« السابقةمتابعة »
approximate to the current standard.” The variations of the actual from the normal weight appear to have been particnlarly great under the Han dynasty, for the intermediate usurper Siu Wang Mang (6-25 A.D.)“ began by annulling the decrees enacted by the Han dynasty, as he wanted to return to the money of the Tchou dynasty, where the mother and the child' (i.e., divisionary piece) weighed in proportion to each other, similarly to those issued by king Wang in 523 B.C."6 In order to see how far the Indo-Chinese coins conform to the normal weight, we must test them by their average weight. Judged by this test they, curiously enough, very nearly agree with what should be their normal weight. For the average weight of the nine large coins is 213.44 grains (normal 227-48), and of the 63 small coins, 47.857 (normal 48.72). The agreement in the case of the large coins would probably be still greater, if we had a larger number of them to make up the average.
The date of these Indo-Chinese coins can be approximately determined by the following considerations. The fact of their superscriptions being in Indian and Chinese characters and langnage shows that both those languages must have occupied a recognised position in Khotan at the time when the coins passed current. In the case of the bilingual Indo-Greek coins, Indian was the language of the population of the country, while Greek was the language of the administration or the ruling power. Khotan, so far as known to us, never had a Chinese population; but it fell under the power of China at a very early date. In the sixth year of the Emperor Ming-ti of the Later Han dynasty, in 73 A.D., Kuang-te, the king of Khotan, submitted to the Chinese General Pantchao. Thenceforward the kingdom of Khotan became a regular dependency of China, which formed that kingdom, together with Kashghar and other Central Asian principalities, into an administrative unit under the name of the “ Western Countries " and under a Chinese Governor-General,7 and placed Chinese Governors in Khotan and the other chief towns. Shortly afterwards, King Kanishka of India (about 78-106 A.D.) is said to have held hostages from the Chinese " tributary Princes to the west of the Yellow River," that is, from the princes included in the Chinese “Governor-Generalship " of the “ Western Countries."8 It is true that there had been some political intercourse between China and Khotan since the days of the Emperor Wuti (140–87 B.C.) of the Earlier Han dynasty, but Khotan only lost its independence in 73 A.D., when it was included in the Chinese “ Governor-Generalship” of the Western Countries. The Chinese currency of Khotan cannot be placed earlier than that year. The native kings continued to reign under the Chinese supremacy, and this fact explains why the coins bear bilingual legends. It is distinctly a Chinese currency, because the standard of the coins is Chinese, inscribed in Chinese language and characters, and this fact clearly indicates Chinese supremacy. On the other hand, the reverse of the coins bears the symbols and names of the native kings, in native (Indian) characters, a fact which indicates both that native kings still continued to reign, and that the language and characters, used by the native administration, were Indian.
6 See p. 365 of the Brit. Mus. Catalogue.
6 The weight of the Brit. Mus. specimen, figured on p. 394 of the Catalogue, would seem to be 220 grains ; for on p. xliii of the Introduction it is said “the Bactro-Chinese coin of 2 liang 4 tchu= 220 grs." There is here some confusion. The weight inscribed on the coin is 1 liang 4 tchu of the Han standard, which is equal to 2 liang and 8 tchu of the old standard ; and both alike are equal to 227.48 grains (normal).
7 See Abel Remusat's Histoire de la Ville de Khotan, p. 3 and passim.
The first connection of India with Khotan dates back to the time of king Açoka (264-233 B.C.). Ancient Khotanese chronicles, quoted by Chinese writers, relate that the eldest son of that king, when dwelling in Takşaçilā in the Panjāb, had had his eyes put out, and the tribal chief who had been guilty of the outrage was banished, together with his tribe, across the Himālayas. There the tribe settled and later on chose a king from among themselves. Soon afterwards they came into collision with another tribe settled to the east of them, whose king had been expelled from his own country. In the resnlt, the western or Indian tribe was conquered, and the eastern king, now uniting both tribes under his rule, established his capital in the middle of the country, at Khotan.9 This must have been about 240 B.C. The eastern tribe wonld seem to have been the Uighurs, of the Turki race. They gradually occupied the whole of Eastern Turkestan before 200 B.C., being pushed forward from the northeast by the Hiungou or Huns, another Turki tribe. The latter, in their westward movement, displaced two Turki tribes, the Yuechi (or Yueti) and the Uighur; the former migrated to the north, the latter to the south of the Tian Shan mountains, displacing in their turn the Saka tribe which had formerly dwelled there. The Yuechi were gradually driven across the Ili and the Yaxartes. From 163 to 126 B.C., they occupied the country between the latter river and the
8 See Beal's Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. I, pp. 57 and 173 ; also Numismatic Chronicle, Vol. IX (1889), p. 272.
