Kandahar of the Arab Conquest

8/3/2019 Kandahar of the Arab Conquest

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kandahar-of-the-arab-conquest 1/14

Kandahar of the Arab ConquestAuthor(s): S. W. HelmsReviewed work(s):Source: World Archaeology, Vol. 14, No. 3, Islamic Archaeology (Feb., 1983), pp. 342-354Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/124347 .

Accessed: 15/12/2011 02:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to World

Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis

http://www.jstor.org/stable/124347?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/124347?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis



Kandaharof the Arabconquest

S. W. Helms

Much of the early Islamic history of the eastern regions - as-Sind - is shrouded in mystery and

described in legends. An account, for example, quoted by Ferrier (1857), may be taken as an

apocryphal reference to the fortunes of the Arab conquerors of Old Kandahar:

In the year of the Hegira 304 (AD 916), in the Caliphat of Mocktader, in digging for the

foundation of a tower at Kandahar, a subterranean cave was discovered, in which were a

thousand Arab heads, all attached to the same chain, which had evidently remained in good

preservation since the year Hegira 70 (AD 689) for a paper with this date upon it was found

attached by a silken thread to the ears of the twenty-nine most important skulls, with their

proper names.

Similarly, the only certain account of the Arab conquest of al-Qunduhar, which must be Old

Kandahar, comes from al-Baladhuri (futuh al-buldan) who died in AD 892, mentally derangedafter drinking the juice of the anacardia (baladhur), hence his name. This is quoted as an

etiological legend (Enyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed.). According to al-Baladhuri the general

'Abbad ibn Ziyad raided the frontier of al-Hind from Sijistan (Seistan) in the time of the

Umayyad Caliph Mu'awiya' (AD 661-80) 'as far as the river Hindmand' (Murgotten 1924: 212)

which probably refers to the Hilmand (the Erymandus of Pliny VI, 61, 92; the Haetumant and

so on). Ziyad 'crossed the desert until he came to al-Kunduhar' (Murgotten 1924:212), travelling

eastwards from 'Kish' (cf. al-Istakhri and ibn Hauqal below) across the semi-arid land between

the Khash-rud and the Hilmand/Arghandab confluence about the region of Bost.

Al-Qunduhar of Baladhurl is the earliest mentioned name that our city was to bear for most

of its consequent Islamic history. Etymologically there is a problem here that is relevant through-

out the city's most ancient history: that much can be read into a name, and nothing. In Mur-

gotten's translation, 'Abbad ibn Ziyad saw at al-Qunduhar 'the high turbans of the natives, and

had some made like them. [In consequence of this] they are called 'abbadiyah.' Yet the Arabic

has been read in another way: that the city was renamed 'Abbadiya, after its conqueror

(Rawlinson 1849:127; 1873:213; Rescher 1917-23; cf. at-Tabba 1959: 210).

Whether the city was renamed or merely continued as al-Qunduhar famed for its tall turbans,

all that we can glean from this and other accounts of the Conquest is that the city did not then

WorldArchaeology Volume 14 No, 3 Islamic archaeology

?R.K.P. 1983 0043-8243/83/1403-342 $1.50/1



Kandahar f theArabconquest 343

Figure1 South-centralAfghanistan.

featureas an importantcentre. Bost, Herat,Ghazniand Kabulamongothersstill knowntoday

are listed, but with the exception of Baladhuri,never al-Qunduhar.That name does not

reappearuntil the Ghaznavidperiod and then only in poetry, some of which was written

specifically for those Seljuk rulersduringthe early 11th and late 12th centuries(Wallbrechtin Fischeret al. 1976: 295ff.).

Still on the etymologicalsideof the problem:how farbackin the city'shistorycan one take

its name? The allegation that Kandahar Pushtu) or Qandahar Arabic and Farsi) comes

somehow from Alexanderthe Great (via Iskandarabador example) has been long rejected.

That somehowone can make Kandaharout of FavbicpopaHelms 1982) may be possible,but

ratherfar-fetchedat present. The stem Kand or Kund, as in many CentralAsiancity names(Samarkand,Tashkent, etc.) variouslymeaningfortressor simplyplace, can in the first place

add little more than typifying a durableand common practice.Its source in Avestan iterature

(kang)ka7rha) fortress' n Iranianepics, or Old Iraniankan (to dig))kand(a), Avestankanta,

Sogdiankanth or Choresmiankdth from kdtha,meaningperhaps'fortress'merelyunderlines

this whileadding ittle of realapplicablehistoricalvalue(Vogelsang1981 andpers.comm.).

