Carl Sagan famously said that you have to know the past to understand the present. As the inheritors of the Dhārmika civilization, to understand the present, we must go back to where it all began – Mūlasthāna, a place we are guilty of forgetting.
An Old Fort of Dharma
The origin of the great Bhāratīya civilization is widely acknowledged to date back to antiquity. However, the question of which city in the region of Bhāratavarśa has been continuously inhabited for the longest period, remains unresolved. Multan, formerly known as Mūlasthāna, Sāmbapurā, Mūlasthāna, and Prahlādapurī, is widely believed to be the oldest city in the Indian subcontinent, with an estimated antiquity of 3000-2800 BC according to Ahmad Nabi Khan’s book “Multan: History and Architecture”. This estimation, however, is just a glimpse into Multan’s distant past, as its true age has been muddied by the passage of time. Today, the city of Multan finds itself in Pakistan, following the partition of India in 1947, and for most Indians today, the memory of this city itself has become a hazy one.
Multan was historically a bustling city located at the crossroads of important trade routes. To get a sense of what ancient Multan was like, imagine a city with narrow, winding streets lined with vibrant bazaars, populated by merchants and traders, selling everything from exotic spices and textiles to precious gems and jewelry. The air is filled with the sounds of bargaining and the smell of spices. In the center of the city stands a majestic temple, a symbol of the city’s religious importance. Around the temple are grand buildings and mansions, constructed from gleaming red bricks and decorated with intricate carvings and mosaics. The city is surrounded by high walls, giving it a fortress-like appearance and providing protection from invaders. Beyond the walls are lush green fields, dotted with farms and orchards, stretching as far as the eye can see. The Chenab River flows nearby, providing a source of irrigation and water for the city’s residents. In this ancient city, one can see the blend of different cultures, reflected in the architecture, art, and customs of its people. Ancient Multan was truly a city of great beauty and importance, and a visual feast for the senses.
So, what do Dhārmika scriptures tell us about the origins of Multan? According to tradition, the city was founded as Kaśyapapurī by the sage Kaśyapa, a descendant of Brahma, and the son of Manu. Its ancient heritage is confirmed by numerous archaeological sites in the area dating back to the Early Harappan period of the Sindhu-Sarasvatī civilization. This same city is described as Kaspapuros by Hekatues, Kaspaturos by Herodotus, and Kaspeira by Ptolemy. The Mahābhārata mentions Multan as the capital of the Trigarta Kingdom, ruled by the Katoch dynasty, during the Kurukṣetra War.
Additionally, Multan is considered to have been the capital of King Hiraṇyakaśipu of the Kāśyapa gotra and was later renamed Prahlādpurī after his son Prahlāda became king. It is thought that the Hindu festival of Holī originated from the Prahlādpurī Temple in Multan. (Gazetteer of the Multan District, 1923-24 Sir Edward Maclagan, Punjab (Pakistan). 1926. pp. 276– 77.)
The name Multan is derived from the Sanskrit word “Mūlasthāna,” meaning “the place of origin.” Some believe that it was one of the earliest settlements in the region and may have even been the birthplace of Hindu Dharma. Dr. D.S. Triveda, for instance, proposes that the original home of the Vedic Aryans, who considered the Sapta-Sindhu their home, was near the Devikā River in Multan. This is not a consensus view, however.
Another version of the city’s origin story involves King Uśīnara of the Ānava (Anu lineage), who divided a kingdom on the eastern border of the Punjab among his five sons. Śibi, one of the sons, eventually became the ruler of Multan. He went on to conquer the entire Punjab region, except for the northwest corner, and established four separate kingdoms through his sons: the Vṛṣadarbhās in Multan, the Sauvīras in Sind, the Kekayas in the districts of Gujarat and Shahpur between the Jhelum and Chenab rivers (the Chaj doab), and the Madrakas, with their capital in Sakala (modern-day Sialkot), in the Lahore division of Punjab. According to the Mahābhārata, Śibi was renowned for his honesty, and a story about his truthfulness and compassion is recorded. The tale recounts how Śibi protected a dove from a hawk that sought to make it its midday meal, offering his own flesh from his thigh as a substitute meal for the hawk.
Multan has also uncovered coins belonging to the Yaudheyas. The Yaudheyas were a powerful and influential republican tribe in the area who claimed to be a warrior clan descended from King Yuddhiṣṭhira of the Pāṇdavas. The warrior-related forms Yodheya and Yaudheya are descended from Yodha. (Majumdar, R. C. (Ed.). (1973). History and culture of the Indian people (Vol. 2). Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.)
