This page contains affiliate links. As Amazon Associates we earn from qualifying purchases.
Language:
Published:
Edition:
Collection:
Buy it on Amazon FREE Audible 30 days

“Wild rhubarb, for which the Nan-shan was famous in Marco Polo’s days, spread its huge fleshy leaves everywhere.” (STEIN, _Ruins of Desert Cathay_, II., p. 305.)

XLIII., p. 218.

SUKCHUR.

The first character of Suchau was pronounced _Suk_ at the time of the T’ang; we find a _Sughciu_ in von Le Coq’s MSS. from Turkestan and _Sughcu_ in the runnic text of W. Thomsen; cf. PELLIOT, _J. As._, Mai-Juin, 1912, p. 591; the pronunciation _Suk_-chau was still used by travellers coming from Central Asia–for instance, by the envoys of Shah Rukh. See _Cathay_, III., p. 126 n.

OF THE CITY OF CAMPICHU.

XLIV., pp. 219 seq. “The Idolaters have many minsters and abbeys after their fashion. In these they have an enormous number of idols, both small and great, certain of the latter being a good ten paces in stature; some of them being of wood, others of clay, and others yet of stone. They are all highly polished, and then covered with gold. The great idols of which I speak lie at length. And round about them there are other figures of considerable size, as if adoring and paying homage before them.”

The ambassadors of Shah Rukh to China (1419-1422) wrote:

“In this city of Kamchau there is an idol temple five hundred cubits square. In the middle is an idol lying at length, which measures fifty paces. The sole of the foot is nine paces long, and the instep is twenty-one cubits in girth. Behind this image and overhead are other idols of a cubit (?) in height, besides figures of _Bakshis_ as large as life. The action of all is hit off so admirably that you would think they were alive. Against the wall also are other figures of perfect execution. The great sleeping idol has one hand under his head, and the other resting on his thigh. It is gilt all over, and is known as _Shakamuni-fu_. The people of the country come in crowds to visit it, and bow to the very ground before this idol” (_Cathay_, I., p. 277).

XLV., p. 223.

OF THE CITY OF ETZINA.

I said, I., p. 225, that this town must be looked for on the river _Hei-shui_ called _Etsina_ by the Mongols, and would be situated on the river on the border of the Desert, at the top of a triangle, whose bases would be Suhchau and Kanchau. My theory seems to be fully confirmed by Sir Aurel Stein, who writes:

“Advantages of geographical position must at all times have invested this extensive riverine tract, limited as are its resources, with considerable importance for those, whether armed host or traders, who would make the long journey from the heart of Mongolia in the north to the Kansu oases. It had been the same with the ancient Lou-lan delta, without which the Chinese could not have opened up the earliest and most direct route for the expansion of their trade and political influence into Central Asia. The analogy thus presented could not fail to impress me even further when I proceeded to examine the ruins of Khara-khoto, the ‘Black Town’ which Colonel Kozloff, the distinguished Russian explorer, had been the first European to visit during his expedition of 1908-1909. There remained no doubt for me then that it was identical with Marco Polo’s ‘City of Etzina.’ Of this we are told in the great Venetian traveller’s narrative that it lay a twelve days’ ride from the city of Kan-chou, ‘towards the north on the verge of the desert; it belongs to the Province of Tangut.’ All travellers bound for Kara-koram, the old capital of the Mongols, had here to lay in victuals for forty days in order to cross the great ‘desert which extends forty days’ journey to the north, and on which you meet with no habitation nor baiting place.’

“The position thus indicated was found to correspond exactly to that of Khara-khoto, and the identification was completely borne out by the antiquarian evidence brought to light. It soon showed me that though the town may have suffered considerably, as local tradition asserts, when Chingiz Khan with his Mongol army first invaded and conquered Kansu from this side about 1226 A.D., yet it continued to be inhabited down to Marco Polo’s time, and partially at least for more than a century later. This was probably the case even longer with the agricultural settlement for which it had served as a local centre, and of which we traced extensive remains in the desert to the east and north-east. But the town itself must have seen its most flourishing times under Tangut or Hsi-hsia rule from the beginning of the eleventh century down to the Mongol conquest.

“It was from this period, when Tibetan influence from the south seems to have made itself strongly felt throughout Kansu, that most of the Buddhist shrines and memorial Stupas dated, which filled a great portion of the ruined town and were conspicuous also outside it. In one of the latter Colonel Kozloff had made his notable find of Buddhist texts and paintings. But a systematic search of this and other ruins soon showed that the archaeological riches of the site were by no means exhausted. By a careful clearing of the debris which covered the bases of Stupas and the interior of temple cellas we brought to light abundant remains of Buddhist manuscripts and block prints, both in Tibetan and the as yet very imperfectly known old Tangut language, as well as plenty of interesting relievos in stucco or terra-cotta and frescoes. The very extensive refuse heaps of the town yielded up a large number of miscellaneous records on paper in the Chinese, Tangut, and Uigur scripts, together with many remains of fine glazed pottery, and of household utensils. Finds of Hsi-hsia coins, ornaments in stone and metal, etc., were also abundant, particularly on wind-eroded ground.

“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 pronounce 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-yue_ ship for himself, and that it gradually became (1) a title, (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 assumed the title 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 Toeloes 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 illustrate Chinese etymology. It is remarkable that the Kin (Nuechen) Dynasty in its Annals leaves no mention whatever of the Kerait tribe, or of any tribe having an approximate name, although the _Yuean Shi_ states that the Princes of that tribe used to hold a Nuechen 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 _Yuean Shi_, 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 deg., long. 106-1/2 deg.), and was even on his dying bed, giving instructions how to meet the Nuechen army at T’ung-kwan (lat. 34-1/2 deg., long. 110-1/4 deg.), we may assume 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-kue 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.

TAILGAN.

“The _tailgan_, or autumn meeting of the Mongols, is probably the _tai-lin_, or autumn meeting, of the ancient Hiung-nu described on p. 10, Vol. XX. of the _China Review_. The Kao-ch’e (= High Carts, Toeloes, or early Ouigours) and the early Cathayans (Sien-pi) had very similar customs. Heikel gives an account of analogous ‘Olympic games’ witnessed at Urga in the year 1890.” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, pp. 140-1.)

LI., p. 251. Read T’ung hwo period (A.D. 992) instead of (A.D. 692).

LII., pp. 252, 254, n. 3. “[The Tartars] live on the milk and meat which their herds supply, and on the produce of the chase; and they eat all kinds of flesh, including that of horses and dogs, and Pharaoh’s rats, of which last there are great numbers in burrows on those plains.”

Pharaoh’s rat was the mangouste or ichneumon (_Herpestes ichneumon_) formerly found in this part of Asia as well as in Egypt where it was venerated. Cf. _Cathay_, II., p. 116.

LII., p. 254. Instead of “his tent invariably facing _south_,” read “facing _east_” according to the _Chou Shu_. (PELLIOT.)

LII., p. 256 n.

MARRIAGE.

The _China Review_, Vol. XX. “gives numerous instances of marrying mothers-in-law and sisters-in-law amongst the Hiung nu. The practice was common with all Tartars, as, indeed, is stated by Yule.” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p. 141.)

LII., p. 257 n.

_TENGRI_ (HEAVEN).

“The Mongol word _Tengri_ (= Heaven) appears also in Hiung-nu times; in fact, the word _shen yue_ is stated to have been used by the Hiung-nu alternatively with _Tengri kudu_ (Son of Heaven).” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p. 141.)

LIV., p. 263 n.

COATS OF MAIL.

Parker’s note is erroneous.–See Laufer, _Chinese Clay Figures_, Part I.

LV., p. 267. “They [the Tartars] have another notable custom, which is this. If any man have a daughter who dies before marriage, and another man have had a son also die before marriage, the parents of the two arrange a grand wedding between the dead lad and lass. And marry them they do, making a regular contract! And when the contract papers are made out they put them in the fire, in order (as they will have it) that the parties in the other world may know the fact, and so look on each other as man and wife. And the parents thenceforward consider themselves sib to each other, just as if their children had lived and married. Whatever may be agreed on between the parties as dowry, those who have to pay it cause to be painted on pieces of paper and then put these in the fire, saying that in that way the dead person will get all the real articles in the other world.”

Mr. KUMAGUSU MINAKATA writes on the subject in _Nature_, Jan. 7, 1897, pp. 224-5:

“As it is not well known whether or not there is a record of this strange custom earlier than the beginning of the dynasty of Yuen, I was in doubt whether it was originally common to the Chinese and Tartars until I lately came across the following passage in _Tsoh-mung-luh_ (Brit. Mus. copy, 15297, _a_ 1, fol. 11-12), which would seem to decide the question–‘In the North there is this custom. When a youth and a girl of marriageable ages die before marriage, their families appoint a match-maker to negotiate their nuptials, whom they call “Kwei-mei” (i.e. “Match-Maker of Ghosts”). Either family hands over to another a paper noticing all pre-requisites concerning the affair; and by names of the parents of the intended couple asks a man to pray and divine; and if the presage tells that the union is a lucky one, clothes and ornaments are made for the deceased pair. Now the match-maker goes to the burying-ground of the bridegroom, and, offering wine and fruits, requests the pair to marry. There two seats are prepared on adjoining positions, either of which having behind it a small banner more than a foot long. Before the ceremony is consecrated by libation, the two banners remain hanging perpendicularly and still; but when the libation is sprinkled and the deceased couple are requested to marry, the banners commence to gradually approach till they touch one another, which shows that they are both glad of the wedlock. However, when one of them dislikes another, it would happen that the banner representing the unwilling party does not move to approach the other banner. In case the couple should die too young to understand the matter, a dead man is appointed as a tutor to the male defunct, and some effigies are made to serve as the instructress and maids to the female defunct. The dead tutor thus nominated is informed of his appointment by a paper offered to him, on which are inscribed his name and age. After the consummation of the marriage the new consorts appear in dreams to their respective parents-in-law. Should this custom be discarded, the unhappy defuncts might do mischief to their negligent relatives…. On every occasion of these nuptials both families give some presents to the match-maker (“Kwei-mei”), whose sole business is annually to inspect the newly-deceased couples around his village, and to arrange their weddings to earn his livelihood.'”

Mr. Kumagusu Minakata adds:

“The passage is very interesting, for, besides giving us a faithful account of the particulars, which nowadays we fail to find elsewhere, it bears testimony to the Tartar, and not Chinese, origin of this practice. The author, Kang Yu-chi, describes himself to have visited his old home in Northern China shortly after its subjugation by the Kin Tartars in 1126 A.D.; so there is no doubt that among many institutional novelties then introduced to China by the northern invaders, Marriage of the Dead was so striking that the author did not hesitate to describe it for the first time.

“According to a Persian writer, after whom Petis de la Croix writes, this custom was adopted by Jenghiz Kan as a means to preserve amity amongst his subjects, it forming the subject of Article XIX. of his Yasa promulgated in 1205 A.D. The same writer adds: ‘This custom is still in use amongst the Tartars at this day, but superstition has added more circumstances to it: they throw the contract of marriage into the fire after having drawn some figures on it to represent the persons pretended to be so marry’d, and some forms of beasts; and are persuaded that all this is carried by the smoke to their children, who thereupon marry in the other world’ (Petis de la Croix, _Hist. of Genghizcan_, trans. by P. Aubin, Lond., 1722, p. 86). As the Chinese author does not speak of the burning of papers in this connection, whereas the Persian writer speaks definitely of its having been added later, it seems that the marriage of the dead had been originally a Tartar custom, with which the well-known Chinese paper-burning was amalgamated subsequently between the reigns of Genghiz and his grandson Kublai–under the latter Marco witnessed the customs already mingled, still, perhaps, mainly prevailing amongst the Tartar descendants.”

LV., p. 266. Regarding the scale of blows from seven to 107, Prof. Pelliot writes to me that these figures represent the theoretical number of tens diminished as a favour made to the culprit by three units in the name of Heaven, Earth and the Emperor.

