[13] Or Kharesm? Schéfer, in preface to his translation of Riza Kouly’s embassy to Kharesm, _Bibl. de l’École des langues viv. orientales_, 1re série, vol. iii., says that Kharesm in part was identical with Khorassan. But Shehabeddin, trans. by Quatremère in _Notices et Extraits_, xiii. 289, declares that Kharesm is a country distinct from Khorassan. Hadji Khalfa, _Djihannuma_, MS. fr., Bibl. Nat., Paris, nouv. ac., no. 888, p. 815, supports this opinion. The very fact that these writers are so careful to make this assertion shows, however, that there was much confusion as to these terms. According to Vambéry, Kharesm is still in Djagatai Turkish, the diplomatical and political name for the modern Khanate of Khiva. Howorth, _History of Mongols_, ii. 78, says that the Turkish tribes remained in these countries after the Mongol conquest. Is this the Organa or Urgheuz of Marco Polo? [14] Hussein Hezarfenn, ii. 287, and Chalcocondylas (_Patr. Graec._, Migne, vol. clix), 21, call the father of Ertogrul Oguzalp. For critical discussion see Appendix A. [15] This title is invariably given by Neshri to every ruler in the direct line of Osman, just as he calls the Christian opponents of the Osmanlis unbelievers. [16] Probably Sultan Inoenu, anticipating the later name of this district. [17] Sagredo, the Italian historian, whose work was greatly esteemed by Gibbon, makes the curious error of calling Alaeddin ‘Lord of Aleppo and Damascus’. [18] ‘A great mountain situated between Kutayia and Brusa’: Hadji Khalfa, _Djihannuma_, fol. 1975; ‘The paths up this mountain are so difficult that one on foot has a thousand pains to reach the top’: ibid., fol. 1850. [19] Rasmussen, _Annales Islamici_, p. 41, confuses this city with Kutayia, and gives its capture by Ertogrul under date of 1285. [20] Thus in Ali and Neshri. Seadeddin attributes this dream to Ertogrul. But the confusion between Ertogrul and Osman is marked in all the Ottoman historians. [21] The Ottoman historians give as reason for the refusal the social difference between his daughter and the ‘young prince’. This is an excellent illustration of how, writing in the zenith of Ottoman prosperity, the historians lost their sense of proportion or were actually compelled to write in flattering terms of the founder of their royal house. [22] Hammer, i. 67, in relating this dream, has transcribed with fidelity and felicity the Persian poetry of Idris.