SINDH, THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM OF THE WORLD

 

LOCATIONS OF BRAHMANKA, PATALA, DEMETRIAS, MIN-NAGGARA, BRAHMANO,  BRAHMANVA,  BRAHMANABAD,  DALURAI  AND MANSURA

 

M. H. PANHWAR

Printer Friendly Format

Printer-Friendly Format

  

 

There have been controversies on the above sites and more so on Brahmanabad  and Mansura. This started with the coming of scientific minded Europeans in the early industrial age in the mid-eighteenth century.

 

Many noteworthy British scholar are  credited with writing series of articles, notes and books on this subject, which in this way became more clear, but also more complicated with publication of originals as well as translations of Arabic and Persian works. We have to be thankful to all those, who participated in advancement of this knowledge.

 

Archaeology came in the picture much later. These sites were examined almost superficially by early archaeologists. Henry Cousens in the first who is credited for such explorations.

 

The issue has remained unresolved, as historians report the founding of Mansura a town 6 miles away from Brahmanabad,  but Arab geographers visiting the city also assign a local name to Mansura, which according to some means Brahmanabad. Archaeology had another problem to answer; whereas the foundations Mosques are on virgin soil, some of the residential areas also show pre-Muslim phases. Its destruction is recorded historically but not burning of parts of the city.

 

The present paper is meant to bring to light all possible information on the existence of Brahmanabad and Mansura as mentioned in various classical works i.e. Persian, Arabic and some Indian, in a chronological order and also to give opinions of various scholars since 1753 A.D. Thus information with the remarks of the present writer is meant to work as guide-line for all those interested in understanding the question and has been written in good faith without any prejudices, on way or the other. It is a question of history that is to be answered and does not affect us socially in any manner today.

 

 

 

2000 BC-1226 A.D.

 

            Slow – Drying up of Sarswati-Hakra system of the river. By the time of Alexander’s conquest it was a non-perennial river. This river bifurcated at Jamrao head and its western branch followed Jamrao Canal alignment. An eastern branch of river Indus also seems  to have joined  it, in different periods at points much above the area shown in the map. This branch of the Indus most probably continued to feed it between 5th century B.C. to 11th century A.D. The sites shown in the map flourished on combined branches of the two rivers.

 

 

 

Because of this reason, sites of Brahmanka, Patala, Demetrias, Minnagar should also fall within the area shown in the map. Some sites may even go to the Indus Culture times specially those on Hakra system. Aerial photographs show existence of two large settlements, to the north of Mansura-Brahmanabad, one to immediate east, one about 5 miles east and one to immediate south of this site. Hydrological changes in courses of the Hakra and a branch of the Indus are also visible. The area within 7 mile radius of Brahmanabad Mansura should yield all important sites noted in the title of this article.

 

 

5th and 4th Century B.C.

            Panini’s Astadhyayi grammar of Sanskrit language written in 5th and 4th centuries B.C., mentions a town of Brahmanks and also Brahmanka a division of Sindh. He calls the Lower Sindh, forming the present Thatta and Badin districts, along the sea coast as Sindhu-vaktra, Kohistan as Arbhate, Sukkur district and Bahawalpur divisions as Sauvira and the eastern Indus plains forming Nawabshah, Hyderabad districts are considered as Brahmanka, with an important town of same name. the area to the west of the Indus from panjnad to Dadu was called Sindhu. Brahmanka probably was dominated by Brahmans or Brachmans of Alexander’s historians, who came to Sindh, 100 years later and saw them a very power-full.

 

 

 

Ed. Joseph E. Schwartzberg, Historical Atlas of South Asia, Chicago, 1978, plate III B.2 (b), basing on pannini’s Asthadhyayi, ed and tr. by Srisa Chandra Vasu, 8 parts, Allahabad 1891-98, reprint 2 volumes 1962: Agarwal Vasudera Sharma, India as known to Panini, Vanarsi 1962; and Pathak Shridharashtr; Work Index to panninis Vyakarana-Mahabhasya, Poona, 1962. The references in the work to geographical and cultural data were intended to aid in exposition of grammatical rules.