LV., p. 268, n. 2. In the _Yuan Shi_, XX. 7, and other Chinese Texts of the Mongol period, is to be found confirmation of the fact, “He is slaughtered like a sheep,” i.e. the belly cut open lengthwise. (Pelliot.)

LVI., p. 269. “The people there are called MESCRIPT; they are a very wild race, and live by their cattle, the most of which are stags, and these stags, I assure you, they used to ride upon.”

B. Laufer, in the _Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association_, Vol. IV., No. 2, 1917 (_The Reindeer and its Domestication_), p. 107, has the following remarks: “Certainly this is the reindeer. Yule is inclined to think that Marco embraces under this tribal name in question characteristics belonging to tribes extending far beyond the Mekrit, and which in fact are appropriate to the Tungus; and continues that Rashid-eddin seems to describe the latter under the name of Uriangkut of the Woods, a people dwelling beyond the frontier of Barguchin, and in connection with whom he speaks of their reindeer obscurely, as well as of their tents of birchbark, and their hunting on snowshoes. As W. Radloff [_Die Jakutische Sprache, Mem. Ac. Sc. Pet._, 1908, pp. 54-56] has endeavoured to show, the Wooland Uryangkit, in this form mentioned by Rashid-eddin, should be looked upon as the forefathers of the present Yakut. Rashid-eddin, further, speaks of other Uryangkit, who are genuine Mongols, and live close together in the Territory Barguchin Tukum, where the clans Khori, Bargut, and Tumat, are settled. This region is east of Lake Baikal, which receives the river Barguchin flowing out of Lake Bargu in an easterly direction. The tribal name Bargut (_-t_ being the termination of the plural) is surely connected with the name of the said river.”

LVII., p. 276.

SINJU.

“Marco Polo’s Sinju certainly seems to be the site of Si-ning, but not on the grounds suggested in the various notes. In 1099 the new city of Shen Chou was created by the Sung or ‘Manzi’ Dynasty on the site of what had been called Ts’ing-t’ang. Owing to this region having for many centuries belonged to independent Hia or Tangut, very little exact information is obtainable from any Chinese history; but I think it almost certain that the great central city of Shen Chou was the modern Si-ning. Moreover, there was a very good reason for the invention of this name, as this _Shen_ was the first syllable of the ancient Shen-shen State of Lob Nor and Koko Nor, which, after its conquest by China in 609, was turned into the Shen-shen prefecture; in fact, the Sui Emperor was himself at Kam Chou or ‘Campichu’ when this very step was taken.” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p. 144.)

LVIII., p. 282. _Alashan_ is not an abbreviation of Alade-Shan and has nothing to do with the name of Eleuth, written in Mongol _Oegaelaet_. _Nuntuh_ (_nuntuek_) is the mediaeval Mongol form of the actual _nutuk_, an encampment. (PELLIOT.)

LVIII., p. 283, n. 3.

GURUN.

Gurun = Kurun = Chinese K’u lun = Mongol Urga.

LVIII., p. 283, n. 3. The stuff _sa-ha-la_ (= _saghlat_) is to be found often in the Chinese texts of the XIVth and XVth Centuries. (PELLIOT.)

LIX., pp. 284 seq.

KING GEORGE.

King or Prince George of Marco Polo and Monte Corvino belonged to the Oenguet tribe. He was killed in Mongolia in 1298, leaving an infant child called Shu-ngan (Giovanni) baptized by Monte Corvino. George was transcribed Koerguez and Goerguez by the Persian historians. See PELLIOT, _T’oung Pao_, 1914, pp. 632 seq. and _Cathay_, III., p. 15 n.

LIX., p. 286.

TENDUC.

Prof. Pelliot (_Journ. As._, Mai-Juin, 1912, pp. 595-6) thinks that it might be _Tien toe_, [Chinese], on the river So ling (Selenga).

LIX., p. 291.

CHRISTIANS.

In the Mongol Empire, Christians were known under the name of _tarsa_ and especially under this of _aerkaeguen_, in Chinese _ye-li-k’o-wen; tarsa_, was generally used by the Persian historians. Cf. PELLIOT, _T’oung Pao_, 1914, p. 636.

LIX., p. 295, n. 6. Instead of _Ku-wei_, read _K’u-wai_. (PELLIOT.)

LXI., pp. 302, 310.

“The weather-conjuring proclivities of the Tartars are repeatedly mentioned in Chinese history. The High Carts (early Ouigours) and Jou-jan (masters of the Early Turks) were both given this way, the object being sometimes to destroy their enemies. I drew attention to this in the _Asiatic Quart. Rev._ for April, 1902 (‘China and the Avars’).” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p. 140.)

LXI., p. 305, n. Harlez’s inscription is a miserable scribble of the facsimile from Dr. Bushell. (PELLIOT.)

LXI., p. 308, n. 5. The _Yuan Shi_, ch. 77, f deg. 7 _v._, says that: “Every year, [the Emperor] resorts to Shang tu. On the 24th day of the 8th moon, the sacrifice called ‘libation of mare’s milk’ is celebrated.” (PELLIOT.)

[1] The eight stages would be:–(1) Hasanabad, 21 miles; (2) Darband, 28 miles; (3) Chehel Pai, 23 miles; (4) Naiband, 39 miles; (5) Zenagan, 47 miles; (6) Duhuk, 25 miles; (7) Chah Khushab, 36 miles; and (8) Tun, 23 miles.

[2] _Genom Khorasan och Turkestan_, I., pp. 123 seq.

BOOK SECOND.

PART I.–THE KAAN, HIS COURT AND CAPITAL.

II., p. 334.

NAYAN.

It is worthy of note that Nayan had given up Buddhism and become a Christian as well as many of his subjects. Cf. PELLIOT 1914, pp. 635-6.

VII., pp. 352, 353.

Instead of _Sir-i-Sher_, read _Sar-i-Sher_. (PELLIOT.)

_P’AI TZU_.

“Dr. Bushell’s note describes the silver _p’ai_, or tablets (not then called _p’ai tsz_) of the Cathayans, which were 200 (not 600) in number. But long before the Cathayans used them, the T’ang Dynasty had done so for exactly the same purpose. They were 5 inches by 1-1/2 inches, and marked with the five words, ‘order, running horses, silver _p’ai_,’ and were issued by the department known as the _men-hia-sheng_. Thus, they were not a Tartar, but a Chinese, invention. Of course, it is possible that the Chinese must have had the idea suggested to them by the ancient wooden orders or tallies of the Tartars.” (E.H. PARKER, _As. Quart. Review_, Jan., 1904, p. 146.)

Instead of “Publication No. 42” read only No. 42, which is the number of the _pai tzu_. (PELLIOT.)

VIII., p. 358, n. 2.

_Kun ku = hon hu_ may be a transcription of _hwang heu_ during the Mongol Period, according to Pelliot.

IX. p. 360.

MONGOL IMPERIAL FAMILY.

“Marco Polo is correct in a way when he says Kublai was the sixth Emperor, for his father Tu li is counted as a _Divus_ (Jwei Tsung), though he never reigned; just as his son Chin kin (Yue Tsung) is also so counted, and under similar conditions. Chin kin was appointed to the _chung shu_ and _shu-mih_ departments in 1263. He was entrusted with extensive powers in 1279, when he is described as ‘heir apparent.’ In 1284 Yuen Nan, Chagan-jang, etc., were placed under his direction. His death is recorded in 1285. Another son, Numugan, was made Prince of the Peking region (Peh-p’ing) in 1266, and the next year a third son, Hukaji, was sent to take charge of Ta-li, Chagan-jang, Zardandan, etc. In 1272 Kublai’s son, Mangalai, was made Prince of An-si, with part of Shen Si as his appanage. One more son, named Ai-ya-ch’ih, is mentioned in 1284, and in that year yet another, Tu kan, was made Prince of Chen-nan, and sent on an expedition against Ciampa. In 1285 Essen Temur, who had received a _chung-shu_ post in 1283, is spoken of as Prince of Yuen Nan, and is stated to be engaged in Kara-jang; in 1286 he is still there, and is styled ‘son of the Emperor.’ I do not observe in the Annals that Hukaji ever bore the title of Prince of Yuen Nan, or, indeed, any princely title. In 1287 Ai-ya-ch’ih is mentioned as being at Shen Chou (Mukden) in connection with Kublai’s ‘personally conducted’ expedition against Nayen. In 1289 one more son, Geukju, was patented Prince of Ning Yuean. In 1293 Kublai’s _third son_ Chinkin, received a posthumous title, and Chinkin’s son Temur was declared heir-apparent to Kublai.

“The above are the only sons of Kublai whose names I have noticed in the Annals. In the special table of Princes Numugan is styled Peh-an (instead of Peh-p’ing) Prince. Aghrukji’s name appears in the table (chap. 108, p. 107), but though he is styled Prince of Si-p’ing, he is not there stated to be a son of Kublai; nor in the note I have supplied touching Tibet is he styled a _hwang-tsz_ or ‘imperial son.’ In the table Hukaji is described as being in 1268 Prince of Yuen Nan, a title ‘inherited in 1280 by Essen Temur.’ I cannot discover anything about the other alleged sons in Yule’s note (Vol. I., p. 361). The Chinese count Kublai’s years as eighty, he having died just at the beginning of 1294 (our February); this would make him seventy-nine at the very outside, according to our mode of reckoning, or even seventy-eight if he was born towards the end of a year, which indeed he was (eighth moon). If a man is born on the last day of the year he is two years old the very next day according to Chinese methods of counting, which, I suppose, include the ten months which they consider are spent in the womb.” (E.H. PARKER, _As. Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, pp. 137-139.)

XI., p. 370, n. 13.

The character _King_ in _King-shan_ is not the one representing Court [Chinese] but [Chinese].–Read “Wan-_sui_-Shan” instead of _Wan-su-Shan_.

XII., p. 380.

_Keshikten_ has nothing to do with _Kalchi_. (PELLIOT.)

XVIII., p. 398.

THE CHEETA, OR HUNTING LEOPARD.

Cf. Chapters on Hunting Dogs and Cheetas, being an extract from the “_Kitab’u’ l-Bazyarah_,” a treatise on Falconry, by _Ibn Kustrajim_, an Arab writer of the Tenth Century. By Lieut.-Colonel D.C. Phillott and Mr. R.F. Azoo (_Journ. and Proc. Asiatic Soc. Bengal_, Jan., 1907, pp. 47-50):

“The cheeta is the offspring of a lioness, by a leopard that coerces her, and, for this reason, cheetas are sterile like mules and all other hybrids. No animal of the same size is as weighty as the cheeta. It is the most somnolent animal on earth. The best are those that are ‘hollow-bellied,’ roach backed, and have deep black spots on a dark tawny ground, the spots on the back being close to each other; that have the eyes bloodshot, small and narrow; the mouth ‘deep and laughing’; broad foreheads; thick necks; the black line from the eyes long; and the fangs far apart from each other. The fully mature animal is more useful for sporting purposes than the cub; and the females are better at hunting than are the males, and such is the case with all beasts and birds of prey.”

See Hippolyte Boussac, _Le Guepard dans l’Egypte ancienne_ (_La Nature_, 21st March, 1908, pp. 248-250).

XIX., p. 400 n. Instead of _Hoy tiao_, read _Hey tiao_ (_Hei tiao_).

XIX., p. 400. “These two are styled _Chinuchi_ (or _Cunichi_), which is as much as to say, ‘The Keepers of the Mastiff Dogs.'”

Dr. Laufer writes to me: “The word _chinuchi_ is a Mongol term derived from Mongol _cinoa_ (pronounced _cino_ or _cono_ which means ‘wolf,’ with the possessive suffix _-ci_, meaning accordingly a ‘wolf-owner’ or ‘wolf-keeper).’ One of the Tibetan designations for the mastiff is _cang-k’i_ (written _spyang-k’yi_), which signifies literally ‘wolf-dog.’ The Mongol term is probably framed on this Tibetan word. The other explanations given by Yule (401-402) should be discarded.”

