The Ancient Geography of India. I. The Buddhist Period, including the Campaigns of Alexander, and the Travels of Hwen-Thsang c6.s1.t6.29

c6.s1.t6.29

This agrees exactly with what I have already noted, that the city was still flourishing when visited by Masudi and Ibn Haukal in the first half of the tenth century; and I would therefore assign its destruction to the latter half of that century, and not earlier than A.D. 970. It is true that Mansura is mentioned by Abu Rihân in the beginning of the next century, and at a still later period by Edrisi, Kazvini, and Rashid-ud-din; but the last three were mere compilers, and their statements accordingly belong to an earlier age. Abu Rihân, however, is entirely original, and as his knowledge of the Indian language gave him special facilities for obtaining accurate information, his evidence is sufficient to prove that Mansura was still existing in his time. In speaking of the itinerary of Sindh, he says,† “From Aror to Bâhmanwâ, also named el Mansura, is reckoned 20 parasangs; from thence to Loharâni, at the mouth of the river, 30 parasangs.” Mansura therefore still existed when Abu Rihân wrote his work, about A.D. 1031; but as it is mentioned by only one author in the campaigns of Mahmud of Ghazni, it is almost certain that it no longer existed as a great fortress, the capital of the country, otherwise its wealth would have attracted the cupidity of that rapacious conqueror. I conclude, therefore, that Mansura was already very much decayed before the accession of Mahmud, and that the earthquake which levelled its walls and overthrew its houses, must have happened some time before the beginning of the eleventh century. It is probable that most of the inhabitants who escaped the great catastrophe would have returned to the ruined city to look after their buried property, and that many of them again reared their houses on the old sites. But the walls of the city were fallen, and there was no security; the river was gradually failing, and there was a scarcity of water; and the place was altogether so much decayed, that even in A.H. 416, or A.D. 1025, when the conqueror of Somnâth returned through Sindh, the plunder of Mansura was not sufficient to tempt him out of his direct march; so he passed on by Sehwân to Ghazni, leaving the old capital unvisited, and even unnoticed, unless we accept the solitary statement of Ibn Athir, that Mahmud on this occasion appointed a Muhammadan governor to Mansura.