Andi [<^<*1
—and Abri— ^>t], and Falui [<^] or Da lfii [ ]14*, lie on the east
side, in such wise, that, in going from Mansuriyah to Multan, they lie
at a distance from the banks of that river.
“ Balui [ ^-4 or Jalbui — <_5^W>144] is situated on the Mihran, near
•*
unto a channel which branches off from the river behind Mansuriyah
[as shown in the map of the Masalik wa Mamalik, just opposite Sadusan
or Siw-istan].
“ Famhal [ ] is a city [or town] situated on the nearest border
of Hindustan, as far as Saimur [ ] ; and from Famhal to Mukran,
140 in Elliot (p. 37), this description is applied to Alror. He has : “The country
[city] of Alrur is as extensive as Multan. It has two walls, is situated near the
Mihran, and is on the borders of Mansura.”
The text I have quoted is as above, and agrees with the “ Masalik wa Mamalik.”
141 in the map to Ibn Haukal’s text, as in the Masalik wa Mamalik map, Debal is
placed west of the river. The above, therefore, is palpably a mistake of the copyists.
See the map from Pnrchas.
142 This is the same place as is mentioned by the Istakhari, and by the Balaziri
in the account of Muhammad’s advance against Sadusan, or Siw-istan, the modern
Siliwan.
143 Such are the variations in different copies. In the text translated by Ander¬
son in the “Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal” for 1819, the words are
•*
144 The name is thus written in the map to Ibn Haukal’s text in the Bodleian
Library. It will be noticed, that, in writing, if the upper part of ^ is rounded a
little, as in quick writing, it is liable to be mistaken for j ; and this last letter, if
the upper part is lengthened, as it is very apt to be iu MS., may easily be mistaken
for This place is the Kalari of the Istakhari,
216 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
to Nudhah [Nudiyab. of the Sindian historians], to the boundaries of
the territory of Multan, all appertain to Sind. Baniyah [ ]146 or-
Naniyah [ ] or Maniyah or Maniah [ — but all are doubtful,
because the word is chiefly written without points, and and
even ], is a small city [or town] which ’Abd-ul-’Aziz-i-Habbari
the Kureshi, the ancestor of the tribe who hold Mansuriyah in subjec-
• _
tion,146 built. Mand [ aaxj ] belongs to Hindustan, and there are infidels
dwelling therein ; and all that has been mentioned belongs to Hindu¬
stan.”
Then follows the important statement, that, “ The junction of the
Mihran with the Sind Rud [the Biah and its tributaries as elsewhere
explained] is below Multan, but above Basmid. The Jadd [or Chand]
Rud [the Hakra] unites with the Mihran below the junction of the
Sind Rud, towards Mansuriyah.”
Nudiah [ ], or Nudiyali [ ]147 is a flat open tract of Conn¬
ie It is, from its situation, the same place as mentioned by the Istakhari, and
towards the south-east of Mansuriyah, as shown in the map to the Masalik wa
Mamalik. See page 213. It is written without points in the map to the Bodleian
MS. See note 163.
146 That is, the towns dependent on Mansuriyah and its district, and situated
therein. See page 190.
147 Elliot sometimes renders this “ Budh,” “Buddha,” and “Budhiya,” but
says that Idrisi and IJazwmi prefer “ Nadha or Nudha ,” and immediately after
[p. 388, vol. I] says : “ The old tract of Budh or Budhiya, very closely corresponds
with Kachh Gandava,” and straightway goes to “ Bori or Bura in the Afghan pro¬
vince of Siwistan,” and of course, becomes hopelessly confused.
The Borah or table land, so called, of the southern part of the Afghanistan —
for there is no town called “Bori,” much less “ Bura,” as he imagined — is out of
Sind altogether, and one hundred and twenty-five miles farther north than Gandabah.
and more than three hundred and fifty miles north of Bahman-abad.
In a note at page 389 he says : “ In the passage above quoted from the
Mujmalu-t-Tawdrikh, Bahman is said to have founded a city called Bahmanabad
in the country of Budh. There is a place entered as Brahiman in Burnes’ map,
between Shal and Bori.” This shows the utter confusion into which he has fallen.
He should have added to the above, that, in the work last quoted, the author says
that “ this Bahman-abad is said to be Mansuriyah by some,” and he assigns it its
proper position. See Elliot, Yol. I, page 109 as to “ Mansura” and Bahman-abad,
and note 105, para. 18.
I may add, that, Ibn Haukal, and the Masalik wa Mamalik, have Nudhah —
AAAJ — at all times ; and in changing it to, or reading it as, “ Budh,” “ Budha,”
and “ Budhiya,” Elliot may have been under the impression, that it must be correct
to do so, if the people were Budhists, or in support of some theory that required
to be bolstered up. See also pages 206 and 208.
It so happens that Nudah or Nudiyah lay on the west of the Mihran, while
Budah the Budiyah of the Namah, lay on the east. See what Wilford, who
217
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
try, situated between Turan [the territory dependent on Kusdar, from
which Kanda’il is five farsangs distant] and Mukran, and Multan and
tlie towns of Mansuriyah ;148 and this tract lies to the west of the river
Mihran. From this part bakhti [hairy, double-liumped] camels are
taken to other parts of the world.149
The Kasbah [bazar town] of the tract called Nudiyah is a place
of traders, and they call it Kanda’il.150 The inhabitants of this tract
of country are in appearance like the people of the desert [of ’Arabia],
and have dwellings constructed of canes151 along the banks of the Mihran,
from the boundaries of Multan as far as the sea coast ; and they have
also grazing lands between the river and Famhal [farther east, and
elsewhere said to be “ the first place belonging to Hindustan in that
direction”]. They are a numerous tribe. Famhal, Sindusan [or
Sadusan, Sihwan of the present day], Samur, and 0r all
four towns, have Adinah masjids, which the Musalmans founded.
was far in advance of his time, says respecting these parts in the 9th volume of
the “ Asiatic Researches,” page 225. Budah or Budiya has nothing whatever to do
with Braliuis as M. de Geoje, states in his notes to the text of what he calls
“ Beladsori ” (referring to the Balaziri) : they were unknown in that early day.
143 See pages 189, 90.
149 Compare this passage in Elliot, Yol. I, p. 38.
150 The Istakhari says, respecting Kanda’il, that it was so called after A’il
[ f a man of that name who subdued it ; so here we have the word Kand, as in
Kand- ahar, and in Samr-fomcZ and Bey-kand. The word is plainly written cbolAi.
With the above very plain statement before him, Elliot persists time after time, in
calling the place “ Kandabil ” and “ Kandhabel.” Cunningham, of course, follows
Elliot in the spelling, but he considers that, “ Ptolemy’s Badana , which lies im¬
mediately to the north of the rivulet, must be the present Gandava, as the letters
B and G are constantly interchanged. In the books of the early ’Arab writers
[according to Elliot’s versions, it should have been added] it is ahvays called Kandd-
bilT See “ Elliot,” vol. I, pages 29 and 84, as to its conqueror. It so happens,
that Kanda’il is not Gandabah, but stood on a hill, which Gandabah does not. The
Masalik wa Mamalik distinctly states, that there is but five farsangs distance between
Kusdar, the situation of which is well known, and Kanda’il, which is eight days’
journey from Mansuriyah, and ten from Multan.
M. Barbier de Meynard’s 'Arabic text of Ibn Khurdad-bih, p. 57, contains the
same error respecting Kanda’il, and Kusdar, after the same fashion is “ Kusdan.” See
my ‘"Notes on Afghanistan,” etc., page 558, note §§.
l&l Because the river was continually altering its course. It was the same when
Abu-1-Fazl wrote upwards of six centuries after ; and canes play a great part in the
construction of dwellings of all kinds, both for man and beast, in Sind and the
Indus valley higher up, up to the present day. The people here referred to are the
Sammahs and Jliarijahs (or Zharijahs) or both.
168 This word is unpointed and may mean anything. Elliot reads it “ Kambaya ,”
but as he reads Kanda’il as “ Kandabil ,” we must make allowance, and be permitted
218 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
Respecting the distances between some of the places mentioned
above, he says: “From Mansuriyah to the boundary of Nudah [or
Nudiyah, as the Sindis write it] is five stages or days’ journeys [ mar -
halali ] ; from Mansuriyah to Famlial eight ; from Multan to Basinid
two ; from thence to Alror [ jjfl ] or Alroz [ ]lbS three ; from thence
to Abari [ ] or Iri [ ] four ; from thence to Faldi [ ] or
Falui [ ] four. From Faldi or Falui [the Kalari of others] to
Mansuriyah one stage or a day’s journey;' from Debal to Nirun four;164
from Faldi or Falui [Faldi before, the Kalari of others] to Ladan four
farsangs ; and Baniyah [written Maniah or Maniy ah and in other ways
before166] or Naniali is distant one stage or a day’s journey from Man¬
suriyah.
The source of the Mihran, the waters of which are pleasant, is in
the same mountain range in which the Jihun takes its rise. It comes
out at [t. e., near] Multan, and166 passes the boundary [ ^ ] of Basmid
Alror or Alroz,167 and by Mansuriyah, and falls into the sea to the east¬
ward of Debal. * * * The Sind Rud, the waters of which are also
wholesome, is likewise a great river, and at three stages or days’ journey
below Multan unites with the Mihran Rud.”
to doubt its correctness. The Gulf of Kachchh and the whole peninsula of Kathia¬
war [vul. “Kattywar”] intervenes, and Kanbhayat (vul. “Cambay”) was not
subject to Musalmans at such an early date as the time of the writer above quoted.
Part of Kachchh is doubtless referred to here. The north-west part if it is called
Kandhar and Kandahar.
153 Two copies have the rud — — instead of Alror —
154 In two copies of the text this name is written Biroz or Biruz [ ] and
Piroz or Piruz [jjjitf ] respectively.
155 See note 105, and pages 212 and 215.
156 Although Ibn Haukal calls this river, which is the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, by the
name of “ Mihran,” it will be noticed that he makes a distinction between it and the
“ Mihran Bud.” Had he not done so, we could only suppose that he considered
the two other great rivers to be tributaries of this one, but he evidently means the
river which “ went to form the Mihran of Sind,” as others do, or what he here calls
the Mihran Bud.
Bu-Rihan calls the river the Sind until it unites with the others, and the united
streams he calls the Nahr-i-Mihran. See the previous note 117, and the extract
from that author at page 221.
157 This word does not occur in two out of three copies of the text cousulted.
See page 213, and also the learned note in Elliot, Yol. I, pages 380-81, from the
pen of his Editor, on the subject of “ Chand Rud.” He takes it for granted, that
the Ohin-ab always flowed as at present. In the text, page 48, he has another
meaning for “ Chand.” He says “ there is some confusion here,” and he has made
it still more confused.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 219
Another copy quoted by Elliot has : “ The Chand Rud is also a
great and pleasant [ ] river on whose bank is the city or town of
Chand Rud. It falls into the Mihran below the Sind Rud towards the
territory of Mansurah.” This, however, does not agree with three other
MS. copies which I have used, but agrees with the Masalik wa Mamalik
just quoted ; and, for a town “ Chand Bud ” is an impossible name, and
must refer to the river, or a town situated thereon.
Bu-RiHAN-AL-BERdm, says, after noticing the junction of the river
of Kabul with the “ Nahr-i-Sind : ” “ The river Biliat, called Jihlam, on
the west, unites with the Ab-i-Chandra [the Chand Rud of Ibn Haukal
before noticed] at Jharawar ]1B8 or Jhara Rud [ <i^y^or ]
Jandrahah [ J nearly fifty mil [miles] above Multan, and flows
past it on the west. Then the Ab-i-Biah [!] increases it [by uniting
with them] from the east. Then the Trawah [ — the Rawah of the
Tabakat-i-Nasiri — the Rawi] joins them. The Nahr-ul-Kaj [or Gaj — ■
— in one copy Laj — ^159 — the upper stroke of the unbeing left out,
but that letter may be mistaken for J if not marked thus ] branches off
from the Nahr-ul-Kut [ jd which issues from the mountains of
Bahatil [ ], and joins them, after which the Nahr-i-Shutlad [
or Shutladr ] unites with them below Multan at a place called
Panoh Nad.”160
153 In one place in his text, Bu-Rihan says the Sind is called Wahind ; that
or refers to the Ohandar Bhag — the Chandar-Bhaga or Chin-ab _
that the Biah flows to the west of Lohawar, and the Lrawah — the Rawah or Raw! _
on the east of Lohawar.
The Biah never yet flowed west of Lahor, within “ the range of history,” but
the Rawi has, but not very far west of it. It will be seen how he has reversed
matters. In another place, as in the text above, he makes the Biah unite with the
Ohin-ab above or north of the Rawi, again reversing facts.
159 His Nahr-ul-Kaj or Gaj, and Nahr-ul-Kut or Gut can only refer to those
tributaries of the Hakra or Wahindah which came from the hills east of Jasal-mir
in early times, noticed farther on. In the recently published printed text, in place
of this Nahr-ul-Kut we have Naghar Kof —
The letter here written £ may be meant for g. Bahatil is the Haf.il of Mas’udf.
See page 206, 7.
160 Professor Sachau indexes these two simple Hindi words in his printed text
of “ Alberuni,” under the meaningless form of “ Pdncanada and translates the
above passage as “ a place called Pdncanada ” ! A person who had to depend on
his translation would suppose Bu-Rihan had so written it.
The author of the ‘'Lost River” article in the “ Calcutta Review ” appears,
from the following, to have had a confused idea of the Panj Ab or Panch Nad He
says (page 14) : “ Thus, too, is solved the difficulty in providing a place for the
Satlej among the five branches of the “ Panjnad,” which has compelled modern
geographers to transfer that name from the Indus to the Chinab [!]. The latter has
220 H. G. Raverty — The Jtfihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 3,
I have entered here just what he says, hut there is evidently great
confusion; for we know that the Biah — if it is here referred to — never
united with the Ohin-ab and its tributaries before or above the Rawi, as
is here stated. Moreover, the mention of “ Sutlad ” rather shows that
the copyist wrote the names as he knew them best. Indeed, with regard
to all the extracts from Bu-Rihan contained in the Jami’-ut-Tawarikh.
it is difficult to decide which are actually his, and which Rashid-ud-
Din’s (the author), because, especially in reference to the river reaching
the sea by two channels, which, in those early days it did not do, as I
shall presently show, the latter mentions events as if stated by Bu-Rihan
which occurred three centuries after his death. I shall also prove that
no “ Sutlad ” — Shuttlaj or Sutlaj — flowed in the direction here indicated,
even at the time that Atnir Timur, the Gurgau, invaded these parts
more than four centuries after Bu-Rilian wrote.161
To continue his account, however, he states, that, “ After this, the
united streams become a vast river, and during the season of inundation,
the waters spread out to the extent of ten farsangs in breadth, and
swallow up all the other great streams, and the refuse brought down by
no claim whatever to this title, which Barns justly observes (Travels III — 287) is
unknoion upon its banks. The “Panjnad” or “ Panjab ” is the Indus itself. The
application of the term to any one river appears to be of late date.”
All this is contrary to fact. All those who have dwelt in, and are acquainted
with the geography of this part, know, and as the best maps show, that the rivers
which unite above Uchchh, l'eceive the name of Panch-Nad, as Bu-Rihan, here relates,
and as does Abu-1 Fazl likewise ; and it is only after the united streams join the
Ab-i-Sind or Indus, that they cease to be styled the Panch Nad or Five Rivers, and
when all have united they are known, even to the present day, as the “ Sapt ” or “ Sat
Nad,” or Seven Rivers. I believe that what has been read as — Shutlad — was
really meant by Bu-Rihan for “ Sapt Nad” or “ Sat Nad” — See note 139.
It should be borne in mind, when comparing statements contained in Mas’udi,
the Masalik wa Mamalik, and Ibn Haukal, that those writers visited Sind as well as
Multan and other places, while Bu-Rihan never went farther south than Multan or
farther east than Lahor.
It is beyond a doubt, that, until the Biah and the Sutlaj both left their re¬
spective beds to unite and flow in one channel, when they lost those names,
the Sutlaj was a tributary of the Hakra, but, after that, the united rivers, under the
name of Hariari, Gharah, etc., became tributary to the Ab-i-Sind or Indus. These
facts ought not to be overlooked ; and yet we find recent authors writing of “ Per-
dikkas carrying the Greek arms to Ajudan on the banks of the Sutlej, ages before
the Sutlaj and Biah uniting approached within twenty-five miles of Ajuddhan.” Who
shall say that Ajuddhan was in existence even ten centuries after the time of
Alexander the Macedonian ? It is nearer to the Sutlaj at the present time than it
ever was before, and the distance is eight miles and a half. In the last century it
was twenty-five miles distant. See note farther on.
221
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mil trail of Sind and its Tributaries.
it remains sticking in the branches of the trees [which are submerged
during the inundations] and appears like the nests of birds in them.
The united waters bend to the westward162 from the city or town of Aror
[jjf — the Aldor — — of others] in the middle of the territory of
Sind, and are received into the Nahr-i-Mihran or Mihran River, which
flows slowly through the midst of the country, and forms a number of
islands [i. e., the waters flow in several channels which again unite, and
the lands between are islands] until the river reaches Mansuriyat
[ as he always spells the word in the original]. This city is
situated among the branches of the river, and from that place the river
unites with the ocean by two channels. One is near the town of Lo-
liarani [ ],163 and the other bends round towards the east in the
confines of Kaj [ Kachchh— ], and is called the Sind Shakar
[ A.<w — Sind-Sagarah — ‘A* ], which means The Sea of Sind.
# # # The river Sarasat [ ] unites with the ocean to the east of
Suminath.”164 This last named river is, of course, the Saraswati, which
162 This is not given in the printed text.
163 In another place, Bu-Rihan, immediately after referring to Loharani at the
mouth of the Nahr-i-Mihran, where it unites with the ocean, says, that, “ from
Bazanah [ also and in other MSS., and in copies of Rashid-ud-Dfn’s
work], between south and west, is the city of Anhal-warah [ and
], distant sixty farsangs ; and from Suminath, on the sea, fifty. From Anhal-
warah or Nahal-warah towards the south is Lao-des or Lar-des or ],
the kasbahs [bazar towns] of which are Bahzuj or Bahruj [ -^5 or ], and
Dhanjura or Rlianjura [ or ], distant forty-two farsangs. Both
these places are on the sea-shore east of [ Gr — Tana]. This is what Elliot
reads “Baniya” at page 27, “ Bilha [Bania]” at page 37, “Bania” pages 39 and
40, “Tana” and “Bhati” at page 61, and “Bania” at pages 77 and 79. From
Bazanah to the west is Multan, fifty farsangs distant [a distance which will not suit
Gnzarat] ; and from Bhati L ls* or cr* t? or tix ; for it is written in as
many different ways] fifteen farsangs. From Bhati south-west [south-east in one
copy] fifteen farsangs, is Aror, Arro, Aro, or l/dar [jjf “ jjf ~ J’f - ] meant,
probably, for or [foreigners, it will be remembered, always leave out the &
in Hindi words]. Bhati lies between two branches of the Sind Rud [not the Nahr-
i-Mihran, it will be observed], thence twenty farsangs to Bahman-no Mansuriyat ;
and from thence to Lohai'ani, which is the mouth of the river [he mentions two
mouths in the text above : this was the western mouth at that period] ; where it
empties itself, is distant thirty farsangs.” Compare also Elliot, Vol. I, page 61, who
says, at page 58, that this “ Naraya” as he read it, and which his Editor altered
into Narana, is “ the capital of Guzerat,” but, in the original, the word is “
and ” in different copies.
164 See page 182.
C C
222
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
falls into the sea near Pattan Som-natb, not the classical river, the tri¬
butary of the Ghag-ghar, described farther on, the sacred river of the
Brahmans.
In another place he states, that, “ from Bazanah [ also written
Ajfy and Ajfp in different MSS.] where roads branch off to the west, is
Multan, distant fifty farsangs, and to Bhati [ — also written
165 The place called “Bhati” above, is what Elliot at page 79 calls “Bania”
where the country is “ a marine strand and whatever may be its correct name,
whether Bazanah, as Bu-Rihan writes it, be the capital of Guzarat or not (but Anhal-
Warah ivas its ancient capital), all these places, undoubtedly, lay near the sea coast,
between the mouth of the Mihran of Sind and Kathiawar, and this evidently was
Elliot’s idea when writing about it as “ the capital of Gnzerat.” Notwithstanding
this, from the footnote 9, page 58, of the volume referred to, written by the Editor,
Mr. Dowson, it appears that Elliot considered it, “ one of the most interesting
places in the North-Western Provinces [sic] to identify [this “marine strand” in
the North-Western Provinces!] from the pages of Biruni.” He thought it to be
represented by the modern Nanuar, and entered into details in support of this view,
but he was unable to account for its being called the capital of Gnzerat.”
Then the Editor tells us, that General Cunningham takes another view, and
says : “ I have identified Guzerat, with Bairdt , or the ancient Matsya. * * * Firishta
[i. e.y “Briggs?”] gives these two names as Kairdt and Ndrdin, which he says,
were two hilly tracts, overrun by Mahmud of Ghazni. Now Guzerat and Kairdt are
only slight corruptions of Bairdt, when written in Persian characters ; and Ndrdin
and Nardna are still slighter alterations of Ndrdyana, which is the name of a town
to the north-east of Bairdt .” See also pages 394, 5, and 6 of Elliot’s Yol. I.
Now let us see how “ Guzerat ” and “ Kairdt ” look so much like “ Bairdt ”
in Persian characters : — and how very much alike are “Ndr¬
din” “ Nardna ” and “ Ndrdyana ” : — There is not very
much similarity here, I think : at least, I cannot discover it. The word, however, is
Bazanah.
But alas for these “ satisfactory ” identifications ! The names given by Firishtah
. •* •
in his Persian text are <^<j9 J yp "Nur and Kirat, which refer to two darahs north
of Jalal-abad and the river of Kabul, in the Kafiristan, no less than eleven degrees
farther north ! The mistake respecting them I pointed out in my “ Translation of
the Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” page 77 ; and I have also given an account of Amir Mahmud’s
expedition to those darahs in my Notes on Afghanistan,” pages 134 and 135,
from the author from whom Firishtah derived the information, and who wrote in
the time of Amir Mahmud’s grandson, Sultan Farrukli-Zad. See also Elliot, vol. I,
page 47, where the same darahs of Nur and Kirat, written “ NuroJcirdt,” as one word,
are mentioned along with Lamghan north of Jalal-abad and the river of Kabul.
According to Bu-Rihan, who mentioned this so called “ Nurokirat” above refer¬
red to, this Bazanah is 60 farsangs = 180 miles from Anhal-Warah, and we know
where that is, and it is a long way from Lam (than, and from Bairdt too. Aror, the
ancient capital of Sind, also cannot be referred to here, because this Bhati is but
20 farsangs =60 miles, north of Mansuriyah, and SO farsangs =90 miles from Loha-
rani, at the mouth of the Mihran of Sind ; and it is said that this place — Aro, Ador,
223
1892.] H. G. Raver fcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
°r or or The town of the Bhatiah is evidently meant here]
fifteen farsangs. From thence between south and west is x4ro or Aru
[jjl in MS., perhaps Aror jjj t ?], distant fifteen farsangs. From
between two arms or branches of the Sind Rud, is Bahman-no, or
Bahman-no Mansuriyat,166 distant 20 farsangs , from which Loharani,
which is the place of outlet [of the river], is distant thirty farsangs.'1
Referring to other routes going from Kinnauj to the Mihran, he
says, after mentioning Sunam, that, going north-west from thence
[Kinnauj] nine farsangs is Arat-hur [ y*A ch>! also written Arat-huz
or Adatt-hur - jyA o«>f ], then to^hsr^ or or or
or [which I will not attempt to speculate upon] si x farsangs.
From thence to Mandhukur [ ] the kasbah or bazar town of
Lohawar, east of the river Trawat [the Rawah or Rawf], eight farsangs ;
then to the river Ghandrahah [ aA^aia. ] twelve ; then to Jihlam west
of the Bihat [? MS. has and printed text j eighteen farsangs ;
from thence to Daliind [ 0r Wahind-^Aj and ^Jj-Waihind,
in the printed text], the kasbah of Kandhar [Gandharah], which the
Mn glial s 167 call Kara- Jang [ \j's ] west of the Ab-i-Sind, twenty
farsangs .” * * * Referring to the mouths of the Nahr-i-Mihran, he
says : “ After this, you come to the lesser and greater mouths of the
river, and then reach the [haunts of the gfy ] Bawarij who are pirates,
and Kach [Kachchh] and Suminat. * * * From Debal to Kohra’i or
Kohara’i [ ] is twelve farsangs [thirty-six miles or little over].163
••
etc., — which is probably Addo of the maps, about 60 miles east of Bhuj in Kachchh —
is but 15 farsavgs =45 miles from “ Bhati.” The places referred to here mostly lie
near the sea coast, Elliot’s “ Marine strand,” extending from the eastern mouth of
the Mihran of Sind to Surath, the Saurashtrah of the Hindus — Kathiawar — and of
this there can be no doubt. See page 258.
See note 105, ante , page 196, and note 146, ante, page 216. These distances,
if correct, would show this place — Bazanah — to be situated in the north-west
corner of the present Jasal-mir state.
16? The words “ which the Muglials call I£ara-Jang ” will not be found in Bu-
Rihan’s text. Here we have Rashid-ud-Din, not Bu-Rihan, for the simple reason,
that, at the period the latter wrote, and for more than a century after, the Muglials
were unknown to the Musalman waiters. For more respecting this Kara-Jang, see
Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” page 1216; and compare Cunningham, “Ancient India,” page
55.
163 See ante page 206, and note 112. The overflow from the channel of the
Hakra, Wahindah, or Sind-Sagar still reaches the sea by the inlet which appears as
“ Kohri ” in our maps, the names in which are generally incorrectly written. The
Hajamro mouth of the Indus is just thirty-four miles (or lately was : it may have
changed considerably since the publication of the most recent maps) from the
Kohra’i mouth to the north-west. Bawarij is the plural of a war-boat
apparently, and certainly refers to boats or vessels.
224
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
Al-Idrisi, >vlio wrote about 545 H. (1150-51 A. D.), nearly a
century before the investment of Lfqbchli by the Mughals, says, that
“ Sand-ur169 [for Ohand-ur or Jand-ur ? ‘s’ is interchan gable with, and
often substituted for 1 ch ’ and 1 j ’ by foreigners] is situated three days’
journey south of Multan, which is famous for its trade, wealth, and
extravagance of its inhabitants. It is said to form part of Hind [he
afterwards mentions it among other places belonging to Hind], and is
situated on the banks of a river which falls into the Mihran above Samaid
[Basmid of others].170 Going from Multan towards the north there is a
desert tract which extends as far as the eastern boundary of Tubaran.171
From Multan, as far as the neighbourhood of Mansuriyah, the country
is held by a warlike race called Nudah ( or Nfidiyah, as the Sindis write
it], consisting of a number of tribes scattered about between Tubaran
and Mukran, Multan and Mansuriyah, like the Barbar nomads. These
Nudalis [Nudiyalis] have peculiar dwellings, and marshy places in which
they take shelter, if necessary, to the west of the Mihran. They
possess a fine breed of camels, particularly a sort called harah, like the
camel of Balkli [the Bakhti camel], which has two humps, and is held
in great esteem in Khurasan, and other parts of f ran. 172 * # #
The place chiefly frequented by the Niidahs [or Nudiyahs] for purposes
of trade and other matters is Kanda’il.”
Al-Tdrisi also says respecting Debal, that it is a populous place, but
not fertile, and is inhabited merely because it is a harbour for the vessels
of Sind and other parts. “ Going west,” he says, “ from the mouth
of the great Mihran [the principal or eastern branch] Debal is six mil
[miles] distant. From Debal to Nirun, also on the west of the Mihran,
is three days’ journey.173 Nirun is about midway between Debal and
169 This name occurs in an old map which I shall give farther on between Rurhi
and Multan, and it would therefore seem that it was known in the early part of the
last century ; and, from its position therein, appears to have been situated some¬
where about Nohar, or Islam-ICot of the present day, near the banks of the Hakra,
or farther north. It seems to be identical with the town or city of Jand or Oband
mentioned ante, at pages 213-14.
170 See ante page 216.
171 This appears to refer to the southern parts of the great, elevated plateaus
extending from a few miles east of the Indus to the high left bank of the Biah,
and through which the rivers forming the Panj Ab, or Panch Nad, now cut their
way, and which from what is known as the that or tctr-i-Chin&o west of the Ohin-ab,
and bar and dhaiya east of it. These elevated plateaus represent three distinct
geological periods apparently, respecting which more will be found in the notice of
the rivers farther on.
172 See ante page 217, where Ibn Haukal says much the same, and note 146.
173 The position of Nirun is plainly shown in the old maps of the Masalik wa
Mamalik and Ibn Haukal, as well as from the description of its whereabouts in those
225
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
Mansuriyah, and persons going from one to the other cross the river
here. Nirun is a place of little importance, but it is fortified. * * *
two works, and in others, including Al-Idrisi in the text above. Modern writers
identify its position satisfactorily to themselves, but differ as to its whereabouts.
Elliot fixes it at Jarak, while Cunningham prefers Haidar-abad. He says (“ Ancient
India,” p. 279) “the people still know it — Haidarabad — as Nirankot,” but this re¬
quires confirmation. He also says, “it was situated on the western bank of the
river. * * * At present the main channel of the Indus runs to the west of Haidar¬
abad, but we know that the Phuleli or eastern branch, was formerly the principal
stream. According to McMurdo, the change of the main stream [by which McMurdo
means the Hakra, Wahindah, or Sagarali, not the “ Phuleli ”] to the westward of
Haidarabad, took place prior to A. H. 1000, or A. D. 1592 [Haigh previously quoted,
says “ the change occurred only in the middle of the last century,” and he is per¬
fectly right], and was coincident with the decay of Nasirpur [Nasr-pur is the correct
name], which was only founded in A. H. 751, or A. D. 1350.”
The Nasr-pur here referred to, I may observe, lies some seventeen miles N. N.
E. of Haidar-abad, and was founded by Sultan Firuz Shah, the Khalj Turk ruler of
Dihli ; while the place referred to by Elliot (“ Indian Historians,” Vol. I, p. 216) as
being a place of great importance as early as the time of Dudah, the Sumrah, who
was contemporary with Sultan ’Abd-ur-Rashid of Ghaznin, some three centuries
before, refers to an entirely different place. That refers to Nasir-pur in the south¬
east of Sind. It was still the chief place in that part in Akbar Badshah’s time, and
gave name to one of the five sarhdrs into which the territory dependent on Thathah
was divided. It was here that the same Sultan founded a fort on the banks of the
Sankrah [Hakra], on his advance against Thathah the last time from Guzarat.
Cunningham continues : “ As Nasirpur is mentioned by Abul Fazl [Gladwin’s
translation ?] as the head of one of the subdivisions of the province of Thatha, the
main channel of the Indus [the main channel, as I have before mentioned, was the
Hakra] must have flowed to the eastward of Nirun Kot or Haidarabad at as late a
date as the beginning of the reign of Akbar.” I may observe that Abu-l-Fazl’s
work was completed in the forty-second year of Akbar Badshah’s reign, and that
Nasir-pur (a different place from Nasr-pur) was, as stated above, the name of the
most south-easterly sarhar of the Thathah province, one of the seven mahalls of
which was Nasir-pur, giving name to the sarkdr, and that Amar-Kot was another.
In this part a small fortified town was also founded by Sultan Firuz Shah, the Khali
Turk, on his advance from Gondhal to Thathah.
Elliot, on the other hand, identified, according to the writer previously quoted,
Nirun Kot with “ Jarak, and the Kinjar lake near Helai in its neighbourhood, as
that in which the fleet of Muhammad Kasim [Muhammad, son of Kasim, is meant,
the latter having been dead for years] lay,” but Cunningham adds that “the Kinjur
lake has no communication with the Indus,” and thus he disposes of Jarak “identi¬
fied” by Elliot and others ; but Elliot says (Yol. I, p. 400) : “ I am disposed to place
Nirun at Helai, or Helaya, a little below Jarak. # # # Lakes abound in the neigh¬
bourhood, and are large enough, especially the Kinjar, to have admitted Muhammad
Kasim’s fleet.”
The attempt to identify places mentioned in the ancient history of Sind according
to the recent state of the channel of the Indus, as if its banks had been of adamant
instead of hour-glass sand and mud, and had not changed in the space of eleven,
226 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . [No. 4,
From it to Maosuriyah is a little more than three days’ journey. Man-
siiriyah is surrounded by a branch of the Mihran, but it is at a distance
much less twenty-three centuries is sufficiently absurd, but it is still greater when,
from his own authorities (page 157), the fleet of boats of Muhammad was sent up the
Sind-Sagar (or Wahind Sagarah as stated in the Chach-Namah. See note 181, page
231), that is, the Hakra or Wahiudah, mis-called the “ Narra ” in the maps and
Gazetteers, and that it flowed some seventy-five miles east of this “ Helai ” and the
“ Kinjar lake,” and continued to do so for centuries after the time referred to. How
many scores of times, likewise, has the western branch (described farther on),
changed during that period from west to east and back again, and how many lakes
formed, dried up, or swept away P
Wood — a keen observer and experienced surveyor — says in his work (“ Journey to
the Oxus ”) respecting this, that, “ In the neighbourhood of Yikkar is the imbedded
hull of a Dutch brig-of-war, pierced for fourteen guns, affording proof, if any were
wanting, of the ever-changing coarse of the Indus. It is in vain in the delta of such a
river to identify existing localities with descriptions handed down to us by the
historians of Alexander the Great. The whole country from Kach’h to Karachi is
alluvial, and none of its spontaneous productions , the tamarisk tree, for instance,
exhibit the groioth of a century. Higher up the course of the river, where its channels
are more permanent, this tree attains a large size, and this never being the case in
the delta, our conclusion would appear legitimate, the soil at both places being the
same.
“ Could the northern apex of the delta be as easily fixed as its triangular sides
can be defined, we might then venture to speculate on the probability of Alexander
having visited Kach’h or Gujerat. * * * But, as before observed, the absence of
tangible localities involves us in a maze of doubt ; and hence our deductions are
oftener the result of fancy than sound inference.
“ The old Dutch-built vessel mentioned above affords negative evidence that the
mouths of the Indus in her day were not more accessible than at present. * # *
We have tolerable evidence that the Indus has never been more or less navigable
than we now find it to be. Tavernier, nearly two centuries ago, said, “ At present
the commerce of T’hat’hah, which was formerly great, is much diminished, as the
mouth of the river is always getting worse, and the sand, by increasing, scarcely
gives room for a passage,” pp. 2 — 3.
“ In a mud basin undergoing continual change, such as the valley of the Indus
south of the mountains, it is almost vain to look, after the lapse of so many centuries,
for indications of the Grecian general’s march,” p. 20.
As to the apex of the delta, there can be very little doubt, that, in very ancient
times, it was between Bahman-abad, and the range of lime stone hills running down
from Aror, and where the Mihran of Sind separated into two branches. See note on
the rivers farther on.
To return to the previous subject, however, after this digression One thing
appears conclusive, namely, that as the distance between Bahman-abad and Nirun
was rather more than between Nirun and Debal, its site must be looked for some
thirty-five or forty miles south of the modern Haidar-abad, and about the same
distance east of Thathah ; and in the Sindi accounts of the founding of Haidar-abad
there is no mention of its being founded on the site of Nirun. Al-Idrisi says Nirun
lies about half way between Mansuriyah and Debal, that it is three days’ journey
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 227
from the river. It is on the west of the principal branch, which flows
from the direction of Kalari, a town one day’s journey from Mansuriyah,
between the latter place and Nirun, and that people going from thence to Mansuriyah
cross the river at Manjabari (which lay about mid-way between the two places).
Ibn Haukal, on the other hand states, that the country of Nirun is rather nearer to
Mansuriyah than to Debal ; and, in another place, that while it is six days’ journey
from Mansuriyah to Debal, it is but two days’ journey between Nirun and Debal
•
In the map contained in the Masalik wa Mamalik, and also in Ibn Haukal’s map,
Nirun is some distance from the banks of the great river, and Manjabari intervenes
about midway between it and Bahman-abad. But between the time that Al-Idrisi
and Ibn Haukal wrote, a period of about one hundred and eighty years, great changes
appear to have taken place, since the latter says that “ the Mihran passes on
towards Nirun, and then flows to the sea.” See farther on about the second great
transition of the courses of the river, also Elliot Yol. I, page 78.
Cunningham at page 279 of his work has the heading “ Fatala or Nirankot,” which,
as before noticed, he identifies with Haidar-abad, and the “ Pattala of Arrian,” but at
page 236 he considers that “ another name ” appears to have “ a confused reference
to Nirunkot .” It is confused enough truly. This name is “ the Piruz of Istakhri,
[the Istakhari], the “ Kannazbur ” of Ibn Haukal, and the “ Firabuz ” of Edrisi
[Al-Idrisi] j” and, after quoting what they say from Elliot, he considers that their
“unknown city” will accord exactly with that of Nirankot. “Debal” he says,
“ I will hereafter identify with an old city near Lari-bandar [at page 279 he says
Lari-bandar is its probable position], and Manhabari [Manjabari F] with Thatha
Had Ibn Haukal’s map contained in Elliot’s volume given all the names, as in that
of the Masalik wa Mamalik, which I have appended to this paper, it would have
been perceived that what has been called “ Firabuz,” “ Kannazbur,” and “ Piruz,”
lay midway between Darak and Manjabari, and between Nirun and Debal, but a
little nearer to the latter and about north of Debal, while Nirun lay more to the
north-east from Debal ; and the place in question, “Firabuz,” or whatever it may
be, was a town of Mukran, whereas Nirun was a town of Sind, and they are totally
distinct places. The name of this place is written in a variety of ways in the
different authors, but in the Masalik wa Mamalik, in Ibn Haukal, and Al-Idrisi it is
and but by what means
it is managed to get Kannazbur, Kannazpur,” and “ Kinarbur ” out of it, is beyond
my comprehension and how the ‘ n ’ becomes doubled.
It is clearly stated that Nirun lay on the road from Debal to Mansuriyah, the
position of which two places there is no doubt about. Then, that between Debal
and Mansuriyah is six days’ journey. Thus we can compute by actual measurement
within a few miles, to be about one hnndred and twenty miles as the crow flies, or
about twenty miles, to the day’s journey. The Istakhari, the Masalik wa Mamalik,
Ibn Hankal, and Al-Idrisi, all say that Nirun lay between Debal and Mansuriyah, and
that Nirun was three days’ journey from each. It is likewise stated, that from
Arma’il (the Hormara of the maps) to Debal is also six days’ jonrney, consequently,
the distance is much the same from Debal to Mansuriyah as from Debal to Arma’il.”
This being determined, Ibn Haukal says, that from Debal to this “ Kannuzbur is
four days’ journey [“ fourteen days,” as in Elliot is an error or a misprint for
“four”], consequently, the distance from Debal thereto is one-third less than to
228 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
where it separates into two branches, the principal branch flowing
towards Mansuriyah, and the other north-west-wards as far as Sharusan
[Sadusan or Siw-istan] when it turns westwards and re-unites with
Arma’il. He then says that from ‘ Kannazbur” to Manjabari or Manchabari is
two days’ journey. Al-Idrisi says that Manjabari or Manchabari is three days’ journey
from Sharusan [Sfw-istan, the modern Sihwan], and this we know the exact position
of, and therefore Manjabari or Manchabari was the same distance from Sihwan a3
Nirun was from Debal and Mansuriyah. He also says that it is six days’ journey
from Sharusan or Siw-istan to “ Firabuz,” the “ Kannazbur ” of Ibn Haukal [I give
the names as mentioned in Elliot and quoted by Cunningham, because the originals
are anything but “ Kannazbur,” “ Kinnazbur,” “ Firabuz ” or “ Piruz,” as may
be seen above], and that in going from Debal to “ Firabaz ” the road passes by
Manjabari. He also says that “ Firabuz ” belongs to the province of Mukran , that is,
that it was close to the Sind border. Elliot in his version of Ibn Haukal, vol. I, pp.
33-34, has “ Kabryun [Kannazbun] ” for this same place, which he also says is “ in
Mukran.”
Cunningham supposes “ Manhabari,” as he calls it, to be Thathah, but as he
“ identifies ” Debal as Lari-bandar, which were two distinct places and a considerable
distance apart — twelve farsangs, or thirty-six miles or more, according to Bu-Rihan —
we may be permitted to be dubious on the subject ; and after identifying Nirun with
“ Haidarabad,” he “ would suggest,” that the first of the three names, Firm ,
Kannezbxir , and Firabuz (which Elliot identifies with “ Fnnjgoor ”) all of which
refer to one place, “ might possibly be intended for Nirun, and the other two for
Nirunkot, as the alterations in the original Arabic characters required for these two
readings are very slight.” I will show how slight they are. Nirun and Nirun Kot
* t
are written ~ “ Piruz ’’ — » “ Kannazbur” — ; “ Firabuz
— aRt-* All these are very much like each other certainly. A few lines under he
continues : “ comparing Biladuri’s [the Balazari’s extract in Elliot] Kizbun with Ibn
Haukal’ s Kannazbur [see also his note to p. 287], and Edrisi’s Firabuz, I think it
probable they may be intended for PunjgUr, as suggested by M. Reinand.”
The position of this many named place with respect to Arma’il the “ Hormara”
of the maps, Debal, Manjabari or Manchabari on the Mihran (from which it was two
days’ journey), the great mouth of that river, and Nirun, would be some eighteen
miles north-north-east of Jarak, but “Punjgoar” of Elliot, and “Panjgur” of
Cunningham, in Mukran, and only three hundred and seventy miles farther west-north-
west, is totally impossible. With regard to Manjabari or Manchabari, there is a
place called Manjhand in the maps, close to the Railway on the west bank of the
Indus, just half-way between Kotri and Sihwan, fifty-nine miles from Jarak, and
still a place of some importance, but the distance from Debal would be too great.
See the old ’Arab map, where Manjabari or Manchabari, written without diacritical
points, is marked.
To the south of Haidar-abad, in the plain close to where the Fulaili branch of the
Indus used a few years back to unite with the Guni, the country for miles round is
covered with broken bricks and the ruined foundations of large buildings. Tradi¬
tion says that a large and flourishing city once covered the plain and extended as
far as the range of limestone hills on the extreme northern part of which, some
eighteen miles farther north, Haidar-abad stands. Hereabouts the site of Nirun-kot
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
229
the main river, and forms after that but one stream.174 This junction
occurs twelve mil [miles] below Mansuriah. The river then passes
on to Nirun, and subsequently unites with the ocean.176 Mansuriah is
accounted among the dependencies of Sind, like Debal, Nirun, Sharusan,
Chandiir, Baniyah, Kalari, Atri, Basmid, Multan,176 etc.
“ Dor177 lies on the bank of the Mihran which flows west of that city
[or town]. It compares with Multan in size. From it Basmid is three
days’ journey, Atri four days’, and Kalari two. The last-named place
is on the west bank of the Mihran, is a well fortified town, and carries
on a brisk trade. Near it the Mihran separates into two branches, the
largest branch [i. e. the main branch] flows towards the east as far as
the vicinity of Mansuriyah which is on its west bank, while the other
runs north-west, then north, and afterwards towards the west.178 The
branches again unite about twelve mil [miles] below Mansuriyah. Kalari
is some distance out of the main route, but is much frequented for
trading purposes. It is distant from Mansuriyah a long days’ journey of
forty mil [miles], and from Sharusan [Siw-istan or Sadusan] three days’
journey. Sharusan is remarkable for its size, its fountains, and canals,
its abundant productions, and its profitable trade. From thence, distant
might be sought for. Then again there are the ruins near “ Shakhr-pur, of the
maps, some thirty miles westwards from Thathah, and the extensive ruins near Badin,
about thirty-three miles west of that again. The ruins at this place are similar to
those of Bahman-no or Bahman-abad, and the city or whatever it was, was probably
destroyed at the same time. The ruins near Badin may be those of Manjabari, and
those near “ Shakhr-pur ” may be the remains of Nirun Kot, but more probably
of Damrilah ; but there is no district of Sind less likely to show remains of anti¬
quity than that known as Shah Bandar.
174 See Bu-Rihan’s account above, who also mentions two mouths.
175 it is stated in the Tarikh of Hafiz Abru, which is a comparatively modern
work, but held in great estimation, and completed about 829 H. (1425 A. D.j, that,
“ The source of the river Sind is on the skirts of the mountains of Kash-mir [north
of], and runs from the western side of those mountains into the territory of Man¬
suriyah, its course being from north to south, and near the end of its course bends
towards the east, and enters the sea of Hind. The river Jamd [the Jhilam] also
rises in the mountains of Kash-mir, but on the south side. It runs from north to
south, and enters the land of Hind. # # # In the neighbourhood of Multan it unites
with the Sind river, which falls into the ocean. The Biah is a large river, which
rises on the east side of the mountains of Kash-mir, flows through the territory of
Luhawar [Lahor], and from thence to I/chchh, and falls into the ocean in the coun¬
try of Kambayah.” The chronicler, no doubt, meant the tract adjacent to Sorath
or Saurashtra, between it and Sind, the river separating the two tracts of country ;
and he referred to the Hakra or Wahindah of which the Biali was still a tributary.
176 Others consider Multan to be dependent on Hind.
177 The word is or Ror - it appears written with in MSS.
178 See Ibn Haukal, page 215.
D D
230 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
three days’ journey, is Manjabari, a town situated in a depression or
hollow, a pleasant place, surrounded with gardens, fountains, and run¬
ning water. * * * It is two days’ journey from Debal.179 * * *
Among the places of Hind, touching upon Sind, are Famlial,
Sindan, Saimur, etc.” He mentions likewise certain maritime isles,
referring, no doubt, to the tracts on the coast, and the Ban, or great
marsh, between the mouths of the Mihran and Kachohh.
The Kazwini, who quotes from a much earlier writer, does not give
us very much information respecting the rivers of these parts, but he
says, that “ The Nahr- i-Mihran [that is the A'b-i-Sind. See ante note
117.] rises in the same mountain region in which the affluents of the
Jihun take their rise,” and, that “the Nahr- i-Mihran flows in a general
direction of about south-west. After being joined by another Nahr from
the eastward, the united rivers flow towards the west [south-westwards],
and fall into the sea of Fars. A branch having separated from the
IVa7ir-i-Mihran, encircles Mansuriah, and makes it like unto an island.”
The territory immediately about Mansuriyah is, of course, meant as
shown in the Masalik wo Mamalik map.
In another place, quoting from the Istakhari, already noticed, he
says : “ The Istakhari states, that the Nahr-i- Mihran rises at the back
of the mountain [range] out of which the affluents of the Jihun issue.
It then appears near Multan, on the boundary of Samandur [ ],
and, having passed under [below] Mansuriyah, unites with the sea to the
east of Debal.”
In another place the Kazwini mentions Nudiyah or Nudiah, which
he says, “is an extensive tract of country in Sind, containing numer¬
ous people, who are of different tribes. They possess considerable
wealth ; and most of the cultivation is rice, [showing that water was
not scarce]. * * * They also have a fine breed of camels, the like
of which is not found elsewhere. They are taken into Khurasan and
Fars to breed from.”
Another geographical work, the Mcrasid-ul-I’tila, plainly states,
that “ Debal is a well-known town [or city] on the shore of the sea
of Hind, and a place of considerable trade, near which place, likewise,
the rivers of Labor and Multan, empty themselves into the ocean.”
We may now gather further information respecting these rivers of
Sind from the proceedings of the ’Arab conquerors, but they double up
179 The name of this place is generally written Dibal by the old geographers and
historians, but, as the name is evidently derived from Debal or Dewal — an idol-
temple — the mode of spelling given above is the more correct.
180 I leave it as it is written. This is the word of which Elliot Tnakes “ Kam-
baya.”
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
231
events, so to say, considerably. Ahmad, son of Yahya-al-Balazari,
author of the FurtJH-UL-BALADAN, previously quoted, is the earliest
historian.181 He brings down events to the year 227 H. (842 A. D.).
He does not appear to have actually visited Sind; for his work is a
general history of the conquests of the ’Arabs, but he quotes from
persons who had been, and had served, in Sind ; and be is repeatedly
quoted by Al-Mas’udi and Ibn Haukal, both of whom afterwards visited
it, and by others. He died in 279 H. (892-93 A. D.). It is strange
that there is so little mention made in Tabari’s chronicle respecting the
conquest of Sind. All he says is, that, “ during the IOiilafat of Walid,
son of ’Abd-ul-Malik, many victories were gained ; and, among other
parts, a portion of the territory of Hindustan was conquered by Muham-
mad-i-Abu-l-Kasim,’’ and this is all. Sind he included in Hind or
Hindustan.
The Balazari says, that Muhammad, son of Kasim, advanced into
Sind from Sijis-stan by way of Arma’il,182 which was taken, and reached
Debal or Dewal, the sea-port of Sind, and the nearest point from thence
[Arma’il] on the sea-coast of Sind. Here there was a budh, the name
given by the ’Arab writers to a Budhist temple where idols are wor¬
shipped, and which the name of the place was derived from. From this
budh a large red flag waved from a tall staff, which was struck by one of
the balistas of the ’Arabs, and knocked down. The place was taken by
assault, after which Muhammad moved to Nirun or Nirun Kot,183 which
181 The CThach Namah, however, may be considered equally early, as it contains
the accounts related by actual actors in the events recounted in it, handed down
from sire to son. See note 185.
182 This well known place in the history of Mnkran and Kirman, Elliot, in his
“ Indian Historians ” invariably miscalls “ Annabel,” just as he miscalls Kanda’il
“ Kanddbel ,” and “ Kandabhel,” in most places, but “ Kanddil ” in a few others.
It is, apparently, what Masson calls “ Hormara .”
183 The Cliach Namah says, that, after possessing himself of Debal, he despatched
his balistas on boats which went up the river which they call the Sind Sagar [that
is, the main branch of the Hakra or Mihran of Sind] towards Nirun Kot, but went
himself with his army towards Sisam, and when he reached it, he received a reply
to his announcement of the capture of Debal from Amir Hajjaj which was dated
Rajab, 93 H. (May, 712 A. D.).
An ’Arab who was present, quoted in the Chach Namah, states that Muhammad
proceeded from Debal to the Hisar of Nirun, which was twenty-five farsangs
(seventy-five miles) distant, and that on the seventh day he reached the neighbour¬
hood of Nirun, which was a grassy plain which they [the people] called Bala-har in
the tract or district [ zamin ] of Ro’i or Ru’i. At that period, the Ab-i-Sihun and the
Mihran, had not reached it ; and the troops became much distressed for water, and
began to complain. Muhammad having offered up prayers to Heaven for rain, it fell,
and all the water-courses and reservoirs in that vicinity were filled.
232 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
capitulated. Proceeding north-eastwards, he came to a river which
flows on this [the west] side of the Mihran,184 which he crossed, and then
took a place called Sahban [Sisam of the Chach Namah, and Salim of
others], after which he moved to the banks of the Mihran. His object
was to attack Bahman-abad, the place of greatest importance in that part
of Sind ; but, before doing so, he had to detach part of his force to recover
possession of Siw-istan, which had previously been surrendered to him,
but which had now revolted, the exact situation of which, with Bahman-
abad, and Aror, or Alor, there is no possible doubt about. His detaching
this force, as he did, clearly shows, that, at that time, the Mihran of
Sind or Great Mihran, as some of the old writers call it, did not flow
even so near to Siw-istan or Sadusan, as it did when the Masalik wa
Mamalik and Ibn Haukal’s work were written, some two hundred years
after these events ; for, according to the maps in those works, the river
appears to have still passed some distance east of it.185 Had this not
When Ra’e Dahir heard of the fall of Debal, he made light of it, saying that it
was “a place merely inhabited by low people and traders ; and he directed his son,
Jai Sinha, to leave a Samani [Priest] there in charge, and repair himself to old
Bahman-abad.” Nirun was surrendered to the ’Arabs by the Samani in ques¬
tion.
The Chach Namah states, that, “ in the night following tbe fall of Debal, one
Jahin, by name, got his women over the walls, and on arriving outside, found horses
and a dromedary waiting them, which had been sent by Ra’e Dahir, and mounting at
once, pushed on until they reached a cutting or small channel of the Mihran, which
they call Gar Mitti [Gar Mitti] on the east side of the Mihran. From thence Jahin
sent an elephant to convey tbe news of the fall of Debal to Dahir, who enquired
what village Jahin had reached ; and he was told that “ he had reached “ Gar
Mitti,” that is to say “ Kul-i-Shor” [village of Misfortune or Calamity”].
184 This may refer to the western branch of the Mihran of Sind, which, near
Kalari, some forty miles above Bahman-abad, turned to the north-westwards, and
then south again, but more probably refers to one of the old channels from the
Sindhu or A'b-i-Sind, which flowed between Siw-istan and Bahman-abad, noticed
farther on. According to the Chach Namah this river was called the Kunbh.
185 After halting some days at Nirun and suffering for want of forage, that place
was given up, and Muhammad, leaving a Shahnah or Commissioner there, moved
towards “ the fortress of Siw-istan, situated to the west of the Mihran on the sum¬
mit of a hill.” He determined that he would reduce this stronghold first, and
having set his heart at rest respecting that part of Sind, on his return from thence
he would make preparations for crossing that river, and attacking Dahir. Elliot
has “re-cross” but as he had not crossed it, he needed not to re-cross.
I may mention here, that the Chach Namah, which is taken from ’Arabic annals,
containing the statements of persons who were present along with the Amir, ’Imad-
ud-Din, Muhammad, son of Kasim, and who had related the events to their
descendants some years only after they occurred, was translated in the reign of
Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Iyaba-jah, nearly four hundred years after the Balazari wrote
his work, just one hundred and thirty-five years after the invasion of Sind. The
233
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
been the case, and had no other great obstacles existed, which there did,
he might have crossed and taken his whole force to Bahman-abad from
original was probably written before the Balazari wrote. It states that Mohammad
proceeded from Nirun stage by stage until he reached a place called Mauj or Moj
[ (T*70 ] ^ which others call Bharaj or Bahraj [ £ Jld ]> the same place as is mentioned
at page 215, and which also appears in the old ’Arab map, thirty farsangs from
Nirun, and that there was stationed a Malik on the part of Bajhra, son of Chandar,
Ra’e Dahir’s uncle. Then the account passes at once to Siw-istan, the people of
which — those interested in trade and in saving themselves only — were desirous of
submitting, but Bajhra would not listen to it, and the fighting men were ready to
defend it. # * # “ Muhammad, son of Kasim, took up a position before the Registdn
[sandy tract or desert] gate to attack the place, because there was no other ground ;
for the waters of the rainy season had risen, and, from, or on, the north side, the
yti’e Sind — the Ab-i-Sind — did not, in former times, flow.” That is to say, at the
time the narrator was referring to. There is not a word about any “ selected
ground,” nor any “ Sindhu Rawal.” Elliot mistook (jrf for i Jj^j. His version of
the Ohach Namah is very imperfect, or carelessly done ; and to understand Muham¬
mad’s movements in Sind, and the events which happened at that time, the Ohach
Namah requires to be properly and faithfully translated.
These operations against Siw-istan must have been carried on in December, 711,
if not in January, 712 A. D , but all the dates are more or less confused.
After some days investment, and the failure of an intended night attack upon
the ’Arab camp before the Itegistdn G-ate, Bajhra, under cover of the night, fled by
the Koh-i-Shamali [North Hill] Gate, crossed the river [not the Mihran : that was
a long way off], and did not tarry until he had reached the boundary of Budiyah, east
of the river. At that time, the ruler of the Budiyah territory was Kakah, son of
Kotal, whose residence was the fort of Sisam on the bank of the Kunbh.”
From this it would seem that there were two places called Sisam, or there is a
mistake in one of the two names, which is most probable, because Sisam, the Sahban
and Silam of others, is the place which the ’Arabs reached from Nirun on their way
to Siw-istan.
After the flight of their governor, the people of Siw-istan were allowed to
surrender.
Elliot says that “ Seisan, a village on Lake Manchur may be the place here
called Sisam.” There is a place, so called, in some comparatively recent maps, but
such is not to be found in the “ Indian Atlas ” map from the most recent surveys.
Sisam, however, as the context shows, was a considerable distance to the eastward
of Lake Manchhar.
Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar, one of the historians of Sind, makes a statement worthy
of record here. He says, that the tract of country west of the Mihran [as it flowed
in his day] dependent on Siw-istan, is called by the Fukaha-i-Islam [Doctors of Law
and Divinity] by the name of U’shar, because the Jinnah people [sic. in MSS.,
possibly meant for Ghinnah] submitted of their own accord to the Musalmans, on
which account, according to the Shara’, the legal tribute they were liable to, was
one-tenth ; whereas, if they had been reduced by force of arms, the legal tribute
would have been one-fiftli.
234 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
Siw-istan, instead of having to return to Nirun for that purpose. He found
it impossible, however, to get to Bahman-abad from thence for various
reasons, as related in the Ohach Namah ; for he had previously despatched
his battering rams up the Sind Sagar towards Nirun, on the west side
of the estuary of which, at the distance of about six miles, Bahman-abad
was situated, as stated by the Balazari, who subsequently visited it.
When we see the vast changes which a single year brings about in the
courses of the rivers of these parts, we can form some idea of the changes
which must have occurred in two hundred ; although there are some
who expect to find on its banks, and actually presume to identify, places
mentioned above two thousand two hundred years ago, and suppose the
rivers to be running in the same channels, and in much the same
positions, as the Greeks found them.
The Balazari takes us, at once to Sadusan or Siw-istan, and states
that it capitulated, which so far is correct ; but another work, the Jami’-
ut-Tawarikh, says, that, “ the fortress of Salim186 was first captured, and
then Sadusan or Siw-istan surrendered. Its affairs having been disposed
of, and an ’Arab officer left in charge of it, Muhammad, son of Kasim, pre¬
pared to cross to the east side of the Mihran by a bridge of boats which
he had caused to be constructed.187 But the writers do not mention the
186 The Sahban of the Balazari, and Sisam of the Ohach Namah.
187 Some considerable time elapsed before Muhammad could cross the Mihran.
After the capitulation of Siw-istan, he, leaving a Commissioner there with a small
force, moved with his army against Sisam, and reached a place called Nidhahah
[ ano^er Mg. — Nidhan] on the banks of the Kunbh. The chief
priests of the Budh there, who traced their lineage from Ikranah or Akranah on the
Gang, which they call A-dwand Bihar (See “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” page 491, and Ap¬
pendix D, page xxvi) incited the Ranas of the Jats of Budhiyah, and Kakah, son of
Kotal, to make a night attack on the ’Arab camp. They made the attempt, Kakah
sending a thousand men with them, but it did not succeed ; and, soon after, Kakah
submitted, and subsequently, betrayed his countrymen. After this affair Muham¬
mad appeared before the fort of Sisam and invested it for two days ; the infidels
were defeated, and the fort captured. Bajhra, son of OKandar, and uncle’s son of
Dalxir, with Rawats and Thakurs, who were his dependents and followers, there fell,
along with Bajhra ; while others fled to Upper-most Budhiyah \_j* ], and
some to the fort of Bhatlur ], between Saluj and Kanda’il.
About this time Muhammad received orders from Amir Hajjaj, saying, that it
was necessary for him to leave other places alone, and to return to Nirun, and make
arrangements for crossing the Mihran and reducing Dahir, and when that was
effected, the strongholds and provinces would naturally fall into his hands. Muham¬
mad accordingly returned towards Nirun, and, on his way, happened to halt “near
the fortress situated on the hill ( "koh ) of Nirun, adjacent to which was a lake,” the
praises of which he gives in glowing terms. Without doubt, this lake is that called
the Sonhari Dhand, and the ruins of the fort are on the north side of it. The Jam,
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 235
difficulties he had to encounter, the delay in obtaining boats, the want
Tamachi, one of the Sammah rulers, is said to have subsequently occupied it. See
ante note 173. Muhammad gave Amir Hajjaj an account of his recent proceed¬
ings, and that he “ had reached the bank(Zab) of the Ab-i-Sihun, which they call
Mihran, at a halting place which lay in the tract of country around Budhiyah, and
opposite to the fortress of Laghrur or Baghrur or ], which is situated on
that river [on the east bank] and belonging to the territory of Dahir, and the very
strong fort of Sisam ; but, in accord with his commands, he had returned, and awaited
further instructions, which he hoped to get soon,” as the place he was then writing
from, he says, was “ near to the Dar-ul-Khilafat.” He probably meant nearer than
Siw-istan was.
With all this before him, Elliot, in his work, confounds Baghrur with Nirun,
while it is certain that the place in question lay east of the Mihran, and Nirun on the
tvest, as is plainly stated. See vol. 1, page 163, where lie has, “ opposite the fort of
Baghrur (Nirun), on the Mihran. * # * This fort is in the country [district is
meant which lay east ] of Alor. # # * The forts of Siwistan and Sisam have been
already taken,” etc.
His accounts of Muhammad’s movements preparatory to crossing the Mihran,
in his extract from the Ohych Natnah, is hopelessly confused. He says (page 166) :
“ Muhammad Kasim [this is how he writes the father’s and son’s names together as
those of one person] had determined to cross, and was apprehensive lest Rai Dahir
might come to the banks of the Mihran with his army, and oppose the transit. He
ordered Sulaiman bin Tihan Kuraishi to advance boldly [here a sad mistake has been
made, and the words “ towards Baghrur” have been rendered “ to advance boldly ”
mistaking for — * pride,’ haughtiness,’ etc.] with his troops against the fort
in order that Fufi, son of Dahir, should not be able to join his father [In a note he
says : MS. A. is faulty, but seems to say “ the fort of Aror.” He was a long way
from Aror]. Sulaiman accordingly went with 600 horsemen. He ordered also the
son of ’Atiya Tifli to watch the road with 500 men, by which Akham might be ex¬
pected to advance [this refers to a place, not a man. See his work page 362], in
order to cover Gandava [sic.] and he ordered the Samani, who was chief of Nirun to
keep open the road for the supply of food and fodder to the camp. Mus’ab bin
’Abu-r-rahman was ordered to command the advance guard, and keep the roads clear.
[This Mus’ab, son of ’Abd-ur-Rahman, us-Sakafi, was a kinsman of Muhammad].
He placed Namana bin Hanzala Kalabi in the centre with a thousand men ; and
ordered Zakwan bin ’Ulwan al Bik'ri with 1,500 men to attend on Moka Bisaya, chief
of Bait [sic] ; and the Bheti [Bhati ?] Thakurs and the Jats of Ghazni, who had
made-submission and entered the ’Arab service, were told to remain at Sagara and
the island of Bait.”
We all know where Gandabah is, also that bet, not “ Bait,” means an island, or
rather, the delta of a river, surrounded by channels, which this was— the delta of the
Mihran; and what he has mistaken for “ Ghazni,” along with his “Gandava,” is
the word — western, applied to the Jats on the western side of the Mihran, as
sharki Jats is applied subsequently to those on the east side. We also know for
certain that Nirun lay between Debal and Mansuriyah, but nearer to the former,
and that Sagarah was two days’ journey from Debal on the east. Elliot likewise
tells us, as does Cunningham, who follows him, that “ Gandaba” was always called
Kandabil in those days” See note 150, page 217.
236 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
of food and forage, and the consequent loss of men and horses from
If any one will take the trouble to look at a map, it will be seen at a glance
what nonsense this is. Gandabah is no less than four degrees of latitude farther
north than where these operations took place, namely, in the lowrer part of the delta
of the Mihran, in the southern part of the present Haidar-abad Collectorate of Sind,
and between the present town of Jarak and the Puranah Bhorah, and farther north.
The bet, or delta, at that period, did not extend farther south than the Pir Patho
hills and the present Wangah Bazar, if so far south. The object of these movements
of Muhammad, son of Kasim, is sufficiently manifest. It was to pass the western
branch of the Mihran just above its junction with the main stream again, as in¬
dicated in the “ Masalik wa Mamalik” map. We must not judge of the lower part
of the delta by what it is now, but by what it was some twelve centuries since. See
note 163, page 221.
The account given in the Cliach Namali respecting Muhammad’s movements
after his return from Siw-istan by command of Amir Hajjaj, contains so many im¬
portant geographical details, that I must give a short abstract of them here.
At the period in question, one of Ra’e Dahir’s “ Maliks,” as they are styled in
the Oliach Namah, held a Hisar or fort in the Bet or delta, on the Mihran, and ap¬
parently just below the junction of that branch of the river, which, about forty
miles above Baliman-abad separated into two, and re-united w7ith the eastern branch
again some distance to the south of that city, and towards the sea coast. This Bet,
it is stated, was situated on the east side of the Mihran on the margin of a stream [a
minor channel], an island formed by the Kunbh river. The Malik was called Basil,
son of Sami. Muhammad was told that, if he could win him to his side, the diffi¬
culty of crossing the Mihran would be got over.
Amir Hajjaj, in his letters to Muhammad, containing excellent advice for his
guidance, impressed upon him to choose a place where a strong bridge of boats might
be constructed, and where the cffessing place was flat and even. It was after this
that Nirun was surrendered to him by its governor, who was continued in charge
of it. In the mean time, some of the petty chiefs of the Bhati tribe, and others, began
to submit to him ; and, at Nirun, an inhabitant of Debal, who was a native of Basrah,
brought to him a Samani or Priest, who, he said, could facilitate his crossing the Ab-
i-Sind [sic. not Mihran]. In Muliarram, 93 H. (October, 711 A. D.), Muhammad
moved from his position — the last mentioned was the delightful place on the koh-i-
Nirun, near the lake before referred to — and arrived near the fortress of Ash-bahar
( ), a place of great strength, with a determined garrison, the town, which
lay on the west side, having been brought within the area of the defences by sur¬
rounding it with a ditch. It was, however, reduced and a Shahnah or Commissioner
left there. From thence Muhammad moved to the west bank of the Ab-i-Mihran,
on the verge of the boundary of Rawar. This appears to have been one of the most
important places in lower Sind, which Oliach had founded on the east bank of the
great river, and near it was Jai-pur, wdiich is constantly mentioned along with it. In
the mean time, a chief named Mokah, the Bishayah, submitted to the ’Arab leader.
He was brother of Basil, the then chief of the Bet, above referred to, and between
the two brothers and their father, who sided with Risil, great hostility existed. For
this the Bet was conferred upon him (nominally), and he was directed to collect
boats for the proposed bridge.
Muhammad wrote an account of these matters to Hajjaj, and, soon after, moved
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 237
disease, and the months that elapsed in the mean time. Having effected
to that part of the west bank of the Mihran which was opposite to Kawar [and]
Jai-pur, and Mokah was sent to select a place for crossing. But Hajjaj required “ a
map on paper, with the measures of the depth and breadth of the river, and the
state of the banks for four fnrsangs up and down stream at the place proposed ”
During this period, Dahir’s people had surprised Siw-istan, which had been left with
but a few of his own ’Arab troops, and Muhammad had to detach 4,000 horse thither,
and secure it. This is what the Balazari refers to in the text above, as though that
was the first capture of Siw-istan.
On hearing of Mokah’s proceedings, and of his going over to the Musalmans,
Dahir now sent his son Jai Senha to the Bet, to prevent the ’Arabs crossing and
holding it. Jai Senha came [down stream] with his troops, accompanied by boats, by
the Kotlcah branch, to the banks of the Mihran, to the fort of the Bet opposite to
Muhammad’s position.
More than a month passed, want of food for themselves and their horses stared
the ’Arabs in the face ; the horses fell ill, and such was the scarcity, that those which,
became affected were killed and eaten. Boats were not forthcoming; and suspicion
arose that Mokah was deceiving them. Hajjaj became angry at the delay, and com¬
manded that boats should be procured by whatever means attainable, and sent from
his own stables 2,000 horses. In the mean time, provisions and forage began to be
brought in, but great sickness [scurvy] prevailed, so much so, that Hajjaj had to
send vinegar, which was done by repeatedly saturating carded cotton with vinegar
and drying the cotton each time, and when sufficiently saturated, it was made into
bales for facility of transmission. The cotton was to be soaked in water, and the
vinegar solution given to the sick. Hajjaj further directed that the passage should
be made at the Bet , wherever the Mihran was narrowest and the banks easy ; and,
if there was an island or bank in the channel, it was to be made use of, and the
crossing effected by degrees, constructing a bridge of boats for the purpose.
Muhammad now broke up his camp, and marched into the district [or tract —
earnin'] of Sagarah, belonging to the district of Jhim, and directed the boats to be
brought, and planks as many as might be required. In the interim, the Wazir of
Ba’i Dahir endeavoured to rouse him from his carelessness and neglect of his affairs ;
and Muhammad, not desiring to be obstructed in the construction of the bridge of
boats, and in crossing, detached 600 horse towards the fort of Baghrur (on the op¬
posite side) to attract the attention of Fuff, Dahir’s son, there stationed; also 500
horse on the road to Akham [“Aghamanno” of Hughes, and “Augoomanoo” of
maps, on the Puranah Dhorah, 25 miles S. E. of Haidarabad] to watch the territory
of Kandarah [_ JUANS’. This is Elliot’s “ Gandava.” See also pages 166 and 362 of
his work] ; while the Samanl in charge of Nirun (who had previously submitted to the
’Arabs) was to take care that food and forage reached the army. Another 1,000 men
were pushed forward to guard the road, while another body of 1,500 more, and Mokah,
the Bisayah, Malik of the Bet, and the Thakurs of the Bhatis and the western
[ ] Jats [this is the word read as “ Ghazni” by Elliot. See pages 167 and 507
of his work], and th-e chief men of Sagarah, who have submitted, were stationed in
the jazzrah of Bet” The author, probably, was not aware that both words are of
the same signification, one being Persian and the other Hindi.
As soon as Muhammad reached the Jhim passage, he went to examine where the
ford was narrowest and least obstructed, and the banks suitable ; and he came to a
E E
238 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
the passage at last, without much opposition on the part of Dahir, son of
stand opposite to the jazirah in question. Having satisfied himself, boats were
brought, stones laid out [to moor them], planks laid on, joined, and fastened to¬
gether. Dahir being aware of Mokah’s doings, had sent his son, Jai Senha (as before
noticed) to hold the Bet, and he was directed not to trust the Bishayah, Sarband, who
might be in communication with Mokah. On this, Basil, the latter’s brother, and his
enemy, went to Dahir, and asked to be permitted to defend the Bet, as he and his
father had always been hostile to Mokah ; and he was sent, and directed to prevent
the ’Arab army crossing, and the chief men of the Bet were commanded to obey his
orders. On this, Jai Senha returned to his former post at Rawar. Rasil, accordingly,
effectually prevented the bridge from being finished and secured to the east bank ;
so Muhammad had to have as many boats prepared and joined together on the west
bank as would span the Mihran, troops were placed on it, and it was pushed off.
It so happened that (swinging round) it touched the opposite bank exactly at the
point where the enemy were collected to oppose the passage, and the infantry on the
bridge of boats, pouring a volley of arrows among them, leaped on shore, formed up,
and dispersed them ; while their comrades secured the bridge head with pegs and
stakes, and then they pursued the enemy to the very gate of Jhim. One of the
fugitives, however, managed to get away, and, by dawn the next morning, reached
Dahir’ s camp, and told the bad news. [See Elliot, page 167].
Then Muhammad addressed his army, and told them of the hardships and
dangers they were about to encounter, and that if any one wished to return, now
was the time, but only three persons did, their reasons being deemed sufficient ; and
the bridge being now quite finished, body after body of the troops crossed, losing bub
one man, who fell from the bridge and was drowned. As soon as the passage had
been effected, the army was marshalled in battle array, and moved forward until
near the fort of the Bet, using great caution (as enjoined by Hajjaj), and intrenching
the camp. From thence Muhammad advanced towards Rawar until he reached Jai¬
pur, and between it and Rawar was an inlet or creek, and at the passage across,
Dahir, who had reached the east side of the creek with his forces, had sent a party
to reconnoitre ; and Jai Senha was directed to oppose the further advance of the
’Arabs, but he was overthrown with great slaughter.
At this juncture, Rasil, brother of Mokah, who had prevented the ’Arabs from
completing their bridge and securing it to the east bank, offered to submit ; but, in
order “ to preserve his honour,” he asked the ’Arab leader to send a party of troops
and capture him at a certain place, at the ju-e [canal or water-course] of Bartari
or B atari, five farsaMs from the fort of Kunbh, where he would be, under pretence
of going to Dahir’s presence. This was done, and then Mokah, his brother, was
installed in the Bet.
Muhammad was advised by both brothers, to move from where he then was to
a place called Nara’i or Narani ( ) ; for Dahir was at Kajijak [a strange Siudi
word with two ’Arabic (3 ] ; and, on well examining the country around, it was
found that a large lake [long, narrow lake or dhandf which was impassable (on foot),
intervened. Rasil said it must be crossed ; and he obtained boats, and the passage
was effected, but still another inlet, dhand, or side channel, intervened between.
Rasil advised that the force should move another march farther up stream, towards
Jai-pur on the canal of Dadahah Wab, which is a village belonging to Rawar, and
1892.] H. G-. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 239
Ohach, the ruler of the country, whose capital was Aror, he encountered
Ra’e Dahir in battle, at the head of a considerable army with numerous
war elephants, who, towards the close of the day, was completely over¬
thrown, and killed in the engagement. Muhammad, after this success,
moved towards old Bahman-abad, which was two farsa7igsm from
where Mansuriyah was afterwards built, its subsequent site at the
time being a jangal. The great mound, styled “ Tliool ["Tall] Depur
Ghangra” of the large one inch scale map, six miles north-east of
Bahman-abad is doubtless its site. At Baliman-abad the remains of Ra’e
there halt, as Muhammad would then be parallel with Dahir’ s position, and from it,
would be able to act either in front or rear of it, and on Dahir’s baggage. He did so,
and came to the canal of Dadahah Wall, on which Dahir moved towards Rawar ;
and having there deposited his servants and baggage, he came and took up a position
where, between him and the ’Arab forces, only a farsang distance intervened.
Muhammad, on this, moved nearer towards Dahir’s position until he had reached
within half that distance from him. Fighting had gone on for three days, until, on
the fourth, Dahir himself appeared in the field, and a severe conflict took place.
Muhammad had detached 6,000 of his troops in advance, with directions to cross the
channel, which on that day separated the two armies ; but, finding that they were
likely to be hard pressed, through the enemy having got an inkling of the move¬
ment, he moved to their support with the remainder of his forces. Dahir had
determined on making a supreme effort, and did so. He had concentrated all his
available forces, and the different tribes of Sind, including the sharki Jats — the Jats
east of the Mihran — besides his own troops, were posted in the rear in support. All
was of no avail : the infidels were driven back with great loss; and the Musalmans,
that night, remained on the field, in the position they had gained. This was the 9th
of Ramazan, 93 H. (19th June, 712 A. 1).). On the following day, the 10th, Muham¬
mad harangued and exhorted his troops [there was no “ khutba to read. See
Elliot, page 169] ; the Arabs made a general attack upon Dahir and his forces ; and
he was finally killed near the fort of Rawar, between the Mihran river and the canal
of Dadahah Wah, in endeavouring to reach that fortress, and his troops were over¬
thrown with great slaughter, and pursued to the gates of that place. Jai Senha, son
of Dahir, and Rani Ba’i, Dahir’s sister, whom the latter had married, entered the fort
of Rawar, and there shut themselves up ; but Jai Senha was for sallying forth, and
again fighting the enemy while life lasted. He was dissuaded from doing so, and
advised by the Wazir of Dahir, to retire to the hisdr of Bahman-abad, where he would
be able to rally the forces of the country, and be able to make a stand against the
Musalmans with more chance of success. He did so ; and Rani Ba’i, with some of
Dahir’s Maliks along with her, remained in the fort of Rawar resolved to defend it.
It was invested, and the walls breached, and finally surrendered ; but, before this was
done, Rani Ba’i had ascended a funeral pyre, and joined her husband and brother.
From this it will be seen, that a considerable time elapsed after the ’Arabs
entered Sind before these events came to pass ; and, what is surprising, is, that these
operations went on in the height of the hot season, when, at the present time, the
rivers are in flood, and the country inundated, and yet no remark is made on the
subject.
133 A little over six miles. See note 105.
240
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
Dabir’s forces had rallied ; and in the operations which ensned before
that place fell, 26,000 men were slain on the part of the defenders.189
189 Mir Ma’sum here is quite at variance with the historians who wrote several
centuries before him, and one of whom wrote not much more than a century after the
events he records. Mir Ma’sum is brief, doubles up events, and thereby con¬
fuses them. He makes Muhammad, son of Kasim, after the fall of Siw-istan and
Salim, reject the advice given him to attack Bahman-abad first, and makes him
march direct from Siw-istan to Alor or Aror, which he did not do. He says he
crossed “ the river” to the mauza ’ of Tahl-ti — — which, in two other copies of
his work, is written and — three or four kuroh from Siw-istan. The first
name, however, is correct. “The river” here cannot refer to “the Mihran of
Sind” (nor even to the branch which flowed towards it from Kalari), which passed
upwards of forty miles farther east at the period in question, in which direction
Kalari lay, but to what is called the Kunbh in the Chach Namah. There is still a
mauza’ called Tahl-ti about seven miles north of Siw-istan or modern Sihwan, on the
east side of the river which we call the “ Western Nara,” whose channel, in former
times, was, no doubt, a branch of the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind ; and at that period, it
may have been known as the Kumbh or Kunbh, or river of the Kumbh or Kunbh.
These words, or , signify, ‘ a water-pot,’ or ‘ vessel,’ in Sanskrit ; and
whether we can connect those meanings with the Lake Manchhar which, in its
centre, is somewhat in the form of a pot or water vessel, being very deep, with steep,
rocky sides, is rather doubtful, but the idea crossed my mind. The words cannot be
intended for the Sanskrit word for a spring etc., for that is — Jcund. The ’Arab
writers do not allude in the slightest degree to this at present great lake, which seems
hardly to have existed as a lake in those days. Perhaps at the period in question
only the deep portion contained water, and hence its similarity to a gigantic kunbh.
With respect to Tahl-ti, I do not presume to say that the present mauza ’ — the
“ Talti” and “ Tultee” of the maps — is the identical place referred to by Mir
Ma’sum, for a thousand changes may have occurred since that time. I merely men¬
tion the fact of such a place existing under that name in the exact locality mentioned
and where also is a Tahl-ti dhand or lake. That Muhammad first reduced Bahman-
abad, and then moved to Aror, there is no doubt whatever. Mir Ma’sum says, that
Ra’e Dahir, finding that Muhammad had crossed to Tahl-ti, despatched a force to
oppose his advance to the kol-i-db or lake of iSJ^ — Kinjri — or — Kingri
(about twenty miles west of the ruins of Aror), upon which, the ’Arab commander
marched on — Radian — (in other copies of the original and There
is a Rafi Dero ferry south-west of Kingri), and detached part of his troops to en¬
counter Ra’e Dahir’s forces, and overthrew them. This lake is said, in Mir Ma’sum’s
work, to have been crossed by the ’Arab army by means of one boat, which took
three men at a time, which, of course, is absurd.
After this, according to the same writer, Muhammad moved with his whole
force against Aror ; and, in an engagement, which took place on the 10th Ramazan,
93 H., near that city, Dahir was defeated and slain.
From this it will be noticed that he leaves out nearly every thing that occurred
at Bahman-abad during six months, and all the events which took place on the banks
of the Mihran before that, including Dahir’s death, and has transferred them to Aror
instead ; and, consequently, has shown, that, for the early history of Sind, he is not
1892.] H G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 241
Muhammad, leaving a governor there, moved towards Aror and Baghrur,
to be relied on; while the Cliach Namah, contains the relation of events generally
from the statements of eye-witnesses of what they relate.
As soon as Jai Senha, son of Dahir, reached Bahman-abad, he endeavoured to
rouse his brother and kinsmen to oppose the invaders with energy, but without
result : there was no combined effort made. Accordingly, he despatched letters to
his brother Fuff, at the capital, Aror ; to Chach, son of Darsiyah, Dahir’s nephew,
who held Babiyah [the Pabiyah of Elliot before, but, now he makes it Bhatiya
although there is no ‘ h ’ in it] on the south side of the river Biah [which was subse¬
quently held by Kaksah, son of Ohandar, Dahir’s uncle, according to the same
authority] ; and to Dahol or Dahul, another son of Ohandar, wrho held Nudiyah and
Kai-kanan [the “ Kikan ” of the Balazari — tracts west of the Ab-i-Sind]. Muham¬
mad, son of Kasim, on the other hand, after the death of Dahir, and capture of
Rawar, as before related, moved towards Bahman-abad, between which two places
were two fortified towns Bahrur and Dhaliyah. The first offered obstinate resistance,
and was only captured after two months’ investment, and the latter nearly as long,
but without much opposition. The people, at last, finding they could not hold out,
despatched their families from thence by the bridge over the Manhal [branch of the]
river ; but, on the Musalmans becoming aware of it next day, they were pursued,
and a great number slaughtered. Such as escaped made their way towards Hindu¬
stan by the Ramal territory [the tracts inhabited by the Bhati tribe], and the
registdn, or sandy desert [evidently towards Jasal-mir, the feeders of the Hakra from
the direction of Poh-karn, at that period, having ceased to flow], towards the terri¬
tory of Siro [Sirohi ? There is a “ Sero,” eighty-one miles above Bahman-abad, east
of Sayyidah] of which Diw Ra [or Raj, as in Elliot] was ruler. He was the uncle’s
son of Ra’e Dahir [and, consequently, must have been son of Ohandar].
Dhaliyah having been given up, Muhammad located there Nubah, son of Daharan,
son of Dhaliyah, and charged him with the care and superintendence of boats [it
appears to have been on the Puranah Dhorah branch of the Mihran of Sind] along
the banks from that place to Dadahah-Tiyah [possibly Wadahah-Tiyah], which was
a farsang [three miles] from Bahman-abad. [See Elliot, page 176.] Another march
from Dhaliyah brought the ’Arab forces to the banks of the Jalwali Nahr [canal or
minor channel] on the east side of Bahman-abad [which Elliot’s editor very wisely
supposed was the “ Falalai,” which is only thirty-three miles south-ivest of Bahman-
abad] and there they took up their position.
Bellasis, in his interesting account of the ruins of Bahman-abad, which he
discovered, appears even to have found what we may well suppose was the site of
the ’Arab camp during the investment. He says : “ On my last visit to Brahman-
abad, I made inquiry of an old cultivator if he had ever seen any of the round solid
balls of pottery mentioned in my first paper. ‘ Sahib,’ rejoined the old man, ‘ come to
the Top Khanah [arsenal], and I will show you plenty.’ I followed his guidance,
and he led me outside the city rvalls, and across the dry bed of the river, and there, in
the plain, sure enough were a number of these pottery balls. I could distinctly see
the square heaps in which they had been piled in regular rows like round shot ;
and, scattered over the plain, numbers of single ones were to be found, slightly
embedded in the soil. They were of various sizes, some as large as 12-pounder3,
others about the size of billiard balls. The old man accounted for there being so
many scattered about the plain by saying that in ancient times a great battle had
242 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
but the last name cannot be correct, because it is mentioned previously
been fought on that spot. The smaller balls might have been nsed in a sling, but
the larger ones would have recpiired some engine like the balista to propel them.”
To return, however, to the subject of Jai Senha. Not liking apparently, to
be shut up in Bahman-abad, he had retired to Oliani-sar [Tibbah-i-Chani-sar. See
farther on.], but he had previously selected and appointed sixteen of the chiefs of the
place to the charge of the gates, to guard them as leaders of the troops. Four
gates are mentioned, but the names of five are given ; namely, the Jaritari, which
may be that of the citadel, as the others are numbered, and 1. Bharand or Bharind ;
2. Satiya; 3, Manorah ; and 4. Salah. On Monday, 1st Rajab, 93 H. (April, 711 A. D.
[This cannot be correct, as Dahir was only killed two months and ten days after that
date.], Muhammad intrenched his position, and prepared to attack Bahman-abad,
which was said to contain 40,000 fighting men. Fighting went on continually, until
six months had passed away [the hot season included], and Muhammad and his
forces were become dispirited and almost hopeless of taking the place. At length on
Monday, the end of Zi-Hijjah, the last month of the year [17th October, 711 A. D.]
news of Jai Senha was obtained. He had returned from the country of Ramal, which
is called Bhatiah, and had begun to infest the roads and harass the Musalmans by
causing a scarcity of forage and food. On this Muhammad had to send to Mokah,
the Bishayah, to ask him what had best be done, and he advised the despatch of
forces to drive Jai Senha away. This was done, and Jai Senha, who appears unable
to relieve Bahman-abad, sent his family and effects by way of the registan, or sandy
desert, [the tributaries of the Hakra coming from the eastward, from the side of
Poh-karn and Jasal-mir, as elsewhere stated, had at this time ceased to be perennial
streams and did not reach it, hence that part had become a desert,] to a place called
Jangan, and to ’Ura or ’Orah, and Kaba [Khabo ?J in the territory of Ohutrur ; and,
at last, retired into the territory of Kash-mir.
Jai Senha having retired to Cffitrur, no hope remained of being relieved and
the investment raised ; and the principal merchants and traders, — who always fear
for their money bags, and their own interests — under the plea, that without leaders
to lead the troops, those who could have done so, having been killed, it was impos¬
sible to hold out longer, deputed four of their number to enter into communication
with the Musalman commander. The up-shot was, it was agreed, that a sally
should be made from the Jaritari gate by partizans of theirs, under pretence of
fighting, and that, on the appearance of the ’Arabs they should take to flight, and
leave the gate open for them to enter ; and thus was it treacherously betrayed to
them. As soon as they got inside, and appeared upon the walls, the garrison (or as
many as could) endeavoured to escape by the eastern gate, which of the four
is not named. About 6,000 fighting men were killed; some say 16,000, but this
seems to refer to those who had perished during the investment, and not to
those killed when the place was taken. At this place Rani Ladi, one of Dahir’ s
wives, was made captive, whom Muhammad afterwards purchased, and then entered
into matrimony with her.
After this success, Muhammad wrote an account of the proceedings to Amir
Hajjaj, in which he says, that he had written his report at a place on the higher part
of the Jalwali Ju’ e (canal or minor channel). Before leaving Bahman-abad, and
moving northwards, he settled the government of southern Sind. He placed Nubah
[already mentioned as having been placed in charge of Dhaliyah], son of Daharau,
1892.] H. G. Ravert}~ — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 243
along with Rawar, which lay on the west side of Bahman-abad, and was
son of Dhaliyah, in charge of Rawar and its dependencies, together with the charge
and supervision of vessels and boats, to have them (some) kept in readiness ; and he
ordered that every vessel or boat which should arrive or depart, from above or below
(stream), should be taken to the fort of Rawar if it contained men or war materials.
The boats and vessels above Dhaliyah were placed under the supervision of an
’Arab officer, Ibn Ziyad-al-’ Abdi. Other Walls and ’Amils were nominated to the
charge of Siwistan, Nirun, Dhaliyah, and other places; and the parts inhabited by the
Jats were likewise brought under control.
Having disposed of the affairs of Bahman-abad and the Lohanahs, and all parts
to the east and west, and in the environs and neighbourhood thereof, on Thursday,
the 3rd of Muharram, 94 H. (9tli October, 712 A. D.), Muhammad marched with his
forces to a place called Muthal [in one MS. Munhal. Muthalo of the Sindis, which ap¬
pears in one map as “ Mothilo ” and in another as “ Mothito ” !] in the neighbourhood
of Sawandi, also called Sawandi of the Sammahs, where there was an db-gir and a
grassy plain, and which was called the Karbhar Dandh ( dhand ), and on the shore
thereof he pitched his camp. All the dwellers in that part were Samanis (Priests),
Nahr-ban (canal diggers P), and merchants and traders, who all came out to receive
him, and submit to his authority ; and in the parts around were Jat peasantry. From
thence Muhammad marched to Bharur or Bhirur [mistaken by Mir Mas’um and
others for Baghrur, which was in quite a different direction], and despatched officers
to administer the affairs of that place and of Kandbar. He then moved into the
tract of country peopled by the Sammah tribes, and nominated a chief over them.
Having provided for the administration of the affairs of the Lohanahs, he came
among the Sihtahs, arranged their affairs, and required them to guide him towards
Aror.
I may here notice, that, from the foregoing account contained in the Ohach
Namali, Rawar and Dhaliyah appear to have been situated on the east side of the
western branch of the Mihran of Sind, which separated into two channels forty
miles above Bahman-abad, as shown in the ’Arab map. Also, that there is no actual
mention of that branch having been crossed to get to Aror ; but it was probably
passed at the stage where the Karbhar Dhand is mentioned.
I must also remark that the dates given in the Ohach Namah are either wrong
or confused. Debal appears to have been taken in the first month of 93 H., but the
letter of Hajjaj, acknowledging the account of its capture, is dated in Rajab, the
seventh month, and took sometime to come, a couple of weeks at least. After this
Muhammad moved against Siw-istan, and after his return from thence it was some
months before he could cross the Mihran. Several other letters passed between
them, and yet between the letter of Rajab and the 10th of Muharram when Dahir
was killed, only the months Sha’ban and ten days of Muharram intervened. After
that, when Rawar had fallen it took two months to reduce Bahrur, and the reduction
of Dhaliyah took nearly as long. This would bring us to the end of the year 93 H. ;
and yet, it is said, that he appeared on the 1st Rajab, 93 H. before Bahman-abad,
two months and twenty days before Dahir was killed ; and after being six months
before Bahman-abad, it was only the end of Zi-Hijjah, the last month of 93 H., that
news of Jai Senha was received which led to its capture. Then it must have taken
some little time to settle the affairs of Bahman-abad, and yet he is said to have
marched towards Aror from thence on the 3rd of Muharram 94 H. According to
244
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
captured after Daliir’s defeat, and was close to the east bank of the
western branch of the Mihran. It appears to refer to the Balirur of
the Chach Namah. First, the people of Tawandari [the name is some¬
what doubtful. See the Samandur of the Kazwini, page 211, and Samand
of the Istakhari, page 211] submitted to him, and he reached Basmad
[not to be mistaken for Basmid nearer Multan near which the Mihran
flowed] which also submitted, after which he appeared before the
capital, Aror. This place was situated on a hill, and he had to besiege
it for several months ; it finally capitulated on terms.
Having effected these successes, Muhammad advanced to &CJ|,190
which was situated on this side, that is, on the south side or left
bank, of the river Biah.191 This was captured, and was in ruins when
the author wrote.192 After this Muhammad crossed the Biah, and
the time occupied in the different operations as stated in the Ohach Namah, he conld
scarcely have started for Aror before Rajab, 94 H., otherwise there is but four
months and twenty-three days from the death of Dahir for the completion of opera¬
tions which it is said took upwards of ten months to accomplish, and consequently,
there is an error somewhere.
190 This word, being without points, might be mistaken for one word, but it is
merely the Sindi proper name Sikah, with the ’Arabic prefix ‘ al,’ as distinctly
shown in the Chach Namah. See note 192.
191 This is incorrect. Sikah was close to the east bank of the Rawi, but Babiyah
was on the left or south bank of the Biah, and Asal Kandah or Askandah was on
the north of the Biah, as shown in the following note.
192 Certain enthusiastic writers have supposed that the name of the Oxydracoe
is derived from the name of U'chchh, which they also suppose was in existence two
thousand two hundred years ago ; while some of those who labour under this sup¬
position call it by the incorrect names of Uja, TJch , and even Uk. The only
doubts entertained on the subject, apparently, arise in the minds of more recent
European writers because “ Arrian and Strabo seem to say,” that it [the town of
the Oxydracce ] stood “ on the ivest bank of the Acesines [the Chin-ab].
U'chchh stands on the east bank of the Chin-ab and its tributaries now, but, in
former days, and down to comparatively modern times, it stood on the west bank of
the Biah, or Rud-i-Sind wo Hind of the old writers, and a little above its junction
with the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind ; and, at the period in question, the Chin-ab and other
Panj-ab rivers were tributaries of the Biah. The Greek accounts, however, show,
that the country or town of the Oxydracae lay north of the Rawi, and in the Rachin-
ab Do-abah, as shown farther on.
Elliot ( vol. 1, p. 109), quoting the “ Mujmalu-t Tawarikh,” on the division of
Sind by the son of Kafand, one of the ancient kings, said to have been contemporary
with Alexander the Great, states, that, “ One king [governor is meant] he established
in ’ Askalandusa. Upon another he bestowed the country of Zor, to which Anj
[Uch ?] is attached.” In a note, he says, “ It is written ■ with two
purely Arabic letters, ^ and (3 ? “ hut the name is generally accepted as
’Askaland, or ’ A steal an dr a, and the termination usa has not been found elsewhere,
[that is, in one MS. only]. May not the passage be read— He established one khm
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . 245
moved towards Multan and invested it, first defeating the infidels out-
at ’Ask aland and Sail ? or may not the last word signify — and three (depen¬
dencies) p” Yes, if “ sah” meant three in Persian, only it does not.
Such are some of the foundations on which are based the identification of the
Oxydracce with Uja, Uch, or Uk. Very solid foundations, truly !
At page 104 of the same volume, relating as far back as the traditionary period
of the fall of the Panclus, where this supposed same place is mentioned as Askal-
and, but where neither Uja, nor Uch are mentioned, we are referred to Ap¬
pendix X, which (p. 365) states, that, “ The Askalanda, Asal-kanda, and Askalandra
of the Chach-nama, is the same as the Askaland, and Askaland-LTsa, [leaving out, of
course, all reference to the ’Arab letters in the word] of the Mujmalu-t Tawarikh,
and the Askandara and Askanda of the Tuhfatu-l Kiram. The close correspond¬
ence of the name, especially in the last instance, induces us at once to recognize it
as identical with the Alexandria built at the confluence of the Acesines with the
Indus ; but a little examination will show the resemblance to be more specious than
real. # # * The ancient kingdom of Sind was divided into four Satrapies of which
the third (p. 138) comprised the fort of Askalanda and Maibar. Now Mdibar
and Chachpur still exist [the same since the time of the Pandus, probably ?]
under the modernized names of Mirbar and Chdchar, close together at the very
junction of the Acesines and the Indus. Consequently, Askalauda must have been
higher up the river, as subsequent passages will show.” In a foot-note to the
name Maibar the Editor says, “ The text has Ydhiba, but Pabiya is the more
general spelling,” but, in the extract at page 138, he has “ Askalanda and Pabiya ,
which are called Talwdra and Chachpur ; ” and in another foot-note, he says that
“ the name is written Pdya and Bdya, Pabiya, and Pabiya : the last seems the pre¬
ferable form
I may mention that the C ha char here referred to, some forty years ago, was six
miles below the junction of the Panch Nad, or Panj Ab with the Indus. Mitlian da
Kot wag then three miles and a half below the junction ; and about ten years since,
Mitlian da Kot was eleven miles below the junction, such are the continual altera¬
tions. There is no Mirbar now, but there is a Juja fourteen miles south-east
of Chachar. Why not have pressed that into service ? Further I may mention,
that it is only within the last century that the junction of the Panch Nad with the
Indus has taken place within twenty-four miles north-east of Chachar and Mithan
da Kot, and how far off it was before who shall say. Where it was in the last
century will be found farther on.
After all this, supposing that the courses of the rivers have remained precisely
the same for over two thousand years, although we find so much change in forty,
he says : “ Its [’Askalanda’s] proximity to the Buis, and its name of Askaland-
Usa ” — about which, at page 109, he was doubtful whether it was part of the name
or not — “lead us to regard it as Rclih of more modern times.” Yet he adds that,
“ That place bears marks of most undoubted antiquity, and the absence of all men¬
tion of it in the Chach-nama, where we are, both in the time of C'hach and Muham¬
mad Kasim ” — here the father’s name is again brought in as that of the son — “intro¬
duced to many transactions in its neighbourhood, can only be accounted for that it
is disguised under some other appellation.”
It certainly seems strange that LTchchh should not be mentioned in the Qhach
Namah, and in the earlier works on Sind, because we know from the Tuhfat-ul-
F F
2IG H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
side, who fled in disorder to regain the shelter of their walls. After
Kiram that it was an ancient fortress on the frontier of that country. It states,
that Ra’e Sahasi remitted the taxes of his people on the condition that they should
increase the height of six fortresses: namely, Relic hh, Mathilah, Siw-ra’i or Siw-
rahi, Ma’u or Ma’uh, Aror or Alor, and Siw-istan.” See my “ Notes on Afghan¬
istan,” etc. page 567.
Rchchh was several times destroyed and repaired, from the time of Sultan
Jalal-nd-Din, the Khwarazm Shah, to the time of the Arghun dynasty of Sind. Ibn
Batutah says, in his time, Rchchh was “a large city on the Sind,” and that “ Multan
was then the principal city of Sind.”
Elliot also speculates on “the other ancient Rchh [sic], now in ruins,” — jnst
as the other has been for a long time — “near the junction of the Hydaspes with the
Acesines.” Here again he takes it for granted that the present junction has always
remained the same; but in 801 H. (1398—99 A. D.) we know that it was twenty-six
miles lower down than at present, and that it was continually altering ; that, before
that again, it was many miles higher up ; and in the last century was near CThhau-
tarah. See farther on.
With respect to the name of Rchchh, there are no less than three places so
called, still existing, and all of some antiquity. — 1. Rchchh which is forty-seven miles
north of Shikar-pur, and twenty-seven to the northwards of Khan Garh, now Jacob-
abad. It is in Kachchh or Kachchhi — a common term for an alluvial tract, not
peculiar to this part any more than to Kachchh Bhuj — and is simply known as Rchchh.
It is not far from the Sind Hollow, in which the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, or a branch
of it, once flowed, as shown in the account of that river farther on. 2. Rchchh-i-
Gul Imam, a strong fort in the last century, but now in a state of rnin, twenty-one
miles north-north-west of Shor Kot, and about eleven miles south-west of the late
junction of the Bihat [Hydaspes] and the Chjn-ab [Acesines]. I say late, because
it has probably altered considerably since the Survey map I refer to was made a few
years since. This is the “ Uch” which Elliot (vol. 1, p. 367) considers “ as offering
a far more probable identification,” and is seventy-two miles to the northward of
Multan. 3. Rchchh-i-Jalali, or R'chchh-i- Sharif, formerly, that is to say within the
last century or thereabouts, consisting of seven small contiguous villages, or rather
quarters, enclosed within one wall Now it consists of three rather large villages
on mounds, contiguous to each other, and connected by a wall of brick, which lately
was in a dilapidated state. These villages or towns stand on high, artificial mounds,
the neighbourhood having been at all times liable to be swept away by the Ab-i-
Sind or Indus, as related in another place. The western-most of the villages is
small, bub contains a celebrated shrine, within a large and handsome old Muham¬
madan building, sadly out of repair. This is known as Pir ka Rchchh or Rchchh-i-
Makhdum, and the houses have sprung up around it. It is said to have been called
VValh-har in ancient times, before the Makhdum in question took up his dwelling
there. The eastern-most of the villages is the largest, but there are no walls now
standing, the ruins of the gateways, however, can still be seen. Some little trade is
carried on with Sind in grain, which is sent down the river in boats. In the neigh¬
bourhood are very extensive ruins of the ancient stronghold, embosomed in dense
groves of date trees and venerable pipals. Many of the buildings are almost entire,
and could easily be made habitable. They are constructed in the best style of
Muhammadan architecture of kiln-burnt bricks.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 247
sitting down before it for a considerable time, the supplies of the ’Arab
The site is undoubtedly ancient ; and yet, strange to say, it is not mentioned
in the Cliach Namah ; nor, under that name at least, by the ’Arab writers, includ¬
ing tbe Balazarf, in his history ; nor by the other Muhammadan historians of the
time of Sultan Mahmud of Ghaznin and his sons, namely, Al-’Utba, Bu-Rihan, the
Bailiaki, and the Gardaizi. I believe, however, that it is mentioned by these
historians under the name of Bhatiah, (called the country of Ramal in the Ohach
Namah) ; and for this reason.
The author of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasirf,” the next author who follows them that
we know of, mentions (page 449), the “ delivei’ance of Multan from the hands of the
Karamitah ’’ heretics, but l/chchh is not referred to; yet, immediately after (page
451) he mentions the Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhatnmad-i-Sam, marching towards
Nahar-Walah by way of Multan and l/chchh. In the account of his victories, how¬
ever (page 491), his “victories over the Karamitah of Multan and l/chchh ” are
distinctly stated, but, there is no mention of the Bhatiah among them, although the
capture of the stronghold of the Bhati tribe is distinctly mentioned. The author
knew l/chchh, for he was for a time in Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah’s service there,
being in charge of the Firuzi College in 624 H. (1227 A. D.), and holding the
office of Kazi to the forces of ’Ala-ud-Din, Bahram Shah, the Sultan’s son. It is
strange that the Bhstiah are not noticed by him. Yet others relate that the
Sultan delivered Multan from the Karamitah, and annexed the territory, and then
invested the Bhatiah, (which is the plural of Bhati), within the walls of l/chchh ; and
that, after its fall, it was entrusted to ’All Karmakh’s charge together with Multan.
It is evident from this, that those authors whose works have been translated, such as
’Utba’s, did not mean that there was any town or fortress called Bhatiah, but meant
the stronghold of the Bhatiah, that is, of the Bhati tribe, and their stronghold, we
know, was l/chchh, which they appear to have obtained possession of sometime
before the reign of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazniu, when the power of the ’Abbasi
Khalifahs over Sind and Multan was merely nominal. Elliot, therefore, was right
in supposing that l/chchh was “disguised under another name”; and I believe that
the sentence in the “ Tabakat-i-Nasirf” at page 449, was, before the text had been
interfered with, that “he marched an army towards Multan and U'ohchh and deli-
vered them out of the hands of the Karamitah”; and this would account for the
“ stronghold of the Bhatiah” not being here mentioned by its author.
With respect to Sultan Mahmud’s capture of the stronghold, the Gardaizf, a con¬
temporary writer, states, that the Sultan attacked the fortress of the Bhatiah in
396 H. (1005-6 A. D.), and that Bajra ( 1^^ ), the Bhatiah, so called on account of
the number of his men, his success, and his great haughtiness [ —bajra or ivajra
signifies ‘a thunderbolt’ in Sanskrit], put his forces in array to oppose the Sultan,
and sent them out against him, while he himself kept aside, near the skirts of a
jangal. Some of the Sultan’s troops suiwounded' it, on which the Bhatiah Rajah
drew his dagger and killed himself. Great slaughter was made among his tribe,
the Rajah’s head was brought in, and a great number of elephants were taken. It
was after this that the Sultan attacked the Karamitah of Multan, for which I have
not space here, but it will be related in another place.
Bu-Rihan mentions this tribe in several places as though it was the name of
a place, as and hi the printed text, but, in the Index, as two different
248 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
force fell short-, and they liad to eat some of their animals for food ;
places. The passage is, with three exceptions, much as Elliot translates it (p. 61),
namely : “ West of Narana [ **!/ and in MSS. in text] is Multan distant
fifty far sang s ; thence to [and to?] Bhati fifteen. South-east from Bhati is Arur,
distant fifteen farsangs. Bhati is situated between two arms or branches of the
Sind Bud.” The name Arfir is doubtful : the MSS. have jj) - |Jbj| -jjj | '• if Aror is
referred to, that is nearly south-west. The Sind Rud is the Biah and its tributaries,
not the Indus (See ante page 211, also page 221, note 163) ; but the word rendered
“ Bhati” here by Elliot, in his extract, is very different at pp. 37, 39, 40, 77, and 79.
According to this statement, the stronghold of the Bhatiah would lie exactly midway
between Multan and Aror. If we calculate the thirty farsakhs between Multan and
Aror at eight mil to the farsakh, which is certainly not correct, it would make two
hundred and forty miles, which, as the crow flies, is just the distance between those
two places; but Lfchchh, the fortress of the Bhati tribe or Bhatiah, is but seventy-
five miles (equal to twenty-two farsakhs ) from Multan, while Aror is one hundred and
sixty (equal to nearly forty-seven farsakhs) from lfchchh; consequently, by Bu-
Rihan’s account, if we are to place entire dependence on it, which I am hardly
disposed to do for several reasons, his “Bha$i”and “Bhatiah” cannot represent
l/chchh, unless we read his statement to mean that this Bhatiah lies about midway
between Multan and Aror, without taking distances into account. There is still a
Bhati Wa-han in this part, an ancient place, once the chief town of a mahdll of the
Berun-i-Panoh Nad district of the Multan sdbah, which is situated just midway
between Lfchchh and Aror; but, from what other writers state, as will be seen
farther on, there can be little doubt, that, under the name of the town or city of
the Bhatiah, Lfchchh -i- Sharif is referred to.
Elliot, in the two first volumes of his “ Indian Historians,” tries, by many
arguments to prove that the Bhatiah here referred to, is what he calls “ Bhera on
the Jailam,” that is, Bahrah, no less than one hundred and ninety-two miles, north-
north-east of Multan ; while from several translated passages in his own work, its
whereabouts is distinctly shown. All these errors arise from the supposition that
the courses of the rivers have never changed, and, that the tracts east of the Indus
have always been a desert. See Vol. 11, page 439. For example: Sultan Mahmud
returning from the expedition against Somnath in 417 H., set out with the object of
returning by Mansuriyah, the ruler of which was a Mulhaidah or Karamitah. On
the news of his approach the heretic fled to the date forests in the vicinity of Man¬
suriyah, but the Sultan having surrounded the one in which he had taken shelter,
oame upon him and his followers, the greater number of whom were either killed
or drowned in endeavouring to cross the river (the Hakra or Wahindah), and very
few of them escaped.
From thence the Sultan, having crossed the Ab-i-Sind near Multan, moved
against the Bhatiah, and after reducing that refractory people to submission, returned
to Multan again, and from thence to Ghaznm, which he reached in Safar, 417 H.
(about 11th March, 1026 A. D.). Now how is it possible that “ Bhera on the Jai¬
lam” can be the place referred to? There is a “Bhera” just five miles east of
Aror, if a “ Bhera” is required.
After this, in the year following, a naval battle was fought ; and it appears to
have taken place near the then place of junction of the Ab-i-Sind with the Sind Rud
or llud-i-Sind wo Hind, on the then Ranch Nad consequently. I believe it was fought
1892.] H G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 249
bat, at this crisis, a man came to Muhammad and promised, if admitted
between U'qhchh and Ghaus-pur, which I suppose to be the position of Basraid of the
’Arab writers or very near it ; and, possibly the action may have been fought a
little lower down.
The Gardaizi states, that, as the Sultan had sustained great annoyance and
much insolence from the Jats of Multan and the Bhatiah, on the side of the Sihun
[a name applied by the early writers to the Panch Nad as then existing] on his way
back from Somnath, he now determined to chastize them thoroughly for it. When
the year 418 H. came round he set out from Ghaznin, and on reaching Multan, gave
orders for the construction of 1,400 boats, each of which was to be fitted with three
strong [and sharp] iron rams, one in the bow, and one on each side, and strong-
enough to cut and destroy whatever came in contact with them. In each boat
twenty men were embarked, armed with bows and arrows and flasks of naphtha.
The Jats hearing of these preparations sent away their effects to distant jazzrahs [or
bets : tracts encircled by minor channels of the rivers], and prepared to encounter
the Sultan’s vessels with 4,000 of their own, some say with 8,000, in each of which
were a number of armed men They accordingly moved to attack the Sultan’s fleet ;
and in the action which ensued, they were nearly all sunk or destroyed by the rams,
or the naphtha. As the banks of the Sihun were occupied by troops, horse and foot,
and elephants, those who escaped to land were captured or slain. Continuing to
follow the remainder of their vessels along the banks [down stream ; for they could
not go up under such circumstances], the troops reached the place where the Jats
had deposited their property and effects, which were seized by the victors, and great
numbers of other captives were likewise made. After this affair the Sultan returned
to Ghaznin.
In the following reign, when Ahmad-i-Nial-Tigin, feudatoiy of Labor, rebelled
against Sultan Mas’ud, being defeated by the troops sent against him under Tilak,
the leader of the Hindu troops of the Sultan, Alimad had to evacuate Lalior, and
retired towards Multan with the object of reaching Mansuriyah of Sind. He was
harassed the whole way by the Hindu tribes, Tilak having raised the whole province
against him. From Multan he moved towards the Bhatiah (stronghold) whither
some of the Hindu (BhatiP) chiefs had retired. The chief of the Bhatiah, however,
was unable to stop the progress of Ahmad-i-Nial-Tigin ; for the small force of Turks
with him (two hundred men) was still unbroken ; and the chief had to furnish him
with the boats he required to enable him to cross the Sind Rud [or Rud-i-Sind wo
Hind, i. e., the Biah and its tributaries], between two branches of which Bhatiah was
situated, on his way to Mansuriyah, near which latter place, in attempting to cross
the Mihran, he was subsequently drowned.
How is it possible that this Bhatiah can refer to “ Bhera on the Jailam ” ?
Cunningham (“Ancient India,” p. 256) considers “Pabiya” to be “ Bhatiya,”
of others, but as he also considers it “ probably the same place as Talhati where
Jam Janar [Jam Junan, the Sammah] crossed the Indus, or perhaps also the same
as Matila or Mathila,” we may easily dismiss that theory, because the Jam crossed
the Mihran where the ’Arab leader is said to have crossed before him or nearly so
at Talh-ti, more than one hundred miles below Aror on the south-west ; while Mathi-
lali or Mathilo is thirty-seven miles above Aror to the north-eastwards.
With respect to the seven contiguous villages surrounded by a wall which con¬
stituted U'chchh a little over a century since, here is a specimen how some writers
250 H. G. Raverly — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
to quarter, to point out a nahr or river [also a canal] by means of which
will jump at conclusions. Vincent, in his “ Navigation of the Ancients,” on the
subject of the “ Oxydracoe Ontche,” says : “ It is somewhat singular that Arrian
should mention these people as cantoned into departments, and their magistrates as
presiding in each separate canton, while the moderns distingnish them to this day
by the appellation of the “ Seven Towns of Ontche.” This, he says, is on the
authority of Tieffen thaler, Vol. 1, p. 118, and de la llochette’s map.
Cunningham, also, appears to agree in this. He says : “ It has been supposed,
indeed, that the name of the Oxydracae is derived from the old town of U'chh, but
their position according to Strabo and Arrian appears rather to have been on the
western side of the Akesines,” See the first paragraph of this note.
From the accounts of the campaign of Mirza Shah Husain, the Arghun Mughal
ruler of Sind, against the Langah Jat ruler of Multan in 931 H. (152i— 25 A. D.),
l/chchh was still considered to be a very strong place, and enclosed within lofty
walls. He first reached Siw-ra’i, one of the six forts mentioned in the Tuhfat-
ul-Kiram, the mounds of which were to be raised, and still one of the strongest in that
part, which was taken and destroyed, after which the Baluchis, who held these parts
under the Langahs, retired within the walls of l/chchh. The Mirza subsequently
reached Ma’u, also written Ma’uh, another of the six forts above referred to, and
pitched his camp near a kol-i-a^ or lake at that place. From thence he reached the
shrines of the Shaikhs, of which the Shaikh, Ruh-ullah, Knreshi, had charge ; then
to the boundary of the Badar ) people, and from thence to l/chchh. It was
captured and destroyed and all the wood put on boats and sent to Bakhar, according
to the historian, Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar ; and he states, that what fortifications were
standing when he wrote, were of Mirza Shah Husain’s erection.
In after years, down to within the early part of the present century, the place
suffered greatly in the constant hostilities between the Shaikhs of l/chchh and the
Da’ud-pntrahs, hence the fortifications raised by the Mirza are in ruins. See my
“ Notes on Afghanistan,” etc., page 665.
To return, however, to the place of so many names supposed to be l/chchh. I
do not consider that either of the places called 1/chchli are referred to, but a totally
different place. All these three places certainly lay west of the Chin-ab (but only
as a tributary of the Biah), even after it changed its course from the east to the west
side of Multan. One still lies near the tvest bank, and another west of the Ab-i-Sind
or Indus; and l/chchh- i- Sharif also continued west of the Ohin-ab down to com¬
paratively recent times, but, when the Ohin-ab (along with the other rivers forming
the Punch Nad), changed its course, as mentioned above, 1/ chchh-i- Sharif was placed
in the Bist-Jalhandar Do-abah, and continued there until the Sutlaj deserted the
Halcra to unite with the others and formed a new Panch Nad, when it was shut out
of that last-named Do-abah into the district or tract of country styled Berun-i-Panj-
Nad, or Extra Panj-Ab, and was placed on the east side of the river. But, since
the time of Arrian and Strabo, it is probable that this, as well as the other rivers
of this part, have altered their courses hundreds of times ; and it is very certain, as
will be shown farther on, that few parts of the territory now known as “ the Panj-
ab,” have seen greater changes than the tract between Multan and Aror in one
direction, and Bahawal-pur and Rujan in the other, the rivers having, at different
periods, flowed over every part of it; and consequently, in no place, was any “city
founded by Alexander,” less likely to have had any long existence.
1892 J H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 251
the people of the place received their supply of water from the river
Let us now see what history says respecting Asal Kandah, etc.
After Ra’e CThach had attained sovereignty over Sind, he set out from Aror for
the northern frontier of his territory, between the Ab-i-Sind and the Hakra, and
reached the hisdr of — Babiy ah, also written — situated on the south bank
of the Biah [the Yabiba of Elliot, page 202], which was afterwards known as Oh. och-
pur, and captured it. Finding that the enemy had retired within the fort of
JSAx/ cLo| — Asal Kandah or Usal Kandah, also written — Askandah, anciently
called Talwarah, he left a garrison in Babiyah, crossed the river Biah, and appeared
before Askandah, or Asal Kandah, which latter word, being without points, might be
transliterated in several ways. Having gained possession of that fortified place,
Chnch moved towards Sikah of Multan. The ruler of Multan, hearing that Ohach
had reached the Biah, issued from that stronghold, and advanced to the banks of the
Rawi, in order to support his nephew, who was in charge of the fortress of Sikah,
opposite to Multan on the east side of that river. They then moved to encounter
Ohach and oppose his crossing that river ; and Ohach remained encamped near the
fo d over the Biah [See the strange note by Mr. Dowsou to page 142 of Elliot’s
“Historians,” Vol. 1, on the “Bias”] until the water decreased sufficiently, and
then he effected the passage. He was then in the fork, so to say, between the Biah
and the Rawi, which united a short distance from where he crossed, and consequentlv,
in the Bari Do-abah. He then moved towards a place higher up, where there were
less obstacles in crossing, and reached the kasbah of Sikah, defeated the enemy
outside the walls, and invested the place for some days, after which it was evacuated,
and the governor fled to his uncle at Multan. The latter, with his nephew, and all
their available forces, then marched out of Multan to encounter Ohach on the west
bank of the united Ohin-ab and Rawi, in case he should pass over that river. Ohach
effected the passage, defeated the Multan chief in several encounters, and the latter
then retired within the walls of that fortress, in which lie was closely invested by
Ohach. The Ohin-ab then united with the Rawi north-east of Multan.
According to the Chacli Namah, which I have said before gives a much more
detailed account of events in the time of the ’Arabs, they followed the same route
from Alor or Aror as Ohach had previously taken in going against Multan. Muham¬
mad, the son of Kasim, having disposed of the affairs of Aror, and installed a
governor there, marched from thence towards Multan until he reached the fort of
Babiyah, situated on the south, or left bank of the Biah (the site of “ Pubbeer walle ”
of the maps of the present day ? See the notice of the Biah farther on), and which
place, Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar says, was called Oh.ach.-pnr in his day. This Babiyah
was an old place in which Kaksah, son of Ohandar, Ra’e Dahir’s brother, who had
fled from the battle-field near the Mihran when Dahir was slain, had taken shelter.
He, on the appearance of the ’Arab forces, came out and submitted, and was taken
it is said, into the confidence of the ’Arab leader. In another place, however it is
said that the Hindus evacuated that place.
After this, Muhammad, leaving a garrison in Babiyah, crossed the Biah— I wish
to draw attention to this fact— that is to say, from the southern to the northern bank
of that river, and appeared before the fortified town, the name of which is written
Axx-vdj BAxS' — Askand or Iskand, ’Alah Kandah or
’Ulah Kandah, Asal or Usal Kandah, Askandarah or Iskandarah, and in other ways,
in different places, in as many different MSS., for we do not know for certain the
252
H. G. Raver ty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . [No. 4,
of Rasmid,193 and which flowed into the city into a hauz or reservoir,
vowel points — the people of which issued forth to oppose him. Now how is it possi¬
ble that this place situated on the north or right bank of the Biah, as it flowed in its
old bed, could be “ Uch,” as Elliot and others suppose, which lies forty-five miles
farther southwards? The author of the Cbach Namali, who wrote in the time of
Sultan Nasir-ud-Dfn, Kaba-jah, whose capital was Uchchh, was a native of that
place ; and if it had been anciently known as Askand or Asal Kandah, or whatever
it may be, is it likely that he would have neglected to say so when writing of its
former history ? Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar writes the word, or rather it appears in
three different MSS. of his work ; as Axxvo), and and he distinctly
states that this place, supposed to be “Uch” to support a theory, ivas anciently
called Talwarah.
The people fought obstinately, but had, at last, to seek shelter within the walls ;
and they resisted for seven days all the attacks of the ’Arab forces. The latter had
now become distressed for provisions, when the nephew of the Multan chief, who
had defended it so bravely, at the end of this time, under cover of the night, aban¬
doned it, and threw himself into the fort of Sikah — — which was a great forti¬
fication on the brink of the southern (left) bank of the Rawi, the river, at that time
flowing east of Multan and uniting with the Biah some twenty-eight miles to the
southward of that place. See farther on. Finding themselves deserted by their
governor, the inhabitants of Askand or Asal Kandah (or whatever may be the true
reading), sent to tender their submission to the ’Arab leader. The fighting men
to the number of 4,000 were put to death, and their families were made slaves, but
all others were spared.
Neither the Mujmal-ut-Tawarikh, nor the Chach Namah, mention Uchchh,
which, probably, was not known by that name at the period in question, but both
mention this Askand or Asal Kandah, or Usal Kandah, said to have been even then,
an old fortification.
In one place (p. 366), Elliot is inclined to suppose that “ the Satrapy of Askalanda
contained the whole tract north-east of Alor, and south-east of the Pavfnad and
Ghara ; almost precisely the same, in short, as the present Daudputra counti’y.”
He is nearer the mark here, but it will be noticed that he seems to take for granted,
that the rivers ran then as now. The position of the fortress of Askand or Asal
Kandah is distinctly stated to have been on the north bank of the Biah, as it flowed
in ancient times, and must have been within twenty-eight miles or less of Multan.
Cunningham supposes that “ the old bed of the Rawi and Sikah Multan ” — the
original is “ Sikah-i-Multan,” that is Sikah of or belonging to Multan — “ to be somewhat
near Mari Sital, which lies on the old banks of the Ravi, two miles and a half east
of Multan.” It is no proof, however, as he seems to think, that the Rawi flowed
under the walls of Multan, because Alexander, the Greek, is supposed to have circum¬
navigated the walls of some city supposed to be Multan. This he could have done,
in the last century, if Multan is the place (only it could not have been according to
the Greek writers), by the Loll Wa-han, and which then had to be crossed by a
bridge ; and it was some cutting, or branch from the Cliin-ab like this one, no doubt,
which, as mentioned in the following note, Muhammad cut off or diverted, and
caused the surrender of that stronghold.
193 This cannot be the river of Basmid referred to by Tbn Haukal at page 216,
because that was two days’ journey or more below or south or south-east of Multan,
253
3892.] H. G. Raver ty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
which, they call a tdlab [pure Persian word]. This was destroyed,
after which, the defenders, overcome with thirst, surrendered the place.
The fighting men were put to the sword, but the women and children,
and the attendants of tbe budh or temple, to the number of 6,000 persons,
were made captives. ”19i This was in 95 H. (713-14 A. D.).
unless it refers to it as the river “which, below Multan and above Basmid, united
with the Mihran,” and that was the Rud-i-Sind wo Hind, the Biah and its tributaries.
194 The Oliach Namah here again differs from the Balazari, but we must not
forget, that, at this period, the Rawi and Biah, at this point, flowed nearly parallel
to each other, and united near by. The author of the former says, that after Asal
Kandah or ’Alah Kandah, etc., as it is here written, surrendered, Muhammad crossed
the Biah, and advanced to Sikah of Multan, which was a strongly fortified place on
the south or left bank of the Rawi. The Balazari is somewhat confused here,
through confounding Sikah with Asal Kandah, and says it — — ns-Sikah — is a
town “on this side of the Biah, and now in ruins.” As the author of the Oliach
Namah was a native of these parts, and the account of Ohach’ s campaign in the very
same places is perfectly clear, we may place dependence on his statements. After
seventeen days of hard fighting, in which the ’Arabs lost twenty-five distinguished
officers, and two hundred and fifteen other warriors, Bajhra, a relative of the
Multan chief, Daliir’s uncle’s son, Kaursiyah, son of Chandar, brother of Ohach, who
held it, passed over and entered Multan. This clearly shows, as indicated in the
maps referred to, how the Rawi then flowed, and the nearest point of which, at
present, is thirty-four miles north-north-east of Multan. The ’Arabs followed the
Hindus, severe fighting ensued, and continued with great obstinacy for about two
months, by which time provisions became so scarce that “ the head of an ass cost
five hundred dirams .” The ’Arabs had gained a footing near the walls, but no spot
was found suitable for sinking a mine, until a person came out of the place by
stealth and sued for quarter, which was given him. He pointed out a spot towards
the north of the fort, on the banks of a canal or cutting [ ^ 1, the same to
which the Balazari refers. Elliot (page 205) supposes that “ this can hardly mean
the main river .” Hardly : it refers to a cutting or canal, similar to the Loll Wa-han,
which flowed in the same direction up to modern times, and traces of it still remain
or recently did, between the northern face of the fort and the Td-gah, and in the
time of the inundations contains water.
“ A mine was dug, and in the course of two or three days the wall was brought
down and the fort captured. “ Six thousand soldiers were taken prisoners and put
to death, and their families were taken as slaves. The rest of the inhabitants were
spared.”
The account of the finding of the treasure, as related in the Ohach Namah, has
been already related. See note 97, page 192.
After Muhammad had settled the affairs of Multan, founded a Jami’ Masjid, and
appointed Da’ud, bin Nasr, bin Walid, ’Umrnani, governor of the place, he sent
another, ’Abd-ul-Malik, Tammi'mi “to the fort of Bramah-yur or Brahmah-pur, on
the side of the Ab-i-Jihlam,” which was called Su-bur or Su-pur in one
copy — Sur-badar. Not intended for Shor Kot, certainly, which was on the
Chin-ab) ; another to the territory around Multan, and another to the forts of
Ijtahad and Karur or Karud. All these names are more or less doubtful. Kurur is
G G
254
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
The finding of the gold, from which this temple was afterwards
known among the Musalmans as “ the Far Ml of the Bait, or Receptacle
or Chamber of Gold,” has been related in another place.
“ After this success, Muhammad, son of Kasim, returned to Alor or
Aror and Bagbrur, and made presents to his soldiers.”
After the removal of Muhammad, son of Kasim, and his death, when
Habib, son of Muhallab was Amir of Sind, Jai Sinha, son of Dahir, had
returned from Kash-mir to Bahman-abad and established himself there,
but Habib having advanced to the banks of the Mihran, the people of
Aliur [jjj) t sic. Ar-Rur ? or Ar-Ror ?] made their submission. In the
mean time rhe Khalifah, Suliman, son of ’Abd-ul-Malik, died, and
’Umar, son of ’Abd-ul-’Aziz, succeeded. He sent to the native chiefs of
Sind inviting them to become Musalmans, and several did so, including
Jai Sinha, son of Dahir, and they received ’Arab names.
possibly meant for Kuhror. Then he is said to have sent a force of 10,000 horse
against Kinnauj, which is constantly mentioned in connexion with Sind and Multan,
and appears to have adjoined the latter territory on the east, and included part of
the present Bikanir state. See pages 207, 208, and 223.
On reaching a place called Udah-fur [jj-J Odih-pur — the “Odipoor” of the
maps, fourteen miles to the southwards of Alwanah on the Hakra], one of the ’Arab
officers was sent to the ruler of Kinnauj, who is styled Ra’e Har-Chandar, Jhital ;
and at this same place, which Muhammad had thus reached, in expectation of enter¬
ing into hostilities with the Kinnauj ruler, and extending the Muhammadan conquests
in that quarter, the orders arrived from the Khalifah for him to be sewn up in a
raw hide and sent to the ’Arab capital, which subject I need not enter into here ;
but, soon afterwards, great disorders appear to have arisen in these parts, and the
Musalmans lost ground considerably, and which they did not recover for sometime
afterwards.
The Ohach Namah says Muhammad, son of Kasim, was preparing to make war
on Ra’e Har-0han(lar, Jhital, of Kinnauj (not the city on the Kali Nadi), the very
day before his recall (on account of the false accnsation of the daughters of Ra’e
Dahir), but Tod, in his “Annals of Mewar,” whose historic knowledge was of a
peculiar kind, actually makes him march to “ Cheetore,” as he spells Ohitor, but
only to be overthrown by a Raj-put, as we might fully suppose. He says (vol. 1,
p. 231) : “ In the ninety-fifth year of the Hegira — A. D. 713, Mahomed Bin Kasim ,
the general of the Caliph Walid, conquered Sinde. * * * If any doubt existed that
it was Kasim [sic] who advanced to Cheetore, and was defeated by Bappa, it was set
at rest by finding at this time in Cheetore, ‘ Dahir,' the Prince of “ Jbebeil," as he
spells Debal, which Dahir had been killed in battle more than two years before.
All this is not surprising when we consider who this “ Bappa” was who defeated
“ Kasim," only it was Kasim’s son who conquered Sind, after his father, Kasim, had
been dead some years. According to Tod’s “Annals,” Bappa “ overcame all the
kings of the west, Ispahan, Kandahar, Cashmire, Irak, Iran, Tooran, and Cajferist.'han ;
all of whose daughters he married, and by whom he had one hundred and thirty
sons, called Noslxeyra Pathans This is quite sufficient.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
255
Subsequently, Junaid, son of ’Abd-ur-Rahman-al-Marri, was made
Amir on the frontier territory of Sind, as the deputy of ’Umar, son of
Hubairah-al-Fazari [he, at this time, was Amir of Khurasan and the
East], by the Klialifah, Al-Hisham, son of ’Abd-ul -Malik, who began to
reign in 105 H. (724 A. D.). Junaid proceeded to Debal,195 and
advanced to the Mihran ; but Jai Sinha, [whose ’Arab name, however,
the historian does not give] requested that he would not cross over, as
he had become a Musalman, and his territory had been confirmed to
him by the ruling power. After receiving the tribute due, and giving
and taking pledges, hostilities arose between them. Some say that Jai
Sinha first took up arms ; while others affirm that Junaid acted unjustly
towards Jai Sinha, who assembled his forces, fitted out vessels, and got
195 It is strange that neither the early ’Arabs, nor the travellers who followed,
ever mention Damrilah, which, in after years, is constantly mentioned along with
Debal or Dewal.