Prof. Pelliot writes to me: “J’incline a croire que les _Cunichi_ sont a lire _Cuiuci_ et repondent au _kouei-tch’e_ ou _kouei-yeou-tch’e_, ‘censeurs,’ des textes chinois; les formes chinoises sont transcrites du mongol et se rattachent au verbe _gueyue_, ou _gueyi_, ‘courir’; on peut songer a restituer _gueyuekci_. Un _Ming-ngan_ (= _Minghan_), chef des _kouei-tch’e_, vivait sous Kublai et a sa biographie au ch. 135 du _Yuan Che_; d’autre part, peut-etre faut-il lire, par deplacement de deux points diacritiques, _Bayan gueyuekci_ dans Rashid ed-Din, ed. BLOCHET, II., 501.”

XX., p. 408, n. 6. _Cachar Modun_ must be the place called _Ha-ch’a-mu-touen_ in the _Yuan Shi_, ch. 100, f deg.. 2 r. (PELLIOT.)

XXIV., pp. 423, 430. “Bark of Trees, made into something like Paper, to pass for Money over all his Country.”

Regarding Bretschneider’s statement, p. 430, Dr. B. Laufer writes to me: “This is a singular error of Bretschneider. Marco Polo is perfectly correct: not only did the Chinese actually manufacture paper from the bark of the mulberry tree (_Morus alba_), but also it was this paper which was preferred for the making of paper-money. Bretschneider is certainly right in saying that paper is made from the _Broussonetia_, but he is assuredly wrong in the assertion that paper is not made in China from mulberry trees. This fact he could have easily ascertained from S. Julien,[1] who alludes to mulberry tree paper twice, first, as ‘papier de racines et d’ecorce de murier,’ and, second, in speaking of the bark paper from _Broussonetia:_ ‘On emploie aussi pour le meme usage l’ecorce d’_Hibiscus Rosa sinensis_ et de murier; ce dernier papier sert encore a recueillir les graines de vers a soie,’ What is understood by the latter process may be seen from Plate I. in Julien’s earlier work on sericulture,[2] where the paper from the bark of the mulberry tree is likewise mentioned.

“The _Chi p’u_, a treatise on paper, written by Su I-kien toward the close of the tenth century, enumerates among the various sorts of paper manufactured during his lifetime paper from the bark of the mulberry tree (_sang p’i_) made by the people of the north.[3]

“Chinese paper-money of mulberry bark was known in the Islamic World in the beginning of the fourteenth century; that is, during the Mongol period. Accordingly it must have been manufactured in China during the Yuan Dynasty. Ahmed Shibab Eddin, who died in Cairo in 1338 at the age of 93, and left an important geographical work in thirty volumes, containing interesting information on China gathered from the lips of eye-witnesses, makes the following comment on paper-money, in the translation of Ch. Schefer:[4]

“‘On emploie dans le Khita, en guise de monnaie, des morceaux d’un papier de forme allongee fabrique avec des filaments de muriers sur lesquels est imprime le nom de l’empereur. Lorsqu’un de ces papiers est use, on le porte aux officiers du prince et, moyennant une perte minime, on recoit un autre billet en echange, ainsi que cela a lieu dans nos hotels des monnaies, pour les matieres d’or et d’argent que l’on y porte pour etre converties en pieces monnayees.’

“And in another passage: ‘La monnaie des Chinois est faite de billets fabriques avec l’ecorce du murier. Il y en a de grands et de petits…. Ou les fabrique avec des filaments tendres du murier et, apres y avoir oppose un sceau au nom de l’empereur, on les met en circulation.'[5]

“The banknotes of the Ming Dynasty were likewise made of mulberry pulp, in rectangular sheets one foot long and six inches wide, the material being of a greenish colour, as stated in the Annals of the Dynasty.[6] It is clear that the Ming Emperors, like many other institutions, adopted this practice from their predecessors, the Mongols. Klaproth[7] is wrong in saying that the assignats of the Sung, Kin, and Mongols were all made from the bark of the tree _cu (Broussonetia)_, and those of the Ming from all sorts of plants.

“In the _Hui kiang chi_, an interesting description of Turkistan by two Manchu officials, Surde and Fusambo, published in 1772,[8] the following note headed ‘Mohamedan Paper’ occurs:

“‘There are two sorts of Turkistan paper, black and white, made from mulberry bark, cotton and silk refuse equally mixed, resulting in a coarse, thick, strong, and tough material. It is cut into small rolls fully a foot long, which are burnished by means of stones, and then are fit for writing.’

“Sir Aurel Stein[9] reports that paper is still manufactured from mulberry trees in Khotan. Also J. Wiesner,[10] the meritorious investigator of ancient papers, has included the fibres of _Morus alba_ and _M. nigra_ among the material to which his researches extended.

“Mulberry-bark paper is ascribed to Bengal in the _Si yang ch’ao kung tien lu_ by Wu Kien-hwang, published in 1520.[11]

“As the mulberry tree is eagerly cultivated in Persia in connection with the silk industry, it is possible also that the Persian paper in the banknotes of the Mongols was a product of the mulberry.[12] At any rate, good Marco Polo is cleared, and his veracity and exactness have been established again.”

XXIV., p. 427.

VALUE OF GOLD.

“L’or valait quatre fois son poids d’argent au commencement de la dynastie Ming (1375), sept ou huit fois sous l’empereur Wan-li de la meme dynastie (1574), et dix fois a la fin de la dynastie (1635); plus de dix fois sous K’ang hi (1662); plus de vingt fois sous le regne de K’ien long; dix-huit fois au milieu du regne de Tao-koang (1840), quatorze fois au commencement du regne de Hien-fong (1850); dix-huit fois en moyenne dans les annees 1882-1883. En 1893, la valeur de l’or augmenta considerablement et egala 28 fois celle de l’argent; en 1894, 32 fois; au commencement de 1895, 33 fois; mais il baissa un peu et a la fin de l’annee il valait seulement 30 fois plus.” (Pierre HOANG, _La Propriete en Chine_, 1897, p. 43.)

XXVI., p. 432.

_CH’ING SIANG_.

Morrison, _Dict._, Pt. II, Vol. I., p. 70, says: “Chin-seang, a Minister of State, was so called under the Ming Dynasty.” According to Mr. E.H. Parker (_China Review_, XXIV., p. 101), _Ching Siang_ were abolished in 1395.

In the quotation from the _Masalak al Absar_ instead of _Landjun_ (Lang Chang), read _Landjun_ (_Lang Chung_).

XXXIII., pp. 447-8. “You must know, too, that the Tartars reckon their years by twelves; the sign of the first year being the Lion, of the second the Ox, of the third the Dragon, of the fourth the Dog, and so forth up to the twelfth; so that when one is asked the year of his birth he answers that it was in the year of the Lion (let us say), on such a day or night, at such an hour, and such a moment. And the father of a child always takes care to write these particulars down in a book. When the twelve yearly symbols have been gone through, then they come back to the first, and go through with them again in the same succession.”

“Ce temoignage, writes Chavannes (_T’oung Pao_, 1906, p. 59), n’est pas d’une exactitude rigoureuse, puisque les animaux n’y sont pas nommes a leur rang; en outre, le lion y est substitue au tigre de l’enumeration chinoise; mais cette derniere difference provient sans doute de ce que Marco Polo connaissait le cycle avec les noms mongols des animaux; c’est le leopard dout il a fait le lion. Quoiqu’il en soit, l’observation de Marco Polo est juste dans son ensemble et d’innombrables exemples prouvent que le cycle des douze animaux etait habituel dans les pieces officielles emanant des chancelleries imperiales a l’epoque mongole.”

XXXIII., p. 448.

PERSIAN.

With regard to the knowledge of Persian, the only oriental language probably known by Marco Polo, Pelliot remarks (_Journ. Asiat._, Mai-Juin, 1912, p. 592 n.): “C’est l’idee de Yule (cf. exemple I., 448), et je la crois tout a fait juste. On peut la fortifier d’autres indices. On sait par exemple que Marco Polo substitue le lion au tigre dans le cycle des douze animaux. M. Chavannes (_T’oung pao_, II., VII., 59) suppose que ‘cette derniere difference provient sans doute de ce que Marco Polo connaissait le cycle avec les noms mongols des animaux: c’est le leopard dont il a fait le lion.’ Mais on ne voit pas pourquoi il aurait rendu par ‘lion’ le turco-mongol _bars_, qui signifie seulement ‘tigre.’ Admettons au contraire qu’il pense en persan: dans toute l’Asie centrale, le persan [Arabic] _sir_ a les deux sens de lion et de tigre. De meme, quand Marco Polo appelle la Chine du sud Manzi, il est d’accord avec les Persans, par exemple avec Rachid ed-din, pour employer l’expression usuelle dans la langue chinoise de l’epoque, c’est-a-dire Man-tseu; mais, au lieu de Manzi, les Mongols avaient adopte un autres nom, Nangias, dont il n’y a pas trace dans Marco Polo. On pourrait multiplier ces exemples.”

XXXIII., p. 456, n. Instead of _Hui Heng_, read _Hiu Heng_.

[1] _Industries anciennes et modernes de l’Empire chinois_. Paris, 1869, pp. 145, 149.

[2] _Resume des principaux Traites chinois sur la culture des muriers et l’education des vers a soie_, Paris, 1837, p. 98. According to the notions of the Chinese, Julien remarks, everything made from hemp like cord and weavings is banished from the establishments where silkworms are reared, and our European paper would be very harmful to the latter. There seems to be a sympathetic relation between the silkworm feeding on the leaves of the mulberry and the mulberry paper on which the cocoons of the females are placed.

[3] _Ko chi king yuan_, Ch. 37, p. 6.

[4] _Relations des Musulmans avec les Chinois (Centenaire de l’Ecole des Langues Orientales vivante_, Paris, 1895, p. 17).

[5] Ibid., p. 20.

[6] _Ming Shi_, Ch. 81, p. 1.–The same text is found on a bill issued in 1375 reproduced and translated by W. Vissering (_On Chinese Currency_, see plate at end of volume), the minister of finance being expressly ordered to use the fibres of the mulberry tree in the composition of these bills.

[7] _Memoires relatifs a l’Asie_, Vol. I., p. 387.

[8] A. WYLIE, _Notes on Chinese Literature_, p. 64. The copy used by me (in the John Crerar Library of Chicago) is an old manuscript clearly written in 4 vols. and chapters, illustrated by nine ink-sketches of types of Mohammedans and a map. The volumes are not paged.

[9] _Ancient Khotan_, Vol. I., p. 134.

[10] _Mikroskopische Untersuchung alter ostturkestanischer Papiere_, p. 9 (Vienna, 1902). I cannot pass over in silence a curious error of this scholar when he says (p. 8) that it is not proved that _Cannabis sativa_ (called by him “genuine hemp”) is cultivated in China, and that the so-called Chinese hemp-paper should be intended for China grass. Every tyro in things Chinese knows that hemp (_Cannabis sativa_) belongs to the oldest cultivated plants of the Chinese, and that hemp-paper is already listed among the papers invented by Ts’ai Lun in A.D. 105 (cf. CHAVANNES, _Les livres chinois avant l’invention du papier, Journal Asiatique_, 1905, p. 6 of the reprint).

[11] Ch. B., p. 10b (ed. of _Pie hia chai ts’ung shu_).

[12] The Persian word for the mulberry, _tud_, is supposed to be a loan-word from Aramaic. (HORN, _Grundriss iran. Phil._, Vol. I., pt. 2, p. 6.)

BOOK SECOND.

PART II.–JOURNEY TO THE WEST AND SOUTH-WEST OF CATHAY.

XXXVII, p. 13. “There grow here [Taianfu] many excellent vines, supplying great plenty of wine; and in all Cathay this is the only place where wine is produced. It is carried hence all over the country.”

