2010 3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
: mda sor mo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181

Another Hungarian looting Chinas treasures? Sir Aurel Stein, Lajos Ligeti
and a case of mistaken identity Imre GALAMBOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209

2010.031-13

1
2

3
4

2009 3 20

53 1025

7 1 25-48

1948 1974

1986

1994 110-111

645

663

730

7838207
8

2006 3 1-8
6


931

940

987

10

10

1994 109-156

2009

1811-1889

50 60 80
207

124

11 12
13

14

2009 3 49-54

25.1x77.3cm 21.8x48.4cm
34.3x77.5cm21.4x42.2cm

128

11

1992 2 54-61
F
86
1991 1-44 F

2005 3
12
1996 12
13

2008 8
14

1997 5 83-96

2002 7 47-66

2006 2 359-367

11

Ch/U6782d, Ch/U6784, Ch/U6788, Ch/U7279, Ch/U7447, Ch/U7448, Ch/U7449

15
Dh256+Dh583, Dh965V,

F230

S.5895
P.4788

631

S.3538V

T II Y

58-66
15

60 848

16

17

981985

18

1988
186-188
17

70 1985 7 134-150

62 1990 3 329-343
18

16

19

20
P.3428 P.3429

85121

22

940

P.2948

7 9
1980

2006

20
1956 125
21

50 738
22

19

23

24

25

1994 3 118-124
24
40-41

25

2001 1 95-96
23

Ch1874

26
926-929

956

26

50 871

27 1010-1031

1251
1933

28

1993
28

1964 49

1516
2005 16

432009 1-12
27

10

K.1063
K.1064
K.1257
K.1497
K.1498

1645-1711
173829
174630

1711

31

32

1983 289-297
1931

30

31
1727
32
1751

29

11

33

34

1934

35

954-959

1086

1090

36

1984 202-203
33

34

35

13
1880 18 1885

19091913

36

1989 6

1072

12

37

38

37

37

2003 151

80 5

38
939

13

14

2010.0315-33

Dh
Dh
Dh
Dh

Dh
Dh
Dh

P.3266V S.3277-1
3860 3885A 11049 2654 S.9502V+S.9501+S.11419+S.13002
RV 3135+ 3138 12833RV

780

S.6207


1 2

P.3350S.3877VS.5949
S.5515P.3893P.3909P.2976
D246RV

D246RV
P.3266VS.3277-1 Dh3860Dh3885ADh11049Dh2654
S.9502V+S.9501+S.11419+S.13002 RVDh3135+Dh 3138Dh12833RV

1984 8
1994 12

273 284
1179 1192

16

780

1988 12

1654

17

P.2976

P.3350
P.3893

P.3909

69 128

1984

18

284

1997 6

19

S.6207 932

Dh

01055

908

319 324

20

1997 6

P.3350 P.3893 P.3909

S.6207
P.2976 S.0329V
S.2049V S.5546

Dh1455
S.8336

P.3909
S.5546
S.8336

P.3909
S.6207

10

10

21

4 3811

11
12

13

1: VHV1192 1896
1979 11

11

12

13

4185

1988 12

1653

1984 6

22

59-60

P.3909

2: AF-a08-1-22

3: AF-a08-1-1

23

14

P.3552

15

16

1979 11

14

3127-3128

15

16

382

24

381-382 432 475




17

18

19

20

17

19

20

18

25

21

22

P.3302V 930

S.3905RV

901
P.4995

23

24

1979 10

21

77

23

24

22

1979 8
1969

26

74

4637

873933

25

26

27

1987 3

25

3995 3996

27

26

207

206

531

27

4:

28

(1299-

1375)

28

2009 01

28

P.3350 1
S.3877V 2
S.5949 3
S.5515 4
P.3893 5
P.3909 6 +
Dh01055
P.2976 7
D246RV8
S.55469
S.2049V10
S.620711
S.0329V12
P.3270+P.3270V+
P.4976+Dh1049
P.346813
P.3856
P.4011
P.4055
S.6181
P.3702
P.3552

29

P.2569V
P.3555V
S.2055V
P.2612V
P.2058V
S.8210V
P.3302V
S.3905RV
P.4995V
P.3266V14
S.3277-1
S.833615
Dh265416
Dh3860RV17
Dh3885A18
Dh11049RV19 +
Dh2654
S.9502V+ S.9501
+S.11419
+S.13002RV20
Dh1049
Dh2235V
Dh3135+Dh313821
Dh12833RV
Dh1455
Dh05877

3
4
5
6 P.3909

P.3893

8
9
S.5546
10 S.2049

S.2049V

30

11 S.6207

P.3909

P.3909 S.6207

12

13
14

P.3486

15 S.8336
16
17
18
19
20
21

1962

3 1963

1980 105

1981 5

1981

1983

162-180

1987
31

S.5643 P.2350

2 40- 50

1987

1988

P.2976

1988

1989 11
P.3350 P.3284
483 505
P.3270 P.4011 S.2055 P.3552 P.4055

194 215

1989 12
346 359
P.3468

1990 104-105

1992 5

1992
165-182

1993

1993 8
P.3909

P.3909
P.3350P.2976P.3909

P.3909
S.6207P.3608S.5546P.2976P.3893P.3252P.3350P.3909
S.6207P.4638

1996.09

533 564

1998.11

141 180

32

2001 3

3 5 2001

2003 10

2003 1 45 48

200522 1416

2005

2006.08

383 385

-

2007.03
337366

1971

1983

85-104

2008 4

28

2009 01

33

34

2010.0335-79

S.1366

180 2004

S.2474
980982
S.1366

S.6577Va
P.2641 947

1S.2474 9809823

38
39 4
2S.1366 980982
2

2
()
,1959 369380

427 108129 1985

42 8
4856 ,1990

1990 1
1991 1

387440
1993

1993

6579 2002 1

1995 1 8796

1996 2 101104

21 1 193224 2003

2003
, 2000
19002000

, 2003
3
19861990

4
3-280
36


23
24
25
62
63
64
68
69
70
71
72
73
74 5
3S.6577Va

1
2
3
4
5

4P.2641 947

1
2

3
4
5
6

7
5
6

3-281286
3-609
37

10
11

12
13
14

15

16

17

18
19

20

21
22
1718 1

1.5

14
15

1
2
3
4

5
6
10
11 7

3-610614
38

S.2474
13

10

11

12

13

725 1964
1960 7-2293
10
1827
11
568
12
18321833
13
356
9

39

14

15

16 17

18

S.1366
1.9 8 10

1516

25

475

1819

2 50

88

16

1920

76

32

2123

5 50

345 250

40

2325

25 15

655

2729

7 20

333 100

56

2930

7 60

433

56

3031

10 60

490 300

80

3738

10 50

440 250

80

43

57

24

5965*

1509 2914

886

53397

/
200

260

17344

250 7
6872**

33 29 32

1750

384

450
72***

2 1 1 50

125

20

*
**
14

296
297
16
103 2003

17

18
297
15

40

***

1.9

P.2744
1

2
3
4
5
6

8
9
10
11

12
13

14
15

16
17

18 19

19

10-11

3.8

0.8

12-13

11.4

2.8

14-15

58

110.2

1.6

/
4.6

0.4

0.4

15
2

117.8

18-53 :, 19942005
41

 1.9

0.4 0.2

0.2 20

21

22

23

S.2472V/1 24 S.1366

25
P.3234Vi943

3637 26P.2032V

713 27

P.2641

P.2641

S.2474

28
20

172173
P.2937P1

22
129 1992
23
<> 1018 1982
24
4-8384
25
192
26
3-447
27
3-499
28

113
21

42

P.2005

692 695

29

30

31
++
++

69TAM331/5b
1/1b
1

191 296

29
1-2
30

31
1990 2 83
43

2
3

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22
23

32

3458121819

33

32

245246 19921996

33
178179
44

S.1366 23 25

25 47.5 1.9
18 15
1.2
S.1366 68 72
68
69
70
71 34
72
175.7
33 62.7 45 30 32
1 1.2

35

P.2641
12.5
2 3.8 5 1.5 2.2

1.2 1
1.9 15 18 19

34

3-286

69
179

13
13161819202225262930313738424345555657586162
6468747576788182 32
70

3-286

35

179

45

P.2641 947

12
13

9
10

11
12
13

20

S.2474
S.1366
S.1366
S.1366
S.1366
S.1366
S.1366

P.2641()

P.2641()

P.2641()

P.2641()

P.2641()

P.2641()

P.2641()

30

57

20

24

25

47.5

15

18

20

38

10

12

10

10

19

10

12

5.7

10

12

17

17

1.9

1.9

1.2

9.5

11

13.2

22

41.8

30

36

12

43

19

11

10

46

12

65.5.

2.6

175.7

3.84

12.5

0.2

10
45
5
1

0.5

0.5

11

131

1.5

10

100

22.8

81.7

1.5

0.5

P.2641()

P.2641()

P.2641()

P.2641()

1.5

2.4

P.2641

P.2641 24

S.1366
P.2641
1213

S.6577Va

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

S.6577

47

S.6577

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

3
5
9

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

S.2474

S.1366

4.75

S.1366

2.84

146

S.1366

14

S.1366

10

**

**

1 2

48

P.3644

36

37 P.3644

P.3644

36
37

26-200202
192
49


P.3272 966

38 S.3728
955
39

2 2

40

P.3745

39
40
41
42 41

38

3-599
3-618
40
267 , 55 61
41
4-19
39

50

001 (1)
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001

001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
P.3569V (2)
P.3569V
P.3569V
P.3569V

10

27

270

60

60

60

10

88

880

10

70

20

140

20

80

30

20
20

100

20

129

258

75

365

10

70

10

70

15

45

10

50

2.5

203

507.5

2.5

150

375

30

137.5

4125

40

20

10

60

6.66

10

30

35
6

86

32

2752

2.4678

16

32

512

2.667

32

288

11

24

14

336

2.18

(1) 3-271
(2) 3-622624
*

51


P.3569V
P.3569V

2.5 /

5 /

3 10 20

S.1366 7

S.5713
1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 42

42

9-94 1990
52

307

60TAM3075/3a

1
2

43
60TAM3075/2a
1

3

....................................................................................................