When Saltan Jalal-ud-Din, Mang-barni, the Khwarazm Shah, had to retire from
the Panj-ab into Lar or Lower Sind, he, having gained possession of Siw-istan, as it
is called by some historians, as well as Sharusan, Sindustan, and Sadusan, marched
towards Debal and Damrilah. A Habash [here the Sumrah chief of Debal is meant],
who was ruler of that district or territory, fled, got on ship -board, and escaped.
The Sultan detached part of his forces towards Nahar Walah, from which they
returned with immense booty. He founded likewise a Jami’ Masjid at Debal on the
ruins of an idol temple. See “ rJL’abakat-i-Nasiri,” note, page 294, and a note
farther on.
lbn Batutah went into Lar or Lower Sind before going to Dihli. He says : “ I
then went by the Sind to the city of Lahari [Loharanf, supposed by some to refer
to Debal, but is a totally different place], which is situated on the shore of the sea of
Hind, where the Sind unites with it [but the junction of the main channel of the
river with the ocean was at some distance to the eastward of Debal]. It has a large
harbour, into which vessels from Pars, Yaman, and other parts come. At the
distance of a few mil [miles] from this town, are the ruins of another, in which
stones in the shape of human beings and beasts, in vast numbers, are to be found.
The inhabitants of this place say, that, according to their chroniclers, there was
formerly a city in this place, the people of which, for the most part, were so wicked,
that the Almighty transformed every thing within it, the people, their beasts, even
the seeds of plants, into stone.” This was written in 734 H. (1333-34 A. D.)
This would seem to refer to the situation of Damrilah, but, as late as the reign
of Sultan Muhammad, son of Tugliluk Shah — 744 H. (1343-44 A. D.), it is mentioned
as lying in the route from Gondhal in Kathiawar to Thathah, and in connection with
the Sumrahs.
Taghi, the rebel, whom Sultan Muhammad pursued from Guzarat into Sind,
took refuge in Damrilah ; and in reference to the boundaries of India, which Sultan
’Ala-ud-Din, Muhammad, the second Sultan of the Khalj Turk dynasty, who succeed¬
ed to the throne of Dihli in 695 H. (1295-96 A. D.), the different tracts which he
was advised to bring under complete jurisdiction, that extending “ from Multan to
Damrilah” is referred to, but such a place as Thathah is not mentioned because it
was not yet founded.
256
H. G. Raverfy — The Miliran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ho. 4,
ready for war. Junaid moved against him in vessels likewise ; and they
fought a naval action in the estuary of ush- Shark! [ush-Shagira — The
then Kohra’i196 mouth, no doubt, by which that branch of the Mihran of
Sind which flowed past Mansuriyah, united with the ocean, but which
estuary, in that day, existed much farther north], in which Jai Sinha
was defeated, his own vessel captured, and he was taken prisoner and
put to death. * * *
This Junaid, son of ’Abd-ur-Rahman, was subsequently made Amir
of Khurasan, which included all the eastern territories under the sway
of the Musalmans, and he greatly distinguished himself in Farghanah,
between 111 H. and 116 H., (730-734 A. D.) when he died.
In after years, when Hakam, son of ’Awanah-al-Kalbi, succeeded
Tammim, son of Zaid-ul-’Utba, the people of Sind had, for the most part,
relapsed into idolatry ; and the Musalmans being without any place of
security to which, in case of need, they might retire for safety, he built
a town on the other side of the estuary in question, and made it the
chief town, to which he gave the name of Mahfuzah — the Guarded or
Preserved. Subsequently, ’Umaro, son of the unfortunate Muhammad,
son of Kasim, the conqueror of Sind, was made governor of Mahfuzah,
and was greatly trusted by Hakam, and had been employed in many
important affairs. He was sent from Mahfiizah on an expedition [but
whither is not stated], in which he was successful, and was elevated to
the rank of Amir. He founded another city on this side [the west] of
the estuary, which he named Mansuriyah, in which the governor now
[when the Balazari wrote] dwells.”
Then came the time of the ’Abbasis [132 H. — 750 A. D.], and Abu-
Muslim-al-Marwazi, who was the chief instrument in setting up that
dynasty of Klialifahs, despatched ’Abd-ur-Rahman, son of Abu-Muslim-
al-Mughallisa-al-’Abdi, to proceed into Sind to oust the ’Ummiyah
officials therefrom. He came through Tukharistan from Marw, but he
was encountered by Mansur, son of Jamhur-al-Kalbi [the same after
whom the city and district of Mansuriyah were named according to lbn
Khurdad-bih 197 ] . his troops put to flight, and himself killed. Abu-
Muslim then despatched Musa, son of Ka’ab-ut-Tammimi into Sind, who
reached the banks of the Mihran, which separated him from Mansur,
who thought himself secure as the river flowed between them ; but Musa,
came upon him [in what manner is not stated], put Mansur and his
forces to flight, and slew Manzur, brother of Mansur. The latter, in a
sorry plight, fled to the sandy desert tracts, where he perished of thirst.
Musa ruled in Sind for some time ; and he repaired the city of Man¬
suriyah, and enlarged the masjid there.
196 See ante note 168, page 223,
197 See ante page 195, and note 102.
257
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
He was succeeded by Hisbam,198 son of ’Umaro-ut-TagballuM,199
wlio was sent into Sind by the Khalifah, Al-Mansur. He reduced many
places which still held out against the ’Abbasi authority, and among
them was Multan, which, up to this period, still remained refractory.
Kanda’il was also reduced. He proceeded to Kandhar [Kandharah or
Kandharo] on vessels, and reduced it likewise.200 * * * Musa, son of
198 Hisham means, ‘benevolent,’ ‘ liberal,’ but “ Hasham” is meaningless.
199 Called. ’Umaro-us-Sa’labi by others. He was sent to succeed ’Umar bin Hifz,
whom the Khalifah, Al-Mansur, Abu-Ja’far, ’Abd-ullah, deposed in 141 H. (758-59
A. D.), for giving shelter to ’Abd-ullah, son of Ibrahim, son of the unfortunate
Hasan, son of the Khalifah, ’All. ’Umar, son of Hifz, received him with great dis¬
tinction and espoused his cause, as did also the other Musalman officers in Sind ; and
they cast off their black ’Abbasi garments, and adopted white ones, white being the
colour of the Shi’ahs. At last, finding ’Abd-ullah was not safe in Sind, ’Umar sent
him to a Rajah of Hind, between whom and ’Umar great friendship existed, so that
he might not fall into the hands of his persecutor, the Khalifah. In consequence
of ’Umar’s conduct towards ’Abd-ullah, he was removed from Sind and sent to serve
in Afrikah.
The Sayyids of Sind are said, on the authority of the Tarikh-i-Alfi, to be
descended from the above mentioned ’Abd-ullah, who was subsequently killed by a
party of ’Arabs, who came upon him in a shikdr-gdh on the borders of Sind, leaving
a son who was under the protection of the before-mentioned Rajah — of the neigh¬
bouring territory of Saurashtrah, probably, and one of tbe Balabhi dynasty.
200 it would be a physical impossibility to reach Kandahar in the present Afghan
state by boats, unless they were boats attached to baloons, and just as practicable
to reach Gandhara on the upper Indus above Atak by the same means from Sind.
The part meant here, lay near the banks of the Hakra, and has been already referred
to at page 207.
Because this word is written “ Kandahar ” by persons who did not know, ap¬
parently, the word in its original characters, and because a tract of country lying
on the east bank of the Indus above A tak was anciently known as Gandhara, and,
in comparatively modern times, between the inroads of the Chingiz Khan and Amir
Timur, the Gurgan, the south-easternmost part of Zabul-istan of the ancient T-ranl
empire became styled Kandahar, European writers, and English in particular, have
managed to confound them (just as they have confounded Gajni and Ghaz-nih or
Ghaz-m), and some try to make them out to be all one. An example of this is to be
found in the “ Herodotus” of the Rev. Canon Rawlinson, page 175, in which
“ Beladhore,” “ Mass’ oude,” etc., are quoted, and we have “ Sindhu Gandhara,” the
“ Cahool Gandhara,” and the “ modern Candahdr,” the appellation alike of the pro-
vir-eandof the capital,” in one delightful jumble. The “ Sindu ” Kandharah is
written (Sindi— ) ; that of Kathiawar jwJsJS — Kandhar— or _y*>| 'Sif—
O ..
40 • S*
Kandahar in the original ; the tract on the upper Indus . and tffie
formerly Persian, and now Afghan province (anciently called Bal-yus or Wal-yus)
• H
and its chief town, and —Kandahar, and all are totally different.
It is from similar theories that Hindil Lohdnahs or Lohanos of Sind are turned
258
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries . [No. 4,
Yahya, of the family of Barmak, was Amir of Sind in the time of the
Khalifah, Al-Mamun [198-218 H. — 813-833 A. D.], but he died in
221 H. (836 A. D.) ; and the Khalifah, Al-Mu’tasim B’illah, confirmed
his son, ’Amran, in the government of the province. * * * He made
war upon the Meds ( and slew 3,000 of them ; and there [in their
country] constructed a band or embankment, which is called Sikr201-u.l-
Med, after which he encamped on the Nalir of Aror or Aro.” Why this
band was constructed is not mentioned. This affair happened, of course,
near the sea coast of Kachchh, because ’Amran caused a canal to be dug
from the sea to the reservoir or tank of the Meds, and spoiled all their
fresh water. This Aro or Ado or Aror refers to the place, the name of
which is written jj\, jjjj, jjj I, t, and the like, by Bu-Rihan, and which
I believe to the “ Addo ” of the maps, the “ Addooe ” of Dr. J. Burnes,
and, correctly, Adhoi,202 by which, indeed, a nalir or small river runs,
some sixty miles east of Bhuj. In the. ’Arabic character this name
would be and in that character j, and j, in manuscripts especially,
if carelessly copied, are very liable to be written and mistaken one for
the other. What satisfies me that the coast above referred to is meant
is, that Muhammad, son of Kasim, is said by the Balazari, to have
entered into an accommodation with the people of Surast, with whom
the men of Aw*, Ax ' to, Aub or <X>oj,205 were then at war, who are
Meds, sea-faring men and pirates'. Of course Surast refers to Surath,
the Saurashtrah of the Hindus — the Kathiawar peninsular lying nearest
to Sind, and or AAJly etc., to the place which Elliot reads as “ Bana,”
“ Tana,” “ Bania,” “ Basia,” and the like, which, as may be seen from
the “ Masalik wa Mamalik ” map lies between Pahmal and Mausu-
riyah.
This is all I find in the Balazari in which the rivers of these parts
are anywhere mentioned.
I must now leave Sind204 and return to the territory of the Panj-ab
again.
into the descendants of the Afghan Nuh (Noah). There are still other places also
called “ Kandhar.” See ante note 105, page 196, and note 114, page 207.
201 Sikr— — in ’Arabic means an embankment, but not “ safer.” The em-
bankment may have been erected by the ’Arabs in order the better to approach the
stronghold of the Meds.
202 It is in the Morbi district of Kathiawar, which compi’ises the sub-districts
or dependencies of Morbi, Wagar, and Adhoi.
203 See ante page 216, and note 145, and page 221, and note 163.
204 J may mention that the Khalifah conferred the territory of Sind, as well
as other parts, upon Ya’kub, son of Lais, the Suffari, of Sigiz-stan, in 257 H. (870-71
A. D.) ; and that Sultan Mahmud, of Gliazuin took Mansuriyah in 417 11.(1026-27
259
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
In the extracts from Abu-Rihan given by Elliot, I notice'events
which are not mentioned by him, bnt by Rashid-ud-Din, and are not
contained in Bu-Rihan’s text. It is the extract [at page 57] in which
the latter is made to quote events which occured in 692 H. ( i 293 A. D.),
about two hundred and sixty years after that author completed his
work.206 From this we might suspect, that even some of the extracts
which I have given here from Rashid-ud-Dm’s work, which he appears
to attribute to Bu-Rihan are his own, such for example as the mention of
all the rivers of this part, with the Bi'dh north of the Bawi , uniting with
“ the Satladar below Multan, at a place called Panch-Nad,” as already
noticed in the extract from Bu-Rihan ; but I shall presently show, that,
for upwards of two centuries and more after the date above quoted
[692 H.], the Sliuttlaj, that is the Sutlaj — if that is what he means by
the Nahr-i-Sutlad'206 — did not unite with the other rivers of the Panj-ab
at the place indicated.
The son of the Turk Sultan of Dihli, Grhiyas-ud-Din. Balban (the
same who, under the title of Malik Grhiyas-ud-Din. Balban, conducted
the army under Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, Mas’ud Shah, to the relief of
Uchchii in 643 H. — 1245 A. D.), Muhammad by name, entitled Muham¬
mad Sultan, and subsequently styled the “ Khan-i- Shahid ” or “Mar¬
tyred Khan,” on the death of Malik Sher Khan-i- Sunkar, Bal ban’s
kinsman, who is said to have founded Bhatnir207, or more probably
A. D.), which was the year of his expedition to Somnath, when, on his return from
thence he drove out the Karamitah ruler thereof. See note 192, page 244.
205 it is the statement, that “ Multan and l/chchh are subject to Dihli, and the
son of the Sultan of l)ihU is governor .” There were no Sultans of Dihli when Bu-
Rihan wrote — 428—430 H. (1020-1030 A. D.), and not for nearly two centuries after,
the first being Kutb-ud-Din, T-bak, the Turk, in 605 H. (1208-9 A. D.) ; and there
was never any Sultan’s son governor of these parts until the time of Muhammad
Sultan, the Khan-i- Shahid, son of Sultan Grhiyas-ud-Din, Balban, the Ilbari Turk.
Rashid-ud-Din completed his work twelve years after the date given in the text
above, namely, in 710 H. (1310 A. D.).
206 See page 220. In the MSS. of the A’in-i-Akbari, which I have examined,
the name is written Shutlaj, but in Blochmann’s printed text it is “ Shattdur —
OS JJy
See the extract from Muir’s <c Sanskrit Texts” in the account of that river
farther on.
207 Malik Nusrat-ud-Din, Slier Khan-i-Suukar, referred to in note 45, page 171,
is said by Ziya-ud-Din, Barani, to have built a loftly cupola or domed building at
Bhatnir, and to have erected, among others, the fortresses of Bhatnir and Bhatindah.
He held for a considerable time, off and on, the frontier provinces of the Dihli
empire on the -west, or, rather, the provinces which still remained ; for the traitor,
Malik ’Izz-ud-Din Balban-i-Kashlu Khan, had betrayed Multan and U'chehh, and
such part of Sind as he had held, by becoming a feudatory of the Muglials.
260
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
restored it, was placed by liis father in charge of the western frontiers
of the Dihli kingdom, as it then existed ; and the fiefs of Samanah,
Debal-pur, and as much of the Labor province as was in the possession
of his father, were conferred upon him. Muhammad Sultan used to
send his troops to patrol as far west as the Biah, and to guard the
frontier from the incursions of the Mughals, who held all the parts
beyond or west of the Rawi under subjection. From their domination
Multan had only lately been recovered ; and they carried their inroads
into the parts between that city and Labor, which was still in ruins, as
far as, and even beyond, the banks of the Biah, which washed the walls
of Debal-pur.
Muhammad Sultan, subsequently, on an invasion of the Panj-ab
territory by the Mughal infidels, under the Nii-in or Nu-yan, both being
correct, Timur,203 in 684 H. (1285-86 A. D.), moved from Multan to
encounter them. He fell in with them between Debal-pur and Labor,
and overthrew them ; but he was afterwards killed by a body of the
invaders which had rallied during the pursuit, and came upon him un¬
expectedly when almost alone, at a well, where he had alighted to refresh
himself, and to say his prayers, and when he supposed they had all
disappeared. On this account he is styled “the Khan-i- Shahid ” or
“ Martyred Khan.” It was in this affair that Amir Khusrau. the Poet,
was made captive by the Mughals.209
“ Malik Sher Khan, was greatly trusted, and held in great respect and reverence ;
for he was as the Sadd-i-Yajuj Majiij [the Barrier of Gog and Magog] against the
Mughals, whom he had repelled on several occasions. He brought under subjection
to his authority the Jats, Khokhars [not “ GicJcers ” or “ Ghukhurs ”], Bhatis,
Meniahs [Ma’ins ?], and Mandahrs, and other marauding tribes, which those who
succeeded him were unable to control. Sher Khan died early in the reign of his
kinsman, Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Balban, the Ilbari Turk, and never used to come to
Dihli; and it is said, but, apparently, without good reason, that the Sultan caused
poison to be administered to him.” The author of the “ Tarikh-i-Finiz-Shah-i says
he died at Bhatuir, where a fine tomb was erected over him.
For more respecting this great feudatory, see my “ Translation of the Tabakat-
i-Nasiri,” page 791.
Called by some writers Timur Aka, which is, doubtless, his correct name.
Nu-in or Nuyan merely indicates his rank.
209 Another battle with the Mughal invaders took place in 691 H. (1292 A. D.)
in the reign of the Khalj Turk Sultan, Jalal-ud-Din, Ffruz Shah, on the confines of
Bar-ram ( fbji), with the river between ; but I cannot discover whereabouts this
place is, or was, situated. In the printed text of the A’in-i-Akbari (in which the
names of places are often incorrect) the word is Bagram ; and lest it should be sup¬
posed to refer to Pes’hawar, the old name of which was Bagram, I beg to state that
that part is not referred to. This Bar-ram was in Hindustan, the Mughals having
entered it ; and Bagram of Pes’hawar is not Hindustan.
261
1892.] H. G. Raver ty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
Mir Ma’sum of Bakliar, the historian of Sind, states, that in 693 H.
(1293-4 A. D.), Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, the Khalj Turk ruler of Dihli,
marched to Labor, and despatched his middle son, Arkali Khan, to
assume the government of l/ohchh and Multan; and Nusrat Khan,
another son, was made feudatory of Sind. Subsequently, Nusrat Khan
was placed in charge of the Multan, U'chchh, Bakhar, Siw-istan, and
Thathah territories, with the town of Multan as the seat of govern¬
ment.
In 697 ET. (1297-98 A. D.) Saldae, the Mughal, invaded Sind, on
which occasion Nusrat Khan took his troops to Siw-istan (but not
to Sivvi) by water — this does not mean that Siw-istan, the modern
Sihwan, was close to the banks of the A'b-i-Sind ; for it was still a con¬
siderable distance from it — overcame the Mughal s, and returned to
Bakhar. There he found orders awaiting him to lead half his forces
from Bakhar by way of Jasal-mir, in order to take part in the campaign
against Gujarat, upon which service his brother, the Ulugh Klian, had
been sent. From this it appears that there was no scarcity of water
between Bakhar and Jasal-mir, and the Hakra or Wakindah must have
been still flowing, but whether in so large a volume as previously, we
cannot say, as there is no distinct mention of it.
After these events, in the reign of Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, the Khalj
Turk, Ghazi Malik, afterwards Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Tughluk Shah,
was sent to Debal-pur at the head of 10,000 horse to repel the Mughal
inroads into that part of the Panj-ab territory.
In the Tarikh-i-’Ala’i, or Khazain-ul-Futuh by Amir Kliusrau, there
is an account of Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, the Khalj Turk, who reigned from
695 H. to 710 H. (1296 to 1310 A. D.). In the first-mentioned year,
Kadar, the Mughal [who is made a Tatar of in Elliot’s “ Historians ”] ,
invaded the tract of country called Jaran-Manjur,210 having come from
the Koh-i-Jud or Salt Range west of the Jihlam. The author says he
crossed the Biah, Jilam, and Sutlaj , and burnt the villages of the Klio-
kliars.” The rivers are mentioned by him in the order in which they
are here written.
’Abd-ullah-i-Wassaf, in his history, completed in 728 H. (1327
A. D.), in the brief notice of the Sultans of Dihli, mentions the Sutlaj.
He says with reference to the route between Khurasan and Hind :
“ After crossing the panj-ab or five rivers, namely, the Sind, the Jilam
[Jihlam], the river of Lohawar, the Satlut [in the margin is Sutlaj],
210 The name of this place is written in various ways— Jawan Manjur, Jaran-
Majur, Jar-Manjhur, and the like. In Elliot it is turned into “Jalandhar.” See
vol. Ill, p. 162, note 2.
H H
262
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
and the Biah” thus reversing their situations as is done in the previous
extract, while the Ohin-ab is not mentioned. He also mentions towns
and districts, saying: “There are Banian of Koh-i-Jud [he is the only
author that I know of who distinctly mentions where this tract lay211],
Sudarah [Sudharah], Jalandhar, the territory of theKokars [Khokhars],
Multan, I/chohh, Hasi [Hansi], Sur-Suti, Kaithal, Sunam, Tabarhindah/’
etc.
Previous to this, about 707 H. (1307-8 A. D.), Sultan Ghiyas-ud-
Din, Tughluk Shah, when he, as Ghazi Malik, held the fiefs of Multan
and Debal-pur,212 then the capital of the northern Panj-ab, and Multan
See “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,’’ page 677, note 5. Sudharah is situated about four
niiles east-north-east of Wazir-abad, and styled “ Sohdurah ” in the maps. In former
times the Cliin-ab flowed close to it on the north, but is now nearly four miles from
it. Sudharah is an ancient site. In the last century, there used to be a lofty
mandr of burnt brick standing there, on the bank of the Ohin-ab.
213 From the various operations and encounters between the rivals for tho
throne, before Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Tughluk Shah, succeeded to it, who, as Ghazi
Malik, held the fief of Debal-pur, there appears to have been no want of water be¬
tween that place and Sarasti. He, on one occasion, came out of Debal-pur to meet
his rivals coming from that part. “ Ghazi Malik, leaving Debal-pur, passed the
kasbah of Dabhali ( ), and with the river (ab) in his rear, he encountered
them.” That river is not named, but the place here mentioned lies between Debal-
pur and Sarasti or Sirsa, thirty-six miles to the westwards of Uboh-har, and stands
on the bank of the oldest channel of the Sutlaj, called in the maps “the eastern
“ Naiwal” and “ Nyewal.” See the notice of the river Sutlaj farther on.
In the extracts given by Elliot in his “Indian Historians” vol. Ill, from a
French version of Ibn Batutah, it is stated, that, in the reign of Sultan Muhammad
Shah, son of Tughluk Shah, “ Kishlu Khan revolted against him, spread his money,
raised troops, and sent emissaries among the Turks, Afghans, and Khurasanis, who
flocked to him in great numbers. His army was equal to the Snltan’s, and even
superior to it in numbers. Tho Sultan marched in person to fight him, and “ they
met two days’ journey from Multan, in the desert plain of Abuhar. The “ desert
plain” here mentioned, refers to the sandy tract referred to in the next paragraph
of the text above.
There seems to have been considerable disarrangement in the MSS. from which
Lee’s and other translations of Ibn Batutah have been made; for, in them he sets
out from Multan and goes to Uboh-har, and, after going a journey of four days from
thence, reaches Ajuddhan. The traveller’s account, therefore, has been reversed.
He first went to Ajuddhan from Multan, and, from the first-named place, in four
days, reached Uboh-har. At Ajuddhan he visited, he says, “ the famous Muhammadan
saint, whose tomb after his decease became a place of pilgrimage,” and after a lapse
of five centuries still continues to be held in great veneration— the Shaikh-ul-Islam,
Farid-ul-Hakk wa ud-Din, Shakar-Ganj, son of Jalal-ud-Din, Suliman ; and at whose
tomb, Sultan Firuz Shah, and Amir Timur, offered up their prayers, as related
farther on. It is from this Muhammadan saint that Ajuddhan is also known as the
Bale Pat tan — The Holy Town— but not Pat an, a Ferry, as some have assumed.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 263
of the southern parts, used often to make incursions into the tracts held
by the Mughals and their tributaries farther west. His son and suc¬
cessor, Sultan Muhammad Shah, when about to enter Lar or Lower Sind
from Guzarat towards the close of 751 H. (about January, 1351 A. D.),
in order to punish the Sumrahs of that part for sheltering rebels from
his dominions, gave directions for boats to be collected from all parts,
from Siw-istan [but not Siwi nor “ Sebi ”21S], from U'chchh, Multan, and
other parts, at Debal-pur, to enable him to convey his troops across the
Sind river. To have directed boats to be collected at Debal-pur after the
Biah had deserted its old bed would have been simply ridiculous, since,
by that desertion, it left Debal-pur some twenty-three miles farther
west. From the above facts it is beyond a doubt, that, at that period
also, the Biah still flowed in its old bed, and no Sutlaj had united
with it.
In 734 H. (1332 A. D.), the Moorish traveller, Ibn Batutah, crossed
from Multan to Dihli, about eighty years after the investment of 1/chohh
by the Mughals ; twenty-eight years before Sultan Firuz Shah brought
his first canal to Mansur-pur and Samanah ; and sixty-seven years before
the invasion of Amir Timur, the Gurgan. Ibn Batutah proceeded by
way of Ajuddhan and Uboh-har, and would have had to cross the Biah
as Amir Timur subsequently did, before reaching the former place, and
the Sutlaj after leaving the latter, and soon after the different tributaries
of the Hakra higher up. He says, after noticing that Ajuddhan was
a small place, “ The first city we entered belonging to Hindustan214
[here he is perfectly right, the river was the boundary between the
Multan province and Hindustan] was Uboh-har,216 which is the first
place in Hind in this direction. It is small and closely built [it was a
walled town with a fort], and abounds with water and cultivation. * * *
At length I left the town of Uboh-har, and proceeded for one day
through a desert enclosed on both sides by hills [low, rocky hills],216
upon which were infidels and rebellious Hindus. The inhabitants of
Hind generally are infidels ; some of them live under the protection of
213 See a note farther on.
214 The reason why he says this is that the Multan province extended, at the
period in question, to the Sutlaj, which then flowed in the Uboh-har channel, and
was still a tributary of the Hakra or Wahindah.
215 This name is written “ Abohar,” and “ Abuhar,” and the like in MSS., but
it was founded by Janra, grandson of Rajah Rasalu, the Bhati', and named after his
wife, Uboh, and therefore Uboh-har is the correct name. The termination, ‘ har *
occurs in the names of many places where the Bhati tribe dwell, or previously dwelt,
and refers to standing water, or where water is found.
216 These are the rocky hills lying immediately south of Tohsham, south of
Hansi, and the former place stands on the northern skirt of part oC them.
264 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
the Muhammadans, and reside either in villages or cities : others, how¬
ever, infest the mountain tracts and rob on the highways. I happened
to be one of a party of twenty-two persons, when a number of these
Hindus [Bhatis probably], consisting of two horsemen and eighty foot,
made an attack upon us. We, however, engaged them, and by God’s,
help put them to flight, having killed one of the horsemen and twelve
of the others. ^ * After four days’ journey, I arrived at the town of
Sarasti [Sirsa], It is large, and abounds with rice, which they carry to
Dihli. After this I reached Hansi, which is a very beautiful and closely
built city, with extensive fortifications. I next came to Mas’ud-abad,
after two days’ travelling, and remained there three days.” He adds,
that, “ The whole way between Multan and Dihli, a distance of forty
days’ journey, there are many contiguous inhabited places.” From these
remarks, it will be noticed, that, with the exception of “ one day’s
journey through a desert tract ”817 after leaving Uboli-liar, there was no
scarcity of water whatever.
Some of the events which happened in Sind and the Panj-ab and
adjacent parts, during the time of the Khalj Turk or Klialji dynasty,
will tend to throw some light on the courses of the rivers of these parts,
more particularly with respect to the Biah and Sutlaj.
Shams-i-Saraj,218 the ’Afif (abstainer from anything forbidden),
217 This “desert tract” was that between the Uboh-har channel in which the
Sntlaj then flowed, and the one farther east which it had last deserted. In all its
changes it has invariably left the tract between its old and new channel covered
with sand and silt.
218 There is, of coarse, a “ Gazetteer of the Hisar District, 1883-84. Compiled
and published under the authority of the Punjab Government;” and in that
“ Gazetteer,” as in most others, are some choice specimens of history burlesqued.
The above writer is quoted therein as “one of Sir H. Elliot’s Historians,” under the
name of Shams-i-iS'/mAs, the compiler apparently, having taken him for a native of
Shiraz in Persia. It is a pity the Panj-ab Government has not some one to correct
the historical part of its “ Gazetteers.”
For example : we are told time after time about “ the reign of the Emperor Ala¬
nd- din Ghori” I beg leave to observe that no “Emperor Ala-ud-din Ghori” ever
yet reigued in the Panj ab or Hind. The Sultan, Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad, son of
Sam, the Shansabani Tajzik Ghuri (who, in his youthful days, and before he became
Sultan of Ghaznin and assumed that title, bore that of Shihab-ud-Din), who con¬
quered Hindustan, and established the Muhammadan faith at Dihli, is not once
referred to in the Gazetteer in question !
Here is one more specimen. Referring to the claim of a Jat tribe to Rajput
descent from “ Mans, the grandson of Salvahan, Raja of Sialkot,” the compiler
says: “As their story involves a ivar bettveen Salvahan (A. B. 90) and the Muham¬
madans of Mecca , it cannot be accepted with confidence.”
I trow not, considering that the year 90 A. D ., happens to be only ./we hundred
and thirty-two years before the Muhammudan era, and actually four hundred and
seventy-three years before Muhammad ivas born !
265
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
the author of the history of Sultan Firuz Shah’s reign, dwelt at Uboh-
har, which, he says, is the country of that Sultan’s Bhati mother ; for
she was the daughter of Rana Mai, the Bhati. The great grandfather
of Shams-i-Saraj was the ’ amal-ddr or revenue collector of the district
dependent oil Uboh-har — which shows that it could not have been short
of water in his day, and as Ibn Batutah confirms — and Shams-i-Saraj
was intimate with Sultan Ghiyas-ud- Din, Tughluk Shah, before he came
to the Dihli throne, when, as Ghazi Malik, he held the fief of Debal-pur,
of which, at that time, Uboh-har was a dependency. Shams-i-Saraj
states, that, at that period — previous to 720 H. (1320 A. D.)219 — all the
lands from the largest to the smallest estates, and all th ejangal, or
waste lands, or uncultivated tracts, belonging to the Ma’in and Bhati
tribes, were dependent on the town of Uboh-har. He also states that
in the language of this part tal-wandi 220 means a village.
When Sultan Firuz Shall was about to return to Dihli, after the
death of Sultan Muhammad Shah, his kinsman,221 whom he succeeded
on his death on the banks of the Sind near Thatliah, in Muharram,
752 H. (March, 1351 A. D ), he was advised to return through Guzarat.
As Ahmad-i-Ayaz was in rebellion at Dihli, he determined to do so by
marching up the Ab-i-Sind river instead, with his still numerous forces
and followers, and going by way of Multan and Debal-pur. This also
shows that he did not anticipate any scarcity of water for his forces and
the numerous followers and animals. First, he moved up to Siw-istan,222
the modern Sihwan, and from thence towards Bakhar, where he crossed
the river, and then marched to Multan without having to cross any other
river. Leaving it, he moved to Ajuddhan, and paid his devotions at the
tomb of the Shaikh-ul-Islam, Farid-ul-Hakk wa ud-Din, Shakar-Ganj.
From Ajuddhan he moved right across the worst part of what, in modern
days, is known as the “ Indian Desert,” to Sarasti [now Sirsa]. March¬
ing from thence he reached lkdar and founded Fat h-a bad, 223 so named
219 Sultan Ghiyps-ud-Dm, Tnghluk Shah, ascended the throne of Dihli in 720 H.
220 Villages in this part are also called mandats by some writers. This word, in
Hindi, means ‘ a circle,’ also a ‘ circular hut or tent.’ Mandats, however, are not
1 ‘ fortifications,” as Mr. Dowson, the Editor of Elliot’s “Historians” supposed
(Vol. Ill, page 254). The word is a common one in Hindi.
221 Sultan Firuz Shah was the son of Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Tughlnk’s brother,
and Sultan Muhammad Shah was the latter’s son.
222 See a note farther on.
223 This place is now the principle town of one of the five tahsils or revenue
divisions into which the Ilisar district under the Panj-ab government is divided.
There is a “ Report,” published in 1875, of the “ Settlement of the Hissdr
Division of the Panjab,” the history of which, so called, is taken from the “ Am-i-
Akbar ” [sic], in which its compiler has the assurance to tell us, that, “ Under Mu-
206
H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
after bis son, Fath Klian.224 From thence be continued bis march to
Hansi, having been joined by the feudatories of Samanak and Sunam
with their respective contingents.
On his return from Lakhanawati in 754 H. (1353 A. D.), he founded
the Firuzali Hisar, on the site of which were two villages \_tal-wandis] ;
and there were fifty kharaks included in the first, and forty kharaks in
the other. These villages were called Bara (Great) Saras, and Chliota
(Little) Saras, respectively ; and in this tract of country there are no
villages containing other than these kharaks [the Hindi for a cattle-shed,
but hero seems to refer to the dwellings such as the Jats of the Khar’l
and Si-al tribes construct — a flat roof of thatch or canes raised on poles
but without sides or walls]. The Sultan was much pleased with the
situation of Bara Saras,226 and he thought it would be advantageous to
found a town there ; for water was deficient there at that period, and, in
the hot season, travellers had to pay as high as ionv jltals for a kuzah of
water. * # * A fortress of considerable extent and loftiness was com¬
menced ; and in course of time [two years and a half] the place was
completed, and the Sultan named it Hisar-i-Firuzah or the Firuzali
Hisar or Fortress. It was surrounded with a ditch, and within the
hisar a large and deep hauz or reservoir was constructed, which was
intended to supply the ditch.”226
hammadan rale and prior to Firoz Shah’s reign, nothing worthy of note occurred ” /
See note 239, page 274, for the confirmation or otherwise of this statement. Then it
states, that, in 1372 he erected the fort, and founded the town of Hissar, and had
to cut a canal from the Jainna. # * # Firoz also built the Kasbah of Fattiabad, to
which place, from the Ghaggar, he had a small canal cut, which is still in use.” In
the same “Report” it is stated, that “Hissar” is otherwise called “ Habeli ” —
“ Hissar ( alias Habeli).” This of course is a great error. Haweli is not the alias of
Hisar, any more than it is of Rewari bd haweli , Buda’un bd haweli , Siw-istan bd
haweli , and many other places. Hisar bd haweli is as old as the A’in-i-Akbari,
wherein it will be found with many others. Haweli is merely the ’Arabic for ‘ habita¬
tion,’ ‘ mansion,’ etc. — the Government building or public offices, appertaining to
the chief town of a Sarhdr. Hisar not “ Hissar ,” of course means a fortress or
fortified place.
221 At the same time he founded three other small fortified places, which he
named after his other sons, namely, Zafar-abad, Riza-abad, and Muhammad-pur.
Villages still bearing these names, and marking the sites, lie, in succession, along
the banks of the Ghag-ghar on the south side, north-east of Fath-abad, but the places
he founded have now disappeared.
225 At each of those places there was, and still is, I believe, a stone column like
the lath of Firuz Shah at Dihli. They were of red sandstone, and were erected by
his orders.
226 The “Report” above referred to states, that, immediately under the build¬
ing, a spiral staircase leads to a series of rooms, said to be connected under ground,
with a similar building at Hansi. A Jami’ Masjid, erected by Sultan Firuz Shah.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 267
The Sultan made great endeavours, according to the same writer,
to supply the place and lands around with water. He succeeded in
doing so by means of two canals — one from the river Jun or Yamunah,
and one from the bed of the Sutlaj, and which was again connected with
that river lower down. This is important, as showing that the Sutlaj
must, at that period, have been running very much farther to the east¬
ward than in later years, and much nearer to the Firuzah Hisar, and about
mid- way (in the Uboh-har channel) between that place and the Blah,
which we are certain still flowed in its old bed. These canals were the
Rajlrah and Aghamani. They were brought from the northward of
Karnal, aud flowed a distance of eighty kuroh to the Firuzah Hisar.227
This is about the first time, if not the very first time, that the Sutlaj
is mentioned in the Muhammadan histories of India by a contemporary
writer. After the new town and hi§dr were finished, and water supplied,
this part was separated from the district of Sahrind, formed into a
separate one, and named the district of Hisar-i-Firuzah, that is, of, or
dependent on the Hisar of Flruz Shah.
The Tarikh-i-Alfi, written in the reign of Akbar Badshah, and com¬
piled from the best histories then available in India, says, that “ In
the year 762 H. (1360-61 A. D.), the Sultan set out for a nadir or stream
which is called Astimali, which really embraced two considerable streams,
and contained never failing water, and between which a high pushtah —
a spur or hill — intervened. The Sultan set 5,000 belddrs or pioneers to
work in order to remove this obstruction ; so that the waters of the
still stands within the walls. The lath, also erected by him, is still visible among
“ the mounds and broken bricks and tiles, which lie scattered profusely on the plain
to the south of the modern city, and tombs and temples still remain standing to tell
of by-gone splendour. These remains cover a wide area.”
227 Firishtah (the often quoted, because translated)— the original, I mean, not
“Dow,” nor “Briggs” — says: “In 762 H., Sultan Firuz Shah heard, that near
Haradwar, there was a hill [ pushtah or TcoK] out of which water flowed towards the
river Sutlaj, and that it was called Sursuti ; that, on the other side of the hill was a
rivulet [ju’e] called Salimah ; and, that, if this intervening hill were removed, the
Sursuti would be able to flow and unite with the Salimah rivulet, and their waters
might be made to flow on to Sahrind, and Mansur-pur, and from thence to Sunam,
and would keep constantly flowing. The Sultan accordingly [after cutting a canal
separating the Sahrind district from that of Samanah, and founding Firuz-abad, a
totally different place from the Firuzah Hisar, which is upwards of sixty miles to
the east-south-east of Firuz-abad], proceeded to carry this into effect.”
Firishtah is merely a servile compiler ; and, as every one knows who can read
the originals from which he copied, copied others almost word for word. This may
be judged of from the following note 230. The Tarikh-i-Alfi supplies him with a
deal of information, as well as the Tabakat-i-Akbari, especially regarding the events
happening out of Hind \ and he copies both almost word lor word.
268 H. G. Raver ly — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries . [No. 4,
Sursuti might be brought to the nadir in question, and, when united,
might flow on to Sahrind, Mansur-pur, and Samanah.”
’Abd-ul-Kadir, the Buda’uni, one of the authors of the Tarikh-i-Alfi
above mentioned, says in his history of India, that “ the water is that
which issues from a mound or hill of a sandy nature, of considerable
size, and which water falls into the nadir or stream of the Sutlaj, which
is also called the Suttladr,” and that it — the water falling into’ the
Sutlaj — is called the Sursuti ; ” that “it was distributed by means of
two canals, and used to flow by Sahrind, Mansur-pur, and Samanah. The
whole of the mound or hill was not removed.” It was, perhaps, merely
cut through sufficiently to permit the water to pass freely.
“ While employed in these excavations, the bones of elephants and
human beings were discovered in this great mound or hill, among which
were their arms [dast — the hand, including the arm to the elbow], mea¬
suring three gaz in length, some of which were petrified, but the rest
still remained unchanged.228 It was represented to the Sultan, that,
when Sikandar [Alexander the Great] reached that place, the people,
having made images of Nushabah,229 used to keep them in their dwell¬
ings and worship them ; and that, now [in the time of Sultan Firuz
Shah], her image had become the deity worshipped by the people of
these parts.”
Sultan Firuz Shah, likewise, when proceeding towards Debal-pur
on a hunting excursion in 756 H. (1355 A. D.), “determined,” it is
said, “on opening a canal from the Suttladr (Sutlaj) to Jhajhar, a
distance of forty-eight Jcuroh ,” or about eighty-four miles. Here there
must be some error in the names, because the Sutlaj where it issues
from the hills at Ruh-par, its nearest point to Jhajhar, is about one
hundred and seventy miles, and the nearest of its old channels to the
west — the easternmost “ Nyewal N.” of the maps, is one hundred and
forty miles to the westward of Jhajhar. Consequently, if Jhajhar is
correct, the Sutlaj cannot be meant, and if the Sutlaj is meant, then
some other place than Jhajhar must be meant, to which it would have
been far easier to have brought water from the Yamunah.
228 “ Being therefore unresolved what course to take, he [Alexander] leaped
from the tribunal, and shut himself up in his tent, forbidding any to be admitted,
except those with him. Thus he sacrificed two days to his passion, and on the third
he appeared publicly again, and ordered twelve altars to be erected of square stone
to remain as a monument of his expedition. He also caused the fortifications of
his camp to be extended, and beds to be left of a larger size than the ordinary stature
of man required , designing to impose upon posterity by this excessive outward ap¬
pearance of things” “Quintus Curtius.” More respecting these altars will be men¬
tioned farther on.
229 Nushabah is the name of the ancient queen of Bar da5, in Shirwan. on the west
bank of the river Kur.
209
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
In the following year he had another canal excavated from the
Yamunah or Jun near Sirmnr. He connected it with seven small rivers,
and brought their waters to Hansi [which canal still exists], and from
thence to the Ffruzah Hisar; and a great lake [or dhand , as it is called
in those parts], close to the kushk or castle there, was filled therefrom.
The same Sultan brought yet another canal from the river Ghag-ghar,
and conducted the water into the wa/ir-i-Khirah [ ], and erected
a fortress between, which he named Firuz-abad, near which there also
used to be a great hoi [the Persian of dhand ] or lake, several miles long,
filled from the Gliag-ghar.230
His reasons for making all these canals are obvious. They are
doubtless, connected in some way with the drying up, diversion of, or
fluctuation in, some of the tributaries of the Hakra or Wahindali; but
230 The Buda’um says — and the “Haft Iklxm” agrees with his statement — that
the Sultan went to Debal-pur in 756 H. (1355 A. D.), and caused a canal to be made
from the Sutlaj to Jhajhar, which is forty-eight Jcuroh distant. In 757 H. (1356
A. D.), he opened a canal from the territory of Mandu and Sirmur, and connected
seven other nahrs or streams with it, and conducted the waters to Hansi, and thence
to Rasin ; and there the Firuzah hisar or fortress was founded. Beneath the kasr or
palace or castle, a hauz or reservoir was constructed, and filled with water from the
canal in question. Another canal was opened from the Kandar Nahr [ ],
and brought under the walls of the hisar or fortress of Sarasti, and from thence con¬
ducted to Biri Kharah [Khirah ?] ; and there a city [town] was founded which was
named Firuz-abad.”
In his extract from the Tarikh-i-Mubarak-Shah-1 Elliot says (Vol. IV., p. 8) that,
“ Firishta closely follows our author,” or, more correctly, copies from him. He adds
“and helps us to understand him,” as we shall see. He continues : “There are
several inaccuracies in the passage as given in Brigg’s translation, so the following
is offered as a more correct rendering of the lithographed text. “ In the month of
Sha’ban, 756 H. (the Sultan) went towards Dibalpur hunting, and having dug a
large canal ( ju’e) from the river Sutlej, he conducted it to Jhajhar, forty-eight kos
distant. In 757 he cut a canal from the river Jamna, in the hills of Mandawi [Man-
dun or Mandu is well known, the other is an error] and Sirmor, and having turned
seven other streams into it, he brought it to Hansi, and from thence to Abasin [Ba¬
sin ?], where he built a strong fort which he called Hisar Flrozah. # * # He formed
another canal from the river Khagar [it is Ghag-ghar in the original], and conduct¬
ing it by the fort of Sarsuti, he brought it to the river Sar-khatrah ( ),
where he founded the city of Firozabad. He also brought another canal from the
Jumna, and threw it into the tank of that city. Then the Editor, apparently,
adds: “The words “ river of Sar-khatrah ” are clearly wrong. In the translation,
which was made from MSS., the name is given as “ Pery Khera,” which is more like
Harbi-khir of our text. The real name is possibly Hari-khira.” All this speculation
is about the words mentioned above; and it will be seen how “closely Firishta fol¬
lows our author.” It will be noticed that is an error for LSjV.jV
with iS not
• »
I I
270 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
notLing whatever is mentioned, or even hinted at, on this subject, under
the events of his reign, although we find, as related in detail farther on,
that he followed the route from Debal-pur, Ajuddhan, and across to
Fath-abad and Hansi on more than one occasion, and which same route
was followed by Amir Timur, the Gurgan, some forty-three years
after.231
Having arranged the affairs of his kingdom, in the year 763 H.
(1361-62 A. D.), Sultan Firuz Shah turned his attention to Sind, the
expedition against Thathah having had to be abandoned on the death of
Sultan Muhammad Shah, his predecessor, on the banks of the Sind, in
the vicinity of that town, about eleven years before. His forces on this
occasion amounted to 90,000 cavalry, and 480 war elephants ; and yet,
strange to say, although it has been stated before, that water was scarce
in the neighbourhood of his new town and fortress of Firuzah in the hot
season, he marched across that very part : because it is plainly stated
by the historians of his reign, that he again went across to Ajuddhan,
and offered up his prayers at the tomb of Shaikh Farid-i-Shakar-Ganj,
and that, after that, he reached “ the confines of Bakhar and Siw-istan.
Boats were collected from Debal-pur, and other places lower down, to
the number of 5,000 ; and part of the troops, the baggage, and heavy
equipments were embarked on them ; while the Sultan, with the rest
of his army, accompanied the fleet of boats, marching along near the
river’s bank. The father of Shams-i-Saraj, the author of the Tarikh-i-
Firuz-Shah-i, had charge of one division of boats containing troops, on
this occasion.
The Sultan was unsuccessful in his operations ; for a disease broke
out among the horses in lower Sind, and three-fourths of them died.
The hot season being near at hand, he determined to retire into Guzarat,
obtain reinforcements, and return as soon as the season opened, having
first beaten off the forces of the Jam of Lower Sind, who had become so
emboldened from the Sultan’s losses, as to venture out and attack him.
£31 The author of another Tarikh-i-Firuz-Shah-f. Ziya-ud-Din, Barani, states,
that, on one occasion, when he, the author, “was within the fortress of Bhatnir, in
the cold season, some little disorder arose, and the people from the tal-wandts
[villages] round about the neighbourhood came flocking in to the shelter of the
fortress ; and from the excess of dust raised by the horses and cattle, the broad light
of day became so darkened therefrom, that people could not distinguish each others
faces. Out of a thousandth part of the people and their animals, it was possible for
one 'part to find a place within the walls. I entered the stable of the Hajjam,
Ikhtiyar-ud-Din, Madhu, and counted therein thirteen horses of 1,000 and 2,000
tangahs each in value ; and the rest of the other property who shall calculate.” All
this does not indicate any scarcity of water ; for horses and other animals cannot
exist without water any more than human beings.
271
1S92.J H. G. Raverfcy — The MiJirdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
The guides proved treacherous, and brought the Sultan into the Kunchi
ran or marsh 2o2 [the ran of Ivachohli], and his whole army was on the
point of perishing for want of water. The author says it was “ such a
howling desert that no bird ever flapped its wings over it ; not a tree
was to be seen ; not a blade of grass ; not even a miserable, noxious
weed.”
232 This word is spelt ran, but never rin, because rin means ‘ battle,’ while ran
means ‘ a marsh ’ or 1 marshy ground.’
The Tarikh-i-Tahiri states, that this run extended from the ocean between the
countries of Sind and Gfuzarat. Abu-1-Fazl, in his A’in-i-Akbari says, that “ between
Jhalawarah [Jhalawad] of the Sarkdr of Ahmad-abad, and the Pattan or City [i. e.,
Anhal-warah], and Surat h [i. e., Saurashtrah] there is a great depression, in length
ninety kuroh , and in breadth from eight to thirty kuroh. This they call ran (with
short ‘a’ to ‘ r,’ and the ‘ n ’ quiescent).”
When Saltan Mahmud-i-Sabuk-Tigin returned from the expedition to Somnath,
towards Mansuriyah, he was led by his Hindu guide into this ran, and on this occa¬
sion, according to the Baihaki, one of the Sultan’s huntsmen killed an enormous
serpent, — a python or boa-constrictor — which was skinned, and found to be thirty
ells [grass] in length, and four in breadth. The Baihaki adds, “ Whoever doubts the
correctness of this statement, let him go to the citadel of Ghaznfn, and see for him¬
self the skin in question, which is hung up like a canopy.” See note 105, page 196.
It is a wonder that Sultan Mahmud ever ventured to attack this hot-bed of idol-
worship ; and that he and his army escaped is more wonderful still, because, in a
book published at Bombay and in London in 1S82, entitled “ Tarikh-i-Sorath : A
History of the Provinces of Sorath and Ilalar in Kathiawad, by Ranchodji Amarji,
Divan of Junagadh, and edited by Jas. Bargess, LL. D , F. R. G. S., etc., etc , etc.,”
who considers it “ a genuine native history,” and so it is in a Hindu point of view,
we are told (p. Ill) that, “ The hateful Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi marched with an
army from Ghaznin to Gujarat with the intention of carrying on a religious war.
In Samvat 1078 (A. D. 1021, A. H. 414) he demolished the temple of Sri Somnath
and returned. This act so provoked the Maharaja Mandalika, who was a protector
of his own religion, that he marched with Bhim Deva, the Raja of Gujarat, in
pursuit :
They ran like fawns and leaped like onagers,
As lightning now, and now outvying wind !
The Muhammadans did not make a great stand, hut fled ; many of them iveie slain
by Hindu scymitars and prostrated by Rajput war-clubs, and tvhen the sun of the Riga s
fortune culminated SUh Mahmxtd took to his heels in dismay and saved his life, but
many of his followers , of both sexes [sic], were captured. Turkish, Afghan, and
Moghal female prisoners were, if they happened to be viigins, etc., etc. So much
for the “ genuine native history.” It is strange the valiant Rajah of the Hindus did
not make the Sultan “ take to his heels ” before he captured the place, and that he
did not bring back the four fragments of their stone deity, instead of allowing the
Musalmans to carry them off to Ghaznin, where a fragment was cast before the
entrance of the great masjid and the Sultan’s palace, respectively, to be trodden
under foot (and where they might have been seen a little over a century since), and
the others sent to Malckah and Madinali.
272
II . G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
The season having come round, lie returned from Guzarat with
recruited forces, and reached the banks of the Sind; but, although he
had boats, the breadth of the river was so great, and the opposition of
the Sindis so determined, that it was found to be impracticable to cross
it.233 The author states that tne Sultan was consequently under the
necessity of sending a portion of his army up-stream, to cross at Bakhar,
a distance of one hundred and twenty kuroh , then march down again on
the other side, and attack Thathah.234 When this force had appeared
before Thathah, and fighting commenced, the breadth of the river was
so great at this point, that, although the fortifications of Thathah. were
visible from that [the east] side, the land around could not be distin¬
guished, and it could not be discovered whether his troops had been
successful or not.236 In this state of uncertainty, the Sultan sent a
messenger across, with directions to the leader of the troops to march
up-stream again, re-cross at Bakhar, and re-join his camp, he having
determined to occupy his position on the east bank, and await the arrival
of additional troops from Dihli. At this juncture, the Sindis besought
the Makhdum-i-Jahanian, the Sayyid, Jalal-ud-Din, Husain, son of
Ahmad, Bukhari, the saint of U'chqhh, who was in the Sultan’s camp,
to make overtures on their behalf ; and the upshot was that an accom¬
modation took place, the Jam and his brother came and made submis-
233 Fearing that those first sent across would be annihilated before others could
arrive to support them.
234 The town or city of Thathah had only recently been founded by one of the
early Sammah rulers, as mentioned farther on. The name of Thathah, as a city or
fortified town, will not be found in any history written previous to the historian of
Sultan Ffruz Shah’s reign — Ziya-ud-Din, Barani.
235 The Sultan could not have had any boats with him then, or perhaps they
had been sent with the troops which marched upwards to Bakhar, otherwise, with
a considerable part of his army on the Thathah side, he might surely have crossed
with his army to their support, unless the Sindis with their vessels commanded the
river, which is not improbable ; for his troops had to march all the way back ao-ain
by Bakhar to rejoin him. It will be noticed, that, when the Sultan returned after
the accommodation with the Sindis, he came up the west bank of the river to Siw-
istan, the modern Sihwan, and from thence to Bakhar where he passed to the east
side.
If we take into consideration the state of the river and delta near Thathah now
and, that although that place could be distinguished from the opposite side of the
river, the land around could not, we can calculate how broad it must then have been
in the beginning of the cold season, too, after the inundation subsides. The river
now, at the height of the inundations attains a breadth of about 1,600 yards _ not
quite a mile— and at its lowest is about 480 yards broad. A great part of the delta
south of Thathah has been formed since these events happened.
273
1892.] H. G. llaverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and, its Tributaries.
sion, and the Sultan marched hack to Dihli by Siw-istan, Bakhar,
Multan, and Debal-pur, crossing once more, what has been assumed to
have been, at that time, a great, waterless desert, on his way to Dihli.
If there then was such a scarcity of water, and all the rivers be¬
tween Ajuddhan and the Firuzah Hisar had been dried up, he certainly
would not have chosen that route on so many different occasions.236
Sultan Finiz Shah died in the ninth month of 790 H. (1388 A. D.),
Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Mahmud, his grandson, who succeeded his father,
Sultan Muhammad Shah in 796 H. (1393-94 A. D.), despatched one of
his Amirs, Sarang Khan, to Debal-pur, to gain possession of that fief
and also Multan, and to put down Shaikh a. the Khokhar,237 who was in
rebellion. In the eighth month of that same year (796 H.), Sarang
Khan proceeded to Debal-pur. # * # In the eleventh month of the
same year (just five years before Amir Timur appeared upon the same
scene), Sarang Khan, having taken along with him Ra’e Dul-Ohin, the
Bliati chief, (the same who surrendered Bhatnir to Amir Timur), and
Ra’e Da’ud, and Kamal-ud-Din, the Ma’in238 chief, and the forces of
Multan and Debal-pur, crossed the Suttladr (Sutlaj) near the town of
Tiharah, and afterwards the Biah near Duhali or Dohali, and entered
the territory of Labor. Shaikha, the Khokhar, hearing of these move¬
ments, having previously mustered his followers, took advantage of
236 Shams-i-Saraj (as well as others) states, that, “in the hot season, numbers
of gor hhar or wild asses congregate between Debal-pur and Sarasti,” where Akbar
Badshah hunted them in after years, as he also did in the neighbourhood of Ajuddhan.
237 See my “Notes on Afghanistan,” etc., page 367 respecting these Kho-
khars, who are invariably made “ Gickers,” “ Gukkurs,” “ Ghakkars,” “ Gakkhurs,”
and the like, by different English writers, unaware of the existence of the great tribe
of Khokhar who are Jats, and of the Gakhars, a comparatively small tribe, being a
totally distinct race. The Khokhars extend from the northern Panj-ab, where
their chief places are Bharah and Khush-ab, down into Lar or Lower Sind, Kachchh,
and even Kathiawar. They cannot number at present less than 50,000 families,
and are probably nearly double that number. Cunningham, who falls into the
same error as others respecting them, says, “ Gakar ” — turning them into Gakhars —
is most probably only cl simple f!] variation of the ethnic title of Sabar ov Ab&ri,” but
the Khokhars are never even named by him ! The Gakhars at this period were of
no account whatever, being then a small and weak tribe, dwelling much farther
west. They afterwards became somewhat stronger, and finally extended as far
east as Gnjarat (in the Panj-ab), the farthest point east ever reached by them.
This was but for a short period, however, while they never extended farther south
than the parallel of the Salt Range, about 323-20/ N. Lat., while the Khokhars
overran nearly the whole of the remainder of what, in after times, was called the
Panj-ab, east and south, and even contemplated the seizure of Dihli and its territory.
See also Amir Timur’s encounter with them on the Biah near Multan at page 281.
233 Also written Mahin.
274
H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
them, and moved into the neighbourhood of Debal-pur, and invested
Ajuddhan; but, on gaining intelligence that Sarang Khan had passed
Hindu-pat, and had sat down before Labor, he gave up the investment
of Ajuddhan in the night, and made a forced march towards Lahor.
Next day, the hostile forces having drawn near each other, came in
contact at Samu-talah, twelve Icuroh from Labor, in which Shaikh a was
overthrown, and fled towards Jammu.
There is a very important passage contained in the Tarikh-i-Mubarak
Shah-i, of YAhya, son of Ahmad, the Sahrindi, whose work embraces
events up to the year 85*2 H. (1448 A. D.). After the departure of
Amir Timur from Hindustan, little was left to Sultan Nasir-ud-Din,
Mahmud Shah. He says: “In 803 H. (1400-1 A. D.), Taglii Khan, the
Turkchi Sultani [that is, the Turkish mamlnk or slave of a former
Sultan], who was the son-in-law of Gkalib Khan, the Amir of Samanah,
assembled a large force, and moved towards Debal-pur against Khizr
Khan [afterwards ruler of Dihli, who had been left by Amir Timur in
possession of the whole of the Multan province, and the territory de¬
pendent on Debal-pur, both of which tracts of country extended east¬
wards as far as the banks of the Hakra or Wahindah].839 Khizr Khan,
239 This fact, not generally known, or not well understood, has led some to
assume that all this central tract, constituting the eastern parts of the Multan
subah, the western parts of the Dihli subah, i. e., the sarkdr of Hisar Firuzah, and
the northern and western parts of the Ajmir siibah , was left out altogether by Abu-1-
Fazl. Elliot in his “ Memoirs on the Races of the N.-W. Provinces (Vol. II, p. 17),”
says : “It will be observed, by referring to the map of Dasturs, that the Western
boundary of Sirkar Hisar Feroza has been extended only to the bed of the War
river, which runs not far to the westward of the Ghaggar, the new Parganah of
Wattu and Bhattiana, being altogether excluded : for this tract, full of sandy plains
and Thais, seems to have been little known in the time of Akbar, nor with the ex¬
ception of Malaud, which was in Multan, does it appear to be included in any Sirkar
of the adjoining Subahs. It is to be observed, that Abu’l Fazl, in mentioning the
breadth and length of the several Subahs, measures from Hisar in the Dehli Subah,
from Ferozpur in the Multan Subali, from the Satlaj in the Lahore Subah, and from
Bikanir in the Ajmir Subah. He appears, therefore, with the above exception, to
leave the tract between all these 'places as neutral ground.”
All this is entirely erroneous : Abu-l-Fa/.l plainly says, and as the printed text
will show, that the Dihli subah extends from Palwal to Ludhianah on the banks of
the Sutlaj, and from Hisar to Khizr-abad ; and among the mahalls or districts of the
Hisar sarkdr are the districts of Bhatnir, Tihwanah, Hisar Firuzah, Sirsa, Fath-abad,
Anbalah, Bhatindah, Sahrind, Sunam, Samanah, etc., in all twenty-seven districts.
Bhatnir and Bhatindah extended to the former channel of the Sutlaj, which
flowed past Uboh-har, and the Debal-pur sarkdr of which Uboh-har on the bank of
that channel was the frontier town, adjoined the Bhatindah district on the other
bank. The Debal-pur sarkdr included the mahalls or districts of Firuz-pur, and
Muhammad-ot (vul. “ Mumdot”), which joined the mahalls of the sarkdr of Sahrind
275
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
wlio was at Debal-pur at the time, advanced into the khittah or district
of Ajuddhan to meet him ; and a battle was fought between them on the
9th of Rajab of that year, near the banks of the Bahindah [ ] or
Wahindah [ 4 b,’ and ‘ w ’ being interchan gable. In this word
the j, in MSS. is liable to be mistaken for and j, and vice versa ], in
which Taghi Khan was overthrown and fled to Uboh-har.” Here we
have one of the names of the Hakra, but, most unfortunately, the writer
did not think it necessary to say whether it contained water or not, but,
from the manner in which he relates these events, it would appear that
it did contain water, or he would have mentioned such an important
matter. It is very certain that large bodies of troops could not have
moved about in those parts so continually unless there had been suffi¬
cient water for them. It is also proved beyond a doubt, that, at this
time, the Sutlaj240 flowed between Uboh-har and Ajuddhan, about sixteen
miles from the former, and nearly double that distance from the latter
place ; while we know, from subsequent events, that the Biah still
flowed in its old bed.
Nearly five years after the events above related, in Muharram, 808
H. (July, 1405 A. D.), Ikbal Khan, brother of Sarang Khan, chief rival
of Khizr Khan, in the struggle for power among the feudatories of the
Tughluk dynasty, marched against Samanah, and afterwards moved
towards Multan, and arrived at Tal-wandi. From thence he reached
the banks of the Wahindah or Bahindah, in the direction of the khittah
of Ajuddhan (i. e., the district depending on it), and was encountered
in that direction. Indeed, Abu 1-Fazl says that the Labor sub ah extended on the
south to the frontier of Bikanir.
On the other hand, he describes the subah of Ajmir as extending to the sarkdrs
of Multan and Debal-pur of the Multan subah ; and one of the sarkdrs of Ajmir
was that of Bikanir, consisting of eleven mahalls or districts, of which Jasal-mir,
Bikam-pur, Birsil-pur, Pugal, Bikanir, and others, adjoined the Debal-pur and Multan
sarkdrs in the other direction; consequently, ever xj 'portion is filled up, and the so-
called “ neutral ground ” is as unsubstantial and illusive as the mirage which prevails
on the borders of these subahs. The error appears to have occurred through not
knowing that both sarkdrs of Debal-pur and Multan extended eastwards to the
ancient bed of the Hakra or Wahindah, and, farther north-east-wards, to the banks
if the Sutlaj as it flowed in its old channel. As to its being so little known in the
time of Akbar Badshah see ante note 236, page 273.
840 This, its last deserted, independent channel, is now known as “ the great
dandah” The author of the Survey I have been quoting in this paper, says, that,
“ The people of this part apply the term dandah or dandd to the south or left bank of
the Sutlaj. See the notice of that river farther on, but, I may observe that dandah
— — is differently written from Wahindah— —or Bahindah— referred
to in the text above, and must not be confused the one for the other.
276 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
by Kliizi’ Khan at the head of a considerable force, defeated, and put to
flight; and, in the pursuit, Ikbal Khan was slain.
This was in the height of the hot season, it must be remembered,
and that these two armies were operating against each other in the
midst of what could not then have been a sandy, waterless desert,
although much must have been uncultivated waste.
In the time of Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Dm, Mubarak Shah, son of the
Rayat-i-’Ala, Khizr Khan,241 who succeeded his father in 824 H. (1421
A. D.), Jasrath, the Khokhar, Shaikha’s son,242 rebelled. Among some
241 This was the title assumed by the Sayyid-zadah, Khizr Khan, who never
took that of Sultan, as he acknowledged the supremacy of the Amir Timur, and
after him, that of his son and successor, Sultan Shah Rukh, Bahadur Khan.
242 In every translation of these events, Shaikha, the father, has been mistaken
for Jasrath, his son (just as we have in Elliot, for example, Vol. IV, page 54 — “ re¬
bellion of Jasrath Shaikha Khokhar ”), precisely in the same way that Kasim, the
father of the conqueror of Sind, has been mistaken for his son, Muhammad, merely
because the translators did not understand the proper use of the Persian izdfat, and
that an izdfat, expressed or understood, was required between the names of Jasrath
and Shaikha, and between Muhammad and Kasim, thus — Jasrath-i- Shaikha, and
Muhammad-i-Kasim — after the idiom of the Persian, instead of writing Muhammad
bin Iyasim, or Muhammad ibn Kasim, according to the ’Arabic usage.
Scores of errors on this account occur in translations of the kind referred to,
through want of knowledge of the use of the izdfat of the Persian grammar ; for,
considering the two names thus following each other like the Christian name and
surname of Europeans, such, for example, as James Thomas, or Thomas James, and
the like, the translators generally manage to drop the first and retain the second,
as in the case of Muhammad, whose father, Kasim, was in his grave long before his
son set out for the conquest of Sind ; and in the events above related, we have
Shaikha, who had been dead for some years, doing what his son, Jasrath performed.
In the same manner, we have Muhammad-i-Sabuk-Tigin, written exactly in the
same way in Persian M88., but, as most writers appear to have been aware that
Sabulc-Tigin was the father of Mahmud, the translators have seldom failed to add
“ son of,” after Mahmud’s name when it did not occur (except in the form of an izdfat,
expressed or understood), in the original.
Such errors cannot be too much guarded against, when we find such scholars
as Elliot, who must have known all this, falling into the same error, even after
writing the names Muhammad bin Kasim in his extracts from ’Arab authors ; yet,
when he comes to Persian and other non-’ Arab writers, forgetting what he had
written before, he constantly writes the two names as that of one person , and some¬
times leaves out the first, the actual performer of the action, altogether, and makes
the defunct father perform what his son had effected. It may not be amiss to give
an example here. Elliot, Vol. I, page 432, has : “ Muhammad Kasim, as he is uni¬
versally styled by the Persians, but by Biladuri [the Balazari was an ’Arab author],
“ Muhammad bin Kasim,” and by Abu-1 Fida [another ’Arab or of ’Arab descent
who wrote in ’Arabic], “ Muhammad bm Al-Kasim but, at page 397, he actually
writes the word “ Md. Kasim,” as one would write “ltd. Smith” for Richard
277
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
of liis acts was the plundering of some of the parganahs around Labor
(the Buda’uni, and Firishtah — who copies the Tarikh-i- Mubarak Shah-i
and other writers almost word for word — say, that he destroyed Labor,
which Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Diu, Balban, is said to have rebuilt, after its
destruction by the Mughal s in the preceding reign), after which he
crossed the Biali, and from it passed the Sutlaz,243 and plundered the
tal-wandi of Ra’e Kamal (Kamal-ud-Din, previously mentioned), the
M a’in, or Mahin, as it is also written. After this he moved towards
Ludhianah, and, after that, re-passed the Sutlaz and invested Jalandhar.
Sultan Mahmud Shah had to move against the Khokhars in person ; and
in that same year he reached Ludhianah, although it was the height of
the rainy season. The Sutlaz was, however, so much swollen, and all
the boats in Jasrath’s hands, that the Sultan was unable to cross ; and
Jasrath, with his forces, was posted on the opposite bank. Matters went
on in this wise for about forty days ; and when the waters began to
Smith ! At page 488 he quotes Elphinstone thus, showing Elphinstone’s terrible
mistake at the same time. He says : “ Elphinstone observes that, ‘ Kasim’s conquests
were made over to his successor,’ ” etc., etc., and here again we have the dead
father making conquests in Sind !
Lieut.-Colonel H. S. Jarrett, in his translation of “ A's Suyutis History of the
Caliphs,” page 229, note after writing, that “ Muhammad-b-ul- Kasim commanded
the army in Sind,” immediately under refers to Elphinstone’s India, “ where will
be found a sketch of Kasim's conquests” — the dead father for the son again.
I could mention scores of other instances in Elliot’s “ Historians,” and in the
writings of many others. The famous blunder of turning Tajzlks, Turk slaves, Jats,
Sayyids, and others, into “ Pathan Dynasties,” and their money into “ Pathan
Coins,” arose entirely through reading the names of the ancestors of the Shansabanf
Tajzik Sultans who ruled in Ghur, namely, Muhammad-i-Suri, or Muhammad bin
Suri — for the names appear in both ways on the same page — as that of one man ,
thus: “ Muhammad Sun.” On this, those who knew no better, at once jumped to
the conclusion (since there was a Patan or Afghan Sultan of Dihli some centuries
after , styled Sher Shah, Sor or Soraey, who belonged to the Sort subdivision of the
Lodi tribe, but whose progenitor Sor or Soraey was not born at the period that
Muhammad, the Shansabani Tajzik, and his father, Suri, flourished), that this
“ Muhammad Suri ” must be one and the same person, and at once turned all the
Tajzik rulers of Ghur into Afghans likewise. See “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” Appendix B,
page VII, and a note farther on.
The Ohach Hamah contains scores of instances to prove the izdfat. All the
headings have lia’e Daliir, bin Ohach, but when we come to the text we find Dahir-i-
Oh.ach ; and Dharsiyah bin Ohach in the headings, and Dharsiyah-i-Ohach in the text.
This occurs not only with respect to Ohach and his sons, but the names of others
are written in a similar manner, just as Muhammad bin Kasim and Muhammad-i-
Kasim.
243 This is the way in which the name of the river is written in the I abakit*i-
Akbari, and in other works of that period,
J J
278
H. Or. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
subside, the Sultan moved from Ludhianah to Kabul-pur, along the
river’s bank, followed by Jasrath, the Khokhar, on the opposite side.
On the 11th of Shawwal, the tenth month, the Sultan managed to pass
the Sutlaz, on which Jasrath retired to Jalandhar, and was finally pur¬
sued to the Chin-ab. The citadel and town of Labor was then in ruins,
but the Sultan had them repaired. This was in 825 H. (1422 A. I).).
At the time of these operations the usual ferry over the river Biah
was at the mauza ’ of Loh-Wal c Jb ) or Lohi-wal ( J)j ) a
M
dependency of Haibat-piir Pati or Pati Haibat-pur,213, but the Sutlaj
flowed a considerable distance — some eight miles or more — farther
south-east.
In this same reign, the fort of Multan, which had become greatly
dilapidated through the attacks of the Mughals, was rebuilt from its
foundations by Malik Mahmud, the feudatory of the district, son of the
’Imad-ul-Mulk, Malik Rajab.
We notice from the foregoing, that Debal-pur was a place of great
importance for some centuries. Up to the time of Malik, afterwards
Sultan, Bahlul, the Lodi, the first Afghan or Patan. who sat on the throne
of Dih.li, we hear of his holding the fiefs of Debal-pur, Sunam, and the
Firuzah Hisar. The first named place would have been useless to him
without water; and there is no doubt whatever that the Biah, in his
time, washed the walls of Debal-pur. It is certain, likewise, that it
still did so up to the latter part of Akbar Badshah’s reign (and down to
recent times, as I shall presently show), and, in which reign, Debal-pur
still continued to be the chief place of that sarlcar or division of the
Multan siibah, and Uboh-har was its frontier town on the east.
244 This place is a little less than fifteen miles nearly dne north from Dharam-
Kot ; fifteen miles and a half west of Nikudar (the “Nukodur” of the maps, but
named after the Mnglial inning or hazdrah which once held it, called the Nikudari
hazdrah), and six miles south of Haibat-pur of which Loh or Loin Wal was a de¬
pendency. It is also just fifteen miles east of the Patan, Ghat, or Ferry of Harf ke,
as the river ran in 1860. There happens to be a place about two miles west of Hari
ke Patan of the present day, called ^ — Buh, or — Bu-pur, which appears in
the maps as “ Booh.” During the operations against Jasrath, the Khokhar, there
was a ferry at this place, which lies close to the old right or west bank of the Biah,
but it was a ferry of the Biah only ; for the Sutlaj and Biah had not then united even
temporarily. This Buh or Bu-pur lies about fourteen miles west of the place where
the junction of the two rivers took place in the last century, when they lost their
respective names altogether, and the united streams became the Hariari, Machhu-
wah, or Nili, and, farther south, was known as the Ghallii Gliarali, or Gliarah.
As the first letter of when written rather long, may, without a point, be
mistaken for ^ , as in and some have supposed that referred to and
that the junction took place at this last named point, but such was not the case,
See farther on.
279
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
When Pit Muhammad-i-Jaban-gir, that is, Pn* Muhammad, son of
Mirza Jahan- gir, son of Amir Timur, attacked the reinforcements from
Multan sent to the relief of Lrchohh which he was investing, he fell upon
them at Tamtamah ^ ) or Tantanah ( ) on the banks of
the Biah. Many perislied by the sword, and many threw themselves
into the Biah, and were drowned, and but a remnant of the force sent
from Multan under Taj-ud-Din, Muhammad, succeeded in reaching that
place again.
I have compared three or four good copies of the Zafar Namali
respecting Amir Timur’s march from Bannu across the Indus to Multan
and Dihli, which lay through some of the very parts in which these vast
changes in the courses of the rivers occurred, and the following is the
result, omitting the operations by the way.
Leaving the banks of the Sind, so called in the Zafar Nam ah, and
having crossed it at the same place where the Sultan, Jalal-ud-Din ,
Mang-barni, plunged in, Amir Timur marched to the river which, in
that history, is called the Jamad — the Bihat or Jliilam, which flowed
towards ITchchh. Proceeding downwards along its banks, he reached
the banks of the Ohin-ab, Chandra Bliaga, or Chin-ao, as it is also
called, at, or near a fort, opposite to which the Jamad and Chin-ao met,245
and was astonished at beholding the waves, eddies, and whirlpools
caused by the meeting of these two great rivers, or, as they are called in
the history, seas. A bridge of boats had to be constructed ; and, having
passed over,2^ he inarched downwards, and encamped on the river [the
245 See a note farther on.
246 The Malfuzat says, that he halted that day and the next to enable the
troops, materials, and baggage to cross.
In following Amir Timur’s movements, the former channels of the rivers should
be remembered ; not traced according to their present courses. See the general
map.
From whence these boats were obtained is not said, but, as Shihab-ud-Din,
Mubarak Shah? the Tammxmi, Hakim of the “jazi'rah,” or do-abah or bet, or terri¬
tory between two rivers— for the meaning of jazi'rah is not an island only— after
his night attack upon the Mughals, who had appeared before Bliaiah, his capital (also
written Bharah, the “ Bherah” of the maps) and his defeat, endeavoured to escape
from thence by dropping down the Jamad, Bihat, or Jihlam towards U'chchh, with a
fleet of two hundred boats or vessels, which he had collected, and most of which
were captured before he had gone very far, it is probable that these captured boats,
or a portion of them, furnished the means for constructing this bridge. By the time
Shihab-ud-Din, Mubarak Shah, with the remainder, reached the vicinity of Multan,
the Mughals were ready to receive him on both banks to prevent his passing down.
He first threw his wife and children overboard, and then took to the water himself,
most of his followers who could do so following his example, and escaped to the
jangals along the banks. Every boat was captured or sunk, the fugitives were pur¬
sued iuto the jangals, and many were killed.
280
H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Trihutaiies. [No. 4,
Rawi] opposite Tulaim [i. e., Tulanbah], facing that town. He passed
over with his forces, no bridge being mentioned, and pitched his camp
in the plain near the fort of Tulaim.”
From Amir Timur’s own Tuzuk it also appears, that he crossed the
united Bihat or Jihlam, which he calls the Jamad, and the Chin-ao or
Chin-ab. He says : “ There was a fort there, which was erected near
the bank of these rivers [the point where the confluence then took place],
and there I encamped, and amused myself in watching the force of the
current, and the dashing and surging of the waters, where these two
great rivers meet.” Having crossed the river, he moved downwards
towards Tulanbah, crossed the Rawi, and moved nearer to that place,
which, it is stated, “ is thirty-five leuroh from Multan.” It must be
remembered, that, at this time, his grandson, the Mirza, Pir Muhammad,
was in possession of Multan. The Amir then crossed what he calls
“the Tulambi river,” by which he refers, of course, to the Rawi, and
which, as I have before stated, then flowed more to the north of Tulanbah
than at present. He subsequently moved towards the Biah as stated
below.
The historian says, that no Badshah had ever before bridged the united rivers
Jamad and Chin-ao ; for, that, although Taramshirin Khan had crossed the Chin-ao,
he did not succeed in throwing a bridge across it. This is the ’Ala-ud-Din, Taram¬
shirin Khan mention by Ibn Bat Utah, who was then ruler of Bukhara. He was the
son of Dowa Khan, and brother of Kutlugli Khwajah, of the family of the Chingiz or
Great Khan, who then ruled over Mawara-nn-Nahr. Taramshirin Khan invaded
India in 729 H. (1328-29 A. D.), having entered it through the territory dependant
on Multan ; carried his arms to within sight of Dihli, the ruler thereof, at that time
being absent in the Dakhan ; passed through Guzerat and Sind ; and finally re¬
crossed the Indus near Multan. What these parts suffered from this raid may be
imagined.
The Malfuzat-i-Timuri says, that he, Taramshirin Khan, used his utmost en¬
deavours to construct a bridge of boats, but without success, and had to cross his
army by means of boats. This was what the people of that part told Amir Timur.
The often-quoted “ Ferishta55 says (in the original) that Amir Timur “ keeping
along the banks of the river reached a place where the river of Jalandar [sic. he
did not copy his authorities correctly here] and the Biah join, and there there
were tivo strong fortresses called Talmani ( ). He passed the river by a bridge
of boats, and encamped in the Talmani plain [ sahra ]. After having destroyed
Talmani, he arrived at the mauza’ of Shah Nawaz on the bank of the Biah.5’ Here
it will be seen what a precious jumble he has made of matters. Again, in the extract
from the Tankh-i-Mubarak Shah-i, by the Editor of Elliot’s “Historians55 after he
had written lulamba5 and “ Talami,55 a score of times, we have the following :
Intelligence came that Amir Timur, King of Khurasan, had attacked Talma, and was
staying at Multan. To this “Talina” is a note, saying, “This name is also given
in the Tabakat-i Akbari, and in Badauni.’5 It never strikes him that “ Tulanba55
is the place, or that he had previously referred to it#
1892.] H. G. Raver ty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
281
Amir Timur having gained possession of Tulanbah, together with
its hisdr or fortress,247 moved from thence, and the next day encamped
near a great chdl , kol-i-db, or lake, near the banks of the Biah, and near
the mau z a ’ of Shah Nawaz, on or close to which chdl , the Khokhar chief,
Nusrat [brother of Shaikha, previously mentioned] had fortified himself.
This chdl or lake, so styled, appears to have been what is called in
the Panj-ab and Sind, a dhand. There is one still thereabouts, close to
the old bed of the Biah, about thirty miles south-east of Multan, but, at
the period of Amir Timur’s invasion, it appears to have extended much
farther towards the north-east than at present, and was of great extent
and considerable depth.2 18 Amir Timur was in these parts just at the
beginning of the year 801 H. (The year began 12th September, 1398
A. D.) ; for he crossed the Ohin-ab on the 2nd of October of that year
(1398 A. D.). All the rivers of this part are at their full in August in
the present day ; and the above shows what changes have taken place.
One would scarcely attempt to bridge the united Jihlam and Ohin-ab
247 The town and fortress was surrendered on the 1st of Safar, 801 H., without
any opposition whatever. There was, in fact, no one able to oppose him.
Cunningham, in his “ Ancient Geography of India,” says (p. 224), that Tulamba
must have had a remarkably strong fortress, “as Timur left it untouched, because
its siege would have delayed his progress,” and Briggs’s ‘Ferishta’ is quoted. On
the next page he says, “ The old town was plundered and burnt by Timur, and its
inhabitants massacred, but the fortress escaped his fury, partly owing to its own
strength and partly to the invader s impatience, etc., etc.
The Malfuzat-i-Timurl says, that the chief people of Tulanbah presented them¬
selves in the Amir’s camp before he reached that town, and that the sum of two
lakhs of rtipis had been fixed as an indemnity for sparing the place ; and Sayyids
and ’Ulama were exempted from payment. There was no opposition whatever.
Provisions being exceedingly scarce, Amir Timur wished the people to pay the
ransom in corn instead of money, but they refused to do so ; and a large body of
fresh troops having arrived in the mean time, but, unaware that teims had been
concluded, and being distressed for want of food, entered the place and began to help
themselves. As soon as intimation was brought to Timur of these doings, he says :
“ I gave orders to the Taivdchis and Sazdwals to expel those troops from the town,
and commanded that whatever corn they had plundered or property seized, should
be taken as an equivalent for so much of the ransom.” I think most troops would
have acted in just the same manner. No people were massacred, nor was the place
burnt, but some of the refractory inhabitants of the parts around, who, after first
submitting of their own accord to his grandson, Pir Muhammad the previous year,
on his march to Multan, and had acted in a rebellious manner after, and massacred
some of his men, were punished. A detachment was sent against them, and they
were harried, the men killed, and their families and cattle were brought in, and were
distributed among the soldiery. Most European generals and their troops would
have acted in m°uch the same fashion and punished the “ rebels,” I expect, in the
fourteenth century, as well as in the nineteenth.
243 gee note 192, page 244.
282 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn oj Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
near tlie point of junction in September even now, or attempt to cross
tlie Rawi with a large army at such a season by fording in that month.
The rainy season, too (and now there is no rainy season hereabouts :
the monsoon does not extend its influence so far west; and what may
have been the climatic changes since Alexander’s time P), just preceding
Timur’s arrival, had been very severe ; and it was through its severity
that the forces of his grandson, Pir Muhammad, then in possession of
Multan, had lost so many horses, that, when he presented himself in his
grandfather’s camp at Jinjan on the banks of the Biah, his men were
mostly mounted on bullocks, and the rest on foot.
Round about this chal, dhand, or lake were bogs and swamps ; and
these rendered the stronghold of the Khokhar chief very difficult to
approach. The mauza ’ of Shah Nawaz is described, at that period, as a
very large village, but I fail to find any traces of it now,249 but the chat ,
dhand , or lake, as previously observed, still exists or what remains of it,
in the old bed of tlie Biah, six miles and a half north-north-east of
Tibbah, in Lat. 30° 3' N. and Long. 71° 45' E. Up to this point it will
be observed, Amir Timur kept along or near the right or north bank of
the Biah.250 Some of liis nobles and their men had crossed the Biah in
249 it was still known, apparently, in the last century, when the Sayyid, Ghulam
Muhammad, who proceeded from Hindustan to Kabul on two or three occasions,
with despatches from Governor Hastings, to Timur Shah. Badshah of Kabul, reached
that part. The Sayyid crossed over on one occasion from Uboh-har to Baliawal-pur,
and thence to Multan. Setting out from that city to proceed to the Derail of ’Isma’il
Khan, he says : “ My first stage from Multan was five kuroh in the direction of N. W.
to Khan Chat ; the second stage was ten kuroh in the same direction to the Dih-i-Shah
Naivaz , on the banks of the Biah ; the third stage was ten kuroh N. to Shah-pur ; and
the fourth another ten kuroh N. W. to Tulanbali.” This journey was undertaken in
H. 1201, which commenced on the 13th of November, 1796, only a few months pre¬
vious to the time the Sutlaj is said to have suddenly changed its course.” Neither
Khan Chal, the Dili of Shah Nawaz, nor Shah-pur are now to be found. When the
Sutlaj changed its course, the Biah also deserted its old bed, and both rivers uniting,
lost their respective names, and became the Harfari and Nili, upwards, and Gharah
lower down, as previously mentioned.
£50 During the revolt of the Mirza’s in Akbar Badshah’ s reign, in the year 980
H. (1572-73 A. D.), news was received at Labor, 'that Ibrahim Husain Mirza, accom¬
panied by his youngest brother, Mas’udMfrza, having been defeated at Nag-awr (vul.
Nagore) by the Badshah, was making his way across to the Panj-ab territory; that
he had crossed the Sutlaj, and was advancing towards Debal-pur, and plundering
the country. The Khan-i-Jahan, Husain Kuli Beg, the Turk-man, the feudatory of
the Sub ah of Labor, with the forces of his province, at once moved against him, and
came suddenly upon his camp — he had only about 400 followers along with him _ in
sight of Tulanbali, just as Ibrahim Husain Mfrza was returning from hunting (Blocli-
mann, in his printed text of the Akbar Namah, in which names, of places are often
incorrect, has “ Paltah ” ( ) instead of Tulanbah ( y A fight ensued, in
1892.] H. G. Ravcrty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
283
pursuit of tlie Khokliar cliief ; and tlie Amir followed, with, the rest of
the army, to tlie river’s banks, opposite to a place called — Jinjan
* ♦ • ♦
[or — Khanjan and — Khanjan, in two other copies of the
MS. forty kuroh%bl distant from Multan, where the whole of the forces
had congregated. He directed that they should commence crossing the
same day. This was the 13th of the month Safar. On the 15th (26th
October, 1398), Amir Timur crossed the Biah, and his camp was pitched
which his followers were overcome and dispersed, and his brother, Mas’ud Mirza,
was captured. Ibrahim Husain Mirza now sought to re-pass the river Biah, as he
feared an attack from Multan, Husain Kuli Beg having intimated to Sa’id Khan, the
feudatory of Multan, that the Mirza had entered his province. As the Mirza had
only a few followers with him, and night had set in, and no boat was procurable, he
rested on the river’s bank until day should appear. A party of fishermen, styled
jhi'ls, and some Baluchis dwelling in that part of the Multan province, fell upon the
fugitives in the night, and dangerously wounded the Mirza in the throat with an
arrow, a volley of which they had discharged among the party. He was captured,
and taken away to Multan to Sa’id Khan.
The Tabakat-i-Akbari states, that he halted for the night “ in order to cross
the Gharah, which is the name of the river formed by the junction of the Sutlaj with
the Biah.
Another writer relates this affair somewhat differently, and states, that Ibrahim
Husain Mirza halted on the banks of the Biah and the Sutlaj (that is, where the rivers
then met again, in the Multan district, after having separated, as subsequently des¬
cribed) ; that he was set upon and wounded by a low class of Multan peasants styled
jhils, and that he took refuge in the dwelling of a darwesh, Shaikh Zakariya by
name, who sent information of his whereabouts to Sa id Khan at Multan. This
agrees with Abu-l-Fazl.
Faizi, the Sahrindf, says, that the Mirza wanted to cross where the Biah and
Sutlaj unite and are known as A b-i- Gharah ; while the Akbar Nam ah states, that
Ibrahim Husain Mirza was crossing the Sutlaj at Gharah (see faither on. Gliallu-
Gharah was then a mahdll of the Multan sarkdr), ivhere the Biah unites with the
Sutlaj, when he was taken prisoner by the fishermen and peasantry.
All this clearly shows that the Biah still flowed in its old bed, but that the
Sutlaj had re-united with the Biah some miles to the south-west of the chdl , or
dhand, or lake near Shah Nawaz, mentioned in the account of Amir Timur’s move-
ments, one hundred and eighty years before.
251 Not “ four kos”— eight miles— as in Elliot, but forty, as above. The “ Zafar
Namah” referring to this chdl-i-db, on the banks of which the Kbokhar chief had
fortified himself, says, that, “ this sheet of water was of great expanse, like unto
the mind of the pure in spirit, deep, and as the area of the inclination of the most
Editor of “ Elliot’s Historians,” in his version of the Zafar
a
beneficent, broad.” The Editor of
Namah, contained in that work, tarns this part into “ rud-lhana-i'aiim, and, translates
it “ a strong riser fortress ! ” The original is : f#* of J and there is not
word about any “ rud-hhdna," or “ river fortress.”
P de la Croix, in his “ History of Timur-Bec,” surrounds this vast lake with a
wall, behind which “ Nusret Coukeri retired with 2000 men,” and others copy this
nonsense.
284 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
near the Jearyah of Jinjan, where he halted for four days and nights. 252
“ In the mean time,” he says, “ in the course of two or three days, the
whole army, some by means of boats, and some by swimming [their
horses], effected the passage of that rolliug river without a single ac¬
cident.”
There is no remark made, either by Amir Timur himself or by the
historian, as to any difficulty in crossing the Rawi, but here there was
Some difficulty experienced. Further, we find the Biali still flowing
in its old bed, and that it was a “ rolling river,” and “ was not fordable.”
This fact is conclusive ; and I shall presently show, that no Gfiarah,
Ghara, or Hariari263 (miscalled Sutlaj, so low down, by English writers)
flowed in this neighbourhood at this time, and that such names were
unknown in these immediate parts, at the period here referred to.
Leaving Jinjan, Amir Timur marched one stage to the karyah of
— Sihwal, or Siliwal — Jj-^> ; and on the 21st from thence made
another stage to — Aswan or Asuan, where he remained one day.
Next day, leaving it, he made another stage to — Jliawal or —
Jliawal.2541 The people of Debal-pur, when the Mirza, Pir Muhammad,
arrived in those parts, had submitted to him, and had been well treated ;
but, when they found that, through the mortality among his horses, he
had been obliged to leave his camp outside, and retire within the walls
of Multan, they, like others in the neighbourhood of that place, rose,
and in combination with the Ghulams of Sultan Firuz Shah, Musafir,
252 Timur’s “ Malfuzat” says, respecting his camp at Janjan : “I directed that
the whole army, with the war materials and baggage, should cross the river (Biali)
to Janjan, and that my pavilion should be erected on a small pushtah (eminence)
just outside the place, at the foot of which there was a pleasant garden. When this
had been done, I crossed the river, after which I ascended the little eminence, and
from it a verdant plain lay stretched out before me.”
253 Also written Harihari.
254 The names of these places vary a little in different MSS., and in different
works. Some have Khinjan instead of Jinjan, ‘kh’ and ‘ j ’ being often changed
through the displacement of a point over or under, others Sahan, and even Sahak.
The second name does not vary so much, and is written Sihwal or Sihwal. The
third, likewise, does not vary much, being Aswan in most MSS., and Aswal in one or
two. The last is written Jliawal, Jhawal, and Jawal. The first reading given in the
text above is the most trustworthy ; but I fail to trace any of these four places.
Rennell, in his “ Memoir on the map of Hindoostan,” has Jenjian, Schoual,
Asouan, and Jehaul respectively (from P. de la Croix’s “History of Timur-Bec),”
but, since his map was constructed, vast changes have taken place through the altera¬
tions in the courses of rivers, especially those of the Rawi and Biali ; and these
places happened to lie in the very tracks of these vast changes, which altered the
whole face of the country, and places which before were in one do-abah were
transferred to another. See note 272, page 293.
285
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
tlie Kabuli, who had been sent to Debal-pur as Daroghah, with 1,000
troops, were all massacred by them. On the approach of Amir Timur
to the aid of his grandson, they abandoned the place with all their be¬
longings, and went off to the hisdr of Bhatnir.
When Amir Timur reached Jhawal or Jhawal he gave orders for
the main body of his forces to move by way of Debal-pur, in order that,
in the vicinity of Dihli, at the mauza ’ of Samanah, he would re-join it.
Then, taking a body of 10,000 cavalry along with him, he turned off
towards Ajuddhan ; and making a forced march, and going on all night,
on the morning of the 24th, at sunrise, reached that place. Many of
the principal people of this town had also gone off to Bhatnir, and none
remained but a few Sayyids and ’Ulama, who came forth to receive him.
They were well treated, and a Daroghah was left with them that they
might not be molested by any other troops passing that way. On the
morning of the 25th, after offering up prayers and paying his devotions
within the domed building where is the tomb and shrine of the Shaikh,
Farid-i-Shakar-Ganj, he set out towards Bhatnir. Passing [Ru-
dunah or Rawdunah],254 and proceeding ten huroh , he reached Khalis
254 Jn the Malfuzat-i-Timuri, in “Elliot’s Historians,” it is said [p. 421], that,
<c passing by Rudanah , I halted at Ivhalis Kotali;” but, in the extract from the
Tfmur^Namah in the same work, the same word or rather letters are trans¬
lated : “ From thence he started for Bhatnir, and crossing the river , he arrived at
Khalis-kotali.” This is improved upon in a note to the word ‘ river,’ which is ex¬
ceedingly amusing to read by one who knows the parts in question. See Vol. Ill,
p. 488 of the above work. If water is here referred to, which I do not think it is,
would be the plural of Ay — river.
Referring to the confluence of the “ Bias and Satlej,” in his “ Ancient Geo¬
graphy of India,” Cunningham, quoting “ Abul Fazl,” says “ For the distance of
12 kos near Firuzpur the rivers Biah and Satlej unite, and these again, as they pass
on, divide into four streams, the Hur, Hard, Band, and Nurni,” but this turns out
to be “ Gladwin’s translation of the Ayin Akbari.” The A’in-i-Akbari contains
nothing of this sort. It says (see also Blochmann’s text, page 549) : “For about
twelve huroh above Firuz-pur, the Biah and Sutlaj unite, and after that receive
[That is the two united] the names — Harihari, Dand, and Nurni, and near Multan
unite with the other four [[rivers of the Panj-ab, before mentioned] ; but, in a foot¬
note, Blochmann, who had no local knowledge, divides the word Harihari, which is
so well known, into Ear and Hari, as though two words, which it is not. This
Gladwin also seems to have done, but there is not a word of these again, as they
pass on divide into four streams this is all Gladwin’s own if, in his translation. It
is a great pity that translators when they do not understand a passage, should add
words of their own, because it misleads : better to merely give a literal translation,
and say they do not clearly understand it. An example of this pernicious system is
given in note 255, below.
Abd-l-Fazl, as it happens, says, that, “between the Biah and the Sutlaj is a
distance of fifty kuroh.,> See also page 296.
K K
286
H. G . Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
Kotlah where he halted. This place is fifty huroh [one copy says fifty-
three] from Bhatnir ; and three huroh is a standard farsahh. At the
fort of Khalis Kotlah Amir Timur remained until the time of afternoon
prayer, then pushed on for the remainder of that day and the whole
night, and halted not until he had crossed the chul or desert tract in one
stage. When morning approached, his advanced guard surprised the
patrol from the side of Bhatnir ; and, at breakfast time, Amir Timur
appeared before it.
The historian says, “the fortress of Bhatnir is a very strong place,
and one of the most notable of Hindustan, much out of the high road,
and lying away on the right hand. Round about it is chul (waste)256 ;
The word as it appears in the different MSS. of the Zafar-Namah available —
and I have used five copies — are as in the text above, with the exception of one
copy which has with a j inserted over, showing, that, in copying the MSS.,
a letter had been left out. If we suppose that these letters form two words, and
that they might form Ajj - i - &j, or even that the latter might be with ‘ d ’
instead of ‘ w’; still, that water or a river is not referred to, is evident from the fact,
that, throughout the Zafar-Namah, when the crossing of a river or water is referred
to, the verb used is ‘ to cross from one side to another,’ while here we
have ‘ to pass by/ etc. Moreover, when rivers are referred to, they are
called db, as ‘ Ab-i-Ohin-ao/ ‘ Ab-i-Tulanbah/ etc., and the Biah is styled ‘ db ’ and
‘ daryd.’ Further, if the plural form of — rud — ‘river’ was meant, we should
have — nidahah , not — rudunah. From this it is quite clear to me, that
the word in question refers to a place, not to rivers or river beds, although, at the
'present time , some small river channels do intervene between Ajuddhan, on the north
side. There is the dry bed of a small river which is known as the Dandi (the diminu¬
tive form of Dandah, probably) ; but, what is here referred to — —is south¬
east of Ajuddhan, and between it and Khalis Kotlah. This so called Dandi may
possibly refer to what is left of the channel of the minor of the three branches into
which, the Hariari, or Nili separated, after the Biah and Sutlaj, farther north, had
united, again to separate, but this junction took place after the time of Amir Timur’s
invasion; and, moreover, he had passed south-east of Ajuddhan towards Khalis
Kotlah before was passed , not crossed. It is quite certain that the great
Dandah, or high bank of the last independent channel of the Sutlaj, is not meant in
the text above ; for, instead of being situated between Ajuddhan and Khalis Kotlah,
and west of the latter place, the great Dandah is fourteen miles east of it, and further
more, at the period in question, the Sutlaj, in its inclination westwards, had not yeu
made that new channel for itself, and still flowed in that by Uboh-har.
255 in the extract given by the Editor from his own translation from the £afar
Namah in “ Elliot’s Historians,’’ we have the following : — “ It is situated far out of
the road on the right hand, and is surrounded by the desert of Choi.” Here he has
mistaken the Persian word chul — a wilderness, uncultivated waste, and unpopulated
tract, or containing very few inhabitants, but not necessarily a desert — for a proper
name ! The Editor continues : “ For fifty or a hundred Tcos there is no water.”
This sentence is misleading and incorrect, and will not be found in any copy of the
287
1892.] H. G-. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
and the inhabitants of the place obtain water from a hol-i-db or lake,
which is filled in the rainy season. It was said that no foreign army
had ever reached it; and, on this account, the rebels who had fled from
Debal-pur and Ajuddhan, and other places, had assembled there. Such
a number had reached it, that there was not room for them within ;
consequently, there were many people, and a vast number of animals
and loads of property, left outside. This place, and the territory around,
was held by Rao Dul-chin,266 who collected revenue from those parts,
and from all who passed that way, either merchants or travellers ; and
harwans of traders were not safe from his exactions.” Suffice it to say,
that the place was nearly carried when the defenders called for quarter,
and next day Rao D ul-chm came out. After this, however, the people
again rose, closed the gates, were again attacked ; and when Timur’s
troops had gained the walls, they again sued for quarter, which, was
once more granted. The fugitives from Debal-pur and Ajuddhan, and
other places, having however gained an entrance, in conjunction with
the Bhatis, again broke out, and closed the gates. This, as might be
expected, raised the ire of Timur ; and the place was stormed and cap¬
tured. Many of the defenders burnt themselves, along with their
women, and other belongings. Of the Debal-pur fugitives who had
been concerned in the massacre of Musafir, the Kabuli, and his force of
1,000 men, 500 were put to death, and their families made slaves, and
the remainder spared, but the defences of the fort and town of Bhatnir
were levelled with the dust.267
Zafar Namah, nor is such a word as fcos to be found throughout the whole work.
Compare also pp. 421 and 422 of Elliot s work.
256 The name is written Dul-chin, and those who copy from the Zafar Namah
alter it into Khul-chin, but, in Elliot, it is made “ Khal-chin ” of.
257 All these matters are set down against Timur by history compilers to make
him out a monster, but they leave out what caused him to act with stern severity.
Here persistent treachery, after being twice forgiven, is shown. I wonder whether
in the present enlightened days Skobeloff and Komaroff, and other “ divine figures
from the north” or west would have acted differently ? or even if, during the late
Afghan campaign the Afghan “ rebels ” would not have been served much after
the same fashion, if they had acted in the same manner after once surrendering ? It
would have been very strange if they had not. And yet one writer sets down what
he supposes to be “ Abu’l Fazls little knowledge of Bhattiana,” which knowledge is,
however, very great, as the A’in-i-Akbari shows, to “ the depopulation caused by
< the firebrand of the universe,’ Timur.” The Chingiz Khan put more people to
death after surrendering, at Bukhara and Samr-kand alone, than fell in all the wars in
which Timur engaged during his whole lifetime ; and yet some, unacquainted with
these historical fwts, sing the praises of the “ great Jangez,” without knowing even
how to spell his name correctly, and exclaim against “ the ruthless tyrant and bar.
barian Taimur.” Such writers would do well to read, mark, learn, and inwardly
288
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
Having disposed of tin's affair, on the 3rd of tlie month Rahi’-nl
Awwal, Amir Timur with his force marched fourteen Jcuroh to a place
styled the Hauz-i-Ab — The Reservoir of Water — and on the following
day reached and passed the fort of Firuzah [in one copy Firuzkoh — the
“ Feerozabad ” of the maps, not the Hisar Firuzah] and reached the town
of Sarasti263 now Sirsa [“ Sirsuh ” of the maps], on the Ghag-ghar. It
was deserted by its inhabitants on his approach. Halting a day there,
his next stage of eighteen Jcuroh took him to near the fort of Fath-abad
[the “ Futtehabad ” of the maps]. On the 7th, having passed by the
fort of Rajab-pur [jj* ]259 he reached the fort of Ahroni, which,
showing hostility, was sacked and destroyed, and nothing left to mark
it but some heaps of ruins. He moved again on the 8th, and brought
up in the open plain near the JcaryaJi of Tihwanah [turned into “ Toha-
nuli ” in our maps]. There he came into contact with “ a large and
powerful tribe called Jatan [Jats] who, for a long period of time, had
acquired sway over that part, plundered on the high roads, and way laid
lcarwdns and massacred their people, especially if Musalmans.260 Some
of these had taken shelter among the hills [low, rocky hills] and jangals,
the last consisting chiefly of sugar-canes.261 A party sent against them
digest the account of the “ Invasion of Islam by the Mughals” in the “ Tabakat-i-
b asiri, and then they would know more about these matters. Those who would
write history should be strictly just and impartial, and also know something of it
from the originals, and not from translations only. See Elliot’s “ Races of the
North-West Provinces of India,” Vol. II, pp. 17—19.
258 Sarasti is the old name of Sirsa : Sursuti, not Sarsuti, is the name of a river,
the ancient Saraswati, described farther on.
259 This place is called “ Rajabpur,” in the extract from the “ Malfuzat ” in
Elliot’s work ; and a few pages farther on, in his extract from the “ Zafar Namah,”
it is “Rajabnur” There is very little doubt that the place called “Ryepoor” in
the maps, eleven miles and a half to the north-east of Fath-abad, is the place referred
to, and which lies on the route from Fath-abad to Ahroni, the “Arnaunee” of the
maps.
260 gee Ibn Batutah, page 263.
261 ri his tract appears to have been notable for the cultivation of sugarcane
from early times. Sultan Mas’ud, son of Mahmud of Ghaznin, having entered Hind
for the purpose of crushing the rebellion of his governor of the province east of the
Indus, Ahmad-i-Nial-Tigm, in 426 H. (1031—35 A. D.), marched against the fortress
of Sarasti [now Sirsa], said to have been, at that time, one of the most celebrated
strongholds of Hind. It had been invested by his father, Sultan Mahmud, but he
did not succeed in taking it. After having been before it some days, the ruler of
that part and stronghold, finding he could not cope with the Musalman forces,
despatched an agent to Sultan Mas’ud, offering to pay down a very large sum, and to
afterwards pay a certain yearly amount as tribute. These offers were accepted, and
hostilities were suspended. This Rajah, however, in order to raise the sum to be
paid at once, seized on a number of Musalman merchants and traders, who happened
289
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
slew about 200, and returned with a number of captives, and many bead
of cattle. On the 9tli of the month, Amir Timur started from Tihwanah,
and the families and followers, heavy materials, and booty, were sent off
towards Samanah under the Amir, Suliman Shah ; and he, having that
same day, passed the Kala’ of Mung [Miing A'la — turned into “ Moonuk ”
in our maps] halted. Amir Timur, in the mean time, made a forced
march in order to beat up the quarters of those Jats who had concealed
themselves in the jangals in the neighbourhood of Tihwanah. Some
2,000 of them were put to the sword the same day, and many captives,
and much cattle, were taken. In the part entered there was a village
to be in the place when the investment commenced, and were unable to get away,
and sought to extort this money from them. The merchants managed to acquaint
Sultan Mas’ ad with their helpless state and the Rajah’s tyranny ; and also informed
him of the weakness of the Hindus and their inability to oppose him, and stating,
that, if he remained before the place for five or six days more, the enemy would
have to come out and surrender at discretion. The Sultan was not inclined to wait ;
and when he became acquainted with the Rajah’s tyranny, he resolved to attack the
fortress at once. The country round was remarkable for the extensive growth of
suo’ar-cane ; so “ he directed that they should fill the ditch with sugar-cane ,” and assault
the place. This was done, and the stronghold of Sarasti was stormed and captured.
The drowning of Ahmad-i-Nial-Tigin — not “ Binal-Tagin,” as some have written
the name — near Mansuriyah on the Mihran of Sind, has been already recorded. See
note 105, on Bahman-no, page 196.
In the following year Sultan Mas’ud captured Hansi, after which he moved
against the fort of Soni-pat, belonging to Deobal or Debal of Harianah, as he is
called. Several other strongholds are said to have fallen into the hands of the
Sultan during this expedition, which had never been assailed by the Musalmans
before. His father had despatched an army against one of these, the name of which
is written Narsi— in three MSS. and <^5^— Tarsi in one-but was stopped on
hearing of that Sultan’s decease. Sultan Mas’ud attacked and captured it. He sub¬
sequently, just before his return towards Ghaznin, compelled the ruler of another
part, whose name was Ram, to submit to his supremacy.
Ibn A sir, the Shami, has a wonderful account of the capture of this place—
Narsi— which, he says, is related by “ the most trustworthy chroniclers.” Among
other wonders, “ the city was,” he asserts, “a day’s” journey in length”; that it
took the whole army of 100,000 horse,” a night and a day to sack the bazar of the
’attars and jewellers ; that no other part of the city was molested”; and that, “ in
that hdzdr alone, such a vast amount of gold, silver, and jewels fell into the hands
of the captors, that it was found impossible to compute it, and therefore the shares
among the soldiery had to be dealt out by measure !
It is strange, with his “ trustworthy chroniclers” not named, that the only two
chroniclers who were contemporary with Sultan Mas’ud, and were in the government
employ, Abu-l-Fazl-i-Baihaki, who was his biographer, so to say, and the Gardaizi,
should ’not mention anything of this wondrous place and its booty ; while Ibn Asir
should have it at his fingers ends, who wrote more than a century and a half after—
about thirty years before the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” was finished— and who was never
in Hind or near it in his life.
290 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
inhabited by Sayyids, who were well treated, and a Daroghah was left
to protect them from molestation. On the 10th, Amir Suliman Shall
who with the families, etc., was in the neighbourhood of Mung, moved
again nearer towards the city of Samanah, and remained there that
night. On the 11th he again moved and reached the banks of the
Ghag-ghar ; and Amir Timur, who had set out from Tihwanali to punish
the Jats, joined Amir Suliman Shall on the banks of that river near to
Samanali.262 Having halted there some days to rest the forces and
arrange matters, Amir Timur again moved on the 15tli, and reached the
vicinity of the bridge of Kopilah [or Gopilali — over the Ghag-ghar
as it then flowed. There, the Amirs who had been despatched from
the grassy plain — the Jal-gdli — of Durin263 at Kabul on particular
services [which, unfortunately, are not mentioned], who had reduced all
the places met with on their way, this day effected a junction with the
rest of the army. The march was resumed on the 16th ; the bridge
crossed ; and, in a verdant plain beyond it, a great camp was pitched.
The troops despatched from the banks of the Biali by way of Debal-pur,
here likewise rejoined. On the 17tli the whole army moved from the
camp near the bridge of Kopilah, and marching a distance of five Jcuroh ,
reached the bridge of Bakran or Bagran [ ] over the river Sursuti.
On the 19tli of the month the army marched from thence and reached
the karyah of Kaithal, which is distant from Samanah seventeen kuroh ,
which is equal to five standard farsakhs and two mil” Here the army
of Amir Timur was marshalled in order of battle preparatory to advanc¬
ing upon Dilili ; and here I shall leave him, after merely giving what
the historian of his campaign afterwards says, and in his own exact
words, respecting the different rivers of the territory now known (cor¬
rectly) as “ the territory of the Panj-ab.”
He says : “ The river flowing through the city of Nagar [Sri-Nagar,
which he writes with gh— ], they call Ab-i-Dandanah, and Ab-i-
Jamad. Above Multan it unites with the Ohin-ao, and both having
passed Multan, unite with the Hawaii, which passes on the other side of
that place,264 and approach each other. After that, the Ab-i-Biah reaches
them, and all these, near to U'chckh, unite with the Ab-i-Sind, and the
whole are then known as Ab-i-Sind, which, on the skirt of the territory
of Tatah [Thathah], unites with the ’ummdn or ocean.”
According to the tradition current among the people of this part,
at the time of my Survey record, Amir Timur is said to have crossed
262 That river ran under its walls up to the close of the last century.
263 See my “Notes on Afghanistan.’’ page 689, and compare Elliot here. In
the latter’s work the Ghag-ghar is always turned into “ Khagcir.”
264 I shall refer to the fact noticed here, farther on.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 291
the Chin-ab, that is the Bihat or Jihlam265 and the Chin-ab united, two
huroh south of the Kasbah of Neko-kari, now shortened to Ko-kari,266 near
where the hamlet known as Jaso ke stood, but which has now disap¬
peared. The ferry over it, which appears now to have been abandoned,
was known as the Jaso ke Patan; and there was another at Neko-kari
above, likewise, called the Neko-kari or Ko-kari Patan, the routes from
which ferries led by Shor Kot to Tulanbah. The crossing place was,
certainly, not far off, but it was nearer four huroh than two south of
Neko-kari.
Thus we find from the foregoing, that, at the time of Amir Timur’s
invasion of Hind, the Jihlam and Chin-ab united not far from Shor, or
Shor- Kot, which is an ancient site, and was inhabited by Langah Jats.
It was, in the time of Akbar Badshah, a considerable town, the chief
place of the mahall of that name, and where the Daroghah was located.
It had been in ancient times a large and important walled-town, but it
has been in a state of desolation for a long period of time. When I last
saw it in 1850, the mound on which the old place stood, was covered
with extensive ruins, and surrounded with the remains of a wall of burnt
bricks ; and it was of sufficient elevation to be prominently seen for
several miles round about. I believe it to be the site of the very fortress
near, or in the fork between the confluence of the two rivers, more
particularly since there is no trace of any other old fortress in the
neighbourhood near where the confluence of the two rivers anciently
took place. Shor. I may mention, means ‘ noise,’ ‘ tumult,’ 1 agitation ’
or * commotion of water,’ etc., but that is a Persian or Tajzik word, and
we might expect to find it called by a Hindi name.267 I merely mention
the coincidence.
265 Both the historian, it must be remembered, and Amir Timur, himself, al¬
ways call the Wihat or Bihat or Jihlam river, the Jamad.
266 This Kasbah, which appears in our maps as “ Nee Kokaruh,” and “ NeeJco-
liar ah,” no two maps being alike, at the time of the Survey referred to above, was
peopled by Sayyids ; and in a grove of trees, a little to the south-east thereof, is the
grave of the Sayyid, ’Abd-ullah-i-Jahanian, of the U’chchh family of Bukhara
Sayyids, apparently ; and he is held in such veneration that they would not even use
the dead wood of the trees for fire-wood. The defunct was a man of such great
neko-kari — that is, benevolence and goodness— -that the place was named, after him,
the kasbah of the Neko-kari, but which, through constant use became shortened to
Ko-kari.
267 Unless, as is not improbable, the fact of these parts having been under
Muhammadan rulers, who used the Tajzik language, certainly for four centuries
before the appearance of Amir Timur in this neighbourhood, if not from the occu¬
pation of Multan by the ’Arabs, seven centuries before his time, was the cause of
the Hindi name (if it ever had one : the additional “ Kot” is comparatively modern)
being discontinued, One of the descendants of the ’Arab tribe of Tammim was still
292
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
The old bed of the Chin-ab, or rather the most prominent, and
probably most recent, of its former channels, can still be distinctly
traced within three miles of Shor-Kot on the east and south to this day.
At the period in question, and for sometime after, Shor-Kot was in the
Chin-hath Do-abah,263 as shown from the movements of the Mughal
raiders, who yearly entered these parts up to the year 834 H. (1430-31
A. D.); but, subsequently, on the Ohin-ab inclining farther towards the
west, like the other three rivers east of it continued to do, it was shut
out of that do-abah and transferred to the Rachin-ab Do-abah, in which
it still continues, and lies some six miles east of the left or east bank of
the united Ohin-ab and Bihat or Jihlam. These two rivers, at the time
of Amir Timur’s invasion, had, for some time, separated from the Rawf
and Blah,269 and flowed on the west side of Multan, while the two latter
still passed on the east as heretofore. More respecting them, and the
great flood which devastated the whole northern Panj-ab territory, be¬
tween the Ohin-ab and the Sutlaj, anterior to the arrival of Timur in
these parts, and the probable changes caused thereby, will be found in
the account of the rivers farther on.
Then as to the rivers farther east, let us take into consideration
that Amir Timur’s forces, including followers, could not have been less
than 80,000 or 100,000 persons, and as many horses ; and, that while
he crossed from Ajuddhan to Bhatnir with 10,000, the more numerous
portion, with the followers, baggage, and heavy materials of the army,
crossed direct from Debal-pur to Mung Ala, and all re-assembled on the
banks of the Ghag-ghar near Samanah. In doing this they must have
crossed the beds of all the rivers but one tributary to the Hakra or
Wahindah, including the old channels of the Sutlaj, whether they
contained water or were dry ; and it is strange, that, although Amir
Timur must also have crossed the channel of the Sutlaj, whether it
in possession of territory on the Bihat or Jihlam and the Chin-ab when Amir Timur
crossed the Indus. See note 246, page 279, and a note farther on.
There is an old saying, that, “ Shor is notorious for tumults, as Chandani-ot
is for the quarrelsome proclivities of its inhabitants.”
Cunningham, in his “ Ancient Geography of India,” “identifies” Shor Kot as
“one of the towns of the Malli,” and with “the town of Po-lo-fa visited by Hwen
Thsang and supposes the tradition current in the neighbourhood of its destruction
by “ some king from the westward about 1300 years ago,” to be the “ White Huns.”
We need not go quite so far back, and may leave the “ White Huns ” and “ Hwen
Thsang” for what they are worth.
263 Like the names of towns and villages, this do-abah appears in our maps
under the incorrect names of “ Jech Doab” and “Jech Booab” and, certainly with¬
out the meaning of the word being understood, or how written in the original. See
note 277, page 296.
269 See page 291 and note 265,
293
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
contained water or not, between Ajuddhan and IOialis Kotlah, the
Gliag-gliar is the only river mentioned by name between the Biali and
Samanah. At the same time, although a chid or waste tract is men¬
tioned between Khalis Kotlah and Bhatnir, there is no mention of other
chiils, neither is there the least allusion to any scarcity of water,
and of which such large bodies of troops and animals must have
required a considerable quantity. I have estimated the number of
Amir Timur’s forces at a low figure, and have reason to suppose that
they weie much more numerous; for it cannot be supposed that he
would have invaded Hindustan, intent on reaching Dihli, at the head
of a smaller number. In recent times, say in the last century, it would
have been a dangerous experiment, if not an impossible matter, to
take such a numerous army in two bodies by these routes.271 While
there is no mention on the part of the historian that the beds of
these rivers were passed, or that any rivers had dried up, or were
running, at the time — a matter much to be regretted — but as no scarcity
is mentioned, and the halting places were merely the ordinary ones,
and not specially chosen, we must conclude that there was water in
the beds of some of these rivers (including the Hakra), but not suffi¬
ciently deep as to require remark in crossing them.
Let us now see what the A’m-i-Akbari says respecting the Ab-i-
Sind and other rivers, and the Do-abahs and Subahs of the Panj-ab
territory and parts adjoining it on the east, after which I will give some
extracts from the Survey made of these parts about a century since, to
which 1 have before alluded.
“ The Subah of Labor, ” he says, “ extends from the Sutlaj [not the
Gliarah or Hariliari, bat higher uj3 : above the present junction of the Biah
and Sutlaj] to the Ab-i-Sind, a distance of one hundred and eighty huroh
in length, and from Bhimbar to Ohaukhandi, 272 a dependency of Sat Garh,
£71 The Sayyid, ’Abd-ullah Shah, who, with only a small following, when he
was despatched to Kabul in 1780-81 by Governor Hastings, found the route from
Bikanlr by Phugal and Moj Garb to U'chchh, sufficiently difficult. He lost a son,
and a number of his people, between Bikanir and l/chch. The Hon’ble Monntstuart
Elphinstone also passed by the same halting places on his way to Kabul, but he went
to Bahawal-pur from Moj Garh.
I hope shortly to give the Sayyid, Ghulam Muhammad’s account of his father’
mission and his own to Kabul in his own words. See note 249, page 282.
272 Ohaukhandi was a mahdll of the Rachin-ab Do-abah of the Multan sarkdr of
the Multan subah, and belonged to the KharT Jats. It is now an insignificant place,
and at this time is in the Bari Do-abah, showing how places have been changed from
one do-abah to another, fourteen miles E. N. E. of the town of Hurappah, and about
a mile from the south or left bank of one of the old channels of the Rawi, three miles
and a half from the high bank farther south-east. It appears in the maps as
“ Cliowkundee.” Sath Garh, under the name of “ Sutgurrah,” and “ Slmtgurrah,”
L L
294
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
eighty-six Jcuroh in breadth. Six rivers run through it, all coming from
the Koh-i-Shamali. 1. Sutlaj , the old name of which is Shutlaj [but
in the printed text. See note 205, page 259], the spring-head being
at Kahlur. Ludhianah, Ru-par, and Machlu Warah are on its banks.
At the Guzar or ferry of Loh [ ^ ]27S it unites with the Biah. 2. Biali ,
the old name of which is Iiipasha [ IALj ], rises at Biali Kund, near the
Koli-i-Galu ]. Sultan-pur is near this great river. [It now lies
eight miles west of it, and three miles north of Loh or Loh-Wal]. 3.
Rawi , the old name of which is I'rawati [ ]. It issues from the
Koh i-Bliadral [ (Jl^, or and the Dar-ul-Mulk of Labor is on its
banks. 4. Chin-db , the old name is Ohandar-Bhaga [ ]. Two
rivers rise on the slopes of the Koh-i-Khatwrar [in some, Khishtwar],
one the Ohandar, the other the Bhaga, and having united near Khatwar,
the names become changed to Ohandar-Bhaga. It [the united rivers]
passes by Bahlul-pur, Siidharali, and Hazarah.274 5. Bihat [ the
old name of which is Bidasta [ twxi ]. Its source is a hauz or small
lake in the parganah of Wir in Kash-mir. It flows through Sri-Nagar,
and Bhirah 275 is situated on its bank. 6. Sind. This river is said to
rise between Kash-mir and Kashghar, some say in Khita. It passes by
the confines of Suwad [or Suwat], Atak Banaras, and Ohau-parah to the
Baluchistan.276
is about thirty miles north-east of Ghaukhancli, and between two and three miles
from the south of left bank of the Rawi, near which Chaukhandi lies, and thirteen
miles to the eastward of Fath-pur Ghugherah, “ Fattehpoor Googaira,” of the maps.
Hereabouts, the valley of the Rawi is some thirty- four miles broad, cut up with
several channels, showing the great changes the river has made at different periods.
Khat-pur, the chief place of a mahall, mentioned in the Mughal raids, and the place,
where, at one period, the Rawi used to be forded, was the northernmost part of the
Multan subah , and is repeatedly mentioned in history, but that seems to have dis
appeared.
Sath Garh is the place to which Mr. M. L. Dames’s (Seethe “ Journal ” for
1881) “mighty Chakar Rind,” a petty Balfich chief, retired, when he had to leave
the Baluch country. He did not “found” any “kingdom with its capital Sevi
(Sibi),” and did not “wage war xoith Human Chughutta” as Humayun Badshah
has been styled by him. More respecting Chakar, the Rind, will be found farther
on. See also my “Notes on Afghanistan,” etc. page 347.
278 See ante page 278 and note 244.
274 Or Taklit-i- Hazarah on the west bank of the Chin-ao, 8| miles N. N. W. of
Jalal-pur, and 34 miles below Ram-Nagar, in the Chin- hath do-dbah of Labor subah ,
with a fort of burnt brick, belonging then to the Kholchars.
275 Also written Bhihrah ( ) in some copies of the A’in. This is the
fortress of the Tammmff, Shihab-ud-Din, Mubarak Shah, which Amir Timur captured,
but he calls it Balirah, as does his descendant, Babar, who took possession of it before
he succeeded in his designs upon Hindustan. See note 246, page 279.
276 The present age may be called the “ Age of Gazetteers,” but, unfortunately,
295
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
“ The Badshah named the part between the Sutlaj and the Biah,
Bist- Jalandhar ; that between the Biah and the Rawi, the Bari [ not
between the Harihari, Nurni, or Ghard, and the Rawi, it will be observed.
This is important, because, even now it is considered to extend from the
dried up Biah to the Rawi] ; that between the Rawi and Chin-ab,
Rachin-ao or Rachin-ab ; that between the Ohin-ab and Bihat, Ohin-
many of them contain much arrant nonsense, old statements re-dished up, and the
stories of Dow and Briggs renovated. There is a compilation issued from the “ In¬
telligence Branch of the Quarter- Master General’s Department ” in India, called
the “ Pe'shin Gazetteer,” which is called Part III of a “ confidential ” Gazetteer of
Afghanistan, “ intended for 'Polit ical and Military reference.”
“Pdshin” means ‘ anterior 1 antique,' and also ‘ the afternoon,' but the tract of
country which the compilation in question is intended to give information upon
chiefly, is that part of the southern Afghanistan called Pushang (which ’Arab writers
called Fushanj, according to their system of writing old Tajzik words), through
which part we are carrying a Railway (a good part of which, from a recent “ Report ”
lias been found useless), and call it in public documents “ Balochistan,” because it is
in the Afghanistan.
I will give a specimen of the historical information contained in this “ Antique ”
or “Afternoon” Gazetteer, suggested by the above statement of Abu-i-Fazl. It
says: — “ The Baluch tribes to the west {[the Baluchistan is referred to], being the in¬
habitants best known to Nadir Shah, that monarch bestoioed their name on the country,
which properly should be styled Brdhuistdn, if supremacy and numbers are of any
weight .” I venture to say that there is no authority for stating that Nadir Shah
gave name to the Baluchistan, which was known by that name centuries before his
time.
It will be seen from what Abu-1-Fazl states, that it was the well known name of
their country, ages before Nadir Shah’s time, and also before the Brahuis were known
to history. Of course, it is not to be supposed that the above was intended to mis¬
lead, but it is misleading nevertheless. It is the outcome of persons writing on
subjects respecting which they have no special knowledge, and copying the incorrect
statements of others, upon which they have to depend.
The compiler of the “ Peshzn” Gazetteer, however, is not the only one : there
is a “pamphlet” — written for some political purpose apparently, entitled “Our
Western Frontier,” London, 1887 — containing much after the same fashion, by Mr.
C E. Biddulph, of the Bombay Uncovenanted Service. At page 8 he assures us
that “the terms Afghanistan and Belooehistan, are arbitrary and fictitious that
“ they are terms we have adopted from motives of convenience that “ the region
called by us Baloochistan (p. 13),” is a “ term invented by us (p. 15) and that, “ the
term Afghanistan is one of European invention (p. 16).”
It is very evident that the writer is unacquainted with Abii-l-Fazl, much less
with older writers by five or six centuries. When a person sets himself up as a
teacher of others respecting the geography, history, and ethnography of a country,
he ought, at least, to know something of its past history. The author of the
pamphlet in question will find considerable information on this head from the Mu¬
hammadan writers in the Fifth Section of my “ Notes on Afghanistan and part
of Baluchistan.”
296
H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4,
liath ;277 and that between the Biliat and the Sind, Sind-Sagar.278 The
distance from the Sutlaj to the Brail is fifty kuroh ; from the Biah to
the Rawi, seventeen ; from the Rawi to the Chin-ab, thirty ; from the
Chin-ab to the Bihat, twenty; and from the Bihat to the Sind, sixty-
eight kuroh”
“ The Multan Sub ah ,” he says, “ before the territory of Thathah
[that is middle and lower Sind — Siw-istan or Wicholo, and Thathah or
Lar, making five Sarkdrs] was included, extended from Firuz-pur to
Siw-istan [that is, their boundaries : not to those particular places], a
distance of four hundred and three kuroh , and adjoins the Sarkdr of
Sahrind on the east ; Shor on the north; the Subah of Ajirir on the
south ;279 and Kich and Mukran on the west.230
“ The Bihat unites with the Chin-ab near the parganah of Shor,281
then running for a distance of twenty-seven kuroh , near Zafar-pur,232
they unite with the Rawi, and all three become one river. Sixty kuroh
lower down, near U'chchh, they enter the Sind. For about twelve kuroh
above, to near Firuz-pur, the Biah and Sutlaj unite, and after that lose
their names, and are styled Harihari [ ],283 Dand [ ],28i and
Nurni [ ]. Near Multan, having united with the other four
[rivers], tney flow together.235 Every river that enters the Sind [river]
acquires the name Sind.”
£77 Cunningham, in his “Ancient Geography of India,” page 1 54, says : “The
names of the Doabs [Do-abahs?] were invented by Akbar, by combining the names
of the including rivers. Thus, Chaj is an abbreviation of Chenab and Jhelam ;
Richna of Ravi and Chenab ; and Bari of Bias [there is no river so called except by
Europeans] and Ravi.” What Akbar Badshah called them may be seen from Abu-1-
Fazl’s statement above. There is no such do-dbah as “ Chaj.” This is a mere
mistake for Chin -hath. This name is obtained, as mentioned in the Survey I have
before alluded to, from ‘ ch’ and ‘ n,’ the first two consonants in Chin-ab. and ‘ h,’
and ‘ t,’ the two last consonants of Wihat or Bihat (also called the Jhilam) — Chin-
hat, to which compound word a final ‘ h’ is sometimes added, making it Ohin-hath,
as above described. The name Bist-Jhalandar is obtained in the same manner from
‘b’ and ‘ i ’ of Biah, and ‘s’ and ‘t’ of Sutlaj. In Bloclimann’s printed text of
the A’in-i-Akbari, the ‘ s 5 has been left out.
£78 Abu-1-Fazl gives his master rather more credit here than he is entitled to.
Sind-Sagar is as old as the time of Ibn Khurdad-bih and the Mas’udi. See page 210.
£79 See note 239, page 274.
250 After Thathah and its dependencies were included therein. See A’in.
281 Shor, at present, is some twenty-five miles below the place of junction. See
page 293, and note 267, and also a note on this subject farther on.
282 This place is not now known. The junction must have been a few miles
lower down than the present place of meeting.
283 Also written Hariari [ ]•
234) Or Dandah as it is sometimes written. See also note 240, page 275.
235 I have given his words literally here. See note 239, page 274, and note 254,
page 285.
1802.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Suul and its Tributaries. 297
It will be noticed that Abu-l-Fazl mentions, that, after this junc¬
tion of the Blah and Sufclaj, the newly united river is known by these
three different names above-mentioned, and that they unite for twelve
kuroh only. He says not one word such as can be construed, by the
greatest stretch of the imagination, into three rivers, much less four. It
will also be observed here that he mentions in rotation where the other
four rivers, unite, but that he leaves out the name of the place of junc¬
tion of the Harihari, Dand, or Nurni (he never uses the name Gharah
here, it will be remarked) with the others, merely mentioning the fact of
its uniting with them.286 It seems strange that he should have omitted
to name the place of junction in this case, because Multan is a little over
seventy-one miles, as the crow flies, above l/chchh.
“At Thathah,” he continues, “the Sind is called Mihran,287 and all
six rivers, in one stream [sic in text] pass under [the walls of] Bakhar,
one portion north, and the other south of the fort. The Sind river every
few years goes from south to north, and causes great ruin, consequently,
the dwellings are constructed of sticks and rushes.” 233
In the record of the Survey, completed about a century since, the
following account is given of the different rivers noticed by Abu-l-Fazl
above. It matters little, in regard to the present subject, what course
this and the other rivers took within the hills, as there changes in their
courses seldom take place ; therefore, I shall confine myself chiefly to an
account of them after their entry into the more level tracts.
The Sindhu, Nahr-i-Sind, A'b-i-Sind, or Indus.
I need not mention in the present paper what the author of the
Survey says respecting the upper coarse of the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or
Indus, and its source, and shall only notice it here from its junction with
the river of Kabul just above Atak Banaras. 239
“One kuroh above that place,” he says, “the Sind unites with the
River of Kabul, called Landaey Sind, or Little Sind or River, by the
236 See note 250, page 282.
287 It is so called, by his own account, much higher up than Thathah ; and at
the period in question, seven, not six rivers, flowed past Bakhar.
