It is essential to a right understanding of ancient Sindian geo­graphy to ascertain where Kandábel, of which there is such frequent mention, was situated. We can only do this by implication, and by comparison of the various passages in which the name occurs.

The Chach-náma* mentions it in three different passages, at least, if Kandhála in the last reference be meant, as seems probable, for that place. If we are to put faith in the first passage (p. 152), there would be no need for further enquiry, as it is distinctly mentioned thus:—“Kandábel, that is, Kandahár.” But it may be shown that this identification cannot possibly be admitted, for Chach reaches the place through the desert of Túrán (a province of which Kusdár was the capital),* on his return from Armá-bel to Alor. He straitened the garrison by encamping on the river Síní, or Sibí, and compelled them to agree to the payment of one hundred horses from the hill country, and a tribute of 100,000 dirhams. Here the name of the river, and the position, put Kandahár out of the question, and we can only regard the passage as the conjecture of some transcriber, interpolated by mistake from the margin into the text.

The real fact is, that Kandábel* can scarcely be any other place than the modern Gandáva, and we shall find, with this single excep­tion, that all the other passages where its name occurs sufficiently indicate that as the position. Indeed, it is probable that this very instance lends confirmation to this view, for the Síní river seems to be no other than the Síbí, now called the Nárí, but flowing under the town of Síbí, and, during the floods, joining the Bolán river, into which the hill-streams, which surround and insulate Gandáva, disembogue themselves. The river which runs nearest to Gandáva is now called the Bádra.

The Mujmalu-t Tawáríkh tells us that Kandábel was founded by the Persian king, Bahman, “between the confines of the Hindus and the Turks”* (p. 106). Biládurí frequently mentions it, and speaks of Kandahár as entirely separate and distinct (pp. 117, 118, 125, 127). He tells us it was situated on a hill or elevated site, and that 'Amrán, after taking the town, transferred the principal inhabit­ants to Kusdár (p. 128), from which place it was situated at the distance of five parasangs.*

According to Ibn Haukal, and the corresponding passages in Istakhrí (p. 29), Ouseley's Oriental Geography, and the Ashkálu-l Bilád, Kandábel was the capital of Budha, and a large place of commercial traffic, deficient in the produce of the date-palm, and situated in a desert, eight stages from Mansúra, and ten through the desert from Multán.*

All these descriptions make Kandábel correspond sufficiently with the modern Gandáva, to leave no doubt of their identity. Later historians speak of it as being on the borders of Kirmán,* but their notions of that province were very indefinite, and any place on the eastern confines of Sind would equally answer their loose mode of delineation.

Gandáva, which is the capital of the province of Kachh Gandáva, is surrounded by a wall, and is still one of the most important places between Kelát and Shikárpúr, though greatly declined from its former state. Indeed, Bágh is a much larger, as well as more commercial town, but the credit of antiquity cleaves to Gandáva.

Kandábel, it will be observed, is represented as the capital of Budha, which, therefore, next demands our attention, This is evidently the same province as the Búdhpúr, Búdhiya, and Budápúr (p. 145) of the Chach-náma.

Under the Ráí dynasty, the second satrapy of Sind comprised, besides the town of Siwistán, which was the capital,* “Búdhpúr, and Jankán (Jangár), and the skirts of the hills of Rújhán, as far as the borders of Makrán (p. 138).” Again, “Chach marched towards the fortress of Budápúr and Siwistán.” After crossing the Indus “he went to Búdhiya, the capital of which tract was Nánáráj Kákáráj), and the inhabitants of the place called it Sawís.” … “After taking the fort of the Sawís, he moved towards Siwistán” (p. 145).

