The reading of the fourth name is doubtful, Sichuigiu, Sichingiu (G.  T.), Sichin-tingiu etc.  The Chinese name of Mukden is Shing-king, but I know not if it be so old as our author’s time.  I think it very possible that the real reading is Sinchin-tingin, and that it represents SHANGKING-TUNGKING, expressing the two capitals of the Khitan Dynasty in this region, the position of which will be found indicated in No.  IV. map of Polo’s itineraries. (See Schott, Aelteste Nachrichten von Mongolen und Tartaren, Berlin Acad. 1845, pp. 11-12.)

[Sikintinju is Kien chau “belonging to a town which was in Nayan’s appanage, and is mentioned in the history of his rebellion.  There were two Kien-chow, one in the time of the Kin in the modern aimak of Khorchin; the other during the Mongol Dynasty, on the upper part of the river Ta-ling ho, in the limits of the modern aimak of Kharachin (Man chow yuen lew k’ao); the latter depended on Kuang-ning (Yuen-shi).  Mention is made of Kien-chow, in connection with the following circumstance.  When Nayan’s rebellion broke out, the Court of Peking sent orders to the King of Corea, requiring from him auxiliary troops; this circumstance is mentioned in the Corean Annals, under the year 1288 (Kao li shi, ch. xxx. f. 11) in the following words:—­’In the present year, in the fourth month, orders were received from Peking to send five thousand men with provisions to Kien-chow, which is 3000 li distant from the King’s residence.’  This number of li cannot of course be taken literally; judging by the distances estimated at the present day, it was about 2000 li from the Corean K’ai-ch’eng fu (then the Corean capital) to the Mongol Kien-chow; and as much to the Kien-chow of the Kin (through Mukden and the pass of Fa-k’u mun in the willow palisade).  It is difficult to decide to which of these two cities of the same name the troops were ordered to go, but at any rate, there are sufficient reasons to identify Sikintinju of Marco Polo with Kien-chow.” (Palladius, 33.)—­H.  C.]

We learn from Gaubil that the rebellion did not end with the capture of Nayan.  In the summer of 1288 several of the princes of Nayan’s league, under Hatan (apparently the Abkan of Erdmann’s genealogies), the grandson of Chinghiz’s brother Kajyun [Hachiun], threatened the provinces north-east of the wall.  Kublai sent his grandson and designated heir, Teimur, against them, accompanied by some of his best generals.  After a two days’ fight on the banks of the River Kweilei, the rebels were completely beaten.  The territories on the said River Kweilei, the Tiro, or Torro, and the Liao, are mentioned both by Gaubil and De Mailla as among those which had belonged to Nayan.  As the Kweilei and Toro appear on our maps and also the better-known Liao, we are thus enabled to determine with tolerable precision Nayan’s country. (See Gaubil, p. 209, and De Mailla, 431 seqq.)