^{page 434 note 1} One of their original seven tribes, the Sumo, had formed on the north of Corea (in Mandshu Solgo) the state of Puh–hai (exactly Puthaï), from A.D. 696 to 926, where the civilization was chiefly Chinese. Of. De Guignes, Histoire des Suns, vol. i. pp. 207–208. D'Hervey St.-Denys, Ethnographie des peuples étrangers à la Chine, de Matouanlin, vol. i. pp. 347–372.

^{page 435 note 1} All the bibliographical references will be found in the notes, infrà.

^{page 435 note 2} For instance, among European Orientalists, the late A. Wylie, Prof. Léon de Rosny, Prof. Ch. de Harlez, and Dr. E. Bretschneider spell Niutchi or Niuehi De Guignes spells Nutchin; Klaproth, Ed. Biot, Dr. F. Hirth spell Joutchi or Juchi; Dr. Plath, Prof. Vassiliew, M. G. Devéria spell Joutchen or Juchen, etc.

^{page 436 note 1} Devéria, G., Ezamen de la stéle de Ten-t'aï; dissertation sur les caractérts d'écriture employés par les Tartares Jou-tchen, by Kien-ting, Lin-k'ing, transl. in Revue de I'extréme Orient, vol. i. pp. 173–186Google Scholar; cf. note 4, p. 174. On the Djurtchen Writing, cf. de Kosny, L., Les Niutchih, leur langue et leur écrilure, pp. 179–189 of his Archives paléographiques, vol. i. Paris, 1872Google Scholar. Wylie, A., On an Ancient Inscription in the Neuchih Language (Journ. Soy. Asiat. Soc. 1860, Vol. XVII. pp. 331–345)Google Scholar; On an Ancient Buddhist Inscription at Keu-yung lewan, in N. China (ibid. 1871, Vol. V. pp. 14–44, and plates). And also Hirth, F., The Chinese Oriental College, pp. 207–213 (Journ. China Branch Soy. Asiat. Soc. 1887, vol. xxii. pp. 203–223)Google Scholar. The learned author, while in China, has luckily been able to secure a complete MS. copy of the Hua-y yh yii, containing a vocabulary of 881 words of the Djurtchen language, and proposes to publish it in facsimile.

^{page 436 note 2} Cf. also Sheng wu M, Wars of the Mandshu Dynasty, bk. i. f. 1. A. Wylie, Introd. p. 2 of his Translation of the Ts'ing wan k'e mung, A Chinese Grammar of the Manchu- Tartar Language, Shanghai, 1855Google Scholar.

^{page 436 note 3} Tchtih Shu k'i nien, Shun, year 25.

^{page 436 note 4} Shu king, Preface 56.

^{page 436 note 5} Yh Tchöu shu, also called Kih tchung Tchöu shu, sect. “Wang huei.

^{page 436 note 6} Ts'o tchuen, Tchao kung, ninth year, 2.

^{page 436 note 7} Kwoh yü, k.v., Luh yü, 2. It is also reported in the She lei of Szema Tsien.

^{page 437 note 1} Shan haï king, bk. 7, f. 4.

^{page 437 note 2} Hwai-nan tze, Tchui heng hün.

^{page 437 note 3} Höu Han Shu, bk. 115, transl. A. “Wylie in Revue de VExtreme Orient, vol. i. pp. 65–66.

^{page 437 note 4} Taï ping yü Ian, bk. 784, ff. 2, 3.

^{page 437 note 5} Cf. Kiu T'ang shu, bk. 199.

^{page 437 note 6} Namely suk, sik, tsik.

^{page 437 note 7} E. Bretschneider, Notices of the Mediæval Geography, p. 34.

^{page 437 note 8} On this vocabulary cf. below, § 25.

