The Ancient Geography of India. I. The Buddhist Period, including the Campaigns of Alexander, and the Travels of Hwen-Thsang c5.s1.t10.1

c5.s1.t10.1

From Polusha Hwen Thsang travelled 200 li, or 33 miles, to the south-east to U-to-kia-han-cha, which M. Julien transcribes as Udakhanda, and M. Vivien de St. Martin identifies with Ohind on the Indus. The pilgrim describes Udakhanda as having its south side resting on the river, which tallies exactly with the position of Ohind, on the north bank of the Indus, about 15 miles above Attok. General Court and Burnes call this place Hund, and so does Mr. Loewenthal, who styles Ohind a mistaken pronunciation. But the name was written ويهند Waihand or Oaihand, by Abu Rihân in A.D. 1030, and Ohind by Mirza Mogal Beg in 1790. To my ear the name sounded something like Wahand, and this would appear to have been the pronunciation which Rashid-ud-din obtained in A.D. 1310, as he names the place *Wehand*.* According to all these authors *Waihand* was the capital of Gândhâra, and Rashid-ud-din adds that the Mogals called it *Kârajáng*. The only native writer who uses the abbreviated form of the name is Nizâm-ud-din, who in his ‘*Tabakât-i-Akbari*’ says that Mahmud besieged Jaipal in the fort of *Hind* in A.D. 1002. But this place is differently named by Ferishta, who calls it the fort of *Bithanda*, بتہندہ. In this last name we have a very near approach to the old form of *Utakhanda*, which is given by Hwen Thsang. From all these examples, I infer that the original name of *Utakhanda*, or *Ut-khand*, was first softened to *Uthand* or *Bithanda*, and then shortened to *Uhand* or *Ohind*. The other form of *Wehand* I look upon as a simple misreading of *Uthand*, as the two words only differ in the position of the diacritical points of the second letter. General James Abbott, in his ‘*Gradus ad Aornon*,’ calls the place *Oond*, and says that it was formerly called *Oora*, from which he thinks it probable that it may be identified with the *Ora*, *Ὤρα*, of Alexander’s historians.