National Institute of Informatics - Digital Silk Road Project
Digital Archive of Toyo Bunko Rare Books

> > > >
Color New!IIIF Color HighRes Gray HighRes PDF   Japanese English
0343 Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1
Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1 / Page 343 (Grayscale High Resolution Image)

New!Citation Information

doi: 10.20676/00000246
Citation Format: Chicago | APA | Harvard | IEEE

OCR Text


158. CINGHIS   327

destroyed Hsi-Hsia, they moved their troops towards Shàn-hsi ». In the fourth month, on the day ping-shên (May 3), the Chin Emperor called a meeting of his principal officials to make a decision on the conditions in the west (i. e. in Shàn-hsi). The Emperor said : « I have already issued an order to [Wan-yen] Ha-ta (there is nothing about this in Wan-yen Ha-ta's biography; he had been recalled from Shàn-hsi in the second month [February 18-March 18] ; cf. Chin shih, 112, 2 b) to engage in a decisive battle with all his strength ». Most of the officials were in favour of reaching a peaceful settlement with the Mongols; Sa-ha-lien was the only one to oppose it, and with considerable energy (more details are given in another biography, Chin shih, 109, 7 a, where, however, the deliberation is said to have taken place in the third month [March 19-April 17], and where Sa-ha-lien is not alone in his stand for a decisive battle; the pen-chi, 17, 3 a, give no information). « In the eighth month (September 12-October 11), the Court received the report of [what had happened at] Ch'ing-shui, and the authorities were ordered to stop levying men for garrisoning the cities and repairing their walls; all the taxes and duties for the requirements of the army which were not urgent were suspended. » What had happened at Ch'ing-shui was evidently the death of Chinghiz-khan, on account of which the Chin Court thought they could relax their efforts for the defence of the country.

The conclusion we reach is that Chinghiz-khan certainly died south of the Liu-p'an-shan, within the jurisdiction of the hsien of Ch'ing-shui. But should the « Ha-Iao-t'u hsing-kung of the Sa-li Valley » be located there? PAUTHIER (Pa, 183) said that « Sari-goof » was merely the Mongol translation of Ch'ing-shui, « Pure water ». We have seen above that no text mentions a « Sarigool »; moreover, I know of no Altaic word « sari » meaning « pure ». The Ch'ien-lung Commis-

sioners have explained Sa-Ii as Sali, meaning j{{1,   ti-nu, lit. « earth-crossbow » (Yuan-shih yü-chieh,
4, 1 b). In Mongolian, sali (< Tib. spa-li < Skr. . ä1i) occurs in the sense of « rice », but I am at a loss to understand what is meant by ti-nu. In any case, the restoration is of course arbitrary. I leave out of consideration BI.ocHET's statement that, according to Magrizi, Chinghiz-khan died at A ; ~arû-bâliq (= Sarï-baiiq, « Yellow City »), which would seem to offer another instance of this « Sa-li » occurring in the name of the « Sa-li Valley ». But the Egyptian historian could have had no independent information as to the place where Chinghiz died, and I strongly suspect

« aru-bâlïq » to be a tendencious misreading of a corrupt form of « Liû-pan » or «   »
(cf. TP, 1935, 166). In principle, the existence of some elements of Mongolian nomenclature in Kan-su should not be discarded off-hand, since we know of other uses of it there as well as elsewhere in China, e. g. « Qara-jang », « tay'an-fang », « Citkör », « Yäkä-busä » in Yün-nan (see « Caragian »), « Cad an-baly'asun » in Ho-pei (see « Achbaluch ») ; in Kan-su, we find a *Qara-; ajar between the Alasan and the Huang-ho (see « Calacian »), and, south of the Liu-p'an-shan, the name

misread as 1;   Bisun-gahaiga in B1, iI, 326-327, and wrongly identified with   , Mi-ts'ang,

but which certainly is   9 ~ ~> Yésùn-gàhälgä == Yesün-ga'al;'a, « The Nine Passes » (cf., for the
name, Yäsün-ga'al; atu Kota of SCHMIDT, 289, « Nine-gates City », which is but another name of

Peking); a 411 (S Q, JII Sa-tu-êhr-ch'uan, which seems to be a *Sadur Valley, and a A :   S .17
Hsü-mieh-to-ho, *Sümädü (or *Sümätü) River (? «River with Temples ») are still mentioned under

the Ming, north-west of the Liu-p'an-shan, in the X F   JJ   T'ien-hsia ming-shêng chih
(section of the Shàn-hsi ming-shêng chih, 7, 9 a).