Indian Antiquary Vol 60

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 40

THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[ FEBRUARY, 1931
SIDI ALI SHELEBI IN INDIA, 1554-1556 A.D. BY C. E. A. W. OLDHAM, C.S.I., I.C.. (Retired.)
(Continued from page 8.) The identification of these two rivers is important from a geographical point of view, as illustrating the courses of the Panjab rivers at a definite date. The first may be identified without any hesitation with the Sutlej, because in this case Sidi 'Ali calls the river by the name by which the Sutlej is still known to the local people, the Ghâra, a name under which (in a variety of spellings) it appears in its lower course on nearly all old maps. We know also that the Sutlej had at a much earlier date abandoned its ancient Ghaggar-Hakra channel, joining the TrinAb near Ucch. But the question of the identity of the second river is a more difficult one. There is evidence to show that the Chenåb filowed to the east of Mûltân as late as 1245 A.D., and that by 1397 it had shifted its channel farther north and west, flowing to the west of that town. We also know that up till the end of the fourteenth century at least the Ravi flowed to the east and south of Mûltan, but we do not know exactly as yet when it shifted its course to the north and west, to join the Chenab to the north of Multan, as it does at present.66 We also know that the Bids until comparatively recent historical times flowed through the middle of the Maltan district from east to west, joining the Chenâb, or rather the Trinkb, near Thoh Kalan, some 20 miles south of Shujabad. To judge from what Abu'lfaal writes in his Ain-i-Akbari, it would seem to have been flowing in this channel in Akbar's time. If this be so, it would appear reasonable to conclude that it took that course in Sidi 'Ali's time also, and that this was the second big river he had to cross between Vooh and Maltán. A difficulty, however, arises in this connexion if we read Ibn Batllla's account of his journey from Sind to Delhi (c. 1334). He tells us that, when on the way from Ucoh to Maltan at a distance of ten "miles " from the latter city, he crossed the river called Khusrabâd,67 which was one of the big rivers and could only be crossed by boat. There the mer. chandise of travellers was examined in the strictest fashion and their baggage was ransacked. As he mentions only one river as having to be crossed between the two towns, the question arises, was it the Bids or the Sutlej?. If by "miles " he meant farsangs (as I suspect he did elsewhere), the distance from Maltên would correspond with the known old channel of the BiAA.' In any case the Sutlej must have been much farther from Maltan , and possibly in Ibn Batata's day the Sutlej had not yet adopted the channel that joins the Trinkb to the north of Uoch, which it evidently had before Sidi 'Ali crossed it. We may conclude, therefore, that the two rivers orossed by our author were the Sutlej and the Bids.
In the middle of the month of Ramazan (on the 15th Ramazan, i.e., the 3rd August, aocord. ing to Vambéry's translation) Sidi 'Ali arrived in Máltan. Here, he tells us, he visited the tombs of Bahau'd-dîn Zakariya and Ruknu'd-dîn ; and thus we find further corroboration of the accuraoy of his record. The shrines of Bahau'd-dîn (c. 565 to 665 A.H.) and his grandson Ruknu'd-din are still centres of attraction at Maltan for Muhammadan pilgrims and travellers. From Maltan he moved on to a place which Vambéry transcribes as Sad kere, and Diez as Sadkereh (O sho). There can be little doubt that this should read Shorkot. Thence he went on to Lahore, where he arrived in the beginning of Shauwd1,58 or, say, between the 19th and 25th August, when fighting was still going on in the northern
65 I.G., X, 190. Albiruni, however, says the Chenab passed to the west of Maltan, which seems to conflict with the viows expressed by Major Raverty.
80 From what Abo'l-tapl writes in his Ain-i-Akbart it would appear to have shifted to its more north channel by his time, and we may perhapo prosume that it had taken that course before stai 'All's day.
87 8o. Dofrómary and Sanguinetti, Voyages d'Ion Batoul, III, 117. The name KhusroAbad is poslo; I can find no place of this name in the region concerned. It may of course have been the name of
town or village on the bank of the river Dear a ferry, that has sinco disappeared. It is just possible that . mistake hos ocurred in tho text, and that Kahror may have been intended, as this place lay by the sido 01 an old channel of the Bils.
58 Shauwdl 962 A.H. corresponding with 19th August to 17th September 1655.