4

43

1-412413
53

10

11

12

13

14

44

60TAM3075/4
1

2

4 45
60TAM3074/2a
1

3
4

5
6

46

60TAM3075/1a
1

44

1-413
1-414
46
1-414
45

54

9
10

11

47

60TAM3074/4a
1

2
3
4

5
6

7

....................................................................................................
8

9
10
11
12

48

60TAM3074/3a
1

4
5
6

47
48

1-415
1-416
55

10

49

60TAM3075/2b
1
2
3
4

9

....................................................................................................
10
50
60TAM3075/3b
1

2
3

51

60TAM32923/123/2
1

5
6
7
8

49

1-417
1-418
51
1-419
50

56

10

...................................................
11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

52

60TAM32923/3

3
4

53

60TAM32923/4
1

2
3
54

55

56

E.P.F22:304

52

1-461
1-461
54
1-461
55
57
56
496 1990
53

57

D797A57

58

XX XXX

60TAM3075/3a

60TAM3075/2a

**

60TAM3075/4

60TAM3074/2a

60TAM3075/1a

57

, 100
1991
58

Vo1.22 6382 2005

58

60TAM3074/4a

60TAM3074/3a

60TAM3075/2b

60TAM3075/3b

60TAM32923/123/2

60TAM32923/4

59

59

60

61

56

13

60

12

12

36

60TAM307 5/3

2-3

60TAM307 5/3

3-4

60TAM307 5/3

60TAM307 5/2b

8-9

60TAM307 4/4a

60TAM307 5/3b

1-2

60TAM307 5/3b

2-3

60TAM307 5/3b

60TAM329 23/1 4

20
4

3
1
1

40

13
10

10
10

10

12.5

30

10

10

10

15

15

23/2

13.5 9
59

1996 1
3 2

2-3

1990 1 7080
61
76
60

60

 12

9 12

60TAM3075/4 315 3 3 15
21 3.5 5 2 4 3 21
62
3 1 1 3.3

()

13

3.6

12

10

51
61 121 [9]

61 121 51
3 9
1 3

66TAM509a

62

61

9
10

11
12
13 63
66TAM509b

2
3
4

5
6

7
63

1-376
62

 8
9
10

11
12
13
14

15

16

64

66TAM50
32a

2
3
4

6
7
8
9
10

11 65

66
67

64

1-377
1-378379
66

1990 2 85
2000
67

65

63

60TAM3075/4

60TAM3074/2a

68

60TAM3075/4

15

315

21

3.5

60TAM3075/4

7.5

67.5

60TAM3075/4

14

28

60TAM3075/4

56

3.5

15

15

60TAM3075/4
60TAM3074/2a

1
2-3

3
2

5 2
1 2

68

64

69

70

71

72

1975

69

38

902
7-2359
71
1-395 1985
72
2-1875 1960
70

65


73

1/4

2/22

229(F43AB)
73

5-6869 1978
66


230(F45)
231(F41B)

232(F124)

233(F123)

234(F106)

235(F107)

236(F104)

237(F103)
238(F102)74

1000

371: MC.344

372: MC.345
373: MC.34675

74

3940
2006
75

36
1991
67

76

77

78

79

80
81

82

83

76

2732
2742
78
970
79
2403
80
555
81
658
82
1775
83
1367
77

68

84

84

41 3312033121 ,1977
69

85
300 50

86

87
85

1963 1991
128129
87
506507

86

70

1800

1500
1100
700
600
400
350
300
250

2
2.2
2

()

15

15

1.5

0.8

2.4

2.3

1.1

5.4 4.3
3.1

1.5

3
1

0.3

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.1

20

60

20

90

1.5

1.5

1.5

88

88

4-1257
71

89

5.4 4 1.5

90

91
89

4-1196
203
11-380381
1966
91

61
1936
90

72

92

[]

93

94
92

6-1839
,
17-128 2000
94
3637 1933

93

73

500

500

0.5

0.5

0.5

20

200

100

1.5

100

1.5

95

96

97

98
95

1
96
2
97
23
98
124
74

99

100

101

102

99

330 1986
88
101
125126
102
89

100

75


103

104

103
104

102
597-719727
76

105

105

77

78

 2007-2009

79

80

2010.0381-99

1
2

817

5
1

1980 146
1996 1-3
3

1983 10022

1955 1012

2000 174
5

2007 5 102-105
2

8
6

Natural History

1996 2

17 1949 83-99
1977 190-209
82

10
11

12

13

14
15

16

1976

10

1982 4 60-65
59
11

1992 4 40-43 46
12
1986 237-254
13
1995 626-644
14

1992 269-272
15
1988
16

173-211
404-435

83

17

18

19

20
21

22

1 076

P.251123 P.2522
24 07625

076 301.9cm 31cm

45cm

160
26
27
17

114 6 , 2005 1046-1070

18

90
2 2008 113-143
19

12 2007 15-28
20
1994 65-6678
21

63
2000 1-39
22

1990 1 27-29
23

1989 178-181
24

144
25

1999 224-227
26
366
27

84

28

29

28

1999 116-129

29
125
85

2P.3547

1
2
3

4
530

87731

32

3P.4638

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

33
30

4 1990 367

31

1986 7 59-61
32

105 2003
47-62
33
4 387
86

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

34
P.2945

35
P.2945
(918) 36

916

914

928

37

34

4 388
5 1990 329

36

11
1991 274-281
37

35

87

38

P.3239

39

IDP

40

4S.4398949

1
2

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

38

2001 289-310
39

1991 552
40

XV
2000 17-18
88

41

P.4515

S.518

42

P.4638

41

4 398

42

89



43

44

45

1980
66
41 25

1.2cm 0.75cm 12
46

47

10-30
48

43

1992 68-69
62
45
1988 119
46

1998
598-599
2000 102
47

1994 3 75
48

1999 4 92-93
44

90

49
50
61
32 454
51

49

1990
51

598
89

50

91

52
P.2826

53

P.2992

54

877

916

P.3547

P.4638

924

926

930

932

978

980

999

52

406-408
4 365
54
4 395-396
53

92

1004

1006
1007

1023

1030

1031

932

55 P.4838

56

55

119127

1960
11420
56

93


57

58
934

59

60

Saiga tatarica Linnaeus

61

57

2036

1989 1 95
59
11423
60
11424
61

1981 374-375

58

94

62
63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

62

)
45 4 2005 37-44
63
1953 200
64

1984 70
65
1981 419-420
66

1995 315
67

1986 171
68

315
69
1956 6150-6151
70
2002 400
71

1948 1987
72-79
95

Fetichism72

P.3201

73
74 P.3930

75

76

77

78

P.3930

79 80
81

72

2001 99
240
74
244
75
289
76
290
77
291
78

142
79

1952 10 Michel Soymi

73

ed.,

Catalogue des manuscrits chinois de Touen-houang. Fonds Pelliot chinois de la Bibliotheque

vol.IV, Paris: cole Franaise dExtrme-Orient, 1991, p.420.

279
81

13
2007 471-472
Nationale,

80

96

82

83

84
nava nafa neft
Avesta napta85

86

87 88

743

89

90

91
82

2004 1 13

10 2007 74
83
1988 290
84
1973 18491852
85

Berthold Laufer,

Sino-Iranica:

Chinese contributions to the history of civilization in an-

cient Iran, with special reference to the history of cultivated plants and products,

Chicago: Field

Museum of Natural History, 1919, pp.505-506.

86

E. H. Schafer,

The Golden Peaches of Samarkand, A Study in T'ang Exotics,

Berkeley:

University of California Press, 1963, p.218.

87

118
2005 26
89

P.3930
90
1990 19 13

1979 449-465

91

77 2 1968 45-64 2

- 1 1998 69-90
88

97

92

93


94

P.3547

95 935
96

97

1999 122-189

92
329
93
1993 124
94
1997 86356
95
2036
96

11423
97

E. H. Schafer,

The Golden Peaches of Samarkand, A Study in T'ang Exotics,

109-110.

98

pp.74-75,

 98
99

100
P.3547

101

98

69
127
100

180
101

1983 176-177
99

99

100

2010.03101-117

Dh3895 +Dh3901 1

<
> 11

4
5
6
7

11 1999
2003 2 9-47
3
P.3428+2674Dh.2784Dh.2979Dh.3867S.3993+9213P.25569S.3824v/1
2006 410-418
4
S.6019
419
5
S.6177+P.3378P.3382
420-424
6
P.3274
425-427
7
P.2757V
428-429
2

9
1.

11

95

<> 182 96 1986

S.728

S.728

P.3416P.3698P.2545P.4897P.4628 +

Dh.2962P.3372S.1386P.3369+4775S.728
S.10056A + 10060BP.3830S.5545S.9956+5821Dh.1318P.2715P.3643PLDh.4646
S.707+12911P.2746Dh.838S.6165
389-409
9

2001
102

37-38

2001 305-307

103

2.

