« PreviousContinue »
revenues of that town and district; Sukkur, in the river, better known to the natives as Chipri bunder; Rorí on the opposite side, and Subzulkót. There are of course various others of minor importance in Sindh, particularly on the branches of the river.
Beyond that territory are Kín Kashmor and Rozan, on the western bank, formerly Sindhian possessions, but now annexed to the Punjaub; Mittunkót, at the junction of the five streams; Dera Ghazi Khan and Dera Ismael Khan, and Kalabagh on the main river, Bhawulpúr; Ferozepur and Lúdiana on the Suttledge; and Múltan on the Jilum.
Interest attached to Ancient History of Sindh.
Expedition. Absence of local Records or Monuments.Hindú Government. Cause of Mahommedan Invasion. Invasion. Cruel end of Arab General.- Omiade and Abbaside Dynasties. Súmrahs. Sumahs.- Urghúns.Tirkhans. Akbar Padúsha conquers Sindh — Annexed permanently to Mogul Empire. -Viceroys from Hindostan.Date of Accession of Kaloras. General Review.-Ancient Cities. Former Prosperity of Sindh.
COULD we trace any authentic history of Sindh beyond a certain period, there is no portion of the East endued with so much to recommend it to the notice of the learned or curious as being the scene of Alexander's retreat, when his ambitious projects were suddenly checked by the murmurings of his soldiers, and he retraced his steps to the westward, first, by means of the friendly river, which he rightly guessed must, at no very great distance, conduct him to the ocean, whence he could still farther guide his course to the Euphrates, and thence to his newly-projected seat of Eastern empire of the Greeks. Sindh is at once recognized as Sindomana; but whether the whole or portion of the province we have been describing bore that name during the Grecian expedition does not ap
Beyond this similitude of title and the apparent identity of such places as Pattala with Tattah, and Crocola with Karrachi, or the peculiar geographical features of portions of the river, there is in reality nothing whatever, whether of local record or monuments, to attest that here the great conqueror was; and, except the accounts given by his own historians, all is a blank, for neither by Eastern history nor legend, local or contemporaneous, have we been able to discover a single syllable respecting the great events so graphically described by such historians as Arrian and Quintus Curtius. In fact, the absence of history beyond a limited period, as applied to Sindh, also obtains over the whole of India, and perhaps in its records of some thirteen centuries we have as much as can be found in any other portion of the East, that is, of the countries lying between the Indus and Ganges. It may be observed, however, that the reasons are obvious why in Sindh there are none of those monuments which, to the westward of the river and farther north, are still to be seen of Grecian, Bactrian, Scythian, or Sassanian conquests, in the shape of tumuli, topes, coins, and sites of cities. The spots chosen for these depositories were not liable to be obliterated by foreign agency, and they prove, after a lapse of twenty centuries, their value as infallible records of the past, but on or near the river such could not be the case; and literally to have trusted to such records in Sindh would have been to have written history
in sand. The nature of the soil did not admit of it; and though there may be every reason to imagine that he, whose whole life was a study how to acquire posthumous fame, (even to obtaining a niche in the Pantheon,) was most anxious to leave some splendid monuments, which should attest to after ages the magnitude of his deeds on the immediate scene of their enacting, he could not have found the two indispensables of a stable spot on which to erect them, or any sufficiently lasting materials for his purpose: thus it is that throughout Sindh the most diligent and well-directed antiquarian research has altogether failed to discover one single reminiscence of verified classical antiquity, or to incontestably fix one locality as that described by Alexander's historians; nor have we a single record of the kingdoms who sprung up on the Grecian downfal, and who we know possessed this country, as well as those beyond the Indus. To the east, many cities alluded to by comparatively modern historians, as Minágara, Munsúra, and others, known to have flourished and have attained a great degree of splendour, are sought for in their ruins, but in vain.
Commencing, then, with the date of authentic history, we begin at the earliest period mentioned by Mahommedan historians, who recorded the conquest of this country by the overwhelming arms of the Prophet's followers, and who appear to have taken so little trouble to ascertain anything re
specting it prior to that event, that they only go as far back as half a century, describing a dynasty of Brahmins or priests whom they found in possession of the throne of Sindh. It is, moreover, highly probable that, in their blind bigotry and intolerable fanaticism for the propagation of the true faith, every record was destroyed in common with the temples and other symbols of the "idolatry of the Pagans;" for we find in India that the only depositories of history, and they are very few, are to be found with the priests of a religion now looked upon as a heresy, but in reality the remnant of that which there is reason to believe pervaded the whole continent of India, and even Central Asia, so late as the fifth century of our era. These historical records, then, in the keeping of the Jain priests (the remnants of ancient Búdhism), as still seen in the present day, were so in the period of the Sindhian conquest, and, being preserved with the other sacred books of the temples, they shared their fate, and were, in all probability, destroyed in that iconoclastic fury which pre-eminently distinguished the followers of Mahomed during their early wars.
Between the period, therefore, of Alexander's expedition and the subjugation of Sindh by the Moslems, we have no accounts whatever, traditional or written, local or foreign: the opportunities possessed by the latter to acquire such were lost or neglected, and thus their historians proceed only to