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 ] ? an d, a t 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. 