1
1

11

95

11

95

305-307

10

10

2001 305-307
104

2001 566-567

105

)11
674

12

678

13

680

14

15

624

16

768

17 929

18
1181

19
11

1992 45
751955 1373
13
75
1373
14
1988 354356
15
155
, 1977 3615
16
971960 1153
17
76
1399
18
401976 547
19
156 3653
12

106

703

20
719

P1405

P1406

21
722

22 743
23
744

24 746

25

S.707

S.728 S.1386

20

77
1405
77
1405-1409
22
8
1975 183
23
40 454
24
74
1959
417
25
40 454
21

107

26

P5066-5067

27

28

29

30

31

32

781

26

571975 1439-1443
277 9441
28
441 13060
29
273
9344
30
460 13481
31
431 12819
32
442 13069
27

108


33
782

34

788
35
36
833
37

38
834
834

39

40

833

41
833

33

76
1380
11 1984 419
35
12 444
36
2000 330-338
37

244 1956
7886
38
76
1381
641

7683
39
641 7684
40
171
4454
41
641 7684
34

109

 (832)
42

P3612

957

43

44 955

45

46
(1002)

47
1004-1007

48
(1008)

42

245 7898
263 9090-9091
44
845,1983 8877
45
642 7703
46
39 1979 830
47
53 1169
48
305
10089
43

110


49 1024

480

(1038-1039)

50 (1043)

51 (1044)

1048

52

(1064)

53

()

(1066)

54

49

68 1522
285

9610
50
155 3613
51
314 10273
52
302 10012
53
1186
2006
345-346
54
1188
3
111

55

56

57

1070

58 (1075)

(1086)

59

(1088)

55

690
291-292
1867
210-212
57
1383
20
58
155 3616
59
155 3620

56

112


60

P3620-3621

61

62 (1089)

63

64 13
(1093)

65
(1094)

1184

66

60

412 10018
155 3620
62
155 3620
63
31
1986 295
64
415 10101
65
155 3621
66
156 3649
61

113

P3648

P3649

67

P3704
68

P9093

(P5364)

69
70 <>
67

157 3657
286 9635
69
<>
1358 71
70
<>,1998 4346 <
>
2006 <>

68

114

(1274)
()
71

72

<>
17 73

1147 1227 74

4 156 <>

3
71
2006 1 91-101
72
1035 1002

2001
75-76
73
24 2003 61-82
74

1992 17-31

2006

()2007

115

75

76

77
INV.2627 78
<>

79

75

1976 2019
9
1987 1249
141 8 1997 216 -220
77
485 13995
78
11 1999 2-46
Eric. GrinsteadAnalysis of the Tangut Script, First Edition: Lund,
Studentlitteratur, 1972; Second Edition: Curzon Press, 1975<>

2005 5 97-98
79

2007 2 285-365
76

116

11571190

80

81

82

2008 985
08JJD740059

80

437 12953-12957

1981 2 4 23-28
82

()2007 3
21-28
81

117

118

2010.03119-140

659700

1994
2008
2
2001

P.3849 3 a)

b)

c) d)

e)
f)
g)
h) i)

j) 4
a) P.2616V
b) P.2616VP.4036
c)
P.2616VP.4036
d) P.4036
e) P.2616VP.4036
f) P.2616V

g) P.2616VP.4036
h) P.2616V
i)
P.2616V
j) P.4036

5 6

P.4036

5
199575-76
6
1995137-145
4

P.3849

120

S.6537V
215
216
217
218
219 ?
220
221
222
223
224
225

P.2646
7

2002
121

7
8 a)

9 b)
10

a)
P.2556P.3249P.4019
b) P.2556P.3249P.4019

746820
8 811812

847859
9

P.3849

a)

a)

a) P.3442
b) P.4036
8

1995146-190
S.6537V
2002496
9
1995200-221
P.2646
901904

122

10

11
12
13

14
15

10

1996427-431441
11
1996426

12
1993b1997
13
1993a1996442-458
14

197468-71
15
19921-28 1996425-441
1995285-301 2006
123

768
824

16

766779

772842

16

S.6537V

124

785805

773819

817
17

806815

17

1986329 196392-93
125

() ()

772846

18

19

20
18

1967

19
1987159-160 200928-29 2009
204-205
20

126

21

S.329+S.361
223

224

22

736800

21

22
873-888

1960219-223
127

607 664
23

23

19862002
128

743 777 690 756

129

804806

720 790

24

25

24
25

2008a
2002
130

26

26

2008b
131

S.3011V 27

678

858
91828

29
P.2250V

S.3011V

30

27

1961245-246 678 Lionel Giles1957232 198734

2000874-875 858 1990457 918
29
2002350
678 S.3011
30
1959314-320 P.2250V 925
930
28

132

31

1S.3011V

S.3011V

P.3353V 32

P.3353V

31

32
2000224
P.3353V

133

S.3011V P.3353V 33

S.3011VP.3353V

34

35
713741
847860

33

2002110
2002 570-574
35
200730-34 2009192-193

34

134


36

37

38

(1)
(2)
a)
(3)
b) 39
(4) c)

40

41
a)

b)
c)
36

200279
198497-98234
38

197389
39
1095
1212
1965200858-99
40

41
55
1969593605607
37

135

847

(1)(2)(3) (4)
42
?

43

865

42
43

1984297
55 1111 809884 862 865
136

44

44

1995 95
2001
137

1990

2009

1965

10-4
1969
4
1973

1-11910
1984

1969
2008

2009

5
1986
5
2008

171994
2002

351964
2001

2002

64
2008a

82
2008b

15
1974

1959

29
1984

138

1987

1968

1992

1996

34
1993

1991

1993
2002

12

1992
2002

562001
2006

9
1993a

1993b

1997

3
2001

1995

1985-71985

41987
5
1990

1990-21990

1990-51990
1993-11993
2000

1960

139

1994

2007

2002

1961

1
1963

1986

81958
1987

1987-1

Descriptive Catalogue of the Chinese Manuscripts from

Tunhuang in the British Museum, London: The Trustees of the British

Lionel Giles1957

Museum.

140

2010.03141-161

60 140

(()
()) (

) (()

)
())

1 ) 2

2
S.078 S.1725v
2001pp.168-185

(
2002pp.57-60)

()

()
()

()
()
()(
) ,

14

5(0)

*0

21(21)*1

P.3442Dx.1307

Dx.1441

(
?)

2(2)*2

7(5)

4(1)

1(1)

27(20)*3

?)

S.329+S.361+
S.9713S.6111+

S.10595P.3784

()

(
1995)

1993
1997

1998pp.229-257

62
2000pp.192-208
4
1993

1998 2002
pp.639-646

( 15 17
C 15520409pp.32-34)
(2007pp.30-34)
() (
2001) (
)(
2007)
142

8(0)*4

*4

11(10)*5

P.2616v

P.2619vP.3637
P.3688(1)
P.3849P.4002
P.4036P.5020
P.5035A
0676(

3(1)

2(1)

8(0)

3(2)*6

1(0)

6(6)

()

) 52-2
3( )
18
P.2646P.2556
P.3246P.3249
P.4019P.3284
S.2200S.4761
S.10735A
8 8()
P.2622P.3886
P.3688(2)
S.1040S.8699v

Dx.1256

P.3502v(2)

Dx.1256
52-1()

()

1(1)*7

P.4050+S.5613+

Dx.1458+Dx.3875+
Dx.3870+Dx.1467+
Dx.3902+Dx.3849+
Dx.3905+Dx.3814+
Dx.3917+Dx.5247
H

5(2)

P.3691P.3425v

P.3581P.3716
P.4699S.681
S.766S.5593
S.5636S.8516
S.8680S.9937v
S.10010
S.10531
S.10614Dx.1454
+Dx.2418

76()
Dx.5623
+Dx.5644
I
J

()

*8

*8

S.6537v14

*8

*9

P.5550(2)+

P.5547(1)

()

*0
*1
*2

143

*3

7 14

*4
*5

*6 D
*7 Dx.3814

*8
*9

( I
)
()
()

()
(
)

C A
B
6 P.3637
5

S.329

( 1993p.296)(
1996pp.267-273)

1990 2 pp.65-69(
1995pp.137-145); 1993 pp.295-298
1996

(
2008pp.435-458)
ABC
144

 P.2619v

(P.2619v )

B7
DEF

10

G ()

A11
12
7

2002p.57
(2008) (pp.41-68)

(p.1493)

10
C
I
D
( I)

11
10401936p.7
12
(
57 2 2009pp.51-57)
8

145

13

14

15

2
A

()
(

962

13

14
P.3449P.3864 ()()

15
A

146

*
*

16
17
18
F
H19
D
B

16

1993
1996
2002pp.140-162 Dx.01698

Dx.01698
2008pp.135-151
18

232007pp.117-132
19
1993pp.610-612pp.653-656F H D
17

147

3
C

:i

ii
iii
iv
?

()

i
ii

iii
iv
v

ii
iii
iv

i
!!

!!ii

iiiiv
v

148

? ()

20

21
A

22
23 F

20

22

(1993p.274)
23

21

149

24
25

AD

26 27
//
28
29

30

/
31 32
//

33 B

34

24

10
25
P.3864 ()()

()

26
A


C

27
D

28
2007 p.164
29

30
B

31

( 142 p.570)
32

33
2002pp.248-249 2007pp.377-379
34
C
S.4685

150

35

36

37

38 ()39
CD

40

35

p.107
A
37
C

38

(1980p.2573)
39
72TAM169:26(b)
40
(/)
36

151

41

42

43

/
44 C
()

3
/
() ()45 ()
() () ()

46 C

41

1981p.103
1982p.432
43
p.78
44

p.1234

45

46
p.76
(

812 p.144)
? (

812 p.256)

42

152

47 48
49
50
C

+C

51
D

52

() ()

53

54 55
56

57

47

48
A

?
49

(p.25)
50
C

()
(?)

51

(1991p.47)

(
p.739)
52
1994p.48
53
1987p.51
54
S.2578

55
S.4362

56
S.376

57
C

153

58

////
59
60 (
)
(
)()
61

2002
pp.301-354
58
2007 pp.141-142
59
C

()

(
p.9)
60
2007pp.379-383
61
A

154

62

63

64

65
66 67 68
A

69 +()
(
)
/()
() H

62

1961pp.3127-3128
63
1981p.375
64

(p.1293)

(
p.96)
65
F

66
p.59
67
p.95
68

(
52 p.21)

(
1105 pp.649-650)S.3438

69

155

(
()A C
D
70
F
71
A

()

70

71

()

156

//

72 73
74
Ebrey
(general
public

75
76
A

()

77
(/

72

1998p.237

2002pp.124
74

4
1996p.152 (4)
73

75

Patricia Ebrey, T'ang Guides to Verbal Etiquette,

Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies

, 45:2,

1985, pp.581-613.

76

1996p.430
77
2001 pp.172-175 2002 pp.57-60
157

2
?

