PREFACE

In the spring of 2010，the Museum of Renmin University of China acquired a collection of documents from Hetian（Ancient Khotan），Xinjiang. The main part of the collection is a group of manuscripts written in Chinese，Khotanese，Sogdian，Tibetan and Sanskrit，^[1] including both religious texts and secular documents such as official documents and economic texts. The present authors were allocated the task of editing and studying the Sogdian part of the collection，which amounts to thirteen items，making it one of the more significant Sogdian finds to come from China in recent years. Our edition was first presented in two articles in the Journal of the American Oriental Society. The first（Bi and Sims-Williams 2010）contained the edition of four economic documents（nos. 1–4），while the second article（Bi and Sims-Williams 2015）included one nearly complete letter（no. 5），five fragments of letters（nos. 6–10）and some tiny scraps of which too little is preserved for the contents to be clearly identified（nos. 11–13）. The present bilingual edition incorporates the contents of both articles，with some revisions，as well as a complete glossary.

Only a few Sogdian documents from the Khotan area have previously been made known. Most of these are now in the British Library and were published in Sims-Williams 1976 with facsimiles in Sims-Williams and Hamilton 1990（henceforth：DTS）and 2015（henceforth：TSD）. Those referred to in those publications as Fragments 12，15，16，23，27，30 and 33 belong to the Stein collection and come from Mazar Tagh. Fragment 36（H.143 MNS 18 = IOL Khot 158/5）belongs to the Hoernle collection. There seems to be no evidence about the exact find-spot of this text，but it is certain that it comes from the Khotan region；^[2] moreover，according to Yutaka Yoshida’s recent reading，Khotan is even mentioned in the text.^[3] Yet another Sogdian fragment from this area survives only in the form of a photo in the Trinkler collection，Bremen. This fragment was published by Gropp，^[4] who tentatively suggested that it may come from Mazar Tagh.^[5] However，since Trinkler only mentions Brahmi and Tibetan documents from Mazar Tagh，it is more likely that the Sogdian fragment is to be identified with the so-called “Uighur” fragment found by Trinkler at Dandan Uiliq.^[6] Finally，there is also a small Sogdian fragment amongst a collection of more than 500 documents and other items from the Khotan area recently acquired by the National Library of China in Beijing.^[7]

Unfortunately the findspots of the new documents are not recorded and the texts themselves provide no clear indications of their place or date of writing. However，since a significant Sogdian presence at sites such as Mazar Tagh，Dandan Uiliq and Old Domoko is clear from references in the Khotanese，Chinese，Tibetan and Judaeo-Persian documents from these sites，^[8] as well as from the earlier discoveries of Sogdian documents cited above，it seems likely that the newly acquired texts have a similar provenance. As for their date，the only specific indication we have is a fragmentary Chinese date formula on the reverse of one of the documents（no. 12），which seems to indicate a date towards the end of the eighth century（see discussion below）. In this connection it is worth noting that most dated Chinese documents in the Renmin University collection are dated in the eras of Dali 大曆，Jianzhong 建中 and Zhenyuan 貞元，i.e. the second half of the eighth century，the last stage of the Tang empire’s control of Khotan.

Most of these documents are ratherpoorly preserved and written in a type of cursive script which is often highly ambiguous. In the case of the economic documents，whose structure tends to be very repetitive，it is mainly the personal names and terms for commodities which present difficulties in reading. As for the letters，we know quite a large number of Sogdian letters from other collections，some of them well preserved and clearly written，and these provide comparative material which makes it possible to interpret at least the more formulaic parts of the new documents. When it comes to their substance，however，this material gives us little help，with the result that the readings and interpretations offered below are in many cases hypothetical.

For the opportunity to publish these manuscripts we would like to thank theMuseum of Renmin University of China and the working group of scholars and experts to whom the study of this collection has been entrusted. We are also extremely grateful to Yutaka Yoshida（= Y.Y.），who kindly sent us a large number of corrections and additional remarks，some of which we have been able to incorporate in the final version. We should also like to thank Ursula Sims-Williams（British Library）for providing information on the history and find-spots of the manuscripts of the Stein，Hoernle and Trinkler collections，as well as the map showing the main sites in Khotan.

We arealso happy to acknowledge financial support from the Sino-British Fellowship Trust（via British Library and SOAS）and the Ancient India and Iran Trust（Cambridge）for funding Bi Bo’s visit to SOAS in 2010-11 to work on these documents with Nicholas Sims-Williams. For help with the arrangements we are most grateful to Frances Wood，Wang Tao，Meng Xianshi and Rong Xinjiang.

Bi Bo wouldalso like to thank the late Feng Qiyong，Teng Wensheng and her colleagues at Renmin University and friends for their support and help in completing this work.

Bi Bo and Nicholas Sims-Williams

Beijing and Cambridge，August 2017

[1] Until now only few Chinese，Khotanese and Tibetan documents in this collection have been published or cited in several articles or theses. For a brief introduction to the Chinese documents，see Rong 2011. All the Sanskrit fragments（mainly Buddhist texts）have been edited and will be published soon，see Zhang Xiliang，forthcoming.

[2] It formed part of a consignment of manuscripts from the Khotan area. At least one of these（H. 143 NS 34 = IOL Khot 160/2）presumably came from Khadaliq，since it is part of the same leaf as the excavated fragment Kha.ix.13 = IOL Khot 39/3（Skjærvø 2002：358）.

[3] Yoshida 2010：6. In the first part of this article，Yoshida gives an overview of the Sogdian texts found in recent years in Xinjiang，including the Khotan area（pp. 5–7）.

[4] Gropp 1974：364 with fig. 219a on p. 367. For a corrected reading see Sims-Williams 1979：337 n. 6，where it is shown that this fragment belongs to a religious text，either Buddhist or（less likely）Manichaean.

[5] Gropp 1974：362，citing Trinkler 1930：148.

[6] Trinkler 1930：155.

[7] This document is a slip of paper，with a clay seal and hemp string attached in the middle，on which the name of a srtp’w‘caravan-leader’ is preserved. It was displayed in Beijing in 2009 in the “Exhibition of the Special and Rare Collections of the National Library of China”. According to Yutaka Yoshida，this fragment possibly dates back to the 7th century（apud Duan 2016：115）. As he notes，the spelling srtp’w（as opposed to the older s’rtp’w）is also attested in the funerary inscription of Shi Jun or Wirkakk（see Yoshida 2005：64）.

[8] See Rong 2006：514-18；Rong 2009：405-407. In this connection it is interesting to note a Khotanese document from Mazar Tagh（Skjærvø 2002：132），to which Yutaka Yoshida kindly draws our attention，which contains the phrase sūlī biśa“in the Sogdian’s house” or（as Yoshida argues）“the Sogdian village”.