Returning o early Islamicsources,Mas'adi's died AD 956) note on Kandaharn the Indian

Kingdomof Gandharas perhapsstill the best originfor ourcity's long-livedIslamicname.He

says 'it was from this Kandahar hat the name was carried o the settlementof the Gandharians

on the banksof the Arghastan'which afterwardsbecamefamous as the modern Kandahar.This

IndianKandahar,accordingto al-Baladhuri futth al-buldan:445) was taken by Hisham bn'Amr at-Taghlibi, he governorof Sind underthe Abbasid al-Mansur.Hishamthrew down the



344 S. W.Helms

'Budd' and built a mosque in its place, repeatingperhapsan act that causedthe Gandharians

to flee westwards when the capital of Gandharawas captured by the Hephtalites,accordingto the Chinesepilgrim Sung-yunwho visitedthe regionabout AD 520. Thusthe beggingbowl

of Buddha n the Wais shrineof Kandahar ould be regardedas a relic of those times andthe

existenceof a BuddhistStupaand Viharaat the summit above OldKandaharake on evenmore

meaning or thisperiod.So far as the Conquest s concerned- to reiterate- Old Kandahars not noted while other

places are.Arachosia, he most ancient nameknown of the provincenow calledKandaharand

occasionally also Seistan), or ar-Rukhkhaj see below), was taken by 'Abd ur-Rahmanvia

severalcities such as Bost (or Bust) which later becamemints(underthe Saffarids). t wasnot

until the destruction of Bustby the Ghorid Ala ad-DinJahan n AD 1150 that Kandahar gainrose to importance,at least in name, as al-Qunduhar. hamsad-DinII, the Kastrulerof Herat,

is stated by Khwandamir o have besiegedKandahar bout 1278, suggesting hat by that timeKandaharwasonce againa capitalcity.The subsequenthistory of the city is one of continualsiegesandchangesof government. t

was conqueredabout AD 1383 by Timur (ChereffedinAli 1723), who bestowed it upon his

grandsonPir Muhammad. t was part of the Kingdomof HusainBaikharaof Herat and the

name Kandahar irstappearsas a mint on his coins. UnderHusain, he Arghunchief Dhu '1-Nun

Begobtained the governorship f Zamindawarnd made Kandahar is capital.BaburdroveNun

Beg's son Shah Beg Arghunout of the city in AD 1507 (Leyden 1921; Beveridge1922), but

Shah Beg retook it only to lose it again to Babur in 1522. An inscription commemorating this

victory can still be seen above the Chihil Zina at the northern end of the Qaitul Ridge at Old

KandaharDarmesteter1890). ThereafterKandahar emained n Mughalhandsalthoughalwaysregardedby the Safawidsasproperlybelonging o Khorasan. n 1535 the Persiansunsuccessfully

besieged the city. Kamran had succeeded Baburin Kabul and Kandahar,and his brother

HumayanbesiegedKandaharwith the aid of a Persianarmyand after its fall made it over to

his allies. But then, typically,he re-took the city for himself. Earlyin Akbar'sreign Tahmasp

Shahtook Kandahar 1556) but Akbarre-took it in 1594. Then, finally, the Persiansnvested

the city and took it from Jahangir n 1621 and, but for a short Mughal ntervalwhen Shah

Jahan's army occupied the city in 1637, Kandaharremainedin Persian hands from 1648

onwards under Shah Abbas II. There were two other majorsieges, both unsuccessfuland,

accordingto the records, ypicalof Afghanconflictsandprodromicof the later British roubles

in 1842. The city remainedunderthe SafawiMonarchyuntil the riseof the Ghilzai ribeunderMirWaiswhich resultedin the invasionof Persia.Mahmud Ghilzai)became Shahof Persiaand

the city of Kandaharwas ruled by his brother Husain who called it Husainabad until

finally it was totally destroyed by the vengeanceof the Persiansunder Nadir Shah in 1738

(Lockhart 1938). The population of the conqueredcity was forced to move to NadirShah's

erstwhilesiege-campo theeastwhichwas calledNadirabad.Thefinaldispositionof settlements

is illustratedquiteaccuratelyn a contemporarymanuscriptpage (Arne 1947).After the events of 1738 this 'circum-urbation'ontinuedwith the foundation of what was

to become the modernKandahar. n about 1747 Ahmad Shah Durranihad laid out a typical

18th-century grid-iron town some kilometres to the north of Nadirabadwhich he called

Ahmadshahi: ashraf ul-bilador 'the foremostof cities'. Kandaharwas the capitalof Afghani-stan until 1774, when Timur Shah moved the centre of government o Kabul.Since that time

Kandaharhas been the so-called second city of Afghanistanand the capitalof the province



Kandahar f the Arabconquest 345

bearingthe same name: a fact thatmay be relevant n termsof a patternfor reconstructinghe

long sequenceof names back as faras the Achaemenidperiod.Thecity, whenit wasimportant

enough to be called thus, was either named after its most recentconqueror

and retainedthatname for as long as he or his dynasty held power, or it bore a more generalname, perhapsrelatedto ethniccontent, which wasalso the name of the province.

