Chapter XLV: Appendix: II (1)

The present Minister of War, General Kurapatkine, delivered an address at Askabad, on the 25th November 1897, to some members of a party of English tourists, which is really a remarkably frank enunciation of the policy of his Government in Central Asia. The full text runs as follows:--

“The policy of our Government in Central Asia, since the accession of the late Tsar, has been eminently one of peace; and recourse has never been had to arms until every other means of gaining a given object had failed. Before the extension of the railway and telegraph to these remote regions, a considerable measure of initiative was necessarily left in the hands of local officers. Generals Chernaieff, Skobeleff, and Kauffman were repeatedly compelled by circumstances to undertake expeditions without sanction; and their action was sometimes in opposition to the views of the Central Government. There has been a radical change in our administrative system since the Transcaspian provinces were united to Europe by these powerful civilising influences. Every case of friction on the frontier is reported to St. Petersburg, and instructions are obtained before active measures are adopted. It is now impossible that there could be a repetition of the events of 1865, when General Chernaieff took Tashkent, and then reported having done so to his Imperial Master. No operations likely to produce serious consequences can now be undertaken without the previous sanction of His Majesty. I wish to be particularly explicit on this point, because my nomination as governor of Transcaspia was regarded by many journals, both in England and India, as a presage of what is called a “forward policy.” It is the custom of the present Tsar, as it was of his lamented father, to furnish detailed instructions on questions of internal organisations as well as those which concern foreign affairs. The principles which govern the policy of Russia are very simple. They are the maintenance of peace, of order, and of prosperity in all classes of the population. The means employed to compass these ends are equally free from complexity. Those who fill responsible positions are expressly informed by our Government that the assumption of sovereignty over alien nationalities must not be attempted without very serious deliberation, inasmuch as such become, on annexation, Russian subjects, children of the Tsar, and invested with every privilege enjoyed by citizens of the empire. His Majesty has enjoined on his representatives, as their first duty, the fatherly care of his Asiatic subjects. In order to prevent the possibility of internal discord, we have disarmed the natives, and no pains have been spared to induce them to adopt peaceful pursuits. The fruits of this action are already visible. A solitary traveller can now cross Central Asia, from the Caspian to the Siberian frontier, without incurring the smallest risk of attack. A few years ago I furnished weapons for purposes of defence to the Russian colonists in seventeen villages established by me, and I warned them that it might be unsafe to undertake journeys without arms. They have, however, disregarded this advice, and never carry arms when at a distance from their homes. Last winter a Russian peasant fell on the roadside in a state of helpless intoxication near the Afghan frontier south of Merv; but the Turkomans, so far from molesting him, covered him with carpets and brought him on a camel before the district chief. Similar occurrences are reported from Askabad.

“We may boast with perfect truth that the thirty-five years during which Central Asia has enjoyed the blessings of a firm and civilised rule have been years of sustained progress, of daily-increasing strength in the bonds of attachment and goodwill which unite these subject peoples to the inhabitants of other Russian provinces. As compared with India, our territories in that part of the world are still poor and sparsely populated; but there has been a considerable increase in the country’s wealth since the conquest of Turkestān in 1863. The trading classes are now the staunchest supporters of our authority; next, the cultivators; lastly, the women. Should any mischief arise, it will be due to the intrigues of the mullās, whose powers for evil are great, owing to the ignorance rather than the fanaticism of the population.

“The large measure of progress attained could not have been hoped for did we not possess settled frontiers with which we are perfectly content. Every country in Central Asia has had its period of war; but it is the fixed policy of our Tsar to prevent a recurrence of its horrors arising from our initiative. In the case of the territory most recently acquired, the disturbances lasted for seven years--from 1878 to 1885. Between the latter year and 1888 we established a stable and logical frontier with the aid of Great Britain; and in the twelve years which have since elapsed there have been no expeditions throughout its length of 600 miles bordering on Persia, and 400 on Afghanistān. The latter country contains much inflammable material, but we have taken every means in our power to ensure that the internal disorders of that state shall not react on our frontier. So scrupulous is our regard for the _status quo_, that whole tribes have cast themselves on our protection in vain. The Piruzkuhis, Khezaris, and Jamshidis have crossed our borders in troops of as many as 1000 families, but we have always repatriated such refugees. There have been similar cases in our dealings with Persian subjects. The whole population of Khelat, in Khorāsān, came to us with entreaties to protect them against the oppression of the Shāh’s officers. Our reply was the despatch of troops who conducted them across the frontier, but we took diplomatic steps to assure a pardon for those to whom we had been obliged to refuse our protection. Turkestān proper has been free from war since the occupation of Farghāna--twenty-one years ago. The Bokhārā frontier has remained intact since the capture of Samarkand in 1868. It is true that within the last few years the Pamirs Question has been reopened, and slight modifications have been made in our boundaries towards Afghanistān; but, as far as we are concerned, the operations have been carried out against our wishes--I may almost say, under compulsion. For the Amīr `Abd er-Rahmān infringed the terms of the arrangement entered into between England and ourselves in 1873, when it was agreed that the Afghans should not cross the Oxus, by pushing his boundary beyond that river and occupying Shugnān and Roshān on its right bank. The last complication on the Persian frontier dates from 1829--nearly seventy years ago. Throughout our frontier conterminous with China we have had no disturbance for more than a century. I am led to mention these significant facts in order to show that our policy in Asia is essentially a peaceful one, and that we are perfectly satisfied with our present boundaries. And I may claim to speak with authority, apart from my official position, for I have been personally concerned in all our important military and political movements in Central Asia for many years past. In 1868, when only twenty, I took part in the storming of Samarkand. In 1875 I was employed in the reduction of the Khānate of Kokand. In 1880 I led the advance guard in the conquest of Farghāna; and in 1881 I commanded the reinforcements sent to General Skobeleff from Turkestān, in his struggle with the Tekke tribes, and led one of the assaulting columns at the capture of Geok Teppe.”

MAP SHOWING THE
ADVANCE OF RUSSIA
IN
CENTRAL ASIA.

Methuen & Co. London. _G. Philip & Son, 32 Fleet S^t. London_
]

FOOTNOTES

[1] The Iranian branch of the Aryans is represented in our times by the Tājiks of Turkestān. Cf. _Les Aryens au nord et au sud de l’Hindou-Kouch_, par Ch. de Ujfalvy, _passim_.