^{page 438 note 1} Dr. P. Hirth had (7th Sept. 1888) the kindness to communicate to me some instances of this vocabulary, and the present one was among them. In the History of their Dynasty in Mandshu, that which was lately translated by Prof. C. de Harlez, the name is spelt Niotchi, a simple transcription of the Chinese form, which therefore is no proof in the question of the original name. The history here referred to is a part of the Ilan gurun-i suduri, or History of the Three Kingdoms (i.e. Liao, Kin, and Yuen), which was compiled so late as the years 1644–1646. On the conditions under which it was written cf. de Harlez, C. in Journal Asiatique, 1883, vol. ii. pp. 309–311Google Scholar, and the Manuel de la langue Mandchoue, pp. 227–228, of the same author.

^{page 438 note 2} Devéria, G., Examen de la stéle de Yen-t'aï, cp.c. p. 175Google Scholar.

^{page 438 note 3} G. Devéria, ibid. I cannot explain this etymology, which probably is a simple pun. The word for ‘sea’ in Djuvtchen is given as lu-tih-lin, Mandshu mederi. On the other hand, the Mandshu dictionary gives Jus'en as a term for ‘Mandshu servants,’ and also ‘family people,’ in C. de Harlez, Le Manju gisun-i buleku bithe (Z.f.D.M.O.), repr. p. 2.

^{page 438 note 4} Bretschneider, E., Mediæval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources, vol. i. pp. 196, 224 (London, Trübner, 1888, 2 vols.)Google Scholar.

^{page 438 note 5} i. 46, ii. 5; cf. Yule, H., The Book of Ser Marco Polo (2nd edit.), vol. i. pp. 225, 229, 335, 336Google Scholar.

^{page 438 note 6} Transl. by Schmidt, T. J., Geschichte der Ost. Mongolen, etc., verfasst von Ssanang-Szetzen chungtaidsohi (St. Petersburg, 1828, 4to.), p. 75Google Scholar. Dschurtschid in the German spelling of the translator.

^{page 439 note 1} Liu hieh, also called Liu-hin, of the Liang dynasty, in his Sin lun or New Dissertations, bk. vi., has a special notice on the Hwuy yen or Respected Words.

^{page 439 note 2} The first of these expressions, pi-hwuy, was formerly ti-vi, as shown by the archaic sounds of the Sino-Aimamite dialect. The tepi of Tahiti is much like it.

^{page 439 note 3} K'ang-hi Tze-tien, 149–9, f. 87 v. Cf. some interesting remarks in the Ts'otchuen, Duke Hwan, year vi. 5 (i.e. in 706 B.C.). Also Medhurst, Ancient China, p. 371.

^{page 439 note 4} Cf. Williams, Wells, Syllabic Dictionary, p. 266Google Scholar. de Rémusat, A., Grammaire Chinoise, pp. 16, 48Google Scholar. On the custom among the Annamites, cf. Bastian, A., Sprachverghichende Studien der Indochinesischen Spraohen, p. 33Google Scholar. And similar customs, the Tepi of Tahiti, in Hale's, HoratioUnited States Exploring Expedition, vol. vii. p. 290Google Scholar; the Ukhholonipa of the Kafirs, S. African, in Appleyard, The Kafir Language, 1850, and Müller, Max, Lectures on the Science of Language, 2nd ser. vol. iGoogle Scholar. Cf. also Tylor, E. B., Early History of Mankind, pp. 139, 147, 185–187Google Scholar.

^{page 439 note 5} Cf. Tung Men hang muh, transl. De Mailla, , Histoire générate de la Chine, vol. v. p. 393, vol. vi. p. 168 sqGoogle Scholar. Guignes, De, Histoire des Huns, vol. i. p. 201 sqGoogle Scholar. MrHoworth, H. H. has treated of them in part v. of his researches on The Northern Erontagers of China: The Khitai or Khitans (Journ. Boy. Asiat. Soc. 1881)Google Scholar.

^{page 440 note 1} Tung Men hang muh, op.c. vol. viii. pp. 116–117.

^{page 440 note 2} K'iu T'ang shu, bk. 199.

^{page 440 note 3} Howorth, H. H., The Khitai or Ehilan, p. 4Google Scholar.

^{page 441 note 1} Cf. The Languages of China before the Chinese, §§ 52–36.

^{page 442 note 1} Cf. Schott, Wilhelm, Ueber das Altaische oder Finnisch-Tatarische Spraehengeschlecht, p. 118Google Scholar.