Kandaharoften lay astride a boundary: from the earliest recordedhistory (Old Persian

Harahuvatis/Arachosiand India), throughthe Greek-Mauryaneriod, to the Indo-Scythian/Indo-Parthian-Kushanimes, up to the Persian-Mughalonflicts of the 17th century onwards

-up to even very recenthistory when the interestsof Russia and Americamet symbolicallyat Kandahar,where the Russianconcreteof the trunkroadchanges o Americanasphalt.

II

Excavations at Old Kandaharunder the auspicesof the Society for AfghanStudiesbeganin

1974 and continued until 1978 (Whitehouse1978; McNicoll 1978; Helms in prep., 1978,

1979a, 1979b, 1982) when the historyof Afghanistanook another,predictable urn. The first

two seasonswere limited to specific tasks:the firsta cut throughthe easternfortifications,the

second a seriesof unrelatedsondages.Results from these two preliminaryassayscomplementthe subsequentwork of three seasons, the cut by Whitehousebeing the most useful for the

earlier, pre-Islamicmilitary architectureof the city. McNicoll'ssondagesuncovereda largeamountof later Islamicmaterial Crowe1978).

Qa i t u

0:~ ~? SW

OLD KANDAHAR

1974 - 1978

0 500

1~000 / 4,

1000 /

Figure2 OldKandahar,howingareasof excavation.

Excavationstrategydemandedextensiveexplorationin depth as well as selective clearancearoundsome of the majorarchitectural eatures still visibleon the surface. Most of the infor-

mation uncoveredpertainsto the earlyhistoricalstagesof the site: that is to say, eventhe most

I -BBbl I---III-II



346 S. W.Helms

monumental remains - with the exception of the Buddhist monument - belong to the

pre-Achaemenid period through the Achaemenid/Greek era up to the Indo-Parthian domination

of the region. The architecture of these periods dictated the shape of the city up to its finaldestruction in 1738. Thus sadly very little of the area belonging to the later history of the city

was examined. Yet enough was done to indicate very broadly certain changes in the fortune of

the city throughout its history. We can now say, quite confidently, that its floruit came early

on, well before the advent of Islam. Indeed it seems that after about the 3rd century (AD)Kandahar became a lesser city, something that in retrospect appears to be indicated in the

documentary history cited above.

Kandahar revived a little during the later Islamic period; its final form - no longer at our

ruin field - earning the somewhat undeserved name 'the foremost of cities', cited as such by

many European travellers, one of whom may have witnessed its splendour during the Mughal

sieges of the middle of the 17th century (Tavernier 1676). At that time the city's importance- as so often before - lay in its geographical position: on the easiest road between (Mughal)India and (Safawid) Persia, at the crossroads also of the route north past Ghazni to the western

spur of the Hindu Kush (Kabul) and the network of roads to Bactriaand the Central Asian Steppes

(Transoxiana) and the Indus Valley past Jelallabad. It is this position that can be discerned on the

earliest map of the region, the Tabula Peutingeriana of the greater later Roman world.

There was probably always a settlement of one kind or another at the site of the ruin field;

from its first foundation well before the eastward campaigns of the Achaemenids (Cyrus and

particularly Darius about 520 BC) up to the triumph of Nadir Shah and beyond. For the

Islamic period - as for those preceding - we are dealing with certain geographical and environ-

mental constants: the situation of Old Kandahar surrounded by well-watered orchards andfields that made Kandahar the garden or oasis of Afghanistan's south, just as Jelallabad is the

garden of the east. These constants made the region about Kandahar potentially prosperous and

its capital - which for the most part was Old Kandahar - a vital possession and as often there-

fore a ruin field.

In surveying the Islamic history of the city, a history that represents nearly half the time of

Kandahar'sexistence, one must recognize some serious limitations, of which two are paramount.

The total destruction of much of the later levels at the site during the many sieges and subse-

quent reconstructions, especially since 1738, has left precious little evidence. Second, the

evidence that has been recovered is still largely undigested. This preliminary account should

therefore be regarded in this light. Only the very surface of some very interesting yet vexing

questions can be presented at this time. For that reason I have limited myself to a survey of our

evidence by setting its key discoveries against the necessarily cursory summary of known

documentation, and limit myself further to the period up to the Ghaznavid dynasty. Kandahar's

history thereafter is less problematical.