[2] More correctly Paropanisus. See an article on “Bactria,” by E. Drouin, in the _Grande Encyclopédie_.

[3] The mention of Bākhdi (= Balkh) in Fargard 1 of the Avesta, is perhaps still older.

[4] The Greek historians, following a tradition which made the conquests of Sesostris (Rameses II.) even more extensive than they really were, maintain that this conqueror penetrated into Bactria and Scythia. Rameses II. flourished in the thirteenth century before our era. Cf. Maspero, _Hist. Anc. des Peuples de l’Orient_, p. 225. Equally fabulous is the account given by Diodorus Siculus of the conquest of Bactria by Ninus and Semiramis in B.C. 2180. Cf. E. Drouin, _loc. cit._

[5] This was the most easterly town of the Persian Empire. Authorities differ as to the site, some identifying it with Ura Tepe.

[6] The oases at the embouchure of the Oxus were anciently styled Khwārazm, from a Persian word signifying eastwards. They constitute the modern Khiva. Soghdiana comprises Bokhārā and Samarkand, and the nomenclature is derived from Soghd, the old name for the source of its wealth, the river known to the Greeks as the Polytimetus and to moderns as the Zarafshan.

[7] Cf. Nöldeke, _Aufsätze zur Persischen Geschichte_, p. 23.

[8] Called the battle of Arbela, from a neighbouring city, just as the “crowning mercy” of Waterloo was in reality bestowed at a considerable distance from the town indelibly associated with it.

[9] According to Grigorieff, this means the district lying between the Oxus and Shahrisabz.

[10] The stadium was 600 feet in length; but, as the foot varied greatly in ancient time, this measure of length was never certain. The “great stadium,” otherwise known as the Alexandrian or Egyptian, was .12 of a geographical mile.

[11] Grigorieff suggests the identification of this place with the old town of Baykand, or with Hezārasp, in the Khorasmian oasis.

[12] It may perhaps be identified with Kalāt-i-Nādiri to the north-east of Meshed, called also the “Soghdian Rock.” The famous Roxana, whom Alexander soon afterwards married, was the daughter of a certain Oxyartes, who was among the captives taken with this fort.

[13] Rollin, _Ancient History_, v. 210. See also Quintus Curtius.

[14] He may, for example, have visited Iskander Kul, a lake which to this day bears his name.

[15] Cf. Gutschmid, _Geschichte Irans_, p. 22.

[16] In B.C. 327 Seleucus I. had been placed in charge of Syria and the East, and of Babylon--to which, with the aid of Antigonus, he added Susiana. In 316, owing to a quarrel with Antigonus, he fled to Egypt, but in 312 he re-entered Babylon. The era of the Seleucidæ dates from this event. Seleucus extended his dominions as far as the Oxus and the Indus. Not till 306 did he officially adopt the title of king. Gutschmid, _op. cit._ p. 24.

[17] Cf. E. Drouin, _loc. cit._

[18] Diodotus seems to have prepared his subjects for this change of masters by issuing coins of the type struck by Antiochus II., but bearing his own portrait. Cf. Gardner, _Greek and Scythian Coins_, p. 20.

[19] _Hist._ x. _ad fin._ xi. 34.

[20] Gardner, _Greek and Scythian Coins_, p. 21.

[21] Cf. Justin, xii. 4: “Parthis deinde domitis prefectus his statuitur ex nobilis Persarum Andragoras: inde postea originem Parthorum reges habuere.”

[22] Parthian Coinage, _Numismata Orientalia_, vol. i. p. 2. Strabo, xi. 9. 2.

[23] Justin, xii. 6: “Imperiumque parthorum a monte Caucaso multis populis indicionem redactis usque flumen Euphratem protulit.”

[24] _Ibid._ xlii. 1.

[25] Gardner, _ibid._ p. 6.

[26] Gardner, _ibid._ p. 6.

[27] See Note 1 at p. 6 of Chap. iii.

[28] Strabo, xi. 8. 2.

[29] This sentiment finds many echoes in Latin literature. Cf. _Odes_ and _Epistles_ of Horace, _passim_. It is curious to note the identity between the tactics of the Parthians and those of the hordes of Chingiz and Tīmūr. The usual charge of bad faith is brought by the Romans against their terrible enemies.

[30] The Straits of Yenekale.

[31] The three great reformers Lao-tse, Kung-fu-tse (Confucius), and Meng-tse (Mencius) flourished under the princes of this dynasty.

[32] The greatest calamity which this ruthless despot inflicted on his country was the wholesale destruction of literature which he ordered, in view of keeping his people in ignorance. This atrocious measure was attended by the slaughter of many learned men. Cf. Legge, _Analects of Confucius_, p. 6.

[33] Also called Khamil, a town about 700 miles east of Kulja.

[34] According to Richthofen, the Yué-Chi were of Tibetan stock, but Vambéry and Gerard de Realle assert that they were Turks. Their nidus was to the north-east of Tangut.

[35] Cunningham, _Survey of India_, vol. ii. p. 62.

[36] Ct. d’Herbelot, _Bib. Orient._ vol. vi. p. 10; and Boulger, _Hist. of China_, p. 11.

[37] Cf. Rapson, Indian Coins, in _Grundriss der Indo-Arischen Philologie_, p. 7.

[38] Cf. Ujfalvy, _Les Aryens au nord et au sud de l’Hindou-Kouch_, p. 64.

[39] A distinctly Greek type survives to the present time in the mercantile and settled agricultural population of Bokhārā, and the neighbouring khanates, who are known as Tājiks.

[40] Strabo (xi. 8) tells us that the Greek power in Bactria was overthrown by the Asii, Pasiani, Tokhari, and Sakarauli. The first two names are probably identical, and represent the royal family of the Tokhari. They may be identified with the Asiani of Trogus Pompeius. The Sakarauli are the Sarancæ of Trogus, and correspond with the Chinese _Sé_ or _Su_, _i.e._ the Sakas. Cf. Cunningham, _Survey of India_, vol. ii. p. 65.

[41] Cf. _Journal Asiatique, Série Nouvelle_, vii. p. 162, 1896.

[42] Cf. Colonel Yule, Introduction to Wood’s _Oxus_, p. xxv.

[43] Identified with Kandahār.

[44] Cf. Drouin’s excellent article on “Bactria” in the _Grande Encyclopédie_.