(1)
(2)

78
79

80

78

p.123

(
p.2503)
80
p.1233
79

158

81
()

82

A
83
84

85
86

81

()
D

83

84

2001pp.394-421
85

45 1
1962pp.1-34
86
2002

pp.204-236 2001

82

159

87
88

89
A H
90 F

G
(

)H

91
92

93

87

(
2009p.192 21)

88
B

89

2007pp.263-278
90
B

91

92

(
1997
pp.165-184
93

45 1
1962pp1-34

1996pp.425-441pp.442-457
160

) ()

) ()

161

162

2010.03163-179

640

1993p.27

1993p.47

1993p.47

1989p.60 2003pp.244-247

1990p.30

2005p.138

Or.8212/565Ast.III.3.06

722Maspero1953,PlateXXXI, p.147
1994pp.210-211 2005-1p.128

1990p.32

2006p.149-150

72TAM188:30

p.273
1

1956
1981 1985
1989
1990 1995
164

 1
2

2008p.89

72TAM188:82a706
p.26 20
4
5

5
6

10

165

72TAM188:81a

p.28
4

5
6

65TAM40:24,25 p.296

166

3
4

2006p. 151

Or.8212/568Ast.III.4.076
705
Maspero 1953, PlateXXXI, p.149 1994p.266
2005-1p. 130

2000p.287

2000p.287

Or.8212/551
Ast.III.3.07-08
Maspero
XX II, p113-115

1953, plate XX-

1994pp.199-206 2005-1p.91-94Or.8212/553

Ast.III.3.09-0.10
722
, Maspero1953,plate XXIV-XXV,p123-124 1994pp.192-198 2005-1
pp.97-100

Or.8212/5510718

(08)48

Or. 8212/553(09)15

167

1956p.6

Or.8212/551

1956p.6

1956p.8

pp.112
p.303

30

50

50

168

73TAM509:23/1-1(a)734
p.317

1997p.56
73TAM509:8/26 (b)
p.338
1

2
///
3
4

5

6 /
/// /

//
7
8
9

169

 17p.486

1980
p.322

1960 1960

1960p.40

1960p.40

170

 5839III
IIIpp.208-209 1960pp. 37-381213 2728
910

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

12

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

28

171


18

1728

132
p.3645

172

679
2

728
3

50

p.1339

722009
5p. 133
728

173

5839

31741 2001
Pl.III 2001p.15589

1
2
3
4
5

6
7
8

9
4

199p.5369

174

 10
16
741

73TAM509:8/10733
p.279)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
16

175

72TAM188:87a

p.415

1
2
3
4

2009p.272

73TAM509:8/13a732
pp.275-276
6

2009p.48

176

Les documents chinois de la troisime expdition de Sir Aurel

Stein en Asie Centrale, London, The Trustees of the British Museum.

Maspero, H. 1953

1996
IIIIII2003
2005
: 12

177

2006

1956
/1975
1992

2008

117-11pp. 75-102
1989

70-3/4pp. 35-69
1990Ast.III.3.07.08.037
pp.23-44
1993

52-2pp.23-51
1995

pp.93-125
1997

78

pp.49-64
2000

40pp.199335
1980
3
pp.297-343
1960

pp.133-167
2008

1977

1959

178

 2009

pp.255-275
2002

pp. 149-175
1960

pp.ii-iii 2
9
2009
72pp.33-66
2001
1937
1963
33pp.267-314
195660pp.2-34

2006

1994.
1981
-

1981-3pp.29-38p.66
2006

12
pp. 1-8
1995
2005

19851985-2pp.35-54
2003

179

180

2010.03181-194

: mda sor mo

786 848

khal
bre
phul
2

Pelliot chinois 3432 1-2

[. . .]
1

43 []2006 7
2009 5

1
2002 2007
2
Takeuchi 19951 20 1 6

Hou1981

lusage des mesures tibetaines, telle que tuo , tsien et tche

Mesure tibetaine ancienne dont nous ne connaissons

pas encore la valeur Hou 1981: 153, n.8 Mesure tibetaine

, n.11

4 Pelliot chinois 3432

8-9
14
15-16

59-60
60

60-61

62-64

66-67
68

Hou1981: 152 le registre tibetain

182


73-74
74-75
76-77
77
77
78
79-80
80-81
86
87-88
88-89

58-59

79
* (1979: 514-516, No.243), Hou (1981), (1986-90: 3 2-6)
57-58
5 59-60

66-67

68
6

Pelliot chinois 2583 828

? 1
79

Hou1981: 159

6
Hou1981: 156, 157
4 fl`eches et demie Hou 1981: 157
=
1 = 10
5

183

1:
?

2:

* (1979: 544, No.251), (1986: 3 64-70)

Pelliot chinois 2837verso
9 1 1979: 548, No.252

Dx 6036verso 3 7
Pelliot chinois

2613 873
8
25 873 9

sor mo

sor mo

bru7
10
MvyNo.8201
Anguli-parva(n)

dom. Skt. dhanu . Mvy. No.8204.

Dx 6036verso 4
Dx 6036

8-9

10 1979: 579-582, No.282

1986-90: 3
9-13
9

10
2964
7

184

mtho, mtho gang. Skt.

vistasti. Mvy No.8400.

11 1 =

24 1 = 12 1 = 7 bru
Skt. yava7

12 2002: 19 1 dhanu 165cm

1 = 165cm 1 = 24 1 = 165
24 = 6.875 cm 13 1 = 165cm
6.875cm
6.875cm 5

mda

Pelliot tibetain 1287

Pelliot tibetain 1128, 23-24 : ras khyi sha can zheng mtho gang srubs lhag dom gang //
? 1 mtho
?1 dom
12
2002
13
Jaschke1881sor mo inch580
mtho span241

dom a fathom282
11

185

thul ka. dor ka

mda

srang

chos kyi gzhung

14

* Pelliot tibetain 1287, 451-455 (Bacot et al. 1940-1946: 118, 161

451-455

M.Tagh.0197 ?tong kud15

8
14

bod la snga na yI ge myed pa yang / / btsan po di I tshe byung nas / / bod kyi gtsugs lag bka grims
ched po dang / blon po i rim pa dang / che chung gnyis kyI dbang thang dang / legs pa zin pa I bya dga
dang / nye yo ba i chad pa dang / zhing brog gi thul ka dang dor ka dang / slungs kyi go bar bsnyams pa
dang / bre pul dang / srang la stsogs pa / / bod kyi chos kyi gzhung bzang po kun / / btsan po khri srong
brtsan gyi ring las byung ngo / myi yongs kyis bka drin dran zhing tshor bas / / srong brtsan sgam po
zhes gsol to / /
15
Stong kud Pelliot tibetain 1120
9.5 7 1
stong kud pa [-].5 3

stong sar s[t]ong sde gcig la / / bod rkya phyed dang bcu la / / gser srang bdun dang zho gcig /
/ stong kud pa khyim lnga la / / b[s]e[r?] [. . .] dang gnyis dang zho gsum / / stong kud

186

... ...16

Pelliot tibetan 1128

.... lo thangmen tri9

yug 9 123.5 404 ?
1 ?1 ...

17

9 9

1 yug
2005: 111

9 9 1 9
? Pelliot tibetain 1120

1 232.5
Stong khud kud khud pa
khud pa chen po Bacot et al.1940-46: 43 grand tresorier
Dotson2009: 108, n.245 khud skud pa to
smear
khud pa 2007: 111 Pelliot tibetain 1120
stong kud pa stong

kud khud

M.Tagh.0197
stong kud

16
mda pye [dang +-5]. Takeuchi1997-98: No.10
17
...spreu loi lo thang dang / dus gcig du bul ba la / men tri yug dgu dang mda dgu / / phra ras yug
brgya nyi shu rtsa phyedang bzhi / / sboms yug bzhi brgya rtsa bzhi / ras khyi sha can zheng mtho gang
srubs lhag dom gang /... Pelliot tibetain 1128
IDP
Cf. Iwaoforthcoming. men tri
2005: 59-60

187

?gtso15 1
234.5 18
Pelliot tibetain 1120, 8-10
15 1 234.5
2007
15 1
1 = 15
Pelliot chinois 2583 1 = 15
1 = 15
1 15

7
Pelliot chinois 3432
7
10.5 1 30cm
2 60cm

rgya stong sar stong sde gcig la / / rkya nyis brgya sum cu rtsa phyed dang gsum chis pa la phab
pa / / sha cu gtso ras dar kar thub pa mda bco lnga pa yug du phyin pa bzang rab yug [gny]is brgya sum
cu rtsa phyed dang lnga / / ...
18

188

 80-81
1 1 7
30cm

mda tshad ma

mda tshad ma1377

19

2000: 27, 44

mda tshad ma 60 70cm 11 18cm

khru gang ma 40 50cm 7 10cm
ldeb thung 30cm 5 6cm
*2000: 27, 44.
2000: 27

14 Bu ston

rin chen grub. 1290-136820

ring thung gi tshad mda gang tsam mam / mda la tshad bzhag pai dngos po /.

20

. mda tshad 7 5
Cf. Ruegg1966: 73. 8a4-5.
19

189

 1997: 24
68cm 24cm 1997: 28

69cm 24cm

72cm 21cm

Steinkellner
1994: 123 69 cm x 22 cm
45.5cm x 8.5cm 69cm

60cm 70cm

?
9

21
Lalou1954,

1957
75cm x 25cm
70cm x 20cm

75cm x 25cm

21

1961: 277-27919851988

190

 75cm
75cm
6.875cm 1 = 10.9090...
10 12
6.875cm
= 6.875cm
165cm
1 = 10 =

7.5cm 1 = 12 = 6.25cm
6.25cm 7.5cm

1.
mdasor mo

2.

3. 75cm 6.25cm
7.5cm

4. 1 yug = 15
5.
. mda tshad ma

191

[ 1979]

, . , .

[ 1990]

,
. In: ,
, , : 46-70.

[ 2007]

,rkya
. 113 : 118-103.

[ 1988]

, In: ,
, , : 190-198.

[ 1990]

,.
In: , ,
, : 402-419

[ 1997]

, .
41/42 : 23-32.

[ 1916-25]

, , 2 .
, . = [Mvy]

[]

[ 1985]

[ 2005]

,. In:
, , , : 100-124. : in:
, :
, (2001 ): 635-652.

[ 2002]

,
. 104 : 124-106.

[ 1985]

, . , . = []

[ 1986-90]

, , 5 .
, .

192

[ 1985]

, . In: ,
6: , , : 379-393.

[ 1961]

, . 31 : 199-292.

[ 2002]

, yojana.
6
II
,
, : 1-51.

[ 2000]

,. , .

[ 2005]

, 8-9
38 .
, .