III

The later history of Kandahar may be divided somewhat arbitrarily into five broad sections:

the very nebulous period between the clearly stratified deposits in the city and the first

definitely Islamic layers, the Conquest period from about AD 650 onward, the period of

Ghaznavid rule, the Mongols and finally the see-sawing politics following the conquest by

Babur at the beginning of the 16th century.



Kandahar f the Arabconquest 347

The first period concerns roughly eight hundred years in terms of stratigraphy there

appears to be a 'gap'- and about the same amount in terms of documentaryevidence. In

various trenchesthe latestpre-Islamicayers belongto the beginningof the Sasaniandominancein the region(coins of ArdeshirandShapurandShapur : up to ca. AD 250); the earliest dated

Islamic ones to the Ghaznavidperiod, representedby a coin of Maudud(1041-8). On the

documentaryside we mightcite Isidoreof Charax'ParthianStations, written towardsthe end

of the 1st century(AD), as the best-knowngeographical ourcemarking he (near-)end of the

pre-Islamicoccupationas excavatedso far. The far end of the 'gap'may be representedby the

various accounts of the Conquest(al-Baladhuri;Yaqat) written some years after the events

in question:al-Baladhuri n the 10th centuryandYaqutin the 13th. This is the barestevidence

in the strictest 'archaeological' nd historicalsenses: and yet there is more, to close the 'gap'.There is also the striking phenomenon of toponymy. Isidore speaks of 'AXe~avbpo6roXc)

lf7Tp07roXLc'Apaxcoaiac e'ot be 'EXXrvi Kai rapapapetabTriv 7roTatio 'ApaXcroT6 Isid. ? 19),that is 'a city populated by Greeks,called Alexandropolis'[or Alexandria- cf. Tarn1951;

Fischer 1967; Bernard1974, amongothers], the capitalof the provinceArachosianear a river

named Arachotos. In the Conquest stories we readvariouslyof ar-rukhkhaj/-rukhkhadhIbnRusta: 105) and ruhwadh Muqaddasi:50, 292) = Arachosia= (amongotherspellings)Harah-

uvatis.At the very least, then, the regionabout Kandahar etained ts name throughout:over

1,500 years. Whether the ruin field was a city - or even occupied- is another matter. Al-

Qunduhar, s we saw,appearsonly once in the records.

The only admissibleevidence- in the strictestsense - concerning he ca. 800-year'gap'to

hand so far comes from severalgravesexcavatedby McNicoll(1978) which producedsilver

drachmsof Kobad I current n the 6th century(MacDowall1978: 51). Thesegraves ay in areaS which, for variousreasons,we now regardas anextra-mural rea,at least throughoutthe pre-Islamichistory of KandaharFig. 2). At this stage,then, all that can be said is that the evidence

points to a drastic reductionin both the political importanceand the populationof the citysometime after the beginningof the Sasanianperiod. This is reflectedin the apparentackof a

definite name for the settlement,even if one acceptsthe Indo-Parthian ame FavUcpopas a

potential identity, even if we quote againthe Islamic sourcesregardinghe Gandhariansbout

the 5th century.Two additional and very tentative items of evidencemightbe noted. Ceramic inds from a

deep soundingon the Citadel(areaC) appearto narrowthe 'gap'.The beginning s about the

same as elsewhere at the site, but the end may be as early as the 9th century, that being theearliest date one might give to lustre waresof which one smallexample was found. A second

indicationof at least some continuity on the provincial evel is a connectionbetween Isidore's

XopoXoa&ro6Xt?19) in Arachosia and the Nestorianbishopricof Roukout duringthe 6th

century (Chabot 1902: 343, 681). Altogether this is not much more than reiteratingthat

althoughlife continued in the countryside,at the ruin field very little has remained o giveus

a history.Yet al-Qunduhar pecificallyand ar-rukhkhaj enerallydo feature in the accounts of the

Islamic Conquest of Afghanistanfrom about AD 650 onwards: and as a not insignificantobstacle to progresseast and north. The apocryphal story quoted in the beginningof this

essay aside, that of ibn Ziyad- if al-Baladhuriwas indeed speakingof our Kandahar,which

is likely - notes a numberof Muslimcasualtiesandgoeson to quote ibn MufarrighMurgotten1924: 213):



348 S. W.Helms

Figure 3 7th-century Conquest of Persia.

