"The
name of Tenduc obviously corresponds to T'ien-te Kiun, a military post,
the position of which Chinese geographers identify correctly with that of
the modern Kuku-hoton (Ta tsing y t'ung chi, ch. on the Tumots of
Kuku-hoton). The T'ien-te Kiun post existed under this name during the
K'itan (Liao) and Kin Dynasties up to Khubilai's time (1267); when under
the name of Fung-chow it was left only a district town in the department of
Ta-t'ung fu. The Kin kept in T'ien-te Kiun a military chief, Chao-t'ao-
shi, whose duty it was to keep an eye on the neighbouring tribes, and to
use, if needed, military force against them. The T'ien-te Kiun district was
hardly greater in extent than the modern aimak of Tumot, into which
Kuku-hoton was included since the 16th century, i.e. 370 li from north to
south, and 400 li from east to west; during the Kin it had a settled
population, numbering 22,600 families."
In a footnote, Palladius refers to the geographical parts of the Liao
shi, Kin shi, and Yuen shi, and adds: "M. Polo's commentators are wrong
in suspecting an anachronism in his statement, or trying to find Tenduc
elsewhere."
We find in the North-China Herald (29th April, 1887, p. 474) the
following note from the Chinese Times: "There are records that the
position of this city [Kwei-hwa Ch'eng] was known to the builder of the
Great Wall.