^{page 442 note 2} I am glad to see that DrHirth, F. has independently arrived at the same conclusion in his China and the Roman Orient, p. 139Google Scholar.

^{page 442 note 3} The Méthode pour déchiffrer et transcrire les noms Sanskrits qui se rencontrent dans les livres Chinois, by Stan. Julien, is full of such instances. As initial r was rendered simply by l… or by a-l… or by a-l… Cf. ibid. p. 53.

^{page 443 note 1} DrHirth, F., in his paper on Chinese Equivalents of the letter R in Foreign Names (Journ. China Branch Roy. Asiat. Soc. vol. xxi. pp. 214–223)Google Scholar, has collected many such instances. The learned author does not mention the first and fifth of the five processes here described.

^{page 443 note 2} Cf. § 5.

^{page 443 note 3} Cf. § 6.

^{page 444 note 1} For instance, the Tun-hnng or Tungwan, forming the kingdom of the Si-hia in N.E. Tibet on N.W. China, between the years 881 and 1227, became the Tangut of the Mongols.

^{page 444 note 2} The same thing occurred with the Liao or K'itan Tungus, who ruled over the northern part of China between the years 907 and 1226. Their name has become K'itdï, which is now the Russian appellative of China.

^{page 444 note 3} For all these grammatical forms, cf., for the sake of convenience, the grammatical recensions in Byrne, James, Géneral Principles of the Structure of Language, vol. i. pp. 352–473Google Scholar. Adam, L., La déclinaison Oural-Altdïque, pp. 247–258Google Scholar of Revue de Linguistique, tome iv. E. de Ujfalvy, Etude comparée des langues Ougro-Fiimoises, in Revue de Philologie, tome i. And the special grammars of the languages spoken of.

^{page 445 note 1} Niu-tchis et Mandchous, rapports d'origine et de langage (Journal Asiatique, 1888, 32 pp.).

^{page 445 note 2} The Djurtchen language, so far as we can judge from the Chinese transcripts of its words, possessed the same degree of harmonization of vowels as its kindreds the Mandshu and Tungus languages. This remarkable phenomenon of the Turano-Scythian languages at large in various degrees, first pointed out with reference to the Ugro-Altaic languages since 1845 (Dr. J. L. Otto Ræcehrig), 1849 (same author), 1850 (L. Dubeux), has been studied with care by M. Lucien Adam in 1874, from a functional point of view. In a recent paper by Grunzel, Herr Josef, Die Vocalharmonie der Altaischen Sprachen (Wien, 1888)Google Scholar, attention has been duly called to the physiological attractions of the vowels as an explanation of the phenomenon. Prof. Victor Henry, the successor of the lamented Abel Bergaigne in his chair of Sanskrit in Paris, has rightly remarked (Revue critique, 18 Feb. 1889), in his recension of the paper, that the vocalic attractions in their activity must find a resistance or a help in the respective force of the classes of consonants.

^{page 445 note 3} Niu-tchis et Mandchous, p. 31.

^{page 446 note 1} .—This work was begun as early as 1389. In the year 1382, under the Yuen dynasty, a Mongol named Hwo-yuen-Kieh, was commanded to translate some Mongolian texts. He wrote in 1389 a work in two volumes called Hwa Y yh yü. This dictionary, Chinese and barbarian, is said to have been completed afterwards by the Persian division of the College of Interpreters. It was preceded by a preface from the pencil of Liu San-wu, and was composed on the same system as a previous work of the same kind, Mung-Ku yh yü due apparently to the same Hwo-yuen-Kieh. (From a MS. note kindly communicated to me by M. G. Devéria, lately Secretary of the French Legation at Peking, who has collected a large quantity of notes in view of a history of the College of Interpreters.)

