Panhwar.com Welcome to site dedicated to M. H. Panhwar (1925 - 2007)

A brief sketch of M.R. Haig and his works.


As Director Survey and Settlement.


Major General M.R. Haig joined in East India Company’s service and 1858 was posted in Sindh as Director Survey and Settlement. The Orders of Governor General of India in 1861 facilitated sale of Government land in blocks upto maximum of about 3,000 acres or less at Rs.5.00 per acre for the land ready for cultivation right away and Rs.2.50 for that needing forest and shrub clearance and levelling to the farmers or growers who could cultivate it. In the initial years he had differences with all three Collectors (Deputy Commissioners) of Karachi, Hyderabad and Shikarpur and Political Agents of North Western Sindh (Jacobabad) and Thar and Parker. These officials wanted the Government agricultural land to be distributed to big-land owners, who were helping the administration in maintaining law and order and collection of land revenue, where as Haig was distributing newly released land to the actual tillers of land or those living in the villages surrounded by the new land, made available by extension of irrigation canals, in different parts of Sindh by his own standards of merit. They jointly asked for his transfer, but he had become indispensable to the Government of the Bombay Presidency for his administrative and technical efficiency, which was measured from:


His thorough knowledge of Sindhi language and communication with farmers in the local language.








All these reports give an accurate Taluka maps with Dehs, roads, towns, villages, railway lines, canals, branch canals, and etc. This is a mine of information on Sindh, but present records of the Director Survey and Settlement are in shambles. One has to refer the records of Bombay Government at Bombay or at the British Library, London (originally India Office Library). Some reports may not be available at both the places. For the training of mapping and revenue records a Tapedars training school was established at Hyderabad for which also credit goes to him.


The reports to be revised every tenth year were invariably delayed after Haig and were published only once after 1901. After opening of Sukkur Barrage these were abandoned.


M.R. Haig’s reports as Survey and Settlement Officer.















M.R. Haig’s publications on history and historical geography of Sindh.


 

 



Opinion on the Historical geography in the Indus delta country Haig by M.H. Panhwar.


The work on historical-geography in Sindh dates back to the early efforts of Asiatic Society of Bengal, which in its Asiatic Researches Vol.1 to 20 had tried to find-out the location of various ancient geographical places in Sindh in the first two decades of the 19th century. It was based on study of historical documents without any visit to Sindh. Some 20 years later, Alexander Burnes in his “Travels to Bukhara” Vol. I, 1831, had discussed ancient geography of Sindh. His articles in journals of Royal Geographical society, as well as Royal Asiatic Society, London, give information which can be classified as historical geography of Sindh. Captain E.B. Eastawick a British political officer at Khairpur had great curiosity for ancient monuments and ancient geography and his “Dry leaves from Young Egypt” 1849, was the first book having considerable information on historical geography and monuments of the northern Sindh based on personal visits.


Next was systematic work of Sir Henry Elliot who in “History of India as told by his historians in Vol.1” published from Cape Town (South Africa) describes historical geography of Sindh in 1853, to be followed by henry Elliot and John Dowson’s “History of India as told by his own historian” in Vol.1, 1867. It is a detailed account of historical geography of Sindh on which improvements were being made for next 40 years, until Raverty’s Mihran of Sindh and Haigs above book. Alexander Cunnigham, the Director of Archaeological Survey of India, published his Ancient Geography of India in 1871 in which Hieun Tswang’s travels in Sindh are described. By this year the foundation for the study of historical geography of Sindh, thus was laid. The subsequent 20 years work on historical geography of Sindh was mainly concentrated on courses of the river Sarsuti-Hakra discussed by the present writer in notes on Raverty’s Mihran of Sindh, in an article Hakra-Sarsuti controversy. Two important and much discussed and read books of 1890’s were, those of Raverty “Mihran of Sindh” 1892 and their Sindhi translation published by Sindh Language Authority and Haig’s, “Indus Delta Country”, 1894. Haig’s book was much referred, discussed and quoted for next 70 years. His stand on Hakra-Sarsuti has been superseded by various authorities as discussed by the present writer in Hakra-Sarsuti controversy but his other opinions were gradually being superseded and finally by Lambrick’s “History of Sindh - a general information”. 1964. During past 30 years even some of the findings of Lambrick have been superseded. Haig’s views were strong and logical enough, to have influenced every historian of Sindh for next 70 years until Lambrick’s work. Even after Lambricks book became available, in absence of its Sindhi translation, Haig’s views were accepted by most Sindhi Scholars.


Below is the opinion of the present writer on Haigs book “The Indus Delta Country” and two articles “Ibn Battutta in Sindh” and “On the site of Brahmanabad and Mansura”. Haigs opinions on historical geography of Sindh discussed in his book and two articles, today stand superseded, but as a general history of Sindh it still has valuable material, which will be referred to for many years. The readers will benefit by the analysis of the present writer, as well as the Lambrick’s book above referred to.


On the course of Hakra-Sarsuti, Haig supports version of C.F. Oldham of Survey of India in Calcutta Review 1974, claiming that Sutlej was discharging in the bed of Sarsuti or Ghaggar or Hakra-Eastern Nara. This is not correct and has been discussed by present writer in Hakra-Sarsuti controversy.


His map on courses of the Indus in the southern Sindh is very accurate and shows major courses as they existed from 1300-1758 AD, as it is based on actual depressions and maps of Surveys of India and his own Deh maps.


His coast line of Sindh is based on surveys carried out in 1860s and shown in the map and is accurate for 1860s. Ren a branch of the Indus existed from the end of 14th century to 1758. It was not the main branch. The Baghar was the main branch on which stood Lahri Bander. Gungro was the main branch of the Indus in twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The Western Puran was on eastern branch of the Indus upto 1758 and Eastern Puran (The Puran river in Haig’s map) was an eastern Branch of the Indus during Habari rule of Sindh (854-1011 AD), or even earlier.