[Bacot et al. 1940-46] Bacot, J., Thomas, F. W. and Toussaint, Ch., Documents de
Touen-houang relatifs a` lhistoire du Tibet. Librairie orientaliste
Paul Geuthner, Paris.
[Dotson 2009]

Dotson, Brandon, Old Tibetan Annals: An Annotated Translation

of Tibets First History. Verlag der Osterreichischen

Akademie der
Wissenschaften, Austria.

[Hou 1981]

Hou Chi-lung, Tresors du monast`ere Long-hing a` Touen-houang:

une e tude sur le manuscrit P.3432. In: M. Soymieed., Nouvelles
contributions aux etudes de Touen-houang, Gen`eve: 149-168.

[Iwao forthcoming] Iwao Kazushi, Dpyatribute and Accounting Systems in the

Old Tibetan Empire: an Introduction to Pelliot Tibetain 1128. In:
Scherrer-Schaub, C. and Takeuchi , Ts.eds, Proceedings of the
Eleventh Seminar of International Association for Tibetan Studies,
E. J. Brill.
[Jaschke 1881]

Jaschke, A.H., A Tibetan-English Dictionary. London.

[Lalou 1954]

Lalou, M., Les manuscrits tibetains des grandes Prajna paramita

trouves a` Touen-houang. In: Silver Jubilee Volume of the Zinbunkagaku-kenkyusho, Kyoto University, Kyoto: 257-261.

[Lalou 1957]

Lalou, M., Les plus anciens rouleau tibetains trouves a` Touenhouang. Rocznik Orientalistyczny Tom. 21: 149-152.

[Mvy]

[ 1916-25]

[Ruegg 1966]

Ruegg, D. S., The Life of BU STON RIN PO CHE: with the Tibetan
Text of the Bu ston rNam thar. Is.M.E.O., Rome.

193

[Steinkellner 1994] Steinkellner, E., A Report on the Kanjur of Ta pho. East and
West, vol.44-1: 115-136.
[Takeuchi 1995]

Takeuchi Tsuguhito, Old Tibetan Contracts from Central Asia.

Daizo shuppan, Kyoto.

[Takeuchi 1997-98] Takeuchi Tsuguhito, Old Tibetan Manuscripts from East Turkestan
in the Stein Collection of the British Library. 2 vols + Supplement,
The Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies for Unesco, Tokyo.

194

2010.03195-207

Another Hungarian looting Chinas treasures?

Sir Aurel Stein, Lajos Ligeti and a case of mistaken identity
Imre Galambos
The voluminous publication Zhonghua minguo shi dangan ziliao huibian
(Archives of the History of the Chinese Republic) includes a group of documents called Correspondence related to the theft of historical artefacts in the Xinjiang
and Gansu region by the British national Stein (May 1930-December 1931).1 One of
the files in the group is titled Report of the Government of Jehol province regarding the
coping of Buddhist scriptures by the Hungarian national Stein (September 9) . In a recent article, the Chinese historian HUO Yunfeng scrutinized the details of Sir M.
Aurel Steins (1862-1943) visit to China during 1930-1931 and came to the conclusion
that the telegram from Jehol could not have been written about Stein.2 He concluded
that the person mentioned therein must have been an unrelated ordinary man (
) who was investigated only because he was engaged in copying Buddhist writings
and happened to have a Hungarian passport.
HUO was, of course, correct in pointing out the mistake of the editors of the archives
in associating this telegram with Stein,3 he was, however, unable to determine the identity of the person referred to in the telegram dispatched by the Jehol Government. In
reality, this was the young Lajos LIGETI (1902-1987) who was to become one of the
giants of Mongolian and Turkic studies, and who subsequently served for 20 years as
vice president of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.4 From the 1980s, his name,
transliterated as Li Gaiti , became well-known in academic circles in China, as
he gradually became one of the trusted authorities in the field of Mongolian linguistics
and history. But at the time of his first visit to China he was still in his late twenties,
and completely unknown to anyone there. He had just completed his studies in Paris
with Paul Pelliot (1878-1945) and Henri Maspero (1882-1945), and upon his return to
1

Zhongguo dier lishi danganguan 1994: 679-710.

HUO 2008.
3
At the same time we should give credit to the editors who organized the material on the basis of the
content, which in fact refers to Stein. Thus they are surely not the ones to be blamed for the resulting
confusion.
4
LIGETIs first name Lajos is more commonly known in Western literature as Louis, and this was also
the name he used for academic publications in French.
2

Hungary succeeded in obtaining a three-year scholarship to visit the lamaseries of Inner

Mongolia to study Tibetan Buddhist texts.
Sir Aurel Steins 4th, so-called American, expedition to Xinjiang is the least known
of all of his explorations.5 This is no doubt due to the ultimate failure of the enterprise,
which had been the result of a public campaign organized against him and his archaeological activities. While his former work in Western China earned him a knighthood
and international fame as scholar and explorer, the fact that he removed the rich archaeological material of his expeditions from Chinese territory eventually led to resentment
among Chinese intellectuals. His image evolved into that of an imperialist thief and
spy. During his earlier expeditions, he had successfully cooperated with provincial authorities, even if with time this was becoming increasingly difficult, and in many cases
earned the respect of the officials he interacted with. But in 1930, amidst the patriotic
sentiments struggling to reassess Chinas historical past and to define its new identity,
the public saw foreign explorers and archaeologists as plunderers of Chinas cultural
property.
In the late 1920s, the main voice against foreign excavation and surveying in China
was that of the Society for the Preservation of Cultural Objects, an unofficial organization consisting of scientists and scholars, many of whom had been educated abroad. In
1927, two major foreign expeditions that were in the process of being organized became
the primary target of the Society. One of them was Sven Hedins 1927 expedition which
was only allowed to proceed after he assented to the Societys demands to finance ten
Chinese members and to share the archaeological proceeds with China. The other major
foreign enterprise at the time was the Mongolian expedition of the American Museum
of Natural History, headed by the adventurous naturalist and explorer Roy Chapman
Andrews (1884-1960). Hedin was flexible enough to accept the Societys demands and
to convert his original team into a Sino-Swedish expedition. Accordingly, his work
not only received great support from Chinese officials but was also widely publicized
within China. In contrast, Andrews adamantly defended the autonomy of his operations
and regarded the compromises unacceptible. Although he managed to recover the material seized by the Society in 1928, by 1931 he was forced to abandon his expeditions and
completely withdraw from China. Writing about the events in retrospect, he voiced his
opinion that the efforts to prevent foreign exploration were part of a new nationalistic
movement in China:
Anti-foreignism accompanied the increasing nationalistic spirit throughout
China; any agitation of whatever character that was directed against foreigners found immediate popularity with the masses. The Cultural Society saw an opportunity to obtain an exaggerated importance for themselves
5

On the background of Steins 4th expedition, see BRYSAC 2004.

196

before the public by attacking our Expedition. They had been successful
in the case of Doctor Hedin a year earlier and obtained much face for
themselves. Later they and the official offshoot called the Commission
for the Preservation of Ancient Objects caused enormous trouble for the
Citron-Haardt Trans-Asia Expedition, and drove the distinguished British
archaeologist, Sir Aurel Stein, out of Chinese Turkestan.6
Stein, of course, was well aware of these difficulties, and thought it prudent to visit
Nanjing in person in April-May 1930 to secure a travel passport for his new expedition.7
His notebook and diary written during this time show that both he and the diplomats
aiding him exerted considerable efforts to come up with a scenario that would ensure
the success of the expedition. Following a meeting over dinner at the British Consulate,
he wrote that Sir Miles Lampson (the British Minister), Sir Frederick Whyte (advisor
to the Chinese Government) and Eric Teichman (Secretary at the British Legation) all
agreed that the submission to the National Council of Cultural Association in his case
was undesirable.8 Two days later, during a visit to the US Consulate, the British
Ambassador Nelson Johnson gave the same advice: N. J. knows of Chapman Andrews
acceptance of National Councils conditions but does not think it advisable in my case.9
On May 10, Stein finally received his passport that permitted him to trace ancient
vestiges and artistic remains.10 Three days later he left China on board of the Japanese
ocean liner Hakone Maru in order to return to India and make preparations for the
expedition. As the ship was leaving the Chinese continent, he enthusiastically related his
successful application for a permit to his long-time friend, the Hungarian art historian
Zoltn Felvinczy-Takcs (1880-1964):11
... I am glad to inform you, at this time only confidentially, regarding the
aim and results of my visit to China. The truth is that I was trying to obtain from the Central Chinese Government official permission for another
Central Asian exploration, for which Harvard University, with the assis6

ANDREWS 1932: 418.

Stein arrived in Shanghai on April 22, coming from the United States via Japan. He spent almost
three weeks in China, mostly in Nanking, and on May 13 continued his trip to India. After leaving
Shanghai, he also made a brief stop in Hong Kong.
8
Notebook entry for April 28 (MSS. Stein 264).
9
Nootebook entry for April 30 (MSS. Stein 264).
10
This was, in fact, a corrected version of the passport because the first version received on May 8
did not specifically authorize him to travel in Inner Mongolia. Stein also requested further corrections
because in his opinion the expression to trace ancient vestiges and artistic remains did not include
surveying work. Dr. C. T. Wang, the Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs, however, assured him that to
trace vestiges implied surveying. (Notebook entry for May 9, MSS. Stein 264.)
11
Felvinczy-Takcs was the Director of the Ferenc Hopp Museum of East Asian Art in Budapest, and
this is where his papers, including his letters from Stein, are held today. I am grateful to Dr. Gyrgyi
Fajcsk and Tatjna Kardos from the Museum for helping me with the archives.
7