9 See Abel Remusat's Histoire de la Ville de Khotan, pp. 37, 38, and Beal's Budihist Records of the Western World, Vol. II, p. 310.
Oxus, and by 26 B.C. they had extended their settlements beyond the Hindukush into Afghanistan. Here they formed a great kingdom under the two Kadphises and under Kanerkes and Hverkes from about 25 B.C. to 180 A.D. Their rule gradually comprised the whole of NorthWestern India in addition to Eastern Afghanistan. On their coins they used both the Greek and Indian-Kharoşthi characters: the former they retained from their Greek predecessors whose official script it had been ; the latter was the script of secular commerce of their Indian subjects. Co-existing with these scripts there were in use also the Iudian-Brāhmi characters, favoured by the religious and learned, especially the Buddhists.
Concurrent with the great Yuechi kingdom there was in NorthWestern India a smaller que of another Turki race under the kings Maues, Azes, and their successors, from about 50 B.C. to 80 A.D. It did not extend beyond the Panjāb, and the Turki invaders who founded it, must have entered India through Kashmir and over the Karakorum passes from the direction of Khotan. Here, we have seen, the Uighur tribe, which still continues to form the main stock of the population of the whole of Eastern Turkestan, 10 had gradually established itself in the second century B.C., in constant warfare with the Hiungnus and Sakas. It was no doubt the Uighurs who, similarly to the Yuechis further west, pressed forward and extended their role into India in the first century B.C. Here they became the neighbours and rivals of the Yuechis, and here also they became acquainted with Greek and Indian culture ; for, like the Yuechi Indian kings, the Uighur Indian kings Maues, Azes and their successors have both Greek and Indian-Kharoşthi legends on their coins. The Uighur kingdom, which in the South, (in India), had to contend with the Yuechi, and in the North, (in Eastern Turkestan), with the Hiungnu, at last declined in power. In order to secure the assistance of the Chinese empire, its Northern portion submitted to China and consented to pass under its administration. This happened, as we have seen, in 73 A.D.11 About the same time its southern portion was annexed by the Yuechi king Kanishka, who extended his rule over Kashmir up to the Karakorum (Tsung-ling) range, and took hostages from the remainder of the Uighur kingdom.12 Under these altered conditions, the Uighur coinage in Khotan was conformed to the Chinese standard, and its obverse legend, which had hitherto been Greek, was replaced by a Chinese inscription. The reverse legend, on the other hand, continued, as hitherto, to be expressed in the official Indian language and Indian-Kharoşthi characters. This explains the use of the latter amongst a Turki population, such as that of Khotan must have been. They were the language and script of the Uighur Government, having originally been adopted in India, and surviving in Khotan after the Indian portion of the kingdom had been lost. Similarly the use of the Indian-Uighur types of the bare horse and the Bactrian camel were continued. These types are found on the coins of Maues, Azes, and their successors ; 18 and indeed, they rather point to Turkestan as their home-laud.
10 See N. Elias' Tarikh-i-Rashidi, p. 92. Il See Abel Remugat's Histoire de la Ville de Khotan, pp. 3 ff. 12 See Beal's Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. I, pp. 56, 57.
