„ANCIENT LETTERS"
Without doubt t h e Sogdian ' A n c i e n t L e t t e r s ' belong t o the group of the m o s t i n t e r e s t i n g written s o u r c e s concerning the history of Ancient Central A s i a . [ 1]
T h e i r h i s t o r i c a l value was c l e a r l y r e c o g n i z e d by Sir A u r e l Stein even b e f o r e t h e i r decipherment and publication. Without any knowledge of the contents of the 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' , he counted with two p o s s i b i l i t i e s : e i t h e r they t e s t i f y t o the p r e s e n c e of an Iranian element in the indigenous population of the Tun-huang L i m e s or they may e m a n a t e f r o m Sogdian t r a d e r s t r a v e l l i n g along the "Silk Route"
between China and the Sogdian land. [ 2] The c o r r e c t evaluation of any h i s t o r i c a l s o u r c e , however, i s only possible a f t e r c l e a r i n g up its chronological position. It happened, t h e r e f o r e , not by chance that the date of the ' A n c i e n t L e t t e r s ' a r o u s e d a keen i n t e r e s t among Iranian s c h o l a r s .
It i s i n t e r e s t i n g to observe that Sir Aurel Stein himself did not r a i s e the question of the date of the 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' . He only wanted to e s t a b l i s h c e r t a i n chronological l i m i t s f o r the use of the p a p e r on which t h e l e t t e r s were w r i t t e n . He r e f e r r e d to the invention dated f r o m 105 A . D . of the p a p e r in China on the one hand, and to the l a t e s t Chinese d o c u m e n t s , dated f r o m 137 A . D . and 153 A . D . r e s p e c t i v e l y , found on the Tun-huang L i m e s , on the other hand. On the b a s i s of t h i s and other a r c h a e o l o g i c a l evidence he concluded "that the g a r r i s o n i n g of the stations of the L i m e s m u s t have c e a s e d some time in the second century A . D . " [ 3 ] F r o m this statement it b e c o m e s p e r f e c t l y c l e a r that he imagined the writing of t h e s e paper documents roughly between 105 A . D . and t h e end of the second c e n t u r y A . D . Unfortunately, the opinion expounded by Sir Aurel Stein concerning the c o m -posing of the Sogdian 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' was m i s u n d e r s t o o d and m i s i n t e r p r e t e d by H . R e i c h e l t , publishing these documents f o r the f i r s t t i m e . He a s c r i b e d t o him the view that the l e t t e r s a r o s e between 105 A . D . and 137/153 A . D . , i . e . between the invention of the paper and the supposed withdrawal of the Chinese g a r r i s o n s f r o m the L i m e s . [4] A s anybody can s t a t e , h o w e v e r , f r o m the text quoted above, Sir A u r e l Stein c a r e f u l l y put the abandoning of the m i l i t a r y s t a t i o n s on the Tun-huang L i m e s into " s o m e t i m e in the second c e n t u r y A . D . " .
It is to be r e g r e t t e d that W. B. Henning, too, w a s m i s l e a d by the m i s t a k e committed by R e i c h e l t . Thus, he a s c r i b e d again the opinion to Sir Aurel Stein a c
-c o r d i n g to whi-ch the ' A n -c i e n t L e t t e r s ' a r e t o be dated between 105 A . D . and 1 3 7 - 1 5 3 A . D . B e s i d e s , he wanted to r e f u t e this t h e o r y , a s c r i b e d e r r o n e o u s l y t o Sir A u r e l Stein, even by a r c h a e o l o g i c a l a r g u m e n t s , placed a s h i s disposal by G.
H a l o u n . Unfortunately, Henning had no acquaintance either with a r c h a e o l o g i c a l methodology or with t h e a r c h a e o l o g i c a l finds of the Tunhuang L i m e s . Thus h a p p e n e d that the e s s e n c e of the a r g u m e n t a t i o n expounded by Sir A u r e l Stein fully e s -c a p e d h i s attention. M o r e o v e r , he supposed that the 'An-cient L e t t e r s ' were found t o g e t h e r with about seven hundred C h i n e s e documents. [ 5] A c c o r d i n g l y , he believed t h a t t h e main a r g u m e n t used by Stein f o r a date between 105 A . D . and 137/153 A . D . w a s t h e joint o c c u r r e n c e of the ' A n c i e n t L e t t e r s ' and the d a t e d Chinese d o c u -m e n t s . Now, Haloun co-mposed a t a b l e [6] for hi-m which shows that while 78 C h i n e s e documents a r e dated between 98 B . C . and 39 B . C . and 30 p i e c e s between 1 A . D . and 94 A . D . , it i s only one document which dates back t o 137 A . D . and a n o t h e r doubtful one d a t e d f r o m 153 A . D . On the b a s i s of t h e s e data Henning s t r e s s e d that it is p e r i l o u s "to a r g u e that the Sogdian L e t t e r s m u s t belong to a y e a r in which occupation of the s i t e i s a t t e s t e d by the p r e s e n c e of a Chinese d o c u m e n t " because " C h i n e s e paper d o c u m e n t s , too, some ( t h r e e ) f r o m the s e c -ond ( ? ) century, but m o s t of them (eleven) f r o m T ' a n g t i m e s , probably the eight c e n t u r y , w e r e found in the s a m e a r e a " . [7]
The a r c h a e o l o g i c a l f a c t s a r e , h o w e v e r , the followings. The Tun-huang L i m e s r e p r e s e n t s a f o r t i f i c a t i o n s y s t e m the extent of which i s m o r e than 70 m i l e s . [ 8 ] Behind the wall r o s e a chain of w a t c h - t o w e r s . The distance of t h e s e f r o m e a c h other v a r i e d between 3 / 4 of a mile and 4 1 / 2 m i l e s . The o v e r -w h e l m i n g m a j o r i t y of the finds u n e a r t h e d by Sir Aurel Stein c a m e to light exactly in t h e r u i n s of buildings adjoining to the w a t c h - t o w e r s and in r e f u s e - h e a p s situated in or a r o u n d them. T h a t m e a n s that we have t o do not with one but with many a r c h a e o l o g i c a l sites on the Tunhuang L i m e s inasmuch a s each w a t c h t o w e r r e p r e -s e n t -s a -s e p a r a t e -site lying often at a d i -s t a n c e of 3 - 4 m i l e -s f r o m the other one. On the b a s i s of a thorough study of the a r c h a e o l o g i c a l finds and the Chinese documents found a t the s e p a r a t e s i t e s , Sir Aurel Stein succeeded in e l u c i d a t i n g the h i s t o r i c a l f a t e of s e v e r a l w a t c h - t o w e r s . Each of t h e m had i t s own individual f a t e : they w e r e built a t different t i m e s a s the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the L i m e s advanced w e s t w a r d s ; they w e r e u s e d for v a r i o u s p u r p o s e s , g a r r i s o n e d or abandoned and r e o c c u p i e d again a t s e v e r a l e p o c h s .
