Pishan County
county
Pishan County (Chinese: 皮山县) as the official romanized name, also transliterated from Uyghur as Guma County (Uyghur: گۇما ناھىيىسى; Chinese: 固玛县), is a county within the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and is under the administration of the Hotan Prefecture. It contains an area of 39,412 km2 (15,217 sq mi). According to the 2002 census, it has a population of 220,000. The county borders Maralbexi County and Makit County to the north, Karakax County, Hotan County and Kunyu to the east and Kargilik County to the west. The county includes lands near the Karakoram Pass which are part of the Aksai Chin area that is disputed between China and India.
History
In 1902, Pishan County was created from Guma, Sanju and other areas originally part of Kargilik.
In March 1950, the Pishan County People's Government was established.
In May 2010, Shahidulla (Xaidula/Saitula) was made a town.
On the night of December 28, 2011, Koxtag (Kuoshi Tage) in Pishan was the site of the 2011 Pishan hostage crisis.
In 2012/3, Muji was changed from a township into a town.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Pishan County” is county. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Pishan, County and county, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “county” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Place names and jurisdictional language are key evidence: both can reveal earlier catalogue descriptions and overlooked record series. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 21, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1028101. Authority coordinates are 37.614, 78.280. 1 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2002, 1902, 1950 and 2010.
A single description cannot reconcile every naming convention, rebuilding phase or administrative transfer associated with a place. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Pishan County”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Pishan County primary sources, Pishan County archive and Pishan research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Pishan County”?
- What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
- Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Pishan County” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.