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

« Barscol » the hypothesis that « Sichin- » might be 給 興 Shih-hsing (*Si-hing), a district (hsien)
at the seat of Chao-chou under the Chin; « Sichin- » would be correct enough for Shih-hsing, but
there is little likelihood that this obscure hsien should have survived under the Mongols and come
to the knowledge of Polo; moreover it never was a chou. The name of « Sichintingiu » is probably
corrupt, with a wrong duplication of the second syllable; but I have as yet no reasons to decide for
« Sichingiu » or for « Silingiu ».
I do not believe in « Shang-ching » + « Tung-ching », quoted from YULE-CORDIER in B¹, 447,
and still less in writing « Shing-king », i. e. Shêng-ching (Mukden); this last name dates only from
the 17th cent.

337. SILINGIU

City
bugiun V singui L, VA, Z sirigai VL
singiu F singuy FA, FB, LT zigoi VB
Province
silingiu Z siulagui V
City or Province
cinguy P singhui TA¹, TA³ singui R

This had been identified with 西 寧 州 Hsi-ning-chou (Hsi-ning-fu under the Ch'ing) by
MARSDEN, PAUTHIER, and YULE, even though the Mss. usually only gave « Singiu »; « Silingiu »
occurs only in the recently discovered Z, but is confirmed by « Sinlingin » on Fra Mauro's map (Zu,
34; HALLBERG, 479). It is well known that in Central Asian languages the name of that place is
Siling, Seling, etc. (cf. Y, I, 276; YULE, Hobson-Jobson², 846-847; LAUFER, in TP, 1916, 518-519);
despite the usual Tibetan form Zi-liṅ (for instance in Sarat CHANDRA DAS's Dictionary), the
Geography of the Min-jul ḅutuktu (V. VASIL'EV, Geografiya Tibeta, 1895, p. 52) writes Si-lin.
PARKER's hypothesis of 鄯 州 Shan-chou, quoted in Y, III, 61-62, is unnecessary and falls
to the ground, at least phonetically, now that we have the true reading « Silingiu ». It is under the
name of Hsi-ning that the place appears in YS, 60, 13 a, and in the itineraries of Yung-lo ta-tien,
19426, 6 b. Polo speaks here of a part of China which he never visited and which lay between his
route Kan-chou–Liang-chou–Ning-hsia, when he came to the Court of Qubilai, and his later itinerary
via Hsi-an–Han-chung–Ch'êng-tu, when he went to Yün-nan. Polo's tendency to put « seloc »,
south-east, for all sorts of places in China which he speaks from hearsay affords ample explanation of his
giving the same indication about a place of which he speaks from hearsay, and which is really south-
south-west. CHARIGNON has proposed 靈 州 Ling-chou (Ch, I, 233-234), which is impossible, since