217 
1892.] H. G. Raverty— The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 
try, situated between Turan [the territory dependent on Kusdar, from 
which Kanda’il is five farsangs distant] and Mukran, and Multan and 
tlie towns of Mansuriyah ; 148 and this tract lies to the west of the river 
Mihran. From this part bakhti [hairy, double-liumped] camels are 
taken to other parts of the world. 149 
The Kasbah [bazar town] of the tract called Nudiyah is a place 
of traders, and they call it Kanda’il. 150 The inhabitants of this tract 
of country are in appearance like the people of the desert [of ’Arabia], 
and have dwellings constructed of canes 151 along the banks of the Mihran, 
from the boundaries of Multan as far as the sea coast; and they have 
also grazing lands between the river and Famhal [farther east, and 
elsewhere said to be “ the first place belonging to Hindustan in that 
direction”]. They are a numerous tribe. Famhal, Sindusan [or 
Sadusan, Sihwan of the present day], Samur, and 0 r all 
four towns, have Adinah masjids, which the Musalmans founded. 
was far in advance of his time, says respecting these parts in the 9th volume of 
the “ Asiatic Researches,” page 225. Budah or Budiya has nothing whatever to do 
with Braliuis as M. de Geoje, states in his notes to the text of what he calls 
“ Beladsori ” (referring to the Balaziri) : they were unknown in that early day. 
143 See pages 189, 90. 
149 Compare this passage in Elliot, Yol. I, p. 38. 
150 The Istakhari says, respecting Kanda’il, that it was so called after A’il 
[ f a man of that name who subdued it; so here we have the word Kand, as in 
Kand- ahar, and in Samr-fomcZ and Bey-kand. The word is plainly written cbolAi. 
With the above very plain statement before him, Elliot persists time after time, in 
calling the place “ Kandabil ” and “ Kandhabel.” Cunningham, of course, follows 
Elliot in the spelling, but he considers that, “ Ptolemy’s Badana , which lies im¬ 
mediately to the north of the rivulet, must be the present Gandava, as the letters 
B and G are constantly interchanged. In the books of the early ’Arab writers 
[according to Elliot’s versions, it should have been added] it is ahvays called Kandd- 
bilT See “ Elliot,” vol. I, pages 29 and 84, as to its conqueror. It so happens, 
that Kanda’il is not Gandabah, but stood on a hill, which Gandabah does not. The 
Masalik wa Mamalik distinctly states, that there is but five farsangs distance between 
Kusdar, the situation of which is well known, and Kanda’il, which is eight days’ 
journey from Mansuriyah, and ten from Multan. 
M. Barbier de Meynard’s 'Arabic text of Ibn Khurdad-bih, p. 57, contains the 
same error respecting Kanda’il, and Kusdar, after the same fashion is “ Kusdan.” See 
my ‘"Notes on Afghanistan,” etc., page 558, note §§. 
l&l Because the river was continually altering its course. It was the same when 
Abu-1-Fazl wrote upwards of six centuries after; and canes play a great part in the 
construction of dwellings of all kinds, both for man and beast, in Sind and the 
Indus valley higher up, up to the present day. The people here referred to are the 
Sammahs and Jliarijahs (or Zharijahs) or both. 
168 This word is unpointed and may mean anything. Elliot reads it “ Kambaya ,” 
but as he reads Kanda’il as “ Kandabil ,” we must make allowance, and be permitted 
