[693] Villani, book VI, c. 32, in Muratori, xiii, col. 175, describes this battle; also _Vie de Saint Louis_, by Le Nain de Tillemont (ed. Gaulle), iii. 4. [694] Abulfeda; Howorth, iii. 47. [695] This is the opinion of two of the ablest modern scholars, Heyd, i. 534, and Sarre, p. 41. [696] I can find no record of coins to controvert this statement. Lane-Poole, _Mohammedan Coins in the Bodleian Library_, 41, gives only one coin of the Bodleian collection after 641 of the Hegira, and to this he assigns the date A.H. 663 with a question mark. [697] MS. Bib. Nat., Paris, fonds arabe, 583, folio 144 rº and vº. [698] The lists of coins in I. Ghalib Edhem’s _Monnaies turcomanes_ also bear eloquent testimony to the disappearance of Seljuk vassal dynasties during this period. [699] I have not heard of such a coin existing to-day, but make the statement on the strength of Abulfaradj, _Chronicon Syr._, 527-8. [700] Abulfaradj, ibid., 542-3; Howorth, iii. 69. [701] Abulfeda, v. 15-16, under date of A.H. 662. Villani (in Muratori, xiii), VII. c. 40, column 261-2, describes how Abaka Khan chased the Saracens (_sic_) from ‘Turchia’, and also the ‘Re d’Erminia’, who ‘lasciò a’ Tartari la Turchia’. [702] Huart, _Souvenirs de voyage_, 164, speaks of the battle, but does not mention occupation of Konia. [703] Abulfaradj, _Chronicon Arab._, 365-7; d’Ohsson, _Histoire des Mongols_, ii. 570-80; Howorth, iii. 295. [704] Howorth, iii. 315. [705] _Konia, Ville des Derviches tourneurs_, 177. [706] ‘Ils sont souspost an Tartar de Levant, qui y met sa seigneurie.’ Edition of Pauthier, 37. For status of this country at the beginning of the thirteenth century, see _Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Trésorier_ (ed. Mas-Latrie, Paris, 1871), pp. 377, 381. [707] Hadji Khalfa naïvely solves this doubt by rolling Masud and Kaï Kobad into one and the same person. _Djihannuma_, folio 1752 _bis_. [708] There is no way of reaching certainty on this point. Rasmussen, _Annales Islamici_, pp. 34-8, reflects the confusion which attended the scholar of the early nineteenth century who wanted to make a chronological table of the later Seljuk Sultans. The two best modern tables are to be found in Sarre and Huart, scholars who became interested in the Seljuk problem through their archaeological travels in Asia Minor. The best account of the Seljuks is that of Houtsma in the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_. It is to be regretted that Professor Houtsma has not published the French translation of Ibn Bibi, which he promised in his introduction to the 4th volume of the Leyden series of Seljuk texts. Three years ago, Professor Sir William Ramsay, who knows Konia better than any European scholar, told me that he felt there was rich reward for the research student in the Seljuk period. The history of the Seljuks of Konia has yet to be written. [709] Osman was the sole heir according to Boecler: also Donado da Lezze, 4.