It i s i m p o s s i b l e , t h e r e f o r e , t o say that the Sogdian ' A n c i e n t L e t t e r s ' " w e r e found t o g e t h e r with a l a r g e number (about seven hundred) of C h i n e s e documents"
b e c a u s e t h i s is the t o t a l n u m b e r of the C h i n e s e documents found along the Tun-huang L i m e s (708 published by E . C h a v a n n e s t o which 62 published l a t e r by H . M a s p e r o can be a d d e d ) in at l e a s t 31 s i t e s . We m u s t t a k e , however, into c o n s i d e r a t i o n that the f i n d s c a m e to light on s e v e r a l p l a c e s within one and the s a m e s i t e . Thus the 770 d o c u m e n t s belong to 67 finding p l a c e s . T h i s was the c a s e a l s o a t watch-tower T . X I I . a , the finding p l a c e of the ' A n c i e n t L e t t e r s ' where f i n d s w e r e made a t s e v e r a l p l a c e s . A c c o r d i n g l y , the Sogdian 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' w e r e found together with only two complete Chinese s l i p s (documents Nos. 607, 609) and a f r a g m e n -t a r y one[ 9] , i . e . i n s -t e a d of abou-t seven hundred Chinese d o c u m e n -t s wi-th only
Date
On the b a s i s of T a b l e I we can s t a t e that t h e r e e x i s t s no c o n t r a s t between the two documents, c o n t a i n i n g the dates 137 A . D . and 153 A. D . , and the group of all o t h e r documents c o n c e r n i n g their c h r o n o l o g i c a l evidence and the chronological gap b e t w e e n them a s it w a s supposed by Ilaloun and Henning. At f i r s t , it m u s t be
s t r e s s e d that we have evidence (= dated document) for a l t o g e t h e r 54 y e a r s (even if we include some doubtful c a s e s ) f r o m the 303 ones between 98 B. C. and 205 A . D . , i . e . f o r only 17,8 % of the whole space of t i m e . Then we can state that we have only one evidence f o r 39 y e a r s , i . e . 72 % of the 54 e v i d e n c e d ones and two e v i -d e n c e s f o r 13 y e a r s , i . e . 24 % of the t o t a l . It follows that 8 2 , 2 % of the y e a r s f r o m 98 B . C . to 205 B . C . a r e not a t t e s t e d by dated Chinese documents at a l l and 96, 2 % of the indicated 54 y e a r s a r e only evidenced by one — in a few c a s e s by two — documents. L a s t l y , a s r e g a r d s the chronological g a p s , the r e l e v a n t data a r e a s f o l l o w s : the gap of 51 y e a r s o c c u r s one t i m e and a l s o the g a p s of 25, 21, 20, 17,
15, 14, 12, 9, 7, 5 y e a r s occur one t i m e e a c h . That m e a n s t h a t 11 chronological g a p s span 196 y e a r s , i . e . the a v e r a g e length of these g a p s i s 17,8 y e a r s . B e s i d e s , 25 s h o r t gaps span 53 y e a r s , the a v e r a g e being 2 , 1 y e a r s .
