Regarding the principal arrangement of the mountain ranges and systems of Tibet we may with the greatest confidence accept the views of Sir S. G. BURRARD as they appear on his frontispiece map 1 — so far as the western and southern portions of the highlands and the gigantic ramparts are concerned, the Pamirs and the Himalaya. His conclusions, founded upon the most reliable material in existence, must both in the west and the south be used as fundamental lines in our attempts to follow the alignments of the systems in the little known or even unknown parts of the interior of Tibet, and in our speculations regarding the connection of the more or less well-known ranges in the west with their continuations and prolongations in the east.
As a series of starting points of great importance I also regard the S. E. ends of the three Kara-korum Ranges as the latter have been described by Dr. ARTHUR NEVE. (Cf. Pl. LXXXVIII below.)
The Ladak Range of Burrard we may take as fixed. Regarding his Kailas Range my results in very essential points disagree with his, especially in the whole central section of this system. The first step we have to take is therefore to try and fix the situation of the Kailas Range. It should be said at once that this name is unsuitable for the whole system. The Kailas is only a point on a very long line, whereas Transhimalaya is a name indicating a labyrinth of ranges situated on the other side of, or beyond, the Himalaya. As soon as we are able to fix the situation of the Transhimalaya, we have a framework or starting line to the south and west, from which we may continue our attempts to conquer the next great fold to the north of it, and so forth the whole way up to the Kwen-lun. To this problem also belongs the interesting question about the connection of the Tang-la with one of the Kara-korum Ranges.
IIIF Color HighRes