283 See page 217, note 151.
239 It may not be amiss to mention here what the old European travellers say
respecting the Indus and the changes in its channel, as well as of the rivers consti¬
tuting the Panj Ab, or Panch Nad. What they mention about the places on their
banks will be found farther on.
Sir T. Herbert, writing in 1626, says: “The River Indus, called by Pliny
Sandus, and Arrian Sinthus, is now called Sinde. After a course of 3,000 miles from
298 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Afghans. The Sind contains a whitish deposit, and looks milky in con¬
sequence ; while the other, from its great clearness and purity, is very
blue, and therefore the Tajzik people of these parts call it the Nil A'b,
or Blue River, or Blue Water. At different points it is called the Atak
and Nil Ab indiscriminately. * * * Near U'che_hh290 it unites with the
Panj Ab, or Panch Nad, or Five Hi vers; and towards the bandar (port)
of Lahri it unites with the ocean.”
The Sindhu, or Ab-i-Sind, which we call Indus, lias, in the lapse
of ages, changed its course very considerably, though not so much
the Casnirrian [Kash-mfrian] Mountains, part of Caucasus, it empties itself into the
Ocean at two great Ostiums. * * * The Rivers Bohat [Bihat], Ravore [Rawi]
Damiadee [See the old map, p. 297], Obclian, Woihy or Ilydaspes, Ascines, Copliis
Adris, etc., all fall into it.” See pages 207, and 229, and note 175.
Mandelsloe, who was in India in 1639, says : “ The Persians and Indosthans
themselves, having given the name of Pangah [Panj-Ab], i. e., Five Waters, to the
River Indus, because it is joyn’d with so many Rivers before it exonerates itself
into the Sea. The first is the River Bugal, or Begal [in other places he has Nibal —
the Nil-ab], whose source is near Kabul ; the second is call Chanab, which rises in
the Province Quesmir, or Cossimer, fifteen days’ journey to the North, above Labor,
The third is that of Ravy, or Ravee, which rises not far from Labor, and runs by it
The two others, viz ., the Rivers Via [Biah] and Osuid [Hakra ?] have their sources
at a vast distance, their co7ifluence being near Balcar [this is an important statement],
which lies at an equal distance between Lahor and the Sea. Some Authors havo
confounded this river with that of Liul [ Debal ], and placed it 24 degrees on this
side the Line. # # # The Province of Tatta is a congeries of many Islands made by
the same River. # # * The Province of Attack is seated upon the River Nibal
(which falls into the Indus) and is by it divided from the Province of Haca Chan, or
Hanji Chan [the Dera’h-jat of the present day]. # # * The city of Lahor is seated
on the River Ravy, one of those that with four more joins its Waters with the
Indus.” The Jihlam he does not mention.
Thevenot, who was in India in 1636, says : “ The Moguls have given that Pro¬
vince [ Lahor] the name of Pangeab, which signifies the five Rivers, because five run
in the territory of it These Rivers have received so many particular names from
the Moderns that have spoken of them, that at present it is hard to distinguish them
one from another ; nay, and most part of these names are confounded, though Pliny
distinguished them by the names of Acelines, Copliis, Hydarphes, Zaradras, and
Hispalis. Some Moderns call them Behat, Canab [Ohin-ab], Find [Sind], Ravy,
Van [Biah] ; and others give them other Appellations, which are not the names of
[*. e., in use in] the Country, or at least, which are not given them, but in some
places of it they run through. However, all these Rivers have their Sources in the
Mountains of the North, and make up the Indus, that for a long way, goes by the
name of Sinde, into which they fall ; and that’s the reason why this River is some¬
times called Indy, and sometimes Sindy.”
290 See page 296. Abu-1- Fazl also says “near Lfchchh.” He likewise says
that the rivers of the Panj-ab are six, and include the Ab-i-Sind, which is not
correct.
Journal, As Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI, Part 1, 1892.
PLATE 1.
|plan of
U R E N.
400
REFERENCES TO PLAN
1. Buddha’s foot-print.
2. Do. lota- print.
3. Do. promenade.
4. Lorik’s (Yaksha’s) foot-prints.
5. Do. ‘house.’
6. Indistinct foot-print.
7. Probable site of Buddha’s seat-mark.
8. Brick-mound (Stupa remains).
9. 9, 9. Rock-cut Inscriptions on summit.
10. Natural avenues leading1 to summit-
11. Lower terrace of brick-debris.
12. Lowest do.
13. 13, 13, 13, 13. High brick-mounds with granite blocks and
sculpture fragments.
14. Fragments of life-sized standing Buddha.
15. Two ornamental pillars.
16. Brick-mound with Buddhist & Brahmanic images,
A Rock-cut Cbaitya figures.
-
it.
Dh aka lutruLci
ill1 11 * ^ l j '
yet dr alii po
1
I i
Keg No. -13, As. Soc.— Feb. 92 _ 680.
Litho.( S. I. O., Calcutta.
PLATE II
Journal As. Soc.
Bengal, Yol. LXI, Part I, lssa.
Calcutta. Phototype Cj
Li A. Waddell, Tel
THE LOTA-MARK CB AITY A-FIGTJRES (fore-shortened).
REFERENCES
1 LOTA circumference, .
2." Lota profile with leafy rim and attached rope with fingers grasping. 2a. Larger view ot sam
3'. KAMANDALU Pitcher with attached rope and fingers grasping. 3a. Larger view of same.
4. Coiled Drawi ig-rope.
5. Pyramid of rice &c , offerings on raised tray
6. SANKHA, or Conch shell Trumpet on stand.
7. 1 Cymbals.
Journal As. Soc., Bengal, Vol, LXI-, Parti, 1892.
BUDDHA'S PROMENADE.
X = site of demon’s 2-fcot prints.
joornal As, Soc , Bengal, Vol. LXi , Part i, 1392.
No 1.
PLATE IV
No. 2.
No. 3.
L. A. W addell, Del. C alcutta Phototype Co
1 Sc 2 . C uneiform Inscriptions
from Statue Bases.
3. Kuthila Inscription.
No, 5.
4. Rock-cut inscription to East of Buddha's Footprint (|th actual size),
5. Rock-cut Inscription to North of Buddha's Footprint (J^th actual size)
1
Mt UREN Buddhist Inscriptions.
Plate V,
Journal As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI, Part 1, 1892.
Obverse.
Reverse.
Obverse.
Obverse.
Obverse.
Reverse.
Reverse.
Jov>*'muI' CU. Soo-j BengaX} Vot. L XT’. p^»f J, 18&2,
JPUzteVT
REIN'O.JffiLLiMA
DE BREMA IJMA
REINO DE KARRA
TIPORA
ARRACAM
REINO
ESTADO BO
DETIP ORA
CORAVASCAMg
CAM
DO CAM
SIROTEjm REINO SIROTE
■ " - ... V 'r ~
HATIGA
REINO DE 9 2'i'
COMOTAH a>
* - • iij£
CAOR
&n£yo ou.
jVbX/ rpur\
??cis) ntoUtco
. ur~
CH »VRO
BENGAL
"SATTGAM
C/iou>\
REINO
Marieub 'anv
COSPET1R
DESCRIPCAO
do REINO
•E BKNGALLA
rJ|gauga'
REINO DE
OFUXA
PATANES
/’rv/rz/v/
I&PIPILIPATAM
05
oo
o
o
o
P-<
cS
O
Fragment of a Wheel of Life from Ajanta.
JOURNAL, As, Soc. -Bengal, Vol, LXI, Part I, 1892. Plat®, "VIII,
THE BUDDHIST WHEEL OF LIFE.
7 otrrnal As . S o c . B sti;
//Sh Krtdhh Goondr
4 rPtw ft //n •' 1 1 V
huHoriU
'pi>X;lfumgi. Pus, y
< ah rah
S arfurt
Khushs- ait
H'antcks
0Sp,
Gamut R
Xiranah J fills ^
Darnrtiaha
Suser, Nikkei
Ka,^Ur °ttttU,,,l"x,J rl^*T*T'r aX°bzct'£
_ Derail ofQ
jtfsnutHM' KhanYf
Bhaluxjt df'Pituii
Tro*1#^ 1/*N
N. SunwHn „fr,Mi ijSr(M„an,
SS,u,m,u. . , TMt:. -Sutunoa f
Chnrulan t r> I
^Kftryy a ft
°Kot'Isa SJuiJt
1 LaJu/i ’
vnn-Thalah
‘L □ +cQfri- t.
j 0<7huitg
/'U “Mityli tannh
Pet tan
.Loh \jfB7u^wuP
StUlttaJ
S/Jlc/roriar . ,
Kaqiir
KoJuirt
cun .
Neff a -h’>
an<z2kZ 1 K ' P liT
artrh o oCtUrtn-kaur
Bahia f
Hr ah
! Gfaighercdt.
Sailtdolh
^ ^Jier trariu^y
JJujr’aJi^at' Shalt Midi.
K^Vnixrcan App^
fflcar&Ji'
Moutihs Jogrccon
\ian
’zxfnxnuiicu:
Ahmad
hrtXs mcgraJv
• m mho i>
‘tlmukoii,
\infr KJias.^ %
Stchrind
Deb a]
/, aitar-i It,
-i Baud a
ifttatt rh\
'J.ahiJikUKs^J
rR/akhttsoi-
o'*/ Tula nb ah
s-iddhn
BudJair
otnn
li, tfnaJ.o It
9aliaJuh
/^iih AjaxLdJiait or( -
yy s' PjSJkrJttan -%) ‘(Jr
/ AotgaJ.jnnlyJ ft„h,y-a
a-
uw.mf pur jy Knounl.eWP.n sir
Got'\ Acr nofChoucRcu t> /
Stuiotrruh
7 tali'- aba/f &
The S u'Laj
Muxaffar Garh.
//J? j(d ta, KkcfuJi. •s’v
Mcprrth
tsuhjJi^ "‘Kaithal
Hdhri j
nfv K hem h /& R
°Uhoh- Ion
Suit/nt,
fist Hu sir ah
Bhiki
RilenruU
M Wtclftiif
Vf 1 1 hhdi i rn*p $ &
huta'ot
Bhalada.
,Bohah
MuiujAUj,
' Dun i <» ^ur
<7//y Dltucnv,
r'v .piool Soomra
Ruins <;/ Dalnrqh j
ttLfc ^~*~°Muiiumrriua/
1 Jiurruud
B . /-' IftllUlTltOUuf
\algurh 9 /A
'4 lirijtr e>-
•v 0 h'a-xil-pur / ' \
Room ku Thool 0J )Stt
Noh- shahrahfm
BfajfiuJi
tJCothah
l J>«sp"
4w»:fc
,tran
A , , r-o Hainan
r),,bhhy Bl, irailS TihlZo/
VixtJt Garh " j
°S urahGarh or SCuhti -har
vKo( ' p. ’
JC^ar
S rsah
Dtrfu
. o
I JfiHhee
-Jfftakhf Jed Dt
Bt-cUanee
JUyu/Ia th
{a rob oh
thiriZW'^i ah\
ZMakfiajt Bel ah o ^
V'hehJt /‘obh*r»alle
0 ot Hot lean
Alimadpu/
*Wvlh
, /unfit }
jfTuihxir liar
Varrco /
{oJiri
/>'/ ' r V/
\?/jPiuitLa
Witfu, da Hot
ifllL ® aOuihorhtr
' Glum s- j JUl
Jaufirfi Ha, fto/i
Gar hi JkJiliydj- JQuw
-pur cjyfhui -par
, *M<*LMiiharak
Xfutir tfctrh
Jluhtak
< met
Pits lee f-fjfhi,
5 Amaj'Kot
> undone*
,/ohe Shall piu-
1 o J eh chit
3 Tohojiant
Oft,
Bhctwdrut
j Guild ah a h
^ Ranrt Bhiirds
R*xj Garh
Chilian Garh
mires
Sehrf
Kundah
Mi/iob,
Kumbi
h’trnfiKvt
1 Q GJujj t a Gorh, or
IUtki , piii
Uirh
Cit ihrlai
Khau pur fJmfir km
Nttnih. -rnt^
0Kaiufhcirtth
t& a A
Hand fun
WunjK rid
(B 14 no of
thluwir
•hjuirt Gcu h
Ntxnddjuj Hums
fiu/ciu td
RattdA) erufi
No w ah Dertdi y
°Nofh
Is lean
" I'chuJirf
lsohdrajx
tJuuuUxi'L
fluuuy
Monty ornery
\1 tieu 11 tci\ Gtuzh
Mails
Mulhjjc
('htiT.jAXJii-ol
Multan
Ghiigheicd:
Pal*. Patton
Pak Pat Ion
'<jines\
GhziLfheruh,
Multan
Sidho Ice L
Lilh. at l-hn Indian Art Cottage, Calcutt a.
MAP of PAN JAB and SINN
Scnle 48 Miles t u an Inch.
JKirtaJc-
' 'ibarv r
Val v
y aKahaJv
t'U if i
DehraJi
Gamdi
7/ £ kcv 6'hghr\
'Amor Hot
[irwcpOr^j^f
fShuhpur
fills hh
Gan dab al
Kotrtof'
p ohcJJi,
hlMorcu
>7? 7 — °\
oar shoralti
KajJir
Lahri
‘Zihrttearuici
Ghaibt Dero
T.t rkanali
uiroDeruh
WicJiniu
(niin&iit
Cfumd. ■ ■ hi \
Sarjyil. iu
Ov Khan lit tiro
y ®T /
SaJdiah
=> lihiria.lv
f] f)cuvlat-
iihuan )
.Miuu Jibnj' Li
> _ -JiiJcrcU)
MitraJn >c
» Shah, pur
Sunqhur0 1
'nJumuJ
map pur \
y Vofr-pnJ-x
ahiidar ■ olaitl
jSaniaraJi Lake or
\iimar&r
Vu/n^Lp
Garblin'
1&rvlo Muha'invud ^ Khpin
• Tdroik
J j ’hjLtihaJv
11° D -t-.
Jhfanhir*
NcnvaJiXot
/ NiruJJu
lluMr.pa^B&^
Mu if )ml - bins
RAN oh MARSH of
WAP OF SlIID.
Scale 48 Miles toOhe Inch.
Joqrn al As .So-. 7 eng ,ToI LXJ, P*rbl. , \?Sx
Spins- Galls
\ ) ABhi
• ,aru puj‘
Ralcxl/-is- Nirhchcirahs
:MithI daKot
5AHAWAL-PUK STATE
, Baqhlah
I rah. a J
.(at a Sahib Craih
yOlad o y.apibbw /' ^
KsOpruisL-jg-Garht JilMuraxl KuvKot
1 ■ n m
■ ;V „ sJant-D»nJv0 Mir-ptr _y ~ I Salnal.Cot. •?<%
a.' ‘ oVbtiru} sJUx} in, or Jisb'in,C
y _ | Bhcuro Garhls ^jjfhcur -pur bah r heQ ° Zee
PDr GMir keQ ° Zee rah^ °Kandhurah or Kandhhro%Q
ihi-lah ^ ajVnr " aKJta„ Garh Kisfum&arh
o .Jordan or Jang an 0
| °Rhan-pur ^ , 7 7 .
y.KhAh ,.MP *>- / planar or /slant Garh.
i rjRfum -pur ^
pd ar / °S hall pur ^
(Rl rfJor l, uhrf ^
iJO or fs
1 °Aror
\ Salihs-pai f
Milr alt • ) jtr^hf ftfuu i
ira\
Bahs(C]ihoIi )
ruins
Meh
.****’’ Ko& Klutro
& ^ I
>» \
j^y
KAGHCHII
Lilli- at the Indian Art Cottage, CidotiLva .
JOURNAL
OF THE
ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.
Part I.— HISTORY, LITERATURE, &e.
Extra No. — 1892.
The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries : a Geographical and Historical
Study . — By Major H. G. Raverty, Bombay Army (Retired.).
(With six Plates.)
Continued from Page 297 of No. IV, 1892,
In the record of the Survey, completed about a century since, the
following account is given of the different rivers noticed by Abu-1-Fazl
above. It matters little, in regard to the present subject, what course
this and the other rivers took within the hills, as there changes in their
courses seldom take place ; therefore, I shall confine myself chiefly to an
account of them after their entry into the more level tracts.
The Sindhu, Rahr-i-Sind, A'b-i-Sind, or Indus.
I need not mention in the present paper what the author of the
Survey says respecting the upper course of the Sindhu, A'b-i-Sind, or
Indus, and its source, and shall only notice it here from its junction with
the river of Kabul just above Atak Banaras.2?9
2^9 It may not be amiss to mention here what the old European travellers say
respecting the Indus and the changes in its channel, as well as of the rivers consti¬
tuting the Panj Ab, or Panch Nad. What they mention about the places on their
banks will be found farther on.
Sir T, Herbert, writing in 1626, says : “ The River Indus, called by Pliny
Sandus, and Arrian Sinthus, is now called Sinde. After a course of 3,000 miles from
M M
298 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
“ One l 'enroll above that place,” he says, “ the Sind unites with the
River of Kabul, called Landaey Sind, or Little Sind, or River, by the
Afghans. The Sind contains a whitish deposit, and looks milky in con¬
sequence ; while the other, from its great clearness and purity, is very
blue, and therefore the Tajzik people of these parts call it the Nil Ab,
or Blue River, or Blue Water. At different points it is called the Atak
and Nil Ab indiscriminately. * * * Near UAhohh290 it unites with the
Panj Ab, or Panch Nad, or Five Rivers ; and towards the bandar (port)
of Lahri it unites with the ocean.”
the Casnirrian [Kash-mirian] Mountains, part of Caucasus, it empties itself into the
Ocean at two great Ostiums. * * * The Rivers Bohat [Bihat], Ravore [Rawi],
Damiadee [See the old map, p. 297], Obchan, Woihy or Hydaspes, Ascines, Cophis,
Adris, etc., all fall into it.” See pages 207, and 229, and note 175.
Mandelsloe, who was in India in 1639, says : “ The Persians and Indosthans
themselves, having given the name of Fangah [Panj-Ab], i. e., Five Waters, to the
River Indus, because it is joyn’d with so many Rivers before it exonerates itself
into the Sea. The first is the River Bngal, or Begal [in other places he has Nibal —
the Nil-ab], whose source is near Kabul ; the second is call Chanab, which rises in
the Province Quesmir, or Cossimer, fifteen days’ journey to the North, above Labor.
The third is that of Ravy, or Ravee, which rises not far from Lahor, and runs by it.
The two others, viz., the Rivers Via [Biah] and Osuid [Habra?] have their sources
at a vast distance, their confluence being near BaTcar [this is an important statement],
which lies at an equal distance between Lahor and the Sea. Some Authors have
confounded this river with that of Diul [ Debal ], and placed it 24 degrees on this
side the Line. * # # The Province of Tatta is a congeries of many Islands made by
the same River. * * # The Province of Attack is seated upon the River Nibal
(which falls into the Indus) and is by it divided from the Province of Haca Chan, or
Hanji Chan [the Dera’h-jat of the present day]. # # # The city of Labor is seated
on the River Ravy, one of those that with four more joins its Waters with the
Indus.” The Jihlam he does not mention.
Thevenot, who was in India in 1666, says : “ The Moguls have given that Pro¬
vince [Lahor] the name of Pangeab, which signifies the five Rivers, because five run
in the territory of it. These Rivers have received so many particular names from
the Moderns that have spoken of them, that at present it is hard to distinguish them
one from another ; nay, and most part of these names are confounded, though Pliny
distinguished them by the names of Aoelines, Cophis, Hydarphes, Zaradras, and
Hispalis. Some Moderns call them Behat, Canab [Okin-ab], Find [Sind], Ravy,
Van [Biah] ; and others give them other Appellations, which are not the names of
[i. e., in use in] the Country, or at least, which are not given them, but in some
places of it they run through. However, all these Rivers have their Sources in the
Mountains of the North, and make up the Indus, that for a long way, goes by the
name of Sinde, into which they fall; and that’s the reason why this River is some¬
times called Indy, and sometimes Sindy.”
290 See page 296. Abu-1-Fazl also says “near U'chchh.” He likewise says
that the rivers of the Panj-ab are sw , and include the Ab-i-Sind, which is not
correct.
1802.] H, G. Raverty — The MiJirdn of Sind and its Tributaries * 299
The Sindhu, or Ab-i-Sind, 'which we call Indus, has, in the lapse
of ages, changed its course very considerably, though not so much
perhaps, considering its size, as some of the other rivers presently to be
noticed.
Traces of ancient channels are met with every here and there,
especially to the immediate westward of Multan, between that place
and the present channel of the river, and south of it again, between it
and U'chchb, the intervening tracts of country being literally seamed
with old channels. The whole of the southern part of the present
Muzaffar Garli district of the Panj-ab, as at present constituted, below
that part of the Thai or elevated alluvial waste,291 running down through
the southern part of the Sind-Sagar Do-abah from north to south,
and which terminates a little to the north-west of the town of
Muzaffar Garh, in about 30° 10' N. Lat., is low and depressed, and con¬
sists entirely of stretches of alluvial soil running parallel to the banks
of the two rivers, Sind and Ohin-ab. This extensive tract is seamed
with channels, showing, beyond a doubt, that nearly the whole of what
now constitutes this district was a river bed.
Respecting this Thai , it is necessary to state that, like the district,
it is somewhat in the shape of a triangle, the base on the north being
about thirty-five miles in breadth, and the sides about fifty ; that it is
highest on the west, and that it slopes downwards from the banks of
the Indus, towards the Ohin-ab, from west to east. The western part of
it consists of sandy soil, with sand-hills here and there, which latter
increase in number and in elevation as you move eastwards, and run
north and south in detached ridges or waves, between which, narrow
flats of stiff clayey soil occur, which the people bring under cultivation,
and which yield good crops, and finally terminate in the hollow, or
valley, in which the Ohin-ab flows.
It must not be supposed, however, that because these ridges of
sand-hills increase in height from west to east, that the bed of. the
Qhin-ab lies highest, for the contrary is the fact. There is a regular
slope from the Indus towards the Ohin-ab ; while the southern part
of the district, from a little above Shahr-i-Sultan,292 is so depressed
that the waters of the Ohin-ab and Indus find their way during the
inundations into the very middle of the delta. This difference in the beds
291 Also known, in history, as the Ohul-i-Jalali. See my “Notes on Afghan¬
istan,” etc., page 338.
292 In the hot season of 1754, the ghahr-i- Sultan was swept away by the river,
together with the shrine of one of the Bukhari Sayyids of the Uchohh family, named
Pir-i-’Alam. They were subsequently re-built about two miles from the previous
site.
300 H. Or. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its TribiUaries. [Ex. No.
of these rivers was noticed by Wood, in his “Report on the Indus.”1193
He says : “ The depth of the bed of the Ohin-ab is lower than the
Indus; for they cut canals from the Indus in July, when both are in
flood, and the surplus water flows down into the Ohin-ab, proving that
although their beds, for a distance of sixty miles, are not more than
ten miles asunder [they are fourteen now, at the narrowest part], yet,
in their relative level, there is a considerable difference.”
Since the Survey, the record of which I have been quoting from,
was made, towards the end of the last century, the main stream of the
Indus has been pushing westwards considerably, notwithstanding the
fact of the land sloping eastwards. At present there is a strip of
kachchhi land, some ten miles in breadth, between the Thai and that
river, which fifty years since did not exist.
Four miles south of the ancient town of ’All-pur,8941 as far as the
298 “ Journal : ” Vol. for 1841, page 557. About the parallel of Kot Addhu, in the
extreme north-west part of this district, the bed of the Indus is about forty feet or
more higher than that of the Ohin-ab.
If we draw a line from Multan by Basirah west to the Derah of Ghazi Khan,
and then southwards to Ghaus-pur — close to which the Ab-i-Sind flowed when it was
a tributary to the Hakra, and went to form the Mihran of Sind — a distance of 107
miles from the former and 86 from the latter, we shall find what a vast depression
exists hereabouts, which accounts for alterations in the junctions of the different
rivers so often and so easily. By this depression from Ghaus-pur water still reaches
the old channels of the Hakra. Thus, Multan is 402 feet above the sea, Basirah, 410,
and the Derah of Ghazi Khan, 440. Then again, Bahawal-pur is 375, ’Ali-pur, 337,
Islam-pur, 368. Ghaus-pur is but 209, and is the lowest point in the neighbourhood ;
while about ten miles east and west, the height increases to 301 and 295 feet respec¬
tively, and about the same distance south, to 296 and 288. The height of the
country generally is greatest along the west bank of the Indus as it now flows, down
as far as a little north of Kin or Kin Kot, where the height above the sea on both
sides is 305 and 304 feet. Below this point, at Kin, it falls to 270 feet, and then
declines again 245 at Kashmur, between which places the country slopes away
lower towards the depression, locally called the “ Sind Hollow,” referred to farther
on ; while the country on the east bank is a little higher than that on the opposite
side down to near Aror, near which, to the south-eastwards, is the low tract of land
in which the waters from near Ghaus-pur find their way into the old Hakra channels,
and which waters form the so-called “ Eastern Narra.”
S94 To judge from the height of this place above the surrounding country, it
must be an ancient site, and at one time stood near the confluence of the C^in-ab and
its tributaries with the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus. The present town is supposed
to have been founded by one of the chiefs of the Nagliar tribe, mis-called Nahars,
named ’All Khan. Much information respecting this tribe is contained in my
“ Notes on Afghanistan,” etc. ’Ali-pur lies twenty-five miles north of Uchchh.
thirteen south-westwards of Jalal-pur in the Multan district, and a little over seven
miles west of the present point of junction of the Gharah with the Chin-ab and its
tributaries forming the present Panch Nad, or Panj Ab.
301
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
present junction of the two rivers thirty miles farther south, the whole
space between is subject to inundation, that from the Indus extending
farthest. When the two rivers rise, they begin to draw near each other,
but, at last, the Indus water manages to force its way across towards
Jatu-i,296 and reaches its old channel of the last century, passing by
’Ali-pur, and meeting the Chin-ab near the village of Pakkah Na’ichh,
four miles and a quarter farther southwards. This state of things con¬
tinues from June to September, during which period, all the district to
the southwards of those places and beyond, is under water, and the only
means of communication is by boats. During this time the inhabitants,
washed out of their dwellings, live on small platforms raised on poles,
with one or more of which each homestead is provided, called machdn
in Hindi, and also man chan , both words being from Sanskrit ffa, and are
often not able to leave them for weeks together.
At this time, however, the modern town of Khair-pur, a little over
five miles west of Pakkah Na’iohh, just midway between the two cold
season channels of the rivers, and which is protected all round by a
strong band or embankment, becomes an island and a port ; for cargoes
of grain and other commodities are sent off from thence in large boats
down to Sind. Should this band give way at any time the place would
probably be washed away.296
There is no doubt but that the Indus, in former times, flowed
through the middle of the present Muzaffar Garh district, in a direction
almost due north and south, but inclining a little eastwards towards
Multan and U'chchh ; and history confirms the tradition respecting it,
as I shall presently show. The tradition extant among the people is,
that the river once flowed through the middle of this Thai, but rather
nearer towards the Multan side,297 after which it began to alter its
296 This was the chief place of the rnahall of Jatu-i, one of the twelve constitu¬
ting the Bakhar SarJcar of the Multan Sub ah, and was so called after a Baluch tribe
of that name, once very powerful. In the time of Akbar Badshah they paid
revenue to the amount of 2,346,873 dams ; held free grants to the amount of
156,841 dams ; and had to furnish 500 horsemen and 800 foot as militia when called
upon. In computing the amount of revenue, forty dams were equivalent to a rupi.
296 The sand hills of the Thai, and several bands or embankments, alone pre¬
vent the surplus waters from the Indus sweeping over the whole district, and hence
there is a constant danger of such happening, should any of the bands give way.
297 Elliot (“ Historians,” Yol. II, page 28), in his extracts from the Tarikh-i-
Yamim, where Sultan Mahmud is said to cross the Indus [Sihun in the original, but
often applied to a great river] “ in the neighbourhood of Multan, and march towards
the city of Bhatia,” he adds in a foot-note — “ Literally, ‘ behind ’ or ‘ beyond ’—[and
Ibn A sir uses the same expression], but the position of Multan is such as to render
the author’s meaning very doubtful.” Here the meaning is made quite clear : the
river did not flow then as now, as Elliot supposed. See note 349, page 347.
302 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
course more to the west ; and that the sand hills were produced by the
action of wind, blowing the deposits left by the river in its deserted
bed into heaps, and into their present shapes. The proof of the correct¬
ness of this tradition, which is corroborated by the old ’Arab writers,
lies partly in the fact, that, in the middle part of this Thai , and
farther towards the east, are villages, still existing, with the addition
of the words ‘ hachcKhd 1 belahj and ‘ bet ’ to their names, and that it is
literally seamed with the old channels in which the Ab-i-Siud or Indus
once flowed. As an example of this, I may mention a village called
Basirah, west of the town of Muzaffar Garh, and now in the middle of
this Thai , just midway between the Indus and Qliin-ab as they now
flow, and about thirteen miles from each. That village stood on the
banks of the Indus in the last century ;293 for, in a deed of sale of this
particular village at that period, it is designated Bet Basirah. The
Revenue Settlement Records, no doubt, would furnish many more
proofs. At Shah Garh, likewise, which lies but six miles and a half
farther south of it, and about the southern and terminating point of the
Thai , a long hol-i-db , dhand , or lake, still exists, part of the channel in
which the river then flowed.
In former times, as elsewhere mentioned, it united with the rivers
of the Panj-ab territory opposite U’chqhh, which now is forty miles above
the confluence near Mit-hi da Kot ; and what now constitutes the ’Ali-
pur sub-division of the Muzalfar Garh district, then lay on the ivest, in]
stead of the east bank of the Indus ; and Jatii-i, Sit-pur,299 and Ghaus-pur
293 For other information respecting these parts on either side of the Ab-i-Sind
or Indus, as it flowed in the last century, see my “ Notes on Afghanistan,” etc.,
pages 656-660, and 673-676.
299 The present town is situated on an eminence, the remains of older buildings.
Here also stands a fine tomb of one of the Naghar chiefs, called Nahars by the Sindis.
The dome is covered with the usual glazed blue tiles of this part.
The country round about towards the junction of the rivers is covered with low
tamarisk jangal , and tall, coarse reeds.
One of the “ Punjab Gazetteers,” in an account of these parts, presents us with
some wonderful history — Gazetteer history it may be styled. Therein it is mentioned,
that it was in the time of the Langah dynasty that the independent kingdom [sic. —
much like the kingdom of “ the mighty Chaker Rind”] of the Nahars was established
in what is now the ’Alipiir Tahsil [they must have been content with a small “ king¬
dom”]. It was during this dynasty that the Biloches first emerged from the
Suliman Mountains [in which they were not located, and from which they did not
come at that period, but from Kich and Mukran], and occupied the country on the
left bank of the Indus.” It also states, that, “ of the twenty-six generations of
the Nahar princes, the last is Baklishan Khan, Jamadar of the ’Alipur Tahsil.” Here
he would probably get pay at the rate of twelve or fifteen rupis per month — Sic
transit gloria Naharan ! See my “ Notes on Afghanistan.” etc., pages 4 and 648.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
303
in tlie Bahawul-pur territory, were all three places on the west bank of
the river. The Ohin-ab and its tributaries, the Jililam and Rawi, flowed
some miles farther east, the junction being then a few miles east of
Sliahr-i- Sultan. S0Q Just at the close of the last century, the Indus sud¬
denly forsook its channel about twenty miles above Gchqhh, and took a
direction more to the south-south-west towards Mit-lii da Kot, thus
placing ’Ali-pur, Jatu-i, and Sit-pur in the Sind-Sagar Do-abali, in
which l/chchh was once situated.301 The Janun Canal (the “Jamoo
Canal ” of the maps) now runs in this deserted chanuel, and unites
with the Panj Ab or Panch Nad below Makhan Belah.
Another purdnah, buddli , or old channel, of which there are several
others in different parts of the district, called the dhand of Shah Garh,
can be traced a short distance from the present Kureshi Patan or Ferry.
It takes a tortuous course among the sand ridges of the Thai , and
The same “ authority ” states, that u Sitpur was first called Kanjan Mai, then
Khudi Bhir — the hunting seat of Raja Khudi,” only her - signifies an enclosure
— the hunting seat, so called — not bhir. There is no mention whatever of Ratta-
Matta, which famous place is situated only four miles and a half from Jatii-1. See
a subsequent page and note on this subject farther on.
8°° See note 292, page 299.
801 The cause of this change, according to native statements, and which are
probably correct in the main, is, that from near Kinjhir, the point where the Indus
formerly turned eastwards to unite with the Ohin-ab, one of the modern Nahar
chiefs of Sit-ptir, excavated a canal to irrigate some land farther west in the direc¬
tion of the present course of the river. All at once (at the commencement of the
inundation it may be presumed), it suddenly left its old channel and took to the
canal, and very soon made a new channel for itself ; and in it, with occasional minor
changes, it has since flowed, thus showing how easily great changes can be brought
about in such a sandy, alluvial tract, and that the feat of Saif-nl-Muluk near Aror,
according to the tradition elsewhere related, and which is said to have caused such
mighty changes in Sind, was not so difficult to effect after all.
It will be noticed, that it was at this same period, when the Ab-i-Sind or Indus
thus suddenly changed its course, and taking to the abovementioned canal speedily
cut a new channel for itself, that the Blah and Sutlaj likewise changed their courses,
and united into one river, and that the Ohin-ab and Rawi, instead of uniting as
before, a short distance west of Sidhu ki Sara’e, turned some ten miles farther
towards the south-west. All this shows that the same causes produced the same
effects — all the rivers were more or less affected. This is said to have happened
about the year 1202 H. (1787-88, A. D.).
The place where the Ab-i-Sind or Indus changed its course farther to the west,
as noticed above, was near Kinjhir (the “ Keenjur ” of the maps) on the west, which
place lies about twelve miles west of Khan Garh in the Muzaffar Garh district.
After the Ab-i-Sind or Indus made this sudden change, the Nawwab of Baha-
wal-pur, who considered that river his boundary on the west, wherever it might be,
annexed the whole of the intervening tract between the old channel and the new
to his territory, and managed to hold it up to about the year 1820.
304 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
terminates near the old garli or fort of Shah Garb, north-west of
Muzaffar Garli. Another is the Panjihar dhand , which can be traced
from a little west of Kinjhir to near the village of Rohilan-Wali, and
from thence for about twelve miles farther to the southwards of Khan
Garb. Hereabouts the land lies so low that water finds its way into
the middle of this part of the delta, where quite a network of dhands
exist, which for the most part tail on to this one.
Without being aware, apparently, of these facts, it is in the tract
I have been thus describing, that the “ archeological experts ” venture
to identify places as “ the Alexandria built at the confluence of the
Acesines [Chin-ab] with the Indus,” after the lapse of some twenty-
three centuries, when such mighty changes occur in less than one !302
In the same manner as in the tracts north and west of U'ohohb,
just described, and between it and Mit-lff da Kot, called by us Mithan
Kot, below those places again, other ancient channels exist, but not of
the Ab-i-Sind or Indus only ; and it is beyond a doubt, that it and other
tributaries of the Mikran of Sind, have, at different times, flowed over
great part of the alluvial plain of Sind between U'chchh and Aror, and
farther south, but much nearer towards the hills westwards than has
generally been imagined. sos
It appears to me that what the old ’Arab writers say respecting the
“ tributaries, which go to make the Mihran of Sind,” has been over¬
looked, or not understood. Al-Mas’udi, for example, says (page 206),
that, “ it comes from the kohistan or mountain tracts of Sind,” and
adds, that, “ with its tributaries, which rise in those countries [lying
303 See farther on where these changes are described.
303 Vast changes have taken place, and have continued to occur down to the
present time, in the course of the Sindhu, or Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, above A^ak (see
my “Notes on Afghanistan,” page 32), as well as below Kala Bagh where it
issues from the mountain tracts, particularly between the town of the ’Isa Khel
Niazi Afghans and Mian Walah. (See “ Notes ” page 322, and 343, note If). There
is, as already mentioned in note 116, page 207, of this paper, a tradition, that in
ancient times, the country round Laka’f of the Marwat Afghans was a vast lake,
as the ancient name Dand or Dhand indicates, and was so called long before these
Afghans gained a footing therein. See also a note farther on.
Between the town of the ’Isa Khel Ni&zis and the modern Derail of Isma’il
Khan, the course of the Ab-i-Sind appears likewise to have changed considerably ;
and the Gumul and its tributary, the river of the Jziobali Darah and its affluents,
and other streams from the range of Mihtar Suliman, Koli-i-Siyah, Tor Ghar, Kala
Itoh, or Kala Pahar, between the Gamilah or Gambilah and the Sun River near
Kashmur, mentioned in note 116, above referred to (which now are for the most
part dry, or their waters drawn off for irrigation purposes, and which only find their
way to the Ab-i-Sind in time of flood, if they reach it at all), once contributed
greatly to the volume of the great river, as I shall presently show.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 305
towards the kohistan, bounding it on the west and north he means], it
flows on towards Multan.” Now from this it is quite clear that none
of the five rivers constituting the Panch Nad, or Panj Xb can be meant
or referred to here, because the “ Mihran Rud,” or Xb-i-Sind,30* which
he is describing, only united with the other great river into which the
Panch Nad, or Panj Xb fell, three days’ journey, or seventy-one miles as
the crow flies, to the southward of Multan [that was, near I/chqhh, but,
it must be remembered, that Uchqhh is never mentioned by these
old writers by that name], consequently these tributaries were quite
distinct from the Panqh Nad, or Panj Ab, and united with the “ Mihran
Rud ” or Xb-i-Sind, to the northwards , and rather above Multan .30B
This is further confirmed by the statement of Al-Mas’udi (page
207), that, “the fourth river of the five which go to form the Mihrdn
Rud306 comes from the boundary or frontier of Sind towards, or in the
direction of, Bust, Ghaznin, [?], Ar-Rukhaj, and the terri¬
tory of Dawar; and another of these five rivers [the tributaries] comes
from Kash-mir.” This, superficially regarded, might seem to refer to the
Bihat or Jihlam, which does come out of Kash-mir, but then again, the
Mas’udi refers to a river which had entered and become part of the
“ Mihran Rud,” or Xb-i-Sind, before it united with the Panch Nad , or
Panj Ab, of which the Bihat was one.307
304 See note 117, for what is meant by “ Mihran Rud,” and the difference
between that name and the “ Mihran of Sind.”
Strabo says, in his Fifteenth Book, that it is stated that there are, altogether,
fifteen considerable rivers which flow into the Indus. Arrian says the same, who
takes the number from Megasthenes : Pliny says there are nineteen. Of course, the
united rivers refer to the “ Great Mihran,” or “ Mihran of Sind.”
305 In the same way that the five rivers constituting the Panch Nad, or Panj
Ab, which these Hindi and Persian names signify, the junction of the whole into
one stream is known to this day, in the Muzaffar Garh district and vicinity, as the
“ Sath Nad,” or Seven Rivers ; while after the junction of the Rawi with the Chin¬
ch and Bihat, farther up, the united waters are known locally as the Trim Ab,” or
Three Rivers.
306 Because in the Turkish language mur-dn means a river, Tod, in his “ Raja¬
s’ than ” (Yol. I, page 19), supposed that Mihrdn is one and the same word. He
says: “the ‘sweet river,’ the Meeta Muran [Hindi and Turkish together!], a
Sythic or Tartar name for river, and by which alone the Indus is known from the
Panj Nud to the ocean.”
To “ Panj Nud,” he adds a note, that they “ are the confluent arms or source
of the Indus ” !
307 From all this it is clear, that the “tributaries” which go to form the
« Mihran Rud,” Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, refer to rivers uniting with it on either side
above the parallel of Multan. There are several of these, but some may have
been scarcely worthy of the name of river3 in those remote days, or, since that
N N
306 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Al-Iatakhari also says (page 211) : u The river of Sind , which is
called the Mihrdn of Sind, is said to issue from a mountain range in which
time, may have changed considerably; while others may have been more im¬
portant then than they are at present. I will mention these rivers in rotation.
First : the Haru from the mountain tract of Malach, bounding Kash-roir on the
east, with a course of some sixty miles, which unites with the Indus on the east
near the ancient town of Nil-Ab below Atak. Second: the Kaghzi, or river of
Kohat, on the west, with a course of about ninety-five miles. Third : the Sfi-han,
rising in the kohistdn of Gharal, with a course of about one hundred and twenty-
four miles, broad and rapid ; and though not more than knee-deep in the cold season,
is, in the time of inundation, quite impassable. It enters the Indus on the east side,
between Makhhad and Kala Bagli. Fourth : the Kurma’h ( vul . “ Kurrara ”) from
the west, with several important affluents. It has a course of over ninety miles, but
its feeders which go to form it, rise still farther to the west. The Kurma’h rises in
the mountain range so called, the particulars respecting which will be found in my
“Notes on Afghanistan,” page 78. Near its junction with the Indus it is joined
by two considerable tributaries. This is still an important river, and from proofs
remaining, and from what tradition asserts, it was, in former times, a great river.
This, I conceive to be, without doubt, one of the five tributaries referred to. Fifth :
the Gumul, which rises on the east slopes of the great western range of the
Koh-i-Siyah, orTorGhar, separating the Afghanistan from Zabul-istan — the Ghaznin
territory under the Turkish sovereigns, including Kandahar. A few miles west of
the great eastern range of the same Koli-i-Siyah, or Tor Ghar, it receives from the
south-west the river of the Jziob or Jziobah Darah (vul. “ Zhob ”), and farther west
again, the Kwandar river, flowing through the Darah of that name. All these under
the name of Gumul now scarcely reach the Indus except in time of flood, but tradi¬
tion relates that it was, as it must have been, in by-gone times, a river of considerable
magnitude. It has a course of about one hundred and eighty miles ; while the river
of the Jziob and Kwandar Darahs have, respectively, courses of about one hundred
and twenty-five, and sixty-five miles. The Gumul must at one time have sent
a great volume of water into the Indus, and is, undoubtedly, one of the “ tribu¬
taries” referred to by the old ’Arab writers. These are the principal rivers above
the parallel of Multan ; but there are others, and important ones, lower down,
which must be noticed here. Sixth : the Kaha river, or rather, the river of the
Kaha Darah, which takes its rise in the slopes of the south face of the great range
of Mihtar Suliman, or Koh-i-Siyah, which, after a course of between eighty-five and
ninety miles, enters the Derah-jat near Harand, where the waters are drawn off for
purposes of irrigation. This river, with its feeders, which come from still farther
west, is the most considerable of south-east Afghanistan, and appears in ancient times
to have been a perennial stream, and to have contributed a considerable body of
water to the Indus. Seventh : the river of the Suri Darah, which rises in the same
range, and has a course of some eighty miles. It drains the Shum plain, but its
waters now seldom reach the Indus. It would have entered it between Kin Kot
and Bujan near where the Indus bent west and flowed in the “ Sind Hollow.”
Eighth : the Nan, which rises among the southern slopes of the same great moun¬
tain range north of Siwi of the Parni Afghans, which it passes on the west. Lower
down, it receives the waters of the Bolan river, once much more considerable than
ac present, and the Lahri river from the east, passes Bliag, also called Bhag-i-Nari on
J 892.] H. G-. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 307
the Jihun rises.” These old geographers can scarcely be expected to have
known much respecting those tributaries of the Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, north
the east side, and runs southwards in two main branches towards Shadad-pur ; and
after a course of about one hundred and seventy miles, much of its waters having
been drawn off higher up for irrigation purposes, it is lost in the dense jangal in the
thirsty soil of the great Ran , or “ Sind Hollow,” about twelve miles south of Tanbbu
(“ Turnboo,” “ Tambu,” and “ Tambu ” of as many different maps), but, in time of
flood, even now, its waters reach the Manchbar lake, one hundred and thirty-four
miles farther south, for it then contains a vast body of water. Ninth : the Ghar or
Ghaj which rises in the Baluchistan near Kalat-i-Nicharah ( vul . “Khelat”), which,
flowing through the Mulah Darah, and making, so to say, the Mulah Pass, after
receiving some minor tributaries by the way from the direction of Gand-abah,
issues from the hills ; and, after a course altogether of between one hundred and
fifty and one hundred and sixty miles, is, like the Nan river, some forty miles
farther to the south-east, lost in the great Ran — the “ Sind Hollow” — about twelve
miles north-west of Shadad-pur, but it is generally flooded twice every year. At
such times, the waters of these two rivers, Ghar and Nari, meeting the overflow
from the Indus by the old channel I have referred to, causes vast damage, and lays
a great tract of country under water, as related in the text farther on.
This great Ran of Upper Sind, or “ Sind Hollow,” may be said to form the natural
boundary of the territory of Sind on the north and north-west, from Kashmur to
Khairo Gafin, and the Kahtar range on the west.
That the fourth river of the five referred to by Al-Mas’udi, as coming from the
side of Bust, Ghaznin, Ar-Rukhaj, Dawar, etc., can refer to the Ghar and its tribu¬
taries, is out of the question, because it is impossible for any other river to be
referred to as coming from the side of Bust, unless the Ivojzakh range has been
thrown up since Al-Ma’sudi wrote, a thing not impossible, and diverted the Lorah,
that is, “ the River,” which now flows through Pushang (incorrectly written Peshin
in official documents) to the west side of that great range, into Shora-wak and
the sandy desert farther south. There are certainly traditions current among
the Afghans and Tajziks of these parts, that that river did find its way eastwards
in bygone times, and that its old bed lay in the part now constituting the Bolan
Pass and defile, and that a great convulsion of nature changed the face of the
country, turned up hills, and diverted rivers. Whether the geological appearances
are sufficient to warrant our placing faith on these traditions I am unaware, but I
believe that all traditions have some foundation of truth.
This may also account for the fact, that such a route as the Bolan is never
once mentioned in any history whatever up to quite recent times ; and the route
from Sind, and sometimes from Multan also, to Kwatah and Kandahar, was always
by Siwi and Sangan, about twenty-five miles east of the present Bolan route.
The Gumul river, and its tributaries also, certainly rise in the range, which, in
Al-Mas’udi’s time, and in all time, formed the eastern boundary of Zabul-istan.
Farther south again than the Ghar, in the “ Tcohistan” of Sind, is another im*
portant river bed, the Baran of the maps, which drains a large extent of country,
and, after a course of about ninety miles or more, unites with the Ab-i-Sind, or
Indus, a few miles above Kotri. Though now chiefly dependent on rain, it appears
not to have been always so ; and it is, together with some lesser river beds
or mountain torrents, as they now are, its tributaries, the rivers referred to by the
308 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
of the junction of the river of Kabul and its tributaries with it, seeing
that, until comparatively modern times, the tracts through which they
flow have been scarcely known to ourselves. The Istakhari immediately
after also mentions the “ other great river, the Sind Rud,” distinct from
the “ Mihran Rud,” or Ab-i-Sind, which former, he says, “ is three days’
journey or stages [that is, lower down stream] from Multan,” and adds,
that “ the waters of the Sind Rud [the Rud *i-Hind wo Sind ” of the
Masalik wa Mamalik] are sweet and pleasant, even before its junction
with the Mihran.”
Ibn Haukal also mentions (page 216), the junction of the “ Mihran
Rud ” with the Sind Rud and the Jand or Qhand Rud. He subse¬
quently refers (page 218), separately to the Sind Rud uniting with
the “ Mihran Rud ” three days’ journey from Multan, that is below or
to the southwards of Multan.
Bearing these important facts in mind respecting the tributaries
received by the “ Mihran Rud” or Ab-i-Sind before it reached down as
far southwards as Multan, we find, that up to or about the time that
Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah, ruled over the territories of Multan
and Sind, from about the parallel of Kin or Kin Kot, and between it
and Kashmur where there is a depression westwards,303 the “ Mihran
Rud ” or Ab-i-Sind, made a more sudden bend towards the west than
in more recent times. At the present day, one of its old channels, which
is broad and winds considerably, can be traced westwards from near
Kashmur. It passes Yaru, Kumbri, Kand Kot of the Parni Afghans,
and Ghaus-pur (of Sind: a different place from that mentioned at
Istakhari, who says, “ Mukran is mostly desert waste, and contains bnt few rivers.
Their waters run into the Mihran [of Sind] on either side of Mansuriyah [the
territory dependent on],” and through which that river flowed.
We may consequently assume that “ the five rivers which went to form ” the
Mihran Rud or Ab-i-Sind (not the “ Mihran of Sind.” See note 117, page 208),
according to the Mas’udi, were : — 1. The River of Kabul, the Landaey Sin of
the Afghans ; 2. The Haru ; 3. The Sii-han ; 4. The river of Kurma’h (vul.
‘ Kurram”) ; and 5. The Gumul with its tributaries. We may rest assured that the
Nari could not possibly have formed one of the five, because it could not have united
with the Mihran Rud, or Ab-i-Sind, before it reached Multan, which all are said to
have done.
As recently, however, as Akbar Badshah’s reign, we know that the course of
the Nari river was changed by an earthquake, and to such like convulsions of
nature all the tracts around are constantly liable, and were often subject.
That the River of Kabul is included among the five rivers of Al-Mas’udi there
can be little doubt, and particularly since, at this day, after the junction of all the
rivers now forming the Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, the united stream is locally called the
Sath Nad, or Seven Rivers. See note 305, page 305.
503 See note 293, page 300.
309
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
page 302), then, changing from the direction of sonth-sonth-west more
westwards, it passes north of Jagan, between Shikar- pur and Jacob-abad,
and finally reaches the Sind Hollow of Europeans, presently to be
noticed, near KhairO Garhi — the “ Khairagari,” “ Khairo Garin,” and
“ Khyrah Gurhee,” of as many different maps. This ancient channel
was, in comparatively recent times, utilized for what became known
as the Began Wa-hah, or Canal, the largest in Siro or Upper Sind. In
still more recent times another channel appears to have branched off
from near Ghaus-pur, above mentioned, more to the southward and
westward, which passed near Lar-kanah, or Lar-kano as the Sindis call
it, and from thence made a bend more directly south, passing near
Khandiaro, and a few miles east of Noli-Shahrah or Noh- Sharp (the
“ Nowshera” of the maps), which leaving Siw-istan, the modern Sihwan,
some sixteen miles or thereabouts on the west, united with the old channel
of the river called the Kunbh, which intervened between Siw-istan and
the Mihran of Sind when Muhammad, the son of Kasim, marched from
Nirun to attack Bahman-abad, as related at page 232. This old
channel can be traced from the existing mounds and hollows as far
down as about eight miles east of Lakhhi, near which the rise of the
country towards the hills on the west turned it aside, on which it took a
more south-easterly course towards Halah (the “Halla” of the maps),
passing between it and Shadad-pur towards its former place of junction
with the Mihran of Sind, Hakra, Waliindah, or Sind-Sagar, some distance
south of Mansuriyah and Bahman-abad. I may add that the whole of
Siro, or Upper Sind, and Wicholo or Middle Sind, is so cutup with dhands
or beds of lakes, and puranahs, buddhs, dhoros, or deserted channels,
many of which have now been utilized as canals, as to show, as previously
noticed, that there is scarcely any part of this vast alluvial tract, over
which in the course of ages, the Ab-i-Sind or Indus has not flowed at
some time or other, and the Mihran of Sind, Hakra, or Wahindah also,
but to a much less degree.
After some further changes in Siro or Upper Sind, another channel
appears to have branched off from the main stream, which ran in a more
southerly direction from the first, towards Lar-kanah, constituting what
is called in our maps “the Western Nara,” and “ Narra,” and which
channel is still open.
I now come to the most important of the channels, and the oldest
of which we have any record, which branched off between Kin Kot and
Kashmur in a westerly direction, passing between six and seven miles
north of Kumbri, before mentioned, then within two miles south of
“ Sanri ” and “ Sundree ” of the maps, then more towards the north
towards the fort of Dil-Murad* to within seven miles of Uchohh (this
310 it. G. Raver ty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
is the third place of that name previously noticed, and which lies im¬
mediately at the skirts of the outer waves of the Koh-i-Surkh, Sor
Gliar, or Rata Roll, (described in my “ Notes on Afghanistan/’ pages 5,
and 658), after which it bends southwards at about eleven miles west
of Khan Garb, now called Jacob-abad, towards Khairo Gar hi and
Shadad-pur. This ancient channel, which is likewise the largest, marks
the boundary of our territory in Upper Sind, and separates it from
Kachchhi. It has since been utilized, I believe, for the new “ Frontier
Canal,” or at least, such was proposed.
From what the historian of Sind, Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar, says
in his work, we know that as late as his day, the “Mihran Rud,” or
Ab-i-Sind, made a sharp bend westwards below Rujan (the “ Rohjan ”
and “ Rojhan,” etc., of the maps), a few miles above Kin Kot, and that
the distance from the river to Siwi, (one of the mahalls of the Sarkdr of
Bakhar of the Multan Subah, in the southern part of the Afghan state
lately annexed), in one direction, that is from the river bank near Rujan
in the direction of Siwi westwards, was then one hundred kuroh, equal
to one hundred and seventy-five miles. It is now only one* hundred and
fifty-two miles ; while, in the opposite direction, that is towards the
south, in about the direction of Bakhar, the river was, in Mir Ma’sum’s
time, but sixty kuroh distant from Siwi, equal to one hundred and five
miles, but now its nearest point is distant one hundred and thirty-two
miles, just in the position where the other old channel I have referred
to at page 308, which runs from near Kashtnur by Kand Kot, lies.
This ancient channel or great depression which I now refer to, is what
is called, locally, the Ban or Marsh, the Pat or Desert, and “ Dasht-i-
Beddri by the people, and the “ Sind Hollow ” by Europeans. The
land slopes down from the banks of the present channel of the Indus
towards the west as far as this depression. For example : — Kaslimur
on the river bank is some eighty feet higher than Khan Garh or Jacob-
abad, and the latter place is lower by some ninety feet than the bed of
the Indus at Mithri, between Kin Kot and Kashmiir, twenty-one miles
farther north. There is nothing really to keep back the river until
the country north and west of this great depression begins to rise in
the direction of the outlying waves of the Koli-i-Surkh on the north,
and the Kahtar range309 (turned into “ Kheerthur,” in the maps) on the
west ; for the country along the right or west bank of the Ab-i-Sind or
Indus continues higher than the level of this great depression down
beyond Mihar on the west, as far down as which the overflow from the
river between Kin Kot and Kashmur finds its way ; and on some occa¬
sions as far down as the Manchhar lake, as I shall presently show.
309 See my “ Notes on Afghanistan/' etc., page 558, and note tt-
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its ributaries. 311
High mounds, the sites of former towns, and the substantial ruins
of others, such as Fath-pur,310 Uchqhh, and Shah-pur; the fact that
the tract of country north of Shikar-pur, which is now known as the
“ Frontier District,” is cut up, so to say, with dliorahs or old channels, and
dhands or hollows, in which water accumulates ; and that it is still
flooded from the Xb-i-Sind or Indus for twenty miles north of Ghaus-pur ;
all tend to confirm the statements of former historians, that the northern
parts of Sind, as anciently constituted, lying north of Shikar-pur, and
between Rujan and Gand-abali, contained a number of flourishing towns
and villages, and was in a high state of cultivation, and, that the lands
lying along the banks of the Ghar or Ghaj river used to be some of the
most productive in all Sind.
Only fifteen years ago an incident occurred illustrating what I
have here stated. The waters of the Indus rose in the month of July
some eight or nine feet higher than usual between Kin Kot and Kash¬
mir, which, flowing in two branches in the direction of about west-south¬
west, entered the ancient channel in the great depression, the so-called
“ Sind Hollow,” and reached the district of Lar-kanah. The two
branches having united at Khairo Garin, forty miles west of Shikar- pur,
were joined by the overflow of rain-water from the Koh-i-Surkh or
Rata Pahar, and the Koh-i-Siyah or Kala Paliar ranges, bounding the
Kachchhi plain on the north, and the water from the Ghar river from
the Miilah Pass. The united waters then continued their course towards
the south, passing near the town of Shadad-pur,311 and finally entered
SIO This place was, in the time of Akbar Badshah, the chief town of the
Mahdll or sub-district, one of twelve into which the Bakhar Sarkdr of the Multan
Suboh was divided. The inhabitants then were Samijahs, and Zharijahs ; they had
8050 bi'gahs of land under cultivation ; were assessed thereon in 477, 858 dams
(equal to just 11,416 rnpxs and a-half) ; and had to furnish 200 horsemen and 1,000
foot for militia purposes.
311 Dr. R. H. Kennedy, Chief of the Medical Staff of the Bombay Column of
the Army of the Indus, crossed part of this great ran or “ Sind Hollow,” marching
from Lar-kanah upwards towards Shadad-pur, in March, 1839. He says (“ Campaign
of the Army of the Indus,” Vol. I, page 189): “The third march brought us to
Shadadpore : the country for the last twenty miles was more like the dry bed of a
salt lagoon in an interval between spring tides, than an inland district.” On leaving
Shadad-pur, he says : “ In less than half an hour we reached the desert ; not an
expanse of loose heavy sand like the sea beach when dry, as I had expected, but a
boundless level plain of indurated clay of a dull dry earthy colour, and showing
signs of being sometimes under xoater. At first a few bushes were apparent here
and there, growing gradually more and more distant, until at last not a sign of
vegetable life was to be recognized.” In another place (Vol. II, page 165) he says :
“ Betwixt Mehur and Bang [Bhag], we crossed a singular ridge of earthy hills,
evidently the effect of an earthquake-convulsion ; the strata of soil distinctly show?
312 H. G. Raverfy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No
the Narah branch of the river and the Manehhar lake. A vast area of
country was flooded in the Shikar-pur. Lar-kanah, and Mihar districts ;
and upwards of five hundred villages, great and small, were flooded, and
many substantial buildings swept away.
It therefore may be assumed that it is not beyond the range of
possibility, that, some day, the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, may leave its present
channel and choose a new one, notwithstanding that it has not altered
very materially for nearly a century, but a slight obstacle might bring
about a great change.812
ing that they must originally have been watery deposits on a level surface bursting
upwards and elevated by volcanic action. See note 307, page 305. Two parallel
ranges of hills appear here, as at Lnkky [Lakhhi] ; but these do not exceed four
hundred feet in height, and seem entirely composed of the silt of the Indus, or what¬
ever inland sea once flowed over these vast levels : with the exception of these
ridges, the whole plain from Daudur [Dhatlar] to Sukkar [Sakhar] is one uniform
flat of the same character.
Masson, who travelled in Sind some years previous to the annexation of the
country, mentions (Yol. II, page 130), that latterly, the inundations of the Indus
had increased westerly, and that, near “ Dera Ghaibi,” which is nearly forty miles
to the southwards of Khairo Garhi, mentioned above, “is a branch of the Indus,”
(page 132.).
312 We may judge of the vast changes which must have taken place in the lapse
of many centuries in the tracts lying in and under the south-eastern parts of the
range of Mihtar Suliman, or Koh-i-Siyah, or Tor Ghar, or Kala Roh, and the outer
and lower range of Koh-i-Surkh, Sor Ghar, or Rata Roh, the tracts in which the
Mari and Bughti, and other Baluchis now dwell, in which the Dawi and Naghar Afghans
previously dwelt, and likewise in the parts still farther west. Al-Idrisi refers to
marshy places west of the Ab-i-Sind between Kashmur and Sharu-san or Siw-istan, the
modern Sihwan ; and the Ara’ish-i-Mah-fil, a more modern work, states, that between
Bakhar and Siwi, nearly one hundred and fifty miles to the north-north-west, the
towns and villages are often laid waste through the Ab-i-Sind flowing from the
south towards the north [sic. in Mss.] at intervals of some years. For half this
distance towards the north and north-west, between Bakhar and Siwi, the half
nearest the latter has now few villages to be laid waste ; for the country has been
for more than two centuries, a howling desert, over which, for four months together,
the deadly simum blows, and in the other half, nearest Bakhar, the villages and
towns are not numerous ; but, in both portions, the ruins of several ancient towns
and villages are even still to be traced. These statements contained in the Ara'ish-
i-Mah-fil, are confirmed by the statements of Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar, one of the
historians of Sind, already referred to, who describes the state of that part in his
day.
We read in the native historians — the originals I mean — of these parts being
in ancient times well cultivated and flourishing, and of numerous gardens, parti¬
cularly around Siwi of the Parni Afghans, now, or very lately, a complete waste.
Shah Beg Khan, the Arghun Mughal, would scarcely have selected Siwi as his future
place of residence, when under the necessity of evacuating Kandahar, and previous
to his conquest of Sind, in preference to Kwatah ( vul . “ Quetta ”) and Kalat-i-Ni-
1892.1 H. G. Rftverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries ,
313
The Ghar river, previously referred to, appears to have sent another
branch into the Ab-i-Sind in recent times, and in a more easterly
direction. This old channel, which is broad and deep, can be traced
from about fourteen miles to the southward of Khairo GarhL It runs
in the direction of about east-south-east, passing Lar-kanali and the
ruins of Mahortah on the north, and after passing them about three
miles, it turns sharply to the northward, and unites with the Ab-i-Sind
a little over sixteen miles west of Bakliar, and about eight miles higher
up than the point where the Western Narali, as it is called by Europeans,
branches oft from the Ab-i-Sind, or Indus. Some have mistaken this
oharah ( vul . “Khelat”), if it had been, and the tracts surrounding it, anything
like what they subsequently became, and lately were. After his time, and within
two generations, a great change took place. Siwi became so very sickly, that
Sultan Mahmud Khan, the feudatory of Bakhar and its dependencies under the
Arghuns, of which Siwi was a dependent district, had to replace its garrison yearly ;
for inost of the men perished through the badness of the olimate and water. Of
the badness of the water on the way from the Derah of Ghazi Khan to the Shrine of
Sakliln Sarwar, I can, myself, testify. This continued until the time of Akbar
Badshah, after the death of the above mentioned Sultan Mahmud Khan, when
Bakhar and its dependencies beoame annexed as a Sarhdr to the Multan Subah.
Shortly after, a great flood came, accompanied by some volcanic action (See what
Dr. R. H. Kennedy states in the preceding note, 311), and the spring-head, the source
of this river, which supplied the place, beoame ohanged, and the river’s course likewise,
and the deleterious nature of the water at the same time. Previous to this change,
the river used to flow a distance of fifty Tcuroh, and its waters collecting in the Sar-
Wah district — about the position of the great ran or “ Sind Hollow,” already referred
to, and once the channel of the Ab-i-Sind, or Indus — used to be drawn off for irriga¬
tion purposes, and what remained reached the Manchhar lake, about one hundred
and twenty miles farther to the south, in Wicholo or Middle Sind.
Alexander’s march, according to the map given by Cunningham in his “ Ancient
Geography of India,” page 248, is represented as leading straight down from “ Uch,”
which he calls “ Alexandria ” [seethe observations on this subject in note 192,
page 244 ] to “ Ubaro ” along the Indus, and then by “ Aror ” to “ Mahorta ”
across the Indus as it at present flows, and from thence down the west bank to
“ Sehwan,” and subsequently, by “ Bralimanabad,” “ Hala,” “Kotri,” and “Thatlia”
to “ Kurachi.” In another direction Alexander is taken from “ Kotri ” to “ Lonibari
ost,” just according to the present course of the river, as though it had never changed
from his time to this day. Of course, all this is pure imagination, while we know
what mighty changes have taken place, even since the time of the ’Arab conquest of
Sind, and that the river has been constantly changing.
The same writer makes “ Kraterus ” cross the Indus at “ Fazilpur,” and then
takes him by “ Kusmur ” and “Khangar” to “Dadar” and “ Bagli,” and so
through the “ Bolan defile and quotes Curtins as his authority for all this, but
I fail to find any confirmation of it in the latter’s history after careful search, but
I know quite well that none of the places mentioned were then in existence, and
that the Indus did not run then as supposed.
0 0
314 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
old branch of the Ghar for the Narali ; hut the latter is a natural branch
or offset from the Ab-i-Sind, and not a canal, as some have imagined,
hut it may have been artificially improved in recent times.
Mahortah, near Lar-kauah, on the Ghar channel, is the site of an
ancient fortified town, on a great mound, and, in former times, must
have been a place of some importance.
The Narali, which is navigable, runs in a very tortuous channel,
hence its name of Narali or Snake, like the so-called Eastern Narali,
elsewhere described, but the channel of the one under description winds
very much more than its eastern namesake. It pursues a course almost
parallel with the Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, and on the northern side falls
into, and forms, the Manohhar lake. Its continuation, known as the
Aral, issues from the eastern side of the lake, and unites with the main
channel of the Ab-i-Sind below the town of Sihwan, the ancient Siw-
istan, which gave name to the province of which it was the capital.
This Narali channel is probably the continuation of that in which
the diverted branch of the Hakra, or Mihran, first flowed, when diverted
from the east of Aror.
Farther south again, and within the limits of the old Sarlcar of
Siw-istan, or Wicholo, or Middle Sind (which has been mistaken for
Siwi and its district, more than two hundred and ten miles, as the crow
flies, farther north),818 the Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, was kept within bounds,
513 This is the name, which strange to relate, nearly every English writer
manages to mistake for Siwi of the Parni Afghans, becanse some stupid or careless
map-maker or engraver, in former years, before correct surveys wrere made, hap¬
pened to write the name of this well-known province of Wicholo or middle Sind,
and its chief town, a little too far north.
Professor Lassen, too, in his “ Indische Alterthnmsknnde,” taking his infor¬
mation, apparently, from English writers, makes the usual error of mistaking Siw-
istan, the modern Sihwan, for the hilly tract of country forming the southern
boundary of the Afghan state, where the Koh-i Siyah, or Suliman range, or Tor
Ghar,or Kala Roll, or Kala Pahap, becomes mixed up with the outlying waves of
the Koh-i-Surkh, or Sor Ghar, or Rata Roll, or Rata Pahap (as they are called in
various languages used in this neighbourhood where so many different peoples
adjoin each other), around Siwi of the Parni Afghans, while, at the same time, he
calls it correctly, “ Sindomana-— Sihwan.” This ought to have opened his eyes to
the fact, that Siw-istan or Sindomana, or Sihwan, is not Siwi, and never was Siwi.
Cunningham, on the other hand, in his “ Ancient Geography of India,” says
(page 264): “I agree with all previous writers in identifying Sindomana with
S eh wan ; partly from its similarity of name [I fear “ similarity,” after this fashion
goes too great a way in these “ identifications”]. * * * At page 266 he says :
*• Its present name is said to be a contraction of Sewistan. # # # ifc seems
strange that a notable place like Sehwan should not be noticed by Ptolemy under
any reoognizable name. * * # I, therefore, rejeofc tlio reading of Sewistan [the
315
1892.] H. G. ftaverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
and prevented from encroaching farther westwards, through the rise
of the country in that direction towards the Kahtar range, and also by
the rocky nature of the country, the lower skirts of the Lakhhi moun¬
tains. This rocky barrier intervened from Siw-istan Haweli, the
Sindu-stan, Sliarusan. and Siw-istan of the old geographers and the
A’in-i-Akbari — the modern Sihwan — down to within a few miles of
Thathah, north and west of which it once flowed.814 Even this rocky
name is not written “ Sewistan,” but Siw-istan] as a modern innovation of the
Hindas, to connect the place with the name of the god Siva, etc., etc.
It would have been passing strange if Ptolemy had mentioned it under the name
of “ Sehwan,” since it was not known by the name of Sihwan for ages after Ptolemy.
I, however, beg to say, that the name Siw-istan, is perfectly correct. It was so
called when the ’Arabs conquered Sind,, and the Chach Namah shows that it was
so called before that time ; while the statements of early Muhammadan geographers
show, that it continued to be so oalled, and likewise Sharu-san and Sindu-stan, for
the first three centuries of the Muhammadan era. That such was the fact, every
native writer, (including the historians of Sind), from the earliest time that Sind
is mentioned in history, shows, as all may see who can read the originals for them¬
selves. The author of the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” who wrote in 1260 A. D., was not a
Hindu, yet he calls it Siw-istan and Sindu-stan (pages 532 and 539) ; and Ibn
Batutah, who likewise, was not a Hindu, calls it Siw-istan. It was still best known by
that name in Abu-l-Fazl’s time, and the province also. It is not surprising, therefore,
that “ Hwen Thsaug does not notice Sehwan,” it would have been surprising if he
had, because it was not known as Sihwan in his day any more than in Ptolemy’s.
Another modern writer — Tod — in his “ Rajas’tlian ” (Vol. IT, page 230), on
the other hand, mistakes Siw-istan for “ Seistan , region of cold — * sei ’ — cold,” but
in what language he does not say, and he places it “ on both sides of the Indus.”
Sistan is hot enough, but it does not lie on both sides of the Indus ; but then Tod’s
geographical, like his historical statements, are often of the wildest.
The most serious error made respecting Siw-istan is by a Government official.
Surgeon-Major O. T. Duke, formerly assistant to the Governor-General’s Agent in
Baluchistan, in a very lengthy “ Report ” to Government on Sim (which he calls
“ Sewi”), and other Afghan districts, some three degrees farther north than Siw-istan
or Sihivdn, (taken, apparently, from some incorrect extract from the A’in-i-Akbari)
bases all his theories, and even calculates the revenue settlements on this, the chief
town of Wicholo or middle Sind, also giving name to a large province, being Siwi in
southern Afghanistan which, of course, it is not. See my “Notes on Afghanistan/’
page 553, and Erratum.
314 There is no doubt whatever that, in comparatively modern times, the main
channel of the Ab-i-Sind, leaving the great ran or “ Sind Hollow,” took a more
directly southern course than at present, from a point a little west of Darbelo.
In the account of the campaign against Mirza Jani Beg, the Tar-lchan. the last in¬
dependent ruler of the territory dependent on Thathah, Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar.
who was present in that expedition, says, that “ the Ab-i-Sind is six huroh [about
eleven miles] from Siw-istan, or Sihwan, and that Jani Beg arrived in the river
from Lar, or lower Sind, with a fleet of Ghurdbs ,” thus showing that there must have
been plenty of water in that branch, even at that comparatively modern period,
namely, 994 H. (1585 A D.) Soe pages 112 and 229.
316 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
barrier has felt the force of the great river ; for the roadway over the
Lakh hi range, which existed when the troops going to Kandahar in
1839 passed over it, was soon after washed away, and Sihwan, which
was close to the river some years ago, is now three miles or more inland ;
and three remarkable detached rocks lower down, between Bahman jo
Piiro and Thathah, which forty years ago were eight miles inland, are
(or very lately were, for the changes are unceasing) now in the bed of
the river.
Thus the Sindliu, Nahr-i-Sind, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, from the time
that we possess any authentic records respecting it, was a tributary,
along with the other rivers now forming the Panoh Nad, or Panj A'b,
of the Hakra, or Wahindah, which having all united into one great
river at the Dosh-i-A'b , as related by the old ’Arab and Sindi writers,
formed theMihranof Sind, or Sind-Sagar. Lower down than this point
of junction it sent off a branch to the westwards which passed Aror,
the ancient capital of Sind, on the east, which again united with the
main channel above Mansuriyah, and entered the ocean sometimes by
one, and sometimes by two principal mouths. The Aror branch having
been subsequently diverted, and other changes having taken place, the
A'b-i-Sind began to incline more towards the west from near Ghaus-pur,
in the great depression referred to at page 304, and by which its surplus
waters still find their way towards Aror, and deserted the other tribu¬
taries of the Hakra. It then passed between wrhere Kin Kot and Kashmur
stand, took a direct westerly course, and cut a new channel for itself
in what is now known to us as the Sind Hollow, and found its way south
as before described. Then other changes succeeded — for they were con¬
stantly taking place more or less — through the Biali and its tributaries,
which formed the Sind Bud or Rud-i-Sind wo Hind, inclining to the west¬
wards, when it joined the Ab-i-Sind, and formed a new Panch Nad, or
Panj Ab, and deserted the Hakra altogether. This appears to have caused
the Ab-i-Sind to alter its course, and, instead of turning so suddenly
westwards as before, it inclined more to the south-westwards, leaving
the Sind Hollow and cutting a new channel for itself by Kand Ko$, as
before described, passing the present Lar-kanah on the west, and then
inclining southwards in the direction of Siw-istan. Other changes
succeeding, when near the parallel of Aror, it found its way into the
channel into which the western branch of the Hakra or Mihran of Sind
had been diverted, and began to cut its way through the limestone hills
where Rurlii and Bakhar now stand. From thence it passed Darbelah
Mir Ma’sum also says, that, at that time, there was “ a small fort on the river
bank at Lahori above Na§r-pur.” Tho last named place is now sixteen miles east of
the river-
317
1892.1 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
or Darbelo, flowed to the southwards, and got into the old channel of the
Kunbh, which flowed between Sfw-istan and Baliman-abad when Mu¬
hammad, son of Kasim, marched to attack them, and through the Noh-
Shahrah district of Sind, passing the range of low hills on which the
modern Haidar-abad stands on the east, and about sixteen miles or more
east of the Mukliahli hills, entered the ocean, at one period to the east
of Debal and at another on the west, a little to the south of Mughal-bin,
which, in comparatively modern times, was near the sea-coast.
The ancient sea-port of Sind, Debal, or Dewal, was well known to
the English traders down to within the last two hundred years ; and
this part of the channel was navigable for small sailing ships up to
within a short distance of Thathah. A vast deal of the delta is of
comparatively recent formation ; for the small district dependent on
Badin was the most southerly part of Sind in Akbar Badshah’s reign,
and now it is over seventy miles from the southernmost part of the
delta. The river, no doubt, formed several smaller channels therein,
and, in later times, inclined farther west a little below Thathah, and
formed a new channel, the Bhagar, which still passed near Debal and
was still navigable as far up as Thathah. Hence, in all probability, the
error aud confusion arose, because Debal was known as “ the Port of
Thathah,” that it must be Thathah itself, which had not been founded
until after Debal had gone to comparative decay. It was the first place
in the territory of Sind attacked by the ’Arab leader, Muhammad, son
of Kasim, the Sakifi, early in 93 H. (711 A. D.)°15
31& See page 206. Mr. A. W. Hughes, in his “ Sind Gazetteer,” on the conquest
of Sind, says (p. 24) : “ Muhammad Kasim [here we have the usual error. See
note 242, page 276] left Shiraz on this expedition in H. 92 (A. D. 711), with
a fine army [the ‘ fine army ’ amounted to about 10,000] and would seem (sic.) to
have reached [There is not the shadow of a doubt about it] the seaport of Debal ( sup¬
posed by some to have been Manora, near Karachi, but by others Tatta) early in tho
following year, which he soon captured.” At page 123 of the same " Gazetteer,”
under the heading of “ Bambura,” he states : “ It is stated [by whom not said] that
there are reasons for supposing that this ancient place was known during the eighth
century under the names of Debal, Dewal, or Dawul [!] ; and that it was the first town
that was stormed by the Muslim invader, Muhammad Kasim Sakifi.” At page 323,
again, we have : — “ It is supposed that Bambura may very possibly have been the
Dewal (or Debal) * * * Others, again [who ?], have presumed that Tatta was
the ancient Debal, or that even Manora was the place stormed # * # At
page 414, the compiler tells us, under the head of Karachi, that, “ By some writers it
is supposed to occupy the same position, or to be at least in the immediate neighbour¬
hood of the ancient seaport of Dewal (or Debal),” etc.
Here it will be seen that we have three different “ suppositions,” or “ it is saids,”
and the like, respecting this one place, and all incorrect, as I shall now show.
See also a deal on this subject in Cunningham’s “ Ancient Geography of India,”
318 H. G. Baverty — The Mihrdu of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
The Wihat, Biiiat, or ancient Bedasta.
The Wihat, Bihat, or Bedasta, constituted one of the seven rivers
pp. 297 to 302. The opinion of Mr. Crow, who was for many years stationed at
Thathah (not “ Tatta”) is the only one nearly correct.
Abu-1-Fazl was the first to make a blunder on this subject in stating thafc
Thathah was Debal, and, after the same fashion, telling us that Bakhar was
“ Mausurah,” which it was not : its site is one hundred and twenty-one miles
south of Bakhar. These errors are the more unaccountable seeing that he described
the ruins of Bahman-abad correctly (see note 105), page 196 and must have
known that Thathah was not founded for some centuries after the conquest of
Sind by the ’Arabs. Bambhurah cannot possibly be Debal of the ’Arabs for the
reasons given at page 224, and as also shown in the map from the “ Masalik wo
Mamalik” at page 213.
Cunningham has also gone astray with regard to the position of Debal or
Dcwal. In his “ Ancient India,” p. 279, after “identifying Haidarabad as Nirun-
Jfcof,” he says, “ Abulfeda [Abu-l-Fida ?] makes it 25 farsangs from Debal. * * #
Lari bandar I will presently show to have been the most probable position of the
ancient Debal.”
I may mention, however, en passant, that Bu Rihansays Lari Bandar — Loharanf —
was twelve farsaJchs from Debal. See also Elliot, Yol. I, pp. 65—66.
At page 297 of his work Cunningham says : “ The position of the celebrated
port of Debal , the emporium of the Indus during the middle ages, is still un¬
settled. By Abul Fazl and the later Muhammadan writers, Debal has been con¬
founded with Thatha ; but as Debal was no longer in existence [indeed !] when
they wrote, I conclude that they were misled by the name of Debal Thatha, which is
frequently applied to Thatha itself. Similarly, Brdhmana, or Brdhmandbdd , was called
Debal Kangra [?], and the famous seaport of Debal was named Debal Sindi. But
Dixval [sic.] or Debal, means simply a temple, and therefore Debal Sindi means the
temple at or near the town of Sindhi. Burton says that the shawls of Thatha are
still called Shal-i-Debali, but this only proves that Debal was the place where the
merchants procured the Thatha shawls.”
I may mention, however, that silken cloth or fabric of various colours, brocade,
is called debd in the Persian language, and that debd-i is its adjective, but the noun
is certainly not derived from Debal or Dewal, because debd, is a purely Persian word,
and the place was so called on account of its great budh or temple. See page 231.
Cunningham then quotes Hamilton’s “ New Account of the East Indies,” I. 130,
who is understood to say, that “the river Sindhi ” is only a small branch of the
Indus, which appellation is now lost in the country [?] which it so plentifully waters
and is called Divellee , or Seven months,” and he adds : “ This statement shows [?]
that the branch of the Indus leading up to Lari bandar was called Debali or the
river of Debal, etc. # # * That this was the Piti branch of the Indus I infer
from its other name of Sindhi, which I take to be the same as Sinthon Ostium of
Ptolemy, or the second mouth of the river from the west.” From this we are
supposed to understand that the “ Piti ” mouth of the Indus existed much the
same in Plotemy’s time as now, and that Sindhi means second !
After saying at page 279, that he is going to “identify” it (Debal) as “ Lari
bandar,” in another place he tells us, that, “ if Debal cannot be identified with either
Karachi or Lari bandar, it must be looked for somewhere between them.”
1892.] H. (t. Raverty — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 319
mentioned in the “ Vedic Hymns,” as the “ Saptah Sindhun, or Sindha-
He should have added something more that Hamilton says, namely, that “ The
river of Sindy would be hard to be found, were it not for the tomb of a. Mahometan
Saint, who has a high Tower built over him, called Sindy Tower. It is always kept
white to serve as a land mark. This writer, according to his map, places “ Dnill ”
(Debal) in Mackraun (Mukran).
There is plenty of proof, however, that neither of the above statements are
oorrect as to its situation, nor the assertion that it was no longer in existence when
Abii-l-Fazl wrote.
As late as the time when the Khnlasat-ut-Tawarikli was written, the author of
which was an official of the Dihli empire in the time of Aurang-zeb-i-’Alam-gir
Badshah, and a native of Patialah, Debal is said, by him, to be the chief port of
Sind ; and Karachi was unknown. I may add that the place on which Karachi stands
is considered really to be part of Mukran rather than of Sind.
The author above quoted says : “ Debal is a great place for pearls and other
valuable commodities ; and it has salt and iron mines, which pay a considerable
revenue to the Government. Near it, at six kuroh distant, is a mine or quarry of
yellow stone of great value for building purposes. About 4,000 vessels and boats
belong to the port of Debal.1’
Salt in vast quantities still exists in the Shah Bandar tcdalluTcah of the Karachi
District or Collectorate.
Wood, too, with all his acumen, fell into the same error, that Thathah and
Dewal, and even Bahman-abad, were all one.
The earliest notice, probably, that we have respecting the seaports of Sind
and the river Indus, from the writings of an Englishman, is contained in a “ Tractate
written by Nicholas Whithington, who was left in the Mogolls country by Captain
Best, a factor, in 1612.” He says : “ Concerning Sinda, no city is by general report
of greater trade in the Indies than Tatta, the chief port, Lowri bandar, three days
journey from it ; a fair road without the river’s mouth, clear of worms, which, about
Surat, and other places of the Indies, after three or four months’ riding (if it were
not for sheathing) would hinder return. In two months from hence by water they
go to Labor, and return in one down. The ports and roads of Sinda are free. * * *
Goods may be conveyed from Agra on camels to Buekor in twenty days, which is on
Sinda river, thence in fifteen or sixteen days aboard the ships. One may go as
soon from Agra to Sinda as Surat, but there is more thieving which the Mogoll seeks
to prevent.”
The distance, in a direct line, is rather greater to Bakhar than to Surat, but
now, for half the way, the route lies through Jasal-mir and the waterless desert, and
would certainly not be preferred to the other to Surat. It is evident from this,
that, at the period in question, that part was not so waterless as it has become in
recent times.
Whithington continues : “ The inhabitants of Sinda are mostly Razbootches.
Banians, and Boloches : in Cities and Towns the Governors are Mogolls. * * *
The Boloches are of Mahmets religion. They deal much in camels ; most of them
robbers by land, and on the river, mnrthering such as they rob. When I was in
Sinda , they took a boat with seven Italians, one Portugal Friar, the rest slain in
fight. The last named was ripped open by them for gold.”
Next we come to Walter Paynton, who accompanied Captain Christopher
320 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and ifi ? Tributaries. [Ex. ISTo.
wall,” here to be noticed from west to east ; and, according to the same
Newport in 1612, on tlie twelfth voyage to India, and who kept a journal. He
gives a long account of Baluch treachery on the coast. They sent a boat on shore
in which was Sir Thomas Powell, accompanied by two Persian servants of the
Persian Ambassador, Sir Robert Shirley, on liis way to Isfahan. He says : “ It was
for the purpose of discovering the countrey, and to seeke some convenient place to
land his Lordship. Where when they came to a little village, called Tesseque
[Jask ?], they spake with camell men, and others of the countrey people, by whom
they understood, that that countrey was called Oetche Macguerona [Kich-Mukran],
and the inhabitants Boloches : all living under the government of one King, named
Melicke Aleirza, whose chiefe residence was some five or six days5 iourney from henoe,
at a port called GuaderP
They discovered the intended treachery in time, however, and by a stratagem,
managed to reach the ship again. This was on the 19th September, 1612. “The
ship,55 he continues, “ was steered for Sind , and came to an anchor at the mouth
of the Indus in 24 degrees 38 minutes, in the Mogolls dominions. Variation 16
degrees 45 minutes, in five fathoms, less one foot of water, and in good ground.
* * * Boats were sent from Diul [Dewal] for conveying the Ambassadors goods
and people, 29th September, and the Ambassador left the ship under a salute of 11
guns. * # * Tata, a great citie one dayes iourney from Diul, loth cities standing
in the Great Mogolls Dominions .”
Lahri Bandar is mentioned separately, and was a totally distinct place from
Diul or Debal. Bu-Rihan says they were twelve farsaMs, or leagues apart.
Walter Paynton, and Joseph Salbancke [the same who proceeded from Ajmir to
Isfahan by Kandahar. See the account of his journey in my “Notes on Afghanis¬
tan, 55 page 547], who were merchants on board, were sent on shore to proceed to Diul
in one of the country boats ; and the former, in his narrative states, that, “ at the time,
the ship was riding about four or five miles from the River’s mouth from whence
they had fifteen miles to the city or town of Diul, where the Ambassador had gone.
He stayed in a house in Diul itself, and there they lodged while the party remained
there. They went “ through the city to the castle, and were reoeived by the
Governour, Arah Manewardus [sic in text].” Compai'o Cunningham’s “Ancient
India, “ pages 297 — 302.”
“ The Portuguese incited the Governour of Diul against the party, and endeavour¬
ed to cut them off. Sir Robert Shirley wished to be allowed to proceed to Tatta, but
the Governour would not give permission, so he left, with one Persian servant,
without leave, and had by the way to pass a river where he could get no one to take
them across, the Governour having prohibited it under pain of death. They made
rafts of boards and timbers, and the Ambassador “ shipped himself 55 with his
servant to help him in navigating it, and had no sooner put off, than 20 or 30 horse¬
men came in great haste, despatched by the Governour [the Hindu “ Das ”] to
seize them. They were brought back, men swimming to the raft, which Kazr Beg,
the servant, was not able to guide against the tide, and they narrowly escaped
drowning. The Ambassador’s followers “ disdaining this rude dealing, one Master
John Ward, shot off his pistol in their faces, and was instantly slain by another shot,
and the rest carried away prisoners to Diulsinde [ i.e ., Dewal on the Sind, by which
name others also mention it], being pillaged by the way by the souldiers. After
some time of imprisonment, the Governour permitted their departure to Tatta, where
1892.] H. G-. Raver ty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 321
legends, the tracts originally occupied by the “ Vedic people,” were the
they were friendly entertained of the Governour [he] being a Persian. Sir Thomas
Powell and Master Francis Bnb were then dead before in Diulsinde. He (Sir
Thomas Shirley) remained at Tatta till fit opportunity for Agra, the way being long
and in danger of thieves : whither he went in company of a great man which had a
strong convoy, for whom he waited also two months.
“ The Lady Powell in this place was delivered of a son, but she and it, together
with Master Michael Powell, brother to Sir Thomas, lost their lives in this tedious
expectation, in Boats, for that great man aforesaid. At his (Sir Thomas Shirley’s)
coming to Agra, the Mogoll [Jahan-gir Badshah] gave him favourable entertainment,
and upon his complaint, sent for the Banian Governour of Diulsinde , to answer at
the Court, promising him his own revenge, if he would stay. But he hasting to
Persia, after many presents from the Mogoll, with a Convoy and necessaries for his
journey, departed for Persia, not having one Englishman with him. Master Richard
Barber, his Apothecary, returned to Surat, and John Heriot dyed at Agra. There
remained with him of his old Followers only his Lady, and her Woman, two Persians ,
the old Armenian, and the Ghircassian [Circassian] : His Dutch Jeweller came from
Agra to Surat, with Master Edwards.” See the map from Purchas, opposite, also
the old map at page 297, which will show where Debal was, and the changes in the
mouths of the Indus.
The above will, I think, conclusively show that Dewal was not Thathah, nor
Lahri Bandar, and that all three were totally different places, as is distinctly stated
by the native authors of Sind.
Subsequent to this unfortunate affair, and ill-treatment of our people by this
mild Hindu, W. Paynton, then Captain Paynton, mentions “ Diul, near the mouth
of the River Indus,” as well as “ Diu in Guzurat where the Portuguese, among other
places, have a very strong castle.”
Sir Thomas Herbert left England in 1626, and was also landed at Diul. Paynton
says : “ Tutta is one of the most celebrated Marts of India, so encompassed with the
River Indus, that it makes a Peninsula. Loor Bander [Lahri Bandar] is the Port of
it, but Ships that lie there are subject to the Worm [this is contrary to the state¬
ment of Whithington], as at Stvallg, Goa,” etc.
In the account of Sir Thomas Roe’s embassy in 1615, Terry, his Chaplain,
writes : “ Tatta , a very fruitful and pleasant country, made so partly by the branch¬
ings of the Indus, that spreads itself into various Circlets, and forms many little
Islands up and down. * * * The main Current of this River meets with the
Sea at Sindee [i. e., Dewal, as shown in the previous notices], a place noted for many
curious handicrafts.”
Thevenot, who reached Surat about fifty years after, namely, in 1665-66, says,
respecting the “ Province of Sindy, which some call Tatta,” that “ The chief Town
of this Province is Tatta, and the most Southern Town Diul. It is still called Diul-
Sind, and was heretofore called Dobil [Debal he means]. It lies in the 24th or 25th
degree of Latitude. There are some Orientals that call the Country of Sinde by the
name of the Kingdom of Diul [he is quite correct : it is called the territory of Debal
or Lar]. It is a country of great TrafHck, and especially the Town of Tatta, where
the Indian Merchants buy a great many curiosities made by the Inhabitants, who
are wonderfully ingenious in all kinds of Arts [and still are]. The Indus makes a
great many little Islands towards Tatta , and these Islands being fruitful and
P P .
322 H. G. Eaverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
seven do-abahs , or deltas, extending from the east bank of the Sindhu, or
pleasant, make it one of the most commodious Towns of the Indies, though it be
exceedingly hot there.
“ There is also a great trade at Lourebender [Lahri Bandar], which is three
days’ journey from Tatta , upon the sea [‘Dial’ or Debal, according to Paynton,
was fifteen miles from ‘Tatta’], where there is a better Road for ships, than in
any other place in the Indies.”
Tavernier, who was in India in the same year as Thevenot, says : “ Tata , is one
of the greatest Cities of India , a little above the mouth of the River Indus. * * *
The Trade of Tata, which was formerly very great, begins now to decay, because the
mouth of the River grows more dangerous, and full of shallows every day more
than another, the sand hills having almost choaked it np.”
It will thus be noted, that a great change was then taking place in the course
of the Indus hereabouts; that Thathah, Debal, and Lahri Bandar were totally
distinct places — “ Bambura,” as the site of Debal is wholly out of the question —
and that such places as “ Manora,” or “ Karachi ” were then unknown to fame,
although some pretend to identify them, even in the time of the campaign of
Alexander of Macedon in these parts. Is it to be supposed that the commanders
of English trading vessels, who at the periods I have been quoting, frequented the
ports of Sind, and the merchants who were passing up and down between Multan,
Bakhar, Thathah, and Debal, would have been ignorant of Karachi and its port if it
had been of any importance, or as good as it was when we first occupied it ? About
the period in question, what was subsequently called Karaohi, was known as Ram
Bagli ; and Karachi, as before remarked, was considered rather to belong to Mukran
than to Sind.
Debal or Dewal is said above to have been in 1666, the southernmost town
of Sind, and its position is plainly stated in the account of Captain Newport’s
landing of Sir Robert Shirley and Sir Thomas Powell there, and the melancholy
events which befell his party therein. The distance given as fifteen miles from
Thathah by the river, would bring us very near to the Shrine of Pir Patho, at the
foot of the Makkahli hills, and near the Bhagar branch of the Indus, about the
period in question, a very great stream ; and it will be noticed that Sir Robert
Shirley tried to cross “ a River” from “ Diul ” to get to “Tatta” on a raft. I
therefore imagine that Debal lay in the vicinity of that Shrine, but a little farther
south-westward perhaps. The Bhagar branch was navigable for vessels of 200
tons as far as Lahri Bandar two centuries since, which latter place was then some
In De Witts’ Atlas, published at
Amsterdam in 1688, in map No. 74, of
which a tracing is here inserted, both
Debal and Thathah are situated on the
right bank of the Indus, showing, that,
after Sir Thomas Shirley’s time, another
change had taken place, which had
placed Debal on the same side as Tha¬
thah. It is in Lat. 24° 50' in that map.
It is said, that when our embassy
was sent to Sind in 1809, the Shrine of
Pir Patho was visited by a party
twenty miles distant from its mouth.
323
1892.] H. G. Haver ty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries .
A'b-i-Sind — for that was not included among the seven rivers, or “ Saptah
Sindhun ” 316 — to the west bank of the Saraswatn
•who sailed thither from Thathah down the Bhagar branch of the river. When
Pottinger was in Sind along with that Embassy, the Bhagar branch is said to have
been “ the chief outlet of the water of the Panjaub and Attock, and was upwards
of twenty miles wide at its mouth.”
In the year 578 H. (1182-83 A. D.), Debal — or Dibal, as its name is written in
the Musalman histories — was taken possession of, together with its territory lying
along the sea-coast, by Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Dm, Muhammad, son of Sam, the Shansa-
bani Tajzik Sultan of Ghazihn, the same who established the Muhammadan rule
over Dihlf, the “ Shabudin,” and “ Shahab-ood-Deen ” of Dow and Briggs, and
their copyists. Near Debal was Damrilah, both of which places were taken posses¬
sion of by Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, Mangbarni, the Khwarazm Shah, when he came
into Lower Sind in 621 H. (1224 A. D.). Having gained possession of Siw-istan,
the modern Sihwan, he marched from thence to Debal ; and its ruler, named
Chanisar, whose Musalman title was Sinan-ud-Din, of the Sumrah tribe, and who was
ruler of Lar, or the Debal territory (and subject to Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jali
of Multan and U'chchh, which included all Sind), who is called a Habash in the
Tabakat-i-Nasiri (page 294, which see, also note), fled by sea and escaped. The
Sultan from thence detached a force against Nahar-Walah, which returned with
immense booty. He then founded a Jami’ Masjid at Debal on the ruins of an idol
temple, the same, in all probability, which was demolished when the ’Arabs captured
the place, and from which it took its name.
At the period in question Thathah was not in existence, neither was it when
Ibn Batutah was at Lahri Bandar in 734 H. (1333-34 A. D.). The ruins noticed by
him I believe to be those of Damrilah. See note 173, page 224, and note 195,
page 255.
There is a deal in Elliot, Yol. I, p. 374, respecting Debal which he “ identified ”
as Karachi, and Manorah as the site of its idol temple, but, as he also “identified”
Mansuriyah and Bahman-abad as Haidar-abad, we may be permitted to ignore its
correctness. No allowance whatever is made by writers of the present day for the
changes which are hourly taking place in the course of the Indus and its tributaries,
and in the formation of its deltas, some of which changes, in rather less than three
centuries, I have shown from the extracts previously given.
The author of the well known and valuable history, the Jahan-Ara, Ahmad, son
of Muhammad, the l^azwini, died at Debal in 975 H. (1567 A. D.), on his way to
Hindustan from Tran.
In the reign of Baki Muhammad Khan of Balkh, about 1006 H., an Uzbak
noble of high rank, Mansur, the Dad-Khwa, set out on the pilgrimage to Makkah
316 Dr. Muir, in his “ Sanskrit Texts ” says, that Prof. Max Muller states
(“ Chaps.” 1-63), that the seven rivers are “ the Indus, the five rivers of the Panj-
ab, and the Sarasvati.” This is a mistake ; and the Indus appears to have been
adopted because he left out the Gliag-ghar, which flows between the Sutlaj and the
Saraswati, but which river, although its ancient name of Drishadwati is given b_y
both the writers named, they do not appear to have been acquainted with its moro
modern name. It is never once mentioned by that name in Dr. Muir’s work.
324 H. Gr. Kaverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
The following description of the Wihat, or Bihat, is from the Survey
record previously quoted.
by the Dasht-i-Kibchak, Ming-Kishlak, the Caspian, the Shirwanat, Gurjistan, and
Kurdistan, to Istambul. From thence he proceeded through Rum, Sham and Misr,
and from thence to Makkah. Having performed the hajj, he returned by sea to the
port of Debal , passed through Sind aud Multan to Lahor, and from there returned
to Balkh.
Having clearly shown that Debal or Dewal was not Thathah, nor “ Bambura,”
nor Lahrf Bandar, nor Karachi, and stated that the latter was not founded for cen¬
turies after the ’Arab conquest, I will now show, as near as possible, when it was.
For about one hundred and thirty years after the time Muhammad, son of
]£asim, subdued Sind in 93 H. (711-12 A. D.), it was held by the Tammimi ’Arabs,
who acknowledged the ’Abbasi Khalifahs as their sovereigns. In 186 H. (803 A.D.),
when Harun-ar- Rashid assigned the eastern half of the Khilafat to his son, Mu-
hammad-al-Mamun, among the territories named is “ the territory on the Ab-i-
Sind ” or Indus, “ including a part of Hind,” referring, of course, to Sind and its
dependencies, and Multan.
In 205 H. (820-21 A. D.), the same in which Tahir-i-Zu-l-Yamanain received
the investiture of Khuras&n and its dependent territories from the Khalifah, Al-
Mamun, and to which Sind and Multan also appertained, the Wall of Sind, Da’ud,
son of Yazid, having died, it was conferred upon Bashar, son of the deceased Da’ud
(Thomas says the coins of the rulers of Mansuryah bear the words “ Bano Da’ud”
which he supposed, but erroneously, might refer to the modern Da’ud-putrahs, but
this family was referred to. It will be noticed that Da’ud is a favourite name among
the Karamitah of Multan), under the stipulation that he should yearly pay 100,000
dirams to the Dar-ul-Khilafat. Subsequently, the Khalifahs, losing power, were
obliged to commit distant provinces into the hands of feudatories more powerful
than themselves ; and iu 257 H. (871 A. D.), Ya’kiib, son of Lais, the Suffari, among
other parts, held Sind, the local Wall's being subordinate to him. In 258 H. (872
A. D.), the Wall of the territory of Sind, Muhammad, son of Sabhun died ; and
in 261 H. (874-75 A. D.), the then Khalifah, Al-Mu’tamid B’illah, gave his brother,
Abi Ahmad, the title of Muwaffik B’illah, and assigned him the government of
the whole east, including Sind. In 265 H. (878-79 A. D.), however, the Khalifah,
in order to divert ’Umaro, son of Lais, who succeeded his brother, Ya’kub, in that
year, from invading ’Irak, conferred upon him Khurasan, Fars, Kirman, Mukran,
and Sind, as well as Sigiz-stan, which he previously held. It was about this time
that the Sumrahs broke out, and acquired some power in Lar or Lower Sind, and,
no doubt, acknowledged the supremacy of the ’Abbasi Khalifahs and their feuda¬
tories. They succeeded in holding power in that part for about one hundred and
seventy-eight years, which would bring us to 443 H. t 1051-52 A. D.).
Sind, and also Multan, had continued, nominally at least, to acknowledge the
suzerainty of the Bani ’Abbas and their feudatories for the time being, until the
time of Sultan Mahmud-i-Sabuk-Tigin, who ousted the officials of the ’Abbasis, and
annexed it ; and the Sumrahs of Lar had to succumb. At this period, the Sumrahs,
who appear to have embraced Muhammadanism, outwardly at least, had become
Karamitah, as were the rulers of Multan, and many of their people. This heresy
seems to have obtained firm root in these parts, which may partly be accounted for
from their communications by sea with Egypt, ’Arabia, and Persia, where it flourish-
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 325
“ This large river issues from the kohistan east and south of Kash¬
mir, flows through its capital, and after passiug under Muzaflar-abad is
ed, and from refugees from those parts finding it convenient to come by sea into
Sind for shelter. Schism had been early sown in Sind, as may be seen from
note 199, page 257. Amir Nasir-ud-Din-i-Sabuk-Tigin tried to put it down in
Khurasan, and his son and successor, Sultan Mahmud, sought to root it out in Multan
and Sind, as well as in Zabul-istan. He first moved against the Bhatiah of U'ohchh
in 396 H. (1005-6 A. D.), as related in note 192, page 244. In the year follow¬
ing, 397 H. (1006-7 A. D.), he determined to attack Mult5n, because the Wall
thereof, Abu-l-Fath-i-Da’ud, son of Nasr, who hitherto had been subject to the ’ Abbasis,
began to assume independence, and read the Khutbcih for himself, besides being
guilty of other misdeeds, and making his stronghold the hotbed of heresy in that
quarter. The ’Abbasi Khalifah had assigned all his claims on Sind and Multan —
the Musalman dominions east of, and on the Ab-i-Sind or Indus — to Sultan Mahmud,
and he determined to enforce them.
This was the period that Anand-Pal, son of Jai-Pal, refused the Sultan a passage
through his territory on his way to Multan, and was well punished for his hostility.
Abu-l-Fath-i-D&’ud, becoming aware of Anand-Pal’s overthrow, speedily collected
his treasures and other movables, loaded them on elephants (some say camels), and
sent them off to Saran-Dip [Kachchh Bhuj], and abandoned Multan. The Sultan on
reaching that part, becoming aware of the misdeeds of Da’ud, devastated his
territory, but those of his supporters who remained, having agreed to pay the yearly
sum of 20,000 dirams as a capitation tax, treating them as infidels, he accepted it,
because the I'-lak Khan was threatening his northern frontier on the Oxns, and his
presence there was urgently required.
When he retired, Daud again appeared, and the jaziah tax remained unpaid.
In 401 H. (1010-11 A. D.), having disposed of his other affairs, the Sultan deter¬
mined to finish the affair of Multan and the Karamitah — or Mulhaidah, as they are
also styled, the word applied to the heretics in general — and annex the territory.
Multan was captured, the greater number of the Karamitah taken, of whom
some were put to death, some deprived of a hand, and the rest sent to fortresses
to be there imprisoned for lifetime, thus making an exemplary example of the
heretics. As Multan and its territory was never “ ruled by a Sumra dynasty,” as
asserted in Gazetteer history, no “ idol of the Sun was again set up, under the
Sumra dynasty.”
I may add, that the Mulhaidah of these parts and provinces adjacent, had
rendered pilgrimages to Makkah impossible for some time past, infesting the routes,
and completely closing them. Repeated complaints were made to the Sultan, and
the matter became so serious, that, in 412 H. (1021-22 A. D.), Sultan Mahmud had
to take efficient steps to remedy it.
The Karamitah ruler of Multan, above referred to as overthrown by Sultan Mah¬
mud, is the same who has been mistaken by Firishtah, and other modern compilers
of his class, for an Afghan of the Lodi tribe (in order to make up the “ Pathan Dy¬
nasties” perhaps), under the name of “ Abn-l-Fath Daud, grandson of Shaikh Hamid
Lodi” There were no Lodi's, nor Lodi rulers, there at the time, nor for centuries after.
The rulers of Multan were Kuresh of the Bani ’Usman, descendants of Sam, son of
Laiui — mistaken for and were still ruling there when the
Sulfcan marched against it. See pages 189-190. An exhortation was addressed by
326 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
joined by the “ Nad, ” or “ River,” coming from Little, or the Lesser,
Tibbat. Subsequently it is joined by the Kishan-Ganga, and after leaving
the Muktanah, Baha-ud-Din, the chief da’i, or apostle, of Hamzah, one of the leading
personages of the sect, at the commencement of the reign of the Saltan’s successor,
Saltan Mas’ud, in 423 H. (1032 A D.), to the }£aramitah of Multan and Sind and Hind,
and particularly to a Sumrah, the chief of the tribe probably, -whom he addresses as
“The Shaikh, the son of Sumar [Sumrah, as the word is also written] Rajah Pal,”
calling upon him, as though he, too, had been a da’i, to accomplish the mission
wherewith he was charged, of bringing back backsliders to the Karamitah heresy,
and particularly, Da’ud, son of Abu-l-Fath-i-Da’ud, the heretic ruler of Multan, who
had fled from thence, and whose son, Da’ud, here referred to, had been thrown
into prison by Sultan Mahmud, and had been set at liberty by Sultan Mas’ud, on his
recanting his heresy apparently.
The Sumrahs paid obedience to the sovereigns of Ghaznin, nominally at least,
until the reign of the amiable, but weak, Sultan ’Abd-nr-Rashid, the affairs of whose
kingdom were in great disorder ; and, in 443 H. (1051-52 A. D.), taking advantage
of the state of affairs, the Sumrahs assembled in the Thar or That, the sandy tract
between Sind and Kachchh, and set up a Sumrah to rule over them independently.
His name is not given by the Sindi writers, and it is probable that he was no other
than this same Rajah (or rather, Rana ; for that, and also Ra’i, were the Hindu
titles by which the local chiefs were known) Pal. But whoever he may have been,
he is said to have ruled several years, and to have left a son, Bhungar by name,
who, after reigning for a period of fifteen years, died in 461 H. (1068-69 A. D.),
in the tenth year of Sultan Ibrahim of Ghaznin. Eighteen others of this race are
said to have followed in succession.
After the fall of the Turk dynasty of Ghaznin, the Shansabani Tajzik Ghiiris held
Sind and Multan, the former territory nominally perhaps to some degree, from 578
H. (1182-83 A. D.), when Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-Sam marched against
Debal, and possessed himself of all the territory on the sea -coast. See paragraph
15 of this note 315. After his assassination in 602 H. (1205-6 A. D.) by the
disciples of the Mulahidah, a name applied, as well as Bataniah, to the Karamitah,
and who may have been, as stated, of the Khokhar tribe of Jats nevertheless, since
the Sumrahs were Karamitah (See Tabakat-i-Xasiri,” page 485, and note 3), his
feudatory of Multan, and l/chchh, the then capital of all Sind, Malik Xasir-ud-Din,
Kaba-jah, one of the Sultan’s four favourite Mamlulis, and a Turk, following the
example of Malik Taj-ud-Din, I-yal-duz, and Malik Kutb-ud-Din, T-bak, the other
Turk feudatories of Ghaznin and Dihli (Baha-ud-Din, Tughril, the fourth of the
favourite Mamluks , had been dead some time), declared himself independent, and
assumed the title of Sultan. At this period there were seven petty Ranas in Sind
subject to his suzerainty, one of whom was Raua Sanir, sou of Dhamaj, of the tribe
of Karijah Sammah Lohanos, who dwelt at Tung in the Riipah territory, and an¬
other, Sinan-ud-Din, Ohanisar, of Debal, who was the fourteenth of the Sumrah
dynasty, and the same who fled, and escaped by sea, from Sultan Jalal-ud-Dfn,
Mangbarni, when he attacked Debal and Damrilah, as mentioned in the paragraph
above referred to.
In after years it is said, during the reign of ’ Ala-ud-Din, the Khalj Turk, Sultan of
Dihli, the people of Lar or Lower Sind, complained to him of the tyranny and op¬
pression of their chief, Ra’i Dudah, aud that the Sultan, to whom they must have been,
] 892,"J H, G. Raverty — The MiJirdn of Sind and ifs Tributaries, 327
tlie more liilly tracts, and reaching more open country, another consider¬
able river from the direction of Punch joins it. After this junction, and
from this, subject, despatched a body of troops against him, on which the Sumrahs
fled from Sind into Kaohohh. and songht the assistance of the Sammahs, who,
through the same Dudah’s tyranny, had fled from Sind and found refuge and a home
there, and had prospered greatly. They took up the cause of the Sumrahs, but the
confederates were overthrown by the Sultan’s troops ; and the Sumrahs were so
completely broken, that not one of their tribe was left powerful enough to rule in
Lar or Lower Sind, the territory subsequently known as Thathah from its capital
of that name. From this period Lar or Lower Sind, again became tributary to the
Dihli sovereigns.
The facts, however, which have been somewhat obscured and confused, are, that
the Sumrah chief and ruler, A mar, turned into ’Umar by the Musalman writers, and
the same who gave name to Amar-Kot, son of Ra’i Dudah above mentioned, was a
great tyrant and oppressor. Among other bad acts, he carried off the wife of an
’Arab chief, ’Umar, the Tammimi, the same tribe which, in former times, had been
all-powerful in Sind. ’Umar proceeded to the presence of Sultan ’Ala-ud-Dm, the
IChalj Turk, Sultan of Dihli, who summoned Amar, Sumrah, to appear before him.
He, fearing the consequences if he did not go, went, and was cast into prison,
where he languished for a considerable time ; and he only regained his liberty through
the intercession of powerful friends, and the payment of a heavy fine. This happen¬
ed about 705 H. (1305-6 A. D.).
In the meantime, the Sammahs remaining in Sind had been prospering, and
gaining influence and some power, and had got possession of most of the territory of
Lar; but, when the feudatory of Multan and Uchohh, Ghazi Malik, afterwards
Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Tuglilnk Shah, in the year 720 H. (1320 A. D.), marched to
Dihli to oust the Parwayi usurper from the throne, Amar, Sumrah, seized the
opportunity and repossessed himself of the territory of Lar, and died after a reign
so called, including the time of his imprisonment, of thirty-five years. On this,
another Sumrah, named Bhungar, succeeded, who held possession for another ten
years, when another, named Hamir (called Armil and Abra by some) succeeded
him. Whether these were sons or brothers of Amar is not stated, but the final over¬
throw of the Sumrahs was close at hand.
During the captivity of Amar, Sumrah, a number of the Sammahs had returned
from Kachchh and joined the others in Lar ; and the tyranny and oppression of
Hamir, Sumrah, becoming unbearable, the Sammahs set up a man, among those
who had come back from Kachchh, named Unar, distinguished for his intelligence and
exemplary conduct, who seized Hamir, the Sumrah, and put him to death. He
received the title of Jam from his tribe, “ which is a title of respectability among
these people.” This was in 738 H. (began 29th July, 1337 A. D.).
During the time the Sammahs had been subject to the Sumrahs, they had
founded a town and a fort on the skirts of the Makkahlx hills, the first being named
Samu’i, also called Sa’i by some few writers, and the other Thakur-abad— the Chief’s
abode or place of residence, the foundations of which had been laid by their then
Thakfir — for by this Hindfi title, as well as Ra’i and Rana, although converts to
Islam, they appear at different times to have been styled — but it had been left
unfinished, probably because the Sumrahs would not permit them to finish it. This
they now completed, and also founded a number of other towns and villages. This
328 H. G. Raverty — The MiJirctn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
flowing between three and four huroh farther southwards, it separates
into two branches, which again unite lower down under the fort of
fort was subsequently called, or the name changed into, Tughluk-abad, a Turkish,
not a Sindf name ; and the author of the Tuhfat-ul-Kiram states, that some of the
“ present defences and erections in the fort of Tnghluk-abad, better known as
Kalyan Kot,” were the work of the Nawwab, Murid Khan [a Turk, or Mughal], who
was the feudatory of the'|Thathali province in 1099 H. (1688 A. D.), the thirty-
second year of Aurang-zeb-i-’Alam-gir Badshah. This place, miscalled “ Kalan
Kot ” (or “ Great Fort,” ‘ Ticilan * being the Persian for great) by Mr. A. W. Hughes,
the compiler of the “ Gazetteer of Sind,” founded by the Thaluir above referred to, he
“ supposes to have been built about 1421 A. D., during the Sarama dynasty,” in which
supposition he is mistaken, “ and is supposed to stand on the site of a still more
ancient stronghold.” Kalyan , is a Sanskrit word, and Kalyan Kot signifies the
Fort of Prosperity, Happiness, or Well-being. The place is now situated on the
right bank of the Bhagar channel of the Indus, about three miles south of Thathah,
where the ruins may still be seen.
Although the Sammahs rose against the Smnrahs in 734 H. (1333-34 A. D.),
and they finally fell four years after, still the Sammahs are not accounted among
independent rulers of Lower Sind until 743 H. (1342-43 A. D.) ; and the question
naturally arises why it was so. We have merely to turn to the events of the reign
of Sultan Muhammad, Tughluk Shah, for a reply. His empire was, for the greater
part of his reign, in a state of chronic rebellion and disorder ; and as quickly as he
moved in one direction to put down an outbreak, another broke out in a contrary
direction. This was the half-mad Sultan who endeavoured to depopulate Dihli,
and to transfer the seat of government to Diw-gir (vul. “ Deogir”) or Daulat-abad
in the Dakhan ; who proposed to conquer China, when he could not take care of,
and hold his own territory ; who would confer distant countries and kingdoms,
which he did not possess, on liis favourites ; and who endeavoured to substitute a
paper currency instead of gold and silver. It was at this period, when the Dilhi
empire was in such a state of hopeless disorder, that the Sammahs became in¬
dependent like other petty feudatories in the empire ; but the traitor, Malik Taglii,
the mamluk of one of his principal Amirs, being harboured by the Sammahs,
brought Sultan Muhammad, Tughluk Sh&h, against them, to die, in the first month
of 752 H. (1351 A. D.), in the neighbourhood of Thathah recently founded, and,
subsequently, caused his successor, Sultan Firuz Shah, to march against it, and to
carry off their Jam and his son captives to Dihli.
The first of the independent Jams of Lar or Lower Sind, Unar, son of Disar,
descended from Jam Junan, son of Lakhah, son of Kahah, who died after ruling
for a period of three years and a half, was succeeded by his brother, Junan, who
ruled thirteen years, but some say fourteen. This brings us, for no dates are given,
to the year 750 H. (1349-50 A. D.). He was succeeded by his nephew, the son of
Jam Unar, with respect to whose name the greatest confusion and discrepancy exists
among the native writers generally, but I think I am able to clear up the matter.
I may mention, however, before doing so, that the Moorish traveller, Muham¬
mad, son of Batutah, came into Sind early in 734 H., and that he visited Siw-istan,
subsequently called Sihwan, Lahri Bandar, Bakhar, and U'chchli, but he never refers
to the Jams of Lar or Lower Sind, for a good reason, that this was the very year
in which the Sammahs rose against the Sumrahs. This also may be the reason
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 329
Jihlam. As at this place is the Shah Guzr, or Royal Ferry, the river
is, at times, called the river of Jihlam, but it does not mean that Jihlam
why he did not visit Debal, which he does not even mention. Thathah we conld not
expect him to refer to, as it was only founded some years after. lie left India
again in 743 H., just before the Sammahs became independent, or about that period.
It was this Jam who, soon after the Sammahs gained the upper hand in Lar, not
far from Samu’i, founded a new town as the capital of his territory, which was
named Thathah ; and therefore, the name he became familiarly known by was, the
Jam, the Bani-i-Thathah — the Founder of Thathah — as is clearly written, and beyond
a doubt, in several different historians, not of Sind only. These words in the
Persian, in which all the histories of Sind are written, are sometimes, but
rarely, by ignorant scribes, as one word — . 5 and, in others, it is written in
various ways, but all tending to show what is meant when the key of solution is ap¬
plied, thus : — - AxjjIj - - Axxjlj - &.xxj - Axxj - and
and in other ways. This place, which some modern writers have “identified”
as “ Debal,” as “ Lahori Bandar,” “ Kalankot,” and other places, and to have been
in existence in the time of the Macedonian Alexander’s campaign on the Indus (as
it now flows) another writer says, was only “ founded in 900 H. (1495 A. D.), by
the Jam Nizam-ud-Din, Nandah,” which date is just twenty-seven years before the
total overthrow of the Samraah dynasty and conquest of all Upper Sind by Shah
Beg Khan, the Arghun Mughal !
It may not be amiss to point out hero some of the errors made by different
historians of Sind, according to their own showing, which have caused suoh confu¬
sion respecting the fall of the Sumrahs, and the rise of the Sammahs to power in
Lar or Lower Sind.
Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar is one of the chief offenders in this respect. He says,
that Jam Junah (but whose name is not written but the final ‘ n’ being
nasal — Juuan) son of and and — for it is written in as many dif¬
ferent ways in different MS. copies of his work — died after thirteen years’ reign, in
the time of Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, the Khalj Turk ruler of Dihli, who reigned from
695 to 717 H. (1295-96 to 1317-18 A. D.), and Tamachi, his brother — for he makes
him, Junan, and Unar, sons of this doubtful ^8^, etc. — his successor. He also makes
Tamachi to be taken captive by the troops of Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, actually before
the time of the Sammahs acquiring superiority over the Sumrahs, and taken to¬
gether with his family to Dihli, where, after some considerable time not mentioned,
Tamachi dies ; and his son, Khair-ud-Din, who, in his infancy, had been taken to
Dihli with his father, was sent back to rule over Lower Sind. He then makes
Sultan Muhammad Shah, who reigned from 725 H. (1325 A. D.) to 752 H„ (1351
A. D.), come into Sind against this same Khair-ud-Din, who would not attend his
summons to appear in his camp ; and shortly after the Sultan dies in the vicinity of
Thathah in 752 H. Thus, between the death of ’Ala-ud-Din and of Muhammad
Shah is a period of twenty-seven years. Mir Ma’sum merely adds, that, some
years after, he (Khair-ud-Din) died. Then a son of his, styled Jam (and in
other ways, as before mentioned) succeeds, against whom Sultan Firuz Shah, in
773 H. (A. D. 1371-72), no less than twenty-one years after, comes to avenge his
predecessor. This Jam also is carried off to Dihli, according to the same writer,
where he is kept a prisoner for a considerable time, after which he is released, and
Q Q
330 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
is its proper name. In the Rash-miri language the river is known as
Bedasta (ULmXjj) ; and as in the Panj-ab territory ‘ w ’ ( j) is used for
is reinstated in the government of Thathah and its territory, where he reigns in
peace for fifteen years more. The writer gives not a single date until he comes
to the thirteenth of the Jams in 858 H. (145-1 A. D.)
Now if we turn to his account of the reigns of the Dihli sovereigns, which he
gives in much greater detail in another part of his work, we shall not find a word
respecting the Jams in ’Ala-ud- Din’s reign, hut there is in the account of Sultan
Muhammad Shah’s, and in Sultan Firuz’s, in the notice of which latter reign he
states, that it was against Jam Khair-ud- Din that that Sultan came, and that he and
his family were carried off to Dihli where he died, and that the Sultan sent his son
Chunah (Junan?) back to rule in Thathah, but no such name as that of the son is
to be found in his account of the Jams. There, he says, that Jam was released by
Sultan Firuz Shah, who sent him back to Sind, and that his brother, Jam Tamachi,
succeeded him.
Thus it will be seen, that Mir Ma’sum makes one and the same Khair-ud-Din
and his father, Tamachi, to be carried into captivity both by Sultan ’Ala-ud-Din, and
by Sultan Firuz Shah, between the death of the first of which, and the latter’s
reduction of Thathah, is a period of fifty-six years ! In another part of his work
he also says, that Jam son of Khair-ud-Din, was carried off by Firuz Shah,
and that his brother, Tamachi, was sent back. He has made one Jam Tamachi into
two persons, and “ made confusion worse confounded.”
One of the greatest errors, probably, in the history of Sind, and respecting the
foundation of Thathah, although no date for the latter is given, is contained in the
extract from the Tarikh-i-Tahiri contained in Elliot, Yol. 1, pp. 273-75. It is, that
Jam Nanda founded Thathah ; and immediately after says he was living in 912 H.
(1506-7 A. D.), and that he reigned seventy-three years. On the other hand, Mir
Ma’sum says, that he came to the Masnad in 866 H. (1461-62 A. D.) in one MS., and
in another, in 896 H. (1490-91 A. D.), and reigned forty-eight years. If we take
the first date as correct, it brings us to 914 H. (1508-9 A. D.). Thus, according to
the Tarikh-i-Tahiri, as in the extract noticed, Thathah was only founded a few years
before Shah Beg Khan’s first invasion of Sind, and fifteen before the final downfall
of the Jams ; but we know it was invested in 752 H., and surrendered to Sultan
Firuz Shah in 773 H. The Tarikh-i-Tahiri has confounded Junan, probably, with
Nandah, between whom is a period of nearly two centuries intervening, the first
mentioned being the second of the Jams, and Nandah the fifteenth.
Mirza Tsa, the Tar-khan Mughal (for the origin of which term see my “TabakSt-
-Nasiri,” page 942), who succeeded Mirza Shah Husain, the Arghun Mughal, in
Sind, became involved in hostilities with Sultan Mahmud Khan, the feudatory of the
Bakhar province, in 962 H. (1554-55 A. D.). In the fourth month of 963 H. (March,
1556 A. D.), Mirza ’Tsa appeared before Bakhar ; and, during his absence from
Thathah, a body of Farangis (Portuguese), whom he had sent for from Gowah
( vul . “ Goa ”) to assist him, reached it. On a Friday, when the people of Thathah
were all assembled in the Jami’ Masjid, the Farangis entered the city, surrounded
the Masjid, and set fire to the city on all sides. They then sacked it, slaying a
great number of the inhabitants, and making many captive, besides which, a great
number were burnt to death. Before they retired, having poured a darn (com-
331
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
and interchangeable with ‘ b ’ (<->), the people of that part call it Wihat
and Bihat.
“ From under the fort of Jihlam the Bihat passes below Jalal-pur-
i-Garchak, and by Bahrah (then close to its bank) and Kdiusli-ab, and
within a short distance of the karyah of Chhautarah ( ) unifes
with the Chin-ab, and loses its own name.”
In the lower part of the Chin-bath Do-dbah, or delta, between the
Bihat or Jihlam and the Chin-ab, there is an extensive tract of table
land, or plateau, sloping gradually upwards on either side, at a distance
of about three or four miles, or more in some places, from the rivers’
banks, and beginning with a low, abrupt ridge, which separates the
good lands lying along the banks from the waste in question. It
extends from near Nun-Miani on the north, in the Shah-pur district,
down towards the junction of the Bihat and Chin-ab. In about the
centre of this plateau there is a range of rugged hills, running in
parallel ridges across the Do-dbah. They extend from east to west about
twenty-one miles, and from north to south about ten or twelve. Some
of their offshoots extend across the Chin-ab, which cuts its way through
them, east of the town of Chandani-ot, or Chandan-ot ( vul . “ Cliuneeot ”),
part of which stands on them ; and some of their minor offshoots, or
waves, extend for some twenty miles or more into the Rachin-ab Do-
dbah, as far as the Sangala Tall , or Tallah. They are known as the
Kiranah range, and this elevated tract or plateau is named the Kiranali
Bar or waste after them.
All along the west bank of the Bihat, which river contains a much
lesser volume of water than the Chin-ab, there is a belt or strip of
alluvium, as its Hindi name of Jcachchhi implies, the same word as
noticed in note 349, at page 348, and applied in the same way. It
extends westwards from the river bank from half a mile to four and
five, and, in some few places, as much as ten miles, but the average
bnstible — napthah or petroleum probably) upon the waters, they set it on fire, drop¬
ped down the channel, and departed.
_ *T S
As to the origin of the name Thathali — — Cunningham states, at pao-e 288
of his “ Ancient Geography of India,” that thattha means a ‘ shore,’ a e bank,’ so
that Nagar Thatha would mean the city on the bank.”
That — — Sanskrit cRT, signifies ‘ a bank,’ 1 a shore,’ and which is
written like the name of the place, and the other mode of writing it — ;n Hindi
signifies ‘ sport,’ £ fan,’ etc. The probability is that the name of the place does not
refer to either of the significations mentioned above. There are scores of villages in
the Panj-ab with the prefix thathi to their names, and the city in question, was not
at all times on either ‘ a bank ’ or c shore.’
‘ a crowd,’ c throng,’ ‘ assemblage,’ is the more
1 hath in Hindi, signifying
likely origin of the name of this place
332 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
breadth, roughly speaking, is from three to five, as far as the abrupt
edge or steep bank of the Thai , another elevated desert tract, referred
to with respect to the course of the A'b-i-Sind or Indus, in the Muzaffar
Garh district, and its junction with the Qhin-ab and tributaries. The
Bihat, here and there, approaches close to this Thai, in part of the Shah-
pur district, and also in the upper part of the district of Jhang-i-
Sialan, where it may be said to be wearing the bank of the Thai away ;
but, more towards the south, the A lachchhi widens considerably, and,
consequently, there is a greater distance between the river and the
Thai .
Very little change, comparatively, appears to have taken place in
the course of the Bihat, except towards its place of junction with the
Qhin-ab, which has changed often, and considerably. In former times
it ran farther east, and passed nearer to Jhang-i-Sialan than at present.
Abu-l-Fazl says, “the Bihat or Wihat unites with the Ohin-ab near the
pargana'h of Shor,” that is to say, the pargana 'h of w7hich Shor or Shor
Kot is the chief place. At the present time the junction takes place
twenty-six miles north of Shor Kot, and eight miles above the place of
junction at the time of the Survey I am quoting. Abu-l-Fazl refers to
the time when the 0]iin-ab flowed some three miles and a half east of that
town, where the old channel is still very distinct, and the Bihat flowed
past it about the same distance on the west. At that time the junction
took place about three miles, or thereabouts, south-south-west of Shor
Kot, but the Qhin-ab having subsequently changed its course very con¬
siderably, ran into the bed of the Bihat, thirty-one miles farther north.
The Khuhisat-ut-Tawarikh, written in the reign of Aurang-zeb-i-
’Alam-gir Bad shah, by an official of the Mughal empire, before alluded
to, states, that the Qhin-ab, at that period, united with the Jililam, or
Biliat, at, that is to say near to, Jhang-i-Sialan, which now is some
thirteen miles above the junction, and the Biliat does not now approach
within twenty-six or twenty-seven miles of if on the west.
At the time of the Survey from which I have been quoting, the
route from Jhang-i-Sialan towards the Dera’h of Isma’il Khan will
show some of the changes which have taken place in the course of both
the Wihat and the Chin-ab within rather less than a century. It states,
that “ In going from Jhang-i-Sialan317 you have to proceed nearly
three kuroh west, and cross the Ohin-ab by boat. This ferry is called
the Patan of Jhang-i-Sialan ; and from thence you go two kuroh more to
Massan, a large k ary ah of the Sial tribe, on the bank of the river. From
thence going six kuroh more in the direction of south-south-west you
817 That is to say, Jhang of the Sials, or of the Sial tribe, but now, from care-
essness or constant use, generally called, in conversation, Jhang-i-Sial.
1892.] H G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 333
reach the banks of the Wihat, and cross into the Sind-Sagar Do-abah
by boat. This ferry is known as the Qhhautarah Patan, and the large
Jcaryah of Qhhautarah is close by the banks on the west side. From
this last named place you proceed, through a very sandy tract, six kuroh
south-west to Uchchh-i-Gul Imam, a strong fort,” etc., etc.
At the present time, Massan, turned into “ Mussun” in our maps, is
nearly four miles from the Qhin-ab, and nearly five east of the Wihat.
There is still a very small village known as Chhautarah, but apparently
not that referred to here,818 which has probably disappeared, close to the
west bank, and two miles and a half above the junction of the two
rivers, just below which is the ferry now known as Trimun Patan.
Among the belahs or islands in the bed of the Wihat, north of the
present Chhautarah, there is one a mile and a quarter in length and
nearly as broad, called the Belah of Qhhautarah, showing where the
large karyah so called once flourished.
In the route leading westwards towards the Dera’h of Ghazi
Khan still greater changes are to be found. The Survey account says :
“ In going from Jhang-i Sialan thither by way of the Haweli of Bahadur
Shah. Kureshi 819 [which is about mid- way between Jhang and Shor Kot]
you leave the aforementioned Haweli , and having proceeded one kuroh
west, reach a large ndlah [yul. “ nulla”] — a small river, a branch of,
or coming from, the Qhin-ab, which, flowing between two and three
kuroh towards the left hand (south), again unites with it. Except in
the rainy season it is fordable knee-deep. From it you go half a Jcuroli
west, and reach the Qhin-ab and Wihat, which flow in one channel, and
here it is near upon two kuroh in breadth. You have to cross by boat.