 

 

446 A.D.

            Herodotus the father of history (born 489 B.C., died 425 B.C.) wrote his work ‘The Histories in nine books, which cover history of Greek world as well as Achaemenians. He was contemporary of Xerxes and Artaxerxes. He does not mention their names as Gustas and Bahman as the later Sassanian romance writer and poets have adopted. He is an authority on Darius-I’s conquest of Sindh in 519 B.C. at a young age, when he could not have grand children of age to be sent to Sindh for conquest and building of cities. Equating of Artxerxes with Brahman is a folk tale absorbed into history by Sassanian, Arab and Persian historians. The founding of Bahmanabad by Bahman, and naming it Bahmano is fiction. Even if Artxerxes had conquered Sindh and built a city there, he would not have called it Bahmano, as he did not know that some 1300 years after his death he would be called Bahman. This story of Zainul-Akbar of Gardezi, Mujma-u-Tawarikh as well as that of Tabri has to be rejected. The story given a new authentic) city by Raverty, was to mislead many scholars like Pithwalla, Lambrick, Dr. N.A. Balouch and Cousens. The last after accepting this version has stated that he still would prefer to call the site by the name it is best known locally i.e. Brahmanabad. I had accepted this version of Raverty and revised only after the study of Schwas berg’s A Historical Atlas of South Asia’ which based on Pannini, mentions town of Brahmanka or Brahmanva.

 

 

 

“The Histories’ is much translated work in many languages. It is unfortunate that this work was not known to Alexander or his historians. Book seven of the work pertains to Darius-Is conquest of Sindh and Skylax’s voyage on the Indus. The notweorthy translations of work, by G. rawlinson and Oanaon, in 4 volumes, London, 1856-60, and G. Rawlins sons and Wilkinson, Histories of Herodotus, London, and besides Rawlinson’s Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World, London, 1867 and revised 1879 were available to Raverty to verify existence of legendary king Bahman, but he seems to be more interested in his argument. Aubrey de Selincout’s translation of 1954 and revised edition 1980 entitled Herodotus. The history is also easily available for verification. The Achaemenian tombs at Nasqsh-i-Rustam have been fully explored their coins examined by numismaticians and no alternate names assigned to them exist. Thus we are simply lead to the conclusion that the words Bambanvo or Bambhanva, Banwan, Bambanwa, Banbhra etc denote the same town of Brahmanka, Brahmano and Brahmanabad.

 

End 4th Century B.C.

            Kautiliya’s Arthashastra written in century B.C., calls the above named area by Panini as Prajjuna or Prasina of early Greek writers, namely; Magasthenese, Strabo, and Pliny Arians and etc. Patalene is probably prasina and Patala is its capital. Thus as Brahmanka area turned into Prajjuna or Prasina and Brahmanka city probably turned into patalene. Kinglet and Trautman Thomas R are the two main exponents of geography of Arthashastra.

 

                        Trautmann Thomas R. Kautilya and the Arthashastra A statistical investigation of authorship and evolution of text, leiden 1971. Kautilya: Arthashastra, Ed. and tr. and PR Kangle, 2 Vols, Bombay 1960, 1965 and Vol. III, A study, 1965, Minnaggara of Periplus from 1st to 2nd century may be the same town Brahmanka or Patala but nothing is certain. It may have been named as such after its fall to Scythians. Its name Banbhra is from Babhan or Brahman may have been coined in 7th or 8th centuries A.D. The name Brahmanabad may have evolved from Brahmanka or Brahmanva between 283-356 when Sassanians ruled Sindh. If Minnaggara was a different town it may be a ruined site nearby.

