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

one at the 'Tati' of v. As a reference to Appendix B will show, all these are Wu-chu pieces pro-
bably of the Later Han dynasty or uninscribed and clipped coins ascribed to the same period. Not
a single T'ang coin was discovered at the site. In order to emphasize the significance of this fact
it will suffice to point out that among the coins actually found in the course of my exploration at the
Khādalik site not less than 98 belonged to T'ang issues and only 5 were Wu-chu pieces.¹⁷ Thus the
numismatic evidence as to the earlier date of the remains at Farhād-Bēg-yailaki appears to me very
strong.

The same is the case with the clay sealings. All three found were manifestly once attached to
wooden documents, and the impressions on them are from gems showing either late classical work-
manship or its immediate influence.¹⁸ Their type is closely allied to that of the clay seal impressions
found at the Niya Site. Some value must be attached also to the architectural evidence of the
double-bracket from F. II, which, as we have seen, represents a development of the form familiar from
the Niya Site, but one decidedly older than that seen in the corresponding wood-carvings of Khāda-
lik.¹⁹ Our knowledge of Buddhist pictorial art in the Khotan region is far too imperfect as yet for
any safe conclusion to be drawn from the style of the few painted panels found at F. II. But my
general impression is that they show the influence of Indian models more closely than the similar
panels from Dandān-oilik or the fresco fragments recovered from Khādalik. On the other hand,
there seems little or no difference in style between the latter and the wall-paintings found in the
shrine F. XII.²⁰ Finally, attention may be called also to the marked distinction in material and
character between the written remains found at the Farhād-Bēg-yailaki ruins and those from Dandān-
oilik and Khādalik. At both the latter sites paper appears as the regular writing-material, whereas
at the Farhād-Bēg-yailaki site the number of paper fragments is insignificant and wooden tablets pre-
dominate. Nor should it be ignored that all the written remains recovered from the latter are in
Brahmi script, while both Dandān-oilik and Khādalik have yielded up Chinese pieces also, and the
second Tibetan pieces in addition.

Regard for all these indications combined makes me inclined to conclude that the Farhād-Bēg-
yailaki site must have ceased to be occupied a considerable time earlier than the settlements of
Dandān-oilik and Khādalik, which, as we have seen, were abandoned towards the very end of the
eighth century or very soon after.²¹ It is impossible at present more definitely to indicate the actual
time when the site became deserted. But two observations should be taken into account as likely
to help in fixing an approximate chronological limit. One is purely negative—the total absence of
written remains in Kharoṣṭhī, a script which, as we know, continued in use within the Tārim Basin
down to the fourth century, if not even somewhat later. The other indication is of a topographical
character and supplied by Sung Yün's narrative. This traveller, passing in A.D. 519 from Charchan
towards Khotan, mentions the town of Mo 末城 at a distance of 22 li to the east of Han-mo 捍摩.
Of this place M. Chavannes has proved that it was identical with Hsüan-tsang's Pi-mo 媲摩, and
for its location at the site of Uzun-tati, north of Ulūgh-ziārat (or Ulūgh-mazār, Map No. 27. D. 4),
I believe that I have advanced strong and convincing reasons after my first exploration of the site.²²

When recording this view I had already suggested that 'Sung Yün's town of Mo which was
22 li east of his Han-mo would . . . have to be looked for somewhere about "Old Domoko" or a little
to the north of it'. A reference to the map (No. 31. A. 4) shows that the Farhād-Bēg-yailaki site
corresponds to this location as closely as we can reasonably expect. Its northernmost 'Tatis' lie