(1A.) “Tartaria” and “Tartaren”, as the names are spelled throughout the text, are substituted in these Notes by Tatary and Tatars, it is hoped on fair grounds. Professor Nève asserts (_Exposé des Guerres de Tamerlan_, etc.: _d’après la Chronique Arménienne inédite de_ Thomas de Medzoph, 24) that Tatar is the term employed by Armenian chroniclers, and he names no exceptions; and is not her ancient literature one of the several excellencies of which Armenia may be justly proud? A note by Dr. Smith in Gibbon (_Rise and Fall_, etc., iii, 294) shows how the Tatars became accidentally named Tartars, through an exclamation of St. Louis of France, although it must be admitted that according to other authors, the use of the word Tartar, in Western Europe, is of earlier date; and Genebrard states (_Lib. Heb. Chro. Bib._, i, 158) that Tatar, which in the Hebrew and Syriac signifies abandoned, deserted, should more correctly be written without an r. The Russians, whose pronunciation of these words is, for obvious reasons, entitled to every consideration, speak of Tatáry’ya-Tatary—and Tatáry—Tatars—unquestionably the sound uttered by the various people themselves, claiming the distinctive appellation, whether on the banks of the Volga, in South Russia, the Crimea, or in the steppes and lowlands of Transcaucasia, as the writer of this note is prepared to testify. The Russian word Tatarui, or Tatars, says Ralston (_Early Russian History_, 198, wherein is cited F. Porter Smith’s _Vocab._, etc., 52), modified in Western Europe by a reference to Tartarus into Tartars, is now generally applied by Russian writers to what used to be the Turkish subjects of the Mongol Empire. It is said to be a corruption of Tah-tan, the name under which the Mongols were anciently known to the Chinese. Morrison writes Tătă as Chinese for Tartars. Colonel Yule (Marco Polo, i, 12) calls attention to an article in the _Journal Asiatique_, ser. v, tom. xi, 203, to show that the name Tartar is of Armenian rather than of European origin, whilst admitting that Tatar was used by Oriental writers of Polo’s age, exactly as Tartar was then, and is still, used in Western Europe as a generic title for the Turanian hosts who followed Chingis and his successors; but he believes that the name in this sense was not known in Western Europe before the time of Chingis. In Howorth’s _History of the Mongols_, 1877 (the one volume as yet published), a ponderous book of 743 pages, replete with the most erudite information, but unhappily unprovided with any guide to its contents, will be found at page 700, a long note, in which admission is made that the word Tartar has given rise to much discussion; and whilst the Russian and Byzantine authors, the Bohemian chronicler Dalemil, Ivo of Narbonne, and Thomas of Spalatro, are cited in favour of the use of Tatar, other authorities are quoted to establish a respectable pedigree for Tartar.—ED.