 

325 B.C.

            When Alexander invaded Sindh he found Sun-God temples in Alore and Multan, but Sehwan and Patala were centres of either Buddhist or Jain. In the second quarter of 325 B.C. Alexander left Musicann’s country (Alore) for Patala by the river. Its ruler Moeris had paid submission, to him at end of 326 or early 325 B.C., while he was busy in reducing Sambus (Ruler of Sehwan). But on reaching to Patala in August 325 B.C., while he was busy in reducing Sambus (Ruler of Sehwan). But on reaching to Patala in August 325 B.C., he found city and country side equally deserted. This is said to be the city of Brahmans. Native guerillas attached Alexanders’ working parties busy  in digging wells and were repulsed with heavy losses to themselves. Alexander collected great booty of sheep, cattle and grains. The revolt is suspected to have been organized by either Chandra gupta Maurya or his Brahmans, advisor Katilya. Brahmans seem to have hand in every revolt and resistance Alexander faced South of Multan.

 

Early History of India p. 104. Banbury: History of Ancient geography Diodorus calls this city of Brachman’s (Brahmanka) and names it as Harmatelia. Mc-Crindle tr, of Arain, p. 160-61, tr, of Curtius, p. 256, tr. of Diodorus p. 293, Strabo, XI, Chapter –II, p. 1. Narain pp. 122, 181, 178, Diodorus also calls Patala as Hermatatelia. Hermatelia tauala, Patala and city of Brachmans denote the same town. Strabo XV        p. 25, confirms revolt at Patala on Alexander’s departure. Eggermont states that there were two Moeris Rulers I & II, probably two brothers or Cousens, whose territories extended to sea coast along two branches of the river Indus. Moeris’ are also though to be Mauryana related to Chandragupta Maurya, who is conjectured to have helped anti-Greek revolutions from the Lower Sindh. Alexander constructed a harbour and dockyard at Patala. Cunningham (Mc, Crindle, p. 355), thinks that Hermalelias is soft pronunciation of Brahma-thela. Strabo Ch, XIII p. 1.

 

187-184 B.C.

            Between 187-184 B.C. when Demetrius I, son of Euthydemus, conquered eastern Gedrosia and patalene, his Lieutenant Appollodotus conquered Suarashtra (Kathiawar) and Sagar-diva (Cutch). The two latter conquests must have been from Patala, as the focal point of their organization, because from Patala by the eastern branch of the river Indus, they could easily reach the Kori Creek and the Rann of Cutch for onward move to Cutch and Kathiawar by water. He is reported to have built a city and called it Demetrias.

 

 

 

Tarn W.W. Greeks in Bactria and India, 1958,pp. 152, 174, 175-77, 141-142, 192.

Woodcock, The Greeks in India , London, 1966, pp. 74 and 78. Narain: Indo Greeks Oxford 1957, pp. 35-42, 68, 92, 122-125 and 181. Demetrias may have been a small harbour township near patala or patala itself may have been renamed as such.

160-145 B.C.

            Demetrius’ grand daughter Agathocleia, who succeeded her father Agathocles, married Menander the governor of Kabul. The latter appointed Appollodotus of Patala to control Sindh, Cutch, Gujarat, Kathiawar and Khambhat etc, with headquarters at Patala.

 

Woodcock, p. 78-87.

          Mookerjee, History and culture of Indian people, vol. II Bombay, 1953, pp. 85-100. Patala or Harmatila, city of Brahmans seems to have survived but now dominated by Buddhists and not Brahmans. Menander himself had accepted this faith. Patala may have been turned into a city of Stupa.

137 B.C.

            Bikshus of Patala including a Bikshu Sangh under the orders of Menander went from patala to Ceylon, for the Buddhist assembly.

 

 

Woodcock, pp. 94, 104, 113-114

100-70 B.C.