The place of junction of the two rivers, which is called by the name
of Trimun, is about three kuroh higher up on the right hand (north).830
“ On the other side of the aforementioned river [the two united]
there is also another ndlah or channel of great size, which comes from
the right hand from the river Wihat, and at the patan or ferry unites
with the Qhin-ab. This guzr or ferry, on the Sind-Sagar Do-abali side,
is called the Patan of ’All Kahanna ( ), and, on the Rachin-ao Do-
M
abah side, the Patan of Bahadur Shah, Kureshi. ’All Kahanna is the
name of a branch of the Sial tribe, who number between three and four
thousand families.
It has probably taken the name of the former village of that name. See the
large scale Revenue Survey map.
M9 See note 325, page 335.
32° The point of junction a short time since was eight miles above ’All
Kahanna, or two miles higher up than at the period in question, and nearly nine
miles below Massan. See also page 335.
334 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
“ After having crossed the united Chin-ab and Wihat, half a
huroh farther west is another large ndlah , as large as a quarter or more
of the channel of the Wihat. It comes from the river from the right
hand (north), runs towards the left (south), and abreast of Kot Mapal
unites with the Ohin-ab. Between this great ndlah and the Ohin-ab
is a large extent of land some three huroh in breadth ; and its inhabi¬
tants are Baluchis of the Almani branch, who pay allegiance to Kabir
Khan, Sial, the ruler of Jhang-i-Sialan, one of the two chiefs of that
great tribe. The chief village of these Almanis is called Almani after
them. As the large ndlah above referred to is very tortuous, it is known
by the name of Kputli ).8S1
“ Having passed this ndlah , and proceeding half a huroh more to
the westward, you reach ’All Kahanna, the name by which several
small haryahs of the Sials of the branch known by that name are
called. From thence you go one huroh south to Miran de Bohar, the
name of a very large and ancient boliar tree,822 beneath which are the
graves of several people of the Musalman faith. From thence the
route leads one huroh south-west to Murad da Kot, a village belonging
to the Salbani branch of the Sial tribe. East and south of this haryah
or village, and of the aforesaid bohar , there is a channel of great
depth, which, running to the loft hand (south-south-westwards), unites
with the Ohin-ab. It is stated that this is an ancient channel of the
Wihat; and save in the rainy season,828 it is fordable in some places,
but at other times, you have to cross it over bridges. One huroh
321 The bar — Ficus Indica.
See note 360, page 362, where we are told in the account of the movements of
Alexander the Great, that it is said, that “ a great banyan tree existed near the
confluence of the Hydraotes [Rawi] with the Acesines [Ohin-ab],” and that it
“ would bo worth while to ascertain whether there be one [after two thousand
two hundred years and moi'e !], of great size and apparent antiquity.” Here is
one ; but there used to be another near the ferry of Fazil Shah, at the place
whore the two rivers united about half a century or more since, but which is
now nearly four miles from the junction, and stood between the two rivers at the
talcijah of a Fakir. It was famous for its great age, but not quite twenty-two
centuries perhaps, and possessed very large trunks from one root, and hence it
was known to the people of that part, by the name of “ Ath Mundi,” or the
“ Eight Pillars.”
322 The “Nulla Fhant’> of the latest maps, probably, or what at present
remains of it.
323 The writer does not mean to say that there is a rainy season here, unless
the seasons have changed since, but merely refers to the period of the rains farther
eastwards within the influence of the monsoon. In the Panj-ab, the hot season is
the time when the rivers are in flood or inundated, at which period in the parts
farther east, the rainy season prevails.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
835
south from Murad da Kot is Rustam da Kot ; and passing it, and going
another huroh in the same direction you reach Islam-pur. Another
two huroh from thence to the south is Kokari, a large haryah of Sayyids
and there is the Mazar (Tomb and Shrine), of Hazrat, ’Abd-ullah-i-
Jahanian, who is known by the name of Munnawir-i-Jhang 821) and the
U'putli ndlali , before mentioned, lies near by on tlie left hand (south).”
Now let us see how matters stand at present. No great nalah
now exists one huroh west of the Haweli of Bahadur Shah, Kureshi,
and the Ohin-ab is but two miles and three quarters, equal to about a
huroh and a half, from that place on the west ; but, in the bed of the
river are several large belahs or islands, the river bed is about a mile
and a half in breadth, and the river flows in two branches. The place
of junction of the Wihat and Ghin-ab, at present — that is according to
the latest survey, but it may have altered, or may have been altering,
very considerably this present hot season — which was known as Trimun,
is now nine miles to the north, or more than five huroh instead of three
huroh, as it was when the Survey above quoted was made, and a little
to the north of what is still known by the old name of Trimun Patan.
The ferry which, on one side, was called the ’All Kahanna Patan, and,
on the other, the Patan of Bahadur Shah, Kureshi, does not now exist
at the point indicated, but there is another, about three miles and a
quarter north-west of the Haweli of Bahadur Shah, Kureshi (called
“ Haweli Bahadur Shah Perry,” and “ Haweli Perry ” in the maps 826)
and more than three miles and a half north of ’Ali Kahanna, the name
of which still remains in the name of a small village a little over four
miles due west of the Haweli of Bahadur Shah, Kureshi, and little more
than half a mile from the west bank of the Ohin-ab.826 There is also
another still smaller village, on the west side of a considerable belah or
island nearly three miles in length and half that in breadth, and a mile and
three quarters south-east of the other ’All Kahanna. According to the
Munnawir, the act, part, of the ’Arabic verb II. of Jj-* ‘that which illumines
or enlightens’ — c the illuminer’ or ‘ enlightener,’ ‘ luminary,’ etc.
825 This place appears in the Indian Atlas and other maps under the strange
name of “ Hawaii,” and the ferry the “ Haweli Terry,” such is the careless
manner in which names are entered.
826 It -was so when the Indian Atlas map of this part was made, but since
then further changes have taken place ; and according to the large scale map of
the Panj-ab Revenue Survey, this place, when the survey for the map was made,
instead of being about half a mile distant west from the right or west bank is
now on the east side of a great belah or island in the middle of the river, and on
the western-most of the two branches into which this belah separates it. We may
assume, therefore, that these rivers are no more subject to changes now than they
were twenty-three centuries since.
336 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
incorrect mode of writing- names of places adopted in our best maps,
through the surveyors, generally, being only acquainted with the
vernacular colloquially, and inserting the names from ear, this name
appears as “ UleeJchunanuh ” ; and while in the Revenue Survey map of
the Jhung (instead of Jhang) District, the Haweli of Bahadur Shah,
Kureshi, appears as “ Hmvali ” only ; in the map of the Multan Division
it actually appears as UB luwah;” while on the opposite side of the
Chin-ab, we find the same word written “ Huvelee ” ! The word, of
course, is the ’Arabic in common use, and signifying, ‘ a house,’ ‘ a
♦4
dwelling,’ ‘ mansion,’ ‘the court-house of a district, public offices,’ 827
and the like, but, in these instances, referring to the dwelling-place
or shrine of a Muhammadan saint.
There is no large ndlah now from the Bihat on the west bank of the
river uniting with the Chin-ab abreast of Kot Mahpal ; and the former
river is, at present, nine miles farther north than the point indicated.
Murad de Bohar, the very large and ancient tree, with the old graves
beneath it, have now disappeared, unless u Huvelee Mohu ” of one map,
and “ Huvelee Mohungir ” — both referring to the same place — be meant
for it ; and of the ancient channel of the Bihat near this venerable tree,
and the village of Murad da Kot, no trace at present remains, because
the Chin-ab since that time has taken to it.sss
This river, the Bihat or Wihat, is called the Jamd and Dandanah
in the histories of Amir Timur’s campaign.
The Chin-ab or Chandar-Bhaga.
The tract of country lying between the Chin-ab and the Rawi,
constituting the Rachin-ao or Rachin-ab Do-abah, especially that portion
of it extending from the southern part of the Gujaran-Walah district,
and below that again to the south and south-west, belonging to the two
districts of Jhang-i-Sialan and Ghugherah, now called Montgomery,
and forming the lower or south-western part of the Rachin-ao Do-abali,
is quite different from the other Do-abahs except part of the Chin-hath
already described, and the Bari Do-abah yet to be noticed. This part
is so cut up with old channels of the Chin-ab and the Rawi, that it
requires special notice before attempting to describe the Chin-ab and
its course. It contains three great tracts of waste land, consisting of
three elevated plateaux, namely, the Sandal Bar, the Gondal Bar, and
the Ganji Bar (in part), besides a fourth, differing considerably from the
others, called the Bdr-i- Chin-ab or Ciiu-ao Bar, lying on either side of
that river, as it flows at present.
527 See note 223. page 265, and preceding note 325.
828 See Abu-l-Fazl’s notice of the rivers at page 294.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
337
“The Sandal Bar , or central alluvial flat or plateau or elevated
waste, lying between the Chin-ab and the Rawi, which stretches from
north-east to south-west, is some forty kuroh in length, and about half
that in breadth, embracing all the jangal waste from the cultivated belt
along the east or left bank of the Chin-ab, to the cultivated belt along
the west or right bank of the Rawi included in the sub-district depen¬
dent on Farid-abad on that river.” Thus this Bar lies in the lower
part of the Gujaran-Walah district of the Panj-ab, as at present consti¬
tuted, and the upper part of the Jhang-i-Sialan, and the upper western
part of the Ghugherah or Montgomery districts. “On the east it
adjoins the Ganji Bar, and on the west, farther down, the Gondal Bar .
The country rises gradually upwards from the banks of the Ohin-ab
towards the edge or ridge of the Sandal Bar, which having reached, the
edge or ridge, in the upper part, in the Jhang district, rises somewhat
abruptly for some feet, and continues to rise until the central or highest
part is reached, which attains a height of between thirty and forty
feet or more above the level of the plain below. At first the river runs
nearly parallel to it in some places, but, farther south and west, the river
flows farther away from it, and at last this Bar dies away towards the
Gondal Bar. Water in the Sandal Bar is exceedingly scarce, and the
inhabitants, who are of the Bhatl tribe, very scanty. In the upper part of
this Bar, and within the Jhang district, are the ruins of three ancient
cities, Sangala or Sangala Tall, Tallah, or Tibbah, Rasul, and Asraur;329
and offshoots from the Kiranah range of hills in the Ohin-hath Do-abah, on
part of which the ancient town of Ohandani-ot,830 also written Chandan-ot,
329 It is strange that these ancient sites, Asraur and Rasul, have not been
“ identified.’’
830 The correct name of this ancient town, about three quarters of a mile from
the Ohin-ab in the last century, is Chandan-ot or Chandanl-ot, and is derived,
according to tradition, from Chandan, the name of the daughter of a petty
chief of these parts, and to which is affixed the word ot (as in Muhammad-ot on
the Hariari, turned into “ Mumdot ” in the maps) from the Sanskrit, which word
signifies, ‘ covering,’ ‘ surrounding,’ ‘ shelter,’ ‘ cover,’ etc.
The famous Wazir of Aurang-zeb-i-’Alam-gir Badshah, Sa’d-nllah Khan, was a
native of Ohandan-ot, as was also another mansab-ddr of that reign, Wazir Khan.
Khatris of this part who turn Muhammadans are, in the idiom of the Panj-ab,
styled Paranchalis and Kahochahs.
From constant use, apparently, the name Ohandan-ot or Ohandani-ot, has been
shortened into Ohani-ot.
The learned Editor of Elliot’s “Historians” (vol. iv, page 232), in the extract
from the “ Tuzak-i-Babari,” where Babar Badshah says: “As I always had the
conquest of Hindustan at heart, and as the conquest of Bahrah, Khushab, Chinab,
and Chaniut, among which I now was, had long been in the possession of the Turks ”
etc., the Editor has a foot-note to “Chaniut,” and after telling us that Bahrah at
R R
338 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
stands, and through openings in which the Oliin-ab at present cuts its
way, extends as far as Sangala, or at least, rocky waves of the same for¬
mation, rising to a height of some two hundred feet and more, on the
part on which the remains of this old stronghold stands.
“ The Rind Baluchis once held part of the Sandal Bar , and bred
numerous herds of camels and other cattle, but they were subsequently
driven out by the Bharwanah Sials.
“ The Grondal Bar, so called after a tribe of Jats of that name, but
some account them Bhatis, extends from the termination of the
Sandal Bar on the south-west, and runs in much the same direction
between the Chin-ab on the one side, and to the Rawi, close to Kot
Kamaliah, on the other.331 It extends downwards towards Shor Kot
and the lower part of the Do-abah. It is about thirty huroh in length
from north-east to south-west, and about twenty in breadth.” When
the Survey I have been quoting from was made, this Bar was a dense
jangal , in which water was difficult to obtain, and the inhabitants few ;
but the remains of old wells, and the ruins of ancient buildings, show
clearly that, in by-gone times, it must have been in a flourishing con¬
dition and well peopled.
“ The Ganji Bar is another elevated tract or plateau of waste-land,
part of which lies between the old banks of the Rawi and the Biah.
Consequently, it is in both the Rachin-ab and Bari Do-abahs, and is about
twenty huroh in length from east to west, and nearly fifteen in breadth
from north to south. It extends in one direction towards Buchian
Malliian, to Yum ki in another ; and in another direction approaches
near to Asraur, also called Saraur, and to Shah-Zadah,838 and in this tract
Hafiz-abad, Shaiklio-purali, and other towns are situated. It is called
Ganji on account of the denseness of the jangal , and close proximity
of the trees to each other. The inhabitants belong- to the Bhati tribe.
This Bar from its elevated position is the most sterile and arid of the
whole of the Ghugherah district lying in the Rachiu-ao Do-abah.
present (sic) lies near Pind Dadan Khan, says : “ No Chaniut can be found ; perhaps
it is Battiut, south-east of Attok, by a slight mistake in writing.” Wonderful
geographical information this ! See note 361, page 366, for one of the reasons men¬
tioned by Babar Badsliah.
331 in going from Kot Kamaliah across to Jhang-i-Sialan, the Gondal Bar
and the Sandal Bar have to be crossed.
As another specimen of the incorrect manner in which names of places are
inserted in our best maps, and become the “ official form” of the names, and not
the true one, this place appears in the India Atlas map as “ Sujaduh .” Shah-Zadah
is an old place, and was in former times the principal town of the district. As
it was the head-quarters of the tribe of Hinjaraun, it is also known as Shah-
Zadah-i-Hinjaraun, or Shah-Zadah of the Hinjarauns.
839
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
“ The jSar-i-Ohin-ao or Ohin-ab Bar differs altogether from the
others, and consists of that strip of sterile waste locally called uthar
(Ml) i. e., ‘ highland ’ or ‘upland,’ which separates the belt of land along
the river’s bank subject to inundation, locally known as hethdr ( i. <?.,
‘ lowland ’ or ‘ at the foot of,’ 333 and which Ohin-ab Bar or uthar separates
the hhddar or bet or sail-obi lands along the river from the high flats or
plateaux of the other Bars. This Chin-ab Bar extends from the
territory of Tarar upwards, down to the junction of the Chin-ab with
the A'b-i-Sind or Indus, a distance of over two hundred huroh , with a
breadth of from four to seven huroh more or less, lying along both
banks of the Ohin-ab.
“ In going from Shah-Zadah to Jalal-pur-i-Ohaddharan on the
Chin-ab, two huroh south from the banks of the river, and three huroh
after passing Bangar, the Sandal Bar terminates in that direction, and
the Granji Bar begins.”
These bars differ from the tract on the Sind-Sagar side, locally
known as the Thai , and the Ohul-i-Jalali by historians,3311 in this respect,
that it is covered with sand-hills, some of considerable elevation, and
the bars are not.
The boundaries of these elevated tracts or bars are generally the
banks of old channels of- the rivers. Thus the Sandal Bar on two sides
Any one would imagine that in these days of “ Imperial Gazetteers,” when
every petty place almost has one all to itself, an effort would have been made to
write the names correctly as they are written by the inhabitants, or, at least, have
produced one uniform mode, but “ red tape ” appears to have prevented it. The
upshot is, that in one Gazetteer the names are written one way, in another, in a
different manner, and as to the maps, each map has a mode of its own, and different
from the Gazetteers !
833 Hindi uth — ‘ high,’ ‘ raised,’ ‘ over-topping,’ etc., from which comes
— uthar — ‘ upland,’ and the like, and — heth — ‘ low,’ down,’ ‘ nether,’ etc.,
from which is derived hethdr — ‘ lowland,’ etc.
First comes the tract nearest the river banks, the ‘ lowland’ or hethdr, under
the influence of the yearly inundations, after which there is a strip or belt irrigated
by means of wells, beyond which again comes the upland or uthar , the Ohin-ab
Bar of the Survey record above quoted, the banjar of other localities, and beyond
which floods never rise, in which are depressions here and there, then sandy tracts
with occasional sand hills, until the rise or ridge of the bar is reached. There
being no rain except on rare occasions, and water for irrigation purposes distant,
and no wells at all farther than the verge of the bar , the few villages hereabouts
are badly off for that necessary element. At times, when rain does fall, the water
pours down from the sides of the Sandal Bar , and this the people endeavour to
utilize by conducting it into their lands.
884 gee my “ Notes on Afghanistan.” etc., page 338.
340 H. G. Raverty — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
lies between the left bank of the Chin-ab and the right bank of the
Rawi in the upper part of the Jhang district, as does the Gondal
Bar, which adjoins it lower down in the direction of Shor Kot, and
terminates in that part of the Rachin-ao Do-abah, in the neighbourhood
and in the sub-district of that name, and which is locally known as
the Wiehanah. After the same manner, the Ganji Bar is bounded by
the old right bank of the Rawi. The whole of the Jhang and Ghugh-
erah districts, and part of the adjoining districts farther up stream,
may be called a great alluvial plateau, the remains of which consist of
the Thai in the Sind-Sagar Do-abali, and the Sandal, Kiranah, Gondal,
and Ganji Bars on the opposite side, which are more or less elevated,
and slope downwards to the alluvial tracts through which the rivers
Wihat or Jihlam, Chin-ab, and Rawi, and some minor tributaries
dependent on rain, have cut their way in by-gone times, and, by their
fluctuations, have separated it into bars, as already described. From the
ruins of old buildings and ancient wells, every here and there, there can
be no doubt, but that, in former times, this great tract supported a
numerous population, and was in a flourishing condition. I believe that
the convulsion of the elements which brought about the great flood in
these very parts, mentioned at page 392, completed the desolation which
the Mughals, by their constant inroads commenced, from the time of the
first invasion of these parts by those infidels, up to the time of the
flood in question.
The Survey record which I have previously quoted says, respect¬
ing the Chin-ab and its course, that, “ the Chin-ab, or sometimes
Chin-ab, is so called because, in former times, most people considered
that it came out of Chin [China].386 This rapid and impetuous river
is also called the Chandar and Chandar-Bhaga, and comes from the
eastward. It is said to issue from the kohistan of Padal, which is the
frontier of the territory of Chin in that direction. Having passed the
mountains of Wachhan, a dependency of Kash-mir, it flows three
kuroh north of the town of Kisht-war, and just thirteen huroh east of
that place unites with the Bhaga, which comes from the Lesser Tibbat,
from the kohistan of Mariin, between fifty and sixty kuroh north of
Kisht-war. After the junction, the united streams receive the name
of Chandar-Bhaga.336 In the winter season it is crossed by wooden
bridges, but at the time of the melting of the snows, when it becomes
flooded, these become destrojmd, and the river is passed by means of
several rope bridges at different places. On issuing from the hills
335 Jt certainly comes from parts which were dependent on China.
336 I have not considered it necessary to mention all the affluents this river
receives during its course into the more level country.
341
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
near tlie kasbah of Akh-nur ),337 it separates into several brandies ;
and, after reaching near to Bahlul-pur, which is twelve kuroh south¬
west, these again unite. Then, passing by the ancient town of Sud-
hara,333 Wazir-abad, Kadir-abad,339 and Ohandani-ot, it unites with
the Wihat or Bihat at the place previously mentioned in the account
of that river, and within twelve kuroh 340 of Jhang-i-Sialan. Between
this place and Chandani-ot its banks on either side are but thinly
inhabited ; 34,1 and they call that part, the Bdr-i-Ohin-ao or Ohin-ab
Bar. The water of this river is excellent, but, it is so deep, that it is
nowhere fordable.
“ North of Kish t- war the course of this river is from east to west ;
but there it makes a sudden bend almost due south, and after flowing
in that direction for some distance, as suddenly turns to the westwards,
and subsequently south again to Akh-nur. From thence its course is
about south-south-west, and this course it pursues for a considerable
distance, and then inclines more towards the south-west. It so con¬
tinues to run until its junction with the Wihat, when it resumes a south-
south -westerly course again, and continues to flow in that direction
until it unites with the Rawi. After this it inclines a little more
towards the south-west again, until abreast of Multan, when it resumes
the previous direction,342 which it follows until its junction with the
Ab-i-Sind near Uchchh-i- Sharif.”
“Although there are several bdrdni rivers [that is, dependent on
rain], and some perennial streams in the eastern part of this, the
Rachin-ab Do-abah, the principal one is the Deg. This river comes
from the vicinity of Sanbah, and issues from a kol-i-ab or lake. It
only obtains the name of Deg some three or four kuroh from its source,
previous to which it is called the Basanthar [the “ Basantha ” of the
maps]. The breadth of its bed is about half a kuroh on the average,
but, save in time of rains, it is dry in most places. This is in a great
measure caused by the cultivators throwing dams across it for irrigation
337 Tlie “ Aknur” of the maps.
333 Sudhara is now three miles distant from the river, but the old channel
passes close to it.
339 “ Quadirabad ” of the maps.
84() The place of junction now is about twelve miles, equal to rather less than
seven kuroh, and two or three kuroh from the kasbah of Ohhautarah. See pages
331 and 335.
341 It is in a more flourishing condition now.
342 The directions here mentioned are general, of course. Boileau, in his
“ Personal Narrative,” quoted farther on, says, that the three rivers, Jihlam or
Wihat, Ohin-ab, and Rawi, after their junction, are known as the “ Trimab ”
until they unite with the Gharah near Uehohh.
342 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and. its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
purposes. It runs about parallel to the course of the Raw! on the
west side, at from four to seven and eight kuroh distant from it, and
in the neighbourhood of Farid-abad [in the Ghugherah, now the Mont¬
gomery, district] unites with that river. The intermediate space, which
is known as Deg Rawi, is exceedingly fruitful. ”8i3
Above the junction with the Wihat the banks of the Chin-ab are
well defined, and during the annual inundations, except on extraordi¬
nary occasions, it does not overflow its banks ; but, after the junction
of the two rivers, the bed spreads out considerably, so much so, that,
a little lower down, it forms several belahs or islands in the sub¬
district of Shor Kot, which extend as far down as the junction with
the Rawi and beyond.
From the junction of the Wihat and Ohin-ab, locally called the
Do-melfn the Thai, which formed the boundary of the hachohhi or hetlidr
on the Sind-Sagar side, recedes for many miles to the westward ;
and immediately south of Shor Kot the country appears to sink, or, in
other words, to become much depressed. Sand-hills begin to cover it
every here and there on either side, but especially on the side of Shor
Kot; and there being no high land to impede or keep back the waters
in the time of periodical inundations — for the Gondal Bxr terminates
farther north, and the Rdr-i-Ohin-ao, is not here to be distinguished at the
present day — and the soil being very sandy, the waters find their way
far inland. Indeed, the whole of the lower part of the triangle con-
343 In the time of Akbar Badshah there were two mahdlls or districts named
Deg Rawi in the Subah of Multan, and both in the Multan Sarlcdr, one on either
side of the Deg : one accounted in the Bari Do-ahah, and the other in the Rachin-ao.
The first was styled the “ Mauwazi’ (plural of Mauza’ J-i-Deg Rawi,” which
mahdll was assessed at the very low rate of 50,147 dams in money, but there were
only 867 bigahs and 14 biswahs of land under cultivation ; while the other, along
with 4-ruj -pur, formed two mahdlls under the name of “ T-ruj-pur and Deg Rawi.”
These were assessed in the sum of 23,77,300 dams in money, but then there were
37,230 bigahs of land under cultivation. The inhabitants wrnre Khar’ls, who were
entered as liable to furnish 200 horsemen, and 2,000 foot as militia.
In the present day, when the Deg overflows its banks, which are below the
level of the surrounding country, it inundates the tracts around ; but its floods, like
the inundations of the Rawi, have decreased from what they used in former times
to be, and the channel, from all accounts, appears to have decreased in breadth
and increased in depth. The supposition that the Deg ever ran as far as Kot
K am all ah is quite impossible, with the high bank of the Rawi intervening, but its
waters in time of floods may have reached as far down as that part. The decrease
of water may be attributed to the increase of cultivation farther north, and the
consequent demand for more water.
344 Mel, in Sanskrit, means ‘ union,’ ‘ association,’ ‘ combination,’ etc. Do, of
course, means ‘ two.’ See also note 337, page 378.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 343
stituting, at present, the lower extremity of the Rachin-ab Do-abah
is, without doubt, of comparatively recent formation. More respect¬
ing this tract will be mentioned in the notice of the river Rawi.
There are several canals from the Chin-ab, in the Rachin-ab Do-abah
in the present Jhang district, some of which are certainly very old,
from the fact that their levels are much higher than the present level
of its channel ; and it is clear that, at a former period, the river must
have flowed at a much higher level to have enabled water to reach
them. There is one about a mile distant from Shor Kot, on the west,
which, even at the period of the greatest inundations, water can
scarcely enter. It is styled the Rani Wa-hah or Rani’s Canal.
Traces of another ancient canal remain in the middle of the
Sandal Bar, near the site of an ancient city, said to have been, in by¬
gone times, the chief place and seat of government of these parts, called
Asraur or Saraur (the “ Khangah Asroor ” of the maps, meant, probably,
for the Khankah or Monastery near Asraur). It runs in the direction
of south-west for upwards of forty miles, passing about four miles to
the southward of the Tall of Sangala. It is known as the Nannan
Wa-hah (the “ Nunnunwah Canal ” of the maps), because Wd-hah
( vul . “ Wall ” and “ Vali ”) means a canal.
The Chin-ab has changed its course very considerably, and its
valley, or rather, the tract over which it has flowed at different periods,
is thirty miles broad. In by-gone days, at about the point where the
Shaikhan Patan now is, some fourteen miles north-east of Chatidani-ot
or Chandan-ot, instead of turning more to the westwards as at
present, it kept a course more towards the south-south-west, and
passed five miles east of Chandan-ot ; while now it passes it two
miles and a half on the west. Its old bed is very distinct, and runs
within a mile of Raju-a. The whole space between this ancient channel
and the present one below Chandan-ot is seamed with other old channels
running in the direction of Jhang-i-Sialan, one of which lies within
four miles of it on the east. These channels, lower down towards
Shor Kot, again unite with the ancient bed.345 At one place, a point
345 Cunningham, in his “ Ancient Geography of India,” like all others, traces
the movements of Alexander and his Greeks, according to the present courses of
the rivers of the Panj-ab, to judge from the maps at pages 101 and 248 ; but, in
some places, his descriptions do not appear to agree with his maps. When we see
what great changes have taken place in the courses of these rivers within the short
space of one hundred years, what may have occurred in the space of two thousand
two hundred ? lie also traces the travels of Hwen Thsang in the same way, from
Shor Kot, according to the present course of the Chin-ab, and along what is known
as the Panch Nad, that is, five rivers, or Panj-Ab, united into one giving name
to the territory. This Panch Nad noiv extends from the junction of the Gharah
344 H. G. Raverty — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
east of Shor Kot, there is but seven miles between this ancient channel
(in which the river flowed when Amir Timur crossed, I believe) and
one of the old channels of the Rawi. This old channel of the Chiu-ab
pursued a course to the east of Shor Kot,346 within three or four miles ;
for the nearest channel is five, and the most distant, nine miles from
that place east. Running in a direction about south-west, this old
bed of the Ohin-ab, about seven miles south-south- west of Shor Kot,
and about four miles east of Rasti-i- Islam, united with another old bed
of the Rawi some twelve or thirteen miles farther east, and seven
or eight miles farther north than at present. After the junction the
Rawi lost its name ; and, at the period in question, the united streams
took a much more southerly course than at present, passing near
(not Sutlaj : that lost its name on uniting with the Biah, as did the Biah likewise
below the junction) and the Ohin-ab, thirteen miles above TTchchh, down to the
junction of the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, with this Panch Nad, a distance, as
the crow flies, of about forty-two miles ; whereas, in the last century, this Panch
Nad united with the Indus close to U'chchh on the west, and did not then exist as
it does at present, but was situated much higher up than U'chchh, as noticed at
page 219. U'chchh now is, or recently was, nearly eight miles from this Panch Nad,
and over twelve miles below its commencement.
With all this he very properly points out (p. 220), that, “ In describing the
geography of Multan it is necessary to bear in mind the great changes that have
taken place in the courses of all the large rivers that flow through the province,”
and yet, in another place (p. 218) says, that “ the site of Alexander’s altars must
be looked for along the line of the present course of the Satlej, at a few miles
below Hari-ki-patan. # # # To this point, therefore, the territory of the Sudraaa
or Surakas, must have extended in the time of Alexander.”
He places it, therefore, at a point immediately east of the 'present Sutlaj, that
is east of, and before its junction with the Biah, for then it ceased to be the
Sutlaj ; and at that period, probably, and up to modern times, certainly, as shown
in the account of that river farther on, it flowed from thirty to sixty-five miles
farther east (the distance of the oldest channel we know of eastwards) than the
present course of the Hariari — the united Biah and Sutlaj in the upper part of its
course, and Gharah in the lower. See page 372.
846 There is a great depression or hollow east of the town of Shor Kot which,
in the rainy season, becomes filled, and forms a large lake. Some of the local
authorities supposed that “ the materials for the great Bhira or Mound,” on which
the place stands, “ were taken from it.” It is much more likely to be the remains
of the ancient channel of the Ohin-ab when it united with the Bihat south of the
town and fort.
The strip of country peculiar to the southern half of the present sub-district
of Shor Kot, is clearly of recent formation. The soil is light and sandy, and water
lies very near the surface. Such parts of it as are not brought under cultivation
is covered with a dense growth of a grass known as sur (Saccharum sura : Roxb.)
The tract below Shor Kot is likewise cut up by numerous channels, which conduct
the inundation waters far inland.
1892.] H. G\ Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
345
Sidliu Id Sara’e on the west, and between nine and ten miles to the
east of Multan, and united with the Biah about twenty-eight miles
south of that place. See note 349, page 347.
Another old channel of the Chin-ab lies a few miles west of the
one just noticed, which passed near Bukhari on the west, ran in the
direction of south-west, passed Khiwa or Kliiwah347 on the east, within
a few miles of Jliang, and within three miles of Mughianah also on the
east, and lower down united with the old channel just described.
There is yet another old channel of the Chin-ab a few miles west
of the present one, and traceable downwards from about Lat. 32°J2',
which runs almost parallel to the present channel with an interval of
from eight to ten miles between at the broadest part, passes within
ten miles north-west of Chandan-ot, and runs towards Kot-i-Tsa Shah
and Kadir-pur on the Bihat or Jihlam. There can be no doubt that,
at some previous period, the Chin-ab, or a considerable branch from
it, ran therein, and united with the Bihat a little to the south of
Kadir-pur above mentioned.343
34,7 The Mnghiani Sials claim that this place was founded by one of their chiefs
who was twelfth in descent from Sial, their progenitor, and that when he founded
it, the Ohin-ab flowed to the east of it. In the last century Ohandan-ot was
dependent on Lahor, and Khiwah on Multan.
843 Asa specimen of the manner in which names are inserted in our maps,
I may mention that a part of the first old channel here noticed, appears in one of
our maps as the “ Boodh N.,” and in others as “ancient bed of the Clienab ; ” the
second as the “ Boodi N. ; ” and the third as the “ N. Boodhee .” Of course all these
•*
three different forms refer to one word, namely, biiddhi — — signifying in
Hindi, ‘ old,’ ‘ancient,’ etc. — -or “ old or ancient channel.”
A right understanding as to the ancient courses of the rivers of these parts
will throw considerable light upon the movements of the Greeks in the Panj-ab
territory and Sind.
Curtius says, that, having turned back from the west or right bank of the
Hyphasis [Biah] in consequence of his troops refusing to proceed farther eastwards,
as related farther on, Alexander reached and encamped along the Acesines [Ohin-
ab]. After this he sailed down that river towards the ocean with a thousand
vessels, proceeding about four hundred stadia [about forty-eight miles] daily [that
is, he probably brought up before dark, as those who even now go by the river
routes in these parts generally do], in order to be able to land his forces at con¬
venient places. Then he came to the tract of country where the Hydaspes [Bihat]
falls into the Acesines [Ohin-ab], from which he fell down the confluence of these
rivers into the territory of the Sobii.” He then landed his forces, marched two-
hundred and fifty stadia [about thirty miles] into the country [to the east, I pre¬
sume, but the author does not say which. This would be in the Bachin-ab Do-abah
wherever the confluence may have been], took the capital, after defeating a great
army [the undisciplined people of the country or mere rabble] of another nation
[tribe?] drawn up on the banks to oppose his landing. He then took a town by
s s
H . G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Subsequently, some great convulsion of nature in the parts far¬
ther north appears to have caused vast changes in the courses of
storm to which they had fled on being defeated; and then another town, which
the people set fire to, and perished in the flames, along with their women and
children. The castle was not damaged; and Alexander left a garrison in it, after
which he went round it by water for it was encompassed by three of the largest
rivers of all India except the Ganges, which seemed to lend their streams for its
fortification. “ The Indus washes it on the north side, and on the south, the
Acesines [Oflin-ab] unites itself with the Hydaspes [Bihat]. The violent meeting
of these rivers makes their waters as turbulent and rough as those of the sea ;
and, as they carry a great deal of silt, which, by their rapid concourse is very
much disturbed, they leave but a narrow channel for boats to pass in,” etc. Here
the fleet got into great disorder, and sustained much damage, two of the largest
vessels were lost ; and such was the danger to the fleet, that many prepared to
swim for their lives. Here three altars were erected, one for each river.
According to Arrian, and the other authorities quoted in the “ Life and Actions
of Alexander the Great,” by the Eevd. J. Williams, a useful abstract, chiefly
drawn from Arrian and Strabo, and also to a less degree from Curtius, Athenaeus,
and Plutarch, the fleet consisted of 80 tria-conters, and more than 2,000 river
craft of every description ; and in eight days [from where he embarked] the
fleet arrived near the confluence of the two rivers [the Hydaspes and Acesines :
there is no Indus mentioned here] ; and their united streams contracted imme¬
diately below the point of junction. “ The current is sharp and rapid, and strong
eddies are formed by the struggling waters that swell in waves and encounter each
other, so that the roar of the conflict is audible from a great distance.”
See Amir Timur’s account of the junction of the Jamd or Biliat with the
Ohin-ab at page 279.
Here the vessels ran foul of each other, and losses were sustained, so that the
fleet was partly disabled, and two vessels sank. A small promontary on the right
bank [west] offered shelter and protection to the partly disabled fleet.
All this took place near and at the junction of the Hydaspes [the Bihat] and
the Acesines [the Oliin-ab]. What part of the territory of the Panj-ab will agree
with these descriptions, according to the present aspect of the country, leaving
alone the rivers ? Not with Multan, I trow, and with no place south of Ohandani-ot
or Shor Kot ; yet Cunningham “identifies” this place of meeting at the time of
Alexander, with Multan, as if the Hydaspes [Bihat] and Acesines [Chin-ab] had
ever yet united south of the walls of that place. If Curtius is right as to the
Indus also uniting near this castle, the matter is still more complex.
It may be well also to mention here, that it is said, previously, that Alexander
built Nicoea on the left [east] bank of the Hydaspes [Bihat] ; and in another place,
that, “on some part of the river, between Nicoea and the standing camp at the
confluence of the Acesines [the Ohjn-ab and Bihat below their junction] and the
Hydraotes [the Rawi], Alexander had visited a prince by name Sopeithes ; and
Strabo says, that, in his territory is a mountain [range] composed of fossil salt
sufficient for the whole of India. Here, of course, the Namak Sai', Koh-i-Jud, or Salt
Range is referred to. Rivers were constantly changing, and the recognition of
places lying near them at the period in question depends on where and how they
then ran, but mountains do not change so easily.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
347
most; of the Panj-ab rivers — the same convulsion, in all probability,
which caused, or happened at the same time as, the great flood recorded
in the Khnlasat-ut-Tawarikh. and related farther on — and the other
rivers adjoining that tract of territory on the east, tributaries of the
Hakra or Wahindah. At this period the Ohin-ab turned more to the
eastward above Ohandan-ot ; passed it on the west side instead of on the
east as it had previously done ; ran for some miles more to the south¬
west, passing Jhang-i-Sialan also on the west, which it had passed
previously on the east; and some thirteen miles farther south-west,
entered the channel of the Bihat or Wiliat, and flowed past Shor
Kot six or seven miles to the west. It also passed west of Multan, as
it does at present; but it then joined the already united Biah and Raw!
about forty-six miles below Multan,8*9 instead of twenty-eight miles
below that city on the east, as it had previously done. Then came
still further changes, which caused the Rawi, presently to be noticed,
to alter its course, when it deserted the Biah altogether, took a more
direct westerly course, and united with the Ohin-ab once more, but
some nineteen or twenty miles north-north-east of Multan, instead of
passing it a few miles on the east side, as it had previously done.
From how far tip the Hydaspes the fleet started we may judge from its having-
taken eight days to reach the confluence of that river with the Acesines ; for if we
take the daily distance at, say, one half of that mentioned, the starting point
would have been considerably above Jihlam of the present day. See note 390.
Alexander’s subsequent movements from this place of junction will be noticed
farther on.
249 Abu-1-Fazl, in the A’in-i- Akbarf, places the city of Multan in the Bari
Do-abah, that is, between the Rawi and the Biah, but this I believe to be an error
in the arrangement of the columns of his work, because as long as the Rawi conti¬
nued to flow east of it, which it still continued to do up to the close of the last
century, it was in the Rachin-ab Do-abah. Consequently, if Abu-1-Fazl is right, the
Rawi must then have flowed north of Multan to unite with the Ohin-ab, which it
could not have done, unless, since his time, it again deserted it, turned southwards,
and again left the Ohin-ab to unite with the Biah; because, as said above, at the
close of the last century the Rawi flowed east of it. Another reason why I think
Abu-1-Fazl in error here is, that Ohaukliandi and Multan were in the same Do-abah
then, and he places the former in the Rachin-ab Do-abah, but now, it is like
Multan, in the Bari Do-abah. I have mentioned previously, that, before being
in the Rachin-ab Do-abah, at the time of the investment of l/chchh by the Mugha
Nu-in, Mangutah, both Multan and l/chchh were in the Sind-Sagar Do-abah.
The Bist-Jalhandar Do-abah extends now no farther south than Han ke
Patan, which is some two hundred miles above Multan. In the same way, Debal-
pur the Pak Pattan or Ajuddhan, and other places around, were then in the Bist-
Jalhandar Do-abah, but noio are some eighty miles beyond it, and are in the Bari
Do-6bah and Ohaukliandi, then in the Rachin-ao Do-abali, is now in the Bari
Do-abah likewise.
348 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No,
Only about a century since, when the Sayyid, Ghulam Muhammad,
before referred to, returned from Kabul by Khush-ab, the Da’irah of
In Abfi-l-Fazl's time, the Mahdlls or sub-districts of Adam Wa-han, Fath-pur,
Jalal-abad, SherGarh, Dunya-pur, Raj-pur, Kuhror, Kha’e Bulidhi, and Ghallu-Gharah
of the Multan Sarkdr of the Multan Siibah, were in the Bist-Jhalandar
Do-abah, that is, between the Sutlaj, as it formerly flowed in a separate channel,
and the Biah before they united into one stream and became the Harlan, Nurni,
Nili, or Gharah, but they are not so now. Multan is still in the Bari Do-abah,
which extends from the Rawi to the right bank of the dried up Biah — not, it will be
observed, to the banks of the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah — while the tract between the
Bari Do-abah and the new river just mentioned, namely, from the left bank of the
dry Biah to the right bank of the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah, has become known to
modern native writers as the Shamali Kachchhi Do abah, or north Kachchhi delta,
locally known as the Nili Bar, names not known to Abu-1-Fazl, because the Biah,
in his day, still flowed in its own bed ; and the Mahdlls above referred to are in
this newly formed Do-abah. The meaning of Kachchhi is alluvial land of recent
formation, subject to the annual inundations, and called hethar in the Jhang district ;
and the tracts of this description lying along either bank of the Hariari, Nili, or
Gharah, within the influence of the annual inundations of that river, are known as
Clihoti Kachchhi to this day. See also pages 331 and 384.
Let us see what the old European travellers say, from actual observations,
respecting the rivers in the vicinity of Multan, or running near it ; and see also
page 301.
The earliest who notice Multan are two Englishmen of Captain Nicholas Down-
ton’s Company, who made a journey from India to Persia in 1614. Their remarks
on Lahor are given farther on. “ From thence [Labor] they pass’d on to Multan,
a great and ancient city, seated pretty near the river Indus. ### When the Potane
[i.e,, Patan or Afghan] Kings maintained their Ground in India, this place was
in a very flourishing estate whilst Agra and Lahor lay both in the greatest obs¬
curity : But now she has little to pretend to, those upstart Rivals have robb’d
her of her Trade and Glory, and left her nothing great to lay claim to, but the
advantage of her Venerable Antiquity. The place is so poor, that Caravans are
obliged to stay hereabouts eight or ten days whether they have business or no,
that they may do it a kindness, by spending some of their Money ; neither will
the Governour let them pass on, till they have rested themselves here for as much
time as that comes to.”
Next in rotation comes Mandelsloe (see also note 289, page 297), who pre¬
viously had accompanied the Ambassadors of the Duke of Holstein to the Shah of
Persia, and who was in India in 1639, the same year in which the traitor, ’ All
Mardan Khan, the Zik Kurd, betrayed Kandahar to Shah-i-Jahan Badshah.
See my “Notes on Afghanistan,” page 605. Mandelsloe says : “The Province
of Multan, with its chief city of the same name extends along the River Indus
to the East, as the Province of Haca Chan or Hangi Chan [he refers to the Derah-
jat] has the same River to the West." Here he, or his printer, has reversed
matters : for west we must read east.
Thevenot, who comes about twenty-seven years after, in 1666, says : » Multan,
which comprehends Bucor [Bakhar was a Sarkdr of Multan], has to the south the
349
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
Shah Mukim, and Bahawal-pur, avoiding Multan, he says he “ left the
Da’irah and proceeded fifteen kuroh from thence to Kot-i-Shuja’ Khan.
Leaving it, and going another twelve kuroh , he reached the village of
Muchaki, a small place inhabited by Musalmans, below which, the
Chin-ab and its tributaries, the Jihlam or Wihat and Rawi, unite with
the Biah (not the Gharah it will be noticed : the Sutlaj and Biah had not
yet finally united) ; and the ferry across is called the Muchaki Patan
or Ferry. Having crossed, he halted at Kothah near by, a small fort
of burnt brick construction, twenty kuroh distant from Bahawal-pur,
and then in Bahawal Khan’s possession.”
This Kothah is the “ Kottee ” of the maps, now on the Multan
side, six miles and a half north of Jalal-pur ; and within about three
Province of Sinde, and to the north the Province of Caboul ; as it hath Persia
to the West, and the Province of Labors to the east. It is watered from many
Kivers that make it fertile. The Capital Town which is also called Multan, was
heretofore a place of very great trade, becanse it is not far from the River Indus ;
but seeing at present, vessels cannot go np so far, because the channel of that
River is spoilt in some places, and the mouth of it full of shelves, the Traffick is
much lessened, by reason that the charge of Land- carriage is too great. How¬
ever the Province yields plenty of Sugar , Opium, Brimstone , Galls, and store of
Camels, which are transported into Persia, by Gazna, and Candahar, or into the
Indies themselves by Labors ; but whereas the commodities went heretofore down
the Indus at small charges, to Tatta, where the merchants of several countries
came and bought them up, they must now be carried by land as far as Surrat,
if they expect a considerable price for them.
“The Town of Multan is by some Geographers attributed to Sinde, though it
make a Province by itself. ### To conclude, the Town of Multan is but of small
extent for a Capital, but is pretty well Fortifi’d ; and it is very considerable to the
Mogul when the Persians are Masters of Candahar, as they are at present.”
This was written in the tenth year of Aurang-zeb-i-’Alam-gir’s reign.
Tavernier, who, at the same period, was travelling in India, says : “ Multan
is a City where there is made a vast quantity of Linnen Calicuts, which was always
transported to Tuta, before the sands had stopp’d up the mouth of the River; but
since that, it is carry’d all to Agra, and from Agra to Surat, as is the greater part
of the Merchandize which is made at Labor. But in regard carriage is so dear,
very few merchants traffick either to Multan or at Labor ; and many of the work¬
men have also deserted those places, so that the King’s Revenues are very much
diminished in those Provinces. ### Multan is the place where all the Banians come,
that trade with Persia .”
Here we have clear evidence of some vast changes in the course of the Indus,
and the other rivers, its tributaries, to cause merchandize to be sent from Multan
and Lahor to Agra in order to reach Surat, instead of sending by vessels on the
Rawi and the CLin-ab from those two provincial capitals. Here is another proof,
were any required, that the Blah still flowed in its own bed, and had not changed
its course. See the map of these parts, constructed a few years previous to the
period in question, taken from Purchas at page 321.
350 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
miles south-west of it, the junction of the Biah and Chin-ab then took
place, and there the old channel of the Biah is still to be seen. Now,
there is no Biah running there, and the Gharah — the Sutlaj and Biah
united — joins the Chin-ab and its tributaries sixteen miles lower down
in the direction of soutli-soutli-west.
The Kot-i-Shuja’ Khan, on the west side of the Ohin-ab above the
junction, here referred to, must not be mistaken for what is, at present,
called Shuja’-abad. The Sayyid, Gliulam Muhammad, says : “ There
are two Kots known as Kot-i-Shuja’ Khan ; one on the west side of the
river, and one on the east [the Shuja’-abad of the present time], and
are distant twenty Tcuroh from each other.”360
Abu-1-Fazl, in the A’in-i-Akbari, gives but a very brief notice
of the Chin-ab ; and what he says respecting it, has been previously
recorded at page 294.
The Khulasat-ut-Tawarikh the author of which was a Hindu,
mentions, that the Ohin-ab, in the books of the Hindus is called
Ohandar-Bhaga, and attributes its name to the Ohandar issuing out of
Chin [China]. It soon enters Kiwar [jfjj/], celebrated for its saffron.
It then receives some tributaries, and gets the name of Ohandar-Bhaga.
It falls over high rocks at a place near Jammun [ vul . “ Jumoo ” and
“Jamoo”], forming a magnificent sight, and after that breaks into
eighteen branches which again unite, after flowing a distance of twelve
Tcuroh , at the Jcasbah of Bahlul-pur. It then flows through the Sial
Kot district, and below the kasbah of Sudharah passes onwards towards
Wazir-abad. The wood called sale («AL») and diydr (jb^), which is
well known, is brought down by merchants from the mountain tracts
of Ohanbah to Wazir-abad ; and floated as far down as Bakhar and
Tliathah. The Shah Guzr or Royal Ferry is at Wazir-abad. *** The
river then reaches Ohandani-ot,361 an ancient place, where is the tomb
of the Sayyid, Shah Burhan. From thence it flows on into Jhang-i-
Sialan, which was the dwelling place of Hirah, who is celebrated
throughout these parts for her love of Ranjah,362 and, after passing it,
the Ohin-ab unites with the Wihat or Jililam, as already recorded.”
*60 Shahamat ’Ali, in his work on Bahawal-pur, says (page xxvii) : “ From
the low and marshy nature of the country south of Multan, there are few towns
or villages in that direction of any distinction, excepting Shujahabad and Kot-i-
Shuja [Khan], which are more military posts than towns.”
361 The anoient channel of the Chin-ab which passes Ohandan-ot less than two
miles on the east, is twenty-five miles from the present channel near Jhang, and as
before mentioned, the whole tract between is more or less seamed with old channels.
362 There is a poem in the Panj-abi dialect, very popular throughout these
parts, on the loves of Hirah and Ranjah.
351
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
There is an old and minor branch of the Ghin-ab, which must not
be passed over, since it has been mistaken for the ancient channel of
the Rawi,363 whereas the former river passed this minor branch of the
Ohin-ab four or five miles farther east. I refer to the Loll Wa-han
(lAG l5^)> “which nahr is supposed by some,” according to my
Survey record, “ to have been originally cut from the Ohin-ab, about
ten or twelve huroh above Multan. In more recent times, after that
river altered its former course east of that place to the west side, it
has been neglected, and has gone to ruin. It becomes full during the
periodical inundations of that river, and passes north of the fortress,
close under the walls, on the side on which stands the tomb of the
Rukn-i-’Alam, then runs towards the south to Kot-i-Shuja’ Khan, and
is used for irrigation purposes, or lost in the thirsty soil. Except in the
time of the inundations it is nearly dry.” A few years since, it
was a mere marsh near the north wall of the fortress of Multan, and,
probably is so still.
353 At page 205, Yol. I., of Elliot’s “ Historians,” it is stated, that “ Mnliammad
Kasim’s forces, [Muhammad, the conqueror of Sind, was Kasim’s so?i] found no
suitable place for digging a mine until a person came out of the fort [of Multan],
and sued for mercy. He pointed out a place towards the north, on the banks
of a river.” In a foot note, the learned Editor has, “ — This can hardly
•*
mean the main river.” Hardly ; for the Lolf Wa-han is referred to or a similar
small channel.
Cunningham (“ Ancient India,” page 142) says : “ The Ravi formerly sur¬
rounded the fortress of Multan, and its bed is still traceable. In seasons of heavy
rains the waters flow to Multan. This agrees with the statement that Alexander
circumnavigated the fortress [supposing that Multan is referred to, perhaps ?].”
See note 348, page 345.
The river “bed” the writer refers to is the Lolx Wa-han, so changed in the
course of ninety -five years as to be scarcely recognizable, but it was not the Rawi.
He appears to have forgotten that there is a canal from the Oliin-ab, passing close to
Multan on the west, navigable, and actually called the Sikandar-abad canal, and,
of course, must have been cut by order of Alexander, for have we not his name
here ?
He also “identifies Atari,” about twenty miles W-S-W. of Tulanbah on the
high road to Multan, which is really called Atari- Walah, of recent origin, founded
by a Sikh of that family name, near ivhich are the ruins he refers to, as “ the city
of the Brahmans which made such a stout defence against Alexander. ### Cur¬
tins says Alexander went completely round the citadel (of Multan) in a boat, which
is probable enough [if the river flowed by it instead of a score miles farther
north or south] as its ditch was no doubt capable of being filled at pleasure from
the river.” Why not have fixed upon Shahr-chah, near which is the tomb of “ Shaikh
Abdool Hakeem,” of the maps, seven miles and a half west of Tulanbah ? It is
the site of an ancient city of great size.
352 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
In another place the Survey record states, that the Loll Wa-han364
passed a short distance north of Jalian-gir-abad ; and, that, “ingoing
from thence to Multan, you proceed three Jcuroh south, and by the way
cross this rud-khanah [river bed] twice; once about half-way, and the
second time near the Lahor Gate of Multan by means of a wooden
bridge.”
The Rawi, Rawah, or ancient Trawati.365
“ The Rawi, called by the old historians the Rawah of Labor or
Lohawar, and I'rawati by the Hindus, issues from the mountain range
of Ohanbah, the source of which river is sacred to Maha-diw. It
351i Fortunately, a record exists respecting this branch or cutting from the
Chin-ab, mistaken for the old bed of the Rawi, the bed of which lies much farther
east. In mentioning the six gates of the city, the Survey record says : “The
Lahori Darwazah is on the north-west side on the Loll Wa-han ; and outside it,
over that rud is a brick bridge [before it was said to be of wood : perhaps there
was one of wood as well]. Beyond the gate is a suburb, inhabited by about a thou¬
sand Afghan families, and it is styled the Kot of Tuli Khan.” This seems to be
what is now incorrectly called the “ Kiri of the Afghans,” instead of Gira’i , a
Pus’lito word signifying a halting place of nomad Afghans. Respecting the Bohar
Darwazah, it says, “this is on the west side of the city walls, and there also is a
suburb; and the Loll Wa-han passes about a quarter of a huroh to the west of it.
The Daulat Darwazah is on the nortli-east side of the walls, and the Loll Wa-han
passes by near to it. Beyond, on the outside, the mansions of Sultans and Princes
of by-gone times were situated, and the camp for their troops, but they are now
in a state of total ruin.” Respecting the four gates of the fortress, the writer
says: “ The northern one is called the Khizri Darwazah, and opens on the Loll
Wa-han [that is, opposite to, and near it], and is always kept closed. ##* Within
the Diw Darwazah, on the Loll Wa-han side, is the Tomb and Shrine of the Rukn-i-
’Alam (Pillar of the Universe), the Shaikh, Rukn-ud-Din, son of the Shaikh, Sadr-
ud-Dm-i-’Arif, who died in 709 H. (1309-10 A.D.b son of the Shaikh, Baha-ul Hakk
wa ud-Din, Zakariya. In the rainy season when the Loll Wa-han, which runs
outside the fort w^alls on the north, becomes full and overflows, the area round
the Tomb and Shrine becomes a gathering place for siglit-seers. The Loll Wa-han
also passes not far from the walls on the side where is the Tomb and Shrine of
Baha-ul-Hakk ; and the Tomb and Shrine of Shams-i-Tabriz is on the other side
of the same Loll Wa-han, farther on towards the south.” This was at the period
that the Nawwab, Muzaffar Khan, Sadozi, held the fief of the Multan province from
Timur Shah Badshah, ruler of the Afghan state, for the annual sum of two and
a half lakhs of rupis, paid to the Durrani treasury.
For the meaning of Wa-han see a note farther on.
Masson (Yol. I, p. 396) says, “ the inundations of the Ravi river extended
to the city, but it is three miles distant, and has what is called a bandar, or port,
in this instance expressive of a boat station.” This refers to an old channel close
to Sital ki Mnji, noticed by Cunningham. See page 365.
266 The people of these parts still call it by the ancient names.
353
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty— The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries .
passes below Chanbah where is a wooden bridge, and flows to Bisob H
where is a boat ferry. Below Shah-pur it leaves the hills,
*4
and here there is a cutting of about a quarter of the volume of water,
which is carried on to Lahor and Pathan or Patan Kot,866 and to the
parganahs of Batalah and Path The channel of this nahr or cutting
is now ruined [through neglect], and the stream having turned away
from Bahram-pur, re-unites with the main river near the city of Lahor.
The Rawi afterwards flows by Farid-abad, Sayyid-Walah, and within
a huroh of Tulanbah ; and just half-way between the village of Dandi-
Walah and Sargani, unites with the Ohin-ab and loses its name. The
place of junction is called Trimun.”
A channel from this nahr from the Rawi can be distinctly traced
from Shah-pur, by Grurdas-pur, Batalah (“Bulata” of the maps), and
from fourteen to fifteen miles south of Amrit-Sar ( vul . “Umritsur”),
and appears in the maps as “ Dry N.” ; while the nahr itself, which
is said (in the Survey record), to turn aside from Bahram-pur (the
“ Buhrampoor ” of the maps) appears as the “Kirn N.,” which now
unites with the parent stream seventeen miles above, instead of close to
Labor.
What changes are here shown to have taken place during the
lapse of even less than a century ! Such is a brief notice of the Rawi
from the Survey record I have already quoted.
366 According to Cunningham (page 144), “ the name of this place is not
derived from the well known Muhammadan Pathans, or Afghans, but from the
Vath&n Tribe of Hindu Rajputs .” This is something quite new, and may account
for the “ Pathan Coins,” and the “ Pathan Dynasties ” of the “ Archaeological
Department,” in which have been included Tajziks, Turks, Sayyids, Jats, Habashis,
and others, who have ruled in Hind, and formed into one delightful jumble, being
styled “ Pathans,” without there having been a single Patan among them ; and now
we must add, it seems, “ Hindu Rajptit Pathans ” although, I suppose, there are no
Musalman “ Rajput Pathans.”
This comes from Tod probably, as, at page 233, Yol. II., of his “ Rajast’han,”
referring to the Langah Jats who once ruled over the territory of Multan (See my
“ Notes on Afghanistan.” etc., page 569) he says that, “ The use of the word
Pat’hdu by no means precludes their being Hindus.” What then does Pat’han
mean ?
The “ Pasto, Pakhhto,” and “ Pukhhsto ” scholars have to their own satisfaction
proved, that the ITd'KTues of Herodotus ” are the “ Pathans or Afghans,” whose
progenitor was only born about the year 576 A. D., but here they are all “identi¬
fied” as “ Hindu Rajputs.”
This, however, is nothing to the discovery of another philosopher, only lately
come to light, namely, that “the name Afghan [only the people call themselves
Pus’htanah] is connected with the A^vaca of the Mahabarata /” This is well worthy
of insertion in a Gazetteer or a Cyclopedia, or such like “popular” reading. See
note 27, page 164.
T T
354 H. GL Ravorty — The Mihrdnof Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Abu-1-Fazl merely mentions »the ancient name of the Rawi, and
that it issues from the mountain range of Bhadral or Bhadra, and th&t
the Dar-ul-Mulk, Lahor, is situated on its banks.867
867 Lahor was visited in 1603 by John Mildenhall, a merchant of London, who
set out in 1599 from Isfahan by Yazd, Kirman, Sijis-stan, and Kandahar. He
reached “ Lahora,” as he styles it, from “ Candahar,” but, unfortunately, no
particulars respecting this part of his journey are in existence that I am aware of.
Two Englishmen of Captain Downton’s company, however, reached it in 1614.
In the extract from the account of their travels it is stated : “ But none made more
of the trade of this famous city than the Portngals did (as long as they had the
Wit to keep friends with the Great Mogul). For all the Merchandize they dealt
for with the Foreigners, or Indians , at Lahore, was here embarked upon the spot,
and so down the Ravee (into the Indus) away for Persia, Ormus, and those parts/'
etc , etc. * * # In the time of the Potane [Patan or Afghan] kings it (Lahore)
was but a trifling village.
This matter of Portuguese trade is entered into more fully by Messrs. Richard
Steele and John Crowtlier, two Merchants in the service of the East Indian Society,
who went from Ajrnir to Isfahan in the years 1614—1615. They reached Multan on
the 22nd May, 1614. They say : “ Lahor stands on the Rieur Indus or Sinde [See
page 301, and note 349, page 347], and from this place came the Treasure of the
Portugals Trade when they had peace, as being the center of all Indian Traffique.
And here they embarqued the same down the Rieur for Tatta, whence they were
transferred for Ormus and Persia. The Merchants also passing that way betwixt
Persia and India, pay’d them fraight. They did likewise drive a great Trade vp
this Rieur for Pepper and Spices, furnishing these parts of India therewith. At
this present the Merchants of India assemble at Lahor, and invest a great part of
their monies in Commodities, and ioyne themselves in Carauans to passe the Moun¬
tains of Candahar into Persia, by which way is generally reported to passe twelve or
fourteen thousand Camels lading, whereas heretofore scarcely pass’d three thousand,
the rest going by way of Ormus. These Merchants are put 'to great© charges
betwixt Lahor and Spahan (besides greate cold in Winter and heate in Summer, and
the badness of the way, spending six or seven months betwixt those two places)
they are said to reckon every Camel’s lading to stand them in one hundred and
twentie or one hundred and thirtie Rupias. Persia is that way furnished with
Pepper and Spices from Ma-sulipatan over land.”
This merchandize went from Multan by the Sanghar Pass, and by Tal, Tsotiali
and Pushang to Kandahar by the route described for the first time, other than by
those two merchants, by me in my “Notes on Afghanistan.” etc., page 547. See
also my account therein of the Powandah Afghan Tribes, page 483.
Thevenot says : “ Lahor is the Metropolis of a Kingdom, built upon one of the
five Rivers that descend from the mountains of the North to swell the River Indus ;
and give the name of Peniab to all the Region which they water. This River at
this time flows not within a league of the Town [now it is just one mile], being
subject to change in its Channel, and many times does very great mischief to the
adjoining Fields, through the rapid deluges which it makes. The City is large,
and extends itself above a league in length. But the greatest part of the Houses,
which are higher than those of Agra and Deli, fall to ruine, by reason of the
excessive rains that have overflowed a great number of them.”
355
1892.] H. Gh Raver ty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries .
The IQmlasat-ut-Tawarikli states, that, at the period that work
was written in 1107 H. (1695 A. D.), the Rawi united with the Ohin-ab
close to Sara#e-i-Sidhu or Sidhu ki Sara’e (the “ Serraiee Siddhoo ” of
the maps), twenty kuroh from Multan. At the present time the Sara e
in question is less than a mile from the south bank of the Rawi, and
from it the river turns northwards and westwards, then south-west,
winding considerably, and unites with the Ohin-ab eleven miles west
of that place.358
The climate of these parts Seems to have changed considerably since Theve-
not wrote. He was there in 1665-66.
Tavernier, who was in these parts about the same years, says of the “ Province
of Labors ,” that, “ The chief Town is not now upon the Ravy as it was for a long
time, because that River having a very flat Channel, has fallen off from it above a
quarter of a league. * # ® This hath been a very pretty Town when the Kings
kept their Courts in it. * * # I have already said, that the great walk of Trees
(which begins at Agra) reaches as far as Labors , though the two Towns be distant
from one another one hundred and fifty Leagues, the lovely Alley is very pleasant.”
This “ lovely alley” was the work of Sultan Sher Shah, Sor, the Afghan or
Patau Sultan of the Dihli empire, who is said to have had a daily postal service
between Nil-ab and Agra, and that trees were planted on both sides of the way
all along this route.
S53 When the Prince, Muhammad-i-Darft- Shukoh. eldest son of Shah-i-Jahan
Badshah, was preparing at Labor for his expedition against Kandahar in 1653, two
battering guns of great calibre for those days, were specially cast at Lahor, one of
which carried a ball of 90 lbs., and the other a shot of 64 lbs. These, together
with a third great gun, brought from Shali-Jalian-abad, after twenty days’ labour
occupied in removing them from the citadel of Lahor to the banks of the Riiwi
and shipping them on board vessels, were sent down that river to Multan.
The Prince’s army amounted to 104,000 men, including 70,000 cavalry, and
5,000 artillery men, accompanied by 36 guns and mortars, and 60 great war ele¬
phants. The heavy guns, ten in all, including the three above mentioned, were sent
down the Ab-i-Sind, and by Dadhar, and Shal (Kwatah, vul. “Quetta”) to
Kandahar, and, in consequence, only arrived there towards the termination of the
investment, and failure of the expedition.
I gave a brief summary of this affair, and the march by the Sangar Pass, a
route wholly unknown to modern writers, by Ohatsah, Tal, Tsotiali, and by the
Siadzga’i or Tabak-sar (both words being of one and the same meaning, the first
being Pus’hto and the latter Tajzik) into Pushang (vul. “ Peshin”), in my “Notes
on Afghanistan,” etc., page 21, in September, 1878. This was the first time that
this route was described by any European author, and the first time the route of
this great army was made known ; and only one native writer knew correctly the
composition of the force, or the route taken by it both in going and returning,
and he accompanied it. A recent reviewer, in the * Athen&umJ for July 26tb,
1890, referring t,o my “Notes,” says: “It was Major Raverty who several
years ago brought to the notice of the Indian Government the existence of
the direct route by which Prince Muhammad Dara-Shukoh led his formidable
army of over 100,000 men from Multan to Candahar, an identification which quite
356 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
When the Sayyid, Ghulam Muhammad, referred to at page 348,
was returning to Kabul from India in 1787, he had to give up the idea
of going from Multan by way of Layya, because a large force of Sikhs
had invaded that part. He, therefore, had to proceed by Mankerah.
His route throws light on the state of the parts near the confluence of
the Chin-ab, Bihat, and Rawi. He set out from Multan for Khan Ohal,
distant five hos (this is what is called the hachchhah Jcos , just a mile
and a half) north-eastwards ; then to the Deli-i-Shah Nawaz, on the
banks of the Biah (not the dry Biah) ten hos in the same general direc¬
tion ; then ten hos north to Shah-pur ; and thence to Tulanbah, be¬
tween north and east, another ten hos. From Tulanbah he went fifteen
hos north-west, and reached Sarwan. He distinctly states that this
stage brought him into the tract between the Chin-ab and the Bihat ,
on the edge or margin of the great desert waste — the Thai — and that
another stage, in the same general direction took him to Maharan
( possibly , what is now styled “ Gurh Maharaja ” in our maps), through
the sandy desert. Another two stages brought him to Mankerah.
About the time of the ’Arab conquest by Muhammad, the son
of Kasim, the Rawi united with the Biah east of Multan. It has always
been remarkable for its erratic course, especially below Labor, and from
thence to its junction with the Chin-ab, notwithstanding that it runs in a
deep bed. Tavernier however, quoted in the preceding note 357, says its
channel is very flat. It is so irregular and uncertain, that it is impossi¬
ble to tell one year where its channel may be the next. On one side,
its left high bank can be traced from some twelve miles above Lahor,
running in a south-westerly direction and winding considerably, by
the Sara’e-i-Noli-Shahrah, and close to it, and between Wandari, which
lies twelve miles east of Sayyid- Walah, and Hinjaraun, so called after
revolutionized the theories of Anglo-Indian strategists.” I find, however, that
there are actually some who would like to take the credit of the discovery to them¬
selves, and, probably, if I live long enough, I shall find some one claiming to have
made the discovery, just as the Siah-posh Kafirs of the Kafiristan have been “ dis¬
covered ” over and over again, since I gave an account of them in the “ Journal ”
for 1859.
Since I wrote about this route, it has been surveyed, and part of the Kandahar
force returning to India followed it — the detachment under the command of Sir M.
Biddulph, K. 0. B. I shall probably give the account of the expedition in full
shortly, but more respecting the route will be found in a subsequent Section of my
“Notes, “ page 546, which see, further researches having thrown additional light
upon it. In that same Section of my “ Notes,” I also pointed out a direct road to
Kandahar from the Derah-jat farther north, by which a line of Railway might
easily be carried, and that road is now I find, being surveyed. Better late than
never.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
357
a tribe of Hindu Jats, down to within a couple of miles of Sath Garh369
on the south. Continuing to run from thence with a very tortuous
859 This place in Blochmann’s printed text is — Sad-Kharah, but, cor¬
rectly, as above, was the chief place of a mahall of that name in the Debal-pur sarkdr
of the Multan subah, which sarkdr contained four Do-abahs, and the Berun-i-Panch
Nad, or Extra Panj Ab. At the time Abu-1-Fazl wrote his A’fn-i- Akbari, there
were 59,448 bigahs of land under cultivation, the revenue amounted to 3,551 ,230
ddms, and free grants existed to the amount of 20,972 dams. The inhabitants
of the mahall were Baluchis and Khar’l Jats, who were assessed as able to furnish
300 horsemen, and 4000 foot for militia purposes.
At the time of the Survey I have been quoting from in this paper, Sath Garb
is mentioned as lying just midway between Fath-pur, Ghugherah, and Sher Garh,
near the dry channel of the Rawi, and as being, in former times, the chief place of
a sub-district, but now, for the most part, in ruins, and in the possession of a Sikh
named Wazir Singh, who also held Hurappah.
Though of little consequence in other ways, it is somewhat so in an historical
point of view.
Colonel Macgregor in his “ Gazetteer,” and Mr. A. W. Hughes of the Bombay
Uncovenanted Service, the compiler of “ a Gazetteer of Sind,” and another of
“ Balochistan,” quote a wonderful history of the Baluchis from a “ Report” by Mr.
R. Bruce, C. S., respecting a petty chief of a section of the Rind clan of that people,
named Chakar. According to this “ history,” after the Baluchis had settled in
Kalat and Kachchhi, a feud arose between Ohakar, and Rahman, a Lishari chief of
the same race. “They collected their armies,” says the “Report,” a battle ensued
and the Rinds were defeated with the loss of 700 killed. On this, “ Mir Chakar
“ sent for assistance to Sultan Shah Husdn, King of Persia , who sent an army under
“ the command of Zami to his aid .”
Unfortunately, such a Shah of Persia never existed, and such a leader as
“ Zami ” is unknown to fame. They have managed to mix up here the name of
the Langah Jat ruler of Multan, Shah Husain.
Then comes a still more wonderful piece of history, that, “ After Mir Chakar had
“committed the country to the care of his lieutenants, it appears that he, with a
“ number of his followers, joined the standard of Hamdyun Shah in his attempts to
“ recover the kingdom of Hindustan , and went with him to Dehli. Other reports say
“ that he took Dehli from Hamdyun Shah, and afterwards tendered his submission .”
Subsequent to Humayun Badshah’s return from Persia, after obtaining aid
from Shah Thamasib, his defeating his brother, Mirza Kamran, and his final
advance from beyond the Indus into Hindustan for the recovery of his empire, the
“ Report” informs us, that “he had a large army,” and that “ it is very probable that
“ he may have returned through the JBolan Pass, and been joined by the Rinds under
Mir Chakar .”
I do not think there is any “ History of India,” however poor, that does not
clearly show that the Badshah did not return by the Bolan Pass ; and, certainlv,
he was not joined on the way by “ the Rind army,” nor Chakar’ s “ lieutenants.”
Added to this “ history,” we have some Baluch Ballads translated by Mr. L. M.
Dames, C.S., which appeared in the “ Journal ” for 1880; and from these more
“history” of the same kind is adduced. There Ohakar “ is said to hare founded a
kingdom [like “ the kingdom of the Nahars,” the “ Sitpur kingdom”] with its capital
358 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
course, in the same general direction as before, its bank in some places
much more defined than in others, it runs close to Hurappah on the
Sevi (Sibi), and to have waged war with Humati Ghughattd for Cliakar was “a
godlike man,” and chief of the “ lofty Ghulam Bolak Rinds.”
Mr. Dames adds that “ it is difficult ffo say how far any part of Chakar’s adven¬
tures are historical;” and he quotes “ Brigg’s Ferishta,” and “ Erskine’s Babar ”
to show that “the irruption of the Baloches into the Panjiib, about 1520 A. D., was
probably caused by the pressure on them of the Turks or [sic.] Mughals who were
then under the Arghuns invading Kacfihi and Sindh.”
More “history” of this kind is given in “Griffin’s Panjaub Chiefs.” The Panj¬
ab Government “invited” all the chiefs of tribes to send in an account of their
ancestors, and descent of their tiubes ; and the result is contained in that work.
It can be imagined how the chiefs drew the long bow, what glowing accounts they
gave, and what noble or royal descent they gave themselves and their tribes.
Fortunately for historical truth, I can show “ how far Chakar’s adventures are
historical,” and also the nature of the “ history” adduced respecting that “ god-like
man.”
Mirza Shah Husain, the Arghun Mughal, son of Shah Beg Khan, the conqueror
of Sind, determined, at the instigation, it is said, of Babar Badshah, to make war
on the Langah Jat ruler of Multan, but before doing so, he determined to coerce the
refractory Baluchis in the northern and western part of his territory, around Siwl
and parts adjacent. With a body of 1,000 cavalry, he made a forced march from
Bakhar by way of Chatar and Lahri, and came upon the Rinds and Bughtfs, over¬
threw them, made many captives, reduced them to submission, and brought back
their head men along with him to Bakhar. This was in 930 H. (1523-24 A. D.).
He then set out on his expedition against Multan in 931 H. (1524-25 A. D.) ;
and a force composed of Langah Jats, Rinds, Duda’is, and other Baluchis, Ohandiyahs,
Naghars, and others, to the number of about 80,000 men, awaited him on the
banks of the Gharah to dispute his crossing. Sultan Mahmud, Langah, had only
made one march from Multan to join this army, when he suddenly died, said to
have been poisoned by his son-in-law, the Shaikh, Shuja’-ud-Din, Bukhari, while
some say he was poisoned by a house-hold slave, named Lashkar Khan, and this
great army melted away.
The Langah Jats, whom such history ” writers will persist in turning into
Afghans, now set up the young son of Sultan Mahmud ; and came to an accommoda¬
tion with Mirza Shah Husain, “ by ceding to him all the Multan territory south of
the Gharah, which river was to be the new boundary.”
Soon after this, in 933 H. (1526-27 A. D.), the affairs of Multan became utterly
disordered : the chiefs of the late Sultan refused to submit to the young ruler, he
being a mere puppet in the hands of the Shaikh, and they invited Mirza Shah
Husain to take possession of Multan. He set out in the same year ; and on the
15th of Rabi’-us-Sani, 933 H. (January, 1527 A.D.), captured Multan, in which the
supporters of the Shaikh and the young Sultan had shut themselves up. The place
was completely sacked, numbers of those found within were put to the sword,
and the remainder enslaved. The Wazir Shaikh and the Sultan were cast into
prison, and there they died, the latter after a nominal reign of one year and eight
months ; and the Langah Jat dynasty, which arose out of a fraud, terminated at the
end of twenty-seven years.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 359
south ; and between this its left high bank and the right high bank of
the Biah, but six miles of elevated plateau or dhaiyd (subsequently to
For some time previously they had lost all their territory north of the Rawi.
Jam Bayazid, the Sammah, a member of the ruling family qf Sind ousted by the
Arghuns, who had taken shelter in the Langah territory, and had become its Wazlr,
rebelled and retired to Shor Kot, and appropriated that part (equivalent to the pre¬
sent Jhang district or nearly so), and tendered fealty to Daulat Khan, Lodi, governor
of the Lahor province on the part of the Afghan Sultan, Sikandar, Lodi, of Dihli.
From the period of the usurpation of the Langah Jats over Multan, numbers
of Baluchis had come thither from the farthest parts of the Baluchistan, from
Rich and Mukran, and took service with them, receiving large grants of land in
lieu of pay, and among these was Malik Suhrab, the Duda’i Hut. About the pei’iod
that Jam Bayazid rebelled, a feud having arisen between one division of the Rinds
of which Ohakar was the head, and other Baluchis, in which the Rinds came worst
off, Ohakar, finding the neighbourhood of Siwi too hot for him — not the fortified
town of that name, but lands dependent on it — left it, and came with his two sons,
Allah-Dadand Shah-Dad (the latter is said to have first introduced the Shi’ah doctrine
into Multan), to seek service with the Langalis, but finding no chance of employ¬
ment there, he went to Shor Kot, to Jam Bayazid, who took him into his service, and
out of his fief, assigned him a jd-gir in lieu of pay. This jd-gir was at Sath Garh
on the Rawi, and there he took up his residence with his people. See note 361,
page 366.
After Humayun Badshah had to abandon his kingdom, and retired to Lahor
in 947 H. (1540-41 A. D.), followed by Sher Khan, of the Sor sub-division of the
Afghan tribe of Lodi, who had assumed the sovereignty and title of Sher Shah,
the Badshah retired into Sind. Sher Shah while in the Panj-ab selected the site
for the fortress of Ruhtas, which was “ To be a spike in the breast of the Galtliar
tribe” ; and shortly after, in 949-950 H. (1542-43 A.D.), he left the Karlarni Niazi
Afghan, Haibat Khan, as governor of the whole Panj-ab, and directed him to free
the territory from the rebel Baluch, Fath Khan, Hut, who had possessed himself of
Kot Kabulah during the distracted state of the country after the downfall of the
Langahs, raided the Lakhln Jangal district, and devastated all the country round,
and as far east as Pani-pat ; to free Multan territory altogether from the Baluchis,
who had seized upon it, and re-people the desolated city of Multan, whose inhabi¬
tants had now entirely deserted it.
Immediately on receipt of these orders, Haibat Khan, Niazi, sent for the Wakil
of Ohakar, the Rind ; for now he held his jd-gir from the Afghan governor of the
Panj-ab, to which government he owed military service, and said to him : “ Go
thou to Malik Ohakar, the Rind, and intimate to him that I shall be comma- into
his district immediately, and let him see that the men of his jd-gir are ready for
my inspection.” The author from whom I take this extract (confirmed by other
writers), 'Abbas, Sarwarni, in his “ Tarikh-i-Sher Shah-1.” says : “ I heard from the
lips of Path Khan, Kambu, that, when the Wakil presented himself to Ohakar he
was dumb-foundered ; for as yet, no preparation had been made for the purpose, or
the reception of the Khan. On the second day after, news came that Haibat Khan
had ari’ived within twelve Jcuroh of Sath Garh. Ohakar now became alarmed, and
said : ‘ I have not mustered my followers, nor made preparations for it. What shall
I do ! ’ and he was in a great way. Next morning a scout of Ohakar' s came in and
360 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
be noticed in the account of the last-named river), intervenes. From
Hurappah it passes close to Ohichawatni on the south, thirteen miles
intimated that the Khan had arrived ; and all Ohakar could do was to ride forth to
receive him, in a very disturbed state of mind. As soon as Haibat IGian perceived
him. he said : ‘ I will not inspect your followers now, but will do so at Debal-pur,'
his object being, lest Fath Khan, the Hut Baluch, should, in case he delayed at
Sath Gaph, take himself off ; and so Ohakar, to his great relief, was dismissed.”
Haibat Khan continued his march to the Pak Pattan of the Kutb-i-’A'lam, the
Shaikh, Farid-i-Ganj-i-Shakar ; but Fath |Oian, alarmed, had fled [Ohakar, doubt¬
less, informed him in time], but Haibat Khan pursued him, and came up with him
near Fath-pur of Kuhror [about twenty miles east of Kuhror]. He had no chance
of escape from Haibat Khan, as he had his family, and those of his followers, with
him. He therefore threw himself into the mud built fort there, and sought shelter
therein. It was immediately surrounded ; and after he had held out for a day or
two, Fath Khan got the Shaikh Ibrahim, the descendant of Shaikh Farid, to
intercede for him ; and he came out and presented himself before Haibat Khan.
The latter told the Shaikh, that he was himself only a servant of the Shah, and
that whatever his commands might be he must carry them out, so Fath Khan was
allowed to return to the fort pending the orders of Sher Shah. He shortly after
managed to escape, however ; for one night, chiefly through the efforts of a faith¬
ful follower, Mando by name, Fath Khan, at the head of 300 men, made a sudden
rush upon the guards, overpowered them, and got off. The Afghans on entering
the place, found that they had butchered nearly all the women and children before
they left. Bakhshu, the Langah, afterwards captux^ed Mando, and brought him
bound to Haibat Khan, and shortly after, Fath Khan was taken. Haibat Khan
proceeded to Multan, having collected the remaining inhabitants, who had long
befoi’e dispersed to various places, and set about re-peopling and repairing the place.
Fath Khan, Hut, and Mando, by command of Sher Shah, were hanged.
For these distinguished services Sher Shah confei’red upon Haibat Khan the
title of Masnad-i-’ Aid, ’A'zam Humdyun — that is “ The Occupant of the Exalted
Seat [of Dignity], the most August,” a title which had been conferred twice before
by the Afghan sovei’eigns on their nobles. He was also assigned a scaiflet tent, which
only the family of the sovereigns had hitherto been pei’mitted to use.” This was
in 950 H. (1543-44 A.D.)
Sher Shah directed the ’A'zrtm Humaytin not to make any alterations in the
assessments, but to observe the rules and usages of the Langahs, and to take the
revenue in kind. The latter, leaving Fath Jang Khan, Kanbu (or Kambu : it is
correct both ways, the person referred to above) in charge of the Multan province,
retnimed to Labor. Fath Khan, Kanbu, brought it into a floui'ishing condition once
more, and founded therein a town which he named Sher Garh.”
This place is still in existence, situated close to the right high bank of the
Biah, some twenty miles to the south-eastwards of Sath Garh. These people under
the “ official name” of Kambohs, still hold a good deal of land in that locality.
That “ god-like man,” the “ mighty Cliakar Rind,” the founder of “ the king¬
dom of the lofty Gtxlam Bolak Rinds,” disappears from the scene ; but he con¬
tinued to hold his jd-gir at Sath Garh, and there died, and was buried. The Rinds,
lattei'ly, were much bullied by the Sials. See page 338. There are more than
“ traces of Biloches ” throughout the whole Panj-ab, particularly in the southern
half of it.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
361
and a half beyond which it makes a sudden bend to the northwards,
then back again to a south-westerly direction, and runs towards
Tulanbah, which it passes five miles to the south. From thence it runs
in the direction of Multan as far as the point near which it used to
unite with the Ohin-ab, when that river passed on the east side of that
city to join the Biah, and which is about fifteen miles nearly due south
of Sidliu ki Sara’e. In the space between this left high bank and the
present channel, between Chichawatni and Tulanbah, are the remains
of two or three other old channels in which it has flowed at different
times, but now partly obliterated.
On the opposite side, in the present Rachin-ab Do-abah, its
extreme high bank can be distinctly traced beginning from about
twenty-nine miles to the westwards of Labor, running in the direction
of about south-south- west along the skirt of the Sandal Bar, farther
west of which again is a part of the same Bar, extending from five
to fourteen miles in breadth from west to east, and some eighteen miles
from north-east to south-west, covered every here and there with
mounds and hillocks, the sites of former towns and villages, and, in
some places, with depressions. Patches of the same hard substance
that composes the Chitr-ang Zamin, described farther on, also crop
up here and there. These patches are described as “ beds of kankar,”
but the formation is, apparently, just the same as that of the Chitr-ang
Zamin alluded to above.
Passing onwards from this in a direct line towards Ghugherah and
It will thus be seen, that out of Haibat Khan, the ’A'zam Hamdyun (which
last word, in this, as well as in the Badshah’s title, means august, fortunate, etc.)
the writers have produced “ Human Chowghutta,” and “Hamdyun Shah” meaning
of course Nasir-ud-Din, Mohammad, Humayuti Badshah [he was a Barlas Mughal
by descent, one of the ulusis of Chagh tide Khan], with whom “ the mighty
Chakar made war,” and even “ took Delhi, from him,” bub kindly restored it !
H ow he “ made war ” upon the ’A’zam Hamdyun , Haibat Khan, I have already
shown above. As to “ Hamayun Shah having very probably returned” to
Hindustan “from Persia through the Bolan pass, and been joined by Chakar
Kind, and other Biloches,” any History of India, even “Ferislita,” or “ Briggs ”
would show, was totally incorrect. Humayun Badshah left Sind in August, 154-3 ;
in January, 1546, he returned from Persia, and recovered Kandahar ; and it was
not until eleven years and a half after that, that he set out from Kabul for Ju’e
Shah-i, then by a raft on the river of Kabul to Pes’liawar, crossed the Indus at
Nil-Ab, and marched straight on Lahor, and from thence through the Jalhandar
Do-Abah, and Samanah, to Dihli.
As to Chakar, the Rind, building the fort of “ Sevf (Sibi) and making it hie
capital,” is on a par with his capture of Dihli. “A little history,” like “a little
learning,” is “ a dangerous thing.” See my “ Notes on Afghanistan,” etc., page
589, note ^[, and page 591, note #
U U
362 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Fath-pur, it runs a little over eiglit miles to the westwards of Farid-
abad, and nearly five west of Sayyid-Walah ; and about seven miles or
thereabouts north-west of the first-named place, the Deg river runs in
its channel. Hereabouts the bank is not so well defined, but, about
four miles and a half west of Ghugherah, it becomes well defined again,
and approaches within a mile and a half of Kot Kamaliah*60 on the
860 Cunningham (Ancient India, page 22fi) “identifies” this place, as “the
first city captured by Alexander on his march from the junction of the Hydaspes
(Jhilam) and the Akesines ( Chenab),” but he does not tell us where the junction
then was ; and he also suggests a connection between the name Kamalia and the
Malli. He also provides a place for “ Harapa ” [Hurappah] as “ most probably,
the city against which Perdikkas was detached because of the mention of marshes,”
but there are, or were, plenty of marshes round about, and near Multan, and also
near Shor Kot, and scores of other places. In the time of Saltan Bahram Shah of
Ghaznin, Muhammad Balilim, the governor of these parts — the Panj-ab — having'
rebelled, the Sultan marched against him in 512 H. (1118-19 A.D.) and defeated him
on the confines of Multan, “the Almighty having rewarded Muhammad Bahlim for
his base ingratitude, and he, and his ten (some say two) sons, together with their
horses and arms, on the day of the battle, sank in a morass, so that no trace of him
and them remained.” It does not follow, however, that Hurappah was the place.
With regard to Karnaliah, or Kot Kamalfah, I may mention that tcamdl is not
Greek, but an ’Arabic word, and that the name of this place is derived from the
Mnsalman name of its founder, Kamal-ud-Din, a Khar’l chief. He may have found¬
ed it on an older site, and a town may possibly have been in existence there in the
time of Alexander’s campaign, but there is a vast difference between probability and
“ identification.” How many times has the Kawi changed its course since that time ?
The direction taken by Alexander against the Malli, and the situation of their
territory, as described by the historians of his compaigns, depends entirely upon
where the Hydraotes [Rawi] united with the Acesines [Ohjn-ab] at that period.
Where the junction took place shortly before the appearance of the ’Arabs in Sind
and Multan has been already related. See also note 192, page 244.
The Malli are said to have occupied the country between the lower part of the
courses of the Hydraotes and Acesines, and also the district beyond the Hydraotes.
What plainer description can be desired to show that the lower part of what in com¬
paratively modern days was called the Raohin-ab Do-abah, in part of the Sandal
Bar , the Gondal Bar, and part of the Ganji Bar adjoining it in the Bfrri Do-abah
is meant, even according to the most ancient courses of the rivers that we know of.
That the greater part of the tract in question was above the place of junction of the
two rivers is clear, because it is stated, that the troops were landed below the
confluence of the Hydaspes [Bihat] and Acesines [Oliin-db] on the right [west]
bank of the latter, that is, in the Sind-Sagar Do-abah, and were directed to march
down stream, on that side, at certain intervals of time, in divisions, to the 'point of
junction of the Acesines [Ohin-ab] with the Hydraotes [Rawi] ; and the fleet was
ordered to be conducted thither also. In the time of the ’Arabs, this junction
took place about twenty miles north-east of Multan , but in Alexander’s day it
probably took place, to judge from the most ancient channels, much higher up,
and between Si<Jhu ki Sara’e and Shor Kot, but nearer to the latter place.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Miliran of Sind and its Tributaries. 363
north, and then makes a sadden bend to the north-west as far as 30°52/
N. L. to within sixteen miles of Shor Kot, and within fourteen miles of
Alexander, himself, however, before they set ont, advanced laterally from the
left [east] bank of the Acesines [Ohin-ab], that is, into the Rachin-ab Do-abah, and
encamped near a small stream which skirted the western edge of the desert [ bar ?]
that intervened between the upper settlements of the Malli upon the Hydraotes
[RawiJ, and came to a halt for a short time. This stream, no doubt, refers to one
of those nahrs, or old canals, as they are supposed to be, still to be traced in the
present Jhang district. After marching the remainder of that day and all night,
at dawn, he arrived before the Malli strong hold, the march across the desert [bar .?]
having exceeded tiventy-five miles. He was still in the Rachin-ab Do-abah, but it is
not said in what direction his march lay, bat, it may have been in a south-easterly
direction, or even more towards the east from the context, and the time it subse¬
quently took to convey him to the confluence of the two rivers, after he was
wounded, and that depends on where that confluence was. The distance mention¬
ed, if he marched south-east fi’om the ancient bed of the Ohin-ab, would have
brought him to the northwards of where Kot Kamaliali now stands, if not to within
four or five miles west of Samandar, on the road from Mughianah to Ghugherali.
Wherever it was, the people were taken by surprise, and their city and fortress
stormed
Curtius differs here from the other writers. He says the people had determin¬
ed to make a vigorous defence, and had chosen a commander out of the Oxydracae ;
that he was an expert soldier, and had pitched his camp at the foot of a mountain,
causing fires to be lighted to a great distance, that his army [the undisciplined
inhabitants] might appear more numerous, and kept up cries and uncouth howlings,
etc ; and that as soon as it was light, Alexander moved to attack them in battle
array, but, the barbarians for some reason fled to the mountains, pursued by
Alexander, but to no purpose, except capturing their baggage.
Where is there a mountain to be found within ninety miles of either of these
places, or even a hill nearer than the Kiranah Hills and their off-slioots, at
Qhandani-ot, and near Sangala Tall ?
According to Arrian and the other accounts, the most important places were
evacuated, and the inhabitants fled for refuge to the dense janguls beyond the
Hydraotes [in the Ganji Bar , in the Bari Do-abah, dense jangals still exist]. After
a short repose the Greeks continued their advance and reached the Hydraotes,
while the Malli were still crossing [into the Bari Do-abah] Their rear guard was
cut up, but the main body of the Malli took refuge in a strong fortified city, which
was stormed by a part of the forces sent against it. Then Alexander crossed to the
left bank [east, and thus entered the Bari Do-abah once more. The first occasion
was when his troops mutinied], and reached a Brahman town, which was also
captured.
Curtius says, that the city was the city of the Oxydracm, and Strabo says, it
was the city of the Sydracce. The Malli evacuated all the chief cities [what a
number of cities !] lying on the left [east] bank of the river Hydraotes ; and
Alexander re-crossed to the right [west] bank [back into the Rachin-ab Do-abah
again] they, the Malli, having concentrated all their forces there. Autumn was far
advanced, so the river was low, and having re-crossed it, he attacked them. 'They
were overthrown, and fled for shelter to a neighbouring fortress. It being late in
364 H. G-. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sincl and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
one of the ancient channels of the Ohin-ab. It then turns abruptly
from north towards the south for seven miles, and then turns west
the day, the attack upon it was deferred till the following day. This was the
place where Alexander was so badly wounded in storming it. Where this fortress
might have been I cannot say, but it was in the Rachin-ab Do-abah, not far from the
then banks of the Hydraotes [Rawi], and somewhere to the northward of Kot
Kamaliah, or between that place and Samandur, or even farther north near the old
channel of the river shown in the general map. No 1.
Masson considers “Tulumba” to have been “the capital of the Malli, which
could not be Multan” ; and respecting this last remark there cannot be the shadow
of a doubt: Multan was too far south, as the other subsequent operations show.
Masson also, contrar}*- to others, considers “ Kamalia” was the site of the fortress
where Alexander nearly lost his life ; and he dwells upon the marsh near it as a proof.
This, however, is neither proof nor clue; for there are marshes in several other
places in these parts : the distance given of the length of the march is the best.
Masson also identified “ Haripah ” [Hurappah] as Sangala, in which, of course,
he was totally wrong; for Sangala Tall lies eighty-four miles to the northwards of
Hurappah, but, as regards Kot Kamaliah, he is certainly in the right neighbourhood,
although too far south perhaps.
Vincent (“Voyage of Nearchus”) says, that “the fortress where Alexander
was wounded, was not the Malli capital [not “ Moultan,” as he writes it] ; for it is
certainly on the north of the Hydraotes as M< ultan is on the south ” But, in another
place, he spoils his, by chance, correct statement, by adding, that “ the Caspiri on
the Rlmadis ought to he Moultan on the Ravee,” etc.
After stating all I have noticed above, the Author of the “ Life and Actions
of Alexander the Great,” like others who have written since, supposes, that “ the
Malli are represented by the modern inhabitants of Moultan, and Outch of the
Oxydracae;” as he says the former [i. e., “Moultan”] is on the left bank of the
Acesines [Ohin-ab], with the cognate city of Mulban [sic] between the Hydraotes
[Rawi] and Hyphasis [Biah], and Outch lower down, not far from the confluence of
the Hyphasis and Acesines. Here he has been guided, it will be seen, by the courses
of the rivers as they now flow, and as those places are now situated, but it was not so
then ; and he has mistaken the Gharali for the Hyphasis, which referred to the
Biah alone. The descriptions given by the Greek writers clearly show, that all
these operations took place in the Rachin-ab Do-abah, between the Chin-ab and
the Rawi, in whatever direction they may have flowed at that period, and chiefly
on the banks of the latter, eighty miles north-east of Multan, and nearly double
that distance north-north-east of tfchchh.
We next come to the descent of the Hydraotes [Rawi]. As soon as Alexander
could be removed, he was taken down the Hydraotes to the confluence of that river
with the Acesines [Chin-ab] where was the standing camp, and where the vessels
of his fleet were directed to assemble. At the time of the ’Arab conquest of Sind,
and perhaps for a considerable- time previously, the confluence was about twenty
miles to the north-east of Multan.
It occupied four days to convey Alexander down the river Hydraotes to its
confluence with the Acesines ; and there the grand army and fleet had already
arrived. While his wounds were healing, new vessels were being built. Near the
confluence was a large banyan tree, below which according to Aristobulus, fifty
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries .
365
again, its bank well defined, with a slope of some forty degrees, the
ground here and there covered with hillocks, to within fifteen miles
north of Tulanbah, and runs in the same westerly direction, the bank
becoming less distinct, towards the former bed of the Chin-ab near
Sidhu ki Sara’e on the north, where they used to unite. Subsequently,
when the Rawi deserted the Biah. to unite with the Chin-ab, the united
streams then passed on the west side of Multan instead of on the east ;
but, even now, the liawi shows a liking for this old channel — the most
horsemen could at the same time be shaded from the sun ; and Onesicritus, as
quoted by Strabo, mentions trees at the confluence in question, with their boughs
bent downwards, of a size that four hundred horsemen might take shelter at mid¬
day beneath the shade of a single tree. The author of the “ Life ” above noticed,
says : “ It might be worth while ascertaining, as connected with the age of this
species of tree, whether there be one of great size and apparent antiquity in this
vicinity.” I have before noticed the great Bohar or Banyan tree near one of the
old confluences of the Uydaspes and Acesines, bat not of the latter with the
Hydraotes, at page 331. After this, Alexander sailed down the three united rivers
to their junction with the Indus, where he was joined by some vessels built at other
places on the latter river. This mention here of the confluence with the Indus
shows, that Curtins’ statement of the Indus being the third river uniting at the
confluence of the Hydaspes and Acesines near the fortress there, to be an error.
“ Here (at the confluence of the Indus and the three united rivers, the Hyphasis,
Acesines, and Hydraotes) Alexander ordered a city to be built, and naval docks
to be constructed, as it was a spot, in his estimation, well calculated to become the
site of a powerful city,” but, as the upshot' shows, he could not have chosen one
worse. See page 299. After this we are told that he came down to the country
of the Soghdi, which name, the author of the “ Life ” supposes, “ they derived like
their northern namesakes, from the great vale occupied by them,” but he does not
tell us why the Tajzik word — sughd — should be used in a Hindu country in
preference to a Sanskrit word, such, for example, as —sukhd or sukhud, meaning
‘ salubrious,’ ‘ pleasant,’ etc. The former word means * a depression where rain
water collects,’ and £ the name of a city in a great depression near Samr-kand.’
Tod says (Rajast’han : Yol. I, p. 93), that, “ the Soghdi country is Dhat in the
desert,” and that, “ the Sodas are the Soghdi.” Cunningham, on the other hand,
says (p. 254), “The Soghdi or Sodrae, I would identify with the people of Seorai,”
the actnal position of which he says, “ is unknown.” “ Siw-ra’i or Sfw-ralu is
well known : a mahall of the Multan sarldr, and lies about five miles above Sabzal
Kot N-N-E. “ The elephants had been repeatedly ferried across as the nature of
the country favoured their movements [The Indus must have been a smaller river
then in comparison with what it afterwards became to have enabled this to be
done] “ They were now transferred,” it is said, “ to the right [west] bank of that
river for the last time ; and Craterus, with them, advanced through the country of
the Arachosii and Drang®,” of whom Arrian makes the Indus the eastern limit.
Here, it will be noticed, that the Hypanis [Biah] and the Hakra or VVahindah
which latter great river as certainly existed at that period as the others, have been
passed over without the least notice whatever.
366 H. Cr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
ancient that we know of, except that in which it flowed when Chacji
attacked Multan, and afterward Muhammad, the ’Arab commander —
and in flood-time some of its water still finds its way into it, or did, at
least, a few years since.
The change last mentioned appears to have taken place at the
time of, or to have been brought about through the effects of, the great
flood which devastated the northern part of the Panj-ab territory,
which will be again noticed ; and this appears to have been the course
of the river when Amir Timur crossed the Ohin-ab below its confluence
with the Bihat near Shor Kot,361 and the Rawi opposite Tulanbah on
the north, and encamped before it. From thence he passed on to the
861 Some additional light is thrown on the courses of the rivers of the Panj-ab
in the accounts of the raids of Mir ’All Beg, the Mughal, from the direction of
Kabul.
During the disturbed state of the Dihli kingdom subsequent to the death of
Khizr Khan, when his son, Sultan Mubarak Shah, succeeded, Shor or Shor Kot
played a conspicuous part from its situation.
Sultan Mubarak Shah, succeeded his father in the fifth month of 824 H. (June,
1421 A.D ), and withdrew allegiance from Sultan Shah llukh Mirza, Bahadur
Khan, son of Amir Timur, the Gurgan. which his father had faithfully observed
from the time Amir Timur conferred upon him the territory of Multan and Debal-
pur, and had never assumed the title of Sultan, which his son now took.
This act soon began to bear fruit. In the year 826 H. (1422 A.D.), the Mir,
’All Beg, son of Danish-Manchah. a descendant of Ghnghatae Khan, son of the
Chingiz Khan, who was the Na’ib or Deputy of the Mirza Saiyurgh-timish. son of
Sultan Shah Bukh, who had been made the feudatory of Kabul, Zabul, and the
territories bordering on both sides of the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, with Sultan Shah
Rukh’s sanction, threatened an invasion of Siw-istan and Bakhar of Sind, but it did
not come about. This Mirza Saiyurgh-timish is the personage respecting whom,
Mr. J. Dowson, the Editor of Elliot’s “ Indian Historians,” has made such a sad
error. He styles him (Vol. IV., p. 59) “ Shaikh ’ All, lieutenant of the prince the
son of 8ar-’atmash.” Another writer calls him “ Suyurgutmish”
Sultan Mubarak Shah, on this, directed Malik Mahmud, son of the 'Imad-ul-
Mulk, the then feudatory of Lahor, to put the defences of Multan, which had
become greatly dilapidated, consequent on the repeated Mughal inroads during
many years, in order ; and he rebuilt the fortifications anew from the foundations.
In 833 H. (1429-30 A D.), during the time that Jasrath, son of Shaikha, the
Khokhar, which latter had died some short time before, was in rebellion, and keeping
the whole of the eastern Panj-ab and adjacent parts in disorder, the Sayyid. Salim,
feudatory of Tabarhindah [in Elliot, IV, 68, the editor inserts “ Sirhind ,” to lec us
know, perhaps, that they are both one and the same place, which they are not],
and an olda nd trusted servant of Khizr Khan for thirty years, who had amsseda great
wealth, died. On this, Folad, a Turk slave of the Sayyid, seized all his property _
instigated by one of the late Sayyid’ s sons, who were at the Dihli court, it is said —
and also upon Tabarhindah for himself. A force was sent against him ; and, after
some time, being reduced to straits, Folad sought aid from Mir ’Ali Beg, the
1892.] H G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
367
banks of the Blah, and crossed it by means of boats, and some of
liis troops by swimming, as already related in the account of his expe¬
dition.
M u glial Deputy at Kabul (who now was acting for Mas’ud Mirza, son of Mirza
Saivurgh-timish, who had died at Ghaznln in 830 H. See my “ Notes on Afghanis¬
tan,” pages 364, and 578), promising him a large subsidy for his help. Nothing loth,
he, with Sultan Shah Rukh’s permission, set out from Kabul in the fifth month of
834 H. (Feby. 1432 A.D.) towards Tabarhindah, plundering and devastating all the
country he passed through until he arrived within ten kuroh of that stronghold.
On this, Sultan Mubarak Shah’s general, Islam Khan, who, with his forces, had
been investing Folad therein, had to raise the investment ; and Folad paid Mir ’All
Beg two lakhs of tangahs for his aid. Taking his family and effects along with him
(including Sayyid Salim’s wealth, probably), Folad proceeded along with Mir ’All
Beg on his return to Kabul.
The latter moved by way of Jalhandar, and from thence towards Lahor, in
the month of Kajab (the seventh month), and by Kasur and Debal-pur, devastating
and plundering the country passed through ; and the people of Khat-pur [the
chief place of the northernmost of the mahdlls of the Multan snbah or province at
that period, situated on the Raw! and then in the Bari Do-abah] he carried away
captive. The ’Imad-ul-Mulk, Malik Rajab, Nadiri, (by some called Muhammad
Hasan), the feudatory of Multan and Debal-pur, moved out of Multan to inter¬
cept him, and marched to Tulanbah.
On this, Mir ’All Beg fell back on Khat-pur ; and just at this time the ’Imad-ul-
Mulk was directed to return to Multan. On the 24th of the eighth month of the
above year he retired towards that place, on which Mir ’All Beg passed the Rawi
near Khat-pur, and then, keeping along the line of the Jihlam (which the Tarikh-i-
Mubarak Shah-1 says “ is well known as the Ohin-ab,” meaning the united Jihlam
and Ohin-ab, but to which, in the extract from that work in Elliot, Vol. IV, p. 70,
Mr. Dowson puts a foot-note, that “ such is the extraordinary statement of the text,
and Firishta copies it,” only there is nothing extraordinary in it), he plundered
the country as he proceeded, and afterwards turned round and marched towards
Multan. This he could not have done had the rivers flowed then as now.
On his approaching within ten kuroh of that place, the ’Imad-ul-Mulk despatch¬
ed Malik Sultan Shah, the Lodi Afghan [uncle of Malik Bahlul, who afterwards
became Sultan of Dilili, and was the first of the Patan or Afghan race who exercised
sovereignty anywhere], at the head of his available troops, and followed himself,
towards Jun-pur, a place I cannot now find. There an obstinate battle took place,
in which Mir ’All Beg was victorious, and Malik Sultan Shah was defeated and
slain, and his troops routed. Mir ’All Beg then pushed on towards Multan, and
appeared before Khair-abad, near that place on the Tulanbah side, on the 3rd of
Ramazan (the ninth month) 834 H. (June, 1431 A.D.), and the next day attacked one
of the gateways of the fort. Fighting went on daily in and around the suburbs until
the 2fith of the following month, when the place was relieved by a force from
Dihll, which attacked Mir ’All Beg and defeated him He then withdrew to a
fortified position, which he had enclosed with a mud wall for his troops and
baggage; but, unable to hold that, he was obliged to retire across the Jihlam [the
Ohin-ab and Jihlam united], and, in so doing, he lost a great number of his officers
and men drowned, killed, or taken prisoners ; and with his brother’s son, Mir
368 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Since tliat again the Rawi once more altered its course ; and there
can be no doubt whatever, that the old channel parallel to the present
Muzaffar, and a mere remnant of his forcea, he succeeded in reaching Shor. The
history (Tarikh-i- A If i ) adds, that, “ such a disaster had never before befallen any
army under anv reign.”
These movements tend to prove what I have noticed before (see page 279)
that, at the period of Amir Timur’s invasion, and at the period here referred
to, the junction of the Wihat or Jihlam and the Chin-ab took place near to Shor
or Shor Kot. See also page 331.
Mir Muzaffar was left to hold Shor, while Mir ’All Beg returned to Kabul,
and the ’Irnad-ul-Mnlk, who had followed in pursuit, invested Mir Muzaffar therein
on the 4th of Zi-Ka’dah (the eleventh month), 834 IT. (August, 1431 A.D.l ; but he
was jnst after removed from the government of the Multan province, and Khair-nd-
Din Khan, Khafi, succeeded him there. Great disorders arose in this part in con¬
sequence, and Jasrath, the Khokhar, again broke out. The result was, that Mir
’All Beg, in the following year, 835 H (1431-32 A.D.), again appeared upon the
scene, and advanced by way of Shor, then in his nephew’s hands, and invaded the
provinces of Multan and Labor. All the country west of the Jihlam, and great
part of that west of the Chin-ab, at this period, was outside the Dihli territory,
and was more or less subject to the Mughals, as all west of the Biah was when
the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri ” was written, and as shown by the number of Turkish names
still existing in those parts. Mir ’AH Beg carried his raids as far east as Sahrind
[which is not Tabarhindah. “ Sirliind,” also, is not the correct name of the former
place]. Facing about, he again retired westwards, making the people of Khat-pur
captive, and those of the villages along the banks of the Jihlam ; and on the 17th
of Rabi’-ul- Awwal (the third month), 835 H. (Dec. 1431 A.D.), again reached
Tnlanbah. There, bv oaths and promises, he gained over the people, and then
broke his agreement, and destroyed the fortress there, which was a very strong
place (See note 246, page 279, and following note 247), and massacred many of
its people.
Folad, the Turk, previously referred to, wrho when Mir ’AH Beg retired defeated
to Kabul had returned to Tabarhindah, now issued therefrom, invaded the territory
of Ra’e Firuz, the Ma’hin, one of the great Zamin-dars of those parts, and slew
him.
At this period Boh, also called Bold, was a ferry over the Biah, the Sutlaj not
having yet united with it, even temporarily.
Sultan Mubarak Shah, consequently, had now to deal with Jasrath, the Khokhar,
Mir ’AH Beg, and Folad, the Turk. In Jamadi-ul- Awwal (the fifth month) of
835 H. (Feby., 1432 A.D.), he moved towards the Panj-ab to suppress these out¬
breaks. On his reaching Samanah, Mir ’AH' Beg beat a retreat, and retired to the
Koli-i-Jud — the Salt Range — but the rebellion of Jasrath became still more for¬
midable than before. This induced Mir ’Ali Beg to return in 836 H. (1432-33 A.D.),
which he did by way of Shor once more. On this occasion he plundered and
devastated the whole country along the line of the Biah (accounting for the
numerous ruined places thereabout), sacked Lahor, and left 12,000 cavalry there
to keep possession. He then plundered Sae-Wal, and took Debal-pur. Again
Sultan Mubarak Shah advanced by forced marches and entered the Panj-ab to
encounter him, and reached Debal-pur. From thence he moved to the Rawi, upon
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 369
left bank on the south, which extends from a little south of Sayyid-
Walah down to within six miles west of Hurappah, where it approaches
close to the present channel, is, as its name clearly indicates, namely
Sukli Rawali,363 the “ Dry ” or “ Dried up Rawah or Rawi,” for it is
known by both names. That old channel adjoining Sidhu ki Sara’e
on the west, and which, under the same name, runs down to within
about three miles east of Multan, is not part of the old channel referred
to above, but a more recent one : that in which it flowed when the
Chiu-ab united with it near Sidhu ki Sara’e in 1695, and which it
appears to have flowed in before it finally abandoned the Biah to unite
with the Ohin-ab.363
After that again, having met with some considerable obstruction
above Tulanbah,364 as its singularly winding course, and its sharp turns —
south, west, and north again — indicate, or some other cause, it betook
itself to that remarkable part of its present channel, known locally as
which Mir ’All Beg speedily retired towards Shor, followed closely by the Sultan,
who crossed the main branch [sic] of the river Rawi, and appeared before it. Mir
’All Beg again retired towards Kabul, still leaving Mir Muzaffar, his nephew, to
hold it. He held out for a month, when, finding lie could not do so much longer,
terms were agreed upon, that Mir Muzaffar should send his daughter as a bride
for the Sultan’s son, together with many valuable presents, and that the troops
left by Mir ’All Beg at Lahor should evacuate that place. This effected, the
Sultan set out to visit the tombs and shrines at Multan, and then returned to
Dihli. Shor. and the tracts to the north and west, still remained in the hands of
the Mughals, until the time of the Langah Jat rulers of Multan, the second of whom,
Sultan Husain, after much fighting, wrested the fortress of Shor out of the hands of
Ghazi Khan son of Saiydu Khan, and also the town of Ohandani-ot, held by Malik
Machhi, the Khokhar, for the same Mughal Khan. The territory of Shor was then
conferred on Jam Bayazid, of the family of the Sammah rulers of Sind, as before
related. Sultan Husain’s wife was Bayazid’s mother by a former husband. See
pages 279 — 281, and 291.
362 This, and the other old channel mentioned after, appear in our maps as
“ Sookhrawa N,” from which one would scarcely recognize the meaning.
363 See page 35 5.
364 Cunningham says, in his work (“Ancient India,” p. 223), that “ the old
town of Tulanba, is said to have been deserted as late as one hundred and fifty
years ago, through changes in the course of the Ravi.” At page 225, however,
he says it was deserted “three hundred years ago,” having told ns on the
previous page, that “ the old town was plundered and burnt by Timur, and its in¬
habitants massacred.” The preceding note 361 will show who destroyed the
fortress and massacred the inhabitants. The place appears to have been in a
flourishing condition when Mir ’Ali Beg attacked it.
Shahamat ’Ali states, that “ the present old fort of Tulanbah is of comparatively
modern construction, and was built to restrain the wild tribes of the Gann
JBdr.”
V V
370 H. G-. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
the Sidhu or Sidli Na’e,366 which runs in almost a straight line for some
twelve miles, and without a turn, to near Sidhu ki Sara’e, where it
united with the Chiu-ab. After that again, when the Chin-ab inclined
more to the west, passed Ohandani-ot and Shor Kot on the west instead
of the east side, the Rawi, to rejoin it, made a fresh effort, and by a
very tortuous course reached the depressed sandy tract near which the
present junction takes place.
The land through which this Sidh Na’e runs declines a little on
the north or right bank the whole way, and is bounded within a short
distance of the bank by a date forest ;s66 while a belt of higher land
fringes it on the south or left bank, but it soon melts into the lower
tract adjoining it.
This is a mere general outline of the principal and greatest
changes which have taken place since the time of the Arabs. I will
not go back to “ Alexander ” and “ Hweng Thsang ” — for there is no
doubt that the Rawi, even more than some of the other rivers constitu¬
ting the Panch Nad or Panj A'b, has changed more or less from one side
S65 The Rawi in its last change before forsaking the Biah altogether, appears
to have met with some considerable obstrnction in its coarse westwards near Bakra
and Lai Kathiyah, as its winding struggles and turnings show, but more particularly
north of Tulanbah, upon which, and in order to reach the depressed tracts towards
the Ohin-ab, it betook itself, naturally, to the first depressed outlet in its way.
This happened to be a canal which a former administrator, or farmer of the revenue,
had cut to facilitate the irrigation of a part not within the influence of the annual
inundations. This was carried towards the Sara’e of Sidhu, to near a point called
Ram Chontarah, where the Hindus have a place of devotion, about two miles and
a half east of Sidhu’s Sara’e, and a little west of which it reached the Chin-ab
again, which ran south-westwards towards the Biah, but a little nearer to Multan
on the east side than it had previously done.
No traces of excavation having remained in after years to show that it had
once been a canal, deepened and widened by the action of the river— for it would
have been strange, if any signs had remained after a few inundations — and the fact
of its being so straight, and running through some of the more elevated land in
that locality, the Hindus (who greatly predominated over the Musalman population
in former times), at once attributed it to one of their deities, while the Musalmans,
more coi-rectly attributed it to some Muhammadan ruler of bygone times. It does
not seem to have struck any one that the same Sidhu, who founded a Sara’e, round
whioh a little town sprung up, could also have had a canal excavated to bring water
to it, and without the aid of demons, but such is the fact.
The Ab-i-Sind or Indus changed its course through a canal being in its way .
See note 301, page 303.
366 Date trees flourish along the Sidh Na’e, and near and around the villages
on the Oliin-ab and the Gharali, in the Multan district, but, strange to say, are not
found on the Rawi and villages thereabouts. The natives ascribe the introduction
of the date palm to the ’Arabs, and beyond the parts they reached it is not supposed
to be found.
371
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Miliran of Sind and its Tributaries.
to the other and back again time after time ; and thus to attempt to
“identify ” places along its present banks with others supposed to have
existed more than twenty-two centuries ago, is so absurd as to require
no further comment. Towards the lower part of its course, from the
proofs still existing, it has flowed, at different times, over a tract of
country from twenty to twenty-five miles in breadth.
After passing Sidhu ki Sara’e the Raw! turns to the northwards,
and soon after towards the west, and finds its way by a very tortuous
course into the depressed tract of country mentioned in the account of
the Ohin-ab, and in which the junction of the two rivers now takes place.
At the present time there is a dense forest of jand trees (a species of
Acacia) in this depression, which forest extends for a considerable
distance southwards into the Bari Do-abah in the Multan district ;
but only for a short distance, comparatively, in the opposite one, into
the Rachin-ab Do-abah of the district of Jhang. In the whole of this
depression, which is seamed with old channels of the rivers, more or
less distinct, water collects from the uthar or uplands on the Jhang
side ; and the waters of the Ohin-ab, at the period of inundation,
spread out for some miles below Shor Kot ; while the lands within the
influence of the inundation on the right bank of the Rawi, are separat¬
ed by a bank of considerable height from their uthdr or uplands for
some distance, and which is cut up by tlie twisting and twining of the
river in its very irregular course. Below this high bank again is an
extensive stretch of hethdr or lowland, or bet as it is also called here¬
abouts, and of rough surface, being intersected by some of the old,
deserted channels of the Rawi, as the term buddh ‘old,’ ‘ancient,’
applied to them, indicate.867
When the river overflows its banks, from as far up as Ohiohawatni,
some fifty miles up stream, a vast tract is flooded ; and the waters find
their way as far as Jalal-pur in one direction, and as far down as
Ahmad-pur of the Sials in the Sind-Sagar Do-abah on the other, and
finally into the Kandi-Wal dhand or lake, fourteen miles lower down
under the high bank of the Thai, and seven miles from the right or
west bank of the Ohin-ab.863
867 Along the course of the Rawi, as in the case of other rivers of this part,
are nnmerous creeks or inlets, in some few of which, at times, a branch of the
stream flows. They are rather numerous in this river ; but, for the most part, are
on a higher level than the cold season level of the stream, consequently, they are
only filled by the rising of the waters. Afterwards, when the inundations subside,
these retain some water, thus forming lakes or dhands, here known as buddhs. See
note 345, page 348.
c63 At times, in the cold season, now-a-days, the river becomes dry, or nearly
so near Ohjchawatni. This appears to be caused through drawing off a great deal,
of water for irrigation purposes, by means of the Bari Do-abah Canal.
372 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
The Bia'h — the ancient Bipasha or Wipashah.369
Abu-l-Fazl, in the A’in-i-Akbari, says very little about this river,
but mentions that its old name was Bipasba (b£U>). The Kkulasat-ut-
Tawarikh says, “ It passes Hindann ; and, after flowing beyond tlie
villages dependent on Nur-pur, enters into the plain country of the
Panj-ab. It then passes by Kano Wa-han (e^fj ^K),370 where is the
royal ferry, flows by Rahllah ; and below the town of Gobind-Wal
and the bounds of Dih-Wal, near the mauza ’ of Loh ( unites
with the Sutlaj, after which it runs past Firuz-pur and Muhammad-ot. 37 L
Between this and Debal-pur, the united streams again separate into
three branches, one of which is but a minor one. One of the two main
branches turns towards the south, and is again known as the Sutlaj ;
while the other, which continues its course towards Debal-pur, retains
the name of Biah. The intermediate or minor branch, known as the
Dandah, passes by Kabulah372 [a little to the north of it], Kha’e
Bulidhi, and north of Fath-pur, Kuliror, and Lodhran, towrards
Jalal-pur, when it again unites with the other two, and near which,
after having flowed apart for near one hundred huroh, the two main
branches again unite into one stream, and receive the name of Ghallii-
F69 Jt was probably out of this word that the Greeks made their name of
“ Hyphasis.”
The traditions current in the northern Panj-ab mention, what history confirms,
that, until within comparatively recent times, the rivers Biah and Sutlaj ran separ¬
ately as far down as the extremity of the Multan province. Another tradition
mentions that near the extremity of the Siwalikh hills, in the sub-district of Do-
suhah (“ Doosooyuh ” of the maps) of the Hoshyar-pur district, where a high, rocky
ridge juts out into the plain, which ridge is known as mandoi , the river Biah, in
anoient times, flowed immediately under.
870 When Babar Badshah orossed the Biah in 932 H. (November, 1526 A.D.)
on his advance towards Mal-o^, also called Bhojpur Mal-ot, it flowed close to Kano
Wk-han, where its high bank is well defined still, but the Biah now flows nearly five
miles farther east. Kano Wa-han is some thirteen miles to the north -westwards of
the ancient town of Do-suhah. It appears in our maps as “ Kanhwan” !
For the meaning of Wa-han see a note on the subject farther on.
871 This place appears in the maps and Gazetteers as “Mumdot” and “Mara-
dot.” The termination is the same as that in the name of Ohandan-ot or Oh,andani.
o\ on the Ohin-6b The Hindi vEsjt — ot — signifying ‘protection,’ ‘shelter,’ ‘covering
and the like, was, in this instanoe, affixed to a Musalman’s name. In Abu-l-Fazl’
time, Muhammad-ot belonged to the Khokhars (always mistaken for “ Gickers,
“ Gukkurs,” and so on) and Bhatis, hence the compound word ; and it was the chief
place giving name to one of the mahdlls of the Berun-i-Panch Nad district of the
Debal-pur sarlcar of the Multan subah, as were, likewise, ’Alam-pur, Jalal-abad
Firuz-pur, Lakhhi Kabulah, etc,
87i See page 296.
373
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
GharahWS (iff ), which, in the tracts peopled by the Baluchis, joins
the river containing the united Rawi, Chin-ab, and Wihat, Bihat, or
Jihlam, when the whole are known by the name of Sind — the Ab-i-Sind
or River of Sind.”
This is. a very important statement, referring, as it does, to the
state of these rivers written by a native Hindu revenue official of the
Panj-ab under the Mughal Government, just a century anterior to the
Survey from which I have been quoting, and to which I shall presently
return. This statement respecting the minor branch accounts for the
existence of that considerable channel which may be traced from some
twelve miles south of Debal-pur, and, a little to the north of Haweli,374
downwards by Kabulah, and Mailsi of the Multan district, and which
passes west of Fath-pur,376 north of Kuliror, and by Lohdran. This
statement also throws light on the rather obscurely expressed passage
in Abu-1-Fazl respecting the three names which he says the Biah and
Sutlaj were known by when they united, and so continued to flow for
twelve huroh to near Firuz-pur.376 No other writer than the author
of the Khulasat-ut-Tawarikh gives such information respecting this
intermediate branch, which is Abu-l-Fazl’s Band ;377 indeed, no others
notice it.
My Survey record, just referred to, states, that “ The river Biah
rises in the kohistdn of Bhutant (euxj^gj), and issues from a lake called
Biah Kund. After flowing through a difficult mountain tract, and
winding considerably, it comes from the eastward, and passes under
Nadaun, the chief town and seat of government of that part. Then
running in a general direction of about north-west, winding among the
hills of the northern Panj-ab, and passing beyond the villages depen-
873 According to Mackeson, in his account of the voyage down the Sntlaj with
Captain C. M. Wade in 1832-33, Ghallu is the name of a tribe of Jats, who dwell
along the course of the Gharah between Bahawal-pur and Mithan Kot in the
present day.
374 The “ Huvelee ” of the maps. This is the identical word noticed at
page 335, note 325, where it is written “ Huivali ” in the maps. See also note 223,
page 265 where it appears as “ Habeli”
376 This place was the chief town of a mahdll of the sarltdr of the Multan subah,
and like Kuhror, the people were Joyahs, but are miscalled Junahs in Blochmann’s
printed text of Abu-l-Fazl. Those of the first named mahdll were rated at 500
horsemen and 5,000 foot, and the latter at 100 horsemen and 2,000 foot, for militia
purposes. The Sayyid-zadah Khizr Khan, afterwards ruler of Dihli, held Fath-pur
at the outset of his career.
876 Consequent on this, the Firuz-pur mahdll was in the Berun-i-PanqJi Nad,
or Extra Panj Ab division of the Debal-pur sarltdr.
377 See note 254, page 285.
374 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
dent on Nur-pur, it separates into several channels, issues from the
hill tracts into the open country, and turns towards the south-west.
It soon after bends more towards the south, then towards the south¬
west again, passes under Kano-Wa-han, near the hunting-grounds of
the ancient rulers of Hind, and by Rahilah, Jalal-abad, Bairo-Wal,
and Fath-abad, and near the karyah of Loh or Loh-Wal, unites with the
Sutlaj, when the united waters obtain the name of Machhu-Wah
and Hariari. It is stated, that, in olden times, opposite the
above-named karyah , at a period when the Sutlaj flowed much farther
eastwards in its old bed, the Biah separated into two branches, one of
which having flowed past Kasur, Kabulah, Kha’e, and the Hujrah of
Shah Mukim,378 passed at a distance of one knroh north and west of
the fort of Debal-pur, and much lower down again united with the
Hariari. This branch still retained the name of Biah. The other
branch, flowing towards the south, united with the Sutlaj,379 which
878 At the time of my Survey recoi’d being made, the last deserted channel
of the Biah passed close on the north side of the Hujrah of Shah Mukim, which it
says, “ flowed on to Debal-pGr, and was the source of the prosperity, and once
flourishing state of this tract of country, but which became ruined and depopulated
when it deserted this channel and united with the Sutlaj.”
In the last century, the town surrounding the above-mentioned Hujrah was
of considerable size, with a bazar. In the midst is the hujrah , closet, or cell, of the
venerated Sayyid, Shah Mukim, giving name to the place. It is surrounded by an
enclosure built of kiln-burnt bricks with a high dome over the cell. This place
appears in the maps as “ Hoojra,” and in the Gazetteers as “ Hujra,” which, of
course, are meaningless as well as incorrect.
Farther south, adjoining the kasbah, is the shrine and tomb of another Musal-
man saint, Lai Bahlul, with a brick-built dome over.
379 The Tarikh-i-Yamini, in the account of Sultan Mahmud’s expedition against
Kinnauj, mentions all the rivers correctly, and the Biah and Sutladar separately.
In the map appended to Professor Lassen’s “ Indische Alterthumskunde,”
the Biah and Sutlaj are made to run in ancient times precisely as they now flow.
The Ghag-ghar is certainly made to run into, or rather its course is marked to,
the “ Sindhu ” close to Mithan Kot, while the Hakra, under the name of “ ancient
course of the Sindhu,” which it never was, is made to leave the present channel
just opposite Shikar-pur, to flow east of Alor and also of “ Brahmanabad,” but the
names Mihran of Sind, Hakra, Wahindah, or CThjtang, are never mentioned, nor
does Debal or Dewal appear in his map, and yet all modern sites almost are “ re¬
cognized,” or “ identified ” by him for ancient ones. The whole tract of country
extending from Bhatnir to “ Amarakota” is styled “ Marusthala (Maraubhumi),”
and U'chchh appears as “ TJk.”
The errors, however, are the rule, not the exception. The Sutlaj has always
been considered to represent the “ Hypanis,” or “ Zaradrus” or “Zadadrus”of
the Greeks, and the Biah (vul. “ Bias ”) to be the “ Hyphasis ” of the same people ;
nevertheless, Dr. Phillip Smith, in his “ Ancient History,” Yol. II, page 75, tells us,
375
1892 ] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
then flowed in its last independent channel. At the present time the
Biah, or main branch, is closed, and dried up entirely, and, in conse¬
quence, the tracts of country around and dependent on Debal-pur830 are
reduced to a state of desolation.”
that Alexander crossed “the Hydaspas (Jeloum) — meant for the Jihlam perhaps —
the Acesines ( Chenab ), the Hydraotes ( Ravee ), and “the Hypasis (Sutlej), the last
of the five rivers.” So, it will be noticed, that he has but four after all, having
left out the Biah altogether, one of the principle of the Panj Ab or Five Rivers,
and that he turns the Hyphasis, which others consider to be the Biah — and correct¬
ly so, no doubt — into the Sutlaj. This error seems to have been brought about
through following the courses of the rivers as shown in the maps of the present
day, and finding no running river called “ Bias ” in the direction required, because
the map-makers will style the Hariari or Gharah by the name of “ Sutlej,” whereas
it is the combined Biah and Sutlaj that formed the Hariari or Gharah, he at once
adopted the “ Sutlej.” He subsequently traces all Alexander’s movements to the
mouth of the Indus according to the present courses of the rivers, as represented
in modern maps.
He further tells us, that, “ Doab signifies the space between each two rivers of the
Tunjab .” However, I need scarcely tell those who have been in the East, that do-
abah in the Persian language, for it is a Persian word, means the delta between
two rivers wherever they may be. He also supposes, that “ Lahore” represents
“ Sangala ” of the Greeks, in which he is also wrong. See note 390, page 380.
330 Debal-pur, not “ Dipalpur,” in ancient times, was a place of considerable
size, and the seat of government of the northern Panj-ab territory, after Lahor
had been sacked by the Mughals as related in the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” page 1133,
and it did not again become the capital for a considerable time. The author of the
Survey record, who visited it towards the close of the last century, states, that,
“ from the time the Biah deserted it, it has gone to total decay and ruin. It has
a fortress or citadel of considerable size and strength, built of kiln-burnt bricks,
which is lofty and imposing viewed from a distance. It can be seen for some three
kuroh. It is now in the possession of Jalal-ud-Din Khan, an Afghan inhabitant of
Kasur [of the Daulatzi branch of the ’Umarzi Khweshki Afghans]. He holds the
first with a small following amounting to one hundred horse and foot. The space
between the four walls constitutes his territory ; and, with the exception of a few
btgahs of land at the foot of the walls, and tolls received from merchants and
traders, he has no other revenue or means of support. Although Bhagwant Singh,
and Wazir Singh, and other Sikhs, have each, at the head of numerous followers,
at different times, invested him therein, they have had to retire without gaining
their object.
“ The dry bed of the Biah lies one leuroh distant on the right hand ( north¬
west), and the Hariari flows away on the left (south-east) distant about nine leuroh
or little more. On the way from the Hujrah of Shah Mukim a great jangal of
pilu trees has to be traversed.”
He relates the legend of the transmigration of Lalu-jas Ra ’e, the Agwdni or
Precursor of the Hing-laj Blrawanr, and that he has a temple there I need not
enter into its details, but I hope this “ Agwdni ” will not be mistaken for an Afghan.
376 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex, No.
The old bed which the Biah last flowed in as an independent river
is sufficiently apparent ; while others still more ancient, have, during
the course of ages, as might be expected, become less defined, and some
worn out or changed, consequent on the opening of canals or utilizing
parts of the old beds for them. The breadth of country over which it
has at different times flowed, now in one part, now in another, extends
in most places from eight to ten miles, and, in some, to twelve.881
The physical features of the tract of country lying between the
rivers Rawi, and the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah, which names the Biali and
Sutlaj took, after their final junction, and about midway between which
the old bed of the Biali runs, is so peculiar that, before I proceed
further in my account, I had better attempt to describe it.
