estify to these conquests. The rule of the Uigurs who replaced
Tibet as the dominant power in Turfan and the northern Tarim basin
does not appear to have extended to Khotan.

It is not till 938 that we hear of renewed diplomatic relations with
China. The Imperial Court received an embassy from Khotan and deemed
it of sufficient importance to despatch a special mission in return.
Eight other embassies were sent to China in the tenth century and at
least three of them were accompanied by Buddhist priests. Their object
was probably to solicit help against the attacks of Mohammedans. No
details are known as to the Mohammedan conquest but it apparently took
place between 970 and 1009 after a long struggle.

Another cultural centre of the Tarim basin must have existed in the
oases near Lob-nor where Miran and a nameless site to the north of the
lake have been investigated by Stein. They have yielded numerous
Tibetan documents, but also fine remains of Gandharan art and Prakrit
documents written in the Kharoshthi character. Probably the use of
this language and alphabet was not common further east, for though a
Kharoshthi fragment was found by Stein in an old Chinese frontier
post[517] the library of Tun-huang yielded no specimens of them. That
library, however, dating apparently from the epoch of the T'ang,
contained some Sanskrit Buddhist literature and was rich in Sogdian,
Turkish, and Tibetan manuscripts.

4

Ample as are the materials for the study of Buddhism in Central Asia
those hitherto published throw little light on the time and manner of
its introduction. At present much is hypothetical for we have few
historical data--such as the career of Kumarajiva and the inscription
on the Temple of Maitreya at Turfan--but a great mass of literary and
artistic evidence from which various deductions can be drawn.

It is clear that there was constant intercourse with India and the
Oxus region. The use of Prakrit and of various Iranian idioms points
to actual colonization from these two quarters and it is probable
that there were two streams of Buddhism, for the Chinese pilgrims
agree that Shan-shan (near Lob-nor), Turfan, Kucha and Kashgar were
Hinayanist, whereas Yarkand and Khotan were Mahayanist. Further, much
of the architecture, sculpture and painting is simply Gandharan and
the older specimens can hardly be separated from the Gandharan art of
India by any considerable interval. This art was in part coeval with
Kani