[45] General Cunningham states, without quoting any authority, that the Yué-Chi waged war with the Chinese in Khotan during this year (_Survey of India_, ii. 63).

[46] General Cunningham, _Survey_, vol. ii. p. 64.

[47] This point is worthy of note in that eminent scholars used to maintain that the names were practically identical. Cf. Vivien de St. Martin, _Les Huns Blancs_, 1849, p. 64.

[48] These notes on the Ephthalites are taken principally from M. Drouin’s excellent _Mémoire sur les Huns Ephthalites dans leur rapports avec les rois Perses Sassanides_, privately printed in Louvain, 1895.

[49] Their chiefs originally bore the title of Shen-Yü, which in the reign of Tulun (A.D. 402) was changed to _Khākān_, an ancient title which we now encounter for the first time in history.

[50] The best accounts of the Sāsānide dynasty are to be found in Nöldeke’s admirable translation of the portion of Tabari’s annals dealing with that period--_Geschichte der Araber und Perser zur Zeit der Sāsāniden_, Leyden 1879, and his _Aufsätze zur Persischen Geschichte_, Leipzig, 1887. From these sources we have derived most of our details, and will therefore give no further references.

[51] Or Artabanus.

[52] Some authorities maintain that this city was founded by Shāpūr II. about 340.

[53] _Gūr_ means “wild ass.” The king, who is one of the favourites of Persian tradition, received this _sobriquet_ on account of his passion for hunting wild asses. He usurped the crown.

[54] The Sāsānides were fire-worshippers, disciples of Zoroaster.

[55] This pass is traversed by the famous Georgian Military Road connecting Vladikavkaz with Tiflis.

[56] Transoxiana was never included in the kingdom of the Sāsānides; the possessions of Achemenides stretched far farther east than those of the Sāsānians.

[57] Cf. p. 21, note 2, _supra_.

[58] Here we follow Malcolm (_History of Persia_), who bases his account on those of various well-known Persian historians, such as Mīrkhwānd and Khwāndamīr.

[59] We are told that when Bahrām Gūr returned from this expedition to his capital, Ctesiphon, he appointed his brother Governor of Khorāsān, designating Balkh as his residence.

[60] According to the Persian historians, the Khākān was named Khush-Nawāz. Nöldeke, however, disapproved of this reading, the invention he thinks of Firdawsi, and employs that of Akh-Shunwar.

[61] Tabari tells us that Pīrūz had previously ceded to the Khākān the important frontier town of Tālikān.

[62] Some of the means would hardly commend themselves to modern economists. Pīrūz remitted taxes and large sums from the treasury; but he also compelled the rich to feed their poorer neighbours from these taxes.

[63] The more ancient form is _Kavadh_.

[64] _I.e._ Ctesiphon.

[65] We are told that this made him look upon Anūshirawān as a talisman, and the interesting detail is added that the mother and the boy were conducted back to Madā´in _in a cart_ as became a princess. Wheeled traffic is unknown on these roads, but Professor Nöldeke refers us to Plutarch’s _Artax._ 27, where we are told that the king’s wife used that means of locomotion. In recent times Europeans have taken their carriages from Meshed to Teheran on Kobād’s route.

[66] Persian historians assert that he was converted by a sham miracle, and that he continued to believe in Mazdak during the rest of his life. But his motives were probably purely political, and not based on conversion.

[67] The famous Orkhon inscriptions which have been deciphered by MM. Radloff of St. Petersburg, and V. Thomsen of Copenhagen, belong to this branch of the Turks.

[68] De Guignes, ii. p. 374.

[69] Cf. De Guignes, vol. ii. p. 378.

[70] Persian and Roman writers assert that Anūshirawān conquered Transoxiana, but this seems most improbable. For, as Nöldeke points out (footnote to page 159 of his Sāsānides), Huen-Tsang, who visited the country soon after these events, speaks only of Turkish and other barbarian States. Moreover, the State of Transoxiana at the time of the Mohammedan invasion augurs strongly against the extension of Persian rule.

[71] For a full account of his life--historical and fictitious--we refer the reader to the Appendix of Nöldeke’s _Sāsāniden_, p. 474.

[72] It was reconquered in 629 by Heraclius, the Byzantine emperor, who set up the Cross in the city which had first beheld the emblem of salvation; and the Feast of the Elevation of the Cross is kept on the 14th September in memory of that event.

[73] The origin of this well-known expression is curious. The designation Yemen, or the “right hand,” was given by its northern neighbours to a strip on the south-eastern coast of the Red Sea. But in Arabic, as in the Latin and many other languages, the right hand is associated with good fortune. Hence by mistranslation the territory became known to the West as “The Blessed,” or “Felix.” It is well watered, and is better peopled than any other part of the Arabian peninsula.

[74] The _Ka`ba_ is said to have contained 160 idols, each tribe having its separate God; and so great was the toleration in ante-Mohammedan times that on the pillars of the temples there were also to be found images of Abraham and of the Virgin and Child. In the sixth century the primitive religion had lost its old signification and had developed into fetishism.

[75] Swedenborg was fifty-eight ere he had his first vision.

[76] There are two popular fallacies to be noted with regard to the so-called “_Hegira_.” In the first place, it should be transcribed as _Hijra_; and secondly, the word does not mean _flight_, but _separation_, for the incident to be recalled was not Mohammed’s flight to Medīna--but his _separation from his family_.

[77] “Islām” is synonymous for Mohammedanism in all Arabic-speaking countries. Its literal meaning is “resignation”--a heart-whole submission to the divine will.

[78] _Khalīfa Rasūl Illāh_ was the full title of the “Successor of the Prophet of God.” The correct designation of the holder of the office is _Khalīfa_, while the office itself is Khilāfaa. The former word has till quite lately been transcribed “Khalif,” or Caliph. The self-styled successor of the Mahdi in the Soudan is, however, known to Europe under the correct designation, Khalifah.

[79] The outraged hospitality was avenged, for the murderer was torn to pieces by the mob, while the body of Yezdijerd was embalmed and buried in his ancestral tomb at Istakhr.

[80] He was the Prophet’s son-in-law, and had been elected in A.H. 44 by a council of six as successor to the stern `Omar, the second Caliph.

[81] _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_, chap. li.

[82] Cf. Muir, _Decline and Fall of the Caliphate_, p. 208.

