You are on page 1of 14

1 NOTES ON THE DATING OF KHOTANESE HISTORY by John E.

Hill (Originally published in the Indo-Iranian Journal 31 (1988), 179-190, with some minor changes and Chinese Romanizations changed from the Wade-Giles to Pinyin system). The oasis of Khotan is strategically located at the junction of the southern (and most ancient) branch of the famous Silk Route joining China and the West with one of the main routes from India and Tibet to Central Asia and China. It provided a convenient meeting place where not only goods, but technologies, philosophies, and religions were transmitted from one culture to another. Khotan, from the traditional time of its founding during the reign of the great Indian emperor Aoka Maurya (c. 269 to 231 B.C.) until the Muslim conquest c. 1006 A.D., had a tempestuous history and suffered many invasions. However, for much of this period it was a very important and influential centre of Buddhist learning and culture. The early history and long lost language of the ancient kingdom of Khotan have been gradually pieced together by the diligent efforts of a remarkable assembly of adventurers and scholars from many countries.1 We are fortunate in now having a relative abundance of information on Khotan readily available for study. The main historical sources are to be found in the Chinese histories (particularly detailed during the Han and early Tang dynasties), the accounts of several Chinese pilgrim monks, a few Buddhist histories of Khotan that have survived in Tibetan, and a large number of documents in Khotanese and other languages discovered, for the most part, early this century at various sites in the Tarim basin and from the hidden library at the Caves of the Thousand Buddhas near Dunhuang. The Li yul lu-bstan-pa or Prophecy of the Li Country2 is of great historical interest. It has been preserved as part of the Tibetan Tanjur but its use of many Khotanese names and terms3 indicate that it was either originally translated from Khotanese or written by someone with direct access to Khotanese sources. The few dates given in the text are sometimes contradictory and most are implausible. Attempts to identify the kings listed in it with the Khotanese kings mentioned in the Chinese histories (which are generally accurately dated) have proved difficult.4 The names the Chinese recorded for the Khotanese kings show little resemblance to the kings names in the Prophecy of the Li country which are mainly of Indian origin. To add to the confusion, the same name is frequently used for more than one king. The Prophecy of the Li Country may usefully be looked at as consisting of five main sections:

a. A preface.5 b. An introduction which includes a mythologised account of the founding of Khotan during the reign of Aoka Maurya (c. 269 to 231 B.C.).6 This story may well include genuine historical information. c. An account, apparently in chronological order, of the reigns of fifty-six generations of kings of Li and one regent.7 It gives details on the reigns of only those kings who supported Buddhism by building vihras (monasteries). The rest are simply listed by the numbers of generations. d. A similar, though shorter, section dealing with the queens and convents of Khotan.8 Although it presents itself (like section c) as being in chronological order, this does not appear to be the case but, rather, information from at least two sources seems to have been haphazardly combined. This makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to determine the original order of events. e. A summing-up, which includes some interesting statistics on the Buddhist community in Khotan.9 The following is an attempt to establish some dates for the period of the final seven reigns and the one regency contained in section c: King Vijaya Krti (III)10 The Prophecy of the Li country, while discussing the foundation of the Bhabaa vihra by King Vijaya Krti and his consort, states that: This vihra was built at the time when the Li country was attached long ago to the Tibetan dominions and was governed by the Mgar minister Ban-en Gu-sto11 This Mgar minister is undoubtedly the same person as the Mgar Ban-en Gu-rton who, according to the Tibetan Annals found near Dunhuang12, was disgraced by the Tibetan king Dus-sro; and executed in 695 A.D.13 He was, apparently, the fifth, and youngest, son of the famous Tibetan prime minister Mgar stong btsan yul bzung.14 After their fathers death in 667 A.D. the five15 brothers virtually ruled Tibet between them16 until King Dus-sro; (r. 676-703 or 704 A.D.) brutally restored the power of the monarchy between 695 and 699 A.D.17 In 670 A.D. the Tibetans took the Four Garrisons of Anxi18 (which consisted, at this time, of Kucha, Khotan, Kashgar and Suj-ab or Tokmak 19 ) from the Chinese who were unable to regain supremacy in the region until 692 A.D.20 The Mgar brothers personally led the armies which responsible for the rapid expansion of the Tibetan empire at this period. It is, therefore, no surprise to find one of the Mgars, Ban-en Gu-ston, governing Khotan as recorded in the Prophecy of the Li country. His governorship of Khotan must have been for some period between the Tibetan conquest of Khotan in 670 A.D. and the reestablishment of