T h e s e data p r e v e n t u s f r o m devaluating the testimony of the Chinese d o c u -m e n t s dated f r o -m 137 A . D . and 153 A . D . r e s p e c t i v e l y . The overwhel-ming -m a j o r i t y (72, 2 % ) of the y e a r s evidenced between 98 B . C. and 205 B. C . a r e only a t t e s t e d by one dated d o c u m e n t . It seldom o c c u r s that these d o c u m e n t s f o r m c o h e r e n t c h r o n o l o g i c a l s e r i e s a s Henning believed [25] and even in t h e s e few c a s e s the s e r i e s a r e very s h o r t ; we find only 3 s e r i e s consisting of a t l e a s t 3 s u c c e s s i v e y e a r s : 96-95-94 B . C . , 6 5 - 6 4 - 6 3 B . C . , and 6 1 - 6 0 - 5 9 - 5 8 - 5 7 - 5 6 B . C . On the c o n t r a r y , the 54 a t t e s t e d y e a r s a r e as a r u l e s e p a r a t e d f r o m each other by longer c h r o n o l o g i c a l gaps s p a n n i n g on the a v e r a g e about 18 y e a r s in 11 c a s e s , and by s h o r t e r gaps of two y e a r s on the a v e r a g e in 25 c a s e s . A c c o r d i n g l y , the two d i s c u s s e d documents f i t well into the s y s t e m of o c c u r r e n c e and chronology of the d a t e d Chinese d o c u m e n t s found on the Tun-huang L i m e s and f r o m h i s t o r i c a l v i e w - p o i n t their t e s t i m o n y cannot be d e v a l u a t e d or n e g l e c t e d .
Table II
Sites/Finding P l a c e s ! 26] Dates[ 27]
T . I V . b . I I T . V T . VI.b
T . V I . b . I I T . V I . b . I
94 B . C . 39 B . C . 63 B . C .
65 B . C . , 63 B . C . , 6 1 B . C 60 B . C . , 5 9 B . C . , 5 8 B . C . 58 or 54 B . C . , 57 B . C . , 56 B . C . , 3 4 B . C . 68 B . C . , 6 5 B . C . ( ? )
• »
Sites/Finding P l a c e s ! 26] Dates] 27]
at 3 finding p l a c e s for 4 y e a r s , at 1 finding place for 5 y e a r s and at 1 finding p l a c e for 10 y e a r s . That m e a n s that f r o m the period spanning 303 y e a r s
between 98 B. C. and 205 A. D. we have chronological evidence for the g a r r i s o n -ing of a watch-tower only dur-ing 3 , 3 % , of this space of t i m e even in the m o s t favourable c a s e .
We cannot p a s s , of c o u r s e , the obvious fact with s i l e n c e that this s o u r c e m a t e r i a l is r e l a t i v e l y s c a n t y . T h i s fact did not e s c a p e the attention of Sir A u r e l Stein e i t h e r who himself e m p h a s i z e d : "It is impossible t o expect that, with such s c a t t e r e d and often incomplete m a t e r i a l s a s our documents f r o m the w a t c h - p o s t s of the Tunhuang L i m e s a r e , we should be able with c e r t a i n t y t o r e c o n s t i t u t e a l l e s s e n t i a l d e t a i l s . " ] 28] In spite of the obvious d i f f i c u l t i e s r e s u l t i n g f r o m the s c a n t -i n e s s of the ev-idence c o n c e r n -i n g the h -i s t o r y of the Tun-huang L -i m e s , we cannot d e s p a i r of using it f o r the elucidation of the date of the Sogdian 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' b e c a u s e this evidence — be it e v e r so scanty — does exist and neglecting it we would commit a s e r i o u s methodological e r r o r .
At f i r s t , we have t o elucidate how t h i s s c a t t e r e d w r i t t e n evidence c a m e into b e i n g and what its r e l a t i o n i s to the original m a s s of d o c u m e n t s produced by the
C h i n e s e military a d m i n i s t r a t i o n on the Tunhuang L i m e s . On the b a s i s of the t e s -t i m o n y of -the Chinese d o c u m e n -t s we can s-ta-te -tha-t a wri-t-ten managemen-t e x i s -t e d a-t the g r e a t e r part of the w a t c h t o w e r s where Chinese t r o o p s w e r e permanetly s t a -t i o n e d . The wri-t-ten d o c u m e n -t s c o m p r i s e d among o -t h e r s c a l e n d a r s , r e g i s -t e r s of o f f i c i a l l e t t e r s r e c e i v e d , official o r d e r s , m i l i t a r y and f i n a n c i a l documents, p r i v a t e r e c o r d s e t c . Surely, we have to r e c k o n at l e a s t with one c a l e n d a r and s e v e r a l dated official l e t t e r s a t each w a t c h - p o s t e v e r y y e a r . Consequently, it b e c o m e s obvious that the original m a s s of Chinese documents at the w a t c h - t o w e r s m u s t have been considerably g r e a t e r than the number actually found by Sir Aurel Stein. We m a y even r e g a r d the l a t t e r a s a very s m a l l f r a c t i o n of all w r i t t e n documents p r o -d u c e -d .
The documents w e r e obviously p r e s e r v e d for s e v e r a l y e a r s . On the b a s i s of t h e " s m a l l official a r c h i v e — thrown down together on the r u b b i s h - s t r e w n slope"]29] found at w a t c h - t o w e r T . VI. b and containing d o c u m e n t s dated f r o m 65 B. C.
up to 56 B. C . , we can even p r e s u m e that they w e r e kept f o r a d e c a d e . T h e r e a f t e r they w e r e thrown on the r e f u s e - h e a p o r , a s m o r e frequently happened, r e p e a t e d l y s c r a p e d , clean and u s e d a s p a l i m p s e s t writing m a t e r i a l ] 30] o r simply used a s matchwood and fuel for heating. [ 31] Leaving the station the g a r r i s o n evidently took the a r c h i v e of the l a s t few y e a r s along. Accordingly, u n l e s s t h e watchtower s u f -f e r e d d e s t r u c t i o n , we m u s t a s s u m e that the occupation o-f a w a t c h - t o w e r lasted 5-10 y e a r s beyond the l a s t date on the Chinese documents found on the r e f u s e - h e a p s t h e r e . On the b a s i s of the a b o v e - s a i d we must r e g a r d the t e s t i m o n y of the C h i n e s e d o c u m e n t s found by Sir A u r e l Stein a t the Tunhuang L i m e s a s a minimum i n f o r m a -tion s y s t e m and not a s a m a x i m u m one a s was done by Haloun and Henning.
