“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 Kerminé, 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-lêh or T’ieh-lêh (who have been clearly proved to be identical with the Tölös of the Turkish inscriptions) with the much later K’êh-lieh or Keraits of Mongol history; at no period of Chinese history were the Ch’ih-lêh called, as he supposes, K’i-lê, and therefore the Ch’ih-lêh of the third century cannot possibly be identified with the K’ê-lieh of the thirteenth. Besides, the ‘value’ of lêh 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 (Nüchen) Dynasty in its Annals leaves no mention whatever of the Kerait tribe, or of any tribe having an approximate name, although the Yüan Shï states that the Princes of that tribe used to hold a Nüchen patent. A solution of this unexplained fact may yet turn up.” (E. H. Parker, Asiatic Quart. Rev., Jan. 1904, p. 139.)
Page 236, note [11]. 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 Yüan Shï, 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. 34½°, long. 106½°), and was even on his dying bed, giving instructions how to meet the Nüchên army at T’ung-kwan (lat. 34½°, long. 110¼°), 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-lê-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-kü 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 there is an article on the Discovery of and Investigation concerning the Tomb of Gengis Khan. I have not seen it.
LI., p. 249.