Chinese power in 692 A.D. King Vijaya Krti (111)21 was followed by King Vijaya Sagrma (IV) who, as will be shown in the next section, was probably identical with the Fudu Xiong of the Chinese sources who came (or fled) with his family and followers to China in 674 A.D. after fighting with the Tibetans.22 If this identification is correct then the Mgar minister Ban-en Gu-ston must have governed Khotan sometime between 670 and 674 A.D. and the construction of the Bhabaa vihra, as well as the end of Vijaya Krtis reign, must also have occurred within this period. King Vijaya Sagrma (IV), Regent Amacha Khemeg and King Vijaya Vikrama Immediately following the account of the reign of King Vijaya K rti (III) the Prophecy of the Li country states:
Then after that King Vijaya Sagrma and his son. King Vijaya Sagrma the Younger, went to China and on the way back to the Li country, their route was restricted by a Dru-gu (Turk) army. The father died in China, and while the son, being small, was unable to return, a Li minister called Amacha Khemeg acted as regent for twelve years.... Then King Vijaya Sagrmas son, King Vijaya Vikrama23 by name, having returned to the Li country, built for his pious friend, the rya Arhat Devendra the Great, the vihra Byi-za-gre-rma.24

This account finds an interesting parallel in the Chinese texts:


The Xin Tang shu says, At the beginning of the shan-yan period (674-675 A.D.), (the king of Khotan, Fudu Xiong) leading his retinue of his sons, younger brothers, and high dignitaries numbering seventy people, came in person to render homage at the court. As he had acquired merit by fighting with the Tubo (Tibetans), the emperor made of his territory the Government of Pisha. He divided it into ten wards and conferred on Fudu Xiong the title of Governor. On the death (of Fudu Xiong)25, the empress Wu put his son Jing26 on the throne.27 The Cefuyuangui states: ln the first month of the second shang-yan year (675 A.D.), the kingdom of Yutian (Khotan) was constituted into the Government of Pishan and its territory was divided into ten wards. The king of Yutian (Khotan), Yuchi (Weichi)28 Fudu Xiong, was named governor of Pishan because of the merit he had acquired by attacking the Tubo (Tibetans).29 Further on it states that: In the twelfth month of the second tien-shou year (early 692 A.D.), the king of Yutian (Khotan) Y(-chih) Fudu Xiong being dead his son Jing was named king of Yutian.30

In spite of the fact that the Tibetan and Chinese accounts are brief, and written from quite different points of view, the outline of the story is basically the same and they dont contradict each other. As we know the Chinese did not regain control of the Four Garrisons until 692 A.D., it seems most unlikely that Fudu Xiong ever returned to Khotan but probably died in China (like King Vijaya Sagrma). The evidence suggests that King Vijaya Sagrma (IV) and his son, King Vijaya Vikrama, are identical to Fudu Xiong and his son Jing in the Chinese texts. There is further support for this identification. The Khotanese monk Devendrapraja (or Devendrajna)31 arrived in China c. 688 A.D. bringing with him more than a hundred Sanskrit texts. He was given the prestigious position of leading the translation team installed by the Empress Wu in the Eastern Weiguo monastery at