Badahari Channel shown in his map and considered by him, leading in the direction of Mansura, may or may not be Sindh-Sagara of Alberuni.


Ren river.


The Ren river shown in Haig’s map was the central branch of the river Indus and was cut by the river after it deserted Gungro branch which then was main branch in the early 14th century. The Ren branch was deserted by the river Indus in 1758 AD, and newly formed Phuleli branch was diverted into it to irrigate areas from Tando Muhammad Khan to Lowari and further south. The Gungro branch belonged to pre-14th century period.


Advancing of the Indus Delta.


The Delta advances at rate of 3 1/8 mile every year at the main embouchure of the river (Lambrick accepts this version). The Indus silt load discharges into the sea at an estimated at rate of 217 ¼ million cu. Yards a year in the nineteenth century. Presently the river discharges into the sea in any year for less than 56 days annually and in some years even for a few days.


Route of Alexander (Chapter-II).


During the time of Alexander the coast line must have been some 25 miles (40 kilometre) inland-wards than is now and Korre Creek too must have been 25 miles land-wards. The eastern branch of it must have entered it around the line running east to west from Karachi or on 25°N latitude. The present writer is of the opinion that the Western Branch of the Indus passed through Bhanbhore then. Bhanbhore has been explored by Dr. F.A. Khan and excavations go back to 1st century BC. The un-excavated starts extend below the water table by about four feet and therefore could not be excavated, but the earliest settlements may well go back to Alexander’s times. This also shows that it was colder in Alexander’s time and therefore sea level was low. The present author agrees with Dr. F.A. Khan that it may possibly be Alexander’s Haven, which remained an active port upto 1224 AD. This identification Alexander’s haven by Haig and Lambrick (Sindh a genera introduction pp.100-132) and maps of the coast line drawn by them, therefore may be considered erroneous for location of Alexander’s Haven and Debal. However Lambrick’s identification of Patala with Brahmanabad appears to logically correct, as the same settlement survived from 5th century BC, first in the name of Brahmanka capital of Brahmanka Parguna in the Central Sindh on the left bank of the river Indus as per statement of Panini the Sansikrit Grammarian and was destroyed in 1026 AD, as reported by archaeologist Halim. The two branches of the river Indus have been drawn by the present writer along with principalities of Sindh conquered by Alexander the Great in a map appended. On the same basis Lambrick’s location of various sites of Nearchus on Sindh coast at the best is an intellectual guesswork, based on approximations of distances travelled.


Country of Patalene according to later Greek accounts (Chapter-III).


Haig has discussed Patalene as mentioned by “Periplus of the Erythean Sea”, written around 60-80 AD, and by Ptolemey the geographer’s map of 140 AD, and also Barbarican or Bhanbhore an inland port on a branch of the Indus. It is not only probable but definite that at the delta the Western branch of the river Indus within the length of 16-20 miles from sea will bifurcate into two or three branches making the Barbarican port on the central branch. Excavations of Bhanbhore have proved that it was a sea port of not only of an importance but also a permanent port on the Indus for about 1300-1400 years from atleast 1st century BC, to 1026 AD. Haig though not correct on location of Patala (Brahmanabad), gives correct alignment of the western branch of the Indus passing near Samui (north of Makli Hills) and through the Gharo Creek. Lambrick does not think that any branch of the Indus passed through this channel during the era under question. Arial photographs and satellite imagery have proved with certainty such a branch. However both Haig and Lambrick are not correct on location of Debal (Bhanbhore).


Minnagara of Periplus is un-recognisable to Haig, but if we accept Haig’s own quotating of Tuhafatul-Kirams version about Minagar in Shahdadpur Pargana, it became obvious the Minnagara was another name for Brahmanabad, the only large town within many small ruined settlements around it. Haig accepts Gharo or Bhanbhore Creek as the most western branch and Koree Creek as most easternly branch of the Indus and he assigns the names Sagapa and Lonibare of Ptolemy to them. This statement of Haig is correct. Further to it may be mentioned that Lonibare (Loonnibari) may have come from Sindhi word Loonn or salt, due to salty water of Rann of Kutch nrear by. The second mouth of Indus from the west called Sinthon may be Sindhu or the Indus, the main channel.


I have discussed the modern names of sites mentioned by Ptolemy in a map in Chronological Dictionary of Sindh. I have discussed Ptolemy, his geography and location of places in Sindh in “A Social History of Sindh” not published as yet.


Sindh according to Hieun Tsang (Chapter-IV).


On the travels of Hieun Tsang are; the works of Cunningham, Director Archaeological Survey of India, “Ancinet Geography of India”, Cousens “Antiquities of Sindh”, Raverty, “Mihran of Sindh”, Pithwalla “Historical Geography of Sindh” and Lambrick “Sindh A General Introduction”. Of various versions, I have accepted the last. Lambrick also does not agree with Haig’s interpretations (Lambrick pp.146, 148).


Debal (Chapter-IV).


Haig has located Debal in Deh Kakar Bukera, Dr. F.A. Khan’s Excavation of Bhanbhore has proved beyond doubt that, this town flourished at least from first century BC, or even earlier (if un-excavated lower level are considered) to 1228 AD, as a harbour and important city. The earlier interpretations of Elliot, Cousens, Pithawalla and many other authorities including Lambrick stand superseded. His contention that Kalri branch of Indus passing through Samu gap was not continuous upto Gharo Creek at the time of Arab conquest of Sindh is incorrect, as Bhanbore (Debal) a sizeable city could not have survived due to brackish water within many miles around it.