XXXII., p. 174.
“The note connecting Hiuan Tsang’s Kieh sha with Kashgar is probably based upon an error of the old translators, for the Sita River was in the Pamir region, and K’a sha was one of the names of Kasanna, or Kieh-shwang-na, in the Oxus region.” (E. H. Parker, Asiatic Quart. Rev., Jan., 1904, p. 143.)
XXXII., I. p. 173; II. p. 593.
PAONANO PAO.
Cf. The Name Kushan, by J. F. Fleet, Jour. Roy. As. Soc., April, 1914, pp. 374–9; The Shaonano Shao Coin Legend; and a Note on the name Kushan by J. Allan, Ibid., pp. 403–411. Paonano Pao. Von Joh. Kirste. (Wiener Zeit. f. d. Kunde d. Morg., II., 1888, pp. 237–244.)
XXXII., p. 174.
YUE CHI.
“The old statement is repeated that the Yüeh Chi, or Indo-Scyths (i.e. the Eptals), ‘are said to have been of Tibetan origin.’ A long account of this people was given in the Asiatic Quart. Rev. for July, 1902. It seems much more likely that they were a branch of the Hiung-nu or Turks. Albiruni’s ‘report’ that they were of Tibetan origin is probably founded on the Chinese statement that some of their ways were like Tibetan ways, and that polyandry existed amongst them; also that they fled from the Hiung-nu westwards along the north edge of the Tibetan territory, and some of them took service as Tibetan officials.” (E. H. Parker, Asiatic Quart. Rev., Jan., 1904, p. 143.)
XXXII., pp. 178–179.