Now, on the b a s i s of t h e s e f a c t s and c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , we can draw some i m p o r t a n t conclusions a s r e g a r d s the h i s t o r y of the Tunhuang L i m e s and the g e n -e r a l t -e s t i m o n y of i t s C h i n -e s -e d o c u m -e n t s . Tabl-e II -e n a b l -e s u s t o draw th-e following sketchy p i c t u r e of the stationing of Chinese t r o o p s a t t h e w a t c h - t o w e r s :
1st epoch 98 В. С. -34 В. С.
T . I V 94 B . C .
T. V 39 B . C .
T . V I . b 68 B . C . - 34 В. C.
Т.ХП1 56 B . C .
T.XIV 96 B . C . - 45 B . C .
T. XV. a . Ill 61 B . C . - 53 B . C .
T.XVII 58 B . C .
T . XVIII 52 B . C .
T . XXII. с 98 B . C .
I n t e r m e d i a t e epoch 34 B . C . - 1 A . D .
T . XXIII. с 17 B . C . ( ?)
2nd epoch 1 A . D . - 205 A. D.
T . VIII 8 - 9 A . D .
T . X I 153 A . D .
Т . Х П . а 1 A . D . - 2 0 - 2 1 A . I
Т.ХП1 5 A . D .
T.XIV 4 A . D . - 19 A . D .
T . X I V . a 87 A . D .
T . XV. a . II 15 A . D . - 56 A . D . T . X V . a . I 67 A . D . - 137 A. D,
T.XVI 68 A . D . - 77 A . D .
T . X X I I . b 12 A . D . - 35 A . D .
T. XXII. d 47 A . D . - 115 A. D,
T.XXII.f 13 A . D . - 205 A. D,
T . XXIII. 1 92 A . D .
т . x x v n 35 A . D . - 61 A . D .
т . x x v n i 75 A . D .
Defective though t h i s evidence may b e , it c l e a r l y p r o v e s that the h i s t o r y of the Tun-huang L i m e s c o n s i s t s of two epochs: one beginning with the c r e a t i o n of the L i m e s and lasting up to the t h i r t i e s of the 1st century B . C . , the other c o m p r i s i n g p r a c t i c a l l y the whole of the 1st and Und c e n t u r i e s A . D . It would appear that the m i l i t a r y occupation of the L i m e s was not quite the s a m e in t h e s e two epochs . In the f i r s t half of the 1st century B . C . g r e a t e r importance w a s a s c r i b e d to the w e s t -e r n m o s t s-ection of th-e L i m -e s w h -e r -e , b-etw-e-en th-e w a t c h - t o w -e r s T . I V . a and T . I V . b , a f o r t i f i e d c a m p a s a b r i d g e h e a d for w e s t e r n expeditions was e s t a b lished and at watchtower T . V I . b a g r e a t m i l i t a r y a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c e n t r e e x -i s t e d . About the t h -i r t -i e s of the 1st century B . C . , h o w e v e r , the w e s t e r n m o s t
s e c t i o n of the L i m e s was apparently abandoned. Notwithstanding, abundant finds of Chinese documents prove beyond any doubt that the g r e a t e r part of the L i m e s w a s a l s o g a r r i s o n e d d u r i n g the Later Han Dynasty. And even though dated d o c u -m e n t s a r e a l -m o s t e n t i r e l y -m i s s i n g a f t e r the -middle of the Ilnd century A . D . , t h e r e can be hardly any doubt that the Tun-huang L i m e s p r e s e r v e d its significance a l s o d u r i n g the second half of the Ilnd century A . D . and a f t e r the l o s s of the W e s t e r n C o u n t r i e s in 153 A . D . i t s importance a s a f r o n t i e r line and b o r d e r land b e c a m e even g r e a t e r . The s c a n t i n e s s of dated Chinese documents f r o m the second half of the Ilnd century A . D . can probably be a s c r i b e d mostly to the c i r c u m s t a n c e that it i s a l w a y s the u p p e r m o s t l a y e r exposed to e r o s i o n , c l i m a t e and human d e s t r u c t i o n which d i s a p p e a r s or s u f f e r s e s s e n t i a l d a m a g e .
We m u s t , h o w e v e r , e m p h a s i z e that t h e r e e x i s t s no t r a c e of stationing of t r o o p s a t the Tun-huang L i m e s during the I l l r d and IVth c e n t u r i e s A . D . This fact cannot be explained by the s a m e c a u s e s a s the a l m o s t total a b s e n c e of Chinese d o c -u m e n t s dated f r o m the end of the Later Han Dynasty b e c a -u s e Sir A-urel Stein did find n u m e r o u s Chinese d o c u m e n t s dated f r o m the Illrd c e n t u r y and the b e g i n -ning of the IVth century A . D . at the Lou-Ian site which w a s equally exposed t o wind and e r o s i o n . The total absence of finds l a t e r than those f r o m the L a t e r Han Age can only by c a u s e d by the abandoning of the whole Tun-huang L i m e s which obviously lost both i t s m i l i t a r y and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e during the I l l r d century A . D .