[83] Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. p. 15. From this date until the appearance in Central Asia of Kutayba in A.H. 86, our history is little more than an enumeration of Arab governors in Khorāsān, whose rule was usually as uneventful as it was shortlived. We have, however, considered it fitting to enter here into detail somewhat disproportionate to the rest of our narrative, seeing that the facts have hitherto been only accessible in works of Oriental writers.

[84] Müller, _Der Islam_, i. p. 354.

[85] Tabari, _Annales_, II. p. 109.

[86] He was not the son of the famous governor of Basra.

[87] In the interim the post seems to have been filled for a short time by Khulayd ibn `Abdullah el-Hanafī (Tabari, II. p. 155).

[88] Tabari, II. p. 156.

[89] Vambéry considers _Tarkhān_ (or _Tarkhūn_) to be an old Turkish title, which Mohammedan authors have regarded erroneously as a proper name.

[90] Tabari, II. p. 156.

[91] Tabari, II. p. 169. Tabari says he was the first to cross the mountains of Bokhārā on a camel, _loc. cit._

[92] Tabari, II. p. 169. The Persian Tabari does not mention this queen, but relates the same incident of the _king_ of the Turks; Ba`lami, the Persian translator, also adds that the shoe was sold by Ubaydullah to the merchants of Basra. Cf. Zotenberg’s _Chroniques de Tabari_, tome iv. p. 19.

[93] The direm, derived from the Greek drachma, contained 25 grains of silver, and was worth about 5d. of our money. On this basis the value of the shoe would be £4166 sterling!

[94] Vambéry, _History of Bokhārā_, p. 20. The author says he has this fact from “Arabic authors,” but we have been unable to find any mention of it in either the Arabic or Persian versions of Tabari.

[95] According to Tabari (II. p. 179), Sa`īd was met by a great Soghdian force on reaching Samarkand. The rival hosts stood facing each other till nightfall, but on the following day Sa`īd made a furious onslaught and put the defenders to flight, taking fifteen young nobles as hostages.

[96] Narshakhi, ed. Schefer, p. 39.

[97] Bellew and Vambéry both call him “Muslim,” a reading which has been adopted in the Russian translation of Narshakhi, published in Tashkent in 1897. The latter, indeed, contains a note to the effect that the name is written “Salm” in Arabic sources. It is also the spelling in the Persian Tabari. Salm was twenty-four years of age on his appointment. His father was `Ubaydullah, the famous governor of Basra.

[98] This warrior held command of the Arab troops in Central Asia under several viceroys in succession, and thus gained the confidence of his troops and an intimate knowledge of Khorāsān and the adjoining tracts. The stability in the office of generalissimo went far to neutralise any disadvantages occurring from the frequent changes in that of viceroy.

[99] Tabari (II. p. 394) tells us that Salm took his wife Umm Mohammed with him, and that she was the first Arab woman to cross the Oxus. She bore him a son, who was surnamed the “Soghdian.”

[100] £55 reckoned in our currency.

[101] Narshakhi’s account of these events brings the lack of discipline among the Arabs into a strong light, and serves to account for the vicissitudes of their rule in Central Asia.

[102] This curious custom still survives in Merv. “One day,” writes O’Donovan, “the town-crier, accompanied by half a dozen other Turcomans, entered my hut, each to present me a new-born child. I could not catch the exact words; all I could understand was that one of the infants was O’Donovan Beg, another O’Donovan Khan, a third O’Donovan Bahadur. I forget what the others were. It turned out that the Tekkes’ newly born children are, as a rule, called after any distinguished strangers who may be on the oasis at the time of their births, or have resided there a short time previously, or after some event intimately connected with the tribe” (_The Story of Merv_, p. 329).

[103] Cf. Aug. Müller, _Der Islam_, p. 411, who gives the date as A.H. 85.

[104] An entertaining account of this cruel and witty governor will be found in d’Herbelot, under the article _Heggiage-ben-Josef-al-Thakefi_.

[105] Merv has been styled by almost all European writers on the subject, “The Queen of the World.” Now the origin of this high-sounding title is the expression _Merv-i-Shāhijān_, a title used to distinguish this town from Merv er-Rūd. This word Shāhijān has been taken as a corruption of Shah-i-jahān, or “Queen of the World.” Yakūt says that Shāhijān means “Soul of the King.” The form as it now stands is probably “Arabicised” from an old Persian form _Shahgūn_, “what appertains to a king.” Cf. Rückert, _Gram. Poet. und Rhet. der Perser_ (Gotha, 1874), p. xix. The mistranslation, if such it be, has shared the fate of most mistranslations of the kind, and become universal among Europeans.

[106] It must be remembered that Bokhārā is the name of a kingdom as well as of a town.

[107] Between Balkh and Merv er-Rūd, three days’ journey from the latter. Istakhri, the geographer, speaks of it as the most important place in Tokhāristān.

[108] _Dihakān_ = the man (_i.e._ the head man) of the _dih_, or village.

[109] Vambéry seems to confuse the two accounts, for he says: “He had not yet arrived within the limits of ancient Bactria when the inhabitants of Balkh came out to meet him, and conducted him with honour into their city.” But Tabari speaks distinctly of an engagement, in connection with which he remembers an interesting detail. Among the captives taken at that time was the wife of a certain Barmek. She was taken into the harem of Kutayba’s brother `Abdullah, by whom she had a son, who was commonly regarded as the ancestor of the famous Barmecīdes of the court of Baghdād. The story was probably invented to give the family a less obscure lineage than that of humble immigrants from Balkh. Cf. Muir, _History of the Caliphate_, p. 358.

[110] Cf. Tabari’s _Annales_, Series II. p. 1187, and Zotenberg’s _Chroniques de Tabari_, vol. iv. p. 157.

[111] Neither version of Tabari gives any details of this siege, but Narshakhi’s account, of which we extract a portion, is most vivid.

[112] Tabari says that he had gone five farsakhs, but mentions no place-name.

[113] Narshakhi records that the lieutenant, who was named Varkā, was answerable for this catastrophe. A citizen of Baykand, it seems, had two beautiful daughters. These the lieutenant abducted, whereupon the father remonstrated with him, saying: “Baykand is a large town, why, when you have the whole population to select from, should you carry off my daughters?” As Varkā gave no answer, the enraged father drew out his knife and stabbed him, but not mortally.

