286 
H. G. Raverty —The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [No. 4, 
Kotlah where he halted. This place is fifty huroh [one copy says fifty- 
three] from Bhatnir; and three huroh is a standard farsahh. At the 
fort of Khalis Kotlah Amir Timur remained until the time of afternoon 
prayer, then pushed on for the remainder of that day and the whole 
night, and halted not until he had crossed the chul or desert tract in one 
stage. When morning approached, his advanced guard surprised the 
patrol from the side of Bhatnir; and, at breakfast time, Amir Timur 
appeared before it. 
The historian says, “the fortress of Bhatnir is a very strong place, 
and one of the most notable of Hindustan, much out of the high road, 
and lying away on the right hand. Round about it is chul (waste) 256 ; 
The word as it appears in the different MSS. of the Zafar-Namah available— 
and I have used five copies—are as in the text above, with the exception of one 
copy which has with a j inserted over, showing, that, in copying the MSS., 
a letter had been left out. If we suppose that these letters form two words, and 
that they might form Ajj - i - &j, or even that the latter might be with ‘ d ’ 
instead of ‘ w’; still, that water or a river is not referred to,is evident from the fact, 
that, throughout the Zafar-Namah, when the crossing of a river or water is referred 
to, the verb used is ‘ to cross from one side to another,’ while here we 
have ‘ to pass by/ etc. Moreover, when rivers are referred to, they are 
called db, as ‘ Ab-i-Ohin-ao/ ‘ Ab-i-Tulanbah/ etc., and the Biah is styled ‘ db ’ and 
‘ daryd.’ Further, if the plural form of — rud —‘river’ was meant, we should 
have — nidahah , not — rudunah. From this it is quite clear to me, that 
the word in question refers to a place, not to rivers or river beds, although, at the 
'present time , some small river channels do intervene between Ajuddhan, on the north 
side. There is the dry bed of a small river which is known as the Dandi (the diminu¬ 
tive form of Dandah, probably); but, what is here referred to— —is south¬ 
east of Ajuddhan, and between it and Khalis Kotlah. This so called Dandi may 
possibly refer to what is left of the channel of the minor of the three branches into 
which, the Hariari, or Nili separated, after the Biah and Sutlaj, farther north, had 
united, again to separate, but this junction took place after the time of Amir Timur’s 
invasion; and, moreover, he had passed south-east of Ajuddhan towards Khalis 
Kotlah before was passed , not crossed. It is quite certain that the great 
Dandah, or high bank of the last independent channel of the Sutlaj, is not meant in 
the text above ; for, instead of being situated between Ajuddhan and Khalis Kotlah, 
and west of the latter place, the great Dandah is fourteen miles east of it, and further 
more, at the period in question, the Sutlaj, in its inclination westwards, had not yeu 
made that new channel for itself, and still flowed in that by Uboh-har. 
255 in the extract given by the Editor from his own translation from the £afar 
Namah in “ Elliot’s Historians,’’ we have the following :—“ It is situated far out of 
the road on the right hand, and is surrounded by the desert of Choi.” Here he has 
mistaken the Persian word chul —a wilderness, uncultivated waste, and unpopulated 
tract, or containing very few inhabitants, but not necessarily a desert —for a proper 
name ! The Editor continues : “ For fifty or a hundred Tcos there is no water.” 
This sentence is misleading and incorrect, and will not be found in any copy of the 
