'The lands of the Eastern Caliphate Mesopotamia, Persia, and Central Asia from the Moslem conquest to the time of Timur' [‎330] (371/586)

33°
was of all nations, as is usual in a great seafaring port; and in the
6th (12th) century the place had, in large measure, acquired the
trade of Hurmuz, which had fallen to ruin K
Of other towns in Makran the Arab geographers give only the
names, and no descriptions. The names of the well-known town
of Bamptir, and Fahraj its neighbour, occur in Mukaddasi as
Barbur (for Banbur) and Fahl Fahrah, Yakiit giving the last
under the form Bahrah 2 . The town of Kasarkand, north of Tiz,
is still a place of some importance; and Kaj, some distance to the
east of this, is mentioned as Kij or Kiz. The names of Jalk and
Dazak also occur; and Khwash or Khwas, which is probably the
modern Gwasht, lying to the east of Khwash in the Sarhad district
(already mentioned, p. 317). Rask was, in the middle-ages, a
town of some note on account of its fertile district called Al-
Kharuj, but, from the Itineraries, there is doubt whether it can
be identical with the present township of this name. Armabil
and Kanbali were two important towns, on or near the coast,
about half-way between Tiz and Daybul at the Indus mouth.
Istakhri describes these as cities of considerable size, lying two
days' march apart, and one of them was situated half a league
distant from the sea. 1 heir people were rich traders, who had
dealings chiefly with India 3 .
1 Muk. 478^ Yak. i. 907. For the present ruins of Tiz see Sykes, Persia,
1 or, r ro, also Schindler, f.R.A.S. 1898, p. 45. See also the history of Afdal
Kirmam, Houtsma, Z. D. M. G. i88r, pp. 394 and 402.
2 Fahraj a few miles to the east of Bampur in Makran, and Fahraj a few
miles to the east of Narmasir in Kirman, must not be confused. There was
also Fahraj near Yazd.
3 1st. 170, 171, 177, 178. I. H. 226, 232. Muk. 475, 476. Yak. i. 769;
iv- 33 2 • The spelling Armayil for Armabil is a frequent clerical error of the
mss. The ruins of Armabil are probably at Lus Bela, and those of Kanbali
at Khayrokot. Sir 1. Holdich, A*. (9. ^S"., 1896, p. 400. The earlier Arab
geographers in point of fact knew little about Makran, and the later ones
add nothing worth mentioning. Yakut only repeats what his predecessors of the
4th (10th) century have said. All that Kazvini (ii. 181) has to tell us of this
province is that there was a wonderful bridge there, crossing a river, and
formed of one single block of stone. He adds,—'he who crosses it vomits up
the contents of his belly, so that naught remains therein, and though thousands
should pass over the bridge this always happens to each one. So when any
man of that country requires to vomit he has only to cross this bridge.'