I have before mentioned, that a plateau of some elevation — an
elevated waste — separates the valley of the Rawi from that of the
Cunningham considers, from the old coins found hereabouts, that this town
was in existence “ in the time of the Indo-Scythians,” and is “ inclined to identify
it with the Diadala of Ptolemy [it certainly has the letter d in it, enough perhaps
for identification], which was on the Satluj to the south of Labokla and Amakatis,”
etc. ; but, as he had previously “ suggested the identity of Diadala with “ Dehli,”
we may easily dismiss it, more especially since Debal-pur never yet lay on the
banks of the Sutlaj, which never approached nearer to it than at present. He
probably meant the Biah, and so it still remains.
In the time of Akbar Badshah, Debal-pur was the chief town of one of the
three sarkdrs of the Multan subah, and the places dependent on it lay in three do-
dbahs — “the Bist Jalandhar, Bari, and Rnchin-ab Do-abahs,” and another division
styled, Berun-i-Panch Nad, or outside the Panj Ab, or Five Rivers, or Extra Panj
Ab — and consisted altogether of twenty-nine mahalls ( parganahs or sub-districts).
The town and mahall are styled in the A ’in-i- Akbari, “ Debal-pfir Lakhhi, with a
fortress of burnt brick.” The lands dependent on the mahall extended to 242, 344
bigahs and 11 bisioahs under cultivation, assessed at 13,514,059 dams, equal to
3 lakhs , and 37,851 rupis , and 19 dams ; while the whole sarkdr yielded 129,334,
153 dams , equal to 32 lakhs, and 33,353 rupis, and 32 dams. Out of the revenue
of the Debal-pur mahall, 499,535 dams, equal to 12,488 rupis and a fraction, were
free grants. The people were Jats, Khokhars (not Gakhars), Kisus, and Bhatis ;
and they were liable to furnish, according to their tenures, 500 horsemen, and 7,000
foot for militia duties.
Great quantities of rice used to be produced here up to the time that the Biah
deserted its channel to unite with the Sutlaj at the close of the last century, and
date palms flourished exceedingly. After the river deserted it, all went to ruin
and decay.
881 I had occasion, early in October, 1855, to cross from Tulanbah by Mian ki
Panki to Ludhan, and, of course, had to cross the old bed or rather beds of the Biah.
When I passed close to the high bank on the south, one of the beds was very
broad, level as a bowling-green, covered with rich sward, and studded with fine,
and handsome trees. I never saw anything in India that put me so much in mind
of an English park scene as this did.
1892. J H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 377
Biah (if such extensive tracts, here and there depressed, in which
these rivers have flowed from time to time, can be called valleys), and
this elevated tract extends from about twenty-one miles in breadth
between Kasur and Labor, but decreases in one place, lower down, to
about eight miles, but it soon increases again to about seventeen miles
in breadth.382
This elevated plateau, which consists of a stiff, clayey surface, was
capable of irrigation, and therefore of cultivation, by means of wells
and water-cuts, of which there are numerous remains still to be seen,
on the northern or Rawi side in particular. This was before the Rawi
and Biah deserted these well-defined high banks ; but who shall pre¬
sume to say where they were, or whether they existed at all twenty-two
centuries since, and what mighty geological changes have taken place in
the interim ? 383 On the south or Biah side, where the plateau rises
abruptly from the surrounding country to the height of some twenty
feet or more, it is about forty feet above the level of the country below,
but it slopes gradually away towards the north or Hawi side, the slope
there being about half of what it is on the other, and in some places,
where it rises abruptly from the plain, the height is about ten feet,
and in some places only five.88i The many and various signs of pros¬
perity, in the shape of mounds covered with fragments of bricks and
pottery, the sites of towns, villages, and fortified places,385 clearly show
that this, now totally waste, tract of country, was once in a flourishing
state, and supported a considerable population. This tract forms part
382 This elevated tract effectually prevented the Biah from following the
other rivers in their inclination westwards, and hence it took a totally opposite
course, and inclined eastwards and met the Sutlaj half way. See the heights of
different places around given in note 387, next page.
333 Volcanic action, and physical alterations have, in many places farther
west, changed the courses of rivers in past ages, and certainly this part was not
exempt from similar changes. I have mentioned the great flood in the northern
parts of the Panj-ab tei'ritory ; and this very part here noticed, from its geological
formation, bears evidence of some such change in by-gone days. See note 307,
page 305.
38-1 This tract is locally known as the dhaiya, signifying in Hindi, ‘ declivity,’
* slope,’ ‘ fall,’ etc. Combined with tekar, ‘ rising ground,’ the compound word —
dhaiya-tekar — is used as an adjective to signify ‘ desolation,’ ‘ ruin,’ waste,’ etc.
The crest of this dhaiyd forms great part of the Ganji Bar previously noticed.
In other districts it is also known as dhah and ndka.
336 Hence the absurdity of attempting to “fix” upon modern places as an¬
cient sites, and “ identifying” them with places mentioned by the Greeks.
Numerous ancient wells remain scattered over the Ganji Bar, as well as in
other now completely waste tracts in the Bari Do-abah, in the Ghugherah or
Montgomery, and the Multan districts, but the water, at present, lies a considerable
distance below the interior brickwork.
W W
378 H. G. Raver ty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. "No.
of what is locally called the Ganji Bar, ivliicli latter word, in Hindi,
signifies ‘ edge,’ ‘margin,’ 4 verge,’ etc., hnt the people of these parts
apply that term to uncultivated wastes generally, beyond the reach of
water.
As in the elevated platean called the Sandal Bar in the Rachin-ab
Do-abah, already described, this stiff, clayey surface overlies a sub¬
stratum, in the shape of a high, and rather barren strip of land beyond
the influence of the yearly inundations, but capable of cultivation if
irrigated artificially.886 This is called hanghar in this part of the
Bari Do-abah, rohi on the Sntlaj, and uthdr or upland in the Raohin-ab
Do-abah. After this again comes another belt, the last, known as
hethar or “ lowland ” in the Raohin-ab Do-abah, and “ bet” “ hhddar ,”
and “ sail-obi ” in other parts, as in the following diagram 887 of the
Raohin-ab Do-abah.
Thai
rO
vC?
S3
*3
o:
hethar
uthdr
Sandal Bar
Rawi.
m.ri.N _ - _ 'i i mi ~i ' : ' i': ! n etn I ‘ ■ n I ' . I ' n I • 1 Tr iTiTTTTr- ^ . 1 1 ; i'l ; r. YTiT' T d > II M fm 1 1 . n ■ 1 1 1 TiTm i n n V i i U 1 1V1 1 iui n mi n^tn M I . < 1 1 1 1 1 HU PTff | ITr; — ^
'A'/}/ ///»///» WA //.W. . -rad//// " w AA/A-// /. ///■■/ ■' s
886 The hethar or ‘lowland’ of the Ohin-ab, is called bet on the Rawi, and
hhddar on the banks of the Sutlaj. Another name in the Persian language appli¬
cable to all, and generally used in official documents, is sail-abi, that is, subject to
the annual inundations. Then again, the uthdr or ‘upland’ tract or belt on the
Ohin-ab is known as hanghar on the Rawi and Sutlaj. The inundations never pass
beyond its bank inland. These belts are again subdivided or distinguished locally
by other names referring to the capabilities of these higher tracts for cultivation
purposes. In some places, as near Shor Ivot in the Jhang district, where several
old channels of the Oliin-ab and Rawi exist, the uthdr belt is wanting altogether,
or lies at a considerable distance farther inland, but really, there is no high land
hereabouts to stay the flood waters.
8^7 These diagrams, of course, are not drawn to scale : they are merely intend¬
ed to give some idea of the features of the tracts between the rivers, and make my
explanations clearer.
A comparison of the heights of some of the places in these remarkable tracts
between the Chin-nb and Rawi, and between the Rawi and the high bank of the
Biah, and the Hariari, N ill, or Gharah, constituting nearly the lower halves of the
Rachin-ab Do-abah, the Bari Do-abah, and Ohhoti Kachchhi, will illustrate these
diagrams.
For example, if we run a line from, say, Ohandan-ot or Ohandani-ot eastwards
towards the Hariari in the direction of Firuz-pur, we find that, while Ohandan-ot
is 831 feet above the sea level, the banks of the Hariari, near the point indicated,
are just 200 feet lower. Going southwards, Jhang, which is just 570 feet above the
sea, is 261 feet lower than Ohandan-ot, but 80 feet higher than Ghugherah, which
is but 490 ; while Debal-pur, near the ancient channel of the Biah, is 20 feet
higher than Ghugherah, but 60 feet lower than Jhang, 321 feet lower than Ohandan-
ot, and 120 feet lower than the banks of the Hariari parallel to Firuz-pur. Going
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 379
In some places, the slope of this high, central plateau or bar ,
marking the old high banks of the Rawi and Biah, and constituting
the greater part of what was, and still is, known as the Bari Do-abah,883
namely, the tract of country between the two rivers referred to, is
gradual from the high bank of the Biah towards the present course of
the Rawi ; and below, towards the place of junction of that river with
the Chin-ab, it melts imperceptibly into the lowland or hethdr below the
farther south again, Shor Kot is 10 feet lower than Jhang, 70 feet higher than
Ghugherah, 00 feet higher than Montgomery, about 55 feet higher than Hnrappah,
and 50 feet higher than Debal-pur.
Then again, if we draw another line across from Shor Kot to Ajuddhan or the
Pak Pattan, we find that that place, which at present is seven miles west of the
Hariari, Nili, or Gharah, is 56 feet higher than Shor Kot, and 106 feet higher than
Debal-pur farther north, 126 feet higher than Ghugherah, and 116 feet higher than
Montgomery ; while Ghugherah, Montgomery, and Debal-pur are respectively,
70, 60, and 50 feet lower than Shor Kot.
Still farther south, Sidhu ki Sara’e is 170 feet lower than Shor Kot, 100 feet
lower than Ghugherah, 80 feet lower than Debal-pur, 226 feet lower than the Pak
Pattan, and 440 feet lower than Ohandan-ot ; while Multan is 88 feet above Sidhu
ki Sara’e, which latter is 98 feet lower than Ghugherah, and 214 feet lower than
the Pak Pattan.
Going towards the southern extremity of the Bari Do-abah, Mailsi, near the
Gharah, is just 2 feet lower than Multan, but it is 10 feet lower than Sidhu ki
Sara’e on the Rawi ; while Shuja’-abad and Lohdran, distant about six or seven
miles respectively from the Chin-ab and Gharah, are both on the same level, being
380 feet above the sea, but 20 feet lower than Mailsi, and 22 feet lower than
Multan, Shuja’-abad and Lohdran, consequently, are the lowest of all the places
mentioned ; and the difference between them and Ohandan-ot, the highest of all,
is 451 feet. It will also be noticed that the country round Ghugherah near the
Rawi is considerably depi-essed, and that this depression continues along the valley
of the Rawi to its present junction with the Chin-ab. The general slope of the tract
of country herein embraced is southwards and south-westwards from Ohandan-ot,
and the greatest fall is from thence to Shuja’-abad on one side, and from the Pak
Pattan to Lohdran on the other.
333 This refers only to the tract of country between the banks of the Biah
and the Rawi, which is also called Manjhah higher up. 'I he lands on either side
of the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah, extending about five or six miles along either bank,
is known as Ohhoti Kachchhi, which, in the last century, extended down as far as
Ubhchh..
380 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
The high bank of the Biah is well-defined all the way down, espe¬
cially from Jalal-abad and Fath-abad, above the present point of junc¬
tion of the Biah and Sutlaj near Hari ke Patan ; but, on the southern,
right, or Hariari, Nili, or Gharah side, after their junction, and thus
forming that river, the plateau, from the high bank of the dry Biah,
is much more abrupt, especially on the north-east side, some eighteen
miles east of Sayyid-Walah339 in the direction of Lahor. From thence
it is wTell defined all the way downwards as far as the supposed position
of the mauza> of Shah Nawaz, referred to in the account of Amir
Timur’s campaign, about seven miles north-east of Din Muhammad ka
Tibbah (vul. “ Tibba ” and “Tibbee”) — The mound or knoll of Din
Muhammad — which name was Still known towards the close of the
last century, before the Biah and Sutlaj each deserted their own beds
to unite midway and form this new river, the Hariari or Nili, as it is
called in the upper part of its course, and Ghallu-Gharah and Gharah
in the lower part, in the Multan district and the Bahawal-pur territory.
The breadth of this high central plateau or bar, from the two high
banks, varies from about twenty-seven miles north of Kasur, where it com¬
mences, towards Lalior, to seventeen miles between Noh-sharah Sara’e
and Ohunhian lower down ; while below that again, near Sath Garh,
in some few places, it is not more than eight, but the average is about
ten miles. It soon, however, begins to increase in breadth again ; and
immediately south of Hurappah,390 which it is close to on the south,
389 At present, Sayyid-Walah is only a little over a mile from the right or
north bank of the ltawi.
890 When my Survey record was written, the Rawi passed much nearer to
Sayyid-Walah than at present. Great changes also have occurred between Hinjaraun
and Chunhian (“ Choonian” of the maps), some large villages that then existed having
now disappeared. Hurappah was then described as still a large town ; and the
Eawi ran much closer to Kot Kamaliah than at the present day. That river flowed
then between seven or eight miles east and south from Bhachehuki (the “ Bhoochoke ”
of the maps), while now it is only between two and three miles from it. At the
same period it flowed within two miles of Kha’e (the “ Khaye ” of the maps), but
now it is a little nearer.
Cunningham, full of Alexander and Hwen Thsang, identifies “ Harapa ”
(writing the name from ear) as, “ another city of the Malli, into which a great body
of Indians had fled for safety,” and the chief reason for it seems because of “ the
mention of marshes,” which “ shows it must have been near the Ravi,” but there
ore plenty of marshes elsewhere. Another reason given is “ because the city of
the Malli must have been beyond Kot Kamalia [not mentioned by the Greeks : it
is a Musalman name] that is to the east or south of it. It is situated on the
opposite high bank of the Ravi.”
Alexander Burnes on his route to Labor went “ to visit a ruined city,” four
miles inland from the Rawi, and to “ inspect the ruins of an ancient city, called
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
381
it is twelve miles broad, and still lower down, south of Tulanbah, it is
above seventeen ; and this continues about the average breadth until it
Harapa.” He does not “ identify” it as existing in the time of the Greek invasion,
but states that the prevalent tradition among the people generally is, that it was
destroyed thirteen hundred years ago, at the same time as Shor Kot. From 1835,
less 1300 years, would bring us to about 535 A. D., about the time that the Turks,
including the Tattars, and Mughals, the Indo-Scythians and Geta9 of Europeans,
began to make inroads into different parts of southern Asia. See my “Translation
of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” note 2, page 869.
Masson (“Travels,” 1—153), on the other hand, “identifies” “ HaHpa,” as he
writes Hurappah, as “ Sangala,” “ for,” he says, “ every condition of Arrian’s
Sangala are here fulfilled — the brick fortress, with a lake, or rather swamp [see
note 393, page 385, for a great lake in the Bari Do-abah], at the north-eastern
angle ; the mound protected by a triple row of chariots, and defended by the
Kathi’s,” etc., etc.
As an instance of a great mistake, “ Arrian’s conditions ” notwithstanding, and
which shows likewise how “ doctors disagree,” I may mention that the Tall of
Sangala happens to lie just eighty miles farther north than Hurappah, and, that it
is also in the Rachin-ab Do-abah, while Hurappah is in the Bari Do-abah. Dr. Phillip
Smith (“ Ancient History ”) “identified” Lahor as “Sangala,” see note 379, page
371. Masson adds, that, “ the identification of Sangala gives a point from which
we may safely [truly ! as I have shewn] calculate upon the site of the celebrated
altars of Alexander, which in all probability were in the neighbouidiood of Pak
Pattan, on the Satlej, two marches from Haripah, Alexander having there gained
the high road into India, which was afterwards followed by Taimur.”
Now that we know the exact position of Sangala, it is amusing to read of these
“ identifications and were we to be guided by him according to the distance of
“ the altars,” from “ Haripah ” by a similar distance from Sangala, we should have to
look for them along the present banks of the Rawi, or at the farthest, at the nearest
points of the banks of the Biah instead of the “ Satlaj,” which, less than five
hundred years ago, flowed upwards of sixty miles farther east than the Biha. The
only wonder is that these altars have not yet been “ identified.”
Cunningham, on the other hand, tells us (“ Ancient India,” p. 217) that, “the
famous spot on the eastern bank of the Hyphasis [which refers to the Biah only],”
where “ Alexander halted and wept,” must have been somewhere in the low ground
between the Satlej and the Bias [sic], at a short distance above the old junction
opposite Kasur and Bazidpur [six miles south-east of Firuz-pur]. For 20 miles
above this point the courses of the two rivers ran almost parallel, and within a few
miles of each other, from the earliest times [!] down to 1796, when the Satlej
suddenly changed its course,” etc., etc. I may mention, however, that from the
bed of the Biah to the last old bed of the Satlaj is about thirty-six miles on the
average. In another place, he says this change in the Satlaj took place in 1 790 ;
and, in another place, that “ the altars must be looked for along the line of the
present coarse [!] of the Satlej, at a few miles below Hari-ki-patan.” Hari ke Patan
is twenty-five miles north-east of Bazid-pur, and thirty-three miles east of Kasur.
Why these “ altars ” must be looked for on the banks of the Sutlaj, seeing that
Alexander never crossed the Bidh, the writer does not tell us ?
Between the “ Pak Pattan ” near where “ the altars ” may be looked for
382 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrau of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
melts into the plain towards the Chin-ab, in the south-west extremity
of the Multan district.
“safely,” according to one authority, and “ Hari-ki-pattan, below which along the
line of the present course of the Satlej the altars must have been,” according to
the other authority, is only ninety-four miles as the crow flies !
Now respecting these altars, Curtius states that Alexander having constructed
his fleet on the Hydaspes [Bihat] he, in eight days, sailed down and reached the
confluence of that river with the Acesines [Ohin-ab], after stating in another place,
that, for the convenience of his troops, he went about 400 stadia daily. This
would be rather less than 50 miles, consequently, in eight days he would have gone
some 400 miles. But let us see how great a distance he must have been from the
lowest possible point that we know of for the junction of the Bihat with the
Chin-ab. According to that computation he must have set out from the alpine
Panj-ab, some 50 miles above the present town of Jihlam, and certainly, a part
where timber could easily and conveniently have been obtained.
Having reached the confluence of the two rivers — about which more in its
proper place— Alexander is said to have crossed the Hydaspes [really, as the context
shows, the united rivers, close to the confluence], and to have passed through tracts
of desert [waste, not necessarily desert], and came to the river Hydraotes [the
Pawl], which he likewise crossed, and reached the river Hyphasis [the right bank
of the Biah]. This, too, he proposed to cross, “ which undertaking,” Curtius
says, “ was difficult, not only by reason of its great breadth, but also on account
of the many rocks that lay scattered up and down it”
Is there a single rock to be found in the whole bed of the Biah, or anywhere
in the vicinity of that river for one hundred and seventy-five miles or more “above
the Pak Pattan,” or for an hundred miles above “ Kasur and Bazidpur? ” Except
the Kiranah hills, there is neither a rock nor a stone from one end to the other,
save near the hills to the north.
On the west bank of the Hyphasis (in the Bari Do-abahl Alexander’s troops
mutinied and refused to cross or to proceed farther. He directed that twelve
altars of square stone should be erected, to remain as monuments of his expedi¬
tion ; and in order to deceive and impose on people hereafter, ordered beds to be
left there of much larger size than the ordinary stature of men, and the fortifica¬
tions to be increased accordingly.
Where was stone to be found for this purpose between the Pak Pattan and
Kasur F He might, however, have obtained stone from the hills, but he could not
put rocks in the river bed.
Then Curtius says, that, this having been done, he marched back by the same
way as he came, and encamped along the river Acesines.
In the “ Life of Alexander the Great,” previously quoted, it is stated, that
“ The Acesines (the modern Chun-ab) was then crossed, but the channel, as describ¬
ed by Ptolemy, the son of Lagos, was nearly a mile broad. * # * Alexander
then led his army across the Hydraotes (the modern Iravati or Ravee), and heard
that a warlike nation, called Cathaians had roused two other independent tribes to
arms, and were preparing to receive him under the walls of a strong city called
Sangala.” Sangala, however, lies in the middle of the Raqhin-ab Do-abah at pre¬
sent, that is, a considerable distance before reaching the Hydraotes. The Macedo¬
nians arrived before Sangala on the evening of the third day after crossing the
1892.] H. G. Raverly — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
383
On the south or Biah side, the rise of this central plateau, as
already noticed, is about forty feet, while on the north or Rawi side it
Hydraotes [Acesines ?]. They captured it, and Alexander was informed, “that
India beyond the Hyphasis — the modern Bezah, or perhaps the united streams of
the Bezah and Sutlege — [here the writer supposes they had united 2216 years ago
instead of less than 100], was very fertile, etc. * * * “ He prepared to cross
the Hyphasis,” bat as above stated his troops refused to do so. “ On the banks of
the Hyphasis he erected twelve towers in the shape of gigantic altars. * * *
Alexander then returned from the Hyphasis [which was not crossed], recrossed the
Hydraotes [llawi] and Acesines [Ohin-ab], and arrived on the banks of the
Hydaspes [Bihat] again. See note 379, page 374.
Strabo agrees with the others that the Hypanis, the Hyphasis of the others
[Biah], was not crossed, and adds, that Alexander kept much nearer the hills during
his march from the Hydaspes, consequently, there would be no need to seek for
these altars, if they existed now, “ between the Satlej and Bias opposite Kasur and
Bazidpur,” nor “ in the neighbourhood of Pak Pattan, two marches from Haripah.’
From what Strabo says they would have been situated some fifty miles or more
above Kasur ; and to crown the whole, the Hyphasis [Bhih] as late as the time of
the ’Arab conquest of Sind, was separated by a tract of country some ninety-two
miles in breadth from the Zaradrus, Hesudrus, or Satadru [Sutlaj], and even in the
last century, the distance between them was an average of thirty-eight miles. See
page 388.
Dr. (now, Sir) William Smith, LL.D., in his “ Classical Dictionary,” after telling
us that “ Alexander penetrated as far as the Hyphasis , which was the furthest point
he reached,” assures us that this river is the “ Garra.” The Gharah, Hariari, or Nili,
did not then exist ; and a century has not yet elapsed since the Biah and Sutlaj
permanently uniting, formed what is known as the Gharah in the lower half of its
course, and Hariari and Nili in the upper half. These two rivers had certainly
united, temporarily, within the last four hundred years ; but, after flowing together
for a short distance, again separated, and again united after flowing apart for one
hundred and seventy-five miles or more. The “ Hyphasis ” which Alexander
reached, and beyond which he did not pass, nor any of his troops, was the Bidh
alone. Having fallen into one error, the writer, naturally, falls into others. Under
the heading of “ Zaradrus,” he informs us, that it is the “ Sutlej,” which falls into
the Hyphasis (Gharra),” here written with ‘ gh ’ under the previous heading it was
‘ g.’ Thus he makes the Gharah and Sutlaj two distinct rivers ; but, if we turn to
the heading “Hyphasis,” we are told that the 1 lyphasis or Hypasis or Hypanis,”
is ((the Beeas, and Gharra, a river of India ” — one river ! The Sutlaj, which eleven
centuries after Alexander’s time was flowing eighty miles or more to the east of the
Biah, is the “ Zaradrus,” “ Zadarus,” or ‘ Hesudrus,” and this the Greeks did not
reach.
The Survey record which I have been quoting from elsewhere, records a cari¬
ous fact. On the route from Labor to Nur-pur, thirty-three miles and a half from
the former, and two miles north of Ujnala, and less than a mile from the north or
right bank of the Kirn Nalah, and foui miles and a half from the left bank of the
Rawi, there stood in the last century a tnllah or mound, which is described as
“ about one hundred cubits in height, and which can be seen from a distance of two
and three huroh. On the summit thereof is a large tomb or something of the
384 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
is only about twenty, and the Rawi, at present, flows about sixteen
miles from it farther north ; but, from Chichawatni as far as about
twelve miles lower down, the Rawi flows close under the high bank.
On the opposite or Biah side, the Hariari, Nili, or Grharah (always
miscalled Sutlaj), has not yet approached this plateau nearer than
twenty- three miles, and that only at one point, some twelve miles west
of Ludlian in the Multan district, and about four miles south of
Karam-pur, where it makes a sudden bend from west towards the south.
On the south side of the plateau, and between it and the southern¬
most of the old channels of the Biah, and between that again and
the banks of the Hariari, Nili, or Grharah, and the tract of country which
is locally called the Nili Bar , is quite different from that on the other
side through which the Rawi has at different times flowed, known as
the Rawi Bar. This tract is but slightly elevated above the banks of
the Hariari, Nili, or Grharah ; and, in the south-western part of the
Multan district, the ridge of the Chit Dhu’an, subsequently noticed,
appears to have prevented the above mentioned river from approaching
nearer to the bed of the Biah in that direction ; for, near Karam-pur,
as before stated, it seems to have made an effort in that direction, but,
finding an obstacle, it turned suddenly from west to the south-south¬
east, and then to the south-west, and west again.
This tract, the Nili Bar, bears evidence of comparatively recent
formation, and the action of water ; for, a few feet below the surface,
deep beds of sand are found, and consequently, wells are with difficulty
sunk, and when sunk are very liable to fall in ; yet, it seems strange
to those unacquainted with the past history of these parts, that this
very tract of now dreary waste, without signs of vegetation, should
contain so many remains of towns, forts, and villages, 391 water-courses,
and canals. They are most numerous perhaps along the old bed of
the Biah and the parts around Kot Kamaliah in the Gfhugherah or
Montgomery district. As already mentioned, there is no land fit for
cultivation, or very little, except a belt or fringe of /chadar or sail-abi
land along the banks of the Hariari, Nili, or Grharah, which, as the
term indicates, is under the influence of the periodical inundations, and
which is also known locally as kachchhi , presently to be explained, or
kind, about twelve cubits in length, and three or four in breadth'; 'and the tradition
handed down respecting it is, that this is the resting-place in the sleep of death
of one of the companions of “ Sikandar-i-Zu-l-Karanain ” [as Oriental writers call
Alexander the Macedonian].” rlhe Rawi at the time of the Survey flowed at much
the same distance from it as now.
S91 These remains are locally known under the name or term of khofa — *y( -
signifying, in Hindi, ‘ defective,’ ‘ faulty,’ ‘ ruinous,’ etc.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 385
what can be artificially irrigated by means of canals or cuts from that
river. This belt or fringe in many places does not exceed three miles in
breadth from the banks-, but in some places it is four or five. In the parts
around Ajuddhan or the Pak Pattan much less land is fit for tillage, it is
the most elevated part of the tract around,892 and is covered with
dense jangal ; but, in the south-west corner of the Do-abah, in the
Multan district, along the banks of the Ohin-ab, this strip of cultiva¬
tion may extend to six or seven miles on the average from the river’s
bank.
Thus an extensive tract of waste land, extending some twenty
miles or more in breadth in the Grhugherah district, intervenes between
the high ridge of the elevated plateau marking the northern-most point
the Biah ever reached, and the belt or fringe of cultivation before
alluded to. On the northern half of this waste, nearest the high
plateau, traversed by old channels of the Biah, water collects every
here and there in its hollows in rainy seasons, 393 and these collections
of water are called dhoras. The other or southern half is also inter¬
sected in several places with numerous old channels of minor branches
or offshoots from the Biah, but all inclining towards the old bed of
the river in the lowest part of this waste, towards the south-west
extremity of the Multan district, in the direction of the point where,
at one time, the united Biah and Rawi were joined by the united Ohin-
4b and Bihat.
392 Since the Pak Pattan stands just 616 feet above the sea, and 106 feet
above the level of Debal-pur, and the banks of the Harlari, Nili, or Gharah,
twelve miles above and below the Pak Pattan, are respectively, 548 and 520 feet
only above the sea, that is, an average of 82 feet lower than the Pak Pattan, how
is it possible that Debal-pur could have stood on the bank of the Sutlaj, as
Cunningham asserts, or for the Pak Pattan “ to have been for ages the ferry over
the Sutlej,” which has never approached it nearer than at the present day?
393 From the heights given in the preceding note 392, it will be observed,
that around Ghugherah the country is considerably depressed, and that this
depression continues to increase down as far as the junction of the Rawi with the
Chin-ab.
Towards the close of the last century, in going from Sher Garh to Hinjaraun
across the high plateau between the Biah and the Rawi which slopes towards the
latter, just mid way, and near the present line of Railway between Multan and
Lahor, there was a great dhorah or lake, called the Palti, which extended five kuroh
in length from east to west, with a breadth of one leuroh. It was generally dry
except in and after rainy seasons. This great lake, therefore, lay just in the
middle of “the plateau. There were no inhabitants between Sher Gaph and
Hinjaraun, but there was a dense jangal , and scarcity of water. It was much the
same farther north-west to Wandiri and Salabat Pind, now a mile from the left
bank of the Rawi, and seven miles east of Sayyid-Walah.
X X
^86 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No,
The “ Barani Ruds,” now so called, that is, dependent on rain
for water, namely the Parhah and its branch, called the Dahara, and
the Sohag — the still minor ones are not of much importance to the
present subject — are merely offshoots from the Biah, which separated
from its left bank and flowed south and south-westwards. As long as
the Biah continued to flow in the channel which passed close by Debal-
pur, these barani ruds continued to flow also, and their waters were
the source of prosperity to the country through which they passed.
Now, except after rainy seasons, they contain no water until the period
of the inundations, when the overflow from the Hariari or 1ST ill reaches
them, and they become filled. At the period of the Survey quoted here,
the channel of the Sohag passed within three miles and a half of
Ajuddhan, but now it is over five miles north of it.
What is known as the Sukh Na’e (the “ Sookhnye N.” of the
maps) is, to all appearances, the old channel of the intermediate
branch of the three, into which, after uniting and forming the Hariari
or Nili, the Biah and Sutlaj again separated “to unite one hundred
kuroh further down and form the Gharah,” as already noticed. It is
called by Abii-l-Fazl, and the author of the Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, as
well as in the Survey record, the Randall, and which, lower down, in
the Multan district, is represented by the “ N. Bhuttyaree Nullah”
of the maps, and is there separated from the old bed of the Biah by
the plateau of waste known as Ohit Dhii’an — the “ Flat
or Supine Bank ” or “ Rising Ground.” It will be noticed that these
“ ruds ” are now more numerous on the south or left side of the old
bed of the Biah, and between its extreme high bank on the right or
north, and the present channel of the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah, as the
country, which gives evidence of its comparatively recent formation,
slopes down towards the last named river, which has no high bank what¬
ever like the others to the westwards. Indeed, the whole extent of
country between the high banks of the Rawi as well as the Biah, lying
on either side of the central ridge or plateau of the Ganji Bar of the
Bari Do-abah and the present channel of the Rawf, and the dry channel
of the Biah, is cut up for miles by old channels more or less defined
or much obliterated ; and the ruins of brick-built buildings, and sites
of ruined and abandoned villages, scattered over the whole of the
present desolate tracts, show that they must have been once in a
flourishing condition, and supported a considerable number of people.
894 From Hindi chit ‘ flat,’ c supine,’ ‘ prostrate,’ and dhu’an or dhu '& 1 a bank/
‘ mound,’ ‘ rising ground,’ ‘ declivity,’ and the like. This plateau or bank appear
in one of the best survey maps as “the wilderness of ‘ Chit Duen.’ ”
39b &ee preceding page, note 392.
1892.] H. Gr. Raver fcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 387
The “ Old Bias Nalla,” so called, is without doubt, the remains
of the channel of that second branch into which the Biah in bygone
times separated into two branches near the karyah of Loh-Wal or Lohi-
Wal, as already noticed, long before it had any connection with the
Sutlaj ; and not long ago water found its way into it.395
With respect to the two perennial hill streams in the present Jal-
handar Do-abah, which are “ supposed to be all one with the upper
and lower Sohag, and the Khan -Wall canal,” I may mention, that, of
the streams in that Do-abali in the last century, when the Survey was
made, there were two principal ones, the one named Kali WTa’m or
Ba’in or (jJpj), and the other Dhauli Wa’ in or Ba ’in.397 The
latter issuing from the hills of the Siwalikh, and running southwards,
passed Sara’e-i-Dakhani on the south, and, opposite Jalal-abad in the
present Firuz-pur district, three miles south of Dbaram Kot, united
with the Sutlaj, which since that time has changed its course.
The other is called the Dhauli Wa ’in or Ba ’in, which issues from a
kol-i-ab or lake west of the ancient town of Do-suhah,393 and which lake
is some six or seven kuroh in circumference, and very deep. It passes
Yahya Kagar on the north, where there is a masonry bridge of burnt
396 See following note 399.
397 In the maps, the lower part of the Kali Wa’in or Ba’fn is styled the
“ Kalnah River,” but, a little higher up it appears as the “ Veyn Nuddee ” ; and the
Dhauli Wa’in or Ba’in, is called “ Beyn Nuddee.” It was thought, probably, that
one river was called the “ Veyn” and the other the “ Beyn.” In the Gazetteers,
on the contrary, they are styled the “ Kali Ben,” and the “ Sufed Ben,” safed being
merely the Persian of the Hindi name.
Dhaula is from the Sanskrit — ‘white’ — and Ba’in or Wa’in is probably
from channel,’ ‘ gully,’ ‘ pipe,’ etc., in the same language.
The Dhauli Wa’in or Ba’ in appears to have passed rather nearer to Jalhandar
in former times than at present. When Jasrath, son of Shaikha, the Khokhar, rebel¬
led in 824 H. (1421 A.D.), among other doings was to invest Jalhandar ; and
Zirak Khan, the feudatory, was obliged to shut himself up therein. Jasrath took
up his position on the banks of the Sarasti, as the Dhauli Wa ’in or Ba ’in was then
called ; and Zirak Khan had to make terms with the rebel, and evacuate the place.
After this, Sultan Mubarak Shah had to move against him, as already related.
Lahor, at this time, was a heap of ruins; and the Sultan on this occasion repamed
its citadel, and the walls of the town.
393 Spelt in the original but Abu-1-Fazl, in the A ’in-i-Akbari, spells
it — Deso-ah. It appears in our maps as “ Dusooyuh,” and “ Dussohuh” and in
other ways, no two maps being alike, and all wrong !
According to tradition, this place was founded only five thousand years ago,
and was the capital of Rajah Bharata of the Maha-bharata, in whose service the
five Pandavas continued during their thirteen years of banishment while the Kurus
were all powerful.
388 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No;
bricks ; then to the north of Sultan -pur, under which place it is also
spanned by a brick bridge, and about eleven huroh farther to the south¬
west unites with the Blab.” At this period the Sutlaj passed close to
Pindouri, two miles and a half north of Dharam Kot, and which former
place is now five miles south of the Sutlaj.
That these two streams had any connection with the “ two Sohags ”
or the “ Khanwah canal,” is very improbable. The Kali Ba’in or
Wa ’in may possibly have had some connection with the Katorali canal,
or that canal, rather, with the Kali Wa ’m.s"
At a period long anterior to the two accounts of the Biah as it
flowed just one hundred and two hundred years ago respectively, as
mentioned at pages 372 and 373, it was separated from the Sutlaj by a
tract of country some sixty-five miles or more in breadth, and the
latter river was still a tributary of the Hakra or Wahindali. The Biah
also still flowed through the Sarlcdr of Debal-pur, in the direction of
about south-west, to within some twenty-eight miles south-east of the
city of Multan ; 400 and three or four miles or thereabouts north-west
of Din Muhammad ka Tibbah, and between that village and the Chak
of the Makhdum-i-Rasliid (the “ Mukhdoom Rusheed” of the maps),
was joined by the united Wihat, Ohin-ab, and Rawi.401 It then con¬
tinued its course more towards the south, passing between Lohdran
and Jalal-pur, in the south-west corner of the Mullan district, but
nearer to the former place. From thence it ran to Babiyah (or
Pabiyah — the Pubberwalla ” of some of the maps, but it has dis-
399 According to my Survey record, “ in going from Debal-pur towards Kasur,
after passing Sham Kot, half a kwoh north of that place yon come to the channel
called the Khan-Wa-hah, in which, in former times, a stream of water from the
Darya-e Biah ran, which passed by Debal-pur on the south towards the south¬
west. It was also known as the Biah, and now its channel is deserted, and dried
up.” It was never yet called “ Ghara,” except in Gazetteers.
At the present time, instead of being half a Tcuroh north of Sham Kot, the
channel is nearly a huroh, or about a mile and a half, south of Sham Kot; and in
the several routes across the Do-abah from Debal-pur in different directions, there
is not one word about any “ Kutora Canal,” thus showing that it must have been
opened since. It may have been some minor channel utilized as a canal.
400 The nearest point of the most recent channel in which the Biah flowed,
is just eighteen miles south of Multan ; and to this point a new canal has been
brought from the northwards from the Ohin-ab. whieh passes close to Sitalkf
Mari. See note 354, page 352.
401 The country hereabouts for many miles northwards of the chak (farm or
estate) of Makhdum-i-Rashid and Din Muhammad ka Tibbah, as far as the termi¬
nation of the high left bank of the Rawi, and the right high bank of the dry
Biah, bears undoubted signs of the violent action of water, and shows whereabouts
these rivers once united. See Sikah or Us-Sikah of Multan, page 244 and note 192.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
389
appeared from more recent ones), about twenty-nine miles to the east¬
ward of ITcbohb, and was situated on its left or south bank, and which
place, known as the fort of Babiyah, is mentioned in the Chaoh Namah,
and by the old historians of Sind.403 After reaching this point, the
Biah, and the other rivers which had united with it, forming the Rud-
i-Sind wo Hind of the old Muhammadan writers, made a bend a little
more to the westward, and united with the Hakra or Waliindah lower
down, about ninety-eight miles farther to the south-south- west, at a
place between Baghlah and Sahib Garb in the present Bahawal-pur
State, which place of junction was known in the early times of the
writers just referred to, as the Dosh-i-Ab, signifying the “Meeting
Place of Waters,” as already recorded.
The Sutlaj flowing in an independent channel, one of those pre¬
sently to be described, was still a tributary of the Hakra or Wahindah,
and united with it some twenty-five miles above the Dosh-i-Ab, where
the other more western rivers joined it.
After this period again, and probably a considerable time after
U'chchh was invested by the Mughal Nu-ln, Mangiitah, and about the
time of the great flood in the northern parts of the Panj-ab territory,
other great changes took place.403 The Qhin-ab, which previously
402 Boileau mentions this place in his “ Personal Narrative.” He says :
“ Pdbarwdli is among the chief towns of the Daoodputrahs.” In another place
he says, that, in “ going from Khanpur to Bahawulpur, Dilawar is 24 kos, then
Mithra 12 kos, after which is Pubnrwalee 12 kos, and Bahawnlpur 12 kos V
These two names (written differently) both refer to one and the same place,
which is, I believe, identical with the site of the fort of Pabiah referred to above,
or very near it.
Boileau subsequently mentions a “ Powarwala.” He says : “ Left Bahawulpur
8 kos E. S. E. over a bad road to the little village of Powarwala, and from thence
to Mojgur [Moj Garh] 16 i kos.” This can hardly refer to the former place, which
he says, was then a considerable town.
Crofton, in his “ Plan for the Sirhind Canal,” has Bdbberwala, 13£ miles about
S. W. of Bahawnl-pur, and near the high bank of the “ Sutlaj.” He rightly refers
to the old channel of the Sutlaj as it now remains, not to the channel of the
Gharah, which has no high bank. The whole tract of country for many miles
hereabout is of recent formation. See page 386. In former times, likewise, the
Biah took a more direct southerly course after the junction with it of the Chin, ab
and Rawi east of Multan.
The place referred to by Crofton is the same as that referred to by Boileau
under the name of “ Powarwala,” and seems much too far south to be the site of
Pabiah above referred to. See note 192, page 244.
403 What brought about this flood noticed at page 392, is not stated, but it is
highly probable that some volcanic action was at work, and this may account for
the formation of these Bars and the Thai, the raised plateaux which I have been
describing, and the geological formation of which indicates something of the kind.
390 H. (t. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . [Ex. No.
flowed in the old channel by Bhatian di Pindi, and some miles east of
Ohandan-ot or Ohandani-ot (yul. “ Chuneeot ”), Kliewah. Jbang-i-
Sialan, and Shor Kot, as mentioned in the account of that river,
changed its course much farther towards the west, passed those places
(or the positions where they now stand) on the west instead of the east ,
and continuing its course in nearly the same direction, flowed into the
low-lying ground, a short distance on the west side of Multan. The
Rawi on being deserted by the Ohin-ab, became also affected thereby,
and although it still continued to unite with the Blah, it altered its
course likewise, but not considerably, to a more westerly direction,
nearer Multan, where its old bed, under the name of Sukh Rawah or
Rawi or “ Dried up Rawah ” channel, still exists, as mentioned in the
notice of that river. The Biah, on the other hand, also affected from
the same causes as had affected the others, and on account of the Rawi
passing nearer to Multan than before — within about three or four miles,
and hence that side of the city is still known as taraf Rawi, or ‘ Rawi
Side ’ to this day — instead of running towards the south to unite with
the Hakra or Wahindah, it took a direction more to the westward —
about south-west— and was joined by the Chin-ab and its tributary
the Wihat or Jhilam ten miles north-west of Jalal-pur, and three miles
and a half west of Kotli, in the south-west corner of the Bari Do-abah
in the Multan district ; and the united waters soon after fell into the
Ab-i-Sind or Indus, a short distance west of U'chchh.404 From thence,
the Ab i-Sind kept a more southerly course on its way to the place of
junction at the Dosh-i-Ab, already noticed, and respecting which further
particulars will be found in the notice of the Hakra or Wahindah.
These changes were not confined to these two Do-abahs, we may be certain, and,
donbtless, the Ab-i-Sind or Indus and its tributaries farther west were affected
likewise, and, probably, the Hakra also in the opposite direction. See note 307,
page 305.
404 Abu-1-Fazl, likewise, states in the A’in-i-Akbari, that, in the reign of Akbar
Badshah, the Ab-i-Sind united with the rivers of the Panj-ab, near LTchchh, on the
west.
It was just the same in the time of Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah, rilier
of Multan, LTchchh, and Sind, and also at the time of the investment of LTchchh
by the M u glial s, already noticed. The following tradition respecting it, contained
in the Life of the famous Afghan saint, the Shaikh, Yahya-i-Kabir, the Bakhtyar
Sherani Afghan. “ It is related that the Shaikh, Yahya-i-Kabir, came to U'chchh
from the Afghanistan at the time that the celebrated saint of that place, the
Makhdum-i- J ahanian, was at the height of his fame and veneration for sanctity.
On this occasion, it is said, that, when the “rainy season” came round, the
Darya-e Sind, had put forth great violence, in such wise that it reached close up
to the city of U'chchh, and swept away several houses. As the people were filled
with fear and dismay in consequence, they assembled together, and came to the
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 391
The Sutlaj, or Sutlaj, or Shuttlaj.405
Before I give any account of the Sutlaj, the ancient S'atadru, it is
necessary that I should relate what is stated in the Khulasat-ut-
presence of the saint, the Makhdum-i-Jahaman, and besought him, saying : “ Ah
Makhdum ! the Ab-i-Sind has risen so high as to threaten to overwhelm us. Let it
not happen, that, with such a sanctified person as yourself among us, we should be
swallowed up.” The Makhdum replied : “ Whatever may be the will of Almighty
God, that we must bow to : and whatever He may be pleased to do, that He will
perform, and we have no reason to say “ why ” or “ wherefore.”
“ This happened on the night of a Friday (our Thursday night : the night is
reckoned first in eastern countries, and the day last) ; and the Makhdum advised
them, saying : “ Return to your homes and pray devoutedly to God, and supplicate
Him, that He would vouchsafe to direct you in your sleep what you should do.”
When the morning came round, they came to him again, and began to relate what
their dreams had been. The Makhdum said : “I have seen the blessed Prophet in
my sleep, and he thus directed me, saying : ‘ Ah Maklidum-i- Jahanian ! in a certain
place there is a large brick which Mihtar Khwajah Khizr baked for a certain Zahid
(Recluse) in the time of Mihtar Musa — on whom be peace! — who used to perform
his ablutions on the bank of the Ab-i-Sind, in order that by standing thereon the
Zahid’s feet might not be soiled by the dirt, and his mind thereby become distracted
every time he performed his ablutions. That brick lies buried in a certain place :
let it be brought from thence and given to the Khwajah, Yahya-i-Kabir, and let
him, with his own hands, place it on the bank of the Ab-i-Sind, and Almighty God
will cause the river to recede, and no injury will be sustained from it by U'chohh to
the end of time.’ ’’
“ The Makhdum having taken the people along with him to the place indicated,
set them to excavate ; and the brick was found and placed before him. He then
requested the Khwajah, Yahya-i-Kabir, to take it, saying : “ With thine own hands
place this brick on the bank of the Ab-i-Sind.” He replied : “ Oh Makhdum ! let it
not be that some other and more worthy Yahya was intended ; for it does not appear
that the blessed Muhammad indicated me, his servant, who is not worthy to carry out
his command.” The Makhdum answered, saying The Blessed Prophet indicated
thee to me, saying: ‘ He is a Rohelah, who has come from the Koh-i-Suliman, and
speaks the Pus’hto tongue.’ ” On this, the Khwajah, Yahya-i-Kabir, ejaculated “ Bis-
mil’ldh ! ” took up the brick, and placed it on the spot indicated by the blessed Pro¬
phet, and Almighty God caused the Ab-i-Sind to recede ; and, Please God ! the river
will not pass beyond that brick, and no injury will be sustained therefrom by
U'chchh to the end of the world.”
4*05 Muir, in his “ Sanskrit Texts ” (vol. 1 , p. 417) relating the Vedic traditions
or legends, says, that this river, which is called the “ dreadful S'atadru (Satlej),
which was full of alligators, etc., derived its name from rushing away in a hundred
directions on seeing the Brahman, the Sage, Vasishtha, who on hearing of the
destruction of his sons by Visvamitra, in the early contests between the Brahmans
and Kshattriyas, threw himself into it.”
In another place (vol. 2, p. 417) it is called “The dreadful S'atadru (Sutlej)
which was full of alligators,” etc., and “ derived its name from rushing away in
a hundred directions on seeing the Brahman brilliant as fire.”
392 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Tawarikh. and in that chronicle only, respecting the great flood in the
Panj-ab territory. The author was a native of the part adjacent to the
tract of country affected by it, and possessed the necessary local know¬
ledge to describe it. The exact year in which this flood took place is
not fixed, but it was a long time before the invasion of Hindustan
by Amir Tinrnr. In all probability it happened a short time before
Sultan Firuz Shah commenced opening canals ; and the vast changes
which this flood appears to have caused, may have been the reason
of his bringing canals to his newly founded Firuzah Hisar and parts
adjacent.
Some great physical disturbance in the mountains bounding the
Panj-ab territory on the north “ caused the whole of the country of the
northern part of that tract to be flooded, in such wise, that the whole
extent of country between the rivers Sutlaj and Ohin-ab, was over¬
whelmed and completely swept by this flood, and the whole face of the
country changed.” The remains of the ancient channels of these rivers,
and of the Rawi and Biah, which flowed between them, tend to prove
this ; and the flood appears to have swept along in a south-westerly
direction. “When it subsided, the country affected by it, for a long time
lay waste and uninhabited , but, subsequently, by degrees, it began to be re¬
peopled. As the Mughals from the direction of Balkh and Kabul made
incursions into the Panj-ab territory nearly every year, the country did
not soon recover : it continued in a state of ruin, and so remained, paying
little or no revenue, until the time of Sultan Bahlul, the Lodi Afghan, and
first Patan who ruled in Hindustan, who made Tattar Khan feudatory of
the Lahor province, at which time Ra’e Ram-Diw, the Bhati, farmed the
whole Panj-ab [the Labor province is most likely meant, but such are
the author’s words] for nine lakhs of tangahs ,406 This Ram-Diw sub¬
sequently became a Mussulman, and this greatly conduced to his rise.
In the year 887 H., and 1522 of Bikramajit [1488 A. D.], he, with Tattar
Khan’s sanction, founded Patialah, the site of which, at that period, was
a jangal waste. The first place selected was a pushtah or mound ; but
the omens regarding this site not being deemed propitious, it was aban¬
doned, and another pushtah chosen, the same on which Patialah now
stands. The word patialah means dunbdlah [signifying ‘after,’ ‘be¬
hind,’ etc.], referring to the subsequent selection of its site.”
Others say its name is “ S'atadru, of the hundred channels,” and others again,
“ S'atadru, of the hundred bellies.”
These terms may have been applied to it on account of its repeatedly forming
new channels.
Of silver, equal to about four Idkhs and a half of rti'pfs. See Thomas’s
“ Pathan Coins,” p. 369.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 393
I may mention that the author, as well as being* a native of Pati-
alah, was also a revenue official of the Mughal Empire in the reign of
Aurang-zeb-i- ’Alam-gir Badshah.
It may be noticed here in connection with this great flood, that
Amir Timur having reached Bharah on the Jihlam, and defeated the
Tammlmi, 407 Mubarak Shah, which place, as the crow flies, is about two
hundred and fifty-six miles from Samanah by Labor, instead of taking
the direct route, he marched towards Multan, one hundred and seventy-
six miles in a direct line, or thirty-two miles farther from Samanah
than Bharah is. True, his grandson, the Mirza, Pir Muhammad, was
at Multan, and wanted help in the shape of horses to enable him to
move, but he might have joined his grandfather at Labor by Debal-pur
as easily perhaps as joining him on the Biah, or the Amir might have
detached a portion of his army to his assistance ; for Amir Timur did
not go to Multan408 from Tulambali, but marched to the Biah direct.
It will be noticed that his grandson also came into the Panj-ab by a
southern route, as did Taramshirin Khan, to whom Amir Timur refers
with respect to bridging the united Bihat or Jihlam and Chin-ab by
means of boats. I imagine that the choice of a more southern route,
in preference to the direct one by Labor, by Amir Timur and the others,
was, in some way, connected with the desolate state of the Labor terri¬
tory, or northern Panj-ab, occasioned by this great flood, mentioned by
the author I have quoted, and for the reasons he gives.
We know from the historian of Amir Timur’s campaign, that the
Chin-ab passed on the west side of Multan at that time, but what had
become of the Sutlaj is not so clear. It is certain that the Rawi still
united with the Biah, and passed Multan as heretofore on the east, and
that the Biah still flowed in its old bed. It is also very evident, that,
if Amir Timur had had to cross the Sutlaj in going from Ajuddh an
(afterwards ealled the Pak Pattan) to Bhatnir we should have heard
of it, especially if it contained its usual volume of water, or its previ¬
ous volume; for it was unfordable as far up as Ludhianah and Tiharah409
during the operations against Jasrath, the Khokhar, in 825 H. (1422
A, D.),410 until the cold season set in, but it was still unfordable farther
4.07 The Bam Tammim, were powerful in Sind from the time of the ’Arab
conquest, several of its members, being governors under the Khalffahs. Mubarak
Shah was one of that ’Arab tribe, still independent some seven centuries later.
See note 315, page 324.
4i0S Moreover, he does not appear to have cared for Multan, for he left no troops
to occupy it, and seems simply to have abandoned it to any one who might choose to
seize it.
409 Then on the bank of the Sutlaj.
410 See page 278.
Y Y
394 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. Ko.
downstream. Amir Timur crossed from Ajuddhan to Bhatnir on the
last day of October, 1398 A. D., shortly after the subsidence of the
inundations, and when all the rivers are still high.411 Although he tells
us about the Biali being rapid and unfordable, and that he had to send
his troops across in boats, -while some swam their horses across, he
makes no mention whatever of any river, or channel of any river,
between Khalis Kotlali413 and the Gliag-ghar at Bhatnir. Indeed, there
is not a word respecting the Sutlaj, either in the histories of Amir
Timur’s expedition, or in Ibn Batut all’s travels. It seems almost im¬
possible for Amir Timur to have reached Bhatnir from Pir-i-Khalis
without having to cross the Sutlaj, yet, as before remarked, it is never
once referred to ; and Ibn Bat Utah mentions no liver whatever between
Ajuddlian and U bob-liar,413 but says that that place abounded in water
HI Not so liiglr, of course, as during the inundations, but xnueli higher than
the usual cold season levels.
412 Pir-i-Klialis of the present time, the “ Peer Khalis” of the maps. See
page 285.
H3 Cunningham in his “Ancient India/’ pp. 218-219, refers to “ Ajudhan ”
as “ for many centuries the principal ferry of the Satlej,” and says, that, “at this
point the great conquerors Mahmud and Timer, and the great traveller Ibn Batuta
crossed the Satlej.” I have stated above that in Ibn Batutah’s work there is no
mention whatever of any Sutlaj ; and no river is mentioned between Ajuddhan and
Uboh-har ; and neither in any history of Mahmud of Ghaznin, nor of Amir Timur,
will such a word as “ Satlej ” be found, nor Sutlaj either.
In another place, lower down, he says : “ the fort is said [by whom not men¬
tioned] to have been captured by Sabuktugin in A. H. 367, or A. D. 977-78 during his
expedition into the Panjab, and again in A. II. 472, or A. D. 1079-80 by Ibrahim
Ghaznavi # # * The present name of Pak-pattan is of comparatively modern
date.” See note 330, page 37 5, and note 420, page 398.
There is no record in early history to show that Sultan Ibrahim of Ghaznin
“ captured” Ajuddhan, because the whole of the Panj-ab territory as far east as the
Hakra, and in which Ajuddhan lay, had been subject to the Ghaznin Sultans for
some seventy years before 472 H. The Tarikh-i-AIfi. quoting older works, states,
that the place (mistaken by Firishtah for Ajuddhan) was called [Ajud or Achud]
one hundred farsangs, equal to three hundred miles and more, from Labor, then the
capital of his dominions in Hind ; and that, after obtaining possession of that place,
another stronghold, named U'man was reduced. This last was situated on
the exti’eme border of Hind, on a high mound, on one side of which was the ocean,
and near which vessels could be seen passing to and fro ; and on the other side
was a jangal so dense as to exclude the light of day. At the foot of the fortress
there was scarcely standing1 room for the troops to attack it. The only direction
that the distance here given will suit is near the sea coast, between Sind and Kan-
bhayah (vul. “ Cambay ”), on the coast of Kathiawar.
Sultan Ibrahim is also stated to have captured Lfdah-purak, said to have been
11 peopled by the descendants of Khurasanis transported thither in former ages by
Afrasiyab, near which was a reservoir of vast extent, and the jangals surrounding
which were so dense, that the Hindu Rajahs deemed it unassailable.”
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Miliran of Sind and its Tributaries.
395
and cultivation, and yet does not say what river this water came from.
It was, however, the Sntlaj, which then flowed in the Uboh-liar channel
and was a tributary of the Hakra. It was shortly after Amir Timur’s
time that the Sutlaj formed a new channel for itself, now represented
by the great dandah or high bank, between the Uboh-har channel and
the present Hariari or Nili. After that again, the rivers Biah. and
Sutlaj, by uniting at Loh, Loh-Wal, or Lohi-Wal,414 above Biruz-pur,
formed the Hariari, Hiirni, or Hill, as described by Abu-l-Fazl. This
junction was temporary, however, for they again separated a few miles
east of Debal-pur, and, on this occasion, separated into three branches
the Biah returning to its old bed again, and the Sutlaj bending south¬
wards regaining its former channel likewise, and each regaining there
former names. The third branch, was smaller and insignificant, compared
with the other two, and, under the name of Dandali passed between
Ajuddhan and Khalis Kotlah, almost parallel with the Biah until about
midway between Lohdran and Jalal-pur in the Multan district. Having
thus flowed apart for about one hundred kuroh , the Biah and Sutlaj
again united 415 — the Dandah had previously united with the latter a
little farther up stream — and losing their names once more, formed the
Gliallu-Gharah or Gharah, and finally united with the Sindhu or Ab-i-
Sind near U'chchh-i- Sharif. The intermediate channel is represented
4G Cunningham (“ Ancient India,” page 210, etc.), says, that, “ for centuries
before the present confluence of the Bias and Sutlej, the point of junction was
just above Bhao hi Patan, between Kasur and Firuzpur. This junction is mentioned
by Jauhar, A.D. 1555,” etc. This is a mistake: neither in Stewart’s translation of
the work of Johar, the Ewer-bearer of Humayun Badshah, nor in the original , is
there a word about Bhao ki Patan. The word is (see page 372), which some have
mistaken for — without a point thus — All that Johar says (I quote Stewart’s
translation here, because it is that which Cunningham follows) is (page 112) : “ The
chiefs that had been sent to Jallindhar having crossed the Sutlege, and passed
through Machwareh [this is how Stewart writes Machhi Warah], entered the district
of Sirhind [Sahrind he means] and on the next page, that, “ Information having
been brought to the king that Omer Khan Ghicker [Gliakar], having collected a
very large force at Fyruzpur [Firuz-pur], ivhich is situated at the junction of the
Beyah and Sutlege rivers.” There is nothing more except, that, “ about this time
the Afghans marked out a ford across the Sutlege opposite the town of Machwareh
* # # By ram Khan crossed the river by the very ford the Afghans had marked
out # # * Accordingly the king crossed the Sutlege at Machwareh, and joined the
army at Sirhind,” etc.
Now “ Booh,” as it appears in the maps, and is what has been mistaken by
Cunningham for Bhao, is twenty-three miles above Machhi Warah, and a conple of
miles noi'th-west of llari ke Patan; a few miles north-east of which, higher u.p still
the confluence took place in 1874. See note 214, page 278.
See page 372.
396 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries . [Ex. No.
now by what is called the Sukhh M’e or “ Dry Stream,”416 which flowed
a little west of Lolidran, but subsequently shifted nearer towards Jahil-
pur, a short distance farther west. The channel called “ Nulla Bias ”
in the maps, a little east of Ludhan, appears to have been connected
with it.
The surface of the country south of the banks of the Sulla] — I
refer to it before its junction with the Biah — is a dead flat, and
throughout the Firuz-pur district, and farther south into Sind, without
a hillock of any kind until the sand hills of the registdn or sandy desert
are reached, with the exception of a few dreary looking sand hills to the
south and south west, the remains probably of some high bank or
dandah of ancient times. It also slopes towards the south and south¬
west, but more so in the latter direction, through which part the
Hariari, Machliu-Wah, Nili, or Gharah now flows, from about 727 feet
above sea-level at Dullo-Walah to 545 feet near Fir-i-Khalis : 340 at
the junction of the Gharah with the Chin-ab ; and 335 at the junction
of the Panch Nad or PanjAb with the Ab-i-Sind or Indus.
The following is the Survey record account of the Sutlaj, as it
flowed in the last century, and its subsequent junction with the Biali.
“ The Sutlaj, properly called Sutlaj ( but, from constant
use, Sutlaj ), flows out of the Tcohistdn of Bhutant ( ), and
from the hoh of Sir Khand and Kahlur, the chief place of which is
Bilas-pur. One bank lies in Hindustan, and the other in the Panj-ab
territory. After issuing from the hills it separates into two branches ;
and, having passed below Makho-Wal and Kirat-pur, the branches
again unite near Ruh-par (“ Rooper,” “ Ropar,” and “ Roopur ” of the
maps and Gazetteers). After this, it passes under Bahlul-pur (“ Bliilol-
poor ” of the maps), Machhi-Warah, Ludhianah, and Tiharah, and near
the village of Loh-Wal ( J lj orLohi-Wal (<Jtj ), a dependency
of Haibat-pur Pati, unites with the Biah. Both rivers then lose their
names, and the united streams are known as the Machhu-Wali j-psr/0)
and Hariari [Abii-l-Fazl’s u Harihari.”] They again separate into
two417 branches, and after flowing separately for about one hundred
416 This is not the Sukhh Na’e referred to at page 386. “ Dry Channel,” as the
words mean in the original, are applicable to any dried up channel or water course,
hence, if not explained, so many similarly styled might cause confusion.
417 Prom this it appears that the Sukhh Na’e and Sukhh Biah, had already ceased
to be perennial streams. We must not presume, however, to assume that those two
branches flowed precisely then as now, because the river, as now constituted, never
runs exactly in the same course two years following, for the change is constant.
Thero are the remains of an old branch still known as the Hariari, but nearly
obliterated, which ran south to the Sutlaj when it flowed in what is now known
as the Dandah, as mentioned at page 372. It is again noticed farther on.
J892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
397
kuroh they re-unite.418 In the part where this fresh junction takes place,
in the rainy season, on occasion of the slightest swell, the river over¬
flows its banks, and the waters spread out for a distance of several
kuroli on either side — for the banks are low and consist of soft, alluvial
earth — fertilizing the country thereby. In this part the united stream
is known to the people as the Gballu- Gharah, or Gharah, and ISTili ; and
the tract of country along its banks on either side is known as the
Ohhoti Kachohhi.419 Continuing its course, and having passed U'chchli-
i-Sharif, just below it, it unites with the A'b-i-Sind.”
Sncli was the united river towards the close of the last century,
yet what changes have we here, to judge from the present P
Without noticing the turns and windings of the Sutlaj in former
times north of its present channel more than I have done, which are
413 The author of the article on the “ Lost River ” in the “ Calcutta Review,”
previously noticed, states (page 13), that “in the Ain-i- Akbari, the united Sutlej
and Biyas is said (A. D. 1596) to flow in four streams, which meet near Multan.
Of the names given Har, Hari, Nurnai, and Dhund, the latter is the only one known
at present.”
This is a great mistake : the A’in-i-Akbari contains nothing of this kind, as
may be seen from the original text. The writer must have seen some statement of
this kind, in Gladwin’s translation perhaps ; for the account in the original coincides
precisely with what I have mentioned at page 296, that the united river is known
by those three names, not that there are three rivers, much less four.
Perhaps Rennell obtained his four streams from the same source. See page 405.
The “ Calcutta Review ” writer also states, that, “ the two rivers Sutlej and
Bivas did not meet (in Arrian and Strabo’s days) until they reached the Rann of
Each.” I do not think any of these names will be found mentioned by the writers
referred to.
419 Eachchh — not ‘Each” — means silt or alluvium thrown up and left by
water, and rivers, after inundations. The name of the level tract north and north¬
west of Shikar-pur, and the territory on the sea coast, called Eachchh and
Eachchh- B huj , is derived from the same word, referring to their original formation.
The banks of a river where such deposits are left, are so called ; and “ both banks
of the Gharah and Hariari or Nili, for a distance of about eighty Tcuroh or more in
length,” according to the Survey record above referred to, “ with a breadth of
from five to six Tcuroh, is called Ohhoti Eachchhi. The cultivation of this tract
depends on the inundations of the river. On the southern bank is some small
extent of jangal, and beyond, the chid or desert. On the northern bank, beyond the
lutGhohh of the Nili Bar, the jangal \$ so dense that a horseman cannot get through
it, and even a man on foot penetrates it with great difficulty. Each beshcih (forest)
has a separate name, one of which is Nekali Kand ; and in time of necessity, the
people, who are Jats, take shelter in them.” In the Sanskrit, means ‘ bush/
‘ copse * and the like. See note 360, page 363. The northern side of this alluvial
tract is also known as the Shamali Eachchhi Doabah.
398 H. G. Raverty — The MiTirdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
not material to tlie present subject, its old bed420 — that is to say, the
channel last abandoned before it had anything to do with the Biah, and
when it was a tributary of the Habra or Wahindah — can be distinctly
traced downwards to Sind by its distinct and well marked high bank
or dandali , from Tiharah to Dharm Kot, Kot-i-T'sa Khan, where it bends
towards the south-west, passing near Mudki (“ Moodki ” of the maps)
on the east, then by Farid Kot, north and west of Makhti-sar, close
to Rata Khirali on the west, Bag-sar, about mid-way between Uboh-
har and Fazil ka, thirteen miles south-south-east of Bahawal Garh, and
twenty-three miles south of Ajuddhan or Pattan-i-Panj-ab, or the Pak
420 Cunningham (“ Ancient India,” page 217) inform us that “ Debalpur was
the capital of the northern Panjab,” and he indentifies it “ with the Daidala of
Ptolemy which was on the “ Sutlej [sic] to the south of Labokla and Amakatis, or
Labor and Ambakapi.” In one of his Arch. Rep. p. 140, he had “ identified Daidala
with Dehli.”
I beg to observe that Debal-pur never yet stood on the banks of the Sutlaj, nor
anything near it. The Sutlaj lias repeatedly inclined from east to west, but never
yet from west to east. It never approached farther west than where it united with
the Biah, when, losing their respective names they became the Machhu-Wah,
Hariari Nili, or Gharah (in the lower half of its .course). That river even now, in
no place is less than eighteen miles from Debal-pur, and that is to the south-east.
In another place he says : “ It seems highly probable, therefore, that he [Perdikkas]
despatched by Alexander to the east of the Ravi, may have carried the Greek arms
to Ajudhan on the banks of the Sutlej, from which his march would have been
aloim the course of that river by Ludhan, Mailse, Kahror, and Lodhran to Alexan¬
der’s camp at Uchh.”
Only, the Sutlaj never yet flowed by Ajuddhan (see following note 421),
which is not on the Sutlaj ’s banks and never was ; and it is only since the end
of the last century, when the Biah and Sutlaj by uniting formed a new river,
referred to above, that the Sutlaj approached within twenty-four miles of Ajud¬
dhan, and only a centuiy or two before was more than forty miles east of it.
When the Biali and Sutlaj, after temporarily uniting at Loh Wal, formed the
Hariari or Nurni of Abu-1-Fazl, as mentioned at page 372, and separated into three
branches, the lesser, and middle stream of the three, flowed some miles past
Ajuddhan on the east, and is represented by the Sukhh Na’e. The other two were
the Biah, which continued to flow in its own channel, while the Sutlaj turned south
and re-entered its old channel represented by the dandah or high bank. All this,
however, happened in very recent times. The “ carrying of the Greek arms to
Ajudhan,” and “ Alexander’s camp at Uchh ” depends upon whether these places
existed twenty-three centuries ago, and certainly the rivers did not flow then as
now, nor anything like it. The latest great change in the courses of these two
rivers, as before noticed, took place near the close of the last century ; and at page
217 of his book, Cunningham says himself, that “ the Satlej suddenly changed its
course in 1796,” but, at page 221, he says “ in 1790.” It was not the Sutlaj only,
for the Biah did the same.
However, there is one great obstruction to the “ Greek arms,” being “ carried
to Ajudhan ” and Debal-pur also, as may be seen in note 390, page 381. All ancient
399
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
Pattan.421 From thence to within four miles south-south-east of
Mubarak- pur, about two miles and a half south of the Got of
r't .
writers agree, I believe, that the Hyphasis represents the Biah, and the Suthyj the
Zaradrus, Hesudrus, or Satadru, even by Cunningham’s own statements. As
Alexander’s troops mutinied on the banks of the Hyphasis, and refused to cross,
and he had to turn back without crossing it, how could the “ Greek arms” have
been “carried to Ajudhan,” which was a considerable distance east and beyond
that river ? I suppose it is not intended to assert that the Biah and Sutlaj then
united at “ Bhao ki patan ? ” See also note 345, page 343, and preceding note 41S,
page 397.
421 In the Hindi dialect there are two words, which in the Arabic character
in which Urdu is written, are something alike, but, in pronunciation and in sig¬
nification they are very different, namely, patan and pattan. The former means
a ferry and the latter a town. Oat of these words a sad mistake has been made
in consequence of not knowing the difference, and jumping at conclusions.
Cunningham in his “Ancient India,” page 2 1 9, states, that “Ajudhan, or
Pak Fattan ” was for centuries the principal ferry of the Sutlaj ; ” and is “recog¬
nized as one of the towns of the people — ” says one of the Punjab Gazetteers — “ vari-
ouslv mentioned by Alexander’s historians as Ohydrakse [sic], Sydrakse, Sudrakse,
Surakousse and Hydarkse,” and then it adds: “It is from this Farid-ud-din,
familiarly and better known as Baba Farid, that the name Pak Pattan , or “ ferry
of the pure one, is ascribed.” Then, in another place, after all this, it is stated,
that, “ it is from a ferry over the Bisharat nalld that Pak Fattan derives its name,”
and which nalld is said to pass “ close to Pak Pattan.” In another place in the
same “ Gazetteer,” we find the following : “ The truth of the story is doubtful.
The name may have been changed to Pak Pattan on account of a ferry over the
Bishdrativah , but the town was known as Ajudhan in Tamerlane’s time. In the
Aln-i-Akbari it is called simply pattan or “ the ferry.” * * # In fact Pak
Pattan means simply the “ holy pattan.” Such is a specimen of “ Gazetteer” history.
It so happens that the place is called the Pattan-i-Panj-ab, as well as the Pak
Pattan, its old name, that is to say its original name, being Ajucldhan. It is men¬
tioned in the A’in-i-Akbari as the chief town of one of the mahalls of the Debal-pur
sarhdr of the Multan subah, and one of ten then situated in the Bist Jalhandar
Do-abah of that sarhdr, that is, between the Biah and the Sutlaj when they flowmd
separately, but not when united into one. This is explained in the account of the
rivers at page 372.
It is not called the Pak Pattan or the Pattan-i-Panj-ab on account of any
ferry whatever, much less a ferry over the Sutlaj, because the Sutlaj never yet
flowed nearer to it than it does at present; while in the last century, it was twenty-
four miles east of it, and before that again, it was upwards of forty miles, and in the
time of the Shaikh still farther off. Pattan as I have said before means ‘ a town,’ and
patan '■ a ferry,’ and in the A’m-i-Akbari it is the former word, and not explained
as “the ferry;” and, in the Akbar Namah, it is called the Pattan-i-Panj-ab, but
-
it I)
Blochmann, who had no local knowledge, also mistook for The place is
mentioned by several historians as “ the Pak Pattan ” or “ Holy Town,” on account
of its having been the residence and burial place of the Sultan-uz-Zahidan, Farid-
ul-Millat wa ud-Din, Ganj-i-Shakar, these being his Musalman designations, not
4(0 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries . [Ex. No.
Ka’im Khan, the Ra’is, and at about the same distance south of Kh air-
pur in the Bahawal-pdr state, where it makes a sharp bend towards the
south for about twelve or thirteen miles, and indicating the course it
once took in the direction of Moj Garb towards the Hakra or Wahindah.
After this it turns nearly due west again, and reaches within about
three or four miles of the town of Bahawal-pur. From this point
again it makes a sharp bend to the south, showing another direction
which it formerly took towards the Hakra in the direction of Din Garh
or Trehara, where the action of water is plainly indicated in the direc¬
tion of that place, situated on the south bank of the last named river
channel. After a few more bends of minor importance, it reaches
within about six miles south of Ahmad-pur, where the land slopes
gradually from the banks of the present Gharah, near its junction with
the Chiu-ab towards the channel of the Hakra, after which the old Sutlaj
channel runs in a south-westerly direction towards Khair Garh, Derail,
Ohaudari, Firdzah, Khan- pur, Kot-i-Sambah (I wonder this has not
been “identified” as the capital of the dominions of S ambus ), and
Noh-Shahrah, which places it passes within from eight to three miles
or less on the east. After this, the traces of this last bed in which
his simple name, viz., “ The Sultan of Recluses, the Incomparable or Unique of tlie
Faitli and of Religion, the Hoard of Sugar, i. e., Eloquence.” His father’s names
were Jalal-ud-Din, Suliman, who was descended from Farrukh Shah fa Sayyid not
a King), Kabuli, and the saint himself was brought up at Kutub-Wal, a dependency
of Multan. According to all chroniclers the saint died on Saturday, the 5th of
Muh ar ram, 668 H. (4th September, 1269 A. D.), just ten years after the “ Tabakat-i-
Nasiri” was completed by its author.
Ajdddhan or “the Pak Pattan,” from the time the Sikhs became predominant
in these parts, went rapidly to ruin. At the time of the Survey near the close of
the last century, it is thus described
“ Ajuddhan is an ancient place situated on a high mound, in such wise that
it is visible for a distance of two or three kuroh . Before the arrival of the Sultan-
uz-Zahidan, it was the abode of Jogis and other Hindu recluses. After the saint
had been buried there, it became known as the Pdk Pattan — Holy Town — and the
shrine is situated near the south side of the parapet, consisting of a high domed
building, a large masjid , and a rest-house for travellers. The interior domed
building over the tomb itself is about three times the stature of a man in height,
and has two entrances. Within are two tombs, one that of the saint, and the other
that of his eldest son, buried near on the west side of his father. The entrance on
the south side is called the Bihishti Darwazah, which is only opened on the 6th
of Mnharram [the day following the anniversary of his death], in the evening,
which is the time for making offerings at the shrine, and is kept open for three
watches. A vast concourse of people assemble from far and near, and pass through
this Bihishti entrance ; and whoever does so, it is said, on that person the fire of
hell has no effect.” The writer observes, in the MS., that u such is exceedingly easy
for the Almighty to effect., if He would but do so.”
401
1892.] H. a. R averty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries.
tlie Sutlaj flowed independently to unite with the Hakra becomes
mixed up with the channels of that river, the whole country for several
miles between Klian-pur and Khair Garh being seamed with channels
and banks formed by the action of water. Indeed, a space of some
forty miles to within a short distance of Path Garh or Kowa Kot
farther east, and farther south-west into Sind, is literally covered with
these traces of the rivers Sutlaj and Hakra until they again unite
so to say, between Khan-pur and Khair Garh ; and the dry channel of
the latter river, which appears in the maps as the “ broad, dry bed
of the Rainee Nullah or Wahind,” becomes, near Baghlah and Sahib
Garh, more distinctly defined, and near which, at the Dosh-i-Ab, or
“ Meeting Place of Waters,” in ancient times, the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind,
and the JEtud-i-Sind wo Hind (which it had joined above LTqhqhh), united
with the Hakra, and the Mihran of Sind was formed.
“ Likewise, from the eastward of the Burj-i-Bakhlio Jat (the
“ Pk Boorj,” and “ Bicha Boorj ” of the maps, apparently) on the
way to Hindon, another old bed exists, which is also said to have once
been the bed of the Sutlaj ; while at Rahun, farther north, close to
which place it formerly ran, and now four miles north of the present
channel, there is a large lake three or four lmroh in length, which, it
is stated by the people of these parts, was once part of the old bed
of the Sutlaj.”
“ The erection of this domed chamber and entrance is ascribed to the saint,
Nizam-ud-Din, Ahmad, the Buda’uni, and it is said, that he repeated the whole of the
Kur’an over every brick of which it was built. Close to the Bihishti entrance, on the
east side, there are about 2,000 or 3,000 bricks, which were left after the comple¬
tion of the dome, and these were subsequently used in the erection of a sort of
chabutarah [a raised platform or seat] about the height of a man. The east
entrance to the shrine is kept open at all times for people to pass to and fro. It
is stated, that, when Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Tughlnk Shah, made a pilgrimage to
the shrine, he was desirous of removing the domed building over the tomb, and,
erecting another, but the saint having appeared to him in a dream forbidding it,
he desisted, and, instead, erected another lofty one of bricks and mortar, near by
on the east side. In that building eleven descendants of the saint are buried, who
succeeded to his prayer-carpet. The above-mentioned Badshah, likewise, founded
a large masjid on the west side of the shrine of the saint ; and between it and
the masjid, there is a small chamber or cell roofed with wood, containing two tombs
and a rest-house for travellers to the south, adjoining the walls of the fort. All
these buildings can be seen from the south for a distance of three or four Jcuroh.
“ The shrine of Hazrat, Shah Badr, who was the son-in-law, and disciple of
the saint, the Shaikh, the Farid-ul-Millat-wa-ud-Din, is situated adjoining the
Shahidi Darwazah, and is covered with a brick-built dome. Formerly, the town
was not enclosed within walls, but in the year 1190 H. (1776 A. D.), Pfr Sublian,
erected a wall all round of kiln-burnt brick, in which were five gateways, and three
Z Z
402
H. Cr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind
and its Tributaries.
[Ex. No.
This was the old channel of the river when it united with the
Biah at Loh-Wal or Lohi-Wal, and its right or northern bank is well
defined. After passing close under Rahun it winds considerably, runs
close under Eilur, and opposite Ali-Wal the river now flows close to
this old bank ; but the old bank here turns suddenly towards the north
for some seven miles, then westwards by Mahud-pur and Shah Kot to
Loli-Wal or Lohi-Wal (“ Lolreean ” of the maps), where the junction
with the Biah formerly took place, and then turns south-west towards
the other old channel, previously described, by Tiharah, Dharm Kot
and Jirah.
Thus it will be seen, that, before the junction with the Biah, the
Sutlaj hereabouts had flowed at different times between these two
banks over a tract of country considerably depressed, in some places
ten or twelve miles broad, and sixteen in its broadest parts, and which
posterns. The south gate, adjoining the Khan-kah of the saint, is named the
Darwazalr-i-Mauj-i-Darya [that is, literally, towards the river wave or surge — the
inundation side — from whence it could be seen, probably — but it did not follow
that the Hariari or Nili ever reached within many miles of it], and opens on high
ground ; the Shahidi Darwazah on the south-east side, on level ground ; the Lahori
Darwazah on the east side, also on level ground ; the Mori Darwazah on the north¬
west, at the angle of the wall, opening on a height ; and the Ralnnun Darwazah
on the west side, on high ground. This gate is also known as the Multani Dar¬
wazah. A short distance outside this gateway to the west, there are a few ancient
buildings, and it is said that these formed the property of the saint, and are now
in ruins. A little farther west again is the shrine of ’Aziz, Makkah-i [that is, of
Makkah] who, it is asserted, was one of the companions of the prophet, Muhammad,
who was here buried. It is a grave plastered over with mud mortar, but, is
enclosed within brick walls ; and south of it is a large masjid , founded by Sultan
Ghiyas-ud-Din, Taghluk Sh ih.” In another place it is stated, that, “To the
north of the hisdr there is a great lake, three or four kuroh long and nearly as broad.
The place was completely ruined by the famine of 1197 H. (A. D. 1783.)”
This Sultan, before he came to the throne, as Ghazi Malik, held the fief of
Debal-pur, to which Ajuddhan belonged. He came to the throne of Delhi in 720 H.
(1320 A. D.). The town was then known as “the Pale Pattan,” (this is a little
before “the reign of Akbar ” as well as Ajuddhan. Abu-1-Fazl, in the Akbir
Natnah, states, that, in 979 H. (1571-72 A. D.), while at Ajmir, Akbar Bad shah
determined to proceed to Nag-awr and the adjacent parts, and from thence to go
and visit the shrine of the Shaikh Farid, at the Pattan-i-Panj-ab. He accordingly
went ; and on the way thither, at the Tal-wandi of ’Ala-ud-Din, near the river >
which in this tract of country they call the Hariari, he hunted the wild ass in the
sahrd and the registan, that is, the open uncultivated country — the wilderness
so to say — and the sandy desert. He killed thirteen wild asses ; and was, at times,
distressed for want of water. If this Tal-wandi could be correctly identified, which
at this lapse of time would be very difficult, it would throw some light upon his
route, and also on the course of the river Sutlaj at that period. See note 230),
page 273.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 403
depression is about twenty-five feet below the level of this part of the
district.
In the space between these high banks there is another old channel,
running in this great depression near the southern high bank here
referred to, which runs a little north of west from near Tiharah,
and with a very winding course for some twenty-six miles. It then
bends more towards the south-west, passes close to Firuz-pur, and from
thence on to within about two miles and a half of Klia’e, and almost
parallel to the present course of the Hariari or Hill, but about five
miles east of it, down to within seven and a half miles of Fazil ka,
when it unites with the present channel. The northern part of this
channel in the Firuz-pur district, is what is referred to by Mr. E. L.
Brandeth, C. S., in his Settlement Report of that district, dated 1854,
under the name of “ Suklia Nai ” — Sukha Na’e — Dry Channel423 — but
the lower part, where it turns to the south-west from Firuz-pur, and
passes between Bazicl-pur and Kha’e, is what he also refers to, as far
as the Firuz-pur district extends, as “a still lower danda marking a
later river course.” The ancient channel of the Sutlaj farther east
he distinguishes from this one, as the “ great danda” which is “ very
strongly marked ” in the Firuz-pur district.
This “lower” or lesser “danda” evidently marks the later
channel in which the united streams flowed after their first junction,
when they became the Machhu-Wah, Hariari, or Hili, and when, after
running in one channel for about twelve kuroh or twenty-one miles,
they again separated, as previously described, the Biah returning to
its old channel and retaining its old name ; while the other turned
southwards into the low sandy tract between the ancient bed of the
Sutlaj and the present Hariari or Nili, and cut this intermediate
channel, which retained the latter names. The soil along this inter¬
mediate bank or lower dandali , is sandy, and covered with sand hil¬
locks.423 It will also be noticed that part of this intermediate channel
422 Mr. Brandeth says : “ There is a curious old channel, called the Sakha Nai,
or “ dry channel,” between the new and the old beds of the river [Sutlaj], which
has its origin near Tihara, whence it runs in a very serpentine course along the
whole length of the district to near Maradot. Notwithstanding its winding course,
the banks of the channel are so regularly formed as to have induced many to think
it entirely artificial [just like the Sidli or Sid.hu Na’e mentioned at page 370],
More probably, however, it was originally a natural water-course, afterwards shaped
into a canal. Its breadth is 100 feet, and its depth 7 or 8 feet. As recently as
forty years ago, it is stated that some little water flowed into it, but since then
it has remained quite dry.”
Parts of this old channel have since been utilized for inundation canals.
423 The whole tract of country around, near the present place of junction of
the Blah and Sutlaj, is seamed with old channels of the latter river, and abandoned
404 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
was, in one part, intersected by the present river, and that it branches
off from it towards the south, about fifteen miles south of Ajuddhan
or the Pak Pattau, between Laluh ka aud Ohawi ki, and which branch,
even in the maps which miscall the river the Sutlaj, still appears as the
“ Hariari.” Jt runs almost parallel to the present river for about
thirty-two miles or more, passing within one mile of Kasim ka on the
south, and down to near Muhar and Jhindu ka Shalir,424 where it inclin¬
es towards the south in the direction of Mubarak-pur, and its traces
are lost in the remains of the old channel of the Sutlaj or great dandah.
We learn from the Memoirs of that extraordinary man, George
Thomas, that the Sutlaj in his time [1798] “flowed towards the south
from near Firuz-pur, in the channel called the Danda or high bank
of the Sutlaj ; ”425 and I fully believe, that the intermediate channel
above noticed, and mentioned by Mr. Brandeth as a “lower danda,”
is what is referred to in his “ Memoirs.”
Towards the close of the last century, the river ceased to flow in
this channel, consequent on both the Biah and Sutlaj finally uniting
at Hari ke Patan, abandoning altogether their former channels, and
forming the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah as it at present flows. In this
instance, the action of the Biah was contrary to that of all the other
rivers of this part, which, in the course of ages, had inclined from east
to west. The Biah, however, could not do as the others had done,
because the country fiom its right high bank, which rises in places,
some forty feet above the tract over which it had flowed from time to
time, slopes gradually down towards the channel of the now united
Biah and Sutlaj ; and the fact that, around Ajuddhan or the Pak Pattan,
the country is some thirty feet or more above the bed of the united
rivers, this, together with the gradual rise of the country towards
the west, prevented, in the same manner, the Sutlaj from inclining
farther westwards.426
sites show how often, from its continnal changes, the inhabitants have had te
abandon their homes and move elsewhere.
The sandy soil and hillocks along the banks of the rivers of these parts are
known by the general term of sothrah.
All the old sites lying along the course of the dry channel of the Sutlaj, the
“ great dandah ” described at page 398, which passes by Makhti-sar, are situated
on mounds.
424 It is about fifteen miles east of Ludhan, and nine miles north of Mubarak-
pur. The “ Jhidu ka Sheher ” of the maps.
425 According to the map given in the Memoirs of George Thomas, the channel
referred to therein, is still farther east than the Uboh-har channel, but the mistake
is apparent.
426 If the Sultaj bad inclined westwards farther up stream, then it might have
cut a channel for itself in much lower ground, and have found its way into the
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 405
Another old channel of the Sntlaj requires to be noticed here,
which runs still farther east than this dandah. It commences a little
• •
to the west of Ruh-par, from whence it takes a south-westerly course,
passes within a short distance of “ Chumkour ” (six miles east of
Baklul-pur) and “ Kuliralla ” of the maps, aud disappears after a
distance of twenty-five miles. Of this ancient channel of the Sutlaj,
either the “ Eastern Nyewal,” or the “ Dulwali ISTyewal ” of the maps,
is the continuation. More on this subject will be found in the account
of the Hakra or Waliindali farther on.
Rennell, in his “ Memoir of a Map of Hindoostan,” published in
1793, gives a map of the “countries between Delhi and Candahar ; ”
and he makes the Hariari, under the name of “ Kerah ” (he meant
the Gharah, no doubt) turn southwards between Firuz-pur and
Kasur, which, after passing close to Ajuddhan (which it never did) on
the east,427 fifteen miles beyond it, throws off a branch more to the
westward which re-unites with the Biah. Lower down still, another
branch (making four instead of three), which is made to unite with
the previous one near Kot Kabulah ; while the Sutlaj under the name
of “ Dena ” (for Dandah) is made to bend more towards the west below
Ajuddhan. This likewise, south of Multan, is made to unite again
old bed of the Biah. Indeed, there is a tradition that it did make the attempt
near Firuz-pur, but, meeting with some obstruction, turned aside again. There is
no doubt but that water might be again brought into the bed of the old Biah, by a
cut higher up stream.
427 Cunningham (“Ancient India ”) makes the “ old Bias ” pass some sixteen
miles west of Debal-pur, but the extreme right high bank, beyond which it was
physically impossible it could pass, is nowhere more than eleven miles north-west
of Debal-pur; and the old bed, that is, the old bed now traceable, and the last in
which it flowed independently before uniting with the Sultaj in the last century, is
less than five miles distant from Debal-pur. He places the old bed in the middle
of the tract of country between his Hyphasis , and Zaradrus, or Hesudrus, or Satadru ;
for he has all these names, while the most recent channel of the Sultaj before
its junction with the Biali, called the “ Danda ” in our maps, and which I have
described previously, is called the “ old Sutlej .” I should call it the “ young ”
Sutlaj, because it is the most recent, and after its junction with the Biah it was
no more the Sultaj. I conceive that in whatever channel it might have flowed it
was still the “ Zaradrus, or Hesudrus, or Satadru,” since it would not change
its name with taling to a new channel as long as it flowed independently . See last
paragraph of note 420, p. 398, note 390, page 381, and note 345, page 343.
Alexander’s march is traced, in Cunningham’s work, by “ Kot Kamalia, Tulanba,
and Multan and from thence downwards, his route is made to follow the banks of
the rivers as they at present fiow ; as likewise Hwen Thsang’s route from Shor Kot
along the banks of the Chin-ab, as it at present flows, by “Multan, Ueb, and
Mithan-kot,” as though they had never altered for twenty-two centuries, and so on
into Sind to Karachi.
406 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
with the Biah, and to form one river under the name of “ Galougara ”
or “ Setleje ” (here making the usual mistake), which afterwards unites
with the “ Indus or Sinde,” at “Veh,” a place not known (at present
certainly, nnd I cannot imagine from whence he obained it), which he
places a short distance north-west of Sit- pur, and thirty-five miles
below ITchchh ; while the Chin-ab and its tributaries, forming the
Panch Nad or Panj-Ab, are made to run close under the walls of Multan
on the west side, which it never did. He had heard of the facts res¬
pecting the different rivers as they then flowed, and wThich I have been
here relating, but, unfortunately, lie possessed not the local knowledge
necessary, neither had he the benefit of actual surveys to go by, nor
history to guide him, except the History of Timur contained in P. de la
Croix’s work, and therefore, he is deserving of much credit for what he
was able to accomplish from reports. The high bank or dandah ,
marking the last independent channel of the Sutlaj appears in his map
as the “ Chalescouteli Hills,” but they are only made to commence a
little east of Ajuddhan, and are carried down towards Sind. Of course
he derived this also from P. de la Croix, who says, that Amir Timur
“ crossed the river Dena, and encamped on the hill of Chalescouteli,423
ten miles distant from Adjoudan.” Then, aware of the existence of
the well defined high bank or great dandah , Rennell, at once appears
to have converted it into the “ Chalescouteli ” range of liills, because
Khalis Kotlah, the Pir-i-Khalis of the present time, lay in that direc¬
tion. The dandah is eighteen miles south-east of Ajuddhan, but P. de
la Croix, in his extracts from the Zafar Namah, makes a huroh a mile
only, while it is equal to a mile and three quarters.
Lower down again than the Firuz-pur district, both in the Ghu-
gherah or Montgomery, and Multan districts, the Machhu-Wali,
Hariari, Nili, or Gharah has no high or defined bank, like that repre¬
sented by the dandah or high bank of the Sutlaj, and the whole tract
of country extending from the banks of the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah
to the commencement of the high plateau marking the extreme point
l eached by the Biah. before it deserted its old channel, rises but very
slightly, and is of comparative recent formation.
Of late years this river has set against the extreme southern point
of the Gliugherah district, and the inundations have decreased con¬
siderably. This last, however, may be caused by the opening of new
canals and utilizing old ones, and a greater expenditure of water for
irrigation purposes, consequent on a settled government. The bank
on one side is abrupt in many places, but it is not more than from ten
423 See page 285.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 40 7
to twelve feet above tbe cold weather level of the stream, wliicli over¬
flows its banks during the inundation season. In the lower part of
its course, in many places in the Multan district, the bank is still lower,
and the bed is full of quicksands. Sometimes, after inundations, it
leaves a deposit of sand upon such land as its waters have covered,
thereby spoiling them, and leaving such tracts a desert ; and this it
has done, upon all occasions, in every part it has deserted from time
to time in its inclination from east to west, as shown by its old channels
farther east, presently to be described.
Just to show some of the changes in the course of the Sutlaj, and,
also of the Hariari, Nili, or Gharali (when the Biah and the Sutlaj
lost their former names after uniting), in less than a century, I will
give a few extracts, as illustrations, from the Survey record. At that
period — when the Survey was made — in going from Jirah (the
“Zeera” of the maps) towards Debal-piir by way of Bazid-pur, six
miles south-eastwards of Firuz-pur, “ the Sutlaj,” it states, “ lies about
half a huroh on the right hand (that is, north-west), and the kasbah
of Firuz-pur about four huroh, also on the right hand. The Sutlaj
having passed from Bazid-pur another three or four huroh to the north -
north-west, unites with the Biah, and receives the name of Machhu-Wah
and Hariari.
“ In going from the same Jirah, by Gadi-Walah, Phiro ki, 1 Al-ipur
and Bhak or Baliak, having proceeded four huroh to the north-north -west,
the road winding considerably, and through much jangal , you reach
the Sutlaj, and crossing it by boat from the point called Patan-i-
Burhan to the other side, half a huroh from the bank, is Mulla-Walah,
in the Bist-Jalhandar Do-abah. * # * Previous to the time of
this Survey the Sutlaj used to flow north of Mulla-Walah ; and the
south bank of the river the people call the Danda or Dandah.”
Mulla-Walah is the “ Moolanwala ” of the maps, which is now
thrown out of the Bist-Jalhandar Do-abah, and is fourteen miles from
the nearest point in it. It forms part of the Jirah district of Firuz-pur
at present, but, at the time here referred to, it lay in the Bist-Jalhandar
Do-abah, and Firuz-pur lay Berun-i-Panch Nad, as it is termed, that
is, without the area of the five rivers — extra Panj-ab — as it is at
present.
Again : “ In going from Bahawal-pur to the Got of Ka’im Khan,
Ra’is, leaving Bahawal-pur, you go one huroh north-east and reach
the Kadhhi river or Khan-Wa-han.4*9 which, coming from the right
429 The term Wa-han or Wa-hah, is derived from the Sanskrit ‘run,
‘ flow,’ ‘ glide/ etc., and is the common termination to nan;es of water-cuts, canals, and
streams utilized as such, both in the Panj-ab and in Sind, but the word is invariably
408 H. G. Raverty — The Mi hr an of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
hand, and passing near Uchchh, unites with the Gharah. From the
Kadlihi two kuroh in the same direction is Ratani [“ Rotani ” of the
large scale Revenue Survey map], and the Nil! daryd [river] lies three
kuroh on the left hand. The Sutlaj and Biah unit ed in one channel,
the people of this part call Hariari, Kill, and lower down, Gharah and
Gh all u- Gharah. From Ratani you go another three kuroh fto Muhi-
Wal ki Thathi and from thence three kuroh more in the same direction
to Bhakhi ka Dliera [“ Bhakidera ” of the maps]. After this,
going another three kuroh in the same direction as before, you reach
the Kadlihi or Khan AY ah an again. * * * Passing by lchrani,
you come to Khair-pur, a large kasbah, the place of residence of ’Umar
Khan, Kahrani, the JDa’ud-putrah, who pays allegiance to Bahawal
Klian. The Kill or Hariari lies five kuroh from it on the left hand,4,30
and the Rud-i-Kadhhi or Khan-Wa-han passes on the west side,
under the walls of the kasbah .” Then, going by Ahmad Shah, now
Ahmad-pur, another village belonging to ’Umar Khan, and by Shaikh -
Wa-han, where is the famous shrine, the Got i-Ka’im Khan, Ra’is, is
reached, where resides, Ka’im Khan, the Ra’is. The Kadlihi Rud
or Klian-Wa-hah passes close by the kasbah on the east side ; while
the daryd [the Nili or Gharah] lies four kuroh distant on the left
hand431 (west).” Then, in going from the Got in question to Multan
by way of Mailsi, the Survey account says : “ going four kuroh north¬
west, you reach the Hariari or Gharah, and pass by boat to the other
side, and m going, the Kadlihi or Khan-Wa-han is crossed two or
three times. Having crossed the Gharah by boat, you proceed six
kuroh west, inclining north-west [W. N. W.], and Mailsi is reached,
passing by many villages, and through much jangal, by the way.
From thence you go fifteen kuroh [allowing for windings : it is really
twenty-two miles as the crow flies] to Nur Muhammad ka Tibbah
[“ Tibba” of the maps], passing by the way two or three small villages,
and through much jangal. Half way the channel of a great river is
reached, which is that of the Biah, which once flowed therein ; and
from the time it left its channel near Kasur and the neighbourhood of
Debal-pur, and united with the Sutlaj [see pages 372 and 374], this
channel became dry. In the time of the inundation, in the rainy season,
it still flows, and opposite Bahdwal-pur unites with the Gharah ,” etc.
written ‘Wah’ in the maps and some Gazetteers, as if the word meant ‘bravo,’
‘well done,’ and the like, which is Persian, and Wa-hah is not. The “Sind
Gazetteer,” however, says “ Vah ” means a canal !
430 it is now only two miles and a half, or about a kuroh and a half.
431 At present it flows seven miles and a half west of it, and ten miles and a
half north.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 409
With respect to the course of the Gharah lower down, the routes
between Uchchh and the Derah of Gliazi IGian show great changes
there likewise, and also in the course of the Ab-i-Sind or Indus.
“ Setting out from Uchchh, and proceeding one huroh west,432 you reach
the Gharah, which you have to cross by boat, and having so done,
you go four Jcuroh a little to the north of west, and reach the Ohin-ab.433
After this you proceed six huroh farther in the same direction, and
reach the banks of the Ab-i-Sind and cross by boat, after which
another huroh takes you to Sit-pur, a large village on the banks of the
Ab-i-Sind. The people here generally call all these three rivers Ab-i-
Sind, the whole of which, six or seven huroh to the right hand (north)
having united, again separate.”
At the present time, the Gharah is eleven miles north of Uchchh,
where the Ohin-ab and its tributaries unite with it, and form the Panch
Nad or Panj Ab, which flows forty-two miles as the crow flies, in the
direction of south-west before it unites with the Ab-i-Sind or Indus.
Sit-pur is now three miles or more west of the Panj-Ab, and the Sind
flows eighteen miles west of Sit-pur.
Likewise, at the time this Survey was made, in going from Ratta
or Ratta-Matta (the “ Kot Ratta” of the maps — about two miles and
a half from the east bank of the main channel of the Indus in 1871,
and thirty- two miles south of the Derah of Ghazi Khan) to Uchchh,
you went from thence to ’Ali-pur, then on the bank {lab) of the Indus.
It is now fifteen miles east of the Indus, and a few years since it was
ten miles and a half only. Rasul-pur, and Ghaus-pur (not that referred
to at page 308) were also on the banks of the Indus, but the latter,
according to the map of 1859, was nine miles from the east bank, and
by the 1871 map, it was seven and a half. Jatu-i, when this Survey
was made, was close to the bank of the Indus, and in 1871, it was five
and a half miles from the main channel ; but, at this point, the river,
at the latter date, flowed in five channels, and the smallest of the five,
was within a mile and a quarter of that place ; and four miles and a
half farther west, on the same map is marked “ old Puttun
Consequently, when this Survey was made, the Ab-i-Sind or Indus
flowed from Ratta-Matta in a direction a little to the east of south,
close by that place, and downwards by Jatu-i, ’Ali-pur, and Sit-pur on
the east, as previously stated at page 303. 434 A glance at a late map
will thus show what vast changes have occurred in the course of less
than a single century, which changes are always going on.
432 It is now six miles and a half west of Uchchh, or lately was.
433 See page 349, confirming this account.
434 See also my Notes on Afghanistan, etc., page 064, and foot-notes.
A 3
410 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
The bend in the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind just below “Keenjur” of
the maps, fourteen miles south-south-west of the Derah of Ghazi Khan,
will show the direction in which it flowed at that period.
It now remains to notice the still more ancient channels of the
Satadru or Sutlaj, which appear in our maps as “Nyewal N.,” of
which there are three, not two only, as mentioned in the Calcutta
Review paper on the “ Lost River,” and the map appended thereto ;
and also in the map appended to Mr. R. D. Oldham’s article on the
same subject in the Society’s u Journal,” Part II of 1886. The middle
one of these three channels appears in our maps as the a Didwali
Nyewal ” because it passes by “ Dubwali” of the same maps, probably.
There can be no doubt, however, that the Sutlaj, in aucient times, and
at different periods, flowed in these three ancient channels. The whole
country west of Ruh-par, near which the waters of the Sutlaj issue
from the hills, where changes are less likely to occur than in sandy,
level plains, as far nearly as Ludhianah. west, is more or less seamed
with channels, some larger than others, although they are, from being
partially utilized as canals, and the effects of rain, and other causes,
being gradually obliterated, and some are already nearly so. It is
evident, that the river, hereabouts, in endeavouring to find its way to
the southwards and south-westwards, has flowed over every part of it
almost, from Ruh-par to Firuz-pur.
One of these old main channels, that of the western Na’e Wall,425
can be distinctly traced a mile or thereabouts east of Cham-kaur, which
is a little over eight miles south-west from Ruh-par, and six miles east
of Bahlul-pur.436 The direction of its course points from near Ruh-par,
and from thence in a south-westerly direction by Cham-kaur. It then
passes east of Kakaralah, and from thence by Akharah, three miles
south-south-east of Jagraon. From that point it can be traced, more or
less distinct, and in a few places nearly obliterated, in the same south¬
westerly direction, to some three miles south of Maharaj,437 and from
435 The meaning of this compound word is not very clear, Wdl or TFal-ah, or
Wd-li means ‘a stream,’ ‘river’ ‘running water,’ also ‘the false appearance of
water in a sandy watei’less desert tract — mirage .’ The meaning ascribed to na’e is
‘ a tube,’ ‘ passage,’ ‘ canal,’ ‘ channel,’ ‘water-course,’ but from what is mentioned at
page 447, it seems to be used in the same sense as nahr, which means, ‘ a rivulet,’
‘ a river ’ ‘ running water.’
Mackeson, in his “ Journal of Captain C. M. Wade’s voyage from Lodiana to
Mithankot by the river Satlaj in 1832-33,” states, that, “ at Jane-gill, 12 miles below
Hari-ke, the united streams of the Beas and Satlaj, are called Ghara, but known to
the natives by the name of Nai.”
436 “ Bhilolpoor” of the maps.
437 “ Mehraj ” and “ Mehrajpur ” of different Survey maps, and about sixteen
miles to the north-eastwards of Bhatindah.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 411
thence about four miles north-west of Bhatindah.438 and on towards
Mal-ot, three miles east of which the channel becomes very distinct
again. From Mal-ot, which is a short distance to the north of its
right bank, it continues to run to Uboh-har, which is close to its south
or left bank. At present, higher up, a canal is to be brought into
this channel from the Sahrind canal system, if it is not actually run¬
ning at this time.
The direction of the central of the three old channels, called
“ Uyewal H.” and “ Dubwali N\” in the maps, takes a course somewhat
more to the south-south- west than that just noticed ; but, although its
channel is not quite so distinct upwards, it also comes from the direction
of Ruh-par and Oham-kaur, at which former point, or near it it
branched off, and can be traced into Budhur,439 just thirty miles to the
north-eastwards of Bhatindah, nearly thirty-two miles above Dab-Wali,
and some thirty-eight miles in the direction of south-south- west from
Akharah. It passes close to Dab-Wali on the north, and Fath-pur on
the south, and subsequently bends towards the west, and unites with
the channel passing Mal-ot and Uboh-har.
The third or easternmost of these old channels evidently came
from the same direction as the other two, as the slope of the country
which declines from north-east to south-west, and the direction of the
channel show.440 At present it is not very distinct, for the reason pre-
4>33 Bhatindah, which is a very ancient place, I believe to be the identical place
referred to, the idol temple of which “ split asunder on the night that Sultan
Mahmud-i-Sabuk-Tigin was born,” and not Uhand on the west bank of the Ab-i-
Sind or Indus above Atak, miscalled “ Ohind.” It will be remembered that the
Hakra is also called the Wahind and Wahindah, and the temple is called “ the
But-Khanah of Wahind.” See Tabak&t-i-N&siri, p. 76, and note 2.
The Tarikh-i-Yammf, in the account of Sultan Mahmud’s victory over “ Brah¬
man-Pal, son of Anand Pal,” states, that they met on the banks of the “ Wahind
river ” ; and, in another place, it is related in the account of the capture of Kal-
C hand’s stronghold, which seems to refer to one of the old ruined fortresses on the
banks of the Hakra or Wahindah, between Bhatnir and Wal-har, that “ a foaming
river flowed on the other side of the fortress,” and that “ the infidels, in attempting
to cross it,” were drowned in great numbers. See page 415.
439 “ Budhaur ” of the maps, to the north-eastwards of Bhatindah, not the place
about eighteen miles east of Bhatindah.
440 In his “ Ancient Geography of India” (p. 144), Cunningham, referring to
the “ district of Satadru ” — the “ She-to-tu-lo or Satadru, described by the Chinese
pilgrim as having a large river on its western boundary” — says : “ the position of
Satadru will correspond almost exactly with the large city of Sarhind or frontier
of Hind’.”
“ Sarhind,” however, is not the correct name of this place, neither is “ Sirhind.”
It is Sahrind and that does not mean “ frontier of Hind.”
412 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
viously mentioned, until within about seven or eight miles north-west
of the fort of Bliiki, where ifc runs nearly parallel to the central or Dab-
Wall channel with an interval of from eight to ten miles between them,
to within nine miles north-east of Bhatnir. Here it becomes less dis¬
tinct, but it united with the Ghag-gliar near the fortress of Bhatnir on
the north side, and subsequently with the Hakra or Waliindah twenty-
one miles farther to the south-west. Into this channel, likewise, a
canal has been brought from near Ruh-par : in fact, these canals, it may
be said, or their proposed extensions, will run all the way, or nearly so,
in these ancient channels of the Sutlaj.441
The channel of the Hakra or Waliindah, after this junction, is clear
and distinct, and has been already described ; but, the channel of the
united Uboh-har and Dab- Wall branches, which unite near Karar-
Walali, about twenty-nine miles below Uboh-har in the direction of
south-west, and nearly eleven miles north-west of Ganes Garh, is, in
some places, not quite so distinctly apparent, but can still be traced to
Then, because this “large river ” does not appear at present, although the
position corresponded “almost exactly” with his “ Sarhind,” Hans! is thought of,
by applying “ a correction” of only 110 miles; but this, too, not being quite
satisfactory, he adds : “ as it was bounded on the west by a great river which
cannot be the Satlej or Satadru, it is quite impossible that Hansi can be the place
intended, as it is upwards of 130 miles distant from the nearest river.
There is nothing in what the Chinese pilgrim says to prevent Sahrind being
the place referred to, because, when the Sutlaj or Satadru flowed in the oldest
channel that we know of, which I have here pointed out, it flowed not more than
seventeen or eighteen miles west of Sahrind ; and the Sutlaj or Satadru is said
to have formed the boundary between the territory of the Panj-ab and Hindustan.
Hansi now is certainly distant from any great river, but at the period of the
Chinese pilgrim, and long after his time, the Ckitang, which, with the Sarsuti or
Saraswati, formed the Hakra or Wahindah, was a great river, and flowed within a
few miles of Hansi ; and the Ghag-ghar, also a great river in those days, and the
Sarsuti or Saraswati by no means a small river, both flotved within tiventy-three miles
of Hansi.
In one of his Archaeological Reports, Cunningham says, that, “ Satadru or
Sirliind in the plains formed part of the states of the Rajput Kings of Kangra,”
which Mr. Barnes, the Settlement Officer of that district, discredits.
The Editor of Elliots’ Indian Historians (VoL 1Y. p. 519) tells us, that,
“ Tabarhinda is an old name for Sirhind,” in which I beg most distinctly to differ
from him.
4,4,1 The ancient channel of nearly all these tributaries of the Hakra, mentioned
herein, have been, or are being, utilized as canals, sometimes without its being
generally known what rivers once flowed in them. Very shortly, therefore, all the
ancient traces of them will be obliterated or altogether lost. See note 496} page 442
whei'e some of the causes of the decrease in the volume of the Ghag-ghar are
mentioned.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 413
within twenty-four miles of Walh.-h.ar on the Hakra, and beyond, in the
Bahawal-pur territory. The direction of its course shows that it united
with the latter, or main river, a little to the north of Marut, lower down
stream, near which, at the time the Survey quoted from was made, it
could be distinctly traced, as mentioned at page 423. North and west
of Marut the channel of the Hakra is very broad and distinct.
The facts I have here related, and the extracts I have given, show
clearly, that in each of these three Na’e Wall channels the Sutlaj once
flowed ; and, that it has, in the course of .ages, deserted one channel
after another as it got silted up, covering the country between with
a sandy deposit,442 in inclining from east to west, a distance altogether
of some eighty-five miles now intervening between its easternmost chan¬
nel, and that in which it, along with the Biah, under the new names of
Hariari, Nili, and Grharah, now flows. The three channels above described,
are, unquestionably, older than that of the great Dandah or Danda,443
and the easternmost of the three is the oldest.
If we merely take into consideration the heights of the different
places above the sea level from Ruh-par to Firuz-pur from east to
west, we shall find the reason why the Sutlaj took a course nearly due
west from Ruh-par by Ludhianah, and Dharm-Kot, and to the north
of Firuz-pur, where it united with the Biah in the last century.
While Ruh-par is 900 feet above the sea, Ludhianah is 806, “ Dal-
lowala,” west of Dharm-Kot, 727, and north of Firuz-pur 650. On the
other hand, if we take the levels from along the parallel of 75° E. Longi¬
tude, which cuts across the ancient channels in which the Sutlaj for¬
merly flowed, we shall find, that, as we go south, the country gradually
rises from 700 feet at Mogah ( I here give the map names for facility of
reference, but they are all written in the same peculiarly incorrect way)
to 759 at Daraoli of one map, and Duroulee of another, a rise of 42
feet. After this again the country gradually declines, and at Alkwala of
one map and Ulkawala of another, it is 737 above the sea, at Ahmad-
wala 729, at Thuna, seven miles to the south-west of Bhatindah, 703, at
442 The Sutlaj held, and the Gh&rah, or Nili, or Hariari, through it, still holds,
a great deal of sand in suspension, much more than the other rivers of these parts.
See note 423, pages 403-406, and first paragraph of note 446, page 415.
443 I fio not know what the correct origin of this name may be, unless it is
Jt
derived from the word which means ‘ a pool ’ and the like ; and it is from this,
a • • ::
probably, that the word, written and used in the Panj-ab territory
and in Sind, comes, by which names the long, and narrow pools of water left in the
channels of old rivers after inundations, are known ; but the people on the banks
of the old channel of the Sutlaj, in the Firuz-pur district, apply this name to any
high bank of a river.
414 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Sarawa of one map, and Sarwa of another, immediately south of the
so-called “ Dnhvali Nyewal,” 722, at Peeplee of one map, and Pipli of
another 717, but another Table gives it at 692), and at Gorkhawali 679.
From this point going farther south the country begins gradually to rise
again, and at Choor Tibi, on the south bank of the Ohuwa river, called
the “War N.” in the maps (Seepage 442), it is 721 feet, but again sinks
towards the channel of the Ghag-gharto 704 feet a little south of Firuz-
abad ; while at Sirsa, nine miles aud a quarter farther towards the
north-west, it is 762 feet.
Continuing southwards on the same parallel, at Gidaranwala the
height is 679 feet, and after that the elevation increases, until at
Moria, nearly as far south as the parallel of Bikanir, the height above
the sea is 1,080 feet ; while on the same parallel westwards it declines
from 1,080 feet to the depression in which the Hakra channel lies, and
then rises again to 231 at Kand Kot, a little west of the Indus.
Now let us examine the heights along the left bank of the united
Sutlaj and Biah — the present Hariari, Nili, or Gharah. At Firuz-pur,
as before stated, the elevation is 650 feet ; and at Fazil ka it lessens to
585, at Pir-i-Khalis (Amir Timur’s Khalis Kotlah) it is 548, while at
Thuna, seventy-three miles farther east , the height, as stated above, is
703, or a difference of more than two feet to the mile from east to west.
At Got-i-Ka’im Khan, the Ra’is, it is 434 feet, at Bahawal-pur 375 ;
and from thence to the banks of the Panch Nad, near the junction with
the Indus, the height is 337 feet above the sea.
Such being the facts, as each of the successive channels of the
Sutlaj became silted up, it could do no other than betake itself to
lower ground, and being unable to incline east, it took to the west ;
and in the course of ages, has now, by its last change towards the
close of the last century, when it deserted the Dandah channel, its
last independent one, reached the lowest level of the country ; 4,14 for
west of the present channel of the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah, the
ground begins to rise again, and the right high bank of the Biah to
intervene ; hence that river, when it deserted its old channel, could not
444s The only points where the Hariari, Nili, or Gharah is now at all likely to
incline farther westwards, are north-west of Kasim ka, which is 492 feet above the
sea, where it might enter the most depressed of the old channels of the Biah or its
minor branches in case of any extraordinary flood ; or lower down, ten miles north¬
east of Mails! in the Multan district ; or twelve miles and a half north-north-west
of the Got of Ka’im Khan, the Ra’is, in the Ghugherah or Montgomery district, the
country opposite lying somewhat lower at these points than others : indeed, within
the last ten years, it has set against the southern part of the last named district
north-west of Kasim ka.
1892.] H. G. Raverty— • -The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 415
flow west for tlie same reason, and, consequently, it turned east, and so
met the Sutlaj, and formed the new river.446
The same causes that led the Sutlaj at Ruh-par to alter its
course by degrees from south-south- west and south-west, to due west,
in all likelihood, affected the Ghag-ghar, Sursuti, and Chitang more or
less ; and, at last, when the Sutlaj left the westernmost or Uboh-har
branch of the so-called “ ISTyewal N.” channels (which it certainly had
not done up to the time of I bn Batutah’s journey to Dihli, and which
was still flowing when Amir Timur, the Gurgan, marched from Pir-i-
Khalis to Bhatnir), and took to that called the Dandali in the present day,
the waters of the Hakra, lower down, beyond the junction of the
united Ghag-ghar and Sursuti, also failed. By degrees, the Ohitang
likewise, lessened by the canal of Sultan Firuz Shah, — and other minor
cuttings probably, or from the same causes that led the Sutlaj to
abandon its older channels — failed, except in time of floods, in reaching
much beyond Bliadara, and consequently, that feeder of the Hakra could
barely reach Bhatnir. Likewise, the waters of the united Ghag-ghar
and Sursuti alone, were not sufficient in volume (after the Sutlaj deserted
it), to feed the Hakra, and it ceased to be a perennial river ; but, up
to the last century, it contained some water, and up to the present
time (before the channel was utilized as a canal), in the rainy season,
water still flowed in its channel as far down as Marut and Moj Garb
and beyond. Indeed, in some years during the present century, after
copious rainy seasons, its waters have reached Lar or Lower Sind, and
almost to tbe ocean.
On the other hand, as long as the Sutlaj continued to flow in an
independent channel, its volume was sufficient to reach the channel of
the Hakra, between Khair Garh and Sahib Garh, to which latter place
its last independent channel can be traced, but, below that it gets
mixed up with the old channels of the Hakra. It can be traced up¬
wards from thence ; and the farther one goes up the more distinct it
becomes.446 As long as this junction continued, the Hakra was of
445 According to the Geologist, Lyall, all rivers on being silted up betake
themselves to the next lower level ; and here, between Pir-i-Khalis and Ajuddhan
the ground is lower than that of the last independent channel of the Sutlaj —
the “great dandah.” This will be found to be the case with respect to all the old
channels I have described, the easternmost, which is the oldest, being the highest
of all.
446 “ It has been observed of all large rivers, and been particularly mentioned
by the same Geologist, that the silt with which their waters are charged is de¬
posited during the season of overflow most abundantly near the edge of the stream,
and in proportionally smaller quantity at a greater distance from it. It thus forms
a natural glacis, the crest of which is on the river, and the slope falls away gradu-
416 H. G. Raver ty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributanes. [Ex. No.
sufficient volume, with, its other tributaries, to reach Lar or Lower
Sind, under the names of Sankra or Sankrah and Sind-Sagar, as well
as Hakra or Wakindali.
The channel of what is now called the Narah ( vul . “ Narra ”),
which is said to be only well defined, or rather, “ to commence ” near
Fakir-abad, is merely the remains of the westernmost and lesser of the
two branches, the Ra’in or Ra’ini branch — the “ Ra’ini Nalali” of the
present day — into which the Hakra separated between Kandharah
or Kandkaro and Wanjh-rut after it had united with its then
tributaries at Dosh-i-Ab, and formed the “ Mihran of Sind ” or “ Great
Mihran.”44,7 This branch was diverted from Aror by the excavation of the
commencement of a new channel, and the raising of a dyke at the same
time, some twenty-six miles above that place on the east ; for after this
branch had been diverted, and had cut its way to the westward of the lime¬
stone range of hills where Bakhar and Rurhi afterwards rose,443 and sub¬
sequently, through the Sindhu, or A'b-i-Sind deserting the Hakra, and
other changes noticed in another place, it ceased to flow from the Hakra
altogether. The waters of the latter, however, including the Sutlaj,
lower down, near Kandharah or Kandharo and Wanjh-rut, again sepa¬
rated into two branches, one, the western and minor branch, finding its
ally towards the boundary of the valley. That the Indus is not an exception to this
rule will be seen on reference to the Cross Section (No. 1 ) across the valley at
Sukkur, and the Profile (No. 2) showing the relative heights of the Bhawulpoor
road and of a line nearly parallel to it, ten miles inland. A continuation of this
process would gradually raise the level of the river-bed, until, during some extra¬
ordinary flood, it should burst its natural embankment and take to one of the lower
tracts, to be, in its turn, raised and deserted. In the meantime the cross section of
the valley would present the general features of a raised central channel with a
depression on each side.
“ On the east bank of the Sutlaj, from Hooper [Ruh-par] to near Bhawulpoor,
a depression of this nature is met with, and is believed to extend in a course parallel
to that of the Garra [Gharah] and Indus to Subzulcote [Sabzal Kot], from the
vicinity of which it has been traced to the head of the Eastern Narra, about eleven
miles east of Roree [Rurhi]. It receives water from the river by direct overflow
and innumerable canals, and its drainage, though variously interrupted, is the source
of the Narra supply.” “Report on the upper portion of the Eastern Narra : ”
Bombay Government Records, 1857.
This last part is not quite exact. Near Sayyidah, the Narah unites with the
main channel of the Hakra, called Hakro by the people of Sind, and their waters
still unite in time of floods.
447 After the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind deserted the Hakra for good, the name
“ Mihran of Sind ” or “ Great Mihran,” applied to the whole of the rivers after
their junction at Dosh-i-Ab, fell into disuse, and the names Hakra, Wahindah, and
Sankrah were again generally applied.
443 At this period, no river separated Bakhar from Rurhi, as in after times, as
will be explained farther on j and those places then did not exist.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries . 417
way into the diverted channel of the Ra’in or Ra’ini449 — the Ra’ini
Nalah of the present day — which, near Sayyidah, some eighty-five
miles lower down stream, united with the main branch again, as the
Ra’in branch had previously done. These channels still exist, and
water still finds its way into them, but, the so-called Narah “ river,” on
the other hand, merely arises from the overflow from the Sindhu, or
Ab-i-Sind, which, considerably higher up, near Ghaus-pur, during the
time of the inundations, finds its way by the ancient channel of the
united Ab-i-Sind or Sindhu, and the Sind Rud, or Rud-i-Sind wo Hind
of the Musalman travellers, also known as the Panch Nad or Panj Ab,
and now consisting of a great depression only, into the ancient channel
of the diverted Ra’in branch of the Hakra, which, before it was diverted,
bad flowed past Aror on the east.
Except in the season of inundation, this main branch is a mere
series of lakes or dhands , most of which, howTever, are of considerable
size, and some as much as three miles and more in length, and half
that extent in breadth.
It must also be remembered, that we continually read of the “ rainy
season ” in the Multan province, up to,450 and in the time of Amir
Timur’s invasion of Hindustan ; but there is no rainy season now as in
the parts farther east, and has not been for a long period of years, the
influence of the monsoon not being felt so far westwards in the present
day. These climatic changes must also have had effect on some of the
rivers of this part. Between the time of Amir Timur’s invasion in 801
H. (1398 A. D.), and the reign of Akbar Badshah, a period of some two
hundred years, great changes must have taken place in the courses of
many of the rivers, to judge from the notice of them in the A’in-i-
Akbari, finished in 1004 H. (1595-96 A. D.), and from the accounts of
the English merchants, already narrated, who visited these western
parts of the Mughal Empire in the following reign ; and such being the
case, other changes must have taken place during these intervals of
time.
Thus it will be seen that in the course of ages, the Sutlaj, and all
the other rivers west of it, including the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind, some to
a greater extent than others, have gradually deserted their old channels,
as a glance at the map No. 1, will show, and moved westwards from
44.9 This is evidently the river referred to by Al-Mas’udi at page 207 ; for the
letters J, and CJ, are somewhat similar in Mss., and if the point of the latter letter
should be left out, as is constantly, and I may say, commonly done by scribes, the
latter is likely to be mistaken for ) and See also note 114 to the page above-
mentioned.
4£>0 See page 282.
418 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrcin of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
the causes mentioned in the preceding note, 446, with the sole exception
of the Biah, which, on account of the high plateau forming its extreme
right or west bank, had to betake itself in the contrary direction, when
it united with the Sutlaj and formed the Hariari,, Nili or Gharali ; and
that the alterations in the course of the Sutlaj — “ the Satadru of the
Hundred Bellies or Channels ” — have been far greater than in those of
all the others. There has been, likewise, during the same period of
time, great changes in the courses of the Gliag-ghar and the Sursuti
and their tributaries, as will be shown in the notice of them farther on.
The Hakra', Wahindah, or Sjnd-Sagar, and the Chitang.
The Survey record says, with reference to this river, that “ One
of the principal tributaries of the Hakra, and the easternmost,
is the Chitang,4151 which is (now) dependent on rain, that is to say,
451 Both Cunningham and the “Calcutta Review” writer make this name
“ Chitrang,” whereas there is no‘r’ nor long ‘ a ’ in the word, which is written
Chitr-ang is the name by which the hard, smooth portions of the soil of a part of
the present desert tract is known, which extends for many miles together, as will be
noticed in its proper place.
It was within two miles of the present south bank of the Chitang, between
Thani-sar and Karnal, thirteen miles south of the former and ten north of the
latter, that the two battles took place between Sultan Mn’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad,
son of Sam, the Shausabani Tajzik Sultan of Ghaznin and Ra’e Pithora, in the last
ol which the latter was overthrown, and killed in the act of flying. These battles were
fought near A’zim-abad-i-Talawari or Tarawari — £ 1 ’ and ‘ r’ being interchangeable
— otherwise Tara’ in Garh, the “ Turaoree ” of the maps, nearer which, in ancient
times, the Sursuti or Saraswati may have flowed, for its course has changed consi¬
derably in the lapse of ages. See also Tabaffdt-i-Nasirt , page G08 and note 8.
Dow calls it “ Sirauri on the banks of the Sirsutty,” while Briggs, by way of improv¬
ing it, turns it into “ N drain on the banks of the Soorsutby,” by turning ‘ t ’ into ‘ n ’
_ 3 for 3. Mr. J. Dowson, Elliot’s editor (“ Indian Historians,” vol. II, p. 295) also
makes it Narain after the same fashion, as though such a word was contained in
the text of the Tabakat-i-Ndsiri, which it is not, and in a foot note adds, that,
“ according to Gen. Cunningham, the battle-field of Narain is on the banks of the
Rakslii river ;” but, as there was no battle of “ Narain,” compilers of Indian his¬
tory, according to the inaccurate manner so captivating to the English reader of
“ popular works,” and the pernicious system of copying from each other, instead of
seeing for themselves (if capable of so doing), stick to “ Narain.” This seems, indeed,
to be a favourite name, for Sultan Mahmud, the Turk Sultan of Ghaznin (p. 449 of the
same vol.) is brought to another “ Narain,” but this one is supposed to be “ Anlial-
wara, the capital of Gajarat.”
VVilford, who notices this river Chitang, also makes the mistake of confounding
its name with that of the Chitr-ang Zarnin. He says (As. Res. vol. 9, p. 214), that
“The river Stranga is now called the Cliitrangh and Caggar [the Ghag-gliar he
means],” but the Ghag-ghar was merely a tributary of the Hakra or Wahindah,
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 419
its waters arise from the torrents flowing from the Siwalik range of hills
north of Sadhurah. It runs, with many turns and bends, in a general
direction of south-west, like all the rivers west of it, as far as tlio
Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus. It passes within half a huroh of Ladwa
on the west, and about nine huroh west of Karnal towards Jindh, a
little more than five huroh north-east of which, at Dahtrat, the waters
of Sultan Finiz Shah’s canal from the direction of Safidun, farther east,
unites with it. Here it winds considerably, passes close to Jindh on
the west side, then on to Ramra, which it passes on the south and west.
and is totally distinct from the 0 hi tang. He also says that the Chitrangh passes to
the westwards of Thanu-sar [Thani-sar is meant], and, that although its waters are
absoi'bed by the sands ; yet the vestiges of its ancient bed may be traced as far as
Bacar [Bakhar] on the Indus.” From this it will be seen that he mistakes the
Ghag-ghar for the Hakra, of which it was merely a tributary.
It must also be remembered, that what has appeared in our maps as “ the old
Chautang nala,” as the Ohitang has been incorrectly styled, has been now utilized
and called the “ West Jamna Canal.”
Ibn Asir, the Shami, who relates some wonderful Indian history, says, that
Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-Sam, whom he, too, will style “ Shihab-ud-Din
(his previous title before he came to the throne of Ghazni), having entered Hind and
passed Multan, he proceeded to LTchchli. “At this time,” he says, “ the greatest of
the Hakims (rulers) of Hind was a woman, whose sway extended over all the Rajahs,
on account of the importance of her family, to which the greatest of the rulers of
that country had belonged.
“ The Sultan’s army consisted of Ghuris, Khalj Turks, and Khurasanis, but he
was overthrown ; and being severely wounded by a champion of Hind with his mace,
fell senseless to the ground, and, in the flight which ensued was passed by un¬
recognized. In the middle of the night his c/hulams returned to the field of battle
to search for him, and, having found him, took it by turns to carry him on their
shoulders ; and after having gone all night in this manner, on foot, by' morning they
reached the city of Uchchh.”
Then he says, that “ on his safety being known, his dispersed troops rallied
round him again, and his brother sent a fresh army to his assistance,” not knowing,
apparently, or at least, not noticing, what events transpired in the meantime, a
period of nearly a year and a half ; and, that Shihab-ud-Din, Muhammad, turning
his face towards Hind on this occasion with a fresh army, the people of Hind
mustered a far greater force than before, so much so, that there was no sahrd
(plain or open space) which could contain them. Shihab-ud-Dm, filled with fear in
consequence, had recourse to stratagem and deceit. He sent an agent to the
Malikah (female sovereign) of Hind with promises of marriage ; but, as she was
aware of the deception he had previously practised on the wife of the Rajah of
U'chohh. [See Tabakdt-i-Ndsiri , note, page 450], she would not give ear to his
offers in the least, and her reply was ‘ Fight, or return to Ghazni, and let that suffice. ’
He then tried another ruse, which was, that he might have time to send a messenger
to his elder brother [his suzerain]. Knowing the position which Shihab-ud-Din
held with respect to his elder brother, and the situation in which he now was, and
conceiving that he did not desire to fight, she consented, and gave the requisite time
420 H. G. Raverty — The Mihr&n of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. Ho.
From thence it runs to Narad or Narnor, which it passes near to on
the east side, and runs to Hansi, which having passed on the east and
south, it turns to the westward, and runs in a direction a little to the
north of west, winding considerably, to the Firuzah Hisar, founded by
the Sultan abovenamed. Passing close under its walls on the south
side, it continues to run in the same direction to a point two kuroh and
a half from that Hisar, to a place called Matarsaum, where another
channel branches off to Bhadara. From thence it runs to Chhini, about
nine kuroh still farther west, where it turns south-westwards, winding
considerably, to Bhadara, rather more than a kuroh south-south- west of
which the old channel from Matarsaum again unites with it. Half way
between, another old channel runs westwards, and again unites with it
about two kuroh and a half farther down stream.
to enable him to receive a reply from his brother, the Sultan of Ghur ; and each of
the hostile forces betook themselves to their respective positions.