How many a footprint in the jungles and the land of India,

And tunics of the unburied slainIn Qunduhar. Yea, of these whose scroll was sealed

In Qunduhar, none brought back the news.

From other campaigns of the 7th century we often read about the hard progress of the

Islamic forces under the leadership of various governors of Seistan against local semi-autonomous

enclaves, the best documented of which are the Shahis. For example 'Abd 'ur-Rahman'ibn

Samurah, after conquering Bust, went next to Khushshak, which is probably Kushk-i-Nakhud

on the river of the same name, whose people capitulated. He goes on to ar-Rukhkhaj. Murgotten

translates this section as 'He met with opposition, but overcame it and conquered the city' (my

italics). The Arabic text (cf. at-Tabba 1959) unfortunately does not mention a 'city' as such; if

it did we would have a definite name for our ruin field in the time of Uthman (ca. 644-56).

'Abd 'ur-Rahman then advances to Dhabulistan (or Zabulistan), whose inhabitants had broken

a treaty, and thence to Kabul. This and other stories (i.e. Ratbil) give us a lively historical

background of the region between Bost and Kabul, presumably along the road as it still runs

today, which was then called tariq ar-rukhkhaj (the road of 'Arachosia') for at least its middle

section about our ruin field.

But can our excavations add anything substantial to this history, having admitted to an

embarrassing 'gap' in occupation on the urban sector of the site?

We were very fortunate in discovering a large hoard of coins sealed into the plaster of a

miniature stupa. This structure was the devotional focus of the main shrine room in the Vihara

which, with its still impressive Stupa, dominates the heights south of Old Kandahar. This area

was ultimately incorporated into the city, probably long after Babur's conquest. The Buddhist

monument became a gun-position then.



Kandahar f theArabconquest 349

The hoard is still beingstudied(MacDowall n prep.), but severalsignal aspectscanalready

be presented as definitive evidence regardingprecisely the nebulous period of the so-called

'gap'.Moreover, his evidence is remarkablypicturesqueand poignantfrom a strictlypoliticalhistorical view. It is also appositein roundingout the long confrontationandpartial usionof

some of the world'sgreat religionsat Old Kandahar,whichmay have begunwith Zarathustra,the Greek pantheon (Fraser 1979), the Buddha,the Nestorian Church and finally the con-

frontationand for a time coexistenceof Gautamaand Muhammad.

Over a hundred coins in the hoard representwhat until now have been called 'hunnish

rulers'of the 7th and 8th centuries(Goebl 1968), whose coinage copied later Sasanian ypesboth in the style of the ruler'sportraitand the depiction of the fire altar on the obverseside.

Wemightnow be ableto addmore. Onecoin of the UmayyadCaliphswasfound stratifiedwith

the hoard.A secondUmayyadcoin appearedbeneath a collapsedroof (with Buddhistpaintings)

in an annexe of the Vihara.In additionto this most useful evidencea Chinesecoin fragmentappearedin the hoard. This has been tentatively ascribed to the rangeof the Sui dynasty

(580-612) to the T'ang dynasty (618-906). Altogetherthis numismaticevidence gives us a

date about the late 7th to early 8th century, that is to the period of the IslamicConquestof

Persiaand Afghanistan.The majorcurrency- which includesthe mysteriousNapkiMalik-

representsone of the semi-autonomous nclavesprobablycentredsomewherebetween Kabul

and Bost. A similarcurrency s now known fromthe Italianexcavationsat TepeSardarGhazni)(MacDowallpers.com.).

Historicallythese rulers in conflict with the advance of Islamhave been the HinduShahis

who, in turn, were competingwith Turkic entities, the TurkiShahis.Theselatter numbered

among their kings individualswhose namescarrya common root: Vrahitiginand Tigin Shah,for example.They were Buddhistswho alsoveneratedHindugods.Moreoverhey appear o be

part of the almost timeless demographicpattern of CentralAsia since accordingto al-Biruni

they were Turks of Tibetanorigindescendantover sixty generations rom Kanik,Kanishkaof

the Kushandynasty, who in turn were the (Lesser)Yueh Chihfrom the north-easternCentral

Asian steppes. The same pattern repeateditself some centuriesafter the IslamicConquestin

the Mongolconquest beginningwith GengisKhan.

A little before this, however, about the beginning of the 8th century, central/southern

Afghanistan became dependent on Zabul, presumably the Dhabulistan/Zabulistan uotedabove. It is, therefore, our preliminary uppositionthat the hoard from Kandahar'sBuddhist

monument might belong to these very rulers of Zabulistanand that the settlement below theshrinesurvived,perhapsas a lesser town thanbefore,for the time being.