Luoyang after the death of Divakara (early 688 A.D.) who until that time had been the only Tripitaka of the empire.32 Devendrapraja was famed for his knowledge and was given the titles Master of the Law and Tripitaka. Unfortunately he died shortly afterwards at Luoyang in 691 or 692 A.D.33 This Devendrapraja would have been in Luoyang for the last three or four years of Fudu Jings long sojourn at the capital before he was placed on the Khotanese throne by the Chinese in 692 A.D. They almost certainly would have met each other in Luoyang. In the quote from the Prophecy of the Li country above it is stated that King Vijaya Vikrama, after his return to Khotan, built a vihra for his pious friend rya Arhat Devendra the Great (dgra-bcom-pa debendra chen-gyi). The similarity between the two names and the use of the title chen-gyi or the Great strongly suggest that the Master of the Law and Tripitaka Devendrapraja was the same person as rya Arhat Devendra the Great. If I am correct in this identification then we must assume that King Vijaya Vikrama built the vihra of Byi-a-gre-rma in remembrance of his pious friend as Devendrapraja died in Luoyang in late 691 or 692 A.D., about the same time that Fudu Jing (Vijaya Vikrama) returned to Khotan Amacha Khemeg is said to have acted as regent for twelve years while King Vijaya Sagrmas son was small. It would therefore seem likely that the regency lasted from c. 680 to 692 A.D., while the Tibetans were still in control of the area, which would explain why the regency is not mentioned in the Chinese texts. King Vijaya Dharma (III) King Vijaya Vikrama was followed by King Vijaya Dharma (III)34 who can probably be equated with Yuchi Tiao although the evidence is limited to their corresponding positions in the Chinese and Tibetan listings. Yuchi Tiao was beheaded by the Chinese in 725 A.D. for conspiring with the Tujue (Turks) to rebel. His relatives and followers were exterminated and another prince was appointed by the Chinese.35 King Vijaya Sabhava (II) The next king listed in the Prophecy of the Li country, King Vijaya Sabhava (II)36, similarly corresponds with Yuchi Fushizhan37 who was probably the prince appointed by the Chinese after they executed Yuchi Tiao in 725 A.D. In 728 A.D. Fushizhan was officially given the title King of Khotan by the Chinese emperor.38 King Vijaya Vahana the Great King Vijaya Sabhava (II) was followed by King Vijaya Vhana the Great (bijaya bo-han chen-po)39, who is the only king in the Prophecy of the Li country given the title chen-po or the Great. In the corresponding

position in the Chinese texts is Fudu Da40 who succeeded to the throne in 736 A.D. after the death of Yuchi Fushizhan. King Ban-bza Ban-la Brtan The Prophecy of the Li country was, apparently, completed during the reign of King Ban-bza Ban-la Brtan.41 This is the same ruler as the Banlegs mentioned in The Religious Annals of the Li Country42 (a document discovered in the hidden library near Dunhuang) and the Rje Bun-legs43 in whose lifetime The Prophecy of the Arhat Saghavardhana is said to have been written.44 The latter two documents, although differing somewhat in details, describe the flight of Buddhist monks from Khotan after persecution by an anti-Buddhist king, presumably King Ban-bza Ban-la Brtan. The monks fled to Tibet where they were initially welcomed and protected by the Chinese wife of the Tibetan king, Queen Kon-co.45 After her death, which was probably in early 740 A.D. (and definitely between 739 and 741 A.D.)46, the rise of anti-Buddhist factions in Tibet forced them to flee again. They headed first to Gandhara and, after a continuing series of misfortunes, to Kaumb in central India where the monks finally ended up quarrelling and slaughtering each other.47 The Chinese sources mention that Fudu Da was succeeded on his death by Yuchi Kuei whose wife was granted the title of Princess by the Chinese court in 740 A.D.48 It seems almost certain, therefore, that Yuchi Kuei is identical to the Ban-bza Ban-la Brtan of the Prophecy of the Li country.49 The Religious Annals of the Li Country state that the Khotanese monks spent twelve years in Tibet.50 This seems to be a mistake. The Prophecy of the Arhat Saghavardhana gives the more likely figure of three years51 while The Prophecy of the rya Arhat of Li says that Queen Kon-co died three or four years after the arrival of the monks in Tibet.52 If Yuchi Kuei succeeded Fudu Da in 736 or 737 A.D. there would have been time for the monks to have been in Tibet for three or four years before the death of Queen Kon-co in c. 740 A.D. Date of the composition of the Prophecy of the Li country The Prophecy of the Li country states that: Reckoning from the time of King Vijaya Sabhava, grandson of King Sa-nu, when religion (dharma) first arose in the Li country, down to the last intercalary autumn month of the Dog Year, there are 1,256 years.53 Earlier in the text it is stated that Khotan was founded during the reign of King Aoka Maurya of India54 (reigned c. 269-231 B.C.) and that A hundred and sixty-five years after the origin of the Li country, when Prince Yehu-las son King Vijaya Sabhava had been King for five years, the religion (dharma) first arose in the Li country.55 This would place the introduction of Buddhism to Khotan early in the 1st century B.C. and the composition of the work well into the Muslim period, several centuries after the last king named in the book. It is of interest to note that The Religious Annals of the Li Country state that from the rise of the religion

