But Pauthier’s MS. C (and its double, the Bern MS.) has viii. marches instead of xx., through the mountains of Cuncun. This reduces the time between Kenjanfu and the Plain to 11 days, which is just about a proper allowance for the whole journey, though not accurately distributed. Two days, though ample, would not be excessive for the journey across the Plain of Han-chung, especially if the traveller visited that city. And “20 days from Han-chung, to Ch’êng-tu fu would correspond with Marco Polo’s rate of travel.” (_Richthofen_). So far then, provided we admit the reading of the MS. C, there is no ground for hesitating to adopt the usual route between the two cities, _viâ_ Han-chung. But the key to the exact route is evidently the position of Acbalec Manzi, and on this there is no satisfactory light. For the name of the province, Pauthier’s text has _Acbalec Manzi_, for the name of the city _Acmalec_ simply. The G. T. has in the former case _Acbalec Mangi_, in the latter “Acmelic Mangi _qe vaut dire_ le une _de le confine dou Mangi_.” This is followed literally by the Geographic Latin, which has “_Acbalec Mangi et est dictum in lingua nostra_ unus _ex confinibus Mangi_.” So also the Crusca; whilst Ramusio has “_Achbaluch Mangi, che vuol dire_ Città Bianca de’ confini di Mangi.” It is clear that Ramusio alone has here preserved the genuine reading. Klaproth identified Acbalec conjecturally with the town of _Pe-ma-ching_, or “White-Horse-Town,” a place now extinct, but which stood like Mien and Han-chung on the extensive and populous Plain that here borders the Han. It seems so likely that the latter part of the name _Pe_-MACHING (“_White_ Maching”) might have been confounded by foreigners with _Máchín_ and _Manzi_ (which in Persian parlance were identical), that I should be disposed to overlook the difficulty that we have no evidence produced to show that Pemaching was a place of any consequence.