Looking up to Sūrya Bhagavān
Multan in antiquity was home to a saṃpradāya dedicated to the Sun God Sūrya, centered around the Multan Sun Temple. The significance of the Sun Temple was such that it was noted by Greek Admiral Skylax during his journey through the region in 515 BCE, as well as by the Greek historian Herodotus in the 5th century BCE. (R. C. Majumdar, J. N. Chaudhuri, G. S. Sardesai, The History And Culture Of The Indian People (11 Vol. Set), 1977.)
The earliest Hindu text that mentions a Sūrya-worshiping sampradāya is the Sāmba Purāṇa, and the associated legend can also be found in the Bhaviṣya Purāṇa and a twelfth-century inscription in Eastern India. The story says that Sāmba, who was cursed and had become a leper, sought Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s help to restore his youth. Kṛṣṇa told him that only the Sun God Sūrya had the power to do so. Following Ṛṣi Nārada’s advice, Sāmba went to the forests of Mitravan on the banks of Candrabhāga, which was already considered a sacred place for Sūrya worship. There, he propitiated Sūrya and received boons of cure and eternal fame, with the condition that he build Sūrya temples. According to the Bhaviṣya Purāṇa, Sūrya specifically instructed that the temples be installed at the banks of Candrabhāga, where he would reside permanently. The next day, Sāmba received an icon of Sūrya while bathing and established the first Sun Temple in Sāmbapurā. Sāmbapurā is believed to be the same as Multan, and the temple is referred to as the eponymous institution. A different legend suggests that the temple was built by the Hindu king Vikramāditya. This temple is also known as the Ādityanātha temple. (Jain, M. (2019). Flight of Deities and Rebirth of Temples: Episodes from Indian History. Aryan Books International.)
The belief in the divinity of the Sun has been passed down from Vaidika times and is still practiced today by the Saura tradition. Ancient coins and medallions, such as a human bust of the Sun with stamens representing his rays, suggest that Sūrya was a widely worshiped deity as early as the third century BC. Greek writers and Kuṣāna coins featuring the name and image of the Sun attest to Sūrya’s continued popularity in later periods. Sūrya is a prominent figure in Itihāsas, with descriptions of his ornaments and family life, including his wives and children, as well as his various adventures. The Gāyatrī Mantra, one of the most sacred in Hinduism, is dedicated to the Sun. Additionally, the Chaṭh Pooja is a popular religious event in Bihar that involves prayer and fasting in honor of the Sun, has been practiced for centuries and continues to this day, further emphasizing the historical significance of sun worship.
The people of Multan are believed to have been protected from conquest and subjugation by the blessings of Sūrya. Even Alexander’s invasion of the city proved to be his downfall. Legend has it that during the battle for the city, Alexander was struck by a poisoned arrow which eventually led to his illness and death. The exact spot where the arrow hit Alexander can still be seen in the old city, as recorded by the Chinese traveler Xuánzàng during his visit to Multan in 641 AD.
During Xuánzàng’s visit in 641 CE, it was the only Sūrya temple in the region. He wrote: “Very magnificent and profusely decorated. The image of the Sūrya-deva is cast in yellow gold and ornamented with rare gems. Women play their music, light their torches, offer their flowers and perfumes to it. The kings and high families of the five Indies never fail to make their offerings of gems and precious stones. They have founded a house of mercy, in which they provide food and drink, and medicines for the poor and sick, affording succor and sustenance. Men from all countries come here to offer up their prayers; there are always some thousands doing so. On the four sides of the temple are tanks with flowering groves where one can wander about without restraint.” (Li, R. (2006). The Great Tang Dynasty Record of the Western Regions (W.M. Keck Foundation Series). BDK America.)
The records of Xuánzàng and various Arab travelers from the 7th to 8th centuries shed light on the significance of the Multan temple during that time. Expensive aloe-wood, imported from Cambodia, was offered to the Sūrya God at Multan.
So what happened to the Sūrya temple in Multan, considering that it no longer exists? It’s intriguing to consider how a temple of such significant repute, known throughout the subcontinent as a wealthy pilgrimage site, can be erased without a trace, to the point where its exact location is unknown today, and even its memory no longer exists. To understand this, we must look forward to the 7th century CE.