(of Buddha) there had passed years a thousand, seven hundred and thirty-three. During the period from king Earth-Breast (Sa-nu) to the Li ruler Ban-legs fifty-six generations of kings....56 Here we have an even more impossible dating for the same period and are thus compelled to reject them both. However, the mention of the Dog year above, presumably during the reign of King Ban-bza Ban-la Brtan (= Yuchi Kuei), provides a clue. Yuchi Kuei, who, as shown above, probably came to the throne c. 737 A.D., was definitely ruling in 740 A.D. and his son and successor, Yuchi Sheng, was ruling by 747 A.D., at the latest.57 The only Dog year in this period was 746 A.D. It would appear, therefore, that the work was compiled in 746 A.D., quite likely by one of the monks who had fled to central India. Similarly, The Prophecy of the Arhat Saghavardhana, which was composed according to calculation made by the assembled Pandits of Li in the Hare year during the lifetime of the Li king Rje Bun-legs...58, may be dated to 739 A.D. However, as this work mentions events which occurred after 739 A.D.,59 it was presumably backdated to make it appear to be a true prophecy. The actual date of composition, therefore, remains unknown although it was probably roughly contemporary with the Prophecy of the Li country.60 The related work, The Prophecy of the rya Arhat(s) of Li (Khotan) 61, appears immediately prior to the Prophecy of the Li country in the Tibetan Tanjur. It was translated into Chinese by the bilingual monk Facheng (c. 770-c. 866 A.D.).62 Unfortunately, neither the author, nor the translator of the Prophecy of the Li country are known, although R.A. Stein suggests63 that Facheng may have played a part in the drafting of the Tibetan version. PROPOSED CHRONOLOGY 670 A.D. The Tibetans defeat the Chinese and take control of the Four Garrisons. Khotan helps the Tibetans conquer Aksu. King Vijaya Krti III builds the Bhabaa vihra. Khotan governed by Mgar minister Ban-en Gu-ston. Fudu Xiong (Vijaya Sagrma IV), his family and followers go to China after fighting with the Tibetans. They are unable to return to Khotan.

c. 670-673 A.D. 674 A.D.

c.680-c.692 A.D. Amacha Khemeg is regent of Khotan. 692 A.D. Fudu Jing (Vijaya Vikrama), son of Fudu Xiong (Vijaya Sagrma IV), is placed on the Khotanese throne by the Chinese. Fudu Jing (Vijaya Vikrama) sends an ambassador

717 A.D.

to China. 725 A.D. Yuchi Tiao (Vijaya Dharma Ill) is beheaded by the Chinese for conspiring with the Turks. Yuchi Fushizhan (Vijaya Sabhava II) is placed on the Khotanese throne by the Chinese. Yuchi Fushizhan (Vijaya Sambhava II) officially given the title King of Khotan by the Chinese emperor. Fudu Da (Vijaya Vhana the Great) succeeds Yuchi Fushizhan (Vijaya Sabhava II). The Chinese emperor bestows a title on his wife. Yuchi Kuei (Ban-bza Ban-la Brtan) succeeds Fudu Da (Vijaya Vhana the Great) and begins his persecution of Khotanese Buddhists. The monks flee to Tibet. (between 639 and 741 A.D.) the Chinese Queen Ko-co of Tibet dies. The refugee monks are forced to leave for Gandhra. The Chinese emperor bestows a title on the wife of Yuchi Kuei (Ban-bza Ban-la Brtan). The Prophecy of the Li country is completed. Yuchi Sheng, after going to China and marrying an imperial princess, helps the Chinese defeat Little Bolu (the Gilgit valley). Yuchi Sheng hands over the government of Khotan to his younger brother, Shih-hu (Jabgu) Yao. Yuchi Yao still ruling Khotan at the time of Wukongs visit. ABBREVIATIONS AM BEFEO Asia Major. Bulletin de lcole Franaise dExtrme Orient.

728 A.D.

736 A.D.

c. 737 A.D.

c. 740 A.D.

740 A.D. 746 A.D. 747 A.D.

756 A.D. c. 787 A.D.

Chavannes, Documents.... Edouard Chavannes, Documents sur les Toukiue (Turcs) occidentaux, St. Petersburg, 1903. Reprint, Taiwan, 1969, which includes the following item.