197

tance of some friends in Boston, and the British Museum had rather generously provided the financial means. The ardent support of the British
Embassy and the friendly help of the American Ambassador yielded positive results, although it was quite difficult to avoid those obstructing conditions with which the nationalistic movement called Young China tries
to burden nowdays any foreign scientific endeavor. But I still cannot be
certain how I shall be treated by the Turkestan government, which since
the revolution has been in rather loose contact with the (changing) Central
administrations. Although fortunately that region is still governed by old
type Mandarins and I have enough old friends who, as I am informed, still
remember me with goodwill...12
Thus it is clear that Stein was very optimistic with respect to his upcoming trip, even
though he acknowledged that he could run into some difficulties in Xinjiang. In the
meantime, however, proponents of the preservation of antiquities movement did not
remain idle, either. On May 31, only two weeks after Steins departure, Academia Sinica
issued a public letter calling for the prevention of Steins new expedition to Xinjiang. It
began with a condemning summary of the British explorers past activities in China:
The Hungarian Stein has already visited Xinjiang and other regions three
times in the past, and has stolen and carried off many antiquities, such as
the Dunhuang manuscripts, the Xichui bamboo slips, Buddhist statues and
murals. He had had no prior permission from Chinese authorities and has
inflicted serious damage on Chinese historical material...13
The reference to Steins Hungarian nationality in the letter is an obvious misunderstanding which clearly shows that the authors were not government officials. All official
communication related to Steins upcoming trip had been conducted through British
diplomatic channels where the country of his birth had very little significance. He had
been a British subject since 1904 and had always traveled as such.
As a result of the letter from Academia Sinica, the Nanjing government sent out a
directive to local administrations in North-Western China, calling for vigilance with respect to Steins archaeological activities in the region. The Commission for the Preservation of Ancient Objects was also successful in pushing through a new Law for the
12

Ferenc Hopp Museum of East Asian Art. A 1994/1. The letter is dated May 16, 1930, Aboard the
Hakone Maru, near Hong Kong.
13
Zhongguo dier lishi danganguan 1994: 679-680. This part of the letter is also quoted for reference
in the Jehol Governments telegram (Ibid.: 684), although with a few typos, including the toponym Xichui
written erroneously as . A draft of the letter from Academia Sinica is also held in the Xinjiang
Archives, and a photograph of this has been published among the archival material related to Steins 4th
expedition (Zhongguo Xinjiang Weiwuer zizhiqu danganguan 2007: 5).

198

Preservation of Antiquities, according to which foreigners could excavate in China only

in cooperation with the Chinese and only if the proceeds remained in the country.14
It seems that Stein himself, confident as ever, did not recognize the extent of hostility
and resentment towards foreign excavations, otherwise he would not have embarked on
this expedition, which turned out to be his most costly and humiliating failure.15 Initially, Jin Shuren (1880-1941), the Governor of Xinjiang was instructed from
Nanjing to deny Steins entry into Chinese territory but after a rapid exchange of diplomatic correspondence, the permission was nevertheless granted.16 This, however, did
not mean the end of troubles for Stein who spent his entire time in China in constant
argumentation with the authorities and was eventually forced to leave the country well
before he had originally planned. Most importantly, he was unable to take with him any
of the material he had collected on this trip and had to leave everything behind under
the care of the British Consulate at Kashgar. The material was finally released by the
British Consul to the Chinese authorities in November 1931.17
Coming from the direction of Srinagar, Stein entered Chinese territory at the end of
September 1930 and made his first major stop at the British Consulate in Kashgar. The
report that is recorded in the republican archives, however, was submitted by the Jehol
Government on August 22 of the same year, while Stein was still in Hunza awaiting
permission to cross into Xinjiang. Since this was only granted in early September, a
fact the Chinese authorities must have been aware of, it is surprising to see that the
young Hungarian scholar LIGETI, working thousands of miles away in the north of
China, could have been suspected of being Stein.
Undoubtedly, the connection was made on two points: interest in ancient Buddhist
writings and LIGETIs Hungarian nationality. LIGETI, in contrast with the ageing Stein,
was a citizen of Hungary and traveled with a Hungarian passport. His philological interests lent him a certain degree of resemblance to Stein, although L IGETI never conducted
any archaeological work and had a very limited budget for acquisitions. When he finally
returned home, he left China with a rather small collection of books and manuscripts
he either salvaged from the book cemeteries at the Lamaist monasteries or purchased
very cheaply. In fact, he describes in his writings that on several occasions he had been
offered good deals on antique books but had to decline the offer because he could not
afford to pay for the books and their shipping.
14

BRYSAC 2004: 20.

In contrast with the resentment experienced by Stein and Roy Chapman Andrews, both of whom saw
the prevention of their exploration as a politically motivated attack on science and scholarship in general,
HEDIN (1943, Vol. 1: 62) described, at least in writing, his dealings with the Society in a much more
sympathetic tone, even claiming that none of the harsh conditions laid down in Peking was applied in
practice.
16
BRYSAC 2004: 20.
17
For a detailed description of the extended diplomatic disputation over the faith of the spoils of Steins
4th expedition, see WANG 1994.
15

199

An archival letter written by LIGETI in Peking in June 1931 before returning home
illustrates the dire financial difficulties he was having while in China. This is a letter
addressed to his former professor, the linguist Jnos Melich (1872-1964), and it is a
desperate cry for help as the young LIGETI, despite having been promised so, has not
been provided with the means for his return trip. The small stipend he had received from
the Hungarian Academy of Sciences only covered his modest living expenses and he did
not have enough money to return home. Although he had initially contacted Professor
Zoltn Gombocz (1877-1935), he received no reply (possibly because the professor was
out of the country) and in this letter was asking the help of Professor Melich:
I have completed my three-year period of studies among the Mongols of
Northern Manchuria. My return home, however, is hindered by unexpected
difficulties. As you may remember, his Excellency the Minister was kind
enough to grant a monthly stipend of five hundred pengo for the duration
of my three-year research. I was not, however, granted travel expenses.
The various promises all turned out to be illusory when the time came. My
situation became all that more difficult because I could not travel through
Siberia. In the first year the Hungarian Academy of Sciences kindly relieved the large deficit caused by my travel expenses, supporting my research in Mongolia with a one-time grant of two thousand pengo. At the
end of last August, anticipating the impossibility of my returning home using the means at my disposal, I submitted a petition to the Ministry requesting a travel grant in the amount of two thousand pengo, as the minimal sum
on which I could travel from Northern Manchuria to Peking, from there to
Shanghai, then by ship to Marseille and then by train to Budapest all using the lowest available fare. Although I have spent three months in Hailar
in Northern Manchuria, I received no reply to my petition. Without waiting
further, in order to complete the remaining part of my schedule, I continued my travels. At the end of April I received the Ministrys resolution
(dated December 31) that I had been awarded one thousand pengo for my
return trip. Following this, I applied for a visa at the Russian Consulate
at Harbin but after lengthy back-and-forth communication my application
was denied...18
The letter continues by asking the professor to take some action because otherwise he
would simply not be able to return home. In his published accounts LIGETI does not
discuss the financial difficulties related to returning home from China and thus this letter
is an interesting piece of evidence that suplements our knowledge about his trip. But
18

Manuscript Collection of the National Szchenyi Library (Levelestr, LIGETI Lajos MELICH
Jnoshoz, Peking, June 4, 1931).

200

it is clear that under such circumstances the young scholar had no chance to engage
in a large-scale acquisition of manuscripts and antiquities. Instead, he either salvaged
discarded manuscripts or copied texts by himself.
The telegram of the Jehol Government identifies LIGETI by name, using the Chinese
transliteration Li Gedi . This was, of course, different from the form Li Gaiti
, how his name became known in China in later years. The telegram is dated
September 9, 193019 and bears the title Report of the Government of Jehol province
regarding the coping of Buddhist scriptures by the Hungarian national Stein (September
9). The document is signed by Tang Yulin (1871-1937), the Governor of Jehol.
The beginning explains that the investigation was launched in response to the directive
calling for caution with regard to Steins activities. It also quotes part of Academia
Sinicas letter in which the explorer is referred to as a Hungarian subject.
Consequently, a Hungarian scholar turning up at the Youshun lamasery at
Chaoyang around the same time with the aim of copying Buddhist scriptures immediately attracted the attention of the Jehol Government. It initiated an investigation
which was carried out by Li Zhongxiang of the First Police Precinct, according
to the instructions of Tian Yufeng , County Police Chief. Li reported back the following: There is a Hungarian national residing at the Youshun monastery at the county
seat. The examination of his passport revealed that his name is Li Gedi. Being asked
about his background, he related that he came here to make copies of Tibetan Buddhist
scriptures and will return once finished with this task.20 To this report the Police Chief
added a comment that Li Gedi has a different name [from Stein] but is of the same
nationality. However, no further assumptions were made beyond this observation.
While the Chinese archives afford no further insights regarding the mysterious Hungarian working at the Youshun temple, there is a wealth of information about this period
in LIGETIs own recollections. He wrote two longer accounts of his journey, one an academic report published in 1933 in French,21 the other a popular narrative that came out
a year later in Hungarian.22 In the French report he gives a general description of his
visit to the Youshun monastery:23
I passed through Beizefu, a Chinese center in terms of its administrative
and commercial makeup, and after three days of travelling on May 20 arrived at Chaoyang. Today, this city is completely Chinese but in the past it
19

Interestingly, just about this time a short review of LIGETIs trip appeared in the Letters to the Editor
column of The Times, in which Dr. Louis LIGETI is commended on having obtained a wealth of
valuable information (Research in Mongola, The Times, September 13, 1930: 6).
20
Zhongguo dier lishi danganguan 1994: 684.
21
LIGETI 1933.
22
LIGETI 1934.
23
I uniformly render the Chinese words and proper nouns in L IGETIs descriptions into pinyin, even if
in the original they appear in their French or Hungarian spelling.

201

was known by its Mongolian name as urban suburan, or the city of the
Three St
upas.

