1892.] H. Gr. Raverty —The Mihran of Sind and its Tributaries. 325 
“ This large river issues from the kohistan east and south of Kash¬ 
mir, flows through its capital, and after passiug under Muzaflar-abad is 
ed, and from refugees from those parts finding it convenient to come by sea into 
Sind for shelter. Schism had been early sown in Sind, as may be seen from 
note 199, page 257. Amir Nasir-ud-Din-i-Sabuk-Tigin tried to put it down in 
Khurasan, and his son and successor, Sultan Mahmud, sought to root it out in Multan 
and Sind, as well as in Zabul-istan. He first moved against the Bhatiah of U' ohch h 
in 396 H. (1005-6 A. D.), as related in note 192, page 244. In the year follow¬ 
ing, 397 H. (1006-7 A. D.), he determined to attack Mult5n, because the Wall 
thereof, Abu-l-Fath-i-Da’ud, son of Nasr, who hitherto had been subject to the ’ Abbasis, 
began to assume independence, and read the Khutbcih for himself, besides being 
guilty of other misdeeds, and making his stronghold the hotbed of heresy in that 
quarter. The ’Abbasi Khalifah had assigned all his claims on Sind and Multan— 
the Musalman dominions east of, and on the Ab-i-Sind or Indus—to Sultan Mahmud, 
and he determined to enforce them. 
This was the period that Anand-Pal, son of Jai-Pal, refused the Sultan a passage 
through his territory on his way to Multan, and was well punished for his hostility. 
Abu-l-Fath-i-D&’ud, becoming aware of Anand-Pal’s overthrow, speedily collected 
his treasures and other movables, loaded them on elephants (some say camels), and 
sent them off to Saran-Dip [Kachchh Bhuj], and abandoned Multan. The Sultan on 
reaching that part, becoming aware of the misdeeds of Da’ud, devastated his 
territory, but those of his supporters who remained, having agreed to pay the yearly 
sum of 20,000 dirams as a capitation tax, treating them as infidels, he accepted it, 
because the I'-lak Khan was threatening his northern frontier on the Oxns, and his 
presence there was urgently required. 
When he retired, Daud again appeared, and the jaziah tax remained unpaid. 
In 401 H. (1010-11 A. D.), having disposed of his other affairs, the Sultan deter¬ 
mined to finish the affair of Multan and the Karamitah—or Mulhaidah, as they are 
also styled, the word applied to the heretics in general—and annex the territory. 
Multan was captured, the greater number of the Karamitah taken, of whom 
some were put to death, some deprived of a hand, and the rest sent to fortresses 
to be there imprisoned for lifetime, thus making an exemplary example of the 
heretics. As Multan and its territory was never “ ruled by a Sumra dynasty,” as 
asserted in Gazetteer history, no “ idol of the Sun was again set up, under the 
Sumra dynasty.” 
I may add, that the Mulhaidah of these parts and provinces adjacent, had 
rendered pilgrimages to Makkah impossible for some time past, infesting the routes, 
and completely closing them. Repeated complaints were made to the Sultan, and 
the matter became so serious, that, in 412 H. (1021-22 A. D.), Sultan Mahmud had 
to take efficient steps to remedy it. 
The Karamitah ruler of Multan, above referred to as overthrown by Sultan Mah¬ 
mud, is the same who has been mistaken by Firishtah, and other modern compilers 
of his class, for an Afghan of the Lodi tribe (in order to make up the “Pathan Dy¬ 
nasties” perhaps), under the name of “ Abn-l-Fath Daud, grandson of Shaikh Hamid 
Lodi” There were no Lodi's, nor Lodi rulers, there at the time, nor for centuries after. 
The rulers of Multan were Kuresh of the Bani ’Usman, descendants of Sam, son of 
Laiui —mistaken for and were still ruling there when the 
Sulfcan marched against it. See pages 189-190. An exhortation was addressed by 
