The Nāṣirī Generations 256.5.6

256.5.6

In an article by Mr. H. H. Howorth, entitled “The Northern Frontagers of China: The Kara Khitai,” in the Journal Ro. As. Soc. for April, 1876, p. 271, the above passage from this Translation is quoted, and its writer adds, referring to our author, “The latter author is mistaken in supposing that Turkistan was then subject to Sanjar,” &c. Now, considering that Mr. Howorth is wholly dependent on foreign translations for his information on these matters, such a statement on his part, to say the least of it, is presumptuous. I need scarcely mention to those who can read the eastern Historians for themselves, that every author who has written on the subject in the Persian language agrees with our author, even the “great Raschid” himself, respecting Sultan Sanjar’s suzerainty over the parts in question, as well as to his father’s and grandfather’s suzerainty likewise. “When their progeny became very numerous, during the Sultan’s reign, they rebelled against his authority, and fought a battle against him. Taniko of Taraz, at the nomination of Sunkam and I-ma, was at the head of the Khita-is. The Sultan’s forces, from a long period of inaction, and enervated by protracted ease and luxury, were unable to cope with or stand before the enemy, and were overthrown; ... he [the Sultan] concluded a peace with them, and the pasture-lands of Turkistan and Bilasa-ghun, along with the cities and towns included in those frontier tracts, were left in the hands of the Khita-i invaders.”