^{page 446 note 2} under the Ming dynasty. Now it is called

^{page 446 note 3} Established iu 1407. The languages taught there were Tartaric (Mongol). Djurtchen, Tibetan, Sanskrit, Persian, Pai-y, Uigur and Burmese. Seven students in. 1469 and twelve in 1483 were in the Djurtchen class. M. G. Devéria, gives me also the following information on a work in his possession (MS. note). In 1580, Wang tsang tsai, a former administrator of the college, and governor of the Kiang-si province, wrote in two vols., called Sze Y Kwan K'ao, “Researches for Use at the College of Interpreters,” some historical notices on the peoples, which the students of the College must study, “notices,” says the author, “which ought to be placed at the beginning of the special vocabularies of each class of the College,” pien yü k'oh kwan yh yü tchi shou. As every section of the work of Wang tsang tsai corresponds to one of the ten classes of the Sze Y Kwan where the Djurtchen formed the fifth class, M. G. Devéria concludes that printed vocabularies of the various classes existed already under the Ming dynasty. This distinguished Sinologist thinks, that the work of the same title, published after 1695 or in 1749 by Kiang-fan, described in the Imperial Catalogue (K. 83, f. 82) and quoted in fragments by P. Amiot, is the same work, with addition of an appendix, containing the petitions which have been copied by the Missionary for the Bibliothèque Nationale, and suppression of all that concerned the Mongols and Djurtchens.

^{page 446 note 4} Hirth, F., The Chinese Criental College, pass., and Journ. China Br. R.A.S, vol. xxii. p. 207, 04, 1888Google Scholar.

^{page 447 note 1} The Urdu of India.

^{page 447 note 2} Cf. Bretschneider, E., Mediæval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources, vol. i. pp. 181–182Google Scholar.

^{page 447 note 3} Sze k'u-tsuan shu tsang muh, Devéria, G., op.c. p. 175Google Scholar. The Liao Kin Yuen shih yü kiai, which was compiled for that purpose, gives also the original spelling of the names. Cf. E. Bretschneider, ibid.

^{page 448 note 1} The Solons (a Mongol name meaning ‘shooter’), also called Manyargs (cf. the Turkish menyak ‘prince’), on the upper waters of the Amur, claim to descend from the ancient subjects of the Kin dynasty; cf. Howorth, H. H., The Ethnology of Mandchuria, p. 21Google Scholar (The Phœnix, 1871, vol. i i). A very intelligent Solon has assured Mr. H. H. Howorth that his language was different from either Mandshu or Mongol. Cf. Howorth, H. H., The Northern Frontagers of China, V. The Khitai or Khitans, p. 7 (J.R.A.S. 04, 1881)Google Scholar.

^{page 448 note 2} In 1658 the Tartar and Djurtchen languages were abandoned as branches of the college, because these two languages were henceforth taught in the schools of the Mongol and Mandshu banners then included in the Empire (G. Devéria, MS. note) or because, for the Mongol, there was less difficulty since the accession to the throne of a Mandshu family, and for the Djurtchen, its literature was then extinct.

^{page 448 note 3} A.D. 1269–1354.

^{page 449 note 1} In 1151 their fourth ruler, Wan-yan-liang Digunai, had established a central college in imitation of the famous Kwoh tze Kien of the Chinese. Cf. De Harlez, , Histoire de l'Empire de Kin, p. 85Google Scholar; De Mailla, , Histoire, Vol. viii. p. 550Google Scholar.

^{page 449 note 2} Cf. C. De Harlez, ibid. pp. 129, 136, 156, 166.

^{page 449 note 3} Devéria, G., Stèle de Yen-t'aï, p. 180 nGoogle Scholar.

^{page 449 note 4} Mantchöu Yuan len, bk. 7, f. 11, in Devéria, G., Stèle de Yen-t'aï, p. 179Google Scholar.

^{page 449 note 5} Tsun Han Shu, by Panku; in some lists Panku shu.

^{page 449 note 6} Wen yuen koh shu muh, bk. 18, p. 2; in A. Wylie, On an Ancient Inscription in the Neuchih Language; Ancient Buddhist Inscription, p. 36; and de Rosny, L., Lea Niutchih, p. 187Google Scholar.