Dr. B. Laufer makes the following remarks to me: “Polo is quite right in ascribing vines and wine to T’ai Yuean-fu in Shan Si, and is in this respect upheld by contemporary Chinese sources. The _Yin shan cheng yao_ written in 1330 by Ho Se-hui, contains this account[1]: ‘There are numerous brands of wine: that coming from Qara-Khodja[2] (Ha-la-hwo) is very strong, that coming from Tibet ranks next. Also the wines from P’ing Yang and T’ai Yuean (in Shan Si) take the second rank. According to some statements, grapes, when stored for a long time, will develop into wine through a natural process. This wine is fragrant, sweet, and exceedingly strong: this is the genuine grape-wine.’ _Ts’ao mu tse_, written in 1378 par Ye Tse-k’i,[3] contains the following information: ‘Under the Yuean Dynasty grape-wine was manufactured in Ki-ning and other circuits of Shan Si Province. In the eighth month they went to the T’ai hang Mountain,[4] in order to test the genuine and adulterated brands: the genuine kind when water is poured on it, will float; the adulterated sort, when thus treated, will freeze.[5] In wine which has long been stored, there is a certain portion which even in extreme cold will never freeze, while all the remainder is frozen: this is the spirit and fluid secretion of wine.[6] If this is drunk, the essence will penetrate into a man’s armpits, and he will die. Wine kept for two or three years develops great poison.” For a detailed history of grape-wine in China, see Laufer’s _Sino-Iranica_.

XXXVII., p. 16.

VINE.

Chavannes (_Chancellerie chinoise de l’epoque mongole_, II., pp. 66-68, 1908) has a long note on vine and grape wine-making in China, from Chinese sources. We know that vine, according to Sze-ma Ts’ien, was imported from Farghanah about 100 B.C. The Chinese, from texts in the _T’ai p’ing yu lan_ and the _Yuan Kien lei han_, learned the art of wine-making after they had defeated the King of Kao ch’ang (Turfan) in 640 A.D.

XLI., p. 27 seq.

CHRISTIAN MONUMENT AT SI-NGAN FU.

The slab _King kiao pei_, bearing the inscription, was found, according to Father Havret, 2nd Pt., p. 71, in the sub-prefecture of Chau Chi, a dependency of Si-ngan fu, among ancient ruins. Prof. Pelliot says that the slab was not found at Chau Chi, but in the western suburb of Si-ngan, at the very spot where it was to be seen some years ago, before it was transferred to the _Pei lin_, in fact at the place where it was erected in the seventh century inside the monastery built by Olopun. (_Chretiens de l’Asie centrale, T’oung pao_, 1914, p. 625.)

In 1907, a Danish gentleman, Mr. Frits V. Holm, took a photograph of the tablet as it stood outside the west gate of Si-ngan, south of the road to Kan Su; it was one of five slabs on the same spot; it was removed without the stone pedestal (a tortoise) into the city on the 2nd October 1907, and it is now kept in the museum known as the _Pei lin_ (Forest of Tablets). Holm says it is ten feet high, the weight being two tons; he tried to purchase the original, and failing this he had an exact replica made by Chinese workmen; this replica was deposited in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in the City of New York, as a loan, on the 16th of June, 1908. Since, this replica was purchased by Mrs. George Leary, of 1053, Fifth Avenue, New York, and presented by this lady, through Frits Holm, to the Vatican. See the November number (1916) of the _Boll, della R. Soc. Geog. Italiana_. “The Original Nestorian Tablet of A.D. 781, as well as my replica, made in 1907,” Holm writes, “are both carved from the stone quarries of Fu Ping Hien; the material is a black, sub-granular limestone with small oolithes scattered through it” (Frits V. Holm, _The Nestorian Monument_, Chicago, 1900). In this pamphlet there is a photograph of the tablet as it stands in the Pei lin.

Prof. Ed. Chavannes, who also visited Si-ngan in 1907, saw the Nestorian Monument; in the album of his _Mission archeologique dans la Chine Septentrionale_, Paris, 1909, he has given (Plate 445) photographs of the five tablets, the tablet itself, the western gate of the western suburb of Si-ngan, and the entrance of the temple _Kin Sheng Sze_.

Cf. Notes, pp. 105-113 of Vol. I, of the second edition of _Cathay and the Way thither_.

II., p. 27.

KHUMDAN.

Cf. _Kumudana_, given by the Sanskrit-Chinese vocabulary found in Japan (Max MUELLER, _Buddhist Texts from Japan_, in _Anecdota Oxoniensia_, Aryan Series, t. I., part I., p. 9), and the _Khumdan_ and _Khumadan_ of Theophylactus. (See TOMASCHEK, in _Wiener Z.M._, t. III., p. 105; Marquart, _Eransahr_, pp. 316-7; _Osteuropaeische und Ostasiatische Streifzuege_, pp. 89-90.) (PELLIOT.)

XLI., p. 29 n. The vocabulary _Hwei Hwei_ (Mahomedan) of the College of Interpreters at Peking transcribes King chao from the Persian Kin-chang, a name it gives to the Shen-si province. King chao was called Ngan-si fu in 1277. (DEVERIA, _Epigraphie_, p. 9.) Ken jan comes from Kin-chang = King-chao = Si-ngan fu.

Prof. Pelliot writes, _Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient_, IV., July-Sept., 1904, p. 29: “Cette note de M. Cordier n’est pas exacte. Sous les Song, puis sous les Mongols jusqu’en 1277, Si-ngan fou fut appele King-tchao fou. Le vocabulaire _houei-houei_ ne transcrit pas ‘King-tchao du persan kin-tchang,’ mais, comme les Persans appelaient alors Si-ngan fou Kindjanfou (le Kenjanfu de Marco Polo), cette forme _persane_ est a son tour transcrite phonetiquement en chinois Kin-tchang fou, sans que les caracteres choisis jouent la aucun role semantique; Kin-tchang fou n’existe pas dans la geographie chinoise. Quant a l’origine de la forme persane, il est possible, mais non par sur, que ce soit King-tchao fou. La forme ‘Quen-zan-fou,’ qu’un ecolier chinois du Chen Si fournit a M. von Richthofen comme le nom de Si-ngan fou au temps des Yuan, doit avoir ete fautivement recueillie. Il me parait impossible qu’un Chinois d’une province quelconque prononce _zan_ le caractere [Chinese] _tchao_.”

XLI., p. 29 n. A clause in the edict also orders the _foreign bonzes of Ta T’sin_ and _Mubupa_ (Christian and _Mobed_ or Magian) _to return to secular life_.

_Mubupa_ has no doubt been derived by the etymology _mobed_, but it is faulty; it should be _Muhupa_. (PELLIOT, _Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient_, IV., July-Sept., 1904, p. 771.) Pelliot writes to me that there is now no doubt that it is derived from _mu-lu hien_ and that it must be understood as the “[religion of] the Celestial God of the Magi.”

XLIII., p. 32.

“The _chien-tao_, or ‘pillar road,’ mentioned, should be _chan-tao_, or ‘scaffolding road.’ The picture facing p. 50 shows how the shoring up or scaffolding is effected. The word _chan_ is still in common use all over the Empire, and in 1267 Kublai ordered this identical road (‘Sz Ch’wan _chan-tao_’) to be repaired. There are many such roads in Sz Ch’wan besides the original one from Han-chung-Fu.” (E.H. PARKER, _As. Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p. 144.)

XLIV., p. 36. SINDAFU (Ch’eng tu fu).–Through the midst of this great city runs a large river…. It is a good half-mile wide….

“It is probable that in the thirteenth century, when Marco Polo was on his travels, the ‘great river a good half-mile wide,’ flowing past Chengtu, was the principal stream; but in the present day that channel is insignificant in comparison to the one which passes by Ta Hsien, Yung-Chia Chong, and Hsin-Chin Hsien. Of course, these channels are stopped up or opened as occasion requires. As a general rule, they follow such contour lines as will allow gravitation to conduct the water to levels as high as is possible, and when it is desired to raise it higher than it will naturally flow, chain-pumps and enormous undershot water-wheels of bamboo are freely employed. Water-power is used for driving mills through the medium of wheels, undershot or overshot, or turbines, as the local circumstances may demand.” (R. Logan JACK, _Back Blocks_, p. 55.)

XLIV., p. 36.

SINDAFU.

“The story of the ‘three Kings’ of Sindafu is probably in this wise: For nearly a century the Wu family (Wu Kiai, Wu Lin, and Wu Hi) had ruled as semi-independent Sung or ‘Manzi’ Viceroys of Sz Ch’wan, but in 1206 the last-named, who had fought bravely for the Sung (Manzi) Dynasty against the northern Dynasty of the Nuechen Tartars (successors to Cathay), surrendered to this same Kin or Golden Dynasty of Nuechens or Early Manchus, and was made King of Shuh (Sz Ch’wan). In 1236, Ogdai’s son, K’wei-t’eng, effected the partial conquest of Shuh, entering the capital, Ch’eng-tu Fu (Sindafu), towards the close of the same year. But in 1259 Mangu in person had to go over part of the same ground again. He proceeded up the rapids, and in the seventh moon attacked Ch’ung K’ing, but about a fortnight later he died at a place called Tiao-yue Shan, apparently near the Tiao-yue Ch’eng of my map (p. 175 of _Up the Yangtsze_, 1881), where I was myself in the year 1881. Colonel Yule’s suggestion that Marco’s allusion is to the tripartite Empire of China 1000 years previously is surely wide of the mark. The ‘three brothers’ were probably Kiai, Lin, and T’ing, and Wu Hi was the son of Wu T’ing. An account of Wu Kiai is given in Mayers’ _Chinese Reader’s Manual_.” (E.H. PARKER, _As. Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, pp. 144-5.)

Cf. MAYERS, No. 865, p. 259, and GILES, _Biog. Dict._, No. 2324, p. 880.

XLIV., p. 38.

SINDAFU.

Tch’eng Tu was the capital of the Kingdom of Shu. The first Shu Dynasty was the Minor Han Dynasty which lasted from A.D. 221 to A.D. 263; this Shu Dynasty was one of the Three Kingdoms (_San Kwo chi_); the two others being Wei (A.D. 220-264) reigning at Lo Yang, and Wu (A.D. 222-277) reigning at Kien Kang (Nan King). The second was the Ts’ien Shu Dynasty, founded in 907 by Wang Kien, governor of Sze Chw’an since 891; it lasted till 925, when it submitted to the Hau T’ang; in 933 the Hau T’ang were compelled to grant the title of King of Shu (Hau Shu) to Mong Chi-siang, governor of Sze Chw’an, who was succeeded by Mong Ch’ang, dethroned in 965; the capital was also Ch’eng Tu under these two dynasties.

TIBET.

XLV., p. 44. No man of that country would on any consideration take to wife a girl who was a maid; for they say a wife is nothing worth unless she has been used to consort with men. And their custom is this, that when travellers come that way, the old women of the place get ready, and take their unmarried daughters or other girls related to them, and go to the strangers who are passing, and make over the young women to whomsoever will accept them; and the travellers take them accordingly and do their pleasure; after which the girls are restored to the old women who brought them….

Speaking of the Sifan village of Po Lo and the account given by Marco Polo of the customs of these people, M.R. Logan JACK (_Back Blocks_, 1904, pp. 145-6) writes: “I freely admit that the good looks and modest bearing of the girls were the chief merits of the performance in my eyes. Had the _danseuses_ been scrubbed and well dressed, they would have been a presentable body of _debutantes_ in any European ballroom. One of our party, frivolously disposed, asked a girl (through an interpreter) if she would marry him and go to his country. The reply, ‘I do not know you, sir,’ was all that propriety could have demanded in the best society, and worthy of a pupil ‘finished’ at Miss Pinkerton’s celebrated establishment…. Judging from our experience, no idea of hospitalities of the kind [Marco’s experience] was in the people’s minds.”

XLV., p. 45. Speaking of the people of Tibet, Polo says: “They are very poorly clad, for their clothes are only of the skins of beasts, and of canvas, and of buckram.”