Between the two hosts was a river, “ the passage of which was everywhere
impossible, save by means of a bridge or by boats ” ; and yet the historian says,
that “ wherever a passage was possible the place was carefully guarded by the
Hindu forces. At this juncture one of the people of Hind came to Shihab-ud-Din,
and told him that he knew of a place where the river was fordable, and would con¬
duct him across in such wise that the Hindus would be entirely unaware of it until
he should fall upon them. Shihab-ud-Din doubted at first whether or not some
treachery was intended ; but, as some of the people of TTchchh and Multan became
security for the man, Shihab-ud-Din despatched Amir Husain, son of Kharmil,
Ghuri [the same who was previously governor of Sial Kot and afterwards Malik of
Hirat. See Tabahat-i-NdsiH , pages 453 and 475], at the head of a strong body
of troops along with the man, to cross at the place he should point out, and then
fall upon the encampment of the Malikah. It so happened that the man guided
Amir Husain across the river in such a manner that he came upon the Hindus
entirely unawares, until he had surrounded them. On this, Shihab-ud-Din. having
obtained intimation of the success of the movement, mounted and crossed over
likewise, wrhich he was now easily enabled to do, the Hindus having abandoned the
ferries [which he said before did not exist] and decamped. Shihab-ud-Din reached
the camp of the Hindus, and made such slaughter among them that but few
escaped, and the Malikah likewise perished. Such a vast amount of booty fell into
the hands of the people of Islam as could not be computed ; and Shihab-ud-Din ac¬
quired sway over the whole of the country of Hind, and all the contumacious Rajahs
became submissive, and agreed to pay tribute and taxes. Shihab-ud-Din’ s slave,
Kutb-ud-Din, I-bak, was sent to take possession of Dihli and exercise the rule over
that territory ; and Muhammad, so n of Bakht-yar [see “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri,” page 548,
and Appendix C. xiii.], with a large force of Khali [Turks], was sent to the
farthest part of Hind, in sach wise that they penetrated into the borders of the
territory of Chin [China], and captured some places which no Musalmans had
hitherto reached.” Here we have the events of some twenty-nine years in as many
lines, and not a word about Ra’i Pithora. Such is the account contained in Ibn
Asir, the Shami historian ; but this Malikah or female ruler is quite new, and was
unknown to the native writers.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 421
“ Bhadara is an ancient place, and still a large kasbah, under the
sway of the Rajah of Bikanir. The river passes close under its walls
on the north and east ; and in rainy seasons, when it overflows its
banks, which hereabouts varies in breadth from half a kuroh to two
Tcuroh or more, it causes great damage, so much so, that, respecting
it, there are two very old sayings, the first in particular, which is
Hindi, i3 : —
‘When the 0 hi tang begins to leap [come down with violence], it brings
destruction to Bhadara.’
The other, in Persian, is as follows : —
C^-wst
‘At all times the Ohitang is the cause of Bhadara’s desolation.’
“ About another kuroh or little more south-west of Bhadara the
Ohitang again resumes a westerly course, and passes close under No-har
on the south, six kuroh farther west of which it turns to the west-
north-west, winding considerably in several places. Then passing close
by the walls of the large village of Gandehli [ ]4&2 on the
south side, it makes a sharp bend to the north, and flows on to Raot-sar,
distant about four kuroh , and situated on its southern or left bank. It
then bends to the south-west for about three kuroh , and, after that,
suddenly turns to the north-west, where another channel, on the south or
left hand, appears to have separated from it, with an interval of about
three kuroh and a half between them. This re-unites with the main
channel a little over seven kuroh farther north-west, and runs towards
the west once more for nearly six kuroh , when the junction of the
Hakra or Wahindah with the channel of the Ghag-gliar takes place ;
and here the bed is of considerable breadth. Many small villages are
situated near the banks of the Ohitang all the way along, and the
sites of many more are scattered about every here and there.
“ Continuing to run in a south-westerly course, and winding con¬
siderably as before, it passes immediately north of Sudar-har [ or
Surat Garh, where it runs west again for a little over six kuroh , to Ulwa-
nah, one kuroh south of which it bends towards the south-west again,
passes north of Suhan Kot,453 in ancient times a fortress of great size,
but now completely gone to ruin, distant seven kuroh and a half from
Sudar-har or Sfirat Garh, aud near the southern bank. From Suhan
Kot it runs by Jal-Mathura,454 the name of a great and lofty khdk-rez
452 “Gandelee” of the maps.
453 Incorrectly called “Sehwan Kot” in the maps.
454 “ Matoola” of the maps, and, of course, incorrect.
422 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. "No.
or mound, visible from a distance of three or four kuroh , distant from
the first named place a little over seven kuroli , and situated on the
northern bank.466 From thence running by Joeyr-i-Baluqhan, so called
from a joeyr or lake dependent on rain in its bed, at the distance of
another seven kuroh , the Manggu-Walali joeyr or lake in the river bed,
also dependent on rain, is reached, and three kuroh more to Ohuhar-
har, a large village of Musalmans, with a fort built of unburnt bricks,
a lake, and several wells. North-west of it, distant rather less than
two kuroh} is Dubh-li, distant six kuroh south-south- west from Bhatnir.
This is a large village, and in the seasons of inundation the Gfhag-ghar
reaches it [at the present time, Dliub-li is two miles and a half from
the channel of the river]. Chuhar-har is situated in the Chitr-ang
Zamin, and being on the border of the Bikanir and Bahawal-pur states,
it sometimes pays allegiance to the Rajah of the former, and some¬
times to Bahawal Khan. The bed of the Ohitang from thence runs for
another seven kuroh to Walh-har (_* ) 466 in the Bahawal-pur territory,
which is a fort constructed of kiln burnt bricks, situated close to its
northern bank, and a place of some antiquity. Here its bed becomes very
broad again.”
Before tracing the channel of the Hakra or Wahindali farther, it
is necessary to describe one important and peculiar feature of this great
desert tract, extending from Bhatnir on the north, down into Sind on
the south, and between Bikanir and Jasal-mir on the east, and the
valley of the Mihran of Sind on the west. One of the main feeders
of the Hakra was the Ohitang river, already described ; and the hard
ground which everywhere crops up in this great desert tract, and rings
under the hoofs of a horse passing over it, is called Chitr-ang ( ),
465 It is now on its south bank, or south side of its channel.
456 Now also known as Sar-dar Garb. The writer on the “Lost River” in the
“ Calcutta Review ” refers to this place, apparently, under the name of “ BaRwr,”
and says that “ near here is the junction of the eastern and western arms of the Sotra
or Hakra.” The Na’i Wal is merely the name of one of the ancient channels of the
Sutlaj, which, like the Ohitang, Ghag-ghar, and others, was a tributary of the
Hakra. As I understand the words Na’i Wal, they merely signify the new or
recent channel or stream , referring to the change in the course of the Sutlaj.
Tod says, that “ Seogurh ” was the former name of Bullur, which was “ one
of the most ancient cities of the desert [!],” and “ like Phoolra, is a Johya posses¬
sion.”
In this name ‘ b ’ and ‘ ru,’ as in others, are interchangeable, and it might be
called and written Balh-liar, but not “ Bullur.” The usual mode of pronouncing
the name is as above. When this and other places here mentioned were in the
height of their prosperity, the country was not “ a desert j” for a city in a desert
would not be inhabited.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 423
but which some recent writers confound with the name of the river
Chitang ( ), between which two words there is no affinity
whatever.
Under the head of Jasal-mir, the author of the Survey says :
This Zamin-i-Chitr-ang is a waterless waste or wilderness wherein the
mirage prevails, extending from Bhatnir down into Jasal-mir for a
distance of some two hundred kuroh in length, with a breadth of about
twenty-five kuroh, and which crops up in other directions on both sides
of which are vast deserts of sand. Here, as before stated, the mirage
prevails ; and great lakes and trees appear to view, only to vanish when
one approaches them. By digging in this Chitr-ang, water is obtainable,
but it lies very deep, and, after all, is brackish. But few wells are
sunk in these parts on account of the excess of sand, which appears
like unto a vast sea. Snakes and scorpions abound ; and the only trees
are the pilu [Salvador Persica], and the sanji [red jujube or ber~\. The
jpilu grows to a large size ; and the other, which in Hindustan they
call butah-i-sanji , attains to about the height of a man.”
In another place he says : “The surface of the ground of this tract
is, for the most part, bare and even [and its surface is clear of any
growth], and such ground or land they style in this locality ‘ Zamin-i
Chitr-ang.’ In former times, according to all the traditions of these
parts, a great river used to flow out of the Siwalik mountains, and
running through these parts used to unite with the Sind darydfb 7 and
which was known as the Chitang, and, lower down, as the Hakra ; and,
from the time this river became obstructed, this tract of country ceased
to be cultivated and to be inhabited.”
£; This vast tract has been called Chitr-ang on account of its hard¬
ness, and the flatness of its surface. It is also stated that part of it is
the old channel of the Ghag-ghar, which runs, through Sahrind, and
which used to unite with the Hakra. In short, at the present time,
the first-mentioned river does not flow much beyond Bhatnir, Moj Garh
Marut, Phulra, Chuhrhu or Chuhr-hu, Sudar-har, etc., are places situ¬
ated in this Chitr-ang. The inhabitants of this part do not dwell in
masonry houses, but in huts or shanties ; and their wealth consists of
a great number of cattle of different kinds.”
I have said that this Chitr-ang Zamin crops up every here and
there, but it seems to prevail chiefly where the channels of these dried
up rivers occur, and in parts over which their waters appear to have
flowed or to have spread.453 * For example: “ In going from Bikanir
457 The Rud-i-Sind wo Hind. See the extracts from the old ’Arab travellers, at
pages 211 to 218
453 * Tod notices this Chitr-ang Zamin, but, under a wrong name, and under
the supposition that it was temporary, instead of which it is permanent. He says :
424 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
to Bhatnir by Mohan Garh, this Chitr-ang commences about eleven
miles454 * south of Sudar-har, also styled Surat Garh in the present day,
and terminates some miles to the north-wards of that mud-built fort.
The channel of the Hakra intervenes in this space. In proceeding from
the Got455 * of Ka’im Khan, Ra’is between Khair-pur and Mubarak-pur,
in the direction of Bikanir, you first go to Marut. For the first ten
Jcuroh on this route you proceed through sandy desert, but after that the
Chitr-ang commences, and extends all the way to Marut, crossing by
the way the old channels of the Sutlaj and Hakra, a short distance
from the south or left bank of which last named river bed Marut stands,
and beyond which for some distance farther the Chitr-ang extends.
“ In going from Bikanir to Ajuddhan, fifty kuroh north is Chiihar-
har, and from thence thirty-five kuroh farther is Admiri, also called
Ajmiri, after a Musalman .Jat tribe ; and for forty kuroh the route lies
“ Chittram — considerable tracts of low, bard, flat, formed by the lodgment of
water after rains.” In a foot-note he says : “ the name is literally ‘ The picture’
from the circumstance of such spots almost constantly presenting the mirage, here
termed chitrdm ,” Yol. II, 329.
In Hindi, chitd is a picture or painting, from Sanskrit f^T ‘ to paint,’ ‘ draw,’
but the derivation of Chitr-ang might more probably be from the Hindi ghetak _
‘ deception,’ ‘ miracle,’ etc. See also page 361, where it also crops up.
454 # About six and a half kuroh.
455# Got, in the language of Sind, Multan, and Jasal-mir, signifies literally, a
station or halting place, but is now applied to a village ; and in our maps, such is
the confusion of tongues because a uniform, and correct system is not adopted, and
an “official” system devised instead by some one who knew nothing of the matter,
and was probably ignorant of the vernacular, that this word appears as “ Goat
Kaimrais ” — “Goth Kaim Raees and “ Gote Kaim-rais ,” in as many different
maps.
In the same manner respecting the rather common name of Ghaus-pur (from
the ’Arabic word ghaus applied to a class of Muhammadan saints), two places of
which name lie only a few miles from each other south-west of Bahawal-pur.
Actually, the names are written “ Ghospoor,” “Khospur,” “ Gaospoor ,” “ Ghouspoor ”
and “ Ghuspoor ” in as many different maps ; and yet it is treason almost to venture
to point such absurd blunders out lest the “ susceptibilities” of those who make them
“ should be hurted.” It is just the same with other names ; for example, the new
station in Southern Afghanistan called by the Pus’hto name of Tal, which is a ver¬
dant tract and well cultivated, and another west of Kohat of the same name,
where water never fails and cultivation is abundant, but the map makers and
Gazetteer compilers will make it “ Thai,” the Hindi name for a sandy, water-less
desert, used in the Panj-ab and Sind, and by the Baluchis dwelling on their borders,
because the compilers in question thought the words were all one ; and so Thai _
a sandy, waterless desert — has become the “official” names of these two green
and verdant Afghan towns, while the Government is studiously kept in ignorance
of such blunders.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 425
over tins Chitr-ang, and the last five huroli is over the sandy desert, the
old channels of the Hakra and Na’e Wall or Na’e Wal intervening.
“In going from No-har,456 * between Bhatnir and Bhadara, on the
way to Bikanir, this Chitr-ang Zamin commences near to No-har, which
is situated on the north bank of the Ohitang, and extends a considerable
distance farther south. In another direction, in going from Jasal-mir
towards Bikanir, this Ohitr-ang extends all the way to Bikam-pur,
the road leading across the channels of the two old feeders of the
Hakra, which take their rise near Poh-kurn, east of Jasal-mir, and
noticed at page 451.
“Then again, fifteen Jeuroh west-nortli-west from Walh-har, on the
west bank of the Hakra, eastwards [about fifty-eight miles] of Moj Garh,
is a place called Farid-sar, where, as the last part of the name indi¬
cates,457 # is “ a large lake of brackish water ; and on going from thence
five huroli in the same direction, the Ohitr-ang Zamin terminates, and
the Registan or sandy desert again commences. Hereabouts the sar-db
or mirage greatly prevails ; and many are the kafilahs , that, thinking they
were going towards water, have perished in following after it. This
Ohitr-ang Zamin, as before stated, is bare and even, over which the
phantasms or shadows of jal-gahs [grassy plains] hover to deceive.
Three huroli north-north-east from this place (Farid-sar) is Mubarak-
pur.” This Ohitr-ang also occurs in other places near the last indepen¬
dent channel of the Sutlaj.
“ By another route by Mahi-Walah Bunga, and Farid-sar above-
mentioned, and ten huroli north from the last named place, is Taj-i-
Sarwar, commonly called Taj Sarwar; and on the way to the first
named place the Ohitr-ang Zamin commences near the deserted channel
of the Sutlajj and Mubarak-pur lies away distant on the left hand.
“In going from Bikanir to Bahawal-pur by Pdgal, a mud-built
fort under the Rajah of Birsil-pur, towards Moj Garh in the territory
of Bahawal-pur, the Ohitr-ang Zamin commences about half way [near
the present frontiers of Bikanir and Bahawal-pur], and the sandy
desert ceases. Between Moj Garli and Bahawal-pur again, the road
lies over the Ohitr-ang, but, in some places the sandy desert inter¬
venes.” This route, it must be noted, crosses the old channel of the
Hakra, and the ancient channel of the Sutlaj between Moj Garh and
Bahawal-pur.
456* There is another place of this name, it must be remembered. Names
ending in ‘ bar ’ I believe to refer to towns or places where there were ferries or
crossing places. See note 465, page 429.
467 * Tod writes this word “ Sirr,” but Sar (Sans. ) is correct. He says :
“ Sirrs are temporary salt lakes or marshes formed by the collection of waters from
the sand hills, and which are easily dammed up to prevent escape.” Yol. II p. 280.
c 3
426 H. G. Raver ty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries . [Ex. No.
The Ohitr-ang again occurs at Dilawar or Dirawar to the south¬
wards of Uchchh-i- Sharif, near the north or right bank of the present
channel of the Hakra, and extends south-eastwards by Ghaus Garh
(now, also called Rukn-pur), in the old bed of the Hakra, towards
Birsil-pur, beyond the frontier of Bahawal-pur, in the Bikanir state.
Nearly the whole distance between Dilawar to within a few miles of
Birsil-pur, a distance altogether of about fifty-six miles, is perfectly
seamed with channels, plainly indicating that the Hakra at different
periods has flowed over nearly every part of it. It is clear, that at one
epoch, the river took a more southerly course by Marut, Moj Garb,468
Dirawal, Oliani-sar or Tibbah Chani-sar,469 Gliaus Garh, Khan Garb,
Wanjh-rut (the “ Beejnot ” of the maps), and No-har or Islam Garh,
into the territory of Jasal-mir, and confirms the traditions prevalent
respecting it. It then continued onwards towards Dhundhar, and from
thence towards Amar Kot in Sind. Subsequently, altering its course
more to the westwards from near Marut, it ran towards Triharah or
Din Garh, and from thence towards Dirawal and Khair Garb, as will
presently be more fully noticed.
The Survey from which I have been quoting, does not, I regret
to say, trace the old bed of the Hakra farther than Walk bar, not
453 Boileau, quoted farther on, also notices this Gliitr-ang Zamin in his “ Per¬
sonal Narrative.” but does not mention it by name. In going from Bahawal-pur
towards Ghaus Garh, he says : “ Leave Bahawal-pur and proceed eight Jcos E. S.E.
over a bad road to the little village of Poharwala. Hard ground for the first kos
and half. Two 1 bos low sand hills : last four over hard ground interspersed with
light sand drifts and bushes. Then sixteen kos S.E. to Mojgur : tolerably hard
path : the fort on firm ground, with low, sandy eminences around, but at a con¬
siderable distance ; built of brick with very lofty walls about fifty feet high with
a seven foot parapet : mosque with a high dome on the east side : the body of the
place about one hundred and ten yards or half a furlong square with bastions : well
supplied with water.”
“ Left Mojgur, and not going to Poogul as Elphinstone did, march twelve Jcos
S. by W. to Troohawalee over a tolerably hard path.” He then went to “ Rukhan-
poor or Ghausghar, fourteen Tcos , the path over sandy ground, with occasional hard
plains called dahar .” He then went on to Birsil-pur in Jasal-mir.
Elphinstone, who crossed from Bikanir to Bahawal-pur, says : — “ From Poogal
for the fist ten or twelve miles sand, but after we reached the hard clay. * # *
Poogal to Bahawalpur flat, hard clay, which sounded under our horses’ feet like
a board, and occasionally some small hills of sand formed by the sand blowing over
the clay # # # the clay is destitute of vegetation.”
459 This is a very ancient site, and is mentioned in the OhachNamah. Jai Senha
son of Ra’e Dahir, retired to this place, on the advance of the ’Arab forces against
Bahman-abad. It lies about twenty-eight miles south-east of Dirawal, and about
twenty miles west-north-west from Ghaus Garh or Rukn-pur. See note 189,
page 210, para. 5.
18'92.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 427
baying been carried farther towards the frontier of Sind, although it
gives several routes which crosses it by various places still on, or once
on its banks.
Continuing to run in much the same direction as before, and
winding considerably, the bed of the Hakra, at present, passes by
Phulra, a kasbah and masonry fort, with lofty walls, and surrounded
by a ditch. It was formerly of considerable importance, 460 but now
much decayed, once situated on its bank, but, at this day, about a
mile and a quarter distant from it on the south. In the bed, about
three miles to the north- wards of Phulra, are the ruins of an old place
called Tehri. After making a short bend to the north-west, from the
tomb of Imam Shah, now in its present bed, it again bends towards the
sonth-west, and runs towards Marut;, distant from the south bank a
mile and a half. Here the bed is from four to five miles in breadth.
Marut, it will be remembered, is mentioned by Mangutah, the Mughal
leader, in the account of the investment of U'ohqhh; and up to this
day, after heavy rains, water still runs in the Hakra bed to within three
or four miles of Marut, which, at the time the Survey was made from
which I have given these extracts, was a small town with a fort con¬
structed of burnt bricks, standing on a khdk-rez or artificial mound about
feet in height. The drifting sands since that time have encroached so
much towards the west as to reach near to the top of the walls ; and
the town, which then carried on a considerable trade in grain, has now
gone to decay, and there is no cultivation 461 A number of routes
branch off from this place in every direction, and also the most ancient
channel that we know of, more towards the south.
After passing Marut — a little east of which, one of the ancient
channels of the Sutlaj can be distinctly traced,463 and which river bed,
appearing in our maps as the “ Nyewal,” and “ Western Naiwal,”
460 Masson, who passed it in 1826, says, that, “ Pularali,” as he calls it, “ has
an antique and picturesque appearance, particularly from the northern side, where
the walls are washed by a large expanse of water in which is an island studded with
trees.” This expanse of water was, of course, in the channel of the Hakra.
461 That is to say, forty years since, about the time of the annexation of the
Panj-ab.
463 At least it could be distinctly traced in 1849-50, at which time, in going
from Marut to Bahawal-pur, you reached it about seven miles from the first named
place, and there the channel was more than a mile and a half broad. It was sub¬
sequent to this being the point of junction, that the Sutlaj again moved farther
westwards, between this old channel and the present Gharah, which channel is
referred to at page 400, which passes east of Bag-sar, Mubarak-pur, Khair-pur,
Bahawal-pur, down as far as Noh-shahrah, below which it united with the Hakra
as already mentioned at the page referred to.
428 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
formerly united with the Hakra a few miles lower down — the bed of
the Hakra continues to run in much the same direction as before for
just eight miles, when it bends to the south, and afterwards to the west,
to Mol Garh, or Moj Garh as it is also called, a masonry fort, situated
close to the southern bank ; and immediately east of it, the bed is some
four miles in breadth. Continuing in about the same direction as
before, towards the west-south-west, the channel contracts again, and
passes the fort of Din Garh or Triharah, situated rather more than a
mile from the south bank. Here the channel widens again, and near
the ruins of an old fort called Barah, close to the northern bank, and
for many miles away to the southward, the action of water is plainly
visible over the face of the whole country. Soon after passing Din
Garh the channel becomes still broader, takes a south-westerly course,
passes the ruins of the Barah fort above referred to, and reaches
Dirawar or Dilawar, which is close to the southern bank. This place,
also called Dirawat,463 a vitiated form of the first name, is a fortress of
great strength from its situation, where the Nawwabs of Bahawal-pur
used to keep their treasures, as it was considered impregnable, but
it was captured by Timur Shah, the Sadozi Durrani Badshah,
in the last century, as Mirza Shah Husain, the Arghun Mughal
ruler of Sind, had taken it from the Langah Jats of Multan in 1525
A. D.
Here between Din Garh or Triharah, and Dirawar or Dilawar, a
vast change takes place in the Hakra bed. The channel becomes indis¬
tinct, because the whole country round, from actual survey, is filled with
innumerable long banks and channels, some of the former being from
two to four miles in length, and one, and sometimes more in breadth.
They chiefly run parallel to the hitherto distinctly defined channel,
namely, south-west, down as far as Baglila and Sahib Garh, towards the
frontier of Upper Sind, a distance of one hundred and eigdit miles, after
which, the channel becomes distinct again. Some of these banks
and channels, but not running in such long, unbroken lengths, run
to the south in the direction of the ancient channel referred to under,
and stretch away beyond Tibbah Chani-sar, Ghaus Garh or Rukn-pur,
463 This place, together with several others lying along the course of the
Hakra, which separated the territories of Sind and Multan from Bikanir and Jasal-
mfr, still belonged to the Bliati tribe in the middle of the last century. Tod says,
“ Derawal ” was the capital of the Bhatis — of this part, probably — and taken from
them by Mubarak Khan, the Ua’ud-putrah. He then adds that it wras “ the chief
town of Khadal ” belonging to the Bhatis.
The name is sometimes written Dhirawal, but the above appears to be the most
correct mode of writing it.
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 429
Klian Garb, Wanjh-rut,464 and No-har or Islam Garh,465 towards the
boundary of Bikanir as shown in the map, No. 1, a distance of upwards
of one hundred and ten miles to the southward of Din Garli, where the
action of water first begins to show itself.
From thence these channels — for the whole country round is
seamed with them — run southwards towards Dhundhar, through the
western part of the Jasal-mir territory, some miles west of the town
of that name, and immediately west of Dhundhar, in the direction of
Amar Kot in Sind, showing, unmistakeably, that at some remote period,
and as asserted in all the traditions current in these parts, the Hakra or
Waliindah flowed through the Jasal-mir country (on the west side),
into Sind.
The next to the oldest bed of the Sutlaj approaches nearer to the
bed of the Hakra north of Din Garh than in any other part of its course
above this point. At Moj Garli or Mol Garh,466 it is twenty-five miles
distant on the north, while at Din Garh, only thirteen miles farther
464 Called, formerly, Wanjh-rut of Multan, it being then included within the
boundary of the Multan province and territory dependent on it. In 625 H. (1227
A. D.), the district or territory of Wanjh-rut was the fief of Malik Taj-ud-din,
Sanjar-i-Gajzlak IOian, a mamluk or slave of Sultan I-yal-timish of Dilili. Its site
is described farther on. See also Tdbakdt-i-Ndsiri page 723.
Shahamat ’All states, that Mubarak Khan, the Da’ud-putrah chief, who suc¬
ceeded his brother, Bahawal Khan, in 1163 H. (1750 A. I).), erected a fort on the
site of a fortification constructed by an infidel named Ranjah which was demolished
by Sultan ’Ala-nd-Din, Ghuri, and which was called Wanjh-rut. No such Sultan as
’Ala-ud-Dfn, Ghuri, ever passed the Indus, and no history says so : it is an error for
Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad, son of Sam, the Ghuri, who invaded Multan and Uchohh
in 571 H. (1175 A. D.), but, as above shown, Wanjh-rut was the chief place of the
district fifty-five years after that period. See also note 218 page 264.
465 No-har or Islam Garh is also an ancient place. It was visited by Lieut.
A. H. E. Boileau of the Hon’ble Company’s Bengal Engineers in 1835, referred to
previously. He says : “ Halted at Nohur or Islamgurh, an ancient possession of
the Bhatee family [Bhati tribe ?]. The fort is a very ancient structure built of
small bricks, the area about 80 yards square, with very lofty ramparts 30 to 50 feet
high. It is disadvantageously situated in a deep basin half a mile or three quarters
of a mile in diameter, surrounded by sand hills from 50 to 80 feet high.”
Of course, when it was bufit, and for centuries after, these sand hills did not
exist, nor would such a place have been of any use in a howling wilderness.
466 Moj Garh is the stronghold whither the Da’ud-putrahs always sent their
women in times of danger. This place, together with Marut, Triharah, Phulra and
Rukn-pur, were taken from the Bikanir Rajah about one hundred and thirty years
ago by the Da’ud-putrahs, who were new comers in those parts, together with
Dirawal or Dirawar, Islam Garh, and Din Garh, from the Rajah of Jasal-mir.
Shahamat ’All says that Din Garli was built by the first Bahawal Khan which I
think is an error j for, in some places he contradicts his own statements.
430 H. G. Raverty — The Mihr&n of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
south-west, it is but fifteen miles distant; and the face of the country
between indicates plainly the action of water towards Din Garb and
beyond. Farther south-west, this old channel of the Sutlaj approaches
still nearer to that of the Hakra, as will presently be shown.
Near the ruins of the fort of IQiair Garh, thirty-six miles and a half
below Dilawar or Dirawar, in the midst of the long, narrow banks and
channels before referred to, the old bed of the Sutlaj, which is distant
only nine miles farther west, becomes less distinctly defined, and banks
and channels from it, extending for many miles, become mixed up with
those of the Hakra, until, near the forts of Baglila and Sahib Garh,
twenty-four miles lower down than Khair Garh, their traces merge into
one, showing very clearly that they once united hereabouts at the Dosh-
i-Ab, or Waters’ Meet, before noticed. Near Baglila. the channel of the
Hakra again becomes clearly defined, and that fort, as well as Sahib
Garh, lies close to its right or western bank, the channel here being
nearly two miles in breadth. Six miles lower down, the channel bends
a little more towards the south, and afterwards resumes its general
course of south-west ; and under the name of “ Rainee Nullah” 467 in
our various maps, but known to the natives as the Waliind, Wahin-
dah, or Hakra, and being from four to five miles from bank to bank, it
Kandharah (the Kandliaro of the Sindis), Liarah, and Khan Garh, all
three forts being on its eastern or left bank, into Upper Sind. Here I
will, for the present, leave it, and turn back towards the old beds of
other rivers, which in by-gone times were its tributaries, and which,
even now, during the rainy season, contribute some water to it.
The Sursuti, the ancient Saraswati.
Next in rotation to the Oliitang on the west is the Sursuti,463 the
ancient Saraswati, which, like the first named river, rises in the
4&7 Styled “ Nullah,” perhaps, because, in some places, the channel or river bed
is some four or five miles broad ; and never less, I believe, up to this point at least,
than a mile broad.
46? The “ Soorsuttee Nud ” of the maps. The tract of country lying on either
side of the banks of the Sursuti or Saraswati, extending from Thani-sar to Se-wan,
six miles N. N. W. of Kaithal, and embracing a circuit of about sixty kuroh, is the
most sacred part of Hind from the Hindu point of view, and was known as Bramlia-
warta, or the abode of the gods. Herein, likewise, the Pandus and the Kurus met
in battle, hence it is known as Kur-Khet or Kur-Khet, and Kur-Ohhatr. Abu-1-
Fazl says that this battle, the subject of the Maha-Bharata, took place just 4831
years before the last year of Akbar Badshah’s reign, which would be just 6721 years
ago, or only 827 years before the world was created according to the chronology of
our Bible, a mere trifle in Hindu chronology. This sacred part of the Hindus con¬
tains upwards of three hundred and sixty places of worship or devotion, and the
most sacred of them all are Thani-sar and Pehu’a.
1892.] H. G-. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 431
Siwalik range, and arises from the overflow of waters in the hills
between Nahhn 469 and Sadhura. From ancient times, a peculiarity
of this river is, that a few miles from its source, it disappears for a
time from the surface in its sandy bed, and again appears. This it
does two or three times in the present day, and, during this temporary
disappearance, is supposed to unite with the Ohitang, until after re-ap¬
pearing at last at Barah Klierah, it flows on uninterruptedly. Its
course, lower down, has undergone vast changes during the lapse of
centuries,470 and in modern times was also known as the Sukhh Suti
In the last century when the Survey I have been
quoting was made, it passed half a Jcuroh north and west of Mustafa-
abad, two kuroh east of Babain,471- north of Thani-sar, and south of
Peliu’a ; 472 for in going from thence to Kaithal by Gumthaila, you
crossed the Sursuti from Pehu’a over a masonry bridge. It then
took a course more directly towards the south-west than it does at
present ; and its old bed can be distinctly traced from Pehu’a to
Furis Majra,473 and within four kuroh of Tihwanah,474 down to Ban-
Lassen says, “ Those who dwell in Kurukshetra south [sic] of the Sarasvatl
and north of the Drishadvati [which is entirely out of the sacred part], dwell in
heaven.” The doctors disagree, however, here. Muir, in his “Sanskrit Texts’
(11,338), says, that the Hindus attach no idea of sanctity to the Panjab ; on the
contrary, the Sarasvatl is the western boundary of the pure land, governed by Brah-
minical laws.”
Here he is somewhat mistaken, because the “ Drishadvati ” flows West of the
Sarasvatl,” and the sacred tract lay between the two rivers. This statement of
Muir here, even by his own account at page 397, is wroug. There he says : “ It
would appear that the narrow tract called Brahmavertta between the SarasvaU and the
Drishadvati, alluded to in the classical passage in Mann II, 17-24, must have been
for a considerable time the seat of the most distinguished Indian priests and sages.”
According to the Hindu legends, the Saraswati was the one only river which
flowed on pure from the mountains to the sea, in which case it could not have
joined the Ohitang or the Ghag-ghar, nor have been a tributary to the Hakra, which
it was, or at least, along with the Ohitang formed it. Some, however, consider the
passage to be entirely allegorical, and that the Saraswati being the goddess of
sacrifice, with her libations, the samudra (the sea) is merely typical of the vesse
destined to receive the libations.
According to the same writer (p. 399), (quoting Mann II, 17-24), “ The tract
fashioned by the gods which lies between the two divine rivers Sarasvati and
Drishadvati, is called Brahmavartta.”
469 Tim “ Shahr-i-Sirmor ” of history.
470 See note 451, page 418, respecting A’zim-abad-i-Talawari.
471 “ Babyn ” of the maps.
472 “ Pihooa,” and “ Pehowah,” of the maps and Gazetteers.
473 “ Farms Majra ” and “ Faras ” of different maps.
474 <( Tohanuh ” in the maps.
432 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and, its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
hurali,476 a little more than eight Jcuroh south-south-west of Tihwanah.
It passed Banhurah a kuroli and a half on the east, where the channel
becomes indistinct, but north of Ohhini, on the north bank of the
present channel of the Ohitang. About twenty-eight miles in the
same direction from Banhurah, where it becomes indistinct, it can be
again plainly traced until its junction with the Ohitang a short distance
west of Bliadara, where the united streams formed and received the
name of Hakra. The Gliag-ghar was never called Sursuti, and only
those unaware of these facts could have imagined that it was so.477
These rivers, the Ohitang and the Sursuti had no connection in former
times with the Ghag-ghar, until they united with it upwards of twenty
miles south-west of Bliatnir.
At the close of the last century, when this Survey was made, when
the Sursuti became flooded, the cultivators of Kaithal, which belonged
to the Mandar Afghans (a colony of that division of the Khas’his
settled here from the time of the Afghan rulers), used to cut the band
or dyke of the river at Pehu’a, and bring water to their lands round
about Kaithal. “ A little to the north-west of Harnolali, on the route
from Kaithal by Agund to Samanah,” the Survey says, “ the great
river Sursuti is crossed, which, on ordinary occasions, contains but
little water, and shortly afterwards two other branches of it have to
be passed.” Now there is but one channel ; but two large lakes, about
two miles or more farther west, indicate where these branches formerly
flowed.
Another old channel of the Sursuti can be traced between that just
described and the present main channel, which runs within just two
miles and a quarter of Tihwanah, and is lost again eleven miles and a
half south of the last named place. It branches off three miles and a
476 “ Buhoonah ” of the maps.
476 Cunningham, in the maps to his “Ancient India,” numbers Y and YT,
indicates correctly the course of the Hakra or Wahindah, but, in the first map
calls it the “ Nudras FI.,” and in the second, the “ Sotra or Chitrang R. ; ” and he
does not indicate the Na’i Wall branches — the old Sutlaj beds — merely the
Qh-itang, which he, like some others, incorrectly calls “ Chitrang ” (which refers to
a part of the great desert already explained), and the Hariari or Gliarah under the
usual incorrect name of “ Sutlej.” The names “ Sotra,” “ Sodrah,” and “ Sothaur,”
as the name is written in different maps, and by different English writers, is applied
by them to the Ghag-ghar not to the Ohitang at all. See page 439, and note 489,
and note 423, page 403, para. 2.
In a recent “ Settlement Report of the Hissar District, ” we are told, that, in
the days of “ Shams Shiraz the Ghaggar was called the Saraswati.” It may have
been so at “ Shiraz,” but it was never so called in Hind, because they are totally
different rivers. See note 218, page 264,
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 433
half east of the present (or l'ate) point of junction with the Ghag-ghar
mentioned in the next paragraph.
At the present time, the Sursuti unites with the Ghag-ghar near
Rasulali, twenty miles north-east of Tihwanah, and fourteen miles and
a half west-north-west of Kaithal, or eight miles or so west of the
course it formerly took to unite with the Ghag-ghar.
Another change in the courses of the rivers of these parts is
indicated by that of the Markandah, which formerly, after reaching
Thaska from the direction of Shah-abad, ran west to Kuliram, and,
after passing one Icitroh south if it, united with the Ghag-ghar. At the
present time it turns off before reaching Thaska, runs to the south, and
unites with the Sursuti about two Jcuroh or three miles and a half east
of Pehu’a.
The Ghag-ghar, the ancient Drishadwati.
I now come to the Ghag-ghar, and its tributaries. The course
of the Ghag-ghar477 # river has probaby changed oftener than that of
any other of these parts ; and its shiftings, no doubt, had a deal to do
with the drying up of the Hakra. The author of the Survey says,
“ the Ghag-ghar is now a rain-formed river [that is, dependent on
rain], and very famous in the parts through which it flows. Its exact
source has not been determined, hut it comes from Kahlur ; and it is
related, that, having flowed past Bhatnir, in by-gone times, it used
477# This river is styled “ Cuggur” by Dow and Briggs, although there is no
such letter as c in the Persian, in which Firishtah’s history is written, nor is there
in Sanskrit or Hindi. Elphinstone, who quotes Briggs, makes the matter still worse
by writing it, in his “ History of India,” “ Gdgar ; ” and Rennell writes it “ Cagga.”
The word in the original form is^-^-S^ the second ‘ g ’ being doubled.
In the “ Memoirs of George Thomas ” it is stated (p. 164) with respect to the
course of the “ Ouggur ,” as the author of the “ Memoirs ” styles the Ghag-ghar,
that, “ during Mr. Thomas’s residence at Batnier , he could perceive little vestige of
what is called the antient bed of this river, but from the scanty information he
procured, it appeared to him that the river, tho ’ it formerly ran along the south side
of the fort, its channel had been choalced up by vast quantities of earth forced
down from the mountains, and according to the prevailing opinion of the natives,
tho’ now lost in the sands, west of the city, it formerly extended as far as the Sutlege
which it joined in the vicinity of Ferozpore.”
The author of the “ Memoirs ” appears to have reversed Thomas’s meaning,
since in the map to the “ Memoirs,” the Sutlaj is made to run southwards from
near Firuz-pur into the Hakra, which it once did, but from a point a long way to
the east of Firuz-pur.
In another place it is stated, that the country of the Bhatis “ extends along
the banks of the Cuggur from the town of Futtahbad to that of Batnier. The soil
is uncommonly productive, which arises in a great measure from the immense body
D 3
434 H. G. Raverty— The Mihrd n of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
to unite with the Sind on the frontiers of Jasal-nur,478 but, for a long
period it has become obstructed and blocked up.” The writer tere,
of course, refers to the Ghag-ghar and Hakra united, and when the
Gling-ghar was not entirely dependent on rain.479 This river aiises
from the overflow of water in the rainy season from the Siwalik
range near Pinjor, on the north and west of the tract wherein the
Chitang and Sursuti take their rise. It then ran towards the south,
passed east of Muni Majra and west of Ram Garh, then turned south¬
west, and reached the kasbah or bazar town of Banliur,480 below the
walls of which it flowed. So far, the changes in its course do not seem
to have been very great ; but, about four or live miles above Banliur,
another rain-fed liver, the ITnbhala ( ), now branches off to the
south-west towards Anbalah, which river will be presently noticed.
From Banlnir the Ghag-ghar ran more to the south-south-west,
and passed about two miles, or a little over, west of Mughal Sara’e ;
and crossed the present line of railway near a place which still preserves
its name, namely Ghag-ghar Sara’e,481 about eight miles and a half to
the north-westwards of Anbalah.
Now it passes less than two miles west of that place.
From Ghag-ghar Sara’e it ran away in a direction about south-west
passing near Chappar and Fath-pur on the east, and midway between
the latter place and Bliunareri, winding considerably in some places;
then turning a little more westerly, it ran on towards Samanah, and
washed some of the buildings of that place on the east side. The Sur¬
vey account says, in proof of this, that, “ in going from Banhur to
Patialah by way of Ram-pur, Madan-pur, Ujrawar, and Kheri,482 the
of water descending from the mountains during the rainy season, thus causing the
banks of the river to overflow to an extent of several miles ”
At page 7 of the article on the ‘‘ Lost River” in the “ Calcutta Review,” the
writer says, that, “ the old river bed noiv [sic] known as the Ga^gar, in which
flows the stream of that name, according to tradition, was originally the bed of
the Satlej.” The tradition so called must have been misunderstood : the so called
“ Eastern Nyewal ” must have been meant ; and the “ old river bed noio known as
the Gaggar,” that is the Ghag-ghar, is as old as the hills.
478 See page 450.
479 See note 485, page 438,
480 “ Boonoor ” of the maps. See following note 485, page 438.
481 The merchants, Steel and Crowther, quoted in note 357, page 354, who passed
the Ghag-ghar two hundred and seventy-five years ago — in 1G14-15 A. D. _ mention
it as follows : “ Mogul 1 Sera or Gaugar, on the route from Shahabad to Sunam.”
432 This word continually occurs in the names of places in these parts, generally
in conjunction with another word, sometimes following, sometimes preceding.
It means a village, from Sanskrit Another form of the word is Khera. In
1892.] H. G-. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . 435
Ghag-ghar had to be crossed in two places by the wa}r. In this neigh¬
bourhood, and farther north, it used, in former times, to cause great
destruction from overflowing its banks, but now, save and except a
contemptible channel, nothing else remains.
“ At that period, likewise, the route between Anbalah and Samanali,
three kuroh distant from Kuhram, used to become so flooded from the
overflow of the Ghag-ghar, that it became entirely closed.”
The distance between Kuhram and Samanali is seventeen miles,
and there were then as now, many villages between. Now, the Ghag-
ghar flows four or five miles farther eastward, and after passing within
four miles or more of Kuhram, flows towards the south-west, and unites
with a river which appears in our maps as the “ Konsilla N.” or
“ Puttealuk river,” but, at the period in question, it was not known.
In going from Patialah to Kuhram by Fath-piir, Sunnur, and
Bhunareri, the Ghag-ghar had to be crossed between Path-pur and
Bhunarerf ; but, now, it flows more than two miles and a half on the
other or south side of the last-named place.
Proceeding from Agund to Samanali 485 by way of Ujhh and Sehun
our maps it is sometimes “ Kheruh,” sometimes “ Khera,” and “ Kheree ; ” and, in
some places, all three variations of the word, after this fashion, will be found
written almost adjoining'eacli other. See note 230, page 269, and note 453,* page
424
4SS I may mention that Hansi, Samanah, Sunam, Kuhram, and Sarasti, or Sirsa
of the present time, particularly Hansi and its dependencies, were some of the most
important fiefs of the Dhili kingdom, as may be gathered from the “ Tabakat-i-Nasiri.”
This fact also shows that the3T must have been far more flourishing at that period
than they were in the time of Akbar Badshah. In former times there was no
scarcity of water, and then these parts were in very prosperous condition, and con¬
tained a far greater number of inhabitants, as the numerous ruined sites confirm.
Ibn Batutah says Sarasti, when he went thither from Uboh-har, was a large
city, and abounded with rice, which the people carried to Dihli for sale. Hansi, his
next stage, he says, was a fine, well, and closely built city, with extensive fortifi¬
cations. Then he went on to Mas’ud-abad.
In the time of the last Shamsiah Sultans of Dihli, Hansi was held by the Ulugh
Khan-i- A’zam, afterwards Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Balban. it was a very ancient and
strong place, and was captured in 427 H. (1035-36 A.D ), by Sultan Mas’ud the
Martyr. This was one hundred years or more before the time of “ Rae Pithaura’
who, we are told, “is supposed to have founded it.”
In the last century it was totally depopulated and ruined. On the north side
of the city and adjoining it was a high tall or mound, and on its summit the remains
of a strong fortress also in ruins. Within the fortress is the shrine of Shaikh Jamal,
Hansawi, who was one of the orthodox disciples, and the successor of that Snltan-
uz-Zahidin, Shaikh Farid, the saint of Ajuddhan, and on the saint’s day is visited by
thousands of people. To the north of the fort there is a great lake some three or
four Jcuroh in length, and nearly as broad. The cause of the desolation of this place
436 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
ATajra, two miles and a half north-east of Agnnd and Marorhi, two
"branches of the Ghag-gliar had to be crossed ; bnt now, there is
but one branch. Likewise, in going from A gund to Sunam westwards
by Ujhli and Nanliera, a distance of four miles and a quarter, in the
time of the Survey, the Ghag-ghar was crossed mid- way between these
two places ; bnt now, even the “ Old Gliuggur Nud ” of the maps is
crossed less than a mile west of Ujhli, and the present channel is a little
over a mile and half east of Nanliera.
is said to have been the great famine of the year 1 179H. (1782-83 A.D.) It was the
capital of George Thomas’s short lived principality.
“ When this place went to decay, merchants and traders began to take np
their quarters in the karyah of Nangalf ( ) (the “ Mingalee,” “ Mangalee,” and
“ Buleealee” of as many different maps), and made it thereby the envy of the other
towns of this part. It is five kuroh to the south-east of Hansi.”
Sultan Mas’ud had captured Sarasti, the modern Sirsa, in the year 425 H.
(1033— 34 A. D.); and in 427 H. (1035-36 A. D.), he moved against Hansi, having,
when very ill, vowed he would undertake a holy war against the infidels, if he
recovered. Ilausi was a fortress of vast strength, and considered impregnable
by the Hindus. In six days, however, one of the bastions was thrown down, leaving,
a practicable breach, and the Musalman troops rushed in and captured it. This
■was in the beginning of the year 428 H. (it began 24th October, 1036 A.D.) ; and
a great deal of booty fell into their hands.
After this Sultan Mas’ud moved against the fortress of Soni-pat (north of the city
of Dihli), which was the stronghold and residence of Deobal (Dewa-Piila, probably)
of Harianah. On the Sultan’s approach, Deobal retired to the jangals with his
numerous forces, leaving the garrison to defend the place. It was captured, how¬
ever, and sacked, and its idol-temples given to the flames. A spy having brought
information of Deobal’s whereabouts, he was surprised by the Musalman troops,
defeated, and put to flight.
After this the Sultan left his son, Abu-l-Mujalla-i-Majdud, governor of Labor
and his territories farther east.
Soon after Sultan, ’Abd-ul-Fath-i-Maudud, had avenged the assassination of his
father, Sultan Mas’ud, in 433H. (1041-42 A.D. ), and he had himself been worsted
by Sultan Alb-Arsalan, the Saljuk, in his endeavours to recover Khurasan from the
Saljulcs, the Musalmans of the territory of Labor and its dependencies, — who in
Sultan Mas’ud’s reign, had crushed the rebellion of their then governor, Ahmad-i-
Hial-Tigin, who, as elsewhere related, was drowned in the Mihran of Sind near
Manfuriyali, but had thrown off their allegiance to Sultan Maudud — found them¬
selves about to be attacked by three of the most powerful of the Rajahs of Hind,
who had combined to recover Lahor and its territory from the Muhammadans,
who now marched to Lahor and invested it. The ringleaders in this act of
disloyalty, now thought it advisable to renew their allegiance, which secured
to Sultan Maudud the services of all the Musalman soldiery in that province;
and two of the Rajahs, out of fear of Sultan Maudud, determined to relinquish this
enterprise against Lahor, and retired into their own territories again. But one
more rash than the others, named Deobal of Harianah, stayed behind for a
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 437
“ At present,” says my Survey account, “ the channel having passed
by Chapar, Fath-pur, and between the latter place and Bhunareri, about
a leuroh farther south-west, the tributaries of the Ghag-ghar [presently
to be noticed], unite with it, after which it is also known as the
Panch Nadi, and lower down towards Tihwanah4,84’ as the Gaji Wa-hah
as well. From this place of junction, the Ghag-ghar or Panch Nadi
short time, thinking, that if the Mnsalmans ventured out, he might be able to over¬
throw them. They considering themselves now strong enough, did so, encountered
him, overthrew him with great slaughter, and put him to flight, killing great num¬
bers in the pursuit. Deobal fled, and shut himself up in a strong fortress
which he possessed, and in it he was invested by the victors. The name of the
place is not mentioned, but is said to have been small, although very strong ; and
the Rajah had brought thither along with him such a number of followers, that
famine began to stare them in the face. He had, therefore, to sue for terms, but
the Mnsalmans would agree to nothing short of his surrendering up all his fortified
places to them, and he was obliged to comply. He obtained quarter; but the
property and wealth contained in these strongholds, which was very great, fell
into the hands of the people of Islam, and 5,000 persons of that faith, de¬
tained as captives by the Rajah, Deobal of Harianah, who, in pomp and power
exceeded all the other Maliks of Hind, were, incorporated with the Muhammadan
army.
This Rajah appears to be the same as the one referred to in Sultan Mas’ud’s
time, but the names are differently written, the first mentioned being plainly
Diobal, probably Dio-pal — and the other Jlw without points, which may
be Do-bal, or Do-pal, or even Do-tal, or Do-yal. If one and the same Rajah is not
referred to, the latter must be the son, or the successor of the former, but they
probably refer to one and the same person.
After finishing this affair, the Mnsalmans marched against the other Rajah,
who was named Mat Mari. He sallied forth from his stronghold to encounter them ;
and although they did not amount to more than a tenth of the number he brought
against them, they defeated and slew him, with the loss of some 5,000 men killed,
and a vast amount of booty fell into their hands. The rest of the neighbouring
Maliks of Hind, having become aware of this disaster, agreed to pay tax and
tribute ; and thus they saved themselves from the swords of the people of Islam.
Sultan Maudud died on the 20th Rajab, 441H. (about the end of January, 1050 A.D.),
at which time his son, Abu-l-Kasim-i-Muhammad, held the government of Lahor
and its dependencies.
484 Tihwanah, in Akbar Padshah’s reign (written “Tohanah” in Blochmann’s
text) was a mahdll of the sarkdr of Hisar Firuzah, and had a fort of kiln-burnt
brick. Its l’evenue amounted to 4,694,354 dams, with free grants amounting alto¬
gether to 150,680 dams. The people were Afghans of the Nuharni or Luhani tribe,
who had to furnish 400 horsemen, and 3,000 foot for militia purposes. It is pi'obable
that some Afghans have been located in these parts ever since the time of Sultan
Ghiyas-ud-din, Balban, who was the first of the great feudatories of the Delili
kingdom who took Afghans into pay. But this was not “in the sixth century A.D.
in the time of Anang Pal Tunur Raja of Delili,” as some tell us. It is said, in
history, to have been founded by Rajah Tihwan Pal son of Abi Pal.
438 H. G. Raver ty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
takes a more south-westerly course, and winding in several places by
the way, reaches Samanah on the east side close to the walls of the
place.486 It then takes a course nearly south towards Nanhera and
Badshah-pur; separates into three channels east of Nanhera, two of
which pass between that place and Sehun Majra farther east [about
two kuroh north of Agund], and the third east of Seliun Majra ; after
which they take a more south-westerly course again, and, subsequently,
more towards the south-west, and reuniting, and bending and winding
considerably, pass towards Mung Ala.”
Now, the Ghag-ghar is, at its nearest point, six miles or more from
Samanah to the south-east. At the period in question the Ghag-ghar
flowed within six miles and a half of Patialah ; now it is distant between
eleven and twelve miles east and south-east of that city. At the same
period, it passed eight miles west of Anbalah, while now it is but two.
At the time of this Survey likewise, after passing the Suweti on
the way from Badshah-pur, above referred to, on the road to Mung Ala,
a little over twelve kuroh towards the south-west by way of Duhandal,
Ra’e Dhirana, and Dudian, you cross the Ghag-ghar twice.”
Now, the Suweti or Ohhu-hey runs three miles east of Ra’e
Dhirana, and a mile and half east of Dudian, and unites with the Ghag-
ghar two miles and a half south-east of Mung Ala ; while an old chan¬
nel of the river, called the “ Old Gliuggur Nud ” in the maps, is nine
miles and a half east of Ra’e Dhirana, and the present channel two miles
and a half still farther east. The Sursuti now unites with the Ghag1-
ghar seventeen miles and a quarter to the north-eastwards of Mung
Ala ; but, when this Survey was made, it flowed some six or seven miles
435 When Babar Badshah invaded Hindustan, the Ghag-ghar flowed under the
walls of Samanah, and from thence to Sumim. He says, in his Tuzuk, that, “ March¬
ing from Sarhind towards Anbalah, “ we alighted on the banks of the river of
Banur [Banhur — foreigners always drop the ‘ h ’ in Hindi words] and Sannur. In
Hindustan, apart from the daryas (great rivers) there is one running stream,
and this they call the Ab-i-Gaggar (Ghag-ghar). Ohhat (the “Chuth” of the
maps), likewise, is situated on the bank of this river.” The Badshah set out, up
stream, to view the country, and says, that, “ three or four Tcuroh higher up than
where this river issues forth, there is another scream, its tributary, which issues
from a wide, open darah , which contains a volume sufficient to turn four or five water¬
mills.” It was such a pleasant spot that he gave directions to form a garden there
on its banks. Then he says : “ This stream having entered the plains and flowed for
a distance of a kuroh or two, unites with the river Gaggar (Ghag-ghar), the point at
which the latter issues [from the hills] being three or four kuroh lower down. In
the rainy season, a great volume of water comes from this channel, and unites
with the Gaggar (Ghag-ghar), which flows on to Samanah and Sunam.” Compare
“ Elliot’s Historians ” (Yol. IV, page 249) here, containing the Editor’s version of
“ Tuzak-i-Babari.” It is a dangerous practice to leave out ivhat is not understood ,
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Milvran of Sind and its Tributaries. 439
farther east than its present place of junction with the Ghag-ghar, ancl
its old bed can be distinctly traced. At the period in question it did
not unite with the Ghag-ghar at all, but passing Tihwanah about six
miles and a half on the east, ran away towards the south-south-west,
and united with the Chitang a little west of Bhadara ; and the two
rivers then lost their name, and the united channels were known as the
Hakra or Wahindah, as already stated.436
“ In going from Kaithal towards Muug Ala by Sher Garb and
Gula-har, the Ghag-ghar passes the latter place close under its walls.
Five Jcuroh farther down is Mandohi, and the river passes north of it,”
but now, it is close to it on the west ; and beyond Makodar, some four
miles lower down, and about three miles and a half south-east of Mung
Ala, the Suweti or Chhu-hey unites with the Ghag-ghar, which then
separates into two branches as before mentioned.
In going from Mung A'la to Fath-abad, at the same period, in the
direction of south-west, you first went “ two kuroh and a half south-
south-west to Handhah,48? on the bank of the Ghag-ghar, and in the
Jamal -pur jparganah ; and, after that, four kuroh farther in the same
direction to Haidar-Walah on the other side of the river ; and half-way
between those two places the Ghag-ghar had to be crossed. From
thence you had to go five kuroh to Shukr-pur,4S3 which was also on the
banks of the Ghag-ghar, which ran close by it on the right hand
(north).” Row, you have to cross one channel of that river from
Mung Ala to reach Handball ; and both it and Haidar-Walah are
close to the west bank of another channel, and Shukr-pur is at
present some two miles from the banks of the Ghag-ghar. Moreover,
in 1821, when Captain John Colvin of the Honourable Company’s
Engineers surveyed these rivers, the present southern-most of the two
without mentioning it. On this occasion the Badshah’s son, Humayun, was des¬
patched from the right wing of his army to Hisar Firuzah, some ninety miles
S. S. W., against the Afghan troops there, but from Mr. Dowson’s version it would
appear that Humayun was with his father all the time. Hisar Firuzah, the revenue
of which was estimated at a Tcaror (of tangahs ?) was sacked, and was afterwards
conferred upon Humayun, together with a lcaror in money.
Clihat (mis-called “ Chuth ” in the maps) was a mah&ll of the sarlcdr of Sahrind
in Akbar Badshah’s reign ; its revenue amounted to 750,944 dams, and free grants
computed at 49,860 dams ; the people were Afghans and Raj-puts; and they had
to furnish 650 horsemen, and 1100 foot for militia purposes.
486 See page 422, and compare the “ Calcutta Review” article which makes it no
to the Grhag-ghar instead.
437 Turned into “ Handee ” in the maps.
433 This is the place called “ Shikohpoor ” in the maps, and not that called
“ Shukoorpoor,” twelve miles south-west of Mung Ala.
440 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
channels passing between Mung Ala and Till wan ah, 489 was lost (or,
at least, is not marked in his map), a mile and a half south-west
of Handhah. Lower down again, in going from Miing Ala by Tihwanali
to Bar-Walab nearly due south, it was necessary to go twro Tcuroh and
a half in that direction to Ram-pur, and to pass the Ghag-gliar, which
flowed under its walls. Now, you have to cross two channels, and the
second one nearly a mile before reaching Ram-pur. Jamal-pur, an
ancient place, likewise, was then one Tcuroh east of the Ghag-ghar, but
now it is two miles and a half distant from its southern-most channel.
4>S9 For some miles north of Tihwanah in Ilarianah, where the Ghag-ghar
separates into two branches, and from thence westwards towards Sirsa, the villages
and lands lying along the banks of the northern channel are known by the general
name of Sot-bar or Sota-har, so called from the Sanskrit sot or sota signify¬
ing, ‘ a spring,’ ‘ a stream ’ ‘ a river,’ bnt the river Ghag-ghar is not called by that
name save in the sense of ‘ the river.’ These sot-har lands are very productive and.
yield two harvests yearly, the autumnal one being rice. Sarsuti or Sirsa produced
much rice in Ibn Bat Utah’s time (see page 264). On the other hand, the villages
lying along the banks of the southern channel are known as the Daban villages,
on account of the abundance of a species of grass known in Hindi as dab (a sacri¬
ficial grass — poa cynosuroides ) growing along its banks.
In the Flruz-pur district the broad belt of sandy soil covered with hillocks, of
from two to three miles in breadth, lying along one of the old channels of the Sutlaj,
is called “ sot-har ” or “ sot-hara .” See note 477, page 432, and note 423,
page 403.
Harianah, especially its western and southern parts about Fath-abad, the
Firuzah Hisar, Tohsham, and Bhawani, the parts nearest to Bikanir and Jasal-mir,
is called Bdnjar " or Banjar - from Sanskrit in which there is go
‘ g,’ but the word has become vitiated, and this part is called Bdngar by those who
do not know the derivation of the word. The term means ‘ lying waste,’ ‘ dry,’
‘ arid,’ ‘ thirsty,’ etc. These parts contain sand hills, and are subject to violent
dust storms, so violent, indeed, that very often after one of these storms, the seed
sown by the cultivator is covered and spoiled. In some places villages have been
abandoned on account of the wells becoming filled up from the same cause.
From fifteen to twenty-five miles towards the south from Suhani (the
“ Sewanee” of the maps) and the Bikanir border, in place of sand hills there are
some bare rocky hills, which rise like islands from the sandy tract, but they do not
rise to any great height, the highest not exceeding eight hundred feet or there¬
abouts. The town of Tohsham stands on the northern skirt of the highest of
them. These appear to be the hills referred to by Ibn Batutah on his way from
Uboh-har to Dihli. See page 261.
Cunningham, in his “Ancient India,” (page 247), says : “ the country of which
Bikaner is now [!] the capital was originally called B&gar des — the land of the
Bagri or Warriors, whose leader was Bagri Rao. If so, it would be “ Bdgri des,
not “ Bdgar des ; ” but it will be seen that he has merely “identified” the word
bdnjar, or rather the vulgar form bdngar, above referred to, for “ a warrior ” (we
are not told when the “ leader, Bagri Rao,” flourished), and that the “ Bagri
warriors” are sand hills. “ Harianah,” herein referred to, the Survey record states,
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 441
‘‘ To the south of Mung Ala,” according to my Survey account,
s>
“ is the river called the Ohliu-hey ( ). Some say it is the Patna-
««
lah river, which passes one kuroh west of Samanah, and unites with
the Ghag-ghar, and, that in the district and neighbourhood of Samanah,
they call it the Suweti ; but, according to the most trustworthy ac¬
counts, it is the Ghag-ghar, the waters of which, through the closing
of the hand or dyke of Jamal-pur in this same district, spread out [in
that direction].”490
The closing of this land or dyke appears to have tended to the
formation of the present southern-most of the two channels into which
the Ghag-ghar now separates east of Mung Ala ; for, at the time of
the Survey here quoted, “the Ghag-ghar,” it is stated, “flows towards
the west in one channel, and winding considerably, to Rutiah, situated
close to its south bank, and Kulotah, close by on the north.”491
“is a dependency of Dikii, and they likewise call it Banjar, that is to say KhushTc
[signifying, in Persian, and used in the Urdu dialect], dry, arid, etc., (see
preceding note 489),” but hart, from which the name is supposed to be derived, is
from Sanskrit, and that signifies ‘ green,’ etc.. Harianah extends in length from
Bahadur Garh to the Firuzah Hisar more tl an one hundred kuroh in length, and in
breadth, from the river Ghag-ghar to Mewiit, about the same distance. It contains
excess of sandy waste and uncultivated tracts and jangal. It is not usual to build
fortifications, forts, or walled towns, or villages, but around each inhabited place
they set up branches of thorns to about twice the height of a man, dig a ditch
around it, and consider this sufficient. In defending such places these people mani¬
fest great bravery.
“ The inhabitants are Jats, Gujars, Ranghars, Ara’fns, Hans, and Afghans. The
latter began to settle here during the rule of Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Balban, the Ilbari
Turk ruler of Dehlf, who was the first to entertain Afghans in his pay, and, subsequent¬
ly, during the time of Afghan rulers. On account of the difficult nature of the country
these tribes have become rebellious to the authority of any ruler [that was when
the author wrote, about a century ago], and are a source of trouble and difficulty
on account of their lawlessness and excesses. * # * Without a force of cavalry,
this territory cannot be brought under control [See following note 498]. Jfndh,
Han si, Hisar Firuzah or the Firuzah Hisar, Agrohah, Fath-abad, Jamal-pur, Tihwa-
nah, Kaithal, Miham, Bhawani, Ohirkhi, Dadri, Biri, Nangali, Kharkhoda, Jajh-har
Rohtak, Kohanah, Bainsi, etc., are its principal towns. Hisar Firuzah, Hansf,
Agrohah, Fath-abad, Jamal-pur, Tihwanah, and some other places in that direction,
are in a state of ruin and desolation through the rapine of the Sikhs, and the
tyranny and lawlessness of the Bhatis.”
490 At the present time (that is, when the “ Indian Atlas ” map was made) the
Chhuhey passes two miles and a half east of Mung Ala, and unites with the Ghag-
ghar about the same distance south-east of that place, and just two miles west of
Makodar (“ Mukodur ” of the maps), immediately north of which the Ghng-gh
flowed, and still flows.
491 It now passes south of it.
liar
E 3
442 H, G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
From thence it runs to Dundhal,492 a little before reaching which,
it turns to the south-westwards, and runs on towards Sirsa, which it
passes a little over four kuroh on the west, and close under the walls
of Jliorur and Dliunor, situated on the right or north bank. Here¬
abouts the bed becomes very broad, and the waters to spread out for
nearly a kuroh or more farther eastwards. The channel passes within
a short distance — about a quarter of a kuroh — south of the ancient
Firuz-abad ; 493 and water is to be found for a long way farther west to
near Bhiraj Id Tibbi, 494 and considerable quantities of wheat are culti¬
vated. From Firuz-abad westwards the channel becomes very broad,
and runs a little to the north of west to Bhiraj ki Tibbi, which lies
close to the south bank, a little north of which the channel of the
Ohuwwa ( )49b from the north-westwards joins it ; and the united
channel runs to Bhatnir, distant six kuroh from the afore-mentioned
Tibbi, and passes under the walls of that ancient fortress on the north
side.”
The Ghag-ghar appears to have changed but little hereabouts
for some thirty years ; for, at the time of Captain John Colvin’s Survey,
the channel was found to be much the same496 as noted in my Survey
record, but, at the present time, after passing Zaffar-abad, close to its
south bank, and thirteen miles south-east of ancient Fath-abad, there
are several large dhands or lakes of standing water. Seven miles west
of the first-named place, this southern-most of the two channels becomes
well defined, and runs nearly due west, passing under the walls of the
ancient town and fort of Sirsa497 on the south, and unites with the
492 “ Doodhal ” of the maps.
493 Now, the other, or southern channel, unites some distance farther south.
Water is to be found in the Ghag-ghar in several places between Mung Ala and
Firuz-abad.
494 AH the villages of this part, nearly, and the old ones in particular, are
situated on mounds, hence the constant use of the Hindi words tibbah and tibbi,
signifying a ‘ mound,’ ‘ height,’ ‘ rising ground ; ’ and this fact indicates anything
but scarcity of water.
495 Called the “War N.” in the maps, immediately noi’th of Sirsa; but, above
Sunam it appears as the “ Choeea Nud,” as though a totally different river !
496 But it may have changed and re-changed its course several times in the
interim.
In days gone by, it flowed without interruption from the hills, but, in more
recent times, a good deal of its water was drawn off for irrigation purposes. At the
present time, the greater portion is drawn off for that purpose ; but, even now,
when the river is in flood, the current is too dangerous for boats. Hxcept on rare
occasions, it is fordable everywhere almost.
497 The A’in-i-Akbari says that near Sirsa is a kol-i-db or lake, the name of
which is Bhadara. This seems to have disappeared.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 443
northern cliannel two miles and a half east of Firuz-abad. From thence
the united channels take a course more towards the west-south-west,
towards Bliiraj ki Fibbi498 and Bhatnir, as abovementioned ; and it still
passes, as in times gone by, close under the walls of the old fortress on
the north side.
From Bhatnir, in former times, as at present, the channel took a
south-westerly course ; but, according to my Survey information, it
passed at the period referred to, “ close under the village of Fath
Garh or Beedior on the west.” Near to Dubh-li,499 the chief town and
residence of the Wall of Bhatnir, two lcuroli west-north-west of Fath
Garh, there are Icolabs , dhands , or lakes, which are filled in the rainy
season when the Ghag-ghar is flooded, the river at such times, even now,
reaching this point which is between five a,nd six kuroh south-west of
Bhatnir. From the afore-mentioned Fath Garh it passed also close to
the village known as Bhara Mai ke Bhaunra,600 also on the east bank,
immediately west of which the channel of the Hakra passed close to
the said Bhaunra on the south, which is just twenty-three miles and a
half from Bhatnir. At, and near the point of junction, there were
numerous long, narrow banks with dry channels between, the effect of
changes in the courses of the two rivers caused by inundations.
At the present time the bed of the Ghag-ghar runs a little more
west from Fath Garh than previously ; and the junction with the Hakra
channel is now more than two miles farther east than Bhara Mai ke
Bhaunra.
The Survey record states, that : — “ Bhatnir, which constitutes part
of the tracts inhabited by the Bhati tribe, and styled the Bhati country,
contains about 40,000 families of this tribe. It is about sixty lcuroli
in length from east to west, and about twenty kuroh in breadth. The
part lying along the banks of the Ghag-ghar andOhitang rivers, reached
by the inundations from them, is very productive ; but, on the north¬
west and south, Bhatnir adjoins the sandy, arid, uncultivated desert
tracts, called the Chulistan, and which the Bhatis term the Thai.”606
498 la the time of the glorious East India Company, when India was happy
and contented, but a time which, to her cost, she is not likely ever to see again,
and the rupl was worth two s hi Uings and three pence, Skinner’s Horse, soon after
their formation, were stationed on this, the then eastern frontier. See note 514
page 449.
499 Duhh-li appears in our maps as “ Dabli ” and “ Dhubli .” See page 410.
500 Bhaunra, in Sanskrit, means ‘ a cavern, a vault, etc.
501 A most amusing mistake has been made respecting the Bhatis, and by Glad¬
win, I believe, originally, in his translation, such as it is, of the A’in-i-Akhari ; and
from that day to this the blunder has been carefully handed down by different
writers, just like the “ Pathan Dynasties,” and the ‘ Ghickers’ and f Ghnkkurs/ etc.,
for the Khokhars.
444 H. G. Raverty — The Mihr&n of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. KTo.
Tributaries of the Ghag-ghar.
I must now refer, as briefly as possible, to the chief tributaries of
the Ghag-ghar as they flowed about ninety years since.
“ The Markanda, which is a perennial stream, rises a little to the
west of Nahun, where it is known under the name of Jura Pani, and
passes a little west of Rasul-pur, which is just two kuroh north of Sad-
hura, after passing which it loses the name of Jura Pani and is known
as the Markanda. It flows in the direction of about south-west, and
reaches Shah-abad, which it passes close by on the north ; and here it is
known by the name of Makra as well as Markanda. Prom thence it
runs on to Thaska, which it passes close to on the north, and thence by
lsma’il-pur, Cliliapra, and Bibi-pur, which two latter places lie on the
north bank. Prom the latter place it runs south of Majra one kuroh
from Kuhram, to reach which place, from the southward, the Markanda
has to be crossed to Majra. From Shah-abad to this point the course is
a little to the south of west, after which it bends more towards the south¬
west, and unites with the Ghag-ghar a little to the west of Agund.”603
At the present time, the Markanda turns towards the south imme¬
diately east of Thaska, and unites with the Sursuti instead of the Ghag-
ghar, rather less than four miles north-east of Pehu’a, twenty-three miles
and a half farther east than its former place of junction with the latter
liver.
In the acconnt of the “ Country of the Bliatties ” by W. Hamilton, in his
“ Hindustan,” Yol. I., p. 523, he says : “ The Bhatties were originally shepherds.
Various tribes of them are fonnd in the Punjab, aud they are also scattered over the
high grounds [!] to east of the Indies, from the sea to Ooch. In the Institutes of
Aeber [the A’l'n-i-AkbariJ these tribes are by Abnl Fazel named Ashambetty.”
Abu-1-Fazl in the “ A’in-i-Akbari,” referring to the people inhabiting the
Thathah province dependent on Multan, says, that, “ they are <Af A jf
az ah shdm-i-BhuU tvo juz-i-dn .” He of course referred to the various sections or sub¬
tribes of the Bhatis, ahshdm being the plural of the ’Arabic word — hashm —
and the person who originally made this absurd error, mistook the two words
“ ahsham-i-BhaU (here again the Persian izdfat was not understood. See note 242
page 276), for Asham-batty, leaving out the ‘ h ’ of one word and ‘ h ’ of the other.
Ahshdm, literally, means ‘ fraternity,’ ‘ bands,’ ‘ bodies,’ ‘ followers,’ ‘ attendants,
‘servants,’ etc., but is used to indicate, not as regards the Bhatis only, ‘clans,’
‘ septs,’ ‘ tribes,’ etc.
There is no mention whatever of any river “ Begunuh” which now, accord¬
ing to the maps, unites with the Markanda two miles and a half south-west of
Paplutha, and this shows what great changes have taken place hereabouts in less
than a century. This “Begunuh” river of the maps, is the “ Begna ” of the
Gazetteers. It appears to be considered right that the two should differ — variety
is c harming !
1892.] H. G. Raveriy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 415
“ In going from Must afa-abad to Anbalah, two kuroh west of Dhin
you reach and cross the Markanda ; and, in going from Thani-sar by
Thaska to Patialah, that tributary of the Ghag-ghar has to bo crossed
north-west of the latter place. Also, in going from Kuhram to
Pehu’a on the Sursuti, the Markanda is crossed one kuroh south of
Kuhram.”
Now all is changed : the Markanda does not reach within twelve
miles and a half of Kuhram, and has deserted the Gliag-ghar altogether.
It turns south-south-west just before reaching Thaska, and now unites
with the Sursuti three miles and a half north-east of Pehu’a.
At the same period, the Markanda was but a kuroh and a half from
the Sursuti in going from Thani-sar to Patialah. The Survey record
says : “You leave Thani-sar and go half a kuroli west and reach the
Sursuti ; and another kuroh and a half brings you to the Markanda.
After crossing it, and going another half a kuroh, Hisalali (“ Hussaluh ”
of the maps) is reached, lying on the right hand. Proceeding two
kuroh farther in the direction of north-west, inclining north, you
reach Bararsi, where the Thani-sar parganah ends. Another two kuroh ,
in much the same direction as before, and you reach Sil Pani, in the
Kuhram parganah. Prom thence two kuroh more brings you to Dunya
Majra on the right-hand side of the road. South of it is a small river
channel dependent on rain, which comes from the right hand and flows
towards the left, called the Wulinda, and from thence, after going
another kuroh and a half west, inclining north-west, Thaska is reached.”
Here again are great changes. The Markanda now does not come
nearer than within eleven miles of Thani-sar ; and two small river beds
intervene between that place and the Markanda, which, at present,
passes close under Thaska on the south. The bed in which it now flows
is evidently that in which the Wulinda then flowed, and to which it
must subsequently have taken.503
s
Another tributary of the Ghag-ghar, called the TTnbhla )■>
conveying the overflow of water from the hills south-west of Nahun,
and between the Markanda and the Ghag-ghar, has next to be men¬
tioned. “ It passes two kuroh north-north-west of Mauhra 5°i> on
the road from Shah-abad to Anbalah, and about three kuroh and a half
from the former place, and subsequently unites with the Markanda
603 The Markanda, from the nature of its stream and channel leaves much rich
deposit after overflowing its banks, and in this deposit the sugar-cane flourishes
exceedingly, as it also did on the banks of the Ghag-ghar in ancient times, when
Sultan Mas’ud filled its ditch with sugar-cane to enable the troops to storm the
walls of Sarasti or Sirsa. See note 261, page 288.
504 “ Movvrnh ” ’of the maps.
446 H. G. Raverty — The Mihr an of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
north-west of Kuhram. It flows in a very deep bed.” 505 Another
minor tributary also called the U'nbhla, will be noticed presently.
s>
“The Tiluhi ( a river dependent on rain, arises from the
—
overflow of water in the bills a little south of Nahun. Its course is
towards the south-west, and it passes close to Sadhura on the west side;
and a considerable distance lower down unites with the Panch Nadi, as
the Ghag-ghar is also called after other tributaries unite with it.”
Now, this rain-dependent river unites with the channel of the
Markanda six miles and a half south-west of Sadhura.
s>
“ The next tributary westward, the Gnblila 1 )? rises in the hills
west of Pinjor, a little to the west of the Gliag-ghar, passes west of
Banhur, and from thence runs towards Raj-purah, about mid -way
between Anbalah and Salirind, and passes the last-named place about
one kuroh distant on the west side. In going to Salirind from Raj-
purah you cross it by a brick masonry bridge, but it is now in a di¬
lapidated condition.”
Where it unites with the Ghag-ghar is not said, but it seems to
9 9
have united with the Suweti ( ) or Ohu-hey ) a few
M M
miles between Sannur and Patialali ; and it now unites with a river
called the “ Puttealawalee river ” in the maps,606 but which, at the
time of this Survey, does not appear to have been in existence.
The next tributary is the Gumhtala ( ilv*). “ It conies from the
hills south of Pinjor, and a little to the .east of where the Ghag-ghar
rises. It takes a southerly course, and passes west of Anbalah. After
leaving that place or the road to Salirind, after passing the kol-i-db
[lake] outside Anbalah, one kuroh and a half north-west is that deep
rain-dependent river, the Gumhtaila ; and you cross it by a masonry
bridge of brick, called the Pul-i-Raj Garli, now dilapidated. Raj Garh
itself lies half a kuroh north on a khdk-rez or artificial mound. This river
unites with the Ghag-ghar between seven and eight kuroh farther to the
south-west.”
Here a vast change has occurred. The Gumhtala is no longer
known ; and the Ghag-ghar, since the period in question, has deserted
its former bed a little below Chhat ; and instead of flowing by Banhur,
it has entered, and flows in the old bed of the Gumhtala to within
At the present time, its waters (or a river of the same name) unite with the
Ghag-ghar north of Agund. It is the “ Oonbla” of the maps,
600 This is the “ Landra,” and “ Patiala rau ” of the Gazetteers, and the
“ Konsilla N.” of the maps, south of Patialali ; and the “ Pnttealwalle Riv.” of the
maps, north of that place, is a mere tributary of the so-called “ Konsilla.” See
page 449.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 447
about four miles to tlie northward of Anbalali ; and then, having left
it again, has kept nearer to Anbalah, within two miles and a half of
which the Ghag-ghar now flows.
To continue the Survey account : “ After passing the Gumhtala
over the Pul-i-Raj Garb, one leu rah and a half farther north-west, and one
huroh south-east of Mughal Sara’e, and before reaching the Ghag-ghar
from Anbalah, is the BliagNa’e ( ) or Bhag Nahr ( ).507
M
It comes from the north-eastwards, but the exact place where it rises
is unknown to the writer. Some say that it runs in a channel which
was excavated by a former Badshah to conduct water to the Firuzah
Hisar. After flowing in a southerly direction for some distance, it
passes west of Kami and Gahnur,608 and from thence to Kuhram,
among the buildings of which town it passes on the west side. It then
takes a course more to the south-west, and unites with the Ghag-ghar
away in the direction of Samanah, near where the other tributaries
unite with it, after which the Ghag-ghar is known as the Panch Nadi
as well as Ghag-ghar.
“Another tributary is the Khand ; but, respecting the
place wdiere it actually takes its rise, the writer has no satisfactory
information. In going from Kaisur ( ^ ),609 south-west of
Agund, to Badshah-pur, crossing by the way three channels or branches
of the Ghag-ghar, here called Na’e Wa-li and Gaji Wa-hah,510 and a
little west of that place (Badshah-pur), you reach the rain-dependent
river, the Khand. It comes from the right hand (north-east) and
passes to the left (south-west), and unites with the Ghag-ghar some
few huroh lower down ; and the Suweti river runs nearly parallel to its
channel about two huroh farther west.”
This Khand river seems to have been of minor importance ; and,
at present, all traces of it have, apparently, disappeared.
“ Lastly comes the Chuwwa, a perennial stream, which rises
in the Siwalik range like the others, but directly north of Anbalah.
607 In another route it is said, in the Survey account, that, “ on the road from
Thaska to Patialah after passing Balia (3b), the “ Ballur ” of the maps, six miles
south-east of Patialah, the Ghag-ghar is joined by another tributary known as the
Bagh-NVe.”
508 “ Ghunnoor ” of the maps, six miles and a half S. W. of Anbalah. The
correct mode of spelling the name, according to the people is as above.
Now the Ghag-ghar passes those two places about two miles on the east, in¬
stead of between three and four miles on the ivest, as in the time of the Survey.
609 “ Kussour ” of the maps.
610 In another place the writer says: “ at Tihwanah it is called the Gaji-VVa-
hah.” He means, that, there it is also called the Gaji Wa-hah, etc.
448 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
It passes east of Sail rind, and is spanned by a masonry bridge of
brick near that place. It then runs almost due south to Patialah,
winding considerably, and passing close to that city on the east and
south, flows towards Samanah by Mayan and Khiri, and passes Samanah
one kuroh on the west. It then separates into two branches, one of
which taking a more southerly course, flows two kuroh west of the
Khand at Badshah-pur, and then runs towards Mung Ala, and east of
it unites with the Ghag-ghar. The other branch runs from near
Samanah towards the west-soutli-west in the direction of Sunam, under
the walls of which it passes on the east 511 side, and is expended in the
irrigation of lands beyond, or lost in the thirsty soil, about four kuroh
east-south-east of Bhiki. This last branch is considered as the Chuwwa
proper, and is not known as the Suweti after bran ching off below
Samanah, that name being applied to the other branch only. In former
times this Chuwwa turned towards the south after passing Sunam, and
ran a kuroh or more north of Boliah, again bent southwards and passed
Fath, after which it ran westwards once more for some distance, and
then again turned towards the south-west, passed east of Guduh, and
finally united with the Ghag-ghar immediately west of Bhiraj ki
Tibbi.”
“ In going from Sahrind to Anbalah, or to Patialah, you have to
cross the Chuwwa by the bridge before mentioned ; and, in going from
Patialah eastward to Sannur, you issue from the Dilili gate of that city
and pass the river by the brick-built bridge. Proceeding from Patialah
to Samanah by Mayan, Khiri, and Dhanan Thai,613 you keep along the
Chuwwa.*** In going towards Samanah by Suh-laun ), a
kuroh and a half nearly south from Patialah, you go along the Chuwwa,
and Mayan, before mentioned, is two kuroh farther down stream.
In going from Patialah to Sahrind by M til-pur ( jjJ ^yo ), you cross
the Chuwwa two kuroh before reaching that place; and, after going another
six kuroh farther, cross the bridge over the Chuwwa and enter Sahrind.”
Here too, vast changes have taken place in the course of less than
a century. Now, the Chuwwa (called “ Clioeea Nud ” in the maps),
runs from Sahrind by Mansur-pur, which it was twenty miles distant
from before, to Sunam, and nearly encircles it ; and another river
(called “ Choa N.” in the maps)613 comes from mid-way between
6,1 It passes it now on tlie west side. See note 485, page 438.
612 This Sanskrit word here means ‘ dry or firm ground.’ In the Panj-ab terri¬
tory and Sind, however, the word is used to signify a ‘ sandy, waterless desert.’
See note 455. * page 424.
613 One is styled “ Clioeea ” and the other “ Choa ” in the maps, by way of dis¬
tinction, perhaps, but the word is Chuwwa, nevertheless.
1892.] G. H. Raverty — The Mihr an of Sind and its Tributaries. 449
Salirind and Patialali, and does not reacli within five miles and a half
of Patialali on the west ; passes two miles and a half west of Samanah,
and eight miles west of Badshah-pur ; runs towards the south, and
unites with the Ghag-ghar two miles and a half south-east of Mur.g
A' hi. Another new river from the north, which runs eight miles and
a half east of Salirind, and seven and a half west of Raj-purali (which,
north of Patialali, appears in the maps as the “ Putt&alawalee RivT),
and which is joined by the Unbhala five miles north of Patialali, is
the only river which at present passes near that city, and immediately
north of which it appears to run in the old bed of the Ohuwwa,
which used to flow close under the walls of both Salirind and Patialali
on the east. It is entered in the maps, below the latter city, a,s the
Konsilla N. ; ” and passes four miles east of Samanah (the old Ohuwwa
passed one mile west of it), and unites with the Ghag-ghar, which
formerly ran under its walls on the east ; but, the nearest point at
which it approaches that place now is six miles farther east.
To continue the Survey account.
“ North of the Ghag-ghar, after the Sursuti and other tributaries
unite with it, and between it and the Ohuwwa proper, is a tract cf
country, often mentioned in history, and known as the Lakhhi Jangal.
It is nearly thirty kuroh in length, and somewhat less in breadth, con¬
sisting of excess of sandy tracts ; and there is great paucity of water.
Its name is said to be derived from Lakhhi, son of Jundharali, who
belonged to the Bliati tribe. During one of the invasions of Hind by
Sultan Mahmud-i-Sabuk-Tigin, he became a convert to Islam, and ac¬
quired the title of It ana — Ran a Lakhhi. He obtained a number of
’Arab horses;514 and with a considerable following of the Bhati tribe,
who paid obedience to him, he was induced to take up his residence in
this dasht , and was there established for the purpose of holding in
check and harassing the Hindu idol- worshippers of the country
614 It might have been expected that the horses of Sind would have been good
ones, from the infusion of ’Arab blood. The ’Arab conquerors must have brought
numbers of horses into the country from time to time, and we might naturally have
expected to find the breed of Sind horses good, but the contrary is the case : the
horse of Sind is a miserable animal, whereas those of the Lakhhi jangal or Lakh-Wal,
and Harianali, generally, are good.
The “Memoirs of George Thomas” states (page 132), that, “adjoining the
province of Beykaneer is the district called the Laclcy jungle, so much, and so de¬
servedly celebrated for the fertility of its pasture lands, and for a breed of excellent
horses of the highest estimation in India. The Lacky jungle is comprised within
the district of Batinda, forming a circle of 24 kosses of the country each way. On
the ‘ N.’ it is bounded by the country of Roy Kelaun, E. by the province of Ilari-
anah, b. by Batiner, and W. by the great desert.”
F 3
450 H. G. Raver fcy — The Mila 'dn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
around. These Bhatis, in time, peopled three hundred and sixty vil¬
lages ; and they bred thousands of excellent horses, which traders used
to take and dispose of in distant countries, and so continued for ages
to do. At the present time, through the tyranny and violence of the
Sikhs, this tract of country has fallen into a state of complete desola¬
tion. # * * In going from Patialah to Sunam, and from thence by
JBhiki to Bhulada from the last named place, you proceed seven kuroh ,
crossing the channel of the Chuwwa by the way, and reach Laklihi-
Wal, in ancient times a large town, but now it is completely desolate.615
The tract of country dependent on, or appertaining to it, is called the
Laklihi Jangal ; and Ajanak and Sayyidi-Walah, are Bhati villages
therein. From Sayyidi-Walah one kuroh and a half distant, is Aorta,
and from it another two kuroh is the afore-mentioned Lakhhi-Wal.
“In another direction, in going from Jindh to Bliatindah, after
crossing the Ghag-ghar, seven kuroh and a half to the north-westwards
of Mung Ala, you reach Sangat-purah ; and from thence go on another
three kuroh to Haria-o, which is a large village of the Bhatis in the
Laklihi Jangal , and in the Sunam joarganah. Another two kuroh in the
same direction is Phulhara, from which, two kuroh west, is Bahadara
on the Chuwwa.”
Other ancient tributaries of the Hakra or Wahindah coming from
a totally different direction, must not be passed over, and which con¬
firm the traditions respecting these parts. Jasal-mir, in by-gone times,
was in a far more fertile and populous condition than it has since be¬
come,616 and contains the remains of some very old cities or towns.
615 In the year 657 H. (1259 A.D.), during the reign of Sultan Nasir-ud-Din,
Mahmud Shah, Malik Badr-ud-Din, Sunkar-i- Sufi, entitled, Nusrat Khan, <held
charge of the city of Tabarhindah, -which is said to be the former name of Bhat-
indah, and Sunam, Jajh-har, and Lakh-Wal, together with the then frontier parts of
the Dilili kingdom, as far as the ferries over the river Biah. See my “ Tabakat-i-
Nasiri,” page 7S8.
516 See the extract from Bu-Rihan at page 219, and also page 261, where mention
is made of Nusrat Khan, son of Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, the Khalj Turk sovereign of
Dihli, who was directed, in 697 H. (1297-98 A. D.), to march the army under his
command from Bakhar in Sind to Jasal-mir to take part in the campaign against
Gujarat.
Lieut. A. II. E. Boileau, of the Hon’ble Company’s Bengal Engineers, in his
“ Personal Narrative of a Tour through the Western States of Rajwara,” in 1835,
acquired some valuable information respecting the Hakra, and these its once
perennial tributaries. He says : “ That this country was not always so desolate
may, however, be inferred from the tradition that Bikumpoor once stood on the
bank of a river which was drank dry by a divinity taking up the water in the
hollow of his hand : this exploit could not easily have been performed since the
days of the royal hero wrho gave his name to the fort, the Raja Beer Bikrumajeet,
1892.] H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 451
Its eastern part is still traversed by two river beds, now entirely
dependent on rain, wliicli take tlieir rise in the low range of hills to
the south-east of the town of Jasal-mir, a little to the east- wards of
Poh-karn (the “ Pokurn ” and “ Poknrun ” of the maps). These ran
in the direction of north-north- west, and unite with the Hakra channel.
These were once perennial tributaries of the Hakra, and at present
even, the waters, when they are at their full, still reach the old channel
of that river. These two rivers are known to the people of the country
under the name of Hakra. The water contained in these, together
with other water in the bed of the Hakra, now go to form extensive
about whose era it is said to have been founded ; and there are really within its
precints a couple of mundurs or pagodas that appear almost old enough to
have been coeval with the great Bikruni who flourished about nineteen hundred
years ago. The fort of Birsilpoor, of which an account has already been given,
being only seventeen hundred years old, modestly claims a less antiquity than the
above, and is said to have been built as a half-way house or resting place in the
dreary track between Bikrumpoor and Poogul.
Should there be any foundation for the above tradition, it may have arisen
from one of these three causes ; either that the small stream running north-west*
wards between Pohkurn and Jesulmer, instead of losing itself in the marsh near
Moliungurh and Bulana, may have found its way through the low lands at Nok into
the neighbourhood of Bikumpoor ; or, secondly, the river Kagur [the Gliag-gliar
he means] that waters part of Huriana may have continued its westerly course to
the valley of the Indus [here he, of course, refers to the Hakra of which the
Ghag-ghar was one of the principal tributaries], being possibly in those distant ages
unchoked by the sand-drifts that have been accumulating for centuries to the west
of Futehabad and Buhadra : or, lastly, the bed of the Sutluj and Ghara [sic] may at
some remote era have had a much more easterly position [see page 417 of this] ; for
it seems to be admitted that the channel of the great river Sind has itself shifted from
the same quarter, perhaps at a comparatively recent date; for instead of running as
formerly from below Dera Ghazee Khan to near Ooch, it now flows more than
twenty miles to the "westwards of this city.”
Tod also says : “ The same traditions assert that these regions [Bikanir, etc.],
were not always either arid or desolate,” and that its deterioration dates “ from the
drying up of the Hakra river, which came from the Panjab [ ! ] and flowed
through the heart of this country and emptied itself into the Indus between Rory
Bekker and Ootch * # # It ran eastward [referring to the “ Sankra ”] parallel
with the Indus * # * This catastrophe [the drying up of the Hakra] took place
in the reign of the Soda prince Hamir.” Yol. II.
From this, however, it will be seen that he has mistaken the Sutlaj for the
Hakra, which latter is his “ Sankra,” and which was one of the names it bore, and
still bears after entering Sind.
The same writer also observes, that, “ History affords no evidence of Alexander’s
passage of the Gharah ,” which is quite correct ; for no such river existed until the
Biah and Sutlaj finally united their waters in the last century. See note 390,
page 380.
452 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
runs, the name given in these parts, as well as in Sind and the southern
parts of the Panj-ab, to marshes or marshy ground. Some of these
rans or marshes are very extensive, one of them, near the very ancient
and deserted city of Hardah, is seven or eight miles in length, and
from two to two and a half miles in breadth. There are others near
Mohan Garb, Gathorah (Boileau’s “Gotaroo”), Khabah or Khabo, and
some other places. The water found in these marshy places is quite
sweet, with the exception of that in the ran of Gathorah, and perhaps
one or two others, which are salt.
After the waters of these two river beds under notice subside,
the land which had been flooded on either of their banks when the
waters were at their height, are brought under cultivation, and yield
good returns. The beds, in some places, contain a great deal of jangal,
and trees here and there, and also some extent of grass land, in which
the Bhati Rajali of Jasal-mir pastures his horses and brood mares.
The town of Jasal-mir is very ancient, its foundation being attri¬
buted to the great Rajah, Salbahan [Saliwanah]. The people have
reservoirs of stone attached to their dwellings for storing rain water,
that element being very scarce. Most travellers have found water in
the wells of this part and of Bikanir only at very great depths ; but, in
the bed of the Hakra, in many places, excellent water is said to be
obtainable within a foot or thereabouts of the surface.617
617 Tod’s explorer, confirms the finding of water here, but confounds the bed
of the Ghag-ghar with that of the Hakra, of which the former was a tributary.
Tod says : “ Abu Birkat in going from Shahgnrh to Korialloh [which, in his map,
is written “ Kharroli,” on the extreme north-west boundary of Jasal-mfr, and to the
northward of Gathorah mentioned in the previous note], notices the important fact
of crossing the dry bed of the Cuggur [as he spells Ghag-ghar] five kos west of
Korialloh, and finding water plentifully by digging in its bed.”
The Kharoh here mentioned lies close to the western boundary of Jasal-mir
towards Sind, on the route from Khair-pur Dehr ke to Jasal-mir. One of the most
ancient channels of the Halira or Waliindah, which comes from the direction of
No-liar or Islam Kot, passes near Kharoh, and some eighteen miles west of Shall
Garh, on its way towards the main channel of the Hakra near Khiprah or Khipro,
by Kot Jiboli (“Jeeboli” of the maps), there unites with the Hakra channel
about midway between Bahman-abad and Amar Kot. Between Shah Garh and
Khiprah several small dhands or lakes still remain in this old channel, now nearly
obliterated.
This place, Kharoh, appears to be the same as is referred to in the legend
of “ The Seven Headless Prophets,” related by Burton respecting the prophecy that
the waters of the Hakra shall again run in its ancient channel. The verse is : —
“ Karo [Kharo ?] Kabaro’s walls shall view
Fierce combat raging half a day ;
The Mirmichi shall routed be,
Then, Scincle ! once more be blithe and gay.”
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries, 453
To the west of Jasal-mir, about half way between it and the
channel of the Hakra, which formed in ancient times the boundary be¬
tween Sind, Multan, and Jasal-mir, the face of the country changes
considerably, aud habitations there are none, with the exception of a
few huts here and there. Scarcely anything but sand hills, and loose,
shifting sand of a reddish yellow colour, meet the view. Some of these
sand hills are over fifty feet in height, the sides of which nearest the
wind, or rather the sides mostly acted on by the wind, are almost per¬
pendicular ; while in some places tibbahs or mounds are to be found,
some of considerable elevation and area, the surfaces of which are free
from sand, and are covered with grass, and sometimes have a few
stunted trees and shrubs upon them, and sometimes a pool or well,
“ Mirmichi,” he says, “ has no precise meaning.” The verse respecting the
Dyke of Aror and the Hakro, has been given farther on.
We have some valuable information respecting the state of the country between
Multan and Jasal-mir and beyond, the part through which the two rivers, rising
near Poh-karn once flowed on their way to unite with the channel of the Hakra,
which passed by No-liar on the west frontier of the Jasal-mir state, in the account
of Sultan Mahmud’s march from Multan by Jasal-mir towards Somnath.
“ The Sultan set out from Ghaznin in Sha’ban, 416 H. (towards the end of
September, 1025 A. D.) ; and was joined by 30,000 cavalry from Turkistan, volunteers,
who of their own accord came to serve in this campaign against the infidels and
their notorious idol, entirely at their own expense, without pay or allowances of
any kind.” The Sultan reached Multan on the 15th of Ramazan, the following
month. “ As a waste tract of country had to be crossed, he commanded that each
person should carry water and forage sufficient for several days’ consumption, by
way of precaution ; and also had 20,000 camels laden with water and forage.
In short, after the army had passed that waste tract, it reached, situated on the
border or edge thereof, the fortress of Jasal-mir, and the city [shahrj situated
near it. This city was taken aud sacked, but the Sultan did not allow himself to be
detained by the fortress, wishing to husband the energies of his troops for the more
important matter. They likewise passed by the way several other places, which
were filled with fighting men, well provided with all the implements of war, but
such was the fear inspired by the appearance of this army in their country, that all
the fortified places were given up without fighting. These were left uninjured, and
only the idol-temples were destroyed, and the country cleared of infidels, who were
in the habit of molesting all travellers who chanced to pass that way, in such wise,
that it used to be avoided.” The Sultan’s route appears to have been nearly due
south, passing between where Dish (Deesa) and JPalhan-pur now stand, and between
Anhal Warah and the modern Alnnad-abad, and from thence near Junah Garh on the
east.
“In the last month of the year, Zi-Hijjah (about the end of January, 1026
A. D.), the walls of Somnath appeared in view;” but, into this I need not enter
here : I hope to do so soon, if time permit. The Sultan returned from Somnath
by way of Mansuriyah, as already related, in note 105, page 196.
See note 232, page 271 on the wonderful “ Maharaja Mandalika” and “ Bhim
Deva” of the “ Tarikh-i-Sorath .”
454 H. G. Raverty — The Miliran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
and seem to have been sites of towns. As one continues to proceed
westwards these sand hills begin to decrease, until at last only the
ordinary sand hills, or waves of sand peculiar to these parts, remain.
The ancient town or city of Ivhabah or Kliabo, before referred to,
to the south-westwards of Jasal-mir, on the route to Mithraho (also pro¬
nounced, at times, Mitharo) and Kh air-pur in Upper Sind, must once
have been a place of great size and importance. It is said to have con¬
tained some eleven or twelve thousand houses, mostly constructed of bewn
stone, many of which houses were of great size, and ornamented with
stone carvings, the remains of which, still to be seen, attest the truth
of the statements respecting it. There are also the remains of what
must once have been two large buds or idol-temples, ornamented with
stone carvings. When the Jasal-mir territory comes to be regularly
surveyed, I apprehend that some interesting and valuable discoveries
will be made, which will tend to throw some light upon the ancient
state of these parts, once fertilized by the waters of the Hakra or
Wahindah and its tributaries ; for, from the traditions and histories
of the past, there can be no possible doubt, that these parts were once
flourishing and populous, and contained several important towns and
cities, the names of which have now been lost.
I have not deemed it necessary to the subject to mention the still
smaller tributaries of any of these rivers, only such as refer to the
main subject.
1 must now return to the Hakra or Wahindah again from where I
left off on its entering Sind at page 422.
I have already mentioned that it passes Sahib Garli and Kand-
harah or Kandharo. It passed the latter place three miles to the west¬
ward, and close to Khan Garh of Bahawal-pur on the eastside, into the
Rurln district of upper Sind; but, although the channel appears in
our maps of the Bahawal-pur territory as the “ Dry Bed of Bainee
Nullah called Wahund ,” it is only called by its correct names of Hakra
or Wahindah in one: the rest have “Old Bed of Rr. Wandu” or
“ Wandun.” 618
613 This is called by all sorts of names. The “ Gazetteer of Sind,” page 4,
says: “ The deserted course of a large river now known as the Ren Nala still exists
in the Bahawalpur territory and the Rorhi district, and this joining the Nara [this
is contrary to fact : the Narah unites with the channel of the Hakra or Wahindah],
may very probably have emptied itself into the sea by what is now called the Kori
mouth of the Indus.”
When the “ Report on the Eastern Narra,” before referred to, was being drawn
up in 1S52, little was known respecting the course of the Hakya, or possibly of its
existence beyond the northern border of Sind, although Lieut. Fife of the Bombay
Engineers, in his valuable “ Report ” (page 40) mentioned, that, “ from Clioondawa
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 455
At a place called Jangan ten miles below Kban Garh above referred
to, the channel of the Hakra, the old Mihran of Sind, turns towards
the south for some miles, and then returns to the general course of south¬
west again, and becomes less marked than before, but distinctly trace¬
able. This part is full of banks, and is seamed with channels of
greater or less depth, indicating the action of water, plainly showing,
that, hereabouts, it has changed its course from east to west, and from
one side of its channel, more or less, several times.619 Indeed, between
Wanjh-rut and Din Garh or Triliarah, one hundred and twenty miles
to the north-east, and between Khan Garh to within a few miles of
Birsil-pur in the territory of Jasal-mir, a tract just one hundred and
thirty-two miles in breadth,520 is perfectly seamed with channels and
high banks caused by the action of water, through the shiftings of the
course of the Hakra and its tributary, the Sutlaj, on one side, and the
tributaries from the side of Jasal-mir, referred to at pages 425 and 434,
on the other, in the progress of the Hakra towards the ocean, under the
process described in the first paragraph of note 446, page 415. It,
however, continues to run in the same general direction from Jangan
for some distance farther, and then bends south-westwards, then south
for a few miles, then south-west again, in which direction it runs as
far down as Mitharo or Mithraho,621 forty-eight miles east-south- east
of Rurhi, when it bends westwards for a little over sixteen miles, and
then meets the channel of its old western branch, which flowed about
ten miles still farther west before it Avas diverted from the direction
of Aror by a dyke erected about twenty-six miles to the east of that
place. The present channel, or the remains of this western or diverted
branch, is the Ra’in or Ra’ini, which appears in our maps as “ Dry
bed of the Rainee Nullah.”
to Nowakote the Karra is termed Hakra in this part of the country,” and, that it
“skirts the foot of the Thurr [the district of the Thar or Thai and Parkar is meant].”
Also, that “ the Hakra continues to skirt the foot of the Thurr for about thirty
miles, after which it joins the Pooraun [Puranah] below Wang a Bazar.” He also
mentions the numerous ruins of masjids near the villages, “ which latter are all,
apparently, of modern construction.”
This last statement is hardly correct ; for some of them are, unquestionably,
of ancient date. All along the course of the Hakra or Wahindah from Marut to
the sea, are the remains of numbers of towns formerly of considerable importance,
but which have gone to decay through the change in the course of that river. The
large scale Revenue Survey maps will show what a number there are.
619 See note 563, page 482.
620 See page 483.
621 The “ Mitarhoe,” “ Mitrahoo,” “ Mitrahu,” and “ Mitrao,” of as many
different maps.
456 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Playing united with, tin’s brand), the channel of the Hakra con¬
tinues to run in a south-south- westerly direction, until about five miles
south of a small village, the “ Saida ” of the maps, but correctly
Sayyidali, the lower portion of the channel of its western branch,
which passed Aror on the east and then turned south before it was
diverted from that old capital of Sind, unites with the main channel
again. In this old western channel coming from the northwards from
Aror, the overflow from the Ab-i-Sind or Indus now finds its way, which
having entered the great depression near Ghaus-pur, the remains of the
ancient channel of the united Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind, and the Sind Hud
or Rud-i-Sind wo Hind of the Arab writers, or Pancli Nad or Panj Ab,
finds it way, lower down, into this old channel of the diverted branch
of the Hakra or Wahindah, and this water is, from the winding course
it takes, locally styled the Narah or Snake, the “ Narra ” and “ Nara ”
of the maps and Gazetteers.
It will be noticed that the range of limestone hills, to which I have
previously referred, rise a little north of Sakhar of the present day,
passes on to Rurhi, and, a little beyond it, begins to bend more towards
the south, and that on the eastern skirts thereof Aror or Alor was
situated, and there its ruins may still be seen. This range extends
thirty-eight miles to the south of Rurhi (Diji Kot,52S formerly called
Ahmad-abad, is situated on its western skirt), and farther down, is
succeeded by sand hills, some of considerable elevation, which stretch
away seventy-four miles farther south, lessening in height by degrees.
This range, and these sand hills south of it, separate the present Narah
channel or old bed of the diverted branch of the Hakra, as already
described ; and those sand hills separate the united channels from
what may be for convenience termed the present valley of the Indus.
On the opposite or east bank, the sand hills of the that or thar run in
a direction from about north-north-west to south-south-west, and the
channel of the Hakra runs between them. According to the account
of the old Arab writers already quoted (pages 207-211), the Rud-i-Sind
wo Hind or Sind Raid, also called Paneh Nad and Panj Ab, having
united with the Ab-i-Sind below Multan, still lower down, near the
borders of the territory of Sind dependent on Aror, united with the
Hakra or Wahindah at a place called Dosh-i-Ab or “ Meeting Place
of Waters,” and formed the great river which was known as the
Mihran of Sind and the Great Mihran. About thirty-six miles lower
down, this river again separated into two branches, the easternmost
being the main branch, and the other, that which flowed past Aror on
522 This place is said to have been a stronghold of the Sumrahs in ancient times.
It stands, probably, where a Sumrah stronghold once stood.
3892.] H. Gr. Raver fy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . 457
the east, as already mentioned.523 These re-uniting below the present
Sayyidah, flowed in a slower current a little to the west of south, for
a distance of about forty-eight miles as the crow flies ; and just forty
miles above Mansuriyah, near which latter place was “ old Bahman-abad”
(not meaning, of course, that there were two Bahman-abads, but
Bahman-nih, or Bahman-no, or Bahman-abad, and Mansuriyah, or, as
they were then styled, “Bahman-no — Mansuriyah”), they again
separated into two branches. This place of separation one author
( Al-Istakhari) states, was near Kalari,524 which was one day’s jour¬
ney from Mansuriyah. Kalari was two days’ journey from Anari,
which was four days’ journey from Aror, which was three days’
journey from Basmid, which was situated at about two days’ journey
from Multan ; but the Masalik wa Mamalik, and Ibn Haukal make the
distance from Anari to Kalari four days’ journey instead of three.526
Al-Idrisi calls the distance from Kalari on the west bank, to Man¬
suriyah “ a hard day’s ride of forty mil (miles).” One of these
branches, the easternmost or main branch, flowed in a southerly direc¬
tion as before, and passed under the walls of Mansuriyah (and near
Bahman-abad), which was situated on the west side, subsequently
taking a more easterly course — about south-south-east — for some dis¬
tance, and then resuming its almost direct southerly course to Wangah ;
and this channel is represented by the Puranah Dhorah, or as the
Sindis call it, the Purano Dhorof 26 or Ancient Channel, to this day.
62S See note 578, page 502.
6S4 Kalari, or whatever may be the correct word, was without doubt, near the
point of separation of the Mihran of Sind into two branches, just forty miles above
Mansuriyah. Al-Idrisi says it lay on the west bank, and it was apparently
situated some miles above the low lying and now marshy tract near to Jakr&o, which
latter place is just twenty-seven miles above Bahman-abad and Mansuriyah, See
page 213, and note 138.
625 From Mansuriyah to Aror, the ancient capital of Sind, if the words
andjj^of the old writers be meant for it, is just six stages of twenty
miles each.
526 In Hindi, the word — dhau — means ‘deep,’ also ‘deep water,’ and
another signification assigned to it is ‘a marsh,’ or ‘ morass.’ The Sindi dhoro is
probably derived from the first meanings.
Mr. W. A. Hughes, the compiler of the “ Gazetteer of Sind,” says (page 2) :
“ Local tradition affirms that a portion of the Rann was once a highly cultivated
tract, known by the name of Sayra [See Wilford in note, 553 page 477], a branch of
the river Indus [he mistakes the Hakra for the Indus] then reaching it, but that
it disappeared altogether when either the Sindians or a convulsion of nature
diverted the waters from it.” He is so very careful as to or, but he could not have
understood the tradition properly. Immediately after he says : “ To this day, the
upper part of the Kori mouth of the Indus [the Kohra’i mouth of the Hakra is
G 3
453 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . [Ex. No,
The other, or westernmost of the two channels which separated
near Kalari, made a bend towards the north-east, and then gradually
referred to really] on which are situated the towns of Wangah and Rahim-ki-Bazar,
is called Puran, or ancient stream [ purdnah , not puran, means anything ancient, and
is the right word here], and the time doubtless was when the Indus [never : the
Hakra here again is mistaken for the Indus] by a more easterly channel than the
present, supplied sufficient water to make a portion at least of the Rann fertile and
productive.”
It will bo seen that the writer has mistaken the tract altogether. The great
ran or marsh of Kachchh was once an estuary.
When he comes to page 137, however, we have several “ ancient streams,” not
one only. Referring to the channel of the Hakra, which he here calls the “ Nara
he says : “ Another striking feature of this valley [which part of the country,
he says, is little known] is, that along its whole length you can trace the dry bed of
a large river. This main stream I take to have been the Eastern Hard, which flowing
past Umarkot and through [ ! ] Kachh, found an outlet into the Gulf of Kachh, or
perhaps at Lakhpat [he is not quite certain about it seemingly], and in modern
times lost itself in the vast lagoon the Rann. This main stream threw off in its
course several branches, the Dhoras or Purans,” etc., etc.
At page 267 he says : “ The Kori mouth of the Indus, separating Sind from
Kachh, once formed, it is supposed, the lower part of either the Fuleli river or the
eastern Nara. ; ” and farther on, at page 729, he writes : “ The Kori or eastern
branch of the Indus, separating Sind from Kachh, once formed the lower part of
the Fuleli . and it also received the waters of a large branch thrown off by the main
river during the inundations near Bukkur.” This is what he previously styled
“ the eastern Nara.”
In another place (page 844), respecting the district of “ Parkar,” he again
mistakes the Hakra for the Indus. He says: “In many parts of this Political
tSuperintendancy numerous beds of rivers long dried up are found intersecting the
arid tract of the Thar [the thal or thar, ‘ l* and ‘ r ’ being interchangeable, signifying
‘desert’]; and these would seem to show [What a delightful air of uncertainty
pervades his statements !] that the waters of the Indus, or some of its branches ,
once flowed through it, fertilizing what is now a wilderness, and finding their way
to the sea by either one of the eastern mouths, or through the Rann, or great salt
marsh of Kachh.”
On the very next page, reverting to the same subject, he says : “ There being
no torrents, floods, canals, or rivers in the Thar and Parkar proper, the water system
comprises, in the first place, the Eastern Ndrd, previously described as being a
natural channel, and most probably at some remote period the outlet to the sea of
the waters of some great river like the Indus, together ivith its branches the Thar, Chor ,
and TImarkotf Were there ever such contradictions and suppositions about one
river? I may add that there are no rivers called by such names.
MacMurdo was much more correct in his suppositions half a century before,
but then he was not a compiler. He says, under “ Thull or Dhat, and Catch,” as he
spells the words : “ I have been informed that there are streams of water through¬
out this tract during the rains, some of which descending from the hills in Marwar,
empty themselves into the desert, where they are lost, or find a drain in the run
[ran] north of Catch. Others on the west border are branches of the Pooran [the
1892.] H. Or. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 459
bent round again in the form almost of a half circle or bow towards
Siw-istan, but did not approach nearer to it than about twenty-two
miles, and, in after times, within about sixteen.627 The channel of this
branch, I believe to be represented by the present Mir Wa-hah or
Mir’s Canal, it having been utilized as such, and which now flows just
seventeen miles east of Siliwan, the Siw-istan of former days. This
branch, after passing east of that place, performing its half circle course,
again bent towards the south-east, and re-united with the main branch
about twelve miles below Mansuriyah, and reached the ocean by one
mouth, known as the Khora’i — the “Kori” of the maps and Gazetteers —
separating Sind from Kachchli. It is not to be supposed that there
was no change whatever in the direction of the channels ; for every
inundation made some change probably, as in the case of the channels
of the rivers of the Panj Ab territory and Sind at the present day, but
no radical change occurred for some time. Subsequently, but in com¬
paratively modern times, I think, because the Mihran of Sind passed
near Mansuriyah when Ahmad-i-Nial-Tigm was drowned therein in
the reign of Sultan Mas’ud of Ghaznin (see page 196, note 105), the
main branch, from the point of junction near Kalari, took a course
more to the east of south, and ran towards Amar Kot of the Sodahs,
between which two places occur those numerous great dhands or lakes
mentioned farther on. It then passed from ten to fifteen miles or more
purdnah dhorah above referred to], which, to this day, receives water from the
Garrah or Sutledge [the usual error : he really refers to the Hakra of which the
Sutlaj was once a tributary], by a channel known by the name of Narri [the Nara
of Hughes]. I have heard of the Nirgullee [ ? ] and the Hagra [Hakra] on the
west, and the Loni in the east,” etc., etc.
Cunningham, in his “Ancient India” (page 251), also mistakes 'the channel of
the Hakra for the “ old bed ” of the Indus. He says : “The old bed of the Indus
still exists under the name of Nava, and its course has been surveyed, etc. # #
The most easterly channel, which retains the name Nara runs to the S. E. by
Kipra and Umrkot.”
He, however, reverses matters, and makes the Puranah Dliorah run into the Indus ,
from S. E. to N. W., instead of into the channel of the Hakra as it does do. He
says : “ The most westerly [ ! ] channel, which is named Purana or the “ Old River,”
flows to the south-south-west , past the ruins of Brahmanabad and Nasirpur to
Raidarabad , below which it divides into two branches # * * one turns S. W. and falls
into the present river 15 miles below Haidarabad and above Jarak. The other called
the Guni turns S. E. and joins the Nara above Runaka Bazar,” etc., etc.
Dr. J. Burnes, in his account of Sind, says (page 21), that, previous to the year
1762, the Puranah emptied itself into the sea by passing Lakh -pat and Kotasir ;
and no doubt he is right.
62? This was the distance when Mfr Ma’sum of Bakhar wrote, about the year
1600 A.D.
460 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
on the west of Araar Kot, much as the channel still remains, which,
from the place of junction, some forty miles above the sites of Mansu-
riyah and Bahman-abad, the place of separation is not yet effaced, and
indicates its having occurred, as near as possible, as described by the old
’Arab writers, the place of separation above Togachli being just forty miles.
West of this, above Jakrao, is a great dhand or lake; and that branch
gets no farther south towards Mansuriyah than Mithrao ( “ Mithrau ”
and “ Mi throw ” of the maps — a different place from that mentioned
at page 454) — about seventeen miles; and hence it is the Puranah.
Dhorah or Ancient Channel. Indeed, from near Mithrao, above which
the Puranah Dhorah branches off, down to near Bakhar, fourteen miles
south-south-east, there is still an extensive tract of ran or swampy
ground some two or three miles in breadth, and extending east and
west about ten, in which is a short channel from the Puranah Dhorah
which unites with the present channel above Bakhar (but “ Bukar ”
in the maps), twenty-six miles north-east of Bahman-abad. In the
season of inundation a large tract of country, from eighteen to twenty
miles in breadth, from Mithrao to the present Hakra channel west¬
wards, is under water.
Just beyond Togachh, where the channel of the Puranah Dhorah and
the present Hakra channel now separate, those numerous elands or
•• , •( •• , *•
dhands ( ^3 or OJobS ), or long, narrow lakes commence, amounting to
some four hundred or more, with high banks between them. These
run nearly at right angles to the old channel, but parallel to the run
of the great sand hills of the thal , thar , or desert, on the left or east
bank, showing that, at some period, not very long ago, the river must
have been of great breadth here, and have contained a large volume
of water.623 Some of these cl, hands or lakes are from four to five miles
in length from east to west, and from a mile to a mile and a half in
breadth, and some of them are of considerable depth. The great lake
near Amar Kot has been mentioned elsewhere.
There are also a number of places where there were ferries over
the Hakra. There was one near Bakhar, and another at Khiprali, or
Khipro, as the Sindis call it, lower down ; and there are nine in all in
the Thai, Thar , or Parkar district. Of course such ferries do not refer
to the crossing places in the channel of a dried up river , but to a river
in which, more or less, water ran, and shows, that at no very distant
623 in the “ Report on the Eastern Narra,” page 34, the Commissioner of Sind
writes, that, “ Authentic history and tradition concur in stating that but a few genera¬
tions ago, there was more cultivation and greater population on the banks of the
Narra [the Hakra is meant] than exists now on those of the present Indus.” See
also what Ibn-i-Khurdad-bih says of this part in ancient times, at page 195.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 461
period, a constant stream of some sort flowed therein, and of some
depth. The wording of the treaty entered into by 'Nadir Shah and
Muhammad Shah, Badshah of Dihli, tends to indicate, that, even at
this period, 1152 H. (1739 A.D.), the river had not altogether ceased
to flow.629
Even of late years, its waters, from as far northwards as the
Bahawal-pur territory, have occasionally reached the ocean or very near
it. In 1826 a flood from the river reached Lakh Pat. In 1833 a flood
passed down as far as Wangali Bazar; and, in 1843, Major W. Baker
of the Engineers, Superintendant of Canals in Sind, saw, near the
head of the channel of the Narah branch, the marks of flood which
had risen eighteen feet, and to which, the Ra’in. or Ra’ini branch of
the Hakra or Wahindah contributed a considerable portion. The Pura-
nah Dhorah appears to have once flowed between its present channel
and the one now called the “ Eastern Nara ” by English writers ; for
the remains of it still exist. There can be little doubt, but that it
shifted constantly from one side to another ; and as most of these
channels have not been subject to regular inundations for some cen¬
turies past, and only obtain a comparatively small portion of water when
the rivers farther north overflow, they have not been subjected to violent
changes.
There can be no doubt, that the subsequent diversion of one of
the branches of the Mihran of Sind — the lla’in or Ra’ini — which
united into one great river at Dosli-i-Ab, must, in some measure, have
upset almost the whole river system of Sind so to say, and that that
diversion caused, not immediately perhaps, the stream farther to the
south to forsake the puranah or ancient channel for the present existing
channel by Amar Kot, and was the cause of the other, which ran to¬
wards Siw-istan, and which again united with the other branch some
distance below Mansuriyali, ceasing to flow altogether.580
629 The water in these dhands or lakes is the water of the Hakra in reality,
which finds its way down in time of extensive floods from as far upwards as the
middle of the Bahawal-pur territory, but some also comes from the overflow of the
A'b-i-Sind or Indus, which finds its way by the great depression, the old channel of
the Panch Nad when it was a tributary of the Hakra, into the present Narah channel
lower down, but this is not much.
630 Alexander, having left the confluence of the three united rivers, Hyphasis,
Acesines, and Hydraotes, with the Indus, as related in the previous note 361, page
366, sails down the Indus, according to the Greek writers — but according to the
courses of the rivers in ancient times, down the Hakra or Wahindah, after the
junction of the Panch Nad or Panj Ab rivers, including the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, with
it at Dosh-i-Ab— to the dominions of Musicanus, which, according to Strabo, “was
the most southerly part of India as described by Onesicritus, who minutely describes
462 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
In proof of wliat I have advanced, let us look at the two channels
of the Hakra or Wahindah in their present or recent state.
it.” The author of the “Life and Actions of Alexander the Great,” previously
quoted, not knowing anything of the existence of the Hakra and its tributaries,
supposes it to suit the well watered plains between the lower course of the Aral,
the Arabis of Ptolemy [the author should have added “ and the Ardbis of Arrian,”
which is supposed to be the Purali river in Mukran, ninety miles west of the
Aral] and the Indus,” a part, which, of course, he knew nothing about. I shall
not follow his other statements, and would merely remark, that Alexander must
have sailed down the Mihran of Sind ; for the writer just alluded to, says, “ he
was now approaching the upper end of the delta of the Indus [Mihran] where the
river divides into two streams.” This cannot refer to the separation of the great
river below the Dosh-i-Ab into two branches and below which Wanjh-rut stood
(See page 497), one of which passed Aror on the east, from what is stated after,
but to the position of Kalari, where the Mihran separated into two branches about
forty miles above Bahman-abad. It is stated further, that, “ the river enters the
sea by two channels of unequal size, more than one hundred miles apart from each
other. The enclosed space was named Pattalene by the Greeks, from the city of
Pattala, situated within the delta below the point of division,” which the learned
author supposes was “at no great distance from modern Hyderabad,” and which
he, not knowing how or when Haidar-abad was built, supposes may be “ the same
cities , as some modern Hyder might easily have imposed his own name on the
ancient Pattala [!]*** Here Hepheestion was ordered to build a citadel, and
construct docks and a harbour at Pattala, while Alexander himself sailed down
the right [west] branch to the ocean.” He is then said to have returned to Pattala,
and, subsequently, to have sailed down the left or eastern branch, and reached an
extensive lake, and an estuary, to the ocean, and “ was satisfied that the western
branch [ ? eastern, apparently, from the context, and what the other writers say]
was better calculated for navigation than the eastern [western ?].” See the
extract from the Balazarf, page 256.
To judge from the courses of the Mihran as it existed some fourteen centuries
ago, Bahman-nih or Bahman-abad lay below the point of separation of the river
into two branches, and about the position in which Pattala is said to have stood ;
and the lake reached in going down the left or east channel, that which existed
at the time of the ’Arab conquest, and the estuary at the Shakarah or Sagarah
mouth, some twelve miles wide, the Shagarah inlet or estuary. At the time of the
Greeks, the last named mouth must have been at least fifty miles above Badin, and
the western branch not much to the south, if so far south as the Makhalili hills
near Thathah. The whole of the Shah Bandar district of Sind may be said to be
of comparatively recent formation.
Strabo, quoting Aristobulus, says “ Pattalene was formed by the two
branches of the Indus [Mihran of Sind], and that the two branches are distant
1,000 stadia from each other [at their greatest distance ?] # * * he reckons
each side of the included island [or bet], which is of triangular shape, at 2,000
stadia, and the breadth of the river, where it separated into two mouths, at about
200 stadia. He calls the island delta.”
These distances must be greatly exaggerated — doubled at least.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 463
After tlie so called Narali channel unites with the main channel
of the Hakra below Sayyidali, and the rocky hills on the west side of
its valley terminate and the sand hills commence, the bed of the
Hakra begins to increase iu breadth ; and while the Narah channel at
Salih Pat is (or was ; for the opening of the canal may have caused
some change), three hundred feet broad, at Janjhu’i, about twenty-eight
miles below its junction with the main channel of the Hakra, the
breadth in some places is from two to three thousand feet, but the depth
decreases in proportion. At about eighty-two miles below Aror, and
forty-four below the point of junction of the Ra’in or Ra’ini (the
present Narah channel) with the main branch of the Hakra (just forty
miles above the site of Bahman-abad and Mansuriyah), clearing the
sand hills which kept it within bounds on the west side, the channel
again separates into two. One turns to the south-south- westwards,
and the other about south-south-east. The former, which is generally
dry, and is very deep in proportion, is that which, in bygone times,
flowed by the walls of Mansuriyah and Mahfuzah — hence its name
“ Puranah Dhorah ” or ancient channel of the Mihran of Sind, or Great
Mihran, as well as Hakra, Wahindah, Sind-Sagar, or Sankrah. It is
The account of Curtins is, that after Alexander left the confluence of the three
rivers of the Panch Nad or Panj Ab with the Indus, after sailing down four days
from that point, he disembarked, and sent Craterus “ to march the army at no great
distance from the river on ivhich he was to sail.” Then embarking again, Alexander
came down stream, but how far is not said, into the territory of the Malli [another
of the same name!] and Sabracae. * * * After sailing on another four days, he
reaches another territory, where he builc a city [one would imagine the materials
were carried in their pockets: it takes time to build cities and find the materials,
even if built of mud mortar], which he ordered should be called Alexandria. He
then enters the country of the Musicani, subdues the country, puts a garrison into
their capital, and from thence marches against the Praesti, another people of India.
Their strong city is taken after the third day. He then enters the territory of
king Sabus. Then another four days sail [twelve days in all: the distances each
day must have been small ] brought him to a city which led into the dominions of
king Sambus. The city of his people was attacked, and Ptolemy wounded. Sub¬
sequently, Alexander marched into the province called Parthalia [Pattalene of the
other writers], whose king “ fled to the mountains.” There are no mountains
near : the lime-stone hills near Aror are probably meant. Here he made choice of
guides [pilots ?] who knew the river, and sailed down to an island [bet] that stood
almost in the middle of the channel [no doubt Bakhar, some will say, but see the
island or bet of the Chach Namah, in note 187, page 234], but the guides got away.
He had only proceeded 400 stadia, however, [about 50 miles from where he took
his “guides”], when “the pilots told him, that they began to be sensible of their
near approach to the ocean. On the third day it was perceived that the sea began to
mingle its waters with that of the river.” Curtius’ description of the approach to
he sea-coast is clear and interesting.
464 H. G. Baverty — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
quite distinct a little way north-east of Mir- pur. The other passes by
Pathayali and Bakhar, both of which are notable places, as I shall pre¬
sently show : indeed, there are numerous ruins, the remains of ancient
towns, of greater or lesser size, still remaining along the courses of
these old channels ;531 and tradition affirms that this tract was once the
most flourishing part of Sind, and its soil is still most productive where
water is available.632 Pathayali and Bakhar are, respectively, thirteen
and twenty miles below this point of separation of the two channels,
and on the banks of the main one or Hakra, which now runs towards
Ainar Kot of the Sodahs ; but, fifteen miles above that ancient place,
it bends or turns more towards the south, and after running in that
direction for about eighteen miles, and passing thirteen miles and a half
west of Amar Kot, begins to bend more towards the south-south-west
again ; and as far as this and beyond, it is still known as the Hakro, as
the people of Sind pronounce it.
At Nowali Kot, a little over fifty-one miles south-south- west from
Amar Kot,533 and eighty-two south-east of Haidar-abad, it again
681 The “ Report on the Eastern Narra” says (p. 6), that “ There are villages
all the way [down] on either side, especially below Saya [ ? ] ; and there are
sand-hills to within four or five miles of Mithrow. * # * The river runs in
several smaller channels — sometimes in one only — from Sayddum down to between
Mithrow and Bakhar, where some old channels occur.”
522 South of Bahman-abad, between Amar Kot and Khiprah, the mins of several
ancient towns are said to exist, including one known as Kot Ratta near the banks
of the Hakra, as well as others lower down towards the ancient mouth of the river,
including the ruins of ancient Badin. Hereabouts are several branches from the
main channel, clearly defined, but now dry, which intersect the country for
fifteen or twenty miles westwards, and run nearly parallel to the main channel.
623 Amar Kot, as is well-known (or ought to be) was the birth-place of Jalal-ud-
Din, Muhammad Akbar Badshah, when his father, Humayun Badshah, in great dis¬
tress and misery, was returning to Sind from Jasal-mir, having gone thither by
Dirawar and Bikanir, on his way to Mai Dfw of Jodh-pur, who had promised him
aid and then deceived him. Finding he wras liable to be attacked by overwhelming
numbers, he, with his small following, turned off towards Jasal-mir, and from
thence towards Amar Kot, the party being nearly starved for want of grain.
Having reached Amar Kot, its chief, Rana Bir-sil, treated him with great considera¬
tion, and gave up his outer fort to the Badshah’s consort, whom he had married in
Sind; and in that fort she gave birth to Akbar on the night of Sunday (our
Saturday night — the night precedes the day in eastern computation), the 5th of
Rajab, 949 H. (night of October 4th, 1542 A.l) ). One of the “ Panjab Gazetteers”
actually tells us that “ Malot” in the Hoshyar-piir district was the place of his birth !
Mr. Hughes in his Sind Gazetteer, of course, mentions the fact of his birth at
“ Umarkot,” but then he adds a rare piece of history, to the effect that, “It was
through this town that Akbar, when emperor, marched in A.D. 1591 to conquer
Sind — an expedition, which, as history relates, was successful.” Only Gazetteer
“ history ” would relate such : Akbar Badshah was never in Amar Kot nor in Sind
1892.] H. Gf. Raverty — The Mihr An of Sind and its Tributaries. 465
separates into two channels, the westernmost of which is the largest ;
and just twenty miles below Nowah Kot, the ancient channel before
referred to, the Purano Dhoro of the people of Sind, but “ Pooran River”
of one map, “ Phooran N. or R.” of another, “ Phurraun R.” of a third,
“ Pnran R.” of a fourth, and “ Dhora Pooran” of a fifth, unites with it,
and no further separation takes place until it enters the great ran ,
marsh, or morass of Kachqhh ; and at times, the waters therefrom, in
periods of flood above, even now find their way into the sea by Lakhh
Pat and the Kohra’i mouth referred to by the ’Arab writers.
On the east bank of the channel of the Ra’in or Ra’ini, in which
the Narah now flows, from near Aror downwards, the sand hills of the
thal or tliar or sandy desert on the east, ran up close to the banks of the
river, and continue to skirt the channel of the Hakra, after the Ra’in
channel again unites with the main one, down as far as Amar Kot,
which is situated on the high bank. The bed here is very broad and
marshy, and here also is the Samarah lake, or great clhand running
parallel to the old channel of the river.634 It is some fifteen miles in
length, and from four to five in breadth ; and on the west side of Amar
Kot are other minor channels into which the river separated in its way
to the ocean. Continuing downwards from near Amar Kot by Nowah
Kot, eighteen miles below it, and four south of Wangah, or Wangah
Bazar as it is also styled, the Puranah channel again joins the main one.
Thus the united channel continues to run in the general direction of
about south-south-west, until within six miles of Rana ke Bazar — the
“ Raima ki Bazar ” of the maps — where it bends a little more south¬
wards, and enters the great ran or morass of Kachchh ; and the overflow
after his birth ; and it was the Khan-i-Khanan, Mirza ’ Abd-ur-Rahfm, who annexed
Sind, and he came by Multan and Bakhar.
654 What may be the real origin of this name I am unaware, but ‘ samar ’ and
‘ sumur ,’ in ’Arabic, mean ‘ a small lake,’ but this appears to have been a large one.
See preceding note 530, page 461.
This is doubtless the lake of Shakarah, or a part of it, referred to in the Chaoh
Namah respecting the movements of Muhammad, son of Kasim, the ’Arab con¬
queror of Sind, and by the Balazari in his account of the naval action there between
the ’Arabs and Jai Senha, son of Ra’e Dahir.
The “ Report on the Eastern Narra,” states (page 40), that, “ Between Ding
and Choondawah the sand-hills recede eastward to Omerkote, forming a kind of bay,
across which the river takes a direct course via Trimmoo. * * * During high
floods the whole country from Omerkote to Soomara, a distance of eighteen miles,
is some times under water.