Chavannes, Notes addit. Edouard Chavannes, Notes additionelles sur les Tou-kiue (Turcs) occidentaux, Toung Pao sr. II, V (1904), pp. 1-110. DTT HADT HERCT JA TLT TTCK 1967. J. Bacot, F. W. Thomas, Ch. Toussaint, Documents de Touenhouang relatifs lhistoire du Tibet, Paris, 1940-1946. Paul Pelliot, Histoire Ancienne du Tibet, Paris, 1961. Don Y. Lee, The History of Early Relations between China and Tibet, Bloomington, 1981. Journal Asiatique. F. W. Thomas, Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan, parts i-iv, London, 1935-1963. R. E. Emmerick, Tibetan Texts Concerning Khotan, London,

NOTES Quotations from French texts have been rendered into English by the author. Romanizations of Chinese words have been standardised according to the Wade-Giles system. Introductions in English to the history of ancient Khotan may be found in M. Aurel Steins Ancient Khotan (1907), pp. 123-184, H. W. Baileys Khotanese Texts, iv. (1961), pp. 1-18 (including a good short bibliography of the various expeditions on p. 2, n. 1.), Baileys paper The Kingdom of Khotan (Australian National University, 1971), pp. 1-15, and his A HalfCentury of Irano-Indian Studies, JRAS (1972), pp. 99-110. Although I have not yet been able to obtain them, I should also mention Baileys five lectures in The Culture of the Sakas in ancient Iranian Khotan delivered at Columbia University in 1979 and published in 1982. 2 There appears to be some disagreement about the name of this text. There are, currently, two translations of the work into English. I have followed here the usage of R. E. Emmerick (TTCK, 1967, p. 1) as his is the most recent of the two. F. W. Thomas (TLT, i, 1935, p. 89), however, gives the title as Li-yul-gyi-lo-rgyus or The Annals of the Li Country. In the Tibetan Tanjur this work is found combined with another, shorter, one which is also found by itself in a Chinese version and in three Tibetan manuscripts discovered near Dunhuang. Emmerick (TTCK, p. ).) calls it the Li yul-gyi dgra-bcom-bas lu-bstan-pa. Thomas, however, gives its name as Lihi-yul-lun-bstan-pa or The Prophecy of the Li Country (TLT, i, p. 77.), the same name Emmerick gives to the previous work! To further
1

the confusion Thomas translates its title, which is given in the colophon, as The Prophecy of the rya Arhat (or Arhats?) of Li (Khotan). (TLT, i, p. 87; iii, p. 9.) 3 See F. W. Thomas, The Language of Ancient Khotan, AM, vol. 2, Apr. 1925, pp. 254-255; H. W. Bailey, Khotanese Texts, iv, p. 2; TTCK, pp. xi, xii. See E. G. Pulleyblanks note in TTCK, p. 100. Earlier attempts to date the kings listed in the Prophecy of the Li country include The Dates in Saka texts from Khotan and Tun-huang by Sten Konow in Acta Orientalia, vii, 1929, pp. 66-76, and Succession and Chronology of the Via Royal Family in Khotan by T. Inoguchi, Rykoku Daigaku ronsh, No. 364, pp. 27-43 (in Japanese). For the dates of some 10th century A.D. Khotanese kings see The Date of the Stal-Holstein Roll by E. G. Pulleyblank, AM, n.s., Vol. iv, Part 1, pp. 90-97.
4 5

TTCK, pp. 3-7. TTCK, pp. 7-21. TTCK, pp. 21-63. TTCK, pp. 63-73. TTCK, pp. 73-75.

I have followed throughout the numbering used by Emmerick for kings sharing the same name. See TTCK, pp. 99-101.
10

TTCK, p. 59. For discussions of the name mgar (Gar) see R. A. Stein, Deux Notules dHistoire Ancienne du Tibet in JA, 1963, pp. 330-333 and H. W. Bailey, Khotanese Texts, vii, 1985, pp. 110-141. F. W. Thomas transcribes the name of this minister as Btsan-in (en) Gu-ston (rton). See TLT. iv. 1963, p. 71.
11 12

DTT, p. 38

That their names are identical is obvious. Additionally, Khotan was controlled by Tibet for only two periods, between 670 and 692 A.D. and from 791 to about 850 A.D. (H. W. Bailey, Khotanese Texts, iv, 1961, p. 3, and E. G. Pulleyblank, ibid., p. 179.) The mgar family or clan is only known to have been prominent in the first period. It would seem most unlikely that there would be two such prominent men at the same period with the same names.
13

