— 39 — 



voys of that country went back , he gave them a letter saying : //The differ- 

 //ent countries over the sea shall all bring tribute once in three years; you, 

 //oh king, must also have compassion with your people and observe this 

 //arrangement." 



In the year 1446 they brought again tribute, but aftervvards it be- 

 came gradually more rare. 



In the year 1452 the king Prabu (*) sent envoys to court with tribute. 



In the year 1460 the king Tu-ma-pan (Tumapel?) ( 2 ) sent envoys to 

 carry tribute. When these envoys went back and had arrived at An-ch'ing 

 ( 3 ) they got drunk and had a fight with foreign priests who came to bring 

 tribute and of whom six were killed. The Board of Rites asked that the 

 Chinese functionaiïes who escorted the envoys should be punished, but that 

 the latter should be sent to their king, with the order to punish them him- 

 self. This was approved by the Emperor. 



In the year 1465 tribute was brought from Java, 



In the year 1499 envoys with tribute were shipwrecked in a storm 

 and only the ship of their interpreter arrived at Canton. The Board 

 of Rites requested that the authorities there should be orclered to en- 

 tertain them and send them back to their country with presents, the arti- 

 cles of their tribute being forwarded to the capital. The Emperor granted the 

 request and after this their envoys arrived very rarely. 



The country in question is situated near Champa, from where one can 

 go there in twenty days. When the army of the Yuan dynasty went to 

 attack it, they left Ch'üan-chou in the 12th month of the year 1292 and arrived 

 at this country in the first month of the next year, so that the distance 

 is only one month. 



When they brought tribute in the year 1432, they presented a 

 letter stating that their kingdom had been founded 1376 years before, 

 that is in the first year of the period Yüan-k'ang of the emperor Hsüan of the 

 Han dynasty (B. C. 65) ("). 



( 2 ) t>5 »ni 3ÖÈ: . Compare note on page 36. 



O Tgr J|g mf , i n ihe province of An-hwui. 



C") There is a discrepancy here whieh we are unable to explain. The letter was presented 

 and probably written in 1433 and from there counting back 1376 years, we arrive at the year 56 

 of om- era, whilst the Chinese writer ealculates back to 65 B.C. It is ppssible that the number 

 of years, given in the letter, has been wrongly handed down by the Chinese and was originally 1497 , 

 in which case it would agree with the Chinese calcnlation , but it may also be that the latter is wrong, 