Subsequent history of central/southernAfghanistanis representedin the Turki Shahis

alreadynoted above, who were succeededby the HinduShahisruling romKabul.YaqubtookKabul in 870 and more or less marked the beginningof at least generalreligiousstability.

Strong Islamic rulers established themselves at Ghazni after one Alptegintook the fort there

in 962. He was a Turkishslaveand by name at least relatedto the Turki Shahis. He was suc-

ceeded by his generalSebuktegin(977-97) in a domainthat was to become the Ghaznavid

Empire.

Here we may be able to link this albeit vaguechain of events and its series of politicalentities more directly to Kandahar.Mapsof WesternAsia retainthe name of an Islamiccity

enticingly close to Kandaharup to the 18th century (Fischer 1967:191) and that city name

is Tecniabad/Tiginabad/Takin-abad:he city of Tiginor Takin.Mightthis not be a foundation



350 S. W.Helms

or rather re-naming of a city controlled by the Turki Shahis? or a little before that by Turkic

rulers, perhaps including those of Zabulistan? Islamic sources might provide further localization.

a^~ L^ ~suratsijista5n ^

IN, har|?

ana

z2aran1.jr I T azna

fl--- ^ ^asfanjay

Ikish lh sh Figure 4 Islam Atlas - surat Sijistan.

kishsh

The earliest geographical compilation referring to the landscape during the 9th and 10thcenturies - that is, as close to the time under discussion as we can get- is an atlas of the

Islamic world, based on various itineraries (cf. Miller 1926). There the name ar-rukhkhajappears

together with iqlim rukhkhaj - specifically 'region' or 'district' of 'Arachosia' - as well as the

unequivocal identification of Bust-Banj(a)way-G(h)azna on a map of Seistan (surat Sijistan)

(Fig. 4). Al-Qunduhar is not mentioned.

The 10th-century writer al-Istakhri (died 951) describes the route from Bost to Ghazna in

al-masalik wa'l-mamalik as follows: Bost to Banjaway, the capital of ar-Rukhkhaj (my italics),

four days and then one more day to Takin-abad. If Banj(a)way is identified with the modern

place Panjway (cf. Fischer 1967: Vasaseneyi Samhita 44, 11 'pafica nadya1i Sarasvatim (?Old

Iranian HaraxVaiti) apiyanti' = 'five rivers flow to Sarasvati', Sarasvati = Arghandab just asthe name Panjab denotes such a system further east), some 20 kilometres west of Old Kandhar,

Takin-abad/Tiginabad lies one march beyond, which is very close indeed to our ruin field,

perhaps no more than 10 kilometres further east. I have taken roughly equal distances per day

and this is not necessarily a hard rule since slightly longer marches can be derived from other

itineraries. Thus Baihaqi, writing in the 11th century, gives the route from Ghazna to Herat:

Ghazna to Tiginabad ten days, Tiginabad to Bost four days - and now no mention of Banj(a)way.

Figure 5 illustrates how Old Kandahar is very nicely 'bracketed' by the two itineraries. But

given such basically inaccurate measurements, can one really make a definite identification?

Probably not: although our coin hoard has made the idea of Takin-abad/Tiginabad as an im-

portant southern Turkic city close to our ruin field more than likely. Furthermore, as I noted

earlier, there is a remarkable conservatism in the various place-names of the immediate region

about Old Kandahar; or rather, a striking thematic continuity.



Kandahar of the Arab conquest 351

Figure5 Kandaharegion(tariq ar-rukhkhaj);tinerariesof al-Istakhri ndBaihaqi.

To conclude this preliminary urveyof the earlyIslamicperiodat OldKandahar,et us take

this questionof toponymy a step further.Marquart nd De Groot (1915) suggesteda relation

between Banj(a)wayand Takin-Abad n the dual ar-rukhkhajainn a verse by Abu'l-'Udafir

(cf. Ibn Hurdadhbahand al-Mas'uidi).Banj(a)wayand Takin-abad/Tiginabadould have been

twin cities or even twin capitalsof the provinceor district of ar-Rukhkhaj.On the other hand

they could representcities on either side of a boundary:Zabulistan o the east andSeistanto

the west. And, finally, one could advancethe argument hat this abundanceof related names

may all have applied to our ruin field at one time or anotherand when conditionschangedhave been transferred o lesser settlementsnearby,the namestransmitted ess throughpoliticalmotivation than simply folk memory. In this way one might repeat another of Fischer's

(1967) lists of names,all of whichshare he root 'white': Isidore's IvSt&KAevKr]whiteIndia',the 18th-century white city' (Arne 1947), Ispingajor 'whiteplace' of al-Idrisi(ca. AD 1154)= Asfijai or Asfanjay (Atlas of Islam: surat Sijistan)and even the ChineseChih-p'an AD

1267-71: cf. Herrmann1922). With Pottinger's (1817) Ispeentigh we might tighten the

'toponymicalcircle'aboutOld Kandahar ndequatetigh with tigin.