[114] Narshakhi tells that in Baykand, Kutayba found a heathen temple in which was a silver idol weighing 4000 direms; also a quantity of golden vessels which, when weighed together, amounted to 150,000 _mithkals_. But the most remarkable of his discoveries were two pearls, each the size of a pigeon’s egg. Kutayba on beholding them asked the people whence such large pearls had been brought. They replied, “that they had been brought to the temple by birds in their beaks.” When Kutayba sent intelligence of his conquest of Baykand to Hajjāj, he also despatched these two pearls, with the account of the tradition relating to them. The reply of Hajjāj ran thus: “We have read your story, and it has filled us with wonder; but more wonderful than the two large pearls, and the birds that brought them, is your generosity in having sent to me these precious prizes you had taken. May the blessing of God be upon you.”

[115] Ed. Schefer, p. 43. Khartūm may possibly come to offer a parallel.

[116] Vambéry, _Bokhara_, p. 25.

[117] Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. p. 1195.

[118] Scholars have hitherto failed to read this satisfactorily. The forms that occur are Kur-Bughanūn, Kurighanūn, etc. Professor Houtsma has suggested that the termination should be read _nūīn_, _i.e._ prince.

[119] Narshakhi.

[120] Not, of course, to be confounded with Fārāb opposite Chārjūy; but the reading of the name is doubtful.

[121] The italics indicate three excellent puns in the original Arabic. Hajjāj had a universal reputation as a master of this difficult tongue. The words may be transcribed as follows: _Kiss bi Kissa wansif Nasafan waridd Wardan_.

[122] Narshakhi’s version of the campaign is full of discrepancies, and the events of the years 88–91 are perforce presented to the reader without much regard for chronology or natural sequence. The results are to be found in Bellew’s epitome (_Yarkand Expedition_, p. 117).

[123] _Annales_, Series II. p. 1201.

[124] Vambéry says, evidently following his Turkish Tabari: “Their women ... _tore their faces_!”

[125] One of the most famous tribes of Yemen.

[126] Vambéry says a yearly tribute of 2,000,000 direms!

[127] Narshakhi, ed. Paris, p. 40.

[128] Vambéry follows Narshakhi in ignoring this revolt, which was certainly a very serious one as far as Kutayba was concerned, but both versions of Tabari give detailed accounts of its various phases.

[129] Old Persian word signifying commander-in-chief.

[130] He was opposed to Nīzek’s design. We are also told that, in order that a certain appearance of respect might be kept up, his chains were of gold. Cf. Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. p. 1206.

[131] Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. p. 1218.

[132] On the river Jīhūn, one of the three principal towns of Khwārazm, of which Medīnat-el-Fīl, or the Town of the Elephant, was the largest.

[133] Tabari relates that one day several Soghdians mounted the rampart and called out: “Oh ye Arabs, why do ye exert yourselves thus vainly? Know that we have found written in a book that our town shall not be taken except by one whose name is “Camel-Saddle,” whereupon Kutayba called out--“God is great! for verily that is my name.” (In Arabic, Kutayba means literally “camel-saddle.”)

[134] He is said to have obtained no less than 20,000 native levies, men from Kesh, Nakhshab, and Khwārazm. Cf. Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. p. 1256.

[135] In the year 95 Hajjāj died at the age of fifty-four.

[136] Welīd had been most anxious to make his own son heir-apparent in the place of his brother, and in his designs had been supported by Hajjāj and Kutayba. Hence the bad blood that existed between the conqueror and the new Caliph.

Vambéry adds the following details without reference (not to be found either in Tabari or Narshakhi): “Having conquered Farghāna, he went through the Terek Pass into Eastern Turkestān. Here he encountered the princes of the Uïgurs, who in default of union among themselves were easily conquered. We are told that the Arabs extended their incursions into the province of Kansu.... Turfan, on the very first appearance of the Arabs, embraced Islam.” (_Bokhara_, pp. 31, 32).

[137] Gibbon recognised the greatness of Kutayba as a conqueror, while lamenting the scanty notices to be found of him in European works; cf. _Decline and Fall_, chap. li. d’Herbelot, in his _Bibliothèque Orientale_, dismisses our hero, under the heading _Catbah_, in a very summary manner. “Ce fut un des plus villains Arabes de son siècle, Valid, sixième Khalife de la race des Ommiades, le fit général de ses armées en Perse, l’an de l’Hégire 88. Il conquît tout le grand pays de Khorazan, et obligea en ces quartiers-là à brûler leurs idoles et à bâtir de Mosquées. Après cette conquête, il passa dans la Transoxiana et prit de force les fameuses villes de Samarcande et de Bokhara, et défit Mazurk roi de Turkestan, qui s’était approché pour les sécourir. Ce grand capitaine finit ses conquêtes l’an 93 (_sic_) de l’Hégire.”

[138] Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. pp. 1283–96.

[139] An important town on the Perso-Turkish frontier, north-east of Baghdād.

[140] This saying is not to be found in the Arabic Tabari, but in the Persian version. See Zotenberg, vol. iv. p. 204.

[141] See Zotenberg’s translation of the Persian Tabari, vol. iv. p. 221.

[142] After remaining, as Tabari tells us, four months in Khorāsān to settle the administration of the province.

[143] Zotenberg, vol. iv. p. 225 _et seq._

[144] Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. p. 1318.

[145] He directed that converts were to be exempt from all taxes, and placed on the same footing as the Arabs; while unbelievers were to be taxed to the utmost. No churches, synagogues, or fire-temples were to be destroyed, but the erection of new ones was forbidden. Cf. Muir, _Caliphate_, p. 380.

[146] His post was the same as Hajjāj’s, and was equivalent to a viceroyalty of the Eastern conquests of the Caliphate.

[147] Known by the sobriquet of _Khuzayna_, “the Village Girl,” because of his effeminate ways.

[148] See Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. pp. 1431 and 1433. Vambéry (who reads the name as _Tarshi_) states that this man succeeded Yezīd ibn Muhallab on the appointment of Maslama. Cf. _Bokhara_, p. 37. The Persian Tabari also says that the nomination was made by Maslama. Cf. Zotenberg, vol. iv. p. 268.

[149] The _Annales_ devote many pages to his progress, but as the details are of small importance we refrain from summarising them, and merely follow the abridged account of the Persian Tabari.

[150] He seems already to have been dismissed, and to have been reinstated.

