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

are told in the Ḥudūd al-ʿĀlam that the river Kisau took the name of γiyān after having entered the boundaries of Buyšūr, and Gardīzī's text seems to me to imply that the Qiyān was crossed at B.γ-šūrā. If Buyšūr or B.γ-šūrā is Lan-chou, the γiyān of the Ḥudūd al-ʿĀlam and the Qiyān of Gardīzī, although rendering the Chinese word chiang, « the River », do not refer to the Yang-tzŭ, but to the Huang-ho. I readily concede that, from the point of view of Chinese usage, such a conclusion is disconcerting, and I shall not hold it as certain so long as we cannot account for the names of K.jā and of Buyšūr.

Even if, in the source common to the Ḥudūd al-ʿĀlam and to Gardīzī, the name Qiyān was misapplied, its very existence makes it likely that it remained alive in Persian-speaking circles, from whom Polo would have heard it in China. But while accounting for Polo's « Quian », it makes his « Quiansui » the more surprising.

The transcriptions of Ch. k- of chiang (= kiang) by Ar. Pers. q- in late T'ang times (« Qiyan »), but by k- in the Mongol period (« Kāng »), and of Ch. k- of 忏 kan (in Mongol times, still kam) by Ar. Pers. b- in T'ang times (« Ɨam[ēū] »), but by q- in the Mongol period (see « Campçio ») are not without parallels. A difficulty remains. According to Karlgren's system, 江 chiang sounded *kâng in Middle Chinese, just as 杭 kang (Analytic Dict., p. 157), that is to say without the palatalization so strongly marked in the 9th or 10th cent. transcription qiyān (or qiān ?). But this is one of the few cases in which I think that the phonetic indications derived from the ancient Chinese dictionaries are misleading and do not represent the pronunciation from which « Mandarin » Chinese is derived. I have discussed in TP, 1930, 194-195, a similar case with 鹽 hsien, *yam according to Karlgren, although it is used towards the end of the 5th cent. to transcribe the first syllable of yamčīn, « postmaster » (see « Iamb »). Chiang (kiang) and hsien (hien < hiäm) must have been pronounced already in Middle Chinese with the palatal element which is suggested by the transcriptions and which appears for these words in modern Mandarin.

324. RUCNEDIN ACMAT

acomant, aromant VB reame de achomac LT rucumodi acamat F
re amadachomach, re ruchomo regno chiamado achomat V ruemedam ahomet, ruomedam
dediachomach VA reumeda jachomat, ruccomot acromac FA
re dininedano comoith, reume- dyacamat TA¹ ruemedan acomat F, FB
clauacomar VL ruchmedin achomach R ruemedan ahommet FB
re humeda jachomat TA³

This name of the king of Hormuz mentioned by Polo has been much discussed. In his text, Yule adopted (Y, I, 107) « Ruomedam Ahomet », which was the form printed by Pauthier (Pa, 85) without any remark, although it was not actually given by any Ms. Benedetto (Be², 446) pronounced in favour of « Maimodi Acomat », which he says occurs once in F (so misread by the editor of 1824, p. 36, and Yule, in Y, I, 120), and Ricci-Ross (RR, 426) added a note suggesting an ori-