F r o m the view-point of the date of the Sogdian ' A n c i e n t L e t t e r s ' it i s , t h e r e f o r e , a fact of d e c i s i v e importance that documents and other finds of the Han Age w e r e exclusively found at the s i t e s and finding p l a c e s of the Tun-huang L i m e s . This fact r e n d e r s the conclusion inevitable that the Sogdian 'Ancient L e t -t e r s ' , -too, could be w r i -t -t e n only wi-thin -the s a m e -time l i m i -t s . Accordingly, -they cannot be dated f r o m a t i m e l a t e r than the end of the Ilnd c e n t u r y A . D . It was a r e g r e t t a b l e m i s t a k e on Henning' s part when he believed that the find of eleven C h i n e s e p a p e r documents f r o m T ' a n g t i m e s "in the same a r e a " d e p r i v e s the a r -c h a e o l o g i -c a l a r g u m e n t s (whi-ch w e r e m i s u n d e r s t o o d and m i s i n t e r p r e t e d by h i m ) of any validity.! 32] He did not r e c o g n i z e that t h e s e Chinese p a p e r documents f r o m the T ' a n g Age were found not at a site or finding place belonging to the Tun-huang L i m e s of the Han Age but in the r e m a i n s of a modest Buddhist s h r i n e , built a c -c o r d i n g to the testimony of t h e Chinese -c o i n s found t h e r e in t h e T ' a n g Age. The s t r a t i g r a p h i e position of the s h r i n e is absolutely c l e a r b e c a u s e it was built above a r e f u s e heap of the Han Age. [ 33] A c c o r d i n g l y , the find of the Chinese paper d o c -u m e n t s of the T ' a n g Age in the neighbo-urhood of watch-tower T . X I V does not a l t e r the f a c t at a l l that at the s i t e s and finding p l a c e s of the T u n h u a n g L i m e s only d o c -u m e n t s and other finds of the Han Age w e r e -u n e a r t h e d . As a final concl-usion, on the b a s i s of the a r c h a e o l o g i c a l finds of the Tun-huang L i m e s , we m u s t put the date of the Sogdian 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' n e c e s s a r i l y between the t i m e l i m i t s of the Han Age.
Now we can p r o c e e d to the other t a s k , v i z . to elucidate the fate of t h e ' A n cient L e t t e r s ' within the h i s t o r y of the s i t e , the watchtower T . X I I . a and the f i n d -ing place T . X I I . a . I I r e s p e c t i v e l y . At f i r s t , we m u s t r e a l i z e t h e c h a r a c t e r of the
d i s t r i b u t i o n of documents and other finds a m o n g the w a t c h - t o w e r s . As was s t a t e d a b o v e , only some of the w a t c h - t o w e r s had a g a r r i s o n . In the C h i n e s e document N o . 6 1 7 [ 3 4 ] an o r d e r is said "to be sent to the commandants of w a t c h - p o s t s and to the company r e s i d e n c e s . . . " . On the b a s i s of this text we can a s s u m e that the L i m e s was divided into sections and in e a c h section a c o m p a n y was s t a t i o n e d . The c o m p a n i e s had t h e i r h e a d q u a r t e r s a t a watch-tower e a c h where a s y s t e m of w r i t t e n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and an official a r c h i v e e x i s t e d . T h e c o m p a n i e s sent s m a l l e r d e t a c h e m e n t s on p a t r o l , for signal s e r v i c e and s u p e r v i s i o n of the t r a f -fic to the other w a t c h - t o w e r s without p e r m a n e n t g a r r i s o n . T h i s s y s t e m e x p l a i n s the abundant o c c u r r e n c e of written d o c u m e n t s and d e b r i s at s o m e w a t c h - t o w e r s and t h e i r s c a n t i n e s s or total a b s e n c e at o t h e r w a t c h p o s t s . The division into s e c tions of the L i m e s , the number of the c o m p a n i e s and the d i s l o c a t i o n of t h e i r d e -t a c h m e n -t s could vary f r o m -time -to -t i m e .
The Sogdian 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' w e r e found a t w a t c h - t o w e r T . XII.a and the c i r c u m s t a n c e s of t h e i r d i s c o v e r y a r e d e s c r i b e d by Sir A u r e l Stein|35] a s follows:
"Immediately against the south f a c e of the tower w a s a s p a c e about 4 feet wide, which s e e m e d to have been filled up on purpose with b r o k e n b r i c k s and loose e a r t h . Next to t h i s c a m e a still n a r r o w e r p a s s a g e (marked II in plan), only l ' l o ' ' wide, enclosed between walls of single b r i c k s and divided by an equally thin p a r -t i -t i o n in-to -two li-t-tle c o m p a r -t m e n -t s , each abou-t 11 fee-t in l e n g -t h . A -thick l a y e r of
s t r a w and stable r e f u s e c o v e r e d t h i s p a s s a g e a s well a s a l i t t l e r o o m , m e a s u r i n g only 5 by 6 feet, which adjoined it and t h e south-west c o r n e r of the t o w e r . The p a s s a g e , a s I convinced myself by subsequent inspection, had its walls still standing to a height of over 4 f e e t .