Jigs-med
nam-mkha talks at length of this city in connection with the history of Buddhism in Mongolia. (Huth did not recognize its Tibetan name

mChod
rten gsum, The Three St
upas.) Of the three towers only two remain today, the third having been completely demolished in the civil war
of the Republic. In fact, the city of the Three st
upas played a particularly
important role in the history of the Lamaist Church. To these glorious times
dates the large and rich Youshunsi lamasery which has fortunately survived
the past twenty years without much damage. Still, one of its buildings was
transformed into a Chinese school, and a small wing of the former residence
of the lamas into a military office. I remained at the Youshunsi lamasery
until July 30, and then returned in a diluvian rain to Beipiao, the terminal
station on the branch of the Peking-Mukden line, from where I took the
train to Peking.24
This short description shows that LIGETI was at the lamasery for over two months, from
May 20 until July 30. In contrast with this terse scholarly narrative, L IGETIs popular
account devotes three whole chapters to his life at the Youshun monastery (Figure 1) and
thus provides a much more detailed description of the circumstances of his stay there.
With his distinctive sense of humor he describes his encounters with the very people
whose report is now kept in the republican archives. He identifies the Police Chief Tian
Yufeng by name, erroneously calling him Tian Fengyu.25
I ensconced myself in the monastery and, as far as it was possible, made
myself comfortable in Deva Chenpos rather uncomfortable dwelling, eager to begin working. As a measure of foresight I gave strict instructions to
little Song, Deva Chenpo, and to Dambinima, the shabi, to resolutely deny
my being home if anyone came to call on me. I had enough experience with
nosy visits that were utterly pointless and only kept me from working for
extended periods of time. My austere precaution worked out quite well, if
only for a short while. One day, a number of policemen of various ranks
came over in an attempt to see me. It would not have been a good idea to
turn them away, and it seemed that Deva Chenpo shared the same opinion,
as he led them straight in one after the other. Whispering in my ear, he
at once let me know what great dignitaries were visiting me and that, for
24

LIGETI 1933: 11.

In this case LIGETI is mistaken because the name of the Police Chief was in fact Tian Yufeng, as can
be attested from other historical sources.
25

202

Figure 1: The main gates of the great monastery at Chaoyang (Ligeti, p. 418).

both his and the monasterys sake, I should give them a friendly reception.
These visits have certainly raised my status in the eyes of the monasterys
residents, and from there on the lamas all greeted me with frequent bows.
To be sure, this reverence was not without reason, as the monastery was in
desperate need of police goodwill but more of this will be said later.
The procession was opened by a police officer. He saluted me in a military
manner and declared that he was visiting me on behalf of Tian Fengyu, the
Chief of Police, and should I feel the need they would be happy to place
two guards in front of Deva Chenpos door for my safety. As much as I was
touched by their kindness and consideration, I anxiously protested against
measures of this kind. I had absolutely no need for two good-for-nothing
soldiers lurking around me all day, not leaving me a minute of peace. Not
to speak of their salaries and rations which I would have been expected to
provide. I had managed to get by in far more dangerous places without Chinese soldiers guarding my doorstep, and I was confident that I would also
manage here. After all, I was in a monastery located in the heart of a large
city.
Thus I politely conveyed my gratitude to chief Tian Fengyu, and as a token
of my appreciation immediately sent him my business card, along with a
small gift.

203

Tian Fengyu called on me the very same day. The lamas bowed their heads
to him and led him to me with full reverence. Tian Fengyu immediately
called lama Chen and turned to him in anger:
How dare you accommodate Li xiansheng in a dirty hole like this?
Lama Chen was lost for words, anxious to come up with an answer; while
inside he surely blamed me for the new troubles with the police, as if they
did not have enough of these already. I came to his rescue by saying that
he had actually wanted to give me a much better room but I insisted on taking this one on account of Deva Chenpo being a famous astrologist. Deva
Chenpos eyes glistened with gratitude. Lama Chen was also appeased and
even Tian Fengyus anger dissipated, although he no doubt thought that
foreigners were crazy to choose of their own accord to live in such filth.26

Figure 2: Tian Fengyu, the polite policeman (Ligeti, p. 417).

Further on, LIGETI retells his adventures with Tian Fengyu (Figure 2) whom he
mockingly calls the polite policeman because he showered the young scholar with a
multitude of small and useless gifts, each of which had to be reciprocated with a gift
of European origin. Since by this time LIGETI was on a very tight budget, this caused
him a considerable amount of headache. He also describes that this polite policeman
26

LIGETI 1934: 446-447.

204

often showed up at his door with pieces of antique porcelain to inquire about their age
and potential prices abroad. This, LIGETI says, was primarily because Governor Tang
was a great collector and Tian Fengyu knew from experience how useful it was to be
passionately interested in the same things as the provincial governor.27 The depiction
of the Governor is even more sarcastic:
Tang Yulin himself was illiterate and, of course, his fondness for collecting
Chinese antiquities did not stem from an innate artistic disposition but from
the fact that he could trade, through his men in Peking, the treasures he had
gathered by means of extortion and looting, for shiny American dollars.28
While such condemning words may appear unwarranted with regard to a provincial
governor, they echo Hedins account of a meeting with the same Governor Tang, whom
the Swedish explorer described as an incapable and unscrupulous person notorious
for being involved in the business of selling off stolen artefacts to Japanese dealers:
He was of medium stature, powerfully built and had coarse features. His
behavior lacked all culture. The temples of Jehol from the time of the great
Manchu Emperors had probably been robbed of most of their treasures of
ecclesiastical art by his predecessors, but a few things had not yet been
stolen and sold to Japanese agents or curio dealers from Peking. During
our stay at Jehol we daily saw loaded lorries which at the command of Tang
Yulin, it was said, removed idols and other objects from the temples, to
Mukden.29
We can see that Governor Tangs passion for temple treasures was not a secret in Jehol
and he felt no need to hide his dealings from others. Of course, the provincial governors looting of antiquities by the truckload in full knowledge of the entire populace
appears absurd in view of the efforts of the Society for the Preservation of Antiquities
during this period. Even more ironic is that Governor Tang was the official in charge of
investigating whether the young LIGETI had any illicit designs on treasures that might
have been considered by the Society as part of Chinas cultural heritage.
Lajos LIGETI spent three years in Inner Mongolia during the time that coincided
with an unprecedented antagonism towards foreign-led expeditions on Chinese soil. He
himself traveled alone and conducted no archaeological excavations, thus remaining
outside the field of vision of the preservation of antiquities movement. Unknowingly to
himself, he had been briefly investigated after his arrival in Chaoyang on the suspicion
27

Ibid.: 450.
Ibid.
29
HEDIN 1940: 46-47.
28

205

that he was in fact Sir Aurel Stein, plotting to rob China of yet another substantial piece
of its cultural legacy. This suspicion was in part the result of official directives recently
dispatched to local governments calling for vigilance with regard to Steins activities
in Chinese Central Asia. Added to this were LIGETIs Hungarian nationality and his
interest in Buddhist scriptures, the two of which were enough to suggest that he was the
notorious Hungarian-born explorer Stein. It is hard to believe that anyone who met the
28 years old LIGETI personally could have mistaken him for someone 40 years senior
to him. The two scholars were a generation apart: LIGETI was a student of Steins great
rival, Paul Pelliot, and in 1930 he was only beginning his career, whereas by this time
Stein was a celebrated explorer who had already completed his finest expeditions.
References
ANDREWS, Roy Chapman. 1932. The new conquest of Central Asia: A narrative of
the exploration of the Central Asiatic Expeditions in Mongolia and China, 19211930. New York: The American Museum of Natural History.
BRYSAC, Shareen. 2004. Sir Aurel Steins fourth, American expedition. In Helen
WANG, ed., Sir Aurel Stein, Proceedings of the British Museum study day, 23
March 2002. British Museum occasional papers. London: British Museum: 1722.
HEDIN, Sven. 1940. Chiang Kai-Shek, Marshal of China. New York: The John Day
Company.
. 1943. History of the expedition in Asia, 1927-1935. Stockholm: Elanders
Boktryckeri. 3 volumes.
HUO Yunfeng . 2008. Sitanyin dangan shiliao bianwu yize
. Minguo dangan (2008) 2: 141-143.
LIGETI, Louis. 1933. Rapport prliminaire dun voyage dexploration fait en Mongolie chinoise, 1928-1931. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz.
LIGETI, Lajos. 1934. Srga Istenek, srga emberek: Egy v Belso-Monglia lmakolostoraiban (Yellow gods, yellow people: A year in the lamaseries of Inner
Mongolia). Budapest: Kirlyi Magyar Egyetemi Nyomda.
WANG Jiqing . 1994. Zhong-Ying guanyu Sitanyin disici Zhongya kaocha
suohuo wenwu de jiaoshe neimu
. Jindaishi yanjiu (1994) No. 4: 242-257.
Zhongguo dier lishi danganguan , ed. 1994. Zhonghua minguo shi dangan , Series 5/1, Wenhua (Vol. 2).
Nanjing: Jiangsu guji.

206

Zhongguo Xinjiang Weiwuer zizhiqu danganguan ,

Riben Fojiao daxue Niya yizhi xueshu jigou ,
eds. 2007. Sitanyin disici Xinjiang tanxian dangan shiliao
. Urumuchi: Xinjiang meishu sheying.
(The Author is Overseas Project Manager, International Dunhuang Project, The British Library)

207

208

2010.03209-245

1.

Google Earth

100 M.A.Stein
2 1
Google

Earth

20

6
1

1p.55 11IDP NEWS, No.32, pp.2-4

2.

2.1

3
1900 4

19001901 Ancient

Khotan 2

19061908 Serindia 5

19131916Innermost

Asia 4

Serindia Innermost

Asia

http://dsr.nii.ac.jp/geography/

(Serindia ) : vol.5 (Innermost Asia ) : vol.4

1. Google Earth
4

210

2.2

Serindia 94 Innermost

Asia 47

KML

(Keyhole Markup Language)

GE
GE

5 1

1
3-4 1

1:

Serindia

30 4
1 1 4
5

15
211

2.3

GE

1.
2.

Google Earth

3.
1 3.2

km
2 GE
GE

GPS GE

2 6
6

2005 8 GARMIN e-trex

LEGEND C
212

GE
GE GPS

GE GE

GPS WGS84
2002
GPS

GE

Google Earth

GE

7
GPS
WGS84

2:

GE

GPS

GE
GPS

213

GE WGS84

2.4

GE
100

100

GE

3 4 3 GE

Serindia Innermost

Asia GE
4 GE Serindia Innermost
Asia 4

1
GE
105

214

1.
2.

200

3:

Ara-tam

4:

temple ruins

215

7:

6:

5:

Serindia

Innermost Asia

Serindia

216

8:

Innermost Asia

2.5

GE
58

Serindia Innermost

Asia 2

10
250m
32km km

6
1.

Serindia Innermost Asia

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
6

217

9:

1 2.4

2.6

10

Serindia Innermost

Asia

11

1.

218

10:

2.
3.
1 3

10

11:

219

3.

3.1

220

20

100

20
20

1.
2.