            Scythian tribes of Seistan after their defeat during the regin of Mithiridates the Great at the hands of Yuch-chi, moved via Kandhar Bola and Mula Passes to Sindh, taking possession of Abhiria (Desert area of Khairpur Sanghar and probably Parkar districts) and Kathiawar between 100-70 B.C. Later on they established themselves in the Lower Sindh. Patala may have been their headquarters.

 

 

Cambridge History of India, vol. I, 2nd edition, Bombay 1962 pp. 563, 567, Narain, pp. 140-141.

Tarn, pp. 232-501.

Woodcock, pp. 24-127.

Percy Gardner, pp. 122-127.

70-71 A.D.

            Writing of Periplus of Erythraen sea, which names Minnaggara possibly Patala, or Brahmanka (Brahmanva), a town where boats carrying goods were sent from Barbarican (Banbhore), via Smithus (Sindhu or Indus.)..

 

 

 

Tr. Scoff Chicago, 1912, p. 12.

70  A.D.-499 A.D.

            Nothing is known about Brahamka, Patala, Demetrias and Minnaggara in the Lower Sindh. In 499 A.D. the Rai Dynasty established itself in Sindh and Brahmanabad became the capital town of Lower Sindh, from where whole of the Lower Sindh and Cutch were controlled.

 

 

 

Brahmanka or Brahmanva may have changed to Brahmanabad may have during the period, due to Sassanian occupation of Sindh between 283-356 A.D. Banbhanva may have become an alternate name as in Sindh Brahman is called Banbhan

644 A.D.

            Chach defeated Agham Lohana the governor of Brahmanabad who was killed. Capital was at Alore but Brahmanabad was also used as summer capital due to torturous heat of Alore.

 

Chach Nama, Bombay, 1940, p. 2171 and 32. It clearly mentions words Brahmanabad or Babanwah, Sindhi word (                     ) when written in persian or Arabic script becomes (                ) Banbhra is also local name for the present controvercial site of Brahmanabad-Mansura ruins. Dr. N.A. Balouch (Notes on Chach Nama pp. 507-8), thinks that this alternate name of Brahmanabad i.e. (                    ) from (                      ) was addition of Ali Kufi, who translated Chach Nama an Arabic history of conquest of Sindh by the Arabic history of conquest of Sindh by the Arabs, written after 841 A.D., and translated into persian in 1216-17 A.D., In view of controversies on this name it would not be fair to discard this on inadequate argument. More reasonable grounds have to be found.

 

668-69 A.D.

            On death of Chandur son Sehlaj-II, Brahman king of Sindh, his kingdom was divided. The Upper Sindh with capital at Alore went to Dahar and the Lower Sindh with capital of Brahmanabad to Duraj son of Chandur.

 

           

Chachnama,  p. 58.

 

669-700 A.D. 

            Dahrsia elder son of Chach ousted Duraj and occupied Brahmanabad from where he ruled Lower Sindh, Sehwan, Western hills, Cutch and Makran. He accepted suzerainty of Dahar, but possibly in the name only, until his death in 700 A.D.

 

 

 

 

Chachnama, London. p. 59-63.

 

669-70 A.D.

            During the period Dahar had no control over the Lower Sindh. Due to internal factions between Dahar and Dahrsia, Sindh’s control over Cutch weakened. The river Indus seems to have changed its course, as Kathias a Sindhi tribe migrated to Cutch and from there to Kathiawar, to which they gave their name.

 

 

 

Williams, Black Hills, Bombay, 1958 p. 68.

 

 

700 A.D.

            After the death of Dahrsia, Dahar became ruler of the whole Sindh from Multan to Cutch and Makran to Eastern desert.

 

Chachnam, pp. 59-63.

 

May 22nd A.D.

         Muhammad Bin Qasim laid Seige of Brahmanabad, which he captured in September 713 A.D. Jasina, Gopi and Vikio sons of Dahar, escaped and tollk shelter in Chitor, Resistance was organized in Alore, but that too capitulated. Muhammad Bin Qasim marched from Brahmanabad via Lohano Dhoro By that time Hakra was a non-perennial river.