When Siwistán was attacked by Muhammad Kásim, the governor fled to Búdhiya, where was “a fortress called Sísam,* on the banks of the Kumbh,” whither he was pursued by the Arab general, who encamped with a portion of his army at “Nílhán on the Kumbh.” Here, the chiefs of Búdhiya determined to make a night attack upon his camp. These chiefs of Búdhiya, who were of the same family as the ruler of Sísam, are subsequently shown to be Jats;* whose origin was derived from a place on the banks of the Gang, which they call Áúndhár.”* After failing in this expedition, they volun­tarily surrendered themselves, as they had “found from the books of the Buddhists that Hindústán was destined to be conquered by the army of Islám,” and then turned their arms vigorously against their former comrades. On Muhammad's advancing to Sísam, “some of the idolaters fled to Búdhya, higher up: some to the fort of Ba­hítlúr, * between Sálúj and Kandhábel” (p. 162); and there sued for peace, and after agreeing to pay tribute, sent their hostages to Siwistán.

In the Mujmalu-t Tawáríkh we read that Bahman, the Persian king, “built in the country of Budh a town called Bahmanábád, which according to some is Mansúra” (p. 106).

[Biládurí mentions this tract as the scene of the slaughter of Budail (p. 119), and it is, perhaps, disguised under the name of Basea in p. 123.]

In Istakhrí (p. 29), and in Ibn Haukal, it assumes the form of Budh, or Budha. “The infidel inhabitants within the borders of Sind are called Budha and Mand. They reside in the tract between Túrán, Multán, and Mansúra, on the western bank of the Mihrán. They live in huts made of reeds and grass” (p. 38). Again, “Atal is inhabited by Musulmáns and infidel Budhas.”* … “From Mansúra to the first borders of Budha is fifteen stages* (p. 39), and any one who travels that road must go along the banks of the Mihrán until he reaches Sadústán (Sihwán).”

“Nadha,” or “Nudha,” seems to be the reading preferred by Idrísí (p. 83), and the Nubian geographer. Kazwíní describes the country as having a population resembling the Zat, and yielding plenty of rice and cocoa-nuts. It also produces camels with double humps, which being rarely found elsewhere, were in great demand in Khurásán and Persia.* Ibn Haukal also remarks upon the excellence of its breed of camels. The Marásidu-l Ittilá'* likewise approves of the initial N, instead of B; but these later authorities are of no value, when arrayed against the repeated instances to the contrary from the Chach-náma, and the great majority of the readings in Ibn Haukal and Istakhrí.*

From a comparison of all these statements, it would appear that the old tract of Budh, or Búdhiya, very closely corresponds with the modern province of Kachh Gandáva, on all four sides except the northern, where it seems to have acquired a greater extension, of which it is impossible to define the precise limits. It is worthy of remark that, in the very centre of Kachh Gandáva, there is still a place called Budha on the Nárí river, and it is possible that the name is also preserved in the Kákar tract of Borí, or Búra, forming part of the Afghán province of Síwistán.* In the Ayín-i Akbarí the town of Budhyán is mentioned as being on the northern frontier of Sirkár Thatta, one hundred kos from Bandar Láhorí.

It is impossible to assent to an hypothesis lately started in the Journal of the Asiatic Society, quoted above, that this tract was desig­nated after the present Burohees, or Bráhúís. Their name itself is too modern,—besides being belied by the usual meaning ascribed to it, of “mountaineer;”—and even their partial occupation of this low eastern tract is not yet a century old. From time immemorial it has been held by the Jats, who still constitute the majority of the population, and the Bráhúís are a mere intrusive stock from the provinces of Múshkí and Jhow, and the rugged highlands of Sahá-rawán, which abut Kachh Gandáva on the westward. It has been surmised, also, that these Budhiyas were the Bhodya and Bhoja of the Puránic legends, and even the Bhotyas of Tibet. This is tread­ing upon still more dangerous ground.* It is far more probable that, if the name had any significant origin at all, it was derived from the possession of the Buddhist religion in its purity by the inhabitants of that remote tract, at the time when Bráhmanism was making its quiet but steady inroads by the more open and accessible course of the river Indus. [See post, Note on the Meds.]