[151] It is very remarkable that from this point in the history the account in the Arabic is as prolix as that in the Persian translation is compressed and condensed.

[152] Vambéry calls him (wrongly) Esresh.

[153] Called by Vambéry, Jandab. He succeeded to the command in A.H. 111. He had previously been in Sind, and on his way to join the army at Bokhārā he narrowly escaped falling into the Khākān’s hands. Tabari relates that he obtained his promotion by offering to Hishām’s wife a necklace of precious stones, which the Caliph admired so greatly that Junayd procured another like it for him. See Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. p. 1527.

[154] In this battle a nephew of the Khākān was taken prisoner, and afterwards sent to the Caliph. Tabari notices that there is a doubt as to the year in which these engagements took place, some saying A.H. 112 and others 113 (730, 731).

[155] This defeat was known as the battle of the Defile (ash-Shīb), A.H. 112 (730).

[156] Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. p. 1539.

[157] About ten or eleven thousand perished in the battle, the remainder were betrayed to the Khākān (Tabari, _loc. cit._ p. 1542).

[158] Tabari, _loc. cit._ p. 1543.

[159] Junayd in his report seems to have laid the blame of his defeat on Saura for advancing too far out of Samarkand. According to Tabari, his words were: “Saura disobeyed me; I ordered him to keep near the river, but he did not do so” (_loc. cit._ p. 1544). Beladhori also, in his very brief account of this campaign, makes no mention of defeat or even disaster. He merely says that Junayd fought the Turks till he had utterly repulsed them, and then asked the Caliph for reinforcements. The account in the Persian Tabari is roughly as follows:--Junayd’s first brush with the Turks was successful; but their Khākān was not discouraged by his reverse. He mustered a host so formidable that Junayd found it necessary to order Saura, who had taken possession of Samarkand, to join forces with him. He then marched against the Khākān with 20,000 men. The Turkish leader adopted tactics which have again and again enabled a prescient leader to triumph against immense odds. On learning that Saura had left Samarkand, he turned and fell upon him with such ferocity that not one of his 20,000 troops escaped to tell the tale. Thereupon Junayd summoned every town of Khorāsān and Tokhāristān to send him its quota of reinforcements; and having thus gathered an army of 43,000 strong, despatched it under a trusted follower to relieve Samarkand, which was closely besieged by the victorious Khākān. The Mohammedans reached the city when their garrison was on the point of surrendering, and attacked the beleaguering host. For the first time during many disastrous years the banner of Islām prevailed. The Khākān was smitten hip and thigh, and forced to raise the siege of Samarkand. Junayd placed a garrison there of 5000 men under Nasr ibn Sayyār, and returned to Merv, where death soon closed his brilliant career.

[160] He appears to have received the appointment from his brother Khālid, the governor of `Irāk.

[161] It is worthy of remark that in the Persian Tabari the record of Asad’s second tenure of office is not only very brief, but even differs essentially from that of the Arabic original.

[162] In Schefer’s edition of Narshakhi (p. 59) the date is absurdly given as 166.

[163] Descendants of `Abbās, uncle of the Prophet. See note below, p. 80.

[164] Cf. Tabari, _loc. cit._ p. 1988 _et seq._

[165] Hārith ibn Surayj mentioned above was still with the Turks, and when Nasr ibn Sayyār reported his victory to the governor of `Irāk the latter ordered him to capture Hārith, subdue Farghāna, and destroy the town of Shāsh.

[166] By the promulgation of a general amnesty the Soghdians were brought back to their allegiance.

[167] Their names were Welīd II., Yezīd II., Ibrāhīm, and Merwān II.

[168] His father, Mohammed, had died in A.H. 124.

[169] An amusing incident is given in this connection by Tabari. Kirmānī was very stout, and the passage by which he had to escape was so narrow that his servant was obliged to drag him through by main force, and the operation very nearly killed him.

[170] See note 1, p. 82.

[171] For a full account of the story of El-Kirmānī and Hārith ibn Surayj, see Tabari, _Annales_, Series II. pp. 1855–69, 1887–90, and 1917–35.

[172] The following table will explain the descent of the two branches:--

Kossay
|
`Abd Menāf
|
+------+--------------+
| |
`Abd Shems Hāshim
| |
Umayya `Abd al-Muttalib
|
+--------------+----+------------+
| | |
Abū Tālib `Abdullah `Abbās
| |
`Alī _Mohammed_

[173] Zotenberg, _op. cit._ vol. iv. p. 323 _et seq._

[174] He was then not twenty years of age.

[175] We are told that Abū Muslim wished to have a distinctive colour for his party, the Umayyads having adopted white. After making one of his slaves clothe himself in suits of various colours, he ordered him to dress in black, and finding the sombre hue the most awe-inspiring adopted it for his party. Cf. Zotenberg, _lot cit._ p. 327. Later the Khārijites adopted red, and the Shi`ites green.

[176] Nasr ibn Sayyār was a poet of no mean order, and Arabic histories contain many quotations from his compositions, specimens of which will be found on p. 87 and 88 of Nöldeke’s _Delectus Vet. Carm. Arab_.

[177] Two very different versions of the end of Nasr are to be found in Oriental histories. That given in the text is the usually accepted one; but in the Persian translation of Tabari (cf. Zotenberg, _loc cit._ p. 329), in the _Tārīkh-i-Guzīda_, etc., we are told that he fled unaccompanied as far as Ray, where he died. No mention is made here of the engagements with Kahtaba, who, according to the author of the _Guzīda_, gained possession of Jurjān, Ray, Sāva, and Kum without striking a blow.

[178] His horse ran away with him and, slipping on the banks of the river, threw its rider into the water, where he was drowned. His disappearance was not remarked until daybreak. The _Guzīda_ says that Ibn Hobayra also perished in the battle.

[179] Numbering, according to the Persian Tabari, more than 30,000 men.

[180] The Caliph’s two uncles, Dā´ūd and `Abdullah,--the former in Mekka and Medīna, the latter in Palestine,--were responsible for the wholesale extermination of the Umayyads in those countries. The historians tell us that `Abdullah on one occasion invited seventy members of the house of Umayya to a feast, under promises of a full amnesty, and that, at a given signal, the servants fell upon the unsuspecting guests and put them all to death. This tragedy recalls the famous “Blood bath” in Stockholm, but the Umayyads had no Gustav Wasa to avenge their death. We are told that the spirit of revenge carried them so far that they caused all the tombs of the Umayyad Caliph to be opened, and what remained of their corpses to be scattered to the winds. Cf. _Chroniques de Tabari_, vol. iv. p. 343.