2.vii. 1982 Institute of Archaeology

London

References

Arne, T. J. 1947. A plan of Qandahar.Imago Mundi. 4: 73f.

Babur. See Leyden.

Baihaqi, Abi 'l-Fadhl Muhammad b. Husain. Ta'rikh-i Baihaqi. In Encyclopaedia of Islam,

1913, vol. I. pt 2, p. 592.



352 S. W.Helms

al-Baladhuri, Ahmad ibn Yahya ibn Jabir. Kitdb futuh al-buldan. Liber expugnationis regionumauctore . . al-Belddsori (ed. M.J. de Goeje; Arabic text). Leiden, 1863-6. Trans. intoGerman by 0. Rescher, E1-Beladori's 'Kitab futuh el-buldan' (Buch der Eroberung der

Ldnder). Leipzig, 1917-23. For English trans., see Hitti.

Bernard, P. 1974. Un probl&medu toponymie antique dans l'Asie Centrale: les noms anciens de

Qandahar. Studia Iranica. 3: 171f.

Beveridge, A. S. 1922. (tr.) The Bdbur-ndma. 2 vols. London.

Chabot, J.-B. 1902. Synodikon Orientale ou Recueil des synodes nestoriens. Paris.

Chereffedin Ali. 1723. The History of Timur-Bec . . . (tr. French; tr. English). 2 vols. London.

Crowe, Y. 1978. Ceramic finds dating to the Islamic period. Afghan Studies. I:49ff.

Darmesteter, M.J. 1890. La grande inscription de Qandahar.Journal Asiatique. 8, s6r. 15: 195f.

Ferrier, J. P. 1857. CaravanJourneys. London.

Fischer, K. 1967. 'AXecavbaporoXtsp7p0rporoMXtApaxwciao: Zur Lage von Kandahar an

Landesverbindungen zwischen Iran und Indien. Bonner Jahrbiicher. 167: 129f.

Fischer, K., Morgenstern, D. and Thewalt V. 1976. Nimruz, vol. 1. Bonn.

Fraser, P. M. 1979. The son of Aristonax at Kandahar. Afghan Studies. 2: 9ff.

Goebl, R. 1968. Sasanidische Numismatik. Brunswick.

ibn Hauqal (Muhammad), Abu 'l-Qasim an-Nasibi. Kitdb surat al-ardh (ed. M.J. de Goeje).Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum. 2 vols. Leiden, 1938-9.

Helms, S.W. 1978. The British Excavations at Old Kandahar: Preliminary Report of the Work

of 1977. Report submitted to the Afghan Institute of Archaeology, Kabul.

Helms, S.W. 1979a. OldKandaharexcavations 1976: Preliminary Report. Afghan Studies. 2: If.

Helms, S.W. 1979b. The British Excavations at Old Kandhar: Preliminary Report of the Work

of 1978. Report submitted to the Afghan Institute of Archaeology, Kabul.

Helms, S. W. 1982. Excavations at 'The City and the famous fortress of Kandahar, the foremost

Place in all of Asia'. Afghan Studies. 3-4: Iff.

Helms, S.W., ed., in prep. Excavations at Old Kandahar 1976-8. Society for Afghan Studies.

Herrmann, A. 1922. Die Westldnderin der chinesischen Kartographie.

Hitti, P. K. 1916. The Origins of the Islamic State. A trans. of al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-buldan.

New York.

ibn Hurdadhbah. See Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum. 6, Leiden, 1889.

al-Idrisi. See Miller 1926.

Isidore of Charax. Parthian Stations. Geog. Graeci Min. (ed. C. C. Muller). Tabula X: Isidori

Mansiones Parthiae. Paris, 1855. For text and trans. see Schoff.

al-Istakhri, Ibrdhim ibn Muhammad (Abu Ishaq) al-Farisi. Al-masdlik wa'l-mamdlik. Istakhri's

Geography. (ed. 'Abd al-Al al-Hini; Arabic text). Cairo, 1961. Cf. Bibliotheca GeographorumArabicorum. I (masalik al-mamalik) (ed. M. J. de Goeje, Leiden, 1870; repr. 1927).