That a species of Indian script was current in Khotan, is well known from Chinese writers. The case is not quite so clear with respect to the language of the country. Hiuen Tsiang (about 645 A.D.) relates that " the written characters and the mode of forming their sentences resemble the Indian model ; the forms of the letters differ somewhat; the differences, however, are slight. The spoken language also differs from that of other countries."! Another account says that “they have chronicles, and their characters, as well as their laws and their literature, are imitated from those of the Hindās, with some slight alterations. This imitation has diminished their barbarism, and modified their manners and their language which (latter) differs from that of other people.”16 These statements clearly indicate that the Uighur population of Khotan, originally totally unlettered and uncultured, derived the whole of their ancient culture from India ; and this fact well agrees with, and is well explained by, the ancient extension of Uighur rule over North-Western India. At the same time, it is not probable that the Chinese statements about the written characters refer to the Indian-Kharoşthi script. They rather indicate a modified form of IndianBrāhmi. The Kharoşthi, as seen on the Indo-Chinese coins, does not merely “resemble the Indian model,” but is identical with that once current in North-Western India and Eastern Afgha tan. Biuen Tsiang was a Buddhist monk, and on his travels he resided in Buddhist monasteries, and came in contact almost exclusively with Buddhist culture. The Indian-Brāhmi was the home-script and the peculiar script of Buddhism, and was carried by them wherever they went. It went with them, as we know from the Bower and Weber Manuscripts to Kuchar, and it is equally probable that it went with them to Khotan. The introduction of Buddhism into both these places may be traced back to as early a time as the first or second centuries B.C. In both places, as the Chinese note, the Indian Brāhmi developed "slight alterations," 16 known to us in Kuchar as the peculiar Central-Asian Brāhmi.!? Hiuen Tsiang, in the passage above quoted seems to distinguish between the spoken and the written language of Khotan. By the latter, which he calls “the mode of forming their sentences,'
18 See British Mas. Cat., pp. 72, 89, 96, 112. On their coins, as well as on the Indo-Chinese coins, the horse is standing or walking, and is turned to the right. The horse occurs also on the coins of other kings (Euthydemus, Heliocles, Menander, etc.), but it is turned to the left, or is prancing. So also the camel is found on Menander's coing, but it is turned to the left, while on the Indo-Chinese coins it stands to the right.
14 See Beal's Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. II, p. 309. 16 See Abel Remusat's Histoire de la Ville de Khotan, p. 37.
and which he says “resembles the Indian model,” I presume he means Sanskrit or Pāli, such as was used in Buddhist literature, and which can have been known only to a very limited class of people, the Religious and Learned. The "spoken language,” which I take to have been that of the general population, must have been the Uighur Turki, and this as Hiuen Tsiang says, differed" from that of other countries,” i.e., China and India. This view is confirmed by a remark of Sung-yun (518 A.D.) respecting Yarkand. Of this town he says, “their customs and spoken language are like those of the people of Khotan, but the written character in use is that of the Brāhmans," 18 ie, the Indian Brāhmi. Moreover, Fabian (400 A.D.) reports expressly with regard to the whole of Eastern Turkestan, that though the people speak different Turki (Hu) dialects, "the professed disciples of Buddha among them all use Indian books and the Indian (Sanskrit) language." 19 None of these Chinese Buddhist pilgrims appears to have noticed the existence of the Kharoşthi script, whether in Khotan or in its Indian home-land. The only script of the Semitic class which Hiuen Tsiang noticed, he mentions in connection with the kingdom of Kesh,80 and this script cannot have been the Kharoşthi, though it may have been allied to it. Possibly in their time, Kharoşthi had practically ceased to exist. In Khotan, at the time of the Indo-Chinese coins, it was evidently the secular official script of the native Government, though not quite exclusively so, as is shown by the Kharoşthi manuscript found near that town by M. Dutreil de Rhins and containing a portion of the Buddhist Dhammapada. 31 It does not seem probable that, after the
16 With regard to Kuchar, see Hinen Tsiang's remark, in Beal's Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. I, p. 19.
17 See a description of it in my Report, in the Journal, As. Soc. Beng., Vol. LXVI (1897), p. 242, LXII, p. 4.
18 See Beal's Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. I, p. lxxxix.
31 See Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Inscriptions, Vol. XXV, (1897), pp. 261 ff.