not be assumed that they were actually of Turkish race, either by origin or by subsequent fusion of blood. There was, however, another and very important circumstance that complicated this question of nomenclature still further. It was, it seems, the desire of all the tribes and nations of Central Asia, to identify themselves with the race which happened to be in the ascendant at any particular time. They endeavoured to adopt its name, and to pass themselves off as members of the nation in supremacy, regardless of racial affinities. Rashid-ud-Din has laid special stress on this point in his great work on the Mongols, and has explained the matter in one place as follows: "They [the Tatars] made themselves so powerful and formidable, that the other nations of Turks passed themselves off as Tatars, and regarded as an honour this name, under which they had become famous; just as at the present day[1] the Jalair, Tatar, Uirát, Ungut, Karait, Naimán, Tangut, and others, find glory in the name of Mongol, made illustrious by that of Chingiz Khan and his descendants—a name which, at an earlier date, they would have disdained. The young people of all these nations believe, even now, that their ancestors have always borne the style of Mongol; but it was not so, for formerly the Mongols were only one of the nations of Turks. … This name has been extended to such a degree, that nowadays the people of Khitai (Northern China) and of Nan-gyass (Southern China), as well as the Churchi, the Uighur, the Kipchák, the Turkoman, and the Karluk; also the Captives and the Táziks (Muhammadans), who have been brought up among the Mongols are [all of them] called Mongols; and they are all interested in passing for Mongols, in order that they may gain consideration. Previous to this period it was the same with the Tatars, on account of their power, and this is the reason why the Mongols are still called Tatars in China and in India, by the Kirghiz, the Báshgirds, in the Kipchák country, in the north of Asia, in Arabia, in Syria, in Egypt, and in Africa."[2]
It has been observed above, that in India the word Moghul was employed, subsequent to the days of Chingiz, in the same way as the word Turk in Central Asia, and Tatar in Europe, and on this subject Mr. H. G. Keene has come to conclusions which coincide with the teachings of Rashid-ud-Din. It denoted, in the first place, the group of tribes or nations who