Add to the note, I., p. 48, n. 5:–

“Au XIV’e siecle, le bougran [buckram] etait une espece de tissu de lin: le meilleur se fabriquait en Armenie et dans le royaume de Melibar, s’il faut s’en rapporter a Marco Polo, qui nous apprend que les habitants du Thibet, qu’il signale comme pauvrement vetus, l’etaient de canevas et de bougran, et que cette derniere etoffe se fabriquait aussi dans la province d’Abasce. Il en venait egalement de l’ile de Chypre. Sorti des manufactures d’Espagne ou importe dans le royaume, a partir de 1442, date d’une ordonnance royale publiee par le P. Saez, le bougran le plus fin payait soixante-dix maravedis de droits, sans distinction de couleur” (FRANCISQUE-MICHEL, _Recherches sur le commerce, la fabrication et l’usage des etoffes de soie, d’or et d’argent_…. II., 1854, pp. 33-4). Passage mentioned by Dr. Laufer.

XLV., pp. 46 n., 49 seq.

Referring to Dr. E. Bretschneider, Prof. E.H. Parker gives the following notes in the _Asiatic Quart. Review_, Jan., 1904, p. 131: “In 1251 Ho-erh-t’ai was appointed to the command of the Mongol and Chinese forces advancing on Tibet (T’u-fan). [In my copy of the _Yuean Shi_ there is no entry under the year 1254 such as that mentioned by Bretschneider; it may, however, have been taken by Palladius from some other chapter.] In 1268 Mang-ku-tai was ordered to invade the Si-fan (outer Tibet) and _Kien-tu_ [Marco’s Caindu] with 6000 men. Bretschneider, however, omits Kien-tu, and also omits to state that in 1264 eighteen Si-fan clans were placed under the superintendence of the _an-fu-sz_ (governor) of An-si Chou, and that in 1265 a reward was given to the troops of the decachiliarch Hwang-li-t’a-rh for their services against the T’u fan, with another reward to the troops under Prince Ye-suh-pu-hwa for their successes against the Si-fan. Also that in 1267 the Si-fan chieftains were encouraged to submit to Mongol power, in consequence of which A-nu-pan-ti-ko was made Governor-General of Ho-wu and other regions near it. Bretschneider’s next item after the doubtful one of 1274 is in 1275, as given by Cordier, but he omits to state that in 1272 Mang-ku-tai’s eighteen clans and other T’u-fan troops were ordered in hot haste to attack Sin-an Chou, belonging to the Kien-tu prefecture; and that a post-station called Ning-ho Yih was established on the T’u-fan and Si-Ch’wan [= Sz Ch’wan] frontier. In 1275 a number of Princes, including Chi-pi T’ie-mu-r, and Mang-u-la, Prince of An-si, were sent to join the Prince of Si-p’ing [Kublai’s son] Ao-lu-ch’ih in his expedition against the Tu-fau. In 1276 all Si-fan bonzes (lamas) were forbidden to carry arms, and the Tu-fan city of Hata was turned into Ning-yuean Fu [as it now exists]; garrisons and civil authorities were placed in Kien-tu and Lo-lo-sz [the Lolo country]. In 1277 a Customs station was established at Tiao-men and Li-Chou [Ts’ing-k’i Hien in Ya-chou Fu] for the purposes of Tu-fan trade. In 1280 more Mongol troops were sent to the Li Chou region, and a special officer was appointed for T’u-fan [Tibetan] affairs at the capital. In 1283 a high official was ordered to print the official documents connected with the _suean-wei-sz_ [governorship] of T’u-fan. In 1288 six provinces, including those of Sz Chw’an and An-si, were ordered to contribute financial assistance to the _suean-wei-shi_ [governor] of U-sz-tsang [the indigenous name of Tibet proper]. Every year or two after this, right up to 1352, there are entries in the Mongol Annals amply proving that the conquest of Tibet under the Mongols was not only complete, but fully narrated; however, there is no particular object in carrying the subject here beyond the date of Marco’s departure from China. There are many mentions of Kien-tu (which name dates from the Sung Dynasty) in the _Yuean-shi_; it is the Kien-ch’ang Valley of to-day, with capital at Ning-yuean, as clearly marked on Bretschneider’s Map. Baber’s suggestion of the _Chan-tui_ tribe of Tibetans is quite obsolete, although Baber was one of the first to explore the region in person. A petty tribe like the _Chan-tui_ could never have given name to _Caindu_; besides, both initials and finals are impossible, and the _Chan-tui_ have never lived there. I have myself met Si-fan chiefs at Peking; they may be described roughly as Tibetans _not under_ the Tibetan Government. The T’u-fan, T’u-po, or Tubot, were the Tibetans _under Tibetan rule_, and they are now usually styled ‘Si-tsang’ by the Chinese. Yaci [Ya-ch’ih, Ya-ch’i] is frequently mentioned in the _Yuean-shi_, and the whole of Deveria’s quotation given by Cordier on p. 72 appears there [chap. 121, p. 5], besides a great deal more to the point, without any necessity for consulting the _Lei pien_. Cowries, under the name of _pa-tsz_, are mentioned in both Mongol and Ming history as being in use for money in Siam and Yung-ch’ang [Vociam]. The porcelain coins which, as M. Cordier quotes from me on p. 74, I myself saw current in the Shan States or Siam about ten years ago, were of white China, with a blue figure, and about the size of a Keating’s cough lozenge, but thicker. As neither form of the character _pa_ appears in any dictionary, it is probably a foreign word only locally understood. Regarding the origin of the name Yung-ch’ang, the discussions upon p. 105 are no longer necessary; in the eleventh moon of 1272 [say about January 1, 1273] Kublai ‘presented the name Yung-ch’ang to the new city built by Prince Chi-pi T’ie-mu-r.'”

XLVI., p. 49. They have also in this country [Tibet] plenty of fine woollens and other stuffs, and many kinds of spices are produced there which are never seen in our country.

Dr. Laufer draws my attention to the fact that this translation does not give exactly the sense of the French text, which runs thus:

“Et encore voz di qe en ceste provence a gianbelot [camelot] assez et autres dras d’or et de soie, et hi naist maintes especes qe unques ne furent veue en nostre pais.” (_Ed. Soc. de Geog._, Chap, cxvi., p. 128.)

In the Latin text (Ibid., p. 398), we have:

“In ista provincia sunt giambelloti satis et alii panni de sirico et auro; et ibi nascuntur multae species quae nunquam fuerunt visae in nostris contractis.”

Francisque-Michel (_Recherches_, II., p. 44) says: “Les Tartares fabriquaient aussi a Aias de tres-beaux camelots de poil de chameau, que l’on expediait pour divers pays, et Marco Polo nous apprend que cette denree etait fort abondante dans le Thibet. Au XV’e siecle, il en venait de l’ile de Chypre.”

XLVII., pp. 50, 52,

WILD OXEN CALLED _BEYAMINI_.

Dr. Laufer writes to me: “Yule correctly identifies the ‘wild oxen’ of Tibet with the gayal (_Bos gavaeus_), but I do not believe that his explanation of the word _beyamini_ (from an artificially constructed _buemini_ = Bohemian) can be upheld. Polo states expressly that these wild oxen are called _beyamini_ (scil. by the natives), and evidently alludes to a native Tibetan term. The gayal is styled in Tibetan _ba-men_ (or _ba-man_), derived from _ba_ (‘cow’), a diminutive form of which is _beu_. Marco Polo appears to have heard some dialectic form of this word like _beu-men_ or _beu-min_.”

XLVIII., p. 70.

KIUNG TU AND KIEN TU.

Kiung tu or Kiang tu is Caindu in Sze-Ch’wan; Kien tu is in Yun Nan. Cf. PELLIOT, _Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient_, July-Sept, 1904, p. 771. Caindu or Ning Yuan was, under the Mongols, a dependency of Yun Nan, not of Sze Ch’wan. (PELLIOT.)

XLVIII., p. 72. The name _Karajang_. “The first element was the Mongol or Turki _Kara_…. Among the inhabitants of this country some are black, and others are white; these latter are called by the Mongols _Chaghan-Jang_ (‘White Jang’). Jang has not been explained; but probably it may have been a Tibetan term adopted by the Mongols, and the colours may have applied to their clothing.”

Dr. Berthold Laufer, of Chicago, has a note on the subject in the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic Soc._, Oct., 1915, pp. 781-4: “M. Pelliot (_Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient._, IV., 1904, p. 159) proposed to regard the unexplained name _Jang_ as the Mongol transcription of _Ts’uan_, the ancient Chinese designation of the Lo-lo, taken from the family name of one of the chiefs of the latter; he gave his opinion, however, merely as an hypothesis which should await confirmation. I now believe that Yule was correct in his conception, and that, in accordance with his suggestion, _Jang_ indeed represents the phonetically exact transcription of a Tibetan proper name. This is the Tibetan _a Jan_ or _a Jans_ (the prefixed letter _a_ and the optional affix _-s_ being silent, hence pronounced _Jang_ or _Djang_), of which the following precise definition is given in the _Dictionnaire tibetain-latin francais par les Missionnaires Catholiques du Tibet_ (p. 351): ‘Tribus et regionis nomen in N.W. provinciae Sinarum Yun-nan, cuius urbs principalis est Sa-t’am seu Ly-kiang fou. Tribus vocatur Mosso a Sinensibus et Nashi ab ipsismet incolis.’ In fact, as here stated, _Ja’n_ or _Jang_ is the Tibetan designation of the Moso and the territory inhabited by them, the capital of which is Li-kiang-fu. This name is found also in Tibetan literature….”

XLVIII., p. 74, n. 2. One thousand Uighur families (_nou_) had been transferred to Karajang in 1285. (_Yuan Shi_, ch. 13, 8_v_ deg., quoted by PELLIOT.)

L., pp. 85-6. Zardandan. “The country is wild and hard of access, full of great woods and mountains which ’tis impossible to pass, the air in summer is so impure and bad; and any foreigners attempting it would die for certain.”

“An even more formidable danger was the resolution of our ‘permanent’ (as distinguished from ‘local’) soldiers and mafus, of which we were now apprised, to desert us in a body, as they declined to face the malaria of the Lu-Kiang Ba, or Salwen Valley. We had, of course, read in Gill’s book of this difficulty, but as we approached the Salwen we had concluded that the scare had been forgotten. We found, to our chagrin, that the dreaded ‘Fever Valley’ had lost none of its terrors. The valley had a bad name in Marco Polo’s day, in the thirteenth century, and its reputation has clung to it ever since, with all the tenacity of Chinese traditions. The Chinaman of the district crosses the valley daily without fear, but the Chinaman from a distance _knows_ that he will either die or his wife will prove unfaithful. If he is compelled to go, the usual course is to write to his wife and tell her that she is free to look out for another husband. Having made up his mind that he will die, I have no doubt that he often dies through sheer funk.” (R. Logan JACK, _Back Blocks of China_, 1904, p. 205.)

L., pp. 84, 89.

CONCERNING THE PROVINCE OF ZARDANDAN.

We read in Huber’s paper already mentioned (_Bul. Ecole Ext. Orient_, Oct.-Dec., 1909, p. 665): “The second month of the twelfth year (1275), Ho T’ien-tsio, governor of the Kien Ning District, sent the following information: ‘A-kouo of the Zerdandan tribe, knows three roads to enter Burma, one by T’ien pu ma, another by the P’iao tien, and the third by the very country of A-kouo; the three roads meet at the ‘City of the Head of the River’ [Kaung si] in Burma.” A-kouo, named elsewhere A-ho, lived at Kan-ngai. According to Huber, the Zardandan road is the actual caravan road to Bhamo on the left of the Nam Ti and Ta Ping; the second route would be by the Tien ma pass and Nam hkam, the P’iao tien route is the road on the right bank of the Nam Ti and the Ta Ping leading to Bhamo via San Ta and Man Waing.

The _Po Yi_ and _Ho Ni_ tribes are mentioned in the _Yuan Shi_, s.a. 1278. (PELLIOT.)

L., p. 90.

Mr. H.A. OTTEWILL tells me in a private note that the Kachins or Singphos did not begin to reach Burma in their emigration from Tibet until last century or possibly this century. They are not to be found east of the Salwen River.

L., p. 91.

COUVADE.