The Arrival of the Arabs: A Temporary Setback
During the 7th century, Multan, which had been ruled by the Rāi and Chacha dynasties for centuries, experienced its first incursion by Muslim armies. Before that, it was a flourishing town with a booming textile industry. Armies led by Al Muhallab ibn Abi Suffrah, Abdool Ruhman Bin Shimur, and Mohalib Bin Aby-Suffra conducted several raids into India, reaching as far as Multan. However, their raids were largely unsuccessful and their progress towards the east was halted. The Arabs were unable to penetrate India through the Khyber Pass, the Bolan Pass, or along the Makran coast. (Asif, M. A. (2016). A Book of Conquest: The Chachnama and Muslim Origins in South Asia.)
A few decades later, however, Muhammad ibn Qasim would launch another invasion on behalf of the Arabs, marking a turning point in the history of Multan. Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, the governor of Iraq, sent Muhammad ibn Qasim into Sindh and Multan to start the Muslim conquest of India. Hajjaj gave strict instructions to kill anyone belonging to the combatants, arrest their children for hostages, and give protection only to those who convert to Islam. (Derryl N. MacLean, Religion and Society in Arab Sind (Brill, 1989), 37.)
In the early 8th century, the Arab armies invaded Sindh, which had recently ended a period of civil wars and was ruled by Rāja Dahīr. Muhammad ibn Qasim faced strong resistance while conquering Sindh, which took him approximately eight months. He encountered difficulties in several towns, including Alor and Brāhmanābād. During the process, he killed many and enslaved thousands of people. Those who were capable of bearing arms were beheaded, while the rest were put in chains.
The Muslim invaders treated the native population harshly and offered the choice of conversion to Islam or death. (Derryl N. MacLean, Religion and Society in Arab Sind (Brill, 1989), 37.) Brāhmanābād’s residents abandoned the fort out of fear for their lives. However, not all Sindhis were willing to surrender, and the invaders massacred thousands of them. As the religious war continued, it proved impractical to offer all Indians the choice of conversion or death, and an adjustment was made to grant the Hindus the status of People of the Book (Ahl al-kitab). The jizya was demanded from the Hindus and their submission was accepted, with the ultimate goal of converting them to Islam. Hindu temples were considered to be centers of idolatry and were destroyed whenever possible. At Daybul, Muhammad ibn Qasim destroyed a Hindu temple and had the Brāhmins circumcised and converted to Islam. However, seeing their resistance, he ordered all those over 17 to be executed. (Arun Shourie, Harsh Narain, Jay Dubashi, Ram Swarup, and Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them, vol. 1, A Preliminary Survey (Voice of India, 1990), 264.)
The main cities of southern Sindh, Nehrun and Siwistan, showed the least resistance. The conquest of these cities was facilitated by the lack of loyalty among the Buddhist section of society, superstition among some sections of the population, and weak leadership among the ruling dynasty. Muhammad ibn Qasim began encouraging the locals to surrender, but this irritated Hajjaj who wrote to him and criticized his policies. (B. R. Ambedkar, Thoughts on Pakistan (Thacker and Company Ltd., 1941), 50.)
Following his conquest of Sindh, Muhammad ibn Qasim crossed the Beas and laid siege to the city of Multan for two months, as it was one of the most important trading centers of the Indian subcontinent at the time. However, the city was heavily fortified, and its inhabitants were not willing to lay down their arms so easily. Despite facing a shortage of supplies, the local ruler Rāja Dahīr managed to hold off Muhammad’s army. During the prolonged siege, Muhammad’s army had run out of provisions and was resorting to eating donkeys. Despite the Hindus’ refusal to surrender, a traitor from the city eventually betrayed Multan.
This Multanī informant told Muhammad about an underground canal that provided sustenance to the city. (Flood, Finbarr Barry (2009). Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval “Hindu-Muslim” Encounter) Taking advantage of this information, Muhammad had the canal blocked, which led to the surrender of Multan. The able-bodied men were massacred, but the children, women and temple ministers, numbering 6,000, were taken captive.
The Muslim invaders discovered a treasure of gold in a chamber that was ten cubits long and eight cubits wide and took it home. Muhammad ibn Qasim infamously looted and transported to Basra 330 chests of treasure, including 13,300 pounds of gold, from the Adityanath temple. The city became known as the “City of Gold” or the “Frontiers of Gold” among Arab geographers until the 14th century due to the acquisition of wealth, either through looting or revenue.
In the 9th century, Aḥmad Ibn Yahya Ibn Jabir Al Biladuri wrote in his work Futuhu al-Buldan about the Arab conquest of Multan and how they acquired a substantial amount of gold from the temple’s halls. He writes, “The Musulmans found there much gold in a chamber 10 cubits long by 8 cubits broad, and there was an aperture above, through which the gold was poured into the chamber.”