[181] _History of Bokhara_, p. 40.

[182] Es-Saffāh was ten years younger than Abū Ja`far, but, as Weil suggests, was preferred to the latter, because his mother was a free woman, while his brother’s was a slave.

[183] See Weil, _Geschichte der Khalifen_, vol. ii. pp. 24, 25.

[184] The correspondence is fully reported by Tabari; and Weil, recognising its historical interest, has translated in full three of the letters. Cf. Weil, _op. cit._ vol. ii. pp. 27, 28.

[185] Tabari, _Annales_, Series III. p. 122.

[186] An account of this man may be found in the _Siasset Namèh_, pp. 122–23 of Schefer’s text.

[187] In the Arabic, _Wadhālika innahu kāna min sanāyi`ihi_.

[188] Numbering 6000 men.

[189] Wrongly read by Weil as _Jumhur_.

[190] Tabari, _loc cit._ p. 120.

[191] According to both versions of Tabari, he fell from a window and broke his back.

[192] El-Mahdi, who was at this time about twenty years of age, had, we are told, a lieutenant to assist him in his duties as governor.

[193] The _Rāvandīs_ believed in the transmigration of souls, and held that the soul of the Deity was temporarily resident in the body of the Caliph, while the souls of Adam and Gabriel were residing in the bodies of two of his generals. For accounts of this sect, see Weil, _Geschichte der Khalifen_, vol. ii. p. 36 _et seq._; Muir, _The Caliphate_, p. 448; Tabari, _Annales_, Series III. p. 129 _et seq._; and Zotenberg, _Chroniques de Tabari_, vol. iv. p. 137 _et seq._

[194] In the preceding pages undue space may appear to have been given to the history of the Caliphs, but the growing importance of Central Asia will in future render our history almost independent of events at Baghdād.

[195] The famous _Annales_ of Tabari (which have been our _Haupt-Quelle_ for the history of the Arabs in Central Asia), like those of Ibn el-Athīr, are arranged under the heading of each succeeding year. We make a point of giving throughout the name of each governor of Khorāsān appointed by the Caliphs, for, though such details are in themselves trivial, no list of them has, to our knowledge, appeared in any European work.

[196] Weil, _op. cit._ vol. ii. p. 65, says that he gave himself out as a _prophet_, but Tabari says nothing of this. Cf. Tabari, _Annales_, Series III. p. 149.

[197] El-Mahdi had held this post since A.H. 141 (758).

[198] We have not thought fit to dwell at any length on the adventures of this famous impostor. Professor Vambéry, in his _History of Bokhara_, devotes no less than ten pages to the rising. The story, in its main outlines, is familiar to Englishmen from Moore’s _Lalla Rookh_.

[199] Cf. Tabari, _loc. cit._ p. 631.

[200] This powerful family took its descent from one Barmek, a physician of Balkh. One of its members, Khālid ibn Barmek, became vezīr of the first `Abbāsid Caliph, and under El-Mahdi was intrusted with the education of the heir-apparent Hārūn. Khālid’s son Yahya succeeded him as vezīr in A.H. 170 (786), and showed himself one of the most capable rulers of his age. For an account of their fall consult Sec. iii. of the Terminal Essay in vol. x. of Burton’s _Thousand and One Nights_.

[201] August Müller, generally so accurate, calls him erroneously Isā ibn Alī, and equally erroneously states that he was killed in battle in the year 191, whereas he did not die till 195 (see below).

[202] Zotenberg, _op. cit._ iv. p. 469.

[203] Cf. Müller, _op. cit._ i. p. 497; Vambéry, _Bokhara_, pp. 53, 54; Zotenberg, _op. cit._ iv, 71 _et seq._

[204] Its exact nature is not known, but it was probably the fruits of a life of reckless dissipation.

[205] Cf. Zotenberg, _op. cit._ tome iv. p. 481.

[206] He was minister of both the civil and military departments, and was hence known as _Dhu-l-Rīyāsatayn_, or “Lord of the two Ministries.”

[207] Cf. Weil, _Geschichte der Khalifen_, vol. ii. p. 197.

[208] He was called “the Magian, the son of a Magian.”

[209] Ma´mūn had conceived an aversion for Tāhir (some authors say because Tāhir reminded him of his brother Amīn’s death), and, being conscious of this, Tāhir naturally feared the proximity of the Caliph. He superseded a certain Ghassān, whom Ma´mūn had left in charge of Khorāsān.

[210] Who died A.H. 166 (782).

[211] His full title was Sāmān-Khudāt, being lord of a village which he himself had built and given the name of Sāmān. He claimed descent from the Sāsānide Bahrām Chūbīn. Cf. Narshakhi, ed. Schefer, pp. 57, 58.

[212] Vambéry (_Bokhara_, p. 55) notes that “the fact that Sāmān, whilst still a heretic, had held a command long after the Arab conquest, proves the small progress Islāmism had at first made among the followers of Zoroaster.”

[213] See above, p. 96.

[214] See note 1 above, p. 100.

[215] Narshakhi, ed. Schefer, reads absurdly 292!

[216] Cf. Mīrkhwānd, _Historia Samanidarum_, ed. Wilken, p. 3. Narshakhi says that Ahmed was made governor of Merv, but from what follows this seems erroneous.

[217] d’Herbelot quotes a Persian quatrain in which the Tāhirides are enumerated--

_Dar Khorāsān zi āl-i-Massābshāh,
Tāhir u Talha būd u Abdullāh,
Bāz Tāhir, digar Mohammad dān
Kū be Ya`kūb dād takht u kulāh._

_Translation._--In Khorāsān, of the house of Massāb (Tāhir’s name was Tāhir ibn Husayn ibn Massāb) there were the following princes--Tāhir, Talha, `Abdullah, another Tāhir and then Mohammad, who gave up throne and crown to Ya`kūb.

[218] He ruled from A.H. 232–247 (846–861).

[219] In Arabic _Saffār_, whence the dynasty took its name.

[220] Cf. Khwāndamīr’s account of the Saffārides in his _Habīb-us-Siyar_. We refer the reader also to Nöldeke’s brilliant sketch of this man’s career, entitled “Ya`qūb the Coppersmith” (_Sketches from Persian History_, pp. 176–206).