Leyden, J. (tr.) 1921. Memoirs of Jehlr-ed-Din Muhammad Bdbur .. (rev. L. King). 2 vols.

London.

Lockhart, L. 1938. Nadir Shah. London.



Kandahar of the Arab conquest 353

MacDowall, D.W. 1978. Coin finds. Afghan Studies. I: 50ff.

MacDowall, D. W., in prep. Pre-Islamic coins. In Helms, ed., in prep.

McNicoll, A. 1978. Excavations at Kandahar, 1975: Second Preliminary Report. AfghanStudies. 1: 41 f.

Marquart,J. and de Groot, J. J. M. 1915. Das Reich Zabul (Festschrift Eduard Sachau). Berlin.

al-Mas'udi, Abu'l-Hasan 'Ali b. al-Husain. Ed. Ahmad, S. Maqbul and Rahman, A., Al-Mas'uidi

Millenary Commemoration Volume. Aligarh, 1960.

al-Mas'iidi. (Ed. & tr. C. Barbier de Meynard). Paris, 1874. vol. 8.

Miller, K. 1916. Itineraria Romana. Stuttgart.

Miller, K. 1926. Mappae Arabicae. Stuttgart.

Muqaddasi, Shams ad-Din Abu 'Abd-Allah Muhammad b. Ahmad ... al-Bashshar.Kitdb ahsanat-Tdqdsim fi Ma'rifat al-Aqalim (ed. M.J. de Goeje). Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabi-

corum. 3. Leiden, 1906.

Murgotten, F. C. 1924. The Origins of the Islamic State. Part II. New York and London.

Pliny. Natural History. D. Detlefsen, Die geographischen BiScher der Naturalis Historia des C.

Plinius Secundus (II, 242-VI Schluss). Quellen und Forschungen zur alten Geschichte und

Geographie, pt. 9. Berlin, 1904.

Pottinger, H. 1817. Reisen durch Beloochistan und Sinde . . . Weimar.

Rawlinson, H. C. 1849. Notes on the Persian inscriptions at Behistun. Journal of the Royal

Asiatic Society. 11.Rawlinson, H. C. 1873. Notes on Seistan. Journal of the Royal Geographical Society. 43:

272-94.

Rescher, 0. 1917-23. See al-Baladhuri.

ibn Rusta, Abu Ali Muhammad b. 'Umar. Kitab al-'Aldq an-nafisa (ed. M. J. de Goeje). Biblio-theca Geographorum Arabicorum. 3. Leiden, 1906.

Schoff, W.H. 1914. Parthian Stations by Isidore of Charax. Philadelphia.

at-Tabba, 'Abd Allah Anis and at-Tabba, Umar Anis. 1959. Futu-h al-bulddn (A History of theArab Conquest). Arabic text, vol. 5.

Tabula Peutingeriana (ed. K. Miller). Die Peutingersche Tafel ... oder Weltkarte des Castorius.Ravensburg, 1887-8 (new ed., Stuttgart, 1962).

Tarn, W. W. 1951. The Greeks in Bactria and India. Cambridge.

Tavernier, J. P. 1676. Les six voyages de Jean-Baptiste Tavernier . . . qu'il a fait en Turquie, enPerse et aux Indes ... 2 vols (ed. Gervaise Clouzier and Claude Barbin). Paris (Kandahar:Book V, ch. 24: 693.) English trans. V. Ball, Travels in India . .. Translated from the originalFrench edition of 1676. London, 1889.

Vogelsang, W. 1981. Kandahar and Arachosia in the Early Achaemenid Period. Doctoral thesis,Leiden.

Whitehouse, D. 1978. Excavations at Kandahar, 1974: First Preliminary Report. AfghanStudies. 1: 9f.

Yaqut ibn 'abd Allah, al-Hamawi. Mu'jam al-bulddn (ed. H. F. Wiistenfeld, Jacut's Geo-

graphisches Wirterbuch). 6 vols. Leipzig, 1866-73.



354 S. W. Helms

Abstract

Helms, S. W.

Kandahar of the Arab conquest

Old Kandahar is a large, impressive ruin field near Afghanistan's modern 'second' city, bearing

the same name. For years the site has been central to many arguments about the most ancient

geography and history of the region. It has been identified with an Alexandria/Alexandropolis,

referring to the conquest of Alexander the Great.

For the Islamic period the excavations on behalf of the Society for Afghan Studies have

revealed some striking new evidence, particularly for the period of the Arab Conquest during

the later 7th and early 8th century. This paper outlines some of these emerging new argumentsand suggests some tentative additions to the long story of the toponymy of Central Asian cities.

Documents

Kandahar of the Arab Conquest