3.2

4
1.
2.
3.
4.
2

100

221

3.

4.

1.
1. 3.3.1

3.3
3.3.1
1.

2 3
GE

222

3.3.2

2
4
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.

GE

2.
3.

4. 2

3.3.3

2
1.
1988-3
2.
29
2005 9

223

4.

4.1

100

Le

Coq
Grnwedel

12

1.
2.

Kara-Khoja

Y
ar-khoto3. Bezeklik Temple Caves

4.

Toyuk Caves5. Sirkip6. Lukchun

7.

Chong-hass
ar, Kichik-hassar

7
8 15

1.

Oi-tam, ruined fort

2.

Bgan-tura

3.

Buluyuk (Shipang, Sassik-bulak, Kazma)

4.

Murtuk-ruins

5.

Yoghan-tura

6.

Chikkan-kol

7.

Bedaulat's town, B
esh-kawuk, Kosh-gumbaz

8.

Yut
ogh

13

Serindia Innermost

224

Asia

3.6

13

4.1
12:

13:

4.2 Chikkan-kol

Chikkan-kol

`Tschyqqan Kl'

1410 6
10

12 p.11, Tafel. 51, Statuettenkpfe und aus Ungebranntem Ton oder Stein, a, b, c, d.

Tafel 70,

Chotscho, i, k.

225

 `Chikkan-kol'

14:
Kl'

Le Coq, Albert von,

Chotscho

, p.11, `Schema der Anlagen von Tscyqqan (qqan

4.2.1

Serindia Innermost

Asia Chikkan-kol

Chikkan-kol
Chikkan-kol

Bezeklik
Ruins

Temple

Serindia 3.2kmInnermost Asia

5.6km
15 Chikkan-kol GE

15: Serindia Chikkan-Kol 3.2kmInnermost

5.6kmChikkan-Kol

226

Asia

4.2.2

16 Chikkan-kol
14

1km
2
600 2600

Tschyqqan

16:

Chikkan-Kol

(qqan) Kl

4.2.3

17
Tschyqqan

Kl 17A
227

16
16

17

16
Chikkan-kol

18
4

Tschyqqan Kl Chotsco, Tafel 70,

CHOTSCHO, k. 2008 9 9

17:

4.2.4

14
16 A
B
CD
228

19:
42 570 13.7600 N, 89 350 49.4500 E
42 570 27.2600 N, 89 350 58.5200 E
18:

4.3 Murtuk Ruins

Innermost
`Site

Asia, vol.3, Pl.29.

Plan of Ruins near Murtuk' 21 Murtuk Ruins

Murtuk

20:

Murtuk Ruins

229

Ruins

4.3.1

20 Innermost

Asia Murtuk Ruins

Bezeklik

Temple Ruins

Innermost
Murtuk

Ruins

Asia 5.6km

20 GE

4.3.2

21:
Site Plan of Ruins

0
42 58 55.1100 N, 89 310 28.0400 E

near

Murtuk

Murtuk

Ruins

21 21
21 GE

B0 Murtuq,
Murtuk

Ruins

2. Anlage

Murtuk
230

Ruins

4.3.3

Murtuk

Ruins

22 Murtuk
Ruins M.B.I 22

23
Murtuk

Ruins M. C. I

23

2 Murtuk
M.B

0
B M.C

22:

Ruins

Murtuk

Ruins M.B.I

M.C. Ruined

Shrine

C0 11

11

231

23:

Murtuk

Ruins Ruined Shrine M.C.I.

4.3.4

24: a
42 590 19.6300 N, 89 300 56.8600 E

24 21 a
21 GraveGE

232


M.A.M.D.b

4.4 Yut
ogh Caves

Lamjin
Yut
ogh
1.

Cave shrine below Yut

ogh

2.

Buddhist shrine below Yut

ogh

3.

Cemeteries near Mas

ar of Yetti-kiz-khojam, Yutogh

3 Innermost

Asia

vol.3

12
Yut
ogh

4.4.1

25:

12

Yut gh

Innermost

20 vol.3, PL.26.
233

Asia

3.3km

 25 Innermost

Asia Yutogh

Lamjin 3.3km
Yut
ogh GE

4.4.2

2004

4 27

Cave

Shrine below Yut

ogh

26:

27:

Sketch Plan of Cave Shrine

below Yut gh

4.4.3 Buddhist Shrine below Yut

ogh

Cave

Shrine below Yut

ogh

Innermost
below Yut
ogh'

`Cave

Asia, vol.2, p.611. `Buddhist Shrine

Shrine below Yut

ogh'

Half a mile farther down the gorge, also on the right bank, lies a
group of small caves, badly injured by the decay of the loose conglomerate into which they are cut, and also by vandal hands. About
234

30 feet above a narrow strip of cultivation two vaulted rooms open

from a small terrace, one measuring 10 1/2 feet by 2 1/2 and the
other 8 feet by 7......

Buddhist

shrine below Yut

ogh

small
`Buddhist
Yut
ogh'

800m

caves

Shrine below Yut

ogh'

`Cave Shrine below

26

(800
) 28 Innermost

Asia, vol.3

GE 800

`Buddhist Shrine below Yut

ogh'

28: Buddhist

0
00
89 54 54.01 E

Shrine below Yut gh

42 510 06.8900 N,

4.4.4 Cemeteries near Mas

ar of Yetti-kiz-khojam, Yutogh

3 2
235

Cemeteries

near Mas
ar of Yetti-kiz-khojam, Yutogh

Innnermost

Innermost

Asia. Vol.3, Pl. 26

Asia. Vol.2, p.610

(Cemeteries near Maz

ar of )Yetti-kiz-khojam, (Yutogh) the Seven Holly
Maids

(p.71)
Yetti-kiz-kh
ojam
4

4.5 Buluyuk (Shipang, Sassik-bulak, Kazma)Bedaulat's town

B
esh-kawakKosh-gumbazOi-tam, ruined fort

27 Schi-pang

13 Shipang

Shipang
28
2005
14
13

12Tafel 71, h.

5 p.40 8p.45

14

236

 sassik-bulak

kazma

sassik-bulak
15

Bedaulat's town B
esh-kawak Bedaulat's
townB
esh-kawak

16 Oi-tam,
ruined fort

15
16

29:

Schi-pang

Ansicht der Ruine Schi-pang

16 PL.XXX.
9
p.48
237

30:

Shipang

Schi-pang

20

4 1.

2. 3.

4.

238

5.1

4.3 Murtuk

Ruins

Murtuq
Anlage

Murtuq
17

Murtuk Ruins

Murtuk

Ruins

2. Anlage

2.

Murtuq Murtuk
3 Murtuq Murtuk

Murtuq
Murtuk

Ruins

Bezeklik

Murtuk

temple ruins

Murtuq

Murtuk

Bezeklik

Ruins

29
A MurtuqB BezeklikC
MurtukDEF

Yut
ogh 4.4 3

30 A Yut
oghB
C D Cemeteries

near Maz
ar

of Yetti-kiz-kh
ojam, YutoghEFG

17

20 vol.2, pp.635-641.,14 pp. 301-313., 16p.48

239

Innermost

Asia

31:

32:

5.3 5.4

5.2

Murtuk

Ruins Murtuk River

M.A. M.D.

240

 Yut
ogh

Yut
ogh Yutogh
Yut
ogh
Murtuk

Ruins

5.3

Murtuk
Ruined

Shrine

Ruins M.C.

21

1.
2.
3.
4.
1. 2. 3.

1.3.
4.

241

 17
A 2. B,C,D,E,F 3.
Murtuk

Ruins

2. 21 M.A.

M.B. a

b 3. 21 cd 4. Yut
ogh 3.

4.

5.4

4.2 Chikkan-kol
`Tschyqqan

Kl'

2018 33
7
`Hhlengruppe bei iqqan-Kl'

19

6
Tschyqqan

Kl

20

18

12 p.11. Tafel. 51, Statuettenkpfe und aus Ungebranntem Ton oder Stein, a, b, c, d,

Tafel 70,
19

Chotscho, i, k.

14 pp.314-315. Fig. 632b

20
3 p.143 (64)
242

21

1) 2)

33:

Tschyqqan Kl

21

13 Fig.2,Planskizze von Idikutschari(Stadt des Dakianus)

243

6.

Google

Earth

20

100

20

4
pp.55-712007
2
1214
B(2) 20002002 2004
3

1977
4CORONA

8pp.37-782000

244

5 (2004 10 14 11 1
)
29 pp.1-412005
6Google Earth
2007
pp.155-1622007
7

Historical GIS , pp.127-142, 2009

82007

:17202018
1720 (A)()2008
91999
10
1988-31-84
11International

Dunhuang Project,

IDP NEWS, No.32, Winter 2008-9

Chotscho, Belrin, 1913

13Grnwedel, A., Bericht ber Archologische Arbeiten in Idikutschari und
Umgebung im Winter 1902-1903, Mnchen, 1906
14Grnwedel, A., Altbuddhistische Kultsttten in Chinesisch-Turkistan, Bel12Le

Coq, A.,

rin, 1912

15Kitamoto,

A., Nishimura, Y., Geometric Correction of Measured His-

torical Maps with a Pixel-Oriented and Geobrowser-Friendly Framework,

Proceedings of the 22nd International Symposium on Digital Documentation, Interpretation & Presentation of Cultural Heritage (CIPA 2009), 2009
16Oldenburg, S. F., Russkaia Turkestanskaia Ekspeditsiia, 1909-1910 goda,
St.Petersburg,1914

17Stein,

M. A., Note on Maps illustrating Dr.

Chinese Turkestan and Kansu.

Mar., 1911, pp.275-280

Stein's Explorations in

The Geographical Journal, vol.37, No.

3,

Serindia, vol.1-5, Oxford, 1921

19Stein, M. A., Memoir on Maps of Chinese Turkestan and Kansu: From
the Survey made during Sir Aurel Stein's Explorations. 1900-1, 1906-8,
1913-15. Dehra Dun, Trigonometrical Survey oce, 1923
20Stein, M. A., Innermost Asia, vol.1-4, Oxford, 1928
18Stein,

M. A.,

245

2010 3 31

606-8265 47
Phone 075-753-6993 Fax 075-753-6999

ISSN 1882-1626