496 H. G. Raverty —The Mihrdn of Sind and its Tributaries. [Ex. No. 
he had reduced Thathah, and all Upper Sind had been ceded to him, 
it was then an island. On his approaching it from Ohandu ka, he was 
met by the governor he had sent thither previously, at the kasbah of 
Sliakar (as it is written in two out of three copies of his work consulted, 
and Sakar in the third) ; and it was just after this, that the Sayyids of 
Bakhar voluntarily left it, and were assigned places of residence in the 
kasbah of Riirhi. 
When Shah Beg Khan, subsequently, in consultation with his son, 
Mirza Shah Husain, resolved to repair and add to the fortifications of 
Bakhar, the old fort of Aror, and other buildings there, were demolished 
for the sake of the kiln burnt bricks to furnish materials for the pur¬ 
pose, together with numerous buildings, which, in former days, had 
been erected by the Turks and Sammahs. The fortifications then 
added to and repaired were still standing in 1007 H. (1598-99 A.D.). 
Mir Ma’sum likewise states in his History, that Humayun Badshah 
received the envoy of Mirza Shah Husain, the Arghun Mu gh al ruler of 
Sind, “ at the baladah of Bakhar,” which must have been on the main 
land even then, because the Badshah never set foot in the fortress. 
When we read in that History of the garrison making sallies on Humayun 
Badshah’s investing forces, and that all that he required was siege 
materials to effect its capture, the conviction will again present itself, 
that the fortress of Bakhar must have still been connected, in some way, 
with the main land, as a great number of vessels, which the Bad¬ 
shah did not possess, would have been required to carry on a siege, as 
well as to convey siege materials. 
rest on its own merits, except to notice that the author of the “ Gazetteer of Sind ” 
tells ns, that “Bakhar district must not be confused Avith the island of Bukkur [sic],” 
thus pretending that there is a distinction between the two names which does not, 
and never did, exist. The same writer also refers to a singular “ sanad ” granted 
to the Saiyads of Bakhar [sic] in A.D. 1711, by the Emperor Jehandar Shah, still 
in existence [what a long time has elapsed ! ] as showing his connection with the 
Government of Sind. How wonderful! It did not occur to the writer that the 
Mughal Empire of Dehli included Sind, and was de facto included in it, until the 
disaffection of the Kalhorahs in 1126 H. (1714 A.D.). Had he studied the history — 
the true history—of these parts, he would have found that Sind continued to con¬ 
stitute a part of the Mughal Empire until ceded to Nadir Shah by treaty in May, 
1739. See also page 677 for one of the rich specimens of Gazetteer History con¬ 
tained in that work. 
Postans (“ Personal Observations”) says, that Sakliar “ is better known to the 
natives as Chipri bunder j” and Elliot (“ Indian Historians,” Yol. I, p. 521), follow¬ 
ing Postans, says : “ Sakar or Sakhar, is better known to the natives as “ Chipri- 
bandar,” which would imply that it was, in part at least, artificial.” Of the deriva¬ 
tion of “ Chipri” I am unaware. 