There is a paper on the subject in the _Zeitschrift fuer Ethnologie_ (1911, pp. 546-63) by Hugo Kunicke, _Das sogennante, “Mannerkindbett,”_ with a bibliography not mentioning Yule’s _Marco Polo_, Vinson, etc. We may also mention: _De la “Covada” en Espana_. Por el Prof. Dr. Telesforo de Aranzadi, Barcelona (_Anthropos_, T.V., fasc. 4, Juli-August, 1910, pp. 775-8).

L., p. 92 n.

I quoted Prof. E.H. Parker (_China Review_, XIV., p. 359), who wrote that the “_Langszi_ are evidently the _Szi lang_, one of the six _Chao_, but turned upside down.” Prof. Pelliot (_Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient_, IV., July-Sept., 1904, p. 771) remarks: “Mr. Parker is entirely wrong. The _Chao_ of Shi-lang, which was annexed by Nan Chao during the eighth century, was in the western part of Yun Nan, not in Kwei chau; we have but little information on the subject.” He adds: “The custom of Couvade is confirmed for the Lao of Southern China by the following text of the _Yi wu chi_ of Fang Ts’ien-li, dating at least from the time of the T’ang dynasty: ‘When a Lao woman of Southern China has a child, she goes out at once. The husband goes to bed exhausted, like a woman giving suck. If he does not take care, he becomes ill. The woman has no harm.'”

L., pp. 91-95.

Under the title of _The Couvade or “Hatching,”_ John Cain writes from Dumagudem, 31st March, 1874, to the _Indian Antiquary_, May, 1874, p. 151:

“In the districts in South India in which Telugu is spoken, there is a wandering tribe of people called the Erukalavandlu. They generally pitch their huts, for the time being, just outside a town or village. Their chief occupations are fortune-telling, rearing pigs, and making mats. Those in this part of the Telugu country observe the custom mentioned in Max Mueller’s _Chips from a German Workshop_, Vol. II., pp. 277-284. Directly the woman feels the birth-pangs, she informs her husband, who immediately takes some of her clothes, puts them on, places on his forehead the mark which the women usually place on theirs, retires into a dark room where is only a very dim lamp, and lies down on the bed, covering himself up with a long cloth. When the child is born, it is washed and placed on the cot beside the father. Assafoetida, _jaggery_, and other articles are then given, not to the mother, but to the father. During the days of ceremonial uncleanness the man is treated as the other Hindus treat their women on such occasions. He is not allowed to leave his bed, but has everything needful brought to him.”

Mr. John Cain adds (l.c., April, 1879, p. 106): “The women are called ‘hens’ by their husbands, and the male and female children ‘cock children’ and ‘hen children’ respectively.”

LI., p. 99 n. “M. Garnier informs me that _Mien Kwe_ or _Mien Tisong_ is the name always given in Yun Nan to that kingdom.”

_Mien Tisong_ is surely faulty, and must likely be corrected in _Mien Chung_, proved especially at the Ming Period. (PELLIOT, _Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient_, IV., July-Sept, 1904, p. 772.)

LI., LII., pp. 98 seq.

WAR AGAINST THE KING OF MIEN.

The late Edouard HUBER of Hanoi, writing from Burmese sources, throws new light on this subject: “In the middle of the thirteenth century, the Burmese kingdom included Upper and Lower Burma, Arakan and Tenasserim; besides the Court of Pagan was paramount over several feudatory Shan states, until the valleys of the Yunnanese affluents of the Irawadi to the N.E., and until Zimme at the least to the E. Narasihapati, the last king of Pagan who reigned over the whole of this territory, had already to fight the Talaings of the Delta and the governor of Arakan who wished to be independent, when, in 1271, he refused to receive Kublai’s ambassadors who had come to call upon him to recognize himself as a vassal of China. The first armed conflict took place during the spring of 1277 in the Nam Ti valley; it is the battle of Nga-caung-khyam of the Burmese Chronicles, related by Marco Polo, who, by mistake, ascribes to Nasr ed-Din the merit of this first Chinese victory. During the winter of 1277-78, a second Chinese expedition with Nasr ed-Din at its head ended with the capture of Kaung sin, the Burmese stronghold commanding the defile of Bhamo. The _Pagan Yazawin_ is the only Burmese Chronicle giving exactly the spot of this second encounter. During these two expeditions, the invaders had not succeeded in breaking through the thick veil of numerous small thai principalities which still stand to-day between Yun Nan and Burma proper. It was only in 1283 that the final crush took place, when a third expedition, whose chief was Siang-wu-ta-eul (Singtaur), retook the fort of Kaung sin and penetrated more into the south in the Irawadi Valley, but without reaching Pagan. King Narasihapati evacuated Pagan before the impending advancing Chinese forces and fled to the Delta. In 1285 parleys for the establishment of a Chinese Protectorship were begun; but in the following year, King Narasihapati was poisoned at Prome by his own son Sihasura. In 1287, a fourth Chinese expedition, with Prince Ye-sin Timur at its head, reached at last Pagan, having suffered considerable losses…. A fifth and last Chinese expedition took place during the autumn of 1300 when the Chinese army went down the Irawadi Valley and besieged Myin-Saing during the winter of 1300-1301. The Mongol officers of the staff having been bribed the siege was raised.” (_Bul. Ecole Extreme-Orient_, Oct.-Dec., 1909, pp. 679-680; cf. also p. 651 _n._)

Huber, p. 666 _n._, places the battle-field of Vochan in the Nam Ti Valley; the Burmese never reached the plain of Yung Ch’ang.

LII., p. 106 n.

BURMA.

We shall resume from Chinese sources the history of the relations between Burma and China:

1271. Embassy of Kublai to Mien asking for allegiance.

1273. New embassy of Kublai.

1275. Information supplied by A-kuo, chief of Zardandan.

1277. First Chinese Expedition against Mien–Battle of Nga-caung-khyam won by Hu Tu.

1277. Second Chinese Expedition led by Nacr ed-Din.

1283. Third Chinese Expedition led by Prince Singtaur.

1287. Fourth Chinese Expedition led by Yisun Timur; capture of Pagan.

1300-1301. Fifth Chinese Expedition; siege of Myin-saing.

Cf. E. HUBER, _Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient_, Oct.-Dec., 1909, pp. 633-680.–VISDELOU, _Rev. Ext. Orient_, II., pp. 72-88.

LIII.-LIV., pp. 106-108. “After leaving the Province of which I have been speaking [Yung ch’ang] you come to a great Descent. In fact you ride for two days and a half continually down hill…. After you have ridden those two days and a half down hill, you find yourself in a province towards the south which is pretty near India, and this province is called AMIEN. You travel therein for fifteen days…. And when you have travelled those 15 days … you arrive at the capital city of this Province of Mien, and it also is called AMIEN….”

I owe the following valuable note to Mr. Herbert Allan OTTEWILL, H.M.’s Vice-Consul at T’eng Yueh (11th October, 1908):

“The indications of the route are a great descent down which you ride continually for two days and a half towards the south along the main route to the capital city of Amien.

“It is admitted that the road from Yung Ch’ang to T’eng Yueh is not the one indicated. Before the Hui jen Bridge was built over the Salween in 1829, there can be no doubt that the road ran to Ta tu k’ou–great ferry place–which is about six miles below the present bridge. The distance to both places is about the same, and can easily be accomplished in two days.

“The late Mr. Litton, who was Consul here for some years, once stated that the road to La-meng on the Salween was almost certainly the one referred to by Marco Polo as the great descent to the kingdom of Mien. His stages were from Yung Ch’ang: (1) Yin wang (? Niu wang); (2) P’ing ti; (3) Chen an so; (4) Lung Ling. The Salween was crossed on the third day at La-meng Ferry. Yung Ch’ang is at an altitude of about 5,600 feet; the Salween at the Hui jen Bridge is about 2,400, and probably drops 200-300 feet between the bridge and La-meng, Personally I have only been along the first stage to Niu Wang, 5,000 feet; and although aneroids proved that the highest point on the road was about 6,600, I can easily imagine a person not provided with such instruments stating that the descent was fairly gradual. From Niu Wang there must be a steady drop to the Salween, probably along the side of the stream which drains the Niu Wang Plain.

“La-meng and Chen an so are in the territory of the Shan Sawbwa of Mang Shih [Moeng Hkwan].”

“It is also a well-known fact that the Shan States of Hsen-wi (in Burma) and Meng mao (in China) fell under Chinese authority at an early date. Mr. E.H. Parker, quoted by Sir G. Scott in the _Upper Burma Gazetteer_, states: ‘During the reign of the Mongol Emperor Kublai a General was sent to punish Annam and passed through this territory or parts of it called Meng tu and Meng pang,’ and secured its submission. In the year 1289 the Civil and Military Governorship of Muh Pang was established. Muh Pang is the Chinese name of Hsen-wi.

“Therefore the road from Yung Ch’ang to La-meng fulfils the conditions of a great descent, riding two and a half days continually down hill finding oneself in a (Shan) Province to the south, besides being on a well-known road to Burma, which was probably in the thirteenth century the only road to that country.

“Fifteen days from La-meng to Tagaung or Old Pagan is not an impossible feat. Lung Ling is reached in 1-1/2 days, Keng Yang in four, and it is possible to do the remaining distance about a couple of hundred miles in eleven days, making fifteen in all.

“I confess I do not see how any one could march to Pagan in Latitude 21 deg. 13′ in fifteen days.”

LIV., p. 113.

NGA-TSHAUNG-GYAN.

According to the late E. HUBER, Ngan chen kue is not Nga-caung-khyam, but Nga Singu, in the Mandalay district. The battle took place, not in the Yung Ch’ang plain, but in the territory of the Shan Chief of Nan-tien. The official description of China under the Ming (_Ta Ming yi lung che_, k. 87, 38 v deg.) tells us that Nan-tien before its annexation by Kublai Khan, bore the name of Nan Sung or Nang Sung, and to-day the pass which cuts this territory in the direction of T’eng Yueh is called Nang-Sung-kwan. It is hardly possible to doubt that this is the place called Nga-caung-khyam by the Burmese Chronicles. (_Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient_, Oct.-Dec., 1909, p. 652.)

LVI., p. 117 n.

A Map in the Yun Nan Topography Section 9, “Tu-ssu” or Sawbwas, marks the Kingdom of “Eight hundred wives” between the mouths of the Irrawaddy and the Salween Rivers. (Note kindly sent by Mr. H.A. OTTEWILL.)

LIX., p. 128.

CAUGIGU.

M. Georges Maspero, _L’Empire Khmer_, p. 77 n., thinks that Canxigu = Luang Prabang; I read Caugigu and I believe it is a transcription of _Kiao-Chi Kwe_, see p. 131.

LIX., pp. 128, 131.

“I have identified, II., p. 131, Caugigu with _Kiao-Chi kwe_ (Kiao Chi), i.e. Tung King.” Hirth and Rockhill (_Chau Ju-kua_, p. 46 n.) write: “‘Kiau chi’ is certainly the original of Marco Polo’s Caugigu and of Rashideddin’s Kafchi kue.”

[1] _Pen ts’ao kang mu_, Ch. 25, p. 14b.

[2] Regarding this name and its history, see PELLIOT, _Journ. Asiatique_, 1912, I., p. 582. Qara Khodja was celebrated for its abundance of grapes. (BRETSCHNEIDER, _Mediaeval Res._, I., p. 65.) J. DUDGEON (_The Beverages of the Chinese_, p. 27) misreading it Ha-so-hwo, took it for the designation of a sort of wine. STUART (_Chinese Materia Medica_, p. 459) mistakes it for a transliteration of “hollands,” or may be “alcohol.” The latter word has never penetrated into China in any form.

[3] This work is also the first that contains the word _a-la-ki_, from Arabic ‘araq. (See _T’oung Pao_, 1916, p, 483.)

[4] A range of mountains separating Shan Si from Chi li and Ho Nan.

[5] This is probably a phantasy. We can make nothing of it, as it is not stated how the adulterated wine was made.

[6] This possibly is the earliest Chinese allusion to alcohol.

BOOK SECOND.–CONTINUED.

PART III.–JOURNEY SOUTHWARD THROUGH EASTERN PROVINCES OF CATHAY AND MANZI.