The Jiu Tang-shu says: Mgar sto-bran yul-zun had five sons; the eldest one was called Zanxiruo, who died young; his second son was Qinling, the third son was Tsanpo, the fourth one was Xiduogan sitokan, and the fifth one was Polun. (D. Y. Lee, HERCT, p. 15. See also P. Pelliot,
14

HADT, p. 7.) Lee identifies the Tibetan names of these brothers as follows: Tsanhsijo is Mgar ban-sa hdom-bu (d. 685 A.D.), Chin-ling is Khri-bri ban-lod, Tsanpo is bTsan-ha, Hsitokan is Sta-gu, and Polu is Mgar bran-en gu-rton (HERCT, pp. 15, 21, n. 2). Some authors (e.g. G. Choephel, The White Annals, p. 91; W.D. Shakabpa, Tibet: A Political History, p. 29) list only four Mgar brothers, as does the Xin Tangshu (HADT, p. 85). However, the list in the Chiu Tangshu (see note 14 above) seems so definite I have accepted its version.
15

The Jiu Tang-shu (HERCT, pp. 24, 25) says: In Tufan, ever since the minister Khri-bri btsan-lod (lun Chin-ling) and his brothers came to control the army, Khri-bri btsan-lod (Chin-ling) always stayed in the centre of Tufan and administered the national affairs. His young brothers were dispatched to the outlying areas. bTsan-ba was steadily in the eastern frontier facing China over thirty years, and made trouble on the border. His older as well as younger brothers all had superior ability, and the various Chiang tribes were afraid of them. (See also HADT, p. 11.) The Xin Tang-shu states: Chin-ling was all-powerful in the (Tibetan) state for a long time; he constantly resided in the central district so as to direct affairs. His younger brothers commanded troops at the various cardinal points. (Among them) Tsan-po had total power over the eastern territories where he was a plague on our frontiers for nearly 30 years. All these brothers had talents of the first order. The masses feared them. (From HADT, p. 94.)
16 17

HADT, pp. 11, 12, 94. DTT, pp. 38, 39.

The Xin Tang-shu states that in 670 A.D. the Tibetans invaded and plundered 18 vassal prefectures. (Besides), bringing (with them the men of) Y-tien (Khotan), they took the town of Po-huan (Aksu), (a dependency) of Jiu-tzu (Kucha). The Four Garrisons of Anxi were then subdued. (From HADT, p. 86.)
18

Chavannes, Documents.... , p. 113, n. 2. Chavannes states (ibid., p. 359) that Sui-shih transcribes the name Suj which refers to the Suj-ab (or Chu) River and, in particular, to the town situated near this river, i.e. Tokmak. In 719 A.D. Karashar replaced Tokmak as one of the Four Garrisons.
19 20

HERCT, pp. 22, 23. HADT, pp. 10, 90-92.

It is not possible to confidently identify King Vijaya K rti with any of the Khotanese named in the Chinese accounts. There is a possibility that he was Shih-hu (Jabgu) Tien, son of Fudu Xin (who ruled from at least 640 to 649 A.D.). In 649 A.D. the emperor Kao Tsung conferred on (Fudu Xin) the title Great General of the Valiant Guards of the Right. He gave him a robe, a sash, six thousand pieces of linen and silk and a princely
21

residence. After keeping him there for several months he sent him back. (Fudu Xin) asked that his sons and younger brothers be incorporated in the Imperial Guard. (From : Chavannes, Documents...., pp. 126, 127.) It is not known if Tien ever came to power. However, even if he did, King Vijaya K rti could well have been a later successor.
22

See Chavannes, Documents...., p. 127.

It is not clear here whether Vijaya Sagrma the Younger, like his father, died in China and Vijaya Vikrama (presumably a younger brother) took the throne, or whether Vijaya Sagrma the Younger took the name Vikrama (perhaps when he came to power).
23 24

TTCK, p. 59.

