398 H. G. Raverty —The MiTirdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No. 
not material to tlie present subject, its old bed 420 — that is to say, the 
channel last abandoned before it had anything to do with the Biah, and 
when it was a tributary of the Habra or Wahindah — can be distinctly 
traced downwards to Sind by its distinct and well marked high bank 
or dandali , from Tiharah to Dharm Kot, Kot-i-T'sa Khan, where it bends 
towards the south-west, passing near Mudki (“ Moodki ” of the maps) 
on the east, then by Farid Kot, north and west of Makhti-sar, close 
to Rata Khirali on the west, Bag-sar, about mid-way between Uboh- 
har and Fazil ka, thirteen miles south-south-east of Bahawal Garh, and 
twenty-three miles south of Ajuddhan or Pattan-i-Panj-ab, or the Pak 
420 Cunningham (“ Ancient India,” page 217) inform us that “ Debalpur was 
the capital of the northern Panjab,” and he indentifies it “ with the Daidala of 
Ptolemy which was on the “ Sutlej [sic] to the south of Labokla and Amakatis, or 
Labor and Ambakapi.” In one of his Arch. Rep. p. 140, he had “ identified Daidala 
with Dehli.” 
I beg to observe that Debal-pur never yet stood on the banks of the Sutlaj, nor 
anything near it. The Sutlaj lias repeatedly inclined from east to west, but never 
yet from west to east. It never approached farther west than where it united with 
the Biah, when, losing their respective names they became the Machhu-Wah, 
Hariari Nili, or Gharah (in the lower half of its .course). That river even now, in 
no place is less than eighteen miles from Debal-pur, and that is to the south-east. 
In another place he says : “ It seems highly probable, therefore, that he [Perdikkas] 
despatched by Alexander to the east of the Ravi, may have carried the Greek arms 
to Ajudhan on the banks of the Sutlej, from which his march would have been 
aloim the course of that river by Ludhan, Mailse, Kahror, and Lodhran to Alexan¬ 
der’s camp at Uchh.” 
Only, the Sutlaj never yet flowed by Ajuddhan (see following note 421), 
which is not on the Sutlaj’s banks and never was ; and it is only since the end 
of the last century, when the Biah and Sutlaj by uniting formed a new river, 
referred to above, that the Sutlaj approached within twenty-four miles of Ajud¬ 
dhan, and only a centuiy or two before was more than forty miles east of it. 
When the Biali and Sutlaj, after temporarily uniting at Loh Wal, formed the 
Hariari or Nurni of Abu-1-Fazl, as mentioned at page 372, and separated into three 
branches, the lesser, and middle stream of the three, flowed some miles past 
Ajuddhan on the east, and is represented by the Sukhh Na’e. The other two were 
the Biah, which continued to flow in its own channel, while the Sutlaj turned south 
and re-entered its old channel represented by the dandah or high bank. All this, 
however, happened in very recent times. The “ carrying of the Greek arms to 
Ajudhan,” and “ Alexander’s camp at Uchh ” depends upon whether these places 
existed twenty-three centuries ago, and certainly the rivers did not flow then as 
now, nor anything like it. The latest great change in the courses of these two 
rivers, as before noticed, took place near the close of the last century; and at page 
217 of his book, Cunningham says himself, that “ the Satlej suddenly changed its 
course in 1796,” but, at page 221, he says “ in 1790.” It was not the Sutlaj only, 
for the Biah did the same. 
However, there is one great obstruction to the “ Greek arms,” being “ carried 
to Ajudhan ” and Debal-pur also, as may be seen in note 390, page 381. All ancient 