LX., p. 133.

CH’ANG LU.

The Rev. A.C. MOULE (_T’oung Pao_, July, 1915, p. 417) says that “Ciang lu [Ch’anglu] was not, I think, identical with Ts’ang chou,” but does not give any reason in support of this opinion.

CH’ANG LU SALT.

“To this day the _sole name_ for this industry, the financial centre of which is T’ien Tsin, is the ‘Ch’ang-lu Superintendency.'” (E.H. PARKER, _As. Quart. Review_, Jan., 1904, p. 147.) “The ‘Ch’ang-lu,’ or Long Reed System, derives its name from the city Ts’ang chou, on the Grand Canal (south of T’ientsin), once so called. In 1285 Kublai Khan ‘once more divided the Ho-kien (Chih-li) and Shan Tung interests,’ which, as above explained, are really one in working principle. There is now a First Class Commissary at Tientsin, with sixteen subordinates, and the Viceroy (who until recent years resided at Pao ting fu) has nominal supervision.” (PARKER, _China_, 1901, pp. 223-4.)

“Il y a 10 groupes de salines, _Tch’ang_, situes dans les districts de Fou ning hien, Lo t’ing hien, Loan tcheou, Fong joen hien, Pao tch’e hien, T’ien tsin hien, Tsing hai hien, Ts’ang tcheou et Yen chan hien. Il y a deux procedes employes pour la fabrication du sel: 1 deg. On etale sur un sol uni des cendres d’herbes venues dans un terrain sale et on les arrose d’eau de mer; le liquide qui s’en ecoule, d’une densite suffisante pour faire flotter un ceuf de poule ou des graines de nenuphar, _Che lien_, est chauffe pendant 24 heures avec de ces memes herbes employees comme combustible, et le sel se depose. Les cendres des herbes servent a une autre operation. 2 deg. L’eau de mer est simplement evaporee au soleil…. L’administrateur en chef de ce commerce est le Vice-roi meme de la province de Tche-li.” (P. HOANG, _Sel, Varietes Sinologiques_, No. 15, p. 3.)

LXI., pp. 136, 138.

SANGON–T’SIANG KIUN.

“Le titre chinois de _tsiang kiun_ ‘general’ apparait toujours dans les inscriptions de l’Orkhon sous la forme _saenuen_, et dans les manuscrits turcs de Tourfan on trouve _sangun_; ces formes avaient prevalu en Asie centrale et c’est a elles que repond le _sangon_ de Marco Polo” (ed. Yule-Cordier, II., 136, 138). PELLIOT, _Kao tch’ang_, _J. As._, Mai-Juin, 1912, p. 584 _n._

LXI., p. 138.

LITAN.

“For Li T’an’s rebellion and the siege of Ts’i-nan, see the _Yuean Shih_, c. v, fol. 1, 2; c. ccvi, fol. 2x deg.; and c. cxviii, fol. 5r’o. From the last passage it appears that Aibuga, the father of King George of Tenduc, took some part in the siege. Prince Ha-pi-ch’i and Shih T’ien-tse, but not, that I have seen, Agul or Mangutai, are mentioned in the _Yuean Shih_.” (A. C. MOULE, _T’oung Pao_, July, 1915, p. 417.)

LXII., p. 139.

SINJUMATU

This is Ts’i ning chau. “Sinjumatu was on a navigable stream, as Marco Polo expressly states and as its name implies. It was not long after 1276, as we learn from the _Yuean Shih_ (lxiv), that Kublai carried out very extensive improvements in the waterways of this very region, and there is nothing improbable in the supposition that the _ma-t’ou_ or landing-place had moved up to the more important town, so that the name of Chi chou had become in common speech Sinjumatu (Hsin-chou-ma-t’ou) by the time that Marco Polo got to know the place.” (A.C. MOULE, _Marco Polo’s Sinjumatu, T’oung Pao_, July, 1912, pp. 431-3.)

LXII., p. 139 n.

GREAT CANAL.

“Et si voz di qu’il ont un fluns dou quel il ont grant profit et voz dirai comant. Il est voir qe ceste grant fluns vient de ver midi jusque a ceste cite de Singuimatu, et les homes de la ville cest grant fluns en ont fait deus: car il font l’une moitie aler ver levant, et l’autre moitie aler ver ponent: ce est qe le un vait au Mangi, et le autre por le Catai. Et si voz di por verite que ceste ville a si grant navile, ce est si grant quantite, qe ne est nul qe ne veisse qe peust croire. Ne entendes qe soient grant nes, mes eles sunt tel come besogne au grant fluns, et si voz di qe ceste naville portent au Mangi e por le Catai si grant abondance de mercandies qe ce est mervoille; et puis quant elles revienent, si tornent encore cargies, et por ce est merveieliosse chouse a veoir la mercandie qe por celle fluns se porte sus et jus.” (_Marco Polo, Soc. de Geog._, p. 152.)

LXIV., p. 144.

CAIJU.

The Rev. A.C. Moule writes (_T’oung Pao_, July, 1915, p. 415): “Hai chou is the obvious though by no means perfectly satisfactory equivalent of Caigiu. For it stands not on, but thirty or forty miles from, the old bed of the river. A place which answers better as regards position is Ngan tung which was a _chou_ (_giu_) in the Sung and Yuan Dynasties. The _Kuang-yue-hsing-sheng_, Vol. II., gives Hai Ngan as the old name of Ngan Tung in the Eastern Wei Dynasty.”

LXIV., p. 144 n.

“La voie des transports du tribut n’etait navigable que de Hang tcheou au fleuve Jaune, [Koublai] la continua jusqu’aupres de sa capitale. Les travaux commencerent en 1289 et trois ans apres on en faisait l’ouverture. C’etait un ruban de plus de (1800) mille huit cents li (plus de 1000 kil.). L’etendue de ce Canal, qui merite bien d’etre appele imperial (Yu ho), de Hang Tcheou a Peking, mesure pres de trois mille li, c’est-a-dire plus de quatre cents lieues.” GANDAR, _Le Canal Imperial_, 1894, pp. 21-22. Kwa Chau (Caiju), formerly at the head of the Grand Canal on the Kiang, was destroyed by the erosions of the river.

LXV., p. 148 n.

Instead of K_o_tan, note 1, read K_i_tan. “The ceremony of leading a sheep was insisted on in 926, when the Tungusic-Corean King of Puh-hai (or Manchuria) surrendered, and again in 946, when the puppet Chinese Emperor of the Tsin Dynasty gave in his submission to the Kitans.” (E.H. PARKER, _As. Quart. Rev._, January, 1904, p. 140.)

LXV., p. 149.

LIN NGAN.

It is interesting to note that the spoils of Lin Ngan carried to Khan Balig were the beginning of the Imperial Library, increased by the documents of the Yuen, the Ming, and finally the Ts’ing; it is noteworthy that during the rebellion of Li Tze-ch’eng, the library was spared, though part of the palace was burnt. See N. PERI, _Bul. Ecole franc. Ext. Orient_, Jan.-June, 1911, p. 190.

LXVIII., p. 154 n.

YANJU.

Regarding Kingsmill’s note, Mr. John C. Ferguson writes in the _Journal North China Branch Roy. As. Soc._, XXXVII., 1906, p. 190: “It is evident that Tiju and Yanju have been correctly identified as Taichow and Yangchow. I cannot agree with Mr. Kingsmill, however, in identifying Tinju as Ichin-hien on the Great River. It is not probable that Polo would mention Ichin twice, once before reaching Yangchow and once after describing Yangchow. I am inclined to believe that Tinju is Hsien-nue-miao [Chinese], a large market-place which has close connection both with Taichow and Yangchow. It is also an important place for the collection of the revenue on salt, as Polo notices. This identification of Tinju with Hsien-nue-miao would clear up any uncertainty as to Polo’s journey, and would make a natural route for Polo to take from Kao yu to Yangchow if he wished to see an important place between these two cities.”

LXVIII., p. 154.

YANG CHAU.

In a text of the _Yuen tien chang_, dated 1317, found by Prof. Pelliot, mention is made of a certain Ngao-la-han [Abraham?] still alive at Yang chau, who was, according to the text, the son of the founder of the Church of the Cross of the arkaeguen (_Ye-li-k’o-wen she-tze-sze_), one of the three Nestorian churches of Yang-chau mentioned by Odoric and omitted by Marco Polo. Cf. _Cathay_, II., p. 210, and PELLIOT, _T’oung Pao_, 1914, p. 638.

LXX., p. 167.

SIEGE OF SAIANFU.

Prof. E.H. PARKER writes in the _Journ. of the North China Branch of the Roy. As. Soc._, XXXVII., 1906, p. 195: “Colonel Yule’s note requires some amendment, and he has evidently been misled by the French translations. The two Mussulmans who assisted Kublai with guns were not ‘A-la-wa-ting of Mu-fa-li and Ysemain of Huli or Hiulie,’ but A-la-pu-tan of Mao-sa-li and Y-sz-ma-yin of Shih-la. Shih-la is Shiraz, the Serazy of Marco Polo, and Mao-sa-li is Mosul. Bretschneider cites the facts in his _Mediaeval Notes_, and seems to have used another edition, giving the names as A-lao-wa-ting of Mu-fa-li and Y-sz-ma-yin of Hue-lieh; but even he points out that Hulagu is meant, i.e. ‘a man from Hulagu’s country.'”

LXX., p. 169.

“P’AO.”

“Captain Gill’s testimony as to the ancient ‘guns’ used by the Chinese is, of course (as, in fact, he himself states), second-hand and hearsay. In Vol. XXIV. of the _China Review_ I have given the name and date of a General who used _p’ao_ so far back as the seventh century.” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, pp. 146-7.)

LXXIV., p. 179 n.

THE ALANS.

According to the _Yuen Shi_ and Deveria, _Journ. Asiat._, Nov.-Dec., 1896, 432, in 1229 and 1241, when Okkodai’s army reached the country of the Aas (Alans), their chief submitted at once and a body of one thousand Alans were kept for the private guard of the Great Khan; Mangu enlisted in his bodyguard half the troops of the Alan Prince, Arslan, whose younger son Nicholas took a part in the expedition of the Mongols against Karajang (Yun Nan). This Alan imperial guard was still in existence in 1272, 1286, and 1309, and it was divided into two corps with headquarters in the Ling pei province (Karakorum). See also Bretschneider, _Mediaeval Researches_, II., pp. 84-90.

The massacre of a body of Christian Alans related by Marco Polo (II., p. 178) is confirmed by Chinese sources.

LXXIV., p. 180, n. 3.

ALANS.

See Notes in new edition of _Cathay and the Way thither_, III., pp. 179 seq., 248.

The massacre of the Alans took place, according to Chinese sources, at Chen-ch’ao, not at Ch’ang chau. The Sung general who was in charge of the city, Hung Fu, after making a faint submission, got the Alans drunk at night and had them slaughtered. Cf. PELLIOT, _Chretiens d’Asie centrale et d’Extreme-Orient, T’oung Pao_, Dec., 1914, p. 641.

LXXVI., pp. 184-5.

VUJU, VUGHIN, CHANGAN.

The Rev. A.C. Moule has given in the _T’oung Pao_, July, 1915, pp. 393 seq., the Itinerary between Lin Ngan (Hang Chau) and Shang Tu, followed by the Sung Dynasty officials who accompanied their Empress Dowager to the Court of Kublai after the fall of Hang Chau in 1276; the diary was written by Yen Kwang-ta, a native of Shao King, who was attached to the party.

The Rev. A.C. Moule in his notes writes, p. 411: “The connexion between Hu-chou and Hang-chou is very intimate, and the north suburb of the latter, the Hu-shu, was known in Marco Polo’s day as the Hu-chou shih. The identification of Vughin with Wu-chiang is fairly satisfactory, but it is perhaps worth while to point out that there is a place called Wu chen about fifty _li_ north of Shih-men; and for Ciangan there is a tempting place called Ch’ang-an chen just south of Shih-men on a canal which was often preferred to the T’ang-hsi route until the introduction of steam boats.”