The fact that the Tibetans retained control of the Four Garrisons until 692 A.D. suggests that Fudu Xiong was never able to return to Khotan but died an exile in China. It is not clear whether Fudu Xiong died, as the text seems to imply, just before Fudu Jing was placed on the throne in 692 A.D., or earlier. If the Amacha Khemeg ruled for the 12 years prior to 692 A.D, it suggests the possibility that Vijaya Sagrma died in China c. 679 A.D. and that the regent was installed after word of his death reached Khotan.
25

Fudu Jing sent an ambassador to China in 717 A.D. presenting various animals to the court. Chavannes, Notes addit., p. 34; Documents...., p. 127. One text, the Tzu chih tung chien, gives his name as Hsia. Chavannes, Notes addit., p. 24, n. 3.
26 27

Chavannes, Documents...., p. 127.

The first character of this name may be read as either Wei or Yu. Chavannes and several other early writers transcribed it as Wei. This has lead some to see a relationship between the name (Weichi) and Via or Vijaya, the title given to the Khotanese kings in the Prophecy of the Li country (e.g. M. Aurel Stein, Ancient Khotan, 1, p. 173, n. 9). However, Yuchi is a well-known disyllabic family name and the reading here should be Yu (see Paul Pelliot, Notes sur Marco Polo 1, pp. 41 8ff.). I have, therefore, changed Wei to Yu, where necessary, when quoting from others. E. G. Pulleyblank suggests a possible relationship with the name of the Yuezhi people in his article Chinese and Indo-Europeans, JRAS, 1965, pp. 18, 19. One branch of the Yuezhi, the Little Yuezhi, did settle in the Southern Mountains to the northwest of Lake Kokonor in the time of the Former Han dynasty. Shjii, chap. 123; see Records of the Grand Historian of China, trans. by Burton Watson, N.Y. and London, 1961, vol. 2, p. 268. The Xin Tangshu states that Yuchi was the family name of the king of Khotan. Chavannes, Documents...., p. 126. Two famous Khotanese painters working in China also had this surname: Yuchi Bochina (early 7th
28

cent. A.D.) and his son (?), Yuchi Yiseng, who was sent to China by the king of Khotan c. 627 A.D. It is not known if they were related to the Khotanese royal family but it is possible. See Mario Bussagli, Central Asian Painting, Geneva, 1963, pp. 66, 67, and Max Loehr, The Great Painters of China, Oxford, 1980, pp. 37, 38.
29

Chavannes, Notes addit., p. 23. Chavannes, Notes addit., p. 24.

30

Antonio Forte, Le moine Khotanais Devendrapraja, BEFEO LXVI, 1979, pp. 289, 290.
31 32

Ibid., p. 291. Ibid., p. 295.

33

Then after that (i.e. after Vijaya Vikrama), the Chinese minister Serthe-i and King Vijaya Dharma together built for their pious friend Parmog Jinasena of Hgum-tir the vihra of Byams-pa Maitri of the Upper City. At present Vairavaa guards this vihra. TTCK, p. 61.
34

The Tzu-chih tung-chien says that in 725 A.D., the king of Yutian (Khotan), Yuchi Tiao, made an agreement with the various Tujue (Turk) kingdoms to rebel. Tu Hsien knew of these schemes; he sent soldiers and found a way to behead him. His relatives and followers were all exterminated. Another prince was appointed, and Yutian (Khotan) was then pacified. Chavannes, Documents...., p. 82, note; p. 311, note.
35

Then after that (i.e. after Vijaya Dharma III), the kings minister Kathe-i and King Vijaya Sabhava by name together built for their two pious friends Udrendra Rod-ci and Dharmnanda the vihra of the Khe-gan Peak. At present Vairavaa guards this vihra. TTCK, p. 61.
36

The Tang annals make no mention of Yuchi Tiao but continue directly on from Fudu Jing: Jing being dead, (the Chinese court) made a new appointment by putting Yuchi Fushizhan on the throne. Chavannes, Documents...., p. 127.
37

The Cefuyuangui quotes a brevet in which Yuchi Fu-shih was named King of Khotan by the Chinese emperor in 728 A.D. The fact that he is mentioned as already having the title of a-mo-chih of Khotan, and that the brevet had to be delivered to him by an envoy, indicates that he had already been ruling Khotan for some period before the brevet was sent; it was merely an honour or a statement of recognition by the Chinese emperor. Chavannes, Documents...., pp. 207--208. For the title a-mochih see H. W. Bailey, JRAS, 1942, p. 26; F. W. Thomas, TLT, ii, pp. 191194, 313.
38