R e f u s e of a l l kinds had c o m p l e t e l y filled the p a s s a g e , and within it was found embedded the r e m a r k a b l e c o l l e c t i o n of Early Sogdian documents on p a p e r , T . XII. a . II. 1 8 . . . According to the N a i k ' s s t a t e m e n t , which I have e v e r y r e a -son t o accept a s a c c u r a t e , t h e i r position w a s about 3 feet above the f l o o r . In the r e f u s e below them t h e r e turned up t h r e e Chinese slips, a m o n g them two c o m p l e t e o n e s , Doc. 607,609. F r o m the little r o o m adjoining w e s t w a r d s c a m e five m o r e C h i n e s e r e c o r d s on wood, a l s o m a r k e d T . XII. a . II, among t h e m one, Doc. 593 . . . b e a r i n g a date which, taken by i t s e l f , could safely be r e a d on the spot a s c o r r e -sponding to A. D. 1 . . . " .
F r o m t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n it b e c o m e s c l e a r that the Sogdian 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' w e r e found in a well defined c u l t u r a l l a y e r of the Han Age which was m o r e than 4 f e e t thick in the p a s s a g e where t h e s e documents were d i s c o v e r e d . On the b a s i s of the Chinese documents found below t h e m and in other finding p l a c e s of the s i t e , a g e n e r a l outline of the h i s t o r y of the w a t c h - t o w e r s T . X I I . a and T.XII situated on the s a m e oblong and n a r r o w plateau can be drawn.
Surely, the m o s t intensive m i l i t a r y occupation of t h e w a t c h - t o w e r s T . X I I . a and T.XII fell into the t i m e of Wang Mang, when T . X I I . a m u s t for a time have been a company r e s i d e n c e . Comparing the Chinese documents N o s . 596, 597, 598, 599 and
587, we can p r e s u m e that T . X I I . a had t h r e e stages f r o m the viewpoint of m i l i -t a r y occupa-tion during -this epoch. A-t f i r s -t , -the h e a d q u a r -t e r s of -the Kuang-hsin company w e r e at Yii-mên and only a detachment of it w a s stationed at T . X I I . a .
L a t e r on, the h e a d q u a r t e r s of t h i s company w e r e t r a n s f e r r e d to the watch-tower T . X I I . a . In the t h i r d s t a g e , the Kuanghsin company w a s followed by the H s i e n -m i n g co-mpany, who had been stationed f o r -m e r l y at Y i i - -m ê n . At the sa-me t i -m e a d e t a c h m e n t of the l a t t e r company was in c h a r g e of the signal s e r v i c e at w a t c h t o w e r T.XII. Being s t a t i o n e d f o r m e r l y at Yiimên, the s a m e company had a d e -t a c h m e n -t a-t w a -t c h - -t o w e r T. VHI. T h e s e -t h r e e s -t a g e s can c l e a r l y be dis-tinguished but t h e i r sequence c a n n o t be e s t a b l i s h e d with c e r t a i n t y ; it might even have been in t h e inverse o r d e r . The dislocation at the w a t c h - t o w e r s or the concentration in Y i i - m ê n of the c o m p a n i e s obviously depended on s t r a t e g i c n e c e s s i t i e s . In any c a s e , w a t c h - t o w e r T.XII w a s subordinated to T . X I I . a being a company r e s i d e n c e at that t i m e .
Neither the C h i n e s e documents nor the other finds d i s c o v e r e d in the d u s t -bin Т . Х П . а . Н f u r n i s h any b a s i s f o r the a s s u m p t i o n that T . X I I . a would have had a p e r m a n e n t g a r r i s o n a l r e a d y during the F o r m e r Han D y n a s t y . Signal s e r v i c e or s u -p e r v i s i o n of the t r a f f i c w e r e -probably m a n a g e d by s m a l l -p a t r o l s and guards sent t o t h e s e w a t c h - t o w e r s f r o m t i m e to t i m e . Thus the r i s e of the dustbin T . X I I . a . I I can be c o n n e c t e d in all p r o b a b i l i t y with the epoch of Wang Mang. The Chinese d o c u m e n t s of t h i s period were t h r o w n away at the t i m e when the p e r m a n e n t g a r r i s o n s of the w a t c h - t o w e r s west of T . X I V were withdrawn to Yii-mên in t h e t h i r t i e s or f o r t i e s of t h e 1st century A . D . A f t e r this event, however, a r a t h e r long period must have b e e n p a s s e d before t h e Sógdian 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' w e r e thrown on the r e f u s e . They w e r e found 3 feet a b o v e the floor and about 1 foot below the s u r f a c e of the dustbin.
T h i s s t r a t i g r a p h i e p o s i t i o n would s e e m to indicate a point in t i m e towards the end of t h e Han Age. Thus a f u r t h e r question a r i s e s : what could have been the function of t h e watch-tower T . X I I . a a f t e r the withdrawal of the p e r m a n e n t g a r r i s o n ?