 

 

Chachnama, pp. 119-202.

Billadhuri, (leiden), pp. 138-439, 185.

 

714 A.D.

        At death of Hajjaj the governor of Basra and Khalifa Walid, the new Khalifa Suleman, an enemy of Hajjaj took vengenca on latter’s family. Muhammad Bin Qasim son-in-Law of Hajjaj was recalled to Iraq, imprisoned and put to death by torture. On recall of Muhammad Bin Qasim Dahar’s son Jaisina re-occupied Brahmanabad in 715 A.D. Khalifa Suleman sent Habib to sub-due Sindh, whose chiefs had regained independence. The whole Sindh had to be re-conquered. Habib bin Muhlab attacked Alore which captuilated on agreeable  terms. He also sub-dued tribes residing on the banks of Indus, but failed to interfere with authority of Jasina, who seems to have retained most of Sindh south of Alore on the eastern branch of the river Indus, with his capital at Brahmanabad.

 

 

Athir, vol. IV, p. 283.

Biladhuri, pp. 440-41.

Yaqoobi (Leiden), vol. II, p. 336.

717 A.D.

       On taking over as Khalifa, Umar bin Abdul Aziz invited Indian Kings to accept Islam. He restored or confirmed the domain of Dahar on his son Jasina, who had accepted Islam and had recovered these territories between September 715 to August 717 A.D. His capital was Brahmanabad. On becoming Muslim Dahar’s son accepted Arabic name of Jalisa.

Biladhuri, (Leiden), pp. 441-442. Elliot and Dowson, 1867, vol I, p. 440.

 

725 A.D.

       Junaid governor of Sindh from 725-730, after arrival at Debal moved towards the Indus and on reaching its Western bank sent a message to Jalisa urf Jasina Bin Dahar, requiring his to pay tribute. The latter refused on the ground that he was a Muslim and territories, were confirmed on him by Khalifa Abdul Aziz and won’t pay any tribute. On insistence of Junaid he is reported to have abjured Islam and prepared to fight, but was defeated, taken captive and beheaded. His Cousins, Chach Bin Daharsia escaped from the battle  field and set for Damascus, to report to Khalif the breach of faith by the governor but he was told by junaid that a battle with Jashina or Jalisa was due to a misunderstanding  and he may return to be compensated. Thus chach was treacherously captured and put to death. Brahmanabad since this day remained under Arab rule.

Yaqoobi, vol. II, pp. 379-38.

Biladhuri (Leiden), pp. 410-420 Athir (Leiden), vol. IV, p. 446 and vol.xp. 64.

725-730 A.D.

         Thus having conquered Brahmanabad, Junaid re-conquered all important towns and conducted successful raids against, Gujarat, Nilmas and Ujjain and returned  with large amount of booty, of which 4000, million Dirhams and prisoners of war were sent to Damascus. The various places he raised were Kiraj (Chitor), Bailman (Vallmandle), Juruz, Ujjain, Marmoud, Nandal, Dahnaz, Cutch, Barwas (Broach) and Malibah (Malwa). Indian sources confirm that Arabs defeated Kings of Saindhavas, Kachchellas (Cutch) Saurashtra (Gujarat), the Chzvotoches, Mauryas and Gujaras. They advanced as far south as Navsari.

 

Epigraphia Indica, Calcutta, Vo. XXIII, p. 151.

Ibn Asir, vol. IV p. 446 and vol. V, p. 93.

Biladhuri, p. 442.

Yaqoobi, vol. II pp. 379-80.

Indian Antiquary, Bombay, vol-xII, pp. 155.

Bombay Gazetter, vol. I part J, pp. 87. and 137.

729 / 35 A.D.