Despite the conquest, most of the city’s population remained non-Muslim and resisted conversion for several decades under Umayyad rule. After this initial victory, the Arabs struggled to maintain control, and in a short amount of time, much of Sindh was lost. They were eventually limited to the small states of Brāhmanābād and Multan in the 9th and 10th centuries. That is all the Arabs had to show for three centuries of relentless effort. This limited success, compared to their conquests in the Middle East, Europe, and Persia, was due to the superior military strength and political organization of the Indians.
The Arab conquest of Sindh was not due to their superior military might, but rather, it was their only successful campaign on Indian soil. After their conquest, they faced defeats in conflicts with powerful Indian states. For instance, one Arab army sent to invade North India suffered a major defeat at the hands of Nāgabhaṭṭa I of the Imperial Pratihāra dynasty that was ruling the region then, while another army that entered Lata in South Gujarat was defeated by Pulakeśina Avanijanāśraya in a battle near Navsari.
An Emirate, and a Site of Blackmail
After Muhammad ibn Qasim’s conquest, Multan was ruled by Muslims, but it functioned as an independent state known as the Emirate of Multan from 855 AD. The 10th-century Arab geographer Al-Muqaddasi noted that the Multan Sun Temple was in a bustling area of the city, between the ivory and coppersmith bazaars (Shourie et al., Hindu Temples.). The temple was a major source of revenue for the Muslim rulers, drawing large numbers of pilgrims and contributing up to 30% of the state’s revenue. They allowed the temple to exist but hung a piece of cow’s flesh on the deity’s neck in order to humiliate the Hindus to whom the cow was sacred (Shourie et al., Hindu Temples.).
Al-Biruni in his book Kitab al-Hind described the temple’s deity as a wooden statue covered in red leather and with two red rubies for eyes, and even stated that it was built during the Krita Yuga. Abu Rihan relates that the temple and the statue of the Sun, which existed before his time, were said by the people to be 216,432 years old.
In addition to being a major source of revenue for the Arab state, the mūrti of Adityanāth in Multan was also used as a defensive measure. Whenever Hindu Rajas attacked to reclaim the city, the Arabs would display the revered deity on the fort wall and threaten to break it. The Pratihāras were influential in North Indian politics at the time and served as a barrier against the Muslims in the Sindhu valley. Muslim writers believed the Pratihāras were the greatest enemies of the Muslims and could easily defeat them. Al-Masudi writes, “When the unbelievers march against Multan and the faithful do not feel themselves strong enough to oppose them, they threaten to break their idol and their enemies immediately withdraw.” Istakhri, who makes a similar statement, adds that “otherwise the Indians would have destroyed Multan.” (Majumdar, R. C. (1956). Arab invasion of India. Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.)
The Muslims leveraged the Hindu Pratihāras religious beliefs to avoid destruction. It seems that the Pratihāras were not fully aware of the Muslim threat, as they let their religious beliefs stop them from defeating the Muslim rule in India, which they had the ability to do.
The Hindu leaders of the Pratihāras and Shāhi dynasties failed to act against the Muslim conquerors due to their lack of foresight, statesmanship, and rationality. They could have easily conquered Multan and defended India against the danger of Muslim invasion, but either they were ignorant of the political situation or too parochial in their thinking. The lack of knowledge of the outside world or failure to understand contemporary events, of the kind of societal storm that Islamic rule was, was the main cause of their indifference to the danger that eventually overwhelmed them.
The Rāṣṭrakūṭas (who ruled over large parts of the Deccan at the time), however, took a different approach and befriended the Muslims, giving them opportunities to settle in their territory, build mosques, and be governed by their own governors. This attitude of religious tolerance was uncommon in the world at that time and showed a stark contrast to the destructiveness of the Muslim invaders.
Multan was later captured by the Qarmatian chief, Jalem, the son of Shaiban, when the priests of the Sun Temple were massacred, the deity was broken to pieces, and the temple itself was turned into a mosque. (Shourie et al., Hindu Temples.)
Slipping Away: The Slow Retreat of Dharma
In the early 11th century, Multan was attacked twice by Mahmud of Ghazni. Later, it is believed that a mosque known as Jami Masjid was constructed on the same site as the temple. A single traitor had initiated this entire sequence of events.
