The very name of "oasis countries" contributes towards creating an impression, that the inhabited part of Turkestan must be unimportant as regards productive power; add to this the poverty and the extremely primitive and simple mode of life of its inhabitants, and it is not surprising that the great distance and the consequent want of knowledge should have begotten and spread erroneous notions. The natives themselves, as well as oriental travellers and geographers, such as Idrisi, Ibni Haukal, Ebulfeda, and the learned Prince Baber, fall into the opposite extreme, by representing Turkestan as the richest country on the face of the globe, India alone excepted. This opinion prevailed in former times,[21] not only throughout Western Asia, but even very lately I have met with it in several localities, and never felt more astonished than when I heard the egotistic Persian eloquently praising the wealth of Turkestan, a country he looks upon with deadly hatred and aversion. As for ourselves, we will try to form as far as possible an impartial estimate, although we must maintain at the outset, that Turkestan by far surpasses the known parts of European and Asiatic Turkey, Afghanistan and Persia, both in the wealth and variety of its productions; nay, that it might be difficult to find in Europe, flourishing as it is, and rich in every blessing, a territory that would rival the oasis countries of Turkestan. [21] The plain of Sogdiana or the Zerefsha--valley between Bokhara and Samarkand--is spoken of as an earthly paradise, and Hafiz calls the towns of Bokhara and Samarkand the greatest treasure, and yet surpassed by his beloved.