         Junaid was dismissed in 729/30 A.D., and joined insurectionary forces against the Umayyads. Khalif Hasham to appease him made him governor of Khorrasan. Junaids successors are reported to have over ran Mandor (in Rajasthan)). The Arab raids between 725-30 A.D., which resulted into collection of booty but no territorial expansion made Indian Kings Chaulakaya (of Lata) Pratihara (King of Malwa), valabhi (of Gujarat) and Jayabhat-IV of Valabhi (Hyderabad Deccan) to retaliate and join together, defeat Arab forces and spread rebellion in Sindh.

 

730-734 A.D.

         In the local uprising mentioned above, Junaid’s successor Tamin (who had previous sent 18 million Tatari Dirhams lieft by Junaid in Sindh’s treasury to Damascus) had to abandon Sindh after many battles, in which many Arabs were killed, others started migrating form Sindh to other p laces of safety. He himself died near Debal (Banbhore) in about 730 A.D., and was succeeded by Hakam Al Kakbi, who built a town of Mahfuza (form Kahfuz or safe) in 730-32 A.D. His aide Amar Bin Muhammad Qasim built another town Mansura on other side of the river Indus. The latter town became capital of Sindh later on. Nothing is heard of Brahmanabad since this date.

 

Biladhuri, (Leiden), p. 442, Murgotton, tr. Biladhuri, p. 228-29.

Ibn Asir, (Cairo), p. 283.

S.S. Nadvi Arab Aur Hind Ke Ta’alquat, 1930, p. 335, puts years of building of Mansura between 738-738. A.D. this puts they year of foundings of Mahfuza to the earliest around 730 A.D., and that of Mansura to the latest in 734 A.D. Mahfuza therefore existed for maximum period of four years. It could not have been better than a transit camp and it would be futile to look for it. There is one question yet un-answered. Why did he not occupy Brahmanabad right away and settle Arabs there. It appears obvious that Brahmanabad, in these operations, may have been badly damaged to have been occupied and there fore Arabs were temporarily settled in its neighbourhood.

 

 

 

743-44  A.D.

        Capital of Sindh was shifted from Alore to Mansura by Yazid Ali Kalbi, Archaeological evidence so far collected shows that Brahmanabad and Mansura are two names of same city. In presence of scientific evidence, the historical statement about founding of Mansura has to be discounted.

 

Biladhuri, p. 450.

Yaqoobi, vol. II, pp. 399/40.

Ib. Asir, Volv, p. 93.

Since nothing is heard of Brahmanabad after 734 A.D., it is a conjecture that Brahmanabad was re-named as Mansura and made the capital of sindh. The only authority on founding of Mansura a new city is Biladhuri, (p. 242) basing on Madaini, who lived between 752/53-839/40 A.D. Madaini also narrated the story of conspiracy of Dahar’s daughters, having managed on false pretex, the dismissal and ignomous death of Muhammad Bin Qasim. His writings on founding of Mansura may also be an equal mis-statement.

 

751-52 A.D.

        Abu Muslim Khurasani Governor of Khurasan attacked Sindh and defeated Mansur bin Jamhur, the rebel of Sindh since 749 A.D. The mosque at Mansura was enlarged and town of Mansura, which also had been damaged during Abu Muslim’s  operations was repaired by Musa Bin Ka’ab Al Tamim the first Abbasid governor.

 

Biladhuri, p. 443.

Murgotten, pp. 229-30.

Asir, Vol. V. p. 347.

Yaqoobi, Vol-II, p. 429.

Vol. III, p. 80.

This would be a second time since 730 A.D. that the city of Mansura-Brahmanabad was damaged in military operations.

757-766 A.D.

        Abdullah bin Muhammad Al-Shattar Alvi direct descenndont of Ali visited Sindh or Shiite Tabligh. Amer bin Hafs governor of Mansura became his desciple and gave him protection by sending him to a Hundu Raja, whose territory lay between Arab Sidnh and desert Possibly on Hakra in Khairpur desert). During this period Kharjis were also active in Sindh. This should be considered as the first beginning of Shiite preachings in Sindh

 

Ibn Asir Vol. V, pp. 283, 455.