The Sun Temple and its deity were however soon restored by the religious zeal of the Hindus. When Al Idrisi of Morocco wrote about Multan in 1130 AD, the worship of the Sun God was as flourishing as ever. The extract from Nuzhat al Musthak of Al Idrisi reads, “Multan is close upon India; some authors indeed, place it in that country. It equals Brāhmanābād in size and is called the house of gold. There is an idol here, which is highly venerated by the Indians, who come on pilgrimages to visit it from the most distant parts of the country, and make offerings of valuables, ornaments, and immense quantities of perfumes. This idol is surrounded by its servants and slaves, who feed and dress upon the produce of these rich offerings. It is in the human form with four sides and is sitting upon a seat made of bricks and plaster. It is entirely covered with a skin like red Morocco leather, so that only the eyes are visible. Some maintain that the interior is made of wood, but others deny this. However it may be, the body is entirely covered. The eyes are formed of precious stones, and upon its head there is a golden crown set with jewels. It is, as we have said, square, and its arms, below the elbows, seem to be four in number. The temple of this idol is situated in the middle of Multan, in the most frequented bazaar. It is a dome-shaped building. The upper part of the dome is gilded, and the dome and the gates are of great solidity. The columns are very lofty and the walls colored. Around the dome are the dwellings of the attendants of the idol, and of those who live upon the produce of that worship of which it is the object.” (Elliot, H. M. (1867). The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians (Vol. 1).)
In 1175, Muhammad of Ghor captured Multan and in 1178, he attempted to invade the Chālukya Kingdom. He sent his envoy to the court of Prithviraj Chauhan to persuade him to come to a peaceful agreement, but Prithviraj refused and Muhammad of Ghor decided to invade his Chāhamāna kingdom. The first battle of Tarain was fought in the winter of 1191 CE, where the Ghurid army was defeated by Prithviraj , who was accompanied by other rulers. Muhammad of Ghor was wounded in the battle, but he retreated and left a garrison at Tabarhindah. Prithviraj Chauhān captured the fort, but did not pursue the Ghurid army. According to the Hammira Mahākāvya, Prithviraj even captured Muhammad of Ghor in the battle but later freed him and let him return to Multan. This proved to be his undoing years later. In 1192, Muhammad of Ghor invaded again, and the second battle of Tarain was fought, ending in a decisive victory for the Ghurids.
The Battle of Tarain is considered a turning point in medieval Indian history as it resulted in the temporary downfall of Rajput power and the establishment of Muslim rule in Northern India, leading to the formation of the Delhi Sultanate.
Multan went on to be ruled by various empires, including the Mamluks and the Tughlaqs. The countryside surrounding Multan was reported to have experienced significant devastation due to the overly high taxes imposed during the rule of Muhammad Tughlaq. Even the Mongols laid siege to Multan at one point. In 1445, it became the capital of the Langah Sultanate and was later conquered by the Mogul Empire in 1526. Under the leadership of the Mogul Akbar, Multan was made into one of the largest provinces of the Mogul Empire.
Saqa Mustad Khan, a Muslim historian, compiled a comprehensive record of Aurangzeb’s military activities using the emperor’s state archives shortly after Aurangzeb’s death in 1707. Benāres, Nādia, Mithilā, Mathurā, Tirhut, Pratiṣṭhāna, Karhaḍa, Ṭhaṭṭā, Multan and Sirhind were the famous seats of Hindu learning at the time. (Roy, S. K. (2018). Education system in India during the Mughals. Research Review International Journal of Multidisciplinary, 3(9), 109.) Multan was famous as a center of specialization in astronomy, astrology, mathematics and medicine. Khan wrote, “In 1669, the Lord Cherisher of the Faith learnt that in the provinces of Ṭhaṭṭā, Multan, and especially at Benāres, the Brāhmaṇa disbelievers used to teach their false books in their established schools, and that admirers and students both Hindu and Muslim, used to come from great distances to these misguided men in order to acquire this vile learning. His Majesty, eager to establish Islam, issued orders to the governors of all the provinces to demolish the schools and temples of the infidels and with the utmost urgency put down the teaching and the public practice of the religion of these misbelievers.” (Shourie et al., Hindu Temples, 279; Goel, The Story of Islamic Imperialism in India, 280.)
In 1666, Jean de Thévenot visited Multan during Aurangzeb’s reign and described a Hindu temple that attracted pilgrims from far and wide, whose offerings contributed to the provincial treasury. He writes, “At Multan there is another fort of Gentiles, whom they call Catry. That town is properly their country, and from thence they spread all over the Indies; but we shall treat of them when we come to speak of the other sects: both the two have in Multan, a Pagod of great consideration, because of the affluence of the people, that came there to perform their devotion after their way; and from all places of Multan, Lahore and other countries, they come thither in pilgrimage. I know not the name of the idol that is worshiped there; the face of it is black, and it is clothed in red leather; it has two pearls in place of eyes; and the Emir or Governor of the country, takes the offerings that are presented to it.” (Thévenot, J. (1687). Relation d’un voyage fait au Levant (English translation: Travels into Diverse Parts of Asia and Africa). Printed for H. Bonwicke, T. Goodwin, M. Wotton, S. Manship, and J. Nicholson.) The description of the idol was similar to that of Istakhri’s description of the Multan Sun Temple, though Thévenot claimed ignorance about the deity’s identity. Al-Idrīsī’s claim that the Sun Temple had been restored was thus corroborated.
In 1853, Alexander Cunningham visited Multan and noted a local tradition blaming Aurangzeb for destroying the temple, though no one could identify its location. There are also contemporary accounts from earlier centuries that corroborate that the Sun Temple again regained its eminence as one of the most important Hindu places of pilgrimage. It is believed to have continued so until it suffered its final destruction at the hands of Aurangzeb in 1666. Cunningham was told that when the Sikhs occupied the town in 1818, they couldn’t find the remains of the temple and converted a venerated tomb into a Gurdwara. Based on etymological arguments, Cunningham believed the recently destroyed Jāmiʿ Masjid to be the most probable site of the temple. (Cunningham, A. (1873). Report for the Year 1872-73. Archaeological Survey of India.) Notably, a stone image of Sūrya was found at the location and is currently kept in an English museum. (Jain, M. (2019). Flight of Deities and Rebirth of Temples: Episodes from Indian History. Aryan Books International.)
An Afghan incursion, a Sikh fightback
Despite repeated invasions, Multan remained northwest India’s premier commercial center throughout most of the 18th century. In the realm of commerce and trade, Hindu merchants still dominated, with merchants from Multan being particularly renowned for their expansive business dealings and abundant wealth. They were frequently sought after by nobles and the bourgeoisie for financial assistance in times of need.
In the following years, it was ruled by the Durrani empire before finally being conquered by the Sikh Empire in 1818. The siege of Multan, as part of the Afghan-Sikh Wars, took place from March to June of 1818, resulting in the capture of Multan by the Sikh Empire from the Durranis. It was the first time in over a millennium that Multan was liberated from Muslim rule, except for the brief period between 1758 and 1760 when the Marathas under Raghunathrao had seized Multan. At the time of the Sikh conquest, its population was still slightly more than half Hindu or Sikh.
In the past, the Sikh Empire had launched multiple assaults on Multan, with the most significant one occurring in 1810. Despite their victories against the defending forces, the governor of Multan, Muzaffar Khan Sadozai, would retreat into the Multan Fort. In previous sieges, the Sikhs accepted large one-time payments of tribute, while the 1810 attack resulted in Multan being required to pay an annual tribute.
In early 1818, the Sikh Empire’s leader, Mahārāja Ranjit Singh, dispatched Misr Diwan Chand to the southwest frontier of the empire to prepare for an invasion of Multan. By January, a robust supply chain was established from the capital, Lahore, to Multan, using boats to transport supplies across the Jhelum, Chenab, and Ravi rivers. Rani Raj Kaur, the consort of Ranjit Singh, was tasked with overseeing the provision of food and ammunition, and ensured the steady flow of grain, horses, and ammunition to Kot Kamalia, a town located between Multan and Lahore.
Misr Diwan Chand launched the campaign in early January by capturing the forts of Nawab Muzaffar Khan at Muzaffargarh and Khangarh. In February, the Sikh forces, led by Misr Diwan Chand and nominally under Kharak Singh, arrived at Multan and demanded that Muzaffar pay the outstanding tribute and surrender the fort. However, Muzaffar refused, and a battle ensued, with the Sikh forces emerging victorious. Despite this, Muzaffar retreated into the fort, and the Sikh army requested additional artillery. Ranjit Singh responded by sending the powerful Zamzama and other artillery pieces, which began bombarding the fort’s walls. Muzaffar and his sons attempted to defend the fort but were killed in the subsequent battle. The successful siege of Multan marked the end of significant Afghan presence in the Peshawar region and eventually led to a series of events that ended in the capture of Peshawar by the Sikhs. When the Sikhs took possession of Multan, there was not a trace left of the old Sūrya Temple. Enraged by this, they turned the tomb of Shams-i-Tabrez into a hall for the reading of the Granth.
