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. j s — 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 
