233 
1892.] H. G. Raverty— The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. 
been the case, and had no other great obstacles existed, which there did, 
he might have crossed and taken his whole force to Bahman-abad from 
original was probably written before the Balazari wrote. It states that Mohammad 
proceeded from Nirun stage by stage until he reached a place called Mauj or Moj 
[ (T* 70 ] ^ which others call Bharaj or Bahraj [ £ Jld ]> the same place as is mentioned 
at page 215, and which also appears in the old ’Arab map, thirty farsangs from 
Nirun, and that there was stationed a Malik on the part of Bajhra, son of Chandar, 
Ra’e Dahir’s uncle. Then the account passes at once to Siw-istan, the people of 
which—those interested in trade and in saving themselves only—were desirous of 
submitting, but Bajhra would not listen to it, and the fighting men were ready to 
defend it. # * # “ Muhammad, son of Kasim, took up a position before the Registdn 
[sandy tract or desert] gate to attack the place, because there was no other ground ; 
for the waters of the rainy season had risen, and, from, or on, the north side, the 
yti’e Sind—the Ab-i-Sind—did not, in former times, flow.” That is to say, at the 
time the narrator was referring to. There is not a word about any “ selected 
ground,” nor any “ Sindhu Rawal.” Elliot mistook (jrf for i Jj^j. His version of 
the Ohach Namah is very imperfect, or carelessly done ; and to understand Muham¬ 
mad’s movements in Sind, and the events which happened at that time, the Oha ch 
Namah requires to be properly and faithfully translated. 
These operations against Siw-istan must have been carried on in December, 711, 
if not in January, 712 A. D , but all the dates are more or less confused. 
After some days investment, and the failure of an intended night attack upon 
the ’Arab camp before the Itegistdn G-ate, Bajhra, under cover of the night, fled by 
the Koh-i-Shamali [North Hill] Gate, crossed the river [not the Mihran : that was 
a long way off], and did not tarry until he had reached the boundary of Budiyah, east 
of the river. At that time, the ruler of the Budiyah territory was Kakah, son of 
Kotal, whose residence was the fort of Sisam on the bank of the Kunbh.” 
From this it would seem that there were two places called Sisam, or there is a 
mistake in one of the two names, which is most probable, because Sisam, the Sahban 
and Silam of others, is the place which the ’Arabs reached from Nirun on their way 
to Siw-istan. 
After the flight of their governor, the people of Siw-istan were allowed to 
surrender. 
Elliot says that “ Seisan, a village on Lake Manchur may be the place here 
called Sisam.” There is a place, so called, in some comparatively recent maps, but 
such is not to be found in the “ Indian Atlas ” map from the most recent surveys. 
Sisam, however, as the context shows, was a considerable distance to the eastward 
of Lake Manchhar. 
Mir Ma’sum of Bakhar, one of the historians of Sind, makes a statement worthy 
of record here. He says, that the tract of country west of the Mihran [as it flowed 
in his day] dependent on Siw-istan, is called by the Fukaha-i-Islam [Doctors of Law 
and Divinity] by the name of U’shar, because the Jinnah people [sic. in MSS., 
possibly meant for Ghinnah] submitted of their own accord to the Musalmans, on 
which account, according to the Shara’, the legal tribute they were liable to, was 
one-tenth ; whereas, if they had been reduced by force of arms, the legal tribute 
would have been one-fiftli. 