Ibn Khaldum, Vol. III p. 198.

791-800 A.D.

        Struggle between local Arab tribes of Mudarites and Yamanites in Sindh developed into civil war. The Governor Tayfur Al-Hamiri supported Yamanites and therefore was dismissed. The next governor Jabir Tai was not able to control up-risings and was replaced by Saeed Bin Qataiba, who also was not able to improve the situation and therefore was replaced by Muhammad Bin Abi Saalabi, but as he was defeated by the local Arab tribes, Abdul Rahman replaced him. He too had to be replaced by Ayub bin Jafar bin Suleman and again the latter by Mughira Bin Yazid Muhlabi. In 801 A.D. Maghira’s brother Daud replaced him and crushed the revolt of Arab tribes Nizaris and Mudartes.

 

Yaqoobi, Vol. II. P. 494 and vol. III. P. 117.

801-  A.D.

         During the Daud’s operations against Nizaris and Mudarites Massacre of population of Mansura lasted 20 days and great portion of city’s population was killed.

 

Yaqoobi, vol-II, p. 494.

This is the third time since 7300 A.D., that city of Brahmanabad-Mansura was sacked and damaged.

841 -  A.D.  or Afterwards.

         Writing of Chachnama in Arabic. The original work is lost but the persian translation of the book by Ali Kufi in 1216-17 A.D., mentions the city Brahmanabad or Bahamnva or (Banbhriya), a word used for Brahmanabad and also for its present ruins, called Mansura site by Pakistan Archaeolgy, No. 5.

 

Dr. Baloach in his notes on Chachnama, pp. 507-08, mentions that the word Babanwah was been added by the translator, when the work was rendered in Persian. On this basis he proceeds to prove that city was known after its founder Bahman the Persian King. Ravery also thinks that the city was founded by Bahman. Henry Cousens rejects Bahaman story, where as Lambrick supports it, Banbhan story, where as Lambrick supports it. Banbhan is a word used for Brahman in Sindhi. This times is pronounced as Bambhan. Alberuni’s Bamhano is outcome of such pronunciation of his informers. See also entry 1028 A.D. Pithawala M.B. in Historical Geography of Sindh, Karachi, 1978, p. 171. accepts Bahman’s founding of city, Elliot p. 370, rejects this theory.

844-848 A.D.

        Ibn Khurdadba the son of Governor of Tabristan and himself a post-master wrote book of roads and countries’, in which he describes Mansura, but not Brahmanabad.

 

The book Kitab al-Masalik wal Mamalik was published for Leyden in 1989. It has been translated in various languages portions pertaining to the sub-continent  appear in Elliot and Down’s vol-I. pp. 12-18.

854-1011 A.D.

        Habaris  rule of Sindh. The first ruler continued living in his native place Bania or Baiza, at a distance form Mansura, though the latter was the capital.

 

Yaqoobi, Vol-II. Pp. 385 and 599.

 

892/93  A.D.

         There was an up-rising in Sindh. Sammah of Banu Kundah established himself as an independent ruler of Sindh at Mansura but Abdullah Bin Umer Habari, soon recovered the town and shifted his headquarter from Bania to Mansura.

 

Biladhuri, p. 442,

This is the fifth time, the town of Brahmanabad – Mansura was damaged by warfare.

892  A.D.

        Biladhuri in his classical work, Futuhul-Baldan stated Mansura was a new city, founded by Hakam Al-Kalbi..

 

It is on the bais of Biladhuri’s statement written 162 years after the said founding of Mansura, and  the same statement copied by Asir (1160 A.D.) after another 278 years, that researchers insist on Brahmanabad not having been renamed as Mansura. But archaeological explorations in many parts of the site show-pre-Arab occupation of the city site, assigned to Mansura. It is now argued.:-

(i)    The place cannot be Mansura, if it was

        a new  town newly built by Hakam.