Afterwards, the stupa (Su-sto-a, built by King Vijaya Sabhava (I) soon after the arrival of Buddhism in Khotan) having fallen into ruin through length of time, after that King Vijaya Vhana the Great (bijaya bo-han chen-po) and the monk called Hbah-la-i, who had come from China, went and, inviting the Sagha of (ar-ma to be their pious friends (kalyamitra), built the vihra of Su-sto-a. At present Vairavaa guards it. TTCK, pp. 61, 63.
39

The Xin Tangshu states: On his (Yuchi Fushizhans) death, Fudu Da succeeded him; at the same time the title of princess was conferred by brevet on his wife Chih-shih. Chavannes, Documents...., p. 127. The Cefuyuangui says that: In the ninth month (Oct.-Nov. 736 A.D.), on the ting-chou day. the title of wife (of the king) of Yutian (Khotan) was granted to lady Shih, (spouse) of Yuchi Fudu Ta, king of Yutian (Khotan). Chavannes, Notes addit., p. 56.
40 41

TTCK, pp. 23, 76; TLT, i, pp. 103, 104 and note 1. TLT, i, p. 305. An error for Btsan-legs (=Btsan-bza Btsan-la-brtan). TLT, i, p. 69, n. 1. TLT, i, p. 69. TLT, i, pp. 60, 61, 82, 83, 314. DTT, pp. 50, 51; HERCT, p. 59; HADT, pp. 27, 105; TLT, i, p. 60, n. 1. TLT, i, 67, 68, 86, 316. Chavannes, Documents...., p. 127; Notes addit., p. 61.

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

Yuchi Kuei was followed by his son, Yuchi Sheng who, after visiting the court and receiving a Chinese princess of the imperial clan as wife, aided the Chinese in their conquest of Little Po-lu (the Gilgit valley) in 747 A.D. In 756 A.D. Yuchi Sheng handed over the government of Khotan to his younger brother, Shih-hu (Jabgu) Yao, and left with 5,000 cavalry to assist the emperor against the rebel An Lu-shan and remained in China until his death. Chavannes, Documents...., p. 127, notes 3, 4; M. Aurel Stein, Ancient Khotan, I, pp. 176, 177. His younger brother, Yao, was still ruling Khotan when the Chinese pilgrim monk Wu-kung visited in 786 A.D. Levi and Chavannes, LItinraire dOu-kong, JA. Sept.-Oct., 1895, pp. 362, 363.
49 50

TLT, i, p. 314. TLT,i,p. 61. TLT, i, p. 83. As mentioned earlier (page 179, n. 2), Thomas entitles this

51

52

work in English, The Prophecy of the Li Country but notes that its title is amplified in the colophon to The Prophecy of the rya Arhat (or Arhats?) of Li. I have used the latter title here to avoid confusion with the text which Thomas calls The Annals of the Li Country but which Emmerick calls the Prophecy of the Li country.
53

TTCK, p. 75. TTCK, pp. 15-23. TTCK, pp. 23, 25. TLT, i, p. 305. Chavannes, Documents...., p. 127, n. 4. TLT, i, p. 69.

54

55

56

57

58

This work mentions the death of Queen Kon-co which took place sometime between 739 and 741 A.D. (see n. 46 above). It then describes the flight of the monks from Tibet to Gandhara, where it says they settled for more than two years (TLT, pp. 64-65) before fleeing once again to Kaumb, in central India.
59

The Prophecy of the Arhat Saghavardhana is mentioned in the colophon of the Prophecy of the Li country. TTCK, pp. 75, 99. It must, therefore, be dated either prior to, or contemporary with, the latter work. As it mentions the death of Queen Kon-co and the flight of the monks to Gandhara and Kaumb it cannot be dated very much earlier than 746 A.D., the date ascribed above to the Prophecy of the Li country.
60 61

TLT, I, pp.77-87; III, p. 9.

R. A. Stein (BEFEO 72, 1983, p. 217) gives Fa-chengs date as ca. 770858. However, Paul Demiville, in his review of Daishun Ueyamas study of Fa-cheng (Toung pao 56, 1970, pp. 49-50), says that the last dated colophon mentioning him is from 859 but that he probably died several years later. Ueyama suggests that a eulogy dating from 866 or 867 relates to Fa-cheng and was composed after his death.
62 63

R. A. Stein, ibid., p. 217.

You might also like