There e x i s t s s o m e evidence (mainly documents) which suggests that the w a t c h - t o w e r s T. VI. c , T . X I , T . X I I . a and T . X I I were kept in u s e even a f t e r the a b a n d o n i n g of the m i l i t a r y occupation of the w e s t e r n p a r t of t h e Tun-huang L i m e s . T h i s c a n be explained by the topographic position of the w a t c h - t o w e r s listed a b o v e . As Sir A u r e l Stein p o i n t e d out! 36] , the w a t c h - t o w e r T.XI lying a day' s m a r c h f r o m T . X V . a and being t h e l a s t station where drinkable water w a s obtainable on the r o u t e w e s t w a r d s , o f f e r e d a convenient i n t e r m e d i a t e h a l t i n g - p l a c e . Similarly, a c c o r d i n g to his d e s c r i p t i o n ] 37] , the w a t c h - t o w e r T . V I . c occupied "an ideal p o s i t i o n on the flat top of a s m a l l and completely isolated clay t e r r a c e . This r i s e s a s a conspicuous l a n d m a r k to a hight of fully 150 f e e t above the s u r -r o u n d i n g low g-round Its top completely ove-rlooks the g -r e a t basin . . . " .
L a s t l y , a s r e g a r d s t h e watch-tower T . X I I , Sir Aurel Stein d r e w attention to the f a c t t h a t " a post maintained at T . X I I was excellently placed for guarding the a n c i e n t route and w a t c h i n g the t r a f f i c p a s s i n g along it . . . The purpose of T . X I I was t o s e r v e a s a r o a d - s i d e post for what I m a y call the police control of the b o r d e r a s d i s t i n c t f r o m its m i l l i t a r y defence . . . In the s a m e way a p r e l i m i n a r y watch could b e kept here upon t r a v e l l e r s , e t c . coming f r o m the W e s t e r n Regions the s y s t e m of 'double c h e c k ' h e r e a s s u m e d could be p a r a l l e l e d . . . by plentiful e a r l i e r h i s t o r i c a l e v i d e n c e . . . " . [ 3 8 ]
On the b a s i s of t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s it b e c o m e s c l e a r that the w a t c h -t o w e r s T. V I . e . T . X I and T.XII were obviously used a s " p o l i c e " pos-ts f o r controlling the t r a f f i c coming f r o m or going to the W e s t e r n R e g i o n s . Because of its excellent t o p o g r a p h i c a l location, t h e watch-tower T . X I I . a lying on the s a m e oblong and n a r r o w plateau a s T . X I I , could probably have s e r v e d with its q u a r t e r s a s the b a s e for the p a t r o l s and g u a r d s sent t o the n e a r b y c o n -t r o l pos-t T.XII for -the supervision of -the -t r a f f i c . The -thick l a y e r of s -t r a w and stable r e f u s e in the p a s s a g e and t h e little room at T . X I I . a s u g g e s t s that mounted p a t r o l s stayed h e r e f r o m t i m e t o t i m e .
According to the Chinese document No. 150, one of t h e main t a s k s of the f r o n t i e r g u a r d s w a s t o control "the m e n , domestic a n i m a l s , c a r t s , and a r m s which leave or e n t e r through the p a s s " . [39] A n o t h e r Chinese document
(No.379) p r e s c r i b e s to prohibit the p e r s o n s t r a n s p o r t i n g o b j e c t s other than those of o r d i n a r y use f r o m departing f r o m the p a s s . [40] Obviously, control was extended over a w i d e r r a n g e of o b j e c t s than those mentioned in the two quoted d o c u m e n t s . Without doubt among the things c o n t r o l l e d at the f r o n t i e r p o s t s l e t t e r s w e r e c o n s i d e r e d of s p e c i a l significance at all t i m e s . In this c o n -text the finding of the Sogdian ' A n c i e n t L e t t e r s ' in the dustbin T . X I I . a . n a l s o b e c o m e s u n d e r s t a n d a b l e . During internal t r o u b l e s all g o v e r n m e n t s s t r i v e t o prevent the d i s s e m i n a t i o n abroad of n e w s and i n f o r m a t i o n s concerning the i n -t e r n a l s -t a -t e of -the c o u n -t r y . This may a l s o have been -the c a s e a-t -the end of the L a t e r Han Dynasty in China. The Sogdians living and t r a d i n g in China c o r -r e s p o n d e d with t h e i -r f a m i l i e s , -r e l a t i v e s o-r l o -r d s in Sogdiana and i n f o -r m e d them about conditions and events in China. As we a l r e a d y know, the Sogdian
'Ancient L e t t e r s ' , too, w e r e of such c h a r a c t e r . On the b a s i s of the above c o n s i d e r a t i o n s it now s e e m s very p r o b a b l e that the ' A n c i e n t L e t t e r s ' w e r e seized by Chinese f r o n t i e r g u a r d s a t t h e watch-tower T . X I I a s they c o n t r o l l e d the c a r a v a n t r a n s p o r t i n g the l e t t e r s a s it passed through the second set of c o n t r o l s . The l e t t e r s w e r e c o n f i s c a t e d and brought by t h e m to t h e i r b a s e , the q u a r t e r s at the w a t c h - t o w e r T . X I I . a and l a t e r thrown on the r u b b i s h .