 

(ii)    It was a very important place having

         large population of about 50,000

         souls and the largest town by size in

         Sindh and therefore most probably

         Was the capital.    

 

(iii)    Since the only important pre-Arab

          town in the area , as known from

          Chachnama was Brahmanabad, it

           Would be fair to conclude that archaeologists  

 

 

(iv)    Unless we now believe that Mansura

          is located else where, we are lead to

          the conclusion that the Arabs    

          renamed  Brahmanabad as Mansura.

 

(v)     The Arab did not destroy Brahmanabad

          and therefore it should have survived 

          side in side. Arab travellers Ibn Haukal

          and Istakhri who visited it in 951 A.D.

           have said in Sindhi, Mansura is called

           Brahmanabad, (Babanwa or Brahman,

           Bamra or Banbhriya) showing thereby

           That the town had retained, its earlier

           Name.

 

 

(vi)      Biladhuri him self had taken pains to

            write Futuh-al-Baldan, but no Sindh

            he has used a work of Madaini, who

            has proved to be un-reliable, see also

            entry 743-44 A.D.

 

(vii)     Bildhris location is 2 farsangs (6miles)

            from Brahmanabad Qadimal-ullah

            meaning these by that, Brahmanabad

            no longer existed.

 

 

915/16 A.D.

         Masaudi visited Sindh and Mansura. In his description of Sindh he does neither mentions existence Brahmanabad nor its destruction in any manner. Masaudi found Budha lying between Makran, Mansura and Multan having capital at Gandava. The so called Bahmanabad built by legendry King Bahman in Budha should have been looked for in that locality not in the eastern Sindh.

 

English translation of his work Murujul-Zahab by sprenger was published from London in 1807 and 1847. Portions pertaining to Sub-continent appear in Elliot and Dowson vol. I, pp. 1826.

951 A.D.

        Ibn Haukat came to Sindh. He states that Mansura is also called Brahmanabad in Sindhi. Same year in Mansura he met Istakhri, who also wrote on Sindh. Both authors state that in Indian language (Sindh) Mansura is called Brahmanabad.

 

Portions pertaining to Sindh with the Haukal map appear in Elliot and Dowson Vol-I, pp. 31-41. The exact word used nor Brahmanabad is Bamiwan, Tamiramman. Anderson in J.A.S.B. 1853 pp. 50 and 68 give worked Memeiwan for it. Astakhri’s portion appear on pp. 26-31 of Elliot’s work.

985-86 A.D.

       Bashari Muqadsi who had visited Sindh in 961-62 A.D., wrote his book Ahsanul-Taqseem fi Ma’arif Al-Qalim, Mansura as described by him, woas one mile long, tow miles wide, surrounded by the river and having a fortt with 4 gates. The present ruins have almost the same size, though all four gates have not been traced. He also gives dimensions of grand mosque, which so far has not been  discovered by the archaeologists.

 

Portions of his book have been rendered in  many languages. Asiatic Society of Bengal issued its full English translation. An Urdu version has been issued by Nidobatul Musanfeen in 1962. Original text was printed from Leiden in 1877 and reprinted in 1906 A.D.

1025 A.D.

         Mahmud of Gazni after sacking of Somnath returned via Mansura and not via the Indian desert.

 

Frishta, Abdul Fazal ( Ain-i-Akbari) vol. II p. 268 Mirat-i-Ahmedi (Baily), p. 33 and Taqhati- Akbari Vol- I. p. 82. state, that he returned via the Indian desert, but Hodivala Vol- I. pp. 238-39, does not agree with them Jackson and Indriji (Bombay Gazeetteer Vol. I, p. 168 f.n. 2) express same view as Hodivala.

 

PAGES                     24 TO   34

BOOK                       SINDH QUARTERLY

VOLUME                  XI  1983 NO    . 1.

 

 Top of Page