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

strata of the third century A. D., our exploring shafts showed that the base
of culture was probably not older than a few centuries B. C.

There can be little doubt that among the great number of wasted
mounds on the large Merv oasis some are exceedingly ancient, but intense
heat and the prevalence of dysentery among the personnel and beginning
mortality among the workmen put an end to excavating, and we removed
to the more healthy altitude of Samarkand, where, after a hasty examina-
tion into the local archeological possibilities, I disbanded the expedition.
Mr. Huntington was left to make a rapid survey of the distribution of mounds
on the Merv oasis, and Mr. R. W. Pumpelly started an expedition on his
own account, for physiographic observation, through the mountains of
Bokhara and over the Pamir to Kashgar in Chinese Turkestan, the results
of which are incorporated in his chapters in the second volume.

It was my intention to defer publication of the results of the expedition
of 1904 until after that proposed for 1905. But the condition of unrest in
Russia during the winter of 1904–05 caused the Trustees of the Carnegie
Institution to postpone the work, and the preparation of the reports was
immediately begun, and continued till 1907.

While each one of the investigators was expected to work up his mate-
rial, there devolved upon me, as initiator and director of the expeditions,
the duty of presenting an independent discussion of the results as a whole.
I found myself confronted with the task of translating and editing the contri-
butions of the experts, and of drawing my own conclusions from these and
from my own observations. To do this I surrounded myself with a library
of six hundred or more volumes, covering many of the more important as
well as latest writings in the sciences related to our work and problems,
besides many borrowed from libraries. Literally living in this problem, for
nearly four years, my whole time, reading, and thought has been devoted
to acquiring such a general survey of the field as would enable me to discuss
the subject of our results and of their wider bearing in the light of the present
condition of archeological and ethnological knowledge.

Besides incidental inspection of the museums of Tiflis and Tashkent,
numerous visits for study were made to those of Moscow, St. Petersburg,
Berlin, Vienna, Zürich, Schafhausen, Cairo, Athens, London, Naples, and
Rome, and to those of Paris, including M. De Morgan's systematically col-
lected finds from Susiana—to me perhaps the most important of all—and in
connection with my chapter on chronology a special journey was made,
together with R. W. Pumpelly, to Egypt to study the rate of growth of
Egyptian village mounds in comparison with those of Anau.

Of the two alternatives—confining the reports, my own included, to a
record of observations and finds—or having each contributor go further and,