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 