^{page 450 note 1} The statement has been translated by Prof. de Harlez, C., Niu-tchis et Mandchous, p. 30Google Scholar, as follows from the preface of the Miroir augmenté de la langue Mandchoue: “J'ai donné l'ordre,” says the Emperor Kien-Lung, “de composer un dictionnaire explicatif des langues des royaumes de Kin et Mongol.… Je l'ai fait publier. … Maintenant j'ai fait achever le Miroir augmenté et fixé définitivement de la langue Mandchoue.”

^{page 451 note 1} They are classified by order of matter, beginning as usual with heaven, earth, seasons, etc.

^{page 451 note 2} List Stan. Julien, 986, my work The Languages of China before the Chinese, § 114. The copy in the British Museum was not mentioned there, because it was entered after the composition of that work.

^{page 452 note 1} None of the three copies show the original order or the vocabularies.

^{page 452 note 2} Rémusat, A., De l'Etude des langues étrangères chez les chinois, p. 8 (Magazin Encyclopédique, 1811Google Scholar).

^{page 452 note 3} Hirth, F., The Chinese Oriental College, p. 213Google Scholar, l.c.

^{page 452 note 4} Devéria, G., La Frontière Sino-Aunamite, p. 104Google Scholar. The decree of 1748 analysed in the Ta Ts'ing huei tien runs thus in the translation made by M. G. Devéria. “J'ai vu, dit l'Empereur Kien-lung, tous les écrits Tibétains et autres, conservés dans le Collège des Interprètes, ils sont divisés par ordre de matières dont chaque objet est accompagné de la traduction et de sa prononciation, mais je n'ai pu contrôler par moi-même que la partie relative à la langue Tibétaine et j'ai pu ainsi constater qu'elle n'est exempte ni d'erreurs ni d'omissions. ⃜ Il existe déjà des recueils de ces différentes litteratures, il convient de les mettre en ordre et de les reviser en sections par ordre de matières et en former ensuite un tout selon ce qui a déjà été fait pour le Tibétain. ⃜ On nous présentera ensuite les copies manuscrites de ces recueils, puis enfin on les remettra aux bureaux des Collège des Interprètes où ils témoigneront de la prospérité des littératures réunies (du polyglottisme).” When the Ta Ts'ing huei tien was compiled, the editors have remarked at this occasion that the College of Interpreters preserved writings of ten nations: Huy-huy or Persian; Kao-tchang or Uigur; Si-fan or Tibetan; Si-tun or India; Sien-lo or Siam; Mien-tien or Burma; Pai-y, a Shan people; Pa-peh or Shans of Xiengmai; Su-lu, and Wan-shang or Laocian of Vien-ehan. In 1810, the revisers of the Great Encyclopedia of Administration discovered a manuscript work containing these ten sorts of writings, and formerly the property of the College of Interpreters, to which it was returned by Imperial command. M. G. Devéria, has had the good fortune of purchasing in Peking in 1879 a MS. work which answers to the description, and according to all possibilities is the very one spoken of. It is called the Huei tung sze yh kuan k'oh kwoh fan tze hua, in thirteen volumes, containing ten vocabularies of the languages quoted above. The dates are indicated for the Siamese 1577, Sulu 1755, and Laocian 1762.—Mr. G. Devéria, from whose MS. note I have derived the above information, has been kind enough to send me a specimen of twenty-six words of the Sulu vocabulary. I find them to be exact representatives of the language of the Sulu archipelago on the N.W. of Borneo, with which the Chinese were in relation already under the Ming dynasty (cf. Ming she, k. 325). It is reported there that in 1417, the Eastern and the Western Kings (i.e. Kings of E. and W. Sulu) and the King of Klaibatangan (of N.E. Borneo) came to the Chinese court. For further details, cf. the extracts translated in Groeneveldt, W. P., Notes on the Malay Archipelago and Malacca compiled from Chinese sources, pp. 100–106Google Scholar.

^{page 453 note 1} In the Yh she k'i yü of 1696? reprinted in the Lung-wei-pi-shu of 1794, sect, ix., there is a Mongol vocabulary, along with others of the Persian, Pai-y, Ugric, Burmese, Papeh, Sanskrit, and Tibetan languages. The Tibetan part contains 740 words in 20 sections, covering 103 pages. The Sanskrit is represented by 42 Devanagari characters.