[221] Malcolm, _History of Persia_, vol. i. p. 148.

[222] Cf. Müller, _op. cit._ vol. ii. p. 29.

[223] Narshakhi (ed. Schefer, p. 78) gives the date as A.H. 260 (872), Mīrkhwānd (ed. Wilken, p. 4) as A.H. 261 (873).

[224] Narshakhi, _loc. cit._ Muwaffak is here spoken of as Caliph, but he was merely chief minister of state to his brother the Caliph Mu`tamid.

[225] This point is not made clear by Persian historians. The Saffārides had by their victories become masters of all the provinces ruled by the Tāhirides, of which Transoxiana was certainly one. It is hard to conceive either that they should have renounced their claim on Transoxiana, or that the feeble Caliph should have taken upon himself to pronounce the Samānīdes independent of Khorāsān.

[226] Narshakhi, ed. Schefer, p. 79.

[227] Vambéry is in this place (see _Bokhārā_, p. 58) guilty of a curious error, for he says that this Rāfi` was the _Rāfi` ibn Layth_ who had rebelled against Hārūn er-Rashīd in A.H. 190 and was pardoned in 196 by Ma´mūn. He would by the year 272 have been rather old to receive a governorship of a province.

[228] Mīrkhwānd (ed. Wilken, p. 6) says that it was in connection with this friendship that certain mean persons poisoned the mind of Nasr against his brother. This author tells us that Isma`īl had requested and received of Rāfi` the province of Khwārazm, and this, so Nasr’s advisers said, was merely a plot to deprive Nasr of Transoxiana.

[229] See below, p. 110.

[230] Five farsakhs to the south of Aulié-ātā. For a full account of what is known of Christianity in Central Asia in early times we refer the reader to an excellent monograph on this subject by M. Barthold, of St. Petersburg, which was published in vol. viii. of the _Zapiski_, or Journal of the St. Petersburg University Oriental Faculty. Much valuable information on this subject is also to be found in Col. Yule’s _Cathay and the Way Thither_.

[231] Ed. Schefer, p. 84.

[232] Bellew (_Forsyth Mission_, p. 119) says that Isma`īl received his patent of succession from the Caliph while engaged in this campaign; but this is not in agreement with Narshakhi, whom he gives as his authority.

[233] See above, p. 105.

[234] Cf. Weil, _op. cit._ ii. p. 483.

[235] Weil, _op. cit._ ii. p. 485, hints at this duplicity, basing his statement on the fact that the Caliph praised and rewarded Isma`īl when he heard of his victory over `Amr. Khwāndamīr, in his _Habīb-us-Siyar_, leaves the question open, and expressly says that Isma`īl acted “either on the Khalif’s orders or on his own initiative.”

[236] Nizām ul-Mulk, in his _Siyāset Namé_, tells an amusing anecdote in this connection. After `Amr had been taken prisoner, towards nightfall one of his fellows, having procured some meat and borrowed a saucepan, was preparing a meal for his master: while he for a moment left his cooking to fetch some salt, a dog came and poked his head into the saucepan. In trying to pull out a bone the handle of the pot fell round his neck, and he scampered off, carrying the scalding pot with him. On seeing this, `Amr remarked: “This morning 300 camels bore my kitchen, and to-night a dog has carried it off.”

[237] Narshakhi, ed. Schefer, p. 90. The editor was here (as in only too many places in this uncritical edition) guilty of allowing an absurd date to be printed in his text; for the date of `Amr’s death is given as 280!

[238] Narshakhi, _loc. cit._ Vambéry points out (_op. cit._ note to p. 66) that Sind and Hind are “a random boast” of the author.

[239] The governor before him had made Bokhārā his residence.

[240] A very striking description of the literary talent gathered there is given by _ath-Tha`labi_, in the _Yatīmatu ´d-Dahr_, vol. iv. p. 30 (Damascus ed.).

[241] Vambéry (_Bokhara_, p. 67) adds to this list Kazwīn, Shīrāz, and Isfahān, which were towns in the dominion of the Būyides. The Būyides and the Sāmānides practically shared the whole of Persia and Central Asia as follows:--

_Sāmānides_--Khorāsān, Sīstān, Balkh, Bokhārā, and Samarkand.

_Būyides_--The two `Irāks, Fars, Kirmān, Khuzistān, and Luristān.

Tabaristān and Jurjān were continually changing hands.

[242] He died of some malady at a place called Zarmān, whither the doctors had sent him for change of air.

[243] Dawlat Shāh, in his _Lives of the Poets_ (see Browne’s edition, p. 44), quotes from `Unsuri the following quatrain in which the rulers of the house of Sāmān are enumerated--

_Nūh kas būdand zi āl-i-Sāmān mazkūr
Dā´īm bi imārat-i-Khorāsān mashhūr
Ismā`īl ast u Ahmadī u Nasrī
Dū Nūh u dū `Abd-ul-Malik u dū Mansūr._

_Translation._--Nine members of the house of Sāmān were famous in the government of Khorāsān, namely, Ismā`īl, one Ahmad, one Nasr, two Nūh’s, two `Abd el-Melik’s, and two Mansūr’s.

[244] Cf. Vambéry, _Bokhara_, p. 81, and Bretschneider, _Mediæval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources_ (London, 1888), vol. i. p. 236 _seqq_. An interesting article was published in 1874 by Grigorieff in the _Memoirs of the Eastern Branch of the St. Petersburg Archæological Society_, vol. xviii. p. 191 _seqq._ This article contains the Turkish text of an extract from the _Tārīkh-i-Munajjim-Bāshī_, with an introduction, a translation, and copious notes. The name of Kara-Khānides was first suggested by Grigorieff for this dynasty, after Satuk Kara Khān, who was the first of its kings to embrace Islām. The title is more convenient than the others by which this dynasty has been known, such as Uïghūrs, Ilek-khāns, and Ilkhāns, as will appear from note below, p. 116. Bretschneider, whom on such subjects it is hard to contradict, was by no means convinced by Grigorieff’s positive assertion that the Kara-Khānides were not Uïghūrs.

[245] The passage from his famous history, the _Tārīkh-i-Jahān-Kushāy_, dealing at great length with the Uïghūrs, has been translated by d’Ohsson. Cf. _Histoire des Mongols_, vol. i. p. 430 _et seq._