Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Ancient Geography of India. I. The Buddhist Period, including the Campaigns of Alexander, and the Travels of Hwen-Thsang c5.s4.t20: Tulamba.

The Ancient Geography of India. I. The Buddhist Period, including the Campaigns of Alexander, and the Travels of Hwen-Thsang c5.s4.t20

Language
English

Tulamba.

c5.s4.t20.1

The town of Tulamba is situated on the left bank of the Râvi, at 52 miles to the north-east of Multân. It is surrounded with a brick wall, and the houses are built chiefly of burnt bricks, brought from the old fort of Tulamba, which is situated one mile to the south of the present town. According to Masson,[*] this “must have been in the ancient time a remarkably strong fortress,” which it undoubtedly was, as Timur left it untouched, because its siege would have delayed his progress.[†] It is curious that it escaped the notice of Burnes, as its lofty walls, which can be seen from a great distance, generally attract the attention of travellers. I have visited the place twice. It consisted of an open city, protected on the south by a lofty fortress 1000 feet square. The outer rampart is of earth, 200 feet thick, and 20 feet high on the outer face, or *faussebraie*, with a second rampart of the same height on the top of it. Both of these were originally faced with large bricks, 12 by 8 by 2½ inches. Inside the rampart there is a clear space, or ditch, 100 feet in breadth, surrounding an inner fort 400 feet square, with walls 40 feet in height, and in the middle of this there is a square tower or castle, 70 feet in height, which commands the whole place. The numerous fragments of bricks lying about, and the still existing marks of the courses of bricks in many places on the outer faces of the ramparts, confirm the statements of the people that the walls were formerly faced with brick. I have already mentioned that this old fort is said to have been abandoned by the inhabitants about 300 years ago, in consequence of the change in the course of the Râvi, which entirely cut off their supply of water. The removal is attributed to Shujâwal Khan, who was the son-in-law and minister of Mahmud Langa of Multân, and the brother-in-law of his successor, from about A.D. 1510 to A.D. 1525.

c5.s4.t20.2

∗ ‘Travels,’ i. 456.

c5.s4.t20.3

† Briggs's ‘Ferishta,’ i. 487.

c5.s4.t20.4

The antiquity of Tulamba is vouched for by tradition, and by the large size of the bricks, which are similar to the oldest in the walls and ruins of Multân. The old *town* was plundered and burnt by Timur, and its inhabitants massacred; but the fortress escaped his fury, partly owing to its own strength and partly to the invader's impatience to continue his march towards Delhi. There is a tradition that Tulamba was taken by Mahmud of Ghazni, which is *very* probably true, as it would have been only a few miles out of his direct route to Multân. For the same reason I am led to believe that it must have been one of the cities captured by Alexander. Masson* has already suggested that it represents "the capital of the Malli," or perhaps "the fort held by Brahmans, whose defence was so obstinate and so fatal to themselves, and which was evidently contiguous to the capital of the Malli." But as I do not agree with either of these suggestions, I will now examine and compare the different accounts of this part of Alexander's route.

c5.s4.t20.5

In my account of Kot Kamâlia I adduced some strong reasons for identifying that place with the first city captured by Alexander on his march from the junction of the Hydaspes and Akesines against the Malli. Arrian then relates that "Alexander, having allowed his soldiers some time for refreshment and rest, about the first watch of the night set forward, and marching hard all that night came to the river Hydraotes about daylight, and understanding that some parties of the Malii were just passing the river, he immediately attacked them and slew many, and having passed the river himself with his forces in pursuit of those who had gained the further side, he killed vast numbers of them and took many prisoners. However, some of them escaped, and betook themselves to a certain town well fortified both by art and nature." A whole night's march of eight or nine hours could not have been less than twenty-five miles, which is the exact distance of the Râvi opposite Tulamba from Kot Kamâlia. Here then I infer that Alexander must have crossed the Râvi; and I would identify Tulamba itself with the "town well fortified both by art and nature,” the art being the brick walls, and the nature, the enormous mounds of earthen ramparts. The account of Curtius* agrees with that of Arrian, “on the bank of a river another nation mustering forty thousand infantry opposed him. Crossing the river he put them to flight, and stormed the fort in which they took refuge.” Diodorus relates the same story of a people named Agalassæ, who opposed Alexander with forty thousand infantry and three thousand cavalry. All these accounts evidently refer to the same place, which was a strong fort near the left bank of the Râvi. This description would apply also to Harapa; but I have already shown that Harapa was most probably the city against which Perdikkas was detached; besides which it is not more than 16 miles distant from Kot Kamâlia. Tulamba, on the contrary, fulfils all the conditions; and is also on the high-road to Multân, the capital of the Malli, against which Alexander was then proceeding.

c5.s4.t20.6

∗ 'Travels,' i. 456.

c5.s4.t20.7

† 'Anabasis,' vi. 3.

c5.s4.t20.8

The name of Agalassæ or Agalessensæ is puzzling. According to Arrian the people of the town were the Malii, but it may be remarked that neither the Oxudrakæ nor the Malli are mentioned by Diodorus and Curtius until later. Justin couples a people called Gesteani with the Arestæ or Kathæi, who should therefore be the same as the Malli or Oxudrakæ, but they are not mentioned by any other author. Agala or Agalassa might be the name of the town itself, but unfortunately it has no similarity with Tulamba, or with any other place in the neighbourhood.

c5.s4.t20.9

∗ Vita Alex., ix. 4, 10. The text has in ripâ fluminum, which is an obvious mistake for fluminis, as is proved by the use of amne immediately following.

Linked texts (4)