^{page 453 note 2} Hirth, F., The Chinese Oriental College, p. 216Google Scholar.

^{page 454 note 1} The Djurtchen language must take its place in the Tungusian group, Mandshu division, which according to recent investigations is no part of the Altaic class of the Ugro-Altaic languages. According to DrWinkler, Heinrich: Uralaltaische Völker und Sprachen, Berlin, 1884, p. 479Google Scholar, and Das Uralaltaische und seine Gruppen, Berlin, 1885Google Scholar, who has more deeply studied the subject than previous writers, these languages, in consequence of their grammatical elements, must be divided otherwise than before, namely, into two large groups: 1) Mongol-Turk; 2) Finno-Samoyèd-Tungus-Japanese. Therefore the general classification of the Turano-Scythian stock given in my Languages of China before the Chinese, § 231, must be thus far rectified with reference to these two groups:

1) S. W. Asiatic: Sumero-Akkadian, &c.

2) Uralic: Ugro-Finnish; Samoyed; Tungusic; Japanese.

3) Altaic: Turkish; Mongol.

4) Küenlunic: Kotte; Chinese; Tibeto-Burmese.

5) Himalaic: Dravidian; Gangetic; Kolarian; Andaman; Australian.

6) Kush- Caucasic: N. Caucasian; Alarodian; etc.

7) Euskarian.

^{page 454 note 2} Kin she, bk. ii. f. 14; Hung Kien luh, bk. 214, f. 14; Shu she huy yao. Wylie, A., Ancient Buddhist Inscription at Keu-yung Kwan, p. 37Google Scholar (J.R.A.S. Vol. V. 1870)Google Scholar. Devéria, G., Examen de la stèle de Yen-tai, Dissertation sur les caractères d'écriture employés par les Tartares Jou-tchen, p. 174Google Scholar (Revue de l'Extrème Orient, vol. i. 1882)Google Scholar.

^{page 454 note 3} Kin she, bk. iii. f. 27; Hung kien luh, bk. 215, f. 13; A. Wylie, ibid.; cf. my Beginnings of Writing, §§ 108–109.

^{page 454 note 4} The Aisin gurun-i suduri bithe, translated by Prof. De Harlez, , Histoire de l'Empire de Kin ou Empire d'Or (Louvain, 1887)Google Scholar, mentions slightly the first of the two writings, p. 35, and says nothing of the other.

^{page 454 note 5} Only five characters of the K'itan writing have been preserved as such, in the Shu she huy hiao or ‘History of Writing,’ and in the Topography of the Tchengteh Prefecture. Cf. Wylie, A., Inscription of Keu-yung Kwan, o.c. p. 37Google Scholar, and Devéria, G., Stèle de Yen-taï, o.c. p. 177Google Scholar. To these must be added those of the engraved fish-badge in the possession of Dr. S. W. Bushell, which were much like the writing of the Lang-Kiun inscription in Large Djurtchen character, but there is no certainty in this statement, as we do not know, exactly whether this specimen was K'itan or Djurtchen, though it appears from the records that the Djurtchen at the beginning of their dynasty have made use of K'itan characters. The fishbadge was an old institution among these races. The Puh-haï of the N. W. (cf. supra, § 1, n. 1) used to bestow fish-badges in gold or silver. Williams, Wells, in his Syllabic Dictionary, p. 119Google Scholar, describes “Pei Kin yü, a prince royal among the K'itans, because he wore a fish made of gold,” but I do not know his authority for this interesting statement. In the K'ang hi tze tien, 195, f. 1, a quotation is given from the Kin she, yü fuh tchi, from which it appears that the relatives of the Djurtchen King, as far as the fourth degree, wore a jade fish, which badge in the latter case was made only in gold, while the relatives of a more distant rank were simply entitled to a silver one. Now the specimen which was in the hands of Dr. Bushell, neither in jade, gold or silver, was 2¾ inches in length, ⅞ inch in width, one side convex, ornamented with scales inlaid with silver, the other flat, with the engraved inscription of which he kindly sent me a rubbing (27 May, 1881). M. G. Devéria, who has seen the object in question, writes to me (24 March, 1889) that it was the half incuse of a seal of command, implying the existence of another half with the same inscription in relief to fit in the former.