An exact p a r a l l e l to the fate of the 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' is o f f e r e d by another Sogdian document found by Sir A u r e l Stein at the w a t c h - t o w e r T . V I . c . This was a "wooden tablet with Early Sogdian s c r i p t " (Inv. No. T . V I . c . I I . 1)[ 4 1 ] , taken by Stein for a sign of the p r e s e n c e of Iranian a u x i l i a r i e s and c o n s i d e r e d by him a t a l l y . [ 42] Actually, however, the r e c o r d was obviously a l e t t e r , w r i t t e n on a wooden t a b l e t , the text of which can be r e a d a s follows:
line 1 MN n y p i ' [ " F r o m the humble A[
2 (îrysk к [S y o u / h e should b r i n g (it) wh[en 3 ' k t k s w r'n [ having done it .[
4 ' s k n y m I ( s h a l l ) note (it)"
R e m a r k s on the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
nypà : the m e a n i n g "humble" can be a s s u m e d on the b a s i s of B. Sogdian пурб - " l i e down". Line 1 probably contained the n a m e of the w r i t e r and that of the a d d r e s s e e and t h e beginnings of t h e t e x t .
ß r y m a y b e 2nd Sing. P r e s , and F u t . Indicative, I m p e r f e c t or Optative and 3 r d Sing. Optative r e s p e c t i v e l y .
sk: durative p a r t i c l e , Brysk m a y be "you a r e b r i n g i n g " .
' ktk: c f . B. Sogdian ' k r t ' к " d o n e " , sw = enclitic p e r s o n a l pronoun 3 r d Sing. A c c .
' sknym: c f . B . Sogdian s k n - " e n g r a v e " , ' s k ' n " s i g n , s c u l p t u r e , i m a g e " , Anc. Lett, s k ' ' nk " n o t e , r e c o r d " .
This Sogdian l e t t e r , too, was obviously seized by the Chinese f r o n t i e r g u a r d s at the second c o n t r o l post and p e r h a p s used by them f o r some purpose of t h e i r own. Below the Sogdian text a C h i n e s e c h a r a c t e r was w r i t t e n which can be r e a d tentatively a s c h ' i . Unfortunately, t h i s word h a s m a n y meanings and without a context its s e n s e here cannot b e e s t a b l i s h e d r e a s s u r i n g l y . If we a s s u m e t h e meaning "to p e r m i t ; t o t r a s p o r t , to e x p o r t " h e r e , the c h a r a c t e r may r e p r e s e n t a note made by the Chinese f r o n t i e r g u a r d s at the occasion of the f i r s t c o n -t r o l a -t -the Jade G a -t e . I-t may have been i n s c r i b e d , h o w e v e r , a f -t e r -the -table-t was s e i z e d at the second c o n t r o l .
To sum up, the a r c h a e o l o g i c a l f i n d s of the Tun-huang L i m e s and f i r s t of all t h e Chinese d o c u m e n t s among them unambigously prove that the Sogdian ' A n -c i e n t L e t t e r s ' w e r e w r i t t e n at the end of the Han Age, i . e . in the se-cond half or t o w a r d s the end of the Ilnd century A . D . This r e s u l t h a r m o n i z e s p e r f e c t l y with the f a c t that the p a p e r of the 'Ancient L e t t e r s ' does not yet show any t r a c e of t h e " s i z i n g " with s t a r c h which a l r e a d y a p p e a r s in a Chinese document f r o m L o u -Ian, dated 312 A . D . (No. 912, Inv. No. L. A . VI. II. 0230). [ 43] F i n a l l y , a s I have shown e l s e w h e r e ] 44] , the contents of L e t t e r II r e f l e c t the e v e n t s connected with t h e decline and fall of the Later Han Dynasty at the end of the Ilnd century A . D .
Notes
1. C t . t h e i r appreciation by W. B. HENNING. The Date of the Sogdian Ancient L e t t e r s : BSOAS 12 (1948) p. 602.
2. Sir Aurel STEIN, Serindia II, Oxford 1921. pp. 676, 752 . 3. S e r i n d i a II. p . 673.
4. H. REICHELT, Die soghdischen H a n d s c h r i f t e n r e s t e des Britischen M u s e u m s II, Heidelberg 1931. p. 6.
5. He wrote: "The Sogdian L e t t e r s were found t o g e t h e r with a large n u m b e r (about seven hundred) of Chinese d o c u m e n t s " BSOAS 12 (1948) p. 602.
6. Haloun compiled his table on the b a s i s of the table published by E. СНА VANNES (Les documents chinois découverts p a r A u r e l Stein, Oxford 1913.Ш) of the dates o c c u r r i n g in the Chinese documents. He a b r i d g e d , however, C h a v a n n e s ' table a r b i t r a r i l y by contracting the evidence into two totals and c o n t r a s t i n g them with the two latest d a t e s . T h i s manipulation is i n a d m i s -sible because one could c o n t r a s t any y e a r evidenced only by one document and separated by a chronological gap f r o m the other y e a r s with the total of the other d a t e s . As we show below, the majority of the d a t e s is evidenced only by one document. Had Henning himself consulted
Chavannes' book he would have spared himself a s e r i e s of m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s and m i s t a k e s . 7. W. B. HENNING: BSOAS 12 (1948) pp. 601-602.
8. Sir Aurel STEIN, Serindia II. p. 735.
9. Sir A u r e l STEIN, Serindia II. p . 669. The f r a g m e n t a r y slip i s not included among the documents published by E. Chavannes and the inventory number of No. 609 (T.XII. a . I I ) is obviously i n c o r r e c t (the s e r i a l number of the find is m i s s i n g ) .
10. Sir Aurel STEIN, Serindia II. pp. 721-766.
11. The t a b l e s were composed on the b a s i s of the books by E. CHAVANNES, Les documents chinois
11. The t a b l e s were composed on the b a s i s of the books by E. CHAVANNES, Les documents chinois