1892.] H. Gr. Raverty —The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 227 
from the river. It is on the west of the principal branch, which flows 
from the direction of Kalari, a town one day’s journey from Mansuriyah, 
between the latter place and Nirun, and that people going from thence to Mansuriyah 
cross the river at Manjabari (which lay about mid-way between the two places). 
Ibn Haukal, on the other hand states, that the country of Nirun is rather nearer to 
Mansuriyah than to Debal; and, in another place, that while it is six days’ journey 
from Mansuriyah to Debal, it is but two days’ journey between Nirun and Debal 
• 
In the map contained in the Masalik wa Mamalik, and also in Ibn Haukal’s map, 
Nirun is some distance from the banks of the great river, and Manjabari intervenes 
about midway between it and Bahman-abad. But between the time that Al-Idrisi 
and Ibn Haukal wrote, a period of about one hundred and eighty years, great changes 
appear to have taken place, since the latter says that “ the Mihran passes on 
towards Nirun, and then flows to the sea.” See farther on about the second great 
transition of the courses of the river, also Elliot Yol. I, page 78. 
Cunningham at page 279 of his work has the heading “ Fatala or Nirankot,” which, 
as before noticed, he identifies with Haidar-abad, and the “ Pattala of Arrian,” but at 
page 236 he considers that “ another name ” appears to have “ a confused reference 
to Nirunkot .” It is confused enough truly. This name is “ the Piruz of Istakhri, 
[the Istakhari], the “ Kannazbur ” of Ibn Haukal, and the “ Firabuz ” of Edrisi 
[Al-Idrisi] j” and, after quoting what they say from Elliot, he considers that their 
“unknown city” will accord exactly with that of Nirankot. “Debal” he says, 
“ I will hereafter identify with an old city near Lari-bandar [at page 279 he says 
Lari-bandar is its probable position], and Manhabari [Manjabari F] with Thatha 
Had Ibn Haukal’s map contained in Elliot’s volume given all the names, as in that 
of the Masalik wa Mamalik, which I have appended to this paper, it would have 
been perceived that what has been called “ Firabuz,” “ Kannazbur,” and “ Piruz,” 
lay midway between Darak and Manjabari, and between Nirun and Debal, but a 
little nearer to the latter and about north of Debal, while Nirun lay more to the 
north-east from Debal; and the place in question, “Firabuz,” or whatever it may 
be, was a town of Mukran, whereas Nirun was a town of Sind, and they are totally 
distinct places. The name of this place is written in a variety of ways in the 
different authors, but in the Masalik wa Mamalik, in Ibn Haukal, and Al-Idrisi it is 
and but by what means 
it is managed to get Kannazbur, Kannazpur,” and “ Kinarbur ” out of it, is beyond 
my comprehension and how the ‘ n ’ becomes doubled. 
It is clearly stated that Nirun lay on the road from Debal to Mansuriyah, the 
position of which two places there is no doubt about. Then, that between Debal 
and Mansuriyah is six days’ journey. Thus we can compute by actual measurement 
within a few miles, to be about one hnndred and twenty miles as the crow flies, or 
about twenty miles, to the day’s journey. The Istakhari, the Masalik wa Mamalik, 
Ibn Hankal, and Al-Idrisi, all say that Nirun lay between Debal and Mansuriyah, and 
that Nirun was three days’ journey from each. It is likewise stated, that from 
Arma’il (the Hormara of the maps) to Debal is also six days’ jonrney, consequently, 
the distance is much the same from Debal to Mansuriyah as from Debal to Arma’il.” 
This being determined, Ibn Haukal says, that from Debal to this “ Kannuzbur is 
four days’ journey [“ fourteen days,” as in Elliot is an error or a misprint for 
“four”], consequently, the distance from Debal thereto is one-third less than to 
