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

i

56   MARCO POLO.   VOL. I. BK. I.

Page 231, note 3. Instead of Yuché, read Juché.

I~

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 I 124 ; 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. Ica) 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'éh-lieh or Keraits of Mongol history ; at no period of Chinese

history were the Ch'ih-lêh called, as he supposes, K'i-lé, and

therefore the Ch'ih-lêh of the third century cannot possibly be

identified with the K'é-lieh of the thirteenth. Besides, the

` value ' of lêla 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 Shi states that