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 After Malik ’Izz-ud-Din, Balban had withdrawn from Multan, 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 Mu gh als, 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 Mu gh als. 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 
