国立情報学研究所 - ディジタル・シルクロード・プロジェクト
『東洋文庫所蔵』貴重書デジタルアーカイブ

323. QUTAN-QUTANSUI   817

Oh, Iv, 102), this name was given to Gäihatu by the babsi (see « Bacsi ») when he ascended the throne; according to others, it was conferred on the ilkhans by the Mongol Emperor (cf. Y, I, 428; HOWORTH, III, 357). The two seem easily reconcilable. Qubilai had given to his eldest son the name of rDo-rje (see « Cinchim »), and, after his accession to the throne, was strongly under the influence of the Tibetan lamas. It may be that the Tibetan lamas in China (whom Wagâàf calls bahsi just as Polo) chose a Tibetan name which Qubilai gave to Gäibatu when he sent him the edict of inves-

titure. As a matter of fact, it is only under the name of « King ;; 04 X. 7   A I-lien-chên
to-êrh-chih » (°Iränjin-Dorji = Rin-Ch'en rDo-rje) that Gäibatu appears in YS, 107, 7 b (and wrongly as a brother of Abaya, while he is his son). It is not impossible that, like Gäihatu, Baidu should have also received the appellation of Irän)in, though, for him, the investiture had no time to come from China, at least in his lifetime. Moreover, this Mongolized Tibetan name Iränjin or Irinjin really came to be in use in Persia by that time and was borne by a great « Emir », who belonged, curiously enough, to the Christian family of the ancient Kerait princes (cf. Hal, II, 457). Both the name Irinjin-torji of Gäihatu and the name Irinjin of the Kerait emir appear in the Life of Mar Yahballaha III, but CHABOT has restored them to their correct form without giving the true readings of the Mss., and BUDGE (The Monks of ûblaî Khân) has reproduced the successive and conflicting readings of the Mss. without taking the trouble to give anywhere the correct forms. To account for the adoption of Tibetan names by Mongols of Persia, without any intervention from the Mongol Emperor of Peking, we must not forget that Arun had greatly favoured the Lamas (bahsi); cf. Oh, Iv, 53.

Gäihatu, of whom Mussulman writers speak so harshly, was benevolent towards Christians, and the Life of Mar Yahballaha III praises him for his justice and generosity (CHABOT, 97); but it seems to be by confusion with Öljäitü that d'OHssoN (Oh, iv, 69) says Gäihatu had been baptized, under the name of Nicholas; with Ahmad (see « Acmat2 ») and Öljäitü, it is enough to have two Nicholas among the Mongol sovereigns of Persia (assuming that Öljäitü's Christian name was not Theodosios; all these questions have never been taken up seriously).

In most Mss. of the F type, Polo speaks of the ilk Min river at Ch'êng-tu, which he takes for the upper course of the Yang-tzû (in accordance with the common Chinese belief of the time), as « Quiansui », and of the Yang-tzû when he reaches it south of Yang-chou as «Quian ». Nevertheless RAMUSIO