LXXVI., p. 192. “There is one church only [at Kinsay], belonging to the Nestorian Christians.”

It was one of the seven churches built in China by Mar Sarghis, called _Ta p’u hing sze_ (Great Temple of Universal Success), or _Yang yi Hu-mu-la_, near the _Tsien k’iao men_. Cf. _Marco Polo_, II., p. 177; VISSIERE, _Rev. du Monde Musulman_, March, 1913, p. 8.

LXXVI., p. 193.

KINSAY.

Chinese Atlas in the Magliabecchian Library.

The Rev. A.C. Moule has devoted a long note to this Atlas in the _Journ. R. As. Soc._, July, 1919, pp. 393-395. He has come to the conclusion that the Atlas is no more nor less than the _Kuang yue t’u_, and that it seems that _Camse_ stands neither for Ching-shih, as Yule thought, nor for Hang chau as he, Moule, suggested in 1917, but simply for the province of Kiangsi. (_A Note on the Chinese Atlas in the Magliabecchian Library, with reference to Kinsay in Marco Polo_.)

Mr. P. von Tanner, Commissioner of Customs at Hang chau, wrote in 1901 in the _Decennial Reports, 1892-1901, of the Customs_, p. 4: “While Hangchow owes its fame to the lake on the west, it certainly owes its existence towards the south-west to the construction of the sea wall, called by the Chinese by the appropriate name of bore wall. The erection of this sea wall was commenced about the year A.D. 915, by Prince Ts’ien Wu-su; it extends from Hang Chau to Chuan sha, near the opening of the Hwang pu…. The present sea wall, in its length of 180 miles, was built. The wall is a stupendous piece of work, and should take an equal share of fame with the Grand Canal and the Great Wall of China, as its engineering difficulties were certainly infinitely greater…. The fact that Marco Polo does not mention it shows almost conclusively that he never visited Hang Chau, but got his account from a Native poet. He must have taken it, besides, without the proverbial grain of salt, and without eliminating the over-numerous ‘thousands’ and ‘myriads’ prompted less by facts than by patriotic enthusiasm and poetical licence.”

LXXVI., p. 194 n.

BRIDGES OF KINSAY.

In the heart of Hang-chau, one of the bridges spanning the canal which divides into two parts the walled city from north to south is called _Hwei Hwei k’iao_ (Bridge of the Mohamedans) or _Hwei Hwei Sin k’iao_ (New Bridge of the Mohamedans), while its literary name is _Tsi Shan k’iao_ (Bridge of Accumulated Wealth); it is situated between the Tsien k’iao on the south and the _Fung lo k’iao_ on the north. Near the _Tsi Shan k’iao_ was a mosk, and near the _Tsien k’iao_, at the time of the Yuen, there existed Eight Pavilions (_Pa kien lew_) inhabited by wealthy Mussulmans. Mohamedans from Arabia and Turkestan were sent by the Yuen to Hang-chau; they had prominent noses, did not eat pork, and were called _So mu chung_ (Coloured-eye race). VISSIERE, _Rev. du Monde Musulman_, March, 1913.

LXXVI., p. 199.

KINSAY, KHANFU.

Pelliot proposes to see in Khanfu a transcription of Kwang-fu, an abridgment of Kwang chau fu, prefecture of Kwang chau (Canton). Cf. _Bul. Ecole franc Ext. Orient_, Jan.-June, 1904, p. 215 n., but I cannot very well accept this theory.

LXXX., pp. 225, 226. “They have also [in Fu Kien] a kind of fruit resembling saffron, and which serves the purpose of saffron just as well.”

Dr. Laufer writes to me: “Yule’s identification with a species of _Gardenia_ is all right, although this is not peculiar to Fu Kien. Another explanation, however, is possible. In fact, the Chinese speak of a certain variety of saffron peculiar to Fu Kien. The _Pen ts’ao kang mu shi i_ (Ch. 4, p. 14 b) contains the description of a ‘native saffron’ (_t’u hung hwa_, in opposition to the ‘Tibetan red flower’ or genuine saffron) after the Continued Gazetteer of Fu Kien, as follows: ‘As regards the native saffron, the largest specimens are seven or eight feet high. The leaves are like those of the p’i-p’a (_Eriobotrya japonica_), but smaller and without hair. In the autumn it produces a white flower like a grain of maize (_Su-mi, Zea mays_). It grows in Fu Chou and Nan Ngen Chou (now Yang Kiang in Kwang Tung) in the mountain wilderness. That of Fu Chou makes a fine creeper, resembling the _fu-yung_ (_Hibiscus mutabilis_), green above and white below, the root being like that of the _ko_ (_Pachyrhizus thunbergianus_). It is employed in the pharmacopeia, being finely chopped for this purpose and soaked overnight in water in which rice has been scoured; then it is soaked for another night in pure water and pounded: thus it is ready for prescriptions.’ This plant, as far as I know, has not yet been identified, but it may well be identical with Polo’s saffron of Fu Kien.”

LXXX., pp. 226, 229 n.

_THE SILKY FOWLS OF MARCO POLO_.

Tarradale, Muir of Ord, Ross-shire, May 10, 1915.

In a letter lately received from my cousin Mr. George Udny Yule (St. John’s College, Cambridge) he makes a suggestion which seems to me both probable and interesting. As he is at present too busy to follow up the question himself, I have asked permission to publish his suggestion in _The Athenaeum_, with the hope that some reader skilled in mediaeval French and Italian may be able to throw light on the subject.

Mr. Yule writes as follows:–

“The reference [to these fowls] in ‘Marco Polo’ (p. 226 of the last edition; not p. 126 as stated in the index) is a puzzle, owing to the statement that they are _black_ all over. A black has, I am told, been recently created, but the common breed is white, as stated in the note and by Friar Odoric.

“It has occurred to me as a possibility that what Marco Polo may have meant to say was that they were _black all through_, or some such phrase. The flesh of these fowls is deeply pigmented, and looks practically black; it is a feature that is very remarkable, and would certainly strike any one who saw it. The details that they ‘lay eggs just like our fowls,’ i.e., not pigmented, and are ‘very good to eat,’ are facts that would naturally deserve especial mention in this connexion. Mr. A.D. Darbishire (of Oxford and Edinburgh University) tells me that is quite correct: the flesh look horrid, but it is quite good eating. Do any texts suggest the possibility of such a reading as I suggest?”

The references in the above quotation are, of course, to my father’s version of Marco Polo. That his nephew should make this interesting little contribution to the subject would have afforded him much gratification.

A.F. YULE.

_The Athenaeum_, No. 4570, May 29, 1915, p. 485.

LXXX., pp. 226, 230.

SUGAR.

“I may observe that the _Peh Shi_ (or ‘Northern Dynasties History’) speaks of a large consumption of sugar in Cambodgia as far back as the fifth century of our era. There can be no mistake about the meaning of the words _sha-t’ang_, which are still used both in China and Japan (_sa-to_). The ‘History of the T’ang Dynasty,’ in its chapter on Magadha, says that in the year 627 the Chinese Emperor ‘sent envoys thither to procure the method of boiling out sugar, and then ordered the Yang-chou sugar-cane growers to press it out in the same way, when it appeared that both in colour and taste ours excelled that of the Western Regions’ [of which Magadha was held to be part].” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p. 146.)

ZAITUN.

LXXXII., p. 237.

M.G. Ferrand remarks that _Tze tung_ = [Arabic], _zitun_ in Arabic, inexactly read _Zaytun_, on account of its similitude with its homonym [Arabic], _zyatun_, olive. (_Relat de Voy._, I., p. 11.)

LXXXII., pp. 242-245.

“Perhaps it may not be generally known that in the dialect of Foochow Ts’uean-chou and Chang-chou are at the present day pronounced in _exactly the same way_–i.e., ‘Chiong-chiu,’ and it is by no means impossible that Marco Polo’s _Tyunju_ is an attempt to reproduce this sound, especially as, coming to Zaitun via Foochow, he would probably first hear the Foochow pronunciation.” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p. 148)

BOOK THIRD.

JAPAN, THE ARCHIPELAGO, SOUTHERN INDIA, AND THE COASTS AND ISLANDS OF THE INDIAN SEA.

II., p. 256, n. 1.

NAFUN.

Regarding the similitude between _Nipon_ and _Nafun_, Ferrand, _Textes_, I., p. 115 n., remarks: “Ce rapprochement n’a aucune chance d’etre exact [Arabic] _Nafun_ est certainement une erreur de graphic pour [Arabic] _Yakut_ ou [Arabic] _Nakus_.”

III., p. 261.

JAPANESE WAR.

“Hung Ts’a-k’iu, who set out overland via Corea and Tsushima in 1281, is much more likely than Fan Wen-hu to be Von-sain-_chin_ (probably a misprint for _chiu_), for the same reason _Vo_-cim stands for _Yung_-ch’ang, and _sa_ for _sha, ch’a, ts’a_, etc. A-la-han (not A-ts’i-han) fell sick at the start, and was replaced by A-ta-hai. To copy _Abacan_ for _Alahan_ would be a most natural error, and I see from the notes that M. Schlegel has come to the same conclusion independently.” (E.H. PARKER, _Asiatic Quart. Rev._, Jan., 1904, p. 147.)

V., pp. 270, 271 n.

CHAMBA.

Lieut.-General Sagatu, So Tu or So To, sent in 1278 an envoy to the King known as Indravarman VI. or Jaya Sinhavarman. Maspero (_Champa_, pp. 237, 254) gives the date of 1282 for the war against Champa with Sagatu appointed at the head of the Chinese Army on the 16th July, 1282; the war lasted until 1285. Maspero thinks 1288 the date of Marco’s visit to Champa (L.c., p. 254).

VII., p. 277 n.

SONDUR AND CONDUR (PULO CONDORE).

Mr. C.O. Blagden has some objection to Sundar Fulat being Pulo Condor: “In connexion with Sundur-Fulat, some difficulties seem to arise. If it represents Pulo Condor, why should navigators on their way to China call at it _after_ visiting Champa, which lies beyond it? And if _fulat_ represents a Persian plural of the Malay _Pulau_,’island,’ why does it not precede the proper name as generic names do in Malay and in Indonesian and Southern Indo-Chinese languages generally? Further, if _sundur_ represents a native form _cundur_, whence the hard _c_ (= _k_) of our modern form of the word? I am not aware that Malay changes _c_ to _k_ in an initial position.” (_J. R. As. Soc._, April, 1914, p. 496.)

“L’ile de Sendi Foulat est tres grande; il y a de l’eau douce, des champs cultives, du, riz et des cocotiers. Le roi s’appelle Resed. Les habitants portent la fouta soit en manteau, soit en ceinture…. L’ile de Sendi Foulat est entouree, du cote de la Chine, de montagnes d’un difficile acces, et ou soufflent des vents impetueux. Cette ile est une des portes de la Chine. De la a la ville de Khancou, X journees.” EDRISI, I., p. 90. In Malay Pulo Condor is called Pulau Kundur (Pumpkin Island) and in Cambodian, Koh Tralach. See PELLIOT, _Deux Itineraires_, pp. 218-220. Fulat = _ful_ (Malay _pule_) + Persian plural suffix _-at_. _Cundur fulat_ means Pumpkin Island. FERRAND, _Textes_, pp. ix., 2.

VII., p. 277.

LOCAC.

According to W. Tomaschek (_Die topographischen Capitel des Indischen Seespiegels Mohit_, Vienna, 1897, Map XXIII.) it should be read _Losak_ = The _Lochac_ of the G.T. “It is _Lankacoka_ of the Tanjore inscription of 1030, the _Ling ya ssi kia_ of the _Chu-fan-chi_ of Chau Ju-kua, the _Lenkasuka_ of the _Nagarakretagama_, the _Lang-saka_ of Sulayman al Mahri, situated on the eastern side of the Malay Peninsula.” (G. FERRAND, _Malaka, le Malayu et Malayur_, _J. As._, July-Aug, 1918, p. 91.) On the situation of this place which has been erroneously identified with