^{page 455 note 1} Neumann, , Asiatische Studien, 1837, p. 41Google Scholar. P. Hyacinthe, in his Russian work on the Statistics of China. Wylie, A., On an Ancient Inscription in the Neuehih Language, 1860 (J.R.A.S. Vol. XVII. pp. 331–345)Google Scholar. de Rosny, L., Les Niutchih, leur langue et leur écriture, 1872 (Archives Paléographiques, vol. i.)Google Scholar.

^{page 455 note 2} Stèle de Yen-t'aï, l.c. p. 185.

^{page 456 note 1} There are two specimens in the British Museum. Dr. S. W. Bushell had himself two in his private collection, of which he had kindly sent me some rubbings. Some are figured by Li Tsohien, in his remarkable numismatic work Ku Tsiuen hui, sect. li. bk. xv. f. 8. They were issued between the years 1049 1120. Cf. my Beginnings of Writing, § 104.

^{page 456 note 2} Dr. F. Hirth was on a wrong track when, in the paper (p. 209) already referred to, he expressed as his opinion that the characters of his Djurtchen vocabulary were the same as those of Keu-yung kwan, which he does not seem to have seen at the time.

^{page 457 note 1} They began to issue coins in 1156, but with Chinese legends.

^{page 457 note 2} According to De Mailla (vol. x. p. 341) their three divisions were located as follows: 1) the unsubdued Niutchi used to trade east of Kai-yuen; 2) the Pehkwan Niutchi near Tchin Pehkwan; 3) the Nan-kwan Niutchi near Kwang-tchung-kwan.

^{page 458 note 1} This famous mountain has recently heen described by MrJames, H. E. M. in the record of his special journey, The Long White Mountain, or A Journey in Manchuria (London, Longmans, 1888)Google Scholar. Long White Mountains is the translation of the Chinese Tchang peh shan. On our maps the name is Shan Alin Mountains, where I beg to remark we have the same word in three languages: Shan is mountain in Chinese, Alin is mountain in Mandshu.

^{page 458 note 2} Cf. Manju in the Manju gisun-i buleku bithe, extract published by Profde Harlez, C., p. 2Google Scholar. Also by the same author, Manuel de la langue Mandchoue, p. 5. MrParker, Edward Harper has contributed to the Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan, vol. xv. part i. pp. 83–92Google Scholar, an article on The Manchus, about their various tribes past and present, but he does not give any authority for his statements, some of which are peculiar.

^{page 459 note 1} De Mailla, vol. x. p. 406. Gaubil, P., Histoire de Gentchis-Kan, p. 87Google Scholar.

^{page 459 note 2} This style of tonsure consists of shaving the hair all round the head, leaving only to grow to their full length and plaiting in one cue the hairs of the top of the head.

^{page 459 note 3} Williams, Wells, The Middle Kingdom, vol. i. p. 761Google Scholar.

^{page 459 note 4} Li tai Ti Wang nien piao, Nan Sung, f. 17. Tung Kian Kang muh, or ‘Histoire générale de la chine,’ transl. De Mailla, , vol. viii. p. 486Google Scholar.

^{page 459 note 5} Toï ping yü lan, bk. 801, f. 3v. The Yü-wen and the Mo-huy are described together, but the hairdress is specially described as that of the Mo-huy.

^{page 459 note 6} Höu Wei Shu. The text runs thus:

^{page 460 note 1} Cf. supra, § 3, and de Harlez, C., Histoire de l'Empire de Kin, p. 2Google Scholar.

^{page 460 note 2} “Dr. E. Bretschneider a trouve que les Mandchous, dans leur commencement, se sont intitulés d'abord Kin posterieurs; des leur arrivée en China leurs princes allèrent sacrifier dans la sépulture des Kin aux environs de Peking. Il leur convenait évidemment alors dans un intérêt politique de se réclamer d'une dynastie qui avait déjà régné sur la Chine.”—G. Devéria.