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

INTRODUCTION   13

not go very far with regard to the accuracy of the first part of the chronicles.

Here folklore comes to our aid. It has preserved the names of two more kings

of the first dynasty in two songs, the drift of which is not in opposition to

what the chronicles say about them ; these are the kings Ni-ma-mgon and Jo-dpal.

And the name of yet another king, or at least prince, of Western Tibet, Prince

Rin-chen, is apparently attested by the chronicles of Kashmir. Certainly, we should

be glad to be able to adduce more arguments to prove the accuracy of the account

of the first dynasty. However, what can be adduced is in accordance with its

statements, even with regard to chronology, and I think we have a right to accept f

also the account of the first West Tibetan dynasty as on the whole true and reliable.

In no case do the West Tibetan chronicles enable us to fix the time of the

reign of a king exactly, and the Tibetan dates have to be used with much caution.

The Tibetans, as well as the Chinese, have cycles of sixty years, which are differentiated

by numbers. The first Tibetan cycle begins with the year J 024, A. D. (1026 according

to Waddell). This great cycle of sixty years contains smaller cycles of twelve years

each, the single years of which are named after twelve animals. To be able to

distinguish between the same animal years within the cycle of sixty, the animals'

names are coupled with the names of the Tibetan five elements. Thus, a date is

complete if the following is given : (1) the number of the great cycle, (2) the animal

of the little cycle, (3) the element. For instance, the water-ox year of the foúrteenth cycle is the year 1853 A.D. But in most cases the date is not given completely enough

to be of much use. In the most ancient dates only the animal's naine is given. Some time between 1500 and 1600 the Ladakhis began to combine the animal's name with

that of an element. Dates furnished also with the number of the cycle of sixty do

not occur before the nineteenth century. Besides, I have come to the conclusion

that the Ladakhi cycles are behind the Tibetan cycles by exactly twelve years.

Compare the dates for the beginning of the Dogra war and for the discovery of

the sapphire mine. But in the second half of the nineteenth century some lama

authority introduced the Tibetan cycles. Thus we have no absolute certainty with

regard to West Tibetan dates. As, however, several West Tibetan kings were

contemporaries of other historical personages whose dates can be fixed, we are in

a position to furnish all the Ladakhi kings with approximate dates. With regard to

the second dynasty eventual mistakes can hardly amount to more than a decade.

From the outset it must be understood that the reign of a certain king may have

been longer or shorter than the period given in this chronicle ; but it is probable

that some years of his actual reign coincide with some of the . years given here.

The fixed dates, on which hinges the whole chronology given in this book, are the following : Glaii-dar-ma, 816-42 A.D., according to the Chinese ; Atésa, 980-1053 according to the Rehu-mig ; Prince Rin-then, c. 1320 A.D., according to the Kashmir

chronicles ; Tsoi -kha-pa, 1356-1418, according to the Rehu-mig ; the Turkoman invasion of Ladakh under Sultan Haidar, 1532 A.D., according to the Ta'rikh-i-Rashidi ; the

siege of Bab-sgo, c.

1650 A.D., according to various authorities ; Desideri's visit to