Indian Antiquary Vol 58

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 164

1.50
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[ AUGUST, 1929
There is another point in which the antiquities of Khotan remind us of those of Ladakh. There are certain designs of a blood-red colour, which are not found in highly artistic later (Hellenistic pottery. They are relics of an older age.
As regards politics, Western Tibet or Ladakh did not come under the Chinese, when the power of the Kushånas declined. It was apparently governed by local chiefs, whose names havo occasionally been preserved in inscriptions and tales. Thus, at Khalatse, according to a Gupta inscription, a certain Satyamati (or Srima-charpati) and, according to oral reports, fifty or sixty miles higher up the Indus valley, a certain Süryamati, are mentioned.
UI. The Times of Tibetan Dominion in Turkestan. During the reign of the Chinese T'ang dynasty, the sovereignty of the Chinese over Turkestan was seriously menaced by other nations, among whom the Tibetans were the most conspicuous. As tho Chinose admit themselves, the Tibetan power in Turkestan way already very strong in the latter half of the seventh century. During the eighth contury, heavy wars took place about the possession of the country, when the Tibetans were allied with the Arabs, and the Chinese with the Kashmirians. During that time, the power of the Uigurs (Turks) was also in the ascendant, and in A.D. 791, when the Chinese left the territory of "the Four Garrisons" altogether, the Tibetans remained there as over-lords; but they land soon to divide their possession with the Uigurs. About A.D. 830-40, the Tibetans, wenkened through civil wars, disappeared from those districts, leaving them to the Uigurs.
Now, what have the Tibetans themselves to report about those times of their greatest power? Until tho Tibetan Annals, discovered at Tun-huang, have boen published, we have to make use of the Chronicles. Thus, from the Ladakhi Chronicles we learn the following:
(1) King Sroi-bisan-sjam-po, c. 600=A.D. 650,- The Hor-regions of the north woro conquered.” In addition to this, there is also a note in the Khotan Chronicles in Tibetan, where it is stated that in the days of the Khotan king Vijayakirti, Li-yul (Khotan) was conquered by Sroi-btsan-sgam-po's General mGar-lui-btsan, who is well known in history. According to the Chinese Tiang-chu, this conquest took place in A.D. 665, which is too late for king Sron-btsan-sgam-pe. But it is quite possible, that the king began this war in his lifetime, and that the general brought it to a happy end after the king's death. (2) King Gur-erov-'adu-rje, c. 679= A.D. 705. "The following districts were conquered. In the east, to the Hoang-ho; in the south, as far as Blo-bo and Shin-kun (Nepal) (there is a Shinkun Pass also on the frontier between Zangskar and Lahoul). In the north as far as Kra-krag-dar-chen (which is certainly in Turkestan; it may be Karakash and Cherohen). In the west as far as Nai-gon (Baltistan)." (3) King Khri-de-btsug-brlan, A.D. 705-755. No conquests are mentioned. (4) King Khri-eroi-lde-btsan, AD. 755-797. "The following countries were conquered : [parts of] China in the cast ; [parts ) of India in the south, 8Bal-ti (Baltistan) and 'a Bru. shal (Gilgit) in the west ; Sai-cho 0-don-kasdkar of the Turks in the north." Sai-cho stands probably for Sai-phyogs, district. O-don is U-thon (Khotan) and Kas-dkar is Kashgar. (5) King Mulliri-btsan-po, A.D. 798-804. "Not all those who had bowed before his father, bowed before him." (6) King Ral-pa-can, A.D. 804-816 "In the east were conquered: the mountains of Po-lon-shan on the frontier of China ; in the south, Blo-bo (east of Nepal), Mon (Indian mountain tribes); Li (in Kunawar); Zahor (Mandi) ; Gangasagara Ganga [in Kashmir) in the west : 'aBru-shal on the Persian frontier; in the north, all the provinces of Hor (Turkestan)."
Although the Tibetan records in their briefness cannot be compared to the very full Chinese records, yet they give the impression that they tell the truth. No. 3, for instance, where no conquests are mentioned, and No. 5, where it is said that not all who had bowed before