facture of salt. I am therefore not inclined to admit that this petty place could have any connection with the great capital of Indo-Scythia. On the contrary, I am disposed to look upon this name of Min-nagara as meaning simply the city of Min. Barbarike-Emporium, or Bhambúra. The ruined town of Bambhora, or Bhambúra, is situated at the head of the Ghára creek, which is "supposed by the natives to be the site of the most ancient seaport in Sindh."* "Nothing now remains but the foundations of houses, bastions, and walls," but about the tenth century Bhambhûra was the capital of a chief named Bhambo Raja. According to the traditions of the people, the most westerly branch of the Indus once flowed past Bhambûra. It is said to have separated from the main river just above Thatha, and M'Murdot quotes the 'Tabakât-i-Akbari' for the fact that in the reign of Akbar it ran to the westward of Thatha. To the same effect Sir Henry Elliot quotes Mr. N. Crow, who was for many years the British Resident at Thatha. Writing in A.D. 1800, Crow says, "By a strange turn that the river has taken within these five-and-twenty years just above Tatta, that city is flung out of the angle of the inferior Delta, in which it formerly stood, on the main land towards the hills of Biluchistan." From these statements it would appear that the Ghâra river was the most westerly branch of the Indus down to the latter half of the last century. But long before that time, * Eastwick, Handbook of Bombay,' p. 481. + Journ. Royal Asiat. Soc., i. 25. See Map No. IX. according to M'Murdo, it had ceased to be a navigable stream, as both Bhambur and Debal were deserted about A.D. 1250, on account of the failure of the river.* My own inquiries give the same date, as Debal was still occupied when Jalâladdin of Khwârazm invaded Sindh in A.D. 1221,† and was in ruins in A.D. 1333, when Ibn Batuta visited Lahari Bandar, which had succeeded Debal as the great port of the Indus. M'Murdo quotes native authors to show that this western branch of the Indus was called the Ságára river, which, he thinks, may be identified with the Sagapa Ostium of Ptolemy, which was also the most westerly branch of the Indus in his time. It is therefore quite possible, as supposed by M'Murdo, that this was the very branch of the Indus that was navigated by Alexander. From the latest maps, however, it appears that about midway between Thatha and Ghâra this channel threw off a large branch on its left, which flowed parallel to the other for about 20 miles, when it turned to the south and joined the main channel just below Lâri-bandar. Now this channel passes about 2 or 3 miles to the south of Bhambûra, so that the town was also accessible from the Piti, the Phundi, the Kyár, and the Pintiani mouths of the river. I am therefore inclined to identify Bhambûra not only with the town of Barke, which Alexander built on his return up the river, as stated by Justin, but also with the Barbari of Ptolemy, and the Barbarike Emporium of the author of the 'Periplus.' The last authority describes the middle branch of the * Journ. Royal Asiat. Soc., i. 25 and 232. Rashid-ud-din in Elliot, Dowson's edition, i. 26. Indus as the only navigable channel in his time up to Barbarike,* all the other six channels being narrow and full of shoals. This statement shows that the Ghâra river had already begun to fail before A.D. 200. The middle mouth of the river, which was then the only navigable entrance, is called Khariphon Ostium by Ptolemy. This name I would identify with the Kyár river of the present day, which leads right up to the point where the southern branch of the Ghâra joins the main river near Lâri-bandar. From this discussion I conclude that the northern channel of the Ghâra was the western branch of the Indus, which was navigated by Alexander and Nearchus; and that before A.D. 200, its waters found another channel more to the south, in the southern Ghâra, which joins the main stream of the Indus just below Lâri-bandar. By this channel, in the time of the author of the 'Periplus,' the merchant vessels navigated the Indus up to Barbarike, where the goods were unloaded, and conveyed in boats to Minnagar, the capital of the country. But after some time this channel also failed, and in the beginning of the eighth century, when the Arabs invaded Sindh, Debal had become the chief port of the Indus, and altogether supplanted Bhambúra, or the ancient Barbarike. But though the Ghâra river was no longer a navigable channel, its waters still continued to flow past the old town down to the thirteenth century, about which time it would appear to have been finally deserted. * Hudson, Geogr. Vet., i. 22. Debal Sindhi, or Debal. The position of the celebrated port of Debal, the emporium of the Indus during the middle ages, is still unsettled. By Abul Fazl and the later Muhammadan writers, Debal has been confounded with Thatha; but as Debal was no longer in existence when they wrote, I conclude that they were misled. by the name of Debal Thatha, which is frequently applied to Thatha itself. Similarly, Brahmana, or Bráhmanabád, was called Debal Kángra, and the famous seaport of Debal was named Debal Sindhi. But Diwal, or Debal, means simply a temple, and therefore Debal Sindhi means the temple at, or near, the town of Sindhi. Major Burton says that the shawls of Thalha are still called Shál-i-Debali, but this only proves that Debal was the place where the merchants procured the Thatha shawls. Just so the name of Multani-matti, that is Multan clay, or Armenian bole, is derived from the place where the merchants obtain the article, as the clay is actually found in the hills to the west of the Indus, beyond Dera Ghâzi Khân. So also Indian-ink is named from India, where the merchants first obtained it, although, as is now well known, it is all manufactured in China. Sir Henry Elliot, who is the last inquirer into the geography of Sindh, places Debal at Karâchi; but admits that Lâribandar "is the next most probable site after Karâchi." But I incline to the opinion of Mr. Crow, who was for many years the British resident in Sindh, that Debal occupied a site between Karâchi and Thatha. His opinion is entitled to special weight, as he is ad*Sindh,' pp. 222 and 224. mitted by M'Murdo and Elliot to have "combined much discrimination with ample opportunities of local inquiry." Sir Henry quotes the Chach-náma for the fact that "the Serandip vessels were in their distress driven to the shore of Debal," to show that the port must have been close to the sea. There they were attacked by pirates of the Tangámara tribe, who occupied the seacoast from Karâchi to Lâri - bandar. This statement shows that if Debal cannot be identified either with Karâchi or with Lâri-bandar, it must be looked for somewhere between them. In favour of Karachi Sir Henry quotes Biladuri, who records that in the year A.H. 15, or A.d. 636, Hâkim dispatched his brother Mughira on an expedition to the Bay of Debal. But as the city of Lyons is not on the shore of the Gulf of Lyons, so it does not necessarily follow that Debal was on the shore of the Bay of Debal. In fact it is described by Ibn Khordâdbeh as being 2 farsangs from the mouth of the Mihran, which is still further extended to 2 days' journey by Masudi.* But as Debal was situated on the Indus, it cannot be identified with Karâchi, which is on the seacoast beyond the mouth of the river. All our authorities agree in stating that it was on the west side of the Mihran,† that is of the main stream of the river, or Baghâr, which flows past Lâri-bandar, and discharges itself into the sea by several different mouths named the Piti, the Phundi, the Kyâr, and the Pintiani. But M'Murdo also quotes the native * Elliot, Muhamm. Hist. of India, Dowson's edition, i. 53-57. These will be found in Elliot's Muhamm. Hist., by Dowson, i. 61; 'Istakhri,' i. 65; Ashkâl-ul-Bilâd,' i. 65, note Ibn Haukal. See also Gildemeister, De Rebus Indicis,' p. 205, for Kazvini. |