“From Choondawah to Nowakote the Narra, or the “ Hakra,” as it is termed
in this part of the country [and its correct name], skirts the foot of the Thurr'
# # # Near Nowakote the channel is very large and deep.”
H 3
466 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
from that channel, in time of flood in Upper Sind, passes north of the
Bandar or Port of Lakhh Pat to the sea.
Such is the Mihran of Sind or Great Mihran, Hakra, Wahindah, or
Bahindah, Wall in d-S agar, Sind-Sagar, or Sank rah, from its sonrce to
the sea, and which as late as Nadir Shah’s time was considered the
boundary between Sind and Hind.&3&
It is necessary to mention, that there area number of old channels —
indeed traces of them are every where met with — between the chan¬
nel of the Sindliu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus as it runs at present, and the
channels of the Mihran of Sind or Hakra, one of which passes close to
Shadad-pur on the west, and runs towards Bahman-abad and Mansuriyah.
It may be said, in fact, that, at different times, the Mihran of Sind or
Hakra has flowed over a great part of Sind, as far west as Shadad-pur,
and this is fully indicated from the many vestiges of ancient towns
635 Bah man evidently thought the same when he founded Bahman-rtih or
Bahman-abad.
The substance of the treaty between Nadir Shah and Muhammad Shah.
BadsMh of Dihli, mentioning the Sankrah, Sind-Sagar, or Hakr&, as referred to at
page 461, I am able here to give. It is to this effect in the Tarfkh of Ni’mat Khan,
* AIi: “The Government of Hindustan agrees to cede to the Shah of Tran of the
Turk-maniyah dynasty, the whole territory of the west, from, and including
Pes’hawar, the Banga&’hat, the Dar-nl-Mulk of Kabul, Gliaxnih, and the Kohistan ,
the dwelling-place of the Afghan tribes [ here it will be noticed that “ the Afghan¬
istan,” as described in my “ Notes,” page 453, which see, is clearly meant ], the
Hazarah-jat, the fortress of Bakhar, and Sakhar, Hamid-abad, and the whole of the
district of the Derah-jat, and the place styled Ohaulri-i-Sokhtah, and other places
belonging to the subah of Thathah, the kasbali of Bndhan [ Badin ? J, the parganah of
Haran, the parganah of Biah-Wali Kandah, and the other remaining parganahs be¬
longing to Pes’hawar, together with the adjoining parganahs of Kabul, from the
boundary of Atak, and the Nalah of Sankuah, the extremity of the river Shnto-
Sagar, which unites with the great ocean ; and that the officials of Hindustan from
henceforth shall not exercise any authority therein. And the Badshah of Hindu¬
stan, on his part, agrees to cede those territories, and from that date considers, that
those territories here named are out of his charge and jurisdiction, and that they
shall not, after that before-mentioned date, be accounted as comprised within or
belonging to the empire of Hindustan ; ” and further, “ that documents to this
effect had been given to be a proof of the same.” This was dated the 29th of
Safar, 1152 H. (26th May, 1739 A.D.). Multan was not included as Tod asserts.
By this treaty the whole territory comprised within the stlbah of Thathah, as
constituted in Akbar Badshah’s reign, and the southern part of the Bakhar sarlcdr
of the Multan sixbah east of the Indus, and the whole of the territory on the west
side of the Indus, were lost to the Dillri empire ; and only what constitutes the
Bahawal-pur state now, and the territory of the lJanj Ab or Five Rivers, were left
to it.
Writers of “ Reports to Government ” on “ Perom, Panjnud ,” etc., and compilers
of Gazetteers, would do well to read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest these facts.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 467
still remaining on the banks of the old channels. These ancient
channels, however, by utilizing them as canals for irrigation purposes,
and the yearly inundations of the Indus, are becoming fast obliterated ;
and this may be some plea for my venturing to record here the little
information which I possessed respecting the Hakra, and the other rivers
herein mentioned, which were its tributaries.
The other channels between the present channel of the Sindhu, A'b-
i-Sind, or Indus, and the Puranah Dhorah , or Ancient Channel of the
Mihran of Sind, or Hakra, immediately north and west of Shadad-pur,
including that of the Lohano Dhoro of the Sindis, are the remains of
channels formed after that branch of the Mihran of Sind or Hakra,
• /
which near Kalari branched off to the north-west and then west to¬
wards Siw-istan, and subsequently re-united with the main branch
which flowed past Bahman-no — Mansuriyah on the east. Those farther
north, and extending eastwards of the present channel of the Sindhu,
or Ab-i-Sind, between Sihwan and the lime-stone hills and sand bluffs
running south from Rurhi, and bounding the valley of the Hakra, as
it may be termed, on the west, after the junction of the Narah or
old western channel just below Sayyidah, are the remains of the
channels in which the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus flowed from
time to time, in its continual movements towards the west, after it had
finally deserted the Mihran of Sind or Hakra subsequent to receiving
the waters of the Panch Nad or Panj Ab, which likewise deserted it, as
noticed farther on. The Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind took some considerable
time to gain its present course, especially west and south-west between
Bakhar and Silitah. From near Kandia.ro and Darbelo south and east,
down towards Sakrand and Shadad-pur, its most ancient channels now
existing run nearly the whole way between these places, as a glance at
the map of Sind shows, but are still more clearly to be seen in the maps
of the Revenue Survey. Among these old channels, probably, is that
in which the river so repeatedly mentioned by the ’Arabs, the Kumbh,
flowed, which passed between Siw-istan,536 the modern Sihwan, and
the western branch of the Mihran of Sind, and into which the Ab-i-
Sind or Sindhu may have found its way during its repeated changes.
These movements extended over a considerable length of time ; for, in
the time of Mirza Jani Beg, the last of the Tar-Khan Mughal rulers
of the Thathah territory, which included Wicholo or Middle, and Lar
or Lower Sind (999 H. — 1590-91 A.D.), the river was still running six
kuroh or about ten miles and a half east of Siw-istan or Sihwan.637
636 See note 545, page 473.
6S7 The compiler of the Gazetteer of Sind says (p. 286), that “ among the
largest canals of the Jerruck Deputy Collectorate is the Baghar or Bhaghiar,
468 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
To the recent formation of the lower part of the delta of the Indus
I have already alluded ; and if we draw a line from near Karachi to
about twenty miles above Lakhh Pat, we shall be able to judge how far it
extended in the time of Akbar Badshah, when Badin and its dependent
lands constituted the extremity of Sind in that direction, all to the
south of such line having been formed since.538 To have a correct con¬
ception of how far it extended when the ’Arabs landed in Sind, we
should draw the line from a few miles south of Pir Patho and Badin
towards Wangali, or even much farther north-east towards Nowa Kot.
* * * The Baghar or Bhaghiar (meaning the destroyer) is the western branch
of the Indus, diverging a little south of the town of Tliatta. # # # It is said
to have been in A.D. 1699 a very great stream, navigable as far as Lahori Bunder
(then the principal port of Sind, and at the close of the last century, the seat of
the English factory) 20 miles from the mouth, for vessels of 200 tons ; afterwards
it resolved itself into four branches.” See the account of Debal or Dewal, note 315,
page 317.
Del Hoste, writing in 1839, says “ the Ilajamree month had only then been in
existence two years, and is now the main branch of the Indus.”
Burton (Scinde : p. 168) says : “ now the Ar or Bhagar is the western outlet
of the Indus.”
Ar, in Hindi, means ‘prevention,’ ‘ hinderance,’ ‘stoppage,’ ‘stop,’ etc., and
such a word as “ Baghar ” or “ Bhaghar ” as Hughes writes it, and “Bagar” as
Postans renders it, I have not found ; but Bigar is intelligible, from Hindi ligdrnd ,
‘ to spoil,’ ‘ damage,’ etc.
Hughes in his Gazetteer says (page 768) in confirmation of this, that there
are “ Traditions of a town of great size called Samma Sumro having once existed
a little south of the present village of Shah-Kapur [the “ Shahkupoor ” of the
Indian Atlas map], in Mirpnr Batoro taluka. Also a town called Roliri in Jali
taluka, and supposed to have flourished about two centuries ago. Remains of forts
are also in some places to be seen, but, owing to the peculiar and erratic course of the
Indus towards the sea, and the consequent changeable nature of its various branches,
there is no district which is likely to show less remains of antiquity than that of
Shahbandar.”
These two places in Shah Bandar district must have gone to ruin long before
“about two centuries ago,” otherwise they would have been mentioned in the
accounts of Lar, Thathah, or Lower Sind. Batora, the Batoro of the Sindis, was the
chief town of one of the eleven mahdlls or sub-districts of the sarJcar or district of
Thathah, in Akbar Badshah’s reign.
Hughes also says (p. 767), that “ the extensive flood, which occurred in Sind
about 1819, the year of the earthquake in Kachchh, caused great changes in
the lower part of the Indus, and tended to hasten the fall of Shah Bandar, by
withdrawing the water from the branch on which it stood. Before this Shah
Bandar was the naval station of the rulers of Sind ; and since that time, still
greater changes have taken place, and they are still going on.”
&33 It is supposed, and with very good reason, that great part of the delta
between Thathah and Karachi south, has been formed since the Ab-i-Sind or Indus
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 469
The identification hereabouts of places mentioned in Alexander’s
expedition, is even more illusive than farther upwards, according to the
present courses of the rivers.639
Thus, from all that I have here adduced, the following are the
results of my investigations ; and from them, as far as tradition affirms,
deserted the channel which passed by Nasr-pur, and took a more westerly course.
There is little doubt, indeed, but that great part of the Shah Bandar district of
Sind, as at present constituted, and the southern part of the Jarak district like¬
wise, are of comparatively recent formation. See note 187, page 234 from the Ohach
Namah on the Bet.
Sultan Firiiz Shah, the Khalj Turk Sultan of Dihli, is said to have founded
Nasr-pur on the then bank of the Ab-i-Sind, a different place from the fort near
Nasir-pur, on the Sankrah or Hakra. See note 173, page 224, note 555, page 479,
and note 576, page 500.
It is stated, likewise, that after the annexation of the Thathah territory above
referred to, the IOian-i-Khanan, Mirza ’Abd-ur-Kahim, desired to have a look at the
great ocean before he returned to the Court at Agrah, and that he set out from his
camp at Thathah for that purpose, and proceeding southwards two easy stages of
about fifteen miles each, he obtained the sight he desired. The place from which
he obtained a view of the ocean is called “ Mughal-Bin,” — the Mughal’s view in — con¬
sequence, to this day, bin being the Persian for ‘ seeing,’ ‘ view,’ ‘ sight,’ ‘ glimpse,’
etc., from the verb didan - ‘ to see,’ ‘to view,’ etc. The place appears in the maps
as “ Mughulbhin,” “ Mogulbeen,” etc. It is now nearly fifty miles from the sea.
639 With regard to the “ identifications ” of places, in Sind in particular, Postans
very pertinently remarks on the building of cities and docks, that “ though there may
be every reason to imagine that he, whose whole life was a study how to acquire
posthumous fame, was most anxious to leave some splendid monuments, which
should attest to after ages the magnitude of his deeds on the immediate scenes
of their enacting, he could not have found the two indispensables of a stable spot
on which to erect them, or any sufficient lasting materials for his purpose : thus it
is that throughout Sindh the most diligent and well directed antiquarian research
has altogether failed to discover one single reminiscence of verified classical
antiquity, or to incontestably fix one locality as that described by Alexander’s
historians.” In another place he says, “ to have- trusted to such records in Sindh
[and in great part of the Pauj Ab also] would have been to have written history in
sand .” Indeed, all practical men who have dwelt in these parts, and surveyed
these rivers, declare that identification is a farce.
As regards the lower deltas, where people expect to find places in the same
situation on the Indus and near its mouths as they were ages ago, the following
extract from Dr. Lord’s “ Memoir on the Plain of the Indus,” may be useful. He
says, “ The river discharges 300 cubic feet of mud in every second of time ; or a
“ quantity which in seven months would suffice to form an island 42 miles long,
“ 27 miles broad, and 40 feet deep; which [taking the depth of the sea along
“ the coast at about five fathoms], would consequently be elevated 10 feet above
“ the surface of the water. Any person who chooses to run out this calculation to
“ hundreds and thousands of years will be able to satisfy himself that much may be
“ done by causes at present in action towards manufacturing deltas,”
470 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Rx. "No.
and history confirms, the state of the seven rivers — the Saptah Sindha-
wah of the Sanskrit writings — between the Hakra, Wahindah, or Sind-
Sagar, and the Sindhu, Nahr-i-Miliran, or Ab-i-Sind, the Indus of
Europeans, the whole of which united formed the “ Mihran of Sind,”
or “ Great Mihran,” as some of the old writers style it, may be divided
or classed under five great transitions or changes. I may assume, how¬
ever, that it will be fully understood, that changes more or less, to a
greater or lesser degree, took place then as now, during, and after, every
annual inundation of these rivers; and that the beds or channels of
the majority of them, in inclining westwards, were being gradually silted
up, owing to the nature of the soil through which they flowed being,
for the most part, alluvial, from causes well known to geologists, and
particularly so with regard to the Sutlaj, but which latter river having
reached a certain point where the tract of country on the west rose so
considerably as to prevent its waters from surmounting the obstacle, this
inclination westwards has been prevented, and, in all probability,
finally stopped.
I will not go back so far as the Macedonian Alexander’s time,
because we have no definite or trustworthy information respecting the
courses, or even the numbers of all the rivers and their tributaries
of the parts now known as the territory of the Panj Ab or Five Rivers,
and of the parts immediately to the east. But we learn from Aristo-
bulus, as quoted by Strabo, that the country was subject to the shocks
of earthquakes, that the soil was loose and hollow by excess of mois¬
ture, and easily split into fissures, whence even the courses of the
rivers became altered. He also states, that, on one occasion, when he
was despatched into the country upon some business, he saw a tract of
land deserted, which contained more than a thousand cities (towns
and cities ?) with their dependent villages. “ The cause of this was,
that the Indus, having abandoned its proper channel, was diverted into
another, on the left hand [east], much deeper, and precipitated itself into
it like a cataract, so that it no longer watered the country by the usual
inundation on the right hand, from which it had receded, and this was
elevated above the level, not only of the new channel which the river
had formed, but above that of the inundation.”
We also know from Indian sources, that the Sutlaj or Satadru —
the Hesudrus or Zaradrus of the Greeks — long after Alexander’s
time, flowed in the easternmost of its ancient channels shown in the
map No. 6. All the Greek accounts respecting these parts, are more
or less, mere surmise and speculation ; and when we find enthusiasts
“ identifying ” towns, fortresses, and the rivers also, as they now flow,
we can value such identifications accordingly.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihr&n of Sind and its Tributaries. 471
The first reliable information that we possess, dates from abont or
shortly before, the time of the invasion of Sind by the Arabs — one
thousand and thirty-nine years subsequent to the invasion of these
parts by the Greeks — and when we find such changes occurring between
712 A. D. and 1890 A. D., a period of 1188 years, we may be sure that
the previous 1038 years had not been without proportionate changes also.
At, or about the time of, the Arab invasion, the Hakra or Wahin-
dah, of which the Ohitang, Sursuti, Ghag-ghar, and Sutlaj, and their
smaller feeders, were tributaries, flowed in two channels from near
Marut, one of which channels, the easternmost, flowed about south-
south-west by Ghaus Garli, or Rukn-pur of after years, Khan Garh
(there are several places of this name, but this one lies on the south¬
eastern border of the Bahawal-pur state, near the western frontier
of Jasal-mir), Wanjh-rufc (the Bijnoot of the maps),540 and No-har or
Islam Garh, skirting the Jasal-mir state on the west, and from thence
down as far as Mitharo or Mitralio, on the south-east frontier of Sind as
at present constituted, and from thence reached the ran or marsh of
Kachehh, which it helped to form, by way of Amar Kot of the Sodahs.
The westernmost branch or channel of the Hakra or Wahindah
passed from Marut more to the south-westwards, through the present
Bahawal-pur state, into Sind, very nearly as indicated by the present
existing channel, as shown in the general map, No. 1. Subsequently,
through some change in the courses of its tributaries, probably, the
eastern branch from Marut deserted its old channel on the Jasal-mir
border, and the Hakra then lost the tributaries it previously received
from the direction of Poh-karn, east of the town of Jasal-mir, alto¬
gether, leaving that part a sandy waste, and the beds of those tribu¬
taries ceasing to be perennial, became vans or marshes.541 This great
change is indicated by existing proofs, and accounts for all the channels
still remaining after so many centuries, more or less prominent, over a
space of some seventy-six miles from east to west, as already recorded.542
Where the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, Nil-ab, or Indus 643 at that period
B4iO There are two places called Wanjh-rut. This is different from that des¬
cribed at page 497, but were included, apparently, in the same district.
6il Tradition affirms, that in the Bikanir territory, the waters of the Hakra or
Wahindah used to spread out into a great lake, near a place called Kak. Shahamat
’All, in his account of the Bahawal-pur state, says, that Bahawal-pur stands on an
ancient site which was called Kak. This great lake may have existed south and
east of that place, for the country is seamed with channels and banks, but the
position of Bahawal-pur is too far to the north-west to be the part indicated.
642 That is, from the east bank of the Hakra channel, eastwards. See also
pages 455 and 479.
643 It will be noticed that I do not call the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, “ the
472 H. G. Raverfcy — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
united with the Hakra is not so clear, but, shortly after, we find
from the earliest ’Arab writers, that four of the five rivers forming
the Panch Nad or Panj Ab flowed within two farsangs (six miles ) of Multan
on the east, and passed from thence southwards towards LTchohli (but
which place is not mentioned by that name by the ’Arab writers), which
it also passed close by on the west side, and lower down again, three
days’ journey below Multan, in the direction of Aror or Alor, the
ancient capital of Sind, united with the Sind Rad, or Rud-i-Sind wo
Hind (the Bihat, Chin-ab, Ravvi, and Biali), and formed the Panch Nad
or Panj Ab.54,i Still lower down again, between Baghlah and Sahib
Mihrdn” for the reason elsewhere explained. See note 124, page 211, and note 548,
page 475.
With respect to crossing the Ab-i-Sind or Indus — the AtaTc or Forbidden River —
daily by Brahmans, Wilford (As. Res. Yol. YI, p. 536) says : “ Those of Multan
jocularly say, that its true bed [from constant shif tings] is not ascertained, so they
may cross it with impunity.”
&44j In ancient times, the Nil Ab, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, took a more direct southerly
course after issuing from the hills below Kala Bagh, and, lower down, ran much
closer to Multan. It was subject to changes in its course upwards as much as
downwards below that place. Here is an illustration in point, from which we
may see what has happened in the course of a very few' years in the upper part of the
Sind-Sagar Do-abah, and we may judge what the changes may have been lower
down in the course of ages.
In his “ Year on the Punjab Frontier,” Edwardes says : “ The Indus has for
many years been gradually taking a more westerly course in its passage to the
Sutlej. [He here makes it a tributary of the Sutlej, by which he means what was
the Sutlaj and Blah, but now, since the junction of the two, the Gharah or Hariari],
and nowhere perhaps so markedly as at Esaukheyl [this shows how far north these
changes commence]. Year after year it has encroached on the western bank, and
in removing from the Sindh Sagur [Do-abah, perhaps ?] has increased its breadth
of terra firma. The alluvium thus thrown up has in process of time created on the
left, or eastern bank, a low but highly fertile tract called Kuchee [kachchhi — this
is the word, signifying ‘raw,’ ‘new,’ ‘recent,’ and applied to alluvium. The word
occurs in Kachchh Bhuj, Kachchhi north and west of Jacob-abad in Sind, Ohhotah
Kachchh on the banks of the Hariari or Gharah, and the term has even extended
to the alluvium thrown up on the banks of rivers cultivated by Afghans on the
side of India, ‘ hats ’]. At Meeanwallee, the point where you leave the Sindh
Sagur Doab to cross over to Esaukheyl, the alluvial tract just spoken of is about
12 miles broad when the river is at its lowest. In other words, the Indus has al¬
ready moved 12 miles from that part of the Sindh Sagur [Do-abah?]; and though
in seasons of its utmost flood the river still reaches its former bank, and permits
the villagers on the old high ground to fill pitchers from the waters with which
Kuchee [Kachchhi] is then overspread, yet, in ordinary times, the original Doab of
Sindh Sagur is now no longer discernable from the ferries of Esaukheyl.”
The country of the ’I'sa Khel clan of the Niazi Afghans is here meant. More
respecting the changes of rivers in this part will be found in my “Notes on Af¬
ghanistan,” etc., Section Four, particularly at pages 340, 341, 370, 371 and 400.
1892,] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 473
Garh, about seventy-six miles South-south-west of U'chchh, at L)osh-i-Ab
— dosh is a Tajzik word signifying ‘ a place of meeting:’ the Waters
Meet — this Panch ISTad united with the Hakra and its tributaries, and
formed the Mihran of Sind. From thence the great river continued its
course in much the same direction as before, for about thirty-six miles
more; and then, between Kanclharali or Kandharo (“ Kundairoh ” of
the maps) and Wanjh-rut, just sixty-four miles north-north-east of
Aror, separated into two channels, one of which, the lesser in volume,
passing Wanjh-rut a little to the north, flowed more westwards towards
Aror, which it passed about two miles or less on the east. Rebutted by
the rocky range of hills, at the eastern foot of which, and into the plain
eastward, where the city lay, it turned to the south, and united with the
main river thirty-seven miles lower down. After the separation above
noticed, the main stream, keeping more towards the south than before,
near the present village of Sayyidali, the “ Saida ” of the maps, was
again joined by the other branch from Aror. From thence, where the
valley opens out considerably, it continued to flow in much the same
south-south- westerly direction as before, until at a point forty-eight
miles as the crow flies, lower down, where the country becomes almost
a dead level towards the south, and also towards the west, it again
separated into two channels, the main branch flowing in much the same
direction as before, but becoming more tortuous in its course, passed
near Bahman-abad or Bahman-nih on the east. The other branch
turning more towards the west into the flat open tract I have before
noticed, passed between Bahman-abad and Siw-istan, about mid- way,
then bending southwards, and subsequently south-eastwards, re-united
with the main river some miles north-east of Badin, and fell into the
sea by one mouth near Shakara, about two days’ journey from Debal or
Dewal, the ancient sea-port of Sind, on the east, where the river was
chiefly known as the Hakra, Wahind Sagar, or Sind-Sagar, as well as
Mihran of Sind and Great Mihran.
Subsequent to the conquest of Sind and Multan by the ’Arabs,545
Edwardes continues: “When Ranjit Singh first came that way — probably
when he went to Lukkee in Mnrwnt — he opened a way through the jangle [the
alluvial tract he mentioned had become covered with a high jangal of reeds, tiger
grass, and tamarisk] for his army by putting four elephants abreast. # * * In one
part of Esaukheyl the Indus has -within the last few years cut off a considerable
slice, and made an adjacent island of it. The zumindars \_zaminddrs — landowners]
clung to their land with the usual tenacity, and actually established two villages
on the island. Occasionally the Indus rose and overwhelmed the island, when both
colonies took boat and retired to the mother country, Esaukheyl, but emigrated
again as soon as ever the island re-appeared.”
546 The Balazarf, who wrote in 270 H (883-81 A.D.), states, that when the
i. 3.
474 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
a change came, the first important one to be noted. The Hakra or Wa-
hindah continued to flow much as before, and to unite into one stream
near Sayyadah, just forty miles above Baliman-abad, the western
branch flowing towards the northwards, and then north-west, to¬
wards Siw-istan,546 but somewhat nearer to it than before, then
bent south and south-east again to re-unite with the main river,
but not so far towards the south as before : at one period falling
into the sea near Debal : at another about two days’ journey from it
eastwards, as it had previously done. At another period it separated
into two branches about twelve mil (miles) below Mansuriyali — for that
had now been built — on the west side, six miles from Baliman-abad, and
from Mahfuzah on the opposite or east side,547 and fell into the sea near
the town of Shakara, two days’ journey east of Debal, by one mouth, and,
subsequently, by two, one nearer Debal than before ; but the other,
known as the mouth of the Great Mihran, was the Shakara channel
separating Kachqhh from Sind. At another intermediate period, the
distance between the mouth of the Great Mihran and the port of Debal
was but six mil (miles) : at another, after the junction with the Ra’in
branch below Aror near Sayyidah, the river began to flow through the
middle of Sind, that is a little more to the westward than before, and
with a slower current, spreading out in that part which I have men¬
tioned as almost a dead level westwards and southwards, and forming
>Arab leader, ’Imad-ud-Din, Muhammad, advanced from Nirun to operate against
Siw-istan and Baliman-abad, a river ran east of Nirun and Siw-istan, parallel or
nearly so, to the Mihran. Muhammad, having crossed that river, which appears to
have been fordable, reached the west bank of the Mihran, and having crossed it to
the east side by a bridge of boats, moved towards Bahman-abad. The first-men¬
tioned river was not the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind, but the river called the Kumbh in the
Ohach Namah, which enters into much greater detail. See the extracts from that
work in note 184, page 2 32, and note 187, page 234.
646 Mr. R. D. Oldham, in a paper on the subject of the changes in the courses
of the Pauj-ab Rivers, says, that “ It would be impossible for the Indus flowing in
the Narra to send a branch past Hermetelia or Brahman -abad [only it is not
Bra7imcm-abad, but Bahman-abad or Bahman-nihj unless water was gifted with the
power of flowing up-hill in the time of Alexander the Great,” etc.
As the bed of the Hakra lies much higher than Bahman-abad all the way down
from Khan Garh and Khair-pur Dehr ke, and lower than its western branch,
which passed Aror on the east, in which the overflow waters from the river Indus
as it now flows find their way, there would be no necessity whatever for water to
“flow up-hill,” and which the Mitraho Canal does not do. At the period in question,
where the Hakra or Mihran of Sind separated into two branches, some forty miles
above Bahman-abad and Mansuriyah, the country was almost a dead level, especi¬
ally from east to west, but inclined slightly towards the south.
bW The Balazari states, that Mansuriyah was founded on one side of the estuary
or lake facing Hind, and Mahfuzah on the opposite side. See note 553, page 477.
1892.] H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries . 475
several islands, until it readied Mansuriyali ; while, lower down, it
united and formed one great river. One writer states, that at this
period, Between the country of Mukran, that is from the Kahtar range
west of Siw-istan (Karachi, it may he noticed, was considered, down
almost to the present century, to belong to Mukran) and Mansuriyah,
the waters of the Mihran of Sind formed great lakes, one of which,
without doubt, is the existing Lake Manehhar.
At this 'period the place of junction of the Wihat, Bihat, or Jihlam
with the Ohin-ab was about midway between Chandani-ot, now in the
Rachin-ab Do-abali, and Sa’e-Wal in the Chin-bath Do-abah, in about
31° 51' IST. Lat., and 72° 28' E. Long. In their downward progress the
united rivers, under the name of Ohin-ab, passed from some four to
fourteen miles (according to the shifting of their courses from time to
time from east to west and back again, from one side to the other of
the broad tract seamed with its channels), and from four to eight miles
east of Jhangf-i-Sialan. On the other hand, the Hawaii or Rawi, which
also flowed, at different periods, from one side to the other of a tract of
country, in some parts from twenty to twenty-five miles in breadth :
at times on one side, at times on the other, and taking a more south¬
easterly course than at present, about eight miles east of Satli Grarh,
about the same distance east of Hurappah, and five miles east of Tulan-
bali, united with the Ohin-ab within a few miles of Multan on the east,
the district immediately adjoining the city on that side being still known
as Taraf-i-Ra wi, or the Rawi Side or Quarter, to this day.
These three united rivers, known as the Trim A'o or Trim Ab, then
flowing in a direction a little to the west of south, united with the Biali
about twenty-eight miles lower down than Multan, and formed what the
Arab writers name the Sind Rud, or Rud-i-Sind wo Hind,-55^ which the
643 Al-Mas’udi, who wrote in 3G0 H. (911-42 A.D.), says, that the river Mihran
of Sind [See note 543, page 471] flows on towards Multan and beyutid , and receives
the name of Mihran. * * * Another of the five rivers which go to form the
Mihran of Sind is called Qatil [See page 207], When, all have passed Multan they
unite about three days’ journey below the city of Multan, and above Mansuriyah,
and unite into one stream at Dosh-i-ab [with the Hakra or Wahindah], which flows
towards Aldor or Alror, which lies on its west bank, and belongs to Mansuriyah,
where [at Dosh-i-Ab] it receives the name of Mihran. * * '* 1 he Mihran
goes to Mansuriyah.” See note 124, page 211.
If the ancient capital of Sind is here referred to under the name of Aldor or
Alror, as it seems to be, it was within the limits of the tract dependent on Bahmau-
abad or Bahman-nili, which territory was afterwards known as Mansuriyah.
Al-Mas’udl, it will be observed, does not notice any third great river. The
Istakhari also states, that “the Sind Bud, is about three stages from Multan, and
that its waters are pleasant before it unites with the Mihran,” and does not refer
476 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Istakhari says is three stages from Multan, and that its waters are
sweet before it unites with the Mihran, here referring to the Ab-i-Sind,
by some also called the Nahr-i-Mihran. This Sind Rud then taking a
course a little more to the south-south-west than before, flowed near by
Uchchli on the east side, Multan and that place being then in the Sind-
Sagar Do-abah, and united with the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, Nil Ab, or
Indus, which, up to this period, kept a more direct southerly course5419
after issuing from the hilly tracts near Kala or Kara Bagh, down to the
vicinity of Multan and U'chchli ; and the united five rivers then con¬
stituted the Panch Nad or Pan] Ab. Continuing to flow much in the
same direction as before, and passing close to, and between Ghaus-pur,
Jachoh-Wa-lian, and Ma’u, and east of Bhati Wa-han, Siw-ra’i, and
Mir-pur550 — by the old channel, now the great depression, by which, at
the present time, the Narah, so called, receives part of its waters — this
Panch Nad or Panj Ab united with the Hakra or Wahindah at Dosh-i-
Ab, much as it had hitherto done. By degrees, however, through
the erratic changes in the course of the Sutlaj, 'which had hitherto
flowed in the easternmost channel that we know of, west of Chamkaur
and Bliatindah, and whose previous junction with the Hakra or
Wahindah, consisting of the Ghag-ghar and its tributaries, inclu¬
ding the Sursuti and the Chi tang, took place near Walh-har, but which
now began to incline towards the west and form a new channel for
itself, the junction of the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus with the Hakra
began to take place a little lower down, between Sahib Garh and Kand-
harali or Kandharo, but nearer to the former.
This junction, as previously noticed in the account of the state of
the rivers about the time of the ’Arab conquest, of the Sindhu, A'b-i-
Sind, or Indus, the Jand Rud, and the Hakra (the three great rivers
mentioned in the Masalik wa Mamalik, and by Ibn Haukal) did not
long continue, but, as before, again separated into two streams or
branches, but to flow much in the same directions as before, the western¬
most one, the Ra’in or Ra’ini, towards Aror, and the main one towards
the place of junction farther south near where Sayyidah now stands.
At this period these brandies of the great river were navigable for
vessels, or rather large boats, from the ocean upwards beyond Aror,
U'chchli, and Multan, and the tradition of the Musalman merchant, Saif-
ul-Muluk tends to confirm it.
Below Sayyidah the course of the great river, the Mihran of Sind,
to a third great river, but this fact does not show that it did not exist. It is,
however, distinctly mentioned soon after, as will presently be shown.
t4*9 See page 301 .
650 See page 488. J
1892.] H. G. Baverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 477
as it was called below Aror,551 was much as before described. It again
separated into two main branches between thirty-nine and forty miles
above JBaliman-abad and Mansuriyali, encircling a large portion of its
territory, and again united below those places, flowed towards Wangah,
and discharged its waters into the sea by the Shakara channel and the
Kohra’i inlet or estuary,562 then, not far from the town of Badin, of the
present day. When in flood, such redundant water as could not pass
readily into the sea by the ordinary channel, spread out, and along
with the overflow from other rivers farther east, including the Lorn,
from Sanskrit Ion — salt — the “ Loonee ” and “ Loony ” of the maps,553
5&1 According to the Tarikh-i-Tahirh but see preceding note 548, page 475, and
note 304, page 305.
552 See note 168, page 223.
553 Tod, in the map to his “ Rajast’han,” actually makes the lower part of the
Hakra close to its junction with the sea, to be the Loony R., and places it a long way
west of Lakhh-Pat and west of the Ban; whereas the Loni flowed into the Ban,
or was lost in it at its eastern extremity. Here, doubtless, was the “ Loni Bari ost ”
of Ptolemy.
The writer on the “Lost River,” in the “Calcutta Review” (p. 18.), makes “the
embouchure of the Indus, Sutlej, and the Luni form the rann of Kach ” ; and adds,
that, “ all traditions of tribes bordering thereon, say that it was anciently an
estuary.” In another place he makes it, the “ estuary of the Sutlej ” only.
It certainly was an estuary, but of the Hakra, Sind-Sagar, or Great Mihran of
Sind, of which the Sutlaj, four degrees farther north, as well as the Ab-i-Sind or
Indus, which thereabouts united with the Hakra, were tributaries.
The same writer recognizes this estuary at the mouth of the Hakra as “ Arrian’s
great lalce, at the mouth of the eastern arm of the Indus ” ; also that it is “ the
lake of Sagara in which according to the Chuch Nama the fleet of Muhammad Kasim
lay ” ; also “the lake Ash Sharki upon which Al-Biladuri says the fleet of Jaishya son
of Dahir, king of Sind, was destroyed by the Arab army under Jnnaid.” This is
from Elliot.
The Samarali lake west of Amar Kot is more probably the remains of that lake
or very near it, since changed, and the “ estuary ” led to it.
See page 67, where the naval battle is mentioned by the Balazari, and note 530,
page 461, also note 534, page 465.
Wilford, who possessed a vast deal of information respecting these parts,
though some of it is speculative and the names generally written from ear only,
says: (As. Res. 6 — 225) The Sigertis of the Greeks is from Hindee Seller Des,
the country of Seher or Sehr. * * * Lehri or Lehralii bunder so called because it is in
the country of Lehreli [Lar], while another part, on the eastern branch is called
Sehri or Sehrdhi-bunder, from the same cause [that is in the country of Sehr~\, but
now is always called Bustali -bunder. Its entrance is broad. * * * A salt water
lake or bay was called Saronis by the Greelcs, aud Eirinos by Arrian in the Periplus.
# # # This lake communicates with the sea through two mouths, the largest of
which is close to Bustah-bunder. The other to the east is small. East of it is Lac -
put Bundur in Cach’ha [Saurashtra or Sorath commences at Lakhh-pat]. It owes
its origin to king Lac-pati, the grandfather of the present Baja of Cach’ha
478 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
contributed to form the great ran or marsh between Kaqhchh and Sind,
which previously had been a broad estuary, bay, or inlet of the ocean,
but which now had begun to fill up.
It must not be supposed that this great river and its tributaries
kept to a single channel only in their courses through alluvial tracts of
country. There were, no doubt, then as now, in all the rivers, minor
channels branching oft on either side at greater or lesser distances, and
flowing for greater or lesser distances, again to unite with the main
channel, and again to branch off. What I have described here are the
general courses of the main rivers.
Up to this period (about 335 H. = 946 A.D.) Rurhi and Bakhar,
now on the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, were unknown : there is no record in
history of their existence ; for, up to this time, no water from the
Mihran of Sind, the united Hakni, Sind Riid, and Ab-i-Sind or Indus,
passed near their sites. The waters from the eastern and southern slopes
of the range of Mihtar Suliman on the west, and from the Haru and
Suhan rivers on the east, as far down as Rujan, flowed to the Sindhu,
Ab-i-Sind, or Indus ; while such streams as the Nan and Lehri, coming
from the range of Mihtar Suliman and the Koli-i-Surkh or Rata Roh,
bounding the Afghan state (or what recently belonged to the Afghan
state, and on that account christened “ British Balochistan” probably)
on the south, and those from the north-west, namely, the Bolan river,
and the Ghar or Gliaj, (some of which appear to have contained a
greater volume of water than in after years), flowing southwards by
Khairo Garhi, and Shadad-pur, must have fallen into the channel called
in our rasps the Western Narra ; and these waters in some parts, evi¬
dently, formed the lakes, previously referred to, between Mukran and
the territory of Mansuriyah, including the Lake Manchhar, in which
the waters collected.654 From this lake they again issued by an outlet
Tod (Yol. I., p. 17) says, with respect to “ Eiriuos,” that, the word is a cor¬
ruption of Run or Rin ; and in a note says, “ Most probably a corruption of ‘ aranya *
a desert ; and so the Greek mode of writing is more correct than the present.”
This is a wonderful statement, truly.
It is strange that, in the detailed account of the operations of the ’Arab
commander, Muhammad, against Siw-istan, contained in the Ohach Namah, there is
no mention whatever of any lake near it, although another is mentioned lower down
stream. All that is said is, that, “ in former times the Ab-i-Sind did not flow on
or from the north side of that place,” but that it did at the time of the ’Arab who
is relating the circumstance. Ammianus Marcellinus tells us (363 A.D.), that, in
that part of Gedrosia which on its right touches the frontier of India, are several
rivers of which the greatest is the Artabius, and that there, “ the Barbitani
mountains end, and from their lowest parts rise several rivers which fall into the
Indus, losing their own names in the greatness of that superior stream.” See note
185, page 233, and page 475.
1892.] H. G. Raverty— - The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 479
running in the direction of about south-south-east to the tract in which
Nasr-pur 556 was afterwards founded, and flowing from thence, by some
of the channels the remains of which still exist in that direction,
towards Wangah, they united with the Puranah channel.556 Subse¬
quently, perhaps, they found their way by forming a new channel
lower down, the Gu.ni channel of the present time, or a still older one,
and fell into the sea by the Kohra’i inlet, along with the Mihran of
Sind or Hakra.
This was the state of the rivers forming the Great Mihran, or
Mihran of Sind, at the time of, and for about two hundred and thirty
or forty years after, the conquest of Sind, when the Istakhari wrote,
and for a short time after the “ Masalik wa Mamalik” was written, and
Ibn Haukal came into Sind and obtained the materials for his “ Ashkal-
• • — •
The Bolan river during the past year (1890-91) has given proof of what it
liad previously been. I stated in my “ Notes on Afghanistan,” that it was liable
to become greatly flooded, when it swept every thing before it. This was sometime
before a line of Railway was thought of ; and during this last year,* the correctness
of my statement has been fully proved, and at a great cost to the State. I hope
I shall not, from this fact “ hurt any one’s susceptibilities,” which is the most
important thing, it appears, after all, to be thought of in these days, but only
persons who make mistakes are supposed to possess any “ susceptibilities.”
555 In the Noh-shahrah district of the Haidar-abad Collectorate of Sind as at
present constituted. The Tuhfat-ul-Kiram says it was founded “on the banks of
the A'b-i-Sind ” by Sultan Firuz Shah, the Khalj Turk sovereign of Dihli ; and
that he also built a fort near Nash-pur, which was called by the latter name,
on the banks of the Sankarah [the Hakra or Wahindah], on his way from Guzarat
against Thathah, when the Jams were reduced to subjection.” Consequently,
Nasrpur and Nasir-pur are totally distinct places, and far apart from each
other.
Postans (“ Personal Observations on Sindh,” p. 161) says, that “ Nasirpur [Nasr¬
pur is the correct name] is alluded to by geographers as one of the most beautiful
cities of Sindh ; but it declined in consequence of the desertion of the main stream.
The learned D’Anville considers this to be the Mansura of the Arabs, and a city of
great importance. ’ See note 173, page 224.
556 q’he wr iter in the “ Calcutta Review ” calls the eastern branch of the “ Indus ”
the “ Dhora Puran, which meets the Narra,” but, in this case where did the Pura¬
nah Dhorah come from if not from the Hakra ?
Seven paragraphs after, the same writer says, that “ although much inferior
in size to the Indus, the Hakra must have been of vast importance,” etc. It will
be seen from this that he confuses the Hakra with the afterwards formed, and
modern Narah, the origin of which has been shown, and vice versa , and does not
appear to have known that the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, at the period mentioned in the
text above, was a mere tributary of the Hakra, which was a great river — the Great
Mihran as it is called by the ’Arab writers. There is no authority, I believe, in
history, to show that the Indus was so great a river as the Hakra, in those early
days.
480 H. G. Raverty — The MiJirdn of Sind mid its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
ul-Bilad. But long before Bu-Rihan-al-Berum finished his “ Tahkik-ul-
Hind ”567 (about 422 H. = J 030-31 A.D.), a great change had taken place,
although not so much as be, or rather Rashid-ud-Din, who quotes him,
would lead us to believe. Be this as it may, the statement, that “ the
river Bihat and the Chandra [Chin-ab] flow west of Multan,” and that
all five rivers, viz., Ab-i-Sind or Indus, Bihat, Chin-ab, Biah, and
Irawah or Ravvi, thus reversing facts, “unite with the Sutladr or Sutlaj
below Multan at a place [sic] called Panch Nad — which for a place is
an impossible name — is incorrect. It is clearly shown from various
statements in history, that the Sutlaj continued for a long period after
his time, and subsequent to the investment of U'chchh two centuries
after, to be a tributary of the Hakra, at the time that the Panch Nad or
Five Rivers used to unite with the Hakra, at Dosh-i-A'b.” B53
The second transition was when the course of the western branch
of the Mihran or Hakra, with which all the other tributaries had pre¬
viously united, namely the Ra’in branch, or the branch which flowTed in
the Ra’in or Ra’ini channel, was diverted, by whatever means accom¬
plished, and directed more to the westward from nenr Kandharah or
Kandharo, and cut a new channel for itself much farther to the west¬
ward than the gap in the lime-stone hills where Bakhar and Riirhi were
afterwards founded. I say much farther westwards, because, if it had
only been diverted into about its present course, Alor or Aror need not
Always mistaken for “ Tarikli-ul-Hind,” even by its translator. See note 79
page 186.
653 The only other construction that can be put on this statement is, that by
the Sutlaj he meant the Hakra or Wahindah, with which the Sutlaj united some
miles lower down than the Panch Nad, for the Hakra or Wahindah is never men¬
tioned by Bu-Rihan separately. If this assumption is correct his place called
Panch Nad, would refer to the Dosh-i-Ab.
The Istakhari, who visited Sind and Multan about the period that the diversion
of the branch of the Hakra is supposed to have taken place, says : “ there is a river
of Sind called the Mihran. It passes the borders of Samand [ of the old
’Arab map] and Aror from the neighbourhood of Multan, and then flows on to
Mansuriyah,” etc. He says nothing of any recent change, which he could not have
failed to have heard of had it occurred before his time, cansing, as it did, the ruin of
the ancient capital, and other vast changes. It is evident, therefore, that this
diversion of the river took place subsequent to his travels in this part. The inscrip¬
tion, and the date contained therein, in the shrine of Khwajali ka Than near
Bakhar, noticed farther on, does not refer to the date the stream was diverted
westwards, but to the period, when the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, being joined by the
Sind Rud or Panch Nad, which had deserted the Hakra, gained fresh power, and
found its way into the channel of the diverted branch of the Hakra, and then, chang¬
ing its course, began to cut its way through a depression in the lime-stone hills
near where lturhi and Bakhar were afterwards founded.
1892.] H. Gh Raverfcy — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 481
have gone to ruin in consequence ; for then, instead of the river flowing
about a mile or mile and a half east of that city, if ice go by the present
channel of the Ab-i-Sind or Indus , it had only left it to pass four miles
and a half on its west ; for the river is now only six miles from the
ancient channel, and water could have been conducted to it without
difficulty.669 There can be no doubt, therefore, that the diverted channel
must have taken a course much farther west of Aror than at present,
and probably ran towards the depression called the Sind Hollow,560 or
certainly into some other channel to the north and west of where Shikar-
pur now stands, before it bent towards the south again, and entered
the then channel of the Ab-i-Sind or Indus, between Rurhi and
Sill wan of the present day.66i
669 After the branch of the river had been diverted, according to the tradition,
Dilu Ra’e directed his people to turn the river into its old channel, but it could not
be done. If the face of the country had been then as now, and the river as close
as at present, this could easily have been effected — and, in fact, it has recently
been done — for now the bed of the Indus is twenty feet higher than the bed of the
old river. See following note 562.
660 Hughes, in his u Gazetteer of Sind” says (p. 770): “ The Jacobabad and
Briggs wah canals in Kashmor taluka were formerly used oliiefly to fill what is
called “ the Sind Hollow,” an old bed of the Indus traversing the Kashmor and
Thul talukas. # * * They are now closed up. The tract between the Sind
Hollow and the river Indus is much cut up with dliands (flood hollows) and dhoros
(old river channels).” See the extract from Dr. Kennedy’s work given in note 311,
page 311.
561 See page 457. A short time after the Istakharf s aocount, just referred to,
we find the Masalik wa Mamalik giving the names of three great rivers, the Mihran,
the Sind Rud, that is what was also called the Panch Nad, three days’ journey from
Multan, and the Jand Rud or Samand Rud, which that work states united with the
Mihran Rud, that is the Ab-i-Sind (see notes 304, page 305, and 548, page 475),
below the junction of the Sind Rud ; and that Basmid or Samid, Jandur, and Multan,
are all on the east side of the Rud-i-Multan, which Ibn Haukal calls the Mihran Rud
(the Ab-i-Sind), and all three places are said to be each one farsatdi or league from
the river Mihran (the Ab-i-Sind). Ibn Haukal says more, namely, that the junction
of the Mihran Rud (Ab-i-Sind) and Sind Rud (Panch Nad) takes place below Multan
and above Basmid, and yet, soon after says, that Basmid has two walls, one on each
side of the Mihran (Ab-i-Sind), from which, just before he said it was a farsak&
distant. I believe Grhsus-pur to stand on or near the site of Bastnid.
Bu-Rihan, whose account follows the above-mentioned works after an interval
of between eighty and ninety years he finished his work in 42ii H. (1031 A.D.),
but he never passed farther east or south than Lahor and Multan — says, that “ Alor
or Aror is situated on the Mihran, which passes on the icest of that town,” If this
is correct, it shows that when he wrote, the western branch of the Hakpa had then
been diverted from Aror, for before that event happened, the river passed it on the
east. The word ‘ west,’ I may mention, is not contained in the recently printed
text of Bu-Riljau’s work.
J. 3
482 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
Whether the tradition respecting the Musalman merchant, Saif-ul-
Muluk, and his causing the diversion of the river from near Aror, be
true or not — but I believe all traditions contain more or less truth — it
is certain that, after all, it was not such a difficult task to accomplish ; 562
and, in connexion with this tradition, we have the place of abode of the
merchant, and the tombs of his two sons still pointed out near Multan,
and they are still existing, or were so, at least, in the last century.
Another curious coincidence, which does not appear to have been taken
into consideration along with this tradition and the existence of these
tombs is, that the supposed remains of the dyke raised by the Musalman
merchant, or a dyke remaining at the very same place, was existing a
few years ago, 663 the situation of which lay about twenty-six miles east
4
662 Referring to the danger of diverting the course of the Indus, by cutting the
canal noticed under, Captain W. Baker, Superintendent of Canals in Sind, wrote,
that “ there would be reason for apprehension lest the channel of supply, excavated
as it would be through a soft soil, should be so widened and deepened by the action
of the torrent as to drain off more water than could be spared from the Indus, or,
perhaps, transfer the main stream of the river, with its fertilizing effects, from its
present to one of its ancient channels. # # * There is no permanency in the bed of
the Indus, which is always cutting one or other of its banks and throwing up shoals
on the opposite one.”
Lieut. -Colonel W. Scott, the Superintending Engineer, also wrote : “ At present
the water is mere overflow, and runs so gently over the surface as to cause no
danger, but let a body of water, 10 or 12 feet deep, pass thi'ough the same country,
even if the ground was hard below (which it is not — it is merely hour-glass sand)
and I should certainly expect the cut to increase far beyond our power of control.
“ See ” Report on the Eastern Narra,” pages 4 and 27.
663 About the same time, the then Collector of Haidar-abad, in a letter dated
31st October, 1850, wrote to the Commissioner of Sind on the existence of a band or
dyke which prevented the water from entering the lower part of the channel, and
at the same time snbmitted a sketch of the country, where the band was said to
exist, by a native of Sind, who was formerly a revenue official under Mir Sub-dar,
one of the Amirs of Sind, and respecting which, the Collector, Captain Rathbone,
observed that it was “ perfectly accurate after the fashion that all native papers of
the kind are, totally destitute of all proportion.” He continues : “ It appears from
this, and the report of my informant, that the Narra branches off from the Indus
near the village of Ghosepoor [Ghaus-pur] which is built on the site of an ancient
city [Basmid of the old writers], and lies in the territory of Bhawal Khan.
The bed of the Narra is said there to be in places a hundred and twenty miles
broad.”
The Collector of Shikar-pur, however, after examining what was considered the
right locality, wrote, that the band or dyke referred to by Captain Rathbone lay
close to the village of Birha, and that it was formed of earth and brushwood closely
rammed together, 600 feet in length, 38 feet broad at the top, and with a height
of 22 feet, the highest water mark in its rear being 15 feet, and the breadth of the
ravine [old channel ?] below the band, about 200 feet. “ I could discover,” he says,
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 483
of Aror, and about eight miles north-west of the Ra’m channel, the
“ Rainee H.” of the maps, and twenty miles in the same direction from
the old channel of the Hakra or Wahindah, close to Mitharo or Mitraho,
and about fifty-four miles below the point where, as I have previously
described, the Hakra separated into two channels after having, farther
up stream, been joined by the tributaries constituting the Panch Had or
Five Rivers. The “ island ” mentioned to the Collector of Haidar-abad
by the native Revenue official, refers to the tongue of land which now
exists, but greatly changed in the course of years, lying between the
two channels entered in the Indian Atlas map as the “ Ghoorelehwah ”
[Grhuri ke Wa-hah ? — The connection of this vitiated name with that
of Fath Muhammad, Grhuri, of the native official, will be noticed], and
the “ Rainee N.” The first branches off a little north of “Retee” [reti-^
1 sand ’] of the map, and passes east of Klxair-pur Dehr ke ; and the second
branches off a little north of Wanjh-rnt, the Winjrote ” of the same
map, which it passes on the west, both channels running about south-south¬
west, and the tongne of land in question lies between. Two miles east of
this latter channel, the main channel of the Hakra or Wahindah, mis¬
called, “ the old bed of the River Wundun ” in the same map, branches
off.
The native official likewise stated, as reported by the Collector of
Haidar-abad, that “ the bed of the Narra ,” as he called it, at Ghaus-pur in
Ci no band one Icoss long and with a breadth of 40 guz, as described by the Collector
of Haidarabad. * * * In the first place, the waters, a portion of which the
hand confines, are those of the Gotekee or minor leht, and it in no way interferes
with the flow of the Ahmedpoor or principal one, which used to find its ingress into
the Narra chiefly by the Rainee channel,” etc. He then adds, that “ the causes of
obstruction to the Khoonum Leht [ Kohan , old ; let, ‘ overflow ’ or ‘ flood ’] from
Ahmedpoor, I am credibly informed, lie in the construction along the banks of the
Indus, within Bhawul Khan’s territory, of extensive embankments, whereby the
Khoonum Leht is prevented from encroaching into the adjacent tracts,” etc., etc.
The band near Bihra [Bhira], however, was not considered to be the one refer¬
red to by the native revenue official ; for the Commissioner of Sind subsequently
wrote, that “ it is still doubtful whether the obstruction is an artificial band, or a
change in the course of the Indus.”
Here they were, so to say, all right, and yet all wrong. The band referred to
by the native official was situated about twenty miles farther east than Bhira, as
described above. The “ Khoonum Leht,” here mentioned, flowed for some distance
in the depression which was once the channel of the Panch. Nad when it united with
the Hakfa at Dosh-i-Ab, but altered in the course of ages of inundations.
I here append a facsimile of the map or sketch of the native official, with a
correct tracing of the country he refers to from actual survey, from which it will be
seen that, barring his drawing, it is correct as to the bed of the Hakra and Pano^
Nad near Ghaus-pur, and the direction in which the band was said to lie.
484 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
the Bahawal-pur territory (thirteen miles south-south-east of Mithan
Kot, and about forty-one south-west of LTchchh) was, “ in places, about
a hundred and twenty miles broad, ” and, that “ in that 'part the name it
is known by is “ Toorkuree ” only taking “ the name of Narra much lower
down.*’ Now it will be seen from my general map No. 1, and confirmed
by the one-inch to the mile Survey map of the Bahawal-pur state, that
a vast tract of country extending from Ghaus-pur, above mentioned,
to near Birsil-pur east-south-east, one hundred and ten miles in breadth,
and about one hundred and forty in length, is literally seamed with
banks and channels showing the action of the Panch Nad (including
the Xb-i-Sind or Indus) and the Hakra, at different times, in effecting
their junction ; and the subsequent changes in the channel of the latter,
caused after, or about the time, of their final separation, and through
changes brought about by the Sutlaj betaking itself to a new channel,
which caused a change in its place of junction with the Hakra.
From all that has been adduced, it is evident that a band or dyke
had been in existence in the locality indicated from by-gone times, and
repaired or renewed from time to time as required ; and the situation
ascribed to it quite agrees with the traditionary account.6641
664 It will be well to give the traditions respecting the diversion of this branch
of the river by means of a band or dyke, as I have not related it in the separate
notice of the river.
“ Saif-ul-Mnluk is the name of a great and rich Musalman merchant, who in
the early part of the fourth century of the Hijrat brought about the ruin of Alor.
The tract of country then dependent on it, was ruled by a Rajah — for the power of
the Musalmans had waxed weak in these parts at that time — who was called Dilu
Ra’e, who was a great tyrant, and deflowerer of maidens. The merchant arrived
near Alor with his merchandize, which was of great value, laden in vessels on
the river which was then navigable from a great distance upwards, down to the
great ocean (Muhammad, son of Kasim, gave directions respecting the navigation.
See note 189, page 243) ; and he had also along with him a beautiful hand-maid
named Badi’-ul-Jamal. Not content with plundering the merchant of a consider¬
able portion of his goods, the Rajah also demanded that the hand-maid should be
given up to him. Finding what a tyrant he had to deal with, the merchant resolved,
with God’s help, to make a bold endeavour to escape from him. He asked to be
allowed three days’ grace — some say eight days — after which he would comply
with the demands made upon him, and deliver up the damsel. In the meantime,
by means of his wealth, having got together a number of artizans and numerous
labourers, he set to work day and night to raise a great band or dyke, up stream,
above Alor, and by making a new channel, to divert the waters of the Hakra or
Wahind farther westwards towards Bakhar [it does not mean from this that Bakhar
was then in existence, but to the place where it was afterwards founded as may be
seen from the reference to Siw-istan. Perhaps the merchant, who was a dweller
not far from the confluence of some of the principal rivers, had witnessed how easily
a change might be effected in such a level tract of silt and sand]. This diversion
485
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries.
Burton (“ Scinde : ” Vol. I, p. 202), wlio saw a good deal of Sind
when employed in the Survey, says, “ the province is a sloping surface
he effected; and on awaking in the morning of the day on which the days of grace
expired, instead of a broad and deep river running near Alor, what did the tyrant
discovei’, but its bed full of mud, and some muddy watei\ The river had left it,
and was running towards Siw-istan and the Lakhhi mountains, and the merchant
and his vessels had been wafted thereon far beyond his reach, and Alor ruined.
The diverted river, lower down, betaking itself to the nearest depression, got,
in all probability, into the channel of the Knmbh of the Ohach Namah.
According to another slightly different version, the merchant was on his way
to Makkah ; and after his return from thence, by another route, he took up his l'esi-
dence near the kasbali of Ratta, which is said to have been at one time a great city,
and thei’e he was bui’ied. It is added, that, by this hand-maid, Badi’-ul-Jamal, he had
two sons, one Ratta, the other Matta, and that the tombs of all thi'ee are at this
place, known as Ratta- Matta to this day, after his two sons.
The Tarikh-i-Tahiri contains this tradition with a slight variation. It says :
“ Below the city of Alor, or Aror [that is, that the city stood higher than the river,
which was at a little distance from it on the east] the river constituting the Panj Ab
flowed, which is likewise called Hakra, Wahindah, and Wahan, indiscriminately,
which sends its waters into the great sea. Dilu Ra’e governed the territory between
Alor and Muhammad Tur, # # * From the merchants who brought their
merchandize by the river from Hind, on their way to the port of Dewal, he levied
one half as toll.” Then the demand is made by the Rajah for the possession of the
merchant’s hand-maid ; and the merchant obtains three days’ grace, and the
author continues : “ During this period he collected a number of skilled men, who,
in the piercing of mountains, exceeded the renowned Farhad, and were able to
close a breach in a rampart like that of the Sadd-i-Sikandar (or Alexander’s Wall).
He bestowed on these men whatever they desired, gold, gems, valuable cloths, and
the like, his object being to throw up a sti-ong embankment on the river above
Alor, and divert the waters in the direction of Bakhar. Night after night these
strong workmen laboured to excavate a fresh channel and throw up an embank¬
ment, and thereby turned the river aside towards Sihwan and the Lakhhi Hills, and
with such force, that the merchant, through God’s mercy, was speedily carried
away beyond the reach of the tyi'annical Rajah.” The latter is said to have com¬
manded his people to turn the river back again into its old channel, but was told
by all, that now that the water had flowed elsewhere, it could not be done It did
not strike them possibly to remove the band or dyke, but, perhaps that would
then have. been useless, the river having cut a new channel for itself.
I may mention here that this tradition is universal in these parts up to the present
time; and, in the l'eign of Akbar Badshah, descendants of this very merchant ai’e
represented as being then living. After Bakhar and its dependencies, in 982 H.
(1574-75 A.D.), fell into the possession of the Badshah, after the death of Sultan
Mahmud Khan (who held it independently after the fall of the Arghun power in
Sind), consequent on the disputes which had arisen between the officials sent fi'om
the court to take possession, “ it was determined in 983 H. (1575-76 A.D.) to make
the Nawwab, Tarsun Muhammad Khan, jdgir-dur of Bakhar ; and, in the first
month of that year, Muhammad Tahir Khan, son of Shah Muhammad, a descendant
486 H. GL Raverty — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
of silt and sand, through which the Indus cuts its varying way with a
facility that passes description. The erection of even a few feet of
brickwork built up in the bed of the Indus as it still flows , might divert
the stream into another channel , cause the decline and downfall of a
metropolis and twenty towns, convert a region of gardens into a silt
of Saif-ul-MuluTc, and two other officers, on the part of Tarsun Muhammad Khan,
entered Rurhi, and sent a copy of the imperial mandate to Kisu Khan, then holding
the government, and residing in the fort of Bakhar.” It appears that Tarsun
Muhammad had subsequently left Muhammad Tahir in charge, because, when
Tarsun Muhammad Khan came to Nag-awr, where the Badshah then was, when ho
was subsequently dismissed to proceed to Bakhar, some of the ministers of the
Badshah represented, that “it was not expedient that a descendant of Saif-ul-Mululc
should he left in charge of a frontier province.”
Ratta or Ratta-Matta is described at the close of the last century, in the
Survey record I have been quoting herein, as “ a large fcasbah or market-town three
Jcuroh (a little over five miles) north-wards of Jatu-i (which was the chief town of
one of the twelve mahdlls or sub-districts of the Bakhar sarlcar of the Multan stibah
in the time of Akbar Badshah), and here is the tomb and shrine of Saif-ul-Mululc, who
is famous among all people”
According to the tradition, it is predicted that the Hakra is to burst the band
or dyke of Saif-ul-Muluk, become a perennial river once more, and empty itself into
the sea. Burton, in his humourous relation of the legend of the “ Seven Headless
Prophets,” in his work on “ Scinde,” gives the prophecy as follows : — ■
“ Dyke of Aror be burst, and flow
Hakro perennial to the main :
Swim ye fish, ye lillies grow
Where Sammahs plough the sultry plain.”
He adds : “ Now the bund or embankment of Aror had, hundreds of years before
the time of Jam Tamachi [third of the Sammah Jams of Sind], been thrown across
the Indus [he is mistaken here : the band was across the Hakra, as the verse men¬
tions] by the masonic prowess of an honourable husband,” etc., etc.
The same prophecy appears, as related by a devotee of the “ Mamoi ” sept, in
the “ Gazetter of Sind,” but was not properly understood. It is : —
“ When broken shall be the bandh of Aror,
And the water shall flow over Hakrah,
Where will be the fishing of the Sammah ? ”
This does not apply to any village called “ Hakrah,” but to the river, thus : —
“ The band or embankment of Aror shall be broken, and the water shall flow [once
more] in the channel of the Hakra; and then where will the Sammahs’ fishing be P ”
Meaning that it would be spoiled.
I am unaware whether the two stones set up by Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar in the
bed of the diverted branch of the river, are still in existence, or whether, if they
are, any inscription is legible ; for he is said to have cut an inscription on them.
If we could find an inscription we might obtain further information on this inter¬
esting subject. See also note 517, page 452.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 487
desert, and transfer plenty and population to what a month before was a
glaring waste. As regards the ancient course of the Lower Indus
infinite has been the speculation, the theorization, the dissertation, the
argument, and the contradiction upon this mucli vexed subject. But
listen to the voice of reason, as proceeding from one Dr. Lord,” etc.,
etc. See Dr. Lord’s “ Memoir on the Plain of the Indus,” also the
statement of the Greek, Aristobulus, quoted at pages 469 and 470.
Postans, too, in his “ Personal Observations on Sindh,” says (page
18) respecting the Indus : “ At Sakkur, Rori, below Hyderabad, and at
Jerruk, rocky barriers interrupt on the western bank its progress at
those particular spots, but elsewhere it has full liberty to choose its
constantly changing course, through an under soil so light and friable,
that it cannot withstand the action of such a mighty rush of water even for
one hour. * * * The noise of the falling banks of the Indus, when
heard upon the stream during a calm night, resembles the constant
discharge of distant artillery.”
Such I have myself heard many times, as all must have who have
passed up and down the great river. I have often in the course of
a single day, seen many acres of land, trees and all, suddenly fall into
the river with a great roar, and such I have witnessed several times in
one and the same day.
It is very certain that what the merchant is said to have done in
ancient times, would, if now carried out, be sufficient to divert the
course of the present Indus, consequent!}7, the feat ascribed to Saif-ul-
Muluk, with the means of paying for the labour, say, of a thousand
men during the space of three days and nights, was not impracticable.
To have commenced the excavation of a new channel above Aror, and
to have erected an embankment with the earth excavated, strengthened
with brushwood, and the like, was as feasible then as now. The por¬
tion of a new channel once opened, the river, on being let into it, would
soon cut a channel for itself, or take to the first depression it met with
in its course ; and, in this instance, it made its way some distance to
the westward of the lime-stone hills at first, and, subsequently, near
to them, but still to the westward of where Rurhi and Bakhar were
subsequently founded, namely a little west of Sakhar of modern days.
In course of time, the Panj Ab or Panch Had having ceased to be a
tributary of the Hakra or Wahindah at Dosli-i-A'b, in inclining west¬
wards lower down, got into the channel of the diverted or Ra’in branch
of the Hakra ; while the main river itself, through the loss of the Sind
Rud or Panj Ab or Panch Nad, was not able to supply it, or to a very
small degree ; and when the Hakra subsequently ceased to be a peren¬
nial stream, the Ra’in, or diverted branch of that river, only received
488 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
water from tlie overflow of this newly-founded Panch Nad from the
direction of Ghaus-pur.665 The Panch Nad having thus got into the
lower part of the diverted Ra’in channel, soon enlarged it, and inclin¬
ing towards a gap in the lime-stone range, flowed through it between
the high ground on the east on which Riirhi was afterwards built, and
the peninsula on which the town and fortress of Bakhar were founded.
Neither of these two places were known, or ever referred to, in history
in the time of the Turk Sultans of Ghaznih. Mathilah.666 (the Mathilo
666 See note 581, page 503.
666 Mathilah or Mathilo was one of the twelve mahdlts of the Bakhar sarJcdr
of the Multan subah , and the place here mentioned was its chief town. This was
one of the six fortresses of Sind, mentioned elsewhere, standing on mounds, the
heights or extent of which mounds were increased in the reign preceding that of
Ohaoh. It is now a small town on an eminence ; and in the neighbourhood are,
or were, the remains of many ancient buildings, and groves of enormous piped trees,
called in the Panj-ab territory, bohar — the ficus religiosa of botanists. See note
page 246.
Another of these six fortresses was Siw-rai or Siw-rahi, the ruins of which
were still existing some fifteen years ago. After the conquest of Sind by the ’Arabs
it still continued to be a place of strength and importance ; and, in the reign of
Akbar Badsnah was the chief place of a mahall of that name in the Berun-i-Panch
Nad district of the Multan silbah. The site indicates that it was once a place of
importance and strength ; and it lies about five miles north-east of Sabzal Kot, and
three miles from a station on the line of Railway, called Walh-har. The mound
on which the town of Siw-rahi stood is about three quarters of a mile round about,
and rises about thirty feet above the surrounding country ; and it is said that some
three hundred or more wells belonging to it, faced with masonry, but in a dilapidated
condition, could still be seen in the jcingals surrounding it. The remains of the
fortress, which adjoins it, is about a quarter of a mile in circumference, and the
walls rise to the height of about fifty feet. The bricks found here are of the same
description as those found at Wanjh-rut, described farther on, together with frag¬
ments of stone carvings, beads, and other ornaments. Hei-e likewise have been
found numbers of pottery balls, similar to those discovered at Bahman-abad, of
considerable size, as large, in fact, as a man’s head. These were the missiles dis¬
charged from the ancient war engines called manjaniks , balistas, or battering
rams, such as were used by the ’Arabs under Muhammad, son of Kasim, the con-
querer of Sind.
I regret to find that this place, like Wanjli-rut, and many others I fear, has
been invaded by Railway Yandals, who have been pulling down the walls of the
place for “ ballast,” as they term it. It is a pity that there was no “ Act for the
preservation of Ancient Buildings ’’ in “ Young Egypt ” as there is in Old Egypt,
so that Railway excavators might not be allowed to demolish the most ancient
buildings to put money in their own pockets. There is one thing, however, to be
noted, and that is, that this line of Railway appears to have been carried, for part
of the way, at least, through the depressions formerly the channels of the rivers
herein described ; and in case of a sudden or extraordinary change in the courses
of the Indus or its tributaries, such as have taken place in bygone times, there is a
chance that a good portion of it would be washed away. See note 554, page 479.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 489
of tlie Sind is), only thirty-seven miles to the north-eastwards of these
places, which was captured by Abu-1- Hasan, the general of Sultan Mau-
diid in 440 H. (1047-48 A.D.), appears to have been the strongest, and
most important place in that immediate locality. If Bakhar had been
in existence, the importance of its position must have been such as to
render it impossible to pass it by without notice of any kind.567 But
these places — Bakhar and Rurhl — are never mentioned, even up to
573 H. (1177-78 A.D.), when Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Dm, Muhammad-i-Sam,
sovereign of Ghaznih invaded Guzarat by way of Uehehli, nor even in
578 H. (1182-83 A.D.), when he marched into Lower Sind from Multan,
and annexed Debal and the territory on the sea coast. If these places
existed at the time, which I do not believe they did, they were of no
account. In fact, Bakhar is not mentioned in history until the time of
Malik Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah, 602—625 H. (1205-6-1227 A.D.), at which
time it had grown into a strong fortress, but it was on a peninsula west
of the river, and not an island, as I shall show. It may have been
fortified by the Malik, Nasir-ud-Din, Aetamur (Ai-Timur,) who held
ITchchh and its dependencies, which included Sind, under the above named
Sultan, and was the first feudatory of that territory after its subjugation
by him. This Malik was killed at the time of the Sultan’s defeat at
Andkhud in 601 H. (1204 A.D.), and Malik (afterwards Sultan) Nasir-
ud-Din Kaba-jali, was made feudatory in his stead.
The fortress of Bakhar and its town continued to be situated on a
It will be noticed that this ancient place, as well as Mathilah, 1/ bar ah, Bhati
Wa-han, Ma’uh, Jachch Wa-han, Rain-kali, Ghaus-pur, and several others, all lie
between the great depression in which the waters forming the Narah now flow,
which, in ancient times, was the channel of the Sindliu or Ab-i-Sind, and the Rud-i-
Sind wo Hind of the Muhammadan travellers, and the channel of the Hakra of
which they were tributaries. The whole of this tract contains, or did contain,
numerous vestiges of the remains of ancient fortified towns ; and every here and
there the soil was strewed over with the fragments of kiln-burnt bricks and other
pottery.
See the amusing piece of “ history ” contained in the “ Gazetteer of Sind,”
respecting this part “ 1400 years ago,” page 677.
Siw-ra’i or Siw-rahi has been “identified” by Cunningham in his “ Ancient
India.” He says (page 254): “The Sogdi or Sodrge, I would identify with the
people of Seorai,” the actual position of which, he says “ is unknown ! ” See also
note 361, page 366.
667 If it did exist, the new channel flowing past it tended to make it a place
of importance.
Burton (“Scinde” Vol. II, p. 250) says, “The channel [present] could not
have existed in Alexander’s day without attracting the attention of his historians.
The Moslems connect the change, by tradition, with a time subsequent to their
conquest of Scinde.”
K. 3
490 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
peninsula for some considerable time after this period, for some two
centuries probably, but in the course of time, consequent on the in¬
creased volume which the Panch Nad or Panj Xb, now included
in the Xb-i-Sind, had acquired, presently to be noticed, the force
of the current washed away all the softer portions of the rocky strata
on which the fortress stood, on the west side, by forming a second
channel, leaving it an island, but larger than at present, and separated
from the town.568 The action of the current still continuing, in the
course of years the other small islands near it were formed, one of
Eastwick (p. 29) referring to the same subject, says, nothing can be made of
Arrian’s account. Certainly not by attempting to trace the movements of Alexan¬
der according to the present courses of the rivers of these parts, but it may be
different if the movements are traced according to the ancient courses of the rivers
as I have here explained them. See also note 530, page 461.
66S With reference to Rurhi more particularly, Captain G. E. Westmacott, of the
37th Bengal N. I. (in “the Bengal Asiatic Journal” for 1841), who wrote on the
spot, says, “ Roree, or more correctly Lohnree [I have already given the derivation
of the word and the vernacular form of writing it in note 121, page 209], the ancient
Lohurkote [?], is a town of considerable antiquity, and is said to have been founded
[this is of course local tradition, not history] with Bukur about the middle of the
seventh century of the Hijerat.” He is here quite wrong, and did not know that
the fortress of Bakhar was invested and captured in 625 H., or twenty-five years
before the middle of the seventh century of the H. He is just a century too late.
He, however, gives some interesting particulars which tend to corroborate what I
have mentioned respecting the action of the river. He says : “ The strata of the
rock is horizontal, and exhibits marks everywhere of the action of the river, which
must have risen formerly at least fifty feet above its present level in season of
floods, and washed the foundations of the houses. In the sandy bays, creeks, and
hollows abandoned by the stream, date and peepul trees grow luxuriously, and rocks
worn by the water, and shattered and broken into gigantic masses, were submerged
at no very remote period. Along the base of the hills, on both banks of the river,
the land bears the appearance of having been under water [when the Panj Ab poured
through the gap]. The remains of a stone and brick wall, or quarry, built evidently,
to oppose the encroachments of the river, runs along the edge of the precipitous
ridge which supports the town, and under it is an extensive cavern.” The buttresses
are evidence that the river has worn away a great deal, or they would never have
chosen to build dwellings in such a position.
Burton (“ Scinde,” Yol. II — 250) also remarks, very pertinently : “In ancient
days, when the Indus — say geographers — washed round the entire shoulder of the
Sukknr Hills, it was, you may be sure, bleak and barren enough. Presently the
stream shifted its course to the present channel, “ cutting away the looser strata of
the limestone ridge, and leaving the harder masses, one of which forms the island,
and others the hills on the Sukknr side of the river. Bukkur, with the moat which
nature thus threw round it, and the least assistance of the mason’s art, in days
when howitzers and mines were unknown, must have been a kind of Gibraltar.
See previous note 567.
3892.] H. G. Raverty — The Milirdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 491
wliicli, Khwajah IDjizr’s island, on which is the Khwajah ka Than,
history distinctly shows was part of the main land on the Rurhi side
up to nearly two centuries and a half after the conquest of Sind by the
Arabs.
What I have here stated is corroborated by a singular coincidence,
which will enable us to arrive at the approximate period when the
Ab-i-Sind, Panj A b, or Panch Nad had already cut a channel between
Rurhi and Bakliar, thus separating them from each other. In the little
island of Khwajah Khizr,569 above-mentioned, there is a masjid whose
569 Khizr or Elias, sometimes confused with the Prophet, Elias, and said to
have been the Wazir of Kai-Kubad, the ruler of T-ran Zamm, is stated to have
discovered and to have drank of the fountain of the water of life, and consequent! y,
will not die until the sound of the last trump at the judgment day. Khwajah
Khizr, for this reason, is also called the Zindah or Living Pfr ; and it is oat of this
that the compiler of the “ Gazetteer of Sind,” when referring to this island, makes
out the shrine to be worshipped by the HindGs as a river god under the name of
Jinda Pir. This is after the fashion of turning every masjid , or place of sijdah
into a “ mazjidT Khwajah Khizr is also accounted, in consequence, the patron
saint of the waters or rivers, hence Muhammadans of Hind are in the habit of
offering him oblations of lamps and flowers, placed on little rafts, and launched
upon rivers, particularly on Thursday evenings (the Friday evening of Musalmans
as the night precedes the day) in the fifth solar month, August. It is at this time
that the festival of the herd or raft is held, when a raft is launched upon the waters
in honour of Khwajah Khizr.
The legend respecting the island of Khwajah Khizr or Khwajah ka Than is,
that a shepherd named Baji, whose hut was situated where one of the quarters of
the town of Rurhi now stands, observed one night a bright flame burning at some
distance from him ; and under the supposition that some travellers passing that
way had kindled a fire, he despatched his wife thither to obtain a light. She went,
but the light vanished as often as she attempted to approach it. She then returned
and l'elated what she had seen to her husband, but Baji, thinking she was frightened,
did not credit what she told him, and went himself to procure a light. He found,
however, that what she had told him was true ; and he concluded that it must bo
some miraculous manifestation. Filled with awe, he thereupon erected a takiyah ,
than, or devotee’s station there, turned devotee, and gave himself up to the care of
the spot. Shortly after, the river is said to have changed its course, and to have
encircled the ground on which the than of the lOiwajah stands.
This island lies a little north of Bakhar, but the channel separating it from the
fortress is narrow and not difficult to cross.
With regard to the date, 341 H., which is undoubtedly correct respecting the
shrine of Khwajah Khizr, it is certain that the branch of the Hakra was diverted
from near Aror sometime before this date ; and, in all probability, the river had
shifted from the westward of the present Sakhar more to the east, and had begun
to cut its way between the present Rurhi and Bakhar, before the island of Khwajah
Khizr was detached from the main land. From all accounts I believe this branch
was diverted, and this great change took place about the year 335 II. (910-917 A D.)
492 H. G. Raver ty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
appearance bears evidence of its antiquity, and in the masjid is an
inscription, of which the following is a literal rendering : —
“ Know, that when this fabric was raised,
Khizr’s waters encompassed it round about,
This pleasing hemistich Khizr wrote : —
In the ‘ Court of God ’ the date is found.”
This, according to the abjad system, gives the date 341 H. (952-53
A.D.), which is just two hundred and forty-eight years after the con¬
quest of Sind, and two years previous to the death (but some say it
happened in that year) of ’Abd-ul-Malik, son of Nuh, seventh of the
Samani rulers, who was killed through falling from his horse whilst
playing the game of Ohaugan or Polo, when the sway of the Kliilafat
over Sind was merely nominal, and part of it and Multan were in the
possession of Karamitah rulers, subsequently expelled by Sultan Mah¬
mud of Ghaznili.
Such a place as Sakhar is not mentioned in history down to the
time of the Sayyid, Mir Ma’sum, styled Bahkari, because he was a
native of the Bahkar district, and one of the historians of Sind. He
was an official under the Mughal government in the reign of Akbar
Badshah, and, after twenty years’ service, was allowed to retire to a jd~
gir conferred upon him in that same district in 999 H. (1590-91 A.D.).
In relating events of the year 416 H. (1025-26 A.U.) he certainly men¬
tions Bakhar, and shortly after Sakhar, but this certainly refers more
to what afterwards became known by those names, in the same way as
he refers to Tliathah which was not founded for centuries after that period,
and as he himself relates ; and moreover, histories written before his
time do not once refer to them. In proof of this, he does not seem
either to refer to Sakhar as a new town, but to what had previously
been known as Bakhar, as if, after the Panch Nad or Panj A'b,
as the river is here styled down to modern times as well as A'b-i-Sind
had cut for itself another and second channel, and severed the fortress
from the main land, the severed town had become Sakhar.570 What the
57° Another fact worthy of notice is, that the channel which separates Sakhar
from Bakhar is not more than one quarter of the breadth of that separating Bakhar
from Rurhi, where the river flowed from the first, when it found its way through the
gap in the rocky hills. The breadth of the former channel is about 100 yards and
the latter 400. Neither was the depth of water so great in the former as in the
latter ; and, lately, the former channel has been widened, in order to lessen the
violence of the current in the larger channel.
Eastwick says, that just by the place where Clibborn’s house stood, “ The river
is exceedingly deep, and a whirlpool is formed by the opposition which the remains
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 493
meanings of the words may be I cannot say, but it is evident that there
is some connection between Sakh-ar and Bakh-ar, or as occasionally
written, Bhak-ar, but not correctly I think. Mir Ma’sum is stated in
history to have died and been buried “ at Bakhar ; ” and bis tomb still
remained in 1848 (and is still there probably, if not desecrated by Rail¬
way Vandals), at the foot of the lofty mandr or tower of his own raising,571
in the Sakhar Cantonment, in what is known as “ old Sakhar” and near
which is a great mound, said to mark the site of the hot of the former
Rajahs of this part of Sind.
From this it is evident, that what was known as “ old Sakhar,”
was really the remains of the town of Bakhar, separated from the
fortress when the Panj Ab or Panch Nad, formed the second channel.
We are told, as far back as the time of Sultan Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah,
that when hard pressed on the investment of Bakhar by the Wazir of
Sultan Shams-ud-Dm, I-yal-timish, his rival, in 625 H. (1228 A. D.),
Kaba-jah had to evacuate the city or town, and retired to the fortress.572
of an ancient building makes to the headlong waters. When the river is low this
building can be distinctly seen, and is another proof, and one far more irrefutable
than the inscription of Khwajah Khizr, that the stream migrated hither from Alur.”
In another place he says, that Sakhar “ contains no trace of Hindu archi¬
tecture or worship.”
571 Mir Ma’sum founded many buildings, both here and at Rurhi, indeed, the
founding of masjids and religious buildings, may be said to have been his hobby ;
and, moreover “ he ornamented them with his own designs in stone ; for, in making
chronograms and cutting inscriptions, he had no equal, and also in the elegance of
his letters. When he accompanied the embassy to Persia, at every prominent stage,
all the way from Hind to Tabriz and Isfahan, he recorded the fact on the masjids
and other buildings. The inscriptions over the gateway of the fort of Agra are his
work, and also those of the Jdmi’ Masjid of Fath-pur, and other places.”
Respecting one notable inscription I shall have something to say hereafter.
Mir Ma’sum also set up two stones in the bed of the diverted channel of the
Hakra or Mihran of Sind, near Aror, to mark the former course of the stream, with
an inscription to that effect. He also left behind him many foundations for pious
and charitable purposes.
Eastwick mentions a small domed building, which, in his time, formed part of
the Agency at Sakhar, built by Mir Ma’sum, with the date 1008 H. thereon, and
another, opposite it, with the date 1006 H.
57 i When Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, Mang-barnf, the Khwarazm Shah (the hero who
crossed the Indus on his charger, fully armed, in the face of the whole Mughal host,
in the rapid part of the river between Nil Ab and Kala or Kara Bagh), had escaped
from the toils of the Mughals, he shortly after entered Kaba-jah’ s territory of Mul¬
tan and l/chchh, which then comprised Sind as well, on his way into ’Irak by Lower
Sind, Mukran, and Kirman. One of his Amirs made a night attack on the camp of
]£aba-jah, who was hostile, which was pitched near if ohchh on the banks of the
Ab-i-Sind, a farsakh (three miles) from that place, and overthrew him. Kaba-jah
494 H. G. Ravert.y — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
If Bakliar had then been an island, and he had the control of the vessels
on the river as stated, he might have defied all the efforts of the enemy
as long as food lasted ; while, if it had been at all like what it was when
Mirza Shah Husain, son of Shall Beg Khan, Arghun, re-built it anew,
there was not standing room for an enemy’s force, however small, at
the foot of the walls, and from which position only a few men could
attack it, at a time when artillery was not in use. The breadth of the
fortress and the island of Khwajali Kbizr together is but five hundred
and two yards.
I may also add, that Sakliar is not noticed in the A’in-i-Akbari,
although Bakliar, Rurhi, and Aror are. The chief place of the mahdll
or sub-district of the Bakliar sarJcdr of the subah of Multan, to which it
belonged, was Bakliar itself. It is also quite certain that when Huma-
yun Badshah, Akbar Badshah’s father, invested the place for some two
years, there were not so many islands existing as there are now.
effected his escape by getting on board a vessel, and made for his strongholds of
Akar and Bakar, as Rashid-ud-Din, in the Jami’-ut-Tawarikh, writes the names,
which, he says, were on two jazirahs, which word means both peninsula and island,
in the Ab-i-Sind. The Jahan-Ivusha’e however, says, that Akar and Bakar were
tivo fortresses on one island or 'peninsula.
It will not be amiss now to give some extracts from a few old travellers res¬
pecting Bakliar, Sakliar, and Rurhi or Lurhi, and also show a few of the wild theories
entertained by some modern “ authorities ” on the subject.
Ibn Batutah is the first eastern traveller that we know of who visited Bakhar,
the place not having been in existence in the time of the still older ones. He was
in Sind in 734 H. (1333-31 A. D.), just a century and a quarter after the death of
Kaba-jah, and sixty-seven years before Amir Timur invaded India. All he says is
that “ Bakar,” as he writes it, is a handsome city, divided by an arm of the Sind
river.” Prom thence he went on to Lfohchh and Multan.
In the time of Jahan-gir Badshah, about eight or ten years only after the death
of Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar, Mr. Joseph Salbanke, who made a journey from India
through Persia and Turkey in 1G09, in the fourth year of that monarch, says ;
“ Reuree is a towne consisting of husbandmen, and painfull people, who deal also in
merchandize, as cotton cloth, indico, and other commodoties, and are a peacable
people to deal withall.
“ Buckar stands towards Lahor , where we received kind entertainment of the
Governour. Sword blades are very good chaffer in this towne : my-selfe having
experience, who might have had ten pounds sterling for my sword, the blade being
worth a noble in England. Close by this citie of BucJcar runneth the River Damiadee
[See the old map, page 297, also that at page 321], which within eight days journey
runneth into the Riuer of Synde, which falletli into the Ocean Sea, between the coun¬
treys of Guadel and Gnzerat. On the Riuer passe Barkes of fortie and fiftie Tunnes,
by means whereof, there is traffique into diuerse parts of India” “ Sucker is situated
on an Hand [ sic . he appears to have mistaken Sakhar for Bakhar and vice versa, as what
follows clearly indicates] in the Riuer, and consisteth most of Weauers and Diers,
1892.] H. G-. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 495
Mir Ma’sum states, in his History, that when Shah Beg TOian, the
Arghun Mughal conqueror of Sind, first went to inspect Bakhar, after
which serue the country round about. At Sucker we stayed [in the town : not in the
fortress, certainly] four and twentie days for a safe conuoy to Oandahar, and passed
to Candahar in twenty days,” etc., etc. See my “ Notes on Afghanistan ” etc.,
note Tf, page 674.
Another traveller, Nicholas Whithington, “left in the Mogols country by
Captain Best, a factor, in 1612,” in the “Tractate” written by the former, states,
that “ Goods may be conveyed from Agra on camels to Buckor in twenty days,
which is on Sinda Riuer, thence in fifteen days aboard the ships.”
If we can place implicit faith in Sir Thomas Roe’s Journal, we shall find, that
Bakhar towrn joined the main land in his time. He says respecting the province
[ sarkdr ] of Bakhar, that, “ the chief city, which is called Buckar SucTcar [according
to this the names were not used singly then] lies upon the River Sindee or Indus
# # * Saagichan, the kingdom [!] of the Baloaches, to the west of Tata and Buckar ,
confines west upon the kingdom of Bar, subject to Sliabas [Shah ’Abbas]. Indus
windeth itself into the eastern side of it : it has no renowned City.”
From these different statements it appears that Sakhar, or old Sakhar, really
formed part of the shahr, baladah, or city, or town of Bakhar, when the latter joined
the main land, as I have before demonstrated from the situation of Mir Ma’sum’s
tomb.
The “ river Damiadee ” of Salbanke, can only refer to the Ab-i-Sind or Indus,
when it flowed in one of the old channels between Dijf Kot and the present channel
referred to at page 458, and the Sindy,” of course, is the Hakra.
Mandelsloe says, that “ Bachar or Bukar, lies on both sides of the River Indus.”
He was in these parts in 1639.
Now let us see what wild theories have been entertained respecting Bakhar,
and its neighbourhood, centuries before it became an island, and even centuries
before any river passed near it.
Vincent, from whom others copy, in his “Navigation of the Ancients,” goes
back to Ptolemy. He says, “The author (Ptolemy) means Bekher [as Dr.
Vincent spells it] for the site of the tribe of Sogdi or Sabracse,” but Vincent himself
says: “ I take Binagara for Bekher. * * * Craterus was detached into Arachosia
and Drangiana from the island of the Sogdi, but he appears to have again rejoined
the main body.” Then again, referring to Pnrchas, he says, “ Bekher is equivalent
to the capital Mansura and the island. Suckor or Sunkar is a town on the island.”
I am sure Parchas never made such a statement that “Mansura was the capital,
or that Bakhar was Mansuriyah. While the writer knows all about Ptolemy, he
does not appear to have known who founded Mansuriyah or when, he seems to
know nothing of Bahman-abad or Bahman-nih, nor of Alor the ancient capital of
Sind.
Tod (p. 334) says, “ The island of Buk’har [in other places he styles it “ Rory
Bekher ” — perhaps they were quite different places in his imagination] on the Indus,
is a place celebrated in Alexander’s voyage.” He also supposes that “ Sangra ” is
“ a stream branching from the Indus,” and that it branches off at Dura, seven
miles north of “ Buk’har;” and that it must be the Sankra [sic] of Nader Shah’s
treaty with Muhammad Shah Badshah. Such nonsense as the above may be allowed to
496 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
he had reduced Thathah, and all Upper Sind had been ceded to him,
it was then an island. On his approaching it from Ohandu ka, he was
met by the governor he had sent thither previously, at the kasbah of
Sliakar (as it is written in two out of three copies of his work consulted,
and Sakar in the third) ; and it was just after this, that the Sayyids of
Bakhar voluntarily left it, and were assigned places of residence in the
kasbah of Riirhi.
When Shah Beg Khan, subsequently, in consultation with his son,
Mirza Shah Husain, resolved to repair and add to the fortifications of
Bakhar, the old fort of Aror, and other buildings there, were demolished
for the sake of the kiln burnt bricks to furnish materials for the pur¬
pose, together with numerous buildings, which, in former days, had
been erected by the Turks and Sammahs. The fortifications then
added to and repaired were still standing in 1007 H. (1598-99 A.D.).
Mir Ma’sum likewise states in his History, that Humayun Badshah
received the envoy of Mirza Shah Husain, the Arghun Mughal ruler of
Sind, “ at the baladah of Bakhar,” which must have been on the main
land even then, because the Badshah never set foot in the fortress.
When we read in that History of the garrison making sallies on Humayun
Badshah’s investing forces, and that all that he required was siege
materials to effect its capture, the conviction will again present itself,
that the fortress of Bakhar must have still been connected, in some way,
with the main land, as a great number of vessels, which the Bad¬
shah did not possess, would have been required to carry on a siege, as
well as to convey siege materials.
rest on its own merits, except to notice that the author of the “ Gazetteer of Sind ”
tells ns, that “Bakhar district must not be confused Avith the island of Bukkur [sic],”
thus pretending that there is a distinction between the two names which does not,
and never did, exist. The same writer also refers to a singular “ sanad ” granted
to the Saiyads of Bakhar [sic] in A.D. 1711, by the Emperor Jehandar Shah, still
in existence [what a long time has elapsed ! ] as showing his connection with the
Government of Sind. How wonderful ! It did not occur to the writer that the
Mughal Empire of Dehli included Sind, and was de facto included in it, until the
disaffection of the Kalhorahs in 1126 H. (1714 A.D.). Had he studied the history —
the true history — of these parts, he would have found that Sind continued to con¬
stitute a part of the Mughal Empire until ceded to Nadir Shah by treaty in May,
1739. See also page 677 for one of the rich specimens of Gazetteer History con¬
tained in that work.
Postans (“ Personal Observations”) says, that Sakliar “ is better known to the
natives as Chipri bunder j” and Elliot (“ Indian Historians,” Yol. I, p. 521), follow¬
ing Postans, says : “ Sakar or Sakhar, is better known to the natives as “ Chipri-
bandar,” which would imply that it was, in part at least, artificial.” Of the deriva¬
tion of “ Chipri” I am unaware.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind audits Tributaries. 497
Bat I am anticipating, and must return to the discussion of the
state of the rivers at other epochs.
The western branch of the Hakra was thus diverted from the
vicinity of Aror more to the westward, and that branch only ; for we
know from the personal knowledge of a contemporary historian, the
author of the Tabakat-i-Kasiri, that in 624 H. (1227 A.D. ), Wanjh-rut
on the Hakra was a flourishing place, and the chief town of a district,
extending eastwards to the Bikanfr border. When the author reached
I/chchh from Khurasan in the above year, having come down to that
place from Ghaznih by way of Banian in the Koh-i-Jud or Salt Range,
by boat on the Bihat, he was made Kazi of the forces under Sultan
Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah’s son, ’Ala-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-Bahram Shah,
and Principal of the Firuzi College at l/chqhh. At this period the
camp was pitched before the gate of the knsbah of Ahrawat ( cirjtyM-
Uhar-ot, possibly ) ; and the whole of Kaba-jah’s fleet, and boats, on
which the baggage and followers of his army were embarked, were
moored in front. Soon after, the author went over to the winning
side — to the enemy’s camp — as soon as the Dilhi forces appeared ; and
the first of the great feudatories to whom he presented himself was Malik
Taj-ud-Din, Sanjar-i-Gajzlak Khan, a personage, he says, “ of sufficiently
formidable aspect, and his form of magnitude,” who then held the
district of Wanjh-rut of Multan ; and after U'chchh and Bakhar fell, he
was placed in charge of the territories dependent on them, which in¬
cluded the greater part of upper Sind. The district of Wanjh-rut de¬
pended on the Hakra ; and that river continued to flow past the town,
and through the district dependent on it, after the western branch was
diverted from Aror, and to flow much as it had previously done towards
Mansuriyah. This state of things continued up to, and for some seventy
or eighty years after the investment of U'chchh by the Mughals in 643
H. (1245 A.D.).
Wanjh-rut, improperly called “ Bijnoot ” and “ Tij not ” by those
who did not know the correct name of this place, was still in existence
a few years since. It stood, in ancient times, before the Hakra or
Wahindah ceased to flow, on the east side of that branch of the great
river which passed Aror on the east, and was afterwards diverted, as
already related, about twenty miles lower down. Its situation was in
the do-abah or delta between that branch and the main channel, about
forty miles below the junction of the rivers, forming the Mihran of
Sind, at Dosh-i-Ab, on the south-west, and is now rather less than eight
miles east, inclining slightly south-east, from the present Khair-pur
Dehr ke. The changes in the river caused it to go to decay centuries
since, although Siw-rahi or Siw-ra’i, which was, probably, a more
l. 3
498 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
ancient place, was still the chief place of a mahall of the Berun-i-
Panch Nad division of the sarkdr of Multan in the time of Akbar
Badshah.
At the period I refer to, a few years since, the site of Wanjh-rut
comprehended a collection of mounds of a blackish colour, ranging
from twelve to twenty feet in height, consisting of the remains of
pottery, fragments of charcoal, and great bricks, such as have been
found at Bahman-abad and in ruined sites higher up, along the banks
of the rivers, and at Bahram ke on the Gharah, and in the ancient
towns of Hindustan. These bricks range in size from fifteen to eighteen
inches long, from nine to twelve broad, and from five to six thick. The
site extends for about half a mile in length and half that in breadth,
and is about a mile and a half in circumference. The base thereof has
been silted up to some four or five feet in height by alluvial deposits,
caused by the changes in the old channel of the river, and the action of
water during the lapse of centuries. There are also a number of mounds
beyond the site, marking where suburbs probably stood. In the centre
of the place there are the remains of a Hindu temple of some kind, built
chiefly of sand-stone, the nearest point from which such is now obtain¬
able is Jasal-mir. Only a few fragments of stone carvings remain
which can tend to the identification of the style and date of the build¬
ing. Some very small silver and copper coins have also been found,
but the figures thereon were too defaced to make anything of them,
and also beads, and fragments of other ornaments. The natives for
years have been carrying away the stones and bricks for building pur¬
poses ; but now, I am told, the Railway Vandals have appeared, and
have been demolishing the site as fast as possible, and other ancient
remains, for “ ballast ” for a Railway ! See note 41, page 169, note 464,
page 429, and “ Notes on Afghanistan,” etc., page 669.
The next or third transition was caused by the great flood, which
overwhelmed the whole of the northern parts of the territory of the
Panj A'b or Five Rivers, as already described at page 392, which occurred
between the time of the investment of U'chohli by the Mughals, and the
invasion of Hind by Amir Timur, that is, between 643 H. and 801 H.,
about the years 720 to 725 H. (1320 to 1324 A.D.). It was at this period
that the Bihat or Jihlam and Ohin-ab, having altered their courses con¬
siderably, united a short distance — a few miles — below Shor or Shor Kot,
whereby that place became placed in the fork between the two rivers,
and in the Ohin-hatli Do-abah. That fort is, doubtless, that which
Amir Timur refers to in his account of the passage of the united
rivers below the junction, and the surging and uproar caused by the
meeting of the waters, (see page 279) ; for the Tajzik word shor , signi-
1892.] H. G-. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 499
fying ‘disturbance,’ ‘tumult,’ ‘uproar,’ and the like, was probably the
origin of the subsequently named, Shor or Shor Kot.
By this change in their courses, the two united rivers above-named
moved some fourteen or fifteen miles farther westwards than before,
and abandoned the Rawi altogether ; and instead of passing Multan
on the east side, and which had been previously in the Sind-Sagar Do-
abah, they passed it on the west side, and thus placed it in the Raohin-ab
Do-abah, but Uchchh was thereby placed in the Bist Jalhandar Do-
abah.573 The united Bihat and Chin-ab now united with the Biah —
with which the Rawi still united574 on the east side of Multan, but
much lower down than before — a little to the north of Jalal-pur in the
south-west corner of the Multan district as now constituted, about forty
miles below that city, and some thirty miles above Uchchh. The united
Rawi and Biah had consequently to run between twenty-five and thirty
miles to the south-westwards to unite with the Chin-ab and Wihat ;
and, soon after, a little lower down, these four united with the A'b-i-
Sind or Indus thus forming a new Panch Nad or Panj Ab near Uchchh
on the west, and deserting the Hakra for good.
It was at this period, I believe, if it had not previously done so,
that the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind threw oft a branch farther westwards,
between Rujan and Kashmur,575 which flowed in the channel which
673 When Abu-1-Fazl wrote the A’in-i-Akbari, Uchchh, through other changes,
had been thrust out of the Do-abahs entirely, and became Beruti-i-Panch Nad, or
Extra Panj Ab, or outside the clo-abahs embraced between these rivers ; and Uchchh
was still thus situated when the A’in-i-Akbari was completed; while Multan,
through a change in the Rawi, was then in the Bari Do-abah as at present.
Before this, the Rawi had united with the Chin-ab before the junction
with the Biah, and nearer to Multan on the east, which part is still known as
taraf- i-Rawi.
575 Ibn Bat utah makes some remarkable observations in confirmation of this.
Respecting the Ab-i-Sind, he says, that he came down the river, and on the 1st of
Muharram, 734 H. (11th September, 1333 A.D.), reached the junction forming
the Panj Ab. Then he says, that “ here commences the territory of the Sultan of
Hind and Sind; and from thence it is necessary, that a description in writing
should be sent of persons arriving on the frontier, to the Amir of the province of
Sind stationed at Multan.” From the junction he proceeded to Jatu-i [in the
original Mss. consulted written or for in which are located a
•• •• ••
people called al-Samirah [Sumrah ?] who have been dwelling in that part from the
period of the conquest of Sind in the time of Amir Hajjaj. From thence he went
to Siw-istan, and makes no mention of Bakhar in going thither, but, coming from
Sind on his way to Multan, he came to Bakhar, which he says is “ a handsome city
(or town) divided by an arm of the Ab-i-Sind. Where was the other arm or arms,
or main channel ? arid how did he reach Siw-istan without passing Bakhar, as he
appears to have done ? I conceive that he went down by the channel flowing farther
west; but, if not, he certainly refers to another arm or channel of the Ab-i-Sind,
500 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
passed more directly westwards towards Shah-pur and Gohchh, in
tli e part known at present as Kachqhhi, and west and south of Khan
Garb (now Jacob-abad), and from thence towards Khairo Garhi and
Shadad-pur, receiving- between these two places the waters of the
streams from the hills on the north, north-west, and west, which hitherto
had made their way towards the Manchhar lake, and the Lakhhi range
of mountains. Then issuing from the lake, and bending more towards
the south-south-east towards Nasr-pur, and near that place deserting
its former channel running in the direction of Badin — one of those
intervening between the Puranah Dhorah or Old Channel and the
present channel of the Indus — the stream turned to the southwards
to unite with the sea not far beyond Shakar-piir, where the remains of
an ancient town still exist.576 Other, bat minor channels, running
southwards or branching off from the main channel, there must have
been then as now, and these I need scarcely refer to here, save to one
larger than the others which passed east of the town of Jarak, and
from thence towards Samui-Nagar, before Thathah was founded, about
740 H. (1339-40 A.D.).577
Thus did the river called the Sind Rud or Rud-i-Sind wo Hind,
which, when the old ’Arab geographers and chroniclers wrote, consisted
of the Wihat, Chin-ab, Rawi, and Biah, desert the EJakra or Wahindah
altogether, but the Sutlaj — which then flowed in the Uboh-har channel,
and has been incorrectly called “ the Western Nyewal” — and the Ghag-
and that certainly flowed in the Sind Hollow, or some distance west of Bakhar.
From the latter place he went on to Multan by Lfchchh, which, he says, was on
the Ab-i-Sind.
576 The ruins of several ancient towns are said to exist in this neighbourhood.
There is a mound at a place called “ Kakeyja,” in one map, and “ Kakeja ” in
another, thirty miles south-east of Jarak. Another ruined site is at “ Katbaman ”
of the maps, tw6nty-four miles east-south-east of Jarak ; a third at “ Shah Toorail,”
nine miles north-north-east of Badin, and rather less than two mites from the recent
west bank of the Guni branch of the Indus ; and a fourth collection of ruins at
41 Nindimanee,” five miles east of Muhabbat Dero. These I believe to have been
in the southernmost parts of the Bet or delta mentioned in the operations of the
Arab leader Muhammad, son of Kasim. See note 187, page 234, and note 538,
page 468.
Close to where the Fulaili and Guni branches of the Indus used to unite, the
ruins of large buildings and fragments of broken bricks and pottery covered the
ground for miles.
677 Mir Ma’sum says, in his History, that when Shah Beg Khan attacked Thathah
the first time on the 11th Muharram, 926 H. (2nd January, 1520 A.D ), he came from
the northward by the Lakhhi Hills, and took up his position on the banks of the
Khan Wa-hah, three Jcuroh (about five miles and a quarter) north of the city; and,
that in those days, it was the main branch of the river, but there was water to the
south likewise, in another channel.
1892.] H. G. Raver ty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 501
ghar and its tributaries, along with the Chitang, continued to unite
with the Hakra as before.
The movement to the westward of Multan of the Wihat and Chiu-
ab appears to have affected the Nil Ab, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus likewise,
and their junction with it tended to its inclining farther westwards to
near ’All-pur and Sit-pur downwards, forming a new channel for itself,
but a considerable distance above the point where it had before united
with the Hakra, thus deserting altogether its former channel by Ghaus-
pur in which it flowed to unite with the Hakra at Dosh-i-Ab ; while,
lower down than that point, this new Panoh Nad or Panj Ab, entered
and appropriated the channel of the western or Ra-in or Ra-ini branch
of the Hakra, a little above Bakhar, and then nearly dry in consequence
of this desertion of the main stream above the point of separation of
the Hakra branch, and passed on towards Rurhi and Bakhar.
In the meantime, between this great transition (brought about
mostly, if not entirely, by the great flood in the northern part of the
Panj Ab territory) and the preceding one, the delta between the sea-port
of Debal, and the principal mouth of the Great Mihran or Hakra, ¥a-
hindah, or Sind-Sagar, below Badin, had been gradually increasing from
the deposits washed down ; and, at the same time, the territory of
KachcJbh or Kachchh Bhuj, as its name, signifying ‘ new,’ 4 crude/
‘ newly-formed/ ‘ alluvial,’ etc., which hitherto consisted of several rocky
heights lying along the sea-coast writh a ran or vast marshy tract on the
other side, was being gradually increased by these deposits from the
Hakra and what had been brought down by the Loni river and its
affluents.
The river Sutlaj which for a long period of time — since the last
great change or transition — had flowed in the channel by Uboh-har
(the “ Western Nyewal ” of the maps) still continued to be a tributary
of the Hakra, but, affected by the same causes that had led it previously
to alter its course westwards from its older channels, caused it now to
take a course still more to the westwards on leaving the hills near Ruh-
par, and then to bend to the south-west again, and to form a new chan¬
nel for itself about midway between the Uboh-har channel and that
of the present Hariari, Nili, or Gharah, which, instead of uniting with
the Hakra near Marut as before, flowed in this new channel some sixteen
miles or more to the westwards of that place, and with a tortuous
course, to a point or position near which the present town of Bahawal-
pur stands, and which is said to occupy the site of an ancient city.
Passing east of it, it bent towards the south-west again j and some
twenty-two miles south-south-east of Ghaus-pur, and between Khan-pur
and Khair Gayh, about thirty-five miles below Dilawar or Dirawar,
502 H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
united with the Hakra, instead of higher up stream as it had formerly
done.678
Having lost such a large volume of water through the desertion of
the Panch Nad or Panj Ab, the Hakra had, with some difficulty, con¬
tinued up to this period to be a perennial stream, and on this account,
when it (including its tributary the Sutlaj ) 679 reached near to Kand-
harah or Kandharo and Wanjh-rut, near where the Hakra, as long as
the Panch Nad continued to unite with it at Dosh-i-A'b, sent off the
branch towards Aror (which had subsequently been diverted towards
the lime-stone range, which at first it passed on the north and west),
it now, likewise, separated into two channels, the western-most or
minor of the two, entered the channel of the Ra’in or Ra’ini or old
diverted channel, and struggled on towards Aror.580 During seasons
of inundation, the overflow waters from the Panch Nad or Panj A'b,
as far north as Ghaus-pur above which the ancient junction used to be,
678 This is the period referred to in the Tarfkh-i-Tahiri, which says, that “ That
part of Sind which is now flourishing [when written in 1621 A.D.] was a mere
waste at the period of the rale of the Sumrah’s, between 700 H. (1300 A.D.) and
843 H. (1439 A.D.), owing to the decrease of the Ab-i-Sind, namely the Panj Ab
[including the Ab-i-Sind], which from Bakliar [as it is therein spelt] downwards, is
called the Bahmin [the old Panch Nad as before described]. No water flowed
towards those then waste parts. * * * The chief town of the Sumrahs was
Muhammad Tur.” The writer refers here to the period when the Sammah tribe was
in a flourishing condition ; and it must not be supposed that by the Panj Ab or the
Sind that the Ab-i-Sind or Indus is referred to, because he immediately adds res¬
pecting it, the diversion of the stream passing Aror on the east, and relates the
tradition already narrated at page 484, namely, “ Below the city of Aror [the city
was built chiefly on the skirt of the rocky hills, but its suburbs probably extended
some distance farther east] the river of the Panj Ab flowed, which was likewise
called by the names of Hakra, Wahindah, and Wa-han, and other names, for it
changes almost at every village it passes After fertilizing the country the river
unites with the ocean.”
The dates given by the Tarikh-i-Tahiri above, are totally wrong even by its own
statements, otherwise, when did the Sammahs come into power ? The Sumrahs
acquired power in Lar, Debal, or Lower Sind about 261 H. (874-75 A.D.), and in
738 H. (1337-38 A.D .) they fell, and the Sammahs rose. Their power lasted, inde¬
pendently from 752 H. (1351 A.D.) to 927 H. (1520 A.D.), when the rule of the
Sammahs was subverted by the Arghun Mughals. See the latter part of note 315,
page 317.
679 The Hakra having lost its last chief tributary in losing the Sutlaj — for the
Ghag-ghar, and its tributaries, could not alone, except in time of floods, reach
much beyond the points where in former periods the other rivers used to add their
waters to it — it from that time, may be said to have ceased to flow.
680 This seems to be what Salbanke refers to as the river Damiadee, or very
much like it. Since he visited Bakhar, no doubt many changes, that we know not
of, may have taken place. See note 572, page 493.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 503
found their way into tlie old channel, which still remains in the form
of a great depression ;68i and this overflow, uniting with such water as
continued to run in the old diverted channel east of Aror, subsequently
united with the main channel of the Hakra near Sayjidah. This
second or minor branch is what appears in our maps as the “ River
Nara,” and “Western ISTarra,” locally called Narah — Snake or Snake¬
like — from its tortuous course.
Such was the general state of the rivers from near the period of
Amir Timur’s invasion of Hindustan, until about the period of Babar
Badshah’s invasion of the country of the Panj Ab in 925 H. (1519 A.D.).
The fifth great change or transition occurred when the Sutlaj, the
681 By this depression the “ Khoonnn Leht ” of the Collector of Shikar-pur
referred to in note 563, page 482, finds its way into the old channel. In his
“ Report on the Indus,” Wood says, respecting that portion of its course between
Mithan Kot and Bakhar — Ghaus-pur, mentioned above, lies nearly due east from
the first-named place — that, “neither on the east or west banks of this division
is there an outer bank, and the consequence is, that the country here is largely
inundated. In the Mizarry districts [he refers to the tracts west of Mithan Kot,
inhabited by the Mazari Baluchis], the floods of 1837 fell twenty miles back from
the river [this overflow was towards the old channel I have before alluded to
between Rujan and Kashmur] ; but, in ordinary seasons, twelve is the more usual
measure of the width. On the opposite bank [the Ghaus-pur side], the inundation
about Subzakote reaches to the edge of the desert [that is to the channel of the
Hakya.]
A little above Mithan Kot, he says, that “ in the month of May, the breadth
of the Indus was 608 yards, while the Chenab or Panjab was 1776 yards, and almost
twice as deep — all canals cut from the Sind [Indus], and surplus wraters pour into
the Chenab.”
If we draw a line from Multan westwards towards the Derah of Ghszi Khan,
and then from those places down to Ghaus-pur, 107 miles south of the former and
86 of the latter, and near which is said to be the site of an ancient city, which
I believe to have been Basmxd, we shall find what a great depression exists in the
part where the Sindhu or Ab-i-Sind and the Rud-i-Sind wo Hind or Panch Nad had
formerly flowed. Multan is 402 feet above the sea, Basirah 409, and the Derah of
Ghazi Khan 440 feet ; while Bahawal-pur is 375 feet, ’Ali-pur 337, and Ghaus-pur
but 295. In this depression the Sindhu or A'b-i-Sind, and the Sind Rud or Rud-i-
Sind wo Hind, flowed w'hen they were tributaries of the Hakra or Wahindah,
and the country all along the east side of the present course of the Indus as far
down as Bakhar and Aror, with the exception of around Kashmur on the opposite
side, where another depression turns westwards towards the Sind Hollow — indeed
it constitutes a portion of it — is higher than on the west side, hut slopes towards
Bakhar; but, on the other hand, there is another depression westwards, which
begins about forty-two miles north-north-west of Bakhar, which runs away
towards Shikar-pur which it passes on the north and west, runs down towards Mehar,
and meets the depression from the direction of Shadad-pur and Khairo Garhx where
the “ Sind-Hollow ” depression turns southwards. See note 575, page 499.
504 H. G. Raverty — The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.
most erratic of all the rivers in this part, instead of flowing in a south¬
westerly direction on leaving the hills near Ruh-par by Cham-kaur,
and! running by Farid Kot, Makti-sar, and Bagh-sar, towards Baha-
wal-piir to unite with the Hakra, as it had previously done, turned
sharply towards the west on issuing from the hills, then turned more
towards the north-west, near Ludhianali, towards Fil-ur, and united
temporarily with the river Biah at Loh-Wal or Lohi-Wal, when the
united streams lost their respective names and became known as the
Harfari, Nurni, or Nili. This united stream after flowing for about
twenty-one miles, again began to separate between Kasur and Debal-
pur, and, soon after, separated into three, instead of into two streams,
as they had previously been. The Biah, it must be remembered, con¬
tinued to flow in its own independent channel, which it had never left
within the range of history, except to change, as it probably did, from
one side to the other and back again in the space constituting its bed,
which hereabouts is from eighteen to twenty miles broad ; and on this
fresh separation it still continued to flow in it as before under its own
name. The middle branch of the three, above referred to, was of minor
importance with respect to the other two, and was then known as the
Dandah,582 which ran almost parallel to the Biah, by Mails! and Lodh-
ran towards Jalal-pur. The third turned more to the south on sepa¬
rating, passed Ajuddhan, or the Pak Pattan, or Holy Town, ten or
twelve miles on the east and south, and regained its name of Sutlaj.
These three branches having flowed apart for just one hundred kuroh,
or one hundred and seventy-five miles,533 again converged towards
each other, the Sutlaj passing near Bahawal-pur on the north, re-united
with the middle branch or Dandah, and then with the Biah once more,
about five miles to the westward of Jalal-pur above-mentioned, and
formed the Ghallu Gharah or Gharah, 534 all three branches thus losing
their old names for this new one.
Thus the Dandah and Sutlaj having re-united with the Biah and
become the Gharah, with a considerable volume of water, pushed
farther westwards from the place of junction, and met the united Bihat,
Ohin-ab, and Rawi. They thus formed a fresh Panch Nad or Panj
632 The meaning assigned to Dandah by the people of this part bas been pre¬
viously mentioned.
58E The middle branch did not flow apart quite so far, as it united with the
Sutlaj before it again united with the Biah, as already stated.
634 Some persons have supposed that Gharah means ‘ mud,’ ‘ silt,’ etc., but
such is not the case, this word is written and while gara means
‘ mud,’ ‘ earth mixed as mortar,’ or ‘ earth prepared for potters.’ See also note 73,
page 183.
1892.] H. G. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 505
Ab,686 without the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus being included as it had
hitherto been ; and such was the general state of these rivers as known
to Abu-1-Fazl when he wrote the A’in-i-Akbari, but this formation of
the Gh&rali had taken place nearly a century before he finished his
work; for when Mirza Shah Husain, the son of Shah Beg Khan, the
Arghun Mughal, overcame the Langah Jat ruler of Multan in 931 H.
(1525 A.D.), he made the Gharah the boundary between their respec¬
tive territories.
By this fresh movement in the courses of the rivers, I/chohh was
removed from the Bist Jalhandar Do-abah into the tract known as
Berun-i-Panch Nad, that is, outside the Five Rivers. The united
streams flowing in one channel under the name of Panch Nad or Panj
Ab for about eighteen or twenty miles, or much more, allowing for the
windings, and subject to minor changes more or less every year, united
with the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus a little below Sit-pur and
ITchohh ; and by this junction the Panch Nad then extended almost
as far above Gchchh as the Panch Nad of the present day extends in
the opposite direction below that place.686
Such was the general state of the rivers, as here described, up to
about ten years before the close of the last century, or just one hundred
years since.
The fifth, and so far, last great transition, up to the present
time,587 began towards the close of the last century, when the Biah,
at last, deserted its ancient channel for the first time since it is heard
of in history ; and this was occasioned, apparently, through the Sutlaj
again altering its course still farther westwards. On issuing from the
hills of the Siwalikh, instead of passing close to Ludhianah, it left it
between seven and eight miles on the north by Fi-lur and ’All Wal
(the scene of General Sir Harry Smith’s brilliant victory over the
Sikhs), and from thence keeping to the northwards of west, united
with the Biah at Hari ke Patan, or Hari’s Ford, some fifteen or sixteen
miles farther west than before. On this the Biah deserted its channel,
and instead of inclining westwards— as all the other rivers had more
or less done, but the Sutlaj to the greatest extent — it took a totally
contrary direction to the east , deserting the channel it had flowed in for
635 This was the first occasion that any of the waters of the Sutlaj formed part
of the Panch Nad or Panj Ab, except, when as a tributary of the Hakra, it united
with that river lower down near Khan-pur and Khair Garh, and it had never reached
BO far west before, u within the range of history.
636 See page 302.
687 The earthquake of 1819 appears to have caused considerable change near
the sea coast, but whether its effects were felt more towards the north it is im¬
possible to say, as there are no particulars available.
M. 3
508 H. Gr. Raverty — The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No.]
tributaries the waters of all the rivers from the Chitang to the Sindhu
or Ab-i-Sind, through the loss of most of its tributaries, and the failure
of others, ceased to flow — although even now, in time of great floods
above, its waters have occasionally reached the ocean — the Sindhu, Ab-
i-Sind, or Indus, now become a mighty river by the accession of five of
those tributaries, flowed towards the south-westwards, changing at times
and forming new channels to be again abandoned, ever changing more
or less. It may be said without exaggeration, that there is little of the
vast, sloping, alluvial tract of Sind, below the parallel of U'chqhli, and
extending from Birsil-pur of Jasal-mir to Shadad-pur of Upper Sind, a
space of four geographical degrees in breadth, that the Hakra or
Wahindah and the Sindhu, Ab-i-Sind, or Indus, have not, at different
epochs, within about the last fifteen hundred years, flowed over ; for
the whole extent is literally seamed with their channels of lesser or
greater age, in all and in every direction.590
500 It seems that the new Railway — the Southern Panjab Railway — will run for
great part of its way, close and parallel to the old channels of the Ghag-ghar and the
Hakra, and will stand a great chance of being flooded. We may also be sure, if
steps have not been taken to prevent it, that all old sites will be destroyed for
“ ballast.” A sharp eye should also be kept on the finding of antiquities and hidden
treasure in such places.
Plate XI (HD
Journal As. Soc
G.Raverty del
Journal Ajs. Soc. BendVolLXI Part 1,1892.
Plato IV.
'
■
Journal. As. Soc.Jjqnjgj.A7oI J.iXlPfrrt [.1892.
Plate V,
CabuJL
B V L ^
''/It', t ( |t ‘ II'"'
ilMulLaji
■Bishur
Cambay
VSBECI#
TARTARIAN
C A N
A '% M r^- 77. .,uto,
4 CandaJwr ^ <%
w -
„ . .
#
JSbuj/r'CLCLctt
L aJwi'
€). ^ / 5^ iitlJlla^uxJcee the'
' .V Pihfaxuume of Uie
V-O-
& « '"DU*.
ft * ..S'
, , ft , ft a e _ %
I E A B A
A ft1.,
ft>
%% DELL I
\ 'V\
ift
Attack.
Belle
s .*w. .
^ (.||1" / ja / l
k Backed
Succor •
A . ••...
Hondo
0 */
JESEL
Feiizp or o
■^V aa
■'-•■>• /jeaeZmeer
BANDO
s: ,.«& tA/Da '- Jeeetmee
^ »*/ %. \ /
H- , ]U "'"‘1" ^4. M E E RE
Jcct;
a/*
o
O
FROM P1TRCHAS
About 1615 A. D.
Li±K ab tKe ludian Art C ottage , C alcatta.
P&sh it w ci f
-ShffcKot
v^5-'/°Firiirx
Qhcuxi
° TihAvanah
Bahawal-
'ms ah'
DIHLI
Bikanir
°Nohar
THE MIHRAN AND ITS TRIBUTARIES
At. or about, the time oftheArab Conquest
First Transition.
Seals, llridv =64 Miles ,or
Lith. at the Indian Art Cottage, Calcutta
\
-
To Face V ^80 Journal 32 6 Ext
<iwar
'1 Tsrrui'i
LAHOR
'trOx-pi b
'lamJtaur
-War aii
Derah ■
> Bhalindah
Tchchh
’Urie
wj OarTv
Dtran'i
DIHLI
£huuf>
THE MIHRA.N AND ITS TRIBUTARIES
Second Transito
Third Transition
Scale 1 1nch
the Indira Art Ci>u*^*, C*<ouHa
H.G Ra.verty.Del
VolI.XIPa.R I 18 92
of Tsmd’ily
AHOR
I.ixdhianahy
Macjfhi-Wttr- <jji
Tulanbah
VerahorGhw
If boh -haj'
hibalah
Bhatirixiah
3 Tihwanah '
Bhatrux yt
_ Bahaw?
t ''cJnJiJi
’ Hansi
Hhddara
DIHLI
Ghaujs Garh
S-haddad
Bikanir
Nohnr
Balmuuv
dmar Kot
THE MIHRAN AND ITS TRIBUTARIES
Fourth Transition
Last Transition
Scale llrwlv
6 4f Miles, or
H.G.Hja/v ,-r v 1 1] >1 .
Lith.ut.'thn Indian Art Gottaje, Calcutt;
Journal As Soe. Rcng. Vol 1.X1 Part l
Stale ot‘ live Old Channels of the IlakraRhin branches asatpresei
existing to lllusu-atc the native may. The ancient courses and as after
wards diverted from Aror indicated m light hlue colour.
Scale 4 miles to the inch.
(Taken from the IndianMas Map,)
Vbcu'ah ■
tulur
point of' S,
^portUujrv
to to o brcutdie*
pxu'Dihr he
^dnjh-rut
Mail aZah
Mittxih MeJiar
JQicur Gunk
{du>erU'<'i
° Ibrahim Mahr
Qhichuri
Dal thin
Boh l
MuhcunuuuJy- n oli Dart' v
X Dang ah - ncdt Dart
Yyv Murad,- wait Dart
,ali Shah
LiiL at the I/idibii Art Coua-gc, Calcutta,
Flute X.
NORTH
Journal As. Soc.Beng Yol LXI Part 1,1892.
To Face Page 4*66.
Plate Xffl(V).
H. G.Ravertj Del
Tf'is m-aptaTr&n from one about one hundred and fifty yeai's ofd
shows the state of' tf>e delta near the months of theJtaJcr'Q. and
A Jj frS in dor. Indus abfhxit period.
Lidiafc I A Cottage, Oaioatta .
JOURNAL
OF THE
ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL.
Part i — HISTORY, LITERATURE, &e.
EXTRA-NUMBER.
1892.
Set Mahet. — By W. Hoey.
Introduction.
The following notes originally formed a report on the excavations
and explorations conducted by me at Set Mahet during the cold weather
of 1881-85, under the orders of the Local (Government, at whose dis¬
posal the Maharani of Balrampur had placed Its. 5,000 for the purpose.
Work did not commence until the 15th December 1881. Operations of
excavation continued up to about the middle of May 1885. Unfortu¬
nately more than one-third of the money at my disposal had to be
expended npon cutting the dense jungle which covered the site.
Once the jungle had been cut I fixed on certain prominent features
and laid out lines which the labourers, who were distributed into
gangs, were required to follow under the supervision of gangmen. The
result was that I have been able in the case of Mahet to lay out some
of the general outlines of the city, the gates and the main street of the
eastern part, and I think I have determined what the chief mounds in
that quarter represent. I have also found some buildings, both Jain
and Hindu, in the western quarter, and have opened up the mound of
Somnath. Outside the city, I have shown what Baghela Bari and
1
2
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra-No.
Kandh Bari are. I have also explored the smaller mound near Ora Jhar,
called Panahiya Jhar, and have shown what it was. The large mound
of Ora Jhar I have left practically untouched. I have examined the
buildings outside the Imliya Darwaza, the western gate, and found a
large number of seals and other remains there, but the uses of the
buildings are still problematical, and we can only surmise that they
formed an apron to the fortified gate.
As to Set, erroneously spelt by previous writers Saliet, I explored
it more fully, and I would refer to the full details and plans which
I give. Here I need only say that my explorations at the octagonal
well show beyond doubt that the lowest present level of the surface of
the Jetavana site is at least thirteen feet above the original garden-
surface. This fact will of itself show how vast an undertaking the
exploration of this venerated ruin is. I regret now that I did not con¬
fine myself to this alone.
The maps and plans which I have prepared are numbered and are
as follows : —
1. General map of Set Mahet.
2. Map showing location of Ora Jhar and Panahiya Jhar with
reference to the city.
3. Map showing outline of both Ora Jhar and Panahiya Jhar irre¬
spective of relative location.
4. Plan of the old Buddhist building in the mound near Kandh
Bari with the later Hindu shrine crowning it.
5. Plan of Set, showing all buildings opened up and trenches cut
by me.
6. Plan of building No. 1 in Set.
7. Plan of Gandha Kuti.
8. Plan of Kosamblia Kuti.
9. Plan of buildings Nos. 17, 18, 19 in Set.
10. Plan of buildings Nos. 21, 22, 23, and 24 in Set.
11. Plan showing the so-called octagonal well, and the pillar and
stupas near it.
12. Sariputta’s stupa.
13. Plan of Mahet South, showing Broad Street and part of the
line of shops.
14. Plan of Mahet East, showing Saiyad Miran’s Dargah, the
Pakka Kuti, the Kachcha Kuti, and Angulimala Stupa.
15. Plan of Pakka Kuti.
16. Plan of Kachcha Kuti.
17. Plan of Mahet West.
18 Plan of Somnath.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
3
39. Plans of two Jain temples.
20. Plan of the Hindu, temple.
The text falls naturally under five heads :
1. An historical sketch, a compilation of whatever data we have
to go upon, whether history or legend. It will be found to contain
something readable, if not very valuable, in the passages referring to
Saiyad Salar’s invasion and the translation of the popular ballad relat¬
ing to the episode at Bahraich, containing references to Set-Mahet.
2. A general review of places outside Set and Mahet and an ex¬
planation of the General Map.
3. An account of the explorations at Set,
4. An account of those at Mahet.
5. A stone inscription from Set.
Part I.
General Historical Note.
The ruins of Set Mahet stand on the west bank of the Rapti,
where that river crosses the boundary between the modern districts of
Bahraich and Gonda in the province of Oudh. Local tradition connects
with it Suhel Deo, one of the opponents of Saiyad Salar, and this would
bring it into touch with one of the earliest episodes of Moslem invasion
and aggression during the period of Muhammadan supremacy, but the
place has, as far as we know, played no part in later history. Y"et it had
associations, political and religious, for Hindu, Jain, and Buddhist more
than a thousand years before the founder of the Muhammadan faith was
born. Over the history of this long period of religious, social, and poli¬
tical revolutions a vail is spread, lifted at but a few and long intervals,
when we see the city the centre of political life and religious movement.
At other times we seem to penetrate the vail, but not until we have a
broader and more intimate knowledge of Sanscrit and Pali literature,
and of the peoples lying north of Oudh, shall we be able to fill in the
outlines of its history.
Before stating anything as to the result of recent explorations, I
have thought it both advisable and regular, to bring together in a con¬
nected form all that I have been able to gather of historical fact, and
perhaps of legend, as a basis of operation. This will show both the data
we have to guide and the matter we have to illustrate.
The name Set Mahet has been, as it seems to me, erroneously,
supposed to be a rhyming word formed according to common usage, on
the analogy of ‘ ulta-pulta ’ and similar words. The Set alone is then
taken to be a corruption of Sawatthi. Some people finding the word
4
W. Hoe j— Set Mahet.
[Extra-No.
‘ set-met * meaning ‘ topsy turvy,’ and seeing its resemblance to Set
Mahet, have supposed that the place as a great ruin has been so called
in allusion to its upheaval, which tradition says occurred on Suhel Deo’s
fall. The people on the spot tell the story and the curious fact exists
that they call the Jetavana mound Set. The settlement map first
prepared after the annexation calls it Set, and the patwaris of the
neighbourhood preserve the name. This is of vast importance, for the
name Set Mahet, which is the correct spelling as I have ascertained, is
wholly different from the word ‘ sent-ment ’ which is suggested as its
derivation, and the name would obviously have been not Set Mahet, or
Sahet Mahet, but Set Met if this derivation were correct. The name
Sahet Mahet hitherto applied by those who follow General Cunningham
must be discarded. It seems to me that Set is a corruption of Sawatthi
and that it probably came to be applied eventually by visitors to the
Jetavana, as it was the chief attraction after the decline of the city,
which, though larger, was but a decayed ruin, and was less attractive to
the pilgrim. The city was then probably known as Sawatthi Mahati,
the larger Srawasti, and this, having been curtailed locally to Mahati,
became corrupted to Mahet.
The name which the city bears in Sanscrit, Sravasti, is said to have
been given to the city by its legendary founder, Saravasta, who is re¬
presented to have been a king of the Solar dynasty : but this may be
set aside for the more obvious derivation, the 1 pleasant city ’ or ‘ city
sacred to Sri’ [Sraya Vasti], implied in its fame as 4 the city of the
seven precious things’ and thus sacred to the goddess of wealth and
plenty. A remarkable passage occurs in the 4 Romantic History of
Buddha ’ [Beal, p. 11], where Buddha is consulted prior to his concep¬
tion as to the place where he would elect to be born. Savatthi is pro¬
posed, the capital of the kings of Kosala. Buddha declines the sugges¬
tion, saying : 4 The kings of Kosala have descended from Matangas
[probably we should read Malangas] “ both on the mother’s and father’s
“ side, of impure birth : and in former days they were of small repute,
“ without any personal courage or nobleness of heart : the country com-
‘‘ paratively poor : although there are the seven precious things there, yet
“ they are in no abundance. Therefore I cannot be born there.”
It is, 1 think, equally fallacious to attempt to establish a connection
between the name of the city and the name of the river. The Pali
name of the Rapti is Aciravati, which still survives in the softened form
of Ahiravati, which the river bears in its course through the hills, a
name which reappears as Irrawaddy in Burmah. The Sanscrit form of
the name is Airavati. Thus the Sanscrit words Sravasti and Airavati
stand corresponding to the Pali Savatthi and Aciravati, and it is not easy
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
5
to see liow in either case the name of the city could have been derived
from that of the river. The connection of any of these with Savitar
the sun-god is equally unobvious. I have only to add that Fa Hian
calls the city Shewei while Hwen Thsang calls it Shylofasiti.
It has been supposed that the city mentioned by Ptolemy under the
name of Sapolis is Sravasti. The suggestion has arisen probably by
taking the Pali Sa and joining it to the Greek — -polis (city) as a sub¬
stitute for — vasti — vastu — vatthi. However neat this conception may
be, I think we must discard it. Ptolemy mentions four cities : Boraita
( v . 1. Boraila), Sapolis, Eorta and Rappha, lying west of the river
Sarabos. We know that Sarabos is the Sarayu or Ghagra which appears
in Pali as Sarabhu. It seems that Ptolemy received the Pali form and
wrote Sarabos as the Greek equivalent, but the position of the four cities
with reference to the river forbids our taking Sapolis as a rendering of
Savatthi. The four cities must, I think, be looked for in the Ganges —
Ghagra Duab.
The earliest data which we have connected by tradition with Sra¬
vasti are derived, according to some, from the poetical accounts of the
Aswamedha of Yudislithir given in the Mahabharata and the Jaimini
Bharata or Jaimini Aswamedha. Unfortunately I have not a copy of
the former at hand, but I have consulted what purports to be a Hindi
rendering of the latter. To it therefore I confine myself, and I must
correct a mistake into which General Cunningham and Mr. Benett have
fallen when they accepted a lame tradition and gave a line of Gauda
or Gonda rajas :
A. D. 900. 1. Mayura-dhwaja or Mora-dhwaja.
925. 2. Hansa-dhwaja.
950. 3. Makara-dhwaja.
975. 4. Sudhanwa-dhwaja.
1000. 5. Suliil-dal-dliwaja (contemporary of Mahmud).
The Jaimini Bharata mentions several kings and their kingdoms
into which the famous steed Shyamkaran found his way. Among
others he came to the country of Raja Hansa-dhwaj whose capital was,
as given in the Jaimini Bharata, Champakapuri. Local tradition has
transformed the name to Chandrikapuri. Arjun was commanding the
force which followed the horse. Hansa-dhwaj was for submitting to a
peace, but he was overruled by his queen, who said Krishna would come
and a view of the divine being be vouchsafed in the battle. The kino*
had two sons, Surath and Sudhanya, who both perished in the fight, but
the latter left his wife pregnant and she bore a son, Bibek, who conti¬
nued the royal line. The contest was in truth unequal from the first, as
might be expected when Arjun was aided by Krishna. The king’s army
6
W. Hoey — Set Mahet .
[Extra- No.
fled and he ordered his ministers, Sankh and Lakhit, to prepare caul¬
drons of boiling oil and to throw into them all who turned from battle.
Sudhanya had gone to take leave of his mother and wife, and the latter
detained him in love. He was late in joining his father, who ordered
him to be thrown into a cauldron of oil, but he came out of the seething
fluid unscathed, entered the fray and perished. I think we cannot
accept the identification of Champakapuri with Set Mahet, as the capital
of Kosala in the days of Yudishthir and the Mahabharata. The capital
of Hansadliwaj was probably Bhagalpur in Bengal.
Sravasti emerges into full light in Buddha’s lifetime about 500
B. C. We then find Prasenajit, son of Aranemi Brahmadatta, ruling
here as king of Kosala. He was probably of about the same age as Bud¬
dha. He was twice married. His first wife was Varshika, a Kshatriya
princess, by whom he had a son named Jeta. His second marriage was
probably a mesalliance. The woman whom he married Mallika, was not
a Kshatriya. By her the king had a son Virudhaka who succeeded him.
She was also probably mother of Seger Sandalitu, a son of Prasenajit ,
who is said to have been elected ruler of Tibet and to have been the first
king of that country.
The marriage of Prasenajit and Mallika was an event of much
importance and, being the origin of one of the most important events in
Buddha’s life, must be noticed here. The Sakya Mahanaman of Kapi-
lavastu was Buddha’s paternal uncle and of course a Kshatriya. He
brought Chandra, the orphan daughter of a Brahman steward, to live
in his house and help his aged wife. She is said to have been in the
habit of weaving pretty garlands of flowers and so Mahanaman called
her Mallika, the ‘ wreath-girl.’ I think it not unlikely that the name
betrays a connection with the Mallas, and that the story about the
garlands is merely a fabula e nomine. Anyhow, one day Prasenajit came
to Kapilavastu during a hunting excursion, saw her in Malianaman’s
garden, fell in love with her and eventually married her. The fruit
of this union was Virudhaka. At the same time Prasenajit’s jpurohita
was presented with a son, Ambharisha, who became a close friend of the
young prince. On one occasion, when the two youths were on a hunt¬
ing expedition together, they came to Kapilavastu, and entered the
Sakyas’ park. The offended Sakyas spoke of Virudhaka as the son
of a slave, alluding to his mother’s origin, a Brahman attendant in a
Kshatriya household, and Virudhaka was so incensed that he vowed to
exterminate the Sakyas after his father’s death. When Virudhaka
ascended the throne, he organized an expedition against the Sakyas of
Kapilavastu, but Buddha went out of Sravasti and stopped his advance,
as will be explained hereafter. The threat was, however, executed
7
1892.] W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
subsequently with too terrible cruelty. I shall return to this narrative
again.
It cannot be inferred from the fact of a raid being made by a king
of Sravasti on the Sakyas of Kapilavastu, Buddha’s native place, that
the latter were independent of the king of Kosala. The Sakyas were,
like the royal house of Sravasti, Kshatriyas, and their position was some¬
what that of a clan living in federated subordination to the greater
power of the Kosala sovereigns. Suddhodana, Buddha’s father, though
spoken of as a king, was probably not more than a powerful taluqdar of
modern days, who happens to be not only a large landholder but also
the head of a much-ramified brotherhood.
It is highly improbable that Buddha visited Sravasti before he
attained enlightenment. We may safely say that he did not. During
Buddha’s early residence as a teacher at Rajagriha, Sudatta, a wealthy
merchant of Sravasti, came on a visit to a householder of Raja-griha
who gave a feast in Buddha’s honour. During his stay, Sudatta, who
was already a man of exemplary humanity and charity, known as ‘ the
feeder of the orphan and the widow’ (anatliapindada), visited Buddha,
and under his teaching became a lay follower. Sudatta then invited
Buddha to came to Sravasti, but Buddha demurred as there was not a
vihara at Sravasti. Sudatta offered to provide one and Buddha pro¬
mised to come when it had been provided.
Sudatta returned to Sravasti and procured a site for the construc¬
tion of a vihara. King Prasenajit’s eldest son, Jeta, had a garden or
park, which Sudatta fixed upon and proposed to purchase, but the
prince declined to sell it unless enough gold coins were paid to cover
the ground required. Sudatta complied and had covered nearly all the
ground when Jeta, stirred by the sacrifice which was being made, de¬
clared himself satisfied and asked to be allowed to retain the part which
was left. On it he built a vestibule, which he presented to the Order,
when Sudatta presented the vihara which he had built on the rest.
When the ground had been procured, Sudatta, went again to Buddha
and asked him to send one of his disciples to superintend the erec¬
tion of the vihara. Buddha deputed Sariputta who came to Sravasti
and encountered much opposition from the members of other Orders,
but he eventually converted them and they joined the Buddhist Sangha.
Buddha came to Sravasti when the building was complete and spent
the ivas of the third year of his ministry here. He named the place by
two names and gratified both donors : Jetavana after the prince and
Anathapindadardma after Sudatta. King Prasenajit visited Buddha
and heard a sermon which led to his conversion. His fifth was was passed
by the Blessed One at the Jetavana, and out of the remaining forty-six
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
8
[Extra-No.
years of his life, the lenten seasons (was) of about one half were spent at
Sravasti, either here or in the Purvarama.
Visakha, one of the sons of Prasenajit’s prime minister (Mriga-
dhara), was married to Visakha, the daughter of the banished minister
of the preceding king, Aranemi Brahmadatta. This lady was highly
celebrated for the good qualities of both her heart and mind. Her
father-in-law called her ‘ mother ’ out of respect ; and she is known in
Pali as Visakha Migaramata. Beal calls her ‘ Visakha-matawi’. The
king Prasenajit was nursed by her through a severe illness, and he called
her his sister. She built a vihara for Buddha near Sravasti unit, if
the words of the Pali texts be taken literally) and presented it to the
Sangha. She stands out as a pious matron whose thoughtfulness extended
to all followers of the Great Master, but who had a special care for the
well-being and good name of the female disciples.
It is not possible to accept as fact or as based on fact every tradi¬
tion or record of events said to be connected with Buddha and located
at Sravasti. Those which are decidedly historical or semi-historical,
as shown by the evidence in local names and the like, may be usefully
put together here, and it will be well to endeavour to maintain some¬
thing of historical sequence.
Foremost we must place the remarkable conversion of Angulimala.
This was a robber of great notoriety, originally named Ahimsaka, who
used to murder his victims and carry their fingers strung together by
way of a garland round his neck. Hence he was popularly known as
Finger-garland (Angulimala). This malignant scourge was subdued
by the benign teaching of Buddha and became an Arhat. He is held
up as an illustration of the inevitable suffering which even a good man
must endure in this life as the result of accumulated evil actions. An-
guli-mala lived in the monastery outside the city (probably the Jeta-
vana) and when he went into the city to beg he was greeted with
derision and made the butt of missiles. He returned on one occasion
to Buddha covered with blood, his garments torn and his alms-bowl
shattered. Buddha then delivered the discourse on the inevitable cau¬
sality and consequences of evil doing.
We have seen how Sariputta met with opposition from the rival
schools at Sravasti, and it was not likely that the Great Teacher would
pass unchallenged here. When he first appeared in the city, king
Prasenajit asked him how he could arrogate enlightenment when other
great doctors such as Purna Kasyapa did not. Later on, in Buddha’s
sixteenth year of ministry, Prasenajit, who had embraced the Dharmma,
arranged for a public controversy between Buddha and the rival doc¬
tors. The arena was laid out on a plot of ground between the Jetavanu
W. Hoey — tSet Mahet.
9
and the city. Buddha here met Purna Kasyapa and probably also
Gosala Mankhaliputta, Sanjaya, son of Vairati, Ajita Kesa-kambala,
Karnda Katyayana and even Nirgrantha Jnataputta (Mahavira of the
Jains). It is said that Buddha’s opponents fled in dismay on beholding
some magical exhibitions of his power. They left him victor. Puma’s
end was melancholy. He was beating his retreat in shame and he met
a eunuch. It was his habit to go naked, and the eunuch chaffed him,
asking him why he went about 4 naked,’ shameless like an ass, ignorant
of the ‘ truth.’ Purna said he was in search of a pool to wash himself,
and the eunuch pointed one out. Purna tied a jar full of sand round
his neck, leaped into the water, and was drowned.
A greater interest attaches to two other names, those of Gosala
Mankhaliputta and Nirgrantha Jnataputta, because the latter was the
founder of the Jain sect, and the Jain religion survived and prospered
in Sravasti long after Buddhism disappeared. G-osala had been a dis¬
ciple of Mahavira, but subsequently posed as an independent teacher
and rival of his early master. The only point to be noted here is that
Gosala lived in the pottery bazar of the potter’s wife Halahala in Sra¬
vasti. He was thus established at this city as a centre for the propa¬
gation of his doctrines, and it is not to be doubted that Mahavira also
made Sravasti one of his centres. Indeed, as I am inclined to think,
Sravasti was not only the capital of a powerful kingdom when Buddha
appeared, but it was also the home of philosophical speculation, and
Buddha found a number of schools of thought and systems of philosophy
already established at Sravasti, when he proposed to visit it. It may
have been from motives of worldly wisdom that he sought the erection
of a vihara prior to his visit. It obviously gave distinction and impor¬
tance to his arrival and crusade against other teachers to have a splen¬
did monastery ready for his reception. It is likely that the fact of the
vihara being erected outside the city and the unwillingness of Jeta to
part with the site, were owing to the opposition of the older schools,
and Sariputta’s deputation to superintend the erection of the vihara
was his commission as a pioneer to prepare the way for the entry of the
new teacher with due circumstance.
It is probable it was when Buddha met his opponents for the public
controversy planned by Prasenajit, that the accusation was preferred
against him by the woman Chinschamana, whose story is told so graphi¬
cally by Fa Hian (vide infra). This was not the only attempt made to
discredit Buddha by imputations of incontinence. He was also accused
of murdering a woman of evil character, but the charge was proved to
be false (vide infra).
It was not only with the opposition of rival schools and the devices
2 .
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra-No.
10
of calumny that Buddha had to contend. He had also the machina¬
tions of a false follower to counteract. Devadatta, his own cousin,
was among his professed followers and desired to secure the succession
to the headship of the Sangha for himself, but Buddha had determined
on another representative. Devadatta therefore tried to create a schism
in the fraternity ; he obtained a temporary mastery of Ajatasatru, the
son of Bimbisara, king of Magadha, and sought to secure eminence
through his aid. He failed. Then he aspired to be king of the Sakyas,
who entertained the notion of placing Yasodhara (Buddha’s wife) on
the throne. He went to her one day on the terrace of the palace at
Kapilavastu, and seizing her hand, entreated her to become his wife.
She resented his proposal and flung him to the ground. He then de¬
termined to destroy Buddha, who was at Sravasti. He placed poison
under his finger nails, approached Buddha, feigning to pay him homage,
fell at his feet and tried to scratch his legs. The attempt failed.
Devadatta then entreated his cousin to forgive him. The Great Teacher
promised to do so, if he once more unreservedly professed his faith in
him. This he did, reciting the usual formula ‘ 1 take my refuge, etc.,’
but there was a lie on his lip and he fell living into hell. The death
of Devadatta occurred at Sravasti a few years before Buddha died.
Sariputta, the great apostle and the architect of the Jetavana
monastery, died soon after Devadatta’s decease. He died at Nalanda,
where he was cremated, and the disciples brought his ashes, alms-bowl,
and cloak to Rajagriha, and laid them before Buddha, who took them
on to Sravasti. Sudatta then procured the ashes from the Master aud
built a stupa over them. It was not long after this that Virudhaka
deposed his father and usurped the throne of Kosala. He had long
cherished schemes for this end, but had been deterred by the prime
minister. One day, however, when that official was driving out in a
chariot with Prasenajit, the latter suddenly conceived a desire to visit
Buddha, who was staying in a Sakya town called Metsurudi. Thither
they drove. The king handed his insignia to the minister and went
in to Buddha. The minister, who had been left outside, drove off in the
chariot to Sravasti and crowned Virudhaka. Mallika and Varshika
now left Sravasti and went in search of their royal husband, whom they
met on his return from Buddha, aud they told him what had occurred.
Prasenajit sent Mallika back to Sravasti to her son, bidding her reign
with him, while he and Varshika went to Rajagriha. Plere the deposed
king died, and Ajatasatru paid royal honours to his remains.
Virudhaka had not been long on the throne when his companion
Ambharisha reminded him of the vow he had made regarding the
Sakyas of Kapilavastu. The king prepared his army for a raid, but
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
11
Buddha, who was at Sravasti, went out of the city and sat down under
a leafless tree by the roadside. When Yirudhaka saw Buddha here,
he asked him why he was sitting under a tree which gave no shade.
Buddha replied that liis kinsmen made it shady. Virudhaka felt
rebuked and turned back, but he was induced by Ambliarisha to march
again, and on this occasion he advanced to Kapilavastu and invested the
city. The Sakyas sallied out and repulsed their besiegers. They then
returned into the city and shut their gates. The Kosala army rallied and
encamped round the walls. Virudhaka by false professions induced the
Sakyas to open their gates. When he had entered, he treacheronsly
ordered the slaughter of the Sakyas. He killed, it is said, 77,000, and
carried off 500 youths and 500 maidens. He killed the youths and tried
to force the maidens into his harem, but they would not go, and so they
too were killed. Buddha now foretold that within seven days, the
Kosala house would be destroyed and that Virudhaka and Ambliarisha
would be burned up.
Virudhaka returned to Sravasti, and noticed Jeta walking on the
palace terrace. He sent for Jeta and told him he had been killing his
enemies. The prince asked who these enemies were and Virudhaka
replied: ‘The Sakyas.’ ‘ Then who are your friends ’? asked Jeta. At
this retort this king was so incensed that he ordered the death of Jeta.
When Buddha’s prophecy of destruction to the Kosala house was
told to Virudhaka, he built a pleasure house in the water and went there
with his harem and Ambliarisha for seven days. On the seventh day,
as they were preparing to return, the sky, which had been clouded,
suddenly cleared up. The sun shone out and his rays fell on a burning-
glass which was laid on a cushion. The cushion caught fire and the
building was burned down. The women escaped, but Virudhaka and
Ambliarisha perished in the conflagration. Thus closed, as far as we
know, the independent dynasty of Sravasti, which had been favourable
to Buddhism, and Buddha does not appear to have again visited the
city. He died soon after.
It will perhaps be best to discuss here the legend narrated by Mr.
Benett in his article on ‘ Saliet-Mahet ’ in the Gazetteer of Oudh, and
quoted also by General Cunningham, regarding a convulsion which is
said to have buried one of the later kings of Suhil Deo’s line in ruin.
I have heard several versions of the tale and it comes in full to this.
The king, whoever he was, went out hunting one day and returned
home very late. The sun was about to set and, according to the cus¬
toms of his house, he could not eat after sunset. He went to perform
his evening devotions, saying he would not eat. His younger brother’s
wife said it was still day and went up to the housetop and addressed
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
1 *>
l u
the sun, who paused to gaze upon her beauty. The king, finding it still
day, ate his dinner and washed his hands. The young lady came down,
and it suddenly grew dark. The king expressed his wonder, and liis
queen told him how the beauty of his younger brother’s wife had de¬
tained the passing sun. Fired with passion, he said : “ I must see
her.” The queen said : “ You cannot see your younger brother’s wife.”
The young princess, who was true to her husband, and as modest and
chaste as she was beautiful, said that the city would be ruined if he
dared to violate her. She went again to the eminence where she had
first held the sun spell-bound, and the king determined to pursue her.
She implored the sun for aid, and he darted a ray upon the king which
burned him and turned the city upside down.
This curious legend is locally attached to some unknown member
of the dynasty of Suhil Deo, sovereign of Kosala at the time of Saiyad
Salar’s expedition, and some ignorant persons narrate it as an expla¬
nation of the desolation of Set Mahet, and, converting the name into
Set met (in the sense of ‘ topsjT-turvy ’), add to the legend how the city
was turned upside down. Mr. Benett attaches special value to the legend
as showing that the king alluded to was a Jain, ‘ the inability to eat after
sunset, which is the point on which the whole turns, being derived,
from the Jain reluctance to sacrifice insect life.’ Mr. Benett also places
this occurrence at about forty years after the invasion of this kingdom
by Salar Mas‘fid, and thinks it points to ‘the conquest of the country by
‘the first of the great Rathor kings of Kanauj, Sri Chandradeva, in the
‘ last half of the eleventh century, when he made a pilgrimage to
‘ Ajodhia, Kosala, etc.’
I think that the germ of this legend lies in the history of
Virudhaka. The point on which Mr. Benett lays stress, the regard for
insect life, is characteristic of the Buddhists equally with the Jains.
Thus, the eating by lamplight, being a forbidden custom, is not conclu¬
sive for a Jain connection of the legend. The supposition of an
invasion by the Rathor king of Kanauj is only a guess and, as far as
I know, a gratuitous guess : and the Jain faith was certainly flourishing
at Sravasti half a century after Suhil Deo’s death, for the finest statues
of Mahavira, which have been discovered by me at Somnath, bear in¬
scriptions of the donor dated 1133 Samvat. How could they have
escaped in a siege and sack ? Besides it is more than probable that his
dynasty ended with Suhil Deo, who fell in conflict with Salar Mas4 ud’s
force : and the tomb at Mahet on the site of the king’s palace is that
of the Kotwal left at Mahet by the invading Moslems.
It will be remembered that Virudhaka conceived the notion
of exterminating the Sakyas because of an insult put upon him when he
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
13
penetrated to tlieir park on a hunting expedition. The insult referred
to his maternity, his mother being a Brahman, who had been a servant
in a Sakya household, while his father was a Kshatriya. His first
attempt was foiled by the entreaty of Buddha, himself a Sakya, who
met him outside the city and induced him to return. His second ex¬
pedition was unopposed by Buddha, and he not only slaughtered the
Sakyas but ho endeavoured to force some Sakya maidens into his
harem. With this, we may compare also Devadatta’s attempt to
coerce Yasodhara on the palace terrace at Kapilavastu, and his
death at Sravasti. In both cases the would-be ravishers were re¬
sisted and perished. Virudh aka’s death was foretold by Buddha,
and there is a marvellous resemblance between the record of the
events attending it and the modern legend. Again, if we bear
in mind that the Sakyas were of the Solar race of Kshatriyas, when we
consider the lady’s appeal (the lady being Mallika, Yirudhaka’s mother,
or some other person interested in the Sakyas) made to the sun, and
the destruction of the wicked king by the sun, we can readily see in
this story the probable appeal of the Sakyas, whose daughters had been
murdered, made through some one to a neighbouring potentate of Solar
stock, who marched to Sravasti and avenged their cause. Buddha’s
prophecy of the death of Virudhaka was probably a forewarning of
the advent of the ally summoned by his kinsmen to their aid, of
which Buddha cannot but have known. Who the avenger was we do
not know, but he was probably Ajatasatru, the monarch of Magadha.
On the whole, I think, we may fairly claim this legend, still lingering
with the ignorant dwellers about Mahet, as a confused memory of the
fall of Virudhaka, which is detailed with some degree of historical
accuracy in the Tibetan records. However this may be, with Viru-
dhaka’s death the curtain falls on Sravasti, and does not rise again
for close on nine hundred years.
What do we know and what can we surmise as to the interval
between 477 B. C and 410 A. D. ?
To this we must answer that we know nothing as to Sravasti itself,
but there are certain historical data from which we can infer probabi¬
lities.
First of all, Sravasti no longer appears as the capital of an indepen¬
dent kingdom. In the next place, the kingdom of Magadha continued to
maintain its independence and individuality and to advance in prosperity
until the zenith of its greatness under Asoka, who reigned ten
generations after Ajatasatru. Again, the Tibetan record that a son of
Prasenajit became the first king of Tibet, possibly covers a mi oration
northward of the family of the Sravasti kings after Yirudhaka’s death.
14
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra-No.
Further, there is some reason to suppose that the kings of Kosala and
Magadha had been rivals, for it seems that Prasenajit had once in
Buddha’s lifetime inflicted a defeat on Bimbisara. When Prasenajit was
deposed by his son, he retired to Rajagriha, the capital of Magadha,
and when he died, Ajatasatru paid royal honours to his remains. What
was more natural than that the Sakyas should appeal to Ajatasatru to
avenge their cause? We do not actually find authority for supposing
that Ajatasatru did come to their aid. Add to all this that Ajatasatru
had become the firm friend and patron of Buddha, that Buddha is re¬
presented to have foretold the coming glory of Pataliputra, that Ajata¬
satru moved his capital to this point, thus bringing it to a place more
central, if Kosala be added to Magadha, than Rajagriha was, and on
the whole I am inclined to believe that, from the overthrow of Viru-
dhaka, Kosala was merged in Magadha and that the latter probably
included all the country which had fallen under the influence of
Buddhism.
Researches hitherto made have not unearthed any monuments at
Sravasti distinctly referable to the age of Asoka, but Hwen Thsang’s
narrative would lead us to refer the stone pillars at the east of the
Jetavana (not yet found by the way) to this king. It is highly probable
that he did erect some monuments, if not these pillars at Sravasti, for it
can scarcely be conceived that he should leave a place so intimately
connected with the Great Teacher’s career without some mark of his
zealous attachment to the Dharmma.
The dominance of the Magadha kings would seem to have conti¬
nued down to the period of the Brahmanist revival, which happened
under some Vikramaditya, possibly him who laid out the city of Ajo-
dhya, but it would be foolish for me to hazard any date for this event.
With General Cuuningham this Vikramaditya of Ujjain is Chandra
Gupta Vikramaditya whom he places as founder of the Gupta era in 166
A. D. But, I think, I may well give some value to the traditions
which ascribe the restoration, the foundation, of the present ‘ Ajudhiya *
to that Vikramadtiya, whose era is current in Upper India, 57 B. 0.
Hwen Thsang mentions a Vikramaditya who was king of Sravasti about
half way between his time and the death of Buddha. Taking Hwen
Thsang’s visit at 635 A D. and Buddha’s death at 477 B. 0., this
would give us 79 A. D. But taking the known date of Hwen
Thsang’s birth 603 A. D. and Buddha’s age at 80 years, we get 20 A. D.
Now, allowing for the Chinese antedating Buddha’s birth and death, we
should get well back to the Vikramaditya whose era is current in the
North West and Oudh. I am inclined to believe that it was to him
that Hwen Thsang referred as the sovereign of Sravasti.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Maliet.
15
There are two kings, an uncle, named Khiradhar, and his nephew,
mentioned as kings of Sravasti between 275 and 319 A. D. in the
Singhalese records, but they cannot have been possessed of any influence
fer they have left no monuments and they are wholly unknown to local
tradition.
I now pass over the visits of the Chinese pilgrims to Sravasti : Fa
Hian in 410 A. D., and Hwen Thsang in some year between 629 aud 645
A. D., for the records of their pilgrimages are in the hands of all. I
need only notice that, when Hwen Thsang visited Kanauj, the king of
that place was Harsha Varddhana aud his dominions probably included
Uttara Kosala.
In the Dasa Kumara Charitam, a Sanskrit work reasonably assigned
to the 6th century A. D., we find Sravasti mentioned, and it is said to
have been the residence of a king named Dharma Varddhana. The work
is a romance, but it probably contains accurate accounts of places known
to the author. It is not improbable that Dharma Varddhana was a
viceroy of the Kannauj sovereign at stationed Sravasti, and that the kings
of Kanauj had extended their supremacy thus far east at this period.
Professor Weber gives a summary of the contents of the Dasa Kumara
Charitam in Indisclie Streifen, Vol. I, pp. 308-351, and I shall here give
the portion referring to Sravasti, as I wish to omit no reference to the
city which I can anywhere find. The book is a narrative of the travels
of the son of the king of Magadha and nine friends of his, who travel
separately and afterwards meet and narrate their adventures. It ia
Pramati who visited Sravasti.
After his separation from his companions, Pramati had come to
the Vindliya forest, lain down under a tree, committed himself in a pious
prayer to the care of the goddess of the tree, and fallen asleep. In a
dream he felt himself lifted up and, opening his eyes, saw himself in a
magic hall, resting beside a sleeping maiden of marvellous beauty, on
whom the moon was shedding her rays. Through fear of awaking her
he does not venture to touch her, and noticing her move he feigns to
lie asleep. She actually wakes up, gazes in astonishment on the com¬
panion of her couch, but soon sinks back again into sleep. He too falls
asleep. In the morning when he wakes he finds himself shivering with
cold under the tree in the forest. While he is still thinking over what he
had seen, a female in celestial guise appears, who embraces him warmly
and solves the riddle for him. It is his own mother, Taravali, the
daughter of the Yaksha king Manibhadra, who had left his father, Kama-
pala, in a hasty passion on some slight provocation, and become possessed
by an evil spirit for a year by way of punishment. The time was now up
and slie.was on the point of returning to her husband. Put she had
IG
W. Hoey — Set Maliet.
[Extra-No.
resolved before doing so to attend the festival of Tryambaka in Sravasti.
On the previous evening she had, when passing along, heard Pramati’s
prayer, and, to protect him from the inclemency of the night, until she re¬
turned from the festival, she had taken him away in sleep to the slumber¬
ing Navamalika, daughter of Dharma Varddhana, king of Sravasti. On
returning from the festal ceremonies, where her spirit was wholly puri¬
fied from the curse, she had recognized him as her own son and had seen
how he, as well as the maiden, had been abashed when they found
themselves lying side by side. She had again caused him to sink
into real sleep and brought him back to this spot, and was compelled,
while hastening to his father, to leave him for the present to his own
devices and to fate. She vanishes after an affectionate farewell. But
Pramati, who is overcome with love, wends his way towards Sravasti.
On his way he wins, as a spectator at a cock-fight, the friendship of an
old Brahman, who lodges him for the nig-ht. On the next morning
Pramati arrives at Sravasti, and, being tired with walking, he lays him¬
self down to rest in the shade of the pleasure-garden outside the city.
Here a waiting woman comes up to him with a picture in her hand, which
she compares with him. Navamalika has painted the picture of the
youth whom she had seen in her dream and sent out her waiting-
woman to find the original. Pramati proves himself to be the person
wanted by drawing the picture of the princess and narrating the occur¬
rence of the night. He sends the woman back with the message that
he would soon come to the princess, and he now turns to the old Brah¬
man with the plan he had laid to effect this. The Brahman brings
him dressed up as his daughter to the king, and asks him to keep her
saying he was going to fetch his son-in-law, and he knew no other way
to keep the maiden safe as she was full grown, especially as her mother
was dead. The king accepts the charge and makes the maiden over
to his daughter as a playmate. After a month, when the ladies of the
seraglio make a bathing excursion, Pramati dives and passes to an appointed
spot on the other side of the river, where the old man is waiting for
him with male attire. The female guise is now discarded and the old
Brahman goes to the king with Pramati as his intended son-in-law to
demand his daughter. The harem meanwhile is in great commotion
on account of her being drowned. The princess is beside herself and
the king is in a most unhappy fix before the old man, who is about to
burn himself in front of the king’s palace, when the king succeeds in
overcoming his resolution by giving him his own daughter in lieu of the
lost maiden in marriage to the intended son-in-law, and he also hands
over the kingdom to the young adventurer. Thus Pramati gains all
his desires.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set MaJiet,
17
The only points to be noted in this passage with reference to
exploration at Set Maliet are that there -was at the time of this composi¬
tion a pleasure-garden outside the city, and that the harem of the local
governor went out, after the fashion of Hindu women in the present
day, to bathe on festivals. Whatever the position of the palace may have
been in Maliet, the river seems to me to have run at one time close up
to the east wall, and in the ruins of that wall I can trace chambers not
yet explored, and probably this wall was laid out as a bathing ghat along
the river bank. This would be the place where the ladies went to bathe
and from which Pramati took his dive to the other bank of the Rapti.
With these remarks I dismiss the story for the present. A less detailed
abstract of the Dasakumara Charitam will be found in Yol. Ill of
Wilson’s Essays.
There is a blank of about four hundred years from Hwen Thsang’s
visit until we reach the period where reliable history begins in India,
the early Muhammadan invasions, and we must discuss the fatal
advance of Salar Mas’ud into the country north of the Ghagra. The
generally current account of this event is that given in an Urdu book
called 1 Mira’t-i- Mas’udi, ’ but this is only a debased translation or
rather amplified paraphrase in Urdu of the Persian work Saulat-i-Mas£udi,
and is very inaccurate. I possess a copy of the Persian work, written
in an age when careful transcription was the means of preserving his¬
torical records, and I have translated a large portion of the book, and
intend to complete and annotate it for publication, when I shall have
sufficient leisure. There is also a popular ballad-record of all events
of the invasion of Salar Mas’ud which I have only heard from the lips
of daffalis who sing this £ Jangnama’, as they call it. I have been unable
to complete the ballad by bringing together all the cantos, but I have
obtained by dictation the version given of the events connected with
the fatal trans-Ghagra episode. The whole may yet be recovered. It
seems to have been composed by a Lalla named Natlimal of Delhi ;
and there was a complete copy in manuscript until recently with a
daffali near Set Mahet, but it was unfortunatly burned,
The ‘ Saulat-i- Mas’udi, states that Salar Mas’ud was at Misrikh
with liis father Salar Sahu when Saif-uddin, who had an advanced post
at Bahraich, sent in word that the Hindu chiefs were rising, and he
asked for reinforcements. Salar Mas’ud was at his own request permit¬
ted by his father to proceed to Bahraich (17 Shaban 423 A. H.). Two
months later Salar Saha died at Misrikh, and for two or three months
more Salar Mas’ud remained in mourning and inactive. He then called
a council of war in the opening of the new year, Muharram 424 A. H.
and about the same time he saw in a dream his father and his mother,.
3
IS
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra- No
Satr Ma’alla, encamped on a river bank, and he seemed to go to join them,
and liis mother held out a chaplet and said she had his wedding feast
laid. This was a presage of his coming end. Next day he received
an ultimatum from the Hindu chieftains demanding that he should
quit their land. The chiefs who are enumerated in this connection are
Rae Ra£t, Rae Saet, Arjun, Bhikan, Kanak, Kalyan, Nagaru, Sagaru,
Karan, Birbal, Ajaipal, Sripal, Harpal, Harakliu, Narakhu, Rajudhari,
Deonarayan, and Barsingh. Salar Mas’ud of course ignored this
demand. The chieftains formed a combined camp on the banks of the
Kuthila. He moved up and defeated them and, after a halt of a week
on the field, he returned to Bahraich. It was now that he gave
instructions for the laying out of a garden at the Surajkund and fixed
on it as his burial-place. He expected death in battle.
A messenger from Rai Jogi Das of Jumla and one from Rai Gobind
Das came now and tendered submission for their masters. Thej were
received with courtesy and others followed suit. The defeated chiefs,
who wished to prolong the campaign, summoned all the aid they could
and now Rai Suliar Deo from Sanjauli and Rai Baliar Deo from Sambal-
auta appear prominent as the organizers and leaders in the struggle
which followed. The chieftains of both plain and hills came together
again on the Kuthila. They once more advised Salar Mas’ud to withdraw.
He rejected the advice and determined to attack them again. At this
juncture he received news that the enemy had driven off all the cattle
of his camp, and he at once sounded an advance. The Hindus suffered
a defeat, but one-third of the Moslem force perished. Salar Mas’ud
returned again to Bahraich and was lost in religious meditation, much
to the alarm of his officers. Meanwhile the Hindus mustered their
forces and advanced against Bahraich. Their first engagement was
with an advanced post about four miles from Bahraich, but the dire
fight was at the Surajkund. The engagement lasted for three days.
By the third day, the 14th Raj jab 424 A. H., the ranks of both Hindu
and Moslem had been thinned to decimation, and now Salar Mas’ud
with a handful of the faithful faced Rai Suliar Deo and Rai Bahar
Deo, who had like him held themselves in reserve. Mas’ud was killed
and not a Moslem remained alive but was wounded. Next day Mir
Saiyad Ibrahim, who had been left at Bahraich, came out with his
reserve, buried Saiyad Masffid and others, and then fell upon Suhar
Deo. The leaders fell dead at each other’s hands. The inscription on
Masffid’s tomb at Bahraich may be rendered :
The Chief Salar Mas‘ud to God was dear :
In 405 he saw the light of day :
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
19
He lived four days into his twentieth year
And in 424 he passed away.
He was born on 9tli Rajjab 405 A. H. and died on 13th Rajjab 424 A. H.
So much for the history : now for the ballad. I give it in English
ballad metre, and I have carefully retained the vulgar corruption of the
Persian names. I have only to premise that in the ballad allusion is
made to the popular belief that Salar Mas‘ud’s mother had arranged
for his marriage with a maiden at Rudauli, in the Eaizabad District, when
the news of the cattle raid came and Salar Mas‘ud started to avenge
the insult and perished on his expedition. No other comment is needed,
but I give footnotes where necessary.
1.
1.
Crowds were moving through the city,
Wedding guests in garments gay :
Bibi Mam ul* sent for mehndi :
And ’twas brought upon a tray.
Gajan’sf hands she coloured with it,
On his neck a garland bound,
While to all the guests assembled
Betel leaf was handed round.
2.
And she sprinkled atar on the
Saiyads of the Prophet’s race,
And she summoned Khwaja Nadir,
Set him in the middle place.
How the squibs and rockets crackled,
Scent of aloe-wood arose,
How the blue stars burst and faded,
Nathmal LallJ the story knows.
3.
Saiyad Rana§ came with mehndi
And the garden || went before.
How bright it bloomed ! — An elephant
On his back a haudali bore.
# This is Satr Ma'alla, S&lar Mas'ud’s mother.
f This is Ghazi Mian, Saiyad Salar Mas’ud.
+ The poet here introduces his own name.
§ The Saiyad of Rudauli to whose daughter it is supposed Salar Mas'ud was
to have been married.
1| This means the artificial flowers made up and carried in the marriage proees
sion. They are scrambled for when the procession reaches the bride’s door.
20
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[ Extra-No.
Came the maiden in a litter,
Borne along in bridal state ;
Saiyad Rana’s train pressed onward
And the melmdi reached the gate.
4.
Bibi Mamul’s love waxed stronger
When she heard they thronged the way,
And her maidens all uprising
Broke into this nuptial lay :
‘ Spread ye now the sandal chauki ,
‘ On it now the bridegroom seat :
‘ Dye ye well his hands with menhdi :
‘ Give him gilded pan to eat.’
5.
Mamul scattered gold and silver,
And she seated Gajan bold :
On his wrist he wore a bracelet,
Pearls inlaid in purest gold.
In his hand he held a dagger
While she spread the mehndis hue :
Then with rice she decked the pitcher,
Finishing maternal due.
II.
The Gwallas danced to mark the day
In forest wild with mirth ;
The townsfolk came their joy to share,
And Indra stooped to earth.
A Sunday for those rites was fixed,
Which never were to be,
A day for war, not nuptials, marked
By Allah’s firm decree.
III.
1.
On guile the raja Rudal Mal#
Was bent and now he rose,
And swore a lie. No king hath fear
No bond in oath who knows.
* One of Suhil Deo’s brothers. There were five brothers. Snhil Deo ( alias
Suhar Dal), Rudal Mai ( aliter Rudr Mai), Bag Mai, Bahar Mai, and Sahar Mai.
1892.]
#
t
W. Hoey — Set Mahet. 2 i
‘ Pirbala’s* marriage feast to-day
‘ They keep with banquet high :
‘ So I shall seize on Gaura Got
‘And on my gods rely.’
2.
Then uprose Raja Suhil Dal ;
‘ My brother king,’ quoth he,
‘ To arms we’ll call our armies all
‘ And I shall go with thee,
‘ The G wallas kill and Salar’s kine
‘ Our booty be to-day.’
A wanton king was Suhil Dal
And would not brook delay.
IV.
1.
The G walla clan at Gaura Got,
They were seven hundred strong :
Nand Maharf was their sturdy chief:
His retinue was long.
To him the raja Suhil Dal
For tribute sent request ;
Of curds and milk on Mahar Nand
He laid a strong behest.
2.
When thus the raja Suhil Dal
Demanded milk and curds,
Nand Mahar heard but heeded not
The raja’s haughty words :
‘ Gajan my master is,’ said he,
‘ Whom fealty I owe :
‘ And to his wedding feast to-day
‘ My milk and curds shall go.’
3.
The raja heard but gave no thought
To what Nand Mahar said :
He drew his army out in line
And Bag Mai went ahead.
Salar Mas'ud.
His name still lives as eponym of a place 12 miles north of Set Mahet.
W. Hoey — Set Mdhet.
[Extra-No.
oo
He went and fell on Gaura Got*
Where dwelt the bold Aliir,
And thus that wanton raja seized
The cattle of the Pir.
4.
Hand Maliar rose in mighty wrath,
His retinue was long :
He called the G walla clan to rise ;
They were seven hundred strong :
1 Hear me my Gwals,’ said he, 1 be brave
‘ And to your salt be true.
Be up and bear in mind to-day
‘ The Mian’s claims on you.’
5.
The Gwallas rushed to battle all
With axes and with bows:
Where’er they saw the stoutest foe
They dealt their boldest blows.
The sturdy Gwallas fought like men
While Maliar cheered the fray,
And he for one remembered well
The Mian’s claims that day.
6.
Among them all was Harbans Lall,
The bravest of their band :
A double sword was in his belt,
A rocket in his hand.
Like thunderbolt he forward leaped
Into the thickest fight :
He drew bis sword and brandished it
Around him left and right.
7.
•
Then trembled warriors of the field
And back they stood appalled :
Matchless he was and fought alone ;
On Gajan’s name he called.
* There are many places known as Gauria this and that, but there is a
Gauradih in the south of Gonda District.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
23
The wounded fell upon the ground
And corpses headless rolled :
He slaughtered chiefs and warriors,
And bravest cheeks grew cold.
8.
Then quailed the raja Suhil Dal ;
He left the cows and fled :
But many of that Gwalla clan
That erst were few, were dead.
Then Raja Bahar Mai reviled
His brother Suhar ‘ Shame !
‘ To turn thy back on Hand and bring
‘ A stain upon our name’ !
V.
1.
The G wallas to Hand Mahar cried :
‘ Come, now the wine cup drain.’
‘ This is no time for wine,’ said he,
But ’gainst them strove in vain.
By clamour led, seven hundred cups
Their chief before them laid :
They drank full deep and sank in sleep
In the cool forest shade.
2.
And now the raja Suhil Dal
A priestly pandit sought :
And horses five and garments five,
And weapons five were brougnt,
‘Pandit,’ the Raja said, ‘these gifts
‘ To Mahar Nand present :’
The Brahman hied to Gaura Got
Upon this message bent.
3.
He went among the G wallas all
And straight the gifts he showed :
‘Ho ! Mahar Hand !’ a Gwalla said,
‘ What do these presents bode ?’
* This form occurs here for the commoner Suhel, Suhil or Suhal. The real
name seems to have been Suliirda (Sans : Su-hrida=Groodheart.)
24
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra-No.
* They are,’ Nand answered, * merely gifts
‘ From Suliil Dal to me,
‘ These horses five, and garments five
‘ And weapons five I see.’
4.
‘ But are these gifts,’ the G walla asked,
‘ For thee or for the clan ?’
To all his tribe Nand Maliar spoke :
‘ Go, let him mount who can.’
Five drunken herdsmen reeling rose
And killed those noble nags,
Those weapons five they broke in twain,
And rent the robes in rags.
5.
The pandit saw this woeful spite
And out Nand Maliar spake :
‘ Go Maharaj ! to Suliil Dal,
‘ And back this message take :
o
‘ “ The Kunwr Kandhaiya is my son,
‘ “ Thy child Singhasan fair :
‘ “ The tilak send full soon or I
‘ “ Nor thee nor thine, will spare.’ ”
6.
‘All will I tell,’ the priest replied:
His face he homeward set :
No haste made he ; he halted at
Each staging post he met.
Arrived — the raja asked him how
At Gaura Got he fared :
tie bent his head and omens sought
And auspices compared.
7.
Then Raja Bag Mai bade him speak :
‘ Say is the omen fair :’
The pandit spread his tables out
The tokens to declare.
‘ Hear, Suhjl Dal,’ lie quick replied,
‘ The auspices are bright :
‘ The Gwallas all are lying drunk.
‘ Rise, Suliil Dal, and fight.’
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
8.
25
A ruthless king was he and called
His forces to the fray :
He Raja Bag Mai sent ahead,
And there was no delay.
He summoned all his men to arms
And rajas great of note :
He placed his guns in front and led
His hosts to Gaura Got.
9.
He fell a thunderbolt upon
The herds in drunken drowse ;
A futile fight they fought and fell :
He swept off all the cows.
Their bodies on the field exposed
A feast for vultures lie :
Like garnered sheaves their corpses fall,
And floods of blood run high.
10.
The king thus slew the sleeping Gwals,
And captive Mahar made,
And with him on his elephant
His captive ride he bade :
Thus with the Gwalla Chief he rode
And there was no delay.
But Mahar Hand uprose and said :
4 Hear, Raja, what I say :
11.
‘ Whoe’er shall see me ride with thee,
‘ Without a shade of doubt
4 Will say this day that I am king
4 And thou art my mahaut.’
The Raja roused, a dagger plunged
Into the chieftain’s breast :
Then onward with the cows alone
Towards his fort he pressed.
4
26
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
VI.
1.
[Extra-No.
‘ Jaso, bring curds,’ Mamula said,
‘ For lucky is my star ’ :
Nand Makar’s wife slie was, replied
4 Long live our lord Salar ’ !
The women of her clan she called :
Each head a milk pail bore,
And round her form from waist to head
One sheet each milkmaid wore.
2.
When Jaso drew near Gaura Got
And kites and vultures saw,
And felt the stillness in the air,
Her soul was filled with awe.
Corpse upon corpse she saw the dead \
With grief she cried aloud :
The robe she wore in twain she tore
And made a mourner’s shroud.
3.
She searched in vain among the slain ;
Her Nand not here she found,
But on she strayed and saw him laid
Alone upon the ground :
4 0 Makar Nand, my sun and moon ! ’
She cried, 4 O husband mine !
4 Who thus hath killed our Gwallas all
4 And driven away our kine P ’
4.
She gently raised Nand Mahar’s head
And laid it on her knee,
While of his Jaso’s tenderness
Thus heedless answered he :
4 0 unclean ! what art thou ? vulture,
4 Tiger, jackal, art thou ?
5 Wilt not wait my parting spirit
4 But gnawest at me now.’
1892.]
W. Hoey — set Mahst.
5.
. Tiger, jackal none,’ said Jaso,
‘ Vulture or kite is nigli :
4 She for whom thy flowers were looted,*
‘ Thy boyhood’s wife am I :
‘ Swami, I am come to teDd thee ’ —
‘ 0 Wife,’ he answered low,
‘ Be thou my wife of early life,
‘ Prithee for water go.’
6,
‘ My lord, I will,’ quoth she, 4 but say
4 Who killed and why our band :
4 Did our cows eat the raja’s crops
4 Or trespass on his land P ’
4 Our cows,’ said he, 4 nor ate his crop
4 Nor trespassed on his land :
4 This ruthless raid aud massacre
‘ He worked with want on hand.’
7.
A tank she sought and raised her hands :
‘ Pir khwajah ! hear me pray ;
4 If in my cloth the water stay
4 My husband’s debt I’ll pay.’
While thus she prayed the water stayed
Within her apron pent :
She had the Salar Gfhazi’s pir
Addressed and back she went.
8.
The draught she brought to Mahar’s lips
And sped his parting breath :
Then to her maids : 4 Your vestments steep
4 In this red flood of death :
4 Your pails seven hundred fill with blood
4 And backward with me turn ’
The while she speaks her heart and cheeks
With hot resentment burn.
27
* Part of the marriage ceremony.
28
W. Hoey — Set Make t.
9.
[Extra-No.
And to the Mian J6so came,
Her crimson plaint she spread :
* To thee I look : onr cows are gone,
‘ A hundred thousand head.’
The words she said like arrows sped
And kindled Gajan’s pride :
He washed the menhdi from his hands,
His bracelets flung aside.
10.
His sword he grasped and kissed the blade
And straight his mother sought :
‘ 0 hear me, mother mine,’ he said,
‘ Great wrong the king hath wrought,
* He hath our kine as plunder seized
‘ And all our Gwallas killed :
‘ Jaso hath come to me : the air
‘ With cries for blood is filled.
11.
* 0 hearken, Saifu’d-din the tale
i To me hath Jaso told ;
* Who kills my Gwals and steals my kine,
‘ A traitor king I hold.’
‘ 0 son, ! ’ (’tis now his mother speaks)
‘ Thy wedding feast is laid :
1 Gajan, thou treasure of my heart,
‘ What new resolve is made ? ’
12.
6 There reigns but one desire supreme
‘ Within thy mother’s heart,
‘ That see she may thy wedding day
‘ And in it bear a part :
‘ I would tliy nuptials celebrate
‘ And welcome home thy bride :
6 Might I but gratify this wish,
£ I have no wish beside.’
* The officer mentioned is Sanlat i Mas’udi as deputed to command at Baliraick
1892.]
29
W. Hoey— Set Mahet.
13.
4 Nay, mother mine, but bid me go,’
Bold Gajan quick replied,
4 And I shall fight the traitor king ;
‘ The Prophet’s on our side :
4 Say Bahhshd-duclh * and I shall go
4 The Moslem faith to spread,
4 Bring back the kine, and with my sword
4 Cut off the raja’s head.
14.
4 Or I shall fight and victor be
‘ And come to wed this maid,
4 Or I shall fall and on my grave
‘ My wedding wreath be laid.
4 For what should all my kinsmen say
4 If I disgraced our name :
Nay, with this king I swords will cross,
‘ And turn his pride to shame.’
15.
Then Chishtif rose to interpose,
But Gajan’s way was won :
His mother said : £ God go with thee ;
4 Dudh-bakhsha ; go my son.’
So now for AjabJ Gajan sent
And asked for ink and pen :
He cleared accounts up to the day
And paid up all his men.
16.
He bid them gird them for the fight :
His armoury they sought,
And arms of every kind they took
And rockets out they brought.
His mother heard the order given
And ran with naked feet,
And clasped her arms around his neck
His filial love to entreat :
# An idiom, a form of speech equivalent to : ‘ prove yourself worthy of vom
mother whose milk nourished you.’
f Also Chifti.
% Mian Ajab Hatila, who is buried near Wazirgunj.
30 W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
17.
* 0 son, on this thy wedding day,
‘ Haste not to leave my side :
* A maid with locks as dark as night
£ I bring thee for thy bride :
‘ The noble Saiyads all are here,
‘ Thy wedding guests are they,
‘ And maidens singing bridal songs,
‘ They sing for thee to day.’
i
. ' 18.
4 Nay, mother, nay ’ he said, ‘ there waits
‘ A martyr’s death for me :
1 A mausoleum and a mosque
‘ My monument shall be.
* I shall be laid in Hind to rest
‘ But still my fame shall grow,
£ And all the four worlds hither come
Their tribute to bestow.
19.
£ Saddle and mail on Lilia* bind
‘ My charger mount will I :
£ My double quiver strap in front :
‘ Two ward rums on her tie.’
He said and went his blood to prove,
True crescentader he,
With force so great that earth did quake
His moving hosts to see.
20.
All this the raja Suhil hears
And he is sore afraid :
The Mian’s army ready is
And no delay is made.
On flags and banners waving went
And crossed the Ghagra’s tide :
The Mian to the Ka‘bah prayed
Bor blessings on his side.
[Extra-No
* The name of Salar Mas’nd’s charger.
1892.]
31
W. Hoey — Set Mahet .
21.
All green the garments were lie wore
From Kabul or Qandhar :
One lakh and thousands thirty-six
Of Saiyads went to war.
Their tents went first, their cannons next,
And elephants in rear :
Full many days they marched ; at last
They drew to Hind Mulk near.
22.
The Gabar* king the tidings hears
How Gajan’s tents are near,
How flags and banners court the breeze
And lines of shops appear :
A sight is his Urdu bazar :f
The people come and go,
And sweets are piled and bakers squat
And at their ovens blow.
23.
Vendors of grain and spices here
And money changers sit,
And on the sutler’s hostel hearth]:
The cheery fire is lit :
Greengrocers vegetables bring
Upon the ground to spread :
The goldsmiths’ deftly work with gold
And pearls for earrings thread.
24.
And guriyas§ from river beds
Have gourds and melons brought,
And dMmars§ offer fish for sale
In running rivers caught :
And who’s kotwal to hear complaints ?
‘ Tis Nirmal Parihar.
Thus well arranged and busy is
Gajans Urdu bazar.
* Applied to Suhil deo as a non-Mussulman,
f 1. e., camp market.
X Bhatiari. § Two classes of kahars.
32
[Extra-No.
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
VII.
1.
When this the Gabar king had heard,
His queen Naurani said :
‘ 0 Sire ! against thy fort his hosts
‘ Hath Mian Gajan led.
‘ The army of the ‘ Din * has come
‘ To lay thy fortress low :
‘ 0 king, they will thy soldiers kill
‘ And streams of blood will flow.’
2.
* Mad art thou, woman,’ said the king,
And mighty wroth grew he,
* For him good grace is second place :
‘ Why name the Turk* to me ?
‘ For I can boast an equal host,
‘ Be still and wait the strife.’
’Twas thus the kino: with anger rude
Strove to put down his wTife.
3.
Again Naurani spoke : £ 0 Sire !
c To fight this Saiyad dread
‘ Who takes the field, a stoutest shield
‘ Must hold above his head :
‘ Through bone he cleaveth clean, and what
‘ Avails thy sword of thread ?
‘ A foe we face who shows no grace
‘ And dyes the earth in red.’
4
But Bahar Mai had been forewarned
And hurried to prepare
The ancient fort of Teliyagarhf
And put it in repair.
The king now staked his spear, and viewed
The fort with heart elate :
He bade them tie his elephant
Beside his palace gate.
* Used merely as term of contempt,
t This is probably Teliyakot near Kauria, a station on B. N. W. Railway. The
1892.]
33
W. Hoey — Set Majiet.
5.
And next lie summoned his mahaut
And usages explained :
The driver went at once to where
The elephant was chained ;
Saluted first the royal beast,
Rubbed ochre on his head,
Then a red housing bound with fringe
Upon his back he spread.
6.
To Bhairon then and Hanuman
And Harsingh he appealed,*
And then of stout rhinoceros hide
He took a studded shield
With burnished boss, which fast across
His giant head he tied.
Then roared that elephant and shook
The walls on every side.
7.
How, Lalla, with due caution speak :
Such elephant ’twould need
With driver bloated and obese,
Twelve villages to feed.
A sword he gave that elephant
Within his trunk to hold :
At which he grew intoxicate
With warlike fury bold.
8.
When sleep o’ercame the elephant —
How hear the tale I tell —
Shah Mardan bore him in a dream
Down to the gate of hell.
While here he stood, a scorching blast
Of flame upon him blew,
And upward to the golden gate
Of Paradise he flew.
poet has with very strained poetic license confounded or brought together widely
distant places and probably he and the author of the Saulat-i-Mas‘udi have com¬
pressed a campaign into one fight.
* This points to Suhil Deo’s being a Hindu, but see v. ii.
5
34
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
9.
Sarwar Rasul* came to the gate :
‘ My son, in heaven,’ said he,
‘ Till thou with Gajan cast thy lot,
Thy portion cannot be.’
The dream was o’er that broke his rest,
The elephant awoke :
Nor longer tarried Night, for now
The dawn of morning broke.
10.
The Raja Suhil Dal aroused
For news despatched a scout,
And Raja Rudal Mai advised
Him lead his army out.
The Raja rode his elephant,
His army on he led :
The war-drums beat to war in front
And firm was every tread.
11.
Then Hindus clashed with Moslems, while
Their king on Somnath calls :
The Moslems opened with grenades,
Hindus with musket balls.
And thus that battle fierce began
While loud the war- drums beat :
Those hosts were numberless and earth
Vibrated ’neath their feet.
12.
The high born Rajputs fought, nor once
Their faces turned away :
Tora in turban, clad in red,
Conspicuous were they.
‘ God keep my name,’ the raja cried:
The Rajputs heard him call ;
The fight he led, his foes he slew,
The foremost he of all.
[Extra-No.
# Muhammad.
1892*]
35
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
13.
Loud Grajan’s war-drums beat ; lie placed
In front each bravest man ;
The ‘ fat ilia ’ recited he
And Ajab led the van.
Hari Singb Nath the standard high
Amid the fight displayed :
He drew his sword, it flashed like fire,
Nine maunds his armour weighed.
14.
It was the doughty Hari Singh
Who struck ’v ith surest stroke :
He mowed the forces of the king
And Kafirs’ noses broke. #
How Raja Suhil Dal was grieved
This carnage sore to see :
His hands he raised to heaven
And wept — ‘ oh ! woe is me ! ’
15.
The Pirf fought on ; great tuskers fell ;
No fear was on his brow :
He hailed the haudah-mounted king :
‘ Cowstealer ! whither now P ’
Barahna raised his spear and charged
Like raging tempest blast ;
Hindu and Moslem made him way ;
The monarch breathed his last.
16.
To Ajab Mian Gajan called :
‘ Set spurs to thy brown mare ;
‘ On Bahar Mai with sword advance
‘ And hold him in the rear.’
Mian himself his Lilia spurred,
To Allah he appealed,
His sword he drew and Baliar Mai
Rolled dead upon the field.
# It is curious to find two Hindus fighting for Salar Mashid.
f Salar Mas'aud.
36
W. Hoey — Set MaHet .
[Extra -No.
17.
Mian hailed Nirmal Parihar ;
Then from his quiver full
He took a shaft, and drew his bow,
And picked off Sahar Mai.
By God’s decree thus Gajan killed
Those kings who wisdom lacked :
He took possession of their fort,
Their palace razed and sacked.
18.
‘ Now by God’s grace the day is thine,*
To Gajan Ohishti said,
‘ And Somnath* it behovetli us
Beneath our feet to tread.’
He said and straight upon that fort
The Moslem flag was shown :
He tore that house of idols down
And smashed the gods of stone.
19.
Whate’er my fame as poet, ’tis
Through Lalla Ustadf won :
The story true he told, I tell,
And now my tale is done.
The Saiyad Mian Gajan now
For Saiyad Mi ran J called,
And in the middle of the fort
As governor installed.
20.
The Moslem force to Gaura Got
Marched from the field of strife :
God gave the word and Gajan brought
The Gwallas back to life.
Like sunlit waves the spear-heads gleamed
And drums were loud in mirth :
Ajab Hatila’s spear had rest
Like sleeping snake in earth.
* The great image of the third Jain patriarch, whose shrine stands in the west
of Mahet near the Imliya Darwaza or Tamarind Gate.
f Nathmal Lall here introduces his teacher’s name and attributes the know¬
ledge of these facts (?) to him.
% This hero is buried in Mahet and his tomb is kept in repair by a family of
Sains who have a Sanad from Shuja’-ud-Daulah.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
37
Part II.
General Map.
I now propose to exclude Set and Mahet from observation for the
present, and to travel over the rest of the ground which occupied my
attention in the cold weather, December 1884 to March 1885. I shall
assume that the reader has read all part Ho. I of this note carefully
and has taken in the main points of the notes left us by Fah Hian
Hwen Thsang. I shall also assume that the reader has consulted
General Cunningham’s notes on Set Mahet contained in Yols. I and XI
of the reports of the Archaeological Survey Department. I shall have
occasion to refer to Rockhill’s Life of Buddha, which is the most recent
work on the subject of Buddha’s career It contains many important
notices of Sravasti and when I shall have need to make use of the book
I shall quote it, noting that I do so, as I cannot expect the book to be in
every one’s hand.
In the ramparts and walls which surround Mahet I have found
four well defined gates, W. X. Y. Z. That at W is the west
of the gate fortified city, and is known locally as the Imliya Darwaza
because of the tamarind tree which covers the mound on the right
as we enter the gate. The walls rise abruptly as they approach the
gate on each side, and form mounds on the summits of which are
still seen the outline walls of brick watch towers. The gate was guard-
ed by an external work, an apron- wall probably, inside which appear
to have been quarters for soldiers. The central space was occupied by a
building, which may have been a guard-room, or a monk’s residence, or
an octroi post ; in fact it may have served all these purposes at various
periods. Inside it I found more than 500 clay seals, almost all unbaked
clay, bearing inscriptions. I sent some of them to the Secretary of the
Provincial Museum, Lucknow, for inspection by a German scholar, who
was at Lucknow in February 1885, but I have heard nothing of them
yet. In the same place I found large round stones seemingly of uniform
weight, probably ‘ paseris ’ of ancient date. I also found a fragment of
a curious vessel of very hard pottery and covered with a green metallic
glaze, which has gone to the Lucknow Museum. It is, to sketch from
memory, something of the shape and size rejnesented in drawing A at
the end of this note. This I believe to have been part of a vessel used
for the transport of some precious stuff, possibly mercury. The small¬
ness of the orifice is remarkable and points to some such use. This
external building, whatever it may have been, will be seen outlined (as
far as it was fully explored) in the sheet marked ‘Mahet West.’
The next gate X is in the south wall, and, on entering it, there was
38
W. Hoey — Set Mahei.
[Extra-No.
a road which for a short distance followed a devious course to the west
and then went up to the western Chauk and Jain quarters. The gate Y
was also in the south, and seems to have consisted of two arches in the
wall. The traces of the centre pillar and of the side walls are still
clearly marked. I have proved by excavation that there was a broad
street which ran from the sacred Buddhist and royal quarters in the city
down through this gate towards Ora Jhar. I have called it 1 Broad
Street ’ in the maps. The gate Z was a large opening and seems to have
been the main entrance to the east of the city. It probably opened on a
road leading towards the spot now marked by the village Dewaria.
The name is from the Sanscrit dvar a gate, and here probably passed
the road leading to this gate of the city. I shall now take up seriatim
the various places which the records of the Chinese pilgrims and other
authorities would induce us to look for outside Set (the Jetavana) and
Mahet (the city).
Lying far east from the Jetavana we have to find the stupa and
vihara which mark the spot where Tathagata (Buddha) defeated
the heretics and acceded to Yisakha’s request. I believe this to be
the ruins named Baghaha Bari. I opened the mound and found the
lines of cells on the south, and in the middle there was a build¬
ing such as would be occupied by a superior, or which might be a
small lecture-liall or a chamber for objects of veneration. I was unable
to continue my exploration to the whole mound for two reasons. There
is a village pathway crosses the mound, and south-east of it there
was a crop growing, which I could not disturb. The name is, I
believe, a corruption of Bhagava vihara, the vihara of Bhagava, a name
applied to Buddha as a title of respect. The word ‘ bdri ’ a ‘ garden ’
or, as it is often pronounced in these parts bhari, is obviously the same
as the Sanscrit and Pali vihara , a pleasure-ground, a garden, a place of
perambulation round a monastic building. Baghaha Bari is probably
Yisakha’s Purvarama, as it lies east of the Jetavana. The pilgrim
notes it was in strict dependence on the Sangharama (of the Jetavana).
This points to its being a nunnery, for all establishments of professed
female followers of Buddha were in strict subordination to the nearest
monastery.
To the south of this place is a large area very much raised, in
which are brick ruins visible on the outskirts of the fields and in the
earth inside them. I could not explore here as I should have had to
remove the crops of some poor cultivators : but I satisfied myself
that there are at least three large buildings buried here. The position
of this area marks it out as the site of (1) the stupas which were raised
where Buddha sat and checked Yirudhaka, when leaving the city to go
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mcihet.
39
against the Sakyas, and (2) the stupa erected over the remains of the
Sakya maidens. These two places are certain to have lain south of the
stupa alluded to in the last para., and close to them was the great lake
in which Yirudhaka is said to have perished. It is clear that Virudha-
ka, according to the Buddhist fable or history, whichever we call it,
perished in a lake, an ornamental water, by a conflagration which burned
up a boat or pavilion in which he was. That this tank was the Awen-
dlia Tal, I have no doubt. It still shows in places on its banks the
traces of masonry probably of a ghat or embankments. The word may
be a compound of Sanscrit ava and indha (burn), and thus afford
internal demonstration of the propriety of this identification.
I may add that there is reason to suppose from the general tenor of
Hwen Thsang’s narrative that there was a palace near this tank, for we
read of Virudhaka’s sending the women of his palace down to the
banks of the lake and his disporting himself with them there. One local
tradition localizes the spot to which the maiden ascended, who invoked
the Sun, as narrated at p. 21, and says she went to the top of Ora Jhar.
This fits in with the belief that Ora Jhar was a kingly residence. An¬
other tradition says that Ora Jhar was an armoury. It is not unlikely
that when Prasenajit married Mallika, she being his junior queen, he
may have placed her in a palace for her own special use, and this may
have been that palace. Any how, the place cannot be what a popular
derivation, based on the present form of the name, would imply ; a spot
where sweepings gathered in baskets were thrown out. The name Ora
Jhar or Orha Jhar* is applied to a high mound near Colonelganj in
Gonda District, and to the Maniparbat at Ajudhia and to other places.
It seems to me that it is probably a corruption of the Sanscrit urddhwa
(high) ddhdra (eminence), and it devotes merely a high place or lofty
eminence, as either affording a commanding view ora site for a building.
Altogether, I believe, that Ora Jhar will be found to have been a terraced
palace, such as that on the terrace of which Virudhaka saw Jeta walking,
when he ordered his death and probably it wTas here that Virudhaka’s
ladies of the seraglio were, when they went down to the ornamental
water on the fatal day. There is no place that I know of to suit the
story in Mahet.
Near Ora Jhar is a mound in which I found only 3 concentric rings
of brick wall, two of which I explored. It is called Panaliiya Jhar.fi
What this place can have been I was long puzzled to know, but it seemed
to me to have been a ring intended for some amusement, with a gradu-
* I have heard both the aspirated and unaspirated forms used.
f Explained from ‘ panhi ’ shoe to be the place where travelpers shook dust
oft' their feet before entering city ! !
40
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra-No
ally rising auditorium or gallery. This was curiously confirmed by my
reading in Weber’s article already quoted, how Pramati made the Brah¬
man’s acquaintance at a cockfight outside Sravasti. I now believe that
this was a cockpit, and certainly it is well suited to such a sport. The
location is probable, being near an ornamental water and garden and a
royal residence. The name Panaliiya is probably derived from the
Sanscrit Pana a wager or gaming. The Jhar is the same as in Ora Jhar.
It is curious that the only case in which superstition interfered with
my excavation was at Ora Jhar. When I had cleared the summit and
was beginning to expose a series of chambers on the south side of the
crest, the appearance of which was that of chambers on a terrace, it was
a cold day after rain and a bitter wind was blowing. The gangman,
who was a Brahman, was seized with a shivering fit and he fell over
crying that the gods had attacked him, and in his raving said that there
were seven spirits inside the mound opposing him. He was so horrified
and weak, that it became necessary to carry him to the grove where the
labourers usually spent the night, and he lay all night long reasoning
with his gods and imaginary demons. I could not prevail on his gang
to resume work then at Ora Jhar, and when I wished to return to the
place later on, funds were too low to admit of it.
The pilgrims noted three deep tanks or ditches, where people fell
living into hell. These are connected with Devadatta, Sundari, and
Chanscha. They differ as to their relative positions. General Cun¬
ningham has announced the identification of these ditches or tanks, but
he has misplaced them in his maps, and has said nothing as to Ihe rea¬
sons of his identifications. The furthest south is Lambhuiha. This is
probably derived from the Sanscrit root lamb (to sink or fall in),
bhumi (earth), the place where ‘ earth sank.’ North-by-east of this, at
the exact distance noted by Hi wen Thsang, is Bhulinalrwan Tal. This is
the second. The derivation is probably from the Sanscrit bhu (earth),
+ Una (disappeared or vanished). The third is the gulf which swallowed
Devadatta.
The tank marked as this last by General Cunningham lies inside the
enclosing walls of the monastic establishment round the large stupa
east of and within the limits of Set. It cannot, therefore, be one
of the three named by the pilgrims for they all lay outside the Jetavaua.
I am inclined to think it must be Kundalivva or Parsaliwa, for near each
is a mound containing brick ruins, probably those of buildings com¬
memorative of some such story. It is immaterial which we assume it to
be. The building near Parsahwa I opened, but it seemed to be a fane
of some kind raised over an older building. Kundaliwa might be a
corruption of hand , a tank, but it is worth noting that kunda is also a
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
41
pot, and the female who falsely charged Buddha with incontinence made
up the semblance of pregnancy by tying a pot round her waist. It is
also possible that Baitara may be one of the tanks in question, because
the very name may obviously be a corruption of baitdl , a demon, the con¬
nection of which with the story of Devadatta is easily seen.
Of other places worth note I must mention Puraina Tal. We may
easily take this to be a corruption in Hindi of the Sanscrit Purna, and,
if we do, it can be fairly inferred that this tank is the spot associated
with the suicide of Purna Kasyapa mentioned at pages 8 and 9. On
its south bank is a long mound which seems to contain briok-work,
probably the remains of a memorial building.
To the north of this is Ambalia Tal, a large and deep tank, with a
mound on three sides, and a thick clump of trees on the south. Near
this I found in 1876 a portion of a stone pillar, cut in a he mi-hexagonal
form, probably one of those stones referred to by Hi wen Thsang as
marking particular places where various holy persons had been engaged
in meditation. This then is the place where was the ivood of the recover¬
ed eyes , and the very story still survives enshrined in the word ambalia.
This is the Sanscrit amba , an eye, which is seen in the word tryambaka ,
triocular. I conclude that General Cunningham was wrong in look¬
ing to Gulariha as the site of this grove.
The mound of Barmdeo is not to be overlooked. Tradition says, it
is the oldest spot round Sahet and Mahet. It will be worth opening, as
we know that Brahmadatta was Prasenajit’s father, and the people round
about say that this mound was a shine of Brahma.
Nor must I omit to notice Husen Jot with reference to which General
Cunningham has made the following observations. #
“ To the north-west of the monastery Hiuen Tsiang places a well
“ and a small stupa, which marked the spot where Maudgala-putra
“ tried in vain to uuloose the girdle of Sariputra. As the distance is
“ not mentioned, it may be inferred that the stupa was close by, and
“ therefore, I would identify the site with that of the shrine of Pir-
“ Parana in the small village of Husen Jot, which is within 700 feet of
“ the north-west corner of the monastery. Near the same place there
“ was also a stupa of Asoka and a stone pillar, which the king had
“ raised to note the spot where Buddha and his right-hand disciple
u Sariputra had taken exercise and explained the Law. I could find no
“ trace of any of these monuments, and I conclude that the stupas, as
“ usual, must have furnished materials for the erection of Pir-Barana’s
“ shrine.”
6
* Archaeological Survey of India, vol. I, p. 313.
42
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra No.
To this paragraph objection must be taken. There is no shrine
of Pir-Barana at Set Mahet and there was no person named Barana.
There was a Pir Barahna. He was Sikandra Diwana, a faqir, a
follower of Sultan Ibrahim Adham, and it was with the disciples
of this Mussalman Saint a rule to abjure covering for the head and
feet. A full account of them is given in the Saulat-i-Mas’udi. He
accompanied Saiyad Salar to Oudh, and the Saiyad expired in his arms.
He was himself killed by a shower of arrows while supporting the
Salar’s head in his lap. He was buried beside the young hero in Bah-
raich. There is no trace of any shrine at Husen Jot, and I have seen
nothing to lead me to suspect a stupa in or near this hamlet. I am
quite at a loss to see how the venerable archaeologist can have come to
pen so erroneous a paragraph as this. Further north there is a grove, a
mound, and a well. On the mound is a shrine of Mahadev, called here
Bannu Nath. The lingam is a red sandstone pillar over which, in the
place where it was found standing, the shrine was, I am told, built.
This may or may not be so, but this place seems to be that which the
pilgrims refer to in the narrative which was before General Cunningham,
when he took Husen Jot to be the place where stood the stupa, marking
the spot where Maudgalaputra tried to unloose Sariputra’s girdle. As
regards Husen Jot a note should be made. The Saiyad Miran, who
was left by Salar Mas’ud as kotwal of Set Mahet, and who is buried
in Mahet inside the brick building called Miran ka dargah and also
‘ Miran Asthan,’ was Saiyad Mir Husen who came with Saiyad Salar
to Oudh. Husenjot is a hamlet where the descendants of the original
Khadim of this Dargah still live. They hold a m’afi conferred by the
Oudh Subahdars, but greatly reduced in area by the Balrampur Taluqdar,
and they still maintain the Dargah, and observe the annual ‘ feast of
oblation (’urs) in Mir Husen ’s memory.
I must now return to the extreme east to the village of Kandh
Bari. This is but a small hamlet, in which are seen at the surface
of the ground the remains of massive brick walls. There are many wells
in the hamlet, which is on an elevation, and close by are some five or more
magnificent old trees, mangos and others. These are north-east of the
village and south-east of the gate. When I first visited this place, I was
amused by a reference made to one Gandhwa in connection with the
name of this hamlet, and it was carried back to the time of Arjun and
Hahsadhvaj. I took no note of it ; but I have since read the paragraph*
in General Cunningham’s second report on Sravasti, in which he
attempts to connect the story of the Gardener Gandamba (sic) who
# Archaeological Survey of India , vol. XI, p. 95.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet
43
presented to Buddha a mango, the stone of which was planted and
became a great tree, with Chakkar Bhandar. The word is not Gand-
amba, but is properly written Gandhamba, and is clearly a compound of
Gandha -f amra (or amba), the fragrant mango. The name of the vil¬
lage is thus a debased form of Gandhamba + vihara : the garden of
‘ Gandhamba’ or the fragrant mango garden. Its location near two gates
of the city mark it out as the probable spot to which the story should bo
attached. Buddha was going towards a gate of the city when the mango
was presented. I shall deal with the name of Chakkar Bhandar later on.
There are two other mounds near Kandh Bari one N. W., the other
N. E. of it. The latter I did not open. That on the N. W. I opened,
and found the building of which an outline plan will be seen on Plate IV,
and its location in Plate XIII. Here I found a late Hindu building, a
shrine of Mahadeo, superimposed on earlier ruins which I had not time to
fully explore. In the argha in the central building I found a shaft of a
red sandstone pillar about 18 in. in diameter and some 4 feet in length,
the upper half only being dressed and polished as a round pillar. It had
clearly been originally the lower part of a massive pillar. The broken
top was dressed off to a hemispherical shape. The argha was very
brittle and of common grey-green sandstone. The walls seem to have
been built round the pillar. I do not see how it could have been
brought in after the completion of the building. The lower part of the
shaft was cut in a polygon of which I do not remember the number of
sides, and was not dressed or polished. It seems this pillar must have
been the lower part of a memorial column found here, or near here, the
broken top of which was subsequently dressed to hemispherical shape
and used as a lingam. There were small modern lingams in two cham¬
bers on the west. I am inclined to look on this as the position of one of
Asoka’s memorial pillars. Another I have already mentioned, the Banni
Nath Mahadeo.
Part III.
I have now to invite attention to the separate map of Set or Sahet.
I have opened so many more mounds and buildings than General Cun¬
ningham, that I have been compelled to number anew. To prevent any
confusion and to make clear my observations which will often conflict
with General Cunningham’s convictions, I shall in the following notes
give, as far as I can, the numbers which he has allotted to buildings as
well as the numbers allotted by me.
The building marked 1 by me is the same as that bearing that num¬
ber in General Cunningham’s map.* Cunningham gives the dimensions
* Archaeological Survey of India, vol. XI, Flate XXIV.
44
W. Ho ej—Set Mahet.
[Extra No.
of the platform of the mound with tolerable accuracy, 350 ft. sq., and
the exact measurement of the enclosing wall of the building now exposed,
nearest the surface of the mound, can be ascertained by scale appended
to my map. But into this I need not go. I shall satisfy myself with
pointing out that there has been a misconception as to the age and
character of the building which crowns the mound.
Cunningham states that there were three platforms and “ on the
uppermost terrace, which was about 80 ft. square stood the temple with its
doorway facing the east. The building consisted of two parts : a large
ball, or assembly room, for reading Ihe Buddhist Scriptures, and a
smaller room, or cell, with a pedestal for the enshrined image.”* He
then goes on to describe the cell and the assembly hall, as he calls
them.
The first point I have to note is, that the cell, as it is termed, is
quite a new building, in fact a modern addition to a modern building.
This is apparent at a glance by observing that there are floral bricks
thrust in here and there at random in the walls, having been clearly
taken from the remains of an older building. In the next place the
four pillars, as Cunningham calls them, small brick pedestals in the large
room, are placed as bedis or Hindu altars, and raise the suspicion that
this was a later Hindu building. I opened the floor and I found the
pilasters of a larger building and four other bedis below. They extend¬
ed to a depth of about 4 feet below and rose out of a concrete floor.
On opening this concrete to dig deeper, I came upon the mouth of a
well which had been closed up. I opened it and found it to be only an
additional piece of masonry continuing the shaft of the original well,
the platform of which was clearly marked by a line of upright bricks a
few feet lower down. I cleared this well to water level, and found it
had been choked with bricks, bones, and weapons. I found human
skulls and bones, and the skull of a camel. One human skull still held
an arrow head by which it had been pierced. Thus we have marked
periods : (1) original well, (2) well repaired and added to and choked up
with bones etc., after a fight, (3) the first building of which I found
bedis and pilasters, (4) the building of which the remains were seen
by General Cunningham. The surface of the floor of this latest build¬
ing is 20 ft. 6 in. above water level.
To the west of this mound I opened trenches in a large level space
adjoining, and I here found very old buildings deep buried under earth,
ten to twelve feet below the surface and made of bricks of very large
dimensions. I could discern chambers which seem to have surrounded a
# Archaeological Survey of India , vol. I, %>. 83.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
45
square enclosure, which were probably among the oldest, if not part of
the original, buildings. In these long buried ruins I found crystal
markers for playing pachisi , also some of clay, and a curious glass plate
about \ inch thick perforated with five holes in the form of a quincunx.
These old remains have not been mapped in yet, but are among the most
interesting remains laid bare. One of the most curious relics found in
them was a heap of charred rice, the form of each grain being preserved
fresh as if of yesterday.
Buildings 2, 3, 4, 5, of my numbering, are not of any importance.
Building G was discovered by me deep under the earth and is
unquestionably of great antiquity. I have exposed the enclosing walls.
The bricks and the style of building point to antiquity, the former being
large and massive and and the mode of construction being by ‘ off-set ’
walls, that is, the bricks being set in a graduated form so as to widen
out the wall like a staircase at the base. This v as necessary to resist
the action of the water in the low level of this ill-drained site. Most
buildings found concealed at a great depth in Set are built thus. In the
east wall of this building I found a fragment of a Buddhist railing. In
the west side I found lying, apparently where it had fallen by accident,
an ancient seal.
The building Ho. 7 is that which General Cunningham terms the
Gandha Kuti. The name may be allowed to adhere, though in the
present stage of our exploration we are not in a position to impose the
name with a certainty of accuracy on any particular building. I must,
however, here point again to the error into which General Cunningham
falls in supposing that a large room with four low pillar shafts is neces¬
sarily ‘ a hall with the remnants of pillars to support a roof.’ In this
case I am almost sure the large chamber of what he calls the Gandha
Kuti is a late Hindu addition. I have removed all the earth round the
building as it now stands, and I have found that the square block or
cell on the west is quite a separate building from the rest. Its base is
built of off-set walls, as I have already described in the case of building
Ho. 6, while the character of the architecture of the large middle cham¬
ber is wholly different and its style modern. In the small eastern
part, which seems to have been a vestibule in later times, there are
traces which indicate that it contained portions of an older construc¬
tion.
I cleared all round the mound and I exposed several bases of pillars
of two dimensions. They were of brick, the bricks being well curved
and calculated to a nicety to suit the pillars for which they were intend¬
ed. But all these pillars seemed to be of late date. On the south I
noticed one base of a pillar of much larger dimensions on which a later
46
W. Hoey — Set Mcihet.
[Extra No.
wall has been built. I then opened the small remnants of buildings,
Nos. 9, 10, 11, and, on going to a great depth, I found that there were
older walls running below, 8 to 13 feet under the surface, which clearly
belonged to a wholly different and much older building. I now deter¬
mined to open the Gandha Kuti and I cleared away the surface of the
concrete external courtyard on the south, and I soon came on a very
ancient wall running down in the form of a lower off-set brick slope, and
forming a masonry terrace round the mound, on which stood the old
chambers I have already described. It is of the same age and style.
Further outside this I found the original enclosing wall, entire in its
whole circuit. Under the modern vestibule I made a tunnel and I found
the same class of old building below. I found only two objects of
interest. They were not in the lower or more ancient building. One
was a fragment of a pottery relief of Buddha standing and preaching.
This was buried in the general ruin near the top of the mound. The
other was an image in red sandstone, probably representing the scene in
Buddha's life when a householder of S'ravasti sent his son to Buddha for
reception into the brotherhood. At its base was inscribed the usual
Buddhist formula ‘ Ye dharmina,’ etc., in characters of about the 5th
century A. D. This stone seems to me to be the fragment of a pillar on
which this figure may have been carved originally, or after the fracture
of the pillar. Any how, the stone slopes like a pillar, and the edges are
dressed, and bear fragments of an old inscription in well executed Sans¬
crit characters of early date. These fragments of writing are, as the
pillar stands, meaningless.
The numbers 12, 13, mark what General Cunningham has identified
as the Kosamba Kuti. My attention was in this drawn to the four bedis
in the part marked 13, and I thought, from what I had seen in Nos. 1
and 7, that it was not unlikely that this was a recent addition to 12. I
opened the ground carefully all round to a depth of about 10 ft. and I
found No. 12 resting on its original foundation and built in the same
style as the older buildings elsewhere opened, with off-set bricks at
the base. I opened a small passage and found clearly where this
formation of wall terminated, 1 ft. 9 in. inside and below the corner
of 13. I also found on the east side that 13 is not deep below the
upper surface. Thus clearly the part 13 is not of great antiquity, and it
is possible that, while the large statue found in 12 by General Cunning¬
ham may have been there from a very ancient date, the part 13 was
added on by either Buddhists or Hindus, who found the statue thus
surviving the desolation of the seventh century. It is not unusual to
find Hindus worshipping any image they find, without inquiring whether
it is Hindu or not. On the north side of this building and close to it, in
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
47
1892.]
part adjoining it, I found two small circular blocks of masonry and one
square one. The former may have been memorial marks, small pagodas
such as Bnddhists build close to large stupas and other sacred buildings.
The square block was probably a monk’s platform. On the east of 13
I found, several feet below the earth, remains of another offset-brick
base, which is of undoubted antiquity, but I had not the funds to con¬
tinue the excavation here.
Nos. 14, 15, 16, call for no note. No. 17 is a curious construc¬
tion. It seems to have been a stupa but may have been a cell. I cleared
the mound in which it was hid and opened it, but did not go below the
surface of the earth around it.
The building by me marked 18, is that which General Cunningham
describes as a stupa and marks 5. I found nothing in it, though I went
several feet deeper than Cunningham had gone. I opened the building
all round outside by a trench about 9 ft. deep, and I ran a trench 9 ft.
deep from the middle of the building to the east and west taking
the line of the octagonal well. The trench on the east is not
marked in the map as it gave no result. That on the west, ffhh,
and others near it ffgg , and jjll , yielded some results which I shall
refer to presently. At the north-west corner of the enclosing wall,
I found some very curious vessels, pottery, well-baked and massive.
These were large hemispherical bowls. They were lying bottom up
and some were 5 feet in diameter. There were some smaller. There
were also ring-like pieces of pottery of similar dimensions. The
only explanation I can give of these is, that they were used in making
umbrella-like cupolas on the top of stupas, or by piling the hemispheres
on the cylinders they may have been used in making small memorial
pagodas. Earth would in the latter case have been filled in as the suc¬
cessive pieces were piled on one another.
Nos. 20, 21, 22, 23 stand on the southern elevation, where General
Cunningham has marked 11 and 12. His No. 12 corresponds to my
No. 20, and I did not do more than clear the upper surface of a part of
it. The building 21 turned out to be so large and promising that I con¬
fined myself to it. The western wall of No. 21 runs on to meet No. 24,
and a wall runs east from 24 which I did not fully expose. Hence it is
not shown. Nos. 22 and 23 are adjuncts to 21 and have probably served
some accessory purpose to the main building. No. 21 is 128 ft. by 118 ft
and the whole block is unquestionably one piece. I cleared the building
all round, going down about 13 ft. on the south, the west, and the north,
I did not go quite so deep at the east. The door was on the east. I
found that this building had one characteristic offset brick base at the
lowest part and was there constructed of very large bricks. There were
48
W. Hocy — Set Mahet.
[Extra-No.
the clearest indications that this building had been twice rebuilt with
extreme care exactly on the old foundation, before it was finally rebuilt
at the latest date prior to falling into the decay in which I found it, the
successive strata being clearly defined. I cleared the whole of the mound
above and found the w7ell shown in the map of Sahet 'or Set, and in one
chamber I found a fragment of a red sandstone slab or pillar. I also
found two fragments of wrell executed stone images — Vaislmavite — with
Small marginal figures of Buddha cut on them. These are referrable
obviously to a period when Buddha had been incorporated among the
incarnations of Vishnu, the period of re-absorption of Buddhism into
Hinduism. When I went to the floor of the next previous stage of
building, which lay about 8 feet below the floor of the upper one, I
found the large slab already referred to at page 3 bearing the long
Sanscrit inscription. It had lain there un-disturbed, for many years,
for the root of a gigantic gular tree had extended a distance of about
17 feet from the parent stem and grown out under the stone and several
feet beyond it. This root was quite flat and bent at a right angle,
showing it had grown under the slab.
There can be no doubt that 21 is one of the oldest and longest
preserved buildings in Set, and should be wholly cleared and exposed.
The buildings 25, 26, 27, 28 call for no remark. They are not
fully exposed. No. 29 is a small platform and will be referred to
again.
No. 32 is a small building which I exposed. It was hidden in a
mound and seems to have been a cell in which a monk may have dwelt,
or possibly it was an image-shrine. The door faced the west. I think
it was more likely a cell. There are in it what seem to me to be two
raised masonry beds for monks, who may have lived here, but of this no
one can be certain.
The most interesting building which I opened, was the stupa (No.
33) which I propose to identify as that of Sariputta. I have completely
exposed the outer walls of the stupa itself and those of the enclosing
square. The hollow on the east in which water still lies, was, I found
as I continued my exploration, originally a masonry tank. To the north¬
east of it, and possibly outside the enclosing lines of 33, was a very
curious building No. 34 in which I found many clay heads, specimens of
well-moulded and well-burnt pottery. What this place was I cannot
say, owing to its very peculiar construction. Lying against the wall
of one of the cells, cut by the trench aabb, I found a well executed brass
cast of an elephant’s head, ears, shoulders, and forelegs.* It is possible
# See Hate XXV, c.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
49
this was the figure which surmounted one of the pillars east of the
Jetavana in the days of the Chinese pilgrims, one of whom says it was
an elephant’s head, while the other calls it an ox head. The pillars were,
it would seem, 70 ft. high. The great elevation of the figure would
amount for its being mistaken by one pilgrim for an ox head. It seems
to have been built into the shaft of the pillar. The groove at the
back points to its having been intended to be fastened into a wall
or stone, so that one line of the groove should be hidden while the other
should seem to be the base from which it rose.
The lines aabb, eedd, zz\ xij , xw, uv, ut are all trenches which I
dug to a great depth exposing walls and cells. There seems to have
been a continuous line of building from u to £, and, when I stopped the
trench at t , I found two curious square remnants of what may have been
pillar bases and portions of chambers (35).
I now return to the stupa (33). It seems to have been built
here for a special reason close to the Jetavana, and I think I can
point to the reason and identify it. On opening the cylindrical shaft in
the middle of the stupa, I went to a depth of about 13 feet before I
got anything. I then found a begging pot and alms bowl, black glazed
pottery, built inside the shaft, and covered by a larger bowl inverted
over them. I went several feet deeper, altogether about 25 feet down,
and I found at the original base a large inverted bowl like that first
found. I managed to lift it and what it covered without breaking the
latter. The covering bowl had been cracked right across, probably in
building it in. I opened the contents with care, and found a large soap¬
stone casket. Inside this casket was a dark green porcelain bowl con¬
taining the charred ashes and some charred bone-joints of a deceased
monk.
We know that when Sudatta promised to build Buddha a vihara,
he asked him to nominate a disciple to design the building, and that
Buddha sent Sariputta with Sudatta to STavasti. Many years after¬
wards Sariputta died at ISTalanda. The disciples cremated him, but
brought his ashes, alms bowl, and cloak to Buddha, who was at Raja-
griha. Buddha brought the relics to S'ravasti. Sudatta induced the
Master to give them to him, and he built a stupa over them. Buddha
himself gave instructions for the building of this relic-tower, and direct¬
ed that it should contain a vase.
The relics found in the stupa 33 correspond, being a porcelain
bowl, or vase, holding the ashes, inside a relic casket, and an alms bowl
and begging pot. The most natural place to locate the stupa was in
close proximity to the entrance of the building which Sariputta had
designed, near the spot where he had been victorious in disputes with
7
5Q W. Hoey — Set Mahet. [Extra No.
rival sects:, nay more, on a part of the very site which Sudatta had
originally purchased.
Round the base of the stupa were several small pagodas or memo¬
rial pillars, some square and some circular. On the west of it was a well.
This probably was to supply with water the mendicants who lived in
the cells around the stupa.
No. 36 represents certain walls discovered just as operations were
drawing to a close, which seem more like the outline of one side of a
gateway than anything else 1 can think of ; but it would be wrong to do
more than hazard this guess, as the counterpart has not yet been found,
nor indeed looked for.
The line rs represents a long trench in which I found, still in ex¬
cellent preservation, the greater part of a drain, or waterduct, made of
tiles, probably used for conveying water for irrigating the garden of
the monastery. The lines Im, no , and pq, are the trenches which
revealed a very old building 37.
The lines gh, and jh, are very deep trenches which enabled me to
touch the walls which further excavations laid bare, now marked in the
triangle ghk, but it is only shown in this — as in other instances — that
there is great need for a full exploration.
The lines of trenches jjll , ffgg, and ffhh, yielded more interest¬
ing discoveries : and here I believe I found the key to the whole excava¬
tion. As I stood one day looking at the octagonal well A, which stands
in the middle of the present interior level of the whole ruins at Sahet,
I reflected on General Cunningham’s specious remarks in his second
report on Sravasti,* where he takes the part of the upper portion of the
well being octagonal, with a slight inward inclination of the sides at the
top, to be a mark of ingenuity on the part of the builders of the well.
I saw that the inward inclination seemed to be in some of the sides
only, and not to bear the marks of design, but of accident, owing to
age or pressure, and I further questioned the probability of a well-
builder varying -the shaft of his well, building circular below and
octagonal above. It would be a source of weakness. I then noticed
that where the circular shaft ended there were horizontal bricks and
slabs, and I felt sure that the original well must have ceased here. I
then laid out the trenches lljj, ffhh , ffgg, and, when I had gone to a
depth near the well, I came across the base of the pillar at T. This is
the remains of a magnificent pillar 13 ft. square at the base. When I had
exposed it, I made a small hole horizontally at the level of its foundation
into the earth near the well, and I found in a few minutes that I touch-
# Archaeological Survey of India , vol. XI, p. 93.
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
51
ed tlie masonry platform of the original mouth of the well, and that it
had originally been only at the top of the circular part of the masonry.
Clearly the octagonal part was an addition. Going on with my trenches
I found IT, V, to be circular bases in offset walls of buildings which had
stood on the original level. W was a pillar similar to T, but of smaller
dimensions. Here then I had touched the original level of the Jetavana,
and here, in all probability, I had come across two of the memorial
pillars, and possibly two of the smaller stupas referred to by the Chinese
pilgrims. If this be so, the lowest level seen by General Cunningham
was about 15 feet above the original ground of the Jetavana. This
shows what has to be done before we shall be entitled to speculate on the
identification of Gandha Kuti or Kosambha Kuti.
I have only now to refer to the trenches ab, cd, de. They have
been cut to a depth in some parts of 20 feet and have revealed very old
walls, but the result was little more than to give me an idea of the
direction of the buildings. The long trench cd, showed at 31 the general
outline of a wall which seemed to be the side of a long passage or
hall, possibly the vestibule of a large building. Ho. 30 is a series of
cells, but they rest on older cells, and in one place I found the remains of
a staircase, as it seemed to me, leading to a lower chamber. In the
earth which had closed up this staircase, I found a terra-cotta figure of
a naked infant and two seals. I also found in one of the lower cells a
large store of rice, which had been preserved from decomposition by
close compression in the ruins. Ho. 29 is a masonry platform, seemingly
a seat for monks at the back of the large building, of which 30 and 31
are parts. It is, however, part of a later building raised on the ruins of
the older.
I have little left to say of the tangible memories of Set except to
call attention to the very obvious reminiscence contained in the name
of Chakkar Bhandar, the adjoining hamlet. It is clearly named from
the chamber and the pillar surmounted by the wheel (chakra), which
flanked one side of the east entrance of the Jetavana. The Chakkar is
the wheel, and the Bhandar is the Sanscrit bhdndagara, or storeroom, the
chamber in which the commonwealth of the fraternity was stored.
Chakkar Bhandar stands on ruins, lines of brick wall being clearly
traceable in parts, and the hamlet should be explored with care and at
the same time with due regard for the villagers’ prejudices and home
feelings. It is true that if Chakkar Bhandar be the actual site of the
wheel-crowned pillar and adjoining storehouse, it will carry us further
east for the main door than General Cunningham fancies it lay, but we
must remember that the pillar was probably raised by Asoka, and that
even in his lifetime the Jetavana must have grown far beyond the limit
52
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra No.
of the small vihara built originally for the Master. A description of
the Jetavana as it was in its prime is to be found in the Thibetan
authorities which state that it contained sixty large halls and sixty
small ones. Buddha himself — say these authorities, attributing every¬
thing to Buddha, as they always do, — gave instructions for the decoration.
“ On the outside door you must have figured a yaksha holding a club in
his hand : in the vestibule you must have represented a great miracle,
the five divisions (of beings) of the circle of transmigration : in the
courtyard, the series of births (Jatakas) : on the door of Buddha’s
special apartment (lit. hall of perfumes, Gandhakuti), a yaksha holding
a wreath in his hand ; in the house of the attendants (or of honour),
bhikshus and stliaviras arranging the dliarmma ; on the kitchen must be
represented a yaksha holding food in his hand ; on the door of the store¬
house, a 37aksha with an iron hook in his hands; on the water-house (well-
liouse ? ), nagas with variously ornamented vases in their hands ; on the
wash-house (or the steaming house), foul sprites, or the different hells;
on the medicine house, the Tathagata attending the sick; on the privy,
all that is dreadful in a cemetery ; on the door of the lodging house ( ? text
effaced), a skeleton, bones, and a skull.’ # What is mentioned as the
wash-house may be the Baitara Tal, a washing tank, and the Baitara be
the evil-sprite.
IV. — Mahet.
The general map shows Mahet as a large walled enclosure with the
gates W, X, Y, Z, but it would be impossible to indicate on it more than
the eastern outline of the city. I have therefore prepared three sheets
on a larger scale marked Mahet South, Mahet East, and Mahet West.
These show the position of the parts of the city in which I made ex¬
cavations. I refer to them in illustration of wThat follows.
Mahet South and East.
The sheets of Mahet South and Mahet East show the thoroughfare
from the gate Y, which I have named “ Broad Street.” It leads up
to the Kachcha Kuti, Pakka Kuti, and other buildings which I have
wholly or partially exposed. While walking up this street we reach
* This quotation is directly taken from a note in Rockhill’s Life of the
Buddha (p. 49), to which I am much indebted. I have merely to remark that the
mention of * arranging the dharma,’ as it probably refers to conferring over the
sacred writings, and there were none until long after Buddha’s death, seems to indi¬
cate that the description of the monastery has been furnished by a visitor or resident
who saw it in its complete state in later days. It is therefore all the more valuable
as a guide in archaeological exploration.
1892.]
W. IToey — Set Mahet.
53
the walls of shops or houses on either side, which I have exposed, and
which are marked by the lines a, a, a, and 6, b, b, on either side
of the street. The transverse lines m, m, and n, n, are the trenches
which I dug when searching for these walls. In these shops or houses
I found some old earthen pots and one copper Indo-Bactrian coin of
no value. The settlement boundary pillar S stands to the north of
the middle of a large open space, which was probably a market place.
This would be easily determined by following out the lines of the
walls of shops or residences which I have begun to expose, pushing
them north and then following the turnings east and west.
The two largest mounds which attracted the notice of the explorer,
as rising above the surrounding jungle, were those known in the neigh¬
bourhood as the Pakka Kuti and the Kachcha Kuti. I shall describe
them first.
The Pakka Kuti is the place fixed on by General Cunningham as
the Angulimalya stupa, but he seems to have had no ground for making
this identification beyond the size and prominence of the mound. I
have opened the mound, cleared the four sides and laid bare the main
walls. I have also removed the earth from the main chamber (marked C
in the drawing of the Pakka Kuti) and I cannot but conclude that this is
not the Angulimalya stupa. In the first place there is no architectural
arrangement, such as is clearly perceptible in the undoubted stupa else*
where found, and in the next place I found in the bottom of the chamber
in C, a portion of an older and more substantial wall (marked W), the
fragment of an older building. I am inclined to think that this is the
site of the Hall of the Law built by Prasenajit, and I think it is satis¬
factory in respect of situation with reference to the royal palace, which I
believe stood round the place where Saiyad Miran’s Dargah now stands
and extended a long way to the west of it. The tomb of this Moslem who
was placed in charge of Mahet by the early Mussalman conquerors is
likely to have been in the quarter occupied by the governor and his
suite, and it is unlikely that they were located anywhere but in the
buildings which the ruler whom they displaced had occupied. There
are clear traces of regularly built and well laid out enclosed buildings
in this part of the city, and I believe their exploration would reveal the
accuracy of this location which I give to the palace. Not only does this
location of the palace fit in with the situation in which the main Bud¬
dhist buildings in Mahet are found, but it suits the narrative of Pramati
where it describes the ladies of the king’s household going from the
palace to the river side to bathe. Had the palace lain to the west of the
city, they would have had to cross the whole city to make their ablutions
and this is not a supposition favourable to the dignity of those ladies.
54
W. Iloey — Set Mahet.
[Extra No.
The Pakka Kuti, as I found it, seems to me to be a later building,
or the repaired remnants of a later building, raised on the site of the
old Hall of the Law, to mark it, and would thus be one of the memorial
buildings mentioned by the Chinese pilgrims. Its true uses cannot be
ascertained until all the chambers have been opened. I opened but one,
that in the heart of the mound. The plan shows a bird’s eye view, and
the dotted lines mark a tunnel which I carried through the whole
mound to drain it, and thus preserve it. I built strong masonry arches
where each wall was cut. The labour of clearing the whole building
would be great, as its external dimensions, 143 ft. long by 90 ft. wide,
will show. The most curious feature of the building, as far as I explored
it, is that in no place did I discover any door or window, and I could
discern no staircase.
The Kachcha Kuti is a much more interesting mound. Of its
character I have no doubt. The plan which I submit gives no idea*
however, of the main impression which it creates. The outermost wall,
of which only a portion was exposed, is an ornamental one, with a
plastered cornice and coping and served to enclose a large building.
The thick main wall of this building, shown on three sides in the
plan, is a wall of similar design, which seems to have been carried
out to a considerable height, and it undoubtedly was built up to support
an older building, which had fallen into decay. I ascertained the exist¬
ence of buried chambers by sinking a shaft at p to a depth of perhaps
20 ft. I then found that a chamber existed below and it seems to have
communicated with others. I closed up this opening at p with a
masonry cap to prevent the ingress of rain. In the passage fg I found
tiles with a metallic glazing, some green and some blue, which seemed
to be part of a floor over which a protective wall had been raised. These
tiles were made of a fine preparation of some white substances, but the
glazing chipped off readily. The herring-bone lines represent a curious
slope made of tiles placed on their edges, which may have been
either a graduated approach to a building or a roof covering a passage
into one. The long spaces a and b on either side were clearly enclosed
at a later date. The walls mm and nn were built as an ornamental
front, and corresponded in style to similar walls mn and nij at the sides.
They were clearly separate from the other walls mtu and wx and ny
nz which were built up later. In the enclosure b I found a clay figure
of a monkey (Plate XXV, d), and a head of an image near it. From the
character of the internal building, as far as I explored it, being that of
a private dwelling, as well as from the fact of this being, as I think,
the dwelling of a person of wealth, as its ornamentation shows, and its
being built in all round to preserve it, I am inclined to surmise that it
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
55
may be Sudatta’s bouse, which the pilgrims tell us was so built up, as a
memorial of him after his death.
B, C, D, are minor buildings calling for no particular notice. Al¬
though carefully examined they yielded no results.
The mound which I have marked stupa A showed itself, where I
had cut down the jungle near it, to be only less prominent than the two
Kutis. I opened it with care and I soon found it to be what I consider
a characteristic stupa. I found a circular tower in the centre, and
round it the walls of an enclosing building. I opened it down to water-
level but discovered nothing. This is; I believe, the Angulimalya Stupa.
It stands on the north-east of a depression, marking what seems to be a
street or road, that ran between it and the Kachcha Kuti to the market
place round the boundary pillars, already mentioned. Thus the site fits
in with the story of the Buddhist records, that the stupa was raised to
mark the spot where Buddha stopped the robber chief as he was ap¬
proaching him along a public street to take his life. It is not that raised
at the place of his cremation. Had it been, it should have contained his
relics.
The figure at E represents the outline of the central portion of a
building crowning another mound yet unopened. It seems to be a stupa.
The place marked as Saiyad Miran’s Dargah is the small rectan¬
gular brick-wall enclosure in which are two tombs. Here was buried
Saiyad Miran, a Moslem chief who was stationed at Set Mahet, according
to the tradition, when the first permanent Muhammadan impression on
Oudh was made. Outside the enclosure are to be seen other tombs.
Hone are inscribed.
Mahet West.
The Jain quarters lay in the west of the city near the Imliya
Darwaza, as the west gate is now called. The chief building of inter¬
est here is the Muhummadan-looking plastered construction which shows
on the ruins of the temple of Somnath, or Sobhnath, which is still vener¬
ated though now seldom visited by Jains. The antiquity of this spot
cannot be doubted. Tradition assigns Sravasti as the birth-place of the
teacher now venerated by the Jains as their third patriarch. His life
falls within the period of unliistorical tradition, and was probably poster¬
ior to the Buddhist age. This is so, as the founder of Jainism was a
contemporary of Buddha, and we have not met with any personage in
the history of Buddha or his successors who corresponds to Somnath.
It is only an anachronism which makes Mahavira the last Jain patriarch.
Tradition, while fixing on the site of the shrine of Somnath at Mahet as
the birth-place, or, possibly, the residental cell and teaching centre, of the
56
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra No.
eponymous patriarch, states that the shrine contained a statue of each
patriarch when it was in its complete state. I have therefore opened
the mound of Somnath with great care. I have been so fortunate as to
recover on this occasion images of seven several patriarchs here. I had
previously recovered some images in 1875-76, and had also pieced to¬
gether the image there lying in the shrine of Somnath. It was one of
Sumati, the fifth patriarch. I brought them all into Gondah where I left
them to be placed in the Anjuman ; but they are now lying in fragments
among the rockeries of a chick house in the public garden. I propose to
remove the pieces which make up the image of Sumati and send them
to the Lucknow Museum.
The plastered building, which now crowns the mound of Somnath,
is Pathan in style : and I have a suspicion that it is a tomb of some
Mussalman who fell here in some assault. I have not opened it. I have
almost wholly cleared the mound round it, and but little more labour
would have been needed to open it to its full depth, but this would have
probably led to the fall of the domed structure on the top. The most
remarkable point about Somnath is that there are traces of an ancient
enclosing wall on the south which shows there was at one time a court¬
yard fronting a large building. When this building fell there was an¬
other built above it, and it was similarly succeeded by another, and so on,
until we have traces of at least four buildings distinct in style and age,
before the final Mussalman erection. A reference to the large plan of
Somnath shows a bird’s eye view of the walls exposed, but I regret I
had no means of procuring a drawing or photograph of the floral pilas¬
ter of the building of the second age on the south, or of the cornice of
a somewhat later building in the middle. These were of exceptionally
neat and elegant design. The floral bricks seem to have been chiselled
to remove inequalities after they had been moulded and baked. I have
in figures 11 to 31 on plate XXVI shown some of the floral bricks worked
into this building.
The images I have recovered at, or near, Somnath are shown in the
accompanying plates. One of them bears a Sanscrit inscription recording
that it was dedicated in Samvat 1133 by Sutan Pandit This is possibly
the period of a revival of Jainism, and restoration of shrines, after the
first wave of Muhummadan invasion had swept by.
There were two other Jain temples near Somnath, the ruins of which
I fully opened. They are marked J 1 and J 2. There were three small
separate cells, or shrines, in J 2. The images were all found in the
northern and middle shrines. The cell to the south was empty. One
these images too, bore the Sanskrit inscription mentioned above, which I
consider points to the restoration of these shrines at the same time.
1892.] W. Hoey — Set Mahet. 57
The building marked C was also exposed. It seems to have been
a private house.
The building H is decidedly Hindu. I have almost completely
opened the mound and I have found that the three cells or shrines cor¬
respond remarkably with those in J 2, and they seem to have been built
on the outline of older ones of the same shape, which I found when I
opened the mound. I consider the temple which stood here to be the
reconstruction, or restoration, of the original Hindu shrine and to be
one of the oldest buildings in Mahet. If the portion of the Chinese
pilgrim’s narrative which speaks of the rival temples of Hindu and
Buddhist’s priests can be held to refer to any buildings within the
city, it may be that this is the temple of the heretics, of which it is
said that it was overshadowed by a Buddhist fane. There are mounds
near, in one of which a rival Buddhist fane may yet be discovered.
S. is the settlement boundary-pillar and lies in the centre of a space
where several roads seem to have met. One passed up close by II to
Somnath.
V. Buddhist Stone-inscription.
The inscription consists of 18 lines (inclusive of the date), and these
lines comprise 17 slokas in various metres.
I sent two rubbings of the inscription to Mr. Fleet, who submitted
them to Professor Kielhorn, whose reading and translation have been
published in the Indian Antiquary . I regret that, at the time when I
forwarded these rubbings, I was under the impression that I had
established the spelling of the words to be Set Mahet, and this led me
to accept an erroneous derivation which Professor Kielhorn published.
I have since satisfied myself that there is no sufficient reason to suppose
that t should be written instead of t in the name, although the ac¬
curacy of Set instead of Sahet cannot be doubtful.
I had considerable misgiving as to the rendering of some expressions
by Professor Kielhorn, and I have therefore obtained a reading and
translation with notes from two competent Sanscrit scholars, Kunwar
Jawala Prasad of the Statutory Civil Service, and Pandit Murlidhar of
Maudlia. The result is a very materially improved and more lucid in¬
terpretation, which I readily accept, as it harmonizes with the Buddhist
character of the record.
The gist of the inscription is that a Solar King, named Mandhata,
built a fortified city called Javrisha, in which dwelt many Srivastav
Kayasths. A head of one of these families, named Vilvashva, had a sou
called Janaka, who became prime minister to Gopala, the sovereign of
Kaunauj, and married Jijja. The issue of this marriage was six sons.
8
[Extra-No.
58
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
Tlie eldest was Pippata and the fifth Vidhyadhara. The latter was a
man of high mental and moral endowments and was also distinguished
for his skill in the management of elephants. The monarch, Madana,
endeavoured, chiefly on the ground of this accomplishment, to make
Vidhyadhara content and happy in his service, but he forsook the
Saivic cult, and embraced Buddhism, and devoted his wealth to the
foundation and endowment of a monastery, a vihara, which probably
took the form of a restoration of the Jetavana at Set.
Buddhist stone-inscription from Set, of Samvat 1176.
L. 1. Om namo vitaragaya || maranashta niyamya dikshvadliipati-
nayojya satvodaye durllanghyanyavamanya sanvararipo rajnaksharanya-
dritah II uddhartum yatate sma yah karunaya srf —
L. 2. S'akyasinho jagadbodhiii prapya cha buddliatamabhigatah sa
tvan paritrayatan n sansaranbhodhitaraya taramuttaralochanan | vande
girvvanavaninan bharatimadliidevatam ||
L. 3. Mandhatakhyah satrujichchhkra-tulyo vanse bhanor bhanu-
tejotisayi I nityanandi sadhu bhokta trilokin rajnamadyaschakravarti
babhuva II svechchhan bhramyan kadachit sara —
L. 4. Siruharajoraji-chitrikritambhh samyag drishtva sarontar-
mada-kala-sakuni-vrata-rababhiramyn I kartun kirte-r-vitanau sucharita-
mudito mridbhirapurya yatnat karkkotadhinara —
L. 5. kslian svapuramidamatho nirmame javrishakhyan || tasminna-
bhuvan dhaninotidhanyah sripurvvavastavyakulapradipah | adyapi
yadvaiisabhavair yasobhirjjaganti subhrair dhavali.
L. 6. kriyante I) teshamabhudabhijane jaladhavivendu rindudyutih
prathita-vilva-sivabhidhanah | yasya smararicharanambujavatsalasya la-
ksh m ir d vi j ati- su j anarthi j anopab h o
L. 7. gya |) saujanyanbunidhe rudaracharitapratyasyamanainasali
sadhunamudayaikadhama-jananl-sthana-sriyah satvabhuh | tasyasijjanako
janiva hridayah putrah satama —
L. 8. granir manyo gadhipuradhipasya sachivo gopala-namnali
sudhih l| tenochchkairabhijanambunidheh prasuta lakshmirivachyuta-vi-
bhushnakantamurtih | anandakandaja —
L. 9. nani janani-kulanan jijjeti sanbhritakulasthitinopayeme II
tabhyamabhuban stanayah shade va shadbhirmukhai rekatanur ya ekah |
jyayan sutah pippata namadhe —
L. 10. yo dhimanivagniprabliavah sivabhyan || tatpancliamah
panchasaranukari tayo-stanujo tanukirtikandah | vidyavabodhadanukir-
tyate yo vidyadharo nama yathartha —
L. 11. nama II rasadhikamabliivyapi girisacliaranasritan | hansiva
1892,]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
59
mansan yasya jabati sma na bbarati II madhuryan madbuno sudba bima-
rucberananda medhavifca mi — -
L. 12. tbyaivambunidhergabbmma gunastnngatva madreralan |
yasyaikaikagunadhirobanagireh saujanyasandrolasatpiyusbaikanidber
gunena guninah sarvvepyadhschakrire || yasmai
L. 13. gajagamarahasyavide gajanamanandanm kalayale dhura-
muddhuraya | bhupalamaulitilako madanah pradanamanadibbib ksbiti-
patih spribayan babbuva || deva
L. 14, layaih pratbayata nijakirtimucbchaib pusbyadvija-vrajamude
tumulambabhuva I yenarjjitan dravinamarta-janopakari jivanusambbrita-
mudamudarambbarinan II satvasarfcbapa
L. 15. ritranakritakayaparigrabab | abbudabbufcapurvvoyaii bodbi-
satva ivaparab || atmajnanakritodayena vigaladragadidosbasrayaprodga-
cbcbbanmanasa vicbarya babuso
L. 16. Madbyastliatan sangate tenaradbitasatpathena yaminama-
iiiraimayyotsasrije vibaravidbina kirterivaikasrayab II
sadbodliavandyacliari —
L. 17. tasya nayaikadbamna scbaiidravadafcaliridayab sumatih
kalavan | asya priyesbu niratah subbagan bbavisbnub sarnbandba bandbu.-
rudayi vidadbe prasastim ||
5. Samvat 1176.
nandamiilalayo
•THT II fiRJKJ
I ^ V: it
*risTTfrr^.* vri-fr I f^TT^it
fi<sfrit’ n ^ikpr
€tW fifrrit ^f^crri i
i ^rfi srsfwr isfrfassiJifai skirt
fejif II 5T^Tf^t^fF^ffT: 5jfirrf^f^rTfw*n | ^
^rirt ff^rk^^rfi^wr-
60 W. Hoey — Set Mahet. [Extra-No.
'R’T'^T anqi^cTT^: II
ST^rTT l^^STOiPfl^: I ^r^r^^ST-
SFT^- 5T^r?tf>^fr^t II mwrro^
WTJ % W I 5SJTOBT ^rr: fxpu^snW-
^t ^farfsi^rfipw^: fs^wf ii rr?ffiw ^5*rw*n*iT?t cpfr^rofr
c\ ■*
| f^r^rteT^T^t5?^ % 5THT W*T-
stprt ii fa^r*rwfor<r i w srsrfrr ^ *t
|| ^*TT W f^^^r^wfafTT fit 1
's# >9
^ A. ^ ^ -^\ ^ ^ ^ »\ ^ ^ • *V ■— ^\
Jwrwr'H ^TJi^tt^^r i
vj vj O \J
3i<c*r Jifw^r* ii w
c\ \i
jTorriiiPC^fat *jx?pjicr*? 1 ^rwlf%f*rwr *^*n
^riritTitrf^fiT: f^frHrftp ii ^rr-
r&y: sr^T*7<Tr i %*rrf^rr
^\fx II
w'%
it^^Trrf iJijth tfarafarrearaw fc^sfi^^ir f^rc-
f^f^iTT II I rftJJ ere^T^W^BTf^b* ^itfrf:
it^TT^r^r i *rci fagj firmer: vif*r*p «
l^cT II
Om ! Salutation to him who has done with passions.
May the revered and illustrious Sakya Sinlia wlio, having1 curbed
the Maras1 by the eight-fold Path2 for controlling the passions ; who,
having directed the thoughts of the rulers of various quarters to the
spread of righteousness; who, having ignored the imperial behests,
difficult of avoidance, of Kama (lit. the enemy of Sanvara8), in his pity
1 This seems to be ‘ pluralis majesticus,’ or plural to cover the personification or
phases of Mara : Kama. Krodha, etc.
Ashta niyamya : ashta does not go with Maran but with niyamya, for it
alludes, this being a Buddhist inscription, to the * eight-fold path ’ (see Oldenberg’s
translation by Hoey, p. 128).
Sanvara ripu : the enemy of Sanvara, i. e., Kama, the destroyer of the
1892.]
61
W. Hoey — Set Maliet.
strove to set free this world ; and who, having attained enlightenment.,4
reached the Buddhahood, protect thee !
I invoke the guiding Bharati,5 the deity tutelary of the diction
of the gods, whose eyes are superbly brilliant6 as the stars, to put me
o’er the ocean of transmigratory life.
Mandhata, the conqueror of his foes, peer of Indra, in the dynasty of
the Sun, more resplendent than that luminary, happy evermore, holding
in virtuous enjoyment the three worlds, was a king of kings, a universal
sovereign.
While he was roving about once upon a time at his pleasure, having
carefully observed a lake with its waters painted with the tints of the
pollen of the lotus, and joysome with the song of flocks of happy singing
birds, he, who delighted in good deeds, with a view to extend his fame,
by great exertions filled in earth, and then built this town of his,
Javrisha,7 depending on the Karkkota for its safety.8
In it there were affluent and highly foitunate lights of families of
the Vastavya, which has Sri as its prefix,9 a stock by whose radiant
fame worlds are yet made lustrous.
deity Sanvara. The legend of the killing of this deity is narrated in the Bhagavat
Puran. Cf. Sanvarari and Sanvarasudana.
4 This might also be rendered : ‘ having reached the Bodhi Tree.’
6 Bharati is the goddess Sarasvati. The word rendered ‘ guiding’ is tara, ‘one
who puts across,’ and may be considered as a play on tara, and mean ‘ radiant.’
There is a further play on the word as it is the name of a later Buddhist goddess.
6 Uttaralochana : ut + tara + lochana, excessively + brilliant (or star) + eye.
This may be also ‘ eye toward stars,’ which would mean ‘ with eyes turned up to
the stars.’ If tara be taken as ‘ pupil of the eye,’ the meaning would be ‘ with
protruding pupils,’ but, as thiswould hardly be complimentary to a mortal, it would
be less complimentary to a deity. A play on words may also be detected in the name
lochana, applied to a Buddhistic goddess, but it is too far-fetched to have been con¬
templated by the author.
7 This may also be read Ajavrisha. Can this be Jais in Oudh ?
8 Karkkota is also spelt karkota. The duplication of the k being a common
occurrence in the case of letters over which r is written. The following text from
the Yisva Kosa explains the word : ‘ Karkoto vrikshabhede cha vapre saile tathaiva
cha,’ i. e., karkota signifies a kind of tree, a rampart, and also a hill. The kind of
tree is the vilva or bel tree, I believe. Forts were not unusually fenced in ancient
days, and in fact up to a late date in some parts of India, with a thicket of
bamboos, prickly pear or other thorny plant, to impede the advance of an enemy.
Karkkota is also one of the principal Nagas mentioned in the Mahabharata, in the
25 section of the Adi Parvva.
9 ‘ Purvva ’ denotes ‘ beginning with,’ and this passage clearly means the sub¬
clan of families which goes by the name of Sri-vastavya. This is most interesting
because the word designates a class of Kayasthas, who are now corruptly termed
62
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
[Extra-No.
As the moon from the ocean, so there was born in their family one
radiant like the moon, who was known by the name of Vilvasiva.10
The wealth of him, who was devoted to the lotns-feet of the enemy of
Smara ( i . e., S'iva), was a means of enjoyment to the twice-born, to the
good, and to the needy.
To him, the ocean of generous deeds, who was hurling back sin with
lofty actions, was born a son, Janaka, a peerless shelter for the encourage¬
ment of tlie virtuous, an ornament to his birth-place, a mine of goodness,
with a tender heart, a pioneer of the pious, (who became) the wise and
trusted minister of Gopala,11 the ruler of Gadhipura.12
With him who duly maintained the dignity of his honse, was
mated a maiden of noble lineage, called Jijja, who was a source of joy
to her kinsfolk on the mother’s side, and who having her fair form decked
with well-fitting13 jewellery resembled the ocean-born Lakshmi, whose
fair form is an ornament to the unfailing one (Vishnu).
From these two there were born exactly six sons. The eldest,
called Pippata, the wise, though he was but one, was like the six-faced
and one-bodied fire-born son of S'iva and his consort.14
‘ Sribastam,’ and among some of them there is a tradition which connects their
origin with the city of S'ravasti, where this inscription was fonnd.
Th;s method of expressing names is not un-common. Gf. S'yamanta namapatina
ghanapnrvakena, which yields the name Ghanasyama.
10 The association of the word vilva with S'iva in this name is a pretty conceit.
The leaves of the vilva (or bel, as it is now called) are sacred to S'iva and presented
as an offering to him : and the farther context shows that he, who bore the name,
was a follower of S'iva.
11 Some years ago I found at Asai on the Jumna in Etawah district, some
inscribed stones, chiefly Jain images, which mentioned Pala rulers, said to have
reigned at Kanauj. One ran : ‘ Sam vat 1227, Phalgun Sudi 9, Somdima, ra,ut Sri
Rudrapala.’
12 Gadhipura is Kanyakubja, the modern Kanauj. Some say it is the modern
Ghazipur.
18 The word here used is achyuta, which literally means ‘ not falling,” and the
same word is used of Vishnu at the end of this paragraph. In the latter case it
is a name often used of Vishnu. In the former case it has been imported for the
sake of the pun.
*4 The eldest of the six sons is compared to Karttikeya (son of S'iva and his
consort Parvati, n. b., S'ivabhyam, dual), who is said to have been six-faced and one¬
bodied. “ He was born of S'iva without the intervention of his wife, his generative
“ energy being cast into the fire and then received by the Ganges, whence he is
“ sometimes described as son of Agni and Ganga ; when born he was fostered by six
“ Krittikas or Pleiades, who offering their six breasts, the child became six headed ”
(vid. Monier Williams ; Sane. Diet. s. v. Karttikeya). This legend explains the
names Shadanana and Shanmatura (Colebrooke’s Amarakosha, p. 7, ed 1825).
1892.]
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
63
The fifth15 of these six sons of theirs who resembles u the five-
arrowed ” (Kama), and who is the cause of no small fame, who is cele¬
brated for his learning and intellectual power, is named Vidyadhara
(wisdom-possessor), an apposite name.
His mind, of mighty grasp and perfect taste, devoted to the feet of
Girisa, Bharati forsaketh not, even as the swan forsaketh not the broad
Manas lake, reposing with its vast store of water at the feet of the Lord
of Mountains (Himalaya).16
Illusive are the sweetness of honey, the nectar of the cool-beamed
moon with its mirth-producing property (lit. efficiency), the deep¬
ness of ocean’s store, and the height of mountain-peaks. A truce to
such ! Each and every quality-endowed hath been dwarfed by the
qualities of him [Vidyadhara] who is the hill for each meritorious qua¬
lity to ascend, and the one fountain of the full-bodied, sparkling nectar
of a goodly life.
Him, versed in the mysteries of elephant lore, and dauntless driver
of the pleasant yoke of elephants, the monarch Madana, the forehead-
gem of kings, by gifts, honours, and the like sought to win.
The wealth amassed by him (Vidyadhara), who raised his fame on
high by building shrines for the gods, a wealth that relieved the poor
and filled the bellies of those gratified by the nourishment of life, was
more than enough for the crowd of twice-born whom he maintained.
He, who had assumed a human form for the deliverance of the
whole range of sentient beings, was, so to speak, a second Bodhisatva,
such as never before had been.
By him, who, illuminated by the light of the knowledge of Atman,
reflecting often in his mind, which had risen free from the asryas 17 of
15 Here a play on words comes in, the fifth son being compared to the five-
arrowed god, Kama.
18 This sloka is remarkable for its conceits which lie in the double significance
of the words : rasa, abhivyapi, girisa, and manasa, in comparing Bharati’s love for
Vidhyadhara’s mind with the swan’s love of the Manasa lake. There is also one
additional point given by the mention of the swan, as it is Sarasvati’s (i. e. Bharati’s)
vahana. The sloka is of immense importance as it gives the date of the inscrip¬
tion.
Rasa is a symbol for six, giri for seven (cf . naga) and isa for eleven. Rasadhikam
girisacharanasritam (sc. Samvatsaram) ; ‘ the Samvat year resting on the base giri-
‘ isa with ras added.’ This gives 117 with 6 added afterwards, i. e., 1176. The
order of the symbolic words used here fulfils the conditions of the rule ankanam
vamato gatih, i. e., ‘ numerical symbols are counted backwards.’ The first symbol
rasa (six) is read last, isa (eleven) first, and giri (seven) between them.
17 The asryas are organs of sense as the entrance of evil according to Buddhists
and the evils are the various passions aroused by the perceptions of sense.
64
[Extra-No.
W. Hoey — Set Mahet.
the evils of emotion and the other passions which were evanescent, on
the madhyasthata 18 of Saugata, had entered the True Path, was built
and given to ascetics in the form usual in the case of monasteries,19 a
delight-giving dwelling to be, as it were, the one monument of his fame.
One who cherishes whatever is dear to (Vidyadhara) that matchless
mine of polity, whose acts are highly esteemed by the followers of True
Knowledge, a kinsman of his named Udayi, moon-like in the pureness of
his heart, well meaning and skilful, being highly favored, has composed
this panegyric.
5 20 Sam vat 11 76.
18 Madhyasthata. This would at first sight possibly seem to refer to one of
the five Buddhist schools, but on closer examination this seems untenable. What is
meant is the equilibrium of Sangata (t. e., of a follower of Buddha), the state of the
Nirvana in this life.
19 A monastery is dedicated to the Sangha or community of Buddhists at large,
and not to any one ascetic. Buddha left a formula for this conveyance.
i0 The 5 before Samvat is in accordance with the usage of astrological almanacs
to this day. It denotes the Panchang, or ‘ five members ’ of each day, which are
noted in the sloka : tithivarancha nakshatram yogam karanamevnch eti panchangam.
Five columns are ruled in these almanacs and one devoted to each ang for each day.
A suggestion has been made, which is not probably correct, that 5 stands for
the five syllables of Vikramaditya.
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra 1892.
PLATE I.
GENERAL MAP
Reg. No. 2353 A., A 8., B - Feb. 93 — 6S0.
Litho., 3 L O , Cali
#
PLATE II.
Journ., As. Soc., 'Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
ORA JHAR
PANAHIYA JHAR.
✓
/
Hoad from, Hahraich /
/ f° & « I rounpuj '
— - - - - - /
PANAHIYA
JHAR.
ORA JHAR.
ScaZt
o so roo Zoo 300
- - i >■■■
*00 Sooff
-* I
ARC
9
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE III.
ORA JHAR
and
PANAHIYA JHAR,
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. L^I., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE IV.
M A H A D E O
Near Kandh Bari
*
5
t-
C
-t—
JO
=t=
Seal#
20
=t=
30
40 /fc
=1
Journ.. As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No,, 189?
PLATE V.
SAHET OR SET
N
6 cotie
10C SO O ICO zoo 300 4-00 sao Ft
UxtlrtiU-ki s.— - -h—r-r-. - - f - ,
■
Journ.. As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892„
PLAT]
i
i\
I
Building No. 1 in Sahet.
10 5 0
30
■to Fv.
Journ., As. Soc„ Bengal, Yol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No,, 1892.
PLATE
GANDHA KUTI.
Building No. 7 in Sahet.
.
*
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE
KOSAMBHA KUTI
Building No. 12 and 13 in Sahet
Scalf'
10 6 6 10 i ‘O
h-MlhH'll - |. - I—
30
4-0 it.
.
'
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892,
PLATE IX.
Buildings Nos. 17, 17, 18, and 19 in Sahet
jo
3P
ts
tt.
Jourrx., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
Buildings Nos. 21, 22, 23, and 24 in Sahet.
i
l
l
i
i
!
\
Scale
io zo 30
. 1 -
■fo Ft.
/O 6 O
bjrntnaLiJL
-
PLATE XI
As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892,
OCTAGONAL WELL IN SAHET
With adjacent remains
'LuJL
dL
iC
=t.
S;a~U-
40 -fit .
'
I
As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE XII.
SARIPUTTA’S STUPA.
30
■--—-.-3-. —
O
s to
20
40
dt:
soft.
=d
*
'
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892,
PLATS XIII.
MAHET SOUTH
Including Baghahi Bari and Kandh Bari
jouvn., As. Soc., Bengal,
Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No.. 1893.
PLATE XIV.
MAH ET EAST
E
❖
N
Sayctn Miran t
~t> - _
-a.
ParkaiSuit
w
'<K
c
A n gulimaLy a.
4.
Kccft’a.Kuii
-i -
5LT — j
SM
D a*
Jrs
i
I
P
t I
\
\ & \
r- '
i 8
r i
r i
i
in
V -- - __-r 1
■\
JO- '
sk
s
TV - \
<7. 1
Scabt
Journ.. As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE X I
|l
PACKA KUTI.
■
Journ., As. Soc , Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
KACHA KUTI.
1
JO s o
8 cede
z ■' o
jo
JO
4,0 At .
.
Journ.. As. Soc., Bengal, Yol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE XVII.
MAHET WEST.
z
Journ.. As. So c., Bengal. Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
SOMNATH,
Section on A.
Seal#
7 O VO
qg Ft.
VO 6 O
30
=fc=
;
Jcrnrn., As. Soc., Bengal, Yol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE XIX.
TWO JAIN TEMPLES.
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1392.
HINDU TEMPLE.
Marked H in map of SVSahet west.
Scale,
to 5 o io no so icFti
r~rTT'lrT;l, .1 i, , I try— rz-rrr, ~ ~t L-^.— : — -j~, —
.
*
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE XXI
.
mrn., As. Soc., Bengal, Yol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE XXII
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892
PLATE XXIII
.
PLATE XXIV
ourn.
, As. Soc., Bengal. Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
Jourri .. As. Soc . Bengal., Vol. LXT., Pt. I., Extra No., 1895.
PLATE XX
e.
■
!
I
■
■1
ti
t
h
I/,
U
h
1
t
r
Journ.. As. Soc., Bengal. Yol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE XX Vi
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI., Pt. I., Extra No., 1892.
PLATE XXVII.
Journ., As. Soc., Bengal, Vol. LXI
♦