Volume II Part 159 (2/2)

”There was much to support the belief that the final abandonment of the settlement was brought about by difficulties of irrigation.” (_A Third Journey of Exploration in Central Asia_, 1913-16, _Geog. Jour._, Aug.-Sept., 1916, pp. 38-39.)

M. Ivanov (_Isviestia_ Petrograd Academy, 1909) thinks that the ruined city of Kara Khoto, a part at the Mongol period of the Yi-tsi-nai circuit, could be its capital, and was at the time of the Si Hia and the beginning of the Mongols, the town of Hei shui. It also confirms my views.

Kozlov found (1908) in a stupa not far from Kara Khoto a large number of Si Hia books, which he carried back to Petrograd, where they were studied by Prof. A. IVANOV, _Zur Kenntniss der Hsi-hsia Sprache_ (_Bul. Ac. Sc.

Pet._, 1909, pp. 1221-1233). See _The Si-hia Language_, by B. LAUFER (_T'oung Pao_, March, 1916, pp. 1-126).

XLVI., p. 226. ”Originally the Tartars dwelt in the north on the borders of Chorcha.”

Prof. Pelliot calls my attention that Ramusio's text, f. 13 _v_, has: ”Essi habitauano nelle parti di Tramontana, cioe in Giorza, _e Bargu_, doue sono molte pianure grandi ...”

XLVI., p. 230.

TATAR.

”Mr. Rockhill is quite correct in his Turkish and Chinese dates for the first use of the word _Tatar_, but it seems very likely that the much older eponymous word _T'atun_ refers to the same people. The Toba History says that in A.D. 258 the chieftain of that Tartar Tribe (not yet arrived at imperial dignity) at a public durbar read a homily to various chiefs, pointing out to them the mistake made by the Hiung-nu (Early Turks) and 'T'a-tun fellows' (Early Mongols) in raiding his frontiers. If we go back still further, we find the _After Han History_ speaking of the 'Middle T'atun'; and a scholion tells us _not to p.r.o.nounce the final 'n.'_ If we pursue our inquiry yet further back, we find that _T'ah-tun_ was originally the name of a Sien-pi or Wu-hwan (apparently Mongol) Prince, who tried to secure the _shen-yu_ s.h.i.+p for himself, and that it gradually became (1) a t.i.tle, (2) and the name of a tribal division (see also the _Wei Chi_ and the _Early Han History_). Both _Sien-pi_ and _Wu-hwan_ are the names of mountain haunts, and at this very day part of the Russian Liao-tung railway is styled the 'Sien-pi railway' by the native Chinese newspapers.” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p.

141.)

Page 231, note 3. Instead of _Yuche_, read _Juche_.

XLVI., p. 232.

KARACATHAYANS.

”There seems to be no doubt that Kerman in South Persia is the city to which the Kara-Cathayan refugee fled from China in 1124; for Major Sykes, in his recent excellent work on Persia, actually mentions [p. 194] the Kuba Sabz, or 'Green Dome,' as having been (until destroyed in 1886 by an earthquake) the most conspicuous building, and as having also been the tomb of the Kara-Khitai Dynasty. The late Dr. Bretschneider (_N. China B.

R. As. Soc. Journal_, Vol. X., p. 101) had imagined the Kara-Cathayan capital to be Kermine, lying between Samarcand and Bokhara (see _Asiatic Quart. Rev._ for Dec., 1900, 'The Cathayans'). Colonel Yule does not appear to be quite correct when he states (p. 232) that 'the Gurkhan himself is not described to have extended his conquests into Persia,' for the Chinese history of the Cathayan or Liao Dynasties distinctly states that at Samarcand, where the Cathayan remained for ninety days, the 'King of the Mohammedans' brought tribute to the emigrant, _who then went West as far as K'i-r-man_, where he was proclaimed Emperor by his officers.

This was on the fifth day of the second moon in 1124, in the thirty-eighth year of his age, and he then a.s.sumed the t.i.tle of _Koh-r-han_” (E.H.

Parker, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, pp. 134-5.)

XLVI., p. 236.

KERAITS.

”In his note to Vol. I., p. 236, M. Cordier [read Mr. Rockhill], who seems to have been misled by d'Avezac, confuses the Ch'ih-leh or T'ieh-leh (who have been clearly proved to be identical with the Tolos of the Turkish inscriptions) with the much later K'eh-lieh or Keraits of Mongol history; at no period of Chinese history were the Ch'ih-leh called, as he supposes, _K'i-le_ and therefore the Ch'ih-leh of the third century cannot possibly be identified with the K'e-lieh of the thirteenth. Besides, the 'value' of _leh_ is 'luck,' whilst the 'value' of _lieh_ is 'leet,' if we use English sounds as equivalents to ill.u.s.trate Chinese etymology. It is remarkable that the Kin (Nuchen) Dynasty in its Annals leaves no mention whatever of the Kerait tribe, or of any tribe having an approximate name, although the _Yuan Sh_ states that the Princes of that tribe used to hold a Nuchen patent. A solution of this unexplained fact may yet turn up.” (E.H.

PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan. 1904, p. 139.)

Page 236, note [dagger] Instead of _Tura_, read _Tula_. (PELLIOT.)

LI., pp. 245, 248.

DEATH OF CHINGIZ KHAN.

”Gaubil's statement that he was wounded in 1212 by a stray arrow, which compelled him to raise the siege of Ta-t'ung Fu, is exactly borne out by the _Yuan Sh_, which adds that in the seventh moon (August) of 1227 (shortly after the surrender of the Tangut King) the conqueror died at the travelling-palace of Ha-la T'u on the Sa-li _stream_ at the age of sixty-six (sixty-five by our reckoning). As less than a month before he was present at Ts'ing-shui (lat. 34-1/2, long. 106-1/2), and was even on his dying bed, giving instructions how to meet the Nuchen army at T'ung-kwan (lat. 34-1/2, long. 110-1/4), we may a.s.sume that the place of his death was on the Upper Wei River near the frontiers joining the modern Kan Suh and Shen Si provinces. It is true the Sa-li _River_ (not stream) is thrice mentioned, and also the Sa-le-chu River, both in Mongolia; on the other hand, the Sa-li Ouigours are frequently mentioned as living in West Kan Suh; so that we may take it the word _Sali_ or _Sari_ was a not uncommon Turkish word. Palladius' identification, of _K'i-lien_ with 'Kerulen' I am afraid cannot be entertained. The former word frequently occurs in the second century B.C., and is stated to be a second Hiung-nu (Turkish) word for 'sky' or 'heaven.' At or about that date the Kerulen was known to the Chinese as the Lu-ku River, and the geographies of the present dynasty clearly identify it as such. The T'ien-Shan are sometimes called the K'i-lien Shan, and the word _K'i-lien_ is otherwise well established along the line of the Great Wall.” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, pp. 136-7.)

Prof. Pelliot informs me that in No. 3 (Sept., 1918) of Vol. III of _Chinese Social and Political Science Review_ these is an article on the _Discovery of and Investigation concerning the Tomb of Gengis Khan_. I